PDA

View Full Version : Massacre in Madrid



Ironduke
11 Mar 04,, 20:52
Spain looking at link to Islamic militants

ETA remains top suspect, ministry says
Thursday, March 11, 2004 Posted: 3:27 PM EST (2027 GMT)

MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- Although Spanish government officials Thursday pinned the blame on the horrific Madrid blasts to the Basque separatist group ETA, investigators are exploring a lead with Arabic and Islamic links.

Spanish Interior Ministry officials said Thursday they are investigating the new angle in the deadly series of Madrid blasts after the discovery of a van containing eight detonators and an Arabic tape with Koranic teachings.

A citizen's tip Thursday led to the van found near the commuter line. The tape is commercially available and contained no threats.

The new line of investigation raises the possibility of a link to Islamic militants.

Still, the Interior Ministry said the Basque separatist group ETA remains the prime suspect in the series of coordinated bomb attacks on Madrid's commuter train system that killed at least 192 people and wounded 1,400 others at the height of the city's morning rush hour.

ETA has been designated a terror group by both the European Union and the United States.

So far, there has been no claim of responsibility.

The Spanish ambassador to the United States, Javier Ruperez, believes ETA was responsible and said "in a way it is" Spain's September 11, referring to the U.S. terror attacks in 2001.

"We have been fighting against terrorism for the last 35 years. I know what terrorism is. I was kidnapped in 1979 by the same people," Ruperez said.

"We've been fighting against that scourge for quite a number of years. But, certainly, this is the first time we have that massive experience of being killed."

Before Thursday's attack, the highest death toll in any ETA-linked attack was in 1987 -- when 21 were killed in a Barcelona supermarket blast.

Attacks blamed on or claimed by ETA through the years have killed 800 people in Spain.

Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar addressed the nation and condemned the terrorists attack, saying ETA must be crushed, and opposed negotiations with them.

"There is no possible negotiation with these killers," he said.

An official from Spain's northern Basque region called it the worst terrorist attack in Spanish history.

Countries across the world expressed their outrage. (Global reaction)

U.S. President George W. Bush sent his condolences to Spain, one of the top U.S. allies in the Iraqi war, saying "we weep with the families" and "we stand strong with the people of Spain."

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw called it "a disgusting assault on the very principle of European democracy."

The U.N. Security Council unanimously passed a resolution condemning the bombings, but did not cast blame on any group.

The attacks took place at the height of Thursday's rush hour when three separate trains were hit by near-simultaneous explosions before 8 a.m. (2 a.m. ET) along the southern part of Madrid's train network, officials said.

Interior Minister Angel Acebes said there were a total of 10 explosions at the Santa Eugenia, El Pozo and Atocha stations, and three other bombs found and detonated by police.

The most deadly blast happened on a train entering Madrid's main Atocha station, according to Acebes.

Security forces found other bombs, and detonated them in controlled explosions, he added.

Survivors described scenes of chaos and panic in the Spanish capital.

"The worst was people screaming for help inside the train and there was nothing we could do," one survivor told CNN's Spanish sister network, CNN+.

People in tears walked away from the city's main Atocha station in droves as rescue workers carried bodies away from the scene.

Many people with bloodied faces sat on curbs, using mobile phones to tell loved ones they were alive. (More eyewitness)

The attack comes ahead of Sunday's general election in which Spain's conservative ruling Popular Party -- which has taken a hard-line stance against ETA -- is currently leading in the polls.

After the blasts, all political parties announced they were suspending campaign rallies ahead of Sunday's election, but there has been no word that elections would be suspended.

The government called for a three-day period of mourning and impromptu anti-ETA demonstrations have broken out in Madrid and other Spanish cities.

Spanish police -- who have foiled several recent bombing attempts by ETA -- were on high alert for terror attacks by the separatist group ahead of Sunday's vote. (On The Scene)

Video of the scene showed the train at Atocha broken into pieces by the force of the explosions.

Medical staff set up a field hospital to treat the wounded at the scene, and buses were mobilized to help ambulances transport the wounded to hospitals.

Shortly after the blasts, Basque leader Juan Jose Ibarretxe held a news conference from the Basque capital of Vitoria, condemning the violence and calling for demonstrations against ETA.

Basque member of Parliament Gustavo Aristegui -- who was in Madrid at the time of the attack -- also blamed ETA for the attack.

"This is probably Spain's worst terrorist attack in history -- not probably, surely our worst terrorist attack ever," Aristegui told CNN. "There are people that are real monsters that are trying to blackmail the whole society through acts of terror."

In an interview on Radio Popular in the Basque country, Arnaldo Otegi, leader of banned radical political party Batasuna, said he did not believe ETA was responsible for the attacks.

The attacks, he said, could have been "an operation by sectors of the Arab resistance."

But Acebes said Otegi was simply trying to confuse the situation.

ETA has been fighting for an independent homeland in northern Spain.

Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio placed the blame squarely on ETA, saying "we knew they are preparing a very big terror attack."

"ETA has a very clear pattern in its activities and we unfortunately have a long experience in dealing with them," she said.

On February 29, Spanish police seized more than 1,000 pounds of explosives and arrested two suspected ETA members who were planning to carry out an imminent attack in Madrid, an official said. (Full story)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/11/spain.blasts/index.html

Lunatock
11 Mar 04,, 22:03
You know there will still be an appeasment crowd, especially in the EU. Me...I want Al-Qaeda heads placed on sticks, how about you?

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4550469&src=US_DskTopTkr/GetContent&section=news

Purported Qaeda Letter Claims Spain Bombings-Paper
Thu Mar 11, 2004 03:31 PM ET

DUBAI (Reuters) - A letter purporting to come from Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network claimed responsibility for the train bombings in Spain on Thursday, calling them strikes against "crusaders," a London-based Arabic newspaper said.

"We have succeeded in infiltrating the heart of crusader Europe and struck one of the bases of the crusader alliance," said the letter which called the attacks "Operation Death Trains." There was no way of authenticating the letter, a copy of which was faxed to Reuters' office in Dubai by the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper.

The letter bore the signature "Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades." The newspaper received similar letters from the same brigade claiming responsibility on behalf of al Qaeda for a November bombing of two synagogues in Turkey and the August bombing of the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad.

ChrisF202
11 Mar 04,, 22:41
As soon as I saw the casulty count in my lunch period (around 10:45) I knew it was probably Al Qaeda or another Muslim group. The Basque terrorists normally only attack police stations and government facilities, usually with car bombs.

smilingassassin
12 Mar 04,, 04:32
Find em and kill em....they didn't show any mercy so its time to kick the crap out of them.....sick idiots.

Praxus
12 Mar 04,, 20:35
"Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent."
-Adam Smith

We need to unleash enough firepower were they relise that not even God himself can save them.

Trooth
12 Mar 04,, 20:42
Eta are claiming now that they didn't do it, but the Spanish are saying that the explosives bear all the hallmarks of an Eta bomb.

Curious.

Another curious fact is that this is a "big one" by Eta standards and Eta was thought to be heavily weakened by Spanish and French arrest successes etc.

Another curious fact is that 11-M (as the Spanish are now referring to yesterday) is 911 days since 911 (as the US refer to 11/9/01). Coincidence?

But perhaps, we will find out on Monday. After all on Sunday there is a general election in Spain. If the Spanish say this was al-qaeda then that can leave mean only one thing, Spain was attacked by Al-qaeda because it supported the US (just as Australia was believed to have been attacked in Bali). This might not help the re-election chances of Prime Minister Aznar.


posted by smilingassassin
Find em and kill em....they didn't show any mercy so its time to kick the crap out of them.....sick idiots.

The US has invaded two countries to do just that. If 11-M is Al-qaeda it doesn't appear to be a strategy that is hurting their ability to operate.

smilingassassin
13 Mar 04,, 00:04
The difference here is that the U.S. dosn't need to Invade Spain as they are an allie and freind who are willingly fighting terrorism, and they have now been hit by the same terrorists.
Oddly enough quite a few nations helping the U.S. out have been hit by terrorist cowards before the war on terrorism like Japan, Spain and Britain which has long been dealing with the IRA allthough thankfully that crap is behind us history wise.
When it comes to terrorist organizations they tend to help each other out, because of a mutual goal or need and mostly due to being under the boot of those they push around. Every time there is a terrorist attack the world can see just what we are fighting, and saddly it puts another nail in the coffin of muslim faith. Soon all european nations will be dealing with the religion in the way the French are. You'll notice the terrorists in Iraq have stopped hitting americans and started hiting Iraqi's who quite clearly tell them where to go, and in a juvinile rage the hit the Iraqi's back for deneying them a safe haven "like all good little muslims should do".
Terrorists only understand one language and thats killing.
Like all wars this is going to have ugly moments and anyone who thinks we should quit now should give their head a shake.
197 dead 1400 wounded (all civilians) is not a political statement, its outright murder.

Ironduke
13 Mar 04,, 00:12
Eta are claiming now that they didn't do it, but the Spanish are saying that the explosives bear all the hallmarks of an Eta bomb.
Actually, I've heard the exact opposite. I've heard that Spanish investigators have found no link between the plastic explosive and anything ETA has used in the past.

In addition, ETA has traditionally attacked government buildings and officials. Only once have they attacked a civilian target. Also, the coordination of the attacks is Al-Qaeda's style.

Trooth
13 Mar 04,, 01:21
Originally posted by smilingassassin
[B]The difference here is that the U.S. dosn't need to Invade Spain as they are an allie and freind who are willingly fighting terrorism,

That wasn't quite my point. My point was the AQ seems to be able to operate quite efficiently (10 bombs planted on 4 trains. All timed to go off at about the same time, 911 days after 11/9/01. A further three bombs being destroyed by police later.) despite the success the west has scored against them.

Therefore i remain to be convinced that the "kill them all let God sort it out" strategy is effective. as this is the second "successful" operation since 9/11.

smilingassassin
13 Mar 04,, 02:33
Its not very difficult to make bombs and time them to go off at specific times Trooth..it has been done for years, so I would hardly call it sophisticated. The "kill em all and let god sort em out" strategy has yet to be used. If we did that we would be laying waste to every muslim country in the world.

Ray
13 Mar 04,, 03:33
What intrigues me is the 'size' of the explosions, the rather devilishly nasty and 'ideal' selection of the target for maximising effect and 'publicity', the timing i.e. near the election time.

It must have been masterminded by an international terrorist group with perfect organisational skills, good number of sympathisers amongst the population, and large amount of ready money. I wouldn't put it beyond the Al Qaeda.

The interesting part, as Trooth was saying (if I understood him right) is that these blokes AQ seems to be oozing out thed woodwork inspite of the beating they are getting. Very very odd.

Ray
13 Mar 04,, 04:22
There is a news report here that a vam has been found which had detonators and tapes of Koranic verses.

It could be the real thing or a decoy. Very confusing.

I however feel that it would be the handiwork of the AQ since they seem to be the largest terrorist organisation with lots of European networking.

Officer of Engineers
13 Mar 04,, 05:00
Compare to Israel, Iraq, and Afghanistan, these are pin pricks. The Drug Cartels and the various Mafias and Asian Gangs did alot worst.

Gio
13 Mar 04,, 05:37
What I find curious is that no one's mentioning the unknown group that threatened France's rail system a few weeks ago.

Trooth
13 Mar 04,, 09:35
Originally posted by Gio
What I find curious is that no one's mentioning the unknown group that threatened France's rail system a few weeks ago.

AZF (apparently named after a chemical factory that blew up killing 30 people). They sent a letter to the police, who then found a sophsticated bomb. Apparently.


Originally posted by Office Of Engineers
Compare to Israel, Iraq, and Afghanistan, these are pin pricks. The Drug Cartels and the various Mafias and Asian Gangs did alot worst.


I must be misunderstanding, but couldn't you say that about any terrorist attack? Even 9/11 was a stastisitcally small number of people compared to the population of the US or even New York. I think the number of people is hardly the point.


Originally posted by Smilingassassin
Its not very difficult to make bombs and time them to go off at specific times Trooth..it has been done for years, so I would hardly call it sophisticated.
I think it is more sophisticated than you think. Spain, for example, would be getting a lot of intel from the US and UK in addition to its own. In today's world, obtaining and shipping explosives around should be increasingly difficult. Then planting them on high profile targets (such as as transport) is increasingly difficult. This when tehy have supposedly been severly weakened by the West's military efforts. The bomb making is not the sophisticated bit of such an attack.


Originally posted by Ray
The interesting part, as Trooth was saying (if I understood him right) is that these blokes AQ seems to be oozing out thed woodwork inspite of the beating they are getting. Very very odd.

Indeed, that was what i was saying. They seem OK for money, logistics, transport, communications etc. 911 days was too significant. This means someone dreamed up the idea for this either pre 911 (unlikely because Spain hadn't been involved in the Portugal summit at that point) or possibly post Bali. Then that had to be communicated and coordinated internationally, equipment, volunteers, safe houses etc all acquired. Plans made.

Officer of Engineers
13 Mar 04,, 11:22
Originally posted by Trooth
I must be misunderstanding, but couldn't you say that about any terrorist attack? Even 9/11 was a stastisitcally small number of people compared to the population of the US or even New York. I think the number of people is hardly the point.
It is EXACTLY the point. The thing about ANY terrorist attack is that it is new and unheard of before but once you get over the "newness" of it all, the terror goes away and you learn to live with it as did the Israelis and as we did with the Drug Cartels and the Criminal organizations.

Originally posted by Trooth
I think it is more sophisticated than you think. Spain, for example, would be getting a lot of intel from the US and UK in addition to its own. In today's world, obtaining and shipping explosives around should be increasingly difficult. Then planting them on high profile targets (such as as transport) is increasingly difficult. This when tehy have supposedly been severly weakened by the West's military efforts. The bomb making is not the sophisticated bit of such an attack.
They have been weakened and tremendously. If this is an AQ attack, it was NOT on American soil, and an attack on somewhat a very weak link against American interests. If this is an AQ attack, they picked on someone who wasn't looking.

The other thing to considered is that this is a kamakazi attack. That cell that did it would be destroyed and never to function again. Unlike Israel, these people don't have a homebase operation to carry on their efforts, making their strategic efforts comepletely negliable.
Originally posted by Trooth
Indeed, that was what i was saying. They seem OK for money, logistics, transport, communications etc. 911 days was too significant. This means someone dreamed up the idea for this either pre 911 (unlikely because Spain hadn't been involved in the Portugal summit at that point) or possibly post Bali. Then that had to be communicated and coordinated internationally, equipment, volunteers, safe houses etc all acquired. Plans made.
I think you over-estimated the complication of this thing. Operation ANNACONDA was devised within 30 days and HARPOON within 24 hours. And speaking as an engr, gathering explosives ain't hard.

Trooth
13 Mar 04,, 20:52
Sorry, i really am missing the point, my reading of the above implies that as long as a terror attack happens somewhere other than the US it isn't a problem? That must be comforting for the people of Spain. It was worth Spain attending the summit in Portugal then with the UK and US. I am sure the rest of the "coalition of the willing" would enjoy that interpretation.

The fact that this AQ cell may now be inoperative, is i think not the point. The one that operated from Boston to New York and Washington is inoperative as well, as is the one in Bali, etc. Still quite a lot of damage was done and still there were other cells ready to be activated.

Terrorists don't have strategic objectives that are pursued through bombs, their objectives are pursued through terror. Which is a very difficult thing to fight because as Dubya and his aides have often stated, it is an invisible menace.

Whether or not this is AQ and the madrid cell is inoperative now, doesn't detract from the fact that AQ itself is operative and able to project its terror around the globe, despite two wars to try and deal with them.

It is fair to assume, therefore that 11-M is not the end of AQ.

smilingassassin
14 Mar 04,, 01:15
"Terrorists don't have strategic objectives that are pursued through bombs, their objectives are pursued through terror."

The methods still don't work...Israel has been hit by terrorists for years and still continues to exist as it is today.
Thats the funny thing about murder, it tends to piss people off, and turn them AWAY from your point of veiw.

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 01:35
So ... you are saying the war on terror is pointless because the terrorists aren't a real threat?

Officer of Engineers
14 Mar 04,, 01:49
My point is that they're being driven further and further away from targets of value.

And the Spaniards should not take comfort. No one this side of the religious divide should have any illusions that we're targets. This being said, no one on the other side of the divide should think that these acts are not going to hurt them in return.

You're absolutely correct that their OPOBJs is terror but when a populace refuses to be cowed, then, they've failed and failed badly.

You will note that these are ONE time hits and currently NOT SUSTAINABLE. It's gruesome. It's bloody. It pisses me off. But it also tells me that they're losing and losing bad.

We cannot and will not prevent every terror act. That is in itself an impossibility. The very nature of asymetric warfare dictates that they would be looking at places that we haven't even thought of looking.

However, can they hit where it would achieve their goals? Which basically is make the world Islam. NOT A CHANCE IN HELL!

As for AQ's reach across the globe, their strikes are ever increasingly irrevelent. They've first hit America, now they're hitting America's friends. What are they going to hit next? America's dogs (as in the four legged kind). Because that's the trend.

Jay
14 Mar 04,, 05:51
I think EU is in midst of a big time bomb. There are a lot of fundamentalist groups operating out of western EU nations like France, Spain, Germany, UK. And these thugs are going to target those nations for siding with the USA.

Alqueda to JEM they obtain funds from UK, I dont even get some of their policies...like Portugal said it wont extradite an Indian terrorist bcoz he's gonna be executed when sent back. He is responsible for similar multiple bomb blasts in Bombay that killed 192 people in 1991.

Its rather intresting that most of EU people in a BBC discussion supported human rights Vs terrorism couple days back. Right after Madrid blast everyone was echoing the same sentiments, kill terror even if it means the govt is gonna curtail rights issues.

This issue has to be delicately solved, these EU nations got a very big minority muslims, so if they do anything radical they are just gonna alienate them, which is of no use.

Said that, all these are true if the attackers are ALQ, If not thats a total new ball game.

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 12:47
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
My point is that they're being driven further and further away from targets of value.

And the Spaniards should not take comfort. No one this side of the religious divide should have any illusions that we're targets. This being said, no one on the other side of the divide should think that these acts are not going to hurt them in return.

You're absolutely correct that their OPOBJs is terror but when a populace refuses to be cowed, then, they've failed and failed badly.

Their objective is to scare people into agreeing with them and to show that they can hurt in the heart of the infidels. That the infidel is not safe no matter how big his army, nor where he deplpys it. AQ showed that in New York and Washington to start this off, in Bali to hurt Australia and now in Madrid. If it is AQ then one has to assume the attack is linked to Spain's very pulic support of the US and the UK. The strategic objective of 11-M. therefore, would have been to show the world that if you side with the infidel, AQ will harm you. If that is the case, they do seem able to operate to pursue that aim.



You will note that these are ONE time hits and currently NOT SUSTAINABLE. It's gruesome. It's bloody. It pisses me off. But it also tells me that they're losing and losing bad.

As was 9/11, Bali etc. I fail to see this point. That is the nature of international terrorism. Internal terrorism, such as Eta, IRA, N17 etc can have permanent cells because of the support offered to the terrorist by the local communities. International terrorism has a whole new set of logistics. The issue is not the use of disposable cells, it is if the recruitment and financing can be sustained to replace them. So far the evidence is that AQ are able to do this.



We cannot and will not prevent every terror act. That is in itself an impossibility. The very nature of asymetric warfare dictates that they would be looking at places that we haven't even thought of looking.
[quote]
To quote the IRA when they were referring to the security forces "You have to be lucky everyday, we only have to be lucky once".

[quote]
However, can they hit where it would achieve their goals? Which basically is make the world Islam. NOT A CHANCE IN HELL!

AQ's goal, as i understand it, is to "free" the world so that people can be "free" to follow Islam. Islam's goal is that everyone should be a Muslim. But then Christianity's is that everyone should be a Christian, it is the only way to salvation if you believe in scripture.



As for AQ's reach across the globe, their strikes are ever increasingly irrevelent. They've first hit America, now they're hitting America's friends. What are they going to hit next? America's dogs (as in the four legged kind). Because that's the trend.

The fact that AQ has not struck at the US since 9/11 should not be construed that they cannot. After all they waited 8 years between attacks on the WTC.

However, as the US is keen on its own national interest, many other countries will be keen on theirs and i am sure high on their list will not be acting as exploding armour for the US.

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 12:54
Originally posted by Jay
like Portugal said it wont extradite an Indian terrorist bcoz he's gonna be executed when sent back. He is responsible for similar multiple bomb blasts in Bombay that killed 192 people in 1991.

The EU has a policy that it won't extradite people to coutrnies that do not support a certain standard (i forget which) of human rights. That generally rules out coutrnies with the death penalty, as i understand it.



Its rather intresting that most of EU people in a BBC discussion supported human rights Vs terrorism couple days back. Right after Madrid blast everyone was echoing the same sentiments, kill terror even if it means the govt is gonna curtail rights issues.

Thats the nature of terror attacks. Theya re an outrage and they provoke people into extreme feelings. My view is that my society must uphold its principles despite the terror attacks. If we start clamping down on our own freedoms because of terror attacks, then this is providing success to those terrorists, as they have reduced the quality of our lives through murder.



This issue has to be delicately solved, these EU nations got a very big minority muslims, so if they do anything radical they are just gonna alienate them, which is of no use.

"Hearts and Minds" on both sides.



Said that, all these are true if the attackers are ALQ, If not thats a total new ball game.

If it isn't AQ, it is the same old ball game, with the likely suspects either being Eta, or those Morrocans that had a go at Casablance a few months back.

I am concinved we will only find out if it was AQ after Spain's general election. It certainly isn't in the ruling partie's interest to announce it is AQ before the polls close.

My prediction is middle of next week.

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 13:01
Originally posted by Trooth
I am concinved we will only find out if it was AQ after Spain's general election. It certainly isn't in the ruling partie's interest to announce it is AQ before the polls close.

My prediction is middle of next week.

Well, it seems regardless of what the Spanish government says, the Police have retrieved a video from AQ which says :-

"We declare our responsibility for what happened in Madrid exactly two-and-a-half years after the attacks on New York and Washington.

It is a response to your collaboration with the criminals Bush and his allies.

This is a response to the crimes that you have caused in the world, and specifically in Iraq and Afghanistan, and there will be more, if God wills it.

You love life and we love death, which gives an example of what the Prophet Muhammad said.

If you don't stop your injustices, more and more blood will flow and these attacks will seem very small compared to what can occur in what you call terrorism.

This is a statement by the military spokesman for al-Qaeda in Europe, Abu Dujan al-Afghani."

source :- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3509556.stm

Officer of Engineers
14 Mar 04,, 14:26
Originally posted by Trooth
Their objective is to scare people into agreeing with them and to show that they can hurt in the heart of the infidels. That the infidel is not safe no matter how big his army, nor where he deplpys it. AQ showed that in New York and Washington to start this off, in Bali to hurt Australia and now in Madrid. If it is AQ then one has to assume the attack is linked to Spain's very pulic support of the US and the UK. The strategic objective of 11-M. therefore, would have been to show the world that if you side with the infidel, AQ will harm you. If that is the case, they do seem able to operate to pursue that aim.

In which case, given the Spanish backlash, they've failed.


Originally posted by Trooth
As was 9/11, Bali etc. I fail to see this point. That is the nature of international terrorism. Internal terrorism, such as Eta, IRA, N17 etc can have permanent cells because of the support offered to the terrorist by the local communities. International terrorism has a whole new set of logistics. The issue is not the use of disposable cells, it is if the recruitment and financing can be sustained to replace them. So far the evidence is that AQ are able to do this.

Again, pin pricks which is by its very nature, NOT very effective.


Originally posted by Trooth
AQ's goal, as i understand it, is to "free" the world so that people can be "free" to follow Islam. Islam's goal is that everyone should be a Muslim. But then Christianity's is that everyone should be a Christian, it is the only way to salvation if you believe in scripture.

As in the Taliban?


Originally posted by Trooth
The fact that AQ has not struck at the US since 9/11 should not be construed that they cannot. After all they waited 8 years between attacks on the WTC.

Oh, it is quite obvious that AQ wanted to hit the US everyway they can. It is also quite obvious that they cannot hit the US in everyway or even currently any way they can. I don't doubt that they will try in the US again but their success is at the moment FAR from certain. This uncertainty is so great that AQ MUST seek success elsewhere and after this, they would be restricted even further away.


Originally posted by Trooth
However, as the US is keen on its own national interest, many other countries will be keen on theirs and i am sure high on their list will not be acting as exploding armour for the US.

As you're so fond of saying, "Either you're with us or against us." AQ has hit the Chinese, the Indians, the Russians, even the Afghan Lion whom none can be called on the side of the US. VERY HIGH on NATO's list is to be AGAINST AQ.

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 15:01
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
In which case, given the Spanish backlash, they've failed.

Interestingly the Spanish are now having a go at their own government for being so quick to blame Eta. Not really in defence of Eta, but i think that the Spanish would rather their gonverment had not tried to deflect the fact that AQ targetted Spain because Spain sided with the US in the portugal summit. Of course, if Aznar could have kept the lid on 11-M being by AQ until Monday it would have been better poltiically for him.



As in the Taliban?

Well, my "free" was in quotes.



Oh, it is quite obvious that AQ wanted to hit the US everyway they can. It is also quite obvious that they cannot hit the US in everyway or even currently any way they can. I don't doubt that they will try in the US again but their success is at the moment FAR from certain. This uncertainty is so great that AQ MUST seek success elsewhere and after this, they would be restricted even further away.

I read this differently. I don't see it that they chose Spain because they couldn't hit the US, my interpretation is that they chose Spain to make a point to the coalition / allies / infidels whatever. That point, although a pin prick, is exactly the point they made on 9/11. Regardless of whether 9/11 was a statistical pin prick, it caused a fair amount of political and military changes.



As you're so fond of saying, "Either you're with us or against us." AQ has hit the Chinese, the Indians, the Russians, even the Afghan Lion whom none can be called on the side of the US. VERY HIGH on NATO's list is to be AGAINST AQ. [/B]

Indeed, it is a polarising statement. A statement i have always believed played into the hands of "black and white" thinkers, such as AQ.

Jay
14 Mar 04,, 17:18
Originally posted by Trooth
The EU has a policy that it won't extradite people to coutrnies that do not support a certain standard (i forget which) of human rights. That generally rules out coutrnies with the death penalty, as i understand it.

Ok lets say the terrorists responsible for Madrid is in India and we have same policy of yours and refuse to extradite them. How would you feel?

Then there is no point in international cooperation and war on global terrorism.

I think ALQ has lot of sleeper cells in Europe given the nature of political conflicts in Eastern Europe, the muslims who immigrated from Arab, Gulf and South Asia.

All these were done in the pretext of cold war with Russia, Palestine uprising and Kashmir.

Some Muslims there, are sympathetic to Palestine, Afghanistan etc . They really think that western nations are out there to kill them kill Islam.

It aint that easy to eliminate all of em at a single go.

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 17:29
Originally posted by Jay
Ok lets say the terrorists responsible for Madrid is in India and we have same policy of yours and refuse to extradite them. How would you feel?[quote]
How i would feel has nothing to do with it, i was explaining the situation. But to answer your question, Spain doesn't have the death penalty (i could be wrong) if it doesn't the refusal to extradite wouldn't be for the same reasons. Therefore the Spanish may, or may not, understand those reasons, whatever they were.



Then there is no point in international cooperation and war on global terrorism.

If "international cooperation" means that all coutnires must behave the same, and to some arbitrary standard that they don't subscribe to, then yes. Clearly there is no point.



I think ALQ has lot of sleeper cells in Europe given the nature of political conflicts in Eastern Europe, the muslims who immigrated from Arab, Gulf and South Asia.

All these were done in the pretext of cold war with Russia, Palestine uprising and Kashmir.

Some Muslims there, are sympathetic to Palestine, Afghanistan etc . They really think that western nations are out there to kill them kill Islam.


It is clear that AQ has cells in North America, Europe and Asia. In all likelyhood there are still active cells on those continents and probably the only continents without AQ are the polar regions.



It aint that easy to eliminate all of em at a single go.

If indeed, ever.

Officer of Engineers
14 Mar 04,, 17:38
Originally posted by Trooth
I read this differently. I don't see it that they chose Spain because they couldn't hit the US, my interpretation is that they chose Spain to make a point to the coalition / allies / infidels whatever. That point, although a pin prick, is exactly the point they made on 9/11. Regardless of whether 9/11 was a statistical pin prick, it caused a fair amount of political and military changes.

QUICK, without reference, what is the Spanish force contribution to OIF and OEF?

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 17:42
No idea.

Officer of Engineers
14 Mar 04,, 18:11
Originally posted by Trooth
No idea.

EXACTLY! Outside of Spain, no one knows. No one cares. The message of don't be an American ally is lost to everyone outside of Spain and within Spain, it is backfiring.

Aside from that, AQ already published a list of target countries accusing them of activiely helping the US. Spain is not on that list.


Originally posted by Trooth

As in the Taliban?
Well, my "free" was in quotes.

Sorry, I missed this. When AQ decided to goto war against Iran (they supported the execution of the Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan), it is saying something, doesn't it?

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 18:52
Perhaps people aren't aware of the military effort expended by Spain. But then equally, most people pay more attention to politicians than to were the troops actually are.

The view held by most people on the war on terror is that it is a war being pursued by the US, whose major allies on this would be the UK and Spain. Indeed i am looking at a photo now of the Azores summit, with Bush flanked by his friends Blair and Aznar (its from the cover of Private Eye magazine from Apil last year that for some reason happened to be on top of my fridge!)

The Portugal summit of 16 March was a key summit for the coalition of the willing. It was the US, UK and Spain that drafted the abortive second UN resolution plan.

Wasn't it only last month that Aznar gave a speech to the US congress where he backed the US to the hilt in the war on terror?

smilingassassin
14 Mar 04,, 19:04
If the war on terrorism is one persued by the U.S. why were they then attacked first?

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 19:13
Pursue doesn't mean start. It means follow. Hence someone had to attack them.

Officer of Engineers
14 Mar 04,, 19:37
Originally posted by Trooth
Perhaps people aren't aware of the military effort expended by Spain. But then equally, most people pay more attention to politicians than to were the troops actually are.

The view held by most people on the war on terror is that it is a war being pursued by the US, whose major allies on this would be the UK and Spain. Indeed i am looking at a photo now of the Azores summit, with Bush flanked by his friends Blair and Aznar (its from the cover of Private Eye magazine from Apil last year that for some reason happened to be on top of my fridge!)

The Portugal summit of 16 March was a key summit for the coalition of the willing. It was the US, UK and Spain that drafted the abortive second UN resolution plan.

Wasn't it only last month that Aznar gave a speech to the US congress where he backed the US to the hilt in the war on terror?

Well, again, what is the impact of this terror action outside of Spain? I do not know about the British public but I do know that the Canadian public (collective term) doesn't even know that Spain has a battalion in Iraq.

Would this terror action make any country think twice in helping the US? Would it even enter into our OP plan?

Trooth
14 Mar 04,, 21:02
Well from my understanding the Spanish people were never particularly pro the war in Iraq. Aznar's party is now under fire as to why they insisted it was Eta, when everything really points to AQ who have now claimed responsibility.

The political reality is as i have said a few times, Spain needed it to be an Eta outrage until after today's election. AQ has indicated it was Spain's support for the US that caused AQ to target it.

This will effect people in Spain. Whether it will effect them enough to vote the socialists in and Aznar's party out, i don't know (Aznar is standing down regardless). From most of the vox pops i have seen, the Spanish people aren't letting this influence them.

Will it effect other countries? It must effect some of the 190 countries that are "either with us or against us"/ It all depends on how the citizenry perceive it. If they subscribe to the US side of the war it won't matter one jot. If however they feel that they have got involved in someone else's fight, well it might give them pause for thought.

You are right int hat it won't effect US foriegn policy at all. And neiterh do i think it should. It might effect some other nations, and it is a very visible reminder that we haven't got to grips with AQ yet.

Officer of Engineers
15 Mar 04,, 01:57
As I read this, I am reminded of NVA General Vo Nyguen Gap who claimed that the Tet Offensive was the most successful operation in history.

Tet showed the American public that they could not win in VN.

WHAT A LOAD OF CROCK!!!!!!

Tet was the worst military disaster the NVA ever devised. The VC was decimated beyond repair and the NVA was destroyed in the field, leaving the route to Hanoi WIDE openned. While true the Americans did left the field soon after Tet, there was no way in hell could Gen Vo have planned American public reaction.

BTW, I am not accusing you of stating this but it would be one hell of an operation that you could sway public opinion by planting bombs. The best you can do is to scare people away from the polls.

Trooth
15 Mar 04,, 08:29
Well. We await the final analysis. However prior to 11-M the Popular party was epexected to retain power in Spain and was ahead in the opinion polls. The Socialists have won, quite easily by the looks of it.

First impressions from the "experts" was that that this swing happened in the last few days.

Whether it was the bombings themselves, or whether or it was the governments refusal to blame AQ and instead lok for an internal problem (Eta) remains to be seen.

However pundits are already asking if this is a western democratic election that has beened decided by Islamic terrorism.

Confed999
15 Mar 04,, 22:29
It looks like all it took was 10 bombs to make the Spanish people surrender to the terrorists. From this point on, a bit of every drop of blood spilt by the victims of all tyrants and terrorists emboldened by the promised withdrawl from Iraq, will be forever on their hands. The worst part is, they don't even know for sure what terrorists did it. :-(

Trooth
15 Mar 04,, 22:47
It isn't quite a simple as that, from my understanding.

The major issues are that some 90% of the Spanish people were apparently not in favour of Spains involvement in the war in Iraq.

They then had 11-M which they were told, by the Popular Party was the work of Eta.

Now it appears that it was the work of AQ.

The Spanish people therefore feel they have got involved in someone else's fight on, some of them believe, false pretences, and that their government lied to them about who committed 11-M.

That is the problem with democracy i guess, sometimes you don't get the answer you want.

Blair must be concerned, as his circumstances are not that removed from Aznar and the PP's. The major difference was that he caved in to the inquiry into the flawed intelligence, whereas Aznar refused it point blank.

It is interesting to note that here in the UK, the government and Transport Police have just launched another round of "keep an eye out for suspiciuous packages" posters and so on. This was apparently planned months ago. However they are now stressing that there is no increased risk of a terror attack in the UK. Only last month our government was telling us that the end of the world was imiminent.

Politics is a funny old business really.

Confed999
15 Mar 04,, 22:55
Originally posted by Trooth
It isn't quite a simple as that, from my understanding.
Maybe not for you, but it is that easy for me.

Trooth
15 Mar 04,, 23:23
Well i ewa trying to give you some of the perspective that i have picked up listening to the people of Spain talking in the last few days. Admittedly through the media.

Bill
16 Mar 04,, 04:03
That is all irrelevant.

What is entirely relevant is that the spanish people have decided at the polls that the actions of terrorists will shape their national policy in the terrorists favor.

This will greatly embolden the terrorists, and more such attacks should be expected.

Look for the UK, Canada, and Poland to be prime targets in the future.

10 bombs equals one enemy defeated....not even the US is that potent.

If we're keeping score, the terrorists just scored a touchdown and added a 2 point conversion.

Bill
16 Mar 04,, 04:08
On a further note,

Upon hearing of the terrorist 'overthrow' of the Spanish government, the French Government has sued for peace with Al Qaeda...in advance of any attacks, just to be sure.

Officer of Engineers
16 Mar 04,, 04:56
Originally posted by M21Sniper
Look for the UK, Canada, and Poland to be prime targets in the future.

The Brits have enough experiece with the IRA as not to be scared off. I would like to think the Canadians would not back down but really depends on whose in power at the time - Trudea yielded to the FLQ while we never yielded going after the Air India strike. The Poles would be pissing mad.

Trooth
16 Mar 04,, 09:30
It depends on whether or not you believe your current government is doing the best job that you think it can, or if someone can do it better. If it turns out that government is pursing policies you don't approve of and possibly lying to you. What are you to do?

Confed999
16 Mar 04,, 12:32
Originally posted by Trooth
What are you to do?
I don't care what they do, as long as they don't support tyrants and terrorists. Their vote DOES support tyants and terrorism, in fact as Sniper said, it will encourage more attacks. My original statement stands.

Trooth
16 Mar 04,, 12:43
They exercised their democratic right. They chose their own government. I see nothing wrong with that. If anything, isn't this what the war on terror is to try and protect?

The alternative would be to have the people of Spain have an unpopular government because to change it might give the wrong impression.

At the time of the election, there were those that said it should be postponed - that so close to 11-M wasn't the right "mood". However, others claimed that moving the election would be a victory for the terrorists.

It is often said "democracies are weak" and this may well be a case in point.

However the Spanish people are what matters here, they have to live under the government they choose.

Confed999
16 Mar 04,, 13:05
Trooth, you read alot more into things than what is actually said. They voted for a group that supports tyrants and terrorism with it's actions, now that blood is on their hands. That's all, no more, no less, I've purposely kept my statements clear and to the point on this matter to avoid this situation. None of your arguments have yet to be relevant to my original statement, because I don't care what the explanation is, just the effect. The effect will be more war and death. So to be painfully blunt, "f**k them and the horse they rode in on", I hope their false security keeps them warm and snug at night.

Officer of Engineers
16 Mar 04,, 14:37
Zapatero's act confirms that terror succeeded. Damn coward's way out.

Trooth
16 Mar 04,, 19:24
Fair enough. Perhaps i do read too much into things. It is tricky to make simple statements when dealing with the minds of over 30 million voters.

I personally do not agree with Zapatero's statements and don't believe that withdrawing troops etc is now the answer.

However, i am in a similar situation to the voters of Spain. My government either lied to me or demonstrated it wasn't as good as it through it was. I will now await the inquiry that Blair has launched.

In addition to that my government is taking some actions regarding domestic matters that i don't approve of.

Therefore come the next election i will have a choice. And i will make my choice on looking at who is going to be best for the UK in the future. I can't make that choice using the mindset that "any change is bad as the terrorists must heve won". I view that line of thinking as a loss of democratic freedom and then the terrorists really have won.

But, before i get to make my choice, you too will get to make yours and the voters of the US will have a similar choice to make. I am not sure there are any Democract voters on this board, so some of you may have to make the leap to follow my point (:)) but as a US voter, should your only criteria in November be to maintain continuity? That is should the Democract and other perties be disbanded in the US as to vote for them would be a vote for terrorism? Or should you vote on what you think is the best way forward for the US ?
If a US voter does the latter and determines it is Democrat, should (s)he then say "but i can't vote out Dubya because it will look bad" and then vote Republican?

I think the situation in Spain is slightly different, of course, because apparently 90% of the population were against the war anyway.

Bill
16 Mar 04,, 22:39
Gives you quite a insight into the different mindsets of Americans vs Spaniards.

We were hit and couldn't wait to hit back.

They were hit, and looked for the fastest way to run.

Tossing the gov't that just last week had a 5% lead in the polls was the fastest way for them to play ostrich....so they did.

The statements and actions of the incoming socailist PM will do more to embolden terrorists than 911 ever did.

Cowards.

Ray
17 Mar 04,, 00:34
It matters not which govt is elected in the non Islamic world. The war on terror will continue.

However, I don't think that it was because of the trains being bombed that the Socialists won in Spain. It was coming anyway since 90% of the Spaniards did not want to go to war against Iraq.

It will be interesting to watch how the British jump in their election. Will the socialist Labour govt remain or the newly vamped Conservatives win! In UK too the vast majority did not want to go to war in Iraq, but the socialist Labour Govt still went to war in Iraq.

And anyway, nothing will change in the war on terror. They will be hunted down. Even the Spaniards will not kowtow to terror if they pull out of Iraq. Rache as they say in German.

Confed999
17 Mar 04,, 01:00
Originally posted by Trooth
Fair enough. Perhaps i do read too much into things. It is tricky to make simple statements when dealing with the minds of over 30 million voters.
That's why I don't bother with individual motives, every motive exists in groups that large.

Originally posted by Trooth
I am not sure there are any Democract voters on this board, so some of you may have to make the leap to follow my point (:)) but as a US voter, should your only criteria in November be to maintain continuity? That is should the Democract and other perties be disbanded in the US as to vote for them would be a vote for terrorism? Or should you vote on what you think is the best way forward for the US ?
I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I will be voting for G.W.Bush in the comming election because he is the ONLY one on the right side of the ONLY issue that truly matters right now, the war. I won't vote to protect myself while others need us, period.

Originally posted by M21Sniper
Gives you quite a insight into the different mindsets of Americans vs Spaniards.

We were hit and couldn't wait to hit back.

They were hit, and looked for the fastest way to run.

Tossing the gov't that just last week had a 5% lead in the polls was the fastest way for them to play ostrich....so they did.

The statements and actions of the incoming socailist PM will do more to embolden terrorists than 911 ever did.

Cowards.
I agree. :-(

Originally posted by Ray
However, I don't think that it was because of the trains being bombed that the Socialists won in Spain.
I think you're wrong, elections rarely change 10+ points in a matter of days.

Ray
17 Mar 04,, 04:29
Originally posted by Confed999


I think you're wrong, elections rarely change 10+ points in a matter of days.

In India it did with the Kargil War being thrust on India.

Bill
17 Mar 04,, 09:30
I really do detest socailism.

Yet to run across any 'ism' that doesn't just irk the hell out of me, come to think of it.

ZFBoxcar
17 Mar 04,, 15:34
Sniper, there is a reason why its not really fair to compare Spaniards and Americans ragarding this election.

When the bombing happend, the Spaniards were in a war veyr few of them wanted to be in, whereas on 9/11 there was no war, no way for this to be percieived as a justified attack. Since most Spanish people were against the war, they might see this as retaliation, rather than an unprovoked attack.

Thats their mind frame, although in the end its stupid because the attack was launched by al-Queda, not Iraq.

Plus..a lot of them might just be socialists in which case they are probably cowards :D (hate em too)

So you are against capitalism too Sniper?

Lunatock
17 Mar 04,, 16:15
Originally posted by M21Sniper
I really do detest socailism.

Yet to run across any 'ism' that doesn't just irk the hell out of me, come to think of it.

Socialism...communism...naziism...jism. Those four are most likely are included in your opinion. :lol

Ray
17 Mar 04,, 16:31
Sniper,

Please understand that America was seriously affected by WTC. They have very good reasons to get wild. I appreciate the esntiment since we have been at the brunt of terrorism fro a long time 50 years and it was also CIA inspired and terrorism in other areas USSR inspired! Now we have terrorism in Kashmir, Pakistan inspired!

We have and aare having all types of interesting terrosim. Therefore, we have the same disgust as you have.

Spaniards had no terrorsim. Aznar joined the bandwagon as the Italian PM who is a confoirmed crook for pesonal reasons I reckon. Their country didn' t want them to join. It is the same case with Blair. However, once they are hit hard by the terrosits, they will come to their senses.

Bush has all my support except that it should be done a wee bit 'consumer friendly' and not like as if it were the Sermon from the Mount. No sane educate person appreciates that.

Bill
17 Mar 04,, 16:49
"Thats their mind frame, although in the end its stupid because the attack was launched by al-Queda, not Iraq. "

I agree....all of the reasons you listed for the spanish reaction are extremely stupid. Go figure.

PS....with all of 1300 non combatants in country, it is HARDLY fair to say 'spain was fighting a war they didn't agree with'.


"Plus..a lot of them might just be socialists in which case they are probably cowards (hate em too)"

:)

"So you are against capitalism too Sniper?"

Only when i'm broke. ;)

ChrisF202
18 Mar 04,, 00:32
I dont understand how won can replace a government that was willing to stand up to terrorists and dictators with one that favors appeasing them. They must have forgotten that appesement is what allowed WW2 to happen.

Confed999
18 Mar 04,, 00:43
Originally posted by Ray
In India it did with the Kargil War being thrust on India.
Unless you're saying the Kargil War didn't effect elections in India, I'm not sure of your point. Did you just prove my point instead?

Originally posted by Ray
Please understand that America was seriously affected by WTC. They have very good reasons to get wild. I appreciate the esntiment since we have been at the brunt of terrorism fro a long time 50 years and it was also CIA inspired and terrorism in other areas USSR inspired! Now we have terrorism in Kashmir, Pakistan inspired!
I didn't need the WTC to get here, I was allready mad. As to CIA terrorists, the US has done some really awful and underhanded things in it's past and I hope the culprets suffer for it.

Originally posted by ChrisF202
They must have forgotten that appesement is what allowed WW2 to happen.
After what they went through, I wouldn't think that was possible.

Trooth
18 Mar 04,, 01:14
Originally posted by ChrisF202
I dont understand how won can replace a government that was willing to stand up to terrorists and dictators with one that favors appeasing them. They must have forgotten that appesement is what allowed WW2 to happen.

The Spanish people did not approve of Aznar's stance. 90% did not agree with the position their government had taken. The PP was always on shakey ground when it came to the war on terror and Iraq in particular. In that context the election result in Spain is easily believable. If anything you could argue, that with a government taking an action against the will of 90% of the population that it was acting as a dictatorship.

Confed999
18 Mar 04,, 02:44
Originally posted by Trooth
The Spanish people did not approve of Aznar's stance. 90% did not agree with the position their government had taken. The PP was always on shakey ground when it came to the war on terror and Iraq in particular. In that context the election result in Spain is easily believable. If anything you could argue, that with a government taking an action against the will of 90% of the population that it was acting as a dictatorship.
To counter ChrisF202's statement you would have to explain why they think appeasement works.

Bill
18 Mar 04,, 09:44
"The Spanish people did not approve of Aznar's stance. 90% did not agree with the position their government had taken. The PP was always on shakey ground when it came to the war on terror and Iraq in particular."

The point is that the actions of the terrorists should have galvanized the Spanish people to help stamp out these rodents...instead they ran like cowering dogs.

Hence me calling them "Pussies".

Pussy is as pussy does...

Ray
18 Mar 04,, 13:42
Sniper,

The rodents will be stamped out and shoved into boiling water!

Trooth
18 Mar 04,, 19:42
Originally posted by Confed999
To counter ChrisF202's statement you would have to explain why they think appeasement works.

I wasn't arguing a case for or against apeasement. My point was that the Spanish people viewed the war in Iraq and the war on terror as some one else's fight, or at the very least a fight whose pre-texts they did not approve of. Therefore a government that takes them into that fight anyway is an unpopular one (despite its name). If a consequence of that fight is that Spanish people die on trains, then they seem to have taken the view that (to use a stock market term) there needs to be a correction, and the correction is to get rid of a government that caused them a problem they didn't want to have in the first place.

This isn't an approach i would have taken, but i can see their point. I think from a lot of Spaniards points of view, Aznar created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Lunatock
18 Mar 04,, 21:28
Originally posted by M21Sniper
"The Spanish people did not approve of Aznar's stance. 90% did not agree with the position their government had taken. The PP was always on shakey ground when it came to the war on terror and Iraq in particular."

The point is that the actions of the terrorists should have galvanized the Spanish people to help stamp out these rodents...instead they ran like cowering dogs.

Hence me calling them "Pussies".

Pussy is as pussy does...

Once apon a time the Moor's occupied Spain, and an outsider (Charlemegne) had to go in and drive them back across the Med.

Much has changed since then huh?

Bill
23 Mar 04,, 06:56
"I think from a lot of Spaniards points of view, Aznar created a self-fulfilling prophecy."

And the new PM hasn't???

"Just bomb those pussy spaniards...they'll give in".

Maximus would be disgusted. ;)

Trooth
27 Mar 04,, 21:13
Originally posted by M21Sniper
And the new PM hasn't???

As i said not what i would have done. howver it hasn't made the situation worse for Spain.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 16:00
Originally posted by Trooth
howver it hasn't made the situation worse for Spain.
We won't be renewing supply contracts with Spain starting April 1.

Trooth
28 Mar 04,, 16:12
Whose "we"? The US?

This is the problem with the war on terror, there are several reasons why each side is fighting the war. But they don't get debated. All that gets debated is "your the disease and i am the cure".

Praxus
28 Mar 04,, 16:17
The Spanish people did not approve of Aznar's stance. 90% did not agree with the position their government had taken. The PP was always on shakey ground when it came to the war on terror and Iraq in particular. In that context the election result in Spain is easily believable. If anything you could argue, that with a government taking an action against the will of 90% of the population that it was acting as a dictatorship.

A Democracy is an inherantly evil system!

By your logic, Adolf Hitler had a right to rule because after all the majority supported him.

The majority has no right to will it self on the minority using Governmental force. Spain did the morally right thing in supporting the US, wether the irratonal spanish people think so or not.

Trooth
28 Mar 04,, 16:31
Originally posted by Praxus
A Democracy is an inherantly evil system!

By your logic, Adolf Hitler had a right to rule because after all the majority supported him.

The majority has no right to will it self on the minority using Governmental force. Spain did the morally right thing in supporting the US, wether the irratonal spanish people think so or not.

That makes no sense at all. A government is there to do the bidding of its citizens. If 90% disagree with the actions of the government, the government is wrong.

ChrisF202
28 Mar 04,, 16:33
Maximus would be disgusted. ;)
If you are reffering to Russel Crowe in "The Gladiator", he would take sword and chop off Bin Laden's head in a gladiator match

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 17:52
Originally posted by Trooth
Whose "we"?
The supply co-op my company belongs to. It's called "voting with our wallet".


Originally posted by Trooth
This is the problem with the war on terror, there are several reasons why each side is fighting the war. But they don't get debated. All that gets debated is "your the disease and i am the cure".
What hasn't been debated in the decades leading us to today? You want to keep debating while they kill your friends and family, go right ahead.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 17:59
Originally posted by Praxus


By your logic, Adolf Hitler had a right to rule because after all the majority supported him.




Isn't that what is democracy? If not, do explain what is democracy. Maybe we will learn from educated people like you.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 18:02
Originally posted by Ray
Isn't that what is democracy? If not, do explain what is democracy. Maybe we will learn from educated people like you.
I don't understand, didn't he say it was a bad thing not a good thing?

Originally posted by Praxus
A Democracy is an inherantly evil system!

Trooth
28 Mar 04,, 18:14
Originally posted by Confed999
The supply co-op my company belongs to. It's called "voting with our wallet".

You won't receive an argument from me. Its your business, your money. Your right.



What hasn't been debated in the decades leading us to today? You want to keep debating while they kill your friends and family, go right ahead.

As has been said, statisically, the terrorists outrages don't increase my risk of death. I have lived with terrorism all my life. I wouldn't give in to them, but equally i wouldn't join a fight i didn't believe in. If we are up for statistics, more civilians have died in Afghanistan and Iraq than 9/11, 11-M and the intifada combined.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 18:22
Originally posted by Praxus
A Democracy is an inherantly evil system!

By your logic, Adolf Hitler had a right to rule because after all the majority supported him.



Isn't that is what democracy is all about?

Bush rigged the poll, but the Supreme Court upheld it. Flawed presidency, but the majority accepted it. So? What are you going to do about it. Can you chuck Bush out?

Sorry, the ballot, flawed or otherwise is the stamp of authority. Bush is the president and will always be so, till the ballot rejects him or otherwise.

Those who are not with Bush should wait and see what is the next outcome and till then shut up!

Confed,

Democarcy is an evil system. Tell me of a better system and I will adopt it. :)

Our neighbour Pakistan has become military dictatorship five times (we have a similar heritage before independence), Burma is a military dictatorship, Bangladesh has also veered to military leadership Gen Zia by killing their elected leader and istalling themselves. So, because of ethinicity and common heritage we should have also become a military dictatorship.

Thanks heavens we still believe in democracy, flawed that it is on many counts!

God Bless Democracy and all its infirmities!

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 18:39
Originally posted by Ray
Sorry, the ballot, flawed or otherwise is the stamp of authority.
NO! The rule of law is the authority. In the US it's our constitution. The ballot just sets policy, otherwise nobody would be safe from the one vote past the 50% required to exterminate them.

Originally posted by Ray
Democarcy is an evil system. Tell me of a better system and I will adopt it. :)
People are evil, not systems. You could have a fair and just dictatorship, I'm sure there have been a few.

Ironduke
28 Mar 04,, 18:42
Originally posted by Confed999
People are evil, not systems. You could have a fair and just dictatorship, I'm sure there have been a few.
Singapore...

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 18:43
Originally posted by Ironduke
Singapore...
Thanks ;)

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 18:48
Just dictatorships? Name a few.

Saddam was a just dicatatorship for Arabs but not for the US.
So, dictatorship is just as per the US' desires?

While I respect your views as msot even handed, yet I don't validlity in this.

As far as law is concerned, The US Supreme Court had Okayed Bush's Presidency. Was that valid? I don't know and it matter not for me except the validity question. Ask Gore (wasnt that his name). He would have Gored all if he could.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 18:50
Ir0nduke,

Lived in Singapore?

And if you like it that much, leave the US and go there and enjoy this just dictatorship! You can't even chew gum there.

Come on. If that was so great then the Commies were also great as per you!

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 18:54
What I find interesting here is that to prove a point you decry the basic concept that your own great country stands for - democracy! Freedom of thought and action.

Imagine you can't chew gum, you can''t do many other things and yet you root for it. If Singapore is that close to your heart, change US to be anotehr Singapore.

By your logic then, Hitler also was a great man. He brought a war devastated, economy ruined and self respect lost Nation on to its feet and started kicking the world. Ok, it is a minor point that in between he killed millions of Jews, but the folks whats a few Jews dead between friends. Aftrer all, the Jews were vermins and so we gave them a State Israel so that they could get the hell there and leave Europe clean.

If that is the logic then I have nothing to say.

You win.

BTW,get your general knowledge updated. Singapore is not a dictatorship. It has elections.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 18:59
Originally posted by Ray
Just dictatorships?
Like I said, people are evil, not systems. With the right people in charge any system can be a good one.

Originally posted by Ray
Saddam was a just dicatatorship for Arabs but not for the US.
So, dictatorship is just as per the US' desires?
Nobody stood against him until he started attacking people.

Originally posted by Ray
As far as law is concerned, The US Supreme Court had Okayed Bush's Presidency. Was that valid?
That's their job, figure out solutions to problems based on the rule of law.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:02
Originally posted by Ray
Imagine you can't chew gum, you can''t do many other things and yet you root for it.
There are things you can't do everywhere! This doesn't even make them similar to people who stuffed Jews in ovens and invaded their neighbors with the intent of conquest.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:03
Originally posted by Confed999

Nobody stood against him until he started attacking people.



Did he attack the US? No.

He attacked Kuwait and he got kicked for it. Did anyone complain?

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:05
Confed,

I beg to disagree. Your arguments are flawed. Ask a chewing gum addict. And the US has many having discovered gum if I am correct.

In our country, you can't smoke in the railways trains. I am a chain smoker and I dread travelling my trains. Just because some smartassed environmentalist mininster who chews tobacco decided to be 'modern'. He should have banned tobacco chewing or going one better, banned breathing the polluted air in his blasted trains.

How far will the govt go to control our daily lives!

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:09
Originally posted by Ray
Did he attack the US? No.

He attacked Kuwait and he got kicked for it. Did anyone complain?
The US has intrests in Kuwait, those intrests were attacked. Americans were in Kuwait, they were attacked. He attacked his own people. He attacked Israel. He attacked Saudi Araibia. He fired on US forces for another decade. He offered money to terrorists to kill Americans. He tried to assassinate our President. Sorry, he got better than he deserved IMHO.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:13
Confed,

When he attacked his own people and started sorting out Iran, Rumsfeld himself came to Baghdad and shook his hands.

The US has paid many to kill Castro too. US killed Allende. It killed Mujabir Rehman. It killed Bandaranayke, Indira Gandhi and Zia ul Haq of Pakistan (last three conjectures)

How far can hypocracy go?

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:14
Originally posted by Ray
Confed,

I beg to disagree. Your arguments are flawed. Ask a chewing gum addict.

In our country, you can't smoke in the railways trains. I am a chain smoker and I dread travelling my trains. Just because wome smartassed environist mininster who chews tobacco decided to be 'modern'. He should ahve banned breathing the polluted air in his blasted trains.
I'm not a liberal, I don't like all the government regulations and laws, but there will allways be things you can't do. I mean, ask a cocaine addict if it's fair coke isn't legal and he'll say it's not fair. That's an extreme example but it illustrates the point.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:17
Originally posted by Ray
Rumsfeld himself came to Baghdad and shook his hands.
I wish there were a law they could all be prosecuted under, but someone convinced the world it was a good idea to deal with bad guys because they didn't like other bad guys.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:18
What about Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam part of my question?

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:23
Originally posted by Confed999
I wish there were a law they could all be prosecuted under, but someone convinced the world it was a good idea to deal with bad guys because they didn't like other bad guys.

That's good logic. They are bad as along as they are good and then bad since I deceide they are now bad.

Beats me.

Fine.

Singapore is a dictatorship even though they have elections and chewing gum is as bad or harmful as taking cocaine. Why so?

Because US said so.

Thats democracy for you. That is Freedom for you that is being doled out by occcupying your country. :brick

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:25
Confed,

You win.

I won't get into an argument with you any more since I VALUE my friendship wiht you MORE than all the stuff that we write; because neither you nor I can change the world. At least we tried. You in your way and I in my.:TY!

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:25
Originally posted by Ray
Because US said so.
I have no idea what you're talking about. In fact an American told Singapore to allow gum recently. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2494499.stm

Contrary to popular belief, neither the Jews nor the US control the world.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:28
Originally posted by Ray
I won't get into an argument with you any more since I VALUE my friendship MORE than all the stuff that we write
As do I, but your expression of opinion won't change my mind about that friendship. ;) Feel free to debate any point.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:29
Originally posted by Ray
That's good logic. They are bad as along as they are good and then bad since I deceide they are now bad.
I don't agree with it either, I want them all in jail or worse for dealing with him in the first place.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:35
Like all western media they are selective to suit their audience and use clever syntax.

Note the BBC states 'under medical prescriptions'. Chewing gum requires medical advice?

Let me clarify. Our media is more honest. They have mentioned that it is for only for nicotine laced gum that is supposed to wean away smokers.

Try chewing gum in Singapore and you can also write a Hilton Hanio type of a best seller, with Singapore as the background.:lol

Call me over so that I too join you and since I am not white, your book will be a runaway best seller since it will be politically polite and perfect. I will get my borthers in law also, one a Jamaican and the other a Jew and then we will woin the Pultizer Prize and the Nobel Prize too! And we can add my Japanese sister in law and my British cousin! My family is so mixed up internationally that I willthink of other exoctic chaps and invite them too.

:yum

Ironduke
28 Mar 04,, 19:36
Originally posted by Ray
Ir0nduke,

Lived in Singapore?

And if you like it that much, leave the US and go there and enjoy this just dictatorship! You can't even chew gum there.

Come on. If that was so great then the Commies were also great as per you!
Singapore's extremely strict.... also extremely wealthy.

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:38
Is wealth, democracy?

Now I am confused.Very very odd logic indeed.

The Saudi Kings are very very wealthy. So, they are democrats!

I really give up.

Praxus
28 Mar 04,, 19:40
What I find interesting here is that to prove a point you decry the basic concept that your own great country stands for - democracy! Freedom of thought and action.

Read the Federalist Papers and you will find that we never stood for Democracy but a Constitutional Federal Republic, which seperates the power among the people and the government, the state and the government, and the limits the overall power by the constitution.

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.
Thomas Jefferson

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

Hmm it's amazing Jefferson predicted that when we become more "democratic" a welfare state would form and destroy the country. Sounds like it's coming true.

But more on the subject, it is a MORAL CRIME for the United States to support any dictatorship that destroys peoples rights. People supporting these dictators temprorily has to do with people short sightedness because they believe that reality does not exsist, that contradictions can exsist and if this is true how can someone predict what will happen in the long term. So of course they do what they view is pragmatic in the short term.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:43
Originally posted by Ray
Like all western media they are selective to suit their audience and use clever syntax.

Note the BBC states 'under medical prescriptions'. Chewing gum requires medical advice?

Let me clarify. Our media is more honest. They have mentioned that it is for only for nicotine laced gum that is supposed to wean away smokers.

Try chewing gum in Singapore and you can also write a Hilton Hanio type of a best seller, with Singapore as the background.:lol
Ummmm, that was exactly my point, if the US were in control of Singapore then they would be allowed any gum, as was requested, not just gum for medical use. The gum situation comes down to a simple premise, a few bad people ruin it for everyone. It was banned because people complained about it being dropped on the streets and walks. I don't agree, but I don't agree with many laws that create victimless crimes.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 19:44
Originally posted by Ray
Is wealth, democracy?
Who accused Singapore of being a democracy?

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 19:56
Ironduke gave the example that Singapore is a benign dictatorship. I just corrected the misconception. It is a democracy.

BTW people did not complain about gum. It is the President who decided unilaterally.

Look I have a fair idea about Singapore. Its good and wonderful as a tourist, but it is stifling if you have to stay longer.

Originally posted by Ray
Ir0nduke,
Lived in Singapore?
And if you like it that much, leave the US and go there and enjoy this just dictatorship! You can't even chew gum there.
Come on. If that was so great then the Commies were also great as per you!

Ironduke's reply:
Singapore's extremely strict.... also extremely wealthy.

Trooth
28 Mar 04,, 20:03
Originally posted by Confed999
You could have a fair and just dictatorship, I'm sure there have been a few.

Brunei?

Ray
28 Mar 04,, 20:05
Originally posted by Trooth
Brunei?

I thought it was ruled by the Sultan who keeps a whole lot of wives.

They have a democracy?

Trooth
28 Mar 04,, 20:10
Originally posted by Ray
I thought it was ruled by the Sultan who keeps a whole lot of wives.

They have a democracy?

Not that i know of. Seems to be fairly peaceful too.

Confed999
28 Mar 04,, 21:59
Originally posted by Trooth
Brunei?
I had never heard of that one, thanks.
A 'lil CIA info: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bx.html