High Cost on Barbarians: ARanganathan72: Swift Imposition of Cost on Barbarians for Terror Attacks

1. Counter-terrorism response
2. Imposition of cost on perpetrators
3. Swift and disproportionate action against barbarians

In a recent tweet, Nupur J Sharma defended ARanganathan72’s controversial statement about responding to barbaric acts with swift and disproportionate force. Sharma argued that in the face of incidents like the 7th Oct, 26/11, Reasi, Direct Action Day, and Delhi anti-Hindu riots, the state has a duty to impose a high cost on those responsible. This provocative stance highlights the ongoing debate about the appropriate response to acts of violence and terrorism. While some may find this viewpoint extreme, others believe that a strong deterrent is necessary to prevent future atrocities.

.@ARanganathan72 said nothing wrong. The only response to barbarians who can perpetuate a 7th Oct, a 26/11, a Reasi, a Direct Action Day, a Delhi anti-Hindu riots etc, is swift and disproportionate imposition of cost. The state is duty bound to put a high cost on the life of… https://t.co/mHlgoJCzEh

— Nupur J Sharma (@UnSubtleDesi) June 11, 2024

Related Story.

In a recent tweet, Nupur J Sharma quoted ARanganathan72, highlighting the need for a swift and forceful response to acts of terrorism and violence. The tweet emphasizes the importance of imposing a high cost on those who perpetuate heinous acts such as the 7th Oct, 26/11, Reasi, Direct Action Day, and Delhi anti-Hindu riots. This call for a disproportionate response raises important questions about the role of the state in ensuring the safety and security of its citizens.

When faced with acts of barbarism and violence, it is essential for the state to respond decisively and effectively. The tweet suggests that a mere slap on the wrist is not enough to deter individuals or groups who are willing to commit atrocities against innocent people. By imposing a high cost on those who engage in such acts, the state sends a clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated.

The idea of a disproportionate response may seem controversial to some, but when dealing with individuals or groups who are capable of carrying out acts of extreme violence, it is necessary to take a strong stance. By making it clear that there will be severe consequences for those who engage in terrorism or violence, the state can help to prevent future attacks and protect its citizens.

It is important to note that imposing a high cost on perpetrators of violence does not mean resorting to vigilante justice or abandoning the rule of law. Rather, it means holding individuals and groups accountable for their actions and ensuring that they face appropriate consequences for their behavior. This can help to deter future acts of violence and send a strong message that such behavior will not be tolerated.

In addition to holding perpetrators accountable, it is also important for the state to take proactive measures to prevent acts of terrorism and violence from occurring in the first place. This may involve increasing security measures, improving intelligence gathering, and addressing underlying issues that contribute to radicalization and extremism.

Overall, the tweet by ARanganathan72 and the response by Nupur J Sharma highlight the need for a strong and decisive response to acts of terrorism and violence. By imposing a high cost on those who engage in such behavior, the state can help to prevent future attacks and protect its citizens. It is important for the state to send a clear message that acts of barbarism will not be tolerated and that those who commit such acts will face serious consequences.

In conclusion, the tweet underscores the importance of taking a tough stance against terrorism and violence. By imposing a high cost on perpetrators of such acts, the state can help to deter future attacks and protect its citizens. It is crucial for the state to prioritize the safety and security of its citizens and to take decisive action in the face of threats to public safety.