Actually, I had perceived you trying to get a rise out of… well, not me, but gobear, possibly. No matter. Believe it or not, it is possible to write off a society that supports or does not sufficiently condemn behaviour one considers abhorrent. Whether or not that claim is logical hardly matters, since we make illogical claims all the time. Of course the average Palestinian shmoe trying to feed his family is not part of the problem, but there is an elaborate hierarchy and support system of terrorists who are. Their bloodlust is indeed fucked up and a society that doesn’t go to great strides to eliminate them when they are clearly doing more harm to the society than good is also fucked up, though to a lesser degree. As an analogy, I’d consider the Khmer Rouge and the Nazi party (yeah, yeah, Godwin, whatever) to represent extreme examples of fucked-upness (see my earlier definition). Each of these organizations enjoyed some support from some elements of their societies, to the point where they built up sufficient power that a huge price had to be paid to dislodge them. In the case of Hamas, similar in many ways, that particular price has not yet been paid, but it will, sooner or later.
For the sake of this thread, though, the OP was reacting to the Kafka-esque surreality of a suicide bomber being modest about her appearance. The fact that such a bizarre quandry could even be contemplated is a symptom of a society that has slipped into deep irrationality.
We shake hands, part corners, and bid each other “adue” untill our next meeting in this battlefield that is known as the SDMB (maybe even on the same side). How about it?
So, did this woman change her mind about bombing because she didn’t want to wear makeup, or she didn’t want to kill innocent people? Or did she just decide she wasn’t ready to die? Was she fervent in her beliefs about wearing makeup, or did she just wimp out? Has there been any more information on this that would accurately depict where she was coming from?
Hell, it’s not like Yassar told her to get her bikini line waxed (Playboy style). She’s basically a scared little piece of humanity that just might be questioning the loonies that try to control the place.
Toast every one of the knuckle-heads! Toast Mecca! Toast Medina!
I, Guinastasia, notoriously left wing, will shock everyone in agreeing with Jodi and gobear as I state that yes, Palestinian society is quite fucked up.
That’s not to say I don’t feel for them, or that I don’t have problems with Israel too. But their society is pretty damn screwy.
That doesn’t mean that I want to kill them, or hurt them, or wish them ill. It means, I think they’re ignorant, and in need of some serious changes.
Thank you, Guin, you echo my sentiments exactly. I have no animus against Palestinians qua Palestinians. i wish them well. But the suicide bombings, the Jew hatred, and the refusal to compromise have got to go. I don’t have the answers to the West Bank quation, but killing innocents, on both sides, has to end.
bolding mine
Long assed thread which I’ll admit I haven’t read all of yet so forgive me if this already came up but think of Dresden or the fire bombing of Toyko or the 2nd nuke on Japan these where all “messages” to a enemy not just 100% tactical targets. Does nothing mean nothing? Or is it just when you disagree with what happened?
And there’s a complete difference in emphasis in the phrases;
Suicide focuses on the death of the murderer
Homicide focuses on the death of the victims.
I care about the people being murdered, I don’t care about the evil thugs who are killing themselves, hence emphasis on the word “Homicide” so as to draw attention to the victims, not the murderers.
I found milroyj’s use of the words “Pray tell” (which could be construed in a mocking tone) and emphasis on what I would think. As a not-so-clever hostile overture. And that by answering I would be contributing to a search for a sticking point on which an argument can be projected under the guise of precision. Of course it could be a fact that I completely misdiagnosed it and milroyj’s comments were completely innocent. Either way:
Since both statements are true (murder and suicide is taking place) it would even more accurate to state Murder/Suicide bombings, of course a person would not be wrong to call it a either a Murder or Suicide bombing.
If morality is your goal calling it a Homocide Bombing would be more accurate, however, if you want to underline how “fucked up” the bombers mentaliy is, denoting the suicide part would be better. Either way, chosing one and in cutting the other part out it focuses more on YOUR line of thinking, not to accuratly desribe the act in question.
No Efrem, I wasn’t mocking you, or trying to pick a fight. I was just looking for a little precision in the language, as Fenris pointed out. You objected to the use of “suicide bombings”, so I asked what your alternative was.
I happen to disagree with your suggestion of Murder-Suicides, as it implies an extra victim, or at least gives undeserved recognition to the murderer. To take a recent case, the grandmother with her 18 month old grandson were victims, the bomber was the murderer, not a victim. Two victims, NOT three.
Okay this whole thing was a big misunderstand. I didn’t mean to protray my comments as a objection to the term “suicide bombings” I meant it as an objection to the term “fucked up” to describe socities.
I though it was a way to describe the bomber as a victim of his/her own hate and stupidity, not as an innocent victim. Regardless, it is also a suicide which accuratly explains the situtaion, but does not credit the bomber with a sense of morality.
Well, there you go–that’s the point where your point of view diverges from just about everyone else on this board. The murderer is not a “victim” in any sense of the word. He or she is a murderer, period, and those participants in a culture that endorses murder are accessories to murder (and “fucked up” to boot). You seem to discount the elements of both personal responsibility and societal responsibility. If the person isn’t responsible (as implied by your term “victim”) and the society isn’t responsible, then who’s left?
Are you suggesting that he or she should be credited with a sense of morality?