Castro: Al-Zarqawi Killing a 'Barbarity'

While I am not opposed to your sentiment James Mack Unfortunately the old RED is right. Blowing up Zaqawi was a politically stupid move. He should have been captured. Micheal Berg who's son was beheaded was furious with GW for killing Zaqawi. He obviously knows the future consequences of this action.

I SPY
Micheal Berg who's son was beheaded was furious with GW for killing Zaqawi. He obviously knows the future consequences of this action.

Considering Berg's statements of the last couple days a valid arguement can be made he doesn't know the future consequences of placing his right foot in front of his left.

Very true he is in an emotional state. I do think it was a mistake to kill him. A trial would have made a lot more sense.

Michael Berg has a long, long history of being very, very, very far to the left. And when I say very far left, I am not hyperbolic. He's been that way for a long time now.

Very true he is in an emotional state. I do think it was a mistake to kill him. A trial would have made a lot more sense.

I have a question.

If during WWII, Hitler had not killed himself but had instead been captured. Would you have advocated a trial for him as well?

...yes, wouldn't you?

If during WWII, Hitler had not killed himself but had instead been captured. Would you have advocated a trial for him as well?

Yes.

However, this is assuming it is just as easy to capture him as it is to kill him with an aerial strike. Maybe there was not enough time to assemble a strike team to capture him, or maybe assembling that strike team would have tipped him off. Maybe the mission would have been dangerous and we would have more fatalities to add to that counter/tally that the news and certain liberals like to keep reminding everyone of. What we do know is that the bomb assault did work and he is now dead. Maybe not the best result, but certainly a good one and far far from the worst. Nothing in war is ever the best solution, but sometimes they are the best available or most practical solutions.

Adam you stole my comment. I agree with you entirely.

They had surrounded him with soldiers, and an air strike was called in, according to a colonel O'Reilly interviewed on Fox.

They dropped the bomb because they do not trust courts. They would rather dispense sure and lethal 'justice'.

They dropped the bomb because they do not trust courts. They would rather dispense sure and lethal 'justice'.

Or maybe to protect the lives of those soldiers who very well could have been walking into a death trap. This is the leader of terrorists who are known for their suicide bombs...

I do not care about justice in this instance, I care about stopping our enemy from harming us or anyone else. If the bomb created "justice" so be it, but we do know that the bomb terminated the life of one of the most successful terrorist leaders.

Actually, that poor sap could do with two 500 lb. bombs himself.

i think if you find yourself "agreeing 100%" with fidel castro, you should probably be rethinking your logic.

and his analogy is accurate.

Really, has Cuba declared hostilities with the United States recently that I do not know of?

If Cuba is not Communist, then why is the only legal political party in Cuba the Cuban Communist Party (PCC)???

In typical Communist fashion it got 98% of the votes last election. Fidel Castro is the First Secretary of the Communisty Party, naturally, and he got 100% of the votes for President.

It might be if Luis Posada Carriles was running around Texas free and plotting to bomb something or someone. But he's not, he's getting three squares a day. And probably getting fat eating it.

Do you really agree with Fidel or do you just want to try to act condescending and different by saying you do? I hate people that say that Chavez and/or Fidel are great leaders because they feel like being different.

If they want to declare war and promptly get their asses kicked...

not to be an frenzy frenchman, but it's that kind of rhetoric that gets America in so much trouble in the year 2006.

Never be too overconfident. *points at Iraq*

Never be too overconfident. *points at Iraq*

You'll notice that we are being bombed by Terrorists, not the Iraqi army.

I don't care if we were bombed by Sesame Street, we're still losing too many innocent lives, both military and civilians.

As many people died in Baghdad last month (1,400) as the casualties of homicides in LA...for the past 3 years, and no, I'm not talking out of my french ass.

Since when is death by terrorism justified?

This argument has been rehashed a trillion times.

It has nothing to do with this.

The analogy is flawed.

Neither should bullets. At that point we'll all be reduced to playing rock-paper-scissors to solve our feuds. Best 2 out of 3!

And having a big chance of him getting away (including is not getting there in time) or US casualties? No thanks.

Pamela Drew

I agree that they should have tried to get him alive. Not only that dropping the bombs killed innocents

Innocents? In a house beside Zarqawi?

Guilt by association, works for me.

Addendum to the above. I'll concede one small possiblity. One of the dead in the safe house may have been a delivery person from the local Pizza Falafal Hut.

Other than that slight possibility, too bad. You sleep with rats you get poisened with the rest.

Monday morning quarterbacking has really become popular as this war has drawn on. I am astounded at how many non-military people (even anti-military people) have so much knowledge as to how every little military action could be carried out more peacefully. We are not talking about a cowardly dictator hiding in a hole here. Does anyone honestly think that al Zarqawi would have ever allowed himself to be taken alive?

1) The blow to the prestige of his organization would have been enormous if he were tried, convicted, and imprisoned for the rest of his life. Zarqawi and his ilk WANT us to turn them into martyrs. That way the hate just keeps on coming.

2) Killing him lost everything he knew. We could have quite possibly learned enormous amounts of info on how Al Queda operates, as well as the whereabouts of some of the people lower on our list.

3) A child was killed by that bomb.

Exactly! The risk of moving enough troops into the area to cordon off an area that size virtually would assure they be detected before they were in place.

And then a "certain few" would be screaming "They let Zarqawi get away to prolong the war."

Jeff Hewitt

2) Killing him lost everything he knew. We could have quite possibly learned enormous amounts of info on how Al Queda operates, as well as the whereabouts of some of the people lower on our list.

3) A child was killed by that bomb.

Everything wasn't lost. There have been nearly 60 raids conducted since that bombing that are a result off what was gathered both at the site and what was discovered during the surveillance.

Yes a child was killed and it is regrettable, but that is the nature of war and always will be.

However let me ask you this. Would you place your child in that obviously dangerous position next the the most wanted man in Iraq?

Apparently it was a 5 or 6 year old girl. Some reports indicate that she may have been his daughter, although officials are thus far unable to confirm or deny.

The man was a monster, don't get me wrong. He was a thug. Human scum. But the death of even the least of us diminishes the whole. No death should be celebrated. And the fact that a little girl was sacrificed to bring an end to this man should at the very least inspire us not to hoot and holler about it as though we were spectators at a soccer stadium.

That's not actually directed at you, Throttle. More to the gentleman below with the "mad props."

At every turn our government missteps with this situation. I truly wish that we as a nation were strong enough to have risen back to our feet on that fateful September morning, wipe the blood from our brow, and turn to those whom would destroy us with compassion and forgiveness in our eyes.

I grieve for the exinguishing of an innocent life. I mourn the waste of humanity that was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. And I pray that tomorrow, we might gain the wisdom to no longer meet hate with hate.

I'm sorry, but what would showing compassion and forgiveness do? Didn't we try that about 4 times before, at least twice towards Bin Laden (WTC bombing 1, USS Cole). Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, don't confuse it. The Iraq war I'm against like most, but I'm still 100% supportive of the war in afghanistan. The fact that the Afghani war is almost never in the news is a very good thing.

As for innocent lives in that house, the child would've grown up to be a terrorist, and everyone else would've or already was one.

Some could call 9/11 a trap, but it really wasn't, there was no reason to go into Iraq in the first place, and the Afghani war was decently successful, especially for the middle east.

2) Killing him lost everything he knew. We could have quite possibly learned enormous amounts of info on how Al Queda operates, as well as the whereabouts of some of the people lower on our list.

I doubt we would have gotten much information from him directly, unless we used torture, but that is bad now isn't and we would be criticized for that.

Castro, whose regime interrogates supermodels who take photographs of Cuban poverty and brutality.

Ourselves.