Suicide Bombings

[Fawkes]

What are your views on suicide bombings as a form of attack in a war? IF someone is willing to be certain to die for their cause, then suicide attacks make a lot of sense because you can take out a large number of the enemy at the loss of only one of yours.

[Concept]

and also it makes sense when being largely outnumbered like Al Qaida is with the US
i'm kinda mixed tho....too many innocents die usually but if it were directed more at the military or whatever apparatus they r fighting then its ok

[Dante666]

suicide bombing is bad publisity it shows people on the side of the bomber as mindless killers in the media. Also it has horrible mental reprocussions on everyone. Thats just my impression

[Comrade Marcel]

I hope to die via suicide bombing someday. Better than of old age (unless I win the lottery)! :lol:

[which doctor]

Most people who are suicide bombers are doing it largely because of religion, which of course is bad.

[metalero]

Deliverate suicide bombing will alienate support for your cause; but suicide bombing against a military brigade or unit is legitimate. It is tactic that's only worthy under extreme circumstances of military opression with no other means of resistance. It has been historically associated with religion, but japanese did it (as kamikaze) out of nationalism, and most people rather do it out of desperation.

[Springmeester]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2006 07:40 am
Deliverate suicide bombing will alienate support for your cause; but suicide bombing against a military brigade or unit is legitimate. It is tactic that's only worthy under extreme circumstances of military opression with no other means of resistance. It has been historically associated with religion, but japanese did it (as kamikaze) out of nationalism, and most people rather do it out of desperation.
I'm sorry but I fully disagree. There are MANY other forms of resistance and suicide bombings are by far the worst. I'm not that a big fan of Lenin but he wrote a very important lesson about this when he critizised the social-revolutionary's (of wich also Lenin's brother was a member). According to Lenin terrorist action is ALWAYS reactionary by nature because it doesn't get you one step closer towards the emancipation of the working classes. Only by organisation and carefull coordinated resistance will you accomplish anything.


suicide bombing is bad publisity it shows people on the side of the bomber as mindless killers in the media. Also it has horrible mental reprocussions on everyone. Thats just my impression

This is a beautiful trueism and it is very important to understand this. Here is a good example. We have all followed the progression of the resistance of the people of Oaxaca for some time now. I read the papers EVERY morning when I go to work and for 4 months they'd never mention anything about the resistance in Oaxaca. Untill one mornig. It was just a little article in the foreign section telling the Dutch people that some lunatics blew themselves up in Mexico-City in the name of freedom for Oaxaca. The media isn't interessted in the honest struggle of the oppressed for freedom, the media is only interested in making money and assuring its advertisers that everything is under control. It shows that the bombings in Mexico-City were only in favour of the ruling classes because they could use it in there newspapers to show to the people that we are some crazy political fanatics and it didn't change a simple thing for the people in Oaxaca.

[Concept]

what about if ur group of troops was about to go down...gov't troops were on top of ya....u have 2 options...be captured and tortured to no end or go out in a blaze of glory and help ur other comrades out with one final revolutionary act

i believe there is a time and place for almost everything (fasicm is of course excluded from this list)

was watching Andromeda the other day and this guy spoke these words:
"One man's terrorist, is another's freedom fighter."
as long as the truth is spread then it will be the latter

[Fawkes]

Of course I don't believe in suicide bombings if they hurt civilians, but when I asked the question I was leaning more towards something like a person stealing a small propeller plane, filling it with gunpowder and then flying it into a docked Navy ship. When you think about the ratio of damage to each side, it makes a lot of sense.

[The Bitter Hippy]

Suicide bombing could, in theory, be justified, but only if the bomber comes to the decision to do so entirely on their own. When an individual is indoctrinated into a 'cult of death' by others, and encouraged to martyr themselves, the person encouraging the bombing becomes an oppressor.

[RedStarOverChina]

It's stupid to even consider it. The life of a revolutionary should not be wasted like that, as there are tons of other ways of fighting. Suicide bombing achieves very little other than some phychological effects...And often it's the civilians that suffer, because crowded military targets are much harder to get close to. It should only be done when:

1.) Out of absolute necessity
2.) The bomber decides to do so on his own free-will

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Sucide bombing is fairly usless as a tactic, if you blow up all of your own supporters it won't exactally help your cause...

[Janus]

It sends a strong symbolic message but it is also gives off the message of desperation. Really, it's not a very effective political tactic though it can be a fairly effective military one.

[cb9's_unity]

We will need revolutionaries after the revolution as much as during it. Why sacrifice the most dedicated when we will need them after a workers state or anarchist society is established?

[sp468732]

Originally posted by cb9'[email protected] 30, 2006 11:58 pm
We will need revolutionaries after the revolution as much as during it. Why sacrifice the most dedicated when we will need them after a workers state or anarchist society is established?
I agree completely. If someone dies in such a way they only serve once purpose. However if they manage to attack their targer and LIVE, they can continue the struggle and possibly even live to see a better world.

Plus, suicide bombs usually also end up killing innocent people which really discredits the entire cause!

[Guerrilla22]

Waste of valuable manpower.

[Knight of Cydonia]

suicide bombing? nah.....i don't think it's a good idea.why wasting our life if there's no one will hear and understand us,our motives and our ideologies?

[RNK]

At this point suicide bombing has received such bad press that even mentioning it is like painting a bullseye on your forehead for any reactionary right-wing propaganda. Under normal circumstance I'd support suicide bombing against military targets that avoids civilian casualties but now... I'd say it should be avoided.

[Ol' Dirty]

Well, first there are the ethical aspects of someone kiling themself to kill others. I am against suicide (not counting euthanasia), especialy when innocents are involved.

Functionaly, there are much better ways for a popular movement to to fight reactionaries and conservatives. With the power and effectiveness of remote guided missiles, you could be a lot more descriminative about who you kill and what targets you hit.

[Jazzratt]

Look at it like this:

One person on your side dies, which is okay if your side is in the majority - but if it isn't the poor sod has to kill a certain number of the other wankers - otherwise it's pointless. Most of the time they won't reach their target numbers.

That is my opposition.

[Fawkes]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2006 08:12 pm
Well, first there are the ethical aspects of someone kiling themself to kill others. I am against suicide (not counting euthanasia), especialy when innocents are involved.

Functionaly, there are much better ways for a popular movement to to fight reactionaries and conservatives. With the power and effectiveness of remote guided missiles, you could be a lot more descriminative about who you kill and what targets you hit.
And of course any guerilla army that was able to get their hands on remote guided missiles would certainly use them, but most don't. Most, with the exception of a lot of Palestinian ones, don't even have any form of missiles.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Functionaly, there are much better ways for a popular movement to to fight reactionaries and conservatives. With the power and effectiveness of remote guided missiles, you could be a lot more descriminative about who you kill and what targets you hit.
How exactly? As effective as I'm sure remotely guided missiles are, you cannot say they have better discriminatory power than a weapon that actually chooses exactly when and where to detonate.

[Tekun]

Im with RSOverChina and Janus...suicide bombings are an effective psych tool used during war, in addition they might be effective in taking out a good ole number of enemy troops
However, it also exposes desperation and a sense of inferiority on the side utilizing this tactic
There are better and smarter ways to engage in combat

Im not an expert of military history, but I think that the VC displayed greater fearlesness and dedication than the Japanese during WW2, without employing suicide attacks

I have more respect for those willing to fight to death, than for those who use their death to fight

[metalero]

Originally posted by Shift+December 15, 2006 03:05 am--> (Shift @ December 15, 2006 03:05 am)
[email protected] 15, 2006 07:40 am
Deliverate suicide bombing will alienate support for your cause; but suicide bombing against a military brigade or unit is legitimate. It is tactic that's only worthy under extreme circumstances of military opression with no other means of resistance. It has been historically associated with religion, but japanese did it (as kamikaze) out of nationalism, and most people rather do it out of desperation.
I'm sorry but I fully disagree. There are MANY other forms of resistance and suicide bombings are by far the worst. I'm not that a big fan of Lenin but he wrote a very important lesson about this when he critizised the social-revolutionary's (of wich also Lenin's brother was a member). According to Lenin terrorist action is ALWAYS reactionary by nature because it doesn't get you one step closer towards the emancipation of the working classes. Only by organisation and carefull coordinated resistance will you accomplish anything.


suicide bombing is bad publisity it shows people on the side of the bomber as mindless killers in the media. Also it has horrible mental reprocussions on everyone. Thats just my impression

This is a beautiful trueism and it is very important to understand this. Here is a good example. We have all followed the progression of the resistance of the people of Oaxaca for some time now. I read the papers EVERY morning when I go to work and for 4 months they'd never mention anything about the resistance in Oaxaca. Untill one mornig. It was just a little article in the foreign section telling the Dutch people that some lunatics blew themselves up in Mexico-City in the name of freedom for Oaxaca. The media isn't interessted in the honest struggle of the oppressed for freedom, the media is only interested in making money and assuring its advertisers that everything is under control. It shows that the bombings in Mexico-City were only in favour of the ruling classes because they could use it in there newspapers to show to the people that we are some crazy political fanatics and it didn't change a simple thing for the people in Oaxaca. [/b]
Didn't you read what I wrote?
It is tactic that's only worthy under extreme circumstances of military opression with no other means of resistance
I'm not talking about the suicide bomber in the middle of a public Bus, but someone under military agression who might as well get killed otherwise, but have the possibility of taking down a whole unit of soldiers, mercenaries, etc. Why are you so sorprised? this has happened during centuries since human warfare, only that now is partially covered by the media to suit powerful interests, leaving aside other forms of terrorist atrocities. This is only a war resource, and I was replying to the thread in question, but I have never implied It helps the revolutionary cause nor working class emancipation, which relies on class organization, mobilization and many forms of struggle depending on the relation of class forces.