|
Terrorism Wins in Spain (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DaveSZ |
This makes me wonder if the terrorists would try and attack us before the elections to influence the outcome. I certainly hope not.
I also wonder as to how that would change the outcome of the US elections? Would the public be angered at Bush for presiding over 3 of the worst intelligence failures in history, or would they instead rally around him despite his piss poor domestic agenda (in all polls I've seen Kerry is favored over Bush for domestic issues like jobs, healthcare, civil liberties, environment, economy, etc.)?
The main difference on foreign policy between Bush and Kerry is that Kerry is an internationalist/multi-lateralist, and Bush and the neocons are unilateralists. So in regard to that aspect of policy, it will depend on whether Americans want a diplomatic figure who works with US allies, or a leader who spurns most US allies in fighting global terrorism.
Of course, as Sara pointed out, many Americans are easily manipulated, misinformed, apathetic rabble, so I won't dare make a prediction myself.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2004Mar14.html
| quote: |
Spanish Socialists Oust Party of U.S. War Ally
Voters Cite Train Attacks In Poll Upset
By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, March 15, 2004; Page A01
MADRID, March 14 -- Spaniards voted Sunday to remove the party of Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar from power, apparently blaming his staunch support of the U.S.-led war in Iraq for the bombings that killed 200 people in Madrid on Thursday.
While opinion polls taken before the attacks had given Aznar's Popular Party a comfortable lead, voters overwhelmingly endorsed candidates from the opposition Socialist Party, whose leader, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has promised to immediately withdraw Spain's 1,300 troops from Iraq, redirect Spain's foreign policy away from the United States and restore good relations with such European allies as France and Germany that had opposed the Iraq war.
The voting came after a week when more than 10 million people took to the streets to express outrage and grief, many of them questioning whether Aznar's policies had made the country a target for terrorism. Voter turnout, particularly among the young, was high, and many said a desire to oust Aznar's party had brought them to the polls.
The Popular Party's loss deprives the Bush administration of one of its most solid allies in Europe. Aznar has been a frequent visitor to the White House and to the president's ranch in Crawford, Tex.
With nearly all the ballots counted, the Socialists had 42.6 percent of the vote, about 164 seats in the next parliament, compared with 37.7 percent, and 148 seats, for the Popular Party. The results would leave the Socialists short of an absolute majority of 176 seats, but would allow them to govern by forming a coalition with smaller regional parties.
Aznar was stepping down after eight years as prime minister, but the results represented a bitter personal blow. He had hoped to hand over power to his handpicked successor, Mariano Rajoy, who had promised to continue Aznar's pro-American foreign policy. In recent months, controversy over the Iraq war, deeply unpopular here, had receded as a major issue, and more voters appeared focused on Spain's robust economy.
But voters turned against the Popular Party after a series of coordinated bomb blasts ripped through four crowded commuter trains at rush hour Thursday morning, and government officials blamed the Basque separatist group ETA while dismissing the possibility that the attacks might have been carried out by Islamic extremists linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terror network. As mounting evidence pointed to al Qaeda, many Spaniards criticized the government for withholding that information to avoid a public backlash against the decision to deploy troops to Iraq.
The government conceded defeat at 10:30 p.m., just 21/2 hours after the polls closed, with exit polls and early official returns showing the Popular Party trailing badly. Government officials promised to work with the new government for a smooth transition.
"The Popular Party accepts the result of the ballot," said Rajoy, speaking to supporters with Aznar at his side. Referring to the tumult of the prior 72 hours, Rajoy added, "The Spanish people have eloquently shown that they can behave with civility, and this has been a tribute to the memory of those who have fallen."
At the Socialist Party's headquarters, celebrations following the unexpected victory were subdued, overshadowed by the memory of the dead and the nearly 1,500 wounded in the train attacks. Zapatero called for a minute of silence for the victims, and then said: "Today, the Spanish people have spoken, with a massive turnout. They have said they want a government of change."
"My immediate priority will be to combat all kinds of terrorism," Zapatero said. "The terrorists must know that they will confront all of us together. We will win."
Among government officials and supporters, there was bitterness at the notion that by stoking popular fears, the attackers who planted the bombs may have altered the result of the election and could force a firm ally of the United States to modify its foreign policy.
"The terrorists have killed 200 people and defeated the government -- they have achieved all their objectives," said Gustavo de Arustegui, a Popular Party member of parliament and foreign policy spokesman for the government. "I think the terrorist attacks were politically planned. We have transformed terrorists into political actors with this."
In a videotape discovered in a parking lot trash container late Saturday, a man calling himself Abu Dujan al Afgani and describing himself as the head of al Qaeda's military wing in Europe, said Thursday's attacks were a response to Spain's "collaboration with the criminal Bush and his allies," according to a transcript released by the Interior Ministry. The speaker on the videotape also warned, "If you do not stop your collaboration, more and more blood will flow."
Aznar's embrace of the Bush administration's policies in Europe helped raise Spain's international profile, and his supporters said that during his term in office Spain had again become a major player on the world stage. But anti-American sentiment runs deep, and Aznar's closeness to Bush -- and his decision to send Spanish troops to Iraq -- became a political liability. Tens of thousands of Spaniards took to the streets to protest the Iraq war, and polls last year showed 90 percent of the people here opposed the war.
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, speaking before Sunday's results were announced, said the attacks would not necessarily cause a change in Spain's policies toward the United States. "I don't think the case has been made that this will cause Spain to step back from the war on terrorism," Powell told ABC's "This Week."
The Popular Party appeared to suffer from two separate but related fallouts from Thursday's attacks. First was a sense that the government had withheld information. Second, as the al Qaeda link became clearer, there was a sense of outrage that Aznar's pro-American policies had put Spain on the firing line of Islamic extremists seeking reprisals.
"I think the attacks woke up the Spanish people, who did not want to join the war in Iraq," said Maria Requeme, 27, a debt collector. She said she had long ago decided to support the Socialists, but knew others who switched their allegiances in the past few days.
Another Socialist voter, Daniel Rincon, 21, who works part time for a mobile telephone company, said he initially considered voting for a smaller left-wing party, "but after the attack, getting the PP out became the top priority."
The Popular Party was also hurt by the estimated 2 million young Spaniards voting for the first time. "I voted for change," said one first-time voter, Cristina Algema, a journalism student. "After the attacks, I had to contribute to kicking out the PP."
Special correspondents Robert Scarcia and Pamela Rolfe contributed to this report.
|
Oh, and this is also proof that young people can make a huge difference if they care enough to vote. They basically tipped the balance in this election to a large degree. |
|
|
| borron |
First of all, i'd like to say that for you americans, the threat of terrorism is somewhat new; for the spanish people, that's not true, they have been having terrorism since the 60's. So you are teenagers in puberty when it comes with terrorist experiences, spaniards are full-blown adults.
Secondly, the terrorist won the elections? Now that's a good way to put it. The elections were not won by the PSOE's own merit, that's a fact, but they won the elections because of the disonesty of the ruling party, blaming ETA right off the bat and keeping evidence secret until the election day. This all comes together to the second point, which explains why the spanish people blame Aznar (and with reason) for the terrorist attack.
The fact is that, before the Iraqi war, Spain was not a target for muslim terrorism. In fact, spain is the country of europe which has the larger percentage of muslim people registered, due to the fact of a large portion of it's ancient history was dominated by the muslims, but also because it's a point of entry of muslims to europe (through gibraltar).
So why where they targeted now? Because the prime minister Aznar decided to go to war on Iraq, against 70% of their people. That's simply disgusting. I certanly blame the fault on Aznar solely, so i can imagine how the spanish people feel.
So when you americans say "the terrorism has won", that sounds pretty extremist to me. The fact is that the spanish government will now listen more to it's people and eventually withdraw from Iraq, leaving your soldiers to death.
Now the biggest problem of this attack for me, is the repercussions in my country. We are hosting this year the second biggest soccer competition of the world, and before the 3/11 we were almost safe, but now we are a prime target i believe.
And like the spanish, if anything happens here, i'm going to blame all on my government and especially the PM, for supporting the US in their belicist/racist "great middle east" plan. And then, the terrorists will win :p |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
I understand what many of you are saying, but my bottom line remains the same.
Prior to 3/11, the Popular Party was projected to win, not by a landslide, but I have seen no sources that have said otherwise. After 3/11, the Socialist Party in fact won the majority. If it were not for the events of 3/11, the results of the election would have been different. That is what I'm trying to say...the terrorist events of 3/11 changed the outcome of the Spanish elections. It doesn't matter if 70-90% of the population are against Iraq involvement or aiding the US, if 3/11 did not happen, the Popular Party would still have won.
It doesn't matter if you think I am somehow against Spain, ignorant to its politics, or some nutcase pro-American. The final result of the election was directly affected by the events of 3/11, and that is to me, at least thus far, undisputable. If someone can show me that the election was in no way affected by what happened on 3/11, I'm all ears. While you're at it, if you can prove that with the election of the Socialist Party, the desires of al-Qaeda (assuming they were in fact behind the attack) are not more closely met then with the Popular Party, I would also like to see your reasoning.
Again, if 3/11 did not happen, the results of the Spanish elections would have been different, and the newly elected Socialist Party resultant from this election more closely matches the goals of al-Qaeda, those presumably behind the 3/11 bombings. |
|
|
| borron |
What do you mean by matching the goals of Al-Qaida? What are their goals? Do you know?
If withdrawing from Iraq is one of their goals, hell, i support them on that.
But if their goals are those reported in a videotape (or letter, don't remember) some time ago, which include destruction of western world, fall of capitalism, etc, i don't see any connection between that and the winning of the election by the PSOE. |
|
|
| YaleTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
I understand what many of you are saying, but my bottom line remains the same.
Prior to 3/11, the Popular Party was projected to win, not by a landslide, but I have seen no sources that have said otherwise. After 3/11, the Socialist Party in fact won the majority. If it were not for the events of 3/11, the results of the election would have been different. That is what I'm trying to say...the terrorist events of 3/11 changed the outcome of the Spanish elections. It doesn't matter if 70-90% of the population are against Iraq involvement or aiding the US, if 3/11 did not happen, the Popular Party would still have won.
It doesn't matter if you think I am somehow against Spain, ignorant to its politics, or some nutcase pro-American. The final result of the election was directly affected by the events of 3/11, and that is to me, at least thus far, undisputable. If someone can show me that the election was in no way affected by what happened on 3/11, I'm all ears. While you're at it, if you can prove that with the election of the Socialist Party, the desires of al-Qaeda (assuming they were in fact behind the attack) are not more closely met then with the Popular Party, I would also like to see your reasoning.
Again, if 3/11 did not happen, the results of the Spanish elections would have been different, and the newly elected Socialist Party resultant from this election more closely matches the goals of al-Qaeda, those presumably behind the 3/11 bombings. |
Your reasoning is still extremely flawed because you fail to mention the mishandling of 3-11 by the PP government. Perhaps if the government had been truthful from the start they would have won the election. Nevertheless, I always thought that the PSOE had a good chance of winning this election prior to 3-11. I've been following the coverage closely for weeks and the polls were not that striking as the international media would have you believe, many were within the margin of error, which is a virtual tie anywhere.
Terrorism was really not the only factor in this election either, there are way too many domestic intricacies that you just don't know about such as corruption and the eloquent protagonism of Zapatero. Young people went out to vote in record numbers, and young people in Spain are overwhelmingly left-leaning.
If the desires of Al-Qaeda is to take Spanish troops out of Iraq then so be it, they didn't make much of a difference there to begin with. :stongue:
Spain is not a superpower or anything, it's a mid-sized country that should be concerned with its security and safety of its own neighbors. For this, the PSOE ws a way better option. Whether 3-11 altered the results or not is insignificant right now, the fact is that they won and that there's all there is to it. Terrorists know that if they do this in the US a week before the elections it can only help Bush win by a landslide, because they're not oblivious to the fact that the Spanish and American electorates behave totally different. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by borron
What do you mean by matching the goals of Al-Qaida? What are their goals? Do you know?
If withdrawing from Iraq is one of their goals, hell, i support them on that.
But if their goals are those reported in a videotape (or letter, don't remember) some time ago, which include destruction of western world, fall of capitalism, etc, i don't see any connection between that and the winning of the election by the PSOE. |
the ultimate goals of Al-Queda are no secret, expell westerners from the middle east and to restablish the rule of theocracies (see my previous post). its pretty obvious why the election of the psoe helps Al-Queda, but i'll let you connect the dots :rolleyes: |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
| God the naivité of some people here is killing me. You actually apply reason to a bunch of fascist fanatics. You forget that attacks have been also planned in Strassbourg (France = biggest critic of Iraq war) and Hamburg, Germany. That Tunisia (Djerba) and Morroco have also been targets. Not to mention Turkey. Go on and believe that one you'll get rid of terrorism by retreating and appeasing. "Funny" how Al Quaida succeeds in masquerading their -true - ideological goals (Islamization, defeat of western civilization) with political ones (which they change-once its Israel, then Afghanistan, then troops in Saudi Arabia, then Iraq- however it suits them). |
|
|
| YaleTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceGiant
God the naivité of some people here is killing me. You actually apply reason to a bunch of fascist fanatics. You forget that attacks have been also planned in Strassbourg (France = biggest critic of Iraq war) and Hamburg, Germany. That Tunisia (Djerba) and Morroco have also been targets. Not to mention Turkey. Go on and believe that one you'll get rid of terrorism by retreating and appeasing. "Funny" how Al Quaida succeeds in masquerading their -true - ideological goals (Islamization, defeat of western civilization) with political ones (which they change-once its Israel, then Afghanistan, then troops in Saudi Arabia, then Iraq- however it suits them). |
Fact is, Al Qaeda wouldn't have given a about Spain if it wasn't for their inconsequent participation in the Coalition of the Willing. For Spaniards, this election was not about appeasement or retreat. It was about getting rid of a government that has failed and repeatedly lied to its people. All in all, an example of democracy at it's best. |
|
|
| Izzy |
| quote: | Originally posted by YaleTrance
Fact is, Al Qaeda wouldn't have given a about Spain if it wasn't for their inconsequent participation in the Coalition of the Willing. |
i dont know if i agree with that, nor can it be proven one way or another. i guess its a matter of opinion.
i respect that spaniards for their choice in the election, but i do not agree with them blaming these attacks on the actions of the previous government.
************ of what happened, no country spain was in no way deserving of such an attack, nothing justifies it. so in a manner it is reverse logic to blame yourself when in fact you did nothing wrong |
|
|
| YaleTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Izzy
i dont know if i agree with that, nor can it be proven one way or another. i guess its a matter of opinion.
i respect that spaniards for their choice in the election, but i do not agree with them blaming these attacks on the actions of the previous government.
************ of what happened, no country spain was in no way deserving of such an attack, nothing justifies it. so in a manner it is reverse logic to blame yourself when in fact you did nothing wrong |
they have the right to blame the government for lying and misguiding them about the truth of the attacks.
another fact i wanted to mention: the left in Spain is the majority. if you add the PSOE's electorate to Izquierda Unida (IU) and some of the provincial left parties they easily have an absolute majority. in this election, the left united behind a single voice and decided not to give votes to the spoiler. that's why IU lost 5 seats in this election. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by YaleTrance
Fact is, Al Qaeda wouldn't have given a about Spain if it wasn't for their inconsequent participation in the Coalition of the Willing. |
You're falling for Al-Queda propaganda that they have the right or logical reason to attack countries who are involved in Iraq. I mean if you agree with that line of reasoning you would also have to admit Al-Queda has even more of right to attack countries who were directly involved or supported military action against them in Afganastan. Since the United Nations was involved in expelling them, then all UN members are legitimate targets.
Look, Al-Queda in no way represents the concerns of Iraq and they have no business using these issue to justify their evil actions. Inorder to retaliate against someone they have to do something against you first. A while back it was all about the Palestinians and now its all about the Iraqis. If you're saying the Spanish wanted a change in government, fine, but if your saying they deserved the attack because they were involved in Iraq then your just wrong imhop. |
|
|
| YaleTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
You're falling for Al-Queda propaganda that they have the right or logical reason to attack countries who are involved in Iraq. I mean if you agree with that line of reasoning you would also have to admit Al-Queda has even more of right to attack countries who were directly involved or supported military action against them in Afganastan. Since the United Nations was involved in expelling them, then all UN members are legitimate targets.
Look, Al-Queda in no way represents the concerns of Iraq and they have no business using these issue to justify their evil actions. A while back it was all about the Palestinians and now its all about the Iraqis. If you're saying the Spanish wanted a change in government, fine, but if saying they deserved the attack because they were involved in Iraq then your just wrong imhop. |
Huh??? I'm not saying that Al-Qaeda had the right to attack Spain or that they deserved the attack for being involved in Iraq! WTF! God, the day of the attacks I was so desperate. I have so much family and friends in Madrid, and the phone lines weren't working, I was losing my mind. Thank God that they were all fine.
I'm not justifying terrorism at all. I hate it as much as anyone else. What I'm trying to explain here is that Al-Qaeda justifies its actions and policies through a certain dogma that they have established. These are well-planned actions, they're not irrational actors at all. They are evil but certainly not stupid. They have a strategy, that we, as their enemies, have to understand if we want to defeat them in their own game.
Of course it's not Al Qaeda's business to do anything. But what are you gonna do, call up Bin Laden and tell him it's not his business? Iraq is an issue for them whether we like it or not. I stand by my position that this attack would probably not have happened if Spain had not participated so vocally in the Coalition of the Willing. There's no way to prove or disprove that now, the facts that are out there are all we have. |
|
|
|
|
