I think I'd be a suicide bomber because I think that Western capitalism, if unchecked, has the qualities of an disease which degrades culture, and culture is worth dying and worth killing for.[edit]
If done without care, cultivating business communities by opening fragile markets to international competiton is cultural genocide. Sending over Chevron or Haliburton is not the same giving the indians blankets with pox on them, but economics is a muscular force that can easily destroy the simple things, the beautiful things, that are tied to religion and community. If I thought that these things were threatened, I think I may become a suicide bomber.
You don't actually really believe that suicide bombers ( and other terrorists) hate America for no reason or for our "freedom," do you?
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't think of any circumstances in which I'd be a suicide bomber. If something is worth fighting for, then I prefer to fight for it, with hope. I don't think killing people because of ideas or ideology is ever justified. If I were to die for a cause, it would definitely be because the other side killed me, or because I died doing something dangerous that was intended to accomplish something good that seemed worth the risk.
Killing to defend or protect is something I would do, but in that case I wouldn't want to die too. I'd want to try to stay alive to keep defending.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think suicide bombers must have three things, hopelessness and sense of helplessness about their lives, burning anger at someone they think is responsible, and a feeling that their death will accomplish something good and bring them honor, bring safety to their families, and hope of better things after death.
I don't know that for sure, but that is what I feel when I try to understand what it must be like to be a suicide bomber.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That seems a fair evaluation. I know that I feel very strongly about a number of things (so strongly that I could see myself going to jail over them - though maybe I'm just falsely "boasting"). But I don't think I could see myself ending my own life unless I had that utter hopelessness.
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't think I could see myself ending my own life unless I had that utter hopelessness.
The point of being a suicide bomber is almost always about killing other people, as well as yourself. Otherwise, what has your death 'achieved'? Usually, such victims end up being civilians who happen to be passing by. So it's not just about being a suicide. It's also about being a murderer.
No. Just...no.
And just because you would kill yourself in the process does not make it any more noble. Killing the innocent is a stupid, wretched way of dealing with a percieved injustice.
But yeah, Tatiana, that's pretty much what I'd imagine it would be like.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: It's a good exercise.
I think I'd be a suicide bomber because I think that Western capitalism, if unchecked, has the qualities of an disease which degrades culture, and culture is worth dying for.
Being a suicide bomber isn't about what you're willing to die for. It's about making other people die for it. And the vile self-centeredness that would let you come up with reasons for being a suicide bomber without even considering the victims makes me want to puke.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fine. So who would your victims be, when you kill yourself to prevent 'cultural genocide'? How would you decide who deserved to be blown to bits for your cause, and how would you make sure that no-one else got hurt? Or would that not be an issue?
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It strikes me as very Godwin-like to say, but I think it's really appropriate here: the Klan in the 60s thought culture was worth killing for, too.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
A cultural genocide is an awful thing. The killing of an innocent is an awful thing.
They are incomparable. If the company in question refuses to answer my phone calls, driving a truck of explosives through the front door may make them reconsider. It's a tragic choice, but that's the human condition.
Dag,
The clan and the nazies, and they weren't wrong. They just picked the wrong cultures. Our ideas of freedom and the rectitude of democracy are all part of the cultural fabric, and we are proudly training hundreds of thousands of people to kill for them.
____________
Unless you all know something that I don't, everyone here is going to die and knows that everyone else is going to die, so the most pressing question concerns how we live, not how to avoiding death, and to a large extent, the quality of our life involves the maintenaince of those sacred and revered aspects of our culture.
If those come under attack. *shrugs* I wonder what was going through Marvin Gaye's dad's head when he shot him.
There are really two ideas that need to be expressed.
Why I'd be a suicide bomber. and Why I would support, recruit, or send out suicide bombers.
I think most suicide bombers are, to a degree, {I still consider them responsible for their actions} victims of propaganda, poverty, and desperation. If someone blows himself or herself up in Israel, s/he get virgins in heaven and their family gets a nice paycheck. I really don't think ideology or politics is as much of a factor as is being presented in this thread.
Some suicide bombers are just kids (teens) or mentally ill.
Those who encourage and fund suicide bombers are probably more motivated by political agendas and religion. Actually, I suspect they use religion rile up the "lower class."
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not so sure I'd post this sort of thing on a public forum. I'm not overly paranoid, but a lot of people/the government takes statements such as your thread title seriously.
Are kamikazes considered suicide bombers? They are giving up their lives, vis-a-vis an explosion or their suicide, to kill the lives of their enemy for a cause. Granted their enemies were actually engaging them in battle, so maybe that's where the difference lies. I think Americans often tend to them of them as being sworn by duty and devoted to the ideals of Japan rather than delusional, hateful, psychopaths, which is usually the perception of the Islamic ones--seems like to our culture, the distinction is how your enemies are behaving (the context) rather than the action in and of itself.
My opinion is that anyone who participates in suicide bombing is beneath contempt for the same reasons as Tatiana, starLisa, and Bella stated.
Posts: 484 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Irami, what you're saying is "unchecked capitalism is a enemy I would coldly and deliberately kill innocent people to defeat."
The only groups I consider serious enough enemies to even consider the possibility are ones that coldly and deliberately kill innocent people.
You've got to get out of your little brain-bubble, man. It's eating your head. For someone who's so incredibly concerned about figuring out the moral thing to do, I think you'd do well to avoid arguments that lead to sociopathy.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: For someone who's so incredibly concerned about figuring out the moral thing to do, I think you'd do well to avoid arguments that lead to sociopathy.
quote:Are kamikazes considered suicide bombers? They are giving up their lives, vis-a-vis an explosion or their suicide, to kill the lives of their enemy for a cause. Granted their enemies were actually engaging them in battle, so maybe that's where the difference lies. I think Americans often tend to them of them as being sworn by duty and devoted to the ideals of Japan rather than delusional, hateful, psychopaths, which is usually the perception of the Islamic ones--seems like to our culture, the distinction is how your enemies are behaving (the context) rather than the action in and of itself.
I think most people hold a very, very different opinion of people who are willing to get themselves killed attacking a military target (e.g. kamikaze pilots, U.S. soldiers [in most situations]) than people who get themselves killed trying to kill civilians (e.g. suicide bombers).
It's important, though, to distinguish between "civilians" and "innocents," as I'd imagine many suicide bombers think their targets are guilty enough to warrant death simply by existing and contributing to an ideal they wholeheartedly disagree with. This thread's title reads more to me like "I'm willing to kill both civilians and myself in order to achieve a goal," in a more sensationalist way.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or how about: "Why I'd fly airplanes into office buildings and blow up teenagers in a night club."
Posts: 195 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
How I am, and how I was raised I would not become a suicide bomber. But, if I was raised under the right conditions I am sure it is possible I would think it was alright. I think people can do more good for their cause whatever it be if they stay alive.
I do not think suicide bombers are in any way brave. They are so cowardly that they kill themselves and avoid all consequences of their actions. Then they go off to heaven and get 72 virgins or whatever the number is. Suicide bombing s cowardly and disgusting and I would never do it. It is the action of a weak person.
Posts: 473 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think there is any cause such that I would deliberately sacrifice myself for it, with a 100% chance of dying. There are many causes for which I'd take a risk, even a considerable one, and even more causes for which I'd kill, but cold-bloodedly killing myself? Nah. I don't care how many theists I take with me.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why the hell would you want to be a suicide bomber? Do you value your life, the lives of other people and your family that would ache for you when you are gone? There's nothing worth dying for like that, nothing. If a person is so concerned with the spread of captilism why not first of all, use their BRAINS. And I don't mean listening to idiots and hypocrits like Mao who could care less about his people starving if he could build an atomic bomb, I mean thinking of a solution that works, that really works and doesn't destroy lives and other people! Are you out your damn mind? How the hell are you supposed to effect things when you have people angry and enraged and crying from senseless acts of violence? Why the hell don't people THINK about these things? No one will sympathize with a cause regardless of how noble it is if it's stained in blood!
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's an interesting topic, Irami. I'm not appalled by the attempt to think about it, as some people seem to be. I think it's only wise to try and understand them as much as we can.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I forgot to do it in my previous post, but I'd like to offer a warm Hello to all of our friends at the Dept of Homeland Security. Welcome to Hatrack! Feel free to lurk around a bit before posting, and you may want to check out this Newbie Guide Thread, which will help you become active and respected members of the community.
posted
Irami, this thread is causing me to lose respect for you. I find the idea of the slaughter of innocents to be abhorrent and unjustifiable. I do not believe that if you are not a part of the solution that you are a part of the problem. I do believe that there are people who are innocent and uninvolved, and that indiscriminate killing will necessarily put these people at risk.
I believe that there is evil in the world. I believe that suicide bombers are a part of the evil, not a solution to it. I am having difficulty mustering sympathy for your point of view.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not appalled by the attempt to think about it. I'm appalled by the thought that Irami would blow up a schoolbus because he thought capitalism was harshing his cultural appreciation.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Sending over Chevron or Haliburton is not the same giving the indians blankets with pox on them, but economics is a muscular force that can easily destroy the simple things, the beautiful things, that are tied to religion and community. If I thought that these things were threatened, I think I may become a suicide bomber.
Clearly, by your lights, these things are threatened. So why aren't you a suicide bomber?
quote:Unless you all know something that I don't, everyone here is going to die and knows that everyone else is going to die, so the most pressing question concerns how we live, not how to avoiding death, and to a large extent, the quality of our life involves the maintenaince of those sacred and revered aspects of our culture.
This is retarded. I can and do exert great effort to avoid death, not in the sense of avoiding it altogether but in the sense of putting it off. And I would sacrifice quite a lot of quality-of-life in order to do so.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If by "suicide bomber" you mean someone who intentionally targets innocents -- unlike, say, someone out to throw themselves into an enemy military base or something during wartime -- then there is no justifiable reason at all. Not only is it an unconscionable act, but I believe you would be damaging your own message. Why would anyone want to embrace your culture if it encourages harm to the innocent? Let's see, which culture should I go with. The one that brings me movies, or the one that blows up kids? It's not an act of honor, glory, or patriotism. It's an act of fear and blind hatred, and that's not the sort of representative I'd want.
If you're defending a culture, you should make it look worth defending.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a reader of the Old Testament, I must say that it has set forth certain conditions when killing a nation is justified, because the "good guys" kill a few nations. And God himself wipes out a few cities, and even once killed off everyone except the contents of a boat.
However, do the Old Testament justifications hold weight for modern day suicide bombing? Is God really commanding people to blow themselves up to kill capitalists for the same reasons he killed in the past?
The capitalist culture that encourages and even protects evils also protect more righteousness and freedom than cultures that seek to enforce righteousness with the constant threat of extreme punishment. Without the ability to choose right and wrong, nobody gets credit for choosing right. If you are under the constant threat of imminent death or pain, that, my friend, is slavery.
quote:Clearly, by your lights, these things are threatened. So why aren't you a suicide bomber?
It's not my religion or community at stake. I'm not metaphysically invested 4th century Islam, in fact, my ontology sets me dead set against some of the cultural practices. ___
To draw a benign parallel, think about the Last Samurai. There is an extent to which aggressive global economy makes unescapable demands on politics, religion, and community. If these demands make it impossible, or even unlikely, to obtain a sense of self-respect for an individual, and for the way of life that makes sense to that individual, then I can see the attraction of suicide bombing, even as an act of compassion, if that action is going to some how stave off the desolation suffered by ones fellow dispossessed.
quote:You're disgusting.
If you read the Eichmann transcripts, or even Himmler's later expectations of life after the war, or the run up into the war, these guys were living in another world. They weren't hot blooded, malicious, or crazy, they were, however, firmly ensconced in a myth I find despicable.
They weren't insane or malicious. They were, however, deeply otherly sane. I think the same can be said about Ken Lay.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hate to break it to you two, but Homeland Security was aware of Hatrack LONG before this thread. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And God himself wipes out a few cities, and even once killed off everyone except the contents of a boat.
As this is one of the many reasons I am not a Christian, probably not a defense that will work well... Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:then I can see the attraction of suicide bombing, even as an act of compassion, if that action is going to some how stave off the desolation suffered by ones fellow dispossessed.
Irami, I'm curious. Is the suicide bomber in your hypothetical example not actually blowing anything but himself up? Because you keep speaking of this as a symbolic act -- like, say, the old Buddhist monk "tradition" of self-immolation -- and ignoring the possibility that someone else might be injured.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
For me to be a suicide bomber, it'd have to be a seriously out of this world situation. As in aliens coming to Earth or something. Like in Independence Day, when the crop duster pilot guy has to fly his plane into the alien's anti-monument gun.
But short of that, I'm kinda drawing a blank.
-----------------------------
For those of you who equate "suicide bombing" with "willfully killing myself and civilians to achieve a goal," (or something similar), how does that play out with suicide attacks against military targets?
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: And God himself wipes out a few cities, and even once killed off everyone except the contents of a boat.
As this is one of the many reasons I am not a Christian, probably not a defense that will work well...
I mention it because even within the religious context where killing is allowed, suicide bombing as it is practiced today is clearly evil because it is done in the name of cleansing and making people righteous. And my point is that it does no such thing and never can but rather enslaves people.
I was assuming Irami was coming at this with a foundation of religion. But it seems to me he isn't, which to me, is worse as it means he has no respect for life. What is culture that it is more important that life? Without life, there is no culture. Killing innocent people to save a culture puts such a burden of guilt on that culture, I can't imagine it surviving at all.
Posts: 1209 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even with the Dresden firebomb in our history, I think that most Americans do okay suffering the guilt.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps he'd say that without culture, there is no meaningful life? And he'd have a point, at that, but I do think suicide bombings against civilians are the worst possible means of protecting our culture. Now, if you had an oppressive government whose leaders reached for their pistols when they heard the word 'culture', then sure, you might accomplish something by blowing up military bases. (Not civilians; that just feeds the propaganda machine, and quite rightly so.) But against capitalism? Pff.
The thing about a marketplace of ideas is that, if your idea is not up to snuff, it snuffs it. Art that cannot support itself is not art, but elitist snobbery; if it needs subsidies - whether of public money, or of dedicated martyrs - then it has already lost its life. Personally I'm willing to do without ballerinas and opera; not that I object if Irami wants to pay for them, but I do object most strongly if he tears down the current economic system to make me listen to his particular favourites. I have the freedom to make my own culture, and what do I care whether some inner-city child never gets any further than "See Spot run"? Let 'em eat Big Macs.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I think suicide bombers must have three things, hopelessness and sense of helplessness about their lives, burning anger at someone they think is responsible, and a feeling that their death will accomplish something good and bring them honor, bring safety to their families, and hope of better things after death.
Suicide bombers dont become them because they are hopeless nor do they need a burning anger within to accomplish something. Most of the time, a suicide bomber is someone who believes in a cause and misguidedly believes that his suicide, and subsequent murders, will lead to a victory in the war they fought. Cultural relativism tends to play a major role here too, we hear mothers all the time on television who hope that one day their son or daughter will become a suicide bomber because they see it as a noble death in the service of a cause. And while I do think that hopelessness and the promise of an amazing afterlife play parts in some, in many, its simply about an ideolgy that allows this type of warring device. Think of Japanese Kamikaze pilots, they were suicide bombers, technically, and they didnt fight for virgins, the afterlife, or anything like that. They simply fought for an ideology, they fought for Japan, and they fought for what was really important to them, family. In that sense, you are never going to stop suicide bombers who fight for an ideology, you are never going to stop people who fight for a cause because that cause is more powerful than any bomb or leaflet we can drop. Moreover, its never as simple as "they are murderers", its never as simple as they are uneducated or desperate. Some of the smartest people in the world are members of Al Qaeda, but in that, lies where the suicide bomber truly resides. Its where their ideology leads them, its what they seek, and though disgusting to even consider, the answer here is freedom. Oppression will always lead to ideology, and that will always lead to violent resistence.
I know that sounds like I am defending a suicide bomber, but trust me, that is not my intention. My intention is to simply point out that its never black/white, its never absolute, there is always a shade of grey. And only by understanding the mechanics behind the suicide bomber, can we learn how to show people that they do not need to perpetrate these attacks. We will never stop someone who is determined to die for a cause, but we CAN stop people from WANTING too, and in that lies both knowledge and understanding.
Posts: 457 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: Even with the Dresden firebomb in our history, I think that most Americans do okay suffering the guilt.
I don't feel guilty that we fought Hitler, a cold blooded mass murderer. As I've already said, I'm religious and there are religious justifications for killing an entire nation, if that nation threatens to take away your ability to be righteous and follow God.
If American capitalism (American businesses) have become the new Hitler, there are other ways of stopping them rather than destroying the country.
My guess is someone pissed you off. Its natrual to want vengance. But what you are talking about is something else.
Posts: 1209 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
