Classify suicide Bombers

[audiovoodoo]

I think you nailed it with motivation. Look at Nam as a prime example of where all the kit in the world does little good against a highly motivated (and manipulated) foe.

 

[jsc]

I think you nailed it with motivation. Look at Nam as a prime example of where all the kit in the world does little good against a highly motivated (and manipulated) foe.

Bad example.

The U.S. never lost a battle in Viet Nam - not even Tet. In fact, the Tet Offensive resulted in the destruction of the Viet Cong as a viable organization.

We lost the PR war.

 

[alyoshka]

As they have said in a lot of movies, " One man's terrorist, another man's patriot" or something on those lines, the the point of the matter is not who's a terrorist and who's a patriot. The whole point is the invasions of privacy..... don't you think??? anyone who is invading the secure shell of the egg we live in , has by society norms become a terrorist. Yet , what sovereign nations do when they go to war , in whatever name or under whatever claim, is again just terrorism, since that is certainly invading someones town , street or even homes on the basis of sheer brute force.
So basically, all wars and all the so called suicide bombers are just plain simple people , caught up in a frame of mind at a time in life when , I guess, they don't see any other light of hope other than the corridor of bright light (Quoted from NDEs) .
If I was to look at this from a very inner perspective, then , a lot of laws and bills passed by our leaders are, a very very close form of terrorizing it's own people.
So, like they say, charity begins at home, I guess, our political leaders are really following that rule...... of course the expense is always finally only paid by the common man.....and his family, the foot soldier and his family, although we never thanked the tax payers for making such wars of and on terror possible, cos basically he's only getting what he's paying for.....

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Bad example.

The U.S. never lost a battle in Viet Nam - not even Tet. In fact, the Tet Offensive resulted in the destruction of the Viet Cong as a viable organization.

We lost the PR war.

100% agreed.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I just finished watching the restored version of Humphrey Bogart & Katharine Hepburn in "The African Queen", which I have been patiently waiting for these last 6 or 7 years now. Their plan was to make "torpedoes" out of empty oxygen tanks and explosive gel, then ram a German warboat patrolling in a lake with the torpedoes sticking out of holes in the hull of their tiny 30 ft. boat. I guess that makes them terrorists, although since they planned to jump overboard at the last instant, they couldn't be considered "suicidal" 😛.

 

[audiovoodoo]

Bad example.

The U.S. never lost a battle in Viet Nam - not even Tet. In fact, the Tet Offensive resulted in the destruction of the Viet Cong as a viable organization.

We lost the PR war.

Which is the real battle is is not? Did America achieve what it set out to do, no. It might have won the battles but it still lost the war. Period.

 

[jsc]

True.

But the really tragic thing about the Viet Nam War is that it really didn't need to happen. And I'm not talking about getting in the middle of what was actually a civil war.

Right after WW II, a little guy named Nguyen Tat Thanh came to the US. All he wanted for Viet Nam was the same sort of protected status we gave the Phillipines. He wanted out from under the yoke of French colonialism.

Because the French were such wonderful allies :lol: in WW II, we sided with them. After they got their butts kicked, they persuaded the idiot Democrats (that would be Kennedy and his administration) to get involved. And the rest is history.

Oh, that little guy ... you probably know him as Ho Chi Minh.

Their plan was to make "torpedoes" out of empty oxygen tanks and explosive gel, then ram a German warboat patrolling in a lake with the torpedoes sticking out of holes in the hull of their tiny 30 ft. boat. I guess that makes them terrorists,

No. That makes them guerrillas or perhaps irregulars. It's all about the choice of targets. If they were planning on targeting a boatload of German civilians, that would make them terrorists.

 

[audiovoodoo]

Hmmm... now that story sounds an awful lot like a more recent tale in some middle eastern country does it not. Strange how as a society we just don't seem to learn much from the sad deaths of so many that have gone before us.

 

[audiovoodoo]

No. That makes them guerrillas or perhaps irregulars. It's all about the choice of targets. If they were planning on targeting a boatload of German civilians, that would make them terrorists.

Not "Unlawful combatants"? 😉

 

[Bruceification73]

Yes, but they were all good Catholics so they don't count do they. I mean it's not like lots of famous people in the USA gave Gerry A money to buy the semtex that blew my home town to pieces now is it?

nice.

Anyway, definitely terrorists, but with suspicious ties to various state-run agencies (mostly in the ME, but not all).

 

[Reynod]

This topic has been closed by Reynod