April 21, 2007
"Not Responsible for Advice Not Taken"
The title, of course, is a wonderful aphorism by science-fiction writer Larry Niven that I have used (with attribution) many times. But it is particularly poignant in this case.
When Majority Leader Harry "Pinky" Reid (D-Caesar's Palace, 95%) declared that the Iraq war was "lost" -- and even presumed to read the minds of the Secretaries of State and Defense to pronounce that they agreed with him -- Reid cited, as his only evidence, the multiple suicide and car bombings that occurred on Wednesday, April 18th, 2007. Those five bombings on one day proved that the counterinsurgency strategy was a "failure," Reid pronounced.
On that day, nearly 200 Iraqi civilians died (hat tip to Eason Jordan blog IraqSlogger -- and my apologies for mistaking it for a milblog earlier!) Within hours, Sen. Reid rushed to the microphone in palpable glee at being able to declare defeat and squirt insults, like a squid squirts ink (and for the same reason), at President Bush and Gen. David Petraeus. Petraeus is commander of Multinational Force - Iraq (MNF-I) and architect of the 60%-implemented counterinsurgency that Reid, with his solid history in military studies, has dismissed as doomed.
Most of the deaths that occurred on Wednesday came from a single suicide truck bombing in the parking lot of the Sadriya market in Sadr City, a Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad. That explosion alone killed at least 140 people; the other four bombs together killed about 50 more (the exact death toll is subject to some dispute). The Sadriya market bombing accounts for more than 70% of Wednesday's fatalities.
For Reid's conclusion of "failure" to be valid, he must assume that the Sadriya market bombing occurred because of a systemic failure of Petraeus's counterinsurgency strategy. Reid must show that the bombing occurred because of some flaw implicit, or at least implicate, in the strategy itself... not because of either a freak chance or somebody failing to do his job.
(Shorthand distinction: A flaw is implicit if it's already present in the strategy but unseen or unrecognized; a flaw is implicate if it arises as a natural consequence of the strategy. Thus, a yolk is implicit in an egg, but a chicken is implicate.)
To un-generalize my point, suppose your strategy for reducing energy costs in an apartment building you manage comprises:
- Insulating the whole building;
- Replacing the ancient cooling and heating systems with much newer, more efficient units;
- Replacing all the incandescent bulbs in the common areas with fluorescent lights;
- And replacing the old refrigerators with new ones.
Your cost-saving strategy is not discredited if you get socked with a huge electricity bill one month -- because a tenant went AWOL, leaving his electric stove set to 450 degrees!
So what about the Sadriya bombing? It turns out it was only successful because of exactly the kind of idiocy in the analogy above; the explosives-laden truck could not even have gotten into the parking lot -- except that Iraqis removed the concrete barriers that would have forced it to pass through a guarded gate and be searched:
As part of the new Baghdad security plan -- which Petraeus helped design and is in charge of implementing -- large concrete barriers were brought in to restrict access to the parking area after a military "red team" determined that area too was vulnerable. But on April 15, three days before the deadly attack, Iraqi officials ordered the 12-foot "Texas barriers" pulled away after local residents complained about the obstruction.
Clearly, then, the problem the led to the massive death toll last Wednesday was not systemic to Petraeus's counterinsurgency strategy; it was neither implicit nor implicate... unless one assumes that Iraqis will always rebel against security measures, though it means their own suicide, and will never be able to learn the routine caution that Western nations pracice. The suggestion seems terribly bigoted to me.
The flaw was in individual and local Iraqi officials, who listened to the immediate complaints of Sadr City merchants about inconvenience instead of explaining the long-term value of security to their constituents. But that lesson was made, with brutal emphasis, by al-Qaeda itself last Wednesday. Perhaps it will now sink in.
Anybody have Harry Reid's cell-phone number? I would love to ask him whether he really argues that a strategy should be considered a "failure" if even a single Iraqi screws up a smallest piece of it on an isolated occasion.
If so, then can we consider the Congressional Democratic majority likewise a failure? Several of them have signally failed to do their jobs in the past 90 days -- starting with Squeaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Haight-Ashbury, 95%) and Majority Leader Harry "Pinky" Reid, who have yet to pass a single major bill or indeed do anything at all, other than launch scurrilous and ill-advised attacks upon every Executive official from the lowly assistant to Alberto Gonzales to our military commanders in the field.
Harry Reid: doomed failure who has already lost. Kind of like the sound of that...!
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, April 21, 2007, at the time of 11:25 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/2007
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Not Responsible for Advice Not Taken":
» SUN APR 22 Algore The Gift That Keeps On Giving! from The Pink Flamingo
I was going to email a friend and gloat about all the shelf space I now had for more books, ...
[Read More]Tracked on April 22, 2007 7:46 PM
Comments
The following hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman
I just wonder what the effect over the next year or so of seeing such outstanding valour on the part of the Democratic Leadership will be on the American Voter come Poll time.
Now I by no means wanted the Democratic Party to take over control of Congress for these two years, BUT I don't think it will hurt the Electorate to see exactly what they will be getting if they elect one President.
The above hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://biglizards.net/blog/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 21, 2007 11:43 PM
The following hissed in response by: hunter
The dhummies never miss an opportunity to provide aid and comfort to the enemy. Historians will debate how much difference a little dhimmiecrat energy into actually winning the war could have helped by now.
Of course the President, by simply being passive aggressive about this, instead of in the faces of the poultroons, could be actually *leading* us.
Why he has declined to do so will alos be of great interest to historians.
The above hissed in response by: hunter at April 22, 2007 9:43 AM
The following hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist
The enemy must give thanks to Allah each day for our Congress...
The above hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist at April 22, 2007 1:48 PM
The following hissed in response by: Bill Faith
Dafydd,
I'll read your post in a minute and probably link to it, but not till I get something off my chest first. PLEASE do not ever, EVER, refer to IraqSlogger as a milblog. IraqSlogger is run by Eason Jordan of Davos infamy, who openly accused our soldiers of deliberately targeting journalists is Iraq. The same Eason Jordan who was in charge of CNN's Baghdad bureau when they used to routinely lie for Saddam to protect their access to Iraq. Most real milbloggers wouldn't p1$$ on Eason Jordan's head if his hair was on fire. If the sunnybeach tells you the sky's blue it's time to go outside and check for yourself.
Bill Faith
Webmaster, Old War Dogs (a true milblog)
Proud Veteran-American
The above hissed in response by: Bill Faith at April 22, 2007 9:03 PM
The following hissed in response by: Bill Faith
I just added an excerpt and link to my 2007.04.22 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup. btw, you might want to check out Construction on Baghdad Barrier Halted for an indication of how much the Iraqi government learned from the incident last week.
The above hissed in response by: Bill Faith at April 22, 2007 9:23 PM
The following hissed in response by: john the basset
Egads! You cannot mean to place the blame on the heads that earned it.... That's, that's unreasonable!
you said:
The flaw was in individual and local Iraqi officials, who listened to the immediate complaints of Sadr City merchants about inconvenience instead of explaining the long-term value of security to their constituents.
If we Americans did that...chaos, pure and simple! It's NEVER the fault of the politicians....It's ALWAYS the fault of the final victim. My G*d! If we did that here, politicians might...go to jail! Ted Kennedy would have to do jail time for being unable to drink, drive and screw around at the same time! While crossing a bridge.
Putting responsibility where it belongs, a novel concept! It'l never catch on here....
The above hissed in response by: john the basset at April 23, 2007 1:05 AM
The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh
Bill Faith:
Sorry, Bill! I took only a quick glance at the blog, and it looked vaguely milbloggish. I didn't realize it was Eason Jordan.
I only linked to it as a hat tip, because that's where I got the link to the US News and World Report story that described exactly how the car bomber managed to get into the market carpark. I've made the correction... and again, my apologies.
Dafydd
The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh at April 23, 2007 3:17 AM
The following hissed in response by: Bill Faith
Dafydd,
No harm done. Thanks for the correction. .
Bill
The above hissed in response by: Bill Faith at April 23, 2007 10:37 AM
The following hissed in response by: DaveR
"If the sunnybeach tells you the sky's blue it's time to go outside and check for yourself."
How true. Did you know that Jamil Hussein has been located and the AP has been vindicated? Well, Eason Jordan does. The fact that he is not named Jamil Hussein, and denies being the AP contact, is merely an annoying detail that EJ fails to mention lest it confuse us. EJ may not work at CNN anymore, but he is still much smarter than us rednecks. Him and Jon Cary.
The above hissed in response by: DaveR at April 23, 2007 12:16 PM
The following hissed in response by: Eilish
One wonders how much a new and very confused bureaucracy has to do with this sort of action and the newest halt on security construction mentioned by Bill Faith. I only wish that the world media would give the Iraqis the chance that it has given other emerging democracies. God knows that it took our own country more than five years to put things together. I pray daily for General Petraus's plan. I pray for patience and speed.
The above hissed in response by: Eilish at April 23, 2007 2:07 PM
The following hissed in response by: Tomy
Dafydd,
Perhaps some more good news. Frederick W. Kaplan's latest Weekly Standard Article "Friends, Enemies
and Spoilers: Two months in, the consequences of the surge" has this new (to me) information:
Most of the military operations of recent months have been laying the groundwork for clear-and-hold operations that will be the centerpiece of the new plan. Coalition and Iraqi forces have targeted al Qaeda and other Sunni insurgent cells in Baghdad, in their bases around the capital, and in Anbar, Salahaddin, and Diyala provinces. They have established positions throughout Baghdad and swept a number of neighborhoods in a preliminary fashion. They have begun placing concrete barriers around problematic neighborhoods to restrict access and change traffic flow to support future operations. Targeted raids have removed a number of key leaders from the Shiite militias as well, reducing the effectiveness of Sadr's organization, which was already harmed by his hasty departure for Iran early this year . . . Major clear-and-hold operations are scheduled to begin in late May or June, and will take weeks to complete, area by area. After that, it may be many more weeks before their success at establishing security can be judged.
I thought that full clear and hold operations were already taking place in those areas of Baghdad that are already fully manned. This means that when the counterinsurgency plan is fully implemented the results may be much more dramatic than anticipated. Could this cause the Pelosi and Pinky Show to be pulled?
Tomy
The above hissed in response by: Tomy at April 23, 2007 8:55 PM
The following hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist
Big one coming...? 3 days and my 'jones' is kicking in.
The above hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist at April 24, 2007 1:31 PM
The following hissed in response by: snochasr
I have a serious question, for which I would like a serious answer. If declaring that "the war is lost" and demanding that our troops be withdrawn by a date certain does not "give aid and comfort to the enemy" then what DOES? Why hasn't Harry Reid been arrested?
The above hissed in response by: snochasr at April 25, 2007 3:41 PM
The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh
Snochasr:
Why hasn't Harry Reid been arrested?
Because we also have freedom of speech; and giving one's opinion -- even calling upon Congress and the president to do something foolish, but which is nevertheless legal -- cannot possibly constitute treason.
Do you think some imam in Minnesota is allowed to say "I want to see the American form of government collapse, to be replaced by a caliphate under sharia?" The answer is yes, he can, because of our self-evident right of freedom of speech and religion... which we extend even to those who, had they the power, would deny it to us.
Why? Because, as Alexander Mikeljohn said, we must run society according to our rules, not theirs.
Believe me, Sno, it would be a much more horrible punishment to Harry "Pinky" Reid if the Democrats lost their majority and a Republican were elected president in 2008. And that certainly does not run afoul of the Constitution... much as the Democrats may wish it so, they have no constitutional right to a majority in the United States Congress.
Dafydd
The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh at April 25, 2007 8:45 PM
The following hissed in response by: snochasr
Freedom of speech is not free. You cannot say anything you want, anytime. Harry Reid's statements and actions are directly responsible for some number of American servicemen and women being killed or injured, by encouraging the enemy to attack us rather than slink away. Harry Reid is an elected official entrusted with defending the United States and its security interests, who is knowingly acting directly contrary to those interests. If not treason, then what is the proper charge for this outrageous criminal behavior?
The above hissed in response by: snochasr at April 26, 2007 5:55 AM
The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh
Snochasr:
If not treason, then what is the proper charge for this outrageous criminal behavior?
There is none, because it's not criminal behavior.
Sno, you're making the terrible, terrible mistake of adopting the Democratic mindset. The Democrats look at the Bush administration and say:
I hate these people sooooooo much, that they must be a criminal regime! We just haven't found what crime they've committed yet. We must redouble our search -- find the crime, find the crime!
Now you're looking at Reid and saying you hate what he's doing so much, that surely must be a crime... you just haven't figured out which one yet. But the fact is that our protection of freedom of speech is so strong, deep, and intense, that it even covers the fervently expressed wish that the United States lose this war.
Even by a sitting senator. Even by the majority leader.
You just have to accept that: Harry Reid has committed no crime; his sin is political, and so should be his punishment.
Believe me, the Democrats are 100% convinced that they're going to pick up four or five Senate seats and 20-30 House seats in 2008, along with capturing the presidency... in their minds, just like the elections of Al Gore and John Kerry, it has already happened: It's a done deal.
The actual vote of the people is merely a coronation ceremony, like when the Supreme Soviet would ratify a diktat from Stalin.
If Republicans could turn this around and take even a single Senate seat and just 15 House seats, and retain the presidency -- each of which is still very much a possibility, I frankly believe -- then the Democrats would be so crushed in spirit, they would probably descend deeper into the insane conspiracy mongering of MoveOn and George Soros... and file hundreds of federal cases, trying to sue their way not only into the White House but back into the congressional majority as well.
They would disgrace themselves... and that's a far better punishment than merely jailing the clueless Harry "Pinky" Reid.
Dafydd
The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh at April 26, 2007 1:52 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)
(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved
)
