Explain please

[manker]

Indiscriminate murderers of civilians is what they would be, if they used the same methods as contemporary suicide bombers.

Worthy of condemnation. Being of a different skin colour, different creed and being for a different cause cannot dress up the fact that killing civillians for a political cause is wrong.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment I can't wholly agree with the second paragraph, because the murder is totally indiscriminate. They kill people of their own creed, colour etc. They really don't care whether their bomb kills a 5 year old of their own religion.

Freedom fighters, or resistance forces attack military targets. Or destroy property, for example an empty bridge, or a train during the night when no-one is about.

The discriminating factor to my mind is the choice of target.

I did say 'if they used the same methods as contemporary suicide bombers'.

The second paragraph is simply an extrapolation of my condemnation of contemporary suicide methods such as letting off a bomb on a bus.

[RioDeLeo]

.. so as far as I can see you're saying that these terrorists are trying to force british people out of their homes?
Jonno

Not at all, l'm replying to this ..

Suicide bombers.

I don't get it.

I mean these guys blow themselves up with the belief that they are going to a better place.

l'm merely trying to ascertain whether it's the act of suicide bombing you don't understand, or the targets they choose.

[GepperRankins]

what alternative course of action can they (suicide bombers) take?

well apart from getting off the bus first. suicide is a pretty pointless waste of a foot soldier if you ask me

[JPaul]

Whilst I agree with your sentiment I can't wholly agree with the second paragraph, because the murder is totally indiscriminate. They kill people of their own creed, colour etc. They really don't care whether their bomb kills a 5 year old of their own religion.

Freedom fighters, or resistance forces attack military targets. Or destroy property, for example an empty bridge, or a train during the night when no-one is about.

The discriminating factor to my mind is the choice of target.

I did say 'if they used the same methods as contemporary suicide bombers'.

The second paragraph is simply an extrapolation of my condemnation of contemporary suicide methods such as letting off a bomb on a bus.

I understand, it just read to me as if you were saying they were specifically targeting people of different creed, colour etc. Whereas they don't even do that, it's just anyone who happens to be there.

Crossed wires and so forth.

[manker]

what alternative course of action can they (suicide bombers) take?

well apart from getting off the bus first. suicide is a pretty pointless waste of a foot soldier if you ask me

They can have a chat about it.

However just the cause, the indiscriminate taking of civillian life is wrong.

[GepperRankins]

yeah killing is definately wrong but haven't they already tried talking about it?

[manker]

I did say 'if they used the same methods as contemporary suicide bombers'.

The second paragraph is simply an extrapolation of my condemnation of contemporary suicide methods such as letting off a bomb on a bus.

I understand, it just read to me as if you were saying they were specifically targeting people of different creed, colour etc. Whereas they don't even do that, it's just anyone who happens to be there.

Crossed wires and so forth.

I read that paragraph again, after I replied to you, and realised that my sentence was badly worded. I was going to mention it.

However, I hate those ugly edit marks

[manker]

yeah killing is definately wrong but haven't they already tried talking about it?

Yeah.

I agree suicide bombing is their most potent weapon to grab the attention but that doesn't make it right and could be counter productive. In fact it is counter productive.

No-one will be willing to negotiate with a group that encourages it's members to specifically target civillians but if a group renounces the practice, and sticks to it, then their voice would become that much louder in political circles.

[BawA]

So basically it does get you into heaven by murdering innocent people.

I see.

Jonno

"every thing is fair in love and war"
i belive u guys made this sentence, protecting our freedom, country and specialy islamic nation in anyway is fair and in order to do that some sacrifices are needed. both inocent and sacrificer r considered as a martyr, and as promised will goto heaven.
its considered a holy war if u try to cut the invasion from the islamic country.
and once again, living and dieing is in god's hand so its just a matter of time.

[manker]

So basically it does get you into heaven by murdering innocent people.

I see.

Jonno

"every thing is fair in love and war"
i belive u guys made this sentence, protecting our freedom, country and specialy islamic nation in anyway is fair and in order to do that some sacrifices are needed. both inocent and sacrificer r considered as a martyr, and as promised will goto heaven.
and once again, living and dieing is in god's hand so its just a matter of time.

So you're one of these morons who think that by bombing a cafe, you'll go to heaven.

Why are Islamic religious leaders renouncing suicide bombings, calling them unjust and not in accord with the Qur'an? Do you know more about the subject than they do.

No, you don't ... you're a brainwashed fool.