Talk:Terrorism in Bangladesh

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Internal conflict in Bangladesh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150224172700/http://www.thedailystar.net:80/militants-training-centre-busted-66173 to http://www.thedailystar.net/militants-training-centre-busted-66173
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150309035127/http://www.thedailystar.net:80/3-shibir-men-held-with-bombs-bullets-in-ctg-68339 to http://www.thedailystar.net/3-shibir-men-held-with-bombs-bullets-in-ctg-68339

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 1 February 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. There is consensus for move to title which actually summarizes the article's content. This permanent link will show that the article is grossly mistitled as the whole lead section clearly defined Terrorism in Bangladesh not "Conflict". If there's any section that is too off topic in relation to terrorism then split discussion can take place to determine what should and shouldn't remain in this article. (non-admin closure) –Ammarpad (talk) 12:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Internal conflict in Bangladesh → Terrorism in Bangladesh – The article title should be Terrorism in Bangladesh. Bangladesh is not in a state of war or conflict. It experiences terror attacks and for that Terrorism in Bangladesh is the proper title. Terrorist organisations do not control territory in Bangladesh nor have they ever controlled territory. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 16:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support.--Catlemur (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note and split G'day in my opinion terrorism isn't like a conflict that's true, however, terrorism can have a big role if we talk about conflicts and wars. The definition of terrorism means "fear" so you'll expected that killing people is terrorism and that's true, and a lot of citizens were killed in this page, but goverments can also recognise groups as terrorists groups who are attacking pro-goverments people it called "Urban guerrilla warfare". It is still a conflict even terrorism is a big role, also in the most of the Urban guerrilla warfare's do/did not have the rebel groups any controlled territory, an example the Leftist insurgency in Greece and the  where the rebel groups have no controlled territory. The real terrorists are people or groups who are attacking citizens and not pro-goverments people Like ISIL in Europe. SAPT (South Asia Terrorism Portal) claimed that 49 pro-goverments people were killed between 2005 and present day. The deads are both from the Communists and the Islamist. I know it is really low however there were still pro-goverments people killed, except if you can tell me that the rebel groups their real reason is killing people if not then i don't think there is a reason to change the page. CPA-5 (talk) 19:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The argument is not accurate. The Targets of these killings were secular activists, religious minorities (Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, Ahmadiyya) who are definitely civilians and no source calls them pro-government. The definition of pro-government is fluid in a democracy where governments change. Cultural activists tend to align with left wing Bangladesh Awami League but that does not make them pro government. During the term of Bangladesh Nationalist party (1991-1996 and 2001-2006) would they become pro-opposition? The vast majority of the people attacked in this page are civilians. Including secular bloggers who are no way pro-government and in fact some of them were imprisoned by the current Bangladesh Awami League government for criticising religion. Are you referring to security forces in the South Asia Terrorism Portal as pro government forces? By attacking cinemas halls, minority religious institutes, gay rights activists, secular activists, are the terrorist not terrorising them? Home grown terrorists have attacked security personal in France but its not called internal conflict. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 19:22, 1 February 2018 (UTC)::
 * Security forces are indeed pro-goverments and indeed they are terrorising religious minorities and Security forces are trying to restore (kinda) peace by fighting to the terrorists. But i think the terrorists have not really a goal to overthow the goverment. That makes them just terrorists and not even rebel groups. However if the religious minorities start to armed themselves then it would become a conflict again. CPA-5 (talk) 20:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that a split is the only way to solve this probleem. Why a split because the communists are still fighting on an urban guerrilla warfare method by fighting against the goverment, of course there would be civilians fatalities but there real goal is overthow the goverment. I think the communists insurgency needs their own page, (how it should called maybe "Communists insurgency in Bangladesh" or "Left-wing insurgency in Bangladesh") and the Islamists part should called Terrorism in Bangladesh that's my opinion. CPA-5 (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Support — "Internal conflict" implies civil war or active insurgency. Centre Left Right  ✉ 05:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support The conflict in Chittagong Hills is an internal conflict; this is just a straight list of terrorist incidents. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 03:28, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support This seems to be simply a list of terrorist attacks. If there is a conflict in Bangladesh beyond that, it should have a separate page. Oranjelo100 (talk) 09:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.