Wednesday, January 05, 2005


Still no follow-up stories on Zarqawi, but several Alert Readers have given examples of why the US might stay mum: 1. To roll up the rest of a network -- basically to exploit his capture. This reader also notes that two senior aides to Zarqawi were reported captured over the weekend -- they could have used them to find him. 2. Out of concern that announcing his capture will trigger new pre-planned attacks. We don't think this is the case: the terrorists don't seem to be the types to plan an attack just right, then sit on it and wait -- unless it is a balls to the wall, Gotterdammerung style final throwdown. UPDATE: There seems to be a delay in the release of capture stories: This article reports the capture of a senior Zarqawi aide on Dec 23rd -- but the article didn't come out until Dec 31st, and The World Tribune seems to have no shyness about publishing stories as soon as possible. It is tempting to go back and examine the chain of events in Saddam's capture -- but there are many different factors in play now. now we have a sovereign Iraqi government, not the CPA. And Zarqawi seems to be much more of an operational commander than Saddam -- who was really a figurehead for the former regime loyalists. We'll continue treating Zarqawi's capture as a rumor until more comes out.


Blogger Paddy_Lament said...

I think something's up. This story has hung around for 2 days now...

January 5, 2005 at 5:05 PM  
Blogger USMC_Vet said...


The World Tribune = Bill Gertz (& Company).

The most connected Defense/Intelligence journalist in Washington. Period.

Friday or Monday is my call. End of week news cycle or beginning of week cycle. If it's on, that's when we'll likely hear more utterances.

January 5, 2005 at 9:18 PM  
Blogger Glenmore said...

One might leak a fake report of having captured someone - it might cause his organization to alter plans or move people or change reporting relationships, especially in organizations with less-than-ideal internal communications capabilities. Then one might be able to spot these induced changes and grab some bad guys.

January 6, 2005 at 6:02 AM  
Blogger USMC_Vet said...

Not a bad observation, Glenmore. But after thinkng about that for a second or two, it seems illogical. If we did not have Al 'Z', then for your premise to work we would have to at least know that he were communications-isolated. Why would Al Z's boys move anything if Al himself called them up and said not to worry, he was having falafel & tea with camels outside Kirkuk? The ruse only works if Al is isolated. And if he is isolated, he is targeted for vaporization at the least and goat-roped & frog marched at the most.

Some one's right.

Some one's wrong.

Or someone's looking for instant fleeting attention.

Maybe the disinformation (if it's that) is pointed AT us, not FROM us?

Who knows.

January 6, 2005 at 3:24 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on Blogwise