TAKING advantage of the government’s changed stance against terrorism, the New People’s Army said it would not release the soldiers it captured until the government suspends all military and police operations in the Bicol region.
Can anyone really be surprised at this? Any fool could have predicted this would happen, as history is full of examples of the folly of appeasement. But Santayana was right, "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it". Arroyo and all the idiots in the Philippines who cheered so loudly for the early pullout are fools who have utterly failed to learn the lessons of history. While I am certainly glad that De La Cruz was released unharmed, the predictable consequences of caving into terrorists' demands is now starting to follow. Caving into their demands appears weak, and they have only contempt for anything that appears as weakness. They smell blood, and they are emboldened to further action. The Philippines now looks like a soft target, and it also has many homegrown terrorists who can look at Arroyo's response to th Iraqi terrorists, and who will naturally think: "it worked for the Iraqis, so it can work for us too. Time to ratchet the pressure up". Sure Arroyo saved De La Cruz's life, but how many lives of hostages yet to be taken will this action cost?
And this comes mere days after the announcement of the early withdrawal from Iraq. Didn't take long did it? This is just the beginning.
The Filipino government isn't going to be so acquiescent with terrorist forces that it can easily bring significant military power against. That's probably why their local terrorists didn't have as much success with hostages as the Iraqi insurgents.
How popular was the Iraq war with the Filipino population anyway, and how does it compare with the popularity of the fight against the NPA?
Andrew J. wrote:The Filipino government isn't going to be so acquiescent with terrorist forces that it can easily bring significant military power against. That's probably why their local terrorists didn't have as much success with hostages as the Iraqi insurgents.
That may be true, but it's going to be a long, hard fight to convince the local terrorists that's the case. The Filipino government, well intentioned as it was, have traded the lives and freedom of God knows how many future hostages at home to save one truck driver.
And yes, I'm aware it was only 50 or so soldiers, and yes, I'm aware they only sped up a withdrawal already in progress, but that doesn't matter to me and it doesn't matter to their domestic terrorists. All they saw was that Manila WILL allow its policies to be dictated by hostage takers.
How popular was the Iraq war with the Filipino population anyway, and how does it compare with the popularity of the fight against the NPA?
I'm sure most Filipinos would be as happy to see the NPA ground into the dirt as they were unhappy their government participated in any capacity in the Iraqi operation. That's not the point. The Philipines isn't about to cede parts of its own territory over hostages, but that isn't going to stop the insurgents there from trying, any more than the fact that the Philipines had a small force and were already withdrawing will convince Iraqi insurgents that they can't repeat the accomplishment by taking other countries' citizens hostage.
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
Andrew J. wrote:The Filipino government isn't going to be so acquiescent with terrorist forces that it can easily bring significant military power against. That's probably why their local terrorists didn't have as much success with hostages as the Iraqi insurgents.
How popular was the Iraq war with the Filipino population anyway, and how does it compare with the popularity of the fight against the NPA?
I agree, the Filipino government is not going to be so acquiescent with terrorist forces that it can easily bring significant military power against. They can't afford to be. It doesn't matter. They have created the perception that they might, and that is what matters. Perception is what drives most people's actions. They base their actions, not on what is true (the many mistakes people make is proof enough of this), but on what they perceive to be true. So the perception is now that the Philippines are governed by a weak leader, an appeaser. And the perception is also that if they take hostages and act ruthlessly enough, they will force this weak, appeasing leader and her weak, appeasing government to concede to their demands. It doesn't even matter that the war in Iraq was unpopular, while the fight against domestic Filipino terrorists is not; it doesn't change how Arroyo and her government will be perceived by the terrorists. They saw a Filipino truck driver get kidnapped and threatened, and the Filipino government ran like scalded dogs. As I said, the terrorists will smell blood, and they will be emboldened to further action. I would venture to say that many Filipino lives are going to be lost before the government over there can change the perception that it is led by a spineless president, and equally spineless subordinates.
Xenophobe3691 wrote:Whatever happened to the Phillipines that made life hell for us a hundred years ago?!?
Oh I'm sure it's still there in some measure. If the Philippines were invaded again, you might well see the people fighting as ferociously as they did then. Their heart wasn't in this fight. But the problem is, once you have taken a fight on, you had better see it to its end. You better put your heart into it. If you're not willing to do so, you had no business getting into it in the first place. And if you back out, having already committed to the fight, you will then create this perception of yourself as weak and lacking in will. In a world where there are some people - aggressive people - who respect nothing but strength, this is a highly dangerous and unwise perception to create.
Xenophobe3691 wrote:Whatever happened to the Phillipines that made life hell for us a hundred years ago?!?
Oh I'm sure it's still there in some measure. If the Philippines were invaded again, you might well see the people fighting as ferociously as they did then. Their heart wasn't in this fight. But the problem is, once you have taken a fight on, you had better see it to its end. You better put your heart into it. If you're not willing to do so, you had no business getting into it in the first place. And if you back out, having already committed to the fight, you will then create this perception of yourself as weak and lacking in will. In a world where there are some people - aggressive people - who respect nothing but strength, this is a highly dangerous and unwise perception to create.
"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse."
bin Laden's position on the matter.
BoTM / JL / MM / HAB / VRWC / Horseman
I'm studying for the CPA exam. Have a nice summer, and if you're down just sit back and realize that Joe is off somewhere, doing much worse than you are.
Xenophobe3691 wrote:Whatever happened to the Phillipines that made life hell for us a hundred years ago?!?
The current national goverment still has its hand's busy trying to kill those persistent troublemakers.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Xenophobe3691 wrote:Whatever happened to the Phillipines that made life hell for us a hundred years ago?!?
Those particular Filipinos were the "moors" or the "moros", Muslims in the south, the guys who are making life hell for other Filipinos today. The other Filipinos, including me, are just pansies.
I knew this was gonna bite us back in the ass, though this was unexpectedly fast and I expected the Islamic insurgents to be the ones doing the kidnapping, not the commies, but I guess they're all the same *shrugs*
"DO YOU WORSHIP HOMOSEXUALS?" - Curtis Saxton (source) shroom is a lovely boy and i wont hear a bad word against him - LUSY-CHAN! Shit! Man, I didn't think of that! It took Shroom to properly interpret the screams of dying people - PeZook Shroom, I read out the stuff you write about us. You are an endless supply of morale down here. :p - an OWS street medic Pink Sugar Heart Attack!
hear about the Islamofascists? They captured an egyptian diplomat and
are threatening to behead him unless Egypt doesn't recognize the new Iraqi Govt'...
Lets hear it for Spain and the Philliphines for showing terrorists that
yes, they can win
"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong
"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944
Perinquus wrote:I agree, the Filipino government is not going to be so acquiescent with terrorist forces that it can easily bring significant military power against. They can't afford to be. It doesn't matter. They have created the perception that they might, and that is what matters. Perception is what drives most people's actions. They base their actions, not on what is true (the many mistakes people make is proof enough of this), but on what they perceive to be true. So the perception is now that the Philippines are governed by a weak leader, an appeaser. And the perception is also that if they take hostages and act ruthlessly enough, they will force this weak, appeasing leader and her weak, appeasing government to concede to their demands. It doesn't even matter that the war in Iraq was unpopular, while the fight against domestic Filipino terrorists is not; it doesn't change how Arroyo and her government will be perceived by the terrorists. They saw a Filipino truck driver get kidnapped and threatened, and the Filipino government ran like scalded dogs. As I said, the terrorists will smell blood, and they will be emboldened to further action. I would venture to say that many Filipino lives are going to be lost before the government over there can change the perception that it is led by a spineless president, and equally spineless subordinates.
All they have to do is take a hard line against these guys in order to change that perception. Hell, these soldiers were (if I'm reading the article right) captured before all this appeasement hullabaloo. The Filipino government is probably just going to do what it would have done regardless of the Iraq situation.
Perinquus wrote:I agree, the Filipino government is not going to be so acquiescent with terrorist forces that it can easily bring significant military power against. They can't afford to be. It doesn't matter. They have created the perception that they might, and that is what matters. Perception is what drives most people's actions. They base their actions, not on what is true (the many mistakes people make is proof enough of this), but on what they perceive to be true. So the perception is now that the Philippines are governed by a weak leader, an appeaser. And the perception is also that if they take hostages and act ruthlessly enough, they will force this weak, appeasing leader and her weak, appeasing government to concede to their demands. It doesn't even matter that the war in Iraq was unpopular, while the fight against domestic Filipino terrorists is not; it doesn't change how Arroyo and her government will be perceived by the terrorists. They saw a Filipino truck driver get kidnapped and threatened, and the Filipino government ran like scalded dogs. As I said, the terrorists will smell blood, and they will be emboldened to further action. I would venture to say that many Filipino lives are going to be lost before the government over there can change the perception that it is led by a spineless president, and equally spineless subordinates.
All they have to do is take a hard line against these guys in order to change that perception. Hell, these soldiers were (if I'm reading the article right) captured before all this appeasement hullabaloo. The Filipino government is probably just going to do what it would have done regardless of the Iraq situation.
Yes, but though they may have been captured before, the terrorists have taken a new resolve from what they see as they governments willingness to capitulate. Do not try to play this off like it's no big deal. Even if the Filipino government can change that perception, the problem is that they created it in the first place, and it will embolden terrorists until it is changed. This means more potential hostages, who might not have been kidnapped in the first place, may lose their lives as a result of the Filipino governments craven policy of appeasement - which should never have been adopted in the first place, given how full history is of examples that appeasing an aggressor only whets his appetite.
MKSheppard wrote:
Lets hear it for Spain and the Philliphines for showing terrorists that
yes, they can win
I don't think the two cases are really comparable. The spanish were already going to have the election, and the old goverment wasn't especially popular. A lot of the votes for the new government had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.
Hi! I'm Prozac the Robert!
EBC: "We can categorically state that we will be releasing giant man-eating badgers into the area."
Prozac the Robert wrote:I don't think the two cases are really comparable. The spanish were already going to have the election, and the old goverment wasn't especially popular. A lot of the votes for the new government had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.
True, but the attacks and the aftermath clearly changed the outcome of the election. It's not clear whether the attacks themselves or the government's response to the attacks were primarily responsible, but it's pretty clear it was a combination of the two.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Prozac the Robert wrote:I don't think the two cases are really comparable. The spanish were already going to have the election, and the old goverment wasn't especially popular. A lot of the votes for the new government had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.
True, but the attacks and the aftermath clearly changed the outcome of the election. It's not clear whether the attacks themselves or the government's response to the attacks were primarily responsible, but it's pretty clear it was a combination of the two.
Of course, the same will happen if (let's hope not) there's an attack right before the US presidential elections. No matter the outcome, it WILL have been influenced by the attack, at least according to some people (the losing party, for starters). There's no way to avoid that, postponing the elections is by itself another destructive option.
We just have to not give a shit about the terrorists possible opinions and do what the Spanish did, go after the culprits with cold determination, arresting them all or make them blow themselves up while surrounded.
"
- PeZook
