Al-Zarqawi ELIMINATED: Top Terror Leader Killed In Iraq

Filed under:Politics, Web Log (Blog), D. Sirmize — posted by D. Sirmize on June 8, 2006 @ 7:18 am

 

“You can’t run away from trouble- there ain’t no place that far.”  Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, chief of Al-Qaeda In Iraq (or as James Taranto says Democrats call it- ‘al Qaeda Which Has Nothing to Do With Iraq in Iraq Which Has Nothing to Do With al Qaeda’) has been promoted to the rank of martyr after our boys facilitated his meeting with Allah around 6:15 PM Wednesday evening.

AP Reports (reluctantly): 

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida leader in Iraq who waged a bloody campaign of suicide bombings and beheadings of hostages, has been killed in a precision airstrike, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday. It was a long-sought victory in the war in Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi and seven aides, including spiritual adviser Sheik Abdul Rahman, were killed Wednesday evening in a remote area 30 miles northeast of Baghdad in the volatile province of Diyala, just east of the provincial capital of Baqouba, officials said.

“Al-Zarqawi was eliminated,” Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said.

“Those who disrupt the course of life, like al-Zarqawi, will have a tragic end,” al-Maliki said. He also warned those who would follow the militant’s lead that “whenever there is a new al-Zarqawi, we will kill him.”

Tell us, oh great sheik- how are you liking those 72 virgins?

4 comments »

  1. Violence just causes more violence. Another murdering freak is just going to pop up in this guys place angrier and now with a cause. It’s just more media propaganda to make us feel warm and fuzzy about Bush and his crew and all the mistakes they have made to get us were we are over there.
    What I found particularly amusing was when Bush was on the TV this morning saying that another murderer has been eliminated, why couldn’t he just say murdered? It seems that when we kill for our beliefs it’s put into nice neat terms like eliminated (like they are bugs), but when someone who has a different set of beliefs kills it is called murder or massacre. Not that I’m trying to say that this guy was not a bad guy, and he didn’t deserve to be murdered, but if the same guy was in South America (with no oil profits for the US) doing the same thing this guy is doing, and he was killed it would not have warranted a presidential (pat ourselves on the back) news conference. It seems to me that we are just itching for excuses to justify our presence over there.
    Some things to ponder:
    Why are we in that country? The people needed our help? Please!!!! there are people all over the world that need our help that we don’t go to war for them. Why? I’m thinking (No Oil)
    Where are the weapons of mass destruction? We must have forgotten about that.
    Should we not be spending the billions of dollars that we use over there to kill people, on ways to make us more independent from these freaky people, like on alternative fuels, and a better defense system?
    Why piss them off, they were doing a fine job of killing themselves before we decided to go over there and give them another cause.
    Then again this may just be a bad dream, and hopefully I’ll wake up soon.

    Comment by Mike More — June 8, 2006 @ 9:10 am

  2. “Violence just causes more violence. Another murdering freak is just going to pop up in this guys place angrier and now with a cause.”

    You’re right. Maybe we just should have written him a very nasty letter telling him how mad we are. Better yet, maybe we should just pull out of Iraq, put Saddam back in power, give a share of the new government to the insurgents, blow up all the schools we’ve built, and say sorry we were ever there.

    “Why are we in that country?”

    We’re there for strategic military purposes as a component of the larger war on terror. If it was about the oil, why am I still paying $3 per gallon at the pump?

    “Where are the weapons of mass destruction? We must have forgotten about that.”

    Saddam had WMD’s. He used them on his own people. The crux of the original cease-fire was that Saddam must document his WMD, destroy them, and prove to the international community that he had destroyed them. He did not do this. We know he had them. We don’t don’t know that he destroyed them. So where did they go?

    There is little doubt, according to domestic and international intelligence communities, that even if he wasn’t actively pursuing WMD at the time of invasion, he at least had the desire and capability to restart those programs. Since we had no proof of his WMD stockpiles being destroyed, even France, Russia, Germany, and prominant Democrats like Hilary, Kerry, and Kennedy didn’t doubt he had them. Just because we haven’t found huge WMD stockpiles doesn’t mean he never had them. In fact, more and more evidence is concluding that he shipped most of the stuff to Syria in the weeks leading up to the war.

    “Why piss them off, they were doing a fine job of killing themselves before we decided to go over there and give them another cause.”

    You’re right- they were doing an excellent job. And they still are. 90% of victims of Islamic terror are Muslim. We were ok with them just killing each other until they branched out and killed 3,000 of us.

    Mike- we appreciate you reading this blog and taking the time to comment. Nice comment- keep them coming!

    D. Sirmize

    Comment by D. Sirmize — June 8, 2006 @ 11:54 am

  3. “We were ok with them just killing each other until they branched out and killed 3,000 of us.”

    Sorry but there is absolutely no evidence to support that Iraq or Saddam had anything to do with 3,000 deaths in the US. Seems to me that it was Bin .. what’s his name? Oh yea we seem to have forgotten all about him. It was just a good excuse for Bush junior to manipulate the American people and get back at someone that his daddy didn\’t like.

    “We’re there for strategic military purposes as a component of the larger war on terror. If it was about the oil, why am I still paying $3 per gallon at the pump?”
    Paleeese!!! So I guess we can just go in and set up camp anywhere in the world if it benefits us strategically, now that’s not playing nice. I don’t think you would like someone setting up camp in your back yard because it strategically benefits them?

    You pay $3 per gallon? Wow. It used to be a lot lower before we moved into their backyard.

    “There is little doubt, according to domestic and international intelligence communities, that even if he wasn’t actively pursuing WMD at the time of invasion, he at least had the desire and capability to restart those programs.”

    So now we take out leaders of countries for having desires and capabilities. I would love our police force to work this way. I know you were thinking about stealing that Slurpee …..busted.

    D. Its all good, that’s what makes America great. Time is the great filter that tends to filter out the crap and eventually the truth comes out, although some people will never admit it. I was not a big Vietnam fan either. In fact I detest killing and war all together, although I do understand that it is necessary in some situations. You may be right in the end, but for now I got to go with my gut, and my gut is screaming BB for more Bush Bull$*!!

    Comment by Mike More — June 8, 2006 @ 1:23 pm

  4. “Sorry but there is absolutely no evidence to support that Iraq or Saddam had anything to do with 3,000 deaths in the US.”

    Nobody ever said Saddam or Iraq had anything to do with 9-11. That is a liberal straw-man argument. You were originally talking about Islamic radicals. So am I.

    “So now we take out leaders of countries for having desires and capabilities. I would love our police force to work this way. I know you were thinking about stealing that Slurpee …..busted.”

    No. We take out leaders of countries when they violate international agreements. Once again, Saddam was in violation of the original cease-fire and 17 UN resolutions. It didn’t matter what his intentions were- he was fair game either way. If you had warrants out for your arrest or had violated your parole, it wouldn’t matter if you were planning to steal a slurpee or not. Busted.

    Mike, I don’t know if there’s anybody who is really PRO-war. And I don’t think anybody in the Republican Party or the Bush Admin relishes sending our soldiers to kill people and die. We all want a quick resolution to the Iraq situation. My gut doesn’t like some of the bullcrap Bush heaps on us either, but my brain says we would be very irresponsible to ignore the threat of Islamic radicalism based on emotion and political correctness.

    D. Sirmize

    Comment by D. Sirmize — June 9, 2006 @ 8:49 am

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed
HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required, never displayed)




Blog contents copyright © 2006 Tyler Slack