It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How long would it take to run out of suicide bombers?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 11:24 AM
So as I was sitting here reading the news about the U.S having evidence of Iran helping insurgents in Iraq ( ), I got to the part where it talks about 140 suicide bombings last year. I got to thinking "how long before they run out of suicide bombers?"

I tried to do the research and find out how many bombing have happened since the start of the war. I figure that there's had to have been at least 500 of them by now. So if someone more apt to find it could do so, it would be appriciated.

I did track down the populations of some of the possible locations of insurgents:
Iraq Population: 26,783,383 (July 2006 est.)
Iran Population: 68,688,433 (July 2006 est.)
Afghanistan Population: 31,056,997 (July 2006 est.)
( I know there are other potential locations for them, but these seem to be the hot spots)

So we devide those in half for US supporters and non-supporters (just to narrow it down some) and we get 63,264,407 AGAINST us. So lets just say that only 1 quarter of that number is willing to be bombers and we get 15,816,102. Wow, that's a big number....maybe I'm over estimating? Let's devide it by another 1/4: 3,951,026. Maybe still a little too big? Once more by a 1/4: 988,506. Ok I think that's a small enough number since it's no longer in the millions.

Now, how many troops do we have over there? I remember reading somewhere that it was 144, the boost of 20,000 to 30,000 that bush wants....we'll go for 25,000 for simplicity. 169,000 US troops total.

988,506 vs 169,000....5 suicide bombers for every US troop?

Ok...there's my mental rambling. What all do you all think? Anything to add to it?

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 01:22 PM
Do you honestly think that half the population of those countries would be suicide bombers?

Do you even believe that all insurgents are suicide bombers?

If so, you have a badly distorted view imposed by exposure to too much Western mass-media.

For starters, there number of insurgents is a much lower percentage than half. It's hard to make any real estimates of how high that number is, but I'd go with maybe 10%.

Of those people that actually fight, fewer still are into the whole "I'm going to blow myself up thing". These are people we're talking about. Even at war, they would very much prefer to live rather than die.

Suicide bombings are much more rare than what the media tends to tell us. Suicide bombing is sensational and thus worth big ratings. This translates into bigger bottom lines. That's what the Western media is interested in... not how they distort the truth.

I've even wondered about the seemingly random attacks. How many of those were "oopses". Someone building or planting an IE and did the wrong thing at the wrong time. It would work for the Terrorist agenda to claim the "attack" was their's, since it would scare us Westerners. It would fit the media's agenda to not investigate too closely because "Another Suicide Bombing In Iraq, more at 11" gets people to tune in.

So what I'm saying is I think your numbers are WAY off.
What I'm further saying is that you shouldn't buy into the hype.
The Suicide bombers aren't the main threat in Iraq. They're just a nasty one.


log in