Now its Mumbai: I hate fundamentalists!

11/28/2008 12:20:12 PM · #51

Sadly, I think photodude would approve of this.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

11/28/2008 12:22:44 PM · #52

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by photodude:
I have not heard another viable solution in this thread.

Viable...did you say viable. If you honestly believe that your rantings are viable I guess we should thank our stars that you aren't in a position of authority.

Study history... you might learn about causes and effects and just what leads individuals to act in this manner.

Ray

Eventually we are going to elect someone who stands up and say "we're not going to take it anymore"

We did it in 1980 with Ronald Reagan and within hours of his inauguration the Tehran hostages were freed.

As for your implied non viablility of "Mutual Assured Retaliation", then what is your solution. How do we stop the Islamic Terrorists? What's your solution?

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

11/28/2008 01:01:42 PM · #53

Originally posted by photodude:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by photodude:
I have not heard another viable solution in this thread.

Viable...did you say viable. If you honestly believe that your rantings are viable I guess we should thank our stars that you aren't in a position of authority.

Study history... you might learn about causes and effects and just what leads individuals to act in this manner.

Ray

Eventually we are going to elect someone who stands up and say "we're not going to take it anymore"

We did it in 1980 with Ronald Reagan and within hours of his inauguration the Tehran hostages were freed.

As for your implied non viablility of "Mutual Assured Retaliation", then what is your solution. How do we stop the Islamic Terrorists? What's your solution?

If you earnestly believe that the release of hostages can be miraculously attributed Ronald Reagan coming to power then you really ought to study the true reasons why things transpired the way they did. Yes indeed the hostages were released when he came into power, but only because the captors did NOT want to release them during his predecessor's term in office.

As for the solution aspect of your argument, well it is painfully obvious that you do not pay that much attention, since some very viable proposals on how to deal with this issue have already been made by other posters.

If you take the time to listen to people's grievances and honestly strive to rectify real or perceived wrongs, chances are you will benefit greatly from the changes that will follow.

Mind you, these things take time and unlike wholesale bombing of a landscape are not readily and immediately discernable.

Ray

Message edited by author 2008-11-28 13:09:15.

Apple iPhone 5

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

11/28/2008 02:42:38 PM · #54

The siege is entering its third night.

These people must have been really well prepared and planned to carry out this attack. Given the fact they were able to take so many hostages, target so many high-profile buildings, and have so much weaponry - I'm assuming they're very well armed to be able to hold off groups of commandos for three nights.

Message edited by author 2008-11-28 14:42:45.

milo655321

Nikon D70

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

11/29/2008 12:06:32 AM · #55

Originally posted by photodude:

We did it in 1980 with Ronald Reagan and within hours of his inauguration the Tehran hostages were freed.

Minutes, actually. Read Mark Bowden's Guests of the Ayatollah. The hostage release was brokered by the Carter administration in the Algiers Accords in the final days of his presidency. While it is true that the members of the Iranian revolution didn't want to deal with the unknown in President Reagan, they had been looking for a way out of the hostage crisis which had become an internal and international burden. The change in administrations offered an opportunity to resolve an increasingly inconvenient situation.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

11/29/2008 01:58:33 AM · #56

Originally posted by photodude:

Actually we havent heard a sound from them. The silence is deafening.

Originally posted by Los Angeles Times (reprinted in the Tacoma News Tribune), 11/28/08:

Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, said his government condemned the attacks in Mumbai.

Prash

Nikon D90

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/29/2008 02:16:38 AM · #57

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by photodude:
Actually we havent heard a sound from them. The silence is deafening.

Originally posted by Los Angeles Times (reprinted in the Tacoma News Tribune), 11/28/08:
Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, said his government condemned the attacks in Mumbai.

The PM of India had requested the PM of Pakistan to send over the chief of their intelligence body, the ISI. The Indian authorities wanted to share all the evidence they found linking these attacks to certain elements in Pakistan.

At first, Pak PM condemned the attacks and agreed to send the official over. But I just read that they have made a U-turn on their promise and are now sending a lower level official.

It is all propaganda from the Pak government. I heard that there are parts in Pakistan which are off-limits of their government. They probably dont even have a say in where and how the terrorist training camps are run under their nose. What a bunch of retards!

I do understand that violence cant be ended with more violence and hatred. But if someone is already full of hatred, unprovoked, I firmly believe there is nothing wrong in returning that with hatred.

ETA:

Here is a website (India based media channel ) that have live video updates.

Message edited by author 2008-11-29 04:30:38.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

11/29/2008 08:13:31 AM · #58

Now that the seige is over and the dust is settling we can see the final results.

Over 200 deaths, hundreds more injured, buildings and businesses ruined.

My opinion is this...

Islam and its followers must learn to live in peace in an increasingly smaller and overpopulated world. If they can't, they must perish for the sake of mankind. The choice is theirs. "Live in Peace or Perish"

pawdrix

Nikon D700

11/29/2008 09:29:18 AM · #59

Originally posted by photodude:

Islam and its followers must learn to live in peace in an increasingly smaller and overpopulated world. If they can't, they must perish for the sake of mankind. The choice is theirs. "Live in Peace or Perish"

"Islam and its followers..."

I'd be more comfortable if you'd said terrorists but you didn't and fear you've moved into dangerous territory proposing genocide.

I'd say it's set in stone that you yourself are an extremist and have a good deal in common with the people that stormed Mumbai, at least on an intellectual level.

This is not what our country is about or should embrace. Sad, sad, sad...

11/29/2008 10:14:04 AM · #60

Originally posted by photodude:

Like the system of justice that would commit an atrocity in response to an atrocity, like blinding someone with acid for blinding someone with acid, your position is horrifying and ironic. Without seeming to realize it, you are in lock step with the terrorists.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

11/29/2008 12:22:47 PM · #61

Its easy to criticize using force to disuade further Islamic Terrorism. If you are against that strategy (and assuming you are against this terrorism), then what is your strategy?

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

11/29/2008 12:28:55 PM · #62

saying all muslims are terrorists is like saying all baptists can be represented by "brother phelps" and westboro baptist.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

11/29/2008 12:37:18 PM · #63

Originally posted by karmat:

saying all muslims are terrorists is like saying all baptists can be represented by "brother phelps" and westboro baptist.

All Germans werent Nazi's either but it's fair to say that in the late 1930's they had fairly broad support amongst the German population. So should we have only targeted those Germans who were members of the Nazi party.

The terrorists are a minority of Muslims. BUT, they have the support of the average/mainstream Muslim. There is no outcry against the terrorists in the mainstream Muslim world and certainly no effort by them to get their own house in order.

So just like the average German looked the other way (and even cheered) when the Nazis did there thing, we see the same thing in the Islamic world.

So I ask again - WHAT IS THE OTHER SOLUTION?

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

11/29/2008 12:56:37 PM · #64

Originally posted by photodude:

Originally posted by karmat:
saying all muslims are terrorists is like saying all baptists can be represented by "brother phelps" and westboro baptist.

All Germans werent Nazi's either but it's fair to say that in the late 1930's they had fairly broad support amongst the German population. So should we have only targeted those Germans who were members of the Nazi party.

The terrorists are a minority of Muslims. BUT, they have the support of the average/mainstream Muslim. There is no outcry against the terrorists in the mainstream Muslim world and certainly no effort by them to get their own house in order.

So just like the average German looked the other way (and even cheered) when the Nazis did there thing, we see the same thing in the Islamic world.

So I ask again - WHAT IS THE OTHER SOLUTION?

The irony in this example is that you are wanting, in effect, to do the same thing to the Muslims that the Nazis did to the Jews. :/

Edited to add -- Furthermore, many of the German people went along with the Nazis because the propaganda led them to believe the Jews were the one that stole their jobs, were hoarding their money and that they were the enemy. They also told them that Germany could once again be the great country it once was if the Jewish "problem" was handled. First by moving them "out of sight," and then by implementing the "final solution." The Nazis got the German support by making all Jews evil enemies. As a result, the Jews were no longer "human" and the Nazis could proceed.

I should hope that we have learned something from the Holocaust. At the barest minimum -- that you cannot annihilate entire groups of people just because you don't like them or agree with them. Or in this situation, eliminating an entire group because you don't like what a small percentage of them do.

Again, I don't actively campaign against westboro other than occasionally calling them "kooks," so does that mean I condone what they say and do.

The solution? I have no idea what is the right way. BUT, I know that eliminating an entire people group will NOT do it. History has shown that trying to eliminate entire groups, especially religious groups simply makes them stronger and more determined. It really doesn't solve anything.

Godwins law invoked, yet? :P

Message edited by author 2008-11-29 13:18:02.

Sigma 85mm f/1.4 for Canon

11/29/2008 02:27:23 PM · #65

Originally posted by karmat:

Originally posted by photodude:

Originally posted by karmat:
saying all muslims are terrorists is like saying all baptists can be represented by "brother phelps" and westboro baptist.

All Germans werent Nazi's either but it's fair to say that in the late 1930's they had fairly broad support amongst the German population. So should we have only targeted those Germans who were members of the Nazi party.

The terrorists are a minority of Muslims. BUT, they have the support of the average/mainstream Muslim. There is no outcry against the terrorists in the mainstream Muslim world and certainly no effort by them to get their own house in order.

So just like the average German looked the other way (and even cheered) when the Nazis did there thing, we see the same thing in the Islamic world.

So I ask again - WHAT IS THE OTHER SOLUTION?

The irony in this example is that you are wanting, in effect, to do the same thing to the Muslims that the Nazis did to the Jews. :/

Edited to add -- Furthermore, many of the German people went along with the Nazis because the propaganda led them to believe the Jews were the one that stole their jobs, were hoarding their money and that they were the enemy. They also told them that Germany could once again be the great country it once was if the Jewish "problem" was handled. First by moving them "out of sight," and then by implementing the "final solution." The Nazis got the German support by making all Jews evil enemies. As a result, the Jews were no longer "human" and the Nazis could proceed.

I should hope that we have learned something from the Holocaust. At the barest minimum -- that you cannot annihilate entire groups of people just because you don't like them or agree with them. Or in this situation, eliminating an entire group because you don't like what a small percentage of them do.

Again, I don't actively campaign against westboro other than occasionally calling them "kooks," so does that mean I condone what they say and do.

The solution? I have no idea what is the right way. BUT, I know that eliminating an entire people group will NOT do it. History has shown that trying to eliminate entire groups, especially religious groups simply makes them stronger and more determined. It really doesn't solve anything.

Godwins law invoked, yet? :P

It was the Germans that learned "Live in Peace or Perish"

As for brainwashing due to propoganda... Did it matter to us why they (the Germans) felt as they did? The same for holds true today for the Islamics. Does it matter if they think the Koran says we are infidels or they are mesmirized by leaders to thinking that we must all become Muslim or be eliminated? In the end the only philosophy that will end this is making sure they understand "Live in Peace or Perish"

RKT

Canon EOS-60D

11/29/2008 03:30:12 PM · #66

Originally posted by photodude:

Its easy to criticize using force to disuade further Islamic Terrorism. If you are against that strategy (and assuming you are against this terrorism), then what is your strategy?

There is no easy "solution" or "strategy", don't you get that? Blowing shit up will not stop the problem. All you will do is create more terrorists. We need to understand why terrorism is happening, it is about sooooooo much more than simply being Muslim.

And again...have you EVER spoken in a meaningful way with someone of the Islamic faith? You never answered that. And the silence is not deafening as far as the Muslim community speaking out, the media just doesn't cover it all that much. Your "solutions" are elementary and lazy. This is a deep worldwide problem and it will take worldwide work and understanding to end it.

I do not condone terrorism, but to solve a problem, we need to really understand the problem. It is about so much more than religion, that is the facade that terrorism operates under, an excuse...the thing that gathers the weak in the herd. It is about power, greed, feeling disenfranchised, poverty, lack of education and so much more.

Deepak Chopra has some great thoughts on the subject.

ETA: 2 interesting articles here and here.

Message edited by author 2008-11-29 15:52:20.

JMart

Nikon D80

Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di for Nikon

11/29/2008 03:31:21 PM · #67

Violent protests & killings following the Danish political cartoons depicting Mohamed is something that should have rung alarm bells with every moderate Muslim and non-Muslim in the world. People are either deluding themselves or ignorant of clear calls to violence in the Quran if they don't recognize that fundamentalist Muslim extremists are significantly more dangerous than most other religious fundamentalist extremists (Westboro Baptist Church is very offensive, but they don't rise to the level of murdering people en mass)

I'm not in the bomb-the-hell-out-of-all-of-them camp, but I also think it's reckless for westerners to ignore the core arguments

photodude raises, that there is a serious problem in the world, specifically with fundamentalist Islam, that needs to be addressed. Here in the US I am probably among some of the best of the best when it comes to moderate followers of Islam who do not regard the Quran as the literal word of Allah to be carried out to the point of becoming murderers and some here have spoken out against past atrocities by extremist Muslims. The problem however is that the Quran, read literally, can very easily be used to create cold blooded murderers, and admittedly, it's particularly easy to manipulate vulnerable Muslims when it's been so incredibly easy for so long now to point to actions by the US and other western countries as committing atrocities against Islam (I think it's called "blowback" in the 9/11 report).

I'm not going to pretend to have a solution, but I'm also not willing to ignore that there is a major problem. I was horrified after the cartoon episode that EVERY western press outlet didn't choose to publish those cartoons in order to say, "Freedom of thought is supreme and you will not scare us into submission!" Instead, Muslim extremists got exactly what they wanted; All western media outlets were scared into submission. If I have a beginning to the solution it would be that freethinking people demonstrate their freedom and not be afraid to criticize fundamentalist Muslims.

pawdrix

Nikon D700

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

11/29/2008 08:25:51 PM · #68

Originally posted by photodude:

So I ask again - WHAT IS THE OTHER SOLUTION?

The Final Solution?

eta: You're suggesting The Final Solution?

Cool. (sarcasm)

Message edited by author 2008-12-01 13:05:05.

11/29/2008 08:59:38 PM · #69

Originally posted by photodude:

All Germans werent Nazi's either but it's fair to say that in the late 1930's they had fairly broad support amongst the German population.

I'm not certain you can say this with any kind of accuracy.

Originally posted by photodude:

So should we have only targeted those Germans who were members of the Nazi party.

No, the Allies should have done what they actually did: outlaw all Nazi organizations and target the leaders, but leave the millions of Nazi party members alone.

11/30/2008 05:40:06 AM · #70

Originally posted by photodude:

It's time to implement MUTUAL ASSURED RETALIATION. We should find out where each of the suicide shooters/bombers come from and just level their villages and towns taking all of their relatives, friends and neighbors out as well. Some would say thats not fair, but next time someone is living next door to Ahmad who they know is planning some sort of attack, they will step up and do what they have to do to stop it, because Ahmad is going to get them killed.

This would work in the same way that Mutual Assured Destruction kept the US and USSR from engaging in nuclear war for 45 years.

There is a very high chance that the one living next door to Ahmad doesn't know anything, let alone knows where for example Mumbai is, as he has never been further from his home than the next village, a day's walk from his own.

And maybe Ahmad threatened to shoot the neighbours wife and children if he didn't keep his mouth shut.

So in that case it must really suck to be Ahmad's neighbour no? If he tells anyone Ahmad or his friends kill his family. If he doesn't tell anyone you will kill his family.... By that logic we can just as well blow up the world.

11/30/2008 06:13:17 AM · #71

Originally posted by photodude:

Yeah, its been reassuring hearing the repsonse coming from mainstream Islam the past few days expressing their outrage about the actions of a few radicals who dont represent them or their "faith", and they would all work dilligently to eradicate this begavior.

Actually we havent heard a sound from them. The silence is deafening. Again the only way to stop this is to introduce the CERTAINTY of overwhelming retaliation. The message is you leave us alone and we leave you alone. But screw with us and we will bury you. I have not heard another viable solution in this thread.

The problem with the Islam is that there is no superboss. There is no pope, no cardinal, no bishop or whatever who can be questioned by the media and talk for all. So they can not send out a press release to all the world that will be picked up by the media as the genuine answer of all Muslims to whatever happens.
And no, the president of Iran, the great Ayatollah of Iran, the president of Saudi-Arabia or Indonesia is not the boss of the Islam. There is no super structure of organisation. Actually the Ayatollah of Iran only speaks for a small group and this group happens to be very orthodox. So don't expect much from them.
The 2nd problem is that there are many many different streams in Islam (like Christianity too with Catholic, Protestant, Greek orthodox, Russian orthodox, Church of England etc etc etc). 90% of those streams are peaceful loving people. 9,95% are orthodox and 0,05% is fundamentalist. That is the same with Christians and the same with Jews.

Ask a mullah at your nearest Mosque what he thinks about it all. I am sure he has an opinion but that the media do not listen to such a small man in the big world of Islam.

So for an official statement, here you have it:

It is terrible what is happening. It should not be happening. I am very sorry for all the victims. I will try to do my utmost best to stop anyone who plans this terrorism. These terrorists have jack-all to do with faith. Their only goal is to gain power and control over people. They abuse religion for these purposes. They are not real Muslims. They are terrorists and deserve to die.

I will not deny that there are Muslim streams that envision a great Muslim worldstate and want to kill all that don't comply with this idea, I do want to stress that this is a minority vision.

Yes, while I don't walk around with a piece of cloth around my head and a dress, while I don't beat my wife and don't let her walk 20 steps behind me, while I won't kill my daughter if she sleeps with a man before marriage, while I don't arrange my daughters marriage, while I don't have any plans to blow up anything or anyone and don't chant prayers all day, I am officialy muslim. So that's an official reaction...

11/30/2008 06:40:37 AM · #72

Originally posted by photodude:

It was the Germans that learned "Live in Peace or Perish"

As for brainwashing due to propoganda... Did it matter to us why they (the Germans) felt as they did?

As a matter of fact it did matter to us why the Germans felt like they did. The damage paybacks for the first worldwar in gold (this is important) + the economic crisis at the end of the 1920's led to a situation where Germany has hyper inflation, could impossibly pay the damages in gold. So the germans were piss-pour, lost all they had and were very open to anyone who could get them out of the extremely bad conditions they had to live in. This is what made it possible for Hitler to be democratically chosen. And he did lead Germany forward. He stopped paying the damage, invested in the country, created jobs and used this as a cover-up for his fundamentalist plans to conquer the world and kill all non-Arien people. Well, since he got Germany out of the mud, his other plans must be good too (helped by very well thought out media strategies) they thought. So they set off killing millions of jews, and creating a war that killed another 40 million or so.

So that is why after the 2nd world war they did not level Germany (most of it was already leveled anyway) and did not ask again for damage payments (or the due ones of WW1 be fullfilled). Instead they tried to get a normal government in place as soon as possible and even gave the Germans money to rebuild.

The result is that we now have a stable European Union, with less nationalism and people who have no desire to piss other countries off all the time, like we did in the 2000 years before that with a 10 year interval.

Message edited by author 2008-11-30 06:41:43.

11/30/2008 06:45:30 AM · #73

Originally posted by photodude:

The terrorists are a minority of Muslims. BUT, they have the support of the average/mainstream Muslim. There is no outcry against the terrorists in the mainstream Muslim world and certainly no effort by them to get their own house in order.

In the mainstream muslim world where my family in law comes from there is. You only cannot hear them.

They cannot get their own house in order, because there is no house.

11/30/2008 09:24:28 AM · #74

Originally posted by Azrifel:

The neighbors know. No different than when you live in Howard Beach NY and John Gotti is your neighbor. No different than when you live in South Central LA and your neighbor is a Blood or a Crip. No different than when you live in Belfast and your neighbor is an IRA militant. You know.

Will it take courage for the neighbor do actually do something? It sure will. There are 2 great motivators in life - greed and fear. In this situation, we need to make the fear of doing nothing more than the fear of speaking up or acting in advance. That is accomplished by Mutual Assured Retaliation. Meaning if the neighbor does nothing, he and all of his neighbors face certain death. And I won't even discuss the neighbor who is giving money to buy the bombs or ammo.

I have no doubt that we wouldn't have to do this twice. Once the Islamic world sees our seriousness and committment to doing this, they will get their act together and choose to live in peace rather than perishing, and begin to police themselves.

If you think this wrong - then what is the alternative solution?