Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 156

Thread: Suicide Attacks: weapon of the future?

  1. #21
    Council Member Mondor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarajevo071 View Post
    Anyways, my point is that Islam is not what many people today think that Islam is. There are many local customs and beliefs, behaviors that got mix and people there think that is Islam and they behave that way.
    That was my point exactly.
    It is right to learn, even from one's enemies
    Ovid

  2. #22
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Hi Tequila. I don't have time to expand too much, but I see the current conflict as a conflict of cultures -very- similar to the European West discovery and conquest of the New World. The European agrarianism, technologism and expansive nature was diametrically opposed to the folks who were here at the time.

    In the same way, US/Western culture cannot help but to be expansive in nature, and the less wealthy and technologically advanced "Islam" (substitute tribal middle-east if you'd like) cannot bear the onslaught of western culture. As a result of this, they -must- fight us in order to perceive that they have a chance of preserving their way of life.

    No way do they preserve their way of life; even if they were able to destroy us, but it's something they gotta do.

    To lay the current conflict on US military actions alone is a copout, in my view, and exposes the author's prejudices.

    "My" prejudice on the issue is that I want the western world to win. It would be nice if their culture would change peacefully, but I doubt it. It would even be nice if we could build a "cultural wall" that allowed them to continue to be who they are, without changing, but that ain't going to happen.

    As much as I don't want it to happen, I see this going pretty much like the 300 year Euro-native american conflict, with several hundred years of alternating accomodation and slaughter, until the tribal culture is rendered irrelevant.

  3. #23
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Well, do you identify Islam the religion as the problem, or "Middle Eastern culture"? Because I am sure you know that the Middle East is a very small part of the Islamic world. It makes a difference.

    Your attitude appears to be same as Pape's, ironically. Pape identifies aggression expressed in territorial military occupation as the major cause of suicide bombing. You identify specifically Western aggression in terms of cultural assault as the major cause of suicide bombing. Both of you seem to believe that invasion or aggression of some sort as the main cause of suicide bombing.

    Do you believe that Western territorial invasion does not cause suicide bombing? How to account for the fact that the most numerous Muslim/Western suicide bombing campaigns involve a Western territorial occupation, then (Chechnya, Palestine, Iraq).

    Also, how to account for the numerous examples of suicide bombing where Western invasion is not at issue? The LTTE espouses a semi-Marxist ideology, for instance.
    Last edited by tequila; 02-28-2007 at 12:08 PM. Reason: added specificity

  4. #24
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Tequila & 120mm,

    Thought I'd jump in with some observations.

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    Well, do you identify Islam the religion as the problem, or "Middle Eastern culture"? Because I am sure you know that the Middle East is a very small part of the Islamic world. It makes a difference.
    You are quite correct about drawing a distinction between the two. Middle Eastern cultures have also, historically, been producers of God-King ideologies / religions; look at Sumeria, Egypt, Assyria, Persia, etc. While it is important to distinguish between the various Middle Eastern cultures, it is also important to realize that Islam (and Judaism and Christianity) all were produced out of a cultural matrix that centers around a very strong Authority Ranking relationship.

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    Do you believe that Western territorial invasion does not cause suicide bombing? How to account for the fact that the most numerous Muslim/Western suicide bombing campaigns involve a Western territorial occupation, then (Chechnya, Palestine, Iraq).

    Also, how to account for the numerous examples of suicide bombing where Western invasion is not at issue? The LTTE espouses a semi-Marxist ideology, for instance.
    Suicide, as a form of aggression, has been around for a lot longer that we have had explosives . I think it is important to distinguish between a cultural matrix that allows / encourages suicide in its defense, including what specific rationalizations are culturally acceptable, and the particular technology involved in committing suicide. BTW, every cultural matrix includes some justifications for suicide, including the Western Anglo complex .

    Having said that, what then are the rationalizations used in the Middle Eastern Culture Complex (MECC; BTW, geographically, that extends from Pakistan to Morocco)? As I mentioned earlier, the MECC is based on a fairly strict form of Authority Ranking (AR) system and has historically shown up in the form of God-King ideologies either incarnate (Pharaoh, the Persian Emperors, etc.) or discarnate (Johanine Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Mazdean dualism, etc.). The current radical Islamist groups tend to split the difference with a discarnate, absolute deity and incarnate "pseudo-prophets" who share in part of the "divine mana" (e.g. bin Ladin, Mullah Krekar, Muqtadr al Sadr, etc.).

    This AR system is segregated along lines of approach to deity, with the higher status being accorded to those closer to deity. "Suicide" has been culturally "sold" as a short-cut into the direct presence of the deity, leaving the "poor, toiling" pseudo-prophets still awaiting their own turn .

    Is this a response to "Western territorial invasion"? Nope, it's a response that is already in the cultural matrix. Note, for example, that the "history" has been conveniently rewritten by the Islamist crowd to gloss over he minor fact that they invaded and conquered large parts of the Byzantine Empire, the entire Persian Empire and the Visigoth Kingdom of Spain.

    This isn't a response to "Western territorial invasion", it is a response to 350+ years of having their own territorial invasions rolled back. Indeed, if you look at the Muslim Brotherhoods' writings, you will note that structurally they are very similar to every other religion that has had one of its main "truths" dashed on the rocks of reality. Eric Hoffers' The True Believers deals with this type of reaction.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  5. #25
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    Is this a response to "Western territorial invasion"? Nope, it's a response that is already in the cultural matrix. Note, for example, that the "history" has been conveniently rewritten by the Islamist crowd to gloss over he minor fact that they invaded and conquered large parts of the Byzantine Empire, the entire Persian Empire and the Visigoth Kingdom of Spain.
    This seems a rather odd take. If Mexico sent infantry battalions across the border into Texas and California, I doubt anyone here would call this anything but a territorial invasion, despite the fact that Texas and southern California were Mexican territory far more recently than any part of the Middle East was Christian. I don't think we would accept a formulation that told us this was simply Mexican rollback of Anglo-American invasion.

    I also find it odd that you seem to identify the sources to suicide terrorism in the cultural matrix of the Middle East. As Pape points out, suicide terror is a relatively modern phenomenon in the Middle East without any deep historical foundation. Also, the Hindu Tamil cultural matrix seems largely devoid of any historical stirrings towards suicide martyrdom.

    I'd argue as well that Islam represented a historical rejection of the God-King cultural formulation, instead enforcing a strict separation of Godhead from human rulership, instead embedding religious authority in either a more broad-based religious/cultural consensus based in the ulema (the figure of the caliph has often been mischaracterized as a Pope figure, when in fact even Ottoman caliphs who wielded real worldly power often had to mediate their authority through the ulema, especially when it came to intra-Islamic matters). Historically the attitude of most Sunni Muslims towards their rulers has been, I'd argue, represented by the idea that the split between divinely authorized rulership occurred after Ali's death. Yezid and Mua'wiya of the Umayyads have been reviled ever since Abbasid times (understandably since the Abbasids themselves were seeking religious justification, which was also largely withdrawn when they emulated Umayyad decadence) as being earthly kings rather than true caliphs representing God's will on Earth.

    For Shia, of course, there is a definite variation with their veneration of the Grand Ayatollahs.

  6. #26
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Tequila,

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    This seems a rather odd take. If Mexico sent infantry battalions across the border into Texas and California, I doubt anyone here would call this anything but a territorial invasion, despite the fact that Texas and southern California were Mexican territory far more recently than any part of the Middle East was Christian. I don't think we would accept a formulation that told us this was simply Mexican rollback of Anglo-American invasion.
    The point I was trying to make was that the radical Islamists are using a very limited historical take on what is and is not their "territory" in their rhetoric about re-establishing the Caliphate. In effect, they are recognizing the "Right of Conquest" when they were the ones who were doing the conquering, but do not recognize it when they were the ones conquered. On the issue of Mexican battalions, I would agree, but most Western nations recognize the right of conquest and the formal ceding of territorial rights - the Islamists do not, at least when it comes to their territorial claims.

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    I also find it odd that you seem to identify the sources to suicide terrorism in the cultural matrix of the Middle East. As Pape points out, suicide terror is a relatively modern phenomenon in the Middle East without any deep historical foundation. Also, the Hindu Tamil cultural matrix seems largely devoid of any historical stirrings towards suicide martyrdom.
    Then would strongly suggest that Pape go back and read enuma elish, and take a look at groups like the sicarii. As I said, the technology is different, but the validation for suicide is in the cultural matrix. On the Hindu Tamil complex, I don't know it well enough to have an informed opinion. Suicide, loosely construed as death resulting from role appropriate action, is certainly part of Hindism - see the discussion between Krishna and Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita.

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    I'd argue as well that Islam represented a historical rejection of the God-King cultural formulation, instead enforcing a strict separation of Godhead from human rulership, instead embedding religious authority in either a more broad-based religious/cultural consensus based in the ulema (the figure of the caliph has often been mischaracterized as a Pope figure, when in fact even Ottoman caliphs who wielded real worldly power often had to mediate their authority through the ulema, especially when it came to intra-Islamic matters).
    We'll have to agree to disagree on this one . I certainly do agree that much of the divinity was shifted to a discarnate locale, but all that did was to shift the communications chain one link further away. The ulama certainly became important, partly as the "voice of the community" and partly as the "intermediary to God". Still and all, that didn't change the basic God-King complex, it just shifted its focus so that you now had multiple people "speaking for" the God-King.

    On your comment about the Ottoman caliphs, sure, I agree that they used the ulama. However, it's also instructive to look at when they started to go "off". Take a look at Murad II (aka Murad the Mad) and his "reforms" for an example of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    Historically the attitude of most Sunni Muslims towards their rulers has been, I'd argue, represented by the idea that the split between divinely authorized rulership occurred after Ali's death. Yezid and Mua'wiya of the Umayyads have been reviled ever since Abbasid times (understandably since the Abbasids themselves were seeking religious justification, which was also largely withdrawn when they emulated Umayyad decadence) as being earthly kings rather than true caliphs representing God's will on Earth.

    For Shia, of course, there is a definite variation with their veneration of the Grand Ayatollahs.
    As I said, the God-King complex was shifted into a discarnate form, not eliminated. Even the Shia versions of this, e.g. the hidden caliphs, etc., shows a retention of the complex.

    I'm not trying to argue that Islam believes in incarnate God-Kings, just that the concept of a God-King is inherent in the religion and cultural matrix.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  7. #27
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    On your comment about the Ottoman caliphs, sure, I agree that they used the ulama. However, it's also instructive to look at when they started to go "off". Take a look at Murad II (aka Murad the Mad) and his "reforms" for an example of this.
    Are you talking about Murad IV? I'd actually use the Ottoman time period during that time as a good example of ulema independence vs state authority, specifically in their collective refusal to endorse the war against the Shia Safavids as a jihad.

    We'll have to agree to disagree on this one . I certainly do agree that much of the divinity was shifted to a discarnate locale, but all that did was to shift the communications chain one link further away. The ulama certainly became important, partly as the "voice of the community" and partly as the "intermediary to God". Still and all, that didn't change the basic God-King complex, it just shifted its focus so that you now had multiple people "speaking for" the God-King.
    Eh ... very iffy IMO. The ulema do not represent anything like a priesthood in that there is no claim to holy writ in their opinions, thus removing the "intermediary to God" aspect that one finds in Roman Catholicism. You could almost make that argument with regards to Sufi masters, but since most Sufis orders reconciled with the ulema centuries ago I'd even doubt that one. If the God-king discarnated, it discarnated to the Quran, I suppose, but it's tough to get a holy kingdom when you're being ruled by a book --- see the difficulties the Saudis have had, in which the clash of religious justification for an earthly kingdom has resulted in widespread Islamist mockery and hatred for the Saudi royal family.

    I think reaching for the Bhagavad-Vita as an argument for suicide terror is even more of a stretch. If you're going to go there, you'll have to include nearly every belief system which justifies (1) action (2) belief in righteousness.

  8. #28
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Default Divine Rage, Divine Wind

    I think the Viking Berserkers could pretty much be put in the category of suiciders as well as some of the Native American Dog Soldiers. I'm aware of the African Wolloff oral tradition of them, in particular one cultural hero who weighted himself with stones so the remnants of survival instincts couldn't kick in and cause him to flee. There were NVA sappers in Nam' who took themselves out. It's nothing new to the species, that's for sure. To me it's simply the ultimate rejection of unbearable circumstances, a transcendence into divine rage and rejection. The man who jumps on a hand grenade to save his buddies or the man that slaps on a C-4 vest and takes himself out in a market, both are dead, cultural heroes but I contend countless Veterans are buried all over the planet going back a few thousand years who died pretty much resolved to the fact that they were in their last engagement(s).

    Suicide bombing bolsters the rank and file in the jihadist camps and it garnishes media attention and cows-down the civilian victims but it also hardens the resolve of the opponents and eventually numbs the civilian victims into a lethargy that allows life to continue on. Iraqis are still going to the markets and the Israelis kept riding the buses and eating at pizza parlors -they let the divine wind of fate carry them on, resolved that life must go on despite the presence of violent monsters. We see the same dynamic at play in inner cities where many residents don't go out at night but do so in the day time with considerable trepidation. Ontologically, it boils down to our side essentially giving our lives to save lives and their side giving their lives to take lives, each claiming righteousness in the eyes of the Creator. From a COIN perspective, the jihadist suiciders have the immediate tactical advantage but in the long run, we will win out.

  9. #29
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Tequila,

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    Are you talking about Murad IV? I'd actually use the Ottoman time period during that time as a good example of ulema independence vs state authority, specifically in their collective refusal to endorse the war against the Shia Safavids as a jihad.
    <sound of hand slapping head>Sorry, yes Murad IV, my mistake. I was referring to his outlawing of alcohol and tobacco, and his reign of terror both in Istanbul and Anatolia.

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    Eh ... very iffy IMO. The ulema do not represent anything like a priesthood in that there is no claim to holy writ in their opinions, thus removing the "intermediary to God" aspect that one finds in Roman Catholicism. You could almost make that argument with regards to Sufi masters, but since most Sufis orders reconciled with the ulema centuries ago I'd even doubt that one. If the God-king discarnated, it discarnated to the Quran, I suppose, but it's tough to get a holy kingdom when you're being ruled by a book --- see the difficulties the Saudis have had, in which the clash of religious justification for an earthly kingdom has resulted in widespread Islamist mockery and hatred for the Saudi royal family.
    I wouldn't use the RC church as an example, the theologies are too different. Your observation about the Quran are interesting, but I think that they neglect the importance of Hadith (oral tradition) and "continuing revelation" (I know, it's a Christian term, but it does capture most of the flavour of post-Ghazali Sufism up until, say 1600 or so).

    Part of the problem is that this is hard to talk about without using a lot of technical terms. A "culture complex" doesn't necessarily deal with the lived reality of a people at a particular point in time; it deals with mutually reinforcing symbolic "perceptions of reality" that state what social relationships should be in a given situation. The God-King meme is really an absolutist, authority ranking meme that combines divine authority with secular action. In many pastoralist societies (85% according to Lenski's survey), it tends to be transposed into Storm/Sky Gods and act as a rationale for particular kinship forms and overall social organization, even if no particular individual is considered as "divine".

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  10. #30
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    Well, do you identify Islam the religion as the problem, or "Middle Eastern culture"? Because I am sure you know that the Middle East is a very small part of the Islamic world. It makes a difference.

    Your attitude appears to be same as Pape's, ironically. Pape identifies aggression expressed in territorial military occupation as the major cause of suicide bombing. You identify specifically Western aggression in terms of cultural assault as the major cause of suicide bombing. Both of you seem to believe that invasion or aggression of some sort as the main cause of suicide bombing.

    Do you believe that Western territorial invasion does not cause suicide bombing? How to account for the fact that the most numerous Muslim/Western suicide bombing campaigns involve a Western territorial occupation, then (Chechnya, Palestine, Iraq).

    Also, how to account for the numerous examples of suicide bombing where Western invasion is not at issue? The LTTE espouses a semi-Marxist ideology, for instance.
    The reason most suicide bombings involve western invasion is simple: As a relatively primitive culture, they have to have an enemy present to strike them. Invaders = more available enemy to strike.

    I would not get too worked up over "which" part of the tribal world we're involved in a conflict with. I'm generalizing by necessity.

    Do you NOT think that the largely disparate cultures are a significant part of the reason we fight?

  11. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
    "My" prejudice on the issue is that I want the western world to win. It would be nice if their culture would change peacefully, but I doubt it. It would even be nice if we could build a "cultural wall" that allowed them to continue to be who they are, without changing, but that ain't going to happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
    The reason most suicide bombings involve western invasion is simple: As a relatively primitive culture, they have to have an enemy present to strike them. Invaders = more available enemy to strike.

    I would not get too worked up over "which" part of the tribal world we're involved in a conflict with. I'm generalizing by necessity.

    Do you NOT think that the largely disparate cultures are a significant part of the reason we fight?

    Idea that “Western Culture” need to win sounds to me way to imperialistic and colonialistic, to agree with it. And, idea that every single one in the Word just waiting to be “liberated” (and in that process they country invaded either culturally either military) for saggy Mac Donald’s burgers and calorie full Coke is just -wrong.

    Why they culture need to change in the first place? Because they are not same like yours?

    Source of problems Islamic culture (countries) have with West have anything to do with freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with Western policies and actions in the Muslim world. Everything will be different and better if Muslims did not believe their faith, brethren, resources, and lands to be under attack by the West.

    To quote Scheuer:

    “Right or wrong, Muslims are beginning to view the United States as a colonial power with Israel as its surrogate, and with a military presence in three of the holiest places in Islam: the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, and Jerusalem. It is time to review and debate American policy in the region, even our relationship with Israel.

    "No one wants to abandon the Israelis. But I think the perception is, and I think it's probably an accurate perception, that the tail is leading the dog - that we are giving the Israelis carte blanche ability to exercise whatever they want to do in their area. And if that's what the American people want, then that's what the policy should be, of course. But the idea that anything in the United States is too sensitive to discuss or too dangerous to discuss is really, I think, absurd."
    And from Imperial Hubris:

    • U.S. leaders refuse to accept the obvious: We are fighting a worldwide Islamic insurgency—not criminality or terrorism—and our policy and procedures have failed to make more than a modest dent in enemy forces.

    • The military is now America's only tool and will remain so while current policies are in place. No public diplomacy, presidential praise for Islam, or politically correct debate masking the reality that many of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims hate us for actions not values, will get America out of this war.

    • Bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with U.S. policies and actions in the Muslim world. Islamic religion. He could not have his current—and increasing—level of success if Muslims did not believe their faith, brethren, resources, and lands to be under attack by the United States and, more generally, the West. Indeed, the United States, and its policies and actions, are bin Laden's only indispensable allies.


    The military is now America's only tool and will remain so while current policies are in place. No public diplomacy, presidential praise for Islam, or politically correct debate masking the reality that many of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims hate us for actions not values…
    And calling someone primitive or hating them for being different is almost same in value, if you ask me.

  12. #32
    Council Member TROUFION's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    212

    Default Analyze this recent attack:

    In light of the discussion so far, read this AP account of a recent high profile suicide attack. How does this fit the MO, what is the effect: short and long term?

    NATO: Intelligence suggested bomb threat By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer
    Wed Feb 28, 3:01 PM ET

    Intelligence reports indicated that the Taliban had the ability to carry out suicide attacks near the main U.S. base in Afghanistan even before a bloody bombing during a visit by Vice President Dick Cheney, NATO said Wednesday.

    Col. Tom Collins, the top spokesman for NATO's force in Afghanistan, said suicide bomb cells were present in the capital, Kabul, just 30 miles south of Bagram Air Base.

    "We know for a fact that there has been recent intelligence to suggest that there was the threat of a bombing in the Bagram area," Collins told reporters. "It's clear that there are suicide bomber cells operating in this country. There are some in the city of Kabul."

    Tuesday's bombing killed 23 people, including two Americans, outside Bagram while Cheney was meeting with officials inside. The Taliban claimed the attack was aimed at Cheney, but officials said it posed no real threat to the vice president.

    The attacker never tried to penetrate even the first of several U.S.-manned security checkpoints at Bagram, instead detonating his explosives among a group of Afghan workers outside the base.

    "The Taliban's claims that they were going after the vice president were absurd," Collins said.

    Collins said it was unclear whether the Taliban had really known of Cheney's visit, or if the timing of the attack was a coincidence. The last suicide bombing at Bagram was in June 2006, when an attack aimed at a U.S. convoy wounded two Afghans near a market area outside the base.

    U.S. Ambassador Ronald Neumann said he did not believe the Taliban had responded to Cheney's presence, given that he arrived on Monday and only stayed the night because bad weather forced him to postpone a meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

    "I just have not seen the ability to react that quickly, to grab your handy-dandy latest suicide candidate, who is usually not your brightest fellow around, and get him mobilized and get him up to the gate," Neumann said. "It strains credulity for me."

    He said Cheney "could have been in New York for all the threat" the bomb posed.

    Afghanistan's Interior Ministry said a preliminary investigation suggested the bomber was a foreigner. But Lt. Col. David Accetta, a U.S. military spokesman, said the best that investigators could determine was that the bomber was of "Middle Eastern descent," meaning he could have been from Afghanistan, Pakistan or other neighboring countries.

    ___

    Associated Press reporter Fisnik Abrashi contributed to this report.

  13. #33
    Council Member MountainRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    83

    Default Reading Pape

    Jumping in late to the party, but I thought I'd through in a couple of pennies into the mix.

    First, while Pape is cited, his message and his material wasn't contextualized very well. The most notable example is the references to LTTE in this discussion, including by TROUFION. If we're talking about Islamic terrorism, suicide or otherwise, we must explicitly exclude LTTE. They are virtually agnostic.

    Also, if you cite Pape, know that he finds suicide terrorism is directly related to military occupation or location. Messages from OBL/UBL, for example, LTTE, and the 7/7 bombers etc all make specific references to placement of military combat forces in a region. This is the foundation of Pape's argument for off-shore balancing.

    It is also worthy of noting that while "Civilizied peoples deplore, condemn and disdain suicide and suicide warfare", to quote TROUFION in the opening of this thread, this does not discount the Islamic, or otherwise, populations the suicide act is performed for. These populations may not entirely support the means but they support the ends, a scenario seen in Palestine.

    If you don't want to buy his book, which is a good book, or you don't want to download the paper, you can watch or listen (via iPod if you want) his JHU APL Rethinking War series seminar.

  14. #34
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarajevo071 View Post
    Idea that “Western Culture” need to win sounds to me way to imperialistic and colonialistic, to agree with it. And, idea that every single one in the Word just waiting to be “liberated” (and in that process they country invaded either culturally either military) for saggy Mac Donald’s burgers and calorie full Coke is just -wrong.

    Why they culture need to change in the first place? Because they are not same like yours?

    Source of problems Islamic culture (countries) have with West have anything to do with freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with Western policies and actions in the Muslim world. Everything will be different and better if Muslims did not believe their faith, brethren, resources, and lands to be under attack by the West.

    To quote Scheuer:



    And from Imperial Hubris:



    And calling someone primitive or hating them for being different is almost same in value, if you ask me.
    That's not my point at all. A large portion of the world believes in treating women like property, tribalism and revenge/honor killings. They also believe in a form of conservatism that values chastity, among other things.

    The "communications revolution" combined with the amoral (anti-moral?) content being imported into their cultures whether they want it or not, is destroying their culture.

    In effect, the corrosive effect of Britney Spears and Animal Sex on the internet, available 24/7 is damaging to their culture. And while they consume it willingly, I don't think they believe that it is willing consumption.

    My point is not that I don't think that the US is imperial. I don't think we KNOW that we are imperial.

    And as far as wanting "our side" to win, no, I don't want my head sawed off with a rusty knife, and I don't want my wife put into a sack and stoned to death. THAT is what I call Primitive Behavior.

    I would be willing to let folks in the part of the world (that is undefinable, because the Definition Nazis on the board will jump all over me) "just live their lives", but that is not the nature of humanity.

  15. #35
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    120mm - What evidence do you have for your view that cultural difference (exemplified, I suppose, by internet pornography) is the principle reason for Islamist suicide attacks, as opposed to the reasons listed by Islamist terrorists in their numerous statements of purpose which almost exclusively reference politics?

    One could make the argument that tribalism, the treatment of women as property, violence, etc. are far more prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa than in the Muslim Middle East. Yet we have a distinct lack of African terrorists. What accounts for this?

  16. #36
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    120mm - What evidence do you have for your view that cultural difference (exemplified, I suppose, by internet pornography) is the principle reason for Islamist suicide attacks, as opposed to the reasons listed by Islamist terrorists in their numerous statements of purpose which almost exclusively reference politics?

    One could make the argument that tribalism, the treatment of women as property, violence, etc. are far more prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa than in the Muslim Middle East. Yet we have a distinct lack of African terrorists. What accounts for this?
    I'm sorry, I have left the path. I wasn't talking about suicide bombings. I was talking about the overall conflict between the two cultures. The suicide bombing is merely a small portion, a "tactic" if you will.

    On the subject of the Islamist terrorists "statements of purpose", you do know that UBL, et al have listed "America's abuse of the environment" as one of the reasons for attacking the WTC, right? I doubt the average terrorist gives a rip about "the environment. There statements are mainly "bull####" imho. They have a few trick ponies they walk out on the street now and again for the dhimmis.

    I think it is most likely that the guys who issue statements desire power and power alone.

    On the subject of African lack of terror, I reference Marc's above statement about the sentiment that the Arabs once ruled the world, and feel cheated that they still do not.

    I also do not see a strong sense of moralism in African tribes. If there were, where did all the AIDS come from? At the risk of generalizing, Africans don't have the history of world domination and civilization, and I don't "think" they have a uniting moralizing religion which will be crushed by western society.

    And, oh yeah, they also don't have huge oil reserves to purchase.

    As I am dying the "death of a thousand cuts" through your questions, I'm interested in maybe you putting out some of your ideas. Perhaps that will shorten this exercise....

  17. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
    That's not my point at all. A large portion of the world believes in treating women like property, tribalism and revenge/honor killings. They also believe in a form of conservatism that values chastity, among other things.

    The "communications revolution" combined with the amoral (anti-moral?) content being imported into their cultures whether they want it or not, is destroying their culture.

    In effect, the corrosive effect of Britney Spears and Animal Sex on the internet, available 24/7 is damaging to their culture. And while they consume it willingly, I don't think they believe that it is willing consumption.

    My point is not that I don't think that the US is imperial. I don't think we KNOW that we are imperial.

    And as far as wanting "our side" to win, no, I don't want my head sawed off with a rusty knife, and I don't want my wife put into a sack and stoned to death. THAT is what I call Primitive Behavior.

    I would be willing to let folks in the part of the world (that is undefinable, because the Definition Nazis on the board will jump all over me) "just live their lives", but that is not the nature of humanity.
    They don’t care what you posting or watching on Internet… One just DOESN’T need to look of it and he will not see it. That’s not problem. Problem is when “your” culture, values and rules are FORCED on “theirs”. Simple.

    You say it’s not “nature of humanity” to let others "just live their lives"!? Did I understand you well here?

    Once again… Beheading, full covering of woman, stoning are customs of SOME people/tribes/sects and not part of real Islamic thought and culture.

    Same like one would say that random killings of kids in schools, sexslavery and prostitution, racism, etc is not part of real “western culture”. One would say it is part of collective Primitive Behavior.

    I dare to say, there is no difference between “western” or “eastern” Primitivism.

  18. #38
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Washington, Texas
    Posts
    305

    Default Acts of impotence

    Human bomb attacks are acts of impotence and they are rarely aimed at invading forces. The vast majority are aimed at non combatants. In Iraq the victims are almost all Shia Muslims. The recent attack in Afghanistan killed one US soldier and 22 others, which suggest that if were targeting "invading forces" he was a poor shot.

    A brief comment on the "cultural" battle. One of the significant difference between western culture and the culture of the jihadi is that we do not glorify the depravity that sometimes occurs. By that I mean that people who go on a killing rampage in a high school are not considered someone to emulate and put on posters.

  19. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Merv Benson View Post
    Human bomb attacks are acts of impotence and they are rarely aimed at invading forces. The vast majority are aimed at non combatants. In Iraq the victims are almost all Shia Muslims. The recent attack in Afghanistan killed one US soldier and 22 others, which suggest that if were targeting "invading forces" he was a poor shot.

    A brief comment on the "cultural" battle. One of the significant difference between western culture and the culture of the jihadi is that we do not glorify the depravity that sometimes occurs. By that I mean that people who go on a killing rampage in a high school are not considered someone to emulate and put on posters.
    And I don’t say that they should be put on posters… I was just saying that “primitivism” is multicultural thing.

    And about other thing. I agree with you but also wonder…

    How will they play “game” if they have all those toys and gadgets? Would they be called heroes flying planes and bombing villages and doing “collateral damage” or they will still be “impotent”?

    I don’t know. Seams to me, suicide bombings coming from desperation and lack of real weapon systems rather then impotence.


    PS.
    I was talking about western and islamic culture. Not jihadi.

  20. #40
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,098

    Default

    ...figured I'd put this here as well, because of the subject matter - although it has it's own thread in the OEF-Afghanistan forum:

    Cheney Attack Reveals Taliban Suicide Bombing Patterns
    ...Iraqi suicide bombers from such jihadi groups as Ansar al-Sunnah and al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia frequently seek to inflict high casualty rates by attacking soft targets, such as crowded markets. Their objective is to cause as much bloodshed as possible, incite sectarian violence and destroy U.S. efforts to construct civil society in Iraq. Afghan suicide bombers, on the other hand, appear to have different objectives and have focused almost exclusively on hard targets (government, police, military). In 2007, for example, the Taliban have attacked foreign or Afghan military/police targets in 16 of their 22 bombings (in three cases the target was undetermined).

    This in-depth analysis of 158 Afghan suicide bombings since 2001 shows that this is no anomaly and demonstrates an important point: in only eight of the 158 suicide attacks from 2001-2007 did civilians appear to be the direct target of Afghan bombers. Further scrutiny of these eight civilian attacks reveals an important fact. In two of these instances, the Taliban apologized for inflicting civilian casualties and in one case a Taliban spokesmen actually denied involvement. In four other cases the suicide bombers seem to have been targeting passing military convoys or governmental representatives in crowds; therefore, the high civilian casualties appear to have been unintended "collateral damage." In only two instances were civilians clearly the target of Afghan suicide bombers.

    These findings tell us volumes about the Taliban's overall strategy in employing suicide bombing as a tactic. Far from imitating Iraqi insurgent tactics, the Taliban are trying to avoid losing the battle for the hearts and minds of the Afghan people by needlessly killing civilians....

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •