The Case Against Terrorists

[I am NOT an expert in History, International Politics, or Religion for that matter.  Please treat this as a work of purely personal opinion inspired by popular media! Thanks!  :)  ]

The Case Against Terrorists (and the Extremists):

For those who use terrorism as a stick to beat muslims with, saying, “Even though all muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are muslims,” etc., just one question “How is the individual muslim being benefited by terrorism either in short run or long run?”  They are NOT.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF MUSLIMS:  In their community and to outsiders, muslims should present terrorists as jokers, something to be not proud of.  Dangerous madmen.  Not heroes.  Heroes do not sneak in and plant bombs, but fight openly.  No one has invited terrorists in India or any country to fight for them.  How can a bomb blast by a terrorist in India benefit Indian muslims?  

Those who say all terrorist are muslims, answer is “They may have been muslims when they were born, but ceased to be when they took to terrorism.”  Let us be very clear about one thing.  Terrorist organizations are POLITICAL and MERCENARY organizations and not at all religious ones.  

India as a country should fight terrorists as an international threat.  Agreed that terrorists routinely recruit Indians too, but obviously their masters are all outside the country.  Indian Hindus should not make the mistake of using terrorism as a whip to lash out at Indian muslims.  There is absolutely no basis for hounding Indian muslims as a means for revenge against terrorists.

As for those misguided amongst Indian muslims, the Indian authorities are doing a commendable job of deradicalizing and discouraging youngsters who have been inspired by the false heroism of these terrorist jokers.

Terrorists today have gone to the level of just being pests, of the poisonous kind, worse than snakes and scorpions.  They hide and attack.

It is said that Islam was spread through violence.  Maybe violence was used but violence has been used by any number of rulers to expand their worldly empires.  That was not violence.  That was open war, invasion, which has happened throughout history and no one particular kingdom or community can be singled out for that in history.

Today the so-called jihadists have no moral justification for their activities.  What they are indulging in is mercenary activities where those higher up in the chain make a career out of terrorist activities by sending the minions on suicidal missions, some of whom might even have been brainwashed that they are being trained for a virtuous mission.

Terrorists would have gained respect if they were rebelling against a particular regime in their own country or they were part of the military of their own country defending their land from invaders.  That is face-to-face war.  What bravehearts do.

Terrorist organizations in the form that they are today are nothing but pawns in the hands of whoever pays them.  Earlier it used to be developed nations, but nowadays it seems it could be anyone..., seriously!

Launching undercover attacks against unaware innocents in a foreign land, just to grab headlines, is not Jihad.  If they are really fighting for a cause, they should stop killing innocents and come out as soldiers in open warfare.

Another worrying trend is sprouting of newer and newer terrorist organizations, just like a free market economy, with competition heating up and everyone in the race for becoming the most popular and thereby being perceived as most efficient, so as to attract the interest of the best "sponsors" who can use them to further their own agenda against any particular regime.

[This article is a product of a fertile mind in free time, not a professional writer, so please excuse for such an abrupt end without a formal conclusion.  I hope to polish up all these writeups some day.  Thanks.]