« Wizbang Blue Photo Caption Contest - 5/6/07 | Main | NeoCons for Obama? »

Al Qaeda Endorses Bush Veto of Iraq Funding Bill

A large majority of Americans supported the Democratic plan for a partial withdrawal from Iraq that George W Bush recently vetoed. Bush will be heartened to learn, however, that his veto is drawing some support from overseas. In particular from Ayman al-Zawahiri who is Al Qaeda's second-in-command and a mass murderer responsible for the killing of 3,000 of our fellow countrymen.

"This bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap," al-Zawahri said, according to a transcript released by the monitoring group SITE. The bill is evidence of American "failure and frustration," he added.

"We ask Allah that they (U.S. troops) only get out of it after losing 200,000 to 300,000 killed, in order that we give the spillers of blood in Washington and Europe an unforgettable lesson," he said.

In the past, right-wing politicians, pundits and bloggers have used statements by Al Qaeda that appeared to endorse Democratic Party positions as proof that supporting the Republicans was the right course of action. After all, they argued, if Al Qaeda is for something, then we should all be reflexively against it. One wonders if they will use the same logic regarding these statements that effectively oppose the Democratic plan and support Bush's veto.

Zawahiri's statement demonstrates a point that I've been arguing for some time: that Al Qaeda sees the current situation in Iraq working to their advantage and does not want to see a precipitate US withdrawal. They see that our presence in Iraq has radicalized tens of thousands of young men from across the Arab world in a way that our occupation of Afghanistan has not. Those of the jihadists who survive the experience in Iraq will be the vanguard of the 21st century Al Qaeda organization and will continue to ply their deadly trade across the Islamic world and Europe for decades to come. For Al Qaeda, Iraq is the gift that keeps on giving (recruits).

Zawahiri's continued enthusiasm for the presence of US troops in Iraq disputes the "flytrap" theory put forward by such right-wing bloggers as Engram. That theory suggests that the 4,000 or so jihadists who have been killed in Iraq represent progress in the war on terror because they have been removed from the battleground. If that were the case, why would Zawahiri be supporting the continuation of the occupation?

The reason is that for Zawahiri, the number of jihadists who die in Iraq is completely irrelevant. The Arab world produces an inexhaustible supply of such young men. Losing a mere 4,000 isn't going to make any difference in the overall numbers when there are tens of thousands (even hundreds of thousands) eager to take their place and achieve martyrdom fighting against the infidels in Arab lands. What's far more important, is keeping the US in Iraq so that Al-Jazeera and other Arab news outlets have a steady stream of imagery depicting dead and injured Iraqi civilians who are portrayed as the innocent victims of America's "war against Islam" (as Al Qaeda portrays our occupation of Iraq). This is the central theme of Al Qaeda propaganda. Without US forces in Iraq to fight against, Al Qaeda would lose much of its ability to recruit angry young men off the streets of the Arab world into a life of terrorism and jihad.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 4/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 4/5 (5 votes cast)

Comments (4)


It's really an endorsement for the Democratic Party's stance on Iraq.

Congratulations, you've got the bad guys on your side.

Paul Hamilton:

Cirby: By what Orwellian twist of logic do you figure that? Which side wants us to stay and which wants us to go?

civil behavior:

You had to figure. The spinmeisters are indubitably greatly practiced at their craft. There is nothing, I say, nothing, that deters them from articulating their most controverted opinions in order to shower their great leader with plaudits of their undying homage.

Or in Republispeak, they're simply going to twist anything Bush does or says so they don't have to look like a horse's A**.

Congratulations, Cirby. You get five stars for todays republipseak!

You should read my later post (An Insurgent-vs.-Terrorist Tutorial) where I explain subtle distinction between false bravado and strategic objectives. You are taking false bravado seriously. Public pronouncements by al Qaeda are to be believed if they also match what al Qaeda says in its internal communiques, but you should consider the possibility that, sometimes, they are just bloviating. The idea that al Qaeda wants hundreds of thousands of extra American troops invading Muslim holy lands is not believable. The idea that they want to deal us a humiliating defeat is.

Which is why you should read this post, too. Not to mention today's post! The Democrats are afraid to talk about al Qaeda in Iraq, but al Qaeda in Iraq is not afraid to talk about the Democrats.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.