No tears for the demise of Al Zarqawi, but I have to wonder why US and Iraqi forces didn't try to capture him? If he is such a central figure in the insurgency, he would have infomation on hideouts, weapons and other assets, suppliers, sources of funding, and accomplices that would be invaluable in the quest for Iraqi security.
Granted a capture would be risky, there could be a firefight, there could be booby traps, and the targets could somehow escape, but those are risks the patrols face every day. Furthermore, dropping large bombs on the hideout would destroy valuable information such as notes, maps, and possibly computers. It doesn't make sense to me unless the US was more desparate for a high profile kill than actually progress in Iraqi security.
A couple of additional points. It may have been decided that it was simply too risky to attempt a capture. I did point out the possibility of explosives, a firefight, etc. I neglected to make the point that there have been many articles making the case that Zarqawi was overblown as to the degree of his importance to the insurgency, that he was an ill educated, not particularly bright, rather boorish man. One of the commenters brought up the point that perhaps he wasn't as important a target as he was made out to be in the media.
Another thing that doesn't make sense, I don't know just how destructive 2 - 500 lb. bombs are, but from the published photos, Zarqawi seems relatively intact. Wouldn't the 2 bombs pretty much pulverize the house and everything inside? Furthermore, some reports are talking about finding valuable information. Again, wouldn't bombs of that size pretty much destroy all the evidence?
I am not trying to be cavilier about putting our people in harms way. I think these are valid questions.