September 5, 2002

3:36 AM

Israeli Police Find Huge Car Bomb.Certainly car bombings in the Mideast are nothing new but what I found interesting was this paragraph: Police found a cellular telephone attached to the bomb, apparently to set off the charge by remote control. The second vehicle was apparently to have served as a getaway car Does that piece of information strike anyone else as significant? I wonder how many previous "suicide" bombings were not.
posted by ElvisJesus (26 comments total)

"Does that piece of information strike anyone else as significant?"

Significant in what sense?
posted by Witty at 3:59 AM on September 5, 2002

Wireless detonation is nothing new. Stephen King used the basic idea with walkie-talkies in The Stand almost 30 years ago.
posted by mischief at 4:04 AM on September 5, 2002

I wonder how many previous "suicide" bombings were not.

I'm lost. Are you suggesting something along the lines of: "Hey, Akhmed! Run downtown real quick and pick us up some Camel McNuggets. Here ... take the cell phone."

*BOOM*???
posted by RavinDave at 4:14 AM on September 5, 2002

cell phones as detonators have been used by the Palestinian terrorists for some time now, in addtion to stolen cars.
posted by Postroad at 4:16 AM on September 5, 2002

I believe what is on ElvisJesus' mind is that there is a possibliity that previous suicide bombings were not in fact suicide bombings but remote detonations.

Since the body(or at least pieces) of the suicide bomber is recovered I don't believe this is much of a question at all.
posted by futureproof at 4:21 AM on September 5, 2002

Either way, with or without and actual suicide bomber, I don't think it really matters how it's done. There's no reward in knowing that someone died while committing a suicide bombing... while at the same time, I don't think there's anything more threatening about someone being able to bomb a location remotely.
posted by Witty at 4:36 AM on September 5, 2002

The point I was trying to make is that there was some level of "glorification" made in sacrificing oneself as a martyr for Allah. That righteousness (as absurd as it is to begin with to Western thought) is erased if these bombs are being set off from a safe vantage. It seems to me further proof that the cloak of religious justification for this madness is pretty thin.
posted by ElvisJesus at 4:49 AM on September 5, 2002

I think the whole "killing innocent people" thing shredded the religious justification from the get-go.
posted by owillis at 4:55 AM on September 5, 2002

Silly rabbit. Religious justification's for kids!
posted by allaboutgeorge at 6:24 AM on September 5, 2002

with or without and actual suicide bomber, I don't think it really matters how it's done

There's a fascinating article from The Atlantic that has me thinking otherwise.

Suicide bombings inspire suicide bombings. As the article points out, they're great TV, and the bomber becomes a celebrated hero. With the popular support that it has, I suspect that suicide bombing is quickly becoming the Palestinian national pastime.
posted by idlemind at 6:34 AM on September 5, 2002

Silly rabbit indeed
posted by ElvisJesus at 6:41 AM on September 5, 2002

Everytime I see an I/P thread the Darth Vader March theme starts playing in my head.
posted by McBain at 6:46 AM on September 5, 2002

owillis: Are we really going to get into the killing innocent people thing, both sides are far from blameless.
posted by Kellydamnit at 6:49 AM on September 5, 2002

Thanks for the post idlemind. The prospect of a better world on the other side, of enduring Hell on Earth in exchange for an eternity of Paradise, has been used as a lure for centuries. And now ANY bombing in the Mideast is referred to as a Suicide Bombing generically which, as the Atlantic article points out, tends to perpetuate things.
posted by ElvisJesus at 6:53 AM on September 5, 2002

Kelly- You are putting words in OW's mouth. He never said anything about the other side.
posted by McBain at 6:58 AM on September 5, 2002

From the article, this is what I found most interesting (and even a little bit encouraging):

Palestinian militants rejected a recent call by Palestinian Interior Minister Abdel-Razzak al-Yahya for civil disobedience and vowed to press on with attacks in Israel... [emphasis mine]

At least the topic of civil disobedience is being broached these days. Sure militants can reject it all they want -- that's why they're militants, but at least there is another way, another option to weigh.

And as we saw from India v. England and Oppressed Blacks v. United States, this is a truly elegant (and actually pretty fast) solution to a problem. What *would* Israel be able to do against 1 million peaceful palestinians marching on Jerusalem, singing songs, and waving banners that said "We're ready for our state now."? Nothing.
posted by zpousman at 6:59 AM on September 5, 2002

McBain (great name, btw): owillis said "I think the whole "killing innocent people" thing shredded the religious justification from the get-go." in response to a post by ElvisJesus that said, in part, "The point I was trying to make is that there was some level of "glorification" made in sacrificing oneself as a martyr for Allah. "

I wasn't denying or supporting the religious justification of the suicide bombers, I was only stating that Israel has also killed innocent people. It would be wrong to demonize only one side of a conflict where both parties have been particularly vicious.
posted by Kellydamnit at 7:15 AM on September 5, 2002

I wasn't denying or supporting the religious justification of the suicide bombers, I was only stating that Israel has also killed innocent people.

So has America, Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Japan, etc. Any particular country you could name has killed innocent people. If a single innocent victim suddenly makes a country indistinguishable from Hamas, well, let's line up all 6 billion people on this planet and throw a big self-flagellation party.

It would be wrong to demonize only one side of a conflict where both parties have been particularly vicious.

If Israel really acted as vicious as these militants, i.e. targetting and killing civilians just because they're Palestinian, then this conflict would be over in a month, two months tops.
posted by boaz at 9:01 AM on September 5, 2002

< tasteless joke>

Kind of puts a whole new meaning into "Sorry, wrong number."

Dial carefully, huh?

< /tasteless joke>
posted by Vidiot at 9:22 AM on September 5, 2002

"If Israel really acted as vicious as these militants, i.e. targetting and killing civilians just because they're Palestinian, then this conflict would be over in a month, two months tops."

I don't follow what you mean re: this conflict would be over...
Have you been following the news over the last couple of weeks? last couple of years? is a dart bomb shredding a family to pieces vicious enough for you? Or last weekend's barely publicized killings of Palestinian civilians? When has targetting palestinian civilians not been protocol for the IDF?
posted by aLienated at 9:32 AM on September 5, 2002

I mean, dear aLienated, that if Israel considered killing civilians a strategy rather than a tragedy, as a majority of Palestinians do (cite), then it could make this problem go away very quickly.
posted by boaz at 9:46 AM on September 5, 2002

Sanka anyone?
posted by y2karl at 9:52 AM on September 5, 2002

Of what use is a philosopher who doesn't hurt anybody's feelings? --Diogenes (cite)
posted by boaz at 10:00 AM on September 5, 2002

Boaz that may be true from a theoretical perspective, but the most pressing concerns of the Israeli army is not morality but victory. Slaughtering the Palestinians en masse has no doubt been considered and the risks are simply too great for the potential gains. To suggest that either side is acting at their most brutal is naive, hopefully some sanity will return before it gets to that point.
posted by cell divide at 10:07 AM on September 5, 2002

no thanks, y2karl, but you go ahead. Boaz, are you suggesting Israel engage in openly genocidal tactics? They wouldn't have to change much, they'd just have to stop spinning information and muting the media. The "tragic" poverty that is increasing among the Palestinian population is seeing to it that their strategies are working.
Those statistics you cite differ dramatically depending on where the peace process is and the level of desperation among Palestinians, as I'm sure you know. As for targetting civilians being something Sharon (I say Sharon rather than "Israel" because many Israelis oppose these tactics ) considers a "tragedy" rather than a "strategy", I think that's sheer comedy. Collective punishment and killing of civilians is most certainly strategic. I'm a bit saddened by how casually you throw around the idea of genocide.
posted by aLienated at 10:20 AM on September 5, 2002

What *would* Israel be able to do against 1 million peaceful palestinians marching on Jerusalem, singing songs, and waving banners that said "We're ready for our state now."?

Exactly. If they were able to do that, the Palestinians would have proven that they are able to responsibly run a state. They haven't, because they can't.
posted by goethean at 12:45 PM on September 5, 2002