The Myth of the Suicide Bomber

Since the London bombing, I've been wondering if it was possible those guys they claim to have on film thought they were (a) working for the government in a training exercise or, if (b) they were blackmailed somehow into delivering explosives. If they have families, someone could have been threatening them.

Here's a good article:

The Myth of the Suicide Bomber
By "impatient"

Why "Suicide Bombing" Must be a Myth and What Purposes it Really Serves

After reading The Logic of Suicide Terrorism--It’s the Occupation, Not the Fundamentalism by Robert Pape, the main idea that we come away with is that suicide bombers are real, very real indeed. Though we were promised a revelation of the logic, these questions remain:

If the purpose of a suicide-terrorist attack is not to die, but to kill and to inflict the maximum number of casualties on the target society, why do they die?

If the purpose of the suicide bomber is to end the occupation of his country, why is the suicide tactic not as old as war and territorial occupation itself?

If the purpose of the suicide bomber is to end the occupation of his country and to inflict the maximum number of casualties on the target society why are the targets so disparate and scattered, without a clear relation to the occupation?

Why are suicide bombings publicized before any proof is brought by investigation?
www.libertyforum.org...

[edit on 7/16/05 by EastCoastKid]

ECK:

6.) You will not post any copyrighted material, material belonging to another person, nor link to any copyrighted material (with the exception of publicly available sites and pages that the legal owners of the copyrights have created to make that material freely available to the general public), unless that copyright is owned by you or by this website. You will not cross-post content from other discussion boards (unless you receive my advance permission). You will not post-by-proxy the material of banned members or other individuals who are not members, but have written a response to content within a thread on these forums.

Terms and Conditions of this site





As for the "myth," allow me to bust that rationale.
According to Islam:
* It is forbidden to commit suicide, for any reason.
* Terrorism and all such acts of are forbidden.
* It is forbidden to target and kill/murder innocents.
* Each of the above stand in stark contradiction to the teachings of Islam and Muhammad.

More here, which is surpirsing you had no comment to be had in this linked topic: Why It Makes “Sense” For the Resistance to Target Innocent Iraqis
Furthermore here, which I also heatedly contested:
The Logic of Suicide Terrorism: It’s the Occupation, not the Fundamentalism


You see, the issue here is that it is the WEST who is rationalizing such things/acts as you are know quoting from, NOT ISLAM. Despite the reasons we in the WEST can give to rationalize why Muslims target innocents or do suicide bombings, etc, they are Muslims that also strictly practice the faith of ISLAM. I have provide all the non-biased links needed to understand that ISLAM dos NOT condone such acts as described above, no matter how many people in the WEST wish to justify those acts.

Utterly amazing anyone can condone this when those who are doing such things do not even have the backing of their own religion and faith.





seekerof

[edit on 18-7-2005 by Seekerof]

Sorry.. I was unaware I was breaking a rule. I guess we all fall down sometimes..

Here's a great link my friend sent me today (he's also a member of ATS ). The article is an interview with the guy being discussed in my first post. Checkit out, he knows his stuff.

www.amconmag.com...

Well written piece, ECK, but I do not agree with it.
I mentioned in one of those threads that I posted in my last post, I have met Associate Professor Pape. He and I attended some summer seminars together. He is well written and has exceptional research skills.

As such, his data mainly pertains to the Western perspective: you know, the outside looking in type thing? Anyhow, he does not adequately nor nearly cover enough of the Muslim/Islam perspective when he trys to establish that suicide bombings, that also target and kill/murder innocents and children, are soley based on the simple theory of:
"No occupation, no terrorism," or in his applied perspective: "No occupation, no suicide bombings."

His data also fails to mention that the theory he asserts does not apply to all cases of acts involving suicide bombings. Other than that, I agree with alot of what he asserts, based on the data he has at his disposal.

Again, he is giving a Western perspective on this, not an Islamic perspective, because if he was, he would not have failed to mention what I already have in this thread:

According to Islam:
* It is forbidden to commit suicide, for any reason.
* Terrorism and all such acts of are forbidden.
* It is forbidden to target and kill/murder innocents.
* Each of the above stand in stark contradiction to the teachings of Islam and Muhammad.

As such, Islam asserts that those who do such acts are not of Islam, thus making anything they do representative of fundamentalism, extremism, fantical, etc. Again, the links provided by me in the "Why It Makes 'Sense' For the Resistance to Target Innocent Iraqis" explain exactly how Islam views suicide bombings, ECK, despite the best 'logical' well-intended efforts of the esteemed Associate Professor Pape. A good intentioned man.

IMHO, despite his Western perspective [outside looking in] on this matter, I agree with Islam and condemn such acts. I would imagine that Islamic scholars know their stuff, as well.




seekerof

[edit on 18-7-2005 by Seekerof]