Zarqawi is dead

**Shek** · 22 Jun 06,, 01:30

Confed and Lieb,
Maybe I'm wrong, but when you read Swift Sword's posts, consciously think whether it is Swift speaking or whether he has taken on another persona to give a perspective that you won't find in the MSM. He is well versed in Middle East history, and what you are seeing in his post is the headline from a Middle Eastern historical perspective, one that the pan-Islamists use quite frequently. Take a look at one of OBL's, Zawahiri's, or Zarkman's rants, not just the quotes that the MSM will pick out, and look at the historical illusions that they make, trying to invoke the glory days of the expansion of Islam and the defeat of various invading armies.

Swift Sword,
I'm curious if you've read Efraim Karsh's book Islamic Imperialism. If so, what do you think of his thesis and how good of a historical survey of Islamic Middle Eastern history does it provide? It's much more history than I've ever read, but with all of the details being new, it's hard to digest all at once and so I don't know if it's really in-depth or if it's just drinking from the firehouse, making it seem more detailed than it really (probably the case, I believe). It seems that he takes a strictly political Islam approach, and so one of the reviews I saw was real critical about his lack of exploring the religious jurisprudence surrounding jihad. In any event, since I'm just starting to roll up my sleeves and dive into Islamic history, I wanted to get an opinion from someone who's more well read on the topic. For that matter, Sparten, Plat, etc., feel free to comment if you've read it. Thanks.

**Confed999** · 22 Jun 06,, 02:18

Originally Posted by leibstandarte10

If we're not occupying, then what are we doing?

Currently we're there at the request of the Iraqi government. We are no more occupying Iraq, than we are occupying Germany, we're just being asked to do more in Iraq.

Originally Posted by shek

Maybe I'm wrong, but when you read Swift Sword's posts, consciously think whether it is Swift speaking or whether he has taken on another persona

I do my best to only read what is written in peoples' posts, because guessing his actual intent is impossible. So, I just reply to the bits I know are incorrect, or that I disagree with, effectively bouncing the ball back into his court.

**Bluesman** · 22 Jun 06,, 04:34

Originally Posted by Swift Sword

Invading army slays local warlord by the waters of Shinar...hmm...color me silly, but somehow I fail to share your optimism over the novelty...or lack thereof, as the case appears to be.

Enjoying your flattery as always,

Williiam

Look, we all know you're against the war; we get it.

But the stubborn refusal to see this as a Big Dam' Deal marks you as intellectually dishonest, and not really that intellectual after all.

You silly-colored person, you..

**smilingassassin** · 22 Jun 06,, 09:14

Sorry, Zarqawi was not just another terrorist, his track record speaks for itself. To imply otherwise is naive to the extreme.

Fulcrum or not, Iraq has to be stabilized.

**smilingassassin** · 22 Jun 06,, 09:20

Originally Posted by Amled

Of course it hurt them, but Wittmann’s death didn’t stop the Tigers from causing mayhem to the Allies armour. Rommel’s “suicide” apparently didn’t dishearten the Nazi war machine.
Their deaths like Zarqawi’s may in the short term temporarily weaken the cause for which they fought. But the problem with a cause, is that it inevitably finds new icons to mount on pedestals.

Not an accurate compairison. The Nazis had quite a supply of highly compitent generals to pick from, one cannot say the same for Al-Q. Zarqawi had heaps of experience in killing, mutilating and plotting attacks.

One also has to look at the outcome of WW II to figure out what needs to be done. Kill the leadership and widdle its resources.

**Bluesman** · 22 Jun 06,, 09:37

Well, fellas...two of Iraq's Top Five got zapped this week (not counting Zarkman - he led off the Hit Parade). We've been raiding and arresting and killing and disrupting and destroying and destabilizing and denying and demoralizing the Bad Guys for going on two weeks now, and it has been a SPECTACULAR success.

Some of it came from the sensitive site exploitation after the Zarqawi kill.

Some of it came after the boogeyman-in-chief was dead, and the locals felt a bit more confident in peaching on the Bad Guys.

Some of it came from an aggressive Iraqi force that has reason to be confident and bouyed by the Good News.

Some of it came from that particular intangible of success breeding success.

But ALL of it has been due to the Big Story: Zarkman is GONE, and NO, he wasn't some made-up ten-foot-tall legend that we invented to scare children and Congressmen. He was REAL, he was REAL EFFECTIVE, and he was REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT both as a commander, recruiting poster, and anchor of the terrorists.

Guys, you're simply choosing not to see it, and that is not respectable. It is simply beyond dispute that this guy was LARGE, and so was taking him out.

Do we automatically win now? NO, just like you don't get to holler 'checkmate' when you take the other player's queen. But it sure gets easier after you DO, am I right?

**dalem** · 22 Jun 06,, 10:24

I've said it before and I'll say it again: one would have to be a fool of the first order to claim that whacking the Zarqman is not a significant victory in the WoT.

End game? No, but you'd have to be a different kind of fool to claim that, and no one on the side prosecuting this war IS claiming that.

Instead, the weak, spastic, and grasping sisters on the side NOT prosecuting this war are erecting yet another straw man wrt to Zarqman's shuffling off of his mortal coil, but the rest of us know better.

It is a good day, week, and month, to be on the side of ANTI-terror. To be a true Westerner.

To be an American.

-dale

**Dreadnought** · 22 Jun 06,, 13:10

Originally Posted by lemontree

Zarkqawi: ...guys don't tell the world about my thongs..chough chough...choke..grurrgle.
Woman's leopard skin nightgown and other skimpy women's clothes found in ruins of ‘safe house’

Zarkqawi...Cough Cough "Please dont let them find my gay pornography collection" choke choke "dam heterosexual crusaders" expires

**Swift Sword** · 22 Jun 06,, 13:54

Originally Posted by shek

Swift Sword,
I'm curious if you've read Efraim Karsh's book Islamic Imperialism

No, Sir, I have not read though I have seen it around. I will see if the Public's Library has a copy in, check his epilogue and endnotes and get back to you on it.

**Swift Sword** · 22 Jun 06,, 14:54

Originally Posted by Bluesman

Look, we all know you're against the war; we get it.

Actually, you do not quite get it.

What I am against is bad public policy.

But the stubborn refusal to see this as a Big Dam' Deal marks you as intellectually dishonest, and not really that intellectual after all.

Having had little exposure to the advertising, billing and hype surrounding Mr. Zarqawi, I was never under any pressure to unduly ascribe particular importance or assign any extraordinary value to him as a constant or variable in the calculus of what is a long term, dynamic and evolving phenomenon.

Just because millions of people have been told thousands of times that Zarqawi was big and bad like Alan Ladd does not make it true. He was simply one small piece of a very big puzzle, albeit a locally important piece with a good PR machine and handiwork that captured imaginations across the West, at any rate.

And yes, Mr. Zarqawi did need killing.

**Confed999** · 22 Jun 06,, 15:06

Originally Posted by Swift Sword

Having had little exposure to the advertising, billing and hype surrounding Mr. Zarqawi, I was never under any pressure to unduly ascribe particular importance or assign any extraordinary value to him as a constant or variable in the calculus of what is a long term, dynamic and evolving phenomenon.

The value you place on him is meaningless, it's the value the jihadis placed on him that matters. They did value him, and they are less now due to his removal.

**Swift Sword** · 22 Jun 06,, 15:19

Originally Posted by smilingassassin

Sorry, Zarqawi was not just another terrorist, his track record speaks for itself. To imply otherwise is naive to the extreme.

Pan Islamic terorrists were murdering, killing, kidnapping, assasinating and plundering long before Mr. Zarqawi was born and they appear to be murdering, killing, kidnapping, assasinating and plundering with relative aplomb after his passing.

Pan Islamic terrorism jumps from flesh to flesh and outlives its fleshy vessels to boot so I just do not get that excited over dead terrorists regardless of the caliber of the cult of demonification people chose to erect around such personalities.

The enemy is well defined and Zarqawi was not it, merely it's host and servant (which entitled him to a healthy dose of high explosives to be sure).

All this being the case, I think it extremely naieve to employ body counts as an indicator of progress in the G.W.O.T. no matter what name is tied to the toe.

Fulcrum or not, Iraq has to be stabilized.

Ironically, in March of 2003, I was being bombarded with arguments along the lines of "xyz or not, Iraq has to be destabilized".

Regards,

William

**Confed999** · 22 Jun 06,, 15:26

Originally Posted by Swift Sword

Ironically, in March of 2003, I was being bombarded with arguments along the lines of "xyz or not, Iraq has to be destabilized".

Huh? In 2003 Iraq was what you would call a stable nation? Stable for whom, Bathists?

**Swift Sword** · 22 Jun 06,, 15:37

Originally Posted by Confed999

The value you place on him is meaningless, it's the value the jihadis placed on him that matters. They did value him, and they are less now due to his removal.

Question: are there any reliable figures on the number of Jihadis that have gone to Iraq and already returned to their own countries?

To me, this represents a serious threat when we consider the Jihadi blowback from the Afghan War as a case study.

While busting up Zarqawi's cell was certainly a good thing, what I am getting at is if it is a case closing the barn door after the horse has bolted, then our perspectives have to be adjusted to fit the new circumstances.