Article

2004-04-20 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2004-04-20 12:34:18 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Interesting analysis! Leads to kill all the Mullahs who advocate 'martyrdom' and destroy the property of families of 'martyrs' and ensure they do not materially benefit. So Israel should demolish homes of the Mullahs as well as the homes of the 'boomers'. Might as well demolish the mosques as well.

Posted by Phil B 2004-04-20 1:15:27 AM|| 2004-04-20 1:15:27 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 *shakes head* I respect "dissecting leftism", and link to it from my blog, but this article proves my contention that it is futile to try to understand what is fundamentally religiously motivated behavior through explicitly non-religious glasses.

The talk of the society rewarding the suicide bomber with approval clearly misses the obvious fact that a SUICIDE bomber is DEAD, and cannot enjoy any verbal or monetary claps on the back. There IS the possiblity that benefits to SB's family post suicide plays a large factor, although it appears that supporting this idea implies the truth of the Golda Meir statement of peace coming when Arabs love their kids as much as the Jews do. Certainly, they need to love their kids more than money: EVERYONE condemns westeners who do so, but there is silence when it comes to palestinians who were paid off by Saddam for what their spawn did...

The real reason? Get inside the religion's head to understand how they motivate their followers. It is no secret that there are Fatwas and clear statements in the Koran that those who die in battle defending and promoting Islam go straight to heaven. Additional myths and accretions, BTW, have added the 72 virgins. There are no Christian Abortion suicide bombers, because suicide is expressly forbidden, and most works-oriented religions state that suicide is clearly a murder from which the murderer cannot repent (being dead from killing themselves). Neither is there an incentive comparable to what exists in Islam, because 1) salvation comes by faith, not by works, so fighting the pagans doesn't give you credit, and 2) there is no indication that marriage, (and presumably sex as we know it now,) plays a part in the Christian afterlife. (C.S. Lewis argues that it will probably be replaced by something better, since there will always be a need for an act that two individuals deeply in love can indulge in for mutually bestowed pleasure.) No incentive==no market.

It is the promise of the afterlife that is the market incentive for the suicide bomber. They may die for a mistaken belief, but even people when buying in the marketplace buy things that have no value in the mistaken belief that it does have value. Even then, there is always the seed of doubt, and the factories that produce the suicide bombers have mostly to work on breaking down the normal instinct of self-preservation through intense religious indoctrination: Many of those who chose to live instead of self-detonate appear to have not been given adequate preparation or indoctrination.

The method of suicide being chosen not only maximises Israeli fatalities, but also benefits the Suicide bomber, since it is obvious that the suffering of the individual at the epicenter of the blast is extremely short. That is, if it is felt at all: I'd think the blast front would destroy the brain long before the pain signal gets to the spinal column.

Perhaps we should target, in addition to the leaders, the instructors in charge of producing the suicide bombers. This would be analogous to the bombing during WWII of germany's factories to hinder the production of war materiel feeding their armies.

Posted by Ptah 2004-04-20 12:34:44 PM|| [http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2004-04-20 12:34:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Phat, I think that the point of the article was that suicide bombing should be looked at from a supply/demand perspective.
The authors contention was that we should move from the supply side (suicide bombers) to the demand side (those who finance/pay for them)
Target the consumers( hose who pay) rather than the supplier (suicide bomber) I agree with that analysis, and if you think about it, it will require a sea change (paradigm shift?) in how we handle terrorism.
As in everything else, there is a need to do a cost benefit analysis.
Imagine if you had $86 billion, and applied this strategy!
I can't see how it would fail.
I can see how applying it to a supply side might fail, though.

Posted by tipper 2004-04-20 1:33:44 PM|| 2004-04-20 1:33:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Ptah...I believe the correct quote is more along the lines of... When the Arabs love their kids more than they hate Jews.

Posted by B 2004-04-20 1:49:49 PM|| 2004-04-20 1:49:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 B - you beat me to it.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-04-20 8:44:29 PM|| 2004-04-20 8:44:29 PM|| Front Page Top

16:16 Glyph
23:48 Alaska Paul
23:17 Frank G
23:11 Frank G
23:09 Not Mike Moore
12:30 AntiPasto
12:27 Antiwar TROLL
09:43 muck4doo
07:04 Shipman
07:02 Shipman
07:01 Shipman
04:22 Jen
04:18 Bulldog
04:07 Jen
04:04 Super Hose
03:36 Jen
03:14 Super Hose
03:11 Super Hose
02:49 Jen
02:46 Jen
02:43 Jen
02:40 Jen
02:19 Not Mike Moore
02:07 Not Mike Moore