Abu Musab al-Zarqawi DEAD

[kj]

now confirmed.

[AlanG]

woohoo

Except whats the chances this is yet another lie. Theyve announced his death before, and its amazing that it always happens when a major scandal breaks in the papers.

In other words - great if its happenned but if bush/Blair claimed it was 1pm id look out my window to see if it was dark or not.

[PlaySleepRepeat]

I hope this is true.

I wonder who's going to get the $25m bounty that was on him?

Of course at al-Qaeda Inc. the wheels will be in motion to churn out his replacement from the "Freedom Fighter" assembly line.

And the cycle continues.

At least it'll boost the moral amongst our troops and those Iraqi's intent to bringing peace to their Nation.

Good news if true.

[Pubic Wig]

They said he was found due to information from Iraqi people...if they are civilians surely they would be due at least part of the reward yeah? (and then become targets for every resistance group in Iraq)

[Iomega]

Is that the guy who was behind all the kidnappings and ambushes?

[Iomega]

Read the article and it was.

[kj]

I'm hoping this leads to a period of fewer bombings and murders, but i don't think it will. I wonder if anyone will get a share of the $25million reward that was put on his head.

[Iomega]

Yeah I doubt it too.I think theres always going to be fanatics like him.

He wasnt from Iraq either,just caused trouble there.

[Kierkegaard]

Originally Posted by Iomega

Is that the guy who was behind all the kidnappings and ambushes?

Along with Bush and Blair, yes.

[kj]

Originally Posted by Kierkegaard

Along with Bush and Blair, yes.

Do you think it's a good think Zarqawi is gone?

[Kierkegaard]

Whether it's good or bad isn't up to me to decide - as human beings he is my equal, and so I'm not really in a position to judge the worth of his life. I dislike the fact that the political spin machine on both sides of the Iraq War tend to venerate individuals and attribute them with a significance that isn't there. Bush and Blair's working so hard to project themselves as guardian angels of democracy works on the same principle as the way in which they've tried to portray Zarqawi as a demonic figure (who in turn is a holy figure for Al-Quaeda fighting against the "evil" US/British forces).

I've got very little, if any, sympathy for either side because they're both trying to force their religion, be that Muslim fundamentalism or 'democratic' fundamentalism, on other people. I think all this fuss about, and even worse celebration of, Zarqawi's death is missing the point(s) entirely. It's humans, not abstract gods and devils, that are at the heart of this problem.

[kj]

Believe me, i dislike this was as much as you do but at the same time you don't need the press to tell you who the good and bad are in the situation. If you have half a brain you'll know to find out for yourself by looking at a variety of sources what the real situation is all about and i don't think for a minute that Zarqawi was anything else but an evil participant in this... to suggest otherwise, well, i wont go there.

Also the 'political spin machine' isnt just on the iraqi or the american/british sides. Al Qaida themselves gave Zarqawi the significance that i think you are talking about. He was held in high esteem, at least by Bin Laden's deputy although Bin Laden and Zarqawi had their suspiscions about each other. You can't say that the British, or the Americans or the Iraqi's made Zarqawi out to be a huge player in the conflict to furthen their cause when Al Qaida themselves were the ones that made Zarqawi the most wanted man that he was.

I'm just interested to find out if you are for or against what the Americans and British did when they went for Saddam. I wanted Saddam removed, but i don't think the American's went about it the right way and i don't think he was a priority either.

[Kierkegaard]

If you read my post I make it clear that Al-Quaeda are engaged in the same kind of veneration of their figureheads (Al Zarqawi being one of them) as many sections of our so-called free press are with Bush and Blair. I certainly think if you claim Al-Zarqawi to be "evil" because he masterminded from a distance the deaths of innocent civilians to meet the interests of himself and his followers then it's quite easy to claim that Bush and Blair are "evil" by the same logic. However, I think "evil" is a very abstract concept and sweeps aside the fact that every human being is capable of this kind of behaviour, so it's not really a word I'd ever pin on anyone.

With regards to Iraq, I have always been and still am firmly anti-war and I don't think anything can change that. I understand as much as anyone outside of Iraq how utterly repugnant Saddam Hussein was as a leader, but my problem is this - replacing a tyrant with a fraud is just damage control because tyranny feeds on fraud. If the new Iraq is in any way modelled on Blair's Britain, or worse still Bush's America, then it's only a matter of time before things go down the shitter again. That time might be 20 years, 50 years, or maybe even more, but my understanding of history tells me that it will happen at some point, and I don't think those years of respite can morally justify the death of any human being.

What I'm trying to get at is that nothing in this world, especially not war, exists out of its historical context. I detest Saddam Hussein as a leader because he was a tyrant; I detest Blair and Bush as leaders because they are frauds. I wanted Saddam removed as much as anyone, but I do not think a war perpetuated by, or rather on behalf of, frauds solves any problems in the long-run. The short-term benefits are arguable but at the end of the day I can't reconcile myself with the veneration of any political figureheads/leaders so the whole thing just becomes this really murky grey area for me. That's the benefit of privilege, I suppose.

[Pubic Wig]

Interesting points here...but what do you mean 'Blair's Britain' or 'Bush's America' dude?

[kj]

I have no problem with Blair's Britain at all. But that could be the selfishness coming out there.