Naxal and terrorist - Difference

[Premi]

Naxalites are in opposition to the govt., working with the help of common man trying to help them with gun in their hand against the Govt.

Terrorists are against nation, with their own schema of separate the nation based on ecological/geographical boundaries or just to intimidate people.

e.g. Veerapan was just a smuggler but he was supported by villagers so can we categorize him as naxalite …

What’s the difference between two …terrorists and naxalites.

Thread awarded Crown of the Week
http://www.echarcha.com/forum/images/week_crown.jpg - Winner of Crown of the week!

[PeaceSeeker]

Naxalites are in opposition to the govt., working with the help of common man trying to help them with gun in their hand against the Govt.

Terrorists are against nation, with their own schema of separate the nation based on ecological/geographical boundaries or just to intimidate people.

e.g. Veerapan was just a smuggler but he was supported by villagers so can we categorize him as naxalite …

What’s the difference between two …terrorists and naxalites.
there is no similarity between two except that they r both violent.

[ashdoc]

terrorists can be religious fanatics like islamic terrorists .

but naxalites are communists who dont believe in god .

so they do not follow religious extremism .

[Arbaaz Balushi]

Naxalites are in opposition to the govt., working with the help of common man trying to help them with gun in their hand against the Govt.

Terrorists are against nation, with their own schema of separate the nation based on ecological/geographical boundaries or just to intimidate people.

e.g. Veerapan was just a smuggler but he was supported by villagers so can we categorize him as naxalite …

What’s the difference between two …terrorists and naxalites.

Among themseleves, naxalites are poorer cousins of terrorists.

For a government, naxalites are lesser burden on exchaquer as compensation payment is lesser to victims of naxalite attack, compared to terrorist attacks.

Terrorists are more dangerous, as a common man has more chances of being killed by terrorist than by naxalite.

[Premi]

terrorists can be religious fanatics like islamic terrorists .

but naxalites are communists who dont believe in god .

so they do not follow religious extremism .

the attack pattern for both is quite different too. Though one can add spice to the other's movement ( terrorists by supplying arms to naxalites and naxalites by providing unstability to the govt. ) how one is less dangerous than other.

India is lucky these two violent groups are not acting with joined hands YET.

[Arbaaz Balushi]

India is lucky these two violent groups are not acting with joined hands YET.

They are - in andhra.

[landyaBhai]

terrorists can be religious fanatics like islamic terrorists .

but naxalites are communists who dont believe in god .

so they do not follow religious extremism .

It is the same thing ... you see, none of them believe in God ... one tries to fake it and counts strength in his belief by converting whereas the other wants to count his strength in his non-belief ...

[PeaceSeeker]

It is the same thing ... you see, none of them believe in God ... one tries to fake it and counts strength in his belief by converting whereas the other wants to count his strength in his non-belief ...
wtf. how can u say that such-n-such people may be faking faith?

naxalites are not necessarily faithless. that movement was against exploitation of have-nots by haves. so faith or absence of it is not a primary key of them.

[Premi]

Among themseleves, naxalites are poorer cousins of terrorists.

but once they start getting arms and ammun. from across the border they dont need money to change gears for their movement. Just cos they live in tribal areas and dont wear head scarfs doesnt mean that they are not capable to dent the democracy in serious way.

For a government, naxalites are lesser burden on exchaquer as compensation payment is lesser to victims of naxalite attack, compared to terrorist attacks.

why .... cos they put pressure on state govt. only it ll be higher compensation if they ll challenge central govt. instead. human life is human life ..... it doesnt matter it is lost due to naxalites or any terrorists. while compensation should be equel to all activities like this, there would be same punishments to both too.


Terrorists are more dangerous, as a common man has more chances of being killed by terrorist than by naxalite.

Policeman/para-millitary forces are not common man... they dont have families to look after... they dont eat,drink and live in the same society where others do.... why killing a soldier/police/homeguard is any less than killing an IT professional/babu in govt. office/rickshaw puller.....

[Premi]

They are - in andhra.


Is it... which group of terrorists are supporting naxalites there? If that is true then it is not poorer version of terrorists anymore. They can plan attacks where it hurts the most... and unless somebody from the govt. is working for them too it can become unstopable.

[Arbaaz Balushi]

Policeman/para-millitary forces are not common man... they dont have families to look after... they dont eat,drink and live in the same society where others do.... why killing a soldier/police/homeguard is any less than killing an IT professional/babu in govt. office/rickshaw puller.....

The 'whys' are different subject, what i was sayings is 'whats'.

In india, naxals kill rate is double of terrorists, atleast until 2009.

[Arbaaz Balushi]

Is it... which group of terrorists are supporting naxalites there? If that is true then it is not poorer version of terrorists anymore. They can plan attacks where it hurts the most... and unless somebody from the govt. is working for them too it can become unstopable.

Don't know the group's name, but read somewhere that muslim jihadi forces has outsourced the killing of hindu nationalists to naxals. You know, chor chor mausare-bhai kind of alliance.

[Premi]

It is the same thing ... you see, none of them believe in God ... one tries to fake it and counts strength in his belief by converting whereas the other wants to count his strength in his non-belief ...

there is difference landyabhai...

anyone who kill other human-beings is faking his belief.... sometimes by making it God-words to kill infidels, sometimes by calling it against the nature, sometimes calling it only option of survival, sometimes bringing peace/democracy to the nation....

for us, pakis are demon and we want to stamp out them as we are following God's word to kill the demons. for them we are the same. does it take both of us anywhere... not until we think and see beyond that and work towards a progressive nation as India is doing now and strongly building its character on world's map.

[Sane Less]

It is the same thing ... you see, none of them believe in God ... one tries to fake it and counts strength in his belief by converting whereas the other wants to count his strength in his non-belief ...

there is difference landyabhai...

anyone who kill other human-beings is faking his belief.... sometimes by making it God-words to kill infidels, sometimes by calling it against the nature, sometimes calling it only option of survival, sometimes bringing peace/democracy to the nation....

...

How does one fake one's belief:confused: Either one believes or does not. And if one goes to the extent of killing others, wouldn't you say his/her belief is stronger... rather than calling it fake:dontknow:

What if there are gods and what if they actually want you to kill other human beings who disrespect or do not believe in them? In this case, would you go around killing others... or will you tell them to stfu?

[PeaceSeeker]

How does one fake one's belief:confused: Either one believes or does not. And if one goes to the extent of killing others, wouldn't you say his/her belief is stronger... rather than calling it fake:dontknow:


exactly. no one can judge who is faking belief and who is not. there is no such thing as 'faking belief' anyway [except instances like political stunts].

[Premi]

How does one fake one's belief:confused: Either one believes or does not. And if one goes to the extent of killing others, wouldn't you say his/her belief is stronger... rather than calling it fake:dontknow:

What if there are gods and what if they actually want you to kill other human beings who disrespect or do not believe in them? In this case, would you go around killing others... or will you tell them to stfu?

ghanta .... "peaceful religion" is fake ... cos its not peaceful and no religion alllows killing people and if it does I m sorry that should not be a religion. thats just a fake excuse to show how different you are and how insecure you feel in this world.

[PeaceSeeker]

ghanta .... "peaceful religion" is fake ... cos its not peaceful and no religion alllows killing people and if it does I m sorry that should not be a religion. thats just a fake excuse to show how different you are and how insecure you feel in this world.
'faking belief' and 'fake belief' r different. former is a verb, latter a noun.

[Sane Less]

ghanta .... "peaceful religion" is fake ... cos its not peaceful and no religion alllows killing people and if it does I m sorry that should not be a religion. thats just a fake excuse to show how different you are and how insecure you feel in this world.
I do not understand your response (as far as it relates to my post). Are you saying that "peaceful" believers are fake believers and they do not really believe in the "peaceful" religion? Because this was the intent of your previous comments and my response. But I do not think you mean this in this post of yours... basically you are shifting your stand... becomes hard to argue against:D

How do you know that "peaceful" religion is fake? And you say no religion allows killing people... which basically means that you know no religon:D Every (almost) religion allows killing of people... in fact, the gods themselves have killed people and encourage killing in his (or his/her favour) in almost every religion. As to if it should be a religion or not... we will be left with very few choices in that case:D

[Premi]

exactly. no one can judge who is faking belief and who is not. there is no such thing as 'faking belief' anyway [except instances like political stunts].

anyone who is on receiving side can judge that fakeness. for pissful religion, others are already non-believers so non-bellievers are not faking it and it they as believers go on killing rampage for the sake of saving their existence and call it under the words of God then they certainly are faking it...

[Arbaaz Balushi]

I do not understand your response (as far as it relates to my post). Are you saying that "peaceful" believers are fake believers and they do not really believe in the "peaceful" religion? Because this was the intent of your previous comments and my response. But I do not think you mean this in this post of yours... basically you are shifting your stand... becomes hard to argue against:D

How do you know that "peaceful" religion is fake? And you say no religion allows killing people... which basically means that you know no religon:D Every (almost) religion allows killing of people... in fact, the gods themselves have killed people and encourage killing in his (or his/her favour) in almost every religion. As to if it should be a religion or not... we will be left with very few choices in that case:D

Atheism fakers have killed more people than all religions combined. So why complain about religion only?

[Premi]

'faking belief' and 'fake belief' r different. former is a verb, latter a noun.


spot the difference then... both are being used to drive their own mentailty to the extreme levels. putting bullets in somebody does not comes in any religion so whoever doing it either they are followoing a fake religion OR they are faking it to turn its saying in their own terms.

like sikh gurudwara in vancouver CA, which has bhindrawala pictures as martyr in the temple... they say the diwali is for the some guru taking 52 kings out of prison with 52 kali of the dushala and thats the celebration for. they have their own belief which is fake cos of their hatred towards hindus. :dontknow:

[Sane Less]

anyone who is on receiving side can judge that fakeness. for pissful religion, others are already non-believers so non-bellievers are not faking it and it they as believers go on killing rampage for the sake of saving their existence and call it under the words of God then they certainly are faking it...

But if the words of god themselves say slay... slay for righteousness... then what:confused: They shouldn't call them words of god:dontknow:

Atheism fakers have killed more people than all religions combined. So why complain about religion only?

As you said yourself, atheism fakers. Real atheists would not do such bad things:D

[Arbaaz Balushi]

But if the words of god themselves say slay... slay for righteousness... then what:confused: They shouldn't call them words of god:dontknow:



As you said yourself, atheism fakers. Real atheists would not do such bad things:D

For a believer, there is no 'real' atheists, only fakers. :D

So, why complain against religion?

[Premi]

I do not understand your response (as far as it relates to my post). Are you saying that "peaceful" believers are fake believers and they do not really believe in the "peaceful" religion? Because this was the intent of your previous comments and my response. But I do not think you mean this in this post of yours... basically you are shifting your stand... becomes hard to argue against:D

How do you know that "peaceful" religion is fake? And you say no religion allows killing people... which basically means that you know no religon:D Every (almost) religion allows killing of people... in fact, the gods themselves have killed people and encourage killing in his (or his/her favour) in almost every religion. As to if it should be a religion or not... we will be left with very few choices in that case:D

okay .. so you guys say that hinduism is as violent as Izlam is. :dontknow:

if that was a fact then you wont see any pukestan on the world's map.

far away from naxalites and terrorists matter though but terrorists mean muslims all around the world... its no news now. is it?

[Premi]

Atheism fakers have killed more people than all religions combined. So why complain about religion only?

read my reply above... satya ki jeet ashtya par.. killing is never a truth of life ... death is but not killing by some extremist who want to show world how strong we are.

[Arbaaz Balushi]

read my reply above... satya ki jeet ashtya par.. killing is never a truth of life ... death is but not killing by some extremist who want to show world how strong we are.

Ram killed ravan - thats satya ki jeet astya par.

You talk about extremists, whom ravan killed?

[Arbaaz Balushi]

okay .. so you guys say that hinduism is as violent as Izlam is. :dontknow:

if that was a fact then you wont see any pukestan on the world's map.

far away from naxalites and terrorists matter though but terrorists mean muslims all around the world... its no news now. is it?

Not seeing on map is not a criteria to measure violence. With "1000 years of onslaught"; still india's every nook and corner is filled with hindus making it world's one of the largest third-world country. What does that means? Those 1000 years onslaught were just mild violent?

[Premi]

But if the words of god themselves say slay... slay for righteousness... then what:confused: They shouldn't call them words of god:dontknow:

Even arjun killed his relatives when Krishna said slay... but it wasn’t like he wanted to frighten the world or something… killing the human beings can never be a good thing.

As you said yourself, atheism fakers. Real atheists would not do such bad things:D

these definitions and meanings change with times and education as we grow and to make world liveable.

"jo sach kisi ki jaan le le kya faayda aise sach ka..." bhiku mahatre in Satya.

[Premi]

Ram killed ravan - thats satya ki jeet astya par.

You talk about extremists, whom ravan killed?


that was again to save his own wife and nothing else...

if India had the pukistan's wife abducted there then I can see why they keep attacking India ... but showing what they got against us is not gonna take them any further on the progress road.

P.S. kashmir is NOT their wife... its our rakhail... aur rakhail wife se jyada pyaari lagti hai ... ;)

[Premi]

Not seeing on map is not a criteria to measure violence. With "1000 years of onslaught"; still india's every nook and corner is filled with hindus making it world's one of the largest third-world country. What does that means? Those 1000 years onslaught were just mild violent?

1000 years of onslught were killing some and frighten all... like the underworld situation in India... D comp. and brothers kill a few in years and frighten all to take protection money from them. still we say underworld is killing them since ages now but they are everywhere. this will go on another 1000 years and still there will be sath log giving hafta to these guys. nothing compared to terrorists or mughals but just an example.

[Sane Less]

...

if that was a fact then you wont see any pukestan on the world's map.
...

You are shifting your sand like sand in a desert:D Saala, chup-chaap seedha kada reh ne... taaki nishaana laga saku. Aisa hilta rahega toh andhere mein teer chalana padenga:rolleyes:


Not seeing on map is not a criteria to measure violence. With "1000 years of onslaught"; still india's every nook and corner is filled with hindus making it world's one of the largest third-world country. What does that means? Those 1000 years onslaught were just mild violent?

these definitions and meanings change with times and education as we grow and to make world liveable.

...


The only reason you see pukestan on the world map is because Indians have forgotten hinduism. Hindus just take it as a way of life and not as a religion... and this has taken them away from the religion's core beliefs. Arbaab_zulaabi pai, what you see in every nook and corner of the country are not hindus but Indians... plain and simple. They have lost the will to be righteous... they just live... that's all.

[Premi]

You are shifting your sand like sand in a desert:D Saala, chup-chaap seedha kada reh ne... taaki nishaana laga saku. Aisa hilta rahega toh andhere mein teer chalana padenga:rolleyes:.

sidha nishana nahi lagega saney ... brahmastra chhodna padega isspe teer chalane ke liye... :smartass:

[Arbaaz Balushi]

Hindus just take it as a way of life and not as a religion... and this has taken them away from the religion's core beliefs. Arbaab_zulaabi pai, what you see in every nook and corner of the country are not hindus but Indians... plain and simple. They have lost the will to be righteous... they just live... that's all.

:D :D :D

Babri masjid aka disputed structure evidences that.

[landyaBhai]

wtf. how can u say that such-n-such people may be faking faith?

naxalites are not necessarily faithless. that movement was against exploitation of have-nots by haves. so faith or absence of it is not a primary key of them.

faith does not need any belief system, any show of strength ... I mean real faith, that is ...

the rest are like blind following the blind and falling in a ditch:D

[Arbaaz Balushi]

that was again to save his own wife and nothing else...

if India had the pukistan's wife abducted there then I can see why they keep attacking India ... but showing what they got against us is not gonna take them any further on the progress road.

P.S. kashmir is NOT their wife... its our rakhail... aur rakhail wife se jyada pyaari lagti hai ... ;)

You still didn't tell me whom ravan killed? Sirf ek kidnapping ke liye, ram killed hundreds and thousands?

[Arbaaz Balushi]

.. aur rakhail wife se jyada pyaari lagti hai ... ;)

I MUST believe you on this. :D

[Premi]

The only reason you see pukestan on the world map is because Indians have forgotten hinduism. Hindus just take it as a way of life and not as a religion... and this has taken them away from the religion's core beliefs. Arbaab_zulaabi pai, what you see in every nook and corner of the country are not hindus but Indians... plain and simple. They have lost the will to be righteous... they just live... that's all.
changing is the way of life saney... the values the hinduism teaches very few are following that... some are called extermists too .. whatever suits to one they call it hinduism... pictures of naked ladies having four hands is called hindu, not eating meat is called hindu, wearing plain simple nothing hip clothes is called hinduism, keeping urself dedicated to one partner is called hinduism, doing exercise like yoga is called hinduism too...

they can be connected to hinduism at one point or another but they are are hinduism.

[Premi]

:D :D :D

Babri masjid aka disputed structure evidences that.

no it doesn’t... my uncle have seen some SC/ST people fighting against govt. in the mandal commission days back in 90s. I wasn’t there in babri masjid times I m sure even Moslems at that times did some damage to the nation integrity.

[Premi]

faith does not need any belief system, any show of strength ... I mean real faith, that is ...

the rest are like blind following the blind and falling in a ditch:D

eventually they will fall in the ditch ... and US is making sure they have enough wells around the blinds so they dont miss one.

[Premi]

I MUST believe you on this. :D


dukhti rag pe haath to nahi rakh diya maine :smartass:

[Sane Less]

changing is the way of life saney... the values the hinduism teaches very few are following that... some are called extermists too .. whatever suits to one they call it hinduism...


pictures of naked ladies having four hands is called hindu... erotism

not eating meat is called hindu... vegetarianism

wearing plain simple nothing hip clothes is called hinduism... gandhism

keeping urself dedicated to one partner is called hinduism... monogamy

doing exercise like yoga is called hinduism too... plain exercise... and there are many options, maybe better

they can be connected to hinduism at one point or another but they are are hinduism.

Everything is taken over by different strains. So... what is left of (core) hinduism? Nothing:confused:

[rationalthinker]

Babri: regardless of the pogrom of the seculars (anti-Hindus), there ARE a few genuine Hindus who care for their legacy and culture.
Seculars are 'Laaton Key Bhoot'-----the Babri case had come down since the days of the British--------and nothing was ALLOWED to happen.
The genuine Hindus 'forced the issue'.
Only thing is that whereas earlier on the 'status quo' allowed the 'squatters' to hold on to their ill-gotten gains, the 'proactive genuine Hindus' successfully 'changed the scenario'--and the results are there: A matter that was in limbo for nearly a century----is now in it's final stages of resolution!:cool:
And it's the squatters who are intent on 'appealing'!:smartass:

[PeaceSeeker]

faith does not need any belief system, any show of strength ... I mean real faith, that is ...

the rest are like blind following the blind and falling in a ditch:D
that i agree. but like i said earlier, 'faking faith' and 'fake faith' r different things and cannot be used interchangeably.

[Premi]

Thanks for the crown on this thread. another thing is proved now that you dont need to start a crown-worthy thread in begining of the week.

this was started on friday morning 10:43am our time.

:cool: