kutulu

I try not to play the semantics games but this term really bugs me. I understand that the right started using this instead of suicide bomber because they want to take the emphasis off of martyrdom but this term is just plain retarded. Isn't homocide the desired result for virtually all bombers, regardless of what happens to the bomber? Therefore, unless the person is a 'dismemberment bomber' or a 'serious injury bomber' or maybe just a 'fleshwound bomber' they are ALL 'homocide bombers'. Therefore, if we want to be specific, any bomber that intends to blow themself up in order to ensure that someone doesn't notice the random package on the ground is by definition a 'suicide bomber'.

xepherys

Yeah, I agree. However, I think that homicide bomber is probably more semantically viable, as the intent is to commit homicide rather than suicide. If you want to off yourself, there are easier ways to do it then blowing yourself to bits. *shrug* If we could have a blanket turnover in use of terms, I'd go for homicide bomber anyhow, but since it's not bound to change so drastically, I agree that we should stick to what we've used.

BigBen

Ah, semantics, the last resort for Spin Doctors!

We could move this into Tilted Nonsense and ask people to post their new "Bomber" tag;

I prefer : Very-motivated-but-short-term-thinker-bomber.

Pro-Choice, Pro-Life;

People know what the issue is! Calling it "Homicide Bomber" will only cloud the issue, and do no good to solve the problem.

__________________
3.141592654
Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.

kutulu

Exactly. Unless your intention is that your bomb does not kill anyone, you are a homocide bomber. If we are so worried about the martyr issue, why not just drop the prefix and call all of them bombers?

Charlatan

One should be careful who they call homicide bombers. Especially when your nation drops a lot of bombs. You could find your nation getting painted with the very same brush.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Ustwo

Why not just call them terrorists? I know international news organizations don't want to lable people who blow up civilians on purpose terroists, but hey its just words.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Locobot

What? I thought ours were "smart" friendly bombs, like the kind you would use "surgically." Sure there's been some collateral disfriendburment, but I fail to see how OUR high explosives cause actual human death.

kutulu

Yes, when our bomb hits a marketplace does that make the pilot a terrorist or a homocide bomber?

cyrnel

Heh. Took me a minute to figure out what this thread was about. The homicide Fox-ism bugged me long ago so I added a filter to my proxy that changes it back to 'suicide'. Weird phrasing variations get through on occassion but the mosquito is mostly banished.

For me the homicide wording is more confusing than helpful. I stop and think about the politics instead of the terrible act.

__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195

dksuddeth

i prefer the term 'murderers'. the look on their face must be hilarious when they realize that after killing numerous innocent people that they didn't arrive in paradise.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Mojo_PeiPei

Main Entry: ho·mi·cide
Pronunciation: 'hä-m&-"sId, 'hO-
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin homicidium, from homo human being + caedere to cut, kill
1 : a person who kills another
2 : the killing of one human being by another

bomber

n 1: a military aircraft that drops bombs during flight 2: a person who plants bombs 3: a large sandwich made of a long crusty roll split lengthwise and filled with meats and cheese (and tomato and onion and lettuce and condiments)

If the shoe fits wear it.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Charlatan

Shoe? Meet foot.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

cyrnel

It's called a fuck-up with terrible consequences. Terrorists do it intentionally. I haven 't seen anything credible stating members of our armed services routinely seek out and kill groups of Iraqi civilians.

Wasn't "homicide bomber" intended to be specific to suicide attacks? I seem to remember it being introduced two-three years ago during Rumsfeld press conferences.

__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195

Charlatan

Suicide bomber is quite accurate AND it doesn't smell of the cleansers of righteousness that the right would choose to use with "homicide bomber"

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

kutulu

Yes well the shoe also fits for every other bomber out there. How does the term 'homocide bomber' differentiate between a person attacking valid military targets, a person who plants a device in a public place and detonates from a safe distance, and a person who blows themsef up to kill others?

If it doesn't matter, then why not avoid using a loaded term and just call them all bombers?

Mojo_PeiPei

Because they are MURDERERS if they KILL another person, therefore committing a homicide, an action which does not make them some self righteous Allah pleasing martyr.

Charlatan that is cute really, but it isn't merely a suicide when you blow yourself up in a place crowded with other people, again this is what is known as murder in the real world of morals, you know where we have black and white, not some establishment scoffing anti-bushworld hippie colored gray.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Charlatan

Hence the term Suicide Bomber as noted above. The term works. The only reason the current Administration feels the need to change it is because they like to cleanse the language to suit their spin on things... sadly they have been quite successful with this tactic.

This has nothing to do with "establishment scoffing anti-bushworld hippie" rather it has to do with how our perception of events is controlled and focused on one thing rather than another.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

kutulu

That's nice but you still haven't answered any questions. Now please explain the difference between someone who plants a device and detonates from a safe distance and somone who kills themself. By your definition, both would be homocide bombers. If there is no difference, then why not just call all of them bombers?

Mojo_PeiPei

I am confounded by your line of reasoning Kutulu. There is no difference between blowing yourself up while murdering others, or murdering others by blowing a bomb up safely. The outcome is the same though, murder, which equates a homicide.

Is it inconvienent(sp) to call them murderers? Is it unfair? Is it incorrect? I didn't think so. What's the disconnect here?

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

kutulu

The disconnect is that we are not calling people who safely blow up others 'homicide bombers'. The term 'homocide bomber' is almost exclusively used by the right wing policitians and media to describe what everyone else calls a 'suicide bomber'. Bomber works well enough. It's not as if people will be confused and think that the person let off a stink bomb or anything.

filtherton

It works the other way too:
Is it inconvenient to call them suicide bombers? Is it unfair? Is it incorrect? I don't think so. What exactly is the disconnect there?

Mojo_PeiPei

It is incorrect, they are not merely committing suicide, they are committing homicide. It is unfair, suicide would lend them some legitimacy and righteousness to what is a cowardly and reprehensible evil.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Ustwo

Why does the left want to call them suicide bombers?

Its obvious why the right wants to call them homocide bombers.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

filtherton

How does the "suicide" aspect lend legitimacy to anything?

It's probably something similar to the "happy holidays" versus "merry christmas" struggle.

I mostly prefer succint language, and suicide says more about what happened than homicide.

Rekna

a suicide bomber would be considered a homicide bomber but it is a more descriptive class. That is homicide bombers is a superclass containing suicide bombers along with other classes of bombers. Suicide bomber is the appropriate term, there is no reason to change it.

kutulu

Give me a break. As if anyone doesn't know that they are killing others also.

You already said that there is no difference between someone who kills themself and someone who detonates from a safe distance (who we just call a 'bomber') so how is the use of 'homocide bomber' not pure propaganda?

Ustwo

One implies it is a cirminal act, the other doesn't. The fact it gets your panties in a bunch makes me think homicide bomber is on the right track

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

kutulu

Be honest, have you ever read 'suicide bomber' and wondered to yourself if they merely blew themself up at a form of protest (such as Budhist monks lighting themself on fire in protest) or if they blew up a bunch of others along with them?

The term DID work fine for DECADES. It was the Republicans that came along in the last few years and decided to change it for political purposes.

kutulu

Which act is not criminal? AFAIK suicide is still illegal just about everywhere. The fact that you can't come up with anything better makes me think you are talking out your ass.

Ustwo

Speaking of talking out ones ass, thats got to be the weakest argument I've heard for using the term suicide bomber.

The proper term for all these people is just simply TERRORIST.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Lebell

Gents Gents Gents,

Is this REALLY worth an argument?

And is it REALLY worth getting all pissy with each other?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

kutulu

This coming from the one who posted such a gem as: "One implies it is a cirminal act, the other doesn't."

As if someone would be able to walk away free if the stood in a clear open area, notified people that they were about to kill themself, and their bomb malfunctioned and only blew a portion of their arm off... I'm sure we'd be like, "hey man, it's cool, here's some more c-4 so that you can get it done right. Want me to wire it for you?"

Ustwo

Now this is a better topic.

Yes type of statement is what makes people on the right think the left cares more about the bomber than the victims.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

kutulu

That's total bullshit and you know it. The use of the add-on 'suicide' tells you instantly that the bomber is dead. 'homocide' only tells you that there were victims and is redundant.

cyrnel

Being somewhat language anal, at least to my capacity, it bothers me more that people try to redefine common language. It draws attention away from the act. Anyway, we're mixing details with the politics. Both two-word combinations are less than specific. We're still missing:

Delivery (Car, pedestrian...), fatalities, injuries, target type & setting.
Then any political coloring.

As I recall, the White House originally stated they were using "homicide" in lieu of "suicide" in an attempt to de-martyr the perpetrators among Muslims. So it's semantics confused by motive. Some people want to punish or add meaning, some don't, some want to be accurate, others not. Regardless, every story has more than its tag line which is quickly forgotten once the details are known. IMO calling the assholes that took out the crowded wedding party "homicide bombers" lightens their crime by nature of the phrase's overuse on all target types. Edit: Being very clear here, I'm not saying attacks on military or police are justified in any way, just that many Iraqis may be torn on the specifics. Overusing loaded words dulls the sword in the sand.

Going back to the White House's stated goal, I'm curious if either version has significance in middle-eastern translations.

__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195

rlbond86

Come on, don't be rediculous. Everyone knows that a suicide bomber is someone who blows themselves up to kill others. Nobody hears the phrase "suicide bomber" and equates it with someone who hanged himself.

The Unibomber was a homicide bomber.
The terrorists blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel are suicide bombers.


In fact, can you name any sort of non-homicide bomber?
Let's face it, the word "bomber" implies "homicide." Thus "suicide bomber" implies "suicidal homicide bomber."

Ustwo

If its such a non-issue why would it bother anyone?

Its very much the same as the pro-life, pro-choice debate, and no one wants to be pro-abortion.

I like homocide bomber because it stresses the intent, to murder people.

I think the left likes suicide bomber because quite frankly I think the left at the very least feels sympathy for those doing this.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

filtherton

If this is all it takes for people on the right to question the location of my sympathies when it comes to suicide bombers then perhaps i have over estimated their intelligence.
As if a select few on the right required any kind of rational reason to manufacture disagreements with people on the left.
As if a select few on the right were consistent at all in their expressed sympathies towards casualties of war.

Charlatan

While I can appreciate your point of view on this ustwo I don't like the term because it is just another blatant example of this administration sanatizing the language used to describe a war.

Sanitizing so that we don't think about the reasons why people might be fighting back. You are right when you raise the "pro-abortion" issue. This is another example of trying to control the debate by controlling the language... we could also use terms like "collateral damage", "right sizing" or "friendly fire".

One person's liberating army is another invading army. One person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. You don't have to sympathize with any side in order to recognize that the terms used to describe certain actions and people are politically loaded and used to control the terms of the larger discourse.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Willravel

In case anyone wants the link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108329,00.html
In reality she was a suicide bomber responsible for homicides.