I have missed a few pages on this. I am glad that it has stuck to the core topic idea.
"Hommicide Bomber" as a term, is opinionated, When I choose to use the term Hommicide Bomber (and I do use it often) I am expressing the fact that I have lost all sympathy for the cause that has employed such tactic. It is an emotional responce.
When I intend to state something as a matter of historical fact, I use the term "Suicide Bomber" as that is the proper neutral term (IMAO*)
However, Think of this, sometimes the "bomber" could also be considered a "victim" When some *Explative deleted* Straps a bomb to an 11 year old Girl and sends her into a crowd, I am not about to lay blame on that poor child who is frightened, and unable to comprehend the results of that action.
In these cases its not really "suicide" because the child doesnt make a free informed choice to die. In these cases I think the term "Hommicde Bomber" is more technicaly accurate. However the use of "Bomb-Belts" is so frequent that the distinction between the 2 would be too overbearing... So... When reported in news, it should be "Suicide Bomber"
When addressed in an editorial context, "Hommicide Bomber"