| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| Iraqi Insurgency 101 |
| 2005-01-31 |
| Continued from yesterday, EFL ... A video obtained by NEWSWEEK shows some of al-Shayea's half-whispered testimony, prompted by the commanding voice of an interrogator. He seems terrified, confused. Yet according to Kamal, the information he supplied offered startling insights into the relentless insurgency that has grown dramatically since U.S. troops toppled the statue of dictator Saddam Hussein on April 9, 2003. Al-Shayea claimed the Iraqi police even had Zarqawi himself under arrest in Fallujah last October, but despite a $25 million reward—and perhaps not knowing whom they had—they let go the most ruthless and notorious killer in Iraq. (According to the deputy minister, security officials who have checked the circumstances now believe that may well be true.) General Kamal says information supplied by al-Shayea helped Coalition forces round up several of Zarqawi's key lieutenants within a matter of days. Among them is Abu Umar al-Kurdi, real name Sami Muhammad Saeed al-Jafi, a terrorist demolition man who confessed to 32 car bombings over the last two years. Even if Zarqawi continues to elude capture, nailing al-Kurdi was a critical score. It might—just might—eventually help change the course of this war that has seemed to defy political or military solutions, despite last weekend's elections, and despite an enormous toll in blood that included the loss just last week of 31 Americans in a nighttime helicopter crash. The key to defeating the insurgents, Iraqi officials now believe, is to find ways to separate and eliminate the most radical groups, like Zarqawi's, from those others that may be willing to make peace. (Similar strategies were tried, and succeeded, in Algeria and Egypt in the 1990s.) Taking out a key bombmaker producing Zarqawi's arsenal is a solid step in the right direction. But to understand how this might work, it's important to look at the very beginnings of the insurrection, in those months when the Bush administration first seriously threatened war against Saddam and started massing its troops, but hadn't yet made its move. As the world pondered the question of whether Saddam would give up the weapons of mass destruction that, in fact, he no longer had, he was preparing another kind of surprise for the Americans. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #8 Forget the article, the video is powerful. This guy realizes he's been lied to by these terrorist. It's just confirmation that these sons of bitches are evil and we don't need to show mercy. |
| Posted by: Chineter Spoger1529 2005-01-31 2:04:10 PM |
| #7 I like News Weeks monthly advertorial section, it lends creditablity to an otherwise discredited audit dodging rag. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-01-31 1:58:02 PM |
| #6 Not to mention Newsweek's snark-filled "Conventional Wisdom" feature... Or the fact that Anna Quindlen actually gets a page-length column, when she is barely qualified to be part of the night cleaning staff... Or the rampant "People"-ization of its features... Or the way that Newsweek's "news" features reek of stale journo school recieved wisdom and PC-ness... Yeah, I'm bitter about the money I wasted on that rag. Since I dropped it after 9/11, I feel a lot better... |
| Posted by: Carl in N.H. 2005-01-31 11:52:28 AM |
| #5 if dan darling thinks this is worth posting, then rest assured there are useful tidbits amidst whatever spin there is. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2005-01-31 11:48:39 AM |
| #4 Subtly undermine? Nothing they write about for those issues is new news. Often, it is years old for the archeology community. Not to mention that Newsweek presents argued hypothesis as settled fact. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-01-31 11:20:08 AM |
| #3 Newsweak is an insurgent whore |
| Posted by: Duke Nukem 2005-01-31 10:56:16 AM |
| #2 I stopped getting Newsweek when I realized that it frequently bashes Christianity right before Christmas and Easter with "religious" spreads that subtly undermine Christian doctrine using left-leaning liberal theologians and such. Time is somewhat better, but many of the articles in these "news magazines" are just a tad more credible than the tabloids. For example, they select photos for shock value rather than representative photos. Watch -- next week they'll cover the Iraqi election with more bombing photos than voting photos. |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-01-31 10:19:29 AM |
| #1 1st warning this was an MSM hack job: the relentless insurgency that has grown dramatically since U.S. troops toppled the statue 2nd and final warning for me that any conclusions reached by this article would be complete and utter bullshit: It might—just might—eventually help change the course of this war that has seemed to defy political or military solutions, despite last weekend’s elections Screw you Newsweak. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2005-01-31 9:53:06 AM |