In a number of instances, I have argued that if take an action that implicitly admits defeat, you have indeed lost a key battle. With the killing of an Egyption diplomat to Iraq, Al Queda has implicitly admitted defeat in teh battle to prevent the creation of a democratic Iraq.
Al Queda alledgedly killed Egyptian ambassador Ehad Sherif for serving as an ambassador to Iraq. In the video statement, the killers said Sherif was being killed for being "the ambassador of the apostates, the ambassador of Egypt." Such a statement implies that Al Queda recognizes the legitimacy of the democratically elected government of Iraq. The Iraqi people should take a perverse pride in that recognition, because it does two things. One it grants them legitimacy in teh eyes of their enemy, legitimacy they did not have under Saddam Hussein.
Second, it automatically confers onto Al Queda the status of criminals. No longer are they freedom fighters or even jihadists, but common criminals and murderers in the eyes of Iraqi law.
This is a great statement as well: (emphsis added).
In Cairo, the Egyptian government issued a statement expressing "deepest sorrow for the loss of one its finest sons and a martyr of her diplomatic service . . . who lost his life at the hand of terrorism that trades in the name of Islam but which knows no nation nor faith." Sherif's killing would "not thwart Egypt from its unwavering policy of supporting Iraq and its people," the statement said.
I hope that other Muslim nations will start to denounce the efforts of Al Queda in a similar fashion. Now that the hostility of Al Queda extends to Muslim and Arabs, not just Jews and Christians, how long do they think they can sustain their efforts? I wonder what will happen to world opinion now?