As I said before, Zarqawi's death poses a serious security risk to what little containment there was to his cell in Iraq. Despite whatever website claims to be the authority on his replacement, the fact is that a power struggle now appears to be in full swing over who will lead the beast:
Even al Qaeda’s adherents in Iraq are stumped by the identity of their new commander – doubly confused by the bulletins on similar Web sites which all name different successors.
Our Iraq sources list them as: Abdul Rahman al Iraqi, Zarqawi’s deputy; Rashid Baghdadi, an Iraqi believed to head the shura council; Abu Asil, an ex-colonel in Saddam Hussein’s general intelligence service.
This is a situation that really ought to be taken seriously. The single biggest danger of Al-Qu'eda is its fragmentation. The Bushies' desire to classify this organization in a pre-9-11 contruction of a centralized army is understandable given that this is a much more familiar and contained enemy with which to engage. However, this is simply not the case and I would say four or five smaller enemiesm, each trying to outdo the other, poses a far greater risk than a single large cell ever could.
This struggle will never be secure until we start focusing on the ideology and conditions leading to terrorism rather than their armed expression.
Recent comments
31 weeks 2 days ago
31 weeks 3 days ago
31 weeks 3 days ago
31 weeks 4 days ago
31 weeks 4 days ago
38 weeks 5 days ago
49 weeks 11 hours ago
49 weeks 17 hours ago
49 weeks 17 hours ago
49 weeks 19 hours ago