07-14-2006, 06:09 AM
This is what passes for our strategic thinking. Can somebody please ask this moron the position of the US v/s India in the global strategic community ? It is not for nothing that the US is the sole superpower and India has to literally beg for SC seat (vo nahin UNSG chalegaa). Wonder what this idiots strategic 'thinking' was when India did Pokhran2 ??
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/arti...742921.cms
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->While we are all focused on the immediate damage caused by the heinous attacks on the suburban trains in Mumbai, it is important to know that the intention of terrorists is to create secondary consequences.
The primary consequences are the death of about 200 passengers, approximately 800 injuries, decline in household income of several of the affected families and destruction of the properties of the railways. But terrorists are not interested in the primary damage.
Their interest is to cause secondary damage. In this case, the objective seems to be to undermine business confidence and weaken the social fabric. Whether the terrorists succeed in their objective of delivering the secondary consequences depends on how the state and the society respond.
Let me illustrate this with the example of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington DC. The primary damage was about 3,000 deaths and economic losses of a few hundred million dollars. The secondary damage was $500bn.
Thus, the US and the global economy suffered the heavy secondary consequences because of the way the US reacted. In the case of Mumbai, if we make a conscious effort to prevent any kind of communal problems and to prevent any kind of breakdown of confidence in the business environment, the terrorists will fail in their main objective. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/arti...742921.cms
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->While we are all focused on the immediate damage caused by the heinous attacks on the suburban trains in Mumbai, it is important to know that the intention of terrorists is to create secondary consequences.
The primary consequences are the death of about 200 passengers, approximately 800 injuries, decline in household income of several of the affected families and destruction of the properties of the railways. But terrorists are not interested in the primary damage.
Their interest is to cause secondary damage. In this case, the objective seems to be to undermine business confidence and weaken the social fabric. Whether the terrorists succeed in their objective of delivering the secondary consequences depends on how the state and the society respond.
Let me illustrate this with the example of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington DC. The primary damage was about 3,000 deaths and economic losses of a few hundred million dollars. The secondary damage was $500bn.
Thus, the US and the global economy suffered the heavy secondary consequences because of the way the US reacted. In the case of Mumbai, if we make a conscious effort to prevent any kind of communal problems and to prevent any kind of breakdown of confidence in the business environment, the terrorists will fail in their main objective. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->