Therefore, to maintain the perception of that non-zero probability of dying in an attack and at the same time achieve its objective (or at least a high probability thereof), the planners must devise a suitable strategy which necessarily involves a large number of combatants, which consequently implies a large number of deaths. That human cost can be greatly reduced, however, by making the names of those who will die certain.
So the tradeoff is this - either a large number of uncertain deaths in a conventional assault, or a small number of certain deaths in a suicide mission. If we assume that war is moral, then the second solution seems ethically preferable, at least from the utilitarian point of view. A similar argument can be made from deontological positions, if we assume that the will to die is a valid moral principle.
Wojtek
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Supporting facts [mailto:supportingfacts at sympatico.ca]
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 9:53 AM
> To: List
> Subject: Suicide as a tactic
>
> This week's Economist argues that suicide bombing is not the mad
response of
> religious fanatics, but an effective tactic employed by resistance
movements
> against far superior conventional forces. "The term 'suicide bombing',
with
> its connotations of unhinged despondency, obscures the essential
rationality
> of the method.Terrorists have some reasons to believe that such
onslaughts
> work", it says.
>
> While Islamist groups have popularized the tactic, the Economist also
> identifies secular practitioners like Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers and
Japan's
> kamikaze pilots during World War II.
>
> But the Economist is too positive in judging the efficacy of suicide
> bombing. It is only able to cite Hezbollah in Lebanon as having
reached its
> political objective.
>
> In all other historical cases - and also, it could be argued, in
Lebanon and
> Sri Lanka - successful resistance has required more conventional forms
of
> struggle involving guerrilla attacks on military targets, sabotage,
> demonstrations and strikes, the winning of international support, and
the
> economic and political exhaustion of the occupier by a mobilized
population.
>
> Economist article reproduced on www.supportingfacts.com
>
> If you do not wish to receive periodic alerts of interesting articles,
> please reply with "unsubscribe" in subject line.