Why?

[Franconicus]

You will call me a leftie, but I really try to understand what makes people do things like that. Killing people they do not know, never seen in their lifes, did not do any harm to them ...? I am not talking about the political or religious reasons. I am talking about psycho. Is it hate, fear, anger?

So please avoid comments like 'it is all becauseof US imperialism', or 'muslims are bad', or 'it's because the liberals do not let us kill them'.

[King of Atlantis]

The have become consumed by hate and lies.

[Spetulhu]

What's so odd about killing people you don't know? Humans do it all the time. Give a man a cause to fight for and he'll commit actions of violence against those who stand in his way. Hey, he's on the right side! It's justified. Besides, they deserved it.

Why do soldiers think it's OK to kill people they've never met? Artillery and airforce don't even see the people they kill in the name of their country. They're on the right side, fighting the enemy.

Why do terrorists think it's OK to kill people they've never met? Same thinking, probably. They're on the right side, fighting the enemy.

[Franconicus]

What's so odd about killing people you don't know? Humans do it all the time. Give a man a cause to fight for and he'll commit actions of violence against those who stand in his way. Hey, he's on the right side! It's justified. Besides, they deserved it.

Why do soldiers think it's OK to kill people they've never met? Artillery and airforce don't even see the people they kill in the name of their country. They're on the right side, fighting the enemy.

Why do terrorists think it's OK to kill people they've never met? Same thinking, probably. They're on the right side, fighting the enemy.

It is not as simple as that. Artillery and bombers can kill because they do not see the enemy. And if you ever read the stories of allied bomber pilots you see that they had big problems when they saw the burning towns.
Infantry kills for two reasons. First, they are afraid. Second, they do because their commrades do.
I know that the criminal bomb attack on London is not unique. But I do not understand it.

[King of Atlantis]

What's so odd about killing people you don't know? Humans do it all the time. Give a man a cause to fight for and he'll commit actions of violence against those who stand in his way. Hey, he's on the right side! It's justified. Besides, they deserved it.

Why do soldiers think it's OK to kill people they've never met? Artillery and airforce don't even see the people they kill in the name of their country. They're on the right side, fighting the enemy.

Why do terrorists think it's OK to kill people they've never met? Same thinking, probably. They're on the right side, fighting the enemy.

There is a big differnce killing in a war and targetting civilians.

[sharrukin]

Actually it's easier for human beings to kill those they do not know, than it is to kill those they do. That's why we invented propaganda, racism, and a whole slew of other -ism's. It helps to dehumanize those you intend to fight. Of course, the good news is that if we do not know them, we tend to leave them alone simply because we do not care. Usually.

[bmolsson]

Modern warfare doesn't force you to see the enemy die. Modern warfare include to cripple the source of revenue, which includes civilians. Modern war is about Total war, where nobody escapes and everyone participates, regardless if you like it or not.

Very few people are able to kill another human and hold him in your arms and look in to his eyes while he is dying. If you get a bomb off and you only get some flashy news pictures on TV, it's much less real and it's easier to lie to your selves and justify it.

Unfortunately a human life has very little value these days.......

[doc_bean]

I think it's mostly propaganda fueled hate. It might also be possible that Al Quaida pays a lot of money, poor people can get desperate.

[Al Khalifah]

One word - Ignorance.

If I were to include others, they might be: Intollerance and Jealousy. These people have nothing in their own lives and so they try to destroy others.

[econ21]

I suspect the psychology of how people act in groups may be very important. There's been a lot of experiments about how people will do seemingly terrible things (believe they are inflicting pain etc) when instructed by "authority" figures. Islamic terrorism does seem to have some elements of authority in it - appeals to the Koran, the fatwas, Al-Zarqawi setting himself up as the "Shiekh of AQ in Iraq" or whatever he calls himself etc. Also when you are in a close nit group with a harsh mentality - think of a violent youth gang - individuals in that group may participate in things that are hard to contemplate in cool isolation. The gang becomes particularly powerful when subject to violence itself - the "tit for tat" revenge instinct is very strong. Whether or not the terrorists have personally experienced losses, it is clear that they make a big deal of their supposed matyrs and the killings of their enemies.

Now there are some loners who commit acts of terrorism and so most of the above does not apply to them. Often they seem a little disturbed to me - not too different from a pyschopath.

But even "normal" people can do terrible things in certain situations - the whole of human history shows us that.

[Franconicus]

I know in the 30ies when the Nazis buiolt their SA gangs to fight the communists and socialists they told the young men horror stories about their enemies. What they would do if they could, how they rape women, torture their prisoners ... . After that those men were so scared that they were happy to be in a SA brigade and willing to do to their enemies exactly the same things they heard before. Same thing happened over and over, for example in Bosnia. So the motivation is fear, caused by propaganda

[TonkaToys]

[BrainDump]
Indoctrination of extreme belief and misrepresentation of the enemy seems to be the principal way of creating terrorists.
The extension of hate to encompass an entire nation, instead of just targetting the leaders or military bodies of that state, means that the people of that nation become the perceived enemy.
The phrase that Blair used yesterday, "way of life" , is telling too; the extremist sees one culture as a threat to their way of life and is therefore self-justified to try to destroy the other culture.
The fact that religious self-sacrifice is seen as holy and a way to become a martyr make it easier to justify hurting others as long as you too are hurt in the name of your beliefs.
The anonymity of the people you are hurting must make it easier; would it be so easy to blow yourself up in a crowded street if you knew that your sister's husband was there? Wouldn't you think about the consequences to your family?
The cult of personality must have an effect; you idolise a teacher, and that teacher says you will be heroic if you commit a crime.
[/BrainDump]

[Idaho]

There is a big differnce killing in a war and targetting civilians.

Not since the second world war. From then on wars have always killed proportionally more civilians than soldiers. From the carpet bombing of Vietnam, to the 'targeted' bombing in Iraq.

Why do they do it? They must for some reason believe that this is the best way to achieve whatever ends they set themselves - a hodge-podge of different stories of fighting oppression from Kashmir, Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, etc. When you look at the map it's not hard to find potential inspiration for hot-headed young men who are promised an eternity of paradise.

The question is two-fold really. What makes the individuals do it, and what factors have created a situation where such an action is even on the agenda.

[Redleg]

It is not as simple as that. Artillery and bombers can kill because they do not see the enemy. And if you ever read the stories of allied bomber pilots you see that they had big problems when they saw the burning towns.
Infantry kills for two reasons. First, they are afraid. Second, they do because their commrades do.

Not completely correct - the Infantryman fights in combat for numerous reasons. You might want to try reading the studies on WW2 where the statistics show that only about 10% of the infantrymen fired their weapons. (One of the main reasons why many nations went to automatic and semiautomatic assualt weapons was because of this).

[ICantSpellDawg]

i would do it because of anger and hopelessness
maybe with some good intentions

[Idaho]

There is also something in declaring your actions sacred. Islam has a principle that states 'To the pure, all things are pure' - a dangerous concept if ever I did see one. Although I must point out that it is a principle that cuts across religions and even to atheist movements. Communist movements have been past masters at being oppressive b*stards all for the freedom of the people. Once again the great words of C S Lewis come to me:

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Although in this example perhaps it should read:

"but those who torment us with the approval of their own conscience will torment us without end for they have no reason to stop"