iraq's al quada leader dead al zarqawi

[piet11111]

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06...qawi/index.html (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.al.zarqawi/index.html)

seems they got him i dont really mind if it was not for the possibility of more violence as the lower ranked al quada members are now able to fight for the strong man position.

i am curious how this will affect the sectarian violence in iraq though time will tell.

[R_P_A_S]

it will get worst i think. they'll be pissed and retaliate

[The Grey Blur]

RPAS basically summed it up there

The Americans have created a martyr and now they'll have to deal with the retaliation

[Commie Girl]

Yes....another martyr. It is bizarre that people are celebrating this, as if it really MEANS something. :o

[Global_Justice]

when less sectarian fascist murderer in the world. thats the way i look at it. although another will just step up

[Comrade-Z]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 04:09 PM
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06...qawi/index.html (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.al.zarqawi/index.html)

seems they got him i dont really mind if it was not for the possibility of more violence as the lower ranked al quada members are now able to fight for the strong man position.

i am curious how this will affect the sectarian violence in iraq though time will tell.
Well, I guess this means the end of the Iraqi Resistance... :rolleyes:

At least that's what right-wing pun-ditzes will be saying.

In their dreams! :lol:

[piet11111]

yeah he is easily replaced probably by someone who is worse.
social darwinism in practice the americans are killing the weak leaving the stronger behind.

i am curious how this will affect the sectarianist fighting will it get worse or better ?
i doubt it gets better but any change in the sectarian violence statistics would be interesting to see as it would indicate al quada is part of that violence.

[Enragé]

Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 8 2006, 04:49 PM
RPAS basically summed it up there

The Americans have created a martyr and now they'll have to deal with the retaliation
al zarqawi is not a martyr to anyone but his insane little sectarian bunch of assholes

the regular iraqi resistance even declared war on him at one point for targeting civilians!

[drain.you]

I agree with what comrade R_P_A_S said. And I hate the way that world leaders celebrate a man's death, okay so he wasn't on the imperalists side and not ours really but I think its a tad too disrepectful to be happy that someone is dead.

[Jazzratt]

Wonderful. He had fuck all political clout in Iraq except with his band of loonies who will now go apeshit whilst the Iraqi civil war will continue as if not much had happened (because, let&#39;s be honest, not much has). Fantastic, I can&#39;t see this blowing up in anyone&#39;s face <_< .

[Janus]

I doubt this is a major blow to Al-Qaeda. They&#39;re way too decentralized for this. It would be like taking out Bin Laden, some one else will rise up and take his place.

It&#39;s not like Zarqawi was the keystone or anything, he was on the run so much that there wasn&#39;t much that he could do except stand as a symbol of defiance towards the US.

Like what others have said, the US has created a martyr and will incur greater violence and retaliations for this.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 01:40 PM
Wonderful. He had fuck all political clout in Iraq except with his band of loonies
Unfortunately, untrue.

In fact, the feeling was more mixed. While many Iraqis, particularly Shiites, were thrilled by the news that the man they blame for a campaign of car bombings and kidnappings was dead, public sentiment was not unanimous, with some saying that they saw Zarqawi as the bulwark against American occupation and influence from the Shiite theocracy in neighboring Iran.

But the predominant feeling in Madhloom&#39;s restaurant was jubilant.
....
There were a couple of long faces, however. Salam Abdul Rahman, a 28-year-old government employee, angrily refused to take a soft drink from a man who was handing them out.

Another man, Saad Saleem, a 32-year-old laborer, was depressed by the insurgent leader&#39;s death and thought it would lead to trouble for Sunni Arabs.

"Zarqawi was the one who put a limit to Shiite influence and all the killing of Sunnis," he said. "It is a big loss. Who will fight the Americans the way he used to fight them? They were ready to leave the country because of his operations. Now there will be no one like him who will be able to push the Americans to leave Iraq. There will be no one to stop the Iranian Shiites. Al-Qaeda must look for a good replacement for Zarqawi. Otherwise the Sunnis will lose every thing in Iraq".
Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/08/AR2006060800819.html?nav=hcmodule)

Zarqawi was the most extreme expression of religious sectarianism in a deeply divided country. Which is why his death is not going to bring an end to the terrorism he led.

Whether it somewhat weakens al-Qaeda in Iraq, is too early to say. If, as Piet suggests, there&#39;s a factional conflict about the succession, that would tend to weaken al-Qaeda.

It does reflect that Washington is having somewhat more success recruiting useful informants in Iraq. That&#39;s always been a weakness for the occupation.

[Janus]

It does reflect that Washington is having somewhat more success recruiting useful informants in Iraq. That&#39;s always been a weakness for the occupation.
The report said that info. from senior militants, locals, and help from Jordanian intelligence led to the airstrike.

They actually followed Zarqawi&#39;s spiritual adviser though since Zarqawi seems to have gotten very religious as of late.

There may be problems with the succession, but a new leader will no doubt emerge. Though he will face problems with the coalition and the nationalist groups that Zarqawi has also ticked off.

[Amusing Scrotum]

The photo really doesn&#39;t look like him....though he has put on weight over the last few years. How you put on weight in a situation like this, is beyond me. Maybe "Resistance HQ" is located in a greasy spoon café. <_<


Originally posted by CNN+--> (CNN)Rahman "was the spiritual adviser to Zarqawi," Caldwell said.[/b]

I&#39;m pretty sure "Rahman", whoever he is, was not the "spiritual adviser to Zarqawi". If memory serves me correctly, Zarqawi&#39;s "spiritual adivser" was a guy he met in the clink....a Palestinian refugee maybe.


Originally posted by CNN+--> (CNN)In a statement from the White House, President Bush said al-Zarqawi&#39;s death will give Iraq a chance to "turn the tide" in the fight against the nation&#39;s insurgency.[/b]

I seriously doubt that George.

Zarqawi the "global terrorist leader", was, more or less, a mythical creature invented by Washington. He didn&#39;t have a great deal of influence inside Iraq, he wasn&#39;t responsible for many significant actions and his group was pretty small, comparatively speaking. The idea that his death will have a significant impact on the Iraqi Resistance is, well....far fetched. To put it kindly. I mean, Zarqawi had little to no clout over the predominantly Nationalist Sunni Resistance and certainly their numbers and financial strength make them more of a "player".


Originally posted by CNN
Al-Zarqawi was the self-proclaimed leader of one of the nation&#39;s many insurgent factions -- al Qaeda in Iraq --who pledged allegiance to Osama bin Laden.

Superficially, that statement is correct, but there&#39;s a whole lot more to the "al Qaeda in Iraq" scenario than CNN lets on. You see, until 2004 (?) Zarqawi&#39;s group was, more or less, indifferent to al Qaeda; they might even of been hostile....I recall something about Zarqawi refusing an original offer from bin Laden. Indeed, the links between al Qaeda and Zarqawi are pretty superficial, it was a marriage of convenience, that&#39;s all.

Indeed, I doubt such a merger would have happened had it not been for Washington&#39;s promotion of "Zarqawi the terrorist leader"....because, essentially, it&#39;s a merger of propaganda interests and not especially practical ones. Indeed, I think there may even be quite a big theological gulf between bin Laden and Zarqawi....there&#39;s certainly a difference between bin Laden&#39;s emphasis on the "far away enemy" (America) and Zarqawi&#39;s emphasis on the "near enemy" (Shi&#39;ite Muslims). Indeed, if both had been operating in the 80&#39;s, then it&#39;s quite likely that one of the factions would have executed the other faction.


Originally posted by piet11111
i am curious how this will affect the sectarianist fighting will it get worse or better ?

Dunno.

The way these groups are structured, makes them heavily reliant on a "Messianic figurehead"....so it&#39;s quite possible that we will see a few splits occurring, with each factor claiming to be the "true heirs of Zarqawi". That may well lead to a decrease in the "sectarianist fighting", though there&#39;s a certain amount of evidence that a lot of sectarian attacks are carried out by Mercenaries and not Religious nuts....but that remains somewhat speculative at this point in time.

What&#39;s almost certain, is that Zarqawi&#39;s death won&#39;t have a significant affect on the Resistance as a whole. Indeed, it may even help recreate the situation of 2003 where there was a distinct possibility of a Shi&#39;ite and Sunni merger....but I suppose a lot now depends on how the Sunni Nationalists handle this situation and furthermore whether the Mahdi Army once again enters into full out armed conflict.


[email protected]
I doubt this is a major blow to Al-Qaeda. They&#39;re way too decentralized for this.

Other than the group involving bin Laden, the other guy whose name sounds like Zarqawi but I can&#39;t remember how to spell it and the sycophants, it would probably be incorrect to label al Qaeda as an "organisation"....."decentralized" or otherwise. Essentially, certain groups claim to have "links" with al Qaeda, but so far there&#39;s little evidence to support the theory that al Qaeda actually controls anything outside of its one little political sphere. Indeed, the affiliation of other groups to al Qaeda, is, more or less, an affiliation for propaganda purposes....I&#39;ve certainly seen nothing to suggest bin Laden uses his personal fortune in any significant way to back groups other than his own.


Janus
....since Zarqawi seems to have gotten very religious as of late.

Uh, "of late"? :huh:
_______

On a side note, this sure is going to make Question Time a whole lot more boring tonight....not that it&#39;s particularly interesting at the best of times.

[bunk]

On another forum i frequent someone pretty much summed it up


Great news. Hostilities will cease immediately, and all Islamic fundamentalists will embrace Quakerism.

[Ander]

Zarqawi, according to CNN, is the "leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq." However, he has his own group which only formed a kind of alliance with al-Qaeda some time after the US invasion of Iraq.

As for consequences, I&#39;m not sure what exactly this means for Iraq, but I can guarantee that the level of violence will not go down. They&#39;ve now created a martyr and I&#39;m sure that this has pissed many people off, even if it&#39;s not the majority.

[piet11111]

well an obstacle to a unified resistance is gone perhaps now we might see a grand alliance of resistance fighters ?

the iraqi situation is interesting to me because of the mixture of different sects of islam fighting one another along with an imperialist force struggling for control and an international terrorist organisation that has a beef with said imperialists.
then you also have iran in the mixture that probably thinks about annexing part of iraq if not the whole country and trying to make life as hard as possible for the imperialists.

its sad for the iraqi population but its a unique situation that im watching with great interest.

[Enragé]

Iran doesnt want to annex, just increase their sphere of influence. At the moment the best way for them to do this is to maintain some order within iraq (since the shia are the majority), which is why the shia leaders (which are funded and backed by iran) have kept the shia relatively quiet.

[Janus]

well an obstacle to a unified resistance is gone perhaps now we might see a grand alliance of resistance fighters ?
There was already coop. until Zarqawi started his attacks against other groups.

Perhaps it may occur, but the nationalists and fundamentalists have very different goals in mind which aren&#39;t very compatible.

[Ander]

Whatever happens, I hope it makes the US get the fuck out of Iraq.

[Janus]

This only gives them further false hope and increase the government&#39;s optimism. It&#39;ll spawn some more optimistic reports similar to those in Vietnam.

US Army:"Yay, we killed one of their leaders, now we just have to deal with the thousands left."

[Body Count]

Terrible loss for Iraqi resistance.

But, as has been stated....the show must go on, and it will.

[Kamraten]

Al zarqawi was more or less unknown in iraq until US made him the key man in a al qaeda group, before the us invasion there were no so called al qaeda group in iraq.
and i believe they known his where abouts all along they could of easily dropped a bomb ages ago, but they dont , they play the political game.

And from the pictures i saw that bomb looked like it could take out a hood, they mean that they found his face intact like that? tss, anyway i think it was a well organised political strike, in the right time. the price on oil went down pretty fast, its a good message to the people the more we kill the cheaper oil hallilulja.

This is a occupied country, its not just some immigrant al qaeda lovers who is making the violence. I wouldent care who the hell they took out if they were in my country i would be fighting til my death anyway.
so the death of this dude, wont change a damn thing, mayby a retaliation on the world cup might come out of it, probably with Uran so they can legalise a war on Iran as well.
couse dont forget that Usama bin laden was created by the US , worked and trained by CIA and funded by the American government.

And as it seems Al zarqawi was created by the US aswell. Nobody have heard about him until United states government pointed him out.

[Ander]

I haven&#39;t even thought of a strike during the World Cup...does this seem likely to anybody?

[piet11111]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 02:12 PM
I haven&#39;t even thought of a strike during the World Cup...does this seem likely to anybody?
it would be a dream target for sure but i doubt even the most rabid terrorist would target something that is as international as the world cup.
pissing of so many country&#39;s would affect their fund raising and resource gathering way to much.

then again it is a dream target someone that wants to establish a name for himself could not resist.

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by piet11111+Jun 9 2006, 03:19 PM--> (piet11111 @ Jun 9 2006, 03:19 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 02:12 PM
I haven&#39;t even thought of a strike during the World Cup...does this seem likely to anybody?
it would be a dream target for sure but i doubt even the most rabid terrorist would target something that is as international as the world cup.
pissing of so many country&#39;s would affect their fund raising and resource gathering way to much.

then again it is a dream target someone that wants to establish a name for himself could not resist. [/b]
Don&#39;t forget the 1972 and 1996 Olympics, where there were terrorist attacks (although one was a kidnapping of Israeli atheletes rather than a bomb or anything).

[Ander]

I&#39;m still a bit nervous about it..I&#39;m going to be watching to see what happens.

[Comrade Don]

This was such a huge loss , R.I.P. Zarqawi.


Zarqawi was/is the heart and face of the Guerillas in Iraq, and I just hope this doesnt dilute the whole movement.

[Kamraten]

I dont agree, al zarqawi was not the heart nor the face of the iraqi resistence.
If he has done what USA said he has done then he is nothing else then a butcher, helping and encouraging US war in iraq by going under the name &#39;Al qaeda&#39; and by that legalising the US occupation and all the breaking off human rights in the name of war on terror.
When it is infact insurgence iraqi people fighting against an occupation, people who does not belong to any terrorist organisation , freedom fighters and rebells fighting against Americans coming to their country, murdering, abusing, raping, torturing and humiliating their proud people, aswell as stealing their resources.
Thats the heart and face of the guerillas in iraq, not al Zarqawi.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 13 2006, 04:06 AM
Zarqawi was/is the heart and face of the Guerillas in Iraq, and I just hope this doesnt dilute the whole movement.

Don&#39;t be such a dunderhead.

Zarqawi was a rather obscure and unimportant figure in Iraq, who has simply been made into an "insurgent leader" by the propaganda outlets of the occupying countries. Indeed, Zarqawi probably wasn&#39;t even the "little toe of the Guerillas in Iraq"....at best, he was a foot fungus.

[Operation Red Flag]

Originally posted by Body [email protected] 9 2006, 01:32 AM
Terrible loss for Iraqi resistance.
Al-Zarqawi&#39;s sect was tiny and unimportant


This was such a huge loss , R.I.P. Zarqawi.
The man was an idiotic fundamentalist who would have had no problem with killing Socialists or "religious deviants". There is a critical difference between supporting the resistance and romantiscizing it.

[Comrade Don]

Originally posted by Operation Red Flag+Jun 13 2006, 12:14 PM--> (Operation Red Flag @ Jun 13 2006, 12:14 PM)
Body [email protected] 9 2006, 01:32 AM
Terrible loss for Iraqi resistance.
Al-Zarqawi&#39;s sect was tiny and unimportant


This was such a huge loss , R.I.P. Zarqawi.
The man was an idiotic fundamentalist who would have had no problem with killing Socialists or "religious deviants". There is a critical difference between supporting the resistance and romantiscizing it. [/b]
Zarqawi may have been a fundementalist but, That is much more respectable then being a capitalist. He fought against the americans, and along with Al Sadr have ignited this revolution in Iraq, I dont care if it is a Islamic war, A religous nation is much better then a capitalist one.

[Operation Red Flag]

Zarqawi may have been a fundementalist but, That is much more respectable then being a capitalist
A fundamentalist is a capitalist.


He fought against the americans, and along with Al Sadr have ignited this revolution in Iraq
It&#39;s been pointed out a few times that Zarqawi only controlled a small sect and actually had little influence in Iraq. Rather than religious fundamentalists it&#39;s the Imperialist butchering and repression of the working-class that has led to this resistance in Iraq.


I dont care if it is a Islamic war, A religous nation is much better then a capitalist one.
A theocracy is a capitalist system. Or else it&#39;s feudalism (I&#39;m not too sure). Either way would be a defeat for the revolutionary movement in Iraq.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Comrade Don+--> (Comrade Don)Zarqawi may have been a fundementalist but, That is much more respectable then being a capitalist. [....] A religous nation is much better then a capitalist one.[/b]

A "religious nation"? Care to cite a few specific examples of such a "nation"? Because I know of none.

One could cite Iran of course, but Iran, in the major cities and surrounding areas at least, operates within the dynamics of capitalism. The present ruling class may like to call it an "Islamic economy", but the "ghost of Marx" haunts them....because said "ghost" shows, of course, that the fundamental class system and economy operate there, is a capitalist one.

As for examples from before bourgeois society emerged, well, you won&#39;t find any of those, because the bourgeois brought with them the conception of a "nation". The conception, as far as I&#39;m aware, emerged in revolutionary France and the ideological paradigm that came with it, Patriotism, was initially a tremendously progressive paradigm that formed against feudal counter-revolution. But aside from the minor historical details, one could not, in any sense, call pre-capitalist France a "religious nation" even if the term "nation" was correct....rather, it was a "nation" that incorporated a localised and feudal economy.

So honestly, I don&#39;t quite know in what context one is meant to view your statement. But, then again, it&#39;s still a pretty troubling statement; especially if you are aware of the kind of practices used in "nations" where Religion plays a dominant ideological role. Do you admire the practices of the Catholic Clergy in pre-capitalist France? Think carefully about your answer.

Additionally, this is a board which promotes revolutionary leftism, a thoroughly progressive political outlook. So if the context of your statement is one where you are promoting a return to a "more Religious time", that is, a "return to feudalism", then I think you&#39;re going to find yourself banished to Opposing Ideologies pretty quickly....there&#39;s actually a Religion sub-forum you can pollute in there. But remember, NO PREACHING&#33;

On a side note, you&#39;re a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist right? Just curious.


Comrade Don
....and along with Al Sadr have ignited this revolution in Iraq....

Uh, "along with", as in in cooperation with??? :blink:

[peaccenicked]

This thread bothered me, al zarqawi has been declared dead many times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musab_al-....27s_importance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musab_al-Zarqawi#Arguments_downplaying_Zarqawi.27s_importan ce)

[Janus]

Yeah, but they didn&#39;t have evidence till now.

Anyways, it&#39;s been what, a week? The US has already identified Zarqawi&#39;s successor to be Abu Ayyub al-Masri. When they kill him, someone else will take his place. That&#39;s just how it works.

U.S. military shows Al-Zarqawi&#39;s successor (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060615/ap_on_re_mi_ea/al_zarqawi_s_successor)

[peaccenicked]

I am not convinced US miltary intelligence has a history of being deceitful. They have a history of blowing things up and asking questions later(and not answering them). They are not even sure about the successor by their own admission: very likely it is another smokescreen. I reckon al zarqawi is partly myth, partly true, partly a reason to keep US troops in Iraq.

It could be that al qaida is a vey exagerated force in the region or in the world, a CIA bogeyman set up as an image to justify US aggression.

The information in propaganda wars are always sketchy and hard to source objectively.