That’s David Weigel’s count, anyway:
It’s fantastic news that U.S. forces have killed a terrorist who murdered hundreds or thousands of Americans and Iraqis in cold blood. It’s definitely not wise for pundits to take that news and bash Iraq War skeptics over the head with it. Doing so has become a ritual after every milestone in the war – the fall of Baghdad (and the Saddam statue), the killing of Uday and Qusay, the capture of Saddam, the transfer of power to the provisional government, the victory in Fallujah, the killing of al-Zarqawi’s deputies, the first election, the second election, the third election, and now the killing of al-Zarqawi. Every time, when victory didn’t swiftly follow, support for the war and faith in America’s Iraq policy ebbed a little further.
10 major turning points! That’s more than most countries have in a century! Awesome. Can we leave now?
In all likelihood, no. The violence will continue in Iraq, as we learn that Zarqawi wasn’t as indispensable to the insurgency as the Pentagon made him out to be. (Show of hands, warbloggers: how many of you know that Ho Chi Minh died in September 1969?) The ongoing slaughter will, of course, mean that we must stay the course. Some other world-historic something or other will happen, the warbloggers will celebrate, nothing will change, ad infinitum.