Problem: War in Iraq is fueling terrorism and Islamic radicalism.

Solution: Stay the course.

Translation: We started this fire and, by God, we are going to keep throwing gasoline on it 'til it goes out.

JK Rowling clashed with airport security after they attempted to confiscate the manuscript of what, critics and fans believe, will be the explosive finale to the Harry Potter series.

Eventually, Rowling was allowed to board her plane with the manuscript, which, fortuitously, did not detonate in flight.

This week, there has been a piece of news that has captured the imaginations of media outlets the world over. Of course, I speak of the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

From salivating pundits on the various cable news stations to the gleeful heads of state, the death of this villain has united popular opinion in a way that we don't often see. President Bush, for his part, declared this a decisive victory in the war on terrorism.

Not decisive in the traditional sense of the term, it would seem. No sooner had the news hit the wire when various government officials began to temper the optimism with the fact that al-Zarqawi was just one man, and that in the grand scheme of things his death probably wasn't going to lead to a decline in violence in Iraq.

Brushing aside such a decided down note, we watched as the news outlets eagerly ran story after story about the elaborate planning that lead to this death. Oh, sure, it probably never would have happened without the apparent betrayal of al-Zarqawi by others within al-Qaeda, but even still, it required one of those stunning demonstrations of military might that make such great fodder for the evening news. At least many hundreds of personnel were involved, though if the CNN Headline News story is to be believed, it could well be considerably greater. Missiles ain't cheap, nor are umpteen planes and the unknown quantity of soldiers, I think we're safe in assuming this singular operation cost many millions of dollars, at a bare minimum.

That leaves me wondering, personally, what the point of all this was. Was it worth millions to kill a single man, especially when that death isn't going to bring an end to the war?

My fellow pacifist Michael Berg doesn't think so. Having lost his own son at the hands of al-Zarqawi, he still sees no cause for celebration in this death. This has led, rather predictably to some very public castigations of Mr. Berg for not being sufficiently happy.

But why should he be? Al-Zarqawi's death will not bring back his son. The death does not bring the war any closer to a conclusion, indeed the zeal that has sprung forth after finally managing to kill somebody, anybody, of import in the insurgency is if anything going to hurt the chances of an early withdrawal.

I would propose, instead, that perhaps the rest of you are a little too happy about this whole thing. One murderer is dead, killed by others, and thousands upon thousands yet remain to ply their trades upon their respective segments of the Iraqi populace. Is this truly cause for celebration?

Underscoring this, mourners in al-Zarqawi's hometown are hoping for a thousand more like him, to kill the enemies who kill them. Judging from the joy so many feel in one meaningless death of one high profile enemy, it's hard to imagine them not getting their wish, many times over in the future.

I read with great amusement an article about the Mossad hit on Palestinian terrorist Wadia Haddad in the late 1970s. Over a six-month period, they fed the 300lb fatass poison-laced Belgian chocolates, smuggled to him in Baghdad by a Palestinian collaborator. He died in 1978 of "symptoms of leukemia."

I figure if the US is going to prop up such an unsustainable state, I might as well get a few chuckles out of it until it collapses. These overly-elaborate assassinations sure do the trick.