IRAQ. Help, we’re winning! Don’t mention the War! (I always found “Fawlty Towers” very unfunny, didn’t you also?)


This is going to be about Iraq, but I have to get this off my chest, as I borrowed part of the headline from a major 1970s/80s British TV series…..

Did anybody find “Fawlty Towers” (don’t mention the war!) as excruciating, embarrassing and unfunny, in the way only John Cleese can be unfunny, as I did? Please discuss, for I need help, and I feel so terribly, terribly left out of something clearly very universal here where “British” modern humour is concerned. Even though he drove a Rover 2000, I can’t love the man or especially his humour. (Perhaps, tell it not in Gath, I’m not really a libertarian….? Not THAT sort, anyway…? ….[YOU know!...he DOESN'T LAUGH at MONTY PYTHON STUFF.......!!!] )

And I found “Life of Brian” even worse – possibly I was offended to religious reasons, but I watched in in the company of several “English Old Catholics” who all found it an uproarious hoot, and I was frankly mystified.

David Davis

Now then.

I have been wondering quietly over the last couple of weeks and months about Iraq. As everybody here knows, I have never ever failed to oppose, often vociferously, those who said we (which is to say “The West”, which is to say in practice, Britain and our assistant the USA, plus any Anglosphere nations such as Poland who wanted to come along) had no business there.

The probability that, providing whichever Gramsco-Marxian succeeds Bush as our President in 2009 pursues what Petraeus has been doing, Iraq will finally succeed as a project, is high. this was noted today on Kerplunk, a sensible Australian blog. While the main point of the post was about the “West’s” mediarati dis-reporting success in Iraq, the blogger also wondered why the “left” don’t want people to be successful and free. Well, they’d have no job, and would have to break stones or fill shleves like proper people do, as I opined there:-

First of all, thank you for a sensible and grand blog. I have always particularly admired your “Ten Signs that you’re a Moral idiot” essay. It ought to be resyndicated lots.

The left does not want nations, any nations at all, to be successful and free. Why?

Because the very fact of freedom, coupled with success or even relative failure – and most nations fail, just like people – utterly negates any premise that the left (Nazis or other types of left-wing-communists, or “Trotzky-ists” (whatever those may have been) Marxists, Maoists, Polpotists, Sartristas and the like) has any reason for existence, other than in “public-sector” jobs as a bureaucracy.

This latter loophole is the only way they can get “gainful” (yay!) “employment” inside “advanced” (which is broadly to say, liberal capitalist) nations which are peculiarly resistent happily to armed or subversive revolution on the Leninist model.

The “left” is not Mankind’s solution: it is the problem, and the main problem. The uncomputable number of deaths and individual sorrow, which it and its musings have caused, is probably water under a bridge by now…but the scenario in former Warsaw Pact countries now liberated – after a fashion – from pre-capitlist barbarism, shows what can be done with little, even half-heartedly, in a very little time.

No. The “left” does not want you – or anybody – to be lifted out of atavistic misery and servility to barbarous, unsocialised beasts masquerading as human beings. Once everybody is free, and has no need to listen to the buggers, they are f****d. Terminally. Good.

That is why they are so, so very very pissed off about Iraq and the results.

About these ads

10 responses to “IRAQ. Help, we’re winning! Don’t mention the War! (I always found “Fawlty Towers” very unfunny, didn’t you also?)

  1. Got a chance to read your “Ten signs you’re a moral idiot.” Also some of the comments. Seems to me like you nailed it on the head. I noticed that some of the offended commentators always dreg up very specific facts to offset your points, like when you generalize about a particular issue in the Civil War.

    I guess that’s the sign of a moral idiot – not being able to infer from the details the global moral issue.

    Anyway – I would submit that this needs to be updated weekly, as there unfortunately seems to always be another ten signs — well, maybe I’m talking about “signs you’re an idiot” rather than “signs you’re a moral idiot”.

    1. You believe that the oil companies are responsible for high gasoline prices, and that to punish them they should pay a windfall profits tax, even though their margins on revenues are significantly lower than your neighborhood convenience store. And if their profits are 7% (6.8% actually in aggregate) and the US government gets 15%, just who is getting the windfall — especially since the US government doesn’t have plant costs, development costs, labor costs, etc.

    And more…..

  2. I wouldn’t worry about it, let’s not forget that Germany lost the war, they didn’t just think better of it and decide to go home. Things would be a lot worse for other Europeans under the Nazi jackboot, if only for the fact that we wouldn’t be free. I’ve met some lovely German people, but there are also some which make you realise why it is that they went to war against the world – twice – and lost.

  3. Good article, the ten reasons one. I’ve just remembered an incident when I was living in halls of residence. There was a German guy living there, seven foot tall and built like a brick shithouse. He put it about that he liked to be ‘competitive’ and, picking me as the most worthy target, set about a subtle ‘one-upmanship’ campaign.

    I responded by bringing in a large St George’s flag, emblazoned with the words ‘You Lost The War’ in black marker pen, which I hung in the JCR. It disappeared shortly afterward, but I never did get any more trouble from that particular gentleman. Anyway, I was told if I returned next year, my election to JCR President might well be on the cards. I never did though.

  4. Dave:

    “Fawlty Towers” was wonderfully funny. John Cleese (a fellow ‘est’ Graduate!) is quintessentially English, in a self-parodying way.

    I well remember the episode wherein two American guests ask for a Waldorf salad. Basil Fawlty responded loudly: “Send out for a Waldorf!”

    A few days after Hillel Steiner’s LA Inquiry at the Waldorf Hotel, two Special Branch officers with .38 revolvers opened fire on a yellow Mini in a busy London street. They dragged the passenger out of the car, propped him up on the pavement, and put 15 bullets into him, ending by smashing his skull in with their revolvers.

    They had thought they were “arresting” one David Martin, a serious criminal. In fact, the luckless man was Stephen Waldorf, an editor with RV’s “World in Action.” David Ramsay Steele was reported to be one of the witnesses. As Steele had written: “The police fight at something of a disadvantage (at least, when there are media people around).”

    The two police officers were charged with attempting to murder Waldorf. This being Englan, and SB being SB, they were _acquitted_, on the basis that they thought they were trying to kill (arrest”) Martin. Waldorf later got UKP 300,000 in damages.

    Anyone who knows Special Branch humour will understand the NSY cafeteria dissolving into uproarious laughter when Basil Fawlty says: “Send out for a Waldorf!” >:-}

    As for Iraq:

    The US invades the place unnecessarily, and then occupies it, and starts treating the Iraqis the same way they treat Americans. Shootings. Prisons. Rip-offs. Torture. In due course, the Iraqis get really pissed off, and start an insurgency.

    The US has no “exit plan” because they never intended to leave. Oil. Bases (four of them, cities of 25,000 people). So now, we’re fighting for “The (Shi’ite) Islamic Republic of Iraq.” Do you think this is a good idea?

    Meanwhile, the Iraqi Sunnis bide their time for an American departure, whereupon they can slaughter what they call “the Iranian Shi’ias” in the Baghdad government.

    We could have just gotten rid of Saddam’s regime for them, and left. Why do you think we didn’t do that?

    Regards,

    Tony

  5. “est”?

    Ah. I should have known. It all makes sense now, the ruin he has made of his life.

    I remember the frequent phone calls, often in the night, yea at 2 in the morning, from many many people, themselves compelled to give money to that “est” man.

    I am happy to state in full public of blogs that, even in the sunset of my own life, I never gave in, ever, and never went to an “Ehrhard Seminar”.

  6. Dave:

    My life is far from ruined!

    I did the ‘est’ Training in the week that Thatcher was elected in ’79! Almost all the time you’ve known me!

    The first weekend was GREAT! (‘Borrowed’ from the Silva Method, which I recommend). I had Jeremy Shearmur on hand to ‘deprogramme’ me as we went along. >:-}

    Chris and Judy did ‘est’ and loved it.

    You missed out on one of the most wondrously complex experiences of a lifetime! But that’s OK.

    WE TOOK THE RED PILL!!!

    Best,

    Tony

  7. Steven:

    Germany _won_ WWI and got rid of Prussian Militarism.

    Germany _won_ WWII and got rid of Nazism.

    Whereas Britain still has a hereditary aristocracy (a form of eugenics); and is rife with authoritarianism.

    20 million German civilians were murdered during and after the war. Don’t be so bloody cheerful about it.

    Tony

  8. Tony,

    I’m not. And what’s more, I don’t see the logic in saying someboby wins because they are beaten out of something they themselves spawned – in both cases.

    What’s more, I object to having to bear the projected burden of the crimes they committed on the continent during WW2 just because I’m supposedly ‘European’, when I as an Englishman and a British Citizen have the legacy, in political terms, of the strongest opposition to Nazism.

    Don’t get me wrong, I have great liking and respect for the Germans, but by proxy they have done a lot of damage to us by their machinations.

    And I disagree on the last point, I think on the merits she’s worth every penny.

    Steven.

  9. Steven:

    It’s amazing, to have to explain that there’s all the difference in the world between “The State” and the people.

    The German _people_ were rid of the Prussian Nationalist State.

    The German _people_ were rid of the Nazi State, after the British State had declared war on Germany.

    If — in the future — Britain was to be controlled by a totalitarian “Conservative” despotism, I would welcome the liberation of this country and its people by a liberal democratic Germany. Wouldn’t you?

    As to the murder of German non-combatants:

    http://www.jamesbacque.com

    May I take it that you are happy to have a German “Royal Family”? This is “libertarian” _how_? I have no objection to your addressing people (Hoppe-style) as “Your Majesty.” Your choice. You get to pay for it, then… >:-}

    Regards,

    Tony

  10. Tony,

    I see your point there. I just reserve the right to take exception. Anyhow, we’ve all got a bit of German in us probably, so it doesn’t matter. I’m proud she’s managed to keep quiet for all these years. Me, I’d have jettisoned the bastards a long time ago (apart from our David, our one, not the other one).

    Regards,

    Steven.