From freedom fighters to terrorists: US attitude shift

tramp

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
1,464
Likes
580
When it comes to terror from South Asia specifically AfPak region, the US is responsible to a large extent.

Use of "mujahideen" against the Soviets and glorifying them as their abilities. Turning a blind eye to the terror directed against India by Pakistan.

I means these are those same very people not new ones. You reap what you sow is an old saying. America cannot be absolved of promoting terror and I will also add proliferation of nukes by winking at the ChiPak nexus.

If God forbid a nuke bomb makes it way to the US from Pak, the US should blame itself.
The only way the US can absolve themselves is by shedding their policy of cosying up to merchants of death operating out of Pakistan. Otherwise, these Hafeed Saeeds and Masood Azhars, who cloak their retrograde ideologies in anti-India rhetoric, will not let go of any chance to grab a larger world stage by turning against the US or its allies.

All this Pakistani talk about non-state actors and rogue elements is nothing but an admission of the penetration of the ISI and military by Taliban elements. In a situation where the rot has penetrated to the core, nothing will stop these rogue elements from grabbing the most important toy, the nukes. If they have the nukes, India alone will not be on their cross hairs.
 
Last edited:

tramp

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
1,464
Likes
580
Easy to say this when you have the benefit of hindsight and the USSR is no longer breathing fire on US' back...
But think again, has even the hindsight helped the US? They are promoting the same policy of hitting only 'bad terrorists'.


Yeah. Thanks to the stupid decision of the USSR to invade Afghanistan Islamic militancy has been given a boost!


But the USSR provided the excuse to unleash that experiment.
Soviets were stupid. But the US were even more stupid. During the entire Cold War, did the US have a single attack on mainland USA? And what did you get after sleeping with the militants? And what do you continue to get even to this day? You can boast about the best multi-layered security system, but nothing will prevent even future attacks because terrorists had a deadly tool with which to control minds of thousands inside US.


Are there good Islamic militants?
You should ask CIA about this good terrorists and bad terrorists , our terrorists and their terrorists concepts... that is the policy that the US has followed in Pakistan. For a start look up David Headly... and the whole concept that so long as they do not act against the US, they are useful assets to have irrespective of their activities elsewehre even if it does not help US interests in any way!!

Have you not heard about this agreement with Pakistan for drone use... so long as LeT camps stay out, no problem hitting Afghan Taliban. Now, do you think the smart asses in CIA cannot figure out that ISI can keep shuffling their assets on the basis of the value they attach to them from terror camp to terror camp?
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
But think again, has even the hindsight helped the US? They are promoting the same policy of hitting only 'bad terrorists'.
Let's just say that they have their own priorities...


Soviets were stupid. But the US were even more stupid. During the entire Cold War, did the US have a single attack on mainland USA? And what did you get after sleeping with the militants? And what do you continue to get even to this day? You can boast about the best multi-layered security system, but nothing will prevent even future attacks because terrorists had a deadly tool with which to control minds of thousands inside US.
I wouldn't say the Americans were more stupid than the Soviets after all we know now who collapsed between them.


You should ask CIA about this good terrorists and bad terrorists , our terrorists and their terrorists concepts... that is the policy that the US has followed in Pakistan. For a start look up David Headly... and the whole concept that so long as they do not act against the US, they are useful assets to have irrespective of their activities elsewehre even if it does not help US interests in any way!!

Have you not heard about this agreement with Pakistan for drone use... so long as LeT camps stay out, no problem hitting Afghan Taliban. Now, do you think the smart asses in CIA cannot figure out that ISI can keep shuffling their assets on the basis of the value they attach to them from terror camp to terror camp?
Again, they have their priorities. Unfortunately these priorities don't completely fit with the Indian priorities. But I think they do intersect most of the time which is a good thing to start with. Besides, I don't think it's in anybody's interest to see a collapsed Pakistan. That would be more dangerous to everybody.

BTW, I'm not an American.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Do you think there would have been NO Mujahideen's had the US not dip its finger in the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? Anybody who entertains this this thought is living in lala land.
Mujahideen minus $$$, stingers, CIA, professional training etc would have been swallowed up by Soviets.
 

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,478
Likes
17,797
Mujahideen minus $$$, stingers, CIA, professional training etc would have been swallowed up by Soviets.
Stingers myth is still persistent Soviet helicopter losses were massively caused by 12.7mm caliber weapons,MANPADS like SA-7,Stingers,Blowpipe had overall low rates.

Not to mentioned Haqqani (who is reported to be behind Indian embassy bombing) was glorified by US Senator Charlie Wilson himself a good for nothing.

Overall thank you CIA and USA for stirring up Islamic extremism to new heights and sincerely believe that its good they get a dose of their own medecine. Before 9/11 people were victims of terror it was just no white people getting slained though.


PS:Charlie Wilson war movie is the greatest Bullshit movie of all times :)
 

dhananjay1

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
3,291
Likes
5,544
It's simple, if one attacks US interests, he is a terrorist. If one attacks US approved enemies, he is a freedom fighter.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Mujahideen minus $$$, stingers, CIA, professional training etc would have been swallowed up by Soviets.

Maybe, but their brothers in arms would still have grown into what they are now. More so I think since their Mujahideen brothers might have failed in defeating the Soviets and got slaughtered in the process. They will see it as a complicity of the West with the Soviets against Muslims. They will end up ahving more reason to hate the West and America in particular and would even be more fearocious in their Islamic Jihad... You see it's a damn if you do and damn if you don't situation for America.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
My opinion:

The Soviets and the Russians have been a doing a lot of things right, and the US, a lot of things wrong, ever since the Soviet-Mujahideen War that started in 1979.

If 9/11 and Boston are trends to go by, how long before there is another attack from someone from Syria?


@W.G.Ewald, @average american, @Energon, @Tronic, @asianobserve, @Akim, @Lidsky M.D, @Lubov, @KuleshovOleg
Who could possibly know? It seems Islam as it exists anywhere is antithetical to the American Way of Life. We will be the the Great Satan forever; some days even I think so. :-(
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,920
Likes
98,472
Country flag
1. How could someone who grew up in the United States become a terrorist?

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who killed 13 people at Fort Hood Army Base in Texas in 2009, was born and raised in Virginia.


He self-radicalized, in part, over the Internet, which he used to reach out to the Yemen-based preacher Anwar al-Awlaki for advice about whether it is permissible for Muslim soldiers in the U.S. military to kill their comrades in the name of jihad.

Awlaki, a leader of al Qaeda's affiliate in Yemen, was somewhat noncommittal in his responses but did not discourage the act.

Investigators will surely be combing through the e-mail traffic of the Tsarnaev brothers to see if they either reached out to militant Islamist clerics or downloaded lectures by such clerics. They will also examine the brothers' Internet usage to see if they visited jihadist forums or downloaded propaganda from al Qaeda or other allied groups. And of course, it's possible their decision to carry out the attacks was reached without any outside influence.

2. How do you square the multiple descriptions of the brothers as "good guys" with the fact that they plotted mass murder?

It's worth recalling that Mohammed Sidique Khan, the leader of the suicide attackers who bombed the London transit system in 2005 killing 52 commuters, was a beloved teacher at a primary school in the northern city of Leeds who taught children with developmental problems, and the happily married 30-year-old father of a baby daughter. Colleagues and acquaintances described Khan as a gentle, kind man.

No surprise then that we are hearing some similar positive characterizations of the brothers Tsarnaev.

3. Did the brothers have any training or practice on explosives?

It seems quite unlikely that the perpetrators would have been able to successfully set off two deadly bombs within seconds of each other without some sort of training or practice.

Bomb-making recipes certainly exist on the Internet, but actually building effective bombs is generally a skill that requires some training or practice, and even then a successful detonation is not guaranteed.

Faizal Shahzad, for instance, received bomb-making training from the Pakistani Taliban before he constructed a bomb in an SUV that fizzled out rather than blowing up as he intended in Times Square on May 1, 2010.

The older Tsarnaev brother, Tamerlan, spent six months in Russia last year. What precisely he did there will surely be of intense interest to investigators. Could he have received some kind of bomb-training from Chechen militants who are experienced in making explosives?

Also, might the brothers have done some kind of test runs of their explosive devices in the United States?

4. If the brothers' motivation had something to do with their Chechen heritage, how might that have played out in this case?

In the years after 9/11, dozens of young Somali-American men traveled to fight in the civil war in Somalia. Just as the Tsarnaev brothers, these Somali-Americans were first-generation Americans.

For these new Americans, the politics of their homeland can sometimes become more meaningful and important than it was for their parents who fled the chaos of their native countries for the safety of the United States, and who now want to put those conflicts behind them.

What exactly prompted the FBI to interview Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2011, following a tip from an unidentified foreign government that he was "a follower of radical Islam" and was contemplating leaving the United States to join a clandestine organization? And was this tip provided by the Russian government, which has been at war in Chechnya on and off since the 19th century?

5. Did the brothers intend to die during the attacks or their aftermath?

It seems shocking to many that the Tsarnaev brothers might have been wearing suicide vests during their gun battle with police on Thursday night, but in reality several U.S. citizens and residents have intended to die in terrorist attacks.

Three of the young Somali-American men who traveled from Minnesota to fight in civil war in Somalia later carried out suicide attacks there.

Major Hasan undoubtedly went into his attack on a military base full of armed U.S. soldiers believing that it would be the last thing he did before he died. (That prediction did not come true. He was wounded in the attack but not killed).

Al Qaeda recruit Najibullah Zazi, who plotted to bomb the Manhattan subway in the summer of 2009, planned to die in this attack but was arrested before he could pull it off.

6. Were the brothers really "lone wolves"?

Given all the mayhem the two brothers are allegedly responsible for: Two bombings that caused three deaths and some two hundred injuries at the Boston Marathon as well as the subsequent murder of a policeman at MIT, did they have some kind of additional help?

According to Boston law enforcement officials, there is no evidence of such help and it's worth recalling that Hasan was entirely a lone wolf who nonetheless managed to kill 13 on a U.S. military base with heavy security.

7. How unusual is it for brothers to carry out terrorist attacks together?

More frequent than you might think. The deadliest terrorist attack in U.S. history on 9/11 involved three pairs of brothers among the 19 hijackers: brothers Waleed and Wail al-Sheri, Hamza and Ahmed al-Ghamdi and Nawaf and Salem al-Hazmi.
Opinion: Seven questions about the Boston bombers - CNN.com
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Maybe, but their brothers in arms would still have grown into what they are now. More so I think since their Mujahideen brothers might have failed in defeating the Soviets and got slaughtered in the process. They will see it as a complicity of the West with the Soviets against Muslims. They will end up ahving more reason to hate the West and America in particular and would even be more fearocious in their Islamic Jihad... You see it's a damn if you do and damn if you don't situation for America.
Who knows? Pak would have been sanctioned in early 80s for nukes program. May be US would have bombed Pak back then and finished its nuke program. Pakis would have not got the F-16s.

Tangos would not have get the training and other assistance and basically how to fight a long drawn out war of attrition which has now been used against the US itself that they are now being forced to leave.

The US can of be absolved of all the blame. US on more than one occasion has displayed the Texas attitude. Shoot first and ask questions later. That may not be te right policy all the time.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Who knows? Pak would have been sanctioned in early 80s for nukes program. May be US would have bombed Pak back then and finished its nuke program. Pakis would have not got the F-16s.

Tangos would not have get the training and other assistance and basically how to fight a long drawn out war of attrition which has now been used against the US itself that they are now being forced to leave.

The US can of be absolved of all the blame. US on more than one occasion has displayed the Texas attitude. Shoot first and ask questions later. That may not be te right policy all the time.

Islamic fundamentalism did not originate solely from Pakistan. Even if Pakistan may have been destroyed to rubble in the 80s I'm 100% sure that Islamic militancy will still be around by now. It's no coincidence that Islamic Jihad is becoming prominent now. This is because with the integration of the World through technology and with it the spread of modern ideas a lot of these puritanical Muslims are feeling under threat. They are lashing out in a destructive reactionary way the best way they know by killing and terrorising people around the World.
 

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,001
Likes
8,503
Country flag
The Slavs did not mock the losers and do not speak ill of the dead. Soviet Union is dead, so you should not play on his bones.
 

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,478
Likes
17,797
The Slavs did not mock the losers and do not speak ill of the dead. Soviet Union is dead, so you should not play on his bones.
What about the Ukrainian veterans of that war, I mean what's their status now.

Any recognition of what they did etc
 

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,001
Likes
8,503
Country flag
What about the Ukrainian veterans of that war, I mean what's their status now.

Any recognition of what they did etc
The participants of the war (1979-89) in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus have the status of internationalist soldiers.
 

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,478
Likes
17,797
The participants of the war (1979-89) in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus have the status of internationalist soldiers.
What I meant was how is the legacy of this war in Ukraine nowadays among civilians, youngsters and specially the veterans of this war
 

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,001
Likes
8,503
Country flag
What I meant was how is the legacy of this war in Ukraine nowadays among civilians, youngsters and specially the veterans of this war
No, we did not contest their status. And they are well respected. It's just soldiers, not politicians and they honestly fulfilled their duty. So even taught in schools as a lesson of patriotic education. And on Feb. 15 - a day of remembrance for those who died in that war.
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/military-history/47773-february-15-day-withdrawal-soviet-troops-afghan.html
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
Islam is a religion of peace, compassion and brotherhood.

There are some bigots who do this, they are not Muslims, they are brainwashed and have nothing to do with Islam.

e.g.: Boston Bombers.
Yeah yeah we all know :rolleyes:

When it comes to terror from South Asia specifically AfPak region, the US is responsible to a large extent.
Use of "mujahideen" against the Soviets and glorifying them as their abilities. Turning a blind eye to the terror directed against India by Pakistan.
I means these are those same very people not new ones. You reap what you sow is an old saying. America cannot be absolved of promoting terror and I will also add proliferation of nukes by winking at the ChiPak nexus.
If God forbid a nuke bomb makes it way to the US from Pak, the US should blame itself.
The "mistake" US was not just creating "mujahideen" but leaving AF all of a sudden.But unless US faces a really big attack(like 9/11 or nuke) on it's mainland their policies would not change.US might have to pay a BIG price of creating and supporting terrorists.

Islamic fundamentalism did not originate solely from Pakistan. Even if Pakistan may have been destroyed to rubble in the 80s I'm 100% sure that Islamic militancy will still be around by now. It's no coincidence that Islamic Jihad is becoming prominent now. This is because with the integration of the World through technology and with it the spread of modern ideas a lot of these puritanical Muslims are feeling under threat. They are lashing out in a destructive reactionary way the best way they know by killing and terrorising people around the World.
Pakistan took the initiative to be a hub and breeding ground of new age Islamic Extremism and Pakistan HAS TO BE BLAMED FOR THAT.Almost all terrorist activities are linked back to Pakistan.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
FBI interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev after 2011 tip

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Russian FSB intelligence security service told the FBI in early 2011 about information that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings, was a follower of radical Islam, two law enforcement officials said Saturday.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout, and his younger brother was captured alive. They were identified by authorities and relatives as ethnic Chechens from southern Russia who had been in the U.S. for about a decade.

According to an FBI news release issued Friday night, a foreign government said that based on its information, Tsarnaev was a strong believer and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the U.S. for travel to the Russian region to join unspecified underground groups.

The FBI did not name the foreign government, but the two law enforcement officials identified the FSB as the provider of the information to one of the FBI's field offices and also to FBI headquarters in Washington. The two officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record about the matter.

The FBI said that in response, it interviewed Tsarnaev and relatives, and did not find any domestic or foreign terrorism activity. The FBI said it provided the results in the summer of 2011. The FBI also said that it requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.

The bureau added that in response to the request, it checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans and education history.

Source: FBI interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev after 2011 tip - News - Boston.com
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
The two officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record about the matter.
From the post above.

Why? Is it still a taboo to tell the American people the reality, that Russia is not an evil empire, but a country with normal people who are trying to get on with their lives?

And are politicians allowed to deliver hate speech? Apparently so. Why are the gullible American population buying all this crap?

Romney: Russia Our Number One Geopolitical Foe

Irony: Boston is in Massachusetts, the very state that Romney was the governor of.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top