Does anyone here support the Tamil Tigers?

[Fuchs66]

the tamils are only 'terrorists' because they are losing. if they had won the sinhalese would be the 'terrorists'

No they're (the Tigers) a terrorist group because of their tactics

The government forces have shown themselves to be not a great deal better though

E2A a good friend of mine is an Indian Tamil and even he says that although he supports the aim of an independant Tamil region he refuses to support the Tigers because of their tactics.

 

[isitme]

No they're (the Tigers) a terrorist group because of their tactics

The government forces have shown themselves to be not a great deal better though

i'm sure if they could afford more planes etc they would use them instead of 'terrorist' tactics, it's a fine line. the sri lankan army have used pretty dire tactics through the war as well....

 

[Fuchs66]

i'm sure if they could afford more planes etc they would use them instead of 'terrorist' tactics, it's a fine line. the sri lankan army have used pretty dire tactics through the war as well....

Possibly but you cant deal with "what ifs" you have to deal with reality as it is and the tactics used by the Tigers are terror tactics simple as that. As I said I couldn't pick one side or the other here as both are as guilty of behaviour that I couldn't support. I think I'll go along with my Tamil mates opinion.

 

[isitme]

Possibly but you cant deal with "what ifs" you have to deal with reality as it is and the tactics used by the Tigers are terror tactics simple as that. As I said I couldn't pick one side or the other here as both are as guilty of behaviour that I couldn't support. I think I'll go along with my Tamil mates opinion.

well i agree that the tigers are really dodgy (they do a lot of really dodgy stuff to fund their organisation as well as how they fight) but it's war and both sides are pretty brutal

going off on a bit of a tangent here, but it's like america fighting 'terrorism' by bombing countries to shit, the only thing that makes an army 'legitimate' instead of terrorists is the size of it

 

[ska invita]

You are mixing up several issues:

1) Desire for either a separate independent Tamil state or substantial autonomy for a Tamil area within a federal system

2) Support for the LTTE.

3) Historical questions about 'native peoples'.

Taking them in reverse order:

3) Some Tamils (Sri Lankan Tamils) have been in Sri Lanka for a long time, others came over in the 1800s (Indian Tamils) link but this is irrelevant to everyone having equal rights in Sri Lanka or the question of a minority wanting their own separate state.

2) Both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government have been guilty of many human rights abuses. You don't need to support either one to hold an opinion about independence/separatism.

3) You say the campaign for a separate Tamil state "isn't really a fight worth having". However while someone may be against a violent military/terrorist methods, there are valid reasons for people to want independence. Ultimately it is up to a local population to decide if they want to be independent, and whatever the outcome people (from any group in the population) should have equal rights under the law anyway.

Suggesting that only 'native people' have political rights is the kind of thing the BNP advocate. Saying that people shouldn't have independence is a bit like the English telling the Scottish what they should do - in fact it should be up to the people who live in the area effected to decide if they want to separate. Running together 'support for the Tigers' with 'Tamil independence' is suggesting that anyone who wants independence is a terrorist - transpose this argument to Northern Ireland for example to see how this isn't valid.

You might be "totally ignorant about the Sri Lankan civil war" but you can get a long way by spending 10 minutes reading wikipedia for lots of uncontroversial facts and figures and applying your logic about 'native people' and 'independence' to situations you may understand better in the UK, to see if they are valid principles.

Thanks float - all points taken - must admit im being very flippant on this thread, and its clearly a complex and sensitive subject that im trampling through...

 

[Giles]

the tamils are only 'terrorists' because they are losing. if they had won the sinhalese would be the 'terrorists'

Even when they had de facto control of much of the north of Sri Lanka (mid 1990s this was - i went there for a month or so), they were still exploding bombs designed to inflict dozens of civilian casualties in Colombo.

Giles..

 

[nino_savatte]

You don't have to support the LTTE to understand the roots of the conflict.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinhala_Only_Act

 

[nino_savatte]

From the Independent in January. Safe zone comes under artillery fire.

It is believed that 250,000 people have become caught up in the end-game of the island's bitter civil war as the military continues to drive the Tamil Tigers into an ever-diminishing area of jungle following the capture of Mullaittivu, the rebels' last major town, at the weekend. Humanitarian convoys, on which the civilians depend, have not been able to reach them for almost two weeks.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/massacre-in-the-sri-lanka-safe-zone-1517850.html

The government created these "safe zones" as places where civilians can seek refuge. I have to say that they remind me a lot of these places.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Hamlet_Program

 

[dennisr]

it's pretty much over isn't it?

not in the best way, but the newspapers reckon there's only a couple of tigers left

that's the new problem - destroying the tigers militarily does not resolve the underlying reasons that many tamils turned to them, or at least acquiesed, in the first place.

discrimination against the tamils will still exist (and it goes much further than just denial of the right to speak your own language) - use of tamils as scapegoats to be pogromed, beaten and murdered when things get tough for the ruling clique so as to divert attention from real causes of economic and social problems for both tamil and sinhalese peoples

 

[Nigel]

The RCG (rev com group) have long supported the LTTE. Their paper 'fight racism fight imperialism' has always carried pro Tiger material. They made the iissue of Viraj Mendis 'big' in the 80's.

I remember that didn't he speak at the end of Campaign Against Police Act meeting in mid eighties.

 

[Nigel]

Sri Lanka: United Socialist Party

that's the new problem - destroying the tigers militarily does not resolve the underlying reasons that many tamils turned to them, or at least acquiesed, in the first place.

discrimination against the tamils will still exist (and it goes much further than just denial of the right to speak your own language) - use of tamils as scapegoats to be pogromed, beaten and murdered when things get tough for the ruling clique so as to divert attention from real causes of economic and social problems for both tamil and sinhalese peoples

I'm suprised you didn't mention Siritunga Jayasuriya; United Socialist Party which is affiliated to CWI
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/keyword/Nationalist_and_National_Liberation/Tamil_Tigers/4749
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/keyword/Committee_for_a_Workers_International/article/6893
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/keyword/Left_and_radical/article/7141

 

[isitme]

Even when they had de facto control of much of the north of Sri Lanka (mid 1990s this was - i went there for a month or so), they were still exploding bombs designed to inflict dozens of civilian casualties in Colombo.

Giles..

what sort of bombs have the sinhalese been using?

 

[purplex]

You are mixing up several issues:

1) Desire for either a separate independent Tamil state or substantial autonomy for a Tamil area within a federal system

2) Support for the LTTE.

3) Historical questions about 'native peoples'.

Taking them in reverse order:

3) Some Tamils (Sri Lankan Tamils) have been in Sri Lanka for a long time, others came over in the 1800s (Indian Tamils) link but this is irrelevant to everyone having equal rights in Sri Lanka or the question of a minority wanting their own separate state.

2) Both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government have been guilty of many human rights abuses. You don't need to support either one to hold an opinion about independence/separatism.

3) You say the campaign for a separate Tamil state "isn't really a fight worth having". However while someone may be against a violent military/terrorist methods, there are valid reasons for people to want independence. Ultimately it is up to a local population to decide if they want to be independent, and whatever the outcome people (from any group in the population) should have equal rights under the law anyway.

Suggesting that only 'native people' have political rights is the kind of thing the BNP advocate. Saying that people shouldn't have independence is a bit like the English telling the Scottish what they should do - in fact it should be up to the people who live in the area effected to decide if they want to separate. Running together 'support for the Tigers' with 'Tamil independence' is suggesting that anyone who wants independence is a terrorist - transpose this argument to Northern Ireland for example to see how this isn't valid.

You might be "totally ignorant about the Sri Lankan civil war" but you can get a long way by spending 10 minutes reading wikipedia for lots of uncontroversial facts and figures and applying your logic about 'native people' and 'independence' to situations you may understand better in the UK, to see if they are valid principles.

Really excellent post

 

[_float_]

Thanks

 

[ill-informed]

I went there in '87. It was like a ghost island as we were the only tourists, i've got some very fond memories, but one conversation i remember, it was with this old woman landowner who said that the tamils had worked her farm for generations, everyone had got on well untill the tamil leaders told them to attack the sinhalise and then they started running around with machettes killing everyone, people they'd known all their lives.

 

[ymu]

partly a result of the tactics the tigers use - although i guess we all agree on that already

Yeah, 'cos terrorism generally comes out of nowhere. One day some ethnic or geographical group suddenly develop collective mania and start blowing things up. There was a terrible outbreak amongst Jews in Palestine in the 1930's, followed by one amongst the indigenous Arabs (maybe it's contagious?). Some Spaniards caught it a while ago, and of course the Irish. Now it's the poor old Muslims.

In the case of the Tamil Tigers, like some cases found in Palestine, the disease is so severe that they will even blow themselves up. It's a desperate disease, and it strikes so randomly - there's no pattern I can see at all to these outbreaks.

 

[purplex]

Hundreds of people died at the weekend including a large number of children. While I dont approve of the Tamil Tigers methods, its quite clear to me that while they were the enemy, it took the focus away from ordinary Tamils, if they are completely defeated, I really fear for the Tamil population out there.

 

[dennisr]

Yeah, 'cos terrorism generally comes out of nowhere.

that is why the word 'partly' is used. its not a moral position on my part - tactically they are wrong. this has greatly assisted the Sri Lankan state. the situation facing tamil people NOW is the result of both the Sri Lankan state AND the tigers tactics and strategies

given that i have pointed out the root causes of the tigers reaction in three posts on this thread I hope you will forgive me for assuming that i did not need to point this out a further time

 

[TomUS]

Hundreds of people died at the weekend including a large number of children. While I dont approve of the Tamil Tigers methods, its quite clear to me that while they were the enemy, it took the focus away from ordinary Tamils, if they are completely defeated, I really fear for the Tamil population out there.

I fear more for the tamil pop if the tigers aren't completely defeated.

 

[Poi E]

So, yes, I would give my support to the Sri Lankan government.

..

A government that "disappears" journalists and activists and breaches international humanitarian law? Nah.

 

[purplex]

I fear more for the tamil pop if the tigers aren't completely defeated.

While I agree their actions have been pretty heinous, they arent fighting without a cause. The problem is because they are seen as terrorists they are automatically the bad guys, the sri lankan government arent all peace loving buddhists, they are cruel bastards who are committing war crimes. In the middle of all this innocent people are dying and thats really so very sad. Do you really believe people who are prepared to drop bombs on the sick and injured are going to care a hoot about the rights of tamils if the ltte are defeated? The stories coming out of channel 4 last week are the tip of the iceberg and a taster of whats to come over there imo.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

I must admit Im totally ignorant about the Sri Lankan civil war, but from what I can see the Tamil Tigers desire to have a seperate state within Sri Lanka isn't really a fight worth having. From what I can see the Tamil's aren't even necessarily the native peoples of Sri Lanka (though some dispute this).

Does anyone here support the Tigers? Can you explain why?

You could use your argument to cease the existence of the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Brazil...

 

[TomUS]

While I agree their actions have been pretty heinous, they arent fighting without a cause. The problem is because they are seen as terrorists they are automatically the bad guys, the sri lankan government arent all peace loving buddhists, they are cruel bastards who are committing war crimes. In the middle of all this innocent people are dying and thats really so very sad. Do you really believe people who are prepared to drop bombs on the sick and injured are going to care a hoot about the rights of tamils if the ltte are defeated? The stories coming out of channel 4 last week are the tip of the iceberg and a taster of whats to come over there imo.

I doubt the gov will give a hoot about the rights of the Tamils if the tigers are defeated. But, they certainly don't give a hoot about their rights now. I can't see how the tigers are helping the Tamils in any way. It's the continued fighting that's endangering the Tamils, not protecting them. I see the conflict as over & attempting to drag out the fight for a few weeks more will only prolong the suffering.

 

[In Bloom]

Possibly but you cant deal with "what ifs" you have to deal with reality as it is and the tactics used by the Tigers are terror tactics simple as that.

All sides in a war use terror tactics, it's somewhat ironic that the least effective of those tactics are usually the ones taken up by terrorists.

What is the purpose of shelling the no fire zone, if not to terrorise the civillian population and drive them out?

 

[Poi E]

And God help the people of Sri Lanka when their government has disposed of this "enemy within". On to the next one...

 

[purplex]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8048087.stm

Hitting hospitals again. This is happening every day now.
Statement from Obama on there, not too complimentary of the Sri Lankan government.

 

[frogwoman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8048087.stm

Hitting hospitals again. This is happening every day now.
Statement from Obama on there, not too complimentary of the Sri Lankan government.

now where on earth could they have got that idea from?

 

[ymu]

that is why the word 'partly' is used. its not a moral position on my part - tactically they are wrong. this has greatly assisted the Sri Lankan state. the situation facing tamil people NOW is the result of both the Sri Lankan state AND the tigers tactics and strategies

given that i have pointed out the root causes of the tigers reaction in three posts on this thread I hope you will forgive me for assuming that i did not need to point this out a further time

You can't argue that it is tactically wrong unless you understand why they use those tactics. They are designed to provoke a disproportionately violent response from the Sri Lankan government, because the only way an overwhelmingly weak group can overcome an overwhelmingly powerful group is to engage worldwide public opinion to such an extent that things have to improve. It's what the KLA did in Kosovo and it's what Hamas have often done in Palestine. It's arguably what Roosevelt did at Pearl Harbour (the "strong" in that case being the isolationists).

Yeah, it's fucking horrible. But so is imprisoning millions of people for generation upon generation. At some point they're gonna crack and be willing to kill or be killed in order to bring it to an end. Like they always do, in every "conflict" of this nature. Which is why those groups that are willing to direct that desperate response often have enormous popular support even as their enemies are exacting a bloody revenge on those supporters.

The aid agencies face this dilemma all the time. If they stopped keeping people alive in Gaza and the West Bank, or anywhere where the powerful exploit the powerless ... the loss of life would be so extreme that the political situation would be forced to change. They do just enough to keep the situation at an "acceptable" level so that the powerful are not forced to account for their actions.

Peaceful protest is all very well, but quiet martyrdom is such a waste. If a Western journalist can be bothered to trek through endless checkpoints, or better still actually live in these hell-holes, then it might get written about. But they so rarely do, and even then, it has to get past an editor.

So blood and guts it is. Our fault, not theirs.

 

[purplex]

What's the Stop The War coalition's take on this, anyone know?
Why is there such little anger about Tamil persecution from the people of this country?
Are there any Tamil Sri Lankans on this board.

 

[purplex]

They are designed to provoke a disproportionately violent response from the Sri Lankan government, because the only way an overwhelmingly weak group can overcome an overwhelmingly powerful group is to engage worldwide public opinion to such an extent that things have to improve.

I would agree with most of that except I would disagree that any organization is deliberately aiming to provoke a disproportionate response, however since the war on terror it seems to be the standard reply. In my opinion the reason for terrorism is to get your voice heard and to get listened to and to force your views onto the table, not to have bombs rain down on the sick and injured.