This is digging deep ... even for the Bush administration ...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/06/11/guantanamo.suicides/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

6/11/2006 3:12:07 PM

this just screams "cover up by teh j00z" 

6/11/2006 3:35:34 PM

i don't get how this is even news let alone a problem

how many suicides happen in regular prisons every year?

6/11/2006 5:06:17 PM

well, it wouldn't be that big of a deal had they not been synchronized suicides

[Edited on June 11, 2006 at 6:12 PM. Reason : my fucking i key is busted]

6/11/2006 6:10:34 PM

I misread this somewhere else earlier, but wtf.

This is absolutely an act of asymmetric warfare. It's all they can do. This isn't digging deep. It's exactly what they were doing.

6/11/2006 6:14:26 PM

haha
THEY SHOWED US

6/11/2006 7:19:46 PM

Quote :

"30thAnnZ: how many suicides happen in regular prisons every year?"

well yeah, but how many prisons are jam-packed with virtuous freedom fighters opposing imperialist American aggressions abroad?

6/11/2006 7:27:49 PM

A Suicide Warfare Strategy is an oxymoron.

It's one thing when you take some of the enemy with you, but if your goal is to take only your own life then it can only be viewed as a political act - not an "act of warfare," by any stretch.

6/11/2006 8:55:56 PM

you obviously dont understand the concept of asymmetric warfare then

6/11/2006 9:25:20 PM

warning, pointless semantics discussion ahead!

6/11/2006 9:32:36 PM

haha
THEY SHOWED US

6/11/2006 9:41:42 PM

Damn, isn't Islam EXTREMELY anti-suicide?

I guess they really aren't fighting for God afterall

6/11/2006 9:55:26 PM

Quote :

"you obviously dont understand the concept of asymmetric warfare then"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfare

I still haven't read anything about a suicide strategy. Obviously the goal is to frame suicide as an act of violence against an enemy. If it wasn't so Orwellian it would be funny.

6/11/2006 10:27:56 PM

the fact that you are attempting to define the term when it is designed to encompass a multitude of unconventional tactics in the first place should be an excellent indicator that you are bush leaguing the discussion

6/11/2006 10:31:31 PM

Bush leaguing the discussion is an appropriate term ...

The common denominator in all of the "multitude of unconventional tactics" is the attempt to prepetuate violence against the opponent.

Anything else is not "warfare" ... (It's not a complex definition) ... It might be an attempt to achieve the same ends as warfare ... but, warfare it is not.

6/11/2006 11:02:10 PM

try telling our psyops/CA troops that they're not really conducting warfare with a straight face ahaha

6/11/2006 11:05:53 PM

Quote :

"It's one thing when you take some of the enemy with you, but if your goal is to take only your own life then it can only be viewed as a political act - not an "act of warfare," by any stretch."

this also shows your utter fundamental lack of understanding of how the jihadist operates.

they UNDERSTAND they wont win a war with sheer physical power. they know they cannot match the american military industrial complex bullet for bullet

but they do understand that sometimes it is possible to let your enemy trip up over itself and affect the battle/war without amassing an equal force, and whether you want to view it that way or not, it's a part of warfare.

its how they fight. its like you honestly think the whole point of sometihng like 9/11 was to, in effect "9/11 us to death", as many airliners as it takes!1!!111

6/11/2006 11:21:04 PM

Quote :

"A Suicide Warfare Strategy is an oxymoron. It's one thing when you take some of the enemy with you, but if your goal is to take only your own life then it can only be viewed as a political act - not an "act of warfare," by any stretch."

in a sense, you aren't really incorrect


but answer a couple of questions for me:

1. What is war?
2. How do you win a war?

6/11/2006 11:25:28 PM

3. War: good God, y'all. What is it good for?

6/11/2006 11:35:42 PM

ABSOLUTELY NOTHIN'

JOB SECURITY

6/12/2006 12:04:14 AM

I consider war to be an armed conflict, although I know some people use the term lightly - "war on drugs", "price war", etc.

Presumably you win the war when the other person gives up and leaves you alone, or implements your policies.

Although there are many ways to get people to leave you alone or implement your policies - passive resistance, civil disobedience, negotiation, humiliation, etc. - but without inflicting violence on your opponent I wouldn't consider them acts of war. They are political tools.

It is beyond Orwellian when all means of trying to achieve your goals are painted as acts of violence against your opponent, including taking your own life - the ultimate act of civil disobdience.


[Edited on June 12, 2006 at 10:11 AM. Reason : *~<]BO]

6/12/2006 10:06:57 AM

i swear

if you say "orwellian" one more time mother fucker




HE WROTE MORE THAN 2 BOOKS YOU KNOW

6/12/2006 10:16:18 AM

Herman Melvillian?

Charles Dickensian?

Dean Koontzian?

Dr. Seussian?

6/12/2006 1:30:32 PM

i bet in 60 years the term "Crichtonish" will be used to describe what happens when TECHNOLOGY GOES AWRY

[Edited on June 12, 2006 at 2:43 PM. Reason : ho no]

6/12/2006 2:42:32 PM

Your lame attempts to predict the future are so Asimovian.

6/12/2006 3:07:41 PM

you're chasing a white whale here,

how melvillian

6/12/2006 3:08:27 PM

your lack of capitals and use of italics is so e.e.ish

[Edited on June 12, 2006 at 3:20 PM. Reason : `]

6/12/2006 3:20:07 PM

Yes, but his sentence structure and prose is almost Angelouian.

6/12/2006 3:26:07 PM

this thread has the potential to really drag out

why do we have to be so tolstoyic about things?

6/12/2006 3:43:24 PM

What else can you call it ... when love is hate, peace is war, and suicide is asymmetic warfare?

(Thanks for the laughs though.)

[Edited on June 12, 2006 at 3:50 PM. Reason : *~<|BO]

6/12/2006 3:46:03 PM

It is goddamn cheap and childish to call the suicides 'assymetric warfare'.

Had they destroyed ANY enemy asset (person, property, documents, etc) with their suicides, yes, that would be 'assymetric warfare'.

But all they did was take their own lives, without causing an iota of damage to the enemy.

6/12/2006 3:46:25 PM

Quote :

"But all they did was take their own lives, without causing an iota of damage to the enemy."

Rouse anti-american spirit?

Damage Gitmo's reputation to the point where it had to be shut down?

The commander down there said that there was a rumor among prisoners that it would be shut down if there were 3 suicides.

6/12/2006 3:53:30 PM

^ that's all speculation.

either way, they didn't cause any MATERIAL damage.

hurting someone's reputation is NOT warfare.

BTW, 'Gitmo's reputation', that's a glaring oxymoron.

6/12/2006 3:56:18 PM

Quote :

"either way, they didn't cause any MATERIAL damage."

since when is warfare limited to material damage?

Quote :

"BTW, 'Gitmo's reputation', that's a glaring oxymoron."

Yeah, realized that when I typed it, but couldn't think of a better way to put it.

6/12/2006 3:58:34 PM

haha
THEY SHOWED US

6/12/2006 3:58:53 PM

some of you people are acting like you've never heard the term "Martyr"

6/12/2006 4:04:02 PM

^ then you obviously don't know what a martyr is.

suicide is a one-way ticket to hell, according to islam. AND the general population knows this.

6/12/2006 4:38:09 PM

whats that shit salisburyboy always says

i'd rather die on my feet
than live on my knees

or is it

i'd rather annoy people on a website
than think like a rational human being

eh, its one of the two

6/12/2006 4:59:24 PM

Ve are the Judean People's Front. Crack suicide squad. Suicide squad! Attack!

[drum roll]

Uh! Ugh. Aggh...

That showed 'em, huh?

[whump]

6/13/2006 2:45:57 AM

Quote :

"suicide is a one-way ticket to hell, according to islam. AND the general population knows this."

what if you kill some infidels in the process?

6/13/2006 10:23:58 AM

^that is a hot potato...

some scholars say it depends on your intention. since in suicide bombings, your intention is to kill the enemy, and your death is a byproduct, it is ok... no sin committed (provided of course, that you are not killing innocents, only combatants).

others stay strictly with the edict that any suicide is a sin that leads to hell. if YOU KNOW that your action will kill you along with some enemy soldiers, then you go to hell for committing suicide. if, however, you undertake a risky mission in which you might live or might die, that is ok (just like any other mission in war).

6/13/2006 7:57:35 PM

The specificities of this case aside (morality of Gitmo, innocence or guilt of the involved prisoners), could suicide be a form of asymmetric warfare? Well if war is the continuation of politics by other means (to paraphrase Clausewitz) and civil disobedience is a form of politics, then why not? The willingness to give your life for your cause is one of the defining values of any soldier, so suicide is not unthinkable as a means of propaganda. Gandhi essentially used the threat of a long and painful suicide during his hunger strike. The fact that the three committed suicide simultaneously is certainly reason for suspicion. I'm not saying they thought of it as such, just that it shouldn't be simply dismissed out of hand.

6/14/2006 10:59:07 AM

Quote :

"some scholars say it depends on your intention. since in suicide bombings, your intention is to kill the enemy, and your death is a byproduct, it is ok... no sin committed (provided of course, that you are not killing innocents, only combatants). "

so if you kill 5 infidels and 2 muslim bystanders are you going to hell?

or is there some ratio of infedels:muslims that becomes acceptable?

Also are non-combatant, non-muslim deaths considered acceptable?

6/14/2006 11:40:57 AM

this is like arguing over who would win a fight between batman and spiderman

6/14/2006 11:45:17 AM