Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 67

Thread: Serial blasts in Sri Lanka on Easter: 156 killed, including 35 foreigners

  1. #16
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    Govt structure in Sri Lanka is weak atm. Remember back in September, the President sacked the PM and then had to take him back when the Supreme court ruled. The security establishment reports to the President only. PM knew nothing. They were prior warnings, repeatedly from foreign agencies but they went unheeded. Its a failure on the govt level. The authorities had an idea something was up. If the telecom minister's dad tells him not to attend easter service at a church that got attacked. The bastard is actually smiling when he says this !!!

    One of the suicide bombers identified owns a factory. Nine of his employees have been picked up for questioning. The same individual had a run in with the cops several months earlier for defacing buddhist statues.

    ISIS sites are celebrating this attack. Some even called it payback for Christchurch.

    A few revenge attacks against muslims occurred already. The idea is to get others to attack muslims and in this way drive up recruitment for the outfit. That is their MO.

    There is a clear attempt to disrupt inter faith harmony here.

    Looking more and more like IS wanting to open up shop in Sri Lanka.

    That Tawhid group initially identified as potential perpetrators has put out a message denying their involvement. They condemned the attack and are running blood donation camps.

    Rajapaksha has a national security argument to make now for the general elections next year.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 22 Apr 19, at 19:54.

  2. #17
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    The intelligence network in Sri Lanka is weak. And according to the speaker below became still weaker after Sirisena took office as former intel officers were charged with offences from years earlier.


  3. #18
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688


    Theory seems to be payback for Chirstchurch. Christians are an easier target (lower in numbers) than Buddhists (more likely target) but are in the majority so any attack on their temples would result in negative consequences for the muslim community in Sri Lanka.

    Terrorists these days operate as franchises away from the institutional model of Al-Q or IS. They hit where they want whenever they want. Not unlike the Aussie guy who goes to NZ for an op.

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Sri Lanka Was Warned of Possible Attacks. Why Didn’t It Stop Them?

    COLOMBO, Sri Lanka — The confidential security memo laid it all out: names, addresses, phone numbers, even the times in the middle of the night that one suspect would visit his wife.

    In the days leading up to the devastating suicide bombings that killed nearly 300 people in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, the country’s security agencies had been closely watching a secretive cell of the National Thowheeth Jama’ath, a little-known radical Islamist organization that security officials in Sri Lanka now say carried out the attacks and may have received help from abroad.

    They knew the group was dangerous. They had collected intelligence on the whereabouts of its leaders in the April 11 security memo, which warned of Catholic church bombings. They had been warned even earlier by India that the group, also known by the spelling National Thowheed Jama’ath, was plotting church attacks. They knew as far back as January that radical Islamists possibly tied to the group had stockpiled weapons and detonators.

    And within hours of when three churches and three hotels were bombed, Sri Lankan security services swooped down on at least 24 suspects, suggesting that they also knew exactly where the group had been operating.

    Why the security agencies failed to act aggressively on the information before the bombings is now an enormous question. It has been further complicated by a feud between the president and prime minister, which left the prime minister ignorant of the information the security agencies possessed — leading to bitter recriminations that have created a new government crisis.

    The history of bitter infighting between Sri Lanka’s leaders appears to have contributed to a spectacular security breakdown that led to one of the world’s deadliest terrorist attacks.

    One of the suicide bombers had even been arrested just a few months ago, Sri Lankan officials disclosed on Monday, on suspicion of having vandalized a statue of Buddha, an inflammatory act in a Buddhist-majority nation where strident religiosity, on all sides, seems to be increasing.

    On Monday, several ministers lashed out at President Maithripala Sirisena, who controls the security services, for not acting on the detailed warnings before the attacks.

    “We are ashamed of what has happened,” said Rauff Hakeem, the minister of city planning. “If the names of the persons involved were already known, why were they not arrested?”

    He called the attacks a “colossal failure on the part of the intelligence services.”

    Several ministers are now calling for the national police chief to resign. Others questioned how such a homegrown group could have acted alone.

    “There was an international network without which these attacks could not have succeeded,” said Rajitha Senaratne, the health minister.

    Sri Lanka’s president has not provided any satisfying answers about why the security services did not do more to thwart the bombers. Shiral Lakthilaka, a senior adviser, denied that there had been any security lapses. “Everyone has done their job,” he said. “These kinds of alerts are coming time to time. Even U.S. or anyone will not try to panic people.”

    But he said that the president had appointed a special committee, led by a Supreme Court judge, to investigate the matter. And he acknowledged that the warnings about National Thowheeth Jama’ath — disclosed in the April 11 memo from a top police official to division heads — had been circulated only among police officials in charge of “VIP security.”

    “That is why the president has appointed the committee to understand and ascertain what went wrong,” Mr. Lakthilaka said.

    The warnings appear to have gone back even further.

    India, a close ally of Sri Lanka’s, has been watching the entire South Asia region for any sign of activity by Al Qaeda or the Islamic State. And Indian security agencies had been scrutinizing the movements of National Thowheeth Jama’ath’s leader, Mohammed Zaharan, a known extremist who has spent time in both India and Sri Lanka, and who in recent years has preached hateful messages online.

    As early as April 4, the Indians provided the Sri Lankans with cellphone numbers and information about Mr. Zaharan and his lieutenants who they said were planning suicide attacks on Catholic churches and the Indian Embassy in Sri Lanka, several Sri Lankan and Indian officials said.


    The Sri Lankan security services then ran down addresses and put several members of the group under close surveillance.

    The April 11 memo included precise information, such as the observation that Mr. Zaharan’s brother, an avid recruiter for the group, “visits his wife and children in the nights (2300hrs -0400hrs)” and it listed an exact address, down to a house number and cross street.

    But with Sri Lanka’s president and prime minister feuding for months, leading to a political breakdown last year, it seems that the president excluded the prime minister from top security briefings and that the prime minister’s office had no inkling of the warnings of imminent suicide attacks.

    Whether sharing that information would have made a difference is unclear. But the prime minister and his allies are claiming that had they known, they would have insisted on more security at the targeted sites.

    On Monday, the country remained on edge. At a crowded bus station in the capital, Colombo, police officers found 87 bomb detonators.

    As mourners hung white flags around their houses and prepared to bury their dead, Mr. Sirisena declared a conditional state of emergency that gave the security services sweeping powers to arrest, interrogate, search and seize.

    A dusk-to-dawn curfew remained in effect. Schools were closed. So were many shops. Traffic on the main roads remained light, and tourists who visit this tropical island at this time of year were canceling hotel bookings.

    The National Thowheeth Jama’ath group emerged around 2015 in the aftermath of attacks against Muslims. Though Sri Lanka has been mostly spared the religious-driven bloodshed of other South Asian nations, such as India and Pakistan, in recent years some Buddhist monks have become militant and incited followers to attack Muslims. The Sri Lankan government’s security services appeared to have turned a blind eye, letting Buddhist mobs act with impunity.

    In 2014, scores of people were injured and three were killed in Buddhist-Muslim clashes. Some Muslims then joined radical Islamist groups that they believed would defend their faith. Still, few Sri Lankans said they had ever worried about the possibility of the country’s religious minorities attacking one another. Muslims make up about 10 percent of the population and Christians 7 percent, compared with Buddhists at 70 percent.

    According to the April 11 security memo, National Thowheeth Jama’ath’s leader, Mr. Zaharan, had been under close watch for several days. Sri Lankan security officials have blamed his group or allied groups for vandalizing Buddhist statues in December, seen as an attempt to instigate bloodshed between Buddhists and Muslims.

    But in January, Sri Lankan officials said that evidence had emerged that homegrown Islamist groups were even more dangerous. Investigations connected to the statue destruction led police officials to a remote coconut plantation in northwestern Sri Lanka where officers discovered an elaborate weapons cache with more than 100 kilograms of explosives, detonators, wire cords, a rifle, bullets, dry rations and religious propaganda.

    Sri Lankan officials have since said that the cache belonged to a radical Islamist group, probably connected to National Thowheeth Jama’ath. But several security specialists said that even if true, it was unlikely that National Thowheeth Jama’ath members could have carried out the Easter bombings on their own.

    The group had never attempted such a devastating, coordinated attack, with numerous suicide bombers striking different places nearly simultaneously. Some of the bombs were extraordinarily powerful. The explosion at a church in Negombo, north of Colombo, blew off much of the high vaulted roof. Clay ceiling tiles rained down, and dozens of people died.

    Experts said the choice of Christians as a target might mean that a more international extremist group with a broader anti-Christian agenda was involved.

    “There’s no reason for local extremist groups to attack churches, and little reason to attack tourists,” said Amarnath Amarasingam, a specialist in Sri Lankan extremism at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a counterterrorism research group in London. “The target selection and attack type make me very skeptical that this was carried out by a local group without any outside involvement.’’

    No warning seemed to have been communicated to any target. Managers and employees of some of the fanciest hotels in Colombo said they had not received any alert. That included the waterfront Galle Face Hotel, which is next door to the Indian High Commission and is frequently visited by senior officials and foreign dignitaries.

    “No one told us anything,” said Shafraz Nawaz, who works at the Galle Face. “It was normal operation. But security has increased after the attack now.’’

    Sri Lankan officials said they did not know Mr. Zaharan’s whereabouts on Monday. Indian intelligence officials suggested that he might be hiding in eastern Sri Lanka.

    In Washington, intelligence and counterterrorism analysts were scrutinizing possible ties between the Islamic State and the attackers, but as of Monday afternoon had not yet reached any definitive conclusions.

    Nicholas J. Rasmussen, a former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said that the presence of some Sri Lankan fighters in Syria and Iraq raised the prospect of informal connections with members of National Thowheeth Jama’ath.

    “It’s hard to imagine an attack of this complexity without some form of organization and support from a group that has done this kind of thing before,” he said in an email.

    Lisa Monaco, who served as Homeland Security adviser for President Barack Obama, said that if the attacks in Sri Lanka were inspired by the Islamic State, they should serve as a stark reminder to the Trump administration.

    “We should not mistake the defeat of the physical caliphate with that of the virtual caliphate,” Ms. Monaco said.

    “It’s a movement,” she said. “And it, as we’ve seen, can take hold around the world.”

    Correction: April 22, 2019
    An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified the Sri Lankan official Rauff Hakeem. He is the minister of city planning, not the justice minister.
    Sri Lanka was warned by Indian agencies and they allowed this to happen. I don't understand if the SL Government even cared. What a clusterf*** of epic proportions.

    Pakistani jihadis rising in Sri Lanka, India warned

    IS hand in Lanka blasts? Pics of 3 suicide bombers appear online

    I still maintain what I said earlier. ISIS in the sub-continent is just another face of Pakistani terrorists.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Christchurch was a despicable act. It was a hate crime, not a terrorist attack.

    Now, for every terrorist attack planned and executed by muslims worldwide, if christians did the same, will there be muslims left? I don't see strength in numbers of moderate muslims who come out and condemn these brazen attacks. Are there moderate muslims or is the term a creation of the left? Why can't muslims get over their dark-age practice of killing innocents? If muslims in Palestine are attacked, why and how the fcuk does it matter for muslims in, say for example, Pakistan to kill innocents?
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  6. #21
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Christchurch was a despicable act. It was a hate crime, not a terrorist attack.
    I saw it as a terrorist attack as did the NZ PM. It was an attack on NZ and it's politics. I saw no difference with what happened in NZ with Brevik in Norway. Brevik's victims were all white. He saw them as traitors that allowed muslims into Norway.

    Now, for every terrorist attack planned and executed by muslims worldwide, if christians did the same, will there be muslims left?
    This is the exact scenario OBL wanted.

    One challenge to the the chirstchurch theory is this attack would have taken time to plan. In the works probably before Christchurch happened.

    I don't see strength in numbers of moderate muslims who come out and condemn these brazen attacks. Are there moderate muslims or is the term a creation of the left? Why can't muslims get over their dark-age practice of killing innocents?
    The silent majority are the moderates. The moderates are ones that aren't radicalised.

    IS has a unique demographic in the subcontinent. Well educated, middle class as well as their supporters.

    If muslims in Palestine are attacked, why and how the fcuk does it matter for muslims in, say for example, Pakistan to kill innocents?
    The radicals think they are avenging their people. Think of the rewards put out for the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Apr 19, at 06:21.

  7. #22
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Sri Lanka was warned by Indian agencies and they allowed this to happen. I don't understand if the SL Government even cared. What a clusterf*** of epic proportions.
    Govt weak. Intel services had their wings clipped. They couldn't stop it. These people need help.

    This is an election year so there is going to be sniping between incumbent & opposition

    Pakistani jihadis rising in Sri Lanka, India warned

    IS hand in Lanka blasts? Pics of 3 suicide bombers appear online

    I still maintain what I said earlier. ISIS in the sub-continent is just another face of Pakistani terrorists.
    ok, we're seeing an LeT connection which idelogically would be more compatible with IS than the other Pak Deoband outfits.

    If Let is in the fray, it means we're the ultimate target. Indian high commissions. Attack us abroad.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Apr 19, at 06:37.

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I saw it as a terrorist attack as did the NZ PM. It was an attack on NZ and it's politics. I saw no difference with what happened in NZ with Brevik in Norway. Brevik's victims were all white. He saw them as traitors that allowed muslims into Norway.
    Yes I remember, you saw it as a terrorist attack. I saw it as hate crime, still do.

    The silent majority are the moderates. The moderates are ones that aren't radicalised.

    IS has a unique demographic in the subcontinent. Well educated, middle class as well as their supporters.
    If moderate muslims aren't radicalized, why aren't they speaking up in numbers? It has been decades since the start of islamic terrorism. Maybe moderates enjoy watching Hindus/Christians/Jews being killed from the sidelines. Moderates don't celebrate it overtly, probably give a nod at their lounge. Who knows? I have started to question everything about Islam and Muslims now. What muslims are doing today will get them sent to the gas chamber enmasse. The world is just short of that 1 madman.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  9. #24
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  10. #25
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Yes I remember, you saw it as a terrorist attack. I saw it as hate crime, still do.
    If a muslim does it then its terrorism, if a white guy does it then its a hate crime. Why the distinction.

    I learnt on this board to avoid terms like hate crime & racism unless unavoidable. In other words to set the bar to qualify high. Whereas in common use the bar is set low and i find these terms don't illuminate rather they add politics on top.

    These terms are mostly redundant in the subcontinent for similar incidents.

    Shooting people in a mosque or killing them in a church. What difference is there ? None, if seen from India. From an Indian lens. A western lens says hate crime because they don't get as much terrorism as we do.

    These people are plugging into a global network for inspiration. Same thing with the NZ shooter.

    Hate crime ? really ?


    If moderate muslims aren't radicalized, why aren't they speaking up in numbers? It has been decades since the start of islamic terrorism. Maybe moderates enjoy watching Hindus/Christians/Jews being killed from the sidelines. Moderates don't celebrate it overtly, probably give a nod at their lounge. Who knows? I have started to question everything about Islam and Muslims now. What muslims are doing today will get them sent to the gas chamber enmasse. The world is just short of that 1 madman.
    Why don't you get to know some and ask them. The moderates get pressed more on this than non-muslims because the radicals see them as collaborators or somehow impure. 95% of the victims of this extremism are muslims themselves if you look at it on the global level. Why can't they talk up because they will be shot. We see this in Kashmir already. The goal there is to set up an islamic emirate just like in Afghanistan which presently calls itself an islamic republic.

    They do speak up. There was this Canadian cleric called Tahir ul Qadri that's given a few talks. Listen to him. This was the same cleric who collaborated with Imran in 2016 on dharnas against Nawaz.

    I see rhetoric changing when commentators insist on respect in lieu of tolerance. This crimps the space for expression because anything disrespectful now becomes proscribed. Otherwise the protagonists argue like you are that the present situation is untenable that there will be a clash of civilizations

    All of this radicalism got boosted after the Iranian revolution. The Saudis got scared so they pumped in funds (~$80bn to date) into countering it. Result is wahabism gets exported every where. This wahabism then forms the basis for more extreme interpretations. Engulfing more benign interpretations that have existed for centuries in the sub continent all the way down to Indonesia.

    MBS said it was time to change this path. Significant. But there will be a long lag time before these results will be visible.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Apr 19, at 15:20.

  11. #26
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    If a muslim does it then its terrorism, if a white guy does it then its a hate crime. Why the distinction.

    I learnt on this board to avoid terms like hate crime & racism unless unavoidable. In other words to set the bar to qualify high. Whereas in common use the bar is set low and i find these terms don't illuminate rather they add politics on top.

    These terms are mostly redundant in the subcontinent for similar incidents.

    Shooting people in a mosque or killing them in a church. What difference is there ? None, if seen from India. From an Indian lens. A western lens says hate crime because they don't get as much terrorism as we do.

    These people are plugging into a global network for inspiration. Same thing with the NZ shooter.

    Hate crime ? really ?
    Was the Christchurch shooter member of a terrorist group? How many members are there in that group? Where did he get funding for the attack? Does it have international chapters, I mean is that group a global terrorist organisation? I don’t fall for false notions just because newspapers said so, as also I am not a leftist, nor am I the PM of New Zealand. I don’t have to save my political career, nor am I am diplomat. I see evil and call it out. Christchurch attack was pure evil, and the guy deserves death by hanging, but it was not terrorism. Having said that, I withhold sanctity of my POV. You have your convictions, I have mine.

    Why don't you get to know some and ask them. The moderates get pressed more on this than non-muslims because the radicals see them as collaborators or somehow impure. 95% of the victims of this extremism are muslims themselves if you look at it on the global level. Why can't they talk up because they will be shot. We see this in Kashmir already. The goal there is to set up an islamic emirate just like in Afghanistan which presently calls itself an islamic republic.

    They do speak up. There was this Canadian cleric called Tahir ul Qadri that's given a few talks. Listen to him. This was the same cleric who collaborated with Imran in 2016 on dharnas against Nawaz.

    I see rhetoric changing when commentators insist on respect in lieu of tolerance. This crimps the space for expression because anything disrespectful now becomes proscribed. Otherwise the protagonists argue like you are that the present situation is untenable that there will be a clash of civilizations

    All of this radicalism got boosted after the Iranian revolution. The Saudis got scared so they pumped in funds (~$80bn to date) into countering it. Result is wahabism gets exported every where. This wahabism then forms the basis for more extreme interpretations. Engulfing more benign interpretations that have existed for centuries in the sub continent all the way down to Indonesia.

    MBS said it was time to change this path. Significant. But there will be a long lag time before these results will be visible.
    I know enough Muslims, so don’t give me this bull of not knowing Muslims. I am always the first to condemn lynching of Muslims in India. Or for that matter, any other minority group. I condemn Hindus when their actions are barbaric and unconstitutional. Everybody, including the Muslim moderates hate Modi and the BJP. Why? You can say KSA as the spring of terrorism, and I agree, nothing more, nothing less. And if muslims really followed Tahir ul Qadri’s message, why is islamic terrorism still prevalent? Why do muslims still become terrorists and kill innocents by the 100s?

    And btw, that cleric Qadri is a Pakistan Army pawn. But you didn't know it. I have exhausted my brain thinking about terrorism. So, if you can come up with something new, some perspective I haven't thought about, or something intelligent, I'll have a debate. But, please, don't tell me I don't know moderate muslims.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  12. #27
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Was the Christchurch shooter member of a terrorist group? How many members are there in that group? Where did he get funding for the attack? Does it have international chapters, I mean is that group a global terrorist organisation? I don’t fall for false notions just because newspapers said so, as also I am not a leftist, nor am I the PM of New Zealand. I don’t have to save my political career, nor am I am diplomat. I see evil and call it out. Christchurch attack was pure evil, and the guy deserves death by hanging, but it was not terrorism. Having said that, I withhold sanctity of my POV. You have your convictions, I have mine.
    In the age of IS, its just inspiration. A larger political goal. There was an attack on a Gurudwara in the US few years ago. I'm more inclined to call that a hate crime as there was no network involved. No larger collective goal. Difference!

    NZ shooter was self funded. The people he interacted with were online worldwide with similar beliefs. A lot of symbolism and referring to something that happened as early as 700 AD. The guy writes a manifesto just like Brevik. Clear political goals and he wants the world to know about it. And then he decided enough talk and action was required and went about it and filmed it.

    We've had lone wolf attacks like this by IS in Europe. You wouldn't call one guy attacking a soldier with a meat cleaver in London a hate crime yet MO, motivations are not different. Attacks on Charlie Hebdo. Threatening cartoonists. All the same thing. They act independently but with a larger purpose.

    The results were more dramatic in NZ. Just because the death count is higher does not change any thing.

    What i'm doing here is ignoring ethnicity & religion and looking at motivations & actions


    I know enough Muslims, so don’t give me this bull of not knowing Muslims. I am always the first to condemn lynching of Muslims in India. Or for that matter, any other minority group. I condemn Hindus when their actions are barbaric and unconstitutional. Everybody, including the Muslim moderates hate Modi and the BJP. Why? You can say KSA as the spring of terrorism, and I agree, nothing more, nothing less. And if muslims really followed Tahir ul Qadri’s message, why is islamic terrorism still prevalent? Why do muslims still become terrorists and kill innocents by the 100s?
    And what replies have those moderate muslims given you to the bolded bit ?

    Modi isn't disliked by just Muslims, the south does not want him or Bengal. The Boras seem more accommodating but keep in mind the BJP has won in constituencies that had sizable muslim populations too so the picture is mixed here. I remember reading articles in 2014 with muslims in Gujarat preferring him in the spot light as he'd have less chance of causing any mischief than if he was in background. That it was safer with him in office than out just because of the glare. And what most won't admit is communal tensions are down. That there are no major incidents to speak of in his term as PM anywhere in the country. Even terrorism has stayed low in keeping with the trend from UPA2. You'd think they'd be a pickup with Modi in office but it has remained confined to Kashmir.

    We know these groups thrive where there is weak governance. Afghanistan with Taliban is a prime example. When the French moved into Mali with the African union is another example.

    In Sri Lanka they went complete Mongol on the LTTE. Sri Lanka got sanctioned as a result. HR violations through the roof. But they ended the LTTE. Exactly what the Paks have to do to sort out their problem.

    Sri Lanka knows how to fight terrorists. But the govt as it exists today isn't competent to maintain its monopoly on violence. There is a break down in communications between various wings.


    And btw, that cleric Qadri is a Pakistan Army pawn. But you didn't know it. I have exhausted my brain thinking about terrorism. So, if you can come up with something new, some perspective I haven't thought about, or something intelligent, I'll have a debate. But, please, don't tell me I don't know moderate muslims.
    When he was working with Imran he is acting like a pawn. But you're saying more. In his talks you are suggesting he's just doing PR. Talk i heard was from 2011 at a think tank. These guys would be smarter than to get some PR fellow to spin them some stories the Pak mil wants them to believe

    How many Indian muslims went to fight in Afghanistan. How many go to Kashmir. How many joined IS as a proportion of the total. I'll throw you a complimentary question. Why aren't more doing it from India.

    They aren't radicalised.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Apr 19, at 20:50.

  13. #28
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,688
    By taking away territory under IS in Iraq & Syria did the crusaders think they could prevent IS from attacking anywhere it wanted

    That is the message or rather "lesson" IS would like to impress on the world. Christians were attacked because it was the "crusaders" that drove them out of Iraq & Syria.

    The death toll in Sri Lanka surpasses the attack on a Sufi Mosque in Sinai of Nov 24 2017 which killed 310



    It's ironic that people say the intel is weak. The Sri Lankans learnt from the Israelis and paid a heavy price for their victory against the LTTE.

    But that was ten years ago
    Last edited by Double Edge; 24 Apr 19, at 06:03.

  14. #29
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  15. #30
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,388
    Last edited by Oracle; 24 Apr 19, at 14:16.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 152
    Last Post: 04 Mar 15,, 23:47
  2. Serial blasts in Ahmedabad
    By The One in forum Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn
    Replies: 262
    Last Post: 17 Aug 08,, 12:05
  3. Military 'killed Lanka aid staff'
    By Jay in forum International Economy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03 Sep 06,, 05:10
  4. Terror in Delhi.Serial blasts.20 confirmed dead so far.
    By Samudra in forum International Economy
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 13 Nov 05,, 10:45
  5. Two Israelis, including baby girl, killed in Rosh Hashana attack
    By bigross86 in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 29 Sep 03,, 07:12

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •