Suicide? Homicide? FoxNews Story Leaves Me Bewildered

In a FoxNews online story today regarding attacks, counter-attacks and other violence in Iraq today, one paragraph talks about a "homicide" truck bomber. A few paragraphs later they report on a "suicide car bomber." Still later, towards the end of the story, the term, "homicide car bomber" returns.

From the context, my guess is that someone driving a vehicle loaded with explosives is a "bomber." If he is killed before detonating the expolsives or blows himself up without actually killing anyone but himself, he is a "suicide bomber."
If, however, he does succeed in blowing up someone else, he is elevated to the status of "homicide bomber."

I wonder, if the explosives are detonated by remote control, would the driver of the vehicle still be considered a "suicide bomber" (even thought he did not cause his own demise) or would the one who detonated the explosives be considered a "homicide bomber" even if he only killed the guy in the car?

If two guys planting a roadside IED accidently blow themselves up (as happened this past week) are they considered to be "suicide bombers" even if they did not intend to blow themselves up? Or would they be "homicide bombers" because each of them was responsible for blowing up the other?

I'm getting so confused that, in the context of the Iraqi conflict, the terms "suicide" and "homicide" have ceased to convey any clear meaning at all.

How about just calling them "an 'attacker' in a truck who blew himself up while driving into the front door of an Iraqi Police station in Mosul"....or something like that.

Personally, I don't care whether he was suicidal or homicidal or simply suffering from gastric cramping and was having a bad day.

I've been told that journalists are supposed to avoid jargon and cliches in their reporting. Where's the creativity?

To FoxNews I say, "Good try, but no cigar."

.