Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Mumbai Attacks: Terrorism Or Warfare?

Posted by Job on December 1, 2008

Now when dealing with the war on terror with respect to the United States, I always try to bring up the inconvenient issue of America’s dealings in the region, starting with our overthrow of the Iranian government because of a dispute over oil profits and continuing onto such issues as our recruitment and training of such people as Usama bin Laden to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, our training, recruiting and arming Saddam Hussein to fight Soviet – aligned Iran, two wars in Iraq, various machinations with Afghanistan to protect a vital oil pipeline that runs through that nation, our military base in Saudi Arabia, and our abject failures in and subsequent withdrawals from Lebanon and Somalia. With that type of record plus our support for Israel, I really cannot blame any Muslim, Arab, or North African for thinking that we are out to get them, or at the very least will not hesitate to pursue our own agenda at their expense. Seriously, what basis do these people have for feeling otherwise? Do not claim that we had the interests of the Iraqi people in mind when we put Saddam Hussein in power and armed him to the teeth for the purposes of starting a proxy war with an Iranian regime that we put in power (because the prior regime wanted to use its own oil profits for economic development!) to fight a horrible war that dragged on for eight years. And as for freeing the Afghanis from Soviet domination: did any of us know or care about how the Afghanis were living BEFORE the Soviets invaded? Nope. It was all about the Soviets, never the Afghanis, which was why we not only had no problem with the Taliban regime that took over Afghanistan after the Soviets were driven out, but we actually had dealings with the Taliban. I have no problem with pointing out that a great many of our issues in that region are the direct result of first our Cold War actions, and then our attempts to be “the world superpower/leader/police” afterwards. Seriously, how many Americans honestly care whether or how people in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait etc. live or die so long as we retain our own high and comfortable standard of living? We all know the answer to that question. You can call it liberal anti – Americanism, I call it admitting things like the fact that conservative pro – American types honestly did not care how evil Saddam was or how brutally he was treating his own people until he invaded Kuwait over his desire to increase oil prices. (Again, he wanted an increase in oil prices because his regime was broke because of the war with Iran that we put him in power and armed and funded him to fight. After the Soviet Union collapsed, we had no reason to continue funding Saddam, so he had to look after his own affairs. So, who out there is surprised that a guy that we trained and put in power to start a war reacted to his own economic and political crisis by, well, STARTING A WAR?) It is our prerogative to seek our own interests and use violence in doing so? Well fine, but if you take that belief, then you have no standing for refusing the Muslims/Arabs/North Africans that same prerogative.

However, my “contextualization” does not apply to India. India has in fact strongly allied itself with America, Israel, and China … three nations that are involved in violent struggles against Muslims to one extent or another. (China’s problems with Islamic separatists is a spectacularly underreported story.) Of course, imperalistic Islam has taken notice of this and does not like it. However, India has no history of pursuing economic and military aggression against Muslim states. Quite the contrary, India actually treats its Muslim population comparatively well, allowing them not only religious and economic freedom but to politically organize. While London’s socialist Guardian newspaper predictably claims that India’s terror problems are due to India’s discrimination and oppression of Muslims, especially in Kashmir, the truth is that Muslims get far better treatment in India than non – Muslims can expect in any Muslim country, including moderate pro – western regimes like Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan.

This is not to say that India is perfect: after all consider the murderous persecution against Christians in the Orissa region. However, the issue is that the discrimination, marginalization and oppression of Muslims in India is not state – sponsored or supported. Quite the contrary, conservatives such as those who opine for the Wall Street Journal have charged the Indian government with being TOO NICE to its Muslim minority!

It is well known that Muslims in India are but one of many groups all over the world that face discrimination, marginalization and oppression. Yet how many of these put – upon groups respond to their maltreatment with sustained organized acts of violence designed to murder as many innocent defenseless civilians as possible plus to inflict widespread panic, economic collapse, and political instability? Muslims would appear to be unique in this respect. And since as stated earlier the Muslims that attack India can hardly claim themselves to be targeting a regime that has waged economic, diplomatic and military aggression against severely overmatched Muslim and Arab states, then the “self – defense” angle is not nearly plausible as it is with the United States, Britain, and Israel.

So that leads to this conclusion: the bombings in Mumbai are not acts of terror designed to cause the India government to change their policies, as India has no policies that can be construed to be opposing Islam or Arab regimes beyond maintaining financial and diplomatic ties with nations who allegedly do, which incidentally Muslim regimes such as Syria and Iran do the same by having relations with Russia, who is subjugating Islamic Chechnya, and China who has their own aforementioned problems. In other words, there are no anti – Islamic actions on the part of India for any terror acts to change. (Please, do not raise the Kashmir canard, as the Kashmir extremists will settle nothing less for India giving up control of the region, so Muslims and liberal apologists ought to call the Kashmir dispute what it is … Muslims attempting to start a civil war and to grab land that is internationally recognized as belonging to India. In other words, what ultimately happened in Kosovo, except in that instance the Muslims had our help in their land grab scheme!)

No, make no mistake, this is war. The Muslim world is at war with India. It is no less than an imperialistic war of aggression, because as stated before India has done nothing to Muslims either outside of or within its borders to provoke such a war. The Muslim world is trying to exert violent and economic pressure from without and within in order to bring about the collapse of the secular Indian government and replace it with an Islamic one. Of course, when that happens, such a government will go about forcing its Hindu population (as well as its other religions, including but not limited to Christianity) to either convert or leave. (That is assuming that they even allow anyone to leave, as they certainly did not give the Christians in Sudan that option, it was either convert or be killed or made a slave.) So, the Muslim world is waging an imperialistic war with India in order to make it into a Muslim land, just as Islam set about doing shortly after the religion was founded, just as the Koran commands Muslims to do.

Again, I am not convinced by the notion that all of these are internal problems with internal Muslims. First, even though everyone including the Indian government is falling backwards over themselves to implicate first the Kashmir situation and then Pakistan, and that a local obscure group has claimed responsibility, and that Al Qaeda has distanced themselves from the attack, we cannot ignore that this attack has Al Qaeda’s fingerprints all over it. There was the nature of the attack, a spectacular coordinated event. There was also the goal of attacking economic centers to cause financial turmoil (please note Al Qaeda’s recent claims that our current financial problems were caused by 9/11). It fits the methods, goals and ideologies of bin Laden. Also, what evidence is there that the obscure India militant group had the resources and expertise to carry out such an attack?

So, you might ask, why would Al Qaeda deny involvement and allow a local front group to take credit? For P.R. purposes. Al Qaeda’s support is based on the notion that they are defending Muslim victims of aggression. As India does nothing to harm Muslims within its borders or without, for Al Qaeda to target India turns them from freedom fighters to aggressors in the eyes of Muslims and other people in the region. Add that to the huge number of innocent Muslims that Al Qaeda has killed in Iraq, it is something that their image could ill afford right now. But rest assured (according to my theory anyway) let the Indian government take violent action, a military or police crackdown against these murderous criminals, against this army attempting to overthrow its government, and we will very shortly see a tape from Al Qaeda declaring jihad against India for its crimes of aggression against Islam.

And as for the Kashmir situation … that is even more evidence that this is an international Islamic war on India. After all, who denies that Muslims from other countries haven’t been smuggling arms and fighters into the Kashmir region that ultimately filter down into other parts of India for years? Kashmir merely serves as a front, an opening, an excuse just as “Palestine” serves the same purpose to funnel arms and extremists in through the Syrian, Egyptian, Lebanese etc. borders. Kashmir is merely what the Muslim world is using as the entry point, their home base for their war with India, and were India ever to grant “independence” to Kashmir, a) Muslims would then merely claim for themselves other places in northern India and B) Kashmir would be the launchingpad for military and terror campaigns in India. For Muslims do not merely want Kashmir. They do not merely want northern India. They want the whole country.

So, if the Muslim world is attempting to conquer India for Islam, what makes you think that they will stop there? And if they succeed in conquering India, who’s next? That is the first question that must be asked. However, the second and most important question that must be asked: what should the proper Christian response be to Muslim designs for global domination? Christian imperialism in turn? Globalism? The new world order? Mandatory religious pluralism, where all religions are forced to deny that their religion is the only way to salvation? I dare say that none of those are solutions that the New Testament would endorse.


11 Responses to “Mumbai Attacks: Terrorism Or Warfare?”

  1. theoldadam said

    “… what should the proper Christian response be to Muslim designs for global domination?”

    Fight them. Since there is no dealing with them, there is but two options …roll over and die…or fight them.

    There is no danger of Christian Imperialism. Christians do not convert at the point of the sword. The few that did…did it a long time ago. Today, when a Christian kills (on the very rare occasion)in the name of Christ, he is condemned immediately by the entire Christian world. This does not happen with Islamic terrorists. They are cheered! If not openly, then privately.
    When the planes crashed into the twin towers they danced in the streets of the Middle East. Im talking about moderate Middle Eastern Muslim countries like Egypt.

    The strategic alliances made in times of war and cold war are made from necessity not from altruism. We sided with a mass murder the likes of which the world has never known in Joseph Stalin. Was that wrong? No. We were trying to keep the Nazi’s and Japanese from conquering the world.

    In a perfect world we could make clear cut distinctions in who we would choose to have relationships with.

    What would this world look like without the U.S.? For all our faults we still keep evil in check in this world to a large degree.

  2. Job said

    “The strategic alliances made in times of war and cold war are made from necessity not from altruism.”

    Fine. But the Iran issue had nothing to do with the Cold War. It was over oil profits. Iran only became a Cold War player because the regime that we installed turned on us. So we had to put Saddam in power to fight Iran, who also turned on us. Also, we took absolutely no responsibility for our Cold War proxies (one Afghani stated stated that the United States used his country like a condom) after the Cold War was over, and that was how we got the Afghanistan mess.

    I understand that making omelettes require breaking eggs. But if you are the egg, it stinks. Most of the people living in these places would have been no worse off had the Soviets won the Cold War. Afghanistan under the Soviets versus Afghanistan under the Taliban versus Afghanistan now. The difference is WHAT if you are the average Afghani?

    Second, it is curious. Italy, Germany, and Japan were our ENEMIES who ATTACKED US and KILLED THOUSANDS OF OUR MEN in World War II and we rebuild them with the Marshall Plan. But our Cold War “allies”? We leave them to rot on the vine, and later either attack or sanction them if it suits us. Who was it that came up with that policy, eh? Again, from the perspective of the people who live over there, it is easy to see why they fear/distrust/hate us. America’s power and policy is great for Americans. For everyone else, not so much.

    That is what gets me about how we get so angry over here when those countries cut deals with Venezuela, Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, or whoever. I mean, these people are over there living in mud huts living off worse than what we throw away, and no the big bad US military isn’t going to lift a finger if they get invaded (that is unless they sit on OPEC and contain business interests of great value to a sitting president, like, you know, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia maybe). So they are supposed to sit around broke and defenseless just because their being “pro – American” or “pro – western” makes us feel better about ourselves?

    I just get bothered by the notion that we have the right to seek what is best for us but no one else has that same right. “What would this world look like without the U.S.?” If you are the average citizen living in the third world or even in a developing country, to you it would look pretty much the same. The vast majority of the globe’s population receives absolutely no benefit whatsoever from the existence of the United States, and by the way most of the small portion of the globe that does actually benefit from our military and economic leadership is more than capable of defending and providing for themselves. Maybe we should start allowing them to do so while we concentrate on other things, like you know paying down our massive national debt, restoring our infrastructure and manufacturing sector, ending the illegal invasion across the Mexican border, and defending ourselves from being the next target of Muslim imperialism. We aren’t doing any of those things now, and no we weren’t doing them when either Bush was in office either. Clinton and both Bushes had precisely the same approach to those issues, and as Barack Obama is putting members of both Clinton AND Bush administrations into his own Cabinet and White House, it looks like we won’t be in the future.

    I have no doubt that a lot of the tough decisions that we made during the Cold War were necessary. But again, a lot of our questionable dealings had nothing to do with the Cold War, and we should not have just abandoned our non – western “allies” the instant that the Berlin Wall fell.

  3. theoldadam said


    Lots to discuss.

    Iran. Did we not have a good Western ally in Iran…the Shah? Did we not come to his aid (Jimmy Carter) when the Islamists were about to topple him? Was what came after him not immeasurably worse than the Shah? (My Iranian friends we lived there at the time think so)

    I also have friends who lived behind the Iron Curtain and escaped (they were not allowed to go freely). They would beg to differ with you as to the virtues of Communism. Read the Black Book of Communism and see how many millions of their own people they murdered.

    I think we view the world very differently, Job.

    I think that America has been a huge force for good in the world, and apparently you don’t think so, or at least not as much.

    I don’t agree with you with your emphasis on how important oil is in all our foreign dealings.

    There was no oil in South Vietnam, or in Korea. We tried to keep them free (we succeeded in S. Korea).

    Which allies did we abandon after the Berlin Wall fell?

  4. John Kaniecki said


    Hope you are well.

    I was told by a Muslim friend long ago this. The Sunis and Shites will have a war which the Shites will win. Then all of the Muslim world will rise up to conquer the rest of the Earth. So like Marxism there is that tenet of world domination built into the system.

    Oldadam I think there are many Americans who feel as you do. Yet there are many who see American policy as Job does. I believe the ruling elite however thinks like Job but talks like you would like to hear.

    Korea was a different war than Vietnam. It gets very complex. While in Korea it was a clear case of aggression against the south that was not the case in Vietnam. A free and fair election in Vietnam would have put the Communists is power which would not have been the case in Korea.

    For the record I am a pacifist and would not fight in any war but a spiritual one. Christian should be ready to put their lives on the line just like the men and women who do so in a war of man.



  5. Devon said

    John, your friend must have been a Shia that said that….I doubt that the Shia’s, that are about a 15 percent minority in the islamic world, could ever dominate the larger more powerful Sunnis…though anything is possible….Both sides claim to be the true islam and yes, they will continue to slaughter one another ad nauseum until the Lord returns…horrible stuff…

    Regarding Islamic whining…honestly, Islam needs no excuse to go killing and murdering…it is built into their system and was exampled by Muhammed…as you rightly point out Job, in India, the Muslims have no right to complain considering they were the ones that invaded and have been treated relatively well by the Hindu masses…though that might change….

    What a mess…only Christ and his Gospel can rescue this desolate world….

    We could give into every Islamic demand and that still wouldn’t be enough…Islam again, is like Marxism or Nazism…it is just a movement for bullies founded by a bully that has to enforce itself on people…so as much as is possible, as Christians, we need to present the Gospel and have these people won to Christ….I have seen and read of many wonderful testimonies of Muslims being completely changed by the good news..

    As for those Muslims that want to wage war on us and enslave us, I suppose we will have to defend ourselves……..

  6. Boulos said

    For a bunch of Christians you all seem rather hateful. What would jesus do?

  7. Boulos,

    That’s about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

    It’s not hateful to speak of defending your neighbors and your families against a monsterous hoard of murderers.

    To defend people and try to preserve thier rights, their way of life and their freedoms (not to mention their lives!)is not hateful…but loving!

    To protect people from evil is an act of love. The selfish thing would be to do nothing.

  8. Devon said

    Taking a look at Boulos blog , he/she is a radical supporter of the Pali cause…no doubt believes that Hamas and Hizballah are good peaceful muslims and that Arafat was a great man and not a murdering terrorist!

    Regardless, philistine, this is a debate about Islamic terror in India…learn to read and stay in the proper threads!

  9. Nana said

    Hey! Maybe Islam is the ‘Great Whore of Babylon’ + not the RCC!

  10. Operation Freedom Bell- Buy a bell, We send a Bible to troops. only ten dollars

  11. theoldadam said


    Maybe that’s right!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: