I disagree. Plenty of nations are dictatorial regimes and their population don't go around commiting suicide bombings.
But i simply disagree that suicide bombing is inheritly muslim ,and that therefore there is a problem in Muslim believe.Easy to prove to ,suicide bombing is not exclusive in history to muslims.Like: Japenese during WW2 ,Vietnamese during the vietnam conflict ,and these were organized suicde bomber opperations.Quite a few Japanese kamikazed on American Ships ,quite a few vietnamese ran with bombs into American HQ's or positions.If you want to make a count ,a bit there were quite substantial amounts of vietnamese suicide bombers ,thousands if not tenthousands.
Goal of Kamikaze tactics ,or vietnamese ones: to demoralize the enemy with vertical warfare ,schock tactcs ,break the will to fight.Often has proven to be a succesfull tactic to ,forced the USA to bomb Japan with nukes to get the war done withought to much casualties ,and vietnam is obvious.
Difference with "certain" muslim suicide bombers is that usually the Japanese targeted combatants ,while "certain" muslim suicide bombers target non-combatants ,sometimes in large mass and in a time of non-official war.
Now targeting non-combatants is nothing new neither in warfare.Strategic bombers torching whole towns ,German U-boats sinking American civilian ships in a time of no war yet.Nukes.Not to talk about the numbers of casualty's there ,9/11 was nothing compared to Hiroshima ,and the nuke was a demoralization weapon to ,virtual warfare ,if they had taken a rope and tied a person to it it would have been i gigantic terrorist attack.
So whats new? the combination i guess ,virtical warfare in time of no war targetting non combatants.ell why now and not in the past?Simple really ,globalization.Palestinians don't have to go far to target Jewish civilians.In a wy even palestinian suicide bombers often attack israeli combatants.In 1944 the japanese couldn't just take their plane and go fly to America to ram it into a very important installation ,i guess if they could they would have done it ,same goes for those wacky Vietnamese.
I maintain that much like Judaism and Christianism, Islam needs to reformed and softened. You said that in the Mid Ages the islamic world was ahead of Europe, and I know that's true. However social progress in Europe was much more intense, I don't see how one can deny that. Part of social progress is to abandon the fundamentalist approach to religion. For the most part this happened in Europe, but not in the ME.
Extremism simply relates to social conditions.When country's get unstable extremists gain momentum ,simple as that.With the instabilety in france now it's probably clear that the french far right wing will gain most of the situation.Vietnamese don't blow themselfs up for the fun of it ,and since the end of the war they remarkably stoped that tradition ,same goes for the Japanese.
That there is tension between the middle east and the West is easy to explain ,we have been sucking it dry of oil for our use for decade's and need a constnant supply to maitain our richness ,so we excert our influence over it wich in the case of the USA is massive.deny this and youre IMO naive.Israel is USA's good good buddy so the palestinians can't never really win.Saudi Arabia is the good old puppet oil pool ,Iran is the runaway puppet oil pool ,Iraq is an opportunity with shady casius belli above that tiny puppet Koeweit ,oh it was only a few decade's ago that the USA helped Saddam to defeat the runaway puppet.In the USA every attack on civilians means a domestic surge of nationalism and patriotism ,they are handy enemy's for rallying a poppulation behind you.
But you can disagree ,but i'm not that cynical yet ,i'm only warming up.But that is not the point ,A average muslim will be WAAAY more cynical about this whole bussiness than me westerner wiith social reservations ,regadrless if you argue ,and the situation there is more important for this matter.And additionally for them to be anti american is socialy constructive ,youll easily have friends with such thoughts ,it's create's a sort of dangerous pan-muslim nationalims.
This i guess is even more important ,Anti-American's create's solidarity in otherwise a fragmented Muslim worlds ,it ties them closer toghether ,and religion has rather become a means of tying these fragments toghether in a more powerfull whole ,but it remains an exploited means.The Moejahedeen are legendary as pan Muslim fighting force fighting on the fringes of the Muslim world regardless of nationality.They are modern crusaders ,comparable to our medieval ones ,but they are fighting from a position of danger to their independance ,like they historicly did in Afhanistan VS russia.They are not the technoligical advanced ,just as the crusaders were technological inferior to the the Muslims in the 10th century ,safe for brutal methods of warfare.vertcal warfare as means to close the gap in advancement.
And religioun was only a tie for the crusaders to.Little did they care about religion ,heck the Crusaders of the 1st crusade litteraly slaughtered the whole poppulation of jerusalem, ,christinas included.they wern't very zealous ,if anything relgioun was for them the tie that tied their fragments of groups toghether.pope Urbanes his engenious idea ,to make order in his fragmented and threatened Christian world by uniting the warlord nations under the banner of religioun and seeking a comman enemy.Nothing ties people better toghether than a coman enemy.Especially one sticking youre esyes out with vast richness.
That the Muslim world is less advanced ,less powerfull than us the west is largely to our discretion of being more advanced ,and we are more advanced than many others ,more advanced than Africa ,or large parts of Asia.We havn't really been generous in giving away our technoligical or financial advantage's for the coman good.Combine this with interrezsts of us ,namely oil ,and the mix is exmlplosive.
Anyway ,enough text for that topic ,back to Paris ,some notes:
This whole episode will lead to destabilization ,and it will be mostly in favor for ideological party's.Certain pêople will draw the conclusion that immigrants are the problem ,and they'll lean more to the far right.Others will blame goverment policy's ,and will lean more to the left.Eitherway this will probably influence the proportional support of various party's ,and the more outspoken party's will gain from it.
Now the more right wing party is clearly established ,as it seems mostly in the city's ,it looks clear as this will benifit them most.
If ideological left has a solid party representing them ,then it's a good counter for a right wing party ,and forces the party's to seek more concensus either with centre party's.Though hopefully concensus won't result in inabilety to act on the core problem.(whatever it might be)
Though if i presume right the party of Sarkozy is the one mostly representing either left or centre left?
My greatest worry is when a sollution can't be found ,in any case i think it's a dangerous precedent.I only hope France won't be to represive (or even get youngstes killed) ,or that extreme right wing militant people might seek lethal conflict with the gangs.If you get to represive then you might have terrorists in the make (they are nearing it already anyway ,luckily not lehtal yet) ,or it could lead to deep social conflict.
My greatest fear is that this is only the beginning ,since the guys got electrified no deaths have fallen ,but if the gangs get new marty'rs then thing's might turn a lot worse.
But another thing seems important here to me.How will the Muslim and frican world react to this?
It makes you wonder, would we blame the Catholic or Protestant Church if the KKK made some terrorist attacks ? Ah, now you feel closer to the Muslim community, thanks to me. 
