Will our election protect us?

Will our election protect us?
: I wonder whether our upcoming election will protect us from al Qaeda attacks.

They obviously wanted to affect Spain’s elections — and succeeded, getting rid of the Conservative government allied with Bush’s war effort.

But if they want to get rid of Bush, the worst thing they could do is attack here. I do not believe that American voters would react to an attack — like the Spanish — and blame the guy the terrorists blame. Quite to the contrary, an attack would make us angry and defiant and would send us toward Bush, especially since he is still the one acting tougher on terrorism.

And the terrorists are not idiots, politically. So if they want to show they can wage influence in world politics, they are more likely, unfortunately, to go after America’s other allies. God forbid.

: But even the anti-war Guardian says that an attack in England would not help the terrorists get rid of Bush-ally Blair:

…ministers are privately calculating the prospects for a “security election” in Britain in which a similar attack may be attempted….

But Labour’s leadership believes that an attack similar to Madrid would have the effect of driving British voters, more evenly divided on the war, behind strong and established leadership.

With the Conservatives (unlike Spain’s socialists) pro-war, the Liberal Democrats may benefit most from anti-Blair voting.

The Tory defence spokesman, Nicholas Soames, backed the Blair analysis. “In times of trouble, you don’t want change, you want the status quo.” conceded another senior opposition MP.

  • Mike G

    Who says they’re not idiots? What part of their highly successful strategy to have their few toeholds toward Islamic totalitarianism overthrown and be hunted down like dogs everywhere on earth doesn’t suggest that at bottom, no matter how they may occasionally have semi-tactical thoughts, they are (or were) utter, clueless, delusional simpletons?

  • Al Qaeda has almost always proven tactically gifted, yet strategically bereft. And they certainly grossly miscalculated America’s reaction to the 9/11 attacks. They never dreamed we’d take the actions we did.

  • What’s this nonsense about “Bush is tougher on terrorists?” How? Where?
    Where’s the evidence that he’s so tough on terrorists? How many has he caught? Seen any executed? Osama’s still at large, and Al Qaeda is larger than ever.
    Doesn’t sound all that tough to me.
    He talks tougher about terrorists, sure. But talk is cheap.
    Action is hard.

  • Fred Flintstone

    I just wish the Bush campaign had the balls to run a billboard ad picturing Kerry with a rubber stamp that says “100% Al Qaeda Approved.”
    I’d say that would clear drive the message home, and drive the democrats crazy, which is what they already are.
    The coming election is not about Right vs. left, its about Right vs. wrong.
    PS. Perhaps if Bin Laden only targeted Howard Stern, I’d give them a onetime pass.

  • Mike G

    >Al Qaeda is larger than ever.
    That’s an extraordinary statement. Care to attempt to support it with facts?

  • Jeff, I think you’re wrong. The Spanish did not vote out the PP because they blamed the PP for the attack. They voted them out because the government, with a history of crisis mismanagement (Prestige oil spill), was in the midst of mismanaging an even larger crisis.
    The kneejerk reaction ignores all the news that came out of Spain between the attack and the election.

  • bill

    Great to see that everyone’s become an expert on Spain in only days and applying the same level of analysis as they did to their coloring books back in grade 3.
    A small matter: 90% of Spaniards opposed involvement in the Iraq war and the government was already on thin ice before the election. The fact that Aznar blamed ETA straight off without proof maybe didn’t help.
    And if I hear one more person claiming that the US has more experience with terrorism in Europe, why, I just might have to send y’all a history book.

  • oh

    Ain’t gonna happen. Don’t fight the last war. Spain was a unique case.
    There’s a point at which Americans are going to realize we need to change regimes to get back into the community of nations.
    We’ll remove George Bush ourselves, no attacks necessary.

  • Matthew Cromer

    You mean the Community of Nations making illegal weapons deals with Saddam, or the Community of Nations paid off by him directly?

  • KMK

    “In matters of national security, the best politics is no politics.”
    One of our greatest American Democrats said that. Aznar blamed ETA, he let the information leak out about AQ instead of hitting it head on. He put politics ahead of the needs of the people in a time of crisis. The people voted his party out.
    Spain is still an American ally. My friends in Spain are looking at their own media the same way we are. Spin and disappointment. They have repeatedly told me the election was not a knee jerk reaction to the terrorist attack. It was a reaction to their elected leader who tried to lie and manipulate them in order to stay in power. Quite a few were disgusted to read, less then a week after the attack, while they were still in shock and mourning, what did the attack and election mean to Bush and Blair’s coalition. I haven’t commented on it before this. The attack left me raw and flashing back to 9/11. My first thought were for my friends and their families not how it would all play out in the political arena. When news first hit and I went looking for information and I was shocked and appalled by some of the comments. Total disregard for human suffering and partisan BS. As their allies we should have provided assistance even if only our hearts and minds. They were attacked twice once by AQ and then by political spin. I expected better from my countrymen and the international community.

  • Greg D

    That’s a joke, right? You’re trying to be sarcastic, and failing, right?
    IOW, you know about all those al Qaeda leaders caught, the hundreds of millions of dollars confiscated, Afghanistan and Iraq no longer supporting them, etc. Right?
    Or are you really as ignorant as you seem?

  • But if they want to get rid of Bush, the worst thing they could do is attack here.
    Do they know that?
    This is the question that haunts me. These people don’t understand how Americans think and react; they’ve proved that in the past.

  • raygunnot

    What makes you think Al Queda wants to get rid of Bush (or Blair)? They have been useful idiots for the terrorist cause. Bin Laden was trying to get Bush to stupidly attack Iraq, putting our forces within easier reach of terror minded individuals, as well as easing the pressure on Afghanistan.
    The idea that the Madrid attack was cleverly designed to defeat Aznar is similarly farfetched. Did they know him well enough to predict that he would lie and blatantly try to pin the blame on ETA, thus losing the election? That’s a result I don’t believe anyone could have expected to turn an election.
    Only a farsighted and well coordinated international effort has any chance of defeating the terrorists. Anybody who can read knows the aWol administration is not capable of leading this effort. Having Bush in office is the terrorists best chance for survival.