Taking the broader goals of al-queda's objectives in Iraq into perspective, is it any surprise that they would choose a path -- no matter how deploarable -- that is designed to damage the image of US forces? 

 

They can't achieve a battlefield victory, but this plan was clearly designed to stir up anti-American feelings not just in Iraq but across the world.  After hearing Murtha, Durbin, Pelosi and Reid campaign from their platform of weakness (aka "cut and run"), isn't it possibile that they imagined that they could help accelerate the withdrawl by taking this action?

 

On a second note, I can't help but notice that the article refers to the bombmakers as "insurgents".  This just after an agreement in Iraq that insurgents, should only be referred to as "terrorists" if they are attacking civilians or public infrastructure.  I guess booby-trapping dolls with bombs doesn't qualify?