Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stopping Suicide Bombings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stopping Suicide Bombings

    Reading the BBC News, 43 are dead in a series of Baghdad suicide bombings, in addition, there's been a suicide bombing inside the Iraqi parliament building.

    This tactic has become so commonplace it barely registers attention among an international audience. What is it that these people are seeking? I'm aware of the stated goals of organizations such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq or Sunni terrorist groups, but what do these bombings accomplish? They're targeting civilians... mainly Shi'ite. Why? What purpose do they think it serves? What political ends?
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  • #2
    Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
    Reading the BBC News, 43 are dead in a series of Baghdad suicide bombings, in addition, there's been a suicide bombing inside the Iraqi parliament building.

    This tactic has become so commonplace it barely registers attention among an international audience. What is it that these people are seeking? I'm aware of the stated goals of organizations such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq or Sunni terrorist groups, but what do these bombings accomplish? They're targeting civilians... mainly Shi'ite. Why? What purpose do they think it serves? What political ends?
    By fostering the impression of an unsatisfactory security situation, the tendency of Western governments is to lose patience and focus over time with same, they believe they can cause a feeling of hopelessness and futility in the political class.

    They're right; they seem to be succeeding, and at the same time that WE are succeeding. This ironic and seemingly contradictory state is exactly what they've been trying to do all along: foster a false impression among the enemy population (us and those that support us) and their political leaders that all is chaos, there's no progress towards victory, and that we're just throwing money and lives down a bottomless pit, that we'll NEVER be able to come close to victory, etc.

    The only way they can win is if we quit. The only way we can lose if if we quit. It all revolves around OUR WILL, and the suicide bombings against soft targets gets them closer to that point when the weaker wills among us throw their hands up and declare defeat.

    It'll probably work, too, to judge from the last election and the continuing unpopularity of the war. They can now see what was absolutely beyond their dreams just two years ago: they CAN out-last us; they CAN cause us to defeat ourselves.

    They just have to kill a few more women and babies, that's all.

    Comment


    • #3
      Islamist will not stop even if the US quits Iraq since as it appears that they reinvent new grievances. It started with Palestine and it is adding on practically daily.

      The issue of Dar ul Islam is very dear to the devout Moslem and he is actually committed to the same.

      Suicide bombs are merely to infect the population with a siege mentality and add to their stress to daily life. It disrupts economy and thus making the situation even worse for both the seller and the buyer as also the national economy. This in turns turns back the clock and adds to the frustration. In the end the terrorists hope that their will prevail! That is of course a very simplistic explanation.


      "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

      I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

      HAKUNA MATATA

      Comment


      • #4
        Well. I don't see how it can be resolved by diplomatic measures... Russians were brutal to the families of chechen suiside bombers.... They chased everybody who may have been influencing them....

        I guess they must be ashamed of what they have done to relatives of suiside bombers... However.... it reduced dramatically.

        I don't mean that somebody should copy this means... Nazies were even more brutal. Please don't take my post as if I am advocating violence. I am sure there MUST other ways how to stop it...... I just don't see them yet

        Comment


        • #5
          At some point in time, perhaps the Iraqi people will say, "enough is enough" and do something about the violence and suicide bombers and start to govern themselves. They need to figure out how to get over their differences (shiites, sunnis and kurds) and come together as one nation. They don't have to like each other, just get along. You'd think that since all the world's major religions believe in the same God (but in different ways), that people would be friendlier towards one another. I guess that's too simple a viewpoint though.
          Maybe the terrorists will run out of suicide bombers one day when potential recruits realize there is no future in the job! ;)
          "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

          Comment


          • #6
            Mcfire,

            Can you get another avatar instead of the madly careering helicopter?

            It makes me real uncomfortable. I once had a 'flame out' but we landed!

            I hate to remember that incident!

            It gives me a cold shiver.

            It is only a request!


            "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

            I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

            HAKUNA MATATA

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by McFire View Post
              At some point in time, perhaps the Iraqi people will say, "enough is enough" and do something about the violence and suicide bombers and start to govern themselves. They need to figure out how to get over their differences (shiites, sunnis and kurds) and come together as one nation. They don't have to like each other, just get along. You'd think that since all the world's major religions believe in the same God (but in different ways), that people would be friendlier towards one another. I guess that's too simple a viewpoint though.
              Maybe the terrorists will run out of suicide bombers one day when potential recruits realize there is no future in the job! ;)
              Hi McFire,
              you expectations are somewhat unrealistic. Just like believing that ONE day US citizens would get tired of a manniacs shooting their kids and prohibit ownership of guns by citizens.... NO. This will NEVER happen unless some LEADER does not go and fights for this

              Comment


              • #8
                Hey Ray, how's that avatar? I did it just for you


                Garry,
                I know it's unrealistic, but there is always hope that the Iraqis will come together and stop the fanatics (I doubt it though).

                US citizens ARE tired of maniacs shooting their kids, but there are gun laws out there. The Virginia Tech shooter bought his guns LEGALLY. He went through background checks and everything, but because he had no criminal record, there was no legal reason to deny him purchasing the weapons. As the days go on and we find out more details of his mental derangement, I believe he would have just obtained the guns illegally had the gun shops denied him. The system failed because he should have been in a mental hospital or under some kind of therapy. The signs were out there and one of his professors had even tried to get authorities involved, but because he was an adult, the authority's options were limited. I just watched his "manifesto" on the evening news and he was one weird dude.

                As for civilians owning guns, I have no problem with law-abiding (and sane) citizens having them. I'm talking hand guns, rifles and shotguns.

                I do not think ANY type of assault rifle or automatic weapon should be sold to any person or entity that is not directly affiliated with the military. There is no logical/useful reason to have one as a private citizen, unless it is a non-working model for a souvenir/display.

                Anyhow, that's my rant. Let's use the many gun laws we already have. There's no reason to ban guns from the citizens. Prosecute the violaters.

                Just remember that we live in a free and open society in a country of over three hundred million people. Tragedies can and will happen.
                "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                  Reading the BBC News, 43 are dead in a series of Baghdad suicide bombings, in addition, there's been a suicide bombing inside the Iraqi parliament building.

                  This tactic has become so commonplace it barely registers attention among an international audience. What is it that these people are seeking? I'm aware of the stated goals of organizations such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq or Sunni terrorist groups, but what do these bombings accomplish? They're targeting civilians... mainly Shi'ite. Why? What purpose do they think it serves? What political ends?
                  These bombings are direction at two ends: public opinion in judging the effectiveness of the "surge," and at continuing to fan the flames of sectarian strife.

                  Through the action of a couple dozen bombers, they can keep Iraqi civilian deaths in the vicinity of the current steady-state of civilian deaths, thereby making it look like the "surge" isn't accomplishing anything.

                  "3,000 deaths last month; 3,000 deaths this month; what's the difference."

                  That's the goal. However, 3,000 deaths last month, with the majority being extra-judicial killings (EJK), i.e. sectarian strife, vs. 3,000 deaths this month, with the majority being from suicide bombers, are vastly different measures even though they may appear to be no different on the surface.

                  *DISCLAIMER: I don't know if the civilian deaths right now in the majority are due to suicide bombers, but the ratio of EJK vs. suicide bomber related deaths has without a doubt changed.*

                  The reason that this is important is that reducing EJKs reduces the descent into civil war.

                  Lastly, I think that the fact that some of these suicide bombings have taken place against purely Sunni audiences, while from a moral perspective, is a tragedy, but from a perspective of what's going on in the insurgency, is actually a positive. Why is AQI bombing Sunnis, they supposed allies, in Ramadi? It is because they've burned their bridges in large part and persuasion is no longer working. It is an act of trying coercion and a sign that they are losing (and in many cases) have lost their cover and power base. So, once again, simply as a statistic, these deaths play well in the information war if the statistic simply remains a number to the American audience as opposed to if its significance were highlighted.
                  "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by McFire View Post
                    Hey Ray, how's that avatar? I did it just for you


                    Garry,
                    I know it's unrealistic, but there is always hope that the Iraqis will come together and stop the fanatics (I doubt it though).

                    US citizens ARE tired of maniacs shooting their kids, but there are gun laws out there. The Virginia Tech shooter bought his guns LEGALLY. He went through background checks and everything, but because he had no criminal record, there was no legal reason to deny him purchasing the weapons. As the days go on and we find out more details of his mental derangement, I believe he would have just obtained the guns illegally had the gun shops denied him. The system failed because he should have been in a mental hospital or under some kind of therapy. The signs were out there and one of his professors had even tried to get authorities involved, but because he was an adult, the authority's options were limited. I just watched his "manifesto" on the evening news and he was one weird dude.

                    As for civilians owning guns, I have no problem with law-abiding (and sane) citizens having them. I'm talking hand guns, rifles and shotguns.

                    I do not think ANY type of assault rifle or automatic weapon should be sold to any person or entity that is not directly affiliated with the military. There is no logical/useful reason to have one as a private citizen, unless it is a non-working model for a souvenir/display.

                    Anyhow, that's my rant. Let's use the many gun laws we already have. There's no reason to ban guns from the citizens. Prosecute the violaters.

                    Just remember that we live in a free and open society in a country of over three hundred million people. Tragedies can and will happen.
                    McFire! I know what you mean when you say that you are free to have gun... However, if I lived in USA I HAD TO buy gun for myself...... Why? Because others CAN and many of them WOULD/HAD. So I have to take take risk seriously.... But this is a self reinforcing argument!!!

                    Security is a common good.... you CAN NOT organize it alone.... here you need to COORDINATE.... and this means GIVING UP some of your individual rights. So if everybody would be taking care of their OWN security you in general would be in MORE risk...

                    There is no way how to judge who would become insane tomorrow... every old lady may lose her mind.... Guns are available... So if you are a US guy - YOU BETTER HAVE ONE

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Bill Roggio's take on the AQI suicide bombing offensive.

                      Al Qaeda on the Offensive (The Fourth Rail)

                      Eleven major suicide bombings inside Baghdad over the past five days threaten to erode remaining political support for the Baghdad Security Plan. Now is the time for flexibility.

                      After a relative lull in major, mass casualty suicide attacks inside Baghdad, al Qaeda in Iraq has gone on a major offensive inside the capital city. Al Qaeda's latest suicide offensive began on April 13; the last major bombing inside Baghdad was in a Shia market on March 29. Since April 13, al Qaeda has struck at 11 high profile targets inside the city limits. The targets have included the Iraqi Parliament, two of Baghdad's 11 bridges and Shia markets. Under the readership of Abu Ayyub al-Masri Al Qaeda in Iraq is proving agile in its ability to switch targets in Baghdad while continuing to strike at sectarian fault lines outside the capital. The latest campaign threats to erode the remaining support in America for the Baghdad Security Plan, which is still ramping up.

                      The campaign began with two major attacks in Baghdad on April 13, with the destruction of the Jisr al-Hadeed bridge, which crosses the Tigris river, and a high visibility attack on the Parliament building. The bridge was completely destroyed, and over 25 people were killed in the bombing or after their cars plunged into the Tigris. One Member of Parliament was killed and 7 were among the 22 wounded after a suicide bomber detonated his vest in the center of a cafe adjacent to the Parliament. Mohammed Awadh, a Sunni politician, was killed in the attack.

                      The following day, on April 14, a suicide bomber hit the Jadriyah bridge, which also crosses the Tigris river. Ten were killed and 15 wounded in the Jadriyah bridge bombing, but the bridge was not destroyed. Al Qaeda also conducted a major suicide bombing outside the capital in Karbala. A suicide car bomber murdered 47 Iraqis and wounded scores more just several hundred yards from the holy Shia shrine of the Imam Ali mosque in Karbala.

                      On April 15, al Qaeda struck with five bombs inside Baghdad – two in the Karrada neighborhood in central Baghdad, one Al Shurta Al Rabeia neighborhood in southwest Baghdad, and another in the Kadhimiya district. The Karrada bombings included 2 roadside bombs which killed 15 Iraqis and wounded another 50, and a car bomb aimed at a police station killed 5 and wounded 10 Iraqis. The Kadhimiya district bombing was carried out by a suicide bomber, who attacked a bus filled with Iraqis. Six Iraqis were killed and 11 wounded.

                      Today, on April 17, al Qaeda conducted three major attacks inside the capital. The largest attack occurred in the mixed Shia and Kurdish district of Al-Sadriyah near central Baghdad. At least 112 Iraqis were killed in the car bombing, and another 115 wounded. The second attack was carried out by an al Qaeda suicide car bomber. The bomber targeted a checkpoint just outside the Shia stronghold of Sadr City, and killed at least 30 and wounded another 45. The third attack occurred near a private hospital in the Karrada neighborhood. Eleven Iraqis were killed and another 13 wounded.

                      Al Qaeda in Iraq has clearly discovered a seam in the increased security inside Baghdad, and is directing its bombing campaign for political and sectarian effects. This bombing blitz is projecting an image of failure of the nascent Baghdad Security Plan. Al Qaeda clearly hopes to destroy any remaining political support inside the U.S. government and the American people for the security operation, which is still in mid deployment. Al Qaeda also hopes to reignite the Sunni-Shia sectarian war and the activity of the Shia death squads inside Baghdad, which has decreased significantly since the start of the security operation in mid-February.

                      While al Qaeda's haven in Anbar province has been diminishing over the past six months, the terror group has ramped up operations inside Diyala province, where thousands of al Qaeda fighters have relocated from Baghdad. From Diyala, al Qaeda is launching this devastating car and suicide bombing campaign. Al Qaeda's safe haven and command and control nodes inside the province must be diminished to alleviate the pressure on Baghdad.

                      Multinational Forces Iraq is still in mid-deployment of the soldiers alloted to the Baghdad Security Plan. The third of the five combat brigades, which are being deployed into Baghdad and the outer belts, has just arrived in Baghdad. The last brigade will not complete deployment until late may or early June. The Diyala Campaign will not kick into full gear until the entire compliment of forces are available to cordon al Qaeda's havens in the province in preparation for the assualt.

                      The question that remains is does Multinational Forces Iraq and General David Petraeus, the Commanding General, have the luxury to wait until as late as June to launch the Diyala offensive? Al Qaeda in Iraq is scoring major propaganda victories in the international media, and there is a question as to how long the Shia desire for revenge against the wholesale Sunni population can be held off.

                      The failure of lasts year's security operations inside Baghdad occurred after Multinational Forces Iraq, then under the command of General George Casey, did not react to al Qaeda in Iraq's initiation of the sectarian war. General Casey also failed to reacted to the inability of the Iraqi Army units to deploy in to Baghdad and the corruption of the Baghdad police. General Casey had no desire to ramp up U.S. forces to deal with the shortfall – he wanted to use “the minimum amount of force possible” to defeat the insurgency.

                      General Petraeus does not suffer from these deficiencies. Last year's inability to redeploy Iraqi Army units have been resolved, and all Iraqi Army units have arrived into Baghdad as planned. The corrupt Iraqi National Police brigades were pulled off the line, taken apart, vetted and retrained. The U.S committed an additional five combat infantry brigades, a combat aviation brigade and supporting units to Baghdad and the outer belts. The rules of engagement were changed to give U.S. forces greater flexibility to fight the insurgency. U.S. forces are no longer operating from large bases and fighting a commuter insurgency, but instead are deploying into forward bases inside Baghdad's neighborhoods.

                      But Coalition and Iraqi forces must react to al Qaeda's bombing offensive, as time may not be on its side. As we've said from the very beginning, “U.S. and Iraqi forces must be flexible, and quickly react to as yet unseen surprises.” Now is the time to be flexible.
                      "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Shek View Post
                        These bombings are direction at two ends: public opinion in judging the effectiveness of the "surge," and at continuing to fan the flames of sectarian strife.

                        Through the action of a couple dozen bombers, they can keep Iraqi civilian deaths in the vicinity of the current steady-state of civilian deaths, thereby making it look like the "surge" isn't accomplishing anything.

                        "3,000 deaths last month; 3,000 deaths this month; what's the difference."

                        That's the goal. However, 3,000 deaths last month, with the majority being extra-judicial killings (EJK), i.e. sectarian strife, vs. 3,000 deaths this month, with the majority being from suicide bombers, are vastly different measures even though they may appear to be no different on the surface.

                        *DISCLAIMER: I don't know if the civilian deaths right now in the majority are due to suicide bombers, but the ratio of EJK vs. suicide bomber related deaths has without a doubt changed.*

                        The reason that this is important is that reducing EJKs reduces the descent into civil war.

                        Lastly, I think that the fact that some of these suicide bombings have taken place against purely Sunni audiences, while from a moral perspective, is a tragedy, but from a perspective of what's going on in the insurgency, is actually a positive. Why is AQI bombing Sunnis, they supposed allies, in Ramadi? It is because they've burned their bridges in large part and persuasion is no longer working. It is an act of trying coercion and a sign that they are losing (and in many cases) have lost their cover and power base. So, once again, simply as a statistic, these deaths play well in the information war if the statistic simply remains a number to the American audience as opposed to if its significance were highlighted.


                        Regarding suicide bombings vs. Extra judicial killings. We can take March as we have data for it and it was the first full month of the surge.

                        In March there were 3,070 civilians killed in Iraq (roughly) from Brookings. There were also 24 car bombs and 11 other bombings (e.g. vest) that caused mutliple civilian casualties. Excluding roadside bombs, and car and suicide bombs that targeted and killed Iraqi police, army and/or coalition forces I have found that these 35 bombings and 41 bombers (two used 3 suicide bombers each so I don't know if Brookings counted them individually or as one), accounted for 596 civilian deaths directly.

                        So 3,070-596= 2,474 civilians killed by means other than mass bombings, suicide or otherwise (i.e. roadside bombs, mortar attacks, extrajudicial killings, etc). This total does not count the over 200 Iraqi police and soliders who were also killed in the line of duty or any coalition forces. So looking at the breakdown it does not appear to be the fact that extrajudicial killings have decreased significantly vis a vis suicide bombers. This does not reflect any data from April and it may be the case that this trend is reversing this month.

                        All data compiled from:

                        http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

                        iCasualties: OIF Iraqi Deaths

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Sorry folks, I know this is a tangent direction from this thread,

                          Garry,
                          Don't believe everything written about guns and crime in the US. It's not the wild west and everyone doesn't own a gun. I'm in the military and have lived all over the country, and I do not own a gun. I've never needed one to feel secure. I enjoy occassionally target shooting, but I don't hunt, so I really see no reason to buy a gun for myself.
                          Believe it or not, most violent crimes (over two thirds) in the US happen between midnight and five o'clock in the morning. The vast majority of those crimes are committed in high-crime areas (poor urban areas, etc) and the crimes are committed by habitual criminals. Guess what? Those guns are obtained illegally. A lot of crime victims put themselves in bad situations, ie; being in the wrong place at the wrong time, making themselves targets for criminals. Most criminals use "targets of opportunity", those people and places that make easy targets. I work with seventy-five people and none have had anything other than vandalism happen to them or their property. None had any violent crimes committed against them or their family members, that includes uncles, aunts, in-laws, etc. Overall, the media makes the US sound like a wild free-for-all, but that's not the case. There are still small towns where people do not lock their doors at night; places where years go by between murders. Most of the crimes you hear about in the media are committed in urban areas in high-crime neighborhoods. The majority of Americans live outside urban areas, that's why so many people have never personally been affected by violent crime. There are the rare crimes like the Virginia Tech shootings, but he was determined and would have gotten the guns illegally I think. He slipped through the cracks of our legal system on what to do with mentally troubled people. Our system is not perfect, but to blame everything on guns is just plain wrong. Using the anti-gun logic, which should we ban from citizens in the case of drunk driving; the car or the alcohol?
                          "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X