posted
With the Islamic and Palestinian contempt for the West and Israel, this video being shown on Palestinian TV does not surprise me. This fits right in this week's news that two children were used as decoys and then left in the car to die during a "suicide" attack in Iraq.
The video being shown on Palestinian TV obviously illustrates radical Islam's desire to use innocent children to further shahid (a martyrs death for Allah) and jihad and its view that shahid is a supreme virtue.
Horrific video of a child sending her suicide bomber mother to her death Daily Mail (UK) 3/23/07
quote:Palestinian TV is showing a music video in which a four-year-old girl sings the praises of her suicide bomber mother and vows to follow in her footsteps.
The little girl grasps a stick of dynamite from a drawer in her mother's dressing-table and says: "I will follow Mummy".
The shocking footage is being aired repeatedly on Al-Aqsa TV, the official station of the new Palestinian unity government headed by prime minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas, which seeks the destruction of Israel.
The video is shown between programmes without any accompanying commentary.
It shows a child actress playing four-year-old Duha Riyashi singing to her mother, Reem, as she prepares for a suicide bombing.
Reem Riyashi, a 22-year-old mother of two from Gaza, blew herself up at the entrance to a joint Israeli-Palestinian industrial zone in January 2004, killing four Israelis.
She was the first mother to join the grim death-roll of suicide bombers and the first woman despatched on such a mission by Hamas.
In the two minute video the young child sings as her mother prepares the bomb next to her dressing-table in the bedroom.
She sings: "Mommy, what are you carrying in your arms instead of me? A toy or a present for me?"
posted
True, Storm, but in the BBC video you posted "Rageh in Iran" it was made very clear that the clerics are in charge. This is true in Palestin, Iraq, Syria and other Muslim countries too. The clerics goal is to convince the next generation that Isreal, the U.S. and the West are agents of "satan." Sixty-eight% of Palestinians now support peace, but what about in 20 years?
Hitler's use of cinema helped lead to the annihilation of six million plus Jews, Christians, Gypsies, handicapped people and others the Nazis saw as unfit in their scheme for an "Aryan" new world order.
The radical Islam's "cinema" is now in many Muslim people's homes and the their TV is state supported as directed by the clerics.
Beginning in the 1930s, Hitler’s Nazi Youth began to be brainwashed for his “Aryan” goals. Those kids grew up to be his soldiers and SS. I see definite parallels of the clerics desire to brainwash civilians and their kids for their terroristic anti-Jew, West and US goals.
Just as most Germans did not support the annihilation of Jews, most Muslims don't support global terrorism, but their cleric leaders do.
The following is 12 minutes of a documentary called "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against The West". The disclaimer is that it is about the threat of radical Islam & most Muslims don't support terrorism. It is worth the watch.
posted
Actually, it was made pretty clear in my video that the clerics were only somewhat in charge and that Iran has liberalized over the years. You'll notice that the most liberal were often the most wealthy.
I am not denying that 'radical Islam' isn't a threat.
I am not denying that there aren't Islamic 'jihadists'.
What is important to factor in, though, is that they aren't the only Muslims. They aren't the only Persians or Arabs, Palestinians or Iranians. There are many who want peace and want to liberalize their societies. There are many who want to not be under the control of the clerics.
The clerics have had decades and centuries to sell their ideology and work their will on the people, yet it is telling that the large majority of Palestinians, who have suffered far more at the hands of the Israelis, legitimately or not, want peace with Israel. They don't want to suicide themselves against Israel. They want a better life for themselves. As they gain wealth and self sufficiency, they will turn away from the state and the clerics.
'We' 'won' in China because it is basic human nature to want certain goods and to want to be able to live like those mythical images you see in the West. We are winning in China because people are becoming more wealthy and have less need of the state to take care of them and protect them.
This is, along with a strong military (and some other things), what 'won' us the war against Russia. We won because it was clear to the Russian elite that we had the better product. We won because people wanted our life.
Which is not to say that they want to be us.
Our military leadership, in various papers, has recognized that it is not our military victories which win us good will with the Muslim world, and which will assure us peace and stability in the future, it is our willingness to help the Muslim world and make it clear that we aren't the enemy of Muslims. Our aid to Indonesia did more against the war on terror than all of our bombs.
Not making this point clear, and generalizing, makes it harder for those Muslims who want to help their countries be free and peaceful get out from under the influence of those who want war with us.
No greater evidence of what I'm saying exists than here in the U.S. American Muslims are, basically, patriotic Americans and have no desire to commit violence. Because they are free and it is clear to them that we are not their enemy, that they are free to live as they wish and to be prosperous, they get along with non-Muslims.
I think in Europe, it is clear that this is less true and, thus, you have more riots, crime, what have you.
In conclusion, I am not denying that your specific examples aren't true, I'm just saying that they don't tell all the story, and that we need to deal with the Middle East/Muslims with that understanding.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, we should grab the Jesus Camp people, these people, fly them all to Antarctica, arm them and let them fight it out. Give the rest of us some peace and quiet.
Why didn't God give the Jews a better Chosen Land anyways? Say... Algonquin Park? If you're going to fight over a place, at least make it a nice looking one Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Suicide bombers are stupid. Especially if they have CHILDREN! What the hell?
If you come from the mindset that you automatically go to heaven when you die for God/Allah, then presumably you're going to meet up with your children in Heaven anyways. These people probably honestly believe that they're dying to create a better future by removing intruders into their lands. In their religion, they get honour, glory, and eternal life (with numerous virgins, does it work that way for women?) by dying in this manner.
How do we tell them that their religion is wrong?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Israel was a pretty nice country back in the day; "Fertile Crescent" and all that. It's three thousand years of goats that have turned it into desert. And with irrigation, why, it's pretty fertile again.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not even something that's a part of "REAL" Islam. It's not part of their religion, but something these fiendish clerics put into it to justify their deaths. I bet none of them are strapping bombs on themselves.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM: Still, they could have gotten the Bahamas, or Algonquin Park, or sunny Florida, or any number of places. Heck, this is God, they could have gotten a magical land filled with gingerbread houses and sugar coatings. Instead they get a desert land surrounded by enemies. Can you get a refund on a covenant? Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
"Catholic children went on Crusades against Muslims."
A minor knowledge of history would show that young European BOYS were Roman Catholic and served their knights as pages and then squires. They went to battle with the knights, but not into it. Show me where they were sent on suicide missions and/or were forced to fight Muslims before becoming knights during, before and after the Crusades.
posted
I'm so lucky to have been raised in Virginia, with mountains, forests, rivers, and great weather. I just can't imagine being raised in the middle of the hot, dry desert.
I still don't understand what the suicide bombers want that they are being denied. What on earth would drive someone to want to kill themselves/their children? There's something I'm not being told, because it doesn't make sense to me right now.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
But that's my point, Kat--that we clearly don't understand what's going on or who these people are if we can't figure out what is driving them to suicide bombing.
I want to know what they want that they're not getting. The fact is that they're people just like you and me--they want to be happy, safe, and ALIVE, but something is so WRONG that they're sacrificing their lives in hopes of fixing whatever is wrong so someone else might be happy someday (but I can't figure out what's wrong!).
I'm tired of the media campaign to dehumanize Muslims. We're all just people, and when I see suicide bombers, I think they must be having pretty miserable lives, and I wish they didn't.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Poverty? Hopelessness? Some sort of weakness that these leaders can exploit and use for their aims? Their lives are horrible on earth, so they think the afterlife will be better? Ultimately they are people like us. I'm not sure if the usual tactics of war will work. You have to tap into the conditions that cause terrorism and target them... But few are willing to do that.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
KrankyKat: while there's considerable debate as to the details, the Children's Crusade (which did not get very far) probably involved a good number of young people (probably not any/more than one or two four year olds, but probably a good number between 12 and 18). It was a crusade of poor people, and none of them were knights (as far as we know).
The current best guess is they were sold into slavery before they got out of Europe.
Also, squires freqently participated in combat, usually in minor roles. However, that was a relatively common way for a squire to become a knight somewhat early -- a brave deed in battle.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
I would like to point out though that teenaged boys in the middle ages were a lot closer to adulthood than teens of today, especially considering the short average lifespan. I would expect that 12-18 year old boys were no longer considered "children."
Have a good day, Krank
Posts: 1221 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, by 14 or so they were still wards, but typically taking on more adult responsibilities.
However, taking on adult responsibilities at 14 or so is something that still happens today in many places outside the "first world", including palestine.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The clerics goal is to convince the next generation that Isreal, the U.S. and the West are agents of "satan." Sixty-eight% of Palestinians now support peace, but what about in 20 years?
I imagine that has a great deal to do with our actions. I absolutely agree that sucide bombers and other terrorists are horrific and that it needs to be stopped. But I think it's easy to label them as evil and give up efforts on trying to treat them like people. Because when there's such a massive number of people willing to kill themselves to hurt the West and even more that support it, it goes beyond an individual person making horrible choices. It speaks of a society that feels helpless against us and feels that this is one of the few options left to them.
Until our foreign policy changes and we stop treating Muslim countries like children (as somebody recently stated was their own attitude), I don't imagine terrorism will dissipate.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amanecer: "But I think it's easy to label them as evil and give up efforts on trying to treat them like people."
Yes, 911 made it pretty easy to label the terrorists as evil and hard to think of them as just regular "people."
I don't buy into your premise that their societies (meaning just your everyday working guy) feel helpless against the US and the West. The radical clerics and terrorists goal is to convince the next generation of Muslims that Isreal, the U.S. and the West are agents of "satan."
I think the music video/TV ad is evidence of this.
Posts: 1221 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The clerics goal is to convince the next generation that Isreal, the U.S. and the West are agents of "satan." Sixty-eight% of Palestinians now support peace, but what about in 20 years?
I imagine that has a great deal to do with our actions. I absolutely agree that sucide bombers and other terrorists are horrific and that it needs to be stopped. But I think it's easy to label them as evil and give up efforts on trying to treat them like people. Because when there's such a massive number of people willing to kill themselves to hurt the West and even more that support it, it goes beyond an individual person making horrible choices. It speaks of a society that feels helpless against us and feels that this is one of the few options left to them.
Until our foreign policy changes and we stop treating Muslim countries like children (as somebody recently stated was their own attitude), I don't imagine terrorism will dissipate.
It's horrible to hear someone making these sort of excuses. Yes, not all Arabs/Muslims should be considered evil because of the terrorists. But the terrorists are absolutely fundamentally evil, and beyond redemption. And those in their society who support them, while not evil to the same degree, are morally bankrupt.
You assume that they do these things because they feel hopeless. But the fact is, their atrocities wax and wane according to their hopefullness. Every time they score a victory, they ramp up the violence. That's the opposite of what you'd expect if your evaluation had any correspondance with the reality of the situation.
You honestly can't wrap your mind around the idea that their culture is so fundamentally different from yours that they would do the things they do, not out of desperation, but out of cold calculation. But that's a failure of imagination on your part. And it's a failure that they count on.
The leaders of the terrorists tend to be people of means. People who studied in universities. In many cases, at Israeli universities, at Israeli government expense. Why? Because many Israelis thought the way you do. They thought, "Hey, raise their standard of living. Get them out of those refugee camps. Give them an education, and they'll be ambassadors for peace." And how tragically wrong they were.
They'll use their own people as cannon fodder. Not all Arabs are willing to be suicide bombers. But when their families are offered huge financial incentives (paid out of the billions of dollars of aid given to the Palestinians by the US and EU, which never gets to the average guy on the street except as a bounty for violent acts) or threatened, they'll do it.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It all makes me sick, but I refuse to believe that trying to understand them makes me morally bankrupt. Seeing your posts Lisa makes me want to understand them better.
quote: Every time they score a victory, they ramp up the violence.
That is pretty consistent with classical conditioning. Do what works with more intensity. It is sad that they consider it a victory.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
I don't think suicide bombing is inherently evil. Do we think of the suicide bombers during WWII as inherently evil? I think the general feeling on them is sad, desparate, but still noble. I think suicide bombings against CITIZENS is deplorable. Against military targets I think it is a desperate, last option to be used if all other resources are exhausted.
The Children's Crusade like fugu said, wasn't quite what most people seem to think it is. It was the poor, some very old, some perhaps in their teens. Many thousands of them went home before ever even making it to Italy. The few thousands who actually made it onto ships were either sold into slavery in Africa or shipwreaked off Sardinia. For sure, none of them made it to the fight, and very few, if any were actually children. Less than half of the total number who tried to join (maybe 30%) the crusade ended up being sold into slavery. On advice from the King of France, many thousands of them dispersed and went home.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:But the terrorists are absolutely fundamentally evil, and beyond redemption.
I do not believe they are necessarily beyond redemption, but I also do not believe it is the responsibility of our government (or anyone else's) to redeem them.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lem: It all makes me sick, but I refuse to believe that trying to understand them makes me morally bankrupt. Seeing your posts Lisa makes me want to understand them better.
That's sad.
quote:Originally posted by lem:
quote: Every time they score a victory, they ramp up the violence.
That is pretty consistent with classical conditioning. Do what works with more intensity. It is sad that they consider it a victory.
You misunderstand. Among these victories are any offers from Israel. When Israel offered to give away almost the entirety of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and even half of Jerusalem, they responded with the second Intifada. When Israel pulled out of Gaza unilaterally, and rendered 9000 Jews homeless, they responded by launching missiles from the sites that used to be Jewish towns.
It isn't just when violence gets them something that they get more violent. It's whenever they gain anything at all. Whenever it seems to them that they are getting closer to their goal.
It is hope that causes their violence. Not hopelessness.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: A couple thoughts...
I don't think suicide bombing is inherently evil. Do we think of the suicide bombers during WWII as inherently evil? I think the general feeling on them is sad, desparate, but still noble. I think suicide bombings against CITIZENS is deplorable. Against military targets I think it is a desperate, last option to be used if all other resources are exhausted.
What exactly did you think we were talking about? Most of their suicide attacks are against civilians. Explicitly and intentionally against civilians. Pizza shops. Crowded marketplaces. Discos.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But the terrorists are absolutely fundamentally evil, and beyond redemption.
I don't think any person is fundamentally evil. Especially if they've been brainwashed. That makes them pitiable.
quote:You honestly can't wrap your mind around the idea that their culture is so fundamentally different from yours that they would do the things they do, not out of desperation, but out of cold calculation. But that's a failure of imagination on your part. And it's a failure that they count on.
I feel like I'm trying much harder than you are to wrap my mind around their culture. From your posts, I'm getting that you don't consider terrorists people, and you consider anyone from this different culture to be so far removed from our understanding of humanity that they might as well be a different species.
And while the evil leaders of these terrorists organizations might very well be calculating everything because they are inherently evil, do you not also reserve that same possibility for many of our leaders here in the West?
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Krankykat: Amanecer: "But I think it's easy to label them as evil and give up efforts on trying to treat them like people."
Yes, 911 made it pretty easy to label the terrorists as evil and hard to think of them as just regular "people."
I don't buy into your premise that their societies (meaning just your everyday working guy) feel helpless against the US and the West. The radical clerics and terrorists goal is to convince the next generation of Muslims that Isreal, the U.S. and the West are agents of "satan."
I think the music video/TV ad is evidence of this.
If I had your worldview based on your posts, I'd be making statements like "glass parking lot" or somesuch.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
If I had your worldview based on your posts, I'd be making statements like "glass parking lot" or somesuch.
If you are trying to imply that I want to "nuke-um" with your "glass parking lot" comment, that would be rather asinine of you.
Posts: 1221 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: You assume that they do these things because they feel hopeless. But the fact is, their atrocities wax and wane according to their hopefullness. Every time they score a victory, they ramp up the violence. That's the opposite of what you'd expect if your evaluation had any correspondance with the reality of the situation.
Actually, that's exactly what I would expect. They feel that the only way they can effectively influence their country/lives/whatever is via violence. That people place their only hope in violence is a sign of hopelessness.
quote:But the terrorists are absolutely fundamentally evil, and beyond redemption.
I do not accept that anyone is beyond redemption, but that's a significantly different topic. I think that terrorism is evil. I think that the invasion of Iraq is evil. I think that war is evil. But if a situation is bad enough, sometimes we feel like an evil act is necessary. If we were talking about a few isolated incidents, like the Oklahoma City bombing or other isolated acts of terrorism, I'd be inclined to call the people crazy and not need to understand them. But when you're talking about a society where 32% of people do not want peace, well, I consider that something that needs to be understood. It's certainly easier to digest when we can just say the other guys are evil/crazy, but it doesn't lead to an improvement of the situation.
quote:I also do not believe it is the responsibility of our government (or anyone else's) to redeem them.
I don't think it's our responsibility to redeem them. I do think it's our responsibility to stop messing with the internal affairs of autonomous countries.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I do not believe anyone can be fundamentally evil nor beyond redemption, how do you dissuade without the use of force someone that truly believes that it is honorable to sacrifice the lives of a few innocent people for the good of the many, and who has the means to carry that out?
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by camus: While I do not believe anyone can be fundamentally evil nor beyond redemption, how do you dissuade without the use of force someone that truly believes that it is honorable to sacrifice the lives of a few innocent people for the good of the many, and who has the means to carry that out?
Perhaps persuading them with words and good examples that perhaps what they have been told is evil, perhaps is not?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:how do you dissuade without the use of force someone that truly believes that it is honorable to sacrifice the lives of a few innocent people for the good of the many, and who has the means to carry that out?
I'm not proposing the total elimination of force. There are times when there is no other option. I am proposing we try to discover why they believe that force/violence is necessary and what we can do to change that belief.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
I'm saying that you might be a few steps closer to it than I am.
First: The post you refer to was a reply to:
quote:Amanecer's statement:
"But I think it's easy to label them as evil and give up efforts on trying to treat them like people."
Second: Go back and read my reply to Amanecer's post in context and in addition to going back and reading what else I said previously. After you do that then explain your statement that what “I'm saying that you might be a few steps closer to it than I am.” and “If I had your worldview based on your posts, I'd be making statements like "glass parking lot" or somesuch."
Such terse statements by you could use some explaination for understanding.
Posts: 1221 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
I understand. You are disgusted by the inference that you could have that sort of cruelty in you.
Yet you'll post the news about the suicide bomber's girl. I don't think I've seen any positive threads regarding news in the middle east since I've been here, like the church that recently went up in the UAE or how Mahmoud Abbas and Ehud Olmert have decided to hold bi-weekly meetings to speed up cessation of hostilities between the two states. What about your thoughts on the US deciding to give $59 million to the Abbas-led government? No rounded look at the news over there, just the 'turriss' and the death. Well, there was that one thread on the building in Bahrain, not insignificant how that one dropped off the queue pretty quickly.
People hate it when it's said, but perception is a great deal of reality to the individual. You view the world through the lens in which you choose to look. You raise up or knock down depending on where you focus.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ahh, funny. I guess you re-thought your demand that I "reconcile" for you. I see what you did there...
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
~And the "pot to the kettle"? What a confusing statement on your part.
~No "demands", just a rephrase.
~I don't see any American television ads promoting suicide bombings by American children against Muslims. Do you?
You said we "view the world through the lens in which [we] choose to look."
What I see is that "The video being shown on Palestinian TV obviously illustrates radical Islam's desire to use innocent children to further shahid (a martyrs death for Allah) and jihad and its view that shahid is a supreme virtue."
quote:I'm not proposing the total elimination of force. There are times when there is no other option. I am proposing we try to discover why they believe that force/violence is necessary and what we can do to change that belief.
Oh I completely agree. I was just wondering what methods of persuasion there are, if those ideas are being pursued, and how successful they might be.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A senior official, or former senior official, I can't remember who, said that our approach to Iraq and the Middle East should be something like 40% Humint, 40% Aid and Economics, and 20% Military. Right now it's closer to 95% Military, and that military force should be smaller strike forces.
The current administration feels that all military is a better way to do it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A village in Gaza was flooded with sewage the other day. Why? The EU gave them a ton of money to use for modern sewage treatment. But they preferred to dig up the pipes to use as rocket launchers.
It's gotten to the point where the almost daily launching of rockets from Gaza into Israeli towns isn't even reported in the news any more, and people pretend that there's some sort of "cease-fire".
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
~And the "pot to the kettle"? What a confusing statement on your part.
Yes, confusing after you shift gears and completely change your wording from accusational to pleading. Convenient, no?
quote:~No "demands", just a rephrase.
I guess we'll never know, since we only have your word on what was there when I responded versus what is there now.
quote:~I don't see any American television ads promoting suicide bombings by American children against Muslims. Do you?
So, that must mean we're better, right?
quote:You said we "view the world through the lens in which [we] choose to look."
What I see is that "The video being shown on Palestinian TV obviously illustrates radical Islam's desire to use innocent children to further shahid (a martyrs death for Allah) and jihad and its view that shahid is a supreme virtue."
Ahh, and that video is indicative of what, exactly? You seem to qualify with "radical Islam" for that but you counter with "do Americans do that?" to me. In fact, there are some Americans who are just as hate-filled with a holy-inspired self-righteousness and celebrate the deaths of those they call enemy. I can think of one televangelist who even has his own show who makes comments not unlike that. The Phelps gang is another good example. The hate is still there, the 'righteous' anger is just as present, but the venue, wording, and technique is different.
But at least we don't have commercials with little girls telling us how they're going to suicide bomb people, right?
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
"I guess we'll never know, since we only have your word on what was there when I responded versus what is there now."
Justa: For the record, what I originally wrote in that post is: "Such terse statements by you could use some reconciliation for understanding."
I changed it to read: "Such terse statements by you could use some explaination for understanding."
I went back within about 60 seconds of the post (I guess while you were replying) and changed the wording because my original word choice simply did not fit what I was saying.
No "shifting of gears," no changing from "accusational to pleading," no "convenience", and no attempt at "conconfusing" you.
And yes, "at least we don't have commercials with little girls telling us how they're going to suicide bomb people, right?"
Posts: 1221 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by camus: While I do not believe anyone can be fundamentally evil nor beyond redemption, how do you dissuade without the use of force someone that truly believes that it is honorable to sacrifice the lives of a few innocent people for the good of the many, and who has the means to carry that out?
Perhaps persuading them with words and good examples that perhaps what they have been told is evil, perhaps is not?
Not a big fan of force, but I don't think your approach will work either.
I may be sympathetic to the view that the leaders may be manipulative and coldly calculating when they send out these suicide bombers, maybe.. However, if as Lisa says that these people have been educated in universities and Western environments, they're pretty much (as in realistically rather than say theoretically in an ideal case) a lost cause as far as argumentation and persuasion.
The bigger problem are the suicide bombers themselves. Given the information in this thread, news, portrayals of the suicide bombers in their own words, and so forth, I have no doubt that their actions are heavily influenced by religious indoctrination. Indeed we can look at cases of the 9/11 terrorists who spent a lot of time in the United States before their attacks or homegrown Islamic radicals in Canada and Europe, to demonstrate that exposure and eduction is no panacea for religious indoctrination. Indeed, the very origin of the concept of religiously motivated Assassins (from Hashshashin) has a long history in Islam/the Middle East.
Even in other examples, if you look at the zeal demonstrated by Japanese kamikaze pilots or Nazi pilots in similar airplanes, their degree of indoctrination can only be described as religious. You need that level of faith and righteousness to give up your own life in such a manner.
I guess what I'm trying to say in a very-long winded way, is that if there are no atheists in foxholes, it is doubly true that there are no atheist suicide bombers.
The question really becomes, how can you convince these people that their religion is wrong? The great irony of this thread is that we have Lisa railing against suicide bombers that kill maybe 10 to 100 people at a time, saying that they are "absolutely fundamentally evil." Meanwhile, as demonstrated in a recent thread, her own religion forces her to view an act of genocide of thousands (or more) as morally justified, indeed, required.
How can we possibly convince suicide bombers that their religion is wrong in condoning and rewarding *murder*, given our limited contact and communication, when we can't even convince people that we have much more contact with that *genocide * is wrong?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
