Interesting article on suicide terrorism.

[f95toli]

Regarding the motivation it is interesting to note that even some non-religious right-wing extremists have acknowledged that suicide bombings are quite efficent.
If your goal is to instigate fear in your opponent, what better way is there to show that you are ready to die for your cause?

About a year ago the swedish police arrested 3 neo-nazis not far from where I live. This group (just a few people, as far as I remember the police arrested three) was actually planning to recruit suicide bombers and use them in a terror campainng against the swedish society.
Now, I don't think they would have actually succeded in actually recruiting anyone (they were a bunch of losers, lots of planning and so on, but when they were arrested their "terror-campaign had been limited to smashing windows in the local school) but the point is that even in some western non-religous groups suicide bombers are considered good "tools" for whatever insane cause they are figthing for.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Yes, it seems he isn't putting 2 and 2 together. Of course there's strategic, political purposes... yet the methods and justification arise out of a barbaric culture that's dominated by a perverted religion. You cannot separate the two... they are consequences and corollaries of EACH OTHER.

So in your opinion, which is more to blame for suicide terrorist attacks -- the religion of the attackers or the occupation that they are reacting to?

Obviously the occupation. Show me in the Quran where it says to suicide bomb.

? obviously imams and terror groups in the middle east don't use the quran to justify their actions right? lol🙂 are you that niave? it doesn't have to literally say suicide bombing is ok. just that attacking infidels and villiany in the defense of islam or something like that is enough.

one may claim that its not driven by religion..as valgue a claim as that can be, but its undeniable the groups use religion as the best method of control to create and deploy suicide bombers.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: raildogg
So suicide terrorist attacks are only limited to Iraq now?

are we forgetting other conflicts?

secondly, its homicide bomber, not suicide bomber

for example, the homicide bombers in the Palestinian areas often make a video confessional where they praise allah and how they will go to heaven

for many of these people, religion is a very important factor in how they die and kill other people

the reason the attacks are increasing is because our enemies are becoming less patient and they realize that their time is running out. also another reason is because our post-war planning has been terrible

Oh Jesus Tapdancing Christ...not this sh!t again. I'm sorry, I try and be civil on this board if at all possible, knowing that most people appreciate it, even if they don't always say so. But this has got to stop, I can blame Fox News and friends for starting it, but I blame you sheep for repeating it. A simple look through the dictionary will reveal that your phrase is just plain wrong, even if it satisfies you emotional needs.

Actually, you know what, I'm intrigued here. Explain it to me. Help me see why homicide is a BETTER word to use than suicide. While both seem accurate enough, homicide seems more vague, since most bombers end up killing people. But hey, I could be wrong. so enlighten me as to why your silly phrase is more accurate than "suicide bomber".

 

[DealMonkey]

Ahhh yes, "homicide bomber." Straight from the moronic politicization of the language and redundancy files.

:roll:

 

[raildogg]

Because the life of that scum does not matter. It is a homicide.

Its not about being accurate. Its about being respectful to the dead victims instead of the trash that killed them.

 

[NeenerNeener]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Yes, it seems he isn't putting 2 and 2 together. Of course there's strategic, political purposes... yet the methods and justification arise out of a barbaric culture that's dominated by a perverted religion. You cannot separate the two... they are consequences and corollaries of EACH OTHER.

So in your opinion, which is more to blame for suicide terrorist attacks -- the religion of the attackers or the occupation that they are reacting to?

Obviously the occupation. Show me in the Quran where it says to suicide bomb.

? obviously imams and terror groups in the middle east don't use the quran to justify their actions right? lol🙂 are you that niave? it doesn't have to literally say suicide bombing is ok. just that attacking infidels and villiany in the defense of islam or something like that is enough.

one may claim that its not driven by religion..as valgue a claim as that can be, but its undeniable the groups use religion as the best method of control to create and deploy suicide bombers.

Agreed. Just trying to make the point that it is not really part of the fundamentals of Islam. Religion is used to control people, but the ends to which these attacks are useful have nothing to do with religion.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: raildogg
Its not about being accurate.

Well, as long as we have that straight . . .

 

[Infohawk]

Just reaffirms that the enemy is rational. This shouldn't be too much surprise. The US has irrational policy by continually refusing to recognize that the enemy has policy and acts, on the whole, reasonably. (Do not confuse acting reasonably with acting ethically).

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: raildogg
Because the life of that scum does not matter. It is a homicide.

Its not about being accurate. Its about being respectful to the dead victims instead of the trash that killed them.

A couple of thousands books of Terrorism History and Security Studies disagree with you.
It's suicide bombing, the life of the terrorist (the loss of it) is actually the one that matters more, because clearly disignate a very particular, unique and distinctive fighting tactic.

You only can have a couple of airliner crash into a building in NY if you have people ready to use suicide leading fighting tactics.

 

[coomar]

there is a tamil film about a female tiger suicide bomber, it got critical acclaim from western critics, can't remember the name though

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: raildogg
Because the life of that scum does not matter. It is a homicide.

Its not about being accurate. Its about being respectful to the dead victims instead of the trash that killed them.

And that's great, but language doesn't really work that way. In any case, I don't see anything "disrespectful" about calling a suicide bomber a suicide bomber, it's not like it has a positive connotation or anything. Of course I also never got my panties in a wad over calling them "insurgents" in Iraq vs the more negative (apparently) "terrorists". I also never felt the need to call them "scum", "trash", "murders", etc. Not because I am defending them, but because they are just words.

Does it really make a difference whether or not I say "the terrorists bombed a grade school" vs "the murdering scum barbarian killers bombed a grade school"? While expressing your disgust over the actions of the terrorists is certainly justified, mangling the English language in order to continue to express your disgust at every possible opportunity seems like a bit much.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Seriously, Dr. Pape's research is extremely articulate (go read the book they mention at the beginning of the article), insightful, and draws upon a vast body of solid facts & evidence. Anyone who reads it and dismisses it is a non-thinking automaton.

I don't think anyone has overtly dismissed it, but quite a few people in this thread have made articulate counter arguments, or shed a different light on the conclusions he comes to.

While his data may be factually correct, and his arguments articulately stated, it does not necessarily mean that his conclusions are right or wrong.

 

[NJDevil]

Originally posted by: Orsorum
Link

I just found this article fascinating, I did not know that much about the strategic logic of suicide terrorism, I must confess my image of the typical Iraqi suicide bomber was that of an Islamic fundamentalist.

Hope you find it worth the read. 🙂

This was the first article I read in my international security class regarding terrorism. It really is an eye opener, especially considering all the BS we have heard about them hating our freedom. If we werent' in Saudi Arabia in 90', we probably wouldn't be hit in 93' 98' and 2001

edit: I meant his article, "logic of suicide terrorism", not this one.

 

[Fern]

This guy Pape is now apparently making the rounds on news talk shows. I was flipping channels and caught him on some relatively new show I am unfamiliar with on the MSNBC channel. It had Carlson Tucker and a panel of guys I am unfamiliar with. I assume Carlson is the conservative and the others are moderate or liberal.

Anyway, the more Pape was questioned, the more his conclusions sounded contrived. After Pape left they continued the discussion regarding his study/assertions. None of the panel seemed persuaded.

Perhaps he'll appear elsewhere and "flesh out this argument a bit more.