Statistics can always be used selectively. Lets see:Nayak wrote:Hey one line wonder, answer the question !!!!!ldev wrote:
Fantastic!!! Ad hominem attacks continue.....
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122783260486063039.html
The death toll from terrorism -- not counting at least 119 killed in Mumbai on Wednesday and Thursday -- stands at over 4,000, which gives India the dubious distinction of suffering more casualties since 2004 than any country except Iraq.
In sum, the Indian approach to terrorism has been consistently haphazard and weak-kneed. When faced with fundamentalist demands, India's democratically elected leaders have regularly preferred caving to confrontation on a point of principle. The country's institutions and culture have abetted a widespread sense of Muslim separateness from the national mainstream. The country's diplomats and soldiers have failed to stabilize the neighborhood. The ongoing drama in Mumbai underscores the price both Indians and non-Indians caught unawares must now pay.
LINKOctober 31st, 2008 at 8:05 am
Eleven deadly bomb blasts ripped through India’s northeastern state of Assam Thursday, killing about 50 people and leaving more than 300 injured. The serial blasts took place before noon, within a span of 50 minutes......
....Thursday’s serial bombings were the third bomb blast incident in Assam this year. Powerful explosions in March and June had rocked the state. More than 10,000 people have died in the northeastern region in the past decade.
Interesting, this means that if 4000 died from 2004 till now, at least 6000 died in Assam alone in the previous 6 years when the *strong nationalist* government was in power. Would India then have been ahead of Iraq or any other country in the casualty sweepstakes during that period of time?
This above is the result of a simple google search I did.... who knows what else one will find if you search hard enough. I am sure that although it is posted by a poster on the board which is linked, if you search hard enough one will find the original news link.
But one would at least expect rakshaks to also know that there are motivated people out there who are keen to highlight instability in India and hence headline grabbing news items such as the WSJ article posted. But then the need to score partisan political points outweighs objectivity doesnt it?