Blast In Mumbai's Suburban Train

[Guest]

Here's a fundamental <i>Hindu</i> trait that won't change: in general we won't kill unwilling participants. It's the reason why we will never collectively attack the Muslims - until the Muslims all declare war (which might happen when they've reached the desired population size). The last time this happened was when India was under tyrannical Muslim rule. Not a pleasant thought, if that's what it will take to get us willing to fight for our survival. Back then, the Hindus fought until we had wrested control over the country again. Who knows, maybe if the British hadn't come, the Muslims would have attempted to retake India several times (seen as a declaration of war each time) and Islam would have eventually completely lost.
Today, terrorism allows them the ultimate luxury: to continue the Jihad, with us doing nothing.

Find a way to circumvent this:
- Unfeasible: Do we let it precipiate to the point where the Islamic population is large enough to articulate what they've been thinking all along and finally declare all-out war? They're not stupid, meanwhile they'll have done many terrorist attacks to reduce our population, besides which they will sooner use bombs or something than bother killing us person by person - sort of like they're doing regularly now (although it's never beneath them to kill children and women one by one, as Bangladesh showed).
- Unfeasible: The few who are willing today have to do the fighting now, taking up the war that the Islamic terrorists at least have already declared (repeatedly).
- Unfeasible: we (all Hindus) issue an offical call to war, demanding that the Muslims either (1) join the terrorists and fight; (2) leave for Pakistan or Bangladesh and never return; (3) become Hindu or Buddhist or Jain or generally non-ChristoIslamic. Unfeasible too, merely because if Hindus are unwilling to retaliate now, even with all the terrorist attacks, they will not see the point of asking to start a fight. When we can't even <i>react</i>, how can we <i>act</i>.

I still think we need to start by buying time with counter-terrorist operations.

Post 183 (bhushan):
What I wanted to PM you just got so lengthy I've given up. Here's the most important bit of my reply (since I've already taken up so much of this board with irrelevant stuff, this shouldn't make too much difference).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If we did have a non-govt counter-terrorism organisation, say composed of former intel officers and army-personnel with expertise in this field, then they could track down terrorists and just quietly flush them out (our disinterested govt never will). That way the media will never know....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Now this is one of the most unpractical things I have heard. Recruiting former intel officers and army-personnel, that too under the noses of state and central governments? Who will recruit them? How would they operate nationally, as well as within the region?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I was merely regurgitating what I partly overheard my uncle's two friends (both former Indian Army officers) discuss a number of years back. They talked of their fears about the alarming rate at which the madrasas in Kashmir were multiplying and how frequent terrorism could eventually spread to other parts in India. They thought the solution to <i>that</i> was constant active counter-terrorist operations, rather than passive. I should have listened more carefully, but back then I wasn't that interested.

One more thing, Post 235:<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->3) The continuation of the old war between Orthodox Christianity and Catholicism.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->With respect to Serbia and Croatia, this has always been a one-way 'war' (Croatians genociding the Serbians) as even the Croatians proudly admitted until recent times.