Which group simply reconstituted itself under a different name.

Which reminds me of the wasitis or wasitisn’t Al Qaeda debate after every bombing/explosion in Iraq in recent years.

Think tankers (and others) can get very hung up on this stuff and, consequently, miss the forest while focusing on the trees.

One thing for sure is that the point of any and all of these groups (Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, wherever…) is to sow fear, doubt and, most importantly, chaos in whatever region they’re “terrorizing”. Bringing down the worldwide financial network, from New York City to Mumbai, is another major prong of the agenda.

In light of these facts, perpetrators of this action in Mumbai would like nothing better than the governments of India and Pakistan setting at each others’ throats.

This is exactly why we (or the Israelis) need to shut down Iran’s quest yesterday. What are we waiting for?

It is a silly conversation. We are waiting because:

1. The simple fact of Israel, S Africa, France, N Korea, India, Pakistan having nukes does not mean “Each of these nations holds the whole world hostage to it’s will.” (Or the Soviets, Brits, Chinese, or Americans who have all had the reality check of other “hostage” nations not hopping to when they snap their fingers..)

2. Whoever attacks Iran may end up being blamed for sending the world into Global Depression, and for losing the pro-Western younger generation of Iranians.

3. Unless Israel works out it’s own deal with Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan on air transit – any US help in crossing those airspaces in a sneak attack to start a pre-emptive war with Iran would smear the US as fully complicit in illegal war. Strategically, Israel would be more a detriment to the US than an asset in such a situation, undoing all our present ME interests..

4. Israel has been intransigent on the matter of a denuclearized ME, even as the WMD monopoly it has enjoyed and thought it had over a century more of strategic superiority to wield is now almost over. Due to Israel’s WMD, other nations have predictably sought strategic parity. And Iran’s reasons to have the means to defend themselves from the enemies that surround it go far past just Israel. And, lacking any “guarantor” like KSA, Kuwait have with the USA? They are compelling absent a nation offering to put Iran under it’s nuclear umbrella or a comprehensive ME Peace Settlement.
A pre-emptive Israeli nuke attack on Iran would be ruinous for Israel and ruinous for the US if we back their aggression and mass slaughter.

*************
As predicted, I got a few outraged gun-lovers who attribute magical feats of crime-fighting and counter-terror to the “armed citizen” on the street with his potent, mighty weapon…

Armed citizens may be of some use in stopping criminal slaughter sprees (though not in Whitman’s case or the example of a female part-time Deputy whacking a gunman in church). But not likely to be of use in a terrorist attack unless trained and focused on a specific duty (which the “armed citizen” presently is not) and immunized from being ruined by lawsuit if they shoot or endanger citizens by acting in an unplanned, spontaneous manner or society giving them Zero benefits if they get killed or injured(presently no such immunity for “armed citizens” exist except in justifiable self defense).

Mr. Carafano,
I assume that you are aware that Pakistan has been ruled for much of its 60 odd years of existence by the Pakistani Army. The ISI and the various alphabet soup Islamic terrorist outfits based in Pakistan have been closely linked with/supported by the Pakistani Army……..so, do you really expect Pakistan to address the scourge of terrorism?

Further more, expecting Afghanistan to combat terrorism, with what?

Comment writers I give a little slack as far as typos are concerned. Article writers, though, I give no quarter. So, Mr. Carafano, missing commas and missing words means your missive misses with me.

As for the content, I’m left with the uneasy feeling that in a small way you blame the United States for the slaughter.

Your transitional expression, “At the same time,” on the second page, takes your piece into an area you didn’t really have to go. Unless, of course, the real thrust of your writing was to start pinning blame where it arguably doesn’t belong.

Your headline includes the line, “We can’t respond without the facts.” Why not we “shouldn’t”? For that matter, who’s the “we” you’re referring to?

My usual philosophy in so far as taking action is concerned: “Ready. Fire. Aim.” In fact, it’s hanging in a frame on a wall not three feet away from me.

Fact is, before all your facts are gathered, it’s been my experience that it no longer matters whether you shut the barn door or not.

If your parents were in that hotel, perhaps your response would be less measured, much less rationale and much more correct. Maybe that’s not a fair question. But, the fight or flight response is there for a reason.

Your way or my way, it appears to be a matter of survival.

“Since possessing nuclear weapons, this military brass has a strong advantage of holding the world hostage.”

This is exactly why we (or the Israelis) need to shut down Iran’s quest yesterday. What are we waiting for?

Sorry about the ongoing mess in your home country. The repetitiveness of it all is what bothers me. Granted, we in the US are blessed with two relatively friendly neighbors, neither of which is armed with nuclear weapons. It just seems that India needs to try some “cowboy” diplomacy and finally get the bastards. But at the same time, the specter of nuclear war is what kept us from going “toe to toe” with the Soviets as well. It is all just so frustrating.

MI

Besides being wrong (remember that church shooting where the attacker was taken out by an armed female security officer) your advice, which I will paraphrase as do nothing, and die, merely encourages terror. A supply of unarmed victims merely ensures that the terrorist have free reign.

I suppose your police force is a waste, because it costs a lot too. As to protecting the schools, too bad about the kids, but more will be born anyway, right?

I wonder if you’re serious. I wonder if you’re human.

Clearly the “soft targets” are those which are attacked. In India, as in most Commonwealth countries, anything civil is likely to be very soft due to population disarmament, both physically and mentally. In the US, by far the “softest targets” are those which are deemed “gun free zones”, can you say schools and hospitals. Our legislature has basically cherry picked the best targets for the terrorists. Unfortunately, we will have to suffer our own Beslan or Mumbai in order for this stupidity to be addressed. Ask any Israeli which civil institution is best protected in their country.

MI

You will find it interesting how things fold out in the YEARS ahead.

Whitman in the Texas gun tower incident was pinned down and unable to shoot effectively within minutes by fire from professors who had hunting rifles in their offices.

My information is that the police in Denver, and probably also San Francisco, would be relatively useless in this situation, while the LAPD and NYPD would be effective in minutes.

Also bear in mind that the one Littleton, Colorado police officer on duty at Columbine High School took the shooters under fire in seconds of them pulling their weapons out and, with his handgun, hit the stock of one of their long arms, firing through a mass of screaming students at 50 feet distance. That was pretty good shooting in any situation, and amazing given the circumstances. Return fire drove him to cover but his immediate accurate fire also drove them inside the building where they did less damage than they would have firing point blank at a mass of students outside. So give credit to good cops, who can make a difference.

But the most effective way to stop such attacks is to keep them from happening in the first place, and here that means pre-emptive attack on the perpetrators.

Which, here, means the Pakistani state. Pakistan already is what we feared a nuclear Iran will be – a nuclear-armed rogue state which makes terrorist attacks from bases protected by its nuclear deterrent. This was a full-bore planned operation by Pakistan’s Army via its Inter-Service Intelligence Agency.

The only way to stop Pakistan from doing this over and over is to destroy them with a massive surprise nuclear attack. It won’t be pre-emptive because they started the war.

India’s only choices now are to surrender, continue to suffer further attacks without fighting back, or fight back. They’re at war with Pakistan now, and we will be eventually. Assuming we aren’t already given that accounts controlled by Hamid Gul seem to have been the source of the $100,000 used by Mohammed Atta to fund 9/11.

I would not take a good read of this “emboldening terrorists everywhere”. That is another media cliche` like various dumbass police brass and security officials here quoted repeatedly: “We heroes have to be perfect everytime, and the terrorists lucky only once. If they are, we lose, and the terrorists win!”

That from “hero” government officials that gave us Katrina with 1/3rd of the police force deserting and the airport fingernail clipper confiscation follies…And many of them happen to be the last kid in your 1st grade class able to tie their shoes properly, or the momma one job out of welfare into a TSA uniform.. while some terrorists are sadly among the high IQ Muslim “best and brightest”.

Anyways, on the above quote:

1. Mumbai cops have radios on a unit level.

2. India’s police, like other Indian socialist bureaucracies – have cursed the country with red tape, unresponsiveness, and a “that’s the way we have done it, always” complacency. Like elsewhere, failure can be good in forcing improvement. Better training in emergencies, less focus in their bureaucratic world. While NYC cops did well on 9/11, NYC firefighters were forced to confront some ugly truths about their high casualties being as much a function of their lack of professionalism, ability to follow orders in their 9/11 Fiasco as “bad radios”.

3. “WWI” does not mean obsolete. Many law enforcement, certain military outfits, and a great number of private citizens prefer the WWI Colt .45 Semiauto. Same with all the 1898 Mauser variants that were the most common infantry weapon in BOTH World Wars, and are the basis of most modern bolt-action hunting and sniping rifles. The Indians had Enfield .303s. They shoot a more powerful and accurate long distance round than the AK-47, just not as many per minute. From a defensive position or in squad tactics “aimed” at taking out gunman in a hostage situation, they are better than excited cops charging a gunman in the middle of a large crowd with machine guns. The rifle is not the problem – it is the Indian lack of training, and perhaps testicles (and not a problem unique to Indian cops – we have our own USA examples).

4. Incidents like this always bring the usual American gun nuts out to assert that such an attack is impossible in “citizen-armed Red States” or that any attack would be quickly stopped by American gunowners pulling out their beloved, oiled&polished everyday “pieces”. Despite similar incidents in Red States involving deranged madmen that typically have 10-30 minutes to freely wreak carnage before armed resistance organizes and gets over the initial shock and disorganized steps to create a response. Even in City Hall shootings or in an Atlanta Courthouse with dozens of armed heroes (including the one the gunman got his gun from to start with).
Add the understandable prediliction of gunowners to think self-defense 1st and getting to safety and using their gun if need be to protect themselves and family, but not charging in in some sort of ad hoc assault.

5. Such an assault could happen anywhere if you have intelligent, thinking enemy. And it would be a huge waste of manpower and money – have millions of Draftees armed with M-16s “watching our coasts, our elementary schools” in a deluded attempt to create “perfect safety”. At best you end up with the Airport Charades.
In 16 seconds, the Indian birthrate negated their losses in Mumbai to terrorists.
The best response to Mumbai is not “more security means pure safety!!”. That is practically impossible in an Open, democratic society. The best response is to ensure that the people behind such an attack find themselved faced with a measured, intelligent response and the last words they have, if any, as they are dragged to a cell 2,000 miles away from the ACLU or see the Hellfire missile trail headed for them is “Whooops!”.