Appeasement has the expected result

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Nash
Yeah and it only took a few years PRIOR to that attack that Spain's government said they were gonna pull out.

No, the socialists were in the opposition, with no chance of winning the election. Therefore (because they are socialist) they naturally took whatever position on the war in Iraq that they felt would gain them most votes...Im sure you understand.

So we have the government having committed itself in the war against terror. And we have the opposition, desperately trying to get votes by saying "we will pull the troops out as soon as we can because we are chicken**** pacifist ****heads". The government has a 15-20 point lead in all polls.

This is the situation in Spanish politics when Al Quaeda enters the equation.  

The decided that if they attack Spanish targets, the public opinion will swing in favour of the pacifists. They think it will take 2-3 attacks to scare the spaniards into submission...Well, it only took one.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by -dead-
Hmm sounds to me like you're arguing against your original position there.

Please clarify.

[-dead-]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Please clarify.

Well you seem to be stating that given about the same conditions in the US, it would be too simple to say it was appeasement. Yet you assert it's simply appeasement in Spain's case.

[Frogm4n]

[Nash]

Okay I see what yer getting at Grunland,

Lets say that Kerry does want out of Iraq, is behind in the polls, is getting big-time pats on the back from terrorist countries like France (heh), and that the terrorists blow up the Sears Tower 3 days before the election.

And Kerry won.

That would be appeasement, according to your "relevant background info".

So, up until we have the actual terrorist attack all of that more or less parallels your scenario... depending on which week the polls come out.

Now we get the attack, and the Sears Tower no longer towers.

Then the current admin comes out and says "This was the work of a sick Timothy McVeigh type person. Anti-government. We remain secure from outside terror".

He might even bolster that argument with such zingers as "... thanks to our war in Iraq." A lie.

But then it becomes appearent... or excuse me, is "perceived".... to be the work of actual al Quaeda.

and....

Bush gets tossed, Kerry wins.

Appeasers?

[Nash]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Whoa!!!

So whatever response we make to the terrorists is irrelevant because we shouldnt be concerned about how our actions will affect their assesement of us, their assesement of their tactics, their planning for future operations etc? Those are all influenced by the way they think, and what they think - especally in response to our actions..

So its a terrible mistake to not consider and not care what the enemy is thinking....

Because thats exactly the full implication of what you just said Nash...

Ah... So you recommend changes in policy based on the terrorists demands?

Spare me the "tactics and planning" BS.

Their thinking, according to you was: bomb = change in government.

Yeah... lets consider that for 5 seconds.

Now we must be oh so careful in considering this?

[-dead-]

Originally posted by -dead-
Well you seem to be stating that given about the same conditions in the US, it would be too simple to say it was appeasement. Yet you assert it's simply appeasement in Spain's case.

Oops nevermind - curse my reading comprehension!

[Nash]

Originally posted by Hortlund

So we have the government having committed itself in the war against terror.  

Oops. Was that a typo? Because actually  they commited themselves to a war in Iraq.

Like you said: "I'm sure you understand".

though... in my case, I am not as sure.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Nash
Oops. Was that a typo? Because actually  they commited themselves to a war in Iraq.

Like you said: "I'm sure you understand".

though... in my case, I am not as sure.

Ah, time to start flogging the "there were no ties between Iraq and Terrorism"-horse again I see.


Try to get it into your head that there are other terrorist organizations on this planet than Al Quaeda.

I know there were ties between Iraq and Al Quaeda, everyone knows about the cell operating in northern Iraq, but you will never believe or acknowledge that, simply because it doesnt fit the pacifist agenda. Lets ignore Al Quaeda for now, and focus on Hamas and Al Acqsa martyrs brigades and Hezbollah. Three terrorist organizations responsible for the deaths of hundreds of civilians.  

There were ties betwen Iraq and these...yes? The Iraqi government did pay 20 000 USD to the families of every suicide bomber...yes? Or are you denying that too?

[Nash]

Wow, Iraqis responsible for the deaths of hundreds of... Iraqis?

That's just terrible. I agree.

Now how about the Saudis that were behind the wheel of this whole mess. Or the al Quaeda that organized them? Maybe that's just a wee bit more on point, wouldn't you agree? Funny you should mention Al Acqsa whoever the shreck they are... but yet somehow ignore the, ya know, obvious. Doesn't work so well for you?

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Nash
Okay I see what yer getting at Grunland,

Lets say that Kerry does want out of Iraq, is behind in the polls, is getting big-time pats on the back from terrorist countries like France (heh), and that the terrorists blow up the Sears Tower 3 days before the election.

And Kerry won.

That would be appeasement, according to your "relevant background info".

So, up until we have the actual terrorist attack all of that more or less parallels your scenario... depending on which week the polls come out.

Now we get the attack, and the Sears Tower no longer towers.

Then the current admin comes out and says "This was the work of a sick Timothy McVeigh type person. Anti-government. We remain secure from outside terror".

He might even bolster that argument with such zingers as "... thanks to our war in Iraq." A lie.

But then it becomes appearent... or excuse me, is "perceived".... to be the work of actual al Quaeda.

and....

Bush gets tossed, Kerry wins.

Appeasers?

Well I'm curious as to the exent of this ETA  focus theory you hold as cause of the election turn. Yuy are aware that the spanish did just recently before the 311 train attack  arrest an eta terrorist with several hundred pounds of explosives in a van headed for a major spanish city.. You would think that would make them have give serious consideration to an eta source of the bombings, particularly since early tests indicated that the explosive used was often used by eta and of course becaiuse it appeared they were not suiced bombings as recently favored by the islamic terrorists.  Plus IIRC we knew on the first day that that they found a stolen van with koranic tapes near the train bombings, so I'm not sure how much they govt could have been trying to cobver up an islamic cause for the bombings.

[Maniac]

The Spaniards are dropping the ball, I would expect nothing else from a pacifist socialist government. shreck em.

Ok, ill say it then, And this coming from a guy in Sweden!!!

90% of the Spanish population was against sending troops to Iraq.

The Goverment that was in charge when the terrorist attack took place blamed it on ETA when they knew that Al Qaida was behind the attack.

The Spanish people dont like it when their goverment lies to them, so they vote for changing goverment...

It all makes sence...

As i said before, it seems its only in the USA that the citizens like to be lied too...

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Nash
Wow, Iraqis responsible for the deaths of hundreds of... Iraqis?

Israelis...and Americans.

That's just terrible. I agree.

Now how about the Saudis that were behind the wheel of this whole mess. Or the al Quaeda that organized them? Maybe that's just a wee bit more on point, wouldn't you agree? Funny you should mention Al Acqsa whoever the shreck they are... but yet somehow ignore the, ya know, obvious. Doesn't work so well for you? [/B]

You should read up a tad more on the conflict in the mid east before issuing statements on what should or should not be done in the war on terror. You say alot about how the saudis are behind everything, but you dont even know who the AL Acqsa martyrs brigades are? It kinda lessens the impacts of your words if you dont mind me saying so.

Anyway, your saudi masterminds, the ones who are "the weels of this whole mess" could you elaborate some on exactly what the hell you mean when you say that? I suspect this is not some independent analysis made by you, so maybe you could point us in the direction of the webpage you got that from?

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Nash
Ah... So you recommend changes in policy based on the terrorists demands?

Spare me the "tactics and planning" BS.

Their thinking, according to you was: bomb = change in government.

Yeah... lets consider that for 5 seconds.

Now we must be oh so careful in considering this?

Yes thats exactly what they would think and if they think they are succesful they would to to repaeat it, more likely than if they though it would not be succesful.

Why sapre you the tcatictics and planning BS? Do you have any idea how those are really just simple every day concepts that all of us engage in our daily lives to make decsion based on responses and results and percetions. You seem to be saying it BS because its too high order of a satement, too complex for this context - but its not, its real and its what they are thinking about when they analyse our responses?

Or are you saying the arab islamic terrorists are thoughtles? Now of course we shouldnt be praising them as clever, but they are rational thinking human beings who choosde actions logically (our logic and intent differ naturally) in part based on our responses..

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Hortlund
Do the numbers. So they double in Afghanistan, from 100-something to 200-something, meanwhile they pull back 1000-something from Iraq.

Nice catch Hortlund.  

The Spanish have about 1,200 in Iraq.

In Afghanistan they have about 125, and are doubling up to 250.  But it still isn't appeasement.  At least in my opinion.  Those 250 will still be in Afghantistan fighting against the Tailban and Al Quaeda.  Which is certainly more than any of us are doing and alot more than other countries are doing.

PS: Sweden gave us Daniel Alfredson and lost to Byelorussia, so it will always have a soft spot in my heart.  


Grun,

"But the outcome was clear, they voted for the prty they felt would make the terror go away.  Unfortunately it was from a point of view of appeasement. "

Can you please demostrate how the outcome is clear.  Because every I have read seems to indicate otherwise.  The party in power had already lost a great amount of approval rating and was still in decline.

After such a controversial statement, I imagine you actually have some sort of demostratable proof that, "They voted for the part they felt.  Unfortunately it was from a point of view of appeasement.".

I doubt you can.  I imagine you are either lying are spreading lies.  How many people voted for the PP last election, how many this?  What was the reasons stated by the Spaniards in the exit polls?

However we must remember that the same socialit party that won these elections had a somewhat cozy relationship with the basque terrorists, in IIRC fact there was great public emarasement for them when it was discoverd they were in scret talks recently with the basque terrorists.

Liar or spreader of lies, which is it?

"ETA seeks talks, Spain Socialists scoff at it
ANDREW CAWTHORNE & ESTELLE SHIRBON          
 
 
 
MADRID, MARCH 21: Basque separatist group ETA called for dialogue with Spain�s incoming government but pledged to maintain its armed campaign for an independent homeland, according to a new communique. The overture follows PM-elect Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero�s surprise win in last week�s polls and the March 11 Madrid train bombings, initially blamed on ETA but now linked to Muslim militants.

The Socialists immediately poured cold water on the words of a ��terrorist�� organisation. ��We give no validity to a communique from ETA which is a terrorist group,�� a spokeswoman said. Sources in the moderate nationalist Basque regional government were also unimpressed."


"Spain Socialists Reject Dialogue With ETA
By ED McCULLOUGH Associated Press Writer

 MADRID, Spain (AP) - Spain's incoming Socialist government on Sunday rejected an offer for dialogue from the Basque separatist group ETA, calling it "a communique by a terrorist group."


Liar or spreader of lies, which is it?

Come on Grun.  Are you an ignorant sycophant than merely parrots that which is told to you, without bothering to take two second to put "Spain Socialist ETA" into a search engine because it might make you think?  Or are you a liar?


Let me guess.  It was neither you read your documentation without at all understanding it.  And thought some how that the Catalonia was all of Spain?

"is campaign was marred by the disclosure that his party's coalition partner in the Catalan regional government had held secret talks with ETA, after which ETA declared a partial ceasefire limited to Catalonia."