ady wrote:Now i wud like to say tht there are 2 types of suicide bombers. Some are doing for right reasons and some for wrong reasons and just for money matters and dirty political reasons. Though majority of them are doing the right thing. They are not targeting civilians. They are fighting and bombing the evil forces. The evil forces of US and the rest of the world who are its allies including the arab leaders.
The people have tolerated enough and they now see suicide attack as the last means. They are at war against the evil in this world. They are fighting to eliminate the evil on this earth who spread injustice and bloodshed on this earth and suk the blood of the poor and nothing else.
In the future there will b more such attacks and the bombers will seek to do maximum damage to the evil around the world. The fight will go on till the evil forces and people are wiped out. The suicide bombers are the best answer to the evils nuclear bombs and other missiles tht they drop on them and kill innocents.[/b]
Yes I agree with you. Only few leaders are patient enough to see the "cause and effect" relation. They have to ask some questions 1, Are those terrorists always brainwashed? 2, What is the cause so strong for motivating them to take their own life? 3, What kind of injustices have been done to them and what large scale measures can they take so they could peacefully rectify the problem. Yet many leaders in the contries facing the dangers od terrorism dont follow the strategy of "cause and effect" Y? Cos mainly of political reasons. If they peacefully took measures to rectify the problem like providing jobs to people, education, health benefits then I guess few ppl would suffer and the problem solved BUT politicians and the citizens would think that the leader is trying to "appease" the terrorists and he would loose support.
Now I will give an example for "cause and effect" theory. Take for example Yitzhak Rabin who signed OSlo Treaty which one editor said was like giving "cent to a beggar" some conservative Isrealis were very enraged by this Treaty cos they thought their government "yielded" to the terrorist's demands. He was assassinated by a conservative Jew. Now take another example "War on Terror" by Bush. His way of fighting terror is offensive based (war, bombing etc). His party has a propaganda (like many nations) that "terrorists ppl hate America's freedom" , "Axis of Evil"etc. His party implemented a color code which signifies the "threat" level which was successful in terrifying ppl that they are always under attack! Now he won the election cos the way he handled it "fast offensive war" (bombing Afghanistan) and ppl were happy what those fools didnt know was they were sowing seeds for future enemies and more danger.
Lastly I would like to say, the personal losses of the hostage takers does not justify the murder of somebody else's children in revenge, but it does make the point that these "terrorist" attacks do not just come out of the blue for no reason.
The people weeping in States for their own loved ones were silent when American military units were engaging in similar outrages around the world.
"Wars in far away places have a nasty habit of rebounding on people"
Peace