I watched a fascinating episode of the PBS show Wide Angle last week. The topic was suicide bombers in Israel, specifically interviews with several bombers who thought better of it, threw away their explosive belts and were either captured by or turned themselves in to the Israelis. They were interviewed in jail.
The heavy spin from the program was that these bombers were driven to their actions by intolerable conditions created by Israel, but the impression I got was that they were typical troubled teenagers and that the prime difference between them and their peers in other parts of the world is that they were offered suicide belts by terrorist recruiters. One kid (these were boys under 18) was clearly a local outcast, probably picked on by other kids and with no prospect of a girlfriend. Another had recently moved to the West Bank from Jordan, and must have been going through a nasty adjustment to his new situation. I'm not saying that the typical angst-ridden American teenager would commit suicide if given the chance, but suicide as a means of social acceptance is not unknown in the world -- see for example the hangings of young men described in The Tipping Point.
This impression was strengthened by the other two interviews in the show, one with a suicide bomber recruiter, and one with a man who outfitted the bombers. These two were clearly out to lure a certain personality type to use for their own ends. The only concern was advancing their own agenda (which was clearly to total descruction of Israel, not just establishing an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza).
The Orwellian part of the broadcast was that the two organizers were always referred to as "activists." This is true doublespeak. An activist is someone who works through the political process to effect social change. Someone gathering signatures for a ballot measure which would increase teachers' salaries is an activist. The folks mentioned below organizing a demonstration for Iranian freedom are activists. The issue doesn't need to be laudable: even someone lobbying his congressman against equal rights would be an activist, as long as his methods were peaceful.
People who recuit teenagers to kill other children are not activists -- they are terrorists, they are gangsters preying on the vulnerable as much as pimps who force runaways into prostitution or drug lords who use 10 year olds to sell crack. To call them activists is a slur on all the millions of people around the world who dedicate a part of their lives to making the democratic process work.
UPDATE: Rereading this entry, I am afraid I may have left an impression that I believe suicide bombers themselves are victims. This is not my intention. While young, they are still old enough to know right from wrong, and their desire for indescriminant killing is evil. We must hold them accountable for their actions, and indeed these attempted bombers are all holding prison terms.
One thing does separate the attempted bombers from those who detonated and those who recruited and armed them: in the end they turned away from violence and chose life. We can only hope they will be kept away from the unrepentant terrorists so that years from now when they are released they will try to return to a semblance of normal life.