Slashdot Mirror
Militants Planned Attack On Indian Software Firms
Alien54 writes "Militants killed in an encounter in New Delhi on Saturday night planned to attack leading software companies in Bangalore in addition to the Indian Military Academy in Dehra Dun, Delhi police said on Sunday Indian police claim the men were members of Lashkar-e-Toiba - a Wahabi militant group fighting for an independent Kashmir. Apart from maps of call centers police also recovered 100 kilos of dynamite, 10.5 kilos of RDX explosive, 450 detonators, three AK-56 rifles and a satellite phone."
Actually, why did the militants do this? Attacking companies that brings prosperity to the region hardly seems a way to inspire support from the locals or anybody else.
More proof that terrorism doesn't make sense.
For the same reason that Al Qaeda attacked the WTC and Pentagon - to make themselves heard.
Terrorism is not about sense or economic benefits.
I'd like to thank the New Delhi police for a job excellently done.
That was the point. Those were Kashmere terrorists blowing up Indian call centers. Al Qaeda was not overly concerned that 911 might be harming NYC's prosperity either, on the contrary!
Just do it. It's got to be cheaper than the fisticuffs.
Another brilliant post by Truth Quark! 60 years of conflict suddenly resolved! ...
Now, about Palestine
11 of 25 posts so far have been about Call centres and outsourcing.
I know most of it is humour (of some sort), but don't you think this is being just a bit insensitive? Mod me down if you must, but there must be a limit to self-centredness, even for Americans.
</karma-suicide>
StrayByte.Net
You have to understand that Kashmiris don't associate themselves all that much with India. They side more with Pakistan, but prefer an independent state, like Nepal.
The money generated from Bangalore tends to go to other parts of the country, as Kashmir is quite rich on its own. That is why attacking Bangalore's software companies made little difference to the terrorists.
The point of terrorism is exactly that - terror !. Once people are afraid, they have essentially achieved their target. These people are not just "militants" - but terrorists.
Indian software industry is obsessed with Information security that it often does not expect an attack with a car bomb in the parking under ground. And Bangalore is a cosmopolitan city full of all kinds of people. You won't be watched by the entire crowd because you have a 3 inch beard.
Security is an illusion - but it is a precious illusion for those who keep it.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Would you prefer that we called them disaffected individuals with poor impulse control?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
When work is outsourced to countries that are not very stable, or have terrorism problems, or civil wars, it makes portions of that country wealthy. Those wealthy portions become a target for the local Bad People, simply because it will hurt their enemies more than bombing the poor portions.
If you look into slight history, there were a series major bomb blasts occured in Bombay, the financial capital of india in 1993 in places like the Stock Exchange. These resulted into a lot of tension and communal riots between the people.
This one seems to be kindof similar to them, just targetting a little more high-tech organizations. These militants just cant see a country prosper and the people getting happy. If you cant do well, dont let anyone do well.
It is a pity that words like "Militant" are used for these groups. We really need a word that summarises "Organised criminal gangs that want to steal entire countries". Of course {flamebait} this word would be useful because we could apply it to the Bush/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz/Rice/Blair/Berlusconi gang as well as the insurgents in Iraq, the part of the IRA that is opposed to the peace process, and the Taliban.{/flamebait} But words like "militant", "terrorist" and "insurgent" conceal rather than illuminate reality.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Uh, I'm guessing you have no idea about the history behind the India-Pakistan conflict over Kashmir because, if you did, you'd know it's not that simple.
When India was struggling to achieve independence, it became clear that the religious unrest would likely drive the country apart. The solution to this was partition, which divided India into two countries, India and Pakistan (literally "land of the pure"). Kashmir, which was then a kingdom, decided that it didn't like either choice, and its ruler declared Kashmiri independence for itself.
Everyone accepted Kashmir's position but shortly after independence and partition took place, Pakistan unilaterally invaded Kashmir claiming it for itself. Kashmir, with no hope of surviving by itself, and with no other help coming from elsewhere, asked India for assistance. This call for help put India in a bind, because it didn't want to provoke Pakistan unnecessarily (partition itself had been a bloody affair) and so it presented Kashmir with the only viable option: become part of the sovereign state of India.
Kashmir chose India over Pakistan, and officially became part of India. Hence, legally at least, Kashmir is Indian territory. However, Pakistan didnt (and still doesnt) accept this, and refused to withdraw its claim on the region.
Whether or not Kashmir should become independent is a very stickly question. Personally, I'd like to see it happen but, frankly, there's too much at stake - not least of all national pride - for either India or Pakistan to seriously consider it. So the status quo, with part of still Kashmir occupied by Pakistan, remains and probably will continue to do so for some considerable time. Certainly, until Pakistan readopts democracy, its unlikely to change.
By the way, while the India-Pakistan division was based on religion, it's a fact that India now has a bigger Muslim population than Pakistan. And, apart from a few religious zealots on either side, most Hindus and Muslims (and Christians, Buddhists, etc) manage to co-exist peacefully in India.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
India hasn't stolen the jobs, US companies have shipped them there. And US tax loopholes have helped them do it too. Believe me, if it wasn't India, they would have found somewhere else that would have taken the jobs.
But those are the joys of capitalism and the global economy. Funny thing though, when it was blue collar jobs that were being shipped elsewhere no one really gave two hoots (when was the last time you bought clothes that were 100 percent made in the US, with US-sourced materials?), but now it's white collar jobs it's suddenly some sort of travesty.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
..., can I call you comrade, can't I? I mean, you show such ignorance about how open markets work that either you have been in cave for 50 years or are a Communist, comrade. Which one is it?
The Indians are not stealing your jobs. US people in particular, and Western people in general, are pricing themselves too high given the expensive lifestyles they lead.
Which expensive lifestyles? SUVs, overeating, rampant consumerism, irrational Imperial wars in the other side of the planet. All tha adds up until your economy, or parts of it, become uncompetitive.
Indians are "stealing" your jobs in the same sense that a more capable, cheaper worke in the US would be stelaing your job if he was hired to do it instead of yourslef, comrade.
As for the English capabilities of the Indians,, frankly, stop beating that horse. It has been fucking dead for ages.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
(emphasis is mine)
What has the world come too, where we have to qualify that we don't like the idea of people dying - EVEN IF THEY ARE IN COMPETITION WITH US FOR JOBS!
I'm hardly a peace-loving, tree-huggin vegan. But this kind of stuff really makes me think that capitalism has really made a wrong turn somewhere. That and our values of course, but, I'm on slightly more shaky ground there.
For heaven's sake, when did Slashdot become Politically Correct (TM)?
Call them what they are, terrorists. Or if "terrorists" is not acceptable, then how about "necromancers festering on people's grief and death"? That's pretty accurate.
Sigged!
...that I had mod points today to mod down these stupid annoying Funny posts.
I guess even an American can get sick of the typical American attitude sometimes...
Yeah...if the Islamic suicide bombers had reached their targets, killing large numbers of people, surely Kashmir would have become independent immediately!
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
That's amazing that you didn't get modded down to -5.
;)
Last time I made an anti-American comment someone told me "You are, quite simply, not welcome here then" and I got modded Redundant. I guess most people don't see it once it goes below 0 so getting to -5 is hard.
I can tell you're not American simply because you can spell centre
Can your karma go above being Excellent?
Bullshit. Being an Indian, I can tell you that Lashkar-e-Toiba is a Pakistani terrorist group, FUNDED by Pakistan and TRAINDED by ISI, the intelligence service of Pakistan. The terrorists are trying everything - from asking Kashmir to be a state of pakistan to making Kashmir an independent state. Once it becomes independent, the Kashmiri people will themselves "ask" to be merged with Pakistan and Pakistan will "reluctantly" "accept" the offer. Either that, or Kashmir will be an independent state only for name sake; in reality it will be in control of Pakistan. Just look at how Pakistan is controlling it right now. Don't believe everything General Musharraf says. In fact, don't believe ANYTHING he says. If you know the truth, you'll realise that every word Musharraf says is actually just blackmailing India (or extortion or threatening, if you want to be a language nazi).
And 9-11 was carried out by bankers who lost their jobs at the WTC? Get real . This is serious stuff . You shouldnt be joking abt it
**Life is too short to be serious**
Any attack on our call centers is an attack on America. We should be clear on that.
Speaking on behalf of many people I'd like to say "Muh-wha???".
If overseas contractors that companies use so they don't have to pay Americans a living wage are worthy of our military support, why aren't they paying taxes for us to defend them? These terrorists get zero sympathy from me, but shouldn't we be putting our own house in order?
We just had the congress tell us that they can't raise minimum wage because it would hurt companies too much, so now you want the taxes of people working full time and living in poverty to go to the Indian government so that the jobs we lose to them will be safe? Did you forget we're already in the red paying for two wars? Seriously, what the hell are you talking about?
Disclaimer: MINAA (Mummy! I'm Not An Animal!)
If you have a small decentralized and poor army attacking hardened military targets would be useless execize. For terrorists it just makes sense to attack civillian economic targets. If anything it causes even more damage and of course increases the amount of terror. As a bonus it also forces undustry to implement extra security measures which increases their costs and erodes their competitiveness.
The idea is to weaken the entire country and hurt/scare the general population who will eventually give in. I say eventually because terrorists are usually thinking in timespans that take generations.
Whether it works or not is debatable. Terrorism was a key component of the establishment of Israel as a state. It also worked in Afghanistan against russia. In other places the record is spotty at best.
evil is as evil does