Talk:Homicide Bomber

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

I have to say, I've always been a bit confused by the idea inherent in this phrase that bombers are not intending to commit homicide unless they too will be victims of the blast? If a "homicide bomber" is one that kills himself in order to kill his victims, what do you call someone who plants a bomb and runs away, escaping safely before the bomb explodes? Pandeism 23:27, 6 September 2007 (EDT)

The point is that the term "suicide bomber" is a politically correct term intending to minimize the suffering of the victims of the bombing. A true suicide bomber would be someone that blows themselves up only. "Pandeism" is belief in many (false) gods, isn't it? This is a Christian conservative website, don't push your liberal beliefs here. SSchultz 00:13, 7 September 2007 (EDT)

Friend, where on earth did you get the idea that Pandeism is a "belief in many (false) gods"? Pandeism, as is well documented to students of theology, is the belief in one God, the God that is the Creator and the sum principia of the Universe.... the concept is traceable to Xenophanes of Colophon, Heraclitus of Ephesus, and the Milesian philosophers, Thales and Anaximander, among others.... it may well have been the concept Jesus was communicating -- I refer you to Matthew 25:31-46:
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory; And before him shall be gathered all nations; and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; Naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels; For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal.
I invite you to consider that what you do unto your fellow man (no matter the standing of his faith in comparison to yours) you do unto God.... Pandeism 14:48, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

Loathe though I am to say it, I agree with you on this Pandeism. Without trying to start a liberal/conservative war (which is somewhat inevitable but foolish) I just can't see why this debate exists. I approach the issue, not from a political standpoint, but from the point of view of a user of the English language. Simply put, in the context of terrorist attacks, since it is impossible to detonate a bomb without an intent to kill others (bomb=weapon):

  • A Bomber is someone who plants a bomb to kill others and runs away;
  • A Homicide Bomber conveys no further information than the above;
  • A Suicide Bomber kills others, and himself.

It's simply a matter of the English language, not your polticial viewpoint. The simplest construction which conveys the greatest amount of information is ALWAYS the best. If you choose to use the term Homicide Bomber, you must add extra wording along the lines of "who took his own life in the act", or unecessary verbiage to that effect. Not only this, but the act of suicide bombing is an act of violence only used by a subset of terrorists - so the nature of the act is in itself defining, and separates it form other forms of terrorism. It is part of the story. I reject the notion that this is a debate with political/liberal/conservative overtones and submit that it is simply a matter of clarity in use of language. AncientSage 15:20, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

Well I'll be completely honest, when I hear "Homicide bomber" it always makes me think of "homocide" -- the word that detectives often use to describe a murder of one homosexual by another (usually a gay lover, in a fight).... see Urban Dictionary, this blog, etc.... so the phrase just always makes me think of a bomber who kills homosexuals.... Pandeism 16:34, 9 September 2007 (EDT)
Don't tease young Schultzy - he means well, but he needs to think these things through a little more ;-) Pachyderm 16:37, 9 September 2007 (EDT)
No teasing, friend, that's really what it makes me think of!! Pandeism 19:09, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

So what do you call someone like Tim McVeigh, who killed hundreds of people with a bomb, but didn't kill himself? I say the term 'suicide bomber' isn't an attempt to be PC, but an attempt to distinguish them from your typical bomb planter. Maestro 14:13, 12 October 2007 (EDT)

Maestro, for once I agree with you. The term "homicide bomber" is redundant. Unless we are attempting to distinguish the "homicide bomber" from the bombers who try not to kill anyone. Suicide bomber makes more sense. SkipJohnson 14:27, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
Exactly. I think 'bomber' pretty much implies homocidal intentions. And what of bombers who only manage to kill themselves? Attempted-homocide bombers? Maestro 21:11, 12 October 2007 (EDT)

Sources

This is not easy for me to write about, but here goes. The claim I made about Vietnamese adults murdering their own children to "get back" at US soldiers comes from stories told to me by Vietnam veterans while I was a soldier serving (in peacetime) with the 101st Airborne in Fort Campbell, Kentucky. I have tried to find something online to substantiate this, but I failed. Go watch "Good Morning, Vietnam" and then tell me if you still doubt this.

Forcing people drive primed bomb-laden vehicles into security force checkpoints is something that anti-American forces did in Iraq. I might be able to dig up references for that.

You know, people who have been involved in the horrors of war don't like to talk about it. I wasn't involved, but I was close to some who have been. It's still not easy. --Ed Poor Talk 16:12, 9 December 2007 (EST)

Personal tools