NationStates Jolt Archive

Heavily populated civilian areas were not bombed , but whatever, what do I know, I'm sure the <explitive delete> website knows better right?



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3564320.stm
" Air strikes by US planes on the largely Sunni Iraqi city of Samarra have killed at least 13 people and injured 84, a hospital official in the city said."
"At least 43 buildings and homes were destroyed in the city which also came under attack from the ground as US forces searched for weapons before the bombing, the agency reported."

http://news.bostonherald.com/intern...articleid=41110
" Smoke has been seen rising over the city of Fallujah (fuh-LOO'-juh) -- after witnesses say U-S warplanes bombed the Iraqi city early Tuesday. "

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3387826
"Early today, US warplanes bombed Najaf’s Old City, the scene of much of the fighting, and the sounds of shelling could be heard in the streets,
witnesses said."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mi...ast/3558330.stm
" US air strikes and fighting on the ground in the Iraqi city of Kut have left 72 people dead and about 150 injured, the Iraqi government says.
Planes bombed a district of the city associated with Shia gunmen, but the city's hospital director said many of the casualties were women and children."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Stor...1223564,00.html
"A videotape emerged today apparently showing the wedding party in Iraq that survivors say was attacked by US warplanes last week in raids that killed up to 45 people "

Big deal. We killed hundreds of thousands with firebombing during World War II and history has given it the nickname "The Good War."

The march toward victory will continue.

Any bombing of a similar target is more cowardly than a suicide bombing.

The march toward victory will continue.

the death toll increases every day -- each month kills more the previous -- what victory are we marching toward?


Did it ever occur to you that that light at end of the tunnel is the train?

Texas:

Only because we're more concerned with the stories listed in the original post.

Hopefully, once this election is behind us and President Bush is re-elected, a re-enactment of Sherman's March can take place.

Once we get off of this "hearts and minds" garbage and adopt more of an Atillian mindset, that total victory will be realized.

Also, the death toll rising everyday? Compared to what? Zero? Let's compare this conflict, in terms of both civilian and military casualties, to other American conflicts and see where we are at.

I would say we have refined warfare to the point where American lives lost are at a minimum, when looked at in context.

So wait, we're comparing single, solitary, precisely targeted bombs dropped on hostile targets to someone who blows themselves and a school bus full of children up?

Second of all, we're comparing the reaction to attacks and aggressive actions to, the counterattack in an effort to end violence and get rid of those fighting, to suicide bombing which is and of itself an attack and promulgation of violence which are specifically targeted at civilians and children for the greatest shock value and terror?

At some point of partisanship, does your brain actually shut down or parts of it die off or... what?

So what made you decide to come back Roy?

So wait, we're comparing single, solitary, precisely targeted bamobs dropped on hostile targets to someone who blows themselves and a school bus full of children up?
Interesting spin, but when the single bomb weighs several tons and the solitary bomb splinters into hundreds of minibombs (some of which remain unexploded) and when the precise bombs are only accurate with-in 100 yards, it really puts a huge hole in your characterization of the US air strikes.

Beside, take a look at the civilian deaths that are caused by dropping these things -- up to 80 deaths all at one single, solitary moment in time... that's not just heartbreaking, it's unjustifiable.


At some point of partisanship, does your brain actually shut down or parts of it die off or... what?

who's partisan here? I oppose this war based on ethical evaluations, not because of party ideology.

The suicide mission is one of profound and extreme courage.

Few in the west have the bravery to sacrafice themselves for anything.

The suicide missions of the Palestinians are the ultimate expression of the once-American slogan "Live free or die."

Big deal. We killed hundreds of thousands with firebombing during World War II and history has given it the nickname "The Good War."

The march toward victory will continue.

whoever calls WW2 The Good War? perhaps you're confusing it with WW1, which was called The Great War until the middle of last century?

I agree with Granada. Suicide bombing takes a lot of courage. Unfortunately, most terrorists can't afford or get ahold of the proper amounts of explosives. It's a good thing we're bombing them.

whoever calls WW2 The Good War? perhaps you're confusing it with WW1, which was called The Great War until the middle of last century?

Here's one example of "The Good War" being linked to World War II.

"The Good War: An Oral History of WWII"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565843436/104-4731014-9046367?v=glance

Simply Google "The Good War" and see which American conflict comes up. PBS even did a documentary entitled "The Good War and Those Who Refused to Fight It."

The suicide mission is one of profound and extreme courage.

Few in the west have the bravery to sacrafice themselves for anything.

The suicide missions of the Palestinians are the ultimate expression of the once-American slogan "Live free or die."

Westerners are too intelligent to be sucide bombers. That's why we invented missiles.

Westerners are too intelligent to be sucide bombers. That's why we invented missiles.

No kidding. Thanks, we'll do our work with a Tomahawk.

Here's one example of "The Good War" being linked to World War II.

"The Good War: An Oral History of WWII"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565843436/104-4731014-9046367?v=glance

Simply Google "The Good War" and see which American conflict comes up. PBS even did a documentary entitled "The Good War and Those Who Refused to Fight It."


Despite the reasons for WW2, the firebombing of Dresden Germany was the murder of at least 200,000 people, most of them civilians.

You think you can justify that?

Hehe! WHOOPS! *boom* Heehehehehe! Whooooops! *boom*

Ahahahahhaha

Despite the reasons for WW2, the firebombing of Dresden Germany was the murder of at least 200,000 people, most of them civilians.

You think you can justify that?

It wasn't only Dresden. Tokyo, Berlin, Kobe, etc. We firebombed civilian cities and killed more through this method than with "the bomb."

Can I justify it? Sure, the Allies won.

Few people in the west have the courage to sacrifice themselves? What planet are you from Granada. Americans are sacrificing themselves now for Iraqi's to vote. You don't believe it, join the military and ask them. Read stars and Stripes Letters to the Editors. I work for the American Forces Network and I will tell you it doesn't matter why they are there. They are sacrificing themselves to give the children of iraq the same choice the Children of Hitlers Generation got. The same generation Japans Children got.

Sacrificing yourself because you are so poor, destitute, stupid, and horny because you think you get 70 virgins when you are dead is not courageous.

It shows the stupidty of the backwards communities these countries come from. PLA does not want to live free. Iran does not want to live free. They want to live in a backwoods poverty stricken dark age where women are hated, and the floors are made of dirt. Take your misplaced ideas of courage somewhere else, or Get a Dictionary. Courage is the Is the Iraqis and Isreali people still eating at cafes.

So up to 80 people die in a bombing campaign in Fallujah. Let's count how many have died in your suicide heroes attacks. By Standers. Not solders. They kill 10 Civilians for every soldier they hit in the suicide attacks. So take your courage and shove it.

The Idea of a "Free" Fundamental muslim is about as large an oxymoron as I have ever seen.

And for the record, I am an atheist, and have no relation to Isreal. It's just about time someone grabbed people like you and drug you kicking and screaming out of the dark ages.

Texas:

Only because we're more concerned with the stories listed in the original post.

Hopefully, once this election is behind us and President Bush is re-elected, a re-enactment of Sherman's March can take place.

Once we get off of this "hearts and minds" garbage and adopt more of an Atillian mindset, that total victory will be realized.

Also, the death toll rising everyday? Compared to what? Zero? Let's compare this conflict, in terms of both civilian and military casualties, to other American conflicts and see where we are at.

I would say we have refined warfare to the point where American lives lost are at a minimum, when looked at in context.


Ahhh Stalin, that quote of yours really is something...

It wasn't only Dresden. Tokyo, Berlin, Kobe, etc. We firebombed civilian cities and killed more through this method than with "the bomb."

Can I justify it? Sure, the Allies won.


So, let me get this straight...

Your saying that no matter what the costs in innocent, non-combatant lives, the firebombings of certain cities, that had little or no military usefulness...like Dresden....was justifiable?

Because they were the enemy!!! Duh :headbang:

Westerners are too intelligent to be sucide bombers. That's why we invented missiles.
Nothing to do with intelligence. Everything to do with funds and power.

So, let me get this straight...

Your saying that no matter what the costs in innocent, non-combatant lives, the firebombings of certain cities, that had little or no military usefulness...like Dresden....was justifiable?

I believe the saying is "all is fair in love and war."

Also, for the person making reference to Stalin, were you implying I ripped a quote from him?

If so I did it unintentionally and without realization.

Nothing to do with intelligence. Everything to do with funds and power.

Yes. Funds and power. Which we got by being idiots.

Yea, the firebombing of Dresden was so intense it created TORNADOS made of fire, hot enough to melt cement sidewalks...this was across entire major cities..all civilians

Iraq? They're killing barely any civilians compared to that.

Or what about Nagasaki/Hiroshima? Sure, hundreds of thousands died..but the death toll estimated for a full scale assault was in the millions. Point in fact..if you can kill more of them then they can of you, then you'll probably do it.

The thing I don't understand...all the people that say these wars are wrong..if you DON'T fight..then what? The terrorists will just stop and go about their merry way? No..more people will join them because they see that you arn't doing anything ABOUT it.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)

Yes. Funds and power. Which we got by being idiots.
You are being an idiot.
Your ancestors did get their ass to war for your power.

Easy there. Mind my funds and power, collegiate.

I believe the saying is "all is fair in love and war."




Then surely you must acknowledge the 9/11 attacks as justifiable as well, by the same logic.

Easy there. Mind my funds and power, collegiate.I've got funds and power as well. It is not related to intelligence. It is related to where you are born.

Oh, okay. You're one of those. Trendy.

Then surely you must acknowledge the 9/11 attacks as justifiable as well, by the same logic.

Sorry, I think you're confusing me with being on the wrong side of the fence.

While I don't believe in moral relativism, I do believe in nationalism.

Sorry, I think you're confusing me with being on the wrong side of the fence.

While I don't believe in moral relativism, I do believe in nationalism.


Hey, If your leaning to the left, thats great. I just want to know if you consider the 9/11 attacks justifiable, by the "all's fair in love and war" tenet.

I've got funds and power as well. It is not related to intelligence. It is related to where you are born.

Except the Saudi's have funds and power, and they are still suicide bombers.

You don't just get missiles automatically with funds and power. You also have to know what to do with them.

Except the Saudi's have funds and power, and they are still suicide bombers.

You don't just get missiles automatically with funds and power. You also have to know what to do with them.Those who have funds are not suicide bombers. It is not as simple as 1 saudi = 1 saudi.

Oh, okay. You're one of those. Trendy.

actually, skepicism isn't really 'in' right now -- it's more trendy to wave plastic American flags (made by slaves in China) than it is to hold the government accountable.

this brings to me a question ive often asked myself, never really said out loud tho

is a casualty of war, as they are called, not also a murder victim?
not that i want to prosecute our brave soldiers
but this is another thing that makes me unsure where i stand with *war for peace*
i am all for bush, trust me
but killing does not seem like the right way to go, even though did it to our people
im just a bit confused

because, well, murder is murder is murder
so?... any ideas?

sorry to stray off topic
i think killing of any type is completely cowardly!

iraqis (and whoever else) :mp5: :sniper: usa?


:confused: :confused:

Those who have funds are not suicide bombers. It is not as simple as 1 saudi = 1 saudi.

Yes it is.

Saudi Arabi is a very rich country, the richest in the middle east probably. Number of missiles invented = 0.

China, for a long time, was far less wealthy and arguably had more less power than Saudi. Number of missiles invented = a lot.

Therefore you are wrong. Again.

Yes it is.

Saudi Arabi is a very rich country, the richest in the middle east probably. Number of missiles invented = 0.

China, for a long time, was far less wealthy and arguably had more less power than Saudi. Number of missiles invented = a lot.

Therefore you are wrong. Again.
I'm not wrong, it's just that you're not talking about what I'm talking.
Saudi arabia sure is a rich country controlled by the US. The suicide bombers in saudi arabia are not rich and have no power. If they had the power and the funds, they would use missiles instead of suiciding themselves because they are just as clever as you if not more.

Hey, If your leaning to the left, thats great. I just want to know if you consider the 9/11 attacks justifiable, by the "all's fair in love and war" tenet.

If I were on the other side of the fence, probably.

However, I'm not so it wasn't acceptable.

So wait, we're comparing single, solitary, precisely targeted bombs dropped on hostile targets to someone who blows themselves and a school bus full of children up?

Second of all, we're comparing the reaction to attacks and aggressive actions to, the counterattack in an effort to end violence and get rid of those fighting, to suicide bombing which is and of itself an attack and promulgation of violence which are specifically targeted at civilians and children for the greatest shock value and terror?

At some point of partisanship, does your brain actually shut down or parts of it die off or... what?
hold on i need to laugh at you


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

precisevly dropped bombs


AHAHAHAHAHAHA


dropping bombs into CIVILIAN AREAS and firing missiles into CIVILIAN BUILDINGs will OBVIOUSLY cause CIVILIAN casualties, welcome to the corretc side of the looking glass

If I were on the other side of the fence, probably.

However, I'm not so it wasn't acceptable.

Do you think yourself god? Your idology is basically, "anything (I, the party, the nation) does is justified because it is done by (I, the party, the nation) and anything the enemy does is unjustified because they are the enemy. Where do you gain this supremacy?

Americans are sacrificing themselves now for Iraqi's to vote.



Haha, sucker born every minute I suppose...


You do not have the firm will or courage to go on a suicide mission.

I'm not wrong, it's just that you're not talking about what I'm talking.
Saudi arabia sure is a rich country controlled by the US.


Saudi Arabia controlled by the US? You must be making a joke.
Saudis control oil.
Saudi Arabia also has a deterrant as potent as a brace of MIRV ICBMs: Mecca.

You know...why hasn't anyone compared the suicide bombings we see now to the Kamikaze missions of Japanese pilots during World War II? It was considered a very honorable thing to do. The pilots even got to attend their own funeral.

You know...why hasn't anyone compared the suicide bombings we see now to the Kamikaze missions of Japanese pilots during World War II? It was considered a very honorable thing to do. The pilots even got to attend their own funeral.

Because Japanese Kamikaze pilots attacked military targets, not civilians. Todays suicide bombers normally attack civilians, just like the US air force.

Well...I'd say it's pretty cowardly to attack Iraq. I mean...it's like Mike Tyson fighting with a little kid...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3564320.stm
" Air strikes by US planes on the largely Sunni Iraqi city of Samarra have killed at least 13 people and injured 84, a hospital official in the city said."
"At least 43 buildings and homes were destroyed in the city which also came under attack from the ground as US forces searched for weapons before the bombing, the agency reported."

http://news.bostonherald.com/intern...articleid=41110
" Smoke has been seen rising over the city of Fallujah (fuh-LOO'-juh) -- after witnesses say U-S warplanes bombed the Iraqi city early Tuesday. "

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3387826
"Early today, US warplanes bombed Najaf’s Old City, the scene of much of the fighting, and the sounds of shelling could be heard in the streets,
witnesses said."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mi...ast/3558330.stm
" US air strikes and fighting on the ground in the Iraqi city of Kut have left 72 people dead and about 150 injured, the Iraqi government says.
Planes bombed a district of the city associated with Shia gunmen, but the city's hospital director said many of the casualties were women and children."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Stor...1223564,00.html
"A videotape emerged today apparently showing the wedding party in Iraq that survivors say was attacked by US warplanes last week in raids that killed up to 45 people "

well, what do you say for yourselves Jingos, how does anyone justify this blatant disregard for humanity?

I'm not wrong, it's just that you're not talking about what I'm talking.
Saudi arabia sure is a rich country controlled by the US. The suicide bombers in saudi arabia are not rich and have no power. If they had the power and the funds, they would use missiles instead of suiciding themselves because they are just as clever as you if not more.

Well if they used missiles they wouldn't be martyrs would they? Then how would they get guaranteed entry to paradise? You could give them all the funds in the world and they wouldn't invent missiles because they think its intelligent to blow themselves up when they kill others - that's how they get to heaven. Therefore my point still holds, no matter how much funding they have, they will never develop missiles becuase they don't understand what missiles are for really.

And look at the viet-cong. They had no "funds" but they didn't blow themselves up did they? (Well not as sucide bombers). So my overall thesis is valid. Suicide bombers do it because they are not intelligent enough to use missiles - unlike almost every other individual on the planet. Plus, not everything can be divided into US = evil, third world = good. The way you think makes me think that you would act like a sucide bomber given half the chance.

In conclusion, you are wrong.

Done and Done.

(And don't bring up japanese kamikazee pilots as a counter example either, because it will just further expose your myopic blinkered view of the world.)

And what's more I resent having my intelligence compared to some idiot suicide bomber.

I, as I have just proved, am obviously far more intelligent.

Well if they used missiles they wouldn't be martyrs would they? Then how would they get guaranteed entry to paradise? You could give them all the funds in the world and they wouldn't invent missiles because they think its intelligent to blow themselves up when they kill others - that's how they get to heaven. Therefore my point still holds, no matter how much funding they have, they will never develop missiles becuase they don't understand what missiles are for really.

And look at the viet-cong. They had no "funds" but they didn't blow themselves up did they? (Well not as sucide bombers). So my overall thesis is valid. Suicide bombers do it because they are not intelligent enough to use missiles - unlike almost every other individual on the planet. Plus, not everything can be divided into US = evil, third world = good. The way you think makes me think that you would act like a sucide bomber given half the chance.

In conclusion, you are wrong.

Done and Done.

(And don't bring up japanese kamikazee pilots as a counter example either, because it will just further expose your myopic blinkered view of the world.)


Uhh..Im gonna have to agree with whoever told you that you werent very smart.

The Vietnamese used themselves as suicide bombers all the time.
Putting a grenade in a baby's diaper was a good strategy, or so they thought.

Also, your completely wrong about Suicide bombers being too stupid to know what missles are for.
What in the hell makes you think that just becuase they are from another country, and a different culture, that they are stupid?

Of course they know what those are for, and if they had one, you can bet your ass they would use it.

Quite often your talking about very poor people, who get some money, and buy some guns, and some hand-grenades and such, and cuase some havok.
If they could afford Uranium, and whatnot...they would be buying that, instead.

Of course they know what those are for, and if they had one, you can bet your ass they would use it.

Quite often your talking about very poor people, who get some money, and buy some guns, and some hand-grenades and such, and cuase some havok.
If they could afford Uranium, and whatnot...they would be buying that, instead.

also, there is the economic factor: often, the impoverished become suicide bombers because it ensures that their families will be provided for. Remember, alot of the Royal Families and charatable organizations (and even Saddam) send large sums to the family of suicide bombers. When there are no jobs and no chance for advancement in life, (and children are starving because you have no money for food) this can be an enticing offer.

just another poor boy of to fight a rich man's war...

Uhh..Im gonna have to agree with whoever told you that you werent very smart.

The Vietnamese used themselves as suicide bombers all the time.
Putting a grenade in a baby's diaper was a good strategy, or so they thought.


It is you who is not very smart.

I am well aware of the so-called "bomb in the baby carriage"; babies, however, cannot commit suicide. They lack the requisite mental capacity. What you are referring to is infanticide, not suicide. There is an enormous difference - if you can grasp it. Your point holds no water and is inapposite to the issue at hand. I could expand upon you obviously fallacious comparison further, but I will spare everyone your embarrasment.

Also, your completely wrong about Suicide bombers being too stupid to know what missles are for.
What in the hell makes you think that just becuase they are from another country, and a different culture, that they are stupid?

Of course they know what those are for, and if they had one, you can bet your ass they would use it.

Your statement is illogical and offensive Sir (or Madam)! I resent the implication that I am a racist who judges people as stupid simply because they are from other countries or cultures. I never stated that I believed that people from other countries or cultures are stupid, I stated that suicide bombers were stupid . Your response is no more than a leftist hackneyed knee jerk attack upon my character becuase you are unable to refute the obvious truth of my cogent arguments. Indeed, if you actually read my post you would know that I specifically noted that the unintellegence of suicide bombers is a special case " unlike almost every other individual on the planet." Irrefutably therefore, I am judging suicide bombers solely upon their actions and not their ethnic affiliation. Why then do you accuse me of this, other than as a last ditch attempt to maintain your dogmatic and baseless defense of these dangerous lunatics.

And you have not refuted my point that sucide bombers do not fully comprehend the use of missiles. Sucide bombers believe that they are automatically going to paradise for their viscous behavior. They have no such guarantee if they use a missile. Why then, would they ever consider the missile as an alternative. I say again, suicide bombers do not understand the point of a missile because they want to die . This would be impossible under the scheme you suggest for them. If they used missiles, they would not be suicide bombers because they would not be commiting suicide (and I would not be condemning them as moronic for not using them). Clearly, the most important feature of a missile attack, not dying while you do it, is a concept alien to them. How can you therefore maitain that they understand missiles I fail to see why you cannot grasp this obvious and salient feature of the whole phenomenon. But as you believe defending the actions of these ethically crippled, morally degenerate and mentally defective pieces of human waste product, I fully understand that you are mired in illogic and lack the ability to fully comprehend the situation.


Quite often your talking about very poor people, who get some money, and buy some guns, and some hand-grenades and such, and cuase some havok.

There have been many "poor" people who have been involved in terrorism around the globe throughout the twentieth century who have not resorted to such vile practices. The do it by planting bombs and leaving: Then returning to plant more bombs time after time until caught. Not only are they more intelligent - obviously - but they are also more effective.

Again you fail to grasp another salient feature of the whole mentality of these perverted creatures. They risk nothing in their actions , they do not believe that they are making a sacrifice or risking the totality of their lives. No they, in fact, look upon their actions as a blessing and a reward - with the calm assurance that they will live on in paradise. This is because they fail to comprehend either the blessing of human life or the true nature of reality. Indeed, they are even condemned by genuine muslim clerics for their foolishness, not just by me.

They want to die, and this is why they would have no use for missiles or ever develop them. Missiles would not further their aims. Obviously.

It also demonstrates that they do not understand they key feature of missiles. THAT YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DIE WHEN YOU USE THEM . They would have no more use for missiles than I would for a TNT vest and therefore would never develop them. (I do not need a TNT vest because I am more intellgent and understand this key distinction.)

If they could afford Uranium, and whatnot...they would be buying that, instead.

What would they do with uranium, eat it?

In short Sir (or Madam), you have accused me of being a bigot and an idiot. Yet you leap to the defense of these maniacs. Nevertheless I have again prooved all arguments that suicide bombers are intelligent and understand missiles to be false.

You are wrong. ;)

A suicide bomber at least accepts death as the consequence of his/her actions. Not planting a bomb and running away, but in making one unique attempt, imposing the death penalty upon him/herself.

Compare this to someone flying in a more or less invisible aircraft, over a country with no air defences, and dropping bombs on apartment buildings because some wiretap suggested someone there was a dissenter.

One can argue endlessly about morality, but that is a completely separate issue. It's pretty obvious where the bravery lies.

A suicide bomber at least accepts death as the consequence of his/her actions. Not planting a bomb and running away, but in making one unique attempt, imposing the death penalty upon him/herself.

You are assuming that a sucide bomber percieves death the same as others do. Yet as I have made clear this is clearly not the case. The "death penalty" you suggest the suicide bomber imposes upon himself is nothing of the sort. A death penalty is a sanction and a punishment and an eventuality to be avoided at all possible costs. Not for nothing is the death penalty the ultimat sanction the law can impose. A sucide bomber looks at death as a transistion to a better state - as their propaganda has made abundantly clear - and as such is accepting nothing more than what he has spent their entire exisitence trying to merit, to whit, entry into paradise. To the sucide bomber their death in "combat" is the fulfilment of all their wishes and the realization of their deepest desires.

Those who are not suicide bombers view death as a termination; an end and onerous burden. They do not seek it and do not wish it. This contrasts sharply with suicide bombers who harbor the most fervent wish is not to die.

There is no courage in accepting your heart's greatest desire. Bravery is defined by having the courage to accept an undesirable and painful end in spite of what your heart most longs for. Not running headlong towards your supposed reward when duty calls instead is the hallmark of courage. If sucide bombers were truly brave they would deny themselves death and remain alive to continue the fight while doing everything to deny themselves the death they most wish for.

Death as sucide bombers percieve it is not comparable to the perception of death for others. And consider this, when the suicide bomber "makes that one unique attempt" as you so aptly put it, they do so "knowing" that they will be rewarded in heaven while their infidel victims will be consigned to hell.

Your analysis is, thus, false.


Compare this to someone flying in a more or less invisible aircraft, over a country with no air defences, and dropping bombs on apartment buildings because some wiretap suggested someone there was a dissenter.

I shall. The pilot of the plain fears death, yet he is still risking his life on every mission he flies - even during training. Although his death is not by any means certain, he still risks facing consequences that he would normally do everything to avoid. On the other hand, the suicide bomber is certain that he will achieve the outcome he most desires - his own immolation and entry to paradise. There is no question that one faces fear for a purpose larger than himself, while the other gleefully seizes the opportunity to achieve his own desired ends. It is clear therefore who is truly brave and who is the coward; who sholders responsibility and who shirks it; and who we should admire and who we should revile.

One can argue endlessly about morality, but that is a completely separate issue. It's pretty obvious where the bravery lies.

Yes it is.

My point stands. Sucide bombers are unitelligent and cowards. Those they would destroy are not.

I am still right. ;)

exploding yourself in a crowded street is not brave, but dropping bombs from ten thousand feet onto civilians is still worse.

exploding yourself in a crowded street is not brave, but dropping bombs from ten thousand feet onto civilians is still worse.

can you read? or is this a joke?

suicide bombers are cowards.

Well...I'd say it's pretty cowardly to attack Iraq. I mean...it's like Mike Tyson fighting with a little kid...well...we had a choice....it was either the half-blind kiddie (iraq)

...or the small kiddie with the slingshot(NorthKorea)

why hasn't anyone compared the suicide bombings we see now to the Kamikaze missions of Japanese ...
I would not volunteer for a Kamikaze Mission...maybe Im not Brave enough....or maybe cos Im not stupid....

Either way im not the Patriotic type...Maybe cos im not stupid..or maybe because simply Im not willing to die for "the Flag"...any flag...

Do I think they are Brave....YES, I sure do.

The U.S.A. should stop trying to grab power and share some with others. The U.S. is not the most important country in the world! Help people, dont Hurt them!

Lacadaemon: Suicide bombers are dying for what they belive in. Many people consider them cowardly, but i think them brave, even if they are dying for a cause i do not support.

Dying for what you believe in is pretty brave.

Even if what you believe in is dumb.