Justification and conditions regarding suicide missions

[BarakzaiAbdali]

yeah Apples and Oranges

Muslims fighting a technologically superior invader in the 80's

Muslims fighting a technologically superior invader in the 2010's

totally distinct....

Are you really going to play coy with this just to be stubborn?

Lets see, what has changed since the 80s besides bad hair days, 80s rock, the demise of MC Hammer.

Type writers gave way to the Personal computer
Satellite guided missiles directed via laser and via an ability to see something as large as a quarter from the ground
Infrared sensing technology
Drones that can fly higher than any surface to air missile can hit
unmanned air crafts ^ killing groups of 3-4 people being directed from Nevada
Robotics in the theatre of warfare, providing soldiers visualization around corners in hostile city terrain

Moreover, you ignored the original post I made regarding the increased reliance on the Lee-Enfield and the sniper video.

You're conflating idealism and strategy, which is bound to result in severe failure were you to be directing the insurgency.

Paype's thesis appears to be further supported by the advance in technology creating such a lopsided assymetry per the above that it explains the widening of the ring in terms of utilization of suicide bombing.

[ScimitarXEdge]

nice you're comparing consumer electronics to already existing robotics technology, and even then, by the logic that we have "unmaned drones" and "infrared" you would think more clever strategies would be used than the lazy man's suicide bombing. I don't know like studying U.S. patrols; attacking them at night, not mindlessly brandishing weapons in the air, learning accurate firing techniques. Or even yet, mountain wild survival, to stage a coordinated Dummy Attack where drones are lured while convoys are attacked. But no, let's attack in a crowded Bazaar or in front of an adiministration building where MUslims are passing by daily. but thats ok right? Those Muslims are apostates and deserve death, what are they doing walking near an administration building or outpost? I mean their baby might have cholera or their wife might need a C-section, which if performed by the local midwife might kill both the baby and the wife, so they have little other choice but to go to an American Medical Outpost; but alas they should have just trusted God and if the wife and the baby die, it was God's will which they should have accepted, but seeking help from the invader to prevent your wife and newborn from dying is UNACCEPTABLE. So it all works out nicely.

you know what's hilarious( not really but more out of irony), the previous generation has these brilliant strategies; untl some dimwit Wahhabi came around saying "nah nah it's better brothers you blindly start firing your rifles, God will send the bullets straight to the targets brothers; martyrdom is better".

[emkhan]

Schimitar, you better bring some solution and the best way to fight the invaders rather than supporting the invaders by giving your illogical logics.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

yeah Apples and Oranges

Muslims fighting a technologically superior invader in the 80's

Muslims fighting a technologically superior invader in the 2010's

totally distinct....

You are also ignoring the details and presenting the Afghan Soviet Conflict as if the Red Army was facing an army of sahaba with the resurrection of Abu Bakr (R) and Umar (R).

The text reference and and Randolph provide is informative but you are misusing it to assume that the text is alluding to a bygone era of amazing fighters that marched lock stock and barrell to the tune of pure Islamic warfare.

A single case example from the very successfull Mahaz e milli in the south can illustrate this point. This is open source as everyone from Kandahar here will be able to vouch for it and I will dig up a reference should you desire one.

The Lion of Kandahar seen here:
JIHAD: Afghanistan's Holy War - 52 min documentary - YouTube

Was Haji Abdul Latif. He himself, as an old man, fought on the frontlines of the war in Kandahar. His sons are the Sherzai brothers. They derive from menial tribal lineage and are not the actual tribal elite, but have now become that thanks to Latif's prowess.

However, Latif relied on a commodity from the Kandahar markets... a group of young boys who were basically considered street boys called Paylochyaan.

Latif ended up being poisoned and Gul Agha Sherzai led one of the fronts of the Kandahar resistance.

During that time Ulomi, a communist affiliated Barakzai attempted to settle down Kandahar proper with payoffs to the right people in the most peaceful manner he could think of.

The Muj commanders such as Sherzai moved in and divided Kandahar and destroyed the place.

The paylochian were now armed and had free reign, being utilized by these various commanders.

So I would avoid lionizing that era and attempting to claim that civilians were spared.

Another pertinent example is how Russians would cordon villages where they saw Mujahideen escape to and would devastate the village as a response. By your logic we might say that the muj commanders should have been artful and skillful and avoided all populationcentric areas at all, exposing themselves to hostile Russian air bombardment in the open.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

nice you're comparing consumer electronics to already existing robotics technology, and even then, by the logic that we have "unmaned drones" and "infrared" you would think more clever strategies would be used than the lazy man's suicide bombing. I don't know like studying U.S. patrols; attacking them at night, not mindlessly brandishing weapons in the air, learning accurate firing techniques. Or even yet, mountain wild survival, to stage a coordinated Dummy Attack where drones are lured while convoys are attacked. But no, let's attack in a crowded Bazaar or in front of an adiministration building where MUslims are passing by daily. but thats ok right? Those Muslims are apostates and deserve death, what are they doing walking near an administration building or outpost? I mean their baby might have cholera or their wife might need a C-section, which if performed by the local midwife might kill both the baby and the wife, so they have little other choice but to go to an American Medical Outpost; but alas they should have just trusted God and if the wife and the baby die, it was God's will which they should have accepted, but seeking help from the invader to prevent your wife and newborn from dying is UNACCEPTABLE. So it all works out nicely.

you know what's hilarious( not really but more out of irony), the previous generation has these brilliant strategies; untl some dimwit Wahhabi came around saying "nah nah it's better brothers you blindly start firing your rifles, God will send the bullets straight to the targets brothers; martyrdom is better".

Already addressed in the original post in regard to the single Talib sniper and marksmen training, its not my fault you chose to gloss over it and ignore it instead of responding to it. Its the first post under this thread.


Read the section and address it as well as the NY Times video. Read the section on the amount of ammo required to acquire even moderate American policeman style marksmenship. You are making the grave mistake of assuming unlimited resources. As I said, multiple independent witnesses as well as the NY Time article lays bare the Taliban arsenal, of which 30$ of their rifles consist of British era Lee Enfield rifles.

Also, the Wazirs live in the mountains. The closest they have come to downing a drone with their marksmen were low flying ones that the Americans suspected of systems malfunctions. There is no surface to air capability from the mountain to the drone if the drone desires to fly higher.

Also, regarding just being out in the open and shooting off some rounds to learn how to shoot... a practical example of how this is an issue are the multiple wedding bombardments. The Americans visualized light fire form the sky and assumed these were folks with arms, hence they were militants and killed them from above.

Once again, regarding the baby and wife example, Pape and Hoh indicate with the data that you refuse to address that the presence of NATO forces results in a concurrent increase in such events.

So blame the invader, not the invaded.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Here is the reproduced section I would like you to address:

Folks here are creating a false dichotomy, in my opinion, between the Russian Afghan War and the American Afghan War.

1. Paul Refsdahl, in his documentary on the Taliban, seen as the most unbiased piece done, comments that the Muj fighters in the 80s had equipment up to par and that Commander Dauran and his fighters had old weaponry.

2.
Now despite my respect for SXE and Randolph, I must present the reason I disagree with their non evidence based assessments. Their conclusions are not at all driven by actual ground level metrics.

The dramatic assymetry between the insurgents and the occupier force can be demonstrated by the number of Lee Enfield rifles being discovered on the battlefield. The Lee Enfield is a British Era weapon to drive home the point.

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/arti...-1-22-2009.asp

If one does not want to accept strategypage's musings, then the NY Times assessment should suffice:

http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/...an-gun-locker/

"Insurgents in Helmand Province seem to have used bolt-action rifles more than in many regions of Afghanistan. Whether this indicates a pressure on the supply of assault rifles and their ammunition or a preference for the longer effective ranges of Lee-Enfield and Mosin-Nagant rifles is not clear. But the longer range of bolt-action rifles compared with assault rifles, and their relative abundance in Helmand Province, is a reason this particular acreage of Afghanistan has a reputation as being plagued by a more dangerous set of Afghan marksmen, and even a few snipers, as seen in this video. For those who have been under fire in Helmand, finding that a large fraction of captured rifles are Lee-Enfields or Mosin-Nagants is not surprising. This battalion’s battlefield collections fit its Marines’ experiences on patrol."

Lest Randolph or SXE attempt to harp on the increased accuracy of the Lee Enfield, I would say that they are sorely missing the point.

Here is an example from video, via the Times of the sort of tactic they are advocating. One must remember that in the Russian-Afghan war, AK47s abounded and they decreased accuracy. Initially, the rapid fire sequence would cause the muzzle to rise and point to the sky in a display of idiocy (this occured per the conservational laws of physics and is the reason why the M16 has a rapid fire sequence that terminates after a few bullets), and the single shot itself is also not as accurate.

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

Nonetheless, a generation of fighters was trained on these easy to manufacture, easily imitated, and cheap weapons.

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2010/...at-matter.html

This video more than adequately proves the point the strategist makes in the first article:

"In the last year, NATO units in southern Afghanistan estimate there has been a 25 percent increase in sniping incidents. This is not seen as a major danger. NATO troops wear protective bests and helmets that can stop bullets fired at long range, making it very frustrating for the Taliban shooters trying to hit a distant target in a vulnerable spot."

Despite the fact that 1 in a group of say 100 Talibs is sniper trained, he merely was able to cause his American counterpart (where a majority are trained to fire with accuracy) a shoulder injury with a good shot.

Why are 99/100 Talibs not sniper quality? Anyone who has ever fired a pistol and travelled to Afghanistan knows the answer to that question. There is no Wal Mart Wana or Wal Mart Kandahar with massive rounds of ammo available cheaply. The cost of ammo to waste to utilize in training is just too great in such settings. The gunsmiths of dar adam would not able to and are not able to churn out the sufficient number of bullets to ensure this level of lethal accuracy training. The average number of shots fired by an American trained policeman in city violence situations is 3-4 rounds.

http://www.virginiacops.org/articles...ing/combat.htm

So we have an evidence based situation: The Talib is equipped with an AK and possibly a Lee Enfield. The AK is less accurate, and the old AKs lack the rapid fire sequence that terminates and allows for some level of increased accuracy.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Schimitar, you better bring some solution and the best way to fight the invaders rather than supporting the invaders by giving your illogical logics.

The solution is to fight the way MUhammad(saw) fought; don't you agree his method is ALWAYS the best?

[ScimitarXEdge]

Barakzai, all your last post proves is that the Taliban have no excuses for suicide bombs, they have effective weaponry...they just rther kill a few women and children and they say NATO made them do it.

Army of Sahaba, , resurrection of Abu Bakr and Umar? what? ....You can't argue with me with mythifications.
you basically re conceding there was no excuses; because if this alleged "Army of Sahaba" could exist then , it can now

[ScimitarXEdge]

Already addressed in the original post in regard to the single Talib sniper and marksmen training, its not my fault you chose to gloss over it and ignore it instead of responding to it. Its the first post under this thread.


Read the section and address it as well as the NY Times video. Read the section on the amount of ammo required to acquire even moderate American policeman style marksmenship. You are making the grave mistake of assuming unlimited resources. As I said, multiple independent witnesses as well as the NY Time article lays bare the Taliban arsenal, of which 30$ of their rifles consist of British era Lee Enfield rifles.

Also, the Wazirs live in the mountains. The closest they have come to downing a drone with their marksmen were low flying ones that the Americans suspected of systems malfunctions. There is no surface to air capability from the mountain to the drone if the drone desires to fly higher.

Also, regarding just being out in the open and shooting off some rounds to learn how to shoot... a practical example of how this is an issue are the multiple wedding bombardments. The Americans visualized light fire form the sky and assumed these were folks with arms, hence they were militants and killed them from above.

Once again, regarding the baby and wife example, Pape and Hoh indicate with the data that you refuse to address that the presence of NATO forces results in a concurrent increase in such events.


So blame the invader, not the invaded.

I am ....the innocent women and chldren dying in Taliban attacks are the invaded, they never asked the Taliban to suicide bomb on their behalf. The Taliban thus become as much the invader as NATO.

NATO is deliberately Nefarious; they know when they attack weddings it's civilians they just get off on doing it. so it's not that laser guided weapons aren't accurate, they're deliberate targets.

Which is extra pathetic because this means even when NATO PURPOSELY kills civilians, they kill LESS civilians than the Taliban.

By the way bro; you haven't actually presented any data, you presented statements by individuals who you used the Appeal to authority fallacy for who are rattling off numbers, with no actual quantitative analysis.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai, all your last post proves is that the Taliban have no excuses for suicide bombs, they have effective weaponry...they just rther kill a few women and children and they say NATO made them do it.

Army of Sahaba, , resurrection of Abu Bakr and Umar? what? ....You can't argue with me with mythifications.
you basically re conceding there was no excuses; because if this alleged "Army of Sahaba" could exist then , it can now

I already preempted you. Read the section, I stated a response to your argument clearly. I knew you would try to grasp at this straw. You are talking about the Lee Enfield rifle my friend and are out of your depth. Watch the video of its use in action and its LACK of utility per your strategy.:

"Lest Randolph or SXE attempt to harp on the increased accuracy of the Lee Enfield, I would say that they are sorely missing the point.

Here is an example from video, via the Times of the sort of tactic they are advocating. One must remember that in the Russian-Afghan war, AK47s abounded and they decreased accuracy. Initially, the rapid fire sequence would cause the muzzle to rise and point to the sky in a display of idiocy (this occured per the conservational laws of physics and is the reason why the M16 has a rapid fire sequence that terminates after a few bullets), and the single shot itself is also not as accurate.

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2010/...at-matter.html

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

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I am ....the innocent women and chldren dying in Taliban attacks are the invaded, they never asked the Taliban to suicide bomb on their behalf. The Taliban thus become as much the invader as NATO.

NATO is deliberately Nefarious; they know when they attack weddings it's civilians they just get off on doing it. so it's not that laser guided weapons aren't accurate, they're deliberate targets.

Which is extra pathetic because this means even when NATO PURPOSELY kills civilians, they kill LESS civilians than the Taliban.

By the way bro; you haven't actually presented any data, you presented statements by individuals who you used the Appeal to authority fallacy for who are rattling off numbers, with no actual quantitative analysis.

Not my job to present the data, just Pape's paper. I provided you the paper and Pape breaks down the discussion and references the data. Its your job to go read the reference and deal with Pape's conclusions. The Princeton team attempted to, but you seem to refuse because you know it devastates your theory and legitimizes the Taliban as a resistance form.

When one is reading a paper or a book, the references are listed. The author is not obligated to attach a massive appendix of each book and source verbatim. Its your job to go and read Pape's work and examine his data, which is there in Dying to Win and his Paper.

If you refuse to do so, its a concession that you cannot rebut him.

You are welcome to buy his book and to write him asking him for his data base. His database has been relied on by NATO and others as well.

[Al Hanif]

Those Muslims are apostates and deserve death, what are they doing walking near an administration building or outpost? I mean their baby might have cholera or their wife might need a C-section, which if performed by the local midwife might kill both the baby and the wife, so they have little other choice but to go to an American Medical Outpost; but alas they should have just trusted God and if the wife and the baby die, it was God's will which they should have accepted, but seeking help from the invader to prevent your wife and newborn from dying is UNACCEPTABLE. So it all works out nicely.

Exactly, it was God's will which they should have accepted.

And I can proove it 100%. I have 100% proof that what I say is right.

They are now dead.

If they trusted in Allah SWT, maybe they would still be alive in their home.

But they choosed to not trust in Allah SWT and the worse thing which could have happened to them (dying) happened.



Surah Al Munafiqun (the hypocrites)

"(O Prophet), when the hypocrites come to you, they say: “We bear witness that you are certainly Allah’s Messenger.” Allah certainly knows that you are His Messenger. But Allah also bears witness that the hypocrites are utter liars !" [63:1]

"They shelter behind their oath, and thus hinder their own selves and others from the Path of Allah. Evil indeed is what they do." [63:2]

"All that is because they first believed and then disbelieved, and therefore a seal was set on their hearts; as a result they understand nothing."[63:3]





Allah SWT never does any harm to the true believers. He spared Prophet Lot in Sodom. (Prophet Lot was the only righteous inhabitant of Sodom and the only one spared) A true believer would never doubt Allah SWT. The stories of the prophets in the Qur'an are the best examples for a muslim.




(10:49) Tell them: 'I have no power to harm or benefit even myself, except what Allah may will. There is an appointed term for every people; and when the end of their term comes, neither can they put it off for an hour, nor can they bring it an hour before.





You have been exposed. You have 0 faith. You don't believe in Allah SWT. You don't believe in Islam. You are just a munafiq spending his days criticizing Islam and muslims but you're doing it in a very clever way so only few people would be able to see through your speech. But i'm not one of them. Thanks to Allah SWT, I can see clearly in what you say and how you act.

People should read surat Al Munafiqun to understand who they are dealing with.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I am ....the innocent women and chldren dying in Taliban attacks are the invaded, they never asked the Taliban to suicide bomb on their behalf. The Taliban thus become as much the invader as NATO.

NATO is deliberately Nefarious; they know when they attack weddings it's civilians they just get off on doing it. so it's not that laser guided weapons aren't accurate, they're deliberate targets.

Which is extra pathetic because this means even when NATO PURPOSELY kills civilians, they kill LESS civilians than the Taliban.

By the way bro; you haven't actually presented any data, you presented statements by individuals who you used the Appeal to authority fallacy for who are rattling off numbers, with no actual quantitative analysis.

Unsubstantiated comment devoid of evidence. You are attempting to speak on their behalf. Why not let them say what they think?:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/wo...bans.html?_r=2

They (this civilian in Kabul for instance) seem to support Pape's common sense conclusion which you are denying simply to stand rigidly by an unprovable assumption.

"On the back streets of Kabul’s central bazaar, where the turbans are sold neatly folded, thin as a pamphlet and wrapped in torn pages from old glossy magazines, many turban wearers are so angry about the situation that they blame the Americans. Before their arrival, intrusive searches were unknown.

“My father, my grandfather, my great-grandfather, my prophet wore a turban, and that’s why I wear it,” said an older man, looking irritable at the question, adding: “Who brought these turban bombers and turban searchers? You did,”...

Your attempt will be to invert his quote and to say that he is actually seeing the light and noting that NATO and the Taliban are the same. To preempt you there, No, the Times gets it right:

"he said angrily, referring to Westerners, which many Afghans feel are agents of the decline of the society"

Meaning that Robert Pape's conclusion, namely that the presence of NATO is the action and instigator of asymmetry, and the suicide bomber is the last ditch response is on the lips of the Afghans on the ground.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai, all your last post proves is that the Taliban have no excuses for suicide bombs, they have effective weaponry...they just rther kill a few women and children and they say NATO made them do it.

Army of Sahaba, , resurrection of Abu Bakr and Umar? what? ....You can't argue with me with mythifications.
you basically re conceding there was no excuses; because if this alleged "Army of Sahaba" could exist then , it can now

Btw, regarding the army of sahaba, my point was not that the Taliban are that at all. That was a comment directed at your and Randolphs attempt to lionize men like Abdul Latif as that. My point was that the mujahideen of that era WERE NOT like the sahaba either despite this glossing over of their many populationcentric tactics (e.g. going to villages for shelter when they knew the Russians would follow).

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Exactly, it was God's will which they should have accepted.

And I can proove it 100%. I have 100% proof that what I say is right.

They are now dead.

If they trusted in Allah SWT, maybe they would still be alive in their home.

But they choosed to not trust in Allah SWT and the worse thing which could have happened to them (dying) happened.



Surah Al Munafiqun (the hypocrites)

"(O Prophet), when the hypocrites come to you, they say: “We bear witness that you are certainly Allah’s Messenger.” Allah certainly knows that you are His Messenger. But Allah also bears witness that the hypocrites are utter liars !" [63:1]

"They shelter behind their oath, and thus hinder their own selves and others from the Path of Allah. Evil indeed is what they do." [63:2]

"All that is because they first believed and then disbelieved, and therefore a seal was set on their hearts; as a result they understand nothing."[63:3]





Allah SWT never does any harm to the true believers. He spared Prophet Lot in Sodom. (Prophet Lot was the only righteous inhabitant of Sodom and the only one spared) A true believer would never doubt Allah SWT. The stories of the prophets in the Qur'an are the best examples for a muslim.




(10:49) Tell them: 'I have no power to harm or benefit even myself, except what Allah may will. There is an appointed term for every people; and when the end of their term comes, neither can they put it off for an hour, nor can they bring it an hour before.





You have been exposed. You have 0 faith. You don't believe in Allah SWT. You don't believe in Islam. You are just a munafiq spending his days criticizing Islam and muslims but you're doing it in a very clever way so only few people would be able to see through your speech. But i'm not one of them. Thanks to Allah SWT, I can see clearly in what you say and how you act.

People should read surat Al Munafiqun to understand who they are dealing with.

Come on now, thats not the case either. What I am trying to impart to Scimitar, or at least what the argument is between us is in regard to what motivates the suicide bomber... not whether these people deserved death. I am arguing that the data supports gross assymetries result in a shift in tactics to the point where the last ditch effort is the body becoming a weapon.

My point in this sordid back and forth is that in all of these nations, from Saudi to Iraq to Libya to Afghanistan, there are bases galore of NATO.

There is no Afghan base in Alabama.

My point to SXE is that the blame lies on the shoulders of NATO for repeatedly and brazeningly entering Muslim countries and unleashing hell.

Its a simple equation of balance:
No NATO = No Zarqawi
NATO = Zarqawi comes out to play

I also am not stating that this tactic is a long term winning solution. In fact Pape's work shows that it wins short term concessions but may not cause super powers to concede on long term goals.

With that in mind, SXE is correct that if the sequence of events plays out and this ends up creating a situation such as happened to FARC where short term concessions are won but the larger propaganda war is lost... then the tactic needs to be abandoned despite the short term benefits. The data and the verdict are out on this currently. At this point the Afghan population has yet to invent a term like the Pakistanis have for these folks. This may have to do with the lack of TV in every household and adequate communication in southern afghanistan... as opposed to the former NWFP... Petreus has had to rely on radio DJs to attempt propaganda.

Where he and I also disagree is the jurisprudence discussion of it. I am not a scholar, but I am simply pointing out that a moderate non wahabi like Qardawi discusses it in detail and does not condemn it.