None of the Mumbai attackers were Indian?

[Smurf-Herder]

According to the latest, as seen on TV, via India's NDTV:

29 of the attackers were Pakistani and 11 were Bangladeshi.

At least two had British passports.

Two were guests at the Taj Mahal hotel and two were employees.

A cell phone was recovered, which had logged multiple calls during the fighting to a phone number in Pakistan.

And at least three said they were members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Created by Pakistani ISI; and having a loose affiliation with Al-Qaeda ... basically "Al-Qaeda Kashmir".

Weapons and explosive stockpiles were pre-positioned in at least one location. Enough RDX was found in the Taj to do significant damage. And anywhere between one and six guys are still fighting with Commandos after 48 hours in the Taj. With a grenade launcher being fired through a window on newspeople outside, earlier this morning; wounding two of the news crew with shrapnel.

And four Americans were killed.

Officially, 160 dead and 327 wounded.

[Bill]

I wonder if that was from the tons of RDX stolen from iraq?

Having that much hard-to-get plastic and not detonating it just seems careless. Why haul it around and not use it?

Also rather seems like an intelligence failure on someones part. Thats quite a large group of attackers to move, equip, position, and command.

This is why we should have been focusing on an investigative approach more than we have these last 7 years.

But, I guess al qaeda got no oil.

[Moby]

Yeah this entire thing seems very strange.

New tactics that we haven't really seen before.
A shit load of unused weapons.

It's going to be interesting to see how the news reads when the smoke clears. Right now I think there's still a lot of mixed information. At least last night there was.

[Linkster]

Why does it surprise anyone that Pakistanis are attacking Indians - jeeez - this has been going on for 50 years - only reason Pakistan got nukes to defend itself against India when they were doing the same thing - why dont people remember history instead of jumping to thinking this is all new stuff

[Moby]

Why does it surprise anyone that Pakistanis are attacking Indians - jeeez - this has been going on for 50 years - only reason Pakistan got nukes to defend itself against India when they were doing the same thing - why dont people remember history instead of jumping to thinking this is all new stuff
This is new stuff.

We all know about the history of the nuclear bombs that took our CIA by surprise. We all know that fighting in Kashmir and the surrounding areas has been going on for generations and will probably continue for generations more.

I don't recall a terrorist attack like this, so deep in Indian territory with such precision, planning and ammo.

[Smurf-Herder]

No previous attack was of this magnitude; but in some ways it's similar to an attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001.


BTW, they found the hijacked Pakistani fishing trawler they used to get into Indian waters; along with the dead captain and bodies of the missing crew.

[Linkster]

I guess you dont remember the 1970s then - attacks were much more fierce than this one and led to a war with between 1-3 million Pakistanis killed and hundreds of thousands declared "terrorists" and "pows" - like I said this is nothing new - Pakistan has always been at war with India since the Bangladesh independance and Ghandi started coercing people around the world (including the US) to side with India instead of siding with Muslims - its been a religious and land grab thing for ages (very similar to what Israel did to the Palestinians in many ways)

[Linkster]

No previous attack was of this magnitude; but in some ways it's similar to an attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001.


BTW, they found the hijacked Pakistani fishing trawler they used to get into Indian waters; along with the dead captain and bodies of the missing crew.


Might go read your research in the other thread where you claim a much bigger attack by that same fella - please try to get your facts straight????

[Smurf-Herder]

Might go read your research in the other thread where you claim a much bigger attack by that same fella - please try to get your facts straight????

I meant in terms of a sustained firefight attack, as opposed to bombings, when I was referring to the magnitude of the attack.

The 1993 attack was obviously of a greater magnitude in number pf people killed, but involved bombs; not the sustained 60 hours of fighting we saw this time. This attack was of a greater magnitude in terms of sustained fighting for a prolonged period of time. This has never been done before, for so long, with so many fighters.

[Linkster]

So the 3 million killed during the sustained firefight doesnt count????

[Smurf-Herder]

So the 3 million killed during the sustained firefight doesnt count????


You are a serious kook, aren't you.

That was a war.

Can't you tell the difference between a specific attack operation and an entire war?

[Linkster]

Im just pointing out that this is just another attack in a part of the war that has never ended - like I said earlier - this has been going on since the independance of Bangladesh - and isnt likely to get any better soon - especially since both sides have nukes

I dislike it when the press takes something that they have no idea has a huge long history and make it out to be this "special" terrorist attack when also spouting off about all the other things that we should be afraid of coming up in the next (insert whatever event is current) "special" time.

Its all about causing news by causing fear - something the media has gotten very good at - and which puts the average (sheepish as usual) American citizen in a capitulating position which is exactly the opposite of what we were brought up to be ages ago - we were taught in my early years that fear itself is exactly what terrorism wants and that by running around spouting out fear stories is just giving into their desires - and we as Americans have already lost to the terrorists. Thats why back in the 60s and 70s when there were numerous terrorism attacks, the US press refused to cover it until well after it was over and most presidents (up until the Reagan era) preached that to cover in the press and make Americans fearful would mean the terrorists won - and we werent about to do that

[Smurf-Herder]

Im just pointing out that this is just another attack in a part of the war that has never ended - like I said earlier - this has been going on since the independance of Bangladesh - and isnt likely to get any better soon - especially since both sides have nukes

I dislike it when the press takes something that they have no idea has a huge long history and make it out to be this "special" terrorist attack when also spouting off about all the other things that we should be afraid of coming up in the next (insert whatever event is current) "special" time.

Its all about causing news by causing fear - something the media has gotten very good at - and which puts the average (sheepish as usual) American citizen in a capitulating position which is exactly the opposite of what we were brought up to be ages ago - we were taught in my early years that fear itself is exactly what terrorism wants and that by running around spouting out fear stories is just giving into their desires - and we as Americans have already lost to the terrorists. Thats why back in the 60s and 70s when there were numerous terrorism attacks, the US press refused to cover it until well after it was over and most presidents (up until the Reagan era) preached that to cover in the press and make Americans fearful would mean the terrorists won - and we werent about to do that

But the media is covering the aspect of this being part of a bigger long-term regional conflict. There are stories that cover the whole range of issues.

But these guys apparently did come from outside India.

I forget where this whole line of discussion started.

Anyway, both countries have their air force on alert.