Rice Compares Zarqawi To Ulysses S. Grant And Robert E. Lee
Rice Compares Zarqawi To Ulysses S. Grant And Robert E. Lee
Yesterday in an interview with the Fox News editorial board, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice attributed U.S. progress in Iraq to the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) leader. She likened him to a great civil war general, inflating the importance of his death and the U.S. “successes”:
He was diabolically brilliant. I think he was an outstanding organizer, I think he had a kind of strategic sense, and I don’t think the follow-on leadership has been quite as good. So when you hear people say, “You know, well, if you kill one of them, they’ll just replace him with another leader,” remember that that’s like saying, you know, if you take out Robert E. Lee or Ulysses S. Grant, well, they’ll just replace them with another leader. It’s – there are people who are better at this than others and I think the loss of Zarqawi, they – they started to make more mistakes.
While Rice would like to pretend that the United States defeated a brilliant general in Iraq, Zarqawi was not like Ulysses S. Grant or Robert E. Lee. AQI has never been the greatest driver of violence in Iraq.
Nevertheless, the Bush administration continues to overstate its importance. Gen. David Petraeus, for example, recently called the group “public enemy number one.” But approximately 98 percent of violence in Iraq is “Iraqis fighting amongst Iraqis,” according to ret. Gen. James Jones. This sectarian violence continues to rise as Bush’s escalation drags on — despite the death of Zarqawi.
In addition, the U.S. presence in Iraq has actually strengthened the global al Qaeda organization and its “association with AQI helps al-Qa’ida to energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks.”
Rice is fond of analogizing Iraq to the U.S. Civil War. Last year she compared critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq war policies to “people who thought it was a mistake to fight the Civil War to its end and to insist that the emancipation of slaves would hold.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
didn’t the neocons just make fun of him because he didn’t know how to use a rifle?
now he’s a brilliant tactician….i really wish these repuglicans would get their story straight….but then that’s a typical fascist characteristic
September 26th, 2007 at 11:43 amisn’t this sort of in the same vein as “the insurrection will end when we capture and kill Saddam” and when the insurgents not only didn’t stop when Saddam was killed, it got worse, then it became “its al Qaeda!”
at some point, setting up straw men becomes counter productive to identifying the real enemy, much less defeating it.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 amBad metaphors make for bad policy.
A more apt metaphor is that Condi is putting lipstick on a pig.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:47 amJust when you thought these morons had finally hit rock bottom…
September 26th, 2007 at 11:47 amUnfortunately, Bush is diabolically stupid.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:47 amCondi’s desperate to reframe the obvious: the only war Iraq resembles is Vietman.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:47 amYesterday in an interview with the Fox News editorial board
If it’s on fox, we all know where it rates on the credibility-o-meter.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:48 amWhy does she hate America? Why is she helping the terrists?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:49 amMaybe she needs to go back to reminiscing about the Soviet threat.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:50 amAnd we must be fighting to end slavery in Basra?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:51 amThe violence exploded when Zarqawi blew up the al-Askari Mosque [â€Golden Mosqueâ€] in Samarra.
Comment by Toliver — September 26, 2007 @ 11:49 am
WRONG!!! The violence exploded when Bush gave orders to drop the first bomb. Try again… you’ll get SOMETHING right SOMEDAY…
So many idiots… so little time… **Sigh..**
September 26th, 2007 at 11:51 amCaption:
Let me blow in your ear, you sweet little chympie thang!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:52 amOff topic but I didn’t see it on this site so…
This off of AFP IE: I did not write, I claim no credit for this.
Nice.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:55 amHold on a sec. If there isn’t a civil war in Iraq, why does she keep dredging up these civil war analogies?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:59 am*YAWN*
The administration has been trying to exaggerate Zarqawi’s importance for years now.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:00 pmAQI has never been the greatest driver of violence in Iraq.
Wrong.
The violence exploded when Zarqawi blew up the al-Askari Mosque [â€Golden Mosqueâ€] in Samarra.
Comment by Toliver — September 26, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Two percent of violence is at the hands of AQI. CRS Report.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:01 pmZarqawi = Grant/Lee like Bush = Lincoln. More like Zarqawi = Col. Klink and Bush = Nixon.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:06 pmcaption:
“It’s time to got to the restroom now, Georgie, I’ll meet you in stall 3…”
“Sorry, pumpkin, not this time, I’m meeting with a Senator in stall 9…”
September 26th, 2007 at 12:09 pmToliver sez:
First of all, nice qualifier. Way to wriggle off of TRos’ hook.
Second, this is the second time that you’ve claimed the bombing of the Golden Dome was the point at which violence surged upward. We’re going to need to see some links.
Third, regarding the bombing of the Golden Mosque, there is significant evidence that points to perpetrators other than the ones officially recognized. You might want to research this evidence before blindly citing the event as support for your point.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:09 pmToliver: “The violence exploded when Zarqawi blew up the al-Askari Mosque [â€Golden Mosqueâ€] in Samarra.”
Whether or not that is true, it strikes me as outrageous that Bush has never paid a political price for refusing the Pentagon’s request to take Zarqawi out before the war even started. The Pentagon offered Bush three opportunities to kill Zarqawi (they knew exactly where he was in Kurdish northern Iraq) in 2002 and early 03. According to a WAPO article citing a Pentagon report, each time the administration turned down the plan because they didn’t want to undercut a political argument for invasion.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:12 pmIs it just me or has the counter gone odd?
September 26th, 2007 at 12:16 pmW/in the context of the war, the Golden Dome bombing was when the violence really spiked. That was AQI’s intent gloid boy.
Comment by Toliver — September 26, 2007 @ 11:58 am
“W/in the context of the war”??? WTF??? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH…
W/out the Chimpinator’s li’l misguided adventure, there wouldn’t be the level of violence in Iraq there is.
Sematics, ya FRAUD! What an F-in’ joke you are.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:17 pmToliver
I’d say within the context of the war the violence really spiked when America, you know, Invaded Iraq.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:18 pmShock and Awe. Big spike.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:21 pmComment by Bruce Gorton — September 26, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
Shhh… Bruce, you don’t want to upset him. He’s bein’ all “right” this am…
September 26th, 2007 at 12:21 pmThe worst distortion is that Condy is pushing the idea that we’re fighting a war against an army, and that it has generals and, by extension, fronts and flanks and so on.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:21 pmThe insurgent’s ‘positions’ are inside people’s houses, walking down the street, drivung car-bombs around.
If Al-Zarqawi had stood there in his dress blues and handed his sword over to Viceroy Bremer, how many of his ‘troops’ would follow him?
Somewhere between zero and none.
Al-Zarqawi may have been a William Quantrill.
Grant? Maybe–in the ‘drunk and broke in his storefront in Galena’ period.
Since the US civil war was not started by a foreign army overthrowing our government, it’s senseless to try to compare the current situation in Iraq to US history. Can the administration become any more detached from reality?
September 26th, 2007 at 12:37 pmpbg
I agree with you. The thing of it is, you aren’t fighting an army, you are fighting what amounts to several highly religious political parties with militant wings. You can’t beat them with bullets alone, you need to beat them politically. A picture of Bin Laden with a Republican in a bathroom stall would do more to end his cause then any bullet to the head could.
To do that you need to make a bid to understand the Iraqi people, and the people of the Middle East, beyond seeing them as helpless victims or “The enemy.” And most of all, you need to start publically debating the enemy, not simply calling them names.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:37 pmAt the time Zarqawi was killed, the media and the Pentagon had a different story:
The Non-Stop Zarqawi Party
September 26th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
The violence exploded when Zarqawi blew up the al-Askari Mosque [â€Golden Mosqueâ€] in Samarra.
Comment by Toliver — September 26, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Two percent of violence is at the hands of AQI. CRS Report.
Comment by Candyce — September 26, 2007 @ 12:01 pm
Devil’s advocate here. Maybe AQI bombed the Mosques in order to inflame the sectarian conflicts between Sunnis and Shiites, in which case the violence done by them could be said to be “caused” by AQI, even if AQI’s terrorists act were fewer in number.
Just my theory, of course…
September 26th, 2007 at 12:52 pmI think most of us are missing another point.
The Repubs just looked the deep South in the eyes and said “your Confederate heroes are terrorists”.
There are many Confederate-loving Southerners who strictly vote Republican. If these comments get to their ears, there’s hell to pay.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:04 pmAnd once again, Toliver shows his true colors as he bails on yet another thread.
One hour since my challenge to his argument, and nothing but stony silence.
Always a pleasure, Toliver.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:11 pmWhether or not that is true, it strikes me as outrageous that Bush has never paid a political price for refusing the Pentagon’s request to take Zarqawi out before the war even started.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 26, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Why does this strike you as outrageous? Has Bush paid a political price for anything he’s done in this presidency?
And the whole Golden Mosque argument is silly, in my opinion. Personally, I blame the glaciers. If they hadn’t receded at the end of the last Ice Age we would have never left Africa in the first place and wouldn’t have any of these problems. DAMN YOU, GLACIERS!
September 26th, 2007 at 1:13 pmThe Repuds are going to get more upset about this than the General Betrayus line.
George W. Bush’s Sec. of State compared the Dear Southerners of being equivalent to Al Qaeda.
Oh, get me a cold mint julep and my swooning couch.
-GSD
September 26th, 2007 at 1:19 pmBush might not have paid a political price (history will show otherwise) but the republican party certainly has.
http://www.pollingreport.com/institut2.htm
September 26th, 2007 at 1:20 pmPersonally, I blame the glaciers. If they hadn’t receded at the end of the last Ice Age we would have never left Africa in the first place and wouldn’t have any of these problems. DAMN YOU, GLACIERS!
Comment by toasterhead — September 26, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
“Al-Qaeda in Iceland” would like to have a word with you!
September 26th, 2007 at 1:21 pmtoasterhead: “Why does this strike you as outrageous? Has Bush paid a political price for anything he’s done in this presidency? ”
Damn good point. Now, maybe people can start to reevaluate this “liberal media” canard.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:22 pmSo let me get this straight:
Killing that one guy in Iraq was, according to Rice, incredibly important because his leadership was irreplaceable.
Yet when people ask why they haven’t put a whole helluva lot of energy catching bin Laden, they say that one guy really isn’t all that important.
Once again, the Bush Administration talks out of both sides of its ass.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:23 pmhellinabucket: great poll numbers! Maybe people are starting to shake these media-created myths.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:25 pm“Al-Qaeda in Iceland†would like to have a word with you!
Comment by Luis M — September 26, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
Death to Infjordels!
September 26th, 2007 at 1:29 pmKilling that one guy in Iraq was, according to Rice, incredibly important because his leadership was irreplaceable.
Yet when people ask why they haven’t put a whole helluva lot of energy catching bin Laden, they say that one guy really isn’t all that important.
Once again, the Bush Administration talks out of both sides of its ass.
Comment by MarkD — September 26, 2007 @ 1:23 pm
Further talking out of both sides of the BA ass:
1) We’ve got Al Qaeda on the run (said when we kill someone like Zarqawi).
September 26th, 2007 at 1:31 pm2) Al Qaeda is the biggest threat to our security today (said whenever we need to shore up support for the Iraq occupation).
If I were Condi, I would have gone for “A-Z was like Napoleon wrapped in Caesar’s body and then eaten by Alexander the Great reincarnated as Erwin Rommel, with some Crazy Horse on the side.” If you’re going to make insane comparisons, go big.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:41 pmGrant and Lee both survived the Civil War. Zarqawi’s dead – who’s smarter?
September 26th, 2007 at 1:47 pmOK, Toliver, now since most Iraqis believe al Qaeda is only in Iraq because of American presence, and the Iraqis themselves would kick al Qaeda out of the country if Americans weren’t there (that’s what they did in Anbar,) by your reasoning, the Golden Mosque wouldn’t have been blown up if we were not there.
September 26th, 2007 at 2:49 pmOh look…Toliver’s back.
Yes. Provide a link substantiating your claim.
I’ve already been waiting for almost three hours. If it’s such a “basic fact”, you should have no trouble supplying a link.
September 26th, 2007 at 2:55 pmAnd once again, complete silence from Toliver when asked to substantiate his argument.
Boring, Toliver. Positively boring.
September 26th, 2007 at 3:55 pmBoring…
September 26th, 2007 at 6:40 pmHuh? Zarqawi was no general. Condi is flat-out bat shit crazy-delusional and totally bereft of any comprehension whatsoever of American history. Not only did Grant and Lee spin in their graves upon hearing Condi’s quote, they also sat up and puked. For someone who is supposedly so smart, she’s done so little to live up to that reputation.
AF
September 26th, 2007 at 11:27 pmToliver
Okay, so I take it we can all assume that you are making that up.
And Bush is best buddies with Osama Bin Laden. Basic fact.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:10 amLet’s hear more about Al-Qaeda in iceland. It seems more interesting then hearing Rice put yet another political spin on issues she clearly does not grasp.
September 27th, 2007 at 6:43 pm