Article

2004-06-01 Southeast Asia

Terrorists winning the war, Malaysian PM warns

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2004-06-01 11:17:42 AM|| || Front Page|| [11130 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The director of Singapore's Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Barry Desker, told the meeting that Al Qaeda remains resilient and the use of force cannot eliminate terrorist threats.

"The response cannot be a military one. This is fundamentally a US error," he said.

For someone in a supposedly "strategic" think-tank, this person seems to be oblivious to the larger implications of going into Iraq.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-06-01 12:52:12 PM|| 2004-06-01 12:52:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 The director of Singapore's Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Barry Desker, told the meeting that Al Qaeda remains resilient and the use of force cannot eliminate terrorist threats.

"The response cannot be a military one. This is fundamentally a US error," he said.

Actually, use of force can completely eliminate terrorism. It depends on the level of force we're willing to muster.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-06-01 2:00:35 PM|| [http://www.polipundit.com] 2004-06-01 2:00:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 This guy seems to think that the proper position for the Uncle Sam is to be on his knees. Let me reword this passage:

The occasional poster at Rantburg's Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies, Zhang Fei, told the meeting that the US remains resilient and the Muslim world's use of proxy terrorist attacks will prompt a devastating American military attack.

"The Muslim response cannot be a terroristic one. This is fundamentally a Muslim error," he said.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-06-01 2:06:02 PM|| [http://www.polipundit.com] 2004-06-01 2:06:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Malaysia should be placed on the 'terrorist watch list' of nations supporting international jihad.

Posted by Mark Espinola 2004-06-01 2:26:09 PM|| 2004-06-01 2:26:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 "Terrorism is the mortal enemy of Islam, not its consort," he said. Analysts at the meeting backed Mr Abdullah's remarks, saying Al Qaeda had hijacked Islam.

If "terrorism is the mortal enemy of Islam" why isn't more being done to combat its deleterious influence upon their religion?

If al Qaeda has hijacked Islam, isn't it about time to reverse that process? Silent acquiescence to violent subversion is too easily mistaken for collusion. Ask the people on United Airlines flight 93 about what to do when you're being hijacked.

Handwringing and whingeing are insufficient countermeasures to provide outsiders with the least reassurance that terrorism is being fought by those whose house of worship it has sequestered itself within.

Posted by Zenster 2004-06-01 2:37:05 PM|| 2004-06-01 2:37:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 1. Malaysian terrorism say Terrorism is against Islam. LH - fine but what matters is DEEDS, not words. RBers - Malaysia and other states arent doing enough. LH - I agree, though its incorrect to say that they are doing nothing. Reading RB should let you know that they are taking action, though with varying degrees of efffectiveness. In some cases (like Egypt) the "street" if friendlier to terror than the state - in others (like Iran) its less friendly.
2. Malaysia doesnt like the war in Iraq. LH - so what else is new? We dont need Malaysians to win the war in Iraq, we need IRAQIS. Dont sweat this.
3. Is malaysia a state that supports terrorists? LH - not as far as I can see. Lets be a little thicker skinned, gentlemen.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-06-01 3:22:27 PM|| 2004-06-01 3:22:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 We dont need Malaysians to win the war in Iraq, we need IRAQIS. Dont sweat this.

Nobody gives a rat's ass if the Malaysians win the war in Iraq or not. The issue is terrorism, and their largely weak (and predictable) response to it is what is being pointed out. How does this Abdullah character even think that "resolving" the Israel-Palestinian conflict - assuming that his definition of resolution is the same as ours - is going to do something to alleviate terrorism? It just isn't going to happen. Until Islamofascism receives the big stomping that it deserves, there will always be some sort of slight that Islamists are going to use as a pretense to launch terrorist attacks on whomever they feel they have been slighted by. This Abdullah guy sure as hell isn't going to be part of the solution if all he is willing to do is criticize U.S. actions while offering nothing new in the way of ideas and little in the way of material assistance.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-06-01 5:17:27 PM|| 2004-06-01 5:17:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 "Attacking New York and Washington and killing close to 3000 noncombatants alienated us. For the first time in years, some of us stood up and asked the Forbidden Question: "Why do we have to please them?" Since nothing we ever do will be enough, why should we do anything?"

I just have to say Fred, this paragraph is perfect.

Posted by Yank 2004-06-01 5:43:36 PM|| [politicaljunky.blogspot.com] 2004-06-01 5:43:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 I agree with Yank!

Fred those are spot-on comments amounting to an effective fisking. Tis now merely the usual (debunked) apologist BS.

Posted by .com 2004-06-01 5:48:29 PM|| 2004-06-01 5:48:29 PM|| Front Page Top

16:03 M. Murcek
11:30 Halfass Pete
10:37 Halfass Pete
17:30 Victory Now Please
14:29 Victory Now Please
09:01 Victory Now Please
15:27 Victory Now Please
10:50 Victory Now Please
15:55 Victory Now Please
17:14 Faisal
11:09 growler
07:42 Anonymous5089
04:02 gromky
02:41 Mike Sylwester
01:46 Aris Katsaris
01:44 Anonymous2U
00:51 .com
00:43 rex
00:22 .com
00:19 .com
00:15 gromky
00:09 Quana
00:00 Zenster
23:56 Quana