What a week this has been for
the GOP AMERICA! Today's spectacular news is that terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been killed in an airstrike north of Baghdad. This was "confirmed" by the Iraqi government, but actual confirmation appears on the Islamist web-site of his "organization", "Al-Qaeda in Iraq". In short, it might actually be true. There is no doubt that this will be the greatest day in the long march toward winning the key battle in Iraq in the global war against swarthy-people's extremism since the fall of Saddam, or the toppling of his statue, or the deaths of Qusay and Uday, or the capture of Saddam, or the battle of Fallujah, or the first election, or the second election, or the naming of al-Maliki.
This comes on top of the defeat of insurgent California school board member Francine Busby in the global struggle taking place in California's 50th Congressional district.
Take that, you dirty jihadists! You've been SERVED!
The elevator from which I get all my news had the top three monumental stories listed:
1. Zarqawi Killed.
2. New Vaccine Against Cancer.
3. Streisand Going on Tour.
Have the same sexers infiltrated everywhere?
Posted by Rock R. E. Hudpeck at June 8, 2006 7:46 PM
You list different events disparagingly(?) like one 'event' is a defining point in a war. So because there have been many, they disprove any progress. Unfortunately no war has been as simple as you seem to think maybe they were. If I have misread what you were implying, I apologize.
Posted by Xavier at June 9, 2006 10:06 AM
Hey, I'm with Al Gore: I'm unequivocally glad that [evil bastard] Zarqawi is dead. What else can you say? But the bombings in Baghdad continue, the government remains in control of very little, our troops are still getting attacked and killed...
I didn't tout Saddam's capture as a big deal (and quite possibly the end of the war, the death of the insurgency, etc.): the Bush Administration did that. In fact, when Howard Dean said of that event, "It's nice, but not that a big deal-- the war will go on", he was duly mocked from all sides.
So, hey, hurray for those who knocked off Zarqawi and his associates. What else are we supposed to say? At this point, I guess, you're either with us (in the sense of being a 100% uncritical cheerleader of the Imperium) or you're a complete traitor; it's why an entire political spectrum, including all those who used to be called "principled conservatives" have been shoved into the "them" category at the cult of the Praetorian state.
So, like, yeah. Hurray. But we all know that Zarqawi's death changes little, if anything, "on the ground" in Iraq where Zarqawi led but one of dozens of groups like his.
Posted by the talking dog at June 9, 2006 11:09 AM
Things like the Zarqawi killing _can_ have a major impact on how a war progresses. Small psychological shifts can have large leverage on human interactions, and war is the mother of all human interactions (actually chimpanzees I think are a little bit more likely to kill each other than humans but since they are 99.9something % like us genetically maybe we can just include them in the picture.)
But that said what I would call the major psychological hurdle for the U.S. in this war is still with us. Who out there thinks that we have people in charge that are competent? Iím not speaking of the professionals that we have in the military, Iím speaking of the civilian lot that run the White House and the Pentagon.
Do you really think that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are competent? Do you really think that they would do the thing thatís right over the thing thatís easy? That is, for a politician, would they put the needs of the military commanders on the ground ahead of their political needs at home?
Now I know that this is a problem with ALL politicians, but this lot (which was not elected) thinks of nothing else. They are not there to lead America, they are there to make money and mainttain power. They are not there to protect our society, there are the to make money and mainttain power. Why do you think that Halliburton gets all the contracts? Why do you think that the deficit is so bad? Why do you think that they invaded (without provocation) Iraq when the experts warned against it? Why do you think we have an endless war?
So the Zarqawi killing is, unfortunately for us, not meaningful. Not as long as the incompetent-in-chief remains.
Posted by Ken at June 9, 2006 11:35 AM