Spain's Decision: Al-Qeada victory?

[Stravo]

Ok, most of you know I have been away for awhile and even now have sporadic access so if this issue or question has come up please forgive me and lock away. Otherwise here is the question that has gnawed at me since I first heard this news.

Spain suffered a horrific terrorist attack, one which they view as their own 9/11. They respond by doing precisely what Al-Qaeda wants. They pull out of Iraq. The voters elect a president that is partial to Al-Qaeda's desire to see Western powers out of the ME. As best I can see it, this is a sweeping victory for Al-Qaeda. They achieved their goals without losing any agents (as far as we know) or having anyone arrested.

What precisely is Spain thinking this will accomplish? By bowing to this kind of terrorist pressure they merely invite more attacks whenever someone is not happy with their policies.

It also ties into this disturbing trend among European powers that seems mired in the tired old appeasement policy which led us down some horrific roads. The EU powers (Engalnd excepted) seem to fall over themselves to avoid confrontation. See the German Fench move to block the US in its moves against Iraq and generally a year ago.

Yes, the rational answer is that they do not want to become targets of terrorist action, but frankly, with the US on high alert and rampaging in the ME, the terrorists are now preying on Europe anyway and Spain is paying them dividends for this action. By their inaction they have become the very targets that they sought to avoid.

This is NOT a license to EU bash but a serious discussion on whether Europe has learned the lessons of appeasement and avoiding a problem or whether this is actually the US's fault for stirring up the hornet's nest or any other theories that you yourself may have about this situation.

Is Spain making a big mistake and why?

[Sharp-kun]

Spains belief that pulling out of Iraq is misguided. They were a target before they moved into Iraq, both for their past and the simple fact they don't fit with Al Qaeda's vison of Islam.
Pulling out of Iraq also reduces the chance that it will become stable. Even though we all know Iraq had no links to Al Qaeda before the invasion, if Iraq fails, it's very likely they will move in, and then the problem will simply get worse.

[Luzifer's right hand]

The socialist promised to withraw thier forces before the attacks.
Although polls before the attack saw the PP winning.

I think the attck won the vote for the socilats.
A party should do wath they promised after a vote, it's the right thing to do imo.

[Darth Wong]

Ok, most of you know I have been away for awhile and even now have sporadic access so if this issue or question has come up please forgive me and lock away. Otherwise here is the question that has gnawed at me since I first heard this news.

Spain suffered a horrific terrorist attack, one which they view as their own 9/11. They respond by doing precisely what Al-Qaeda wants. They pull out of Iraq. The voters elect a president that is partial to Al-Qaeda's desire to see Western powers out of the ME. As best I can see it, this is a sweeping victory for Al-Qaeda. They achieved their goals without losing any agents (as far as we know) or having anyone arrested.

No, it is a sweeping victory for democracy. The Spanish people were largely against the war in Iraq since before it started.

What precisely is Spain thinking this will accomplish? By bowing to this kind of terrorist pressure they merely invite more attacks whenever someone is not happy with their policies.

So you're suggesting that the entire population of the country should change its tune on Iraq simply to spite the terrorists? What will that accomplish, exactly?

It also ties into this disturbing trend among European powers that seems mired in the tired old appeasement policy which led us down some horrific roads. The EU powers (Engalnd excepted) seem to fall over themselves to avoid confrontation. See the German Fench move to block the US in its moves against Iraq and generally a year ago.

Oh puh-lease, the stench of bullshit stinks to high heaven. How is Iraq similar to Nazi Germany? What the fuck did Iraq even have to do with Al-Quaeda at all, before the US stormed in and ended up inadvertently forcing them to declare that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?

Yes, the rational answer is that they do not want to become targets of terrorist action, but frankly, with the US on high alert and rampaging in the ME, the terrorists are now preying on Europe anyway and Spain is paying them dividends for this action. By their inaction they have become the very targets that they sought to avoid.

This is NOT a license to EU bash but a serious discussion on whether Europe has learned the lessons of appeasement and avoiding a problem or whether this is actually the US's fault for stirring up the hornet's nest or any other theories that you yourself may have about this situation.

Is Spain making a big mistake and why?

Spain is making the same decision that its people wanted to make a year ago. This has nothing to do with "appeasement", and don't waste air invoking false analogies to Chamberlain.

[Darth Wong]

By the way, by this "logic", Bush's tax cuts are appeasement of domestic terrorism, since taxes were a large part of the anarchist platform which produced Tim McVeigh.

[Sharp-kun]

The socialist promised to withraw thier forces before the attacks.
Although polls before the attack saw the PP winning.

I think the attck won the vote for the socilats.
A party should do wath they promised after a vote, it's the right thing to do imo.

Yes, but does that make it any less misguided? I didn't supprt the Iraq war, but now that we're in there it makes far more sense for all countrys to simply make the best of it.

The poll should have been postponed a week, simply for people to calm down and vote with clear minds. A stable Iraq is far more likely to reduce the threat to Spain than abandoning it is.

[Stravo]

Mike are you saying its a good idea to bow to terrorist pressure? Does that not invite more attacks? And the president at the time was ahead in the polls in Spain UNTIL the attack. Afterwards there was a sudden change in direction and people wanted the fuck out.

Nor was I making Iraq into Nazi Germany. I am making Al-Qeada into Nazi Germany. They are fanatical bullies who seem to collapse like a house of cards when directly confroted as we saw in Afghanistan. They blow themsleves and innocents up to make a point and when you give in that does not mean the attacks will stop. It means they now know what you will bow to.

When Osamma saw the US run the hell out of Somalia he deduced that the US was afraid of casualties of any kind. So he crafted his next set of big attacks to cause as much casualties as possible. This is not something new. The point is that Spain has decided to give into terrorist pressure much liek European powers of old gave into German pressure time and again.

[Knife]

Meh, it doesn't help. But I'll reserve judgment untill I see if Spain goes out and figures out all the angles from the attack and what Spain does when they know who, what, where, and why.

As far as the Iraq angle, I care and I don't at the same time. If they wish to pull out, its on them. But remember politics is politics and slights like this will be remembered if they ask for a favor down the road.

For the terrorists? Perception is reality in shit like this so I am sure that the events in Spain will be used as proof of victory. But the propaganda will only be really worth it if Spain fails to deal with the actual Madrid bombings by not either hunting the terrorists down or massively distrupting them.

If Spain effectively deals with the terrorist cells that perpetuated the crime in Madrid then the victory of the terrorists will be hallow.

[Darth Wong]

Mike are you saying its a good idea to bow to terrorist pressure?

No, I'm saying that if you want to make a decision, you should make it regardless of whether terrorists want you to or not. You, on the other hand, seem to be saying that regardless of public sentiment, the state should always do whatever terrorists DON'T want.

Does that not invite more attacks? And the president at the time was ahead in the polls in Spain UNTIL the attack. Afterwards there was a sudden change in direction and people wanted the fuck out.

Are you seriously saying that the general Spanish population was pro-war the whole time? The fact that the opposition was floundering does not change the anti-war sentiment in Spain, nor does it change the fact that the government paid a legitimate price for trying to pin the blame on ETA and play down AQ, thus making it look like it was trying to use the bombing for political gain.

Nor was I making Iraq into Nazi Germany. I am making Al-Qeada into Nazi Germany.

Then why do you keep talking about Spain pulling out of Iraq?

They are fanatical bullies who seem to collapse like a house of cards when directly confroted as we saw in Afghanistan. They blow themsleves and innocents up to make a point and when you give in that does not mean the attacks will stop. It means they now know what you will bow to.

Nice rhetoric. However, they do not "collapse like a house of cards" when confronted, as evidenced by the fact that they continue to conduct their operations. And people should make decisions based on their own motives, not based on doing whatever is the opposite of what terrorists want.

When Osamma saw the US run the hell out of Somalia he deduced that the US was afraid of casualties of any kind. So he crafted his next set of big attacks to cause as much casualties as possible. This is not something new. The point is that Spain has decided to give into terrorist pressure much liek European powers of old gave into German pressure time and again.

Let's try applying that point from before: when Osama saw the US run the Hell out of Somalia he deduced that the US was afraid of casualties of any kind. So Timothy McVeigh crafted his attack to cause as much casualties as possible. The point is that by cutting taxes as people like Tim McVeigh wanted, the US gave into terrorist pressure.

See the error in your logic?

[RogueIce]

Well, I said it in the other thread and I guess I'll say it here. The timing sucked. Regardless of what prior intentions were, coming out and saying it within what, three days of the attack? That makes it look like they're bowing to pressure, and easily gives the terrorists the "victory" they wanted.

IMO, if they'd put it off for awhile (IIRC, they're sticking around to 30 July anyway), it wouldn't have been as easy to say it's in reaction to the attacks as it would be now. But, since they announced it so soon after, the perception is there, and like Knife said, to a lot of people (not just terrorists) perception is reality.

[Thinkmarble]

The government of Aznar stated that the ETA was responsible for the attack because they thought it favourable for their party eventhou after this position became untenable. The vote swing is more due to the fact that the people were disgusted by the obvious lying about "their 9/11" to garner votes then due to the attack alone.

[Joe]

It doesn't matter whether or not Spain was really giving into pressure, I personally would be willing to bet that the socialist victory had as much to do with Aznar's refusal to come out and blame AQ as it did the attacks themselves. What matters is that the terrorists will perceive it that way.

[Colonel Olrik]

First of all, Stravo, welcome back

Second, I recomend you to read thisthread, as my opinion and the other and others have been extensively debated.

I'll get back here later, just want to add this: You're mistaken about tthe authors of the bombing having escaped, there have been about twenty arrests, many of the arrested have already been found directly guilty (they have in custody many of the guys who planted the bombs). Most of my sources are Spanish (www.elmundo.es). Can you read it?

[Rogue 9]

I'm not saying you're completely wrong, Mike, but several parallels can be drawn between Hussein's Iraq and Nazi Germany, mainly the practice of gassing citizens of the country who belong to ethnic minorities.

[TheDarkling]

I'm not saying you're completely wrong, Mike, but several parallels can be drawn between Hussein's Iraq and Nazi Germany, mainly the practice of gassing citizens of the country who belong to ethnic minorities.

Indeed, other startling parallels include both nations using tanks in their militaries and both nations also using electricity. The more one digs the more damming these similarities become.

[0.1]

The Spanish election regardless of outcome is a signal to every terrorist organization around the world that they can change governments with a few choice explosives placed at the right spots.

BS arguments aside about sweeping victory for democracy, it's a sweeping victory for terrorism because of the impression it generated. The Aznar government mishandled the investigation, but would've won with the exception of that incident. This is where the except for argument comes in. As in, except for the terrorist action in Madrid, the socialist would not have won the election.

All this does in the long run is invite additional terrorist acts because of the perception that it will greatly influence world events up to and including changes in government. Spain will now receive a repreive for those acts because a more tractable government has been put in place.

Did the Spanish people make a mistake?

Nope, I don't think so, they opted to preserve their own lives and sparing themselves from further attacks, and have managed to do so with the change in government. That's a very logical thing to do, self preservation. Might that necessarily help them in the long run, who knows. Given the potential downside of a faltering relationship with the U.S. is minimal, the unintended consequence is that the Spanish people came out ahead all around.

In the same token, the German people didn't really make a mistake either when they put Hitler in the chancellory, they did it out of the need for self preservation. Now before the idiots start sounding off about an unfair direct comparison between Spain and Nazi Germany (you know who you are), the point is that people make fundamental choices aimed at their own immediate benefit, usually without considering long term consequences, and that's just human nature.

[Stravo]

First of all, Stravo, welcome back

Second, I recomend you to read thisthread, as my opinion and the other and others have been extensively debated.

I'll get back here later, just want to add this: You're mistaken about tthe authors of the bombing having escaped, there have been about twenty arrests, many of the arrested have already been found directly guilty (they have in custody many of the guys who planted the bombs). Most of my sources are Spanish (www.elmundo.es). Can you read it?

Thank you Colonel and yes I can read it. Its nice to see it from another perspective than the Philadelphia Enquirer. Sometimes I feel like I'm disconnected from the rest of the world down here. (No offense to my Philly bretheren but this is no New York)

[Rogue 9]

I'm not saying you're completely wrong, Mike, but several parallels can be drawn between Hussein's Iraq and Nazi Germany, mainly the practice of gassing citizens of the country who belong to ethnic minorities.

Indeed, other startling parallels include both nations using tanks in their militaries and both nations also using electricity. The more one digs the more damming these similarities become.

Other parallels include absolute authoritarian government, a penchant towards wars of conquest inflicted upon their neighbors, the use of secret police (a characteristic admittedly shared by almost all totalitarian nations), and heavy oppression of individual citizens. I do not claim that they are identical, but there are similarities. Electricity and the use of tanks are not directly relevant to whether the two nations were governed in a similar fashion.

[Colonel Olrik]

Mike are you saying its a good idea to bow to terrorist pressure? Does that not invite more attacks? And the president at the time was ahead in the polls in Spain UNTIL the attack. Afterwards there was a sudden change in direction and people wanted the fuck out.

The prime minister party (Spain doesn't have a president, they have a King ) was indeed ahead in the polls, despite 85% of the population (together with the population of countries like the UK and Portugal) having been against the war since the beginning. It was not a new feeling. It will be very difficult for you to prove that the 10% of votes that changed were not a consequence of the facade the government puled with ETA, trying to make morons out of the voters.

Nor was I making Iraq into Nazi Germany. I am making Al-Qeada into Nazi Germany. They are fanatical bullies who seem to collapse like a house of cards when directly confroted as we saw in Afghanistan. They blow themsleves and innocents up to make a point and when you give in that does not mean the attacks will stop. It means they now know what you will bow to.

They seem to be handling the Paquistanese army quite well, giving whole divisions a run for their money. Not a behaviour to be expected from a house of cards.

The point is that Spain has decided to give into terrorist pressure much liek European powers of old gave into German pressure time and again.

Prove that the terrorists will be any less virulent if Spain stays in Iraq, and keep in mind that we are going after the responsibles, who are definitely not in Iraq.

[0.1]

Olrik,

As you well know, the reason that the Al Qaeda managed to stave off the Pakistani army as long as it did is because the Pakistani army simply could not go in to do what a army would normally do, which is to pulverize a target.

They have all these tribal sensibilities to take care of. They are still negotiating the last I checked. Think about how funny that is.... Let's negotiate with the terrorists so that we can minimize casualties.

[TheDarkling]

Other parallels include absolute authoritarian government, a penchant towards wars of conquest inflicted upon their neighbors, the use of secret police (a characteristic admittedly shared by almost all totalitarian nations), and heavy oppression of individual citizens. I do not claim that they are identical, but there are similarities. Electricity and the use of tanks are not directly relevant to whether the two nations were governed in a similar fashion.

You almost got it, the use of tanks is not relevant you are correct but nor is the gassing of citizens to the question of appeasement (which is what was being alluded to), this was my point which you seem to have stumbled over but not fully realised.

Of course I don't really by into all the talk about appeasement even when it was applied to Chamberlain (people over simplify his actions so that they seem akin to offering virgin sacrifices to an angry Volcanoes instead of being what they really were) but that is another story.

[Alyeska]

Spain did NOT bow down to terrorist pressure. The party that was elected has had the very same goals for a very long time now. Spain elected a party because they were sick and tired of the past one.

Now irregardless of why the new spanish party has been put in power and what they plan to do, the terrorists will note that they can influence elections.

The big question here is do we let terrorism so thurougly rule our lives that we vote AGAINST our desires just to spite the terrorists? No, you do your damnedest to stick to your ideals, terrorists be damned. The terrorists will get the wrong impression. Spain isn't bowing down to terrorists, the are giving them the finger saying that they will do what they damned well please. Spain is already demanding international support in hunting down those responsible for the attacks. Hunting down and imprisoning terrorists aren't going to make them happy and Spain doesn't give a flying fuck what the terrorists think.

[Stravo]

Of course I don't really by into all the talk about appeasement even when it was applied to Chamberlain (people over simplify his actions so that they seem akin to offering virgin sacrifices to an angry Volcanoes instead of being what they really were) but that is another story.

The key to the problem of appeasement is that it assumes the other side is willing to do what you're doing - compromising. When the other side is unwilling to compromise then you have a problem as we see with the fanatical Muslim sects who see it as their god given duty to oppose or destroy us.

Chamberlain was willing to do anything for Peace in our Time. The man across the table was not. The true tragedy is that Chamberlain did not want to or could not see it.

[Colonel Olrik]

Olrik,

As you well know, the reason that the Al Qaeda managed to stave off the Pakistani army as long as it did is because the Pakistani army simply could not go in to do what a army would normally do, which is to pulverize a target.

They have all these tribal sensibilities to take care of. They are still negotiating the last I checked. Think about how funny that is.... Let's negotiate with the terrorists so that we can minimize casualties.

And your point is? They have the explicit support of many tribes, thousands of men willing to fight for them, they've successfully driven off or escaped major attacking forces here and elsewhere, therefore they do not fall like a house of cards.

[0.1]

The point is simple, had they wanted to, they (the Pakistani army) could've turned that entire area into a smoking pyre. The reason they didn't is humanitarian and political. Wouldn't look very good on CNN if they slaughtered everyone else to get at the handful of Taliban or Al Qaeda.

The point is, terrorist organizations as a whole DO NOT and NEVER WILL have the ability to handle any regular military as you seem to be implying. Otherwise, the PLO would've long ago confronted the Israeli military directly. Their capabilities to fight a conventional fight is negligible at best, the reason they've survived is because they've insulated themselves into the local populace, and the sensibilities of the militaries involved does not permit their immediate destruction.

Think Afghanistan for example, what was preventing the U.S. from turning that place to a radioactive wasteland that no one would've escaped from. I'll give you a hint, it wasn't because of Afghanistan's natural resources.