Classify suicide Bombers

Out of curiosity,how would you classify suicide Bombers


  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Idiots.

Generally speaking, if I was figting for my freedom I would want to try and make sure I saw it. I also don't find someone who blows themselves up particularly terrorising.

Also, good to see some nice flame bait topics.
 

johnnyq1233

Distinguished
Aug 15, 2007
1,233
0
19,460
Stupid Idiots!!!!
They're like the kid you talked into doing something crazy at school for a chocolait bar....and they did it!!!

This is how valuable a person you are...we'll strap a bomb on you and you walk into this place and push the button....then you'll get all these virgins and you'll be free (of life)... Umm....could I see the pictures of these virgins first?

What ever happened to lead by example.....if the leaders of these groups followed that principle we would not have to worry about bombings anymore....They're cowards and get everone else to do their work!
 
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?
 
Isn't it strange that these reports of explodo-tities comes just at a time when they needed a bit more public support on the full body scanners... I mean screw public opinion and civil rights, we have exploding boobies to contend with now.
 
Na, just turn the focker up and get higher resolution nude pictures of your co workers... hmm.. that's another interesting one, it does not store your image yet that guy at heathrow was able to print out his workmate.
 

graywolf

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2010
869
0
19,060


Except that they blow up other innocent people with them. Didn't you notice that?
 

graywolf

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2010
869
0
19,060
So you weren't upset by 9/11/ because, after all, the suicide bombers were blowing themselves up? And the thousands they've blown up in Spain, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan? This is comparable to drunk driving?

I'm leaving this discussion.
 

:pfff: Not the same thing. And you shouldn't need me to tell you why ...


A sizable portion of the world does ban booze. Or tries to. I work in one of those places - Saudi Arabia.
 
It's still a meaningless death. The reaction of a government to an apparent threat should be proportionate. Banning the sale of Alcohol would doubtless save more lives than body scanners at airports. What I am saying is that the reaction is to a threat that I and many others do not see as that high, the inconvenience it imposes on everyday life for so many people is not justified.

We had lots of IRA bombings in the UK, they were horrible and detestable instances but we managed to reach peace without the level of control that today's leaders seem to think is required. If you took the current US legislation on terrorist funding and applied it at the time of the hight of the Irish troubles and Gerry Adams visit then a large number of high profile US people would be locked up for funding terrorists.

We need to live, by destroying our liberties we surrender to our oppressors, terrorist or governmental.



 


Where the hell did I say I was not saddened by it?

What I am saying is that there are other things that we could do as a planet that would save more lives than would be lost if we did nothing about the suicide bombers. It's hard cold maths, something a lot of people don't like looking at.
 

doive1231

Distinguished
Jul 17, 2007
631
0
18,990
Sad people who have grown up knowing that it is wrong to kill yet have been brainwashed to the extent that they believe that they will be rewarded for killing.

Morons.
 
Indeed, many would argue that suicide bombers, terrorists, whatever you want to call them are the more likely to win battles against armies as they are the ones who want to fight and die.

Whilst having superior arms and tech is all well and good, if you do not have the will to win then it is all for nothing. How many soldiers would refuse to return home if the government decided to pull them out?

Pitt that against how many suicide bombers would stop fighting if ordered to by those that send them? I would imagine that the chances of soldiers refusing to stay behind to fight a worthy cause will be non existant while the bombers will gladly keep fighting on their own.

Something to think about although I still think the way they fight is bloody stupid. It would be far better to rig up a basic catapult as propel the bombs to there destination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.