The trouble with Indian secularism

[someone]

You are seeing India through the lenses of someone who is one among 300 million people who has a voice. I am seeing India as one among the 800 odd million who don't. Savvy?

Agree and probably change the number to 500 million with their population growing alarming. Really have never understood which direction India is going. Some community( say A) ask for thier own schools, their own education and more quota, and it is agreed( probably for votes). It is thought of helping their community to improve their situation. Other communities members have to obey their rules in their system. Ok no problem but Then, when some other community asks smth like that, the community A does not agree with that.

[Rajiv]

The way these countries have dealt is rather simple - Laissez-faire. So long as these countries interest were not hurt they were more than comfortable glorifying the very same people. Terrorism in India is not new, but when India would speak with European counterparts it was never listened to(early to mid 80s). Right wingers in India shall blame Congress for not being "strong enough" but if you have lived in Europe long enough you know there are Khalistani extremist sought by India still in London, LTTE had its footprint all over Europe and of course the Islamic fundamentalist. So why has Europe suffered fewer attacks? Well for one they have better resources. Secondly they have lot more teeth. When Europe complains, most countries listen. That to me is the reason and not so much about Secularism. xxx

My friend, what do you do when no one listens to you? Cheek or Force

[Guest Gunner]

I will answer both those posts together as you are essentially harping on the same point. No one has denied the existence of homegrown terror in other countries. The only difference is how they have dealt with it. If you compare the number of terror incidents in India with the UK' date= SPain, France, Germany and even the US - you know who will come off the loser. Now you tell me how come the terror incidents in those countries are so low despite the fact that they have a 10% muslim population?

Is that a serious post? The only difference between India and Spain' date=' France, Germany, UK, and US is how India deals with terrorism? Do you have any idea of the per capita income of India and the other countries? [b']Are you aware of the kind of neighbors these countries have? Do their neighbors push in terrorists on their soil? Were these countries born out of intense hatred and communal strife a mere 60 years back? Is gathering intelligence and surveillance even remotely comparable in Chandni Chowk and Queens? Do any of these countries have a Muslim majority state bordering two countries with whom they have fought 5 wars with in the last 60 years?

Mashallah, well done missing the point baharwale bhaisaab. Now to answer your other questions, if you cite economic strength as the only reason those countries have for being able to combat terror its a very poor point indeed. Firstly, those countries have been more proactive about combating terror after the first incident which took place on their soil whereas we continue to be disorganised in our response to terror. The level of organisation was amply seen after the chaos which occurred immediately during the Mumbai attacks. The key elements to fighting terror is a proactive watch, an organised approach to integration of intelligence services to police and army and finally a clear response plan to a terror attack. We have not seen one shred of evidence that India has any of these things as compare to the countries I have mentioned.

Moreover' date=' in the countries you listed only France has a Muslim population of around 10%. [/quote'] Kahe bejti karwa rahen hai bhaisaab, in absolute numbers Germany has the largest muslim population in continental Europe of approx 4 million (perhaps not 10%). Yeh loh ji, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe

There are many ill conceived posts on this thread' date=' but this one beats everyone of them to the post, which takes some doing in a thread graced by the likes of BossBhai, seedhi, and sarchasm.[/quote'] :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: O Rly? I should make it a point to call you out on all the drivel you post across the MB in future.

[The Outsider]

Mashallah, well done missing the point baharwale bhaisaab.

So, before I proceed further let me clarify that you are contending homegrown terrorism is independent of any outside influence?

Now to answer your other questions, if you cite economic strength as the only reason those countries have for being able to combat terror its a very poor point indeed.

Can you quote where I cited economic strength as the only reason that these countries can combat terrorism better. On the contrary, you cited state policies for dealing with terrorism and how secularism pans out in these countries as the only difference and I quote :

The only difference is how they have dealt with it.

Kahe bejti karwa rahen hai bhaisaab, in absolute numbers Germany has the largest muslim population in continental Europe of approx 4 million (perhaps not 10%). Yeh loh ji, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe

Yeah from your very own link : 2%-4% (Andorra, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain) 4%-5% (Germany, Greece, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, United Kingdom) And in the US estimates are between 1-3%. Abhi kis ki beizzati hui, it's for everyone to see. Also, are you really sure you want to go down the route of absolute numbers like you've done with Germany? If you do, here is one number I've got for you - 160 million.

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: O Rly? I should make it a point to call you out on all the drivel you post across the MB in future.

Sure, but why don't you start by cleaning up the garbage you've posted above like claiming the only difference between India and France, UK, Spain, Germany, US is how terrorism and secularism is dealt with there and drivel like Spain, Germany, and US have 10% Muslim population?

[Lurker]

Kahe bejti karwa rahen hai bhaisaab' date=' [b']in absolute numbers Germany has the largest muslim population in continental Europe of approx 4 million (perhaps not 10%).

If you think about it, without rushing to reply, you might see that Outsider is actually onto something here. With respect I dare say that you are doing the typical Indian bladderdash(sp?) these days and that is to sing hosanas about West, US and Europe. For all the brouhaha the fact of the matter is NO Western country even remotely compares to Indian demography. 4 million total population in Germany? You kidding me? I can give you possibly 5-6 times that number in my very own state!! Throw in border states (West Bengal, UP, Jharkhand) and that number shall easily go up to 20 times, if not more! Yes I would be interested in seeing how United States react the day they have 20% population as Muslims...or for that matter UK, or Germany. In your zeal to showcase Europe, and France, you are taking cheap shots at India(which honestly doesnt surprise me as it seems to be the in-fashion thing these days). xxx

[bharathh]

Agreed with Lurker.

[The Outsider]

If you think about it, without rushing to reply, you might see that Outsider is actually onto something here. With respect I dare say that you are doing the typical Indian bladderdash(sp?) these days and that is to sing hosanas about West, US and Europe. For all the brouhaha the fact of the matter is NO Western country even remotely compares to Indian demography. 4 million total population in Germany? You kidding me? I can give you possibly 5-6 times that number in my very own state!! Throw in border states (West Bengal, UP, Jharkhand) and that number shall easily go up to 20 times, if not more! Yes I would be interested in seeing how United States react the day they have 20% population as Muslims...or for that matter UK, or Germany. In your zeal to showcase Europe, and France, you are taking cheap shots at India(which honestly doesnt surprise me as it seems to be the in-fashion thing these days). xxx

Exactly! People just start worshiping the US and west without trying to think and analyze the situation with even an iota of logic. Gunner is talking about the total Muslim population of Germany. Just Bombay and surrounding areas would have a similar Muslim population! The challenges confronting India regarding terrorism are just on a different scale to any country in the world. A developing economy, messed up neighbors, lack of infrastructure, the ease with which terrorists can mix in the society due to race and language, poorly equipped combat forces. To compare India's situation with US and Germany is bordering on delusional. And for all the praise of US, after the first failed attack on the World Trade Center, what could the US do to prevent a successful encore in 2001? Ghanta, that's what! The buildings were blown away by none less than hijacked airplanes of public carriers! Nothing remotely as catastrophic has happened in India, despite all the massive odds stacked against the country. Trillions of dollars were bled away by that one attack from the economy, got the US engaged in wars from which there seems to be no successful way out. And we should follow the US model? Yeah, right!!

[Guest Gunner]

So' date=' before I proceed further let me clarify that you are contending homegrown terrorism is independent of any outside influence?[/quote'] I thought "homegrown" implied internal perhaps you have a different interpretation. If there was outside influency it would generally be called an insurgency, no?

Can you quote where I cited economic strength as the only reason that these countries can combat terrorism better. On the contrary' date= you cited state policies for dealing with terrorism and how secularism pans out in these countries as the only difference and I quote :

Do you have any idea of the per capita income of India and the other countries? Are you aware of the kind of neighbors these countries have? Do their neighbors push in terrorists on their soil? Were these countries born out of intense hatred and communal strife a mere 60 years back? Is gathering intelligence and surveillance even remotely comparable in Chandni Chowk and Queens? Do any of these countries have a Muslim majority state bordering two countries with whom they have fought 5 wars with in the last 60 years?

Those were your questions, they highlighted economics and proximity to islamic countries. I responded pointing out that the discussionwas about homegrown terrorism, that leaves your economic questions. Did I miss something? Perhaps you can point out specifics instead of your hallucinations.

Yeah from your very own link : 2%-4% (Andorra, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain) 4%-5% (Germany, Greece, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, United Kingdom) And in the US estimates are between 1-3%. Abhi kis ki beizzati hui, it's for everyone to see. Also, are you really sure you want to go down the route of absolute numbers like you've done with Germany? If you do, here is one number I've got for you - 160 million.

You have seriously got to be kidding me, I mentioned absolute number of 4 million and specifically admitted that it was not 10% and also gave the link. Beizzati? LOL. I am sure that you do realize that 4 million in proportion to a population of 80 mill is a pretty big number. Further, these 4 million are immigrants and in many ways haven't integrated into the german society, yet the state has curbs on the terrorist activities. Don't go around throwing that 160 million number that doesn't do anything to strengthen your argument.

Sure' date=' but why don't you start by cleaning up the garbage you've posted above like claiming the only difference between India and France, UK, Spain, Germany, US is how terrorism and secularism is dealt with there and drivel like Spain, Germany, and US have 10% Muslim population?[/quote'] Look, the simple point is, There have been no terror attacks on US soil since Sept 11, 2001, none on spanish soil since March 11, 2002, none on british territory since July 7, 2005 and none on french or german soil despite repeated threats to them. Whereas in India there is no cut off date. Answer why to this question otherwise stop wasting my time. Getting angry over the internet and screaming at me doesn't make India better or worse.

[Lurker]

I am sure that you do realize that 4 million in proportion to a population of 80 mill is a pretty big number. Further, these 4 million are immigrants and in many ways haven't integrated into the german society, yet the state has curbs on the terrorist activities.

Some numbers you may want to check/consider: Germany Protestant 34%, Roman Catholic 34%, Muslim 3.7%, unaffiliated or other 28.3% United Kingdom Christian (Anglican, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist) 71.6%, Muslim 2.7%, Hindu 1%, other 1.6%, unspecified or none 23.1% (2001 census) United States Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2122.html?countryName=Germany&countryCode=gm&regionCode=eugm

[Guest Gunner]

If you think about it, without rushing to reply, you might see that Outsider is actually onto something here. With respect I dare say that you are doing the typical Indian bladderdash(sp?) these days and that is to sing hosanas about West, US and Europe. For all the brouhaha the fact of the matter is NO Western country even remotely compares to Indian demography. 4 million total population in Germany? You kidding me? I can give you possibly 5-6 times that number in my very own state!! Throw in border states (West Bengal, UP, Jharkhand) and that number shall easily go up to 20 times, if not more! Yes I would be interested in seeing how United States react the day they have 20% population as Muslims...or for that matter UK, or Germany. In your zeal to showcase Europe, and France, you are taking cheap shots at India(which honestly doesnt surprise me as it seems to be the in-fashion thing these days). xxx

Exactly! People just start worshiping the US and west without trying to think and analyze the situation with even an iota of logic. Gunner is talking about the total Muslim population of Germany. Just Bombay and surrounding areas would have a similar Muslim population! The challenges confronting India regarding terrorism are just on a different scale to any country in the world. A developing economy, messed up neighbors, lack of infrastructure, the ease with which terrorists can mix in the society due to race and language, poorly equipped combat forces. To compare India's situation with US and Germany is bordering on delusional. And for all the praise of US, after the first failed attack on the World Trade Center, what could the US do to prevent a successful encore in 2001? Ghanta, that's what! The buildings were blown away by none less than hijacked airplanes of public carriers! Nothing remotely as catastrophic has happened in India, despite all the massive odds stacked against the country. Trillions of dollars were bled away by that one attack from the economy, got the US engaged in wars from which there seems to be no successful way out. And we should follow the US model? Yeah, right!!

It is actually the easier and more dishonest approach to dealing with my question isn't it? You simply paint me as a person worshipping the west, so now that you have compartmentalised me into a neat little box, you can sleep confidently in the knowledge that you are right. The fact of the matter is that India has many serious failings and many of us have become too nationalistic to want to discuss it. I agree that western democracies are not perfect, in fact I have never claimed so but they have delivered far greater social justice and equality to their respective population than we will ever manage. It is pretty sad actually. If you claim that India is too big to manage then the solution might be obvious although it would be considered to be treasonous by many to state it openly. Although I really did think that you guys were clever enough to work out the proportionality of 4 million out of 80 million than go around saying how andheri has a larger muslim population.

[Guest Gunner]

Some numbers you may want to check/consider: Germany Protestant 34%, Roman Catholic 34%, Muslim 3.7%, unaffiliated or other 28.3% United Kingdom Christian (Anglican, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist) 71.6%, Muslim 2.7%, Hindu 1%, other 1.6%, unspecified or none 23.1% (2001 census) United States Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2122.html?countryName=Germany&countryCode=gm&regionCode=eugm

This is interesting. Are you actually saying that the greater the muslim population in a country, the greater the trouble? I wouldn't consider the muslim population of the European countries as "negligible". Why did you leave out France?

[The Outsider]

I thought "homegrown" implied internal perhaps you have a different interpretation. If there was outside influency it would generally be called an insurgency, no?

How many strictly homegrown Islamic terrorist attacks have there been in India ie. organizations and attacks which have had zero influence - financial, material, moral - from outside in their development?

Those were your questions, they highlighted economics and proximity to islamic countries. I responded pointing out that the discussionwas about homegrown terrorism, that leaves your economic questions. Did I miss something? Perhaps you can point out specifics instead of your hallucinations.

Refer to my question above.

You have seriously got to be kidding me, I mentioned absolute number of 4 million and specifically admitted that it was not 10% and also gave the link. Beizzati? LOL. I am sure that you do realize that 4 million in proportion to a population of 80 mill is a pretty big number. Further, these 4 million are immigrants and in many ways haven't integrated into the german society, yet the state has curbs on the terrorist activities. Don't go around throwing that 160 million number that doesn't do anything to strengthen your argument.

LOL! 4 million out of 80 million is a big number? It's 5%!! There are probably more Muslims in Bombay that the entire Germany!! You had no clue about the Muslim population in Europe and US and were claiming garbage like Spain, Germany, and US have a 10% Muslim population. Pretty disturbing considering you live in Europe!

Look, the simple point is, There have been no terror attacks on US soil since Sept 11, 2001, none on spanish soil since March 11, 2002, none on british territory since July 7, 2005 and none on french or german soil despite repeated threats to them. Whereas in India there is no cut off date. Answer why to this question otherwise stop wasting my time. Getting angry over the internet and screaming at me doesn't make India better or worse.

September 11 was not the first attempt to bring down the World Trade Center by Islamic terrorists in case you are not aware. The first attempt was in 1993. What was US able to do after that to prevent the buildings from coming down? Ghanta! US is bleeding from it's policies on all fronts and you want India to emulate them? What about the Times Square Bomber? What about the guy who gunned down people in their army base? What about the Christmas bomber? What about the Glasgow attacks? Cut off date? Nothing remotely close to 9/11 has happened in India despite having so many disadvantages compared to US! US is still bleeding from that attack and it happened 8 years after the first attempt.

[Lurker]

This is interesting. Are you actually saying that the greater the muslim population in a country' date=' the greater the trouble? I wouldn't consider the muslim population of the European countries as "negligible". [b']Why did you leave out France?

History. France has historical interests in Northern African countries which were mostly Muslim in nature. Morocco and Algeria come to mind immediately. A lot of Muslims in France have moved from Northern Africa thanks to their history, refugee status etc etc. In a way this phenomenon is unique to France and I doubt Germany, UK, US etc have had this issue. By the way my assertion was simple. To see how West "deals" with Muslims and how India should "learn" from them I would first like to have an apple to apple comparison and see what happens if any of these countries have 20% minority population. Fact is, in USA Muslims are less than 1% and people still get apprehensive about Muslim becoming a President. We of course have had couple of Muslim Presidents, so maybe they can learn from us ;-) xxx

[The Outsider]

The fact of the matter is that India has many serious failings and many of us have become too nationalistic to want to discuss it. I agree that western democracies are not perfect, in fact I have never claimed so but they have delivered far greater social justice and equality to their respective population than we will ever manage. It is pretty sad actually.

Yes, India has serious failings. But to suggest that India deals with it's 160 million minority population of around 15%, the same way countries with a Muslim population of a few million amounting to 2-4% deal with the situation is ludicrous and is blind worshiping of the west without analyzing how you are dealing with completely different situations.

Although I really did think that you guys were clever enough to work out the proportionality of 4 million out of 80 million than go around saying how andheri has a larger muslim population.

4 million out of 80 is 5%. I am sure you are clever enough to do that Math. Bombay has a population of 20 million with around 20% Muslims which is again 4 million. Do you now understand what absurd analogies and model replications you are suggesting?

[Guest Gunner]

How many strictly homegrown Islamic terrorist attacks have there been in India ie. organizations and attacks which have had zero influence - financial, material, moral - from outside in their development? Refer to my question above.

One, how does this have any bearing on India's concept of secularism? Two, let us agree for a moment that every attack on Indian soil had foreign fingerprints on it even then there were internal elements who fully participated. Afzal guru for example is an Indian national or not? I am really failing to see the crux of your argument here.

LOL! 4 million out of 80 million is a big number? It's 5%!! There are probably more Muslims in Bombay that the entire Germany!! You had no clue about the Muslim population in Europe and US and were claiming garbage like Spain, Germany, and US have a 10% Muslim population. Pretty disturbing considering you live in Europe!

Chalo bhai, to make you happy I will admit that I am a retard and let us say that 3-5% is a "negligible" population as it is not "10%". Now is it your argument that the greater the muslim population in a country, the greater the problem? I thought secularism meant you don't draw such analogies or perhaps I don't understand the Indian version of "secularism". What is your argument outy? I am going to ignore that, I dont want to turn the debate into disgraceful mudslinging.

September 11 was not the first attempt to bring down the World Trade Center by Islamic terrorists in case you are not aware. The first attempt was in 1993. What was US able to do after that to prevent the buildings from coming down? Ghanta! US is bleeding from it's policies on all fronts and you want India to emulate them? What about the Times Square Bomber? What about the guy who gunned down people in their army base? What about the Christmas bomber? What about the Glasgow attacks? Cut off date? Nothing remotely close to 9/11 has happened in India despite having so many disadvantages compared to US! US is still bleeding from that attack and it happened 8 years after the first attempt.

Epic fail. One, none of those other attacks succeeded whereas in India there have been consistently successful terror attacks. I don't know about you but one would have thunk that the 1993 mumbai bombings, 2001 parliament attack and the 2008 Mumbai attacks were all pretty huge incidents in their own right. Of course if you believe that 4000 deaths in a single day is the only incident which qualifies as a major terror attack sure then India doesn't have any problems. Let me simplify this since you are getting lost in your own arguments. The basic premise is India fails to call out the dangerous elements in its minority communities due to a perverted understanding of secularism which allows those individuals to do a lot of damage directly or indirectly. Other countries call them out, examples Omar mohammed bakri, anjem chaudhary and anwar Al-aulaki. None of the other things which you said actually have any relevance to this discussion.

[Guest Gunner]

History. France has historical interests in Northern African countries which were mostly Muslim in nature. Morocco and Algeria come to mind immediately. A lot of Muslims in France have moved from Northern Africa thanks to their history, refugee status etc etc. In a way this phenomenon is unique to France and I doubt Germany, UK, US etc have had this issue.

O rly? Perhaps you should have a read about the turkish immigration pattern into Germany and the plethora of pakistani/arab/turkic immigrants into the UK. They share very similar historical patterns to the French. I don't want to sound like a french fanboy so I am not going to give France as an example any further. but your point baove is incorrect.

By the way my assertion was simple. To see how West "deals" with Muslims and how India should "learn" from them I would first like to have an apple to apple comparison and see what happens if any of these countries have 20% minority population. Fact is, in USA Muslims are less than 1% and people still get apprehensive about Muslim becoming a President. We of course have had couple of Muslim Presidents, so maybe they can learn from us ;-) xxx

I am not asking India to learn anything from the west, I am merely saying that the Indian government's views on secularism is severely flawed.

[Guest Gunner]

Yes, India has serious failings. But to suggest that India deals with it's 160 million minority population of around 15%, the same way countries with a Muslim population of a few million amounting to 2-4% deal with the situation is ludicrous and is blind worshiping of the west without analyzing how you are dealing with completely different situations. 4 million out of 80 is 5%. I am sure you are clever enough to do that Math. Bombay has a population of 20 million with around 20% Muslims which is again 4 million. Do you now understand what absurd analogies and model replications you are suggesting?

Arre bhai saab, I ask you again are you saying that the number of muslims in a country have any bearing on how many terrorists they produce? if you say yes then you are not being very secular.

[Guest Gunner]

Ever heard of the ethnic cleansing in Kashmir ? I think we have 9/11 ever other year IIRC in terms of overall death toll from Islamic terrorism. But the bigger issue here is the fact that well-educated net-savvy people like you completely forgetting a tragedy of that proportion for one reason or other. This is the reason why we will continue to be raped and pillaged untill there is nothing left to be pillaged. Truly gutless country in all sense.

1192 AD is an important date in Indian history. This was the first time that the moral superiority brigade in Bharat varsh were schooled by the muslims on what their moral superiority was worth. I am fully confident that in the future this will happen to us again.

[Guest Gunner]

Gunner baba ... inko keval 20 saal purani baat yaad nahi aati ... and you are talking about 800+ yr old event ? Those have been swept under the "Glorious age of Islam" ... let me know if you need details :D

But if you note their posts (lurker + outy), in over 10 posts both of them seem to be claiming that apparently the greater the muslim population, the greater the problem. Ab yeh kahan ki secularism hai mere palle nahi pad raha. Agar aapko kuch buj raha ho tho mujhe samja den. :D

[The Outsider]

One, how does this have any bearing on India's concept of secularism? Two, let us agree for a moment that every attack on Indian soil had foreign fingerprints on it even then there were internal elements who fully participated. Afzal guru for example is an Indian national or not? I am really failing to see the crux of your argument here.

Where were the likes of Afzal Guru or other militants in Kashmir trained? Who provided them funding and arms? Pakistan, right? So either they were not 'homegrown' in your strict definition of the word or you cannot ignore the influence of neighbors when discussing terrorism regarding India or US, as you were aiming to do earlier. Do you see the crux now? Let me know if you want me to elaborate further.

Chalo bhai, to make you happy I will admit that I am a retard and let us say that 3-5% is a "negligible" population as it is not "10%". Now is it your argument that the greater the muslim population in a country, the greater the problem? I thought secularism meant you don't draw such analogies or perhaps I don't understand the Indian version of "secularism". What is your argument outy?

Chalo, now that you are aware of the actual facts rather than made up numbers, let me elaborate here as well. You were using those states as role models for India to follow to deal with it's problems of terrorism and drew a similarity with their demographic distribution compared to India as one of the reasons India should follow their footsteps. It has been clearly shown now that the demographic similarity existed only in fiction. Regarding whether more Muslims equal more terrorists that was your implied claim, not mine :

Now you tell me how come the terror incidents in those countries are so low despite the fact that they have a 10% muslim population?

Clear enough?

Epic fail. One, none of those other attacks succeeded whereas in India there have been consistently successful terror attacks. I don't know about you but one would have thunk that the 1993 mumbai bombings, 2001 parliament attack and the 2008 Mumbai attacks were all pretty huge incidents in their own right. Of course if you believe that 4000 deaths in a single day is the only incident which qualifies as a major terror attack sure then India doesn't have any problems.

Your argument was that the steps being taken by the US or these other countries were reducing an inclination of the population to engage in an act of terrorism. Whether a terrorist act was successful or not has nothing to do with whether and why it was attempted in the first place. The attacks were unsuccessful because of a superior security apparatus that the US has compared to India, not because the perpetrators of these attacks backed out of them due to their country's secular policies. So, is the lack of success of these attacks a result of the country's secular policies? If no, then we have successfully dismantled both your premises : 1. Western countries like UK, US, Spain, and Germany have similar demographic profiles to India for their policies to be blindly replicated by India with regards to terrorism. Shown to be false. None of these countries have a demographic profile remotely similar to India. 2. The above countries with their anti terrorism policies have been able to completely eradicate terrorism on their soils. Again shown to be false. There have been terrorist attacks, some of which have not been successful, but that has nothing to do with the success of these countries policies, and is a direct result of a superior security apparatus.