Desicritics Comments on Mumbai Terror Attacks: Rage, Retaliation and Restraint

Comment by Amitabh Mitra

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 15:25:58 EST

Vinod,well said

Comment by Vinod Joseph

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:26:42 EST

TAG, I assume you are an LTTE sympathiser or supporter. Your comment doesn't make any sense. Just like India, Pakistan does not have an embassy or ambassador in the UK. It has a High Commission with a High Commissioner. Pakistan's High Commissioner for the UK, Mr. Wajid Shamsul Hasan, did not make any such comment. TAG, remember this, You can fool some of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all the people all the time.

Comment by Tag

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:04:26 EST

The reason that this tragedy took place is because India's priorities are all wrong. I'll give you an example. As the news of the horrific attack was reaching the western media, BBC asked the Pakistani ambassador to UK for his comment, and he blamed the Tamil Tigers. Now we all know it is rubbish, but why would an intelligent person, who is an ambassador say that? Because he knows the weakness of Indai's leader, Sonia Gandhi. She is only interested in her personal revenge. Is that India's priority?

Comment by William Huang

Fri, 5 Dec 2008 13:46:20 EST

Vinod Joseph #55 I appreciate you take the time to discuss the issue. I am not able to see the consistency in your argument. You mix religion, ethnical identity and geopolitics at your own convenience with a pre-determined conclusion. I am sure you have preference on the matter of Kashmir, India, Tibet and China but your preference is not based on any intellectual analysis, fact and fairness but something else. For the respect to the people of India and what they have just experienced in this horrible and unjustified attack, I end our discussion here. Going forward, I hope you and your fellow countrymen will be fair and just when comes to discussions that concerns the people of China.

Comment by kerty

Fri, 5 Dec 2008 13:38:09 EST

MIA IN MUMBAI Indian officials, police and commandos must share the blame for mishandling the attacks. By Edward N. Luttwak, Los Angeles Times Op-Ed December 5, 2008 http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-luttwak5-2008dec05,0,7905913.story "Those who live in Tel Aviv, New York or London need not fear a Mumbai episode. If 10 infantry-trained terrorists were to attack those cities, local police with their own hostage-rescue teams would quickly deal with them. But in India, the reality is that local police cannot be expected to react usefully to a terrorist attack, or indeed any form of armed attack, as they would in many other countries"

Comment by Vinod Joseph

Fri, 5 Dec 2008 07:14:12 EST

William, I was waiting for you to make an appearance and pop that question. This post has nothing to do with the Kashmir dispute and so this is not really the forum to do discuss it. However, let me try and reply to your questions. William asked – "That said, I do wonder, would you recommend the Indian government to let Kashmir people to declare independence to avoid further blood shade? What kind of retaliation are you referring to?" Vinod replies - The Mumbai attacks were carried out by Islamists who will not stop even if the Kashmir dispute is solved. I used the word retaliation to convey the need felt by millions of Indians (immediately after the attacks) to get even with the attackers. I don't think the Pakistani government sponsored or directly supported the Mumbai attacks. So, I am not even suggesting any attack on Pakistan. I suggest you read Part II of this post: http://desicritics.org/2008/12/01/093138.php William asked – "The reason for my question is that I had disagreement with Vinod Joseph on a different subject which had some similarity to his article in this blog. I wonder if he is consistent in what he believes. Does he believe Kashmir people have legitimacy to be independent? If not, why not? If yes, why not now?" Vinod replies - No, I don't think the Kashmir issue has anything in common with the Tibetan freedom struggle. The reason is as follows. When the British ruled the Indian subcontinent, many chunks of territory were ruled by Kings under British supervision and were called princely states. Kashmir is an example of a princely state. When the British departed from the sub-continent, they made certain arrangements, which are commonly referred to as the Partition. The arrangements were actually much more than just a Partition of the subcontinent into India and Pakistan. The British also blessed the accession by the King of Jammu & Kashmir (Hari Singh) to India. Hari Singh initially wanted Jammu & Kashmir to be independent, but when Pakistani troops and tribal irregulars invaded his country, he chose to be with India. From the early 19th century, Jammu & Kashmir had been ruled by the Sikhs under Ranjit Singh who captured it from the Durrani rulers of Afghanistan. After Ranjit Singh, the Sikhs and the British went to war and Jammu & Kashmir became a British vassal state. The state of Jammu & Kashmir consists of the Kashmir valley with a Muslim majority, Jammu with a Hindu majority and Ladakh with a Buddhist majority. There have always been some Kashmiris who wanted to be with Pakistan, but the people in the south, namely Jammu, have always been pro-India. Ethnically the Muslims in Kashmir and the Hindus in Jammu are the same. The Buddhists in the eastern region of Ladakh have also wanted to be with India. The current insurgency is taking place only in Kashmir valley where there is substantial support for independence or accession with Kashmir. The distinction with Tibet is in the following respects: Tibetans are not divided by religion, with one religious section of Tibetans wanting to be with China and another section wanting to be independent. The partition of the Indian subcontinent was messy and there is no reason why Kashmir alone should now be able to unravel it. The insurgency in Kashmir is now controlled by Islamic fundamentalists from Pakistan who have little in common with the Sufi Muslims of Kashmir. Kashmiri Muslims are very liberal and if the Islamist fighters there have their way, they will turn Kashmir into an Afghanistan. A big chunk of Kashmir is held by Pakistan (called Pak occupied Kashmir by India and Azad (Free) Kashmir by Pakistan. There is no democracy in this bit of Kashmir and there are Kashmiris there who would like to be free from Pakistan Maybe in a few decade, India will be much more decentralised with all its states including Kashmir having much more autonomy.

Comment by William Huang

Fri, 5 Dec 2008 02:18:58 EST

Sanjay #53, I am not suggesting anything. I agree with kerty (#52) that Jehad goes a lot farther than Kashmir and they have an ideology beyond a single territory. The reason for my question is that I had disagreement with Vinod Joseph on a different subject which had some similarity to his article in this blog. I wonder if he is consistent in what he believes. Does he believe Kashmir people have legitimacy to be independent? If not, why not? If yes, why not now?

Comment by Sanjay

Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:52:26 EST

William Huang, if the terrorists have come from Pakistan, you're saying we should surrender to the blackmail demands of Pakistani terrorists in order to avoid their attacks?

Comment by kerty

Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:22:26 EST

William The issue of Jehad goes a lot farther than kashmir. Its much bigger than Kashmir. Kahsmir is merely a current theater of confrontation which would shift to a different front once kashmir is yielded to Jahadis.

Comment by William Huang

Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:14:42 EST

Vinod Joseph I condemn the killing of innocent people by the terrorist in Mumbai. That said, I do wonder, would you recommend the Indian government to let Kashmir people to declare independence to avoid further blood shade? What kind of retaliation are you referring to? William Huang

Comment by G2B

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 05:06:53 EST

Maharashtra Deputy CM resigns as he called this incident "small one, keeps happening here and there" CM is no wiser, he visited Taj along with his actor son and Director Ram Gopal Varma? Very responsible politicians ! No words of abuse is enough for them ! I do nowant to make this place dirty !

Comment by kerty

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:01:42 EST

Barbarians break the gate By Rajeev Srinivasan "The audacious invasion of Mumbai casts a long shadow on the future of the Indian state. Our nation is bleeding profusely from self-inflicted, avoidable wounds. The failure of the political class has left the people stunned and angry. Today's heroes are men in uniform" "The invasion of Mumbai by Pakistani terrorists -- and local collaborators -- is but a replay of times past: The frequent arrival of barbarians over the Khyber Pass, wreaking untold damage on a long-suffering populace. The only crime that the average Indian committed was to focus on the creation of wealth; of course, the barbarians came because of the wealth. Today, once again, India is generating capital, and the intention is to thwart its economic rise." Read full article http://www.dailypioneer.com/138039/Barbarians-break-the-gate.html

Comment by kerty

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 15:49:34 EST

Kaffir Two terrorists had run off with a police van, who were stopped at a checkpoint that resulted in an encounter where one terrorist was captured wounded while other one died - these are the same terrorists that were at the VT station, whose pictures have been widely shown in media. This captured terrorist wants to live and not die, hence he is cooperating - but he knows very little as terrorists were groomed on need-to-know basis. He is likely to say things that his tormentors want to hear - much of it will not stand in court of law. Nor it will satisfy Pakistan as a proof of its complicity. We will know very little about higher ups behind this terrorist event or full extent of their current or future plans. The goal of counter-terrorism is not merely to kill terrorists, but to extract counter-intelligence that can help break up terrorist organization and their will. From that point of view, India's Mumbai operation was badly botched up.

Comment by Sanjay

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 14:14:24 EST

"Moderation should be pursued in all things, including in moderation itself." -Benjamin Franklin This means that if someone has broken into your home and is assaulting your wife and kids, then you don't stand there grinning moderately, preaching tolerance and self-restraint.

Comment by kaffir

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 14:08:23 EST

If one terrorist was captured, it was by accident and not by design - he was captured by local police at a check point. Kerty, I read that he was captured in the hotel as he was injured and pretended to be dead, lying among other bodies. Looks like there are different versions of his capture floating around, and maybe we'll get the true story once the dust settles.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 13:41:07 EST

The manner in which the rescue operations were botched up is mind boggling, notwithstanding the heroics of commandos 1) There are reports that armed Mumbai police did not shoot the terrorists even when they were in clear target at VT. They refused to attack them, nor followed them. 2) The ATS was equally inept and without intelligence and preparedness - the way its top brass got killed shows unprofessionalism and casual atttitude with which they aproached the events 3) The entire Law enforcement apparatus was paralized for hours until army and nsg came on board - why did Mumbai had to wait so long, and why local resources no capable to tackle the situation? Clearly, capability to tackle terrorism was lacking at every level of government - once again army had to step in and handle it as a war. 4) Terrorists were merely frontline expendible foot soldiers, most of whom knew only what they needed to know - they were more valuable alive than dead to help crack their network and their masters. That is why it is shocking that none of them were captured alive. - The focus of entire operation was to kill them and not disable them as if planers of rescue operations wanted to erase all traces of terrorists and their network. - If one terrorist was captured, it was by accident and not by design - he was captured by local police at a check point. - Had it been commandos in stead of police, the lone captured terrorist would have been dead too and we would be at the mercy of political agencies to get spins on actual culprits. - Since there were only handful of terrorists, where was the need to apply tactics as if rescuers were trying to strom the whole army of enemy combatants? Non-lethal use of force could have captured most of terrorists alive. Use of nerve gas, rubber bullets or similar non-lethal weapons that would have disabled the area and people in it would have got the job done quickly, efficiently without so much casualties and damage, while still maintaining the mission to get to the people behind the terror attacks. (5) All terrorist attacks end up in a blame game with Pakistan who demand proof of its involvement which our government is seldom able to provide. Buck stops at Pakistan - thus Indian moslems, Indian jehadis, Government, law enforcement agencies, political establishment gets absolved of their accountability - they all plead innocent and Pakistan becomes their fall guy. After few saber-rattling exchanges with Pakistan, since both countries can not afford to start a war, issue dies down and fades from public memory. This has been the modus operandi of disposing off terrorist events in India, why nothing happens after each terrorist events. Opposition predictably ask for more robust laws and resources, and UPA denying the need for it. The post-terror resolve predictably ends in stalement and political bickering. As next issue arrives, politicians move on to next issue. Nothing happens, nothing changes. It serves the political class that thrives on terrorism and jehad as its ideological compulsions and votebank.

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:42:48 EST

""Ruvy [EDITED-WTF?]"" My apologies. I cannot use the excuse that I'm human all too human.

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 10:06:58 EST

G2B, Worry not, I am moving to Lurkistan for a while. The discussion here has reverted to a predictable pattern; it encourages something unusual in me - a short fuse! time for more kit kat and charminar

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 10:06:51 EST

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 09:43:23 EST

G2B, Comment # 38. Yes, I was more shocked to write the stuff that was edited! a temporary lapse of judgement, aided by the heat of the moment is all I can say. I had a charminar, then a kit kat - back on track to calm the waters rather than ruffling feathers.

Comment by Ruvy

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:34:22 EST

Kerty, Thank you for the kind words. Do take a look at the Debkafile article linked to. This is not so valuable for Mumbaikers who have gone through a harrowing few days, but it will be valuable for those living elsewhere; whether that elsewhere be somewhere else in India or North America or Europe.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:09:28 EST

Ruvy If a person is attacked because he is jew is quite different than a person being attacked for some reasons but merely happens to be a jew - one must distinguish both situations and calibrate the outrage accordingly. What happened to Rabbi Holtzberg is truly gruesome - his house was targeted by terrorists because he was Jewish. Jews around the world have every reason to be concerned and outraged about it and so do Indians who must not let that happen on its soil. You will find most Indians supportive of your outrage - even though hacks in media and blogosphere tend to give a contrary impression. If I were you, I would take them in the stride and not let them be a bother. As long as you take positions that you can defend with sound arguments , and do not take their baits or get into needless arguments with them, they can actually help you articulate your points and educate other readers.

Comment by G2B

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 02:34:14 EST

comment #36, CS very shocked to see your comments getting edited?? I thought you are one of the most sensible here! Cool down

Comment by Ruvy

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 02:18:52 EST

Kerty, A case of mistaken identity. After seeing Jews targeted and murdered in Mumbai just because they were Jews, I'm not inclined to be forgiving when a crowd attacks Jews some more. It's like Chandra says, "give me a gun". Had Rabbi Holtzberg, z"l, HY"D, had one, he might have taken down one or two of the animals who attacked the Haba"d House before dying. "A case of mistaken identity" is little comfort if you die at the hands of a mob that has no idea who you are, and doesn't give a damn. These two men did not die, thank G-d. But they did not have guns either. Like Chandra says, "Give me a gun". As for my own comment #33, CS, having marked his virtual derierre with a "kick me" sign left a tempting target. But it was only after there was a reason to land the "kick" that I responded. CS has taken every opportunity to denigrate me in this comment thread and others, Kerty. He does so now by lapsing into Hindu terms. I see no reason not respond in kind, and denigrate his baiting garbage at every opportunity that presents itself to me. As for something real for you to chew on, however, instead of mere bickering, let me offer you this from Debkafiles: The Mumbai terror attack's first prototype: Mike's Place, Tel Aviv, 2003. To make a long story short, the nightmare that Mumbaikars have had to go through was first attempted by al-Qaeda five years ago.

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 01:21:09 EST

[EDITED-IRRELEVANT]