This Fire Needs to Be Put Out

NEWSWEEK

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: blacktofu @ 12/01/2008 6:47:45 AM

    Blaming 'external links' and Pakistan has always been India's knee-jerk reaction. But it is no panacea to its myriad woes. After all, if the terrorists were so compliant of Pakistan's wishes then surely the country would not have been the victim of devastating terrorist attacks like the gruesome bombing of Islamabad Marriot just two months ago. And even if some officials in ISI did harbor sympathy for some terrorist groups vis-à-vis the Afghan conflict with U.S.S.R in the early1990s or so, that is no longer the case. After all the group with 'ties' to Islamabad and its intelligence agency ISI now being blamed for the carnage in Mumbai is the same one that twice attempted to assassinate Pakistan's former President Musharaff, who was a military general and commander of ISI. Obviously, if the group had been in Pakistan's pocket then it would not have tried to kill its leader.

    India needs to take a leaf out of America's book. When we were targeted with equally reprehensible attacks, we did not launch a PR drive to convince the world about so-and-so's role. We went after the terrorists as hard as we could. And we took measures to monitor threat level as well as to reduce the magnitude lest we were attacked again. India, despite facing repeated attacks, has failed to do so. It is about time it changed.

  • Posted By: PJ_2000 @ 12/01/2008 6:34:09 AM

    India has never had any problems with minorities ruling the country. A case in point - first president of India was a muslim. The current prime minister is a Sikh. The current leader of the ruling party is a christian. The richest person in India not so long ago was a muslim (Azim Premji).

    The problem with India has always been one that of a corrupt polity. So the author is right on that one.

    However on the state of muslims in India - I disagree with the author. Muslims are to blame for their state They are the ones who prefer to speak a different language and send their kids to madarasas. They are the ones who oppose common law, reforms in their own law and enforcement of it. They are the ones who need to treat their own women with dignity and provide them rights. How many muslim organizations do we see that are engaged in the upliftment of their own people. Very few. As a society muslims need to get into the mainstream.

    The problem here is one that of Pakistan. As Pakistan is inching towards becoming a fully dysfunctional state, the attacks on India will only increase in their number as well as their intensity. India must work with US Israel and Pakistan to isolate and kill the terror producing factories all over pakistan.

  • Posted By: 2178743 @ 12/01/2008 5:41:27 AM

    The majority of the American public recognizes the situation Israel is in. A small, democratic country surrounded by those that wish its destruction. Israel is at constant war, and in hindsight, is not without blemish. So how does the world eradicate terrorism? By talking them to death? The war in Iraq and Afghanistan, in my humble opinion, proves Americans and the people of the world do not have the resolve for such an endeavor. This is my main point of respect for Bush, like it or not. Despite the waxing and waning support for a war, he recognizes what must be done and has taken the hits. Will Obama do the same? As terrorists continue to hit one country at a time, will the world learn terrorism is a common enemy, not just the Great Satin's and their allies?

    http://www.usefulopinions.blogspot.com

  • Posted By: hughm8 @ 11/30/2008 9:15:32 PM

    Fernandez, Al Queda never gave a damn about the Palestinians. They halfheartedly jumped on the bandwagon when its seemed to deliver a few populas hats in their ring. In other words, don't be the chump racing to explain to the rest of us about the ROOTS of these murders for power terrorists.

    • Posted By: Jack999 @ 12/01/2008 4:23:21 AM

      Other findings are comparable. More than two-thirds of Americans say their overall view of Israel is favorable. Only 11 percent, by contrast, have a favorable opinion of the Palestinian Authority. While 22 percent of the public wants Washington to conduct diplomatic relations with the Hamas-controlled Palestinian government even if it refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist as a sovereign state, 44 percent say recognition of Israel must be a precondition to relations with the United States. Another 25 percent -- one American in four -- oppose any US dealings with Hamas at all.

      Staunch American support for Israel is nothing new. In February 2005, Gallup reported similarly lopsided findings -- 69 percent of the public viewed Israel favorably, 25 percent unfavorably. In 2004, when Israel was being denounced in Europe and the United Nations for its assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the leader of Hamas, 61 percent of Americans said Israel was justified in killing him. In 2002, when a CBS News poll asked whether Israel's actions against Yasser Arafat and his forces were equivalent to US actions against Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, 59 percent agreed that they were.

      In short, solidarity with Israel is an abiding feature of American public opinion. Because the American people are pro-Israel, the American government is pro-Israel. And because Americans so strongly support Israel in its conflict with the Arabs, American policy in the Middle East is committed to Israel's defense.

      Only someone far outside the American mainstream, then, would insist that ''Israel's past and present conduct offers no moral basis for privileging it over the Palestinians." Or that US policy is engineered through a Zionist ''stranglehold on Congress." Or that ''neither strategic nor moral arguments can account for America's support for Israel," leaving only one possible explanation: ''the unmatched power of the Israel Lobby."

      The Truth is we all are fighting with a bunch of Lunatic,Babaric,Fanatic terrorist,Making worst they are everywhere and INVISBLE,unlike the conventional war we can Face on.They make us fightening all times,either at work,home,or abroad,this War just like we all fighting the invisible DEVIL itself,. that will never lasting war ,till US foreign policy change.

  • Posted By: Tan Boon Tee @ 12/01/2008 4:10:45 AM

    Here a terrorist, there a terrorist, everywhere has a terrorist.

    What has shocked the world in the Mumbai attack was not so much of the casualties (nearly 200 deaths), but the tactic used that resembles urban guerilla war-fare. Indian government seems to have caught by surprise, even though there had been unconfirmed information of the assault a week before the incidents.

    There is no point of pointing fingers. This is not India???s problem alone, for it has become a global issue. Such inhuman and heinous crime could happen anywhere, anytime, and to anyone. The UN should spearhead a concerted effort to eradicate terrorism resolutely -- never mind how much it costs, never mind how long it takes.

    What has the world degraded to? Have we not already had enough of on-going conflicts and wars?
    (Tan Boon Tee)

  • Posted By: aryanboy @ 12/01/2008 2:44:36 AM

    Fareed Zakaria is right on. Ghafoor: do you watch the news? The only terrorist caught alive has been identified and has admitted to being trained by Laskhar E Toiba.

    Muslims should stop being in denial and come to terms that there is a serious problem with many of their faith. That is the only way real change will happen!

  • Posted By: shwet @ 12/01/2008 12:50:59 AM

    after reading this whole thread,i really felt ashamed , people, being so educated and rational are playing a blame game. Evry one is praying for the safety of their own country, petty things. If we are really concerned about this problem ,think of the ideas to conteract those who are smart and are able to brainwash the innocent muslims. these terrorist are just the puppet. we need to tell them the real meaning of "jihad" . They are not out of that afghan war where they were used by the US against Russia. They need to overcome that. WE need to know thr real motive behind these attacks. Ya dats true, its INdia's weak point that so much ammunition came to the city under the nose of the police. WE need to concentrate ove rthese issues rather than playing blaming different communities.

  • Posted By: greatmidwest @ 11/30/2008 11:53:12 PM


    Every nation if possible needs to participate in Interpol, and this organization should have a political representattive from each G20 nation as well as from every nation that has endured a terrorist attack. Terrorism is a global problem and the global community must act together in their efforts to root out terrorist camps. Interpol needs to be an empowered body with a strategic objectives devised by leaders of the free world, as shared intelligence and military manuevers to deter terrorism is vital to our world's safety. it should become an agency of the United Nations. Why there is no annual summit amongst the leaders of the free world to discuss an anti-terrorism agenda is ludicrous...God Bless America

  • Posted By: QuantumOfSilence @ 11/30/2008 11:34:01 PM

    This has nothing to do with issues now been discussed. Terror is terror like KKK evil Christian based terror or Islamic terror etc. Note the number of Tutsi Hutu killed. All are Christians. Note the sectarian violence in Nigeria between Christian and Moslem. Note that Croats were Catholics who killed Moslems. Serbs were Orthodox christians and killed moslems in Bosnia. terror is terror. Bush is a born again and was responsible for a a war that took anywhere from 250,000 to a million innocent Iraqi civilian lives. So the list goes on.

    • Posted By: Sanjoy Das @ 11/30/2008 11:45:51 PM

      That is why I never started a separate thread, only replying to one or two existing ones where atheism was targeted. But in the larger scope of things, let us not forget that the motivating factor behind such terrorist attacks has almost always been religious in nature.

      That is my sincere belief, while my opponent (blackbolt) professes the diametrically opposite belief that "atheist bloodthirstiness" is the bigger cause of killings, and that religion probably enables one to stand against the "evil witnessed in Mumbai".

      Ergo the discussion is related to the original topic, albeit indirectly. But I will restrict this discussion to one thread only and request blackbolt to do the same. Point well taken.

  • Posted By: ok4u @ 11/30/2008 12:17:17 PM

    Hitller was not a Christian. He was an occultist who saw himself as a Messiah. Lot of that going around these days, too. Hitler's "Thousand Year Reich" was a perverted concept of Christ's Millenial reign, but with himself, again, as Messiah.

    • Posted By: Sanjoy Das @ 11/30/2008 1:22:00 PM

      It is a standard defense by pro-religious people to disown the evildoers of their religions.

      A sampler of Hitler's statements:

      On March 23, 1933, he addressed the Reichstag: "We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people."

      He describes his religious status: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so."

      In a speech in 1927: "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter"

      Further, Hitler may have been influenced by Martin Luther (the founder of the Protestant movement), through Luther's book: "On Jews and their Lies".

      In fat the allegations about the "Messianic" aspects of Hitler stems from only tenuous evidence by a book written by a certain Wilfried Daim. That is all. Needless to say, it can be safely assumed that Hitler was a Christian.

      And the earlier statement made by blackbolt about Hitler being motivated by "atheist bloodthirstiness" is a barefaced lie aimed to discredit atheism.

      • Posted By: blackbolt @ 11/30/2008 3:12:59 PM

        Sanjoy Das, you discredit yourself: Have you ever heard of Machiavelli. Like a wolf in sheeps clothing, he taught his followers to couch themselves in the language and affectations of their enemies. Only once they rise to power are they safe to show their true colors. That is the earlier, wolf-like Hitler you so selectively quote (1927-1933). Like the US, where every president pays lip service to religion by using phrases such as God Bless America, Hitler chose your quotations as a means of making himself respectable. Once he was undisputed dictator and aspiring world conqueror, the following quotes revealed his true nature: Christianity is an invention of sick brains, Adolf Hitler, 13 December 1941. So it's not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death," Adolf Hitler, 14 October 1941. Indeed, Christianity had declined in Germany at the time the Nazis came to power. In his book, The Dictators, Richard Overy states that in the decades preceding WWI Germany was becoming secular, and that after that war, 1918-1931, 2.4 million evangelicals renounced their faith. In Prussia only 21% of the population took communion, and in Hamburg only 5%. Professor Henri Lichtenberger in his 1937 book, The Third Reich, describes the religious life of the Weimar Republic as a place in which the large cities were "spiritual cemeteries. Jacob Marcus, in his 1934 booknotes, wrote that though his parents were both Catholics, Hitler himself had apparently no interest in any organized religion. Hitler and his magnum opus, Mein Kampf, reflect the ideology of one of his favorite philosophers, Friedrich Nietzsche. Like Nietzsche, Hitler was anti-democracy, anti-Christianity, anti-Judaism, anti-socialist and a self-acclaimed Anti-Christ who expressed his belief in a master race and the coming of a superman in many of his works. P.S. Since atheists are relativists who do not have any normative basis on which to make moral distinctions, it is laughable when you so righteously proclaim something to be a barefaced lie.

        • Posted By: Sanjoy Das @ 11/30/2008 3:40:11 PM

          It is laughable that anyone who makes a few statements against Christianity automatically becomes an "atheist". Tell me when did Hitler EXPLICITLY state that he was an atheist? In fact despite his stray comments on Christianity, Hitler NEVER formally left the Church!

          In fact, if you read up further, atheists are people who do not believe in "god". People who do not subscribe to your Christian beliefs do not automatically become atheists.

          Wikipedia has an entire article on Hitler's Christian beliefs.
          "In public, Hitler often PRAISED CHRISTIAN HERITAGE, German CHRISTIAN CULTURE, .... His private statements, as reported by his intimates, are more mixed, showing Hitler as a religious man but critical of TRADITIONAL Christianity. ... Hitler advocated a form of the Christian faith he called 'POSITIVE CHRISTIANITY'"

          Your earlier attempt to malign atheists by linking Hitler to atheism is a barefaced lie. Period.

          >P.S. Since atheists are relativists who do not have any normative basis on which to make
          >moral distinctions, it is laughable when you so righteously proclaim something to be a
          >barefaced lie.

          You know zilch about atheism, and I don't think you have it in you to actually understand it. We atheists have a more clearly defined set of ETHICAL principles. No, we do not hate homosexuals or those who do not share our beliefs. We do not have any objections to sexual promiscuity. There is nothing fundamentally wrong in them except in the eyes of a bigot. But we care about the environment, fair treatment of animals, human rights, global warming, world peace, poverty and disease, and frankly, as a group, are more peaceful than religious people are.

          Furthermore, you are not speaking about "religion" per se, even though you pretend to be speaking for all of them. You are speaking only about Christianity. You will find that non-Abrahamic religions - Hinduism, Shintoism, or Taoism, do not care about Christian "moral" issues such as homosexuality and sexual promiscuity. Religions such as Buddhism are agnostic BTW.

          • Posted By: blackbolt @ 11/30/2008 7:00:42 PM

            So your source for accuracy and truth is Wikipedia, not very compelling. However, if you accept it as reliable, note that that same article you quote says -- According to some, Hitler had a general plan, even before the rise of the Nazis to power, to destroy Christianity within the Reich.[275][276][277] The leader of the Hitler Youth stated the destruction of Christianity was explicitly recognized as a purpose of the National Socialist movement" from the start, but considerations of expedience made it impossible publicly to express this extreme position.[278]--Remember, it was you who first made a blanket statement implying that religion is the cause of most if not all of the ills of mankind. So do not be surprised when others take issue with such an obviously simplistic and bigoted notion. PS. Your claim to a more clearly defined set of ethical principles appears to be relegated to self-absorbed sexual liberation and the elitist canons of the liberal-Left ??? it is ironic that these are meaningless if based upon atheism. The religions you mention have a core normative moral code which relate to external eternal consequences based upon adherence or violation. These codes can compel humans to do unto others as they would have done to themselves even when no one else is watching; either out of devotion to a deity or fear of dire consequences in this life or the next. No matter what you say, atheism can provide no such check on human nature outside of violence or statist force i.e., if I can get away with murder and no one holds you accountable, in an atheistic world view, murder is amoral and/or beyond human construct of good or evil. As a practical matter, an atheistic ethic is flaccid and toothless and cannot stand against the EVIL just witnessed in Mumbai.

            • Posted By: Sanjoy Das @ 11/30/2008 11:25:20 PM

              Just a clarification:

              > Remember, it was you who first made a blanket statement implying that religion is
              > the cause of most if not all of the ills of mankind. So do not be surprised when others
              > take issue with such an obviously simplistic and bigoted notion.

              No, if you look back carefully, you were the one who made a blanket statements concerning "indisputable facts" about "atheist bloodthirstiness", at 11:11 AM on Nov 30, where you incorrectly stated that Hitler was an atheist.

              > PS. Your claim to a more clearly defined set of ethical principles appears to be relegated to self-absorbed sexual liberation and the elitist canons of the liberal-Left ???

              Again, if you read my previous post carefully, I clearly attributed world peace, environment human rights, etc. to ethics.

              In fact, far from relegating ethics to sexual liberation, I do not even consider sexual deviousness, homosexuality to be unethical. Those anachronistic ideas of "morality" are an obsession with certain religions - that is the point I was trying to highlight. (In fact some other religions do not. One of the sacred texts of Hinduism is the Kamasutra BTW!).

            • Posted By: Sanjoy Das @ 11/30/2008 11:00:53 PM

              You are wrong on both major issues:

              1. HITLER WAS NOT AN ATHEIST. Wikipedia may not be fully accurate, but that nowhere does it state that Hitler was an atheist is ample evidence that he wasn't. We are also not talking about the Nazi party, but specifically Hitler. Hitler certainly was not a mainstream Christian. But he never disavowed Christianity - the religion he was born into. On the contrary, he has made enough statements proclaiming his Christianity, but not a single one claiming that he wasn't.

              In fact if you go back to my original statement, you will find that I was only responding to your wildly misleading statement that Hitler was an atheist, with the sole aim of sullying atheism (according to me).

              In fact you also have linked mass murderers such as Mao and Stalin to atheism. As I mentioned, they were motivated entirely through their POLITICAL beliefs in communism, and that they were atheists is merely a coincidence. Nowhere have I seen any major statement by Mao for instance, arguing why "god" does not exist. The situation is just like the KKK who are hardcore Christians, but their actions stem from their racist views not Christian ones.

              2. THE OTHER RELIGIONS DO NOT ENTAIL ADHERENCE TO "MORALS" EITHER OUT OF DEVOTION OR FEAR OF DIRE CONSEQUENCE. A fear psychosis replacing real ethics can be found in the Abrahamic faiths, as well as a handful of non-Abrahamic ones such as Sikhism, Bahaism and some (not all) segments of Hinduism. If so, pray spell it out for me, specifically where Shintoism, Taoism, and (core) Hinduism say it. What about agnostics? By your "logic", even agnosticism can provide "no check on human nature". Buddha was an agnostic BTW. Does that make Buddha and his adherents "flaccid and toothless against evil"?

              The problem with some religions is that they replace true ethical behavior with a fear psychosis. Ethics (my preferred word) or morality is deeply ingrained into human behavior. Scientific experiments suggest that other non-human primates possess a sense of morality/fairness, and I guess, possibly dolphins as well.

              When we speak out against whaling on grounds of cruelty, or preserving the Amazonian rainforest, where do you think the guiding principles stems from? The Bible?

              On the other hand, guess what was the motivation behind the "EVIL just witnessed in Mumbai" (your words): RELIGION!

  • Posted By: samka @ 11/30/2008 10:36:54 PM

    I totally agree with a lot of commentators who mention that muslims around the world choose to live in squalor and choose to send their kids to madarsas where they are indoctrinated with the message of hate for "infidels" Mr. Zakaria I would assume that you did not go to one of these madarsas and should be thankful to your parents for that and the success you have achieved. It will be better if you would encourage the muslim community around the world to look at themselves and change. India has proved itself to be a secular, democratic society giving opportunities to all its citizens including minorities, which is reflected in a minority prime minister (manmohan Singh), atleast 3 muslim presidents, numerous ministers, most popular film stars are muslims and one of the richest guys, Azim Premji, founder of Wipro is also a muslim. None of them went to a madarsa and are therefore successful. The opportunities are their for the takers and not for the beggars and whiners.

  • Posted By: Dainzin Gyaco @ 11/30/2008 10:15:31 PM

    It is sad for all. However, India and its majority should self-examine their ill-treatments against the minorities. The muslims always feel to be marginalized...Of course, modern India was set up by British colonists, it needs a long time to digest the problems. It is not easy to unite all of those nationlities under the name of India. Moreover, it is not smart to link all the problems with the neighbour. Indian should tackle the problem internally with reconciliation but not revenge and inveigh against muslim. If you do not treat other people well,you will suffer sooner or later... Learn something from Buddha...

  • Posted By: QuantumOfSilence @ 11/30/2008 9:54:05 PM

    Incompetence by the military was glaring. the Local cops with World War -I rifles could not shoot an Elephant if it stood still. Security was joke it appears. Even the Commandos too 12 hours to deploy and were not well equipped to handle this sort of situation. But R K Narayan was damn good at threatening Sri Lanka last week when it is fighting Tiger terrorists. Even Israel says the commandos botched the operation in the Jewish Centre. That explains why the Tamil Tigers fought the Indian army to a standstill and killed over 1,200 of them after the Tigers turned on their Indian masters. Sad that 10 young terrorist thugs could hold an entire city hostage for 4 and half days like that.

  • Posted By: samka @ 11/30/2008 9:53:16 PM

    We cannot ignore the complicity of Pakistan's government. They know very well that India is growing and rising fast and at the same time they are decending into chaos. They want the chaos to spread to India so as to stop the growth. Obviously they think life is precious in India when we all know it is not so specially for the Indian government, hence they will fail at their game. Indian govts. apathy and ineptitude will infact has made the people resilient and will help Mumbai to bounce back. As far as the problem goes in the muslim world, if you look at the majority of the conflicts around the world one party is muslim. Why is that muslims are not happy anywhere they are in minority or majority? Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, Nigeria, Bosnia, UK (London), US (NY), India, Thailand, Indonesia, Phillipines, CHechnya, etc. etc., that just tells us the majority believes in jihad with arms to achieve their goals, wether it is to convert the entire planet to Islam (as per Zawahiri) or crush western values.

  • Posted By: hughm8 @ 11/30/2008 9:10:05 PM

    "The cancerous rise of fundamentalism and radicalism that has swept up Muslims everywhere has not spared India." I just read this guys book and he makes the opposite point (when covering Bush admin attitude toward Islamic radicalism and terror), saying its an extremely small group, the vast majority of muslims don't think this way and are critical of these type actions. I suppose the closer to home it hits, the more honest one must be.

  • Posted By: Fernadez @ 11/30/2008 8:22:50 PM

    India Government should STOP supporting and traiining secretly to those Nationalist Terrorist againt the Will of Freedom people and democracy ,by Stopping to incites fighting for Kashmir nationalist separatist up-north againt its neighbour Pakistan and and south Tamil Tiger againt Sri Lanka .Its understandable, why India frustation of both situations, the Pakistan Independence in 1947 and "Ceylon" Sri Lanka independence that , was once belongs to India territory but to resort through Terrorist Resort ideology is not an answer to the World stability.On Yearly basis we listen same old stories grow tired of what we heard happening in INDIA over and over again

    • Posted By: Layman @ 11/30/2008 9:06:32 PM

      Fernadez @ 11/30/2008 8:22:50 PM:: As an Indian I can tell a fact that is no longer a secret - the current Indian Government is so inept, that it could not tie its shoelaces if it wanted to. Your accusation makes no sense. Its like accusing a village idiot of planning 911. If I were you, I would try to be more realistic in your assessment!

      And the border problem that you mentioned. Pakistan always had a border problem, with its western neighbour - the Durand Line IS a contested border. In fact, Afghanistan was the ONLY nation to vote against the admission of Pakistan in the UN. Those two had problems from day one. The border problem with India IS Pakistan's own doing when it committed aggression in 1948. You may refer to the UN Resolution of that time. The border problems of Pakistan are no creation of India - so kindly do not credit us with that issue.

      As regards Mr.Prabhakaran - we have not forgotten his assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Rajiv's widow, Sonia Maino may forgive him, but we as Indians have not. He is living on borrowed time, as the Americans would say.

  • Posted By: amit64 @ 11/30/2008 9:06:28 PM

    "Did we ever see Muslim Nationalist Movement?"

    There is an effort by the RSS to include Muslims in the nationalist movement. It is called the Rashtravadi Muslim Manch. Read Tarun Vijay's blog to find out more.

  • Posted By: Fernadez @ 11/30/2008 8:48:28 PM

    IIf the USA Dont take SIDE with Isrealis ,of their years conflict with Palestine ,but ,instead being the friendly friend,balance,fairness as negotiator for them not prejudice one sided, surely i believe that AL-QUEDA will never ever EXIST in the world.
    Why do People fails to understand the cause "ROOTS" of this Stupid damn terrorist ideology ..This Terrorist Ideology are the DEVIL with human 's mask on ,they' have NO Real RELIGION what so ever ...they're NOT human Just devil.

  • Posted By: stockscreeners @ 11/30/2008 8:31:40 PM

    "The best outcome of these attacks would be if they spurred cooperation and reform. If instead they feed rivalry, bitterness and finger-pointing, the victims will have died in vain, and there will be more victims and an insecure neighborhood"
    Mr Fareed...This is an insane article. You say pakistan's miltary does sponsor jihadists and expect India to work with pakistan govt that is incompetent enough to rein on its own military? Its a recipe for disaster. That said, coming to "Hindu Nationalist Movement" did we ever see Muslim Nationalist Movement. No. The simple reason, country does not come before religion for the so called Indian Muslims (for both, Intellectual and ignorants). Religion and Country have same priority whereas all others ,surprisingly, feel country comes before religion. Does it ring bells Mr Fareed?

  • Posted By: stockscreeners @ 11/30/2008 8:31:02 PM

    "The best outcome of these attacks would be if they spurred cooperation and reform. If instead they feed rivalry, bitterness and finger-pointing, the victims will have died in vain, and there will be more victims and an insecure neighborhood"
    Mr Fareed...This is an insane article. You say pakistan's miltary does sponsor jihadists and expect India to work with pakistan govt that is incompetent enough to rein on its own military? Its a recipe for disaster. That said, coming to "Hindu Nationalist Movement" did we ever see Muslim Nationalist Movement. No. The simple reason, country does not come before religion for the so called Indian Muslims (for both, Intellectual and ignorants). Religion and Country have same priority whereas all others ,surprisingly, feel country comes before religion. Does it ring bells Mr Fareed?

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse