Zarqawi killed in air raid

Remove all ads!

The death of the bogeyman?

Full Story

 

The vice bogeyman, actually, since Bin Laden is still at large.

In my version on heaven, Zarqawi wasn't met in heaven by the host of virgins he was expecting. Right now he's being whupped upside the head with a copy of the Koran by Allah, who's shouting, "No, no, no, you got it all WRONG! Did you even read the bloody book?"

 

Rest in pieces

 

Congratulations to our soldiers for finally getting the creep - better late than never. Hooah!

I now pose a question for this thread: what are everyone's predictions for the effect this will have? The cynical *sshole in me (that you've all come to know and love, admit it!) thinks it won't matter much, but the optimist in me hopes this might be a turning point. It's been a while since we've done something it seems the vast majority of Iraqis are thrilled about.Thoughts?

 

didnt US forces report that they'd killed him several weeks ago?

 

DR,

That's hard to say. I mean, we've killed al Queda's #2 man now, what? A couple of dozen times? The difference here is that this time it seems like we really did get the #2 guy. However, given how many al Queda members we've knocked off already, and given that they never to seem to run out of new recruits, my gut reaction is that this won't have quite the impact many would hope. This best case scenario I can see is a short term decrease in terrorist activities, until al Queda gets its house back in order. One a new guy steps up (and it seems like someone always does) it will be back to business as usual.

[ June 08, 2006, 19:38: Message edited by: Aldeth the Foppish Idiot ]

 

I doubt he really had that much influence on the big picture, anyhow. Of course, Zarqawi was controlling one of the more bloothirsty groups, and his death will dampen somewhat the efectiveness of his followers. However, there are plenty other groups with their own agenda and a capability and desire to create mayhem (what, you did not think that all the murderers in Iraq are Al-Qaeda, did you?).

 

I think the most relevant aspect to his death was that he was betrayed from within by elements of El Queda in Iraq. This might bode well for a more peaceful opposition.

 

Opinion around here seems to be that, no, this wont change the situation in Iraq at all. Terrorism geared toward spurring civil war and Iraqi nationalist resistance are the one side of the medal - US management of the entire situation since the very beginning, as well as certain "mistakes", being the other. It was all flawed from the start. How can it stand by itself then? If it was ever intended to.

Personally I dont see what this... glorious success of the US military will change. Just as the capture or whatnot of Bin Laden would probably make little difference. Except that the Bush could fashion a trophy of his former businesspartner.
Al-Qaeda isnt a rigid organization, with a masterbrain coordinating attacks. It is an idea those adopt who resent Westerners mucking around with their culture. Nothing more. Regrettably nothing less. (Of course they refuse to recognize they themselves have failed to balance/integrate their culture/religion with modern reality- Western reality, hence America (and its little appendix Europe?) being the scapegoat)

So perhaps a martyr has been created with Zarqawi's death. Perhaps this will bring about a moments respite, a change of tactics - or attacks will become all the more vicious to avenge him. Who's to say.

p.s.: I only learned today Zarqawi himself took beheading of hostages in his own two hands. Bastard.

 

I think the capture of Bin Laden will mean a great deal to those who lost family and friends in 9/11, as well as many other Americans. I also think it'll affect his organization somewhat, but to what extent is anybody's guess.

 

Capturing Bin Laden will most certainly affect his organisation. I doubt, however, that his capture would have a desirable effect. If we keep him as a prisoner, Al Quaida will increase terror activity in an effort to effect his release. Martyring him, I fear, would be even worse than imprisoning him.

[ June 09, 2006, 01:36: Message edited by: Drew ]

 

Airstrike remix

 

I would have preferred that he was taken alive and put to trial for his actions, but I know I won't be shedding a tear for this man's death.

But, if I may be so bold as to misappropriate a line from a greater man than myself - Zarqawi's death is not the end. It's not even the beginning of the end. If anything, it's the end of the beginning.

 

Meh - this, I'm thinking, changes nothing. I doubt Al Queda's chain of command is so rigid as not to be able to account for the deaths of its leaders. After all, they must expect this kind of stuff to happen - part of the job. Surely they're not stupid enough not to have others primed and waiting to step up.

 

12th May 1916 - James Connolly was executed by firing squad, ending the insugrancy in Ireland forevermore.

 

I agree with Spellbound that to the average American, bin Laden's capture/death would mean a great deal. He is the face of modern terrorism to the American public. I fully realize that groups like the IRA and Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists, and they are modern in every sense of the word (granted I haven't heard about the IRA doing anything for over 10 years, but they are still "modern" in every sense of the word). Those groups never affected Americans in any way however. It was OBL's terrorist network al Queda that Americans identify with terror. I, personally, would like to see him captured or killed, even though I am not naive enough to beleive his death will spell the end of al Queda.

 

This is probably off topic, but a bomb in London during the early 80's killed a few American's, and earlier last year, an American lady was thrown out of a hostle window by suspected nationalist thugs.

The IRA are also linked to Hamas, FARC and Libya (remember the Lockerbie bombing?).

My point from earlier is that simply killing high profile leaders does little to help the situation, its just a temporary morale boost for occupying forces. Still I cannot deny that Zarqawi deserved what he got.

 

I wish the news programs would show more scenes of the Iraqis dancing in the streets and firing thier weapons in the air!, I just can't get enough of that!

 

It is important to keep Zarqawi's death in perspective. In Baghdad alone, over 1,000 people die every month and although Zarqawi was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Iraqis in suicide bombings, his group is just one of many fighting in a complex sectarian struggle. Indeed, since the killing of Sunnis by Shia death-squads, often linked to government ministries and the military, have become rampant, Zarqawi's death may have little impact on the cycle of violence and revenge which has now been set in motion.

Certainly, Zarqawi's death will have little impact on the nationalist insurgency that targets the Americans and British and constitutes the bulk of the “resistance”. Zarqawi and other foreign jihadis were always a minority within the resistance and were often viewed with suspicion and contempt by the indigenous militants. His ultra-radicalism may even have earned him rebukes from within al-Qaida itself. However, Zarqawi undoubtedly had an influence on inciting suicide bombings and his death may ease sectarian animosity. But the character of the newly appointed minsters of defence and the interior will probably play a greater part in reducing or inflaming the Sunni/Shia divide.

 

I was listening to the news, and it said Zarqawi and Bin Laden were opposing terrorist groups. Sure, they both kill people, but they are rivals. So Bin Laden is perhaps happy about this, no?