Suicide Attacks Linked To Military Occupation: Report

Laura Rozen:

Robert Pape, a University of Chicago political science professor and former Air Force lecturer, will present findings on Capitol Hill Tuesday that argue that the majority of suicide terrorism around the world since 1980 has had a common cause: military occupation.

Pape and his team of researchers draw on data produced by a six-year study of suicide terrorist attacks around the world that was partially funded by the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. They have compiled the terrorism statistics in a publicly available database comprised of some 10,000 records on some 2,200 suicide terrorism attacks, dating back to the first suicide terrorism attack of modern times - the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 U.S. Marines.

"We have lots of evidence now that when you put the foreign military presence in, it triggers suicide terrorism campaigns, ... and that when the foreign forces leave, it takes away almost 100% of the terrorist campaign," Pape said in an interview last week on his findings.

Read the whole story: Laura Rozen

Comments

[oregonrain]

01:55 PM on 10/12/2010

http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2010/10/07/rule_of_law/view/index28.html

[aamfo]

12:28 PM on 10/12/2010

This article hits the nail on the head - It is so true and you can't fight the fact.
It has been a common view of many so called pundits ( who dose'nt know a s*** about
anything - in my view) economic problems and lack of education with a high dose of
religious fundamentalism causes people to turn to terrorism of which Suicide attack
is one of its component
There are billions of uneducated or undereducated young people and some of them are
religious as well do not turn to terrorism or do not kill themselves with bombs strapped
to their chests.
If you occupy other people's land, kill them indiscriminately with bombs from high up in
the air and expect them to keep mum and be killed - this is the height of stupidity.
There is always a reaction even it is is unequal.
One should get out of other people's land - and mind one's own business without being greedy for other's natural resources - then do not have to cry because they won't retaliate.

[Cloak And Dagger]

09:10 AM on 10/12/2010

Proves that the statement "we are fighting them there so that they won't attack us here" was stupid at best and more likely a bald-faced lie.

[JoeBlough]

11:25 AM on 10/12/2010

While fighting them there, nothing has ever prevented them from coming over here. I believe there are more than one of them.

[cplKlyde]

06:46 AM on 10/12/2010

One does not need to be an to have figured that out.

[jo smith456]

07:31 AM on 10/12/2010

"Surprisingly" similar to the occupied Palestinian lands

[Wisdo]

06:44 AM on 10/12/2010

they needed a report to tell them that?

heres some more news for you: Loud Explosions linked to scattered human remains.

[Manhajsadiqeen]

06:04 AM on 10/12/2010

The Americans should be more concern about suicides from their soldiers, since there was a explosive report of soldier suicides in Afghanistan.
Press TV reported that the Taliban just raided and chased off an American outpost in northern Afghanistan and the Americans retreated by helicopter. Very interesting! The Taliban have regained the area once again.
All of the talk of terror and so on, the terror that the American and NATO forces are facing is real combat, from battle harden Mujahideen from many different countries.
A very interesting report done by one of your own media networks gave a chilling account of the Taliban and how this war began. Again, based upon false information they invaded Afghanistan, just like Iraq. The difference is that Afghanistan did not possess 'weapons of mass destruction' but Osama Bin Laden.
Bin Laden told the Taliban that he did not set off the chain of events of 9/11 but he did praise what had happened. I have never seen the so called proof that Bin Laden actually televised that he orchestrated this horrible event. Moreover, since he was under the protection of the Taliban, his truthfulness was important since the Taliban needed to know this.
With that said, the shari'ah is clear that you don't hand over another Muslim to the enemy, non Muslim states or entities period. This is a strong ahadith!
This fact aided the Americans to attack who don't have the real evidence that Osama did this horrible deed!

[Pennsanic]

06:30 AM on 10/12/2010

Bin Laden was just a financial supporter. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed boasts that he was "The Mastermind".

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/09/13/100913fa_fact_mcdermott

[BestGuest]

07:07 AM on 10/12/2010

I don't think OBL fits the profile of a man who'd be scared to claim responsibility of a major event like 9/11...

Taliban asked for proof, none was given. There's more proof that the US went into Afghanistan for other reasons....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/17/afghanistan.terrorism11
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/bush-rejects-taliban-offer-to-surrender-bin-laden-631436.html
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/international/secret-papers-made-public-taliban-offered-to-hand-over-osama-to-us-190

[jrfunkenstein]

05:38 AM on 10/12/2010

So the Defense Dept. spends six years studying what an average 8 year old could tell them about the animosity created when one nation invades, occupies and destroys another purely for greed?

Military intelligence is the ultimate oxymoron.

[RegCorleonis]

04:45 AM on 10/12/2010

Duh!

What rocket scientist came up with this totally obscure conclusion?

[bbossin]

05:28 AM on 10/12/2010

You mean they don't hate us for our much publicized freedoms?

[rissole]

04:05 AM on 10/12/2010

Wow, why didn't I think of that?

[Jtt]

04:01 AM on 10/12/2010

Ill repost here later when someone so ignorant isnt reading.

[bbossin]

03:22 AM on 10/12/2010

Is the experts name Captain Obvious?

[buttonz]

03:23 AM on 10/12/2010

No, just self appointed expert.

[lonngfello]

02:06 AM on 10/12/2010

Here is an expert opinion.

"Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer's states that the Al Qaeda Islamic terror attacks against America are motivated not by a hatred of American culture and religion but by the belief that U.S. foreign policy is a threat to Islam,[18] condensed in the phrase "They hate us for what we do, not who we are."

"U.S. foreign policy actions Scheuer believes are fueling Islamic terror include

Unconditioned US support to Israel
U.S. troops on Muslim 'holy ground' in Saudi Arabia (See: United States withdrawal from Saudi Arabia)
U.S. support for "apostate" police states in Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morocco, and Kuwait[19]
The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq
U.S. support for the creation of the Christian state of East Timor from territory previously held by Muslim Indonesia.
Perceived U.S. approval or support of counterinsurgency against Muslim insurgents in India, Philippines, Chechnya, Uyghur separatists in western China, Palestine.[20]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Middle_East_.2F_Southwest_Asia

[buttonz]

02:36 AM on 10/12/2010

Wouldn't be too sure on that.

There is a massive difference between a grievance and ideological organization. Al Qaeda is ideological. They even talked about coming after us when we were helping them against the Soviets.

A good number of those alleged facts are flat out wrong. We supported the Indonesians against the Timorese (I have friends who lost family to US trained Indonesian operatives and Timor was conquered by Indonesia after WWII, never created), we condemned Russia's actions in Chechnya-many times.

The list goes on, but what is critical to understand about extremist organizations is that they will twist any and all media. They cant be appeased and Al Qaeda is the worst of them. This is hilarious considering your using the them as an example as an organization related real grievances. Seyed Al Qutb is the ideological father of Al Qaeda. Even Al Qaeda will openly admit this. Perhaps you should read some of his books on how Western civilization whould be destroyed...

[valiantadvocate]

07:53 AM on 10/12/2010

What rambling.

[lonngfello]

07:58 AM on 10/12/2010

You attempt to downplay any valid motive for Muslim Arabs to hold the western world responsible in our own past transgressions. That kind of arrogance along with "twisting any and all media" is what lead the US to the 2003 Iraq invasion, which had followed decades of western meddling in the Mideast, much of which was lead by the US and much of that which has benefitted Zionist Israel over the decades.

Israel which has a history of terroristic war crimes while continuosly being protectected by US military might and UN voteo power from any meaningful actions being taken - - and still committing war crimes today with the continuation of illegaly "settling" on occupied Palestinian lands while claiming to want peace.

Claiming the west is innocent, is incomprehensible. Our meddling in MidEast affairs is well documented and has a habit of coming back to bite us. The CIA removal of the democratically elected Iranian Mossadegh in 1953 - on behalf of the Britts and BP oil, lead directly to the Iranian revolution in 1979 which came about after two and a half decades of our man the tyrannical Shah.

Events since 1979 have evolved to the situation we have now with Israel's paranoia over the possibility of Iran aquiring nuclear weapons and currently wanting the US to bomb Iran - - for which there has been a concerted effort mounted toward that end - - much like the propaganda campaign that lead the American public to back the invasion

[Better Better]

04:25 AM on 10/12/2010

"The evidence overwhelmingly shows America and Israel killing the weaker men, women and children in the Muslim world and elsewhere." Osama Bin Laden, 1996.

Sounds to me like that's the problem so I'm not sure what invading Iraq did to solve that.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/edicts.html

[buttonz]

04:43 AM on 10/12/2010

If you paid attention you would realize that OBL jumps on every issue that comes up.

This is the same guy who was professing the destruction of the West even when we were "allies". He is a career terrorist, even if we did all he wanted he wouldn't stop there. This is common behavior in terrorist organizations.

Why doesn't he get mad at Russia? Historically, 85% of deaths by military/weapon violence in the ME are because of Russian weapons.

These guys have an objective and are unreasonable. There is a reason we call them extremists.

[lonngfello]

08:04 AM on 10/12/2010

Thanks for that link, information is a weapon to be feared by those who don't want the truth to be understood.

[dteg]

02:00 AM on 10/12/2010

Obama you need a heart to heart talk with the military leaders. Tell them to give you an exit strategy instead of dragging their feet. The guy testifying tomorrow has defined the problem which everyone knows. Oppression causes insurgency attacks. His conclusion therefore we need to stay 3 more years is insane. The military leaders are playing you and he American people again.

[buttonz]

02:42 AM on 10/12/2010

Oppression and occupation aren't one of the same. With that logic we should fight against the police force because they are occupying the US. Afghans don't like foreigners and the least liked of them are the Taliban. (Yes, the organization is not native to Afghanistan)

The interest of military leaders is getting out as quickly as possible. Did you notice how the surge, the massive reduction in violence, and the excuse to draw down troops in Iraq gave Patraeus a promotion? The same applies for Afghanistan. The concept of securing Afghanistan is to make it uninhabitable for multi-national terrorist organizations.

[BestGuest]

07:13 AM on 10/12/2010

They don't like foreigners so u'd send more foreign troops?

U want to make Afghanistan uninhabitable by multinational terrorist organizations?

1) shuda thought about that when the US inundated the region with massive caches of arms and ammunition

2) Bring the troops back.

[valiantadvocate]

07:56 AM on 10/12/2010

Here you go again.

[RubalKhali]

01:18 AM on 10/12/2010

While I generally agree with the idea that occupation breeds the desperation that fuels suicidal attacks, the idea that 1983 was the first suicidal terrorist attack is quite wrong.



Modern suicide bombing as a political tool can be traced back to the assisination of Czar Alexander II of Russia in 1881. Alexander fell victim to a Nihilist plot. While driving on one of the central streets of St. Petersburg, near the Winter Palace, he was mortally wounded by the explosion of hand-made grenades and died a few hours afterwards. The Czar was killed by the Pole Ignacy Hryniewiecki (1856-1881), who died while intentionally exploding the bomb during the attack.


The ritual act of self-sacrifice during combat appeared in a large scale at the end of World War II with the Japanese kamikaze bombers.


The first modern suicide bombing occurred in Iran in 1980 when 13-year old Hossein Fahmideh detonated himself as he ran up to an Iraqi tank at a key point in a battle of the Iran-Iraq War. Lebanon, during its civil war, saw a modern suicide bombing: the Islamic Dawa Party's car bombing of the Iraqi embassy in Beirut, in December 1981.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_was_the_first_suicide_bomber

[BestGuest]

07:14 AM on 10/12/2010

But i thought history started in 2001

[Krek]

01:17 AM on 10/12/2010

Why tell Congress? If his testimony isn't written on the back of a stack of unmarked bills and slipped under the door of a stall in the mensroom they will ignore it.