[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 8]
[House]
[Page 10716]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        THE DEATH OF AL-ZARQAWI

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, Americans woke up yesterday morning to the 
news that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in an air raid in Iraq. Even 
though he was a vicious man, who had contempt for every single thing 
America represents, I do not believe his death signals a particular 
turning point in the Iraq War.
  There have been other supposed watershed moments that were loudly 
trumpeted by enthusiasts for this war, but none of those turned out to 
have long-term significance, and I do not believe this to be any 
different. It will disrupt the operational capability of al-Zarqawi's 
organization, but most certainly will not end the civil strife that has 
engulfed Iraq.
  Although Zarqawi was the leader of a group called al Qaeda in Iraq, 
it is important to note that he was not closely allied to Osama bin 
Laden. In fact, the two men had something of a long-standing rivalry. 
Zarqawi's death is not in any way a blow to bin Laden and the al Qaeda 
that is responsible for 9/11.
  Mr. Speaker, the insurgency is a decentralized force that extends 
well beyond the influence of a single man. As foreign policy scholar 
Ivo Daalder points out, the anarchy that has taken hold in Iraq cannot 
be attributed to just one terrorist. Iraq has mushroomed into what 
Daalder calls a ``large-scale sectarian conflict'' and what I would 
call a full-blown civil war.
  Dueling militias, fueled by ethnic hostilities that are centuries 
old, are fighting for control of the streets of Iraq and leaving a 
trail of carnage and bloodshed in their wake. It is difficult to see 
how the elimination of one man changes that tragic dynamic.
  To the extent that Zarqawi's death has any impact, it will probably 
further animate the insurgency and lead to even more violence.
  We can never forget what Lieutenant Colonel Frederick Wellman said 
last year about the insurgents, and I will quote him. He said, ``We 
can't kill them all. When I kill one, I create three.'' So if killing 
one insurgent creates three more, what happens when you kill one of the 
most visible insurgent leaders?
  And here is an interesting twist. If killing Zarqawi was a primary 
goal of the Bush administration, why did they not act when they had an 
opportunity 4 years ago? According to NBC News, on three separate 
occasions in 2002 and early 2004, Zarqawi was within our sights, but 
all three times, the plan for attack was vetoed at the White House and 
the National Security Council. Why the hesitation on the part of this 
famously trigger happy administration? According to NBC sources, it was 
all about selling the Iraq War.
  At the time, the administration was furiously trying to build public 
support for the preemptive invasion of Iraq, resorting to all kinds of 
misinformation if necessary. And they did not want to lose the public 
relations value of keeping Zarqawi alive and dangerous, which just goes 
to show that this misadventure in Iraq seems to have always been more 
important to the administration than actually stopping terrorists.
  Remember when the President made the reference to: ``Wanted, Dead or 
Alive''? Maybe the real motto should have been: ``Wanted, Dead or 
Alive, Unless You Might Be a Useful Propaganda Tool.''
  Mr. Speaker, conditions in Iraq are unspeakable. According to the 
BBC, the morgues in Baghdad alone have reported more than 6,000 violent 
deaths so far this year, an average of 40 a day in a single city.
  The administration lit the match that ignited this inferno. The death 
of al-Zarqawi will not extinguish it. We must remove the one thing that 
gave rise to the violence in the first place, the very appearance of 
American occupation.
  For the safety of our Nation and the long-term stability of Iraq, 
there is only one answer: Bring our troops home.

                          ____________________