< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" > Sir Humphrey's: A Very Good Week For Iraq - Bad Week For Left

SIR HUMPHREY'S BLOG

SITE MOVED:Sir Humphrey's has moved

Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.

The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

A Very Good Week For Iraq - Bad Week For Left

A pivotal week for Iraq. In spite of the best efforts of the western media and the Left to focus exclusively on the forthcoming 2,000th American casualty in three years, not withstanding that more American military personell die each year from natural causes or accidents; and the best efforts of the terrorists to assault and capture a central city hotel full of it's media friends, the people of Iraq have ratified their new constitution and witnessed their own police force throw back the central city assault.

The number of terrorists involved and the follow-on small arms attacks make it clear that the overall goal was to use suicide vehicle bombs to breach the security perimeter, then take over the hotel and hold the international guests as hostages. Instead, they failed to achieve those objectives and the attackers were killed.

Now, the terrorists can only hope that the video of a failed attack will result in a strategic victory by undermining the level of support that war-weary American people have for the democratization of Iraq. I am writing to encourage readers to take a different view.

The media sources I have seen breathlessly point out the spectacular nature of the attack and show the video clip over and over. They do not seem, however, to be pointing out that the Iraqi Police were instrumental in repelling the assault. They did receive some assistance from the US quick reaction force that arrived later, but the real story here is that the Islamic terrorists in Iraq are incapable of even seizing, let alone holding, a hotel full of journalists.


George Galloway has been shown up as the gutless lying venal windbag that he is and Basher's inept Ba'athist regime in Damascus must be shitting itself, wondering what 140,000 well equipped and experienced US, British and Australian troops plus one NZ Army officer are going to do when they get bored with Iraq.

Ths strident Left are beginning to realise that their campaign of disinformation on the home front, like their terrorist friends' campaign in the field, is steadily failing. Why is this so? They no longer 'own the news.'
· Linked Article

Posted by Adolf Fiinkensein | 10/26/2005 07:28:00 AM

39 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The whole exercise seemed to be a publisity stunt aimed at the west
Maybe looking for a result similar to the reaction to the Tet offensive in 'Nam
Ray

10/26/2005 08:16:00 AM  
Blogger Ackers1 said...

What an absolutely ludicrous comment as if the 2 have any correlation whatsoever. You really are off the planet Adolf, the only way you can see any event is to filter it through some imaginary left right dichotomy and then think the conclusion you reach somehow makes sense. You always manage to miss the bigger picture, it's quite comical really. I'll go back to my new Robert Fisk book, now there's a man who has an understanding of history!

10/26/2005 08:40:00 AM  
Anonymous weizguy said...

"the real story here is that the Islamic terrorists in Iraq are incapable of even seizing, let alone holding, a hotel full of journalists."

Where exactly did you get the idea that there was any intention to seize, or hold, the hotel? As far as I could see, there wasn't any attempt to get inside... This post is simply bizarre.

10/26/2005 09:01:00 AM  
Anonymous andrei said...

Whatever the good News is there is always
something bad to trump it.

In this case, the ratification of the Iraqi Consatitution, in a election in which over 80% of the eligible voters voted is trumped by the fact that the 2000 dead mark was reached in US casualties. sigh

10/26/2005 09:18:00 AM  
Blogger Chris said...

If this was a good week I would hate to see a bad week. If it was like that in New Zealand we would think the apocalypse is upon us.

10/26/2005 09:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fact that 140,000 well equipped and experienced troops 2 years after toppling Iraq can't even secure the centre of Baghdad, the very square where they stage managed the toppling of Sadaam's statue, doesn't seem to have caused you any cause to wonder. Oh wow, the rest of the world is surely shitting itself.

All it's exposed are the limits of American power.

10/26/2005 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous I suggest you visit the website below said...

"In spite of the best efforts of the western media and the Left to focus exclusively on the forthcoming 2,000th American casualty in three years, not withstanding that more American military personell die each year from natural causes or accidents"

Adolf, are you saying that Iraq is safer for military 'personell' than the United States?

Hey should send our troops to Iraq to prevent them dying of natural causes and accidents so we can preserve them for any wars we may need fighting.

What a bizarre world you live in.

10/26/2005 10:31:00 AM  
Anonymous CutFoldGlue said...

Adolf, do you really think repelling a single suicide raid consititutes a "Very Good Week in Iraq"? I think that would demonstrate how low you have had to lower your standards to try and argue that anything that has happened in Iraq has been a success. Keep trying.

10/26/2005 12:05:00 PM  
Blogger Rob O'Neill said...

"In spite of the best efforts of the western media and the Left to focus exclusively on the forthcoming 2,000th American casualty"

What best efforts? The NY Times, NZ Herald and SMH all lead with the ratification, not the 2000th causalty.

You're in fantasyland, Adolf.

10/26/2005 12:09:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Stuck on stupid, commenters. Iraqi's ratifying their Constitution and suicide bombers failing to complete an attack on an extraordinarily prominent target because of well-designed preparations are both positive events, not negative.

Some lefties in the media trying to create a negative media event out of US deaths because it contains some zeros rather than other digits is not.

It shows how leftwing, virulently anti-American and domestically self-centred the NZ media is that the Iraq Constitution vote was not celebrated here in any decent way.

But maybe you guys can hope for some sort of nuke attack on the US eh? That would teach those damned Americans a lesson once and for all. After all how dare they use military force to topple a mass murderer and require the Iraqi people form a democratic government.

BASTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARDSSSSSSSSS

10/26/2005 12:10:00 PM  
Blogger Rob O'Neill said...

Ahh "some lefties" now.

Even the Guardian and the Independent both lead with the ratification, not the 2000 deaths.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good winge, boys!

Have you been drinking, Lemur?

10/26/2005 12:15:00 PM  
Anonymous CutFoldGlue said...

how dare they use military force to topple a mass murderer and require the Iraqi people form a democratic government.

Oh, if only that was why the US [said they] invaded.

Adolf: not withstanding that more American military personell die each year from natural causes or accidents;

Have been trying to find your data. Found this which says that from 1980 - 1993 there were a total of 26503 deaths outside of combat or 1893 per year. It also says that "The frequency and rate of death (for unintentional injuries, homicide, and natural causes) has steadily decreased over the 14­year period". So unless you have other data, you're wrong, or lying.

10/26/2005 12:28:00 PM  
Anonymous CutFoldGlue said...

And Al:

Several Shi'ite and Kurdish regions voted between 95 and 99% "Yes"; in rebellious, Sunni Anbar 97% said "No".

(from here)

Sounds like everything is dandy with the constitution too.

10/26/2005 12:30:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"require the Iraqi people to form a democratic government" say it all really. Of course you might add that they have to do it within a time frame set by Americans and predicated on American domestic political considerations rather than one that makes sense within the Iraqi context.

The difference is AL that we wait and watch what happens rather than leap to triumphant conclusions about what we would like to see happen. History so far has proven the left's analysis of this conflict far more accurate than anything you have come up with in this blog.

10/26/2005 12:42:00 PM  
Blogger Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Cutfoldglue I hope you are not employed anywhere near this country's banking system. The war in Iraq has been in progress for two and a half years. Combat casualties amount to 2,000. That's roughly 800 per year. Go clean out your ears, blow your nose dry your eyes, wipe your arse and don't come around here calling me a liar.

10/26/2005 12:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Being called a liar should be the least of your worries Adolf with some of the tosh you've been posting lately.

10/26/2005 01:00:00 PM  
Anonymous CutFoldGlue said...

Your words are:

"more American military personell die each year from natural causes or accidents."

Even if you want to argue that you meant otherwise, the total death rate for troops in Iraq is about 5 times what it is for troops at home.

10/26/2005 01:02:00 PM  
Blogger Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Anon We post only the very best quality tosh around here, just as Churchil did in 1938 and 1939 when your predecesors were hell bent on convincing the world what wonderful chaps Hitler, Von Ribbentrop, Goering, Hess and Himler were. Yes I'll continue on with the tosh, thank you very much.

10/26/2005 01:08:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

CFG - Don't try to wiggle out of your comprehension problem by carefully not quoting the whole sentence which made it clear the 2000 was over *three years*. And FYI, anyone who has read about this subject should know that the 2000 already includes a substantial number of non combat deaths (around 500 IIRC) and deaths among those not in Iraq but who were working on the larger operation including OIF which NZ has already participated in.

10/26/2005 01:09:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

Ooops OEF not OIF obviously. Stupid non editable posts...

ps. Get that new site working ;)

10/26/2005 01:15:00 PM  
Anonymous CutFoldGlue said...

Sigh

"Ok, here is the whole thing: A pivotal week for Iraq. In spite of the best efforts of the western media and the Left to focus exclusively on the forthcoming 2,000th American casualty in three years, not withstanding that more American military personell die each year from natural causes or accidents; and the best efforts of the terrorists to assault and capture a central city hotel full of it's media friends, the people of Iraq have ratified their new constitution and witnessed their own police force throw back the central city assault."

The key phrase is "more die.. each year".

If I say "Joe Blog makes $50 a day, I make more than that each hour".. do I mean that I make more that $50 a day? No. So I truely hope that you are not employed anywhere near this country's.. err.. English speaking system.

10/26/2005 01:15:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

Yes, more do die in accidents each year. By your own admission around 1900 die in accidents every year versus around 500 in combat in Iraq. Only someone who is obtuse or disingenuous would attempt to compare a three year figure directly with a per year rate. And while we are making snide observations, I hope you are not employed in a job that requires basic numeracy let alone any higher mathematical skill.

10/26/2005 01:24:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Anonymous, the "left's" predictions (analysis is to split something into its components, opinion and predictions are not analysis) have been that each step of the war against terror would be a failure - from the horrific winter of Afghanistan which would kill XXXXX US troops to the abysmmal failure of the attack on Baghdad to letting Saddam slip free to the rejection of the Constitution by the Sunni's. The left as a whole has been wrong about pretty much everything, though some individual lefties were a little perkier. Osama is still free, though by all reports not in charge of much at all.

Also SH has only been around since late February and since we don't possess a time machine weren't able to offer predictions on Afghanistan or the ground invasion of Iraq etc. Therefore you are simply lying anonymous. I know anonymous lefties like to lie because they consider the possibility of twisting the opinion of a casual reader more important than maintaining long-term factual integrity, but it's a little annoying having to deal with it on our own blog. Stop wasting our time and our blogspace.

10/26/2005 01:28:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

I agree JamesP, the non-editable nature of Blogspot comments is a bit irritating. Bring on Drupal!

10/26/2005 01:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Visit the website said...

Adolf is the George Hawkins of Sir Humphry's

10/26/2005 01:29:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

Wow, how awfully clever you must be to mock the mentally ill and stroke victims. Just pray that you never become one of them.

What I want to know is: What kind of person spends their day trolling the comments of a blog that they know is ideologically opposed them? IMO it isn't normal and I certainly wouldn't have the time or enthusiasm for it. Speaking of which, if I don't get back to work now I'll be having a short weekend...

10/26/2005 01:42:00 PM  
Anonymous CutFoldGlue said...

James: someone who is obtuse or disingenuous would attempt to compare a three year figure directly with a per year rate.

1. Which is what Adolf did in his post. I'm inclined to think it is bad wording (rather than what you say above), but you're the one defending the point. And I notice you didn't argue the wording so you agree with me? Which is why I said he could be wrong.
2. In my reply to Adolf, I gave a quick comparison of deaths at home and in the US. Heres the breakdown (approximatly)

1980 - 1993, about 27,000 deaths so around 1900 deaths per year. 1.4 Million troops = 0.13%
Iraq: 2.5 years, about 2000 deaths so around 800 deaths per year. 140,000 troops = 0.57%\

But I'm inclined to think that a death abroad due to what many people see as an unjust war is worse than an accident while training at home in any case.

10/26/2005 01:43:00 PM  
Blogger RightWingDeathBeast said...

What a multi-talentless lot our resident lefties are. One can't do maths (CFG), one can't follow a link (weizguy), and one's silly enough to take the views of Osama bin Laden's hagiographer seriously (you guessed it: ackers). Another thinks deaths from accidents and natural causes suddenly stop when you enter a warzone (ISYVTWB).

Just give up lefties. You may want a battle of wits, but we don't want to pick on those half our size.

10/26/2005 01:54:00 PM  
Blogger Chris said...

jamesp - George Hawkins is mentally ill?

10/26/2005 02:46:00 PM  
Blogger MrTips said...

Cutfoldglue:

you earn more than $50 an hour and can't even make one hours work per day?

You LAZY sod.

10/26/2005 02:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

0.57% ?!?!

And this is a problem why again?

For comparison, the US death rate is around 8.25 deaths /1000 population. I will do the maths for you..... 0.825%.

[Yes, I know its a bullshit comparison. But it is better than CFGs, eh.]

Kimble

10/26/2005 03:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Muslim extremists = Antifreedom
Socialists = Antifreedom

Connect the dots and see how the Morons of the Left are so like the Muslim extremists.
gd

10/26/2005 03:42:00 PM  
Blogger waymad said...

Gosh, hasn't lifting this rock thrown unexpected sunlight on some of God's odder souls? Together with another classic Steyn in the Telegraph, Gorgeous George's sudden spot of bother with a bunch of Yankee lawyers, and a cloud-free day in Canterbury, it makes today one of those 'all's right with the world' days. OK, just call me Pollyanna, why don't you?

10/26/2005 03:56:00 PM  
Anonymous weizguy said...

Can't follow a link? Or won't accept the Powerline party line?

"The number of terrorists involved and the follow-on small arms attacks make it clear that the overall goal was to use suicide vehicle bombs to breach the security perimeter, then take over the hotel and hold the international guests as hostages. Instead, they failed to achieve those objectives and the attackers were killed."

Yet security personnel state that there were no small arms attacks... I have seen no credible evidence that there was an attempt to take the hotel. Is there any?

10/26/2005 04:16:00 PM  
Blogger fm said...

weizguy,

The speculation over whether the terrorists were attempting to seize the hotel and take journalist hostage was reported in one BBC World report that I viewed and repeated in at least one other Australian morning news programme that I saw. There may have been reports which made these claims. The fact that you did not see these reports does not mean that Adolf or the person he was quoting was making it up.

A very quick Google produces the following quote explaining the source:

A triple suicide bombing in central Baghdad yesterday rocked a hotel complex used by foreign journalists. No foreign reporters were killed in the blasts, but Iraq's national security adviser called the attack a "very clear" effort by insurgents to take journalists hostage.

A little slower with the vitriol next time, OK?

10/26/2005 04:36:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

Roger - AFAIK George Hawkins has had a stroke but is not mentally ill. Although IMO anyone who wants to be a politician must be a little nuts :)

10/26/2005 04:40:00 PM  
Blogger fm said...

One of my sentences above should have read "There may have been other reports which made these claims". [I can only watch so much TV after all]

10/26/2005 04:41:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

CFG - I'm inclined to believe that the problem has little to do with the wording but is instead caused by your desire to attack AF. I'm glad we agree that directly comparing a 3 year total to a yearly rate is a stupid thing to do. Which begs the question: Why did you say that AF was doing just that when there was a completely reasonable and obvious alternative interpretation of what he said? Written communication on the internet is prone to misunderstanding so it pays to be charitable with your interpretations.

10/26/2005 05:22:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Speculation the terrorists were trying to seize the hotel was actually started by an Iraqi Minister or senior government official I think.

The theory was the suicide bombers were to crack a hole in the concrete barrier, and then presumedly the hotel was to be attacked by gunmen while the security guards were too stunned to resist.

Don't have a link on hand sorry.

10/26/2005 05:52:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home