This is a few days old, but I haven't seen it remarked upon anywhere. Were the Mumbai jihadists aware of how helpful Putin's Russia has been to the cause of the global jihad? "Terrorists let go 17 Russian hostages," from Rediff, November 28 (thanks to Undaunted):
Terrorists holed up inside Mumbai's Taj and Trident-Oberoi hotels allowed 17 Russian hostages, including nine defence contractors, to leave after checking their passports.Earlier on Thursday, spokesman of Russian arms exporting company 'Rosoboronexport' had confirmed that nine of its specialists working on various defence projects in India were safely evacuated from the Taj Hotel.'
According to the 'Kommersant' daily, eight crew members of Russian Aeroflot airlines dining in the restaurant of Trident-Oberoi were also "politely asked" to follow the hotel staff, who guided them to safety outside the hotel....
So the safest thing you can say to a jihadi is "I am a Russian Muslim".
Sort of a double whammy.
There are several possible reasons for such delicacy with the Russians. But surely, representatives of a country that thinks nothing of smashing the Chechens, in ways no Western Infidel power would dare to contemplate, are not really "friends of Islam." Was it not, in the main, fear -- fear of enraging the Russians, and fear of what the Russians have been known to do, what they have done even in the Middle East, when in the past even one of their nationals is harmed? We have all heard stories of the kind of no-nonsense revenge they quickly take, and perhaps that is what helps explain things. And does anyone think, for one minute, that the Muslims in western China, or any Muslims, would dare to attack, say, in Shanghai, as they attacked in Mumbai, or London, or Madrid, or New York, or Washington? And why would that be? What is it that we can learn from the behavior, so comoparatively circumspect, when it comes to Russia and to China, and what is it, now, that we all must learn to do, so that we too are treated a little more cautiously, as Russians have been, at least outside of Russia (inside, fanatical Chechens have, it is true, not always held back), and Chinese.
Deterrence works. How do we learn what must be done, by governments or by semi-governmental groups, given free rein to do what they must, in order to deter?
I agree with Hugh on this...
That was my first impression, but who knows. Just remember these same folks would have done the reverse 25 years ago...Kill the Russian, and let the American live due to our help in Afghanistan.
I think Hugh nailed it.
Spot on, Hugh.
Remember another incident a few years back when the 'insurgents' in Iraq killed all kinds of foreigners including Nepalese and some Turks, but let some 14 Chinese go?
Why do you think they did that?
Im with hugh on this one
this reminds me of pre china olympics and the attack on those chinese troops by sepretatist muslims. Alqeda immediately released a statement telling muslims not to attack china's olympics. Yhet fear China and Russia. At this stage in the nuclear game, ie Iran gaining more power nad Russia's help, teh last thing that they want to do is bring Russia onboard the west's fight against islam.
excuse any spelling mistakes, i have a screaming baby in the background
I'm also with Hugh. We need to learn from the Russians. Remember what Reagan did to Kadafi and how Kadafi got his message. Its all a matter of communication and Russia knows how to communicate as Reagan surely did. Unfortunately, Bush is terrible at communication and that is a very big part of our current problems.
Yes, I remember a muslim group picked up 2 Russian diplomats in Lebanon 20+ years ago. They murdered one at which point the KGB is said to have picked up one of the kidnappers relatives, cut his foot off and delivered it to them.
I do not know how true it is but the other Russian was released. If we did anything like that the human rights lawyers would be set up for life suing everyone in sight.
I think it's clear to all that Russia is a possible ally against The West and especially the USA. From what I see of islam, they have no problem tossing the Chechens or any other muslims under the bus for the greater goal. Just look at the track record. You got the whole same group of sh*tbags ganging up together as always. The best way to gauge the jihadists interests is to look at the grandaddy of them all; Iran. Even though Iran may be shia, they hate us kuffirs more and especially while the smell of blood is thick in the water.
If true, it's not much of a surprise.
Hugh is right, once again.
4th posting attempt, sheesh. for 2 lousy lines, lol.
Here is why.
Unfortunately, as Fred said, the only person in the West capable of fighting this enemy is Jack Bauer. :)
There is only one way to fight mujahideen. Everything else will fail.
From Hugh:
Deterrence works.
Hillary Clinton, with her "we will obliterate them" statement, gets this… I think.
Gadaffi was more than willing to turn over his WMD science project after the US cut through Saddam's armor in a couple of weeks in 2003. Apparently, there is some evidence that Iran temporarily stopped working on their program during this time period as well. Coincidence? I doubt it.
Overwhelming military deterrence is analogous to capital punishment: it may not always deter, but it often does. But, when it doesn't, and one carries through with the deterrent threat, it eliminates repeat offenders as it crystallizes the situation and clarifies the consequences for others who want to try.
But you have to tell them you understand the root of the problem and what you're willing to do if they don't handle it; then be willing carry through in a spectacular way if they don't.
War, whether waged by governments or loosely connected groups, is a contest of terror, attrition, and will. Our parents and grandparents knew this. The jihadists know this, they are at war, and we are not.
We need to destroy them no matter where we find them.
This is the second time in the last couple of weeks I've noticed rather contrasting views being expressed by Hugh and Robert, and this is the second time I have found myself in agreement with Hugh. I don't doubt that Robert is referring to specific facts he could cite, when he says the Putin government has been helpful to jihadists. But I wonder what the facts are, since he doesn't in at this point cite them.
I agree with Hugh that help given to the Russians by jihadists was possibly due to the deterrent effect of Russia's "no-nonsense" response to offenses. But though I think we can learn something from the Russians in that regard, I also think we could never follow that undiluted path of brutality. The Russians can do that sort of thing because they have been so brutalized and impoverished and tortured for 70 years under communism and Stalin and under the czars before that. If we exercised that sort of "no-nonsense" brutality of response, we would have to do so in a very different way, out of consciousness, rather than out of chauvinism. Because it is a kind of Russian chauvinism and provincialism, inculcated by a closed and backward society over many decades or centuries, that explains the Russian "no-nonsense" approach.
Gaddafi got reparations for Reagans attack, from the same condolleeeezzzza Rice he refused to shake hands with. If that's not encouraging Jihad I don't know what is.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/022244.php
"I support my darling black African woman,” he said.
http://sheikyermami.com/2008/09/06/condi-snubbed-by-gaddafi-remains-deluded-as-always/
As for cutting off hands and feet of Muslim pirates or kidnappers I'm all for it; but perhaps we should start with the 'human rights' shysters who block every move we make for all the wrong reasons.
Overall however, the problem is still the denial in politics and the media that Islam is the enemy. Until the enemy is clearly identified, we are fighting windmills like Don Quichote...
Hugh made an excellent point but the maxim "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is also applicable here, as "CJK" alluded to. Russia has already been useful to Islamic states by running interference for them and providing them sophisticated technology (Syria and Iran come foremost to mind). In the battle against the Great Satan (America) and the Little Satan (Israel), and through in India with 800 million Hindus for good measure, many Islamic terrorists might righty conclude Russia should not to be vexed, at least for the time being.
"Traeh" also made a good point by mentioning Russia's traditional "undiluted path of brutality." Yes, as Churchill noted, sometimes the most civilized states must stoop to measures that mirror those of the barbarians in order to preserve civilization, but it's a slippery slope, as Churchill also observed, and one has to be very careful not to have one's nation wake up someday and find it less civilized than before-------sort of the way Russia always has been.
The USA has used undiluted brutality in the past. Anyone who is skeptical of my statement needs to read up on the philippine insurrection. The firebombing of Germany and especially Japan was astounding. Read some of the USA commanders quotes if you're unsure of their goals. Unfortunately the USA of today doesn't even have the guts to name the enemy much less dehumanitize him. Will it be too late for us to realize that we and our little children are in much, much more danger than we ever were in WWII.
I'd be interested in reading some kind of forecasting from RS or any other participant. Are we going to get out of this mess,and if yes, how? Does America, Europe, India need to ban Islam altogether? or do we want to impose reform to Islam? Do we need to Bomb the Kabaa? What will we do with the few Sufis and the ones who claim to have a muslim faith while valuing the UDHR? And what kind of time frame are we looking at here?
CJK: Yes, the USA has used undiluted brutality in the past. Care to name a country or any political entity, from remote times forward, which was faced with defeat, sometimes on a devastating scale, that refused to resort to undiluted brutality to prevail? The larger point here is that the most decent of states are aware of what they often are doing in exigent circumstances and do so regretfully in order to preserve themselves. They also have the capacity to apologize and try to make restitution for their foul deeds, something that polities constituted with less ethical awareness refuse to do. The measure of true greatness in man's quest to make a better world is not to be lily pure in the first place, unrealistic as that is, but to recognize that corruption is endemic, existence is brutal and apology and restitution heartfelt are the remedy after preservation is achieved.
I do agree with your contention that America and all of the West refuse to name the enemy. The enemy is Islam, all of it. It is an extraordinary, indeed a unique, example in all of history of fighting evil without calling it out by name. You, sheik yer'mami and so many others who post here at JW have mentioned this innumerable times. The fact that it has to be mentioned innumerable times is itself an indication of how dangerous and moronic things are at present.
You seem to think I was criticizing the USA; I wasn't. In actuality I was pointing out her past ability of fighting an enemy appropriately, something which the current generation seems unaware of and incapable of. The USA hasn't and shouldn't apologize for It's unfettered destruction of the enemy's cities. They started the war and what naive fool believes they wouldn't have gone out of their way to torture us if it were within their means. I believe our current enemies are of an even baser sort.
CJK: Understood.
Unfortunately, Bush is terrible at communication and that is a very big part of our current problems.
Posted by: Spot on at December 3, 2008 4:31 PM
--
It's gonna get even better.
B. HUSSEIN Obama, Dhimmi II.
Let's all celebrate the handing over of the Panama Canal by his predecessor, Dhimmi I.
A Russian frigate is about to pas through the Panama Canal on its way back home after joint exercises with Venezuela.
It's enough to make you sick.
I really agree with Hugh's comments above. He was right on the money.
I'll agree that there are "several possible reasons for such delicacy". One that I haven't seen mentioned here is the Russian sucking up to the Islamic world.
I just read an artical the other day in the International Herald Tribune about how lovey-dovey it is between the major Christian denominations and the Muslims and the State in Tatarstan. Muslim clerics get invited to pray at the opening of government buildings, for instance.
One reason may be trying to make nice with the internal Russian Muslim population, which the article estimates at 10-20% of the population. Other reasons probably have to do with how Russia views Islam as a strategic ally against the West.
In any event, they apparently got payback bigtime in Mumbai.
The referenced article is here if you're interested:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/28/europe/kazan.php
maxilo, your call for prognoses is a little OT for this particular thread. But the topic is talked about from time to time among the regulars here. Just hang around and you see plenty of action.
About Russia: As has so often been invoked on appropriate occasions in regard to the U.S., we don't have friends, only interests. That is why one hears this term so often in diplomatic speech, as in, we are protecting our interests. It is a masterfully vague, dare I say, politically correct, term that blandly and nonjudgmentally signals that we have an interest without ever specifying exactly what it is.
Russia is no different. It has interests to protect or to pursue or to advance, and being friends with the U.S. has little or nothing to do with it except as it pertains to its interests.
The Muslim strategists, too, have "interests" they are pursuing, which we discuss endless on these pages. They do their calculations and make their decisions according to the same principles used by nations since time immemorial. They probe for weaknesses where they can, watch the response that comes back, and over time build up a map of where in the world they can focus their efforts with the greatest effect. All nations do this, and always have. Some have been better at it than others. The ones who have been good at it are the nations that are on the earth today. The ones who have not been successful we read about in our history books.
The Islamic master strategists have found several weaknesses in the defenses of the West that they can successfully exploit using methods we have not yet been able or willing to devise an effective response to. Oil financed Saudi Da'wa is one. Massive immigration into the West is another. Suicide bombings are a particularly brilliant and extremely cost effective way to get inside the enemy's defenses cause havoc.
I have always assumed that in the war games the Pentagon runs to try to map out every possible scenario that may develop in the world they include actors who assume the role of the enemy, not as in just in sporting a name tag, but who adopt their persona and personality, get inside their head, who think like them, who understand their psychology. Anything less than this is not being serious. But I'm not so sure any more that they do this in regard to how to interact with Muslim world. To the extent that the planners do not do this, then they are incompetent and should be replaced by planners who understand the enemy we are facing.
Hugh and Robert, you'd both be superb in advising our government such matters.
Posted by sheik yer'mami:
Gaddafi got reparations for Reagans attack, from the same condolleeeezzzza Rice he refused to shake hands with. If that's not encouraging Jihad I don't know what is.
I agree that this is true. Not keeping Gaddafi on edge, once he was there, then paying Jizya on top of that, was a terrible mistake.
Lt. Presley, agreed. The Muslims haven't yet decided they need to exhibit such manners toward the West, so they don't bother.
Slightly OT, but with regard to recent events in India, although our interests in India per se are not as strong as in other parts of the world, India witnesses on a daily basis far greater violence than most other nations, because of the Muslims in their midst and because of the lingering problem in Kashmir. India seems to me to be our natural ally in this fight, for many reasons. Among them are, first, they have a very, very serious historical grudge against the Muslims going back a thousand years, and amounting to 80 million Hindus and Buddhists slaughtered by the Muslims. This can be used to nourish and sustain them during the struggle ahead. Second, although Western religious purists might not think much of Hindu or Buddhist philosophy, these are both peaceful religions that do not pose an existential threat to the West or to the world. We can work with these people. Third, although it's amazingly chaotic in its application, India understands and accepts the principle of democracy, even though it has had difficulty in implementing it because of its caste system.
Is this a JW story or not? At this point, I honestly don't know.
I had read an account of a man found at the bottom of an elevator shaft at a famous building in San Francisco. I was saddened by the story, but assumed it was probably an industrial accident--possibly a maintenance worker.
Well, my friend "Matt" just called me, and told me the dead man was someone he had introduced me to at the Daniel Pipes and Walid Shoebat readings at UC Berkeley last month.
Dr. Daniel Kliman was an activist for Israel who had been taking Arabic lessons at the building where he died. He was just 38.
Apparently, he was also the victim of an attempted mugging two weeks ago, and had maced his attackers. The apartment next to his had been broken into the week he died. He lived in a nice part of Oakland. This is a whole lot of crime surrounding one guy.
Was he just very, very unlucky? Was he targetted? I don't know. I'm still stunned. Here's a link:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/02/BAVE14GCD6.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea
gravenimage
From Zombietime,
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=110
Russia is the salesman and facilitator of materiel for Jihad. Where do you think most of the arms and tech comes from? Who supplies air defence systems to Iran and Syria, for example?
I agree with a poster above. Russia is selling Iran nuke stuff, so they don't hurt Russians. For now.
Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) the terrorist group that sent these jihadis to Mumbai has a camp outside Lahore,Pakistan and operates openly at the behest of the Pakistani authorities. If the Russians received mercy it may be because the Pakistani authorities don't want to antagonize the Russians who are capable of being quite brutal in their retaliation and because they are weary of any help the Russians may give India in reprisal.
Jihadists increasingly see Russia as an ally, nothing more and nothing less. The more Russia acts anti-Western, the more jihadists will avoid killing Russians.
I know that many on this site look to Russia and are desparate to see something that is not there. They are desparate to project certain favorable qualities onto the Russian government that are utterly absent.
We need to be honest with ourselves regarding Islam.
We need to be honest with ourselves regarding Russia.
If a nuclear device is likely to be used in a terrorist attack by 2013, the odds are that Russian will have had something significant to do with it.
Iran is the epitome of a modern Islamic state and as such it pretty much shares the same goals as active, true believing mohamadeans. Even though it is a solidly Shia state, you can bet your bottom dollar that it's the nation most admired and adored by the true believers. Sharing at least 95% of the same constitution (Islamic scripture) Iran is a mirror of the true believers. When they see Russia's sympathy toward Iran and it's hostility toward The Great Satan, it would be against their own perceived interest to alienate Russia. The USA is seen as collapsing under it's own ineptness and the wolves are getting more and more bolder as they look each other in the eyes and salivate. Of course the long term goal of the Islamists and also Iran is to take Russia, but one kuffir at a time.
Interestinconundrum, thanks for the link to the Zombie Time article.
It sounds as though a lot of people are suspicious about what happened to Dan Kliman. I hope we learn more from the investigation. That the SFPD has already stated that this was an accident may not bode well, though. The other incidents happened to him in Oakland.
Unfortunately, there is a pattern in this region that local police forces all too seldom share information or work well together. This has also hampered the Your Black Muslim Bakery case, where crimes were carried out in several local cities.
The only positive thing people here can take away from this is a realization that there are a few liberals, like Dan--whose other causes included gay rights, animal rights, vegetarianism, and mass transit--who are aware of and fighting against the Jihad threat.
What if such a device originates from Pakistan? Will it still have Russian imprints on it?Actually, I'm more suspicious of China than I am of Russia.
As for this story, Paki and Afghan Jihadis are pro-Taliban and anti-Russian, and unlike say, Iranian jihadis, they are unlikely have shown any mercy towards the Russians. As it is, the story above says that the 17 Russians were ordered to follow hotel staff out the place. But the hotel staff was treated as the enemy, and most of those killed in the hotels were hotel staff, and then clientèle. So even the above story does not suggest that it was the Jihadis who let go the Russians the way they did the 2 Turks.
I wonder why Robert said in the headline that the Mumbai jihadis released the hostages, when nothing in the cited report suggests that?
first...type pad is crap.
now, there were 2 stories I've heard that I don't know if they're true or not, but I'd like to see the second one come true.
1 when a minor diplomatic figure was kidnapped in iran some time ago the responsible whack job {local mullah} issued a ransom to the russians.within a short period of time he recieved the finger of his son, along with the message that more would soon follow...and not necassarily of just his son.
the second involved and interview during the hostage crisis {in iran}. The interviewer asked a senior russian diplomat what russia would do if it's embassy was taken over and it's citizens held hostage. The diplomat paused briefly before answering " I'm not exactly sure, but within 72 hrs there would be no iran"
first...type pad is crap.
now, there were 2 stories I've heard that I don't know if they're true or not, but I'd like to see the second one come true.
1 when a minor diplomatic figure was kidnapped in iran some time ago the responsible whack job {local mullah} issued a ransom to the russians.within a short period of time he recieved the finger of his son, along with the message that more would soon follow...and not necassarily of just his son.
the second involved and interview during the hostage crisis {in iran}. The interviewer asked a senior russian diplomat what russia would do if it's embassy was taken over and it's citizens held hostage. The diplomat paused briefly before answering " I'm not exactly sure, but within 72 hrs there would be no iran"
When they show that they can stomp out insurrection in a small border province which is officially part of their nation, I'll start to believe their tough words. I realize that it's a different situation than Iran, but anyone who believes they would bomb Iran with nuclear weapons over an embassy takeover is taking some pretty hard stuff.