The Logic of Suicide Terrorism

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by diamond geezer, Jul 12, 2005.

  1. diamond geezer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    #1
    Bush said after 911 that it was an attack on freedom and had nothing to do with any US actions.

    Blair said this week that the London bombings were an attack on freedom.

    Saying it's anything to do with Iraq is a no-no.

    As usual the last thing either of these bull-****ters will ever say, is the truth.

    link

     
  2. Diatribe macrumors 601

    Diatribe

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2004
    Location:
    Back in the motherland
  3. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #3
    Japanese kamikaze pilots are an early example of suicide bombers.Supported by a state but the same thing.
     
  4. JW8725 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    Well im from Leeds about 5 mins from the area where those bombers came from. I do firmly think they were pawns for someone else. The area is a chav area and the people that live there are commoners who dont really have the intellect to do something of this magnatude. Its council estate territory. Something isnt right here
     
  5. Applespider macrumors G4

    Applespider

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    looking through rose-tinted spectacles...
    #5
    Reading the part that suggests they are not long-term members of a group or particularly religiously motivated, I wonder if suicide bombers actually intend to take their own lives regardless. But because of the stigma still associated with suicide (or their religion's guidance against it), decide that they might as well be part of a larger 'cause' when they do it...
     
  6. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #6
    I agree - for Blair to say that these bombings were nothing to do with the Iraq invasion is more of the same BS and self-justification. Unfortunately in the current political climate no-one is going to call him on this for fear of being branded anti-patriotic and a terrorist sympathizer (or worse).

    Does anyone really suggest that these kids (and God knows how many more like them) were not radicalized by Britain's involvement with Bush in the war?

    If that's how our some of our own citizens have reacted, just imagine the hatred that has been stirred up across the middle-east.
     
  7. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #7
    Its that kind of intolerance and hatred of the other that causes people to believe they have no other option than to use deadly force to change things.Because people are poor doesn't make them less intelligent,in fact it appears the reverse is true,most of the middle classes wouldn't last 5 minutes in their environment.
     
  8. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #8
    It shows how the sloppy use of words like "terrorism" for ideological reasons only serves to muddle the strategy needed to defeat al-Qaida and its allied organizations of militant religious fundamentalists. Not all suicide bombers should be condemned - or do we now think the conspiracy to kill Hitler in WWII was wrong because the plotters were willing to give their lives in the planting of a covert bomb? Not all uses of terror are confined to Iraqi or Palestinian insurgents. Or do we not understand what "shock and awe" was all about in the start of the US invasion. And it is not just the "bad guys" who target innocent civilians. Perhaps it would do for US citizens to reflect on how the "good guys" used incendiary bombs and the world's first and only wartime use of nuclear weapons against primarily civilian populations at Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.

    Does all this mean we are the same as the horrible, despicable people who crashed planes into the World Trade Center or blew up commuters in Madrid or London? NO! But what it does mean is that our own propaganda can blind us to who the real enemy is and how we can go about defeating them. The enemy is a religious based movement that seeks to end the largely worldwide consensus that the Enlightenment was right and the separation of religion from government is a vital principle of the modern age. It would do us well to remember we are fighting against religious extremists who are not the only ones to sink to the use of terror.
     
  9. Applespider macrumors G4

    Applespider

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    looking through rose-tinted spectacles...
    #9
    And who knows whether that attitude of superiority was one of the reasons that they felt justified in attacking? I know many people who live on council estates and work in manual jobs who have a lot more common sense, respect for others and manners than most of the upper-class toffs that I see around me in the streets at work each day.

    They may be working class - that doesn't make them commoners and it certainly doesn't give you the right to question their intellect.
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    It's your attitude.
     
  11. JW8725 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #11
    interesting
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    Evidently, if this guy's information is right, the strategy requires total withdrawal from Muslim lands. Not just Iraq, but Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. Why are we there anyway? Nobody else who buys their oil seems to feel the need to be there.

    Von Stauffenberg was not a suicide bomber.

    Very true.

    I question this. In what way is it "better" to kill 10,000 people from the air with bombs than 3,000 with jetliners?

    The point of the report is that "we" cannot defeat them.
     
  13. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #13
    That was an eye opener for me. My biggest question has always been what is the motivation for the attacks? It has been answered now and perfectly understandable. Israel is therefore doomed until they totally withdraw and allow self rule, as is the US in Iraq and Russia in Chechnya.

    I question your idea, Applespider, that the men were already suicidal. I think they were young, idealistic men who were manipulated by the true terrorists into supporting their cause. Let's face it, those in their 20s are often fatalistic and with enough support can be convinced of almost anything.
     
  14. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #14
    i hope we can learn from the lesson of the messy occupation we have had in iraq

    i think the us military learned a lot from vietnam and to the beginning of the second gulf war, we knew not to go in unprepared...but this last time, with w, we have repeated many of the same mistakes of the vietnam war (no exit strategy and no mandate)

    our current presence in iraq will go down in history as one of our major military blunders and i can see the history channel writers working on this one...black hawk down was a movie spawned from our poor planning in africa which resulted in 19 deaths of us military personnel

    when this mess in iraq is over and bush and his supporters are out of office, even republicans will be able to look back on this war and criticize it the same way they can now criticize nixon and watergate
     
  15. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    You've brought up an interesting point, and the one that will be debated a great deal over the next few months. If it turns out the London bombings were essentially acts of domestic violence, as it now appears, the questions and therefore the answers about who and how must be different. This act won't fit so easily under the convenient rubric of "international terrorism." It will look a lot more like Timothy McVeigh or Columbine High School than Osama bin Laden.
     
  16. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #16
    Theoretically we are targeting legitimate military targets. I realize that there is significant debate surrounding this, but for the most part soldiers are taking care to target those who target them. Yes the line gets blurred and crossed, but there is a differrence between collateral damage, as it's known, and looking for the biggest crowd of people to blow up.
     
  17. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #17
    So in what way were Hiroshima,Nagasaki,Dresden etc not looking for the biggest crowd of people to blow up.
     
  18. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #18
    Yeah those are shameful episodes in our past, I agree. And likely our forces have engaged in some indiscriminate killing in Iraq and Afghanistan. But our forces can be punished for doing what al-Qaeda does routinely. Whether or not they are punished is another matter.

    As I've said before, its not a question of whether or not we're the same as them. The question is why aren't we different enough from them.
     
  19. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #19
    regarding the japanese cities, there were a number of factors that went into site selection. i believe the largest factor was targeting military-industrial areas. iirc, hiroshima was host to ship-building yards.

    afaik, targeting civilians was not a positive factor, but i suspect it also wasn't a large negative factor.

    i visited the peace museum in hiroshima last year and they had a very informative display about site selection and how the american military narrowed down its list of targets. one of the final factors ended up being how many allied POWs were believed to be held in the respective areas. though it was known that some POWs were being held in the two final target cities, there were apparently fewer than in other targets.

    btw, i'm not defending the decision to use nukes, just clearing up the misconception that the purpose was to target civilians.
     
  20. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #20
    In my opinion(of course )all three examples were out and out terror bombings and the same strategic targets excuse was dragged out for all three.In the case of Japan the need to assume control before the Soviets got a chance to arrive was (opinion) at the heart of US thought.What gets me is all these power crazed MF's are all on the same side of the coin(Bush,Blair,Bin Laden,Saud etc)and the vast majority of human kind is on the other.
     
  21. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #21
    A dead civilian is a dead civilian.
     
  22. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #22
    i'm really not disagreeing with you guys, just shedding some light on target selection. if the goal _was_ to kill as many japanese civilians as possible, they would have nuked tokyo, for starters.

    and to dispirit the country, probably kyoto, too.

    as long as we're on about tokyo, it did get the crap bombed out of it with conventional bombs. i believe that more people were killed in a single night of bombing of tokyo than died in hiroshima from the atomic bomb. but i'll have to check that.
     
  23. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #23
    Right. But it's not going to change until the "vast majority" stops allowing these lunatics to tell them what to do.
     
  24. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #24
    So they didn't really need to nuke Tokyo, did they? Not sure what point you're making here. :confused:
     
  25. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #25
    The problem here is Bin Landen and his cohorts can just as easily point out that the Twin Towers and the London undergroud(and many others) are strategic targets in their war against Western occupation of their homelands.
     

Share This Page