Someone bring me a strain-jacket, please.
I.Must.Contain.Urges
I really can´t take this shit anymore.
Bah. Spain, after decades of effort, has a relatively democratic electoral process. The electorate has no obligation to vote for one political party over another on any single issue, every right to vote out a party that has clearly defied its expressed wishes re: Iraq and certainly no obligation to pay any attention whatosever to the opinions of a few conservative-leaning Americans on a US-based message board. The people voted the way they voted. Read into it what you want, although I for one think you are quite wrong in your assessment. In any event, you’ll just have to live with it.
Attack Portugal. I know they had nothing to do with it, but it would take the people’s minds off the real threat. Worked for us, didn’t it?
Okay, sarcasm aside, I think they should focus the bulk of their effort into investigating this disaster and revaluating their security measures. Stay in Iraq or leave, that should be decided on it’s own and without consideration of the attack. One shouldn’t give in to terrorists, nor should one feel obligated to do the opposite of their goal just because it is that. Letting them dictate one way or the other your decision making process is how the terrorists “win”.
And finally, Spain is a democratic nation. They can elect whomever they darn well please. I’m tired of hearing these radio talk shows go on and on about what a mistake Spain made, blah, blah, blah. So what if they did? What are we gonna do about it? Tell them who they have to vote for? Unlike in America, they can vote against the interests of Bush without being traitors. Oh that’s right, I said I was done with the sarcasm. My bad.
Oh and re: the OP, the new government should do what any sensible European, NATO-member gov. would do: a) immediately modify security to make it more difficult to set off package bombs on trains. b) determine by the best means available who carried out the act, c) whether any of the the perpetrators are still in the country, d) whether any particular government or non-governmental organization assisted them; e) punish the perpretrators and any organization found to have supported them, by military or civil means, preferably with the material assistance of the EU and/or NATO. This methodology was used to minimize casualties and ultimately to successfully break up a cell of terrorist bombers using similar methods in France in 1996-97, and I see no reason why it should not work in Spain.
The existence or absence of Spanish troops in Iraq, IMO, is quite irrelevant to the above, unless someone can show that the attack was sourced from somewhere in Iraq. If so, the only significant consideration would be the ability to use Spanish military means to punish the perpetrators there. The vast majority of troops occupying Iraq are American and British and there is next to no chance that removal the Spanish force alone would change the timetable for handover of power to an Iraqi government.
Sorry if none of this is colorful or extreme enough for some folks here.
I never really said otherwise. Sure, they have the right to choose to change their country after one (albeit horrible) act of terrorism, if they think that’s a wise decision. And apparantly they do.
Russia didn’t when terrorists took 1000+ hostages. They, in true Russian style, put capturing/killing the terrorists ahead of the hostages’ saftey.
And Australia didn’t when terrorists blew up several hundred of their citizens. They reiterated their solidarity against terrorism and support for the US.
Spain? Here’s a case of Rice-a-Roni and the home version. Thanks for playing…
A government’s first obligation is to protects its citizens. The Spanish government should take the course of action that will most likely prevent any further major terrorist attacks by Islamic extremist groups. Now in looking over the history books from the past two generations or so, one fact becomes obvious: Islamic terrorists only attack western nations that are actively screwing around***** in the Middle East. Thus, the quickest, easiest, and most reliable way to prevent further terrorist attacks against the Spanish population is to withdraw the troops from Iraq and avoid participating in any other such foolish and deceitful ventures.
Look at it this way. The United States supposedly scored a major victory against terrorism in Afghanistan, and yet for some reason we’re still canceling airline flights, going to orange alert once every few months, seeing our soldiers get killed in Afghanistan and Iraq by terrorists on a daily basis, and generally holding our breath waiting for another major attack against the civilian population. So if Spain goes several years without being attacked by Al Queda again, then who will have really won?
*****Screwing around is defined as waging war in the middle East, stationing large numbers of troops in the region, or supporting oppresive governments with money, weapons, etc…
You’re right. They’ll have peace.
"Peace, in our time…"
Naah, the analogy doesn’t work. AQ is not a nation-state with any significant military power, has no ambitions on territory in Europe, and no one, to my knowledge, is negotiating with them for anything.
Terrorists vs USA - USA drawn into war in middle east, increasing hated for USA, removing non-secular government leading to conditions for terrorist can flourish whilst decreasing freedom of americans and wasting many billions of US budget dollars
terrorists win
Terrorist vs Spain - Spain minimises terrorist threat, maintains a good level of freedom, shows world they are mature by not using violence as a solution and focuses on homeland security
Spain wins
“Islamic terrorists only attack western nations that are actively screwing around* in the Middle East. Thus, the quickest, easiest, and most reliable way to prevent further terrorist attacks against the Spanish population is to withdraw the troops from Iraq and avoid participating in any other such foolish and deceitful ventures.”
I wasn’t aware Bali was a big time oppressor! Wow! Gosh that whole nightclub bombing sure told them huh!
Oh, how about the attacks and kidnappings in the Phillipines?
Or The attack on the Arab compound in Saudi Arabia?
Or The bombing of the Shia Mosque in Iraq?
Or The bombing of the UN compound in Iraq?
That’s off the top of my head with no research whatsoever. If I give it ten minutes I can probably come up with another half dozen at least. Your argument is plain silly, off the cuff and shallow. It exhibits an almost naivete about the religious politics and xenophobia behind these acts of cowardice.
Honestly, you really think if the US walked away from Iraq or the mid-east the attacks would stop? We walked away from Afghanistan in 82’ once the Russians had left. How’d that work out? Oh yeah, six years of civil war, The Taliban and Al-Queda training camps. The Embassy in Kenya, the USS Cole, The Twin Towers. Yeah, abandoning the region is SURELY a plan for success. But only if you’re into suicide.
And even if we realyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally wanted to, we can’t ever leave. We need the oil like a heroin addict needs his smack. In case you hadn’t noticed: A) the economy of EVERY western/industrialized nation is based on it and B) We have the largest economy on the planet. You didn’t really think all that plastic in your computer and in your two liter bottle and in your car and in your TV and in your shooelaces just grew on trees, did you?
It’s not a matter of greedy oil companies. It a matter of every persons job being, in one way or another, at least partially dependent on the stuff. Everyone from the guy wrapping fresh lettuce to the trucker ferrying it across the country to the grocery clerk stocking it, to the female telecomms technician picking it up to make a tuna fish salad sandwich to fit in her tupperware for work tomorrow. Unless you pull a Ted Kaczynski and go live in a shack in the… oh wait, even HE had plastic.
You can’t get away from oil, and we can’t get away from the mid-east. And even if we could, the fanatics would not and will not stop. Remember, OBL said his main beef was us being in Saudi Arabia. We left. Attacks still continue. Work the math already! It has NOTHING (or at least very little) to do with our physical presence and EVERYTHING to do with control over the regions people and resources. And before you turn over the region to their tender mercies, you may want to remember these are the same types that used to shoot women in the head in the public soccer stadium for daring to speak out against the beatings. These are the people who collapsed stone walls onto gays. These are the people who made mothers slit their own childrens throats.
And that’s NOT hyperbole.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Got a bit off track I suppose, but sometimes that happens.
As to Spain, she should do what she believes to be in her own best interest. Personally, I think the incomming PM made a mistake with his public commments, because they have been and will be tied to the bombings. Witness the discussions here as proof of that. They may have nothing to do with one another, but perception is a VERY strong influencer of people, and right now the perception is the Spaniards haven’t the stomache for a fight.
I must stress I don’t personally believe this, okay? I really don’t. However among the terrorists (like ETA and others) they may have just given the impression that the deaths of 200 Spaniards can completely alter both Spains foreign policy and it’s government, and make them wilt in the face of aggression.
If I were a member of ETA that might be a VERY strong argument to begin a bombing campaign to get the independence I’m supposedly after. Think about it from their perspective. Apparently blowing up civilians can get the government to do things you want. That’s the perception. That’s dangerous for obvious reasons.
Further, it’s going to be a tar baby for the new gov’t. Any new attacks will be THEIR responsibility and not that of the old government. The opposition conservatives will probably be quick to play that up as a result of the new mans “capitualtion in the face of our enemies”. Perception again, and politicians aren’t afraid to use dead victims to get votes. They’ve done it before on more occaisions than I can remember.
Seriously, it’d be an easy political move to make with infiite playtime as long as attacks continue. And I believe they will continue. This cell may just be five men, but it’s hard to believe only five or so men could pull off multiple simultaneous attacks like this and get away. It’d seem like you’d need a larger team to put everything together and do a successful escape from the scene. None of the captured ones are likely to talk and as Spain doesn’t do torture anymore. That means tracking down others before they dissapear back into the crowds may be difficult. There was a support network for this attack, and I’ve not heard about it being taken out. It would be in the gov’ts interest to publicize that, if only to re-assure the populace they’re taking steps. But… it’s really quiet on that front, and that’s troublesome.
As an aside, there may also be a backlash against immigrants, which could lead to an even more nationalistic government (and actually spawn more attacks). It could also spawn the burning of Mosques or Synagogues, and that’s not good. Anti-Semitism (which affects Jew AND Moslem) is on the rise in europe and has been for about 6 years now. Further attacks could easily feed that.
It’s a mess, which is why Spains interest is best served by seeming to be resolute, by showing that these attacks WILL NOT alter their central course of action or foreign policies. Unfortunately, their new PM just gave the appearance of saying it would, could, and did. And that’s encouraging news, if you’re a bad guy. It re-inforces your decision o attack and motivates you to strike again.
And that’s not good.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
I don’t agree that ETA will take advantage of this to renew their campaign. ETA relies on the (limited) support it gets from the Basque people for its legitimacy. At the moment, it would get no support for a bombing campaign. The revulsion against terrorism would be too high.
See dissident republicans in Northern Ireland, immediately post-Omagh.
First of all, you may lob all the personal insults you wish, but I’ll just ignore them. Now on to the actual arguments.
My argument is solid and exhibits no misunderstanding of the situation whatsoever. However, on looking back, I realize that it was worded in a way that allowed for misinterpretation. Let me try again.
In all cases where Islamic terrorists have attacked a western country, that western country was screwing around in the Middle East.
Happy now?
As for your argument that the United States pulled out of Afghanistan in 1982, so what? Most people agree that the primes sources for discontent with the USA among Arabs are US support for Israel and US stationing of troops in Saudi Arabia, which is widely viewed as an Arab homeland. Lastly, there the US interference in the Iran-Iraq War. These had both been going on throught the 80’s and 90’s, so it’s incorrect to say that the US was no longer screwing around in the Middle East after 1982.
Also, I’m sure you remember that Al Queda is not largely and Afghan organization. Bin Laden himself is from Saudi Arabia. Most Al Queda leaders are from Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. The hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Thus the argument that the experience in Afghanistan proves that withdrawing won’t succeed doesn’t hold waters, because the Afghans weren’t behind 9/11 (or the Cole, or Kenya, etc…)
And as for Ants, who goes back to the old Hitler/appeasement link: is that really the best you can do? Let me put it this way. I am absolutely certain that if the Socialist government does withdraw all Spanish troops from the Middle East, then there will be no further Al Queda attacks on Spain for as long as that policy is maintained. If I am proven wrong, then you may drag up this thread and gloat about it. On the other hand, if I am proven right, I may just drag this thread up sometime around 2024 and gloat about it.
Why should Spain retaliate ? Do they really want to get into the same shit Israel is in ? Or that Russia is in ? Eye for an Eye stupid mentality does no one good.
They should take care of their borders and their own people. Collaborate only in intelligence against Intl. Terrorism.I favor a hornet analogy.
You just got stung by a hornet. Should you grab a stick and go thrash the hornet’s nest? Or is that just going to create more angry hornets?
What I’d like to see:
-
Spain pull it’s troops out of Iraq, agreeing to return under the UN banner as peacekeepers to oversee general elections.
-
President of Spain declares the Iraq war to be a distraction from fighting terrorists and ultimately a breeding ground for new terrorists. He also claims that Spain was fooled by the US’s insistence on including Iraq in the “war on terror” and Colin Powells’ UN presentation, and should never have invaded Iraq in the first place as it had nothing to do with terrorism at the time and was not a threat to anyone.
-
Spain to set up/ increase funding for a special forces counter terrorism military/intelligence unit - do this overtly with plenty of press attention. Ensure tight links with interpol, Scotland Yard…etc. Get recruits from Spain’s muslim community - train with the SAS…etc. Jack Bauer would be a good catch, if they can find him.
-
Spain pushes for UN control in Iraq, claiming the US occupation has caused more terrorism and that the US has no right to be nation building as it is not impartial.
-
US voters for the most part agree and stop seeing the Spanish ousting of the US supporting, Iraq invading People’s Party as an act of cowardice and see it as democracy at work doing what is best for the fight against terrorism and following the same pattern themselves later on this year.
They could bang on endlessly about the link between Al-Q and Gibraltar and use it as an excuse to seize it.
So, give in to Al-Qaida’s demands and they’ll leave you alone, that’s your position? And you see nothing wrong with that? You think that’s a good idea?
Why stop at pulling out their troops? Why not give them a monthly fee for their generous ‘protection’?
If what they demand I consider just and reasonable I see nothing wrong with that. In fact, I think it is our obligation to do it whether they demand it or not. So, regarding getting out of Iraq, I believe it is the right thing to do whether Al Qaeda demands it or not and the fact that they demand it does not change the fact that it is still the right thing to do.
Obviously, those persons who are guilty of crimes should be brought to justice and judged fairly for their past crimes. But picking fights with them for no other purpose than spite is just stupid IMHO.
If Al Qaeda says we should honor our parents would you immediately go and spit on your parents just to spite Al Qaeda?
Remind me again of when Al Queda made a “demand” that the Spanish government pull its troops out of the Middle East.
Remind me again of when I used the word “protection” in this thread.
Since you apparently missed it the first time, let me repeat my reasoning:
-
The Spanish government is obligated to take the course of action that best protects the Spanish people.
-
The course of action that best protects the Spanish people is to avoid further involvement in the Middle East.
-
It follows logically that the Spanish government is obligated to a void further involvement in the Middle East.
Do you agree with my conclusion, or do you disagree with one of these three statements?