The US warned India before Mumbai terror attacks

Terrorism will always remain!
It's like saying is there a solution to stop Figting against Palestine and Isreal.
Waaaaay to many ppl who hate United States....
But war on Terror i belive will neaver stop :(

Huh? There is no way the Bush Administration could have known about Katrina, that hurricane just kind of snuck up on us with out any warning.

And even if we had some kind of warning, know how long it would have taken Bush to send a telegraph to warn those people?

do some more research

Rebellion, a refusal of obedience, may therefore be seen as encompassing a range of behaviors from civil disobedience and mass nonviolent resistance, to violent and organized attempts to destroy an established authority such as the government.

Terrorism, the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion, common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants.

Two VERY different words with two definitions. Please explain how you think that a rebellion is a rebellion until "the media" qualifies it as terrorism.

Specifically in this instance when albeit suspected Pakistani persons bombed civilian locations throughout a major city killing over 170 civilians, how could this be qualified as an act of rebellion and not terrorism?

i think what stunner1 meant was that it is the media which blows the situation up and places tags such as 'terror' on them. they often exaggerate everything they report on and all the while boost their ratings.

the Mubai attacks were atrocious either way...

I simply can't endorse the idea that all acts of terrorism are simply acts of rebellion that have been 'spun' by the media.

Foreign nationals attacking civilians in another country with the intent of causing harm and chaos in order to coerce their point is not an act of rebellion.

Think about it for a minute. If the media doesn't report it then people don't find out about it. As John Lennon said, "if you don't know, then there's no pain." The intent of terrorism is to instill fear as a motivator for behavioral change.

The media absolutely help to further the goals of the terrorists.

@sam that's a luxurious position you can take seeing as you aren't cleaning up the chaos created in Mumbai much less dead from the attacks.

Legally nothing, and notionally speaking had US bodies intervened and the attack still would've gone off it would've been the US taking the blame regardless of how noble the intentions were.

@pdthorn - very true

Combating extremism with extremism would just perpetuate a cycle of eye for an eye don't you think?

if by unpleasant you mean serious jailtime as a deterrent, by all means [;

pdthom,

Yes, combating extremism with extremism would just perpetuate a cycle of eye for an eye.

I am not advocating combating extremism with extremism. I was just pointing out that the tactic itself can't be defeated. IF terrorism is to become unpopular as a tool, it has to be done by changing the minds of those who would choose it.

Yes, by making the tool unnecessary.

Besides your immediate knee jerk assumption provide some sort of evidence as to why you think that.

Any good theory, conspiracy related or not needs evidence, if it's just your assumption then it won't float in the first place.

Actually i really havent done any research on the attack or do i claim to know any facts...It was just a cynical remark...After reading" Confessions of an Economic Hit Man", by John Perkins, it really changed the way i look at things...The US government has alot of blood on its hands more than any people would like to admit...

It would be difficult to find a country that doesn't have blood on it's hands.

Regardless your cynical remark would only provoke the assumptions and foregone conclusions that could become a state of fear that the US was in fact involved, just because the US is guilty of prior sins does not make them implicitly involved in every other accident.

Remember, Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Even if it's a cynical statement you presented it on the site as if it were your opinion.

i agree with DreSandoval, of course we had something to do with it. the U.S governments always doing shit.

they just send someone else to do instead so that their hands are clean of it. they might not have pulled the trigger, but they supplied the bullets

Kitten, provide evidence.

It was only a matter of time that some dipshit would propose the claim that the US had something to do with it.

What I dont understand is, ... If the US is such an evil, hate filled country by your estimation then why the fuck do you still live here?

Plausible deniability. A very convenient way of removing the blame. It makes evidence very hard to come by, but the responsibility of the actions are still linked to someone along the chain of command.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the opinions on this thread. I'm merely stating why evidence to "extraordinary claims" are typically either non-existent or from witnesses that are immediately discredited by the government, organization or agency in question. It doesn't mean that we should choose to be blind to the possibilities that we don't want to believe.

I love my country, but I don't pretend that it is innocent of all faults. We should at least allow these types of questions to be put forward to remind us that it has happened in the past and is still a possibility.

"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." - Thomas Jefferson

banshee said it all. education and access to opportunity are the true anti-terrorist tactics.

If we were educated enough we wouldn't be afraid of this 'nameless' face-lessness.

"Tolerance and diversity are subjects that are sorely missed in classrooms around the world." I agree with this if we can add in 'revolution'.

Terrorism is just another ism to control the people. Just like communism, catholicism, etc.