Suicide Bombing

**Spexvet** · 06-20-2006, 09:33 AM

How would you feel if an American suicide bomber killed Osama Bin Laden? No one knows if the government sent the suicide bomber, it might have been a private citizen acting alone.

**Pete Hanlin** · 06-20-2006, 11:55 AM

I'm sure there are some military missions which are- for all practical views- suicide missions (i.e., the odds of surviving are extremely slim- e.g., the front line of a charge up a contested hill). However, an attack in which the successful completion of the mission necessarily includes the death of the person conducting the mission seems to cross some sort of line.

The factions which seem to support terrorism hold it as part of their belief system that someone dying in such a suicide mission receives some sort of spiritual benefit (the christian church pulled the same kind of deceit with Crusade participants). This is inconsistent with current western thought, and- in my view- makes this kind of action reprehensible.

**rinselberg** · 06-20-2006, 12:27 PM

The only way I could imagine that is if an American - at the behest of some agency of the government - or acting on their own private initiative - were to pose as a journalist.

But I rather doubt that OBL or the likes of him are granting any interviews these days.

You remind me of the old controversy about Tora Bora, when it appeared that OBL was cornered but managed to slip away. Did the Bush administration go wrong by not using more ground forces in that area? They opted for a monumental aerial bombardment, augmented with what was probably a fairly small number of Afghan ground soldiers .

I think it's very dubious to say that Rumsfeld & Co. called it "wrong" there.

There can be no doubt that putting more soldiers into Tora Bora would have exposed many more Americans to considerably greater risk. It's been seen how dangerous it is for ground soldiers and helicopters in the mountain areas. By restricting the number of soldiers on that ground, they reduced the potential for friendly fire incidents, and set the right conditions for that massive and prolonged aerial bombardment.

I'm not one of those who want to review or criticize that call.

OBL's exact, personal demise isn't worth risking even a single allied soldier's life, particularly.

For a higher resolution image:
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/9300/torabora4zh.gif

**rinselberg** · 06-20-2006, 12:58 PM

OK, Spex ...

I agree with Pete Hanlin.

Civilization has no prerogative - and not any need - to try and defend itself with "suicide bombers" or similar kamikaze methods.

I'm voting for "I would condemn the action as it makes us no better then them" as the most sensible response.

Yours truly

**Blake** · 06-20-2006, 04:48 PM

I would condemn the action only if it were state sanctioned, because in that case the bomber is not necessarily acting totally of his own free will. If it were a private individual, I would neither condemn nor condone it, although it seems to me if we can get somebody that close, a suicide mission would be unnecessary (think al-Zarqawi).

**rbaker** · 06-20-2006, 09:23 PM

Suicide has never been in the doctrine of American warfighting.

**chm2023** · 06-21-2006, 09:45 AM

There is a very interesting article in this month's Esquire, talks about John Walker Lindh, the young man who was captured in Afghanistan with the Taliban. The article implies that the US over-reacted somewhat to what was basically a misguided kid--a position that has some merit in my opinion but as a whole is hard to swallow. Beyond that though, it raises the issue of how do young men get to the point of volunteering to sacrifice their lives for Islam.

You can make the argument that young people are idealistic, meaning looking for a cause, and easy to influence, and that young men historically line up to fight for their country/tribe/religion whatever. But there is something about this, where these young men completely dedicate themselves to the fight, abandoning all relationships, careers etc. and are anxious to blow themselves up. It's troubling to ponder.

(My husband maintains the problem is these guys simply aren't getting laid, what with the Islam view on pre-marital sex!!)

**Spexvet** · 06-21-2006, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by chm2023

There is a very interesting article in this month's Esquire, talks about John Walker Lindh, the young man who was captured in Afghanistan with the Taliban. The article implies that the US over-reacted somewhat to what was basically a misguided kid--a position that has some merit in my opinion but as a whole is hard to swallow. Beyond that though, it raises the issue of how do young men get to the point of volunteering to sacrifice their lives for Islam.

You can make the argument that young people are idealistic, meaning looking for a cause, and easy to influence, and that young men historically line up to fight for their country/tribe/religion whatever. But there is something about this, where these young men completely dedicate themselves to the fight, abandoning all relationships, careers etc. and are anxious to blow themselves up. It's troubling to ponder.

(My husband maintains the problem is these guys simply aren't getting laid, what with the Islam view on pre-marital sex!!)

I heard an interview with a "former Palestinian terrorist" who killed first at 14 years old. Paraphrase: "I figured I'd be dead by the time I was 18, so what the hell" was his perspective.

**Spexvet** · 06-21-2006, 04:09 PM

Lot's of votes, few willing to explain.

I would never condone suicide bombing. If we are the type of society that does that sort of thing, why not just all become muslim and move to the middle east? Then we can start cutting off theives' hands and keeping our women ignorant and out of sight.