Raj said...

Yeah agreed. Since the world is stewing up some serious bullshit like terrorism and jehad.. but then, if we fight back, they also increase the internsity of the fight. So will the cascading effect not lead to more violence?
Are non-violent methods completely out of the question?

Ok as you have brought this up,with the given idea of the workings of 'jehad','terrorism',dont you think any ahimsa method will be recognised as a sign of submission? You stop fighting them and then they'll again quote non-existent chants saying that if an enemy submits then he is ours,its like 'you keep what you kill' or in this case that which you bring down.

Take the example of the reporter who was beheaded(Daniel Pearl),was he up in arms against the forces? Although he was not openly fighting them he was just doing his job but still was a victim to such a gruesome act.To people who kill innocents to strike fear,should they not experience fear as well?

And for Ahimsa to work the enemy must have a fixed goal,all these acts of terrorism are done by different groups and with different agendas,most of whom are just little groups of frustrated men who want to show the world that they are somebody and are not nobody.With these kind of people where is the way of ahimsa?

And if one of the groups is dealt with lightly all other groups expect not resistence but tolerance,at this point in time their hearts dont melt and go "Oh i think I'm doing the wrong thing,let me give up",No they will be more like"Ha, we'r not getting any resistence,lets take this to the next level".