Elections in Spain

[The Fool]

Damn convenient for you that Australia -- so far -- has been out-of-sight out-of-mind. Those silly dead tourists were no great loss, huh? Turn the other cheek, yada-yada-yada.

How is your conversion to Islam coming, or is that already your religion? Brushing up on the arabic too I hope.

Spineless idiots.

Have you checked under your bed lately? There are probably a few under there too.

 

[demon]

corplinx:
"The sad thing is, Islamic Fundie Terrorists pick their targets due to opportunity."

You Americans really don`t get irony do you?

It's depressing how the assessment of "terrorists" takes place in a vacuum.
Terrorists will think nothing of taking a few thousand lives; for example, if a city has to suffer a bomb attack, or if Iraq has to twist in the wind in tortured chaos they'll let it happen.
That the US has killed 10s of thousands isn't apparently worthy of mention. That it could also stop Iraq from twisting in the wind by handing over the core functionality of building Iraq to the UN, including stopping the selloff of its economy, also doesn't bear mentioning.

No application of this standard to the US. It is only "terrorists" who are subjected to a 'nihilism/realism' judgment. They are vicious while the US is benign.

You are a terrorist in the Middle East if you defend yourself from occupation through bloody and vicious means. However, you are a moderate if you attack using even bloodier and more vicious means.

The sinister hypocrisy and double standards of crackpot Western liberals and their and their not so liberal counterparts.

 

[subgenius]

Does everyone agree that changing a vote solely because of the bombings themselves is not a good thing?
Does everyone agree that calling names does nothing to further rational discussion? If someone is, in your opinion, so off base that you have to call them a name, there is no need to engage them in any further discourse.
Just looking for a little common ground. I think there is some. I continue to feel that people (on this forum, at least) have more in common than in conflict if they can just hear each other.
Its cold dark windy and rainy here in Detroit tonight.
I'm sure there's a lot of pain being felt in Spain tonight.
No parent should have to bury their child.

 

[a_unique_person]

It is no worse than choosing your vote because you haven't been bombed. Our PM is always keen to present himself as the tough guy who is keeping us safe with his aggressive foriegn policy, and ridiculing the opposition for being weak. If a bomb brings home to people that tought talk and bluster to get some votes is not entirely moral, then that is what happens. Our PM is a very dangerous man, and people don't seem to realise that because he comes across as such an ordinary, boring person.

 

[demon]

It`s good news! The Spanish government has fallen beneath the wrath of dignified, defiant Spaniards, who, like many of us, have understood that "terrorist violence", particularly from ones own government and in the face of overwhelming opposition, will not be tolerated. They have indeed shown us a lesson in democracy! They, like millions around the world have understood that their government was not a freedom fighter or liberator (what sordid relativism eh?) but a terrorist entity; that peaceful change could and does take place.

I`m looking forward to having a beer with like minded cosmopolitans tomorrow and toasting the coming downfall of the next terrorist organisation - the British labour government.

 

[subgenius]

If that's in response to me (AUP), I agree that changing an otherwise informed vote because you haven't been bombed may be ill considered, as well.
Always hard to determine whether A happened because of B, or despite of it.
Maybe a good reason that pure terror must be ignored in making decisions. Distracts from keeping your eye on your goal.
America took all kinds of measures in the wake of a terrorist attack, that in my opinion were ill advised.
If they should have been taken there was no more reason to take them the day after than the day before.

 

[Wrath of the Swarm]

What about the people who changed their votes because the incumbent party tried to keep the evidence pointing to al-Qaeda out of the public eye until after the elections?

If I were a Spanish citizen, that would have been a significant factor for me. I don't appreciate being lied to - and worse, they did so in such a transparent manner that I'd feel they'd insulted my intelligence in the process.

 

[a_unique_person]

If that's in response to me (AUP), I agree that changing an otherwise informed vote because you haven't been bombed may be ill considered, as well.
Always hard to determine whether A happened because of B, or despite of it.
Maybe a good reason that pure terror must be ignored in making decisions. Distracts from keeping your eye on your goal.
America took all kinds of measures in the wake of a terrorist attack, that in my opinion were ill advised.
If they should have been taken there was no more reason to take them the day after than the day before.

One of the aims of terror is to provoke. Look at Iraq. If the US hadn't invaded Afghanistan, it may not have found it so easy to invade Iraq.

 

[peptoabysmal]

It`s good news! The Spanish government has fallen beneath the wrath of dignified, defiant Spaniards, who, like many of us, have understood that "terrorist violence", particularly from ones own government and in the face of overwhelming opposition, will not be tolerated. They have indeed shown us a lesson in democracy! They, like millions around the world have understood that their government was not a freedom fighter or liberator (what sordid relativism eh?) but a terrorist entity; that peaceful change could and does take place.

I`m looking forward to having a beer with like minded cosmopolitans tomorrow and toasting the coming downfall of the next terrorist organisation - the British labour government.

So you're happy that al-Queda blew Spain back into Socialism?

 

[demon]

I don`t get you point...sounds like another non sequitir but don`t worry, there seems to be a lot of it about.
Spaniards blew Spain back into Socialism...don`t insult them by attributing their decison to al-Queda. They voted, that`s democracy. Just because you don`t like the way they voted and the message it sends to warmongers then tough.

 

[subgenius]

What about the people who changed their votes because the incumbent party tried to keep the evidence pointing to al-Qaeda out of the public eye until after the elections?

If I were a Spanish citizen, that would have been a significant factor for me. I don't appreciate being lied to - and worse, they did so in such a transparent manner that I'd feel they'd insulted my intelligence in the process.

The point has already been made that, if true, that would be a valid consideration.
A day or two is too short of a time to let the dust, and blood, settle. Or to determine the truth or falsity of the premise.

 

[demon]

I see in some quarters the voting in of a democratically elected leader is causing some disquiet.
A few days ago the ousting of a democratically elected leader in Haiti was greeted with hoots, rounds of applause and patriotic flag waving.
I guess those who aren`t happy about the result would have liked it if the US could have stepped in and "brought democracy" to Spain.
Tough eh?

 

[Cleopatra]

Does everyone agree that changing a vote solely because of the bombings themselves is not a good thing?

Obviously not. There are people in this forum that they celebrate today that a terrorist organization influenced the outcome of a democratic election.

I feel that I am so right sometimes when I am skeptical about the benefits of parliamental democracy and the habit of counting votes instead of scalling them.

Does everyone agree that calling names does nothing to further rational discussion? If someone is, in your opinion, so off base that you have to call them a name, there is no need to engage them in any further discourse.

Oh well, we have been throught this many times.

 

[richardm]

90% of the Spanish population were opposed to the war in Iraq, according to some polls.

Is it really so surprising that the government should be heavily thumped in the following election?

Perhaps the bomb attack simply served as a "Told you so" for many voters, but didn't really change the way they were intending to vote. Although perhaps it contributed to the large turnout (77% is pretty good going).

 

[Cleopatra]

Well three days before the elections ( I mean on the eve of the event) the polls showed that Aznar was more that 5% ahead of the Socialists so, there are serious reason to believe that they changed their opinion vecause of this terrorist act.

 

[hammegk]

That reminds me very much of the pre-WWI rubbish that was going on. Bluster, confrontation and pride.

Do you consider that WW1 had a significant religious component?

Don't foret, to a large extent, WWII was merely the conclusion of WWI.

I agree.


The question is, do you contend the world would be a better place today if neither had been fought?

 

[richardm]

Well three days before the elections ( I mean on the eve of the event) the polls showed that Aznar was more that 5% ahead of the Socialists so, there are serious reason to believe that they changed their opinion vecause of this terrorist act.

Hmm, true enough. Although 5% isn't much of a lead, and the ultimate loss was only by 4%, which must be close to the margin of error for the polls.

Still, I wonder if this means Britain can expect to be targetted in 2005/6?

 

[Ziggurat]

It`s good news! The Spanish government has fallen beneath the wrath of dignified, defiant Spaniards, who, like many of us, have understood that "terrorist violence", particularly from ones own government and in the face of overwhelming opposition, will not be tolerated. They have indeed shown us a lesson in democracy! They, like millions around the world have understood that their government was not a freedom fighter or liberator (what sordid relativism eh?) but a terrorist entity; that peaceful change could and does take place.

Wow. Al Quaeda kills two hundred Spaniards, and you call the GOVERNMENT a terrorist organization. You really are the worst sort of appologist. You are a terrorist sympathiser. But you'll disagree with me, because you don't sympathise with the government. You are a craven coward, and should be ashamed of yourself. But of course, you won't be, worm.

I`m looking forward to having a beer with like minded cosmopolitans tomorrow and toasting the coming downfall of the next terrorist organisation - the British labour government.

I note that your type never toasts the downfall of real dictators and tyrants like Saddam, whose crimes were actual genocide and not merely espousing a political philosophy contradictory to yours. And you wondered why I called you an appologist for genocide? Tell me, worm, would you toast the downfall of the mularchy in Iran? Did you toast the downfall of the Taliban? Would you toast the downfall of Al Quaeda? Sure as hell doesn't sound like it to me.

 

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by demon
That it could also stop Iraq from twisting in the wind by handing over the core functionality of building Iraq to the UN, including stopping the selloff of its economy, also doesn't bear mentioning.

Iraqis don't WANT the UN doing the reconstruction. And why would they? The UN never did anything for them, and was in fact complicit in maintaining their misery for its own benefit through the corrupt oil for food program. But of course, you never cared about what they wanted, you were happy to see Saddam stay in power. And you want the criminals who benefited from Saddam's corruption to be the ones to take over after him.

No application of this standard to the US. It is only "terrorists" who are subjected to a 'nihilism/realism' judgment. They are vicious while the US is benign.

It's funny that YOU are accusing someone else of being a nihilist. Saddam kills hundreds of thousands of his own people and his neighbors, and you don't want him brought to justice because of some false concern for the cost of the invasion (I say false because you never, ever consider the cost to Iraqis of maintaining the status quo). That's abandoning any sense that justice can or should be obtained. That's a rejection that anything in this world is worth fighting for (unless it involves killing Israelis). That, in short is nihilism.

 

[WildCat]

I can't help but think that the terrorists have learned how easily they can influence Spanish elections through the killing of innocents. No doubt they will try to apply this lesson to other countries in the future.

Will the politicians now bend over backwards to appease the terrorists, especially in Europe?

It's a dangerous precedent.