On suicide bombings

[roadrunner]

Firstly, I think there's different reasons for what motivates suicide bombers to act. Some are people who are genuinely serious about a cause. They want to meet their maker themselves, a classic example, being the Jap Kamikaze pilots of WW2. But then there's others who use young kids to do their dirty work. I couldn't help but draw some parallels with some of the idiots that have mentioned exactly what I read in the article below. Particularly, this line

"The men who give the orders wouldn't kill themselves; after all, they're too critical for the struggle, but are happy to send naïve young people to their deaths. And here was another victim."

Too critical for the struggle, so they brainwash dopey kids to do the dirty work they themselves don't have the ballz to do.

Old fart cowardly radical terrorist: I have a job for you
Dopey kid: Sure
Old fart cowardly radical terrorist: You would like to live in a place full of all your desires?
Dopey kid: Sure
Old fart cowardly radical terrorist: I know a way for you to fulfill your destiny
Dopey kid: Go on
Old fart cowardly radical terrorist: I need you to film an explosion
Dopey kid: Sounds easy, but why don't you do it?
Old fart cowardly terrorist: Errrr....You see, I'm critical for the cause..For every 1 of you, there are 4 of me urging you on
Dopey kid: I see..but what explosion?
Old fart cowardly terrorist: oh nothing.. just a movie i'm making.

Who is more responsible in these situations? The naive soul or the manipulative bast*rd?

Here's the article. Any comments?

What to do when a young man, with a student's fine fingers, in a land of rough farmers and mountain men, breaks down and cries that he just wants to go home to his mother and father?

The name Hamza is not his real name, but it's the name this alleged suicide bomber goes by. He's an Afghani who says he spent eight years studying Islam in a Pakistani Madrass, that he did a favor to an Arab, and now he's in jail in Kabul, facing a possible death sentence, or decades in a smelly prison.

When he walked into the room, a tiny prison cell, his wrists red and swollen from the metal handcuffs, his eyes shyly averted, I could only think - what a dope! He didn't have to say a word for me to understand. I've met a number of failed suicide bombers, in prisons around the world, and they mostly have the same kind of story: young men sold on paradise by radical Islamic fighters. The men who give the orders wouldn't kill themselves; after all, they're too critical for the struggle, but are happy to send naïve young people to their deaths. And here was another victim.

As Hamza told his story, and talked about his old parents who need him, tears coursed down his cheeks and he gulped back sobs. He's 28, six years older than the other guy we spoke to, Abdel Marouk, who was much more hard-core. He admitted freely that he belonged to Al-Qaeda, wanted to be a suicide bomber, explained why in a coherent, calm manner, and will certainly soon be killed: that's the way it is in Afghanistan.

But Hamza? I felt that I understood him, but that he was doomed. He said that an Arab trained him for two days on how to operate a video camera, and then asked him to go to Afghanistan with Marouk to film an explosion: a landmine in the road. I believed him when he said that he was tricked. But what I believe doesn't matter because the Afghani interrogator didn't believe him. The security official said that Hamza, like Marouk, was an al-Quaeda fighter who had fought in Iraq, trained in Pakistan, and had been on his way to kill Americans in Afghanistan.

When Hamza left the little cell, his head bowed, his eyes glistening, I shook his handcuffed hand and wished him luck. His eyes locked briefly onto mine, searching for encouragement, for a sign that he had a future, but I could only look away.
Afghan suicide bombers - The Daily Nightly - msnbc.com

 

[su-47]

the power of the media is amazing. they can make suicide bombings and IEDs look vile, devastating and inhuman (which they are actually), and this same media can make carpet bombing of vietnam look like the work of hereos.

 

[roadrunner]

the power of the media is amazing. they can make suicide bombings and IEDs look vile, devastating and inhuman (which they are actually), and this same media can make carpet bombing of vietnam look like the work of hereos.

Though I'm against suicide bombings, I think when it's done in a certain way it's anything but cowardly or vile. Some old fart telling some dumb kid to do something is definitely not brave, but you get rational adults who make the same choice to suicide bomb in warfare. That's brave imo, when it's done in this way. Hollywood in fact glorified such acts until very recently (perhaps they still do, but i hardly watch it anymore).

 

[Flintlock]

Though I'm against suicide bombings, I think when it's done in a certain way it's anything but cowardly or vile. Some old fart telling some dumb kid to do something is definitely not brave, but you get rational adults who make the same choice to suicide bomb in warfare. That's brave imo, when it's done in this way. Hollywood in fact glorified such acts until very recently (perhaps they still do, but i hardly watch it anymore).

There is a big difference between suicide bombers and soldiers who are martyred in battle.

To go for war with the intention to kill oneself means that you are brainwashed into believing that death is glorious and a great afterlife awaits you. That's not bravery.

Bravery is when you put your neck on the line, knowing fully well the fact that no lucrative rewards await you in heaven.

 

[roadrunner]

There is a big difference between suicide bombers and soldiers who are martyred in battle.

Hang on, I'm not sure i understand you. Isn't a suicide bomber involved in warfare, and going into a battle to be martyred (with the intention of being martyred). Why is he not a soldier in this case?

To go for war with the intention to kill oneself means that you are brainwashed into believing that death is glorious and a great afterlife awaits you. That's not bravery.

But isn't there an incentive for everyone regardless? Why did they Jap pilots turn kamikaze? It was the vision of a free Japan that motivated them. What motivates some people is the belief in the afterlife. The only difference is that one is motivated by collective good for the country, the other by individual good for themselves. One would perhaps be more greedy than the other, but both are motivated by something which they consider to be a personal gain to themselves.

Bravery is when you put your neck on the line, knowing fully well the fact that no lucrative rewards await you in heaven.

It's bravery AND sacrifice .. one is sacrificing their life for a higher cause, with no returns.
The suicide bomber motivated by a better afterlife is brave, but is not knowingly sacrificing much (as he is gaining in his mind).

 

[Flintlock]

Hang on, I'm not sure i understand you. Isn't a suicide bomber involved in warfare, and going into a battle to be martyred (with the intention of being martyred). Why is he not a soldier in this case?

Sure, you can call him a soldier if you like.

But there is nothing brave about his actions.

His belief in the afterlife and the rewards of heaven are so strong, that his motivations are nothing but material in nature.

For example, if you consider Heaven a place whose existence is beyond doubt, like your belief that Disneyland exists is beyond doubt, then its hardly surprising that you are willing to give up your life to get a ticket.

But isn't there an incentive for everyone regardless? Why did they Jap pilots turn kamikaze? It was the vision of a free Japan that motivated them. What motivates some people is the belief in the afterlife. The only difference is that one is motivated by collective good for the country, the other by individual good for themselves. One would perhaps be more greedy than the other, but both are motivated by something which they consider to be a personal gain to themselves.

Japanese pilots believed beyond doubt that they would be joining their ancestors, i.e. their dead aunts, grandparents, brothers etc. in heaven immediately after their death.
Their motivations were to impress their parents, ancestors and their king, who was worshiped as god.

Undoubtedly, it was love for their country which motivated them to fight. But to willingly give up your life when you can fight on, needs something extra.

Japan before WWII was a very closed society, and still is. If you have heard of nothing but the ideology of your parents and your country since birth, it becomes a reality in your mind.
For example, even if you are a teenager in India who has never been to the USA, you believe in the existence of the USA beyond doubt, even though you have never seen it with your own eyes.

It's not bravery, that's sacrifice .. one is sacrificing their life for a higher cause.

Sacrifice is coincidental.....one should not seek it out.

 

[roadrunner]

Sure, you can call him a soldier if you like.

But there is nothing brave about his actions.

His belief in the afterlife and the rewards of heaven are so strong, that his motivations are nothing but material in nature.

For example, if you consider Heaven a place whose existence is beyond doubt, like your belief that Disneyland exists is beyond doubt, then its hardly surprising that you are willing to give up your life to get a ticket.

It's not much of a sacrifice in this way. But I'd say it would be a brave thing to do still, because danger is involved.

Japanese pilots believed beyond doubt that they would be joining their ancestors, i.e. their dead aunts, grandparents, brothers etc. in heaven immediately after their death.
Their motivations were to impress their parents, ancestors and their king, who was worshiped as god.

Undoubtedly, it was love for their country which motivated them to fight. But to willingly give up your life when you can fight on, needs something extra.

Japan before WWII was a very closed society, and still is. If you have heard of nothing but the ideology of your parents and your country since birth, it becomes a reality in your mind.
For example, even if you are a teenager in India who has never been to the USA, you believe in the existence of the USA beyond doub........

Alright..I can agree with this? So what..it proves that both the Kamikaze and the suicide bomber have been indoctrinated with their beliefs, and are motivated by more or less the same thing. It's still brave, just not so much of a sacrifice. But I can accept the idea of sacrifice is ill defined so that what is brave to one person might not be brave to another.

 

[su-47]

Though I'm against suicide bombings, I think when it's done in a certain way it's anything but cowardly or vile. Some old fart telling some dumb kid to do something is definitely not brave, but you get rational adults who make the same choice to suicide bomb in warfare. That's brave imo, when it's done in this way. Hollywood in fact glorified such acts until very recently (perhaps they still do, but i hardly watch it anymore).

suicide missions have been undertaken by soldiers since time immemorial. but they have usually been undertaken against enemy soldiers, not civilians.

in ww2, soldiers sometimes used to strap explosives onto themselves and blow up tanks, when they ran out of anti-tank weapons. but those type of attacks differ from taliban style suicide bombings. the taliban use suicide bombers as a terror weapon. they specifically use suicide bombing to get out the message, "We are willing to die to take your life." That scares he crap out of people, knowing that even threats of death wont keep these people from trying to harm you. also, taliban have no qualms targeting civillians.

this is why suicide missions in war are glorified, whereas suicide missions by the taliban, and even by the kamikaze of WW2 are vilefied

 

[roadrunner]

suicide missions have been undertaken by soldiers since time immemorial. but they have usually been undertaken against enemy soldiers, not civilians.

in ww2, soldiers sometimes used to strap explosives onto themselves and blow up tanks, when they ran out of anti-tank weapons. but those type of attacks differ from taliban style suicide bombings. the taliban use suicide bombers as a terror weapon. they specifically use suicide bombing to get out the message, "We are willing to die to take your life." That scares he crap out of people, knowing that even threats of death wont keep these people from trying to harm you. also, taliban have no qualms targeting civillians.

this is why suicide missions in war are glorified, whereas suicide missions by the taliban, and even by the kamikaze of WW2 are vilefied

come on. you don't honestly believe what you just wrote, do you?

The Taliban do not set out to attack civilians with suicide bombs (or if they do, provide an example for me since there's no motivation to turn a friendly population hostile - the Taliban do do targeted killings of suspected informants though as they try to prove again and again). However, civilians do get caught in the suicide bombings (collateral damage ring any bells?). One cannot distinguish between civilian deaths caused by a Taliban suicide bomb, and likewise from an Apache gunship. Both are collateral damage.

I think the Taliban and the Kamikaze are vilified because the Western PR has always been quite strong in the West.

However, in Japan, I doubt Hirohito was villifying his kamikaze pilots.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I can see some legitimacy in the argument from the Afghan Taliban POV - i.e their narrative is that their country is under occupation, and they are fighting to drive the invaders out.

But I do not see any honor or justification in what the Pakistani Taliban have done, where the State has been attacked, solely it seem because they do not like what the State is doing. Granted the targets have primarily been SF's, but their was no invasion here and no occupation. The GoP had merely acted to fulfill international obligations under which it could not allow its territory to be used for assault on another - not unless the GoP itself wanted to declare war.

Joining a nation entails certain responsibilities. As part of a collective, ones actions must be within the realms of what has been sanctioned by the collective - that is the laws and polices of Pakistan, or whatever laws and polices are applicable under the laws of Pakistan to your particular case (FCR in the case of FATA).

Beyond that, being part of a collective also binds you to pacts and agreements your collective makes with another, and the Pakistani Taliban flouted those.