# Are Suicide Bombers Cowards



## kaspacanada (28 Jan 2004)

Are Suicide Bombers Cowards?

  I would argue that it depends on the circumstances of the bombing.

When it is cowardly:
To openly seek help from a soldier only to blow up when he/she or they are close enough.

In the words of someone on this site, "that‘s disgusting."   :evil:    :fifty:  

When I find it is not cowrdly:

To approach in stealth, or without attracting attention and attempt to destroy your enemy.

Rationale for this being that they are just as willing to die for their beliefs as we are.  (or their country, their god, or whatever the case may be)  Another reason that I say this is because they are fighting us with really the only tactic that they can.  They can not face us conventionally because they will lose too quickly without inflicting a proportional amount of damage on us.  Our technological and professional superiority has driven them (at least in part) to these tactics.  Submarines were once touted as being a cowardly way to attack, but we‘ve pretty much come around to using them.  Not that I think we will adopt suicide bombing methods, -  we have better weapons and delivery systems that replace the suicide bomber.     

Anyhow, what do you all think?
I‘ve gotta head out for class but will check back with this when I get back.  

Cheers


----------



## nULL (28 Jan 2004)

perhaps this isn‘t the best time to initiate this kind of debate.


----------



## Bulvyn (28 Jan 2004)

I suppose it depends on where and how it is being used. In my opinion it should not be a conventional way to defeat your enemy. The problem is the innocent people that can be injured when it goes off. A suicide bomber may not know if a doctor from the red cross is in the building or if civilians are nearby. I suppose to me it‘s almost like shooting an enemy that is retreating or the old method of "kill first, ask questions later." I certainly doubt anyone in the CF, outnumbered or not, will be asked to do it.


----------



## Thompson_JM (28 Jan 2004)

In my opinion.. he‘s a terrorist.. unless he is acting as a soldier, and openly carrying arms, and wearing some sort of defined uniform, he is a terrorist.


but that is just my opinion...

I hope there is some retribution over there for whats happened.. maybe a few more raids. or something..


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (28 Jan 2004)

Gents lets let this topic rest for a week so that if anyone on the boards that knew Cpl Murphy won‘t be reminded of this everytime they log on.


----------



## Pikache (28 Jan 2004)

I‘ll open it back up in about a week or so.


----------



## Doug VT (29 Jan 2004)

Of course they‘re f‘n cowards.  If you can‘t face me man to man, then you‘re a coward.  Suicide is always the cowards way out.  These people are brainwashed to do these "things".  If I happen across one in my few days left, he will be one sorry *******.


----------



## Canadian Goose (29 Jan 2004)

I don‘t necessarily see the difference between a missile that someone shoots from a building 6 blocks away, or from a ship in the ocean.  What I was getting at wasn‘t the legitimacy of it, but at the word ‘coward‘ as a description.  If you were in their shoes, would you face us if you knew there was no way you could conventionally win?  Submarine warfare was looked down upon for a long time.  Kamikazee pilots took such actions as they saw fit - would that make them cowards?

  As for the legitimacy of suicide bombing?  That‘s another issue together.  The LOAC has criteria for lawful combatants, but also mentions that ununiformed combatants are not protected by the normal conventions of warfare, which implies that we can do what we want if we catch one before he/she blows himself up.  (again depending on your view of International Law and what the US is doing with the prisoners in Cuba)

 Collateral damage is a wieghed risk in conventional military operations and to be quite honest, sometimes we miss too.  Don‘t our rockets and bombs inadvertantly hit civilians and civilian targets too?  Honestly, in war, one should and must use whatever is at one‘s disposal to try to achieve one‘s objectives.  On the other hand, I think they should also know when to admit defeat and get on with life.   :fifty:  

I feel that I need to make it clear that in no way do I support, or would even find ‘respectable‘, the deliberate targeting of civilians...that to me is a key element of terrorism.  


For other information, I am the ‘roommate‘ who posted this forum under kaspacanada‘s name.  I too should make an apology for posting this at such an awkward moment and please understand when I say that I am deeply sorry for the insensitivity I have shown in this matter.  I should have thought more about it.  I registered today so that there would be no confusion as to kaspacanada and I in the future.


----------



## Doug VT (29 Jan 2004)

Well, you listen to me, there is a big difference.  When you survive a suicide attack, and you then know how it feels, talk to me then.


----------



## Infanteer (29 Jan 2004)

Well, tell me from a military standpoint if this is the act of a courageous fighter...

 http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040129.wblast0129/BNStory/International/


----------



## Thompson_JM (29 Jan 2004)

I said it before. I‘ll say it again.. Cowardly B@$t@rd$...  

They fight with no honour at all....  suicide is too good for them.


----------



## EX-STRAT (29 Jan 2004)

These suicide bombers are no way shape or form soldiers and if caught alive should be dealt with in such a manner that no one would want to follow in their shoes ever!  :soldier:


----------



## koalorka (29 Jan 2004)

Quite tragic indeed, "body parts were scattered everywhere" - poor *******s. But Sharone keeps provoking these types of attacks, that is why Israelis want to throw him out of power. Too bad he wasn‘t at his office, he would have personally witnessed his policies in action.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (29 Jan 2004)

So its just the Israeli‘s fault is it FUBAR? I think both sides are equally guilty of the woe they have inflicted on one another.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (29 Jan 2004)

Don‘t waste your fingers ex-Dragoon, everything is the jews fault in fubar‘s world.


----------



## Bulvyn (29 Jan 2004)

> I don‘t necessarily see the difference between a missile that someone shoots from a building 6 blocks away, or from a ship in the ocean. What I was getting at wasn‘t the legitimacy of it, but at the word ‘coward‘ as a description. If you were in their shoes, would you face us if you knew there was no way you could conventionally win?


By that way of thinking what is your stance on Biological weapons? In cases where you feel your side may loose it should be considered just another war strategy?


----------



## Infanteer (29 Jan 2004)

So, going by you statement FUBAR, the Al-Qaeda was justified to commit the September 11?  When is attacks on kids going to school ever provoked?

Your an idiot.


----------



## koalorka (29 Jan 2004)

Infanteer, what is the weather like, up you‘r own ***?


----------



## meni0n (29 Jan 2004)

FUBAR you are an idiot. Both sides are to blame. 
Oh so it‘s only under sharon that suicide bombings happend? Where the **** do you come up with this stuff.


----------



## Canadian Goose (29 Jan 2004)

Infanteer, 

As I SPECIFICALLY mentioned, in no way shape or form do I feel that blowing up civilian targets to make a point is acceptable.  Please do not take that interpretation from me ever again.

Ex Strat, 

I agree completely that they are not soldiers.  They are however fighting what they beleive is a ‘just‘ war.  If we continue to dismiss them as radicals and fanatics, we may not be looking at what has driven them to this.  People are not born this way, they are shaped by their experiences and their environments.  Deviants they may be, but under-estimate their dedication to their causes we all have.  I do agree that they should be made examples of within the normal system of law applicable to their state.  The problem is catching one of the buggers before he/she explodes.  

That begs another question, how should we treat them should we catch them?  Realistically.  Should they be tried under existing criminal laws of their country?  Should we try them as unlawful combatants as we would treat caught spies and persons committing espionage?  It is conceivable that they could be tried for treason against their ‘new‘ government.  Fairness I think would be a big issue, because we all know the likely accusations of political killings that we would face if we did something rash.  Just because we don‘t agree with what they are doing is no reason to break our own laws.  Remember, we are supposed to be the good guys?

Doug, 

 I am sorry that you seem to have had the experience.  I would imagine that it would do a lot of damage to anyone simply because you never know where it is coming from and where it will come from next.  That I suspect is also the intended effect.

We have bombed countries from afar for a long time.  Kosovo is perfect example.  We hit both civilian and military targets.  (albeit the civilian targets unintentionally but that was a calculated risk fully in accordance with the principle of proportionality - arguably)  Those people didn‘t know that it was coming till it hit them.  The only difference between those bombs and a suicide bomber is that they blend into the crowd and have the added strategic bonus of appearing innocent to the eyes, not living to be charged with any crime, and a devastating psychological effect where we may begin to look more and more at the general population as potential ‘enemies‘ - and that is a sad truth particularly since we are there to try and help them.

To all, the Israeli-Palistinian conflict is far from black and white and blame for the continuation of the conflict, I would place squarely on factions within BOTH sides.
But that is a personal view and I think that it would probably be wise not to make any assumptions.  I will stay out of any of those debates.


----------



## Infanteer (29 Jan 2004)

> Infanteer, what is the weather like, up you‘r own ***?


Cute.  That still doesn‘t answer my question.


----------



## EX-STRAT (29 Jan 2004)

Canadian Goose we are from different walks of live. I respect your honesty on this concern BUT if you and I were ever to come across one of these individuals as you were reading his rights etc  your voice would be the last one he hears because now you would be reading  my rights to me. I take my chances on this one and leave it for you guys to pick apart. To you soldiers out there be careful your in our thoughts....


----------



## kaspacanada (29 Jan 2004)

Actually, Goose wouldn‘t read anything to you since he‘s not in the military. (May the powers that be have mercy on us if he did get past the physical ..hehehehe)  We all know the consequences of what your actions would lead to.  You‘d be strung up as fast as the troops were after the Somalia affair.  I don‘t think the Canadian Military needs any loose triggers around like that as we have PR issues as it is.  I truly hope that that is just rhetoric and anger coming out.  Vent it here becuase from what I hear, Club ED is nothing like a civiside prison.


----------



## scm77 (29 Jan 2004)

> Originally posted by kaspacanada:
> [qb]   I don‘t think the Canadian Military needs any loose triggers around like that as we have PR issues as it is.[/qb]


I don‘t think it would be that big of a problem to the rest of Canada.  Sure if somebody did kill a suicide bomber that they had captured before he had a chance to blow himself, they would be charged with murder etc.  But I think the Canadian people would atleast understand the soldiers actions even if they don‘t agree with them.  

Same way people were saying that soldiers should shoot Bin Laden on sight even if he could be captured.  Killing him in that situation would be wrong but people would understand.


----------



## portcullisguy (29 Jan 2004)

I think this is an important debate.

I am personally of the view that there is no more cowardly act that a suicide bombing, and this is supported by western history and philosophy, and can be traced back to a religious view.  Christianity teaches the suicide is a sin, and that to take one‘s own life will ensure a miserable afterlife.

The alternate views of Islam and the eastern religions differ.  And since we are talking about fanaticals who act in the name of religion (although I must stress that in my opinion, they act in a WILDLY misinterpreted view of their religion, and by no means is this limited to Islam), it is clear that these individuals place a different value on their own life, and are quite willing to give it up to further their spiritual ends.

But the bottom line is, cowardly or not, how do you fight an enemy that has already killed himself, the moment he strapped on the bomb vest, if not long before?

By our society and by our standards, this type of warfare is cowardly.  But we hold the upper hand in conventional warfare, we have the training, the equipment, the numbers, the funding.  If YOU had to fight "us", what would YOU do?  I can completely understand why these factions turn to guerrilla warfare and suicide bombings.  I deplore it and find it utterly repugnant, but I can reason that this is the only way they can see to win.

Of course, there are fundamental flaws in the strategy, as there are in any game plan.  If ALL of the enemy force decided to blow themselves up in suicide bombings, then there would be no enemy force left and we would win (to oversimplify it).  Clearly, then, the intent of the enemy is not to destroy us, only to demoralize us.  This makes their acts not one of warfare or combat, but instead a criminal act of terror - trying to achieve their goal through an unpredictable campaign of horrific destruction designed to make us want to no longer fight them.

If we walk away, we lose.  Because it challenges our values, and it ensures we do not complete our mission.

If we stay, we risk losing more good troops, and because of our democratic oversight, we risk being pulled out anyway once our civilian leaders deem their political careers are in jeopardy.

The Brits stayed in Northern Ireland, and although they didn‘t fact suicide bombings, I think people have finally just had it with the continuing cycle of violence, which has led to unprecedented peace agreements and disarmament, and open dialogue.

Can that work in Afghanistan?  In Iraq?  Certainly not right now.


----------



## portcullisguy (29 Jan 2004)

I think it is silly to assume that a Cdn troop killing a would-be suicide bomber in the act would be a PR problem.

A dead guy with explosives strapped to his chest is not out there to have a light debate of political views over the morning coffee.  He‘s out there to murder.  He‘s a criminal.

Even our criminal law recognizes that use of force to PREVENT a criminal act is fully justified.  Force that causes death or grievous bodily harm is also justified if no lesser degree of force would likely have repelled the assault, and that there was an immediate threat of your own death or grievous bodily harm, or to those under your protection (including civilians).  It is for this reason a corrections officer could use deadly force to stop an escapee who was a particularly high risk offender.

I see no problem if a CF troop killed a bomber in the act.  But that‘s the trick.  Is a bomber going to show you his bomb vest and yell out "Allah u akhbar" and give you a warning?  Probably not.  Can you shoot everyone you approaches your vehicle and doesn‘t display only the friendliest dispositions?  Nope.  

Rock, meet hard place.


----------



## EX-STRAT (29 Jan 2004)

WOW that was amazing portcullisguy. Well put, to the point and you were nice about it. A few of us could learn from you. Soldier on!


----------



## kaspacanada (30 Jan 2004)

My comment was made in the context as if we had actually ever caught a bomber and he/she was no longer an immediate threat.  As was said, "if someone had been reading him/her their rights."  Sure if the bombers got his finger on the trigger, by all means, put as many rounds in his body as you see fit to drop him.   :fifty:  

I think that would ‘fly‘ with both the ROE‘s and the public.  Shoot him when you‘ve got him shackled, and are reading the rights and you‘ve opened up a whole new can of worms.  But it was well put Portscullisguy.


----------



## Franko (30 Jan 2004)

Ummm....could we give this topic a break troops like it was suggested earlier?

The memorial is today in Pembroke.

OUT OF RESPECT TO A FALLEN SOLDIER

Regards


----------



## Derick Lewis (30 Jan 2004)

First Off Goose who the **** are you to tell us these guys are soldiers, as for your bombing argument that is what SAMS and radar are for they protect themsleves it isn‘t cowardly it‘s a form of warfare, where both sides have a chance at offense and deffense. They are cowards that stirke not only at us the real warrior but at civilians who are just trying to survive. They target them because they know that a civilain hasn‘t the means to deffend themselves. Doug your right anyone comes near my vehicle and I even have a milisecond of a though that he is trying anythign I‘ll tap him as many times as it takes to make sure he never gets up.

Resty easy Jamie were coming home to see you off right bro!


----------



## scm77 (30 Jan 2004)

portcullisguy is right, except the discussion wasn‘t about a Canadian just killing a suicide bomber.  It was about a Canadian killing a suicide bomber in a horrible way after he had been captured, to send a message to other would be bombers.


----------



## portcullisguy (30 Jan 2004)

First off, I would like to thank everyone for reading and reacting to my comments.  I appreciate that my views are heard, and try to respect everyone else‘s.  I am certainly no political science student, nor am I an expert in international relations.  I have only limited army experience, not even in a full two years in the reserves.  But, I have only my conscience and values to guide me.  I understand not everyone wants to talk about this, and it is a very difficult subject even on the best of days.

I have my own personal opinion of what to do with suicide bombers, living or otherwise, if caught.  However, out of cultural respect, and because my opinion on the matter refers to an illegal and immoral act, I will refrain from sharing it publicly.

Having said that, the correct thing to do with a captured would-be suicide bomber, like any other criminal, is to treat them with their bare minimum of rights and to ensure they are dealt with according to law speedily.  I am not sure I am a big enough man to do the "correct" thing, and fear I would sink to their moral level, perhaps doing something reprehensible or dishonourable in the process.  I hope I am never in that situation.

A good solution, perhaps not the best one (which might involve the families of the bereaved victims, and a locked room, and some bicycle chains and shards of glass), is to encourage the Afghanis to rapidly get their house in order, train judges and police, and instill the requisite national pride in them that they are adamant about ratting out the suicide bombers and their leadership themselves, handing them over to their own justice system, which of course is not restricted in any way by our Canadian constitution, and have the would-be bombers dealt with according to THEIR law, which I assure you has far sharper teeth than any we can invent.

This is easier said than done, and perhaps the day will yet come.  I only pray it comes before more good soliders have to die.


----------



## Gunnar (30 Jan 2004)

Suicide bombers cowards?  Not necessarily.

A man who is willing to die for his beliefs, like any of our soldiers, who bravely puts himself in harms way to "destroy destruction", i.e., destroy an invading army or force that is attempting to destroy him, or his family, or his beliefs is a brave man.  Some things are worth dying for.  Only a man who values life can be called brave for choosing to give it up for his beliefs.  

Now, a man who claims to believe in a non-violent religion of respect for life, whose very own prophet says that "the real Jihad is inside, not outside"  (I‘d quote it exactly if I could remember the passage), then who goes out of his way to blow up women and children, or fly planes into a civilian population (net effect on the "war":  zero) is a hypocrite, a coward, and deserves that people spit at his memory.

It is easy to die for a cause.  It is far harder to live for one.  Most of these suicide bombers have chosen their particular path because:

1.  They have no respect for human life
2.  They have no power to enforce their belief system, i.e., they are such a minority that they couldn‘t raise a militia of like-minded individuals to *fight* a war.  They‘re unconvincing.
3.  They are so grossly uneducated and unprepared for ideological battles that suicide sounds like a good idea:  Take it from the viewpoint of the average starving Afghani...life sucks, women are so tightly controlled you can‘t get laid, you have problems and nobody seems to respect your belief system.  Now, the rich guy over there seems to have it together, promises to look after your family after you die, KNOWS that you‘ll go straight to heaven and be awash in women who will serve your every need, and life won‘t be bad any more.   If you can‘t work all that out in your head, it is possible that with care and patience, someone can turn you into a suicide bomber.

#1 comes from living in a harsh environment, to a certain extent.  Death happens, so it is easy to become inured to it.

#2 comes from the fact that most people don‘t willingly go out of their way to accept a belief system based on death, and by this I mean the belief system of Osama & company, which is incompatible with Islam.

#3 Has a lot of causes, primarily philosophical.

Maybe the suicide bomber believed he was dying for a good cause.  Those who sent him were using him as cheap cannon fodder, asking him to make the ultimate sacrifice as an annoyance to the foreign forces in Afghanistan.  From a tactical point of view, his death was just as meaningless as that suffered on our side.  He‘s probably just some dumb farmer hopped up on cheap opium, Salvation and greenbacks for the family.  To the extent that that is true, then he is not a coward, but a misguided fool.  If he fully believed in the cause, understood all the implications, and chose to follow this course of action, then he was just as cowardly as his terrorist masters and deserves (as do Osama and others of his ilk) to be spat upon and interred with warm pig guts.

What makes *our soldiers* brave is that they understand the sacrifice they are making, but choose to make it anyway.  This is what a REAL martyr is...someone who chooses to put themselves in danger, knowing what that entails, because there are higher-order considerations which are so essential to their life that they outweigh that life itself.  They choose this life to destroy the forces of destruction, not to beat, torture and kill women and children...in fact, our warfare tends towards the "civilized" in that way because in spite of the collateral damage, we do not make war on non-combatants.

Our soldiers are worthy of respect for they have chosen the life they have to protect the kind of life they have.  And they understand the consequences of their actions and inactions.  Suicide bombers are not worthy of respect because instead of looking at death as an unfortunate necessity, they look on death as a means to an end.  It is the extent of their understanding which determines how cowardly their resultant actions are.

Osama and his like are cowards on such a scale it defies imagination.  Some of his followers are brave, but misguided fools.  Which is why a lot of his followers end up dead.


----------



## koalorka (30 Jan 2004)

Well, said Gunnar.


----------



## Bulvyn (31 Jan 2004)

Very well said Gunnar


----------



## kaspacanada (31 Jan 2004)

Very VERY well said Gunnar


----------



## excoelis (31 Jan 2004)

Get the debate into you now troops, because if and when it is a reality, the debate ends.  When your asses are on the line it‘s all about you and the men on your team.  It‘s SURVIVAL!!!  

When you are on foot patrol in the middle of Kabul, you no longer care about what label we as Canadians decide to give him.  You care about where he is, who his next target is, how he intends to deliver.  You will be too busy watching your arcs to ponder such lofty ideals as politics and religion.  

Terrorist, freedom fighter, religious zealot.....who cares.  We‘re more worried about his modus operandi.  We need to know when, where, and who he will strike next.  If, somehow, you find some insight into these questions, by all means let us know.  Until then, enjoy your debate. Unfortunately Doug, Myself, and many others don‘t have that luxury.....................


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Jan 2004)

"Until then, enjoy your debate. Unfortunately Doug, Myself, and many others don‘t have that luxury....................."

Seems to me my friend that your contributing to the debate just as much as everyone else. I don‘t really understand the point your trying to get across here?

Everyone hopes you guys come home okay and were all proud of you guys. I‘d say especially guys from the petawawa area reg force/reserves and the guys who‘ve worked with 3rcr before. I‘m sure some of us are even envious of you guys being there and would jump at the chance to patrol right along side you. I may have taken the attitude of your comment wrong and if i did then i appologize but (to me) why make people feel small about discussing something like this? Everyone knows when something like this happens it generates all kinds of feed back, arguments, topics (theres what 7 ?) and questions. This IS a discussion board after all. Keep your head down and take it easy on the guys who are simply interested and supportive of what your doing.


----------



## excoelis (31 Jan 2004)

Ghost778.

I wasn‘t contributing to the debate as much as I was trying to explain what Doug is trying to convey during this very emotional time.  That‘s what soldiers do, they look out for one another.

Be very ******* careful what tone you take with me.   You little smart-***.

I would never presume to tell you where and what to debate, nor did I.  If you feel small and envious that‘s your problem.

Maybe we‘ll see you again when you aspire to something greater than 863 posts.

BTW, we don‘t put kite sights on our weapons during the day over here...................


----------



## Yllw_Ninja (31 Jan 2004)

Say you had a suicide bomber with arm and leg chains on...and your walking him towards the jailhouse...and theres this flight of stairs...could he not "accidently" trip and fall down said stairs?  i mean you looked away for but a second...next thing you know he‘s tumbling down the stairs...over...and over...and over again...would be a tragic accident...just my view on how one could deal with this slime


----------



## Derick Lewis (31 Jan 2004)

ExCoelis has it right! We don‘t discuss these things over here we just work to minimize the threat and keep our vigilange up. Well Said ExCoelis, now if you‘ll excuse me I got a patrol to do!


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Feb 2004)

"BTW, we don‘t put kite sights on our weapons during the day over here..................."


That picture was taking the morning after a night operation before we got back to our camp.

Like i said, maybe i took the tone of your comment wrong, apparently you feel i did so you would know better then I how it was intended. No offense was ment and now that i re-read your post i can see how i misunderstood it,  Cheers.


----------



## Doug VT (1 Feb 2004)

Did we deserve to be attacked?  Are we an army of occupation?  Have we been killing civilians or even making their lives difficult?  This "man" was a terrorist, plain and simple.  I doubt if he was even an Afghani.

We were on our way to a Malik(mayor) meeting that morning.  No different then any other morning.  There was a taxi in front of us, when isn‘t there?  There were some children in that Taxi, they were waving at us, just before the look of utter horror swept over their faces.  The taxi didn‘t stop, and I don‘t blame them.

What did I think, when my ears were ringing from the blast?  Well, the first thought was disbelief.  Then the CSM‘s voice was in my head, firmly reminding me of the drills that we go over every time we go out.  I looked at the OC to make sure he was ok, good to go.  I moved about 10-15 more meters until pulling over.  I said "I‘m going back", he said "OK".  

I ran back there as fast as I could, cocking my rifle on the way.  It seemed like it had been an IED, but it looked like it had just missed the jeep.  The guys were moving, trying to get out of the jeep.  When I reached the jeep, I saw the legs.  Do you know how that feels?  Suicide bomber hadn‘t crossed my mind.  First thing I thought of was those were our legs.  That‘s what Mac thought too, at first.  None of us had seen it coming.  

I quickly checked the guys, I jumped up to check Murph.  Mac was saying "He‘s gone", but I wasn‘t listening.  I checked his pulse, I held his head in my hands, I saw my reflection in his sunglasses.  I carefully laid him back, I had to help the others.  I ran back to my jeep to grab my first aid kit, gave the OC a quick sitrep.  He was on the radio, trying to sort out the QRF and 83 c/s(we wouldn‘t know until after that one of our radio‘s had been hit, and was useless, lucky for us, it wasn‘t the one that we were using) I ran back to the guys and started moving them back to my jeep.  

Some Bisons happened to be making their way south toward Julien.  The OC quickly got them into a cordon while I tried to find all the injuries.  I bandaged them up and tried to comfort and well as I could.  

It wasn‘t until after Jay got evaced that I noticed how much our jeep got hit.  Both rear tires were flat, there were holes all over the back of the jeep.  Shrapnel had gone right to the backs of our seats.  The blast blanket that hangs from the roll bar, behind my head, was riddled with shrapnel, and pushed right up to my seat.  There was a big chunk taken out of the roll bar, right beside the OC‘s head.  Our translator was hit in his back plate so hard that it left a bruise on his back.  

It happened at about 0825, I didn‘t leave till almost 1400.  I left with Jamie.

How do you think we feel about "Suicide Bombers"?  Are they cowards?  Do we really care?  Does it even matter?  Honestly, I think it‘s a stupid question.  It doesn‘t matter if he/she is a coward or not.  They have still made the choice to do the most disgusting act that I can think of.  There is nothing honourable or respectible about it.  These people are the scum of the earth, these people are terrorists.


----------



## Franko (1 Feb 2004)

Doug...

You have my respect and condolences.

The beers are on me when we get back to Pet...

Regards

 

If it‘s alright and I have your permission I‘d like to send your story to some of the guys here in Zgon.


----------

