# How Is This So Different From Suicide Bombers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 29, 2006, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090 "2006-01-29T17:11:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/21 "2006-01-30T15:01:49Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Another is the so called rules of war, which by default a sucide bomber must violate (non-uniformed combatants = spies). It would seem that we have stretched the rules of war and you ratify the stretch. We now claim the right to conduct a missile attack in the populated places of nations with which we are not at war for the purpose of killing a criminal who is a danger to us and not the people of that nation. And we claim this right based on what purports to be information that the criminal is at at a specific building at a specific time in that populated place whether or not there are other people in the building or area. Our potential gain, based on information that can never be certain allows us to attack their city and it’s population? I call that arrogance and not war. ---
**Author:** ![booklyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a88e57/32.png) [@booklyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/booklyn)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/22 "2006-01-30T15:42:38Z")
Also what about phospherous weapons? Depleted uranium shells? Land mines? Talk about the gift that keeps on giving… ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2006, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/23 "2006-01-30T17:14:59Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > We now claim the right to conduct a missile attack in the populated places of nations with which we are not at war for the purpose of killing a criminal who is a danger to us and not the people of that nation. I wouldn’t necessarily agree that al-Queda terrorists are not a danger to Pakistan. Musharref, I believe, was recently asked specifically about the attack under discussion. While he did not support it, he did mention in his response that al-Queda terrorists were **not** Pakistani, and were **not** welcome in his country. And that he was surprised that no Western journalists seemed interested in that part of the situation. It was discussed on Bill Bennett’s radio program this morning, and occurred (IIRC) at the Davos conference. I can see if I can dig up a cite, if anyone seriously needs it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2006, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/24 "2006-01-31T03:30:38Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I wouldn’t necessarily agree that al-Queda terrorists are not a danger to Pakistan. > > Musharref, I believe, was recently asked specifically about the attack under discussion. While he did not support it, he did mention in his response that al-Queda terrorists were **not** Pakistani, and were **not** welcome in his country. And that he was surprised that no Western journalists seemed interested in that part of the situation. > > It was discussed on Bill Bennett’s radio program this morning, and occurred (IIRC) at the Davos conference. I can see if I can dig up a cite, if anyone seriously needs it. > > Regards, > Shodan Well, they are certainly a danger to Pakistanis when and if we get a tip, legitimate or otherwise, as to a possible location. In that case look out. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that few in the US seem to care that we conduct air raids agains the homes of people in countries with which we are not at war. GW, you’re doin’ a great job. ---
**Author:** ![kniz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c37758/32.png) [@kniz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kniz)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/25 "2006-02-01T01:58:00Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > Our potential gain, based on information that can never be certain allows us to attack their city and it’s population? I call that arrogance and not war. _ **City?** _ all I saw was a few buildings and only one of those was hit. The locals complained about civilians being the target, until they found out there were four known terrorists among the dead. This was so far out in the boonies that the news services were unable to get anyone there to report for quite some time. In Iraq the suicide bombers do target the police and soldiers, but if you consider what has happened in Bali, Madrid, London, New York, etc. the targets were civilians. How about the bombing in Jordan that wiped out so many in a wedding party? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/26 "2006-02-01T02:25:42Z")
> [@kniz](#): > > _ **City?** _ all I saw was a few buildings and only one of those was hit. The locals complained about civilians being the target, until they found out there were four known terrorists among the dead. This was so far out in the boonies that the news services were unable to get anyone there to report for quite some time. Do we have any unbiased proof of that ? Someone unconnected with America or Pakistan ? > [@kniz](#): > > In Iraq the suicide bombers do target the police and soldiers, but if you consider what has happened in Bali, Madrid, London, New York, etc. the targets were civilians. How about the bombing in Jordan that wiped out so many in a wedding party? You mean like the Iraqi wedding we bombed ? ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/27 "2006-02-01T02:31:34Z")
> [@kniz](#): > > _ **City?** _ all I saw was a few buildings and only one of those was hit. The locals complained about civilians being the target, until they found out there were four known terrorists among the dead. This was so far out in the boonies that the news services were unable to get anyone there to report for quite some time. Oh well Hell, in that cae they deserve to be bombed. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/28 "2006-02-01T15:40:34Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > And lastly, I somehow had hopes that our methods had advanced over those of 1943 by as much as has our technolgy in the intervening 60 or so years. Well, they have. We’re no longer firebombing entire towns, or dropping anywhere near the amount of ordinance a typical bombing raid dropped in 1943. The thing is, though, if you fire a missile at any site, you’re going to have collateral damage, and innocents are probably going to be hurt or killed. That’s true of offensive operations generally, though. And if we had sent in troops to capture or kill the al-Qaeda people, in addition to the tactical and operational problems, and the risk that our soldiers would get injured or killed, civilians likely would have been hurt or killed then, too. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/29 "2006-02-01T15:51:45Z")
> [@kniz](#): > > _ **City?** _ all I saw was a few buildings and only one of those was hit. [Three houses were destroyed](http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SP291705.htm): > [@](#): > > The U.S. attack has enraged many Pakistanis and the government of President Pervez Musharraf is having to cope with protests against the deaths of 18 civilians when the missiles hit three houses in Damadola, close to the Afghan border. Though your account may be more reliable, since you were an eyewitness. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/30 "2006-02-01T16:29:52Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > Well, they have. We’re no longer firebombing entire towns, or dropping anywhere near the amount of ordinance a typical bombing raid dropped in 1943. We firebombed Fallujah. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/31 "2006-02-01T16:40:46Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > We firebombed Fallujah. Was it largescale targeting of civilian targets, though, on the level of the bombing of Hamburg or Tokyo? I know we used gasoline bombs and white phosphorus against concentrated troop positions on serveral occasions throughout the war. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/32 "2006-02-01T18:52:51Z")
It doesn’t take courage to be a suicide bomber. It takes fanatacism. The two things are utterly different. Fanatacism does not require bravery; the fanatic is in the grip of an over-riding obsession which drives him forward. He may well be a coward in areas which do not spark his fanaticism. Soldiers on the field of battle are not usually driven by fanatacism. They have to find real courage. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/33 "2006-02-01T22:54:58Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > That’s true of offensive operations generally, though. And if we had sent in troops to capture or kill the al-Qaeda people, in addition to the tactical and operational problems, and the risk that our soldiers would get injured or killed, civilians likely would have been hurt or killed then, too. So the alternative to bombing populated places in countries with which we are not at war is to send _our_ military ground forces into a country with which we are not at war? > [@aldiboronti](#): > > It doesn’t take courage to be a suicide bomber. It takes fanatacism. The two things are utterly different. Fanatacism does not require bravery; the fanatic is in the grip of an over-riding obsession which drives him forward. He may well be a coward in areas which do not spark his fanaticism. Soldiers on the field of battle are not usually driven by fanatacism. They have to find real courage. Drone pilots have all the courage they need, or that anyone could want. In my humble opinion, claiming that you have the right to bomb populated places in other countries based on intelligence which may or may not be reliable is right next door to fanaticism in pursuit of a goal. Four terrorists were reportedly killed, although I don’t know just how reliable that information is. I wonder how many additional terrorist recruits actions like this produce. And I wonder how long it will be before all cooperation in gathering anti-terroris intelligence in those countries disappears. It might very well be like the fable of the dragon’s teeth. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/34 "2006-02-01T23:27:01Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > So the alternative to bombing populated places in countries with which we are not at war is to send _our_ military ground forces into a country with which we are not at war? It’s certainly AN alternative. Whether it’s the best or not, who knows. This specific situation is a difficult one without good answers, because this region the al Qaeda people are in is, while part of Pakistan, not controlled by the Pakistani government. It’s not the situation where Bush can call up the Pakistani government and say, “Hey, you’ve got a terrorist cell in the town of X that both our governments are looking for. We’d appreciate it if you could arrest them. Let us know if you need help.” The area of Pakistan where these people were is ruled by local leaders who don’t like the Pakistani government and ignore it. So, even if Pakistan wanted to capture these people, they couldn’t. Another alternative, of course, is not to do anything, but that lets the al-Qaeda members continue to operate freely. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2006, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/35 "2006-02-01T23:41:49Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > It’s certainly AN alternative. Whether it’s the best or not, who knows. This specific situation is a difficult one without good answers, because this region the al Qaeda people are in is, while part of Pakistan, not controlled by the Pakistani government. It’s not the situation where Bush can call up the Pakistani government and say, “Hey, you’ve got a terrorist cell in the town of X that both our governments are looking for. We’d appreciate it if you could arrest them. Let us know if you need help.” The area of Pakistan where these people were is ruled by local leaders who don’t like the Pakistani government and ignore it. So, even if Pakistan wanted to capture these people, they couldn’t. > > Another alternative, of course, is not to do anything, but that lets the al-Qaeda members continue to operate freely. It’s possible that you’re right as to conditions. However it’s hard to know that the situation is as you describe and I do know that the first thing the US administration thinks of is to grab the biggest club they can find and start flailing around. I do believe that by these methods we multiply terrorist recuits faster than we can eliminate them and increase the alienation of the outside world. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/36 "2006-02-03T16:27:17Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > It’s certainly AN alternative. Whether it’s the best or not, who knows. This specific situation is a difficult one without good answers, because this region the al Qaeda people are in is, while part of Pakistan, not controlled by the Pakistani government. It’s not the situation where Bush can call up the Pakistani government and say, “Hey, you’ve got a terrorist cell in the town of X that both our governments are looking for. We’d appreciate it if you could arrest them. Let us know if you need help.” The area of Pakistan where these people were is ruled by local leaders who don’t like the Pakistani government and ignore it. So, even if Pakistan wanted to capture these people, they couldn’t. > > Another alternative, of course, is not to do anything, but that lets the al-Qaeda members continue to operate freely. Pakistan regularly mounts large military operations in that region. Al-Q don’t get to operate freely. And yes - if the USA has a suspicion that something is going on the correct response is to let Pakistan deal with it. I’d have US operated and funded C130’s with Pakistan Special Forces paratroopers on constant flyover just for that purpose. The correct response is never to drop bombs on civilians in an allied country in the certain knowledge that innocent people will be killed, even if you wish shrapnel with the magic ability to only shred your intended target. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090/37 "2006-02-03T17:05:37Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > Another alternative, of course, is not to do anything, but that lets the al-Qaeda members continue to operate freely. Fortunately, it is not the only alternative. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-this-so-different-from-suicide-bombers/342090.md?page=1)