How is the fact that a fundamentalist islamic republic like Iran who supports and arms terrorists like hezbola to the tune of more than 100 million dollars a year not a painful and brutal fact? How can you say that such country like the Islamic republic of Iran not to be representative of Islam. No matter what they say in the book you've mentioned your argument defies logic for me.
Is it true that their president Ahmadinejad who consorts with human rights champions like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro is simply misquoted and misunderstood?
Perhaps this book bears reading. But if the conclusion is as you state I can only ask myself who is really in denial?The book "Dying To Win: The Logic Of Suicide Terrorism" studies the psyches of all suicide terrorists with knowable histories (over 400 of them). The conclusion: they are actually not very religious at all, in fact they're fairly Westernised. Though Middle Easterners, their common thread is not religious fanaticism, it is a feeling that Western countries (and India) are stepping on their turf. It's a scholarly study whose results even surprised it's author, Robert Pape. Bush supporters can be a clever but denial-ridden bunch.
I would love to read the passage that supports this statement: "in fact they're fairly Westernised. "![]()
Westernized people aren't usually programed to become homicide bombers