Zarqawi's Death from the Illiberals' Perspective

For the vast majority of Americans — and Westerners in general — news of Zarqawi’s death is cause for celebration. But in the darkest corners of the blogosphere, where the illiberals lurk, the death of Zarqawi takes on a different meaning, altogether…

"In all the hours and hours of coverage, has anyone mentioned that the President could have killed Zarqawi before the Iraq War but chose not to? Or that he was caught and then released to kill again by an incompetent Iraqi government?"

That' s the spin that the Daily KOs is putting on the story.  Rather than congratulating our armed forces on a job well done, the KOs see Zarqawi's death as an opportunity to attack President Bush.  Real classy.

Next door at the Huffington Post, Eric Alterman writes about Zarqawi's death in a post entitled "Four Years too Late."  The first sentence of Alterman's post exudes pride and excitement: "It's nice that they got Zarqawi."  Take it easy, Alterman.  That level of excitement can only lead to a coronary.

Alterman's first sentence is immediately followed by a familiar leftist rant:

"It's nice that they got Zarqawi. Too bad they didn't try harder before the invasion, when they lied about his membership in Al-Qaeda to create their phony link between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Remember, in arguing for war, Bush referred to a "very senior al-Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year." But the administration has given no indication that Abu Musab Zarqawi collaborated with senior Iraqi officials."

The remainder of Alterman's post is dedicated to the belittling of the Bush Administration and the war effort in general.  Like the KOs, Alterman saw no need to congratulate the US military or the coalition forces.  Then again, after spending so much time belittling their efforts any such acknowledgement would have been something of an insult.

Next up,  we have TalkLeft, another illiberal blog that not only refuses to thank our troops, but also raises doubts about the news of Zarqawi's death:

"Because this Administration has so little credibility and a history of distracting us with terror news when it is hurting politically, like now, I can't help but wonder if al-Zarqawi wasn't killed some time ago and they just decided to announce it today and tell us he was killed in yesterday's raid. Everyone hates al-Zarqawi, even the Iraqis, particularly because of the wedding bombings."

Illiberals like these always resort to the same platitude: We can support our troops without supporting the war.  While I agree with the sentiment, I have to ask: WHERE'S THE SUPPORT?  True support of our troops requires more than placing a bumper sticker on the back of your car.  If these illiberals truly cared about our men and women in uniform, they would have congratulated them, or at the very least, they would have mentioned them in their posts.

Nevertheless, the above illiberals don't even come close to the pack of hatemongering psychos at the Democratic Underground.  These ultra-illiberals drool at the smell of bad news for our armed forces and despise all of their victories.  Here are a few highlights:

"Very curious (the news). I wonder how this plays into neocon plans to attack Iran?"

"How sad - you know my reaction?? I laughed out loud and said the same thing you did, "AGAIN???" How sad that we cannot trust our government to be honest with us in matters of war and death. The boy who cried wolf is not believed in my house."

"Z has only one leg and has already died or escaped so many times...Nah. I don't believe the story."

"I don't buy it either...Wonder if they had to cut off the leg of the "Zarqawi" for authenticity purposes? Convenient too that this would happen now....guess we should just all forget about that Haditha mess, the fact that we are approaching 2,500 dead and the fact that our economy is in big trouble."

"It's almost an "open joke" among the military and civilians who know how PsyOps operate, and the History, that Zarqowi is merely a "Pentagon creation." And oh, don't we need some good news now? It's so predictable I could write the OP Orders. It's all bullshit LIES paraded around for PR exploitation."

Sadly, I think the ultra- illiberals would prefer news of Americans dying.

The illiberals and ultra-illiberals are the shame of the democrat party -- for those who are democrats.  Their attitudes are offensive and condemnable.  Do not mistake them with the true liberals, who may not agree with the war but they do support our troops.  More importantly, the true liberals love America just as much as conservatives do.

Hat Tip: Power Line

Posted by Dr Politico at June 8, 2006 5:07 PM
Comment #155702


Is it ever OK to look at mistakes Bush has made? I know he refuses to, but surely the rest of us should.

As for Zarqawi, I just don’t think it’s that big a deal. Maybe it will have some real ramifications, but my hunch is that soemone has already taken his place.

Posted by: David S at June 8, 2006 5:20 PM
Comment #155703

David S -

Not a big deal??? What cave have you been hiding in?

Posted by: Don at June 8, 2006 5:26 PM
Comment #155709

Yes it is your Right to Point out the Mistakes and it will always be your Right. Like it or not Zarqawi was a Master of his trade, killing. or a top general in the field of horrors,And his Unclean Shoes won’t be filled SO soon. now with that being said, Let’s Sh#t or get of the pot!.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at June 8, 2006 5:45 PM
Comment #155711


Posted by: Rodney Brown at June 8, 2006 5:46 PM
Comment #155713

I do have to say I think its odd to drop two 500 pound bombs and still manage to find a body.

Posted by: europheus at June 8, 2006 5:55 PM
Comment #155715

Hey, I’m happy. Hooray for us. But you want me to have a coronary? I should be jumping up and down over this? This hasn’t reversed the unfortunate trend (our losing) this war has taken. Our troops don’t need me to pat them on the back. Yes, they did good. Now they have to get back to work. No cigars. No champagne.

I know what you want to say, but this mission is not accomplished.

Posted by: Max at June 8, 2006 6:09 PM
Comment #155719

I wondered the same. Two 500 pound bombs were dropped on a house, apparently direct hits. Who knows, maybe the house had a basement.

Another minor point… A woman and a child were also killed in the bombing. How do you feel about that? I have not seen anyone even bother to mention them.

Posted by: phx8 at June 8, 2006 6:16 PM
Comment #155721


6 people died in all. Most of the news surrounding this story mentions a woman and a child in addition to the four terrorist collaborators. It goes without saying that when innocent people die it is a tragedy. The consolation, of course, is that had these 4 terrorists not been killed, many many many more innocent people would have died.

Posted by: Dr Politico at June 8, 2006 6:27 PM
Comment #155726

A woman and child were killed? They were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Do you remember 3,000 Americans who were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Do you remember the women and children Zarqawi killed with homicide bombings and roadside bombs or did you already forget about them? Did you already forget about the beheadings of civilians who went there to help Iraqi’s? Minor point my rear-end.
The message his death sends is, if he is “findable” so are the leaders who step up after his death.

Posted by: Joey at June 8, 2006 6:36 PM
Comment #155727

Brownshirts tend to blame everything they don’t like, or anything that goes wrong at the feet of a scapegoat, or an enemy. In such a totalitarian society there can be only ONE correct opinion: the one which is promoted by the Leader.
In a Democratic society however, you will find many opinions and points of view. True freedom means that no individual need ever become a slave to the opinions of others.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 8, 2006 6:39 PM
Comment #155734

Well, Joey, sounds like you are very comfortable with violence and killing and war. Eye for an eye, eh? Zarqawi killed innocent people, so therefore it is ok for us to kill innocent people, if killing them takes down Zarqawi.

It is all kind of abstract. An Iraqi woman and child are not really human to us, just stick figures drawn on the wrong page with the wrong lines, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. We will not see their faces displayed on the big screen of the Pentagon briefing.

If I were in the position of making the call, and knew my actions would kill several evil people along with an innocent woman and child, I think I would probably order the bombs dropped anyway.

But I would not pumping my fist in the air, or reveling in blood lust, and late at night I would have some long, long moments of reflection. It is a grim responsibility, taking people like Zarqawi out of the world. Personally, I am never comfortable with enthusiasm for killing, and try to remember to feel more concern for the innocent, whether Americans on 9/11 or an unnamed Iraqi child, than joy over the death of enemies.

Just a wandering comment, maybe food for thought.

Posted by: phx8 at June 8, 2006 6:53 PM
Comment #155737

Adrienne, i did not know Zarqawi wore a brownshirt. thank you for your ever so Heart felt and enlightening posts.

Posted by: steve at June 8, 2006 7:03 PM
Comment #155738

steve, I wasn’t talking about Zarqawi.
I was talking about the fact that Politico thinks there should only be one correct response that Liberals should be allowed to give to the news of his death, otherwise, he’s decided they don’t love America.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 8, 2006 7:11 PM
Comment #155739

phx8, good food for thought. I should not rush to judgement but if a person is hanging with a guy like Zarqawi like an “innocent” child (future terrorist) and one woman (Current Female Terrorist) don’t you consider guilt by association a viable option?

Gloating over his death I am not, but if you ask me if I am happy we finally got this beheader of people. I would say abso-freaking-lutley.

Comfortable with violence, killing and war? Never. Better no Zarqawi than an alive one, won’t you agree? Better to have Saddam behind bars than giving more Palestine homicide bombers families tens of thousands of dollars.

I want to understand your thinking because my “enthusiasm for killing” a person of extreme evil is worth the collateral damage in a war-time situation. Maybe that’s my ex-military mind speaking.

Posted by: Joey at June 8, 2006 7:13 PM
Comment #155741


I agree with your statement. It was a task that needed to be done, but the fervor and excitement I believe is a little over done.


Posted by: einghf at June 8, 2006 7:19 PM
Comment #155743

It looks like some elected officials from the democrat party are adopting the talking points of the illiberal blogosphere.

Read about it here.

Posted by: Dr Politico at June 8, 2006 7:20 PM
Comment #155745


“child (future terrorist) and one woman (Current Female Terrorist) don’t you consider guilt by association a viable option?”

How dare you judge them. Were you there? Did you know them personally? What right do you have to judge another human being? Sorry if you don’t like what I have to say, maybe that is my enlisted military mind speaking.


Posted by: einghf at June 8, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #155746

Thanks Adrienne, for your opinion. and thank you doc. for yours, now I have to finish my homework.

Posted by: steve at June 8, 2006 7:26 PM
Comment #155748

I am ex-military too, B-52 bombardier. I served during a period of relative peace, no combat, just Cold War. I always try to remember just what is happening on the ground when we see those snazzy videos of houses exploding. Dropping bombs or firing missiles into houses or urban areas risks killing innocent civilians, so there had better be an awfully good reason to do it. Yeah, I can think of extenuating circumstances surrounding a woman and a child in that safe house that would make the decision to bomb the house easier to accept. Anyway, I doubt we will ever be privy to the details. This is just another example of why war should always be a last resort, something we do only because it is absolutely necessary.

Posted by: phx8 at June 8, 2006 7:29 PM
Comment #155752

“Dr” P is a hypocrite. When one asks why “Dr” P did not mention the dead woman and child, he responds, “It goes without saying that when innocent people die it is a tragedy.” Yet, when “illiberals” fail to exude the correct degree of euphoria in support of the troops, he condemns them. How come it can’t “go without saying” that all Americans are glad that al-Zarqawi is dead? Why is it ok for us to assume that “Dr” P opposes killing innocents, but not ok for us to assume that the “illiberals” are pleased with the soliders’ success?

The fact is that “Dr” P doesn’t have the first f’in clue what the “illiberals” are thinking. He really just wants to create another distraction to keep people from addressing the criticisms of Bush. Same act, 154th verse.

Posted by: Homer at June 8, 2006 7:39 PM
Comment #155762


Here is some imput from the sites I tend to visit, being one of the leading liberals on this site:

Washington monthly:

Iraqi and U.S. officials agreed that his death would not necessarily stem the violence and insurgency — and as if to prove the point, an explosion ripped through a busy outdoor market in Baghdad just a few hours after Zarqawi’s killing was announced. Regardles, when a dangerous terrorist can no longer wreak havoc, it’s good news. [emphasis mine]

What? A liberal saying it’s good news a terrorist is dead? We mustn’t tell the GOP, the casualty from cardiac arrest would be too grave…

On the balance, they do point out we could have killed him five years ago. Killing him five years ago. Would that have been a bad thing, especially since he was working on poison stuff? I don’t think so. Do any of you out there think so?

The Washington Note

I just learned that Zarqawi was killed — and was watching a short bit of the news coverage last night and this morning. This is important symbolically and substantively — but one thing that Nir Rosen and Fawaz Gerges emphasized when I was with them in Florence was that Zarqawi’s jihadists represented only a very small fraction of the insurgency in Iraq. Most of what is going on there is home-grown and not imported.[emphasis mine]

Again, you see a note of caution, but a recognition that Zarqawi’s death is a good thing, if only one small victory amidst the greater war.

Other people posting on the site reflected the same sentiment: We’re glad he’s dead, but it’s up in the air how much this will do.

“Talking Points Memo/TPM Cafe

This morning’s announcement that Zarqawi is dead is, in the words of Joe Biden, “really, really, really, really (yes, four reallys) good news.” He is right. This is good for the Iraqis most importantly, as evidenced by the spontaneous applause erupting from the Iraqi press at the announcement this morning (similar to the reaction to Bremer’s announcement that Hussein had been captured.)

Again it precedes to caveats and warnings, but the recognition is there.

Ivo Daalder says the violence isn’t over, and that much of the war now is sectarian conflict at the street leve, but this his first line is:

A truly evil man is dead. That’s a very good thing.

He ends by saying:

So Zarqawi is dead — and good riddance to him and his ilk. But the violence in Iraq is likely to continue unabated.

What’s in between analyzes why this might not cool things off too much.

Daily Kos

Yes, Daily Kos:

CHEERS to finding a really evil needle in a really big haystack. U.S. forces rocked terrorist Abu Musab “Dick” al-Zarqawi’s world last night when they tossed a thousand pounds of explosive whupass down his gullet. They found his body in the bedroom. And the kitchen. And the den. And the garage. And the neighbor’s apartment. And I think I found an eyebrow in my Cocoa Puffs this morning. My only regret: he didn’t know what hit him.

P.S. Virgins denied, creep.

P.P.S. For those of you keeping score at home, this is Iraqi Turning Point #697.

I hope I haven’t wiped out a whole generation of Red Columnite Watchbloggers with that shocking bit of prose.

I guess if there is anything dampening this news, it’s that we’ve heard of good things like this happening before, but nonetheless failing to develop into a clear end for this war. We

1)Successfully invaded Iraq
2)Took Baghdad
3)Kicked Saddam out of power
4)Captured him, though after a 9 month delay
5)Killed his sons
6)Retook Fallujah and Najaf (though we had to lose them first)
7)Held a number of elections without major carnage

and now
8)Killed Zarqawi.

But is Iraq in good shape? It’s not, and if we want to have any hope of leaving anything behind but a future al-Qaeda Camp or client state for Iran, we have to get on the ball.

Unfortunately, the focus of the GOP is on winning the media war, which is not only impossible but counterproductive.

Ultimately, I think the networks would be overjoyed to show American Soldiers kicking ass, Iraq shaping up (oh the humanity! or human interest stories, rather), and soldiers coming home to cheering crowds at home.

But their credibility is on the line, especially after having failed to be as critical about the war before all this happened as it was after. They can’t simply put out positive stories without them having a basis in fact, or they will get eaten alive over it by the public.

The good you folks want them to report has to be real, or else it’s just an illusion waiting to be disillusioned.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 8, 2006 8:18 PM
Comment #155770


I think you missed the point here. It is not that the illiberals fail to show the correct response but why cant they say good job for a good job. If someone does not think that it was good to kill this guy that is fine. Many of the off the charts type think it is bad. I would assume most Democrats are very happy about it. I also realize though that most (not all) are not stating that. I do not imagine that DrP is actually equating the illiberals with the standard Democrat. From the quotes he gave they tend to be far from the standard Democrat.

Most Democrats I know are happy Zarqawi is dead. He needed to be. Now true any innocent folk who are dead is bad. I guess what we conservative are looking for is not exhuberance but some sort of positive statement regarding this event. Instead the vast majority seem to be hollow or many almost sad that we did this. I wish that was not the case.

Posted by: Randall Jeremiah at June 8, 2006 8:32 PM
Comment #155782

Of course a child probably has no choice in its adult associations and the death of that child is indeed a great tragedy. The death of the woman is also a tragedy, however, I try to put myself in her shoes. And in her shoes, I believe I would be thinking, oh oh, Zarqawi, isn’t he the guy the Americans/British/Iraqi Govt/Shias are out to kill? Maybe its not too healthy to be in too close proximity to this guy. This of course in not to say that she deserved what happened to her, but I know that if I make a habit of doing a chicken run across a busy motorway, i’m probably going to get creamed sooner or later. Tragic as both deaths are, it was imperative to take this shot at this unspeakable creature masquerading as a human being. I have a certain sympathy for Satan tonight, having his thunder stolen on his own hearth.

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 8, 2006 8:47 PM
Comment #155806


What makes you think she had a choice? Women in that country usually don’t get to choose who they associate with.

Posted by: montanademocrat at June 8, 2006 9:25 PM
Comment #155827

Paul Montanademocrat is correct. Women there have no real rights. They have no choice with whom they fraternize.

Posted by: Randall Jeremiah at June 8, 2006 9:54 PM
Comment #155838


The point is that it is a cheap shot to criticize somebody for what they don’t say.

Posted by: Homer at June 8, 2006 10:12 PM
Comment #155850


I understand what you are saying. I do not agree with it but I understand it. When you are conversing with someone about almost any subject sometimes they speak more volumes about what they do not say then what they do say. This much is true. When something decent happens and most of what you see said about it is negative that is sad be it any side.

Posted by: Randall Jeremiah at June 8, 2006 10:33 PM
Comment #155859

From the Star Spangled Banner:

“Blessed with victory and peace, may the heav’n
rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and
preserved us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause is just,
And this be our motto “in God we trust.”

The war’s not over, but it is a victory in a just cause.

Posted by: Jr at June 8, 2006 11:11 PM
Comment #155861


Nice post! :)

Posted by: Dr Politico at June 8, 2006 11:19 PM
Comment #155871


Enlisted or Officer doesn’t matter. I have every right to judge another human being. I make judgements everyday, just like you. You have judged me according to your philosphy of life that I am wrong by making judgements about who associates with a man who ordered 30 children blown up while being handed candy by US servicemen. I suppose anti-americans like you who believe everything the press says, consider that collateral damage, eh? Stop judging me please. :o) If you don’t stop you’ll be a hypocrite.

Here is a judgement for ya. Hang out with the wrong people, bad things happen, period. Does that make you bad, maybe not. But you should have had enough sense to know you were going to be guilty by association.

War is a horrible thing I admit. But sometimes, and I do mean sometimes, it is needed for future peace.

Posted by: Joey at June 8, 2006 11:51 PM
Comment #155873

I wonder, how is it our poor troops are being torn to shreds by these IED’S , yet we are able to recognize zarkiwi after 2 500 pound bombs were dropped on his “unsafe” house??…

Proof to me that those who stand for nothing will fall for anything….thanks for the reminder.

Posted by: just wondering? at June 8, 2006 11:55 PM
Comment #155875

Check out PART 2: Zarqawi’s Death from the Illiberals’ Perspective — Elected democrat officials are endorsing the illiberals’ views.

Or visit a full day of terrorist whacking coverage here.

Posted by: Dr Politico at June 8, 2006 11:58 PM
Comment #155881

All this talk about judgement. Are we writing about what the Biblical meaning is? When someone of a liberal bent begins qouting scripture, I generally duck & cover. Because a God in Heaven is usually thought of as a weakness, these folks usually spout things that they hear but don’t understand. When speaking of judgement in the New Testament, the judgement is about that persons ability to go to Heaven. We humans havn’t the ability to judge the disposition of anothers soul. We CAN however, judge a persons motives, actions, words and deeds. “You shall know them by their fruits”.

Posted by: Jr at June 9, 2006 12:11 AM
Comment #155884


Are we to assume that you DON’T believe Z to be dead? The munitions dropped were standard bombs, not thermonuclear. He wasn’t hit directly, could have been schrapnel, could have been the concussion. All bombs don’t vaporize the target, unless you’re thinking of Star Trek!

Posted by: Jr at June 9, 2006 12:15 AM
Comment #155915


Jr is pretty much correct. We first dropped 2 seperate 500lb bombs and the house, which was a harder target than expected, survived the hits, so 2 more 500lb bombs were dropped as well. Zarqawi may have been in a basement, part of the house may have collapsed on him and killed him after the first hit but protected his body from the subsequent strikes.
I’d also like to comment on the subject of collateral damage for general edification. Prior to the advent of laser guided weapons etc, bombs were “dumb” meaning they were guided only by gravity and the wind and momentum they got from the plane that dropped them. This of course led to massive inaccuracy. In WWII, part of the reason whole cities were bombed, beyond the fact that advocates of total war emphasized the destruction of a nation’s industrial personnel capacity, is that to have a good chance of destroying the target you want, 100s of planes usually had to be sent and 1000s of bombs dropped.

Accuracy was actively improved in bombs because this would lower the number of planes and people exposed to enemy fire in executing the bombing mission while improving the likelyhood of the target’s destruction. The fact that this also reduced potential collateral damage from a few city blocks to a buildings close to the target is certainly positive but was not a major factor.

It is important to remember that these bombs are only “smart” in that they will very accurately hit exactly what they are told, be it a laser reflection on a tank hull or GPS grid coordinates. Once the bomb explodes, the blast and shrapnel are under the laws of physics, which doesn’t discriminate between innocent and enemy.

It is certainly sad that the woman and child were killed in this bombing, but its important to remember a few things. Number 1, the people who plan these attacks take careful consideration of the target and what surrounds it. For instance, they would not drop 2000lb bombs on a small house in the middle of a crowded neighborhood when a 250lb bomb or an artillery shell would be just as lethal without causing AS MUCH collateral damage. Collateral damage happens, and we take steps to limit it, but it is a sad inevitablity of war. Number 2, using bombs to take out a target like Zarqawi keeps infantry, which are far easier to kill than an F-16 to people armed with AK-47s and RPGs from having to expose themselves to the enemy.

One more thing to respond to some things I’ve read about us killing Iraqi civilians on purpose. If we really wanted to, we could kill the bulk of the Islamic population of the world, to say nothing of the Iraqi population. Even using conventional weapons, such as dumb bombs, we could easily level every city in Iraq in a matter of days. Look at what we did to Germany and Japan in WWII. If we decided to use nuclear weapons, it could be done in an hour. To authorize launch, retarget the missles, and have effects on the targets would take about an hour tops. Just bear that in mind when reading about how our goal is to kill all Muslims.

Posted by: 1LT B at June 9, 2006 6:27 AM
Comment #155921

The common theme of the Liberals perspective is one born of experience: Zarqawi’s death is a good thing, but it could have come sooner, and it won’t end the insurgency. Whether it makes a dent in the violence is an open question. Our experience is that the end of many of our enemies’ careers have not spelled the end of the violence. Zarqawi’s case may be unique, but chances are, it’s not.

Your approach Dr. Politico, is one of assuming that anything less than full and enthusiastic agreement with your assessments represents sympathy with the enemy and against our own people. Any critical viewpoint that doesn’t take an optimistic read, in your opinion, seems to be morally deficient.

The problem with this ceaseless hyping of the war and everything is that it doesn’t fit with the modern culture. It rubs people wrong. A person in the 1940s could be expected to be less critical, to support the war because it was right. You had a war which was not of choice, and a people used to responding more uncritically to both government and media hype.

The Bush Administration has knocked itself silly beating its head against the American People’s skepticism, as have the conservatives. The better course of action, ultimately, would be to recognize that there are reasons people need more proof, more communication on matters, and not go off on people because they don’t loudly and enthusiastically agree with you.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 9, 2006 7:58 AM
Comment #155947

The above articel is prepoaterous and paranoid.
Those of us on the left side of politics in this country have been saying “We can and could have done better and this is how and why…” for years now.

The unreasonable on the extreme and reactionary right see that only as ‘pessimism’ or ‘nay-saying.’

Preposterous. Absolutely preposterous.

What’s more important when we are adressing the big problems here? …giving a pat on the back for taking out a dangerous rabid animal?…or figuring out where the animal got out from and how it got the rabies?

Yet again, Dr Politico, I see you trying to create counter-productive venom in an effort to make political hay.

Posted by: RGF at June 9, 2006 9:42 AM
Comment #155953

Since the death of that maniac there has been over 50 raids on operations that could have caused more damage to our troops and Iraqi citizens. For the libs why don’t the celebrate the fact this saved other ‘innocent’ citizens lives. I thought that is the concern. Why is it that libs always say, “We should never have been there in the first place.” That is the equivalent of it is not my fault, my parents made me this way. We all understand the libs don’t see a need for us to be there and it is illegal. But if you spill milk on the floor you don’t debate whether or not we should have milk in the first place. Or whether we are mistreating the cows. YOU CLEAN IT UP!

Also, why is it our fault that the women and children dead? Why can’t people see that maniac is responsible for their deaths?

Posted by: Mike` at June 9, 2006 9:58 AM
Comment #155961


Am I to be considered a wet blanket because I’m not jumping up and down like a three year old that just got his favorite toy for Christmas?

Zarqawi is dead.

It doesn’t matter if it was a good or bad thing, it had to be done, but I am not going to celebrate the death of another man, no matter how heinous he was.

William Berg is right, we are in the revenge game, and the revenge game will never end.

If we keep taking an eye for an eye, soon we will all be blind.

This man has more than likely, already been replaced. He was, after all, turned in by his own people.

So, excuse me if I leave my pom-poms in the closet until we’re completely out of Iraq.

Posted by: Rocky at June 9, 2006 10:32 AM
Comment #155975


“Your approach Dr. Politico, is one of assuming that anything less than full and enthusiastic agreement with your assessments represents sympathy with the enemy and against our own people.”

I have to disagree with you on this one, Stephen. I do not expect people to share my rection in full. However the following reaction is a clear demonstration of the anti-Americanism that I was talking about:

“This is just to cover Bush’s [rear] so he doesn’t have to answer” for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat. “Iraq is still a mess — get out.” Washington Times

And please keep in mind, I clearly separated these types of people from liberals and democrats in general. It’s fine that people disagree with the war and the President. However, not recognizing Zarqawi’s death as good news — and, in fact, using it to fuel conspiracy theories — sends a pretty clear message to me. How about you?

Posted by: Dr Politico at June 9, 2006 11:10 AM
Comment #155979


You know what I find disturbing about this political hay making? It’s an epidemic!

While the left tries hard to keep the shoulder to the grindstone and focus American attention on finding solutions, the right does things like stop to pat themselves on the back after we kill a rabid dog!…Without any consideration to how dangerous that is in light of the fact that we still don’t know where the source of the rabies the dog was carrying is!

What’s more…
While Dems try hard to get America to see how important it is that we should get spending under control and not lose sight of our own economic health, the right sees an election looming and starts trumping up the issue of immigration and THEN UNDERMINES IT COMPLETELY AND DOES NOTHING SUBSTANTIAL AT ALL (No suprise there, really).

While the left insists that the constitution should protect ALL OUR RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS AS CITIZENS, the right, in its usual failure to even try to respect or understand law or legal evolution, wants to take us back to its interpretation of the old testament in an effort to motivate the loonier voters before this November.

We have MAJOR problems ahead of us. All the right seems to want to do stop, self-congratulate, manipulate and get re-elected (while simultaneously cliaming they are the party which supposedly has ‘ideas’.)

The GOP is feeding us a potentially LETHAL dose of venemous hypocrisy and the spin is making this entire country dizzy!

Posted by: RGF at June 9, 2006 11:16 AM
Comment #156045

Mr. PhD Wannabe

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. If Al Zarqawi was masterminding most of the violence in Iraq, it should slow down now. If he was the product of military or political PSYOPS, then it won’t.

No need to crank up the patented Right Wing Noise Machine. Just wait to see what happens, right?

My binky is on continuing violence, but I’d be glad to be proven wrong for once.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at June 9, 2006 1:42 PM
Comment #156053

Mental Wimp,

Your opinion sickens me. I am in the military, I serve in Iraq, and I’ve lost friends here. Do you honestly believe that we’re bombing ourselves? Wake up! What is happening over here is plain and simple survival of the fittest as far as the insurgents go. The dumb ones are easily figured out, found, and killed. Furthermore, way back when, someone got the brilliant idea to make symbols to represent sounds and written language was born. We use it and so do they. They write about what works and so do we. Zarqawi’s tactics will outlive him for the simple fact that he used tactics that worked. Besides, it doesn’t take much smarts to plant a bomb on the side of the road.

Its one thing to disagree with whether we should be in Iraq or to criticize how it is handled, it is quite another to accuse the people who guarantee your right to express your idiotic opinions of callusion in terrorism. People like you don’t deserve the life God gave you except as an example of how to not to be a citizen and a human being.

Posted by: 1LT B at June 9, 2006 2:01 PM
Comment #156066

AL-Zarqawi, was one of best Killers for their cause, and yes their Are people already in Line to take his Place, But his place will Never be filled.You can not imitate the True Evil Killers.that behavior was A function of his Brain. Do you Really think this guy was still holding the flag For His God? come on! That went Away ages ago. And that in a sense could have brought about his own downfall,yes Kudos to the forces. because he still had a lot of fight left in him.but I still think he lost the vision, in his mind he was invincible.then he lost the Edge.and that made him Wreckless and vunrible from within. the little slip of our military mouths about his own people giving him away is good phscological warfare. it causes fear like the Bagpipes did. these people are going to be looking within and turning their heads for some time. yes you will see some angry reprisals. but when you take out a large peice of the Evil. it takes time for them to regroup the loss. the truly great leaders knew about Phscological warfare.i am not a big fan of building Democracy around the world. because is the Democracy in the hearts and the minds of the people your fighting it for. and that will be the Big Test.the berlin wall was another story.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at June 9, 2006 2:33 PM
Comment #156082

thus Said, I will always support our Troops. People ,like 1LTB Sure would like to be With His Family, Don’t Attack the Troops. question the Leaders, But Support the fine Men And Women who do the fighting. and .

Posted by: Rodney Brown at June 9, 2006 3:12 PM
Comment #156118

Dr. Politico-
I believe there is some sort of comment I made waiting for your approval on the comments section of the MT interface where I lay out the opinions of various Liberal columnists on the matter. In fact, I even included one from Kos.

I’ve never been comfortable with the internal enemies rhetoric. I know both sides too well. Hell, I’ve been on both sides, so it would be almost a self-betrayal to indulge that.

I think we’ve gotten so saturated into matters of political esoterics, that we’ve forgotten that political theory is supposed to serve the people, rather than people political theory. The importance of the distinction can be measured by the extent to which people base their real world behavior on political thought as opposed to their political thought on the real world.

Look at Communism and Fascism: where political theory abstracts the ideal benefit of government for the people from the real, the effect of such government on the real world can be truly nasty.

But where the theory feeds back into real world goods, and real world means of maintaing them, the results can be greater prosperity and achievement by a society.

The value of Democracy is not that people are wise, but that they can, through experience, eventually bring about more optimal government for themselves. It’s been especially valuable for us in this day and age because of the way history has change the world around us. It’s no accident that America is much older than most of the nations in terms of working under a continuous government. Most of the Nations of Europe, while continuously settled for thousands of years, have had great territorial and governmental changes. Just look at Germany. Though it can claim thousands of years of history, it is, in its current form only 16 years old! There are children who haven’t graduated high school who are older than the unified nation of Germany as it is now.

America tunes the activities and attitudes of its government to the consensus of the people, instead of entrusting it to some elite organization, like an aristocracy or party. Instead of putting power in the hands of a group of people with a narrow range of beliefs and interests that they might work to create, America puts that power in the hands of an unstable array of different beliefs and ideologies.

Because America is defined by none of them exclusively, it has the ability to weather political changes and shifts in society that would destroy other nations.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 9, 2006 4:57 PM
Comment #156154


“Enlisted or Officer doesn’t matter. I have every right to judge another human being. I make judgements everyday, just like you. You have judged me according to your philosphy of life that I am wrong by making judgements about who associates with a man who ordered 30 children blown up while being handed candy by US servicemen. I suppose anti-americans like you who believe everything the press says, consider that collateral damage, eh? Stop judging me please. :o) If you don’t stop you’ll be a hypocrite… But you should have had enough sense to know you were going to be guilty by association.”

Do me a favor and explain how I am 1. Anti-American, especially since I am apart of the USAF, and serving our great nation. 2. How does that make it so that I “believe everything the press says” 3. That I am judging you, when I have never said anything other than for you to stop judging 4. Since when did I say that you were ‘wrong’ about the death of a man that needed to be killed? 5. That I am a Hypocrite? 6. How do you know that they even knew Zarqawi?


Posted by: einghf at June 9, 2006 7:32 PM
Comment #156180


What makes you think she had a choice? Women in that country usually don’t get to choose who they associate with.
Posted by: montanademocrat at June 8, 2006 09:25 PM

Paul Montanademocrat is correct. Women there have no real rights. They have no choice with whom they fraternize.
Posted by: Randall Jeremiah at June 8, 2006 09:54 PM

Sorry guys, I’m confusing myself with the situation before 04/03, when Saddam was still in power and women had a great deal more freedom than now. I know that my country has many women asylum seekers fleeing alleged opression in their home countries. Hell, if they can get to Ireland, with no mass transit links outside Europe or the US from some of the most far flung outposts of non civilisation, you would think that a woman could get to Syria or Jordan for example, from Iraq.

But even that is getting away from the point. This womans life was lost tragically. However, if the opportunity to end the evil of Zarqawi was lost in order to save her life, many other lives would have paid the cost. Sometimes there is simply no easy solution.

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 9, 2006 8:58 PM
Comment #156332

Rodney Brown, 1LT B,

Great to see other members of the service and members of service members families. Keep ‘em coming. My thoughts and prayers are with both of you. I know and understand your struggles. I too am also a proud member of the military machine that is winning this war. I was in theater when it started and hope to be back again when we finish the job.

Mr. Brown,

Do me a favor and remember this. It’s not possible to give full support to the troops without supporting the mission or the leaders of that mission. It send a mixed signal sometimes.

Posted by: Jim at June 10, 2006 6:25 PM
Comment #156701

Jim, that’s just not true. I am apart of the military and I know exactly when someone is supporting our troops and when they are not supporting our troops. All because you don’t support the gov’t doesn’t mean that you do not support our troops, in any sense, and the military members are not dense enough to not tell the difference. Do not belittle us, we are intelligent enough human beings to determine the difference. It is possible to support our troops and not support the cause.


Posted by: einghf at June 12, 2006 12:02 PM
Post a comment