Thursday, March 19, 2009
Second attack against Koreans in Yemen.
A delegation of South Koreans visiting Yemen to investigate the terrorist attack earlier in the week were hit with a bomb blast while in their vehicles on their way to the airport. The 20-year-old suicide bomber was killed but no Koreans were injured in the latest attack.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
Now I would start to wonder if Koreans are being targeted.
well, attacking Koreans worked out pretty well for the terrorists in Afghanistan. If you're going to target someone, why not target the developed nation that has a history of negotiating with terrorists?
why not target the developed nation that has a history of negotiating with terrorists?
You mean the Italians?
Ha ha... remember that one time that the President of South Korea came close to being impeached because he traded arms for hostages? Good times.
Sorry for being gruff there, but it's a fiction that South Korea is "the developed nation" that has gone against the no-negotiations principle.
pardon my definite article.
;)
Roboseyo.....Korea is NOT a developed nation. Please do not say that again.
Well, I'd say Korea's at least as developed as Hawaii.
nb, yes it is, give it a rest.
I wonder how long it will be before this type of violence will be considered "normal". How long before people stop helping bombing victims because there could be a second bomber waiting for people to come rushing in to help. I don't think we are far from this point. I think people should be asking more questions like how long it will be before there is a serious backlash against muslims in different countries. The media is really ignoring the evolving story because of their focus on the "newsmakers".
How long before people stop helping bombing victims because there could be a second bomber waiting for people to come rushing in to help.
During the rash of abortion clinic bombings in the late 1990s, this kinds of tactic was used. A smaller device would go off in or near a targeted building, and then a larger device would be set to detonate outside where those from inside the building had come out to gather.
Not to take sides one way or the other as to whether Korea is classified as industrialized, developing, developed, or advanced, but aren't there solid definitions that are used by political economists? Throughout the 1990s, Korea and Taiwan were both NICs — newly industrialized countries — as were the other "Tigers." Ireland, too, when it became known as "the Celtic Tiger."
I was not being glib when I said the development in Korea is similar to the development in Hawaii. While Hawaii lacks the broad industrial base of South Korea, its rural deficiencies remind me of Korea's rural deficiencies and its urban planning is as spotty and haphazard as much of Seoul's, Pusan's, or Kwangju's.
Is this an attack on Koreans, or an attack on foreigners? Yes, Koreans were killed, but are the terrorists killing Koreans because they hate Koreans, or are they killing foreigners who happen to be Korean in this case. In other words, would the terrorists kill non-Koreans as well? Do we know the motives of the terrorists (other than the obvious one of terrorism)?
Before the second attack, I would have assumed it was probably a general attack on infidels. But the second attack suggests they are targeting a particular group.
Korea's status as a largely Christian country may make it a richer target than, say, Japan or China, although Japan's status as an ally of the US makes it a target as well.
In other words, East Asians at home or abroad should not assume they are immune to terror attacks just because they are not "White Westerners."
No, this is not an attack on Koreans because they are Korean. If so, we would not expect to find terrorist attacks in Yemen of other nationals.Yet, Beglians, Spaniards and Americans have all been killed in Yemen since 2000. It is indiscriminate terrorism, not race-related terrorism. Al-Qaeda hates everyone, not just Koreans. Two incidents suggest only that Al-Qaeda is alive and well in Yemen, and that more attacks are to come, against Koreans and others.
Brian,
I stand corrected.
"In the 21st century, the original East Asian Tiger[6] countries (Hong Kong,[7][6] Singapore,[7][6] South Korea,[7][6][8][9] and the Taiwan[7][6]) are considered "developed" region or areas, along with Cyprus,[7] Israel,[7] Malta,[7] and Slovenia,[7] are considered near developed "developing" region or areas."
IMF
The real question here is, why weren't any Koreans injured? I'm guessing it has something to do with Kimchi.
And another question. How does a suicide bomber miss?
Good point the last, since "almost" is just as good as "right on target."
Samuel, I don't disagree with you about the general nature of al Qaeda attacks or Islamist extremism, but I do believe individual attacks may have particular targets, such as individuals of certain nationalities.
I didn't think that was the case with this one since it occurred in a tourist area — and I'm still not sure — but I started to wonder when there was a second attack on the people from the same country who had come to investigate the first attack.
This could be retribution for sending boats to the Gulf of Aden, for allowing missionaries into the country, for being allied with the United States, for having sent troops to Iraq, or... it could just be happenstance that it was Koreans they had killed in the first bomb and whom they targeted in the second.
Al-Qaeda attacked Koreans because Koreans are involved in the petrol industry in Yemen. There are no tourists in Yemen. Those killed were most likely family members visiting the 190 Korean employees working for Korean-based companies in Yemen.
The success of its first attack led Al-Qaeda to reattack Koreans. They smelt blood, and went for another kill. Al-Qaeda doesn't hate Koreans per se--they probably can't even find the country on the map. Rather, Al-Qaedo kills to fulfill its Islamic vision, regards of the nationality of its victims.
Al-Qaeda attacked Koreans because Koreans are involved in the petrol industry in Yemen. There are no tourists in Yemen.
CNN described them as "South Korean tourists." Yemen most definitely has tourists and they occasionally get kidnapped, though it was by non-al Qaeda groups.
They were killed in Shiban, a UNESCO World Heritage Site that attracts tourists.
No one goes to Yemen just to go to Yemen. There is too much violence. Most likely those tourists were acting as tourists when killed, but their reason for visiting Yemen in the first place is related to the workers stationed there.
This dovetails with what I was suggesting could be at work:
Lee noted that Koreans were not well known in the area of Yemen where Koreans were recently targeted in a terrorist attack, but in 2007, local Yemeni media gave a lot of press to a visiting Korean youth group — led by a missionary group — held a Christian-related performance and handed out Bibles and crosses during a summer camp event. Lee said that after the Koreans left, locals expressed unhappiness about what had transpired, and wrote a letter to the Yemeni president complaining about the missionary activity. Afterwards, an Egyptian paper reported that Korean NGOs and KOICA volunteers could be Christian missionaries, too.
how does this dovetail anything?
Make up your mind: were the Koreans and one Yemeni killed because A) they were Korean, and only because they were Korean; B) they were linked to the spread of Christian propaganda C) they were tourists, and only because they were tourists D) they fit the Al-Qaeda hatred of foreigners
Answer D best fits the evidence, since it explains the deaths of other nationals.
Post a Comment