You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Times defends Zarqawi
2006-05-06
An effort by the American military to discredit the terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi by showing video outtakes of him fumbling with a machine gun — suggesting that he lacks real fighting skill — was questioned yesterday by retired and active American military officers.
Just goes to show you can always find someone to disagree with any course of action you take.
In an outtake reportedly taken from a videotape made by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist leader needed some help firing a machine gun.
That's a pretty good indication he doesn't spend a lot of time firing one, isn't it?
The video clips, released on Thursday to news organizations in Baghdad, show the terrorist leader confused about how to handle an M-249 squad automatic weapon, known as an S.A.W., which is part of the American inventory of infantry weapons. The American military, which said it captured the videotapes in a recent raid, released selected outtakes in an effort to undermine Mr. Zarqawi's image as leader of the Council of Holy Warriors, formerly Al Qaeda in Iraq, and suggested that his fighting talents and experience were less than his propaganda portrays.
Nowadays, when you spend your time putting together operations, you don't really spend a lot of time sending rounds downrange. Infantry does that. It's called division of labor. Zark may have fired rounds at live targets to satisfy his vanity, but he doesn't take part in operations on a regular basis.
But several veterans of wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, as well as active-duty officers, said in telephone interviews yesterday that the clips of Mr. Zarqawi's supposed martial incompetence were unconvincing.
Maybe to them...
The weapon in question is complicated to master, and American soldiers and marines undergo many days of training to achieve the most basic competence with it.
Zark's been in Iraq since '02. The Merkins have been there since '03. He's had many days. And if he didn't know how to operate it, he shouldn't have been showing off with it.
Moreover, the weapon in Mr. Zarqawi's hands was an older variant, which makes its malfunctioning unsurprising. The veterans said Mr. Zarqawi, who had spent his years as a terrorist surrounded by simpler weapons of Soviet design, could hardly have been expected to know how to handle it. "They are making a big deal out of nothing," said Mario Costagliola, who retired as an Army colonel last month after serving as the operations officer for the 42nd Infantry Division in Tikrit, Iraq.
I politely beg to differ. He was showing off with the weapon. That implies he's a big he-man who knows how to use it. The outtakes show him as a blowhard putting on a show, a Hollywood Hero.
An active-duty Special Forces colonel who served in Iraq also said that what the video showed actually had little relationship to Mr. Zarqawi's level of terrorist skill. "Looking at the video, I enjoy it; I like that he looks kind of goofy," said the Special Forces officer, who was granted anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on military matters. "But as a military guy, I shrug my shoulders and say: 'Of course he doesn't know how to use it. It's our gun.' He doesn't look as stupid as they said he looks."
It's not his skill with the weapon that's in question. It's a propaganda piece from our side, and the man looks like an ass. That's its value. I'd guess that the SF officer and probably Col. Costagliola both know that, though the NYT report apparently can't grasp it.
The release of the captured video reflected the dueling public relations efforts between the American-led forces fighting in Iraq and the terrorists and insurgents.
More like the dueling public relations efforts between the American-led forces and the New York Times.
It also reflected increasing interest by the military and civilian strategists in trying to ridicule Mr. Zarqawi. "In Arab and Muslim societies, pride and shame are felt much more profoundly than they are in Western culture," said J. Michael Waller, a professor at the Institute of World Politics, a graduate school in Washington. "To find video like this that can cut him down to size and discredit him is a real way of fighting terrorism."
Thank you, Mr. Waller. Those words were sufficiently small that the NYT writers (plural) should have been able to understand them, though had they done so there would have been no story.
A paper written by Professor Waller advocating the use of ridicule against the insurgents has been circulating at the Pentagon and among military commanders with experience in Iraq recently, according to several military officers.
Good Gawd, I hope so. Sometimes I really miss having Spike Jones around.
But the retired and active officers said the public presentation of the tape did not address elements that were disturbing, rather than amusing: the weapon was probably captured from American soldiers, indicating a tactical victory for the insurgents. And Mr. Zarqawi looked clean and plump.
"Of course the release of the tape accomplished its purpose. Since it did, let's quickly change the subject."
"I see a guy who is getting a lot of groceries and local support," said Nick Pratt, a Marine Corps veteran and professor of terrorism studies at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Germany.
Actually, he looks like he's getting too many groceries. I wonder if he can still touch his toes?
"You cannot say he is a bad operator."
He's a bad person. He's probably the most competent terrorist alive today. He's a lousy machinegun operator.
He added, "People should be careful who they poke fun at."
Duh? Am I missing something? Who the hell else would you poke fun at if not the enemy? The innocent dead? The wounded and maimed? I suppose they're less likely to cut your head off it they catch you, but I'd still go with Mr. Zarkleman over all others, save Binny.
David S. Cloud contributed reporting for this article.
Posted by:Grunter

#11  Now if only Parker & Stone where in charge of the propaganda effort...
Posted by: Classical_Liberal   2006-05-06 22:40  

#10  "Also - how did they get telephone interviews w/our guys in Iraq?"

All I can think of is they've probably been carefully rooting around for malcontents over there and cultivating what few they can find to serve as "sources" whenever they need quotes to justify their negative spin.

Take care over there, BH6.

Posted by: Dave D.   2006-05-06 22:36  

#9  I concur Dave. The worst thing about the saw (besides cleaning it's number of parts) is remembering to pull the charging handle to the rear w/your palm up to the sky. I cut the heck out of the palm of my hand as a boot not heeding that.

These "colonels" or whoever should've taken the opportunity to shut the fuck up on this one. Also - how did they get telephone interviews w/our guys in Iraq? Anyways, this is a big propoganda piece for us to show this douche bag as a fuck up - we need to run w/it. BTW - he does look as stupid as we think he does. Fuck the 'times - pussies.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2006-05-06 21:46  

#8  Heh.
Posted by: Dave D.   2006-05-06 21:21  

#7  Not that there's anything _wrong_ with that.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2006-05-06 20:49  

#6  Yah, Dave, but knowing you, he probably learned a lot about machine guns, autocannons, and mortars just growing up around the house.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2006-05-06 20:48  

#5  "The weapon in question [M-249 squad automatic weapon] is complicated to master, and American soldiers and marines undergo many days of training to achieve the most basic competence with it."

Oh, bullshit. My kid used one in the Guard. The only part of using it that requires more than a few minutes of practice is breaking the damn thing down, cleaning it and re-assembling it.

Posted by: Dave D.   2006-05-06 20:27  

#4  "And the NYT was able to interview hundreds or even thousands of unnamed senior officers who all agreed that we are losing the war in Iraq, and that they are all republican conservatives who are going to vote for Hillary because Bush is a poopy-pants."
Posted by: Anonymoose   2006-05-06 20:19  

#3  note any military names? Unnamed sources can say anything you want...might as well have sock puppets (no offense, SPoD) doing marrionette interviews. Just as credible. NY Times sucks a$$
Posted by: Frank G   2006-05-06 20:06  

#2  The New York Times is obviously mining military news releases for negative stories about the military, choosing to use its news pages as a vast anti-American editorial section. It would be nice if they would mine jihadi news releases for negative news about the terrorists. Such as the lies the terrorists periodically release from time to time about their casualties and coalition casualties, and about dead terrorists that the jihadis claim to be civilians. But that will never happen, of course, since the Times's mission is to slam Uncle Sam, not highlight the things that would make America's enemies look bad.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2006-05-06 18:27  

#1  Read this yesterday, NY Slimes provides more cover for Zarq
Posted by: Captain America   2006-05-06 18:13  

00:00