|
|
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius
"Zahra Maladan is an educated woman who edits a women's magazine in Lebanon. She is also a mother, who undoubtedly loves her son. She has ambitions for him, but they are different from those of most mothers in the West. She wants her son to become a suicide bomber."
One of the most bedrock common-sense axioms is that mothers protect their children. Everything goes pear-shaped when this fails.
It's when I read things like this, and only when I read things like this, that I think the sentiment in the title may be the only real solution. Which pisses me off more than you might think.
Via Instapundit.
How do you deal with people with this mind set. If a mother is willing to strap a bomb to her child and set him off to blow innocent people then I just can't and won't ever be able to understand. We need to get out of that war and out of the region. These people have been fighting and killing each other for a thousand years. There is no way to deal with the and I,for one, don't think it is worth another drop of American blood to attempt to do so.
Posted by: Pat J. on March 4, 2008 01:31 PMMy guess would be that this isn't a majority view, which is good. I do believe that somewhere you've linked to an article that demonstrates a cultural bias towards saying all sorts of outlandish things without actually meaning them, so this could also be a case of that.
The other underpinning point here is that, at least with the women, we're seeing a bit of change in tactics. We appear to have gotten significantly better at stopping suicide bombers, so the tactics needed to change. Switching to women, as noted, is a win/win situation.
But, in the big picture, this relates back to an interesting confluence of religion and personal situations. Life is very cheap in a country that's tend to have the levels of poverty that we see in the region. Couple that with the guarantee of heaven and the virgins (no one specified women nor attractiveness, no?) and you get an environment where this is possible.
The author does point to differences in culture as part of it, but I'm not sure they address it appropriately.
Posted by: Ron on March 4, 2008 03:42 PM
Like I keep saying, 'those people' are in their own "Mediaeval Age", quite like the place where we western "barbarians" were between five hundred and fifteen hundred years ago.
And sadly, some of us still are.
Posted by: Mark on March 4, 2008 09:04 PMdammit Mark - I go on and on and you use one sentence to sum up much of what I'm saying.
Too bad they've got something we want or we could just let them be all Medieval until they grew out of it.
Nuclear, solar, wind, and geothermal for the stop-gap win!
Posted by: ron on March 5, 2008 06:34 AMCan't just ignore them, either. We have way too many people living here that would happily help the poor ignorant dears come over, even if it meant breaking the law or killing cops, just because they believe we have no right to be so happy and healthy while the barbarians are so poor and miserable.
They're the people who left the gates of Rome open while the Gauls invaded, so in awe of the "nobility of the savages," as Tacitus called it, that they didn't even care when they themselves were impaled on the barbarians' spears.
Posted by: Tatterdemalian on March 5, 2008 11:00 AMVISIGOTHS, damn it, not Gauls. Got my Roman sackings mixed up. Tacitus wasn't even born yet when the Gauls invaded.
Posted by: Tatterdemalian on March 5, 2008 11:14 AM