Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
"Homocide" Bombings
Topic Started: Apr 23 2004, 12:44 PM (691 Views)
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
Somerland, I gave you the answer up above and I'm not going to repeat it. Suffice to say, if I were able to have as much control over those people as the terrorists do, I could probably get them to throw a jubilant celebration after killing all their children.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

I guess I still feel a little uneasy with the term "homocide bomber". True, we don't want to encourage the practice of suicide bombing by somehow glorifying the bomber. However, I think that ignoring or covering up the fact that the bomber is commiting suicide by changing the name to "homocide bomber" smacks of propaganda and cover up. In my opinion, we should call it suicide bomber because the term carries more information than the other term. We should not try to cover this up out of fear that someone might hear the word suicide and then admire the bomber. I don't really think this happens anyway.
| Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
somerled
Apr 27 2004, 01:13 AM
The question I asked was
Quote:
 
What does it take in a person's life experiences and circumstances to compell a person who ordinarily would be peace loving, law abiding , friendly and hospitable to become a human bomb intent on killing or maiming as many people as possible ?



So why do these people continue acting this way ?

Well since you are obviously in one of your stubborn moods today I will repost both Doctortobe's response and my own. After all we wouldn't want you to feel we ignored your question even though you constantly ignore ours.

Quote:
 
Somerland, it does not take much to compel people to do what you want them to do. Humans, like wolves, have a pack mentality. If there is an influencial leader in power, we are geared mentally to follow them.

To emphasize my point, I would like to tell you about a psychological experiment done some time ago. In this experiment, a group of random people were taken. They were put in a room that had a one-way mirror that allowed them to see into an adjoining room where an elderly man was strapped into a chair.

The man had a number of electrodes strapped to him and there was a box in the enclosed room with a button and a dial that went numerically from 1-10. The electrodes strapped to the man weren't real, and the man himself was an actor that would react to the amount of "shock" he received with an appropriate level of "pain".

When the subjects were situated in the booth, a man in a white lab coat would tell them to set the dial to "1" and push the button. The actor would wince slightly. This would continue up through the number scale. The actor would give more and more painful reactions. From wincing at 1 and 2, he started yelling at 3 and 4. At 5 and 6, he began struggling to free himself and screaming for help. At 7 and 8, the man was shrieking in agony. And at 9 and 10, he slumped over and showed no response to repeated pressings of the button. If they showed any signs of stopping, the man in the white coat would command them to continue.

Almost all the subjects continued the subject until 7 or 8. Many continued up to 10. Only a couple stopped the experiment despite the "scientists'" urgings. These people were from all walks of life. However, all responded to an authority figure that their culture viewed as somebody whos advice should be followed.

So as you can see, economic prosperity has little or no affect on one's ability to be controlled. This experiment has been played out in numerous dictatorships. Take Nazi Germany for example. Do you seriously believe that a whole nation of people believe that a whole race of people should be hunted down and exterminated? Of course there was a minority that did, but the fact that they were the authority in that nation compelled Germans to follow their lead. The fact that the Jews were a frequent scapegoat merely made it easier.

The same thing is happening in Palestine today. Authority figures such as Arafat and terrorist leaders are able to compell Palistinians to strap bombs to themselves and go out and murder innocent civilians.

You may think this is hogwash, but it can be proven by looking at your life. If a police officer in the middle of an intersection holds his hand up as you drive towards him, why do you stop? Obviously there is little that he can do to you to force you to stop, but he is able to control your actions by mere force of authority alone.

Being able to manipulate the pack mentality of the human mind is the key aspect of being in a position of power.



Quote:
 
One thing I would like to add to this argument is that there are millions of people in the world who live in much more dire straits then the Arabs in the occupied territories.

I wonder why the millions of people in Africa and South America who have starved in famines and are poor beyond belief are not commiting mass suicide to end thier agony. People cling to life whenever they can unless they are mentally ill or are being coerced. In the case of Arab homicide bombers I would say they are being coerced by the promise of glory (and 40 virgins) in heaven.

It is the teachings of thier clerics, not thier economic status, that is creating this situation.


Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
gvok
Apr 27 2004, 10:03 AM
I guess I still feel a little uneasy with the term "homocide bomber". True, we don't want to encourage the practice of suicide bombing by somehow glorifying the bomber. However, I think that ignoring or covering up the fact that the bomber is commiting suicide by changing the name to "homocide bomber" smacks of propaganda and cover up. In my opinion, we should call it suicide bomber because the term carries more information than the other term. We should not try to cover this up out of fear that someone might hear the word suicide and then admire the bomber. I don't really think this happens anyway.

But he is not committing suicide, he is committing homicide.

I explained it earlier. A "suicide" bomber would go off into a field somewhere and blow HIMSELF up. A "homicide" bomber blows himself up in a crowd of people to kill them too. This is not propaganda, it is simply truth. In fact, the term "suicide bomber" carries less information, because it neglects to mention the others killed..
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
In fact, is not the term suicide bomber not a propoganda piece for the terrorists? How does the term homicide bomber cover up anything? If it does anything, it exposes the attacks for what they really are.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

Admiralbill_gomec
Apr 27 2004, 10:53 AM
gvok
Apr 27 2004, 10:03 AM
I guess I still feel a little uneasy with the term "homocide bomber".  True, we don't want to encourage the practice of suicide bombing by somehow glorifying the bomber.  However, I think that ignoring or covering up the fact that the bomber is commiting suicide by changing the name to "homocide bomber" smacks of propaganda and cover up.  In my opinion, we should call it suicide bomber because the term carries more information than the other term.  We should not try to cover this up out of fear that someone might hear the word suicide and then admire the bomber.  I don't really think this happens anyway.

But he is not committing suicide, he is committing homicide.

I explained it earlier. A "suicide" bomber would go off into a field somewhere and blow HIMSELF up. A "homicide" bomber blows himself up in a crowd of people to kill them too. This is not propaganda, it is simply truth. In fact, the term "suicide bomber" carries less information, because it neglects to mention the others killed..

I understand what you are saying. I don't think that homocide precludes suicide however.
| Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
But which is the greater wrong?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

doctortobe
Apr 27 2004, 12:35 PM
In fact, is not the term suicide bomber not a propoganda piece for the terrorists? How does the term homicide bomber cover up anything? If it does anything, it exposes the attacks for what they really are.

I don't think the muslim extremists refer to them as suicide bombers. It's not really propaganda unless you think suicide is a moral action -- or if you think suicide in the process of commiting murder is a moral action. I say suicide bomber carries more information because it explains the manner in which the murder was carried forth. Everyone knows that a murder is taking place when the term "suicide bomber" is being used.

I'm not defending the action in any way. I simply feel uneasy with the term "homocide bomber" because it seems artifical and propagandist. Just my opinion and you are certainly welcome to yours.
| Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
^^^
I guess this is why we have the more generic term of "terrorist" to go hand in hand with these bombers...
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

doctortobe
Apr 27 2004, 12:54 PM
But which is the greater wrong?

I think understand your point, that "suicide bomber" emphasizes the act of suicide over the act of homicide. I think that's legetimate. However, the term "suicide bomber" has been used for so long that it has become the accepted term for the act of strapping a bomb to your chest and blowing up in a pubic place so as to kill other people. So, when everyone knows that suicide bomber means this, it seems (to me) artificial and propagandist to all of the sudden change the terminology.
| Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
But in the Muslem world, taking your own life while killing innocents is considered moral, heroic even. But when you get right down to it, they are commiting murder, and they are commiting a whole lot more murder then they are suicide.

That is a FACT, not opinion. Why would you want to name a horrid act like this in a light that makes it seem heroic in the enemies' eyes? It is murder, plain and simple.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

doctortobe
Apr 27 2004, 01:27 PM
But in the Muslem world, taking your own life while killing innocents is considered moral, heroic even. But when you get right down to it, they are commiting murder, and they are commiting a whole lot more murder then they are suicide.

That is a FACT, not opinion. Why would you want to name a horrid act like this in a light that makes it seem heroic in the enemies' eyes? It is murder, plain and simple.

That's not exactly true. In the Muslim world suicide is forbidden. The Muslims refer to suicide bombers as martyrs. Those are FACTS. So, I don't buy the argument that the term suicide is somehow equivilent to heroic.
| Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
Ah, but you see the act of becoming a martyr has nothing to do with killing other people. It is willingly sacrificing yourself rather then giving up your beliefs. Now, that in itself is not suicide. If the Muslem community does consider the suicide bombers to be martyrs, yet they are not commiting suicide, therefore the term suicide bomber is not an accurate description of the action being carried out.

Since murder is involved and not suicide, the term homicide bomber IS the most accurate term to apply to the attacks.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
:ZZZZZ:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
somerled
Apr 27 2004, 08:42 PM
:ZZZZZ:

Another enlightened comment from Somerled
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus