(Via Instapundit.)
The consensus among my friends about this video: “now THAT rocks!”
The pictures of Zarqawis carcass reminds me of Che, that other bearded terrorist, murderer and media sensation that America, with local allies, killed. Much like Zaq, Che never looked better than he did when he was dead.
(When will we have the first live sighting of Zarqawi’s mug on some foul-smelling hippie’s t-shirt?)
God rest the souls of the thousands of men, women and children Zarqawi murdered.
God bless America.
God bless our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, and our allies who put their lives in danger in the fight against Islamic terrorism.
God bless free Iraq.
Death to America’s enemies.
UPDATE: Zarqawi’s death is a setback to the apocalyptic, irrational element in the resistance, composed in large part of non-Iraqi “jihadis”. Paradoxically, his death, while it may lead to less murder of innocent civilians — an unequivocal good thing — may make things harder not easier in the long run. With Zarqawi gone, the potential for a more rational resistance emerges. Successful insurgencies usually have three elements: (1) foreign assistance, (2) a political “front” that has specific goals and seeks unity with all those opposed to the current regime, and (3) a guerilla/terrorist/military arm that wages war in a targeted way against the regime and its supporters. I think we are likely to see a more “traditional” and hence more capable and threatening resistance emerge as a result of Zarqawi’s removal from the playing field. Without regard to this, he was a man who did hideous things, and would continue to do so until he was stopped. As W puts it, justice was brought to him. That is worth celebrating, for its own sake.
Thanks, Lex for saying it, though the shadow of Che is not an attractive one, your words are warming.
I don’t follow Intrade – what were the odds, say 48 hours before the announcement?
And from another point of view than Lex’s, but one that we can appreciate, see Iraqpundit, cheered both by the end of Zarqawi but also by the completion of the cabinet:
Speaking of slavery, Lincoln alluded to the Bible: “The Almighty has His own purposes. ‘Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.'” Surely a nation can be thankful even at death when it comes to a man who found his purpose in beheading, encouraging slaughter, & attempting to provoke a bloody civil war.
Didn’t take long for the “regular” news to try to downplay this, did it?
Ginny, Intrade’s odds that Zarqawi would be captured or killed were less than 10% for the period ending June 30 and less than 25% for the period ending Dec. 31.
I must admit, I thought Michael Totten’s “got the mf” summed it up quite well. Death to humanity’s enemies!
Ginny, see my update.
Jonathan, this is a case where the Intrade score was probably based on speculation, and no one trading really had any good insight into what was actually going on in the hunt for Zarqawi. I see this as a very good thing. It means that the security around such activities is working.
Bruce, they never surprise us, do they?
Jay, in this case at least, they are the same.
Lex, good point about security.
I dunno, Lex. Your update seems like the most pessimistic possible speculation about what might happen. I think it’s more likely that by eliminating this enemy (and numerous of his associates) we not only weaken the insurgency but also make potential insurgents more likely to abandon the fight.
Well, I hope my update is wrong. But it seems to me the people with the most interest in whacking Zarqawi is the Sunni insurgency. If they want to outlast the Americans they need to dig in for a long struggle, and build a popular front with whatever Shia are opposed to the American-instituted government. They also need to get support from abroad, and undermine American support for the war. Zarqawi was an obstacle to that. They can now shift the focus of the war to one of national liberation, which will generate a lot more sympathy in the West. So, killing Zarqawi was certainly a moral victory, and probably a tactical victory, but possibly a strategic advantage to the most dangerous faction among the insurgency. That’s how it looks to me. Maybe I’m wrong. Hope so.
1. As long as we continue to eliminate top AQ leaders faster than the rate at which they mature from young jihadi grunts, we are winning. Lopping off one of the hydra’s heads isn’t futile if we keep cutting it far enough below the point of regeneration that the loss is eventually irreparable.
2. The Sunni insurgents now cannot point to AQII and say, “But we aren’t the worst!” In fact, now they’ll have less excuse not to find a political solution.
3. Middle Easterners respect power and accomplishment, often even when it hurts them individually. The successful kill has got to give pause to some of the young men pondering a (short) life of suicide bombing.
Bruce, I agree that the AQ side of the insurgency has been hurt by this.
I tend to think the Sunni insurgency may switch to a political solution, or to a mixed political/violent approach, in particular a popular front with the Shia, which will be more effective than the kind of random psycho killing that Zarqawi specialized in.
Agreed also that this will not make recruiting any easier for jihadi groups. People rally to success, not failure. If thr contrary were true we’d have had to fight a Fourth Reich by now, or a revived Confederacy. Sad as it may be for some observers, the historical record is that most people flee from causes that lead to the death of their participants. Killing terrorists means that (1) the dead guy won’t bother you anymore, and (2) it will be harder, not easier, to recruit others. Attrition works. Not immediately, but over time, as you keep up the pressure. This is one step in a long journey.