Philip E Kapusta

Suicide Bombers in Conus Philip E Kapusta

Publisher Marketing: This monograph analyzes recent (post-1980) suicide bombings and determines the probability of the same in the Continental United States (CONUS). Analysis includes a brief history of modern suicide bombing and an examination of the strategic, tactical, social and individual logic of suicide bombing. It addresses the probable characteristics of suicide bombings against the U. S., both within CONUS and abroad. The monograph also makes recommendations about what can be done to mitigate future bombings. Finally, Appendix A lists 2,202 suicide bombings since 1980, and as of early 2007 is the best available open source suicide bombing database in the world. Suicide attackers have been a part of warfare for over two millennia, but the coupling of suicide attackers and explosives greatly increased the importance and effectiveness of this tactic in the 20th century. The modern phenomenon of suicide bombing had its genesis in the Iran-Iraq War from 1980-88. Ayatollah Khomeini used his influence to motivate young Iranians to commit suicide attacks, but he was successful in framing such attacks as martyrdom operations. Concurrent with the Iran-Iraq War, Iran influenced the development of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah tried suicide bombing on somewhat of a trial basis against the U. S. and France, and then later against Israel. Unfortunately, Hezbollah achieved both strategic and tactical success and proved the efficacy of suicide bombing. Not surprisingly, other groups such as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the Palestinians and the People's Liberation Army of Kurdistan (PKK) started employing suicide bombers in the 1980s and 1990s. As suicide bombing spread geographically and ideologically, it also increased in sophistication. It advanced from being a simple bomb delivered by truck, to include suicide vests, boat bombs, and eventually airplanes. Target sets similarly expanded. Once the taboo against suicide was overcome, previous distinctions among civilian non-co