INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST

Andrew Bolt notes the death of the 11th Australian soldier killed in Afghanistan, adding:

This brings to 51 the number Coalition troops killed in Afghanistan this month - making it already the deadliest month of fighting there.

Britain has now lost more soldiers in Afghanistan than it has in Iraq. Canada alone has suffered an astonishing 125 fatalities. That said, the Coalition deaths in Afghanistan are still a quarter of those suffered in Iraq. It’s just that Iraq is essentially won, but Afghanistan has little end in sight. It’s also that Americans were left to do almost all the real fighting in Iraq, while now its partners are asked to do their share in Afghanistan.

Typically, it’s largely the English-speaking countries that have responded.

PP boy Scott Bridges trims Bolt's quote down to this:

It’s also that Americans were left to do almost all the real fighting in Iraq, while now its partners are asked to do their share in Afghanistan.

Typically, it’s largely the English-speaking countries that have responded.

A screen-grab of a Wikipedia table showing national force number contributions to the 42-member International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is attached with Bridges observing:

Three of the top ten contributions (apart from the USA) come from English-speaking countries.

Bridges' post, which asks his readers to "compare and contrast" Bolt's post with reality, is patently dishonest: Bolt addresses participation in anti-Taliban operations ("fighting") whereas Bridges looks only at force numbers.

Wikipedia's Coalition casualties in Afghanistan page shows 1,182 coalition deaths connected with Afghanistan operations* of which 985 (83.3%) were sustained by the U.S., the U.K., Canada and Australia. Further, the U.K., Canada and Australia account for 62% of non-U.S. casualties, with the remaining 38% spread over the other 38 participating countries. Bolt is therefore correct: English speaking countries are bearing the brunt of the combat burden, which explains why Bridges resorts to a cherry-picked quote and irrelevant numbers. This is exactly the sort of "intellectual dishonest" the PP boyz are meant to seek out and discredit, not perpetrate.

Regardless, the main point of Bolt's post is reflected in its title -- Eleventh Digger killed in Afghanistan -- and again in its lead sentence:

We have lost our eleventh soldier in Afghanistan.

Bridges could have acknowledged this sad event but didn't because he was on a points-scoring anti-Bolt mission.


* Wikipedia had not yet updated to show the latest Australian killed. Also, not all of those deaths listed occurred as a reult of combat operations inside Afghanistan: personnel killed in car accidents and other non-combat accidents are included in the totals.