Analysis of Spain's elections [R]

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Speedball, Mar 14, 2004.

  1. tcmahoney

    tcmahoney New Member

    Feb 14, 1999
    Metronatural
    He has a mandate to remove them from Iraq. Pay attention.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/sept11/dailyUpdate.html

    Quote from this roundup:

    Spaniards strongly support the war on terrorism, but they do not see the war in Iraq as part of that effort.

    "We love America – Faulkner, Hemingway, Coca-Cola and Marilyn Monroe – but we have something against your government," said Luis Gonzales, 56, a high school Spanish literature teacher, as he stopped to view the rows of candles, flowers, and makeshift signs at the central Puerta del Sol. "Aznar took us into a war that wasn't our war, but only for the benefit of the extreme right and the American companies."


    If we are going to want help abroad, btousley, we are going to need to address perceptions like this. Whether you like it or not.

    Put it another way: To carry your logic to its conclusion, you have to accept that the Spanish people picked Osama Bin Laden over George W. Bush. Care to address why that is, then?

    Even a Bush-hater like me has no problem proclaiming that GWB is a far better person than OBL. Given that fact, the job we're doing convincing people outside of our borders -- you know, what we used to call diplomacy -- is an absolutely awe-inspiring masterpiece of shit that is not in the best interests of this country.
     
  2. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    1. I said "start".

    2. Assertion yes - proof no - As I explained earlier - Group #3 ("out of towners") are the ones conducting these indiscriminate bombings. Even the Baathists have not sought to kill large numbers of civilians.

    regarding your last comment on the Popular Party - why would AQ attack if the PP was on the way out - what do they have to gain?

    Kerry will directly or indirectly blame Bush - it is the core essence of his campaign - that he is more qualified to lead the country than Bush specifically in the area of national security and foreign affairs. If there is an attack - he will blame Bush - one way or the other.
     
  3. MadridForever

    MadridForever Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 29, 2001
    Madrid, Spain
    AGAIN, the reason of why Popular party lost the elections was:

    1 - Aznar took the decision to support the invasion of Iraq when in the surveys the 90% of the people of Spain was against that war. 9 millons of people went to the street saying "No war", but he didn't change his decision and support USA and UK. The people is very upset about that decision. Would Bush attacked Iraq with the 90% of the US citizens against the decision? I don't think so. Bush had the support of his people, well, at least more than 50%.

    2 - After the massacre of Madrid, with the people stilll dying at the hospitals, with all the country and the families crying for the victims, he took the decision to continue blaming ETA even when all the clues indicates that Al Qaeda were the real guilties, and all the governments and media around the world said that Al Qaeda was the assasins. You can't play with the pain and suffer of the people. He was lying only for his benefit, to win the elections, he should have told the truth for the families, for his country,... not hide the truth in the benefit of his party until the day after the elections (that was his intention). What would have happened if a massacre happen in USA and Bush defending his own interests said that it had been Al Qaeda when all the clues indicated that the real guilties are US anti-government militia American Christian Patriots? I think that the people in USA would be very upset with Bush.


    3 - The reaction of the people after the Madrid massacre was defend the democracy, to say to the the terrorists that they aren't going to win/intimidate the people of Spain. And the form that the people though that was better to show that support to the democracy was:

    1- Go to the streets. 11 million of spaniards went to the streets the friday night to show the terrorism that they will never win.

    2 - Go to vote. The participation of the last election was the biggest in the last 20 years of elections. They want to show the terrorist that the democracy in Spain is very strong. Many people that wasn't go to vote in the last elections went to vote the last sunday. And many of that people was young people that were totally against the invasion of Iraq. Consequence a big part of the "new" voters vote to socialist (socialist is similar to democratic party in USA or labour party in UK, popular party is similar to republican party in USA).

    The combination of these 3 points make popular party lost the elections.

    In his first speech as president the night of sunday, the first thing that made Zapatero was dedicate a emotive minute of silence to the victims, the second thing the he said was that his first priority would be the fight against terrorism.

    But he won't support a invasion of a country without the support of U.N. as happened with Iraq (He was agree with Afganistan war because it had the support of U.N). One of his promises as candidate was that If the U.N. doesn't take control of Iraq, the spaniards troops would come back to Spain the June 30.

    It's hard blow to Bush and Blair. It means that Blair is "alone" in Europe in his support to the invasion of Iraq, and that Bush "only" have the "big" support of UK.
     
  4. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    He will remove them from Iraq - IAW the mandate - we all know that.

    He will not be able to save face without also removing support in Afghanistan - guess what - our government also took us into Afghanistan to take the battle to AQ strongholds. So to follow that logic - by not working with the US government - they should pull out of arrangements there also.
    I don't disagree that we need the help of Europe and UN in Iraq - we knew that in advance - but they did not want us to go in the first place - if they have not figured it out by now - it is as much a concern of theirs as our to stabilize the Iraqi situation just as much as to exterminate AQ in the mountains of Afghanistan. That should have been the message that Europe would have learned from the Spain bombings - but old habits die hard.
    Let's be realistic here - many of the European countries and citizens tolerate (and occasionally like) our culture and country. But most tend to the left of center (at least from the center of the US demographic) and for a long time have seen various US politicians - Reagan, Bush I, Bush II as cowboys and mavericks. Conversely - the leaders from the Democratic party that have been closer to their political persuasion and very supportive of the dominion of the UN - more closely align with what they politically admire and so it goes. Not a crisis - just reality. What concerns me more is long term security issues and if the Spanish think that by removing themselves from Iraq (and potentially Afghanistan) they are more stable - more power to em. I think they are flat wrong and time will tell.
     
  5. Foosinho

    Foosinho New Member

    Jan 11, 1999
    New Albany, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Where do you get this stuff? Out of thin air?
     
  6. Ombak

    Ombak Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 19, 1999
    Irvine, CA
    Club:
    Flamengo Rio Janeiro
    Nat'l Team:
    Brazil
    Could be his ass.
     
  7. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    I respect your opinion - but I have to ask a few questions?

    Aznar did not come straight right away - we all know this -

    But do you think that by removing yourselves from Iraq you will be more secure - whether or not the UN is in charge? What difference will that make to the security of Spain? What did the UN do to prevent the train bombing? They certainly did nothing to prevent 9/11.

    Which political party is going to be more aggressive in eliminating terrorism? Which one has the track record of going after it?

    If the Spanish election results were truly a vote against terrorism and in favor of democracy - then I would expect to see a big ramp up of Spanish military effort wherever in the world AQ is lurking. Looking forward to it.
     
  8. tcmahoney

    tcmahoney New Member

    Feb 14, 1999
    Metronatural
    Follow what logic? I don't see any logic there. BTW, MadridForever -- who's actually, like, y'know, in Spain -- just flat-out contradicted you.

    "Stabilize the Iraqi situation?" :rolleyes:

    Hey, Saddam is a bad, bad man. But I don't think getting rid of him was worth twelve digits of cash and the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers.

    Again, what does Iraq have to do with AQ?

    Nice to see you realize there's a difference between Iraq and Afghanistan at long last. Would now be a good time to point out that pretty much all of Europe supported our efforts in Afghanistan? Would now be a good time to point out that you haven't answered my questions about the utter failure of US diplomacy once we shifted targets?
     
  9. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    if the Spanish voter does not trust involvement with the present US government - why stay with us in Afghanistan? Let's see - we will fight with you in one area - but despite the fact that AQ is active in the other - we won't.

    I'll bet that the majority of Iraqis are glad Saddam is gone and that they have a new future to look forward to - once the country is stabilized and a new government starts to take hold.

    AQ is in Iraq - only a fool would deny it.

    In terms of diplomacy and shifting targets .... we all understand how easily defendible going into lawless Afghanistan was based on satellite imagery and intelligence information which appeared pretty straightforward. And we thought the case was the same in Iraq - as we have found out intelligence gathering is not a perfect endeavor.
     
  10. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If btousley read, then he'd have new information, and might even learn something. That can lead to changing one's mind.

    And that is very, very dangerous to his ilk.
     
  11. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So far as I've read, his mandate was just about Iraq. If you have any info about Afghanistan, please share it. Or is this more of your ignorance at work?
     
  12. SoFla Metro

    SoFla Metro Member

    Jul 21, 2000
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    He's heard it from service personnel. You'll just have to trust him.
     
  13. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I figure they'll be +1300 in the "secure Spaniards" department.
     
  14. tcmahoney

    tcmahoney New Member

    Feb 14, 1999
    Metronatural
    I would say that the Spanish government will stay with the US in Afghanistan because -- get this -- it's opposing terrorism!

    I hope you're right. I have zero confidence in this current adminstration to pull off that task, though. I figured long, long ago that the war itself wouldn't be a problem -- it would be the peace that was the problem, and that this administration had no clue as to how to handle the peace. I was under no illusions that we would invade, they'd throw rose petals at our feet and everyone would be in home in time for the World Series.

    They are now. Not before the war they weren't. Except in a section of Iraq where a "I (heart) Saddam Hussein" pin on your lapel was a great way to commit suicide.

    Except, of course, that Iraq had nothing to do with AQ.
     
  15. SoFla Metro

    SoFla Metro Member

    Jul 21, 2000
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    I see you've studied at the George W. Bush International School of Nuance.

    In fact, a majority of Iraqis are glad to be rid of Saddam. However, and here's where it gets tricky for those who refuse to see the world in shades of gray, virtually the same number of Iraqis don't want us either.

    Cause and effect aren't your strong suit, are they?

    Especially when we ignore the intelligence that doesn't conform to our expected endgame.
     
  16. tcmahoney

    tcmahoney New Member

    Feb 14, 1999
    Metronatural
    Let it be noted for the record that so far, btousley has avoided answering this question.
     
  17. Sardinia

    Sardinia New Member

    Oct 1, 2002
    Sardinia, Italy, EU
    I'd call it realism not cynicism.

    A european is and can be idealist just like an american but with a more pragmatic and distrustful attitude.
    We are still more political and engaged in direct political fighting.

    That's why as you know we have more mass demos, more strikes, welfare etc. etc.

    Europe invented all the modern political ideologies so we should know something about ideas and idealism.
    And the most of you are near descendants of europeans.
    So it's better not to overestimate the difference between europeans and americans.

    [realism]Let's not forget though that generalizations are dumb by definition.
    So I suspect all our hijacking discussion is by a large amount a dumb one.[/realism]
     
  18. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    a very productive insightful post

    yes I had already seen and read the link - and the Pew report yesterday.

    a wonderful piece with quotes from Albright and Kerry and a snippet at the very bottom detailing the positive aspects of the Pew report. But there is no point of letting any positive about Iraq getting in the way of supporting the European Union and the UN.
     
  19. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    they voted out of fear my dear.
     
  20. btousley

    btousley New Member

    Jul 12, 1999
    is this your hero?

    "The credibility of the United States is sinking," said Madeleine Albright, who was secretary of state under President Bill Clinton. "Osama bin Laden has been able to do something that 40 years of communism was unable to do, which is to divide Europe from the United States."

    yes that from the Secretary of State of the administration that lobbed cruise missiles in the middle of the night to deal with the problem -

    and you are using this source to justify your views.
     
  21. tcmahoney

    tcmahoney New Member

    Feb 14, 1999
    Metronatural
    And the Spaniards on this thread have already called BS on that assertion.
     
  22. chibchab

    chibchab Member

    Jul 8, 2002
    New Jersey
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is just one of the many wrong things you've said on this thread.
     
  23. tcmahoney

    tcmahoney New Member

    Feb 14, 1999
    Metronatural
    I don't particularly consider her my hero. And I disagree with her: It's not Osama that's dividing Europe from the United States, it's George W. Bush who's doing that. That he's managing this feat with evil guys Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein (who are connected only in that they're both evil bastards) on the other side just tells you how utterly incompetent this administration is.

    You're either completely ignorant or completely dishonest to ignore that the Republicans at the time were more concerned about Monica Lewinsky than Osama bin Laden.

    That's not the source I use to justify my views. Again, pay attention.
     
  24. obie

    obie New Member

    Nov 18, 1998
    NY, NY
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    By this definition it's already started, since we are well below our Iraq War troop peak already. But I'd love to know when you think the word "finished" could be used. My guess is not in my lifetime - and I'm not yet at middle age (I hope).
    Ah, yes, the famous-yet-unsubstantiated "flypaper" theory. Given the stories from, hmm let's see, today, I wouldn't say that the Iraqis love us.

    They weren't on the way out -- only Aznar was.

    Same offer stands -- if Kerry comes out and blames Bush for any future attacks, I pledge to vote for Dubya. If there's another attack and Kerry doesn't blame Bush, you pledge to vote for Kerry. Deal?
     
  25. SoFla Metro

    SoFla Metro Member

    Jul 21, 2000
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Not really

    She's kinda right, you know.

    Forgetting the asinine quality of this comment to begin with, let me remind you that Clinton, at the very least, lobbed those cruise missiles at the right freaking country.

    At least we're using sources.
     

Share This Page