Changes

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):

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;

* 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 Homicide Bomber ''conveys no further information'' than the above;

* A Suicide Bomber kills others, and himself.

* 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.  [[User:AncientSage|AncientSage]] 15:20, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

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.  [[User:AncientSage|AncientSage]] 15:20, 9 September 2007 (EDT)