Group pitting of 17 Dopers who think Spaniards are cowards

The BBQ Pit
181

I did expect a backlash from the posters I named in the OP. And I understand that it’s not so nice to be lumped into the same company as some people who constantly have to wipe their lips to remove the froth. But I stand by that, because when I read the threads in questions, I was getting more and more angry, more and more surprised. It’s not obvious what nationality all these posters have, since it doesn’t show up in all profiles, but my assumption is that a majority, if not all, are Americans.
My being surprised was in connection to 9/11. I could not in any way understand how people from a country where the largest single terrorist attack in history took place, would be so quick in condemning a whole other country for being emotional after an attack that proportionally was almost as big (given Spain’s population of ~38 million).

So I don’t get why you’re making that an issue. Surely you don’t believe that all voters in all countries always vote on the basis of principle and logic? Of course emotions is a large part of it all. There are many hot topics in many countries, where the politicians play for the emotional vote, not the logical. In fact, my feeling is that facts seldom enter the debates before an elections, since they have a tendency to come back and haunt the person who used them. It’s better to use abstract slogans, where no promises are made: “We want more equality.” doesn’t really mean squat, but it sounds nice. And who wants to argue against: “Better security for the elderly.”

I notice, Tabby_Cat, that you’ve engaged in a longer debate in this thread, since you posted the above quote. I think, if you don’t mind, that I’ll stay out of the debate you have with those posters.

I know you wrote this to Coldfire, but after having checked your posts again, I stand by your inclusion. You’re not frothing at the mouth, like some others did, but I do think your voicing basically the same opinion. Note that I don’t have any particular reason to include you, other than what you wrote in that thread. I don’t think we ever interacted here or that we’ve clashed before. I’ve extended an apology to one poster, so it’s not like I can’t change my mind. However, as far as I can see, you’ve done nothing that makes me re-think my position regarding you.

Yes, I do. But it wasn’t just that, it was the conclusions that were made.

You accuse me of not reading the posts properly, of attributing the wrong things to posters, and yet you pressume to do exactly the same.
How dare you pressume to know what I feel? For the record, this is a very emotional subject for me. Had I had family or friends in Madrid, it would’ve been even worse. I don’t, but that doesn’t change the fact at all. People in a country that I know and love are being smeared for other people’s political agenda or need to score points on the debate team. I simply cannot shut up about something that I perceive as so vile. This is why it’s in the pit. It’s emotional, a rant, a need to vent. It’s not a GD topic for me.

182

Gaspode:

-Your OP was titled “Group Pitting of 17 Dopers who think Spaniards are cowards.”

-You included me in your list of the “Gang of 17.”

-Therefore, you accused me of saying I think Spaniards are cowards.

Furthermore, you called me a “maggot,” wrote that I “don’t have a tenth of the bravery of a Spanish sheep on Valium,” and accused me of “using this tragedy to further (my) own power hungry, extended Monroe doctrine agenda.”

I’ve repeated – word for word – the entirety of my three posts on the subject of the Madrid bombings and the Spanish election, which proved I never said, nor implied, that I thought the Spanish people were cowards.

The best you could come up with was taking one line I wrote predicting al-Qaeda would perpetrate similar atrocities in nations allied with the US in the Iraq war as evidence of me “siding” with the other 16 pittees.

As I already pointed out, you took this line completely out of context; I wrote that I thought al-Qaeda would interpret the results of the Spanish election as a validation of its strategy of using terrorism to drive a wedge between America and its allies and therefore may do so again in places like the UK, Italy, Australia, etc.

I posted a brief analysis indicating that I thought different people would take different lessons from the results of the bombing and election. This is hardly an unreasonable assertion. It’s not even partisan rhetoric - it’s just an observation.

How this translates into me saying the Spanish people were “cowards” is beyond me.

You smeared me unfairly, Gaspode. And it’s disingenuous for you to backpedal or equivocate and say something like “Well, you were reserved, you weren’t frothing at the mouth, but you said the Spanish cowards to a lesser degree.”

No. I never said, nor implied, the Spanish people were cowards, AT ALL.

I think I deserve an apology, and I see other Dopers (from different political points of view, mind you) also think I’m not being treated fairly.

I hope you’re a decent enough person to offer me one.

183

You’d better add Dennis Hastert, Congressional Leader of the Republicans, to your list now.

184

GoHeels, I see you’re getting some support for your position, but I want to make it clear that in no way am I backpedaling. I can only go by what I read, and I didn’t include you for kicks, because I have an issue with you or any other reason than what I read. Here are the posts in question. From this thread:

And from here

No, you never said that the Spaniards were cowards. It doesn’t matter. You say that they caved in and gave the vote to the PSOE as a direct result of the bombings. You said that this will make bin Laden happy and will result in even more terror attacks from aQ. For your information, here is a link showing the changes in polls up to one week before the election. The site is in Spanish, but I’m sure you can read the graph without any knowledge of the language. You have no support for your assertion that PSOE won because of the bombing, and you claim that you’re not happy with the outcome of the election in this very thread :

[QUOTE=GoHeels]
No, I am not thrilled with the results of the election. Yes, I am worried that al-Qaeda will be all too encouraged by the result.

[QUOTE]
. So you don’t like to see socialists in power in Spain, you think they won because of the bombing and you believe that this will play into the hands of bin-Laden. These are the very resons there are so many people as 17 in the OP. Ignorance of facts, seeing the Spanish as caving in to the terrorists, and thinking that this will lead to more mayhem. The PSOE would with all probability have won, anyway, so the Spanish didn’t change their votes in significant numbers because of the bombs, and none of us really know what agenda aQ has, apart from mayhem. They made no demands and still aren’t making any demands.
You perceive this as a war between muslim fundamentalists and ‘western’ society, when all indications show that this is not true. They can’t invade us or sway us to giving in to them, accepting bin-Laden as president of the free world. But as long as you think that they’re enemies, in the same way the eastern block was the enemy during the cold war, you will not be able to clear up this mess.
Because of that, your posts just serve to affirm the opinion that aQ just scored a victory, when in fact it’s just a tragedy. Tell me again why you shouldn’t be included?

185

Because he makes EXACTLY the distinction I referred to and which you say you are are capable of seeing: that saying that AQ will claim it as a victory does not equal claiming that the Spanish are cowards.

Quite frankly, your utter refusal to admit that you made an error here makes me question your honesty about all the rest.

186

Gaspode what’s so bad about admitting you made a mistake? Be a fricking man about it. Nothing less honorable than not admitting to error.

187

And why did you post a quote for your own defense that so clearly supports my position? Doesn’t unnecessarily hard condemnations imply that I didn’t agree with them? Christ.

188

KidCharlemagne. I read your quote as saying that the style of (was it Maud’Dib or SlyFrog’s?) OP was wrong, but the content OK. I simply cannot see that.

Furt, there’s no dishonesty, this is the way I read it. Call me stupid, ignorant or whatever you want, but this is me ranting about something I read as stupid and ignorant. I did check Goheel’s posts again, now that I’m less emotional, and I came to the same consclusions. I can only see one reason for dishonesty, and that is that I did the OP for some selfserving purpose. I didn’t. I did it because I was very upset with what I read.

189

And I just learned a new phrase yesterday, “tu quoque” I suggest you try to pit one person at a time in the future, because you’re fucking up big time. I never accused you of what you claim I accused you but I accuse you now as a result of what you just accused me of. I think you should excuse yourself from this thread before you embarrass yourself further and recuse your self adopted position as special prosecutor of the SDMB. Are we clear?

How dare you presume to know how others feel ! You presume the gang of 17 have a political agenda and need to score points. I can assure you that I and I believe in all likelyhood your other targets have no illusions about the popularity of their views expressed over the issue of the Spanish election. But you felt a need to slam the 17 as if the overwhelming condemnation of those lamenting the result of the election prior to your thread wasn’t enough. You sensed the mood my boy, and you ran to the front of the crowd to get on the podium.

190

You know this is just dishonest. The Spanish government has admitted it. They have presented a letter of apology to the UN. The US government has rebuked them

but some people will just not let get the facts get in the way of their “thinking”.

191

very well said
it is unfortunate that some get blind when they get upset because the truth hurts.

192

Do you even know what “dishonest” means? Talk about letting facts get in the way of thinking. I stated an opinion that it was odd that the government would try to cover something up and then absolutely be unable to hold off releasing the crippling video tape until a better time than the morning of the election. How in the hell is that somehow “dishonest?” There’s not a fact in there, unless you dispute that they released the videotape the morning of the election.

There may be other facts that would change my analysis; is that what you were attempting to say through your froth and vitriol?

193

**SlyFrog **, I interpreted your post as a denial of the fact that the Spanish government had withheld information. If that is not what you meant I apologize for my misinterpretation.

194

It was absolutely politically necessary for them to say something about the tape, because, if you’ll recall, its existence was already public knowledge.

Consider the situation:

The government has spent days pushing the ETA angle. Word comes from the Prime Minister himself, and is reported faithfully by supporting papers. The Minister of the Interior boldly says “There is no doubt that ETA is responsible,” and publicly accuses a reporter who asks if there may possibly be an al Qaeda connection of malicious disinformation. A resolution is pushed through the U.N. Security Council, placing the blame squarely on the shoulders of the ETA.

Then the worm starts to turn. Foreign press is focused on the al Qaeda possibility, siezing on early indications such as arab audiotape found and detonators found in the van – while this is still minimized by state-friendly media. A memo from the Foreign Minister urging Spanish ambassadors to “use any opportunity to confirm ETA’s responsibility for these brutal attacks, thus helping to dissipate any type of doubt that certain interested parties may want to promote,” is leaked. People are already grumbling about the government trying to manipulate public perception of the attacks for political reasons.

Then comes the videotape. It is found after an arab-speaking man calls a TV station to tell them where to find it. The police pick it up. The existence of the videotape, and its connection to someone claiming to represent al Qaeda, is known. By the press.

“Releasing” the videotapes contents would be less damaging that appearing to throw it into a black hole, obviously.

So the Minister of the Interior answers the inevitable questions about it, while continuing to maintain the party line. “Our reservations about the credibility remain.”

This is all from material that was apparent before people went to the polls. Afterwards, we find some outright lies-- such as the type of explosive having been used by ETA in the past.

Gee, I dunno.

195

Argh, I ought not to have quoted ‘How in the hell is that somehow “dishonest?”’ out of context, there-- I momentarily forgot whose honesty was the subject.

For the record, SlyFrog, I don’t think you were being dishonest, I think you were just expressing an uninformed opinion.

196

No, I won’t name-call, but I will ask you to please include me on your list.

I don’t think the Spanish as a nation are cowardly (I’m sure some are; that’s human nature). I don’t think that cowardice is the best explanation for the election result. I think its’s equally probable that the voters saw it a policy they never agreed with in the first place finally costing them – a “last straw” kind of thing – or that what really pissed them off was the way Aznar handled it. I honestly don’t claim to know, and don’t want to try to interpret the motives of people I don’t know. It’s never a good idea.

I do however think the ObL crowd will likely – and wrongly – interpret the vote as a “victory” and be encouraged.

So since my position is nearly identical with what GoHeels said (he can correct me if I am wrong) and not much different from KidCharlemagne (ditto) and some of the others; by your criteria I must hate Spain or something.

If you can’t understand that I don’t, than we’ll have to agree to disagree; but if so, please enroll me in the new and improved gang of 18.

197

Well. Many very good and enlightening points. I wince at mass retribution for fear of the innocent getting thrown into the grinder along with the perps, but in the round a fine piece of writing, and a pitting nicely done.

198

I honestly wonder if you ever even read that thread. After the first few pages of slamming the OP, the argument turned to whether or not the attacks could possibly have effected the elections. At first there were those who said it couldn’t possibly have because 90% of the people were already against the war. This is obviously wrong given that there was still a chance the PP was going to remain in power. The quote you refer to above was my comment that I believed that other’s judgements on this issue were being affected by the OP’s claims of cowardice rather than evaluated on the merits of the developing argument. You lumped us all together, sort of like Bush does when he says “You’re either with us, or against us.”

Another thing is why would we accuse you of attempting to curry favor by posting such an easy pitting if we didn’t think that calling Spanish cowards was an obviously easy thing to pit?? If we all agree it’s an easy thing to pit, it’s probably because we don’t agree with it.

Still expect an apology.

furt - atta boy taking one for the team: :slight_smile:

199

Then let them be. They’ll find encouragement wherever they want regardless of whether it’s rational, and it’s just as encouraging to them for people to be rationalizing their vote based on what the terrorists might think anyway.

200

::sigh::

Where do I start?

I suppose I should be grateful, Gaspode, that you at least admitted that I never said the Spanish were cowards, which was what you falsely accused me of doing when you posted your OP entitled “Group Pitting of 17 Dopers who think Spaniards are cowards” and included me among those 17 Dopers.

Of course now, you’re reduced to equivocating.

Gaspode wrote: “It doesn’t matter. You say that they caved in and gave the vote to the PSOE as a direct result of the bombings.”

For the upteenth time, I never said anything of the sort, nor even implied it. That’s your INCORRECT interpretation of what I wrote, not what I actually said.

FWIW, let’s look at all the posts I wrote that specifically addressed the actions of the Spanish citizens themselves.

GoHeels: “Well, I’m sure the Spanish people will see the results of the election the way they want to see it, as is their right. Such is the beauty of democracy and liberty. The people have spoken.”

…and, from this very thread (which I noticed you are still ignoring)…

GoHeels: “All I am saying is that different people will have different interpretations of the election. The Spanish people who voted in the majority may interpret the results of the election as sweeping away a government that a) allegedly lied about who perpetrated the bombing for political purposes and b) brought Spain into an illegal war in Iraq led by the US against the will of its population.

Fair enough.”

There is no possible way you can assert that I said the Spanish people “caved in and gave the vote to the PSOE as a direct result of the bombings,” which is what you’ve accused me of writing.

The fact is, I impute no moral value (either good or bad, bravery or cowardice) to the Spanish citizens. They voted the way they voted – as is their right. As I have now stated repeatedly, I respect the Spanish people’s decision. I have no way of knowing the reason(s) why they voted the way they did. I might not be crazy about the results, but sometimes that happens in democracies. Or, as a noted philosopher once said, “them’s the breaks, kid.”

Then, Gaspode writes: “You have no support for your assertion that PSOE won because of the bombing.”

Blatant dishonesty. Show me where I asserted that “PSOE won because of the bombing,” please. Don’t post something I wrote and then twist it to fit your interpretation. Show me where I actually asserted that “PSOE won because of the bombing.” Otherwise, retract that accusation.

Next, Gaspode writes:

“So you don’t like to see socialists in power in Spain, you think they won because of the bombing and you believe that this will play into the hands of bin-Laden.”

No, I’m not thrilled about the results of the election. I’ve been up front about that, I think.

But again, I dare you to prove that I said the Socialists won BECAUSE of the bombing. Again, show me where I said it; don’t post something I wrote and then “creatively interpret” it. Prove it, or retract it.

As to whether I think the results will play into the hands of bin Laden, yes, I am fearful of that. BUT I DO NOT SAY, NOR HAVE I EVER SAID OR IMPLIED, THAT THIS IS THE FAULT OF THE SPANISH CITIZENS.

Let me repeat, since you are so willfully obtuse:

BUT I DO NOT SAY, NOR HAVE I EVER SAID OR IMPLIED, THAT THIS IS THE FAULT OF THE SPANISH CITIZENS.

And just in case you didn’t quite understand my point:

BUT I DO NOT SAY, NOR HAVE I EVER SAID OR IMPLIED, THAT THIS IS THE FAULT OF THE SPANISH CITIZENS.

Clear now?

As I’ve written now about five times, I think different people will interpret the results of the Spanish election differently. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume that al-Qaeda (or other terrorists) may use the terror tactic to attempt to drive a wedge between America and its allies, the way it has done in Spain. It’s a prediction, one I pray is wildly off the mark, but one I fear is not.

And (I repeat), if my unhappy prediction comes to fruition, I WILL NOT BLAME THE SPANISH PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY VOTED. They voted the way they wanted to vote, which is their basic right. I will blame those solely responsible for murdering innocent people – the terrorists themselves.

Look, I might be wrong (I pray I am), but it’s not like I have no reasonable reason for thinking this way: http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/15/spain.invest/index.html

Next, Gaspode writes:

“Ignorance of facts, seeing the Spanish as caving in to the terrorists, and thinking that this will lead to more mayhem.”

See above.

And also, I might point out that some on your side of the pond are a little worried, too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62387-2004Mar16.html (lists a few European reactions to 3/11)

Next, Gaspode says:

“The PSOE would with all probability have won, anyway, so the Spanish didn’t change their votes in significant numbers because of the bombs, and none of us really know what agenda aQ has, apart from mayhem. They made no demands and still aren’t making any demands.”

Maybe PSOE would have won without the bombing, maybe not. I looked at your cite, I’ll accept its validity. What I’ve been reading mostly indicates the results were an “upset,” so I’m not sure how you can say “the PSOE would with all probability have won, anyway” (full disclosure – I mostly read the U.S. media along with BBC, and as Boo Boo Foo pointed out, reports from the U.S. may not have been completely accurate). Regardless, I don’t think anyone can say who would have won with absolute confidence – by all accounts, the damn race looked pretty close to me.

Regarding, al-Qaeda’s agenda, I think we can see its strategy forming – split America from its allies, as this cite indicates: (caveat – there’s no real way to know for sure if the group quoted in the link actually perpetrated the Madrid atrocity, or if it speaks for al-Qaeda):

And as far as al-Qaeda’s demands go, I see in the cite above (again, with the aforementioned caveat) that the purported al-Qaeda group says: “Because of this decision, the leadership has decided to stop all operations within the Spanish territories… until we know the intentions of the new government that has promised to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq.”

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to read between the lines and determine that the group is saying: “Yo Spain! Get out of Iraq or else we explode more trains.”

Next, Gaspode writes:

“You perceive this as a war between muslim fundamentalists and ‘western’ society, when all indications show that this is not true.”

I see this as a battle between Islamic fascist terrorists – most of whom profess an ideology dedicated to tearing down everything Western society stands for – and the civilized world (Western, Asian, Muslim moderates).

“They can’t invade us or sway us to giving in to them”

They don’t have to invade and occupy. They just want to destroy us and our open society. And I don’t see how you can assert that they “can’t…sway us to giving in to them.” If enough people decide their security is more important than their freedom, liberty, values, etc. they sure as hell can sway us to “give in.”

Next, Gaspode writes:

“But as long as you think that they’re enemies”

Yes, I think al-Qaeda is an enemy. You don’t? Fine, but they sure as hell think you’re THEIR enemy.

Since it’s your MO to put words in other people’s mouths and creatively interpret other people’s posts, I will assume you are (once again, inaccurately) saying that I think Muslims are the enemy. FTR, no, I don’t think all (or even most) Muslims are the enemy, and no, I don’t think the vast majority of my countrymen think all Muslims are the enemy.

You (mercifully) end your post by writing:

“Because of that, your posts just serve to affirm the opinion that aQ just scored a victory, when in fact it’s just a tragedy. Tell me again why you shouldn’t be included?”

I shouldn’t be included in the “Gang of 17” because I never said the Spanish people were cowards (as you’ve admitted). I have proven I never said that, nor even implied that. It’s a blatantly dishonest, unfair smear meant to portray me as an ugly American, insensitive to the tragedy suffered by Spain, panting to portray the Spanish people as “pussies” and “appeasers” because I don’t like the way the election turned out.

Furthermore, I posted an honest (and hardly unreasonable) opinion stating that Islamic terrorist groups’ basic strategy is to drive a wedge between the US and its allies and they may use terror as a tactic to implement this strategy. Why? Because al-Qaeda perceives the results of the Spanish election as a “victory” in the implementation of their strategy, and therefore may try to do the same in the UK, Australia, Netherlands, Italy, etc.

I tempered this assertion/prediction by simultaneously opining that Spanish people would interpret the results of the election differently – they might see it as “throwing the bums who tried to blame the ETA out” or “let’s get rid of the gov’t that got us into Iraq against our will.”

Or, as furt said, “I do however think the ObL crowd will likely – and wrongly – interpret the vote as a “victory” and be encouraged.”

Exactly.

At this point, I don’t care whether or not you apologize, Gaspode. You’ve been proven wrong. I suspect KidCharlemagne and grienspace are right: You wrote this post to curry favor on the board and you knew the 17 Dopers (most of whom – perish the thought! - have expressed opinions that don’t toe the prevailing SDMB party line) would make convenient scapegoats for the ensuing pile-on.

Congratulations for the circle-jerk your OP inspired – I hope it helped your self-esteem. Good show!!

P.S. - furt, no need for me to correct you. Also, I echo KidCharlemagne’s sentiments about taking one for the team. Welcome aboard! :wink: