Socialist claim victory in Spain

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, what you have to agree on is that al Qaeda is not stupid. They are way ahead of the curve for the most part and are enormously effective in their tactics and stragegy. This enemy is the most sophisticated manipulator of public opinion since.... Well, name a terrorist organization that was more effective.

If you get into this line of thinking, then why not say they used 9/11 to manipulate the US into greater involvement in the ME to strenghten themselves.....

Again, even if AQ is happy with the results, just becuase AQ is happy does not make them bad results. Its like saying you can't be happy for the end of facism cause communists are happy with that too.

The world is not black and white, and neither is any one person or group, no matter how close they might come to one of those two shades.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap

They also have every right to make a decision based on cost-benefit to Spain. It would behoove them to consider the impact of sending a message on that Cost-benefit. It may still be that the vote is desirable from the point of view of Spains cost benefit, yet harmful from the point of view of the rest of the world. How does expressing disappointment at the harm done to the rest of the world imply that Spain didnt have the right to do what it did?

Voters within any sovereign state have no responsibility towards the world-not voters in the US, not voters in Spain. That is one of the basic tennets of soverign nation-states that happen to be democracies. As for the contention this vote might harm the rest of the world- that is left to be seen: most liekly that can never be answered.



Then that answers your own question about the issue, does it not?

1. I understand what soveriegnty is. States have the right to put their own interests first - whether its regard to supporting an occupation, voting for a green house gas treaty, or whatever else. It is MY right to note what they do, and to express disappointment.

2. No it does not answer my question, since my question was NOT "will spain veto NATO participation" but "will Spain keep its troops in Iraq if the the multinational force falls under NATO control but not UN control" The question of Spain vetoing NATO participation was raised by YOU, not by ME.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Except that the data was manipulated to downplay the uncertainty that the CIA had, while ignoring many of the Agency's misgivings about the information that contradicted the Bush Admin's claims. Congress was deliberately given bogus information.

But hopefully Bush won't survive (politically) the election to be able to be impeached. Instead we can toss his ass in prison!

I am very sure you are right, Che. This explanation completely explains the Clinton administration's conclusions to the same effect. Ditto Britain, etc., etc., etc. Bush manipulated all of them, even while governor of Texas.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

2. No it does not answer my question, since my question was NOT "will spain veto NATO participation" but "will Spain keep its troops in Iraq if the the multinational force falls under NATO control but not UN control" The question of Spain vetoing NATO participation was raised by YOU, not by ME.

If Spain voted to allow NATO to take a more active role, than vote in and of itself would be valuable. Whether they would contribute token forces-well, you get there when you get there.

[Ned]

GePap, if you think that al Qaeda is right, well of course you are pleased with the results in Spain. I assume you will also be pleased when al Qaeda attacks the United States just before our elections in order to defeat Bush and elect Kerry.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ned
LoTM, come on. They announced they attacked Spain because of its support of Afghanistan and Iraq.

I dont necessarily believe everything Al Qaeeda says.

They will announce as reasons whatever they think likely to win them support in the muslim world, regardless of what their true motivation is.

Aside from which, at this point we dont know if the people who gave the orders for the bombing are the same people as those who released the video.

We're making alot of assumptions here about who and what Al qaeeda is. There is a leadership, includuing Ayamn Zawahiri, and OBL (IF he is alive) moving in the Afghan-Pakistan border area. There is another group of leaders includin Said Al adel and Saad Bin laden in Iran. These leadership groups communicate with underground cells and with aboveground PR "fronts" via various surreptitious means. Apparently some of both the cells and the fronts act on their own from time to time. Given all that I would suggest some degress of skepticism about what any given"announcement" actually represents.

[Ned]

I checked Kerry's major speech today on "terrorism." His only reference to Spain was to call for increased security for US railways.

There is no mention of the socialist victory or their annouced goal of withdrawing from Iraq.

I assume though, that Kerry will say that this is a good thing as it shows that if he were president the Spanish would not pull out.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, if you think that al Qaeda is right, well of course you are pleased with the results in Spain. I assume you will also be pleased when al Qaeda attacks the United States just before our elections in order to defeat Bush and elect Kerry.

I am sure with people like you in the electorate that would not be true Neddy. Be sure that the Nedaverse sadly covers more people than just you.

BUt I appriciate the troll. Keep up the comedy Neddy

[Alfonso]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Congratulations to the socialists and to the people of Spain

Thanks in name of the PSOE, paiktis22.

[Q Classic]

i don't know if anybody's mentioned this?

http://news.google.com/news?num=30&hl=en&edition=us&q=cluster:www%2elgib%2egov%2euk%2fnews%2fstory%2ehtml%3fnewsId%3d1207

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap


I am sure with people like you in the electorate that would not be true Neddy. Be sure that the Nedaverse sadly covers more people than just you.

BUt I appriciate the troll. Keep up the comedy Neddy

Trolling aside, al Qaeda must really be encouraged that it can influence elections. I now fully expect a major attack just before the elections.

[Q Classic]

seems like it. ah, well.

so how many troops are we talking about leaving? <3k, but...?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned


Trolling aside, al Qaeda must really be encouraged that it can influence elections. I now fully expect a major attack just before the elections.

And if AQ succeeds, what does this say about the state of Homeland security under Bush?

[Q Classic]

i don't know if it would lead to a kerry victory.

if anything, it would probably keep things just as contentious as they were, with bush pointing a finger at kerry and saying that with him in power, you're going to get more of this, while kerry will point at bush and say that with him in power, you're going to get more of this.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
That's what happened. People were set to re-elect the PP

This is the fallacy you conservatoves are convinced of. If anything, Spain has shown us yesterday evening that their polls are usually inaccurate: the opinion polls conducted on election day didn't give us a clear picture (two polls believed the PP won, one poll believed the PSOE won), and we could have no definitive answer of the winner at 20:00.
So, how can you assert "the people were set to reelect the PP"? Based on the oh-so-trustworthy polls that show a tiny difference one week ago?

The attacks (or more accurately, the lies about them) may have tilted the balance. But we're not even sure of that. The assertion that the PP was bound to win is pure BAM, or pure bull**** if you prefer.