A nation of Neville Chamberlains

A nation of Neville Chamberlains

: David Brooks tiptoes up to the line — “I am trying not to think harshly of the Spanish” — but then he speaks the harsh truth about the Spanish election:

What is the Spanish word for appeasement

There are millions of Americans, in and out of government, who believe the swing Spanish voters are shamefully trying to seek a separate peace in the war on terror.

I’m resisting that conclusion, because I don’t know what mix of issues swung the Spanish election during those final days. But I do know that reversing course in the wake of a terrorist attack is inexcusable. I don’t care what the policy is. You do not give terrorists the chance to think that their methods work. You do not give them the chance to celebrate victories. When you do that, you make the world a more dangerous place, for others and probably for yourself.

We can be pretty sure now that this will not be the last of the election-eve massacres. Al Qaeda will regard Spain as a splendid triumph. After all, how often have murderers altered a democratic election? And having done it once, why stop now? Why should they not now massacre Italians, Poles, Americans and Brits?

Al Qaeda has now induced one nation to abandon the Iraqi people.

Well said. This echoes what I said in response to Steven Johnson, below.

Every citizen of every civilized country in the world has an obligation to every other citizen to fight united against terrorists.

Brooks goes onto affirm that the same thing would not happen in an election here:

Does anyone doubt that Americans and Europeans have different moral and political cultures? Yesterday the chief of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, told Italy’s La Stampa, “It is clear that using force is not the answer to resolving the conflict with terrorists.” Does he really think capitulation or negotiation works better? Can you imagine John Kerry or George Bush saying that?

Nor is America itself without blame. Where was our State Department? Why hasn’t Colin Powell spent the past few years crisscrossing Europe so that voters there would at least know the arguments for the liberation of Iraq, would at least have some accurate picture of Americans, rather than the crude cowboy stereotype propagated by the European media? Why does the Bush administration make it so hard for its friends? Why is it so unable to reach out?

This is a watershed event. It will change how Al Qaeda thinks about the world. It will change how Europeans see the world. It will constrain American policy for years to come.

And like it or not, al Qaeda has crowned us the leaders of the civilized world.

: Or look at it another way: We’re headed into an era of worldwide isolationism.

102 responses to “A nation of Neville Chamberlains”

  1. Giordano Avatar
    Giordano

    Yes, but every citizen also has the obligation to defend himself and his family first. And, analizing the Spanish vote saying that it was also a reaction to the attacks is wrongs. The attacks were the catalyst, but the truth is that in Spain, as in Italy were I live, the majority of the people were and are against the Iraqi war and will express that view in the next elections, attacks or not attacks.

  2. Shelley Avatar

    So what you’re saying is that the people in Spain had no right to vote the way they did; the same as the folks in the UK can’t vote against Blair, or the people in Australia against Howard, and we definitely have no right to vote against Bush–because any other vote gives in to the terrorists. Is that what you’re saying?

  3. shark Avatar

    Yes, but every citizen also has the obligation to defend himself and his family first
    That’s fine. But all the Spanish have sone is buy themselves some time. What happens when the terrorists decide they want Spain under Sharia?
    *BOOM* – that’s whats gonna happen.
    People can vote any way they want. But they will have to live with the consequences.

  4. billg Avatar

    BBc World Service just aired a report quoting an unidentified Briton as arguing for an “enlightened” approach to fighting terror which would “understand” the causes of terror. Many Spanish voters might agree with this.
    But that places responsibility for terror on the victims. This notion — that the victims are at fault for not changing their principles and their behavior to appease the terrorists — is folly. It is akin to Neolithic villagers sacrificing animals to placate the rain gods, and no more likely to be successful.
    We all need to understand that terrorism is not our fault. Terrorists are responsible for terror. No cause, no grievance, no belief can justify terrorism.
    The world has many ills that need to be understood and corrected, but appeasement of criminals only adds to the burdens of civilization.

  5. Swopa Avatar

    the majority of the people were and are against the Iraqi war and will express that view in the next elections, attacks or not attacks
    Amen. If the majority of Spaniards supported the Iraq war, then changed their minds after a terrorist attack, then you’d have a case for appeasement.
    But that’s not what happened. The Spanish people voted out a government that dragged them into a war that they overwhelmingly opposed, and then tried to lie to them about a terrorist attack. Sounds like a well-functioning democracy to me.
    Interestingly, at first Jeff pointed out that the Aznar government’s attempts to blame the attacks on ETA played an important role in its defeat. Now, he says “the harsh truth” is that it was appeasement. I wonder if he learned that he was out of step with the war-supporters’ party line.

  6. hen Avatar

    uh huh – the fact that days before the terror attack the majority party was picked to win easily of course just means that…..?
    AQ/terrorists set off bombs in Spain; Spainish people take to the streets en masse; then they crawl into the voting booths and give the terrorists what they desire. there is no other way to look at it – European appeasement at its absolute craven worst.

  7. shark Avatar

    But that’s not what happened. The Spanish people voted out a government that dragged them into a war that they overwhelmingly opposed, and then tried to lie to them about a terrorist attack. Sounds like a well-functioning democracy to me.
    Yet you ignore that Aznar’s party was ahead before the attacks.

  8. Swopa Avatar

    billg, your analogy is completely wrong. When doctors try to understand the causes of a disease like cancer, are they blaming the victims? No, they’re just trying to find a solution that works.
    Similarly, understanding the causes of fire helps you to realize that maybe pouring gasoline on one isn’t the best way to stop it.
    Unfortunately, too many people seem interested merely in the approach that makes them feel morally superior, rather than finding one that actually works.

  9. Swopa Avatar

    Both hen and shark ignore the Aznar government’s attempts to blame ETA for the Madrid bombings.
    Like I said, it’s the war-supporters’ party line. Punishing a government for lying doesn’t fit the approved worldview, so down the memory hole it goes.

  10. mrsizer Avatar

    finding one that actually works.
    That’s fine if the opposition is working under the same rules. We’re not facing a “loyal opposition”. We’re facing an enemy. They don’t want to be left alone, a concept that’s meaningless in today’s world anyway, they want to obliterate the infidel.
    There’s an obvious solution that works: Convert to Islam. Vote for a theocracy that will end your democracy – it will be your last vote but it will solve the problem. Anything less is insufficient and the attacks will continue.

  11. shark Avatar

    I am truly ashamed of this planet….never have I seen so much hue and cry and anger and bitterness over having done the right thing. Nobody, not even the biggest anti-war, anti-Bush activist can argue that we have done trememdous good in Iraq. (Well that’s not true, I expect to see the usual moonbat suspects will try to claim that, but they will be wrong). We’ve made trememdous strides there- really historic in many ways.
    But everyone is so angry.
    The Democrats are upset that we didn’t follow some debating society’s rules and act under UN jurisdiction
    The French and Germans are upset because we took out a source of illict money (weapons and kickbacks) that flowed to them
    The UN is upset because we wound up stopping the Oil for food corruption pipeline
    Others internationally are upset because America “acted unilaterally”, even though the laundry list of countries we acted in concert with is long. Even though we engaged the UN for months.
    And yet, Iraq is free. A new poll shows the Iraqis now have such horrible things to worry about like job security, instead of childrens gulags or rape rooms. Iraq has a constitution, and while not yet a true democracy, is farther down the road to that goal than any arab nation in that region- and the people are noticing in Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia. Libya also got the message.
    But no, everyone was against Iraq. Just disgusting. How many more mass graves would’ve been filled had we not done the right thing? Had we decided that we couldn’t do anything w/o UN sanction?
    Just an absolute disgrace

  12. triticale Avatar

    Swopa might do well to look at how backfires are used in fighting wildfires, as that is a closer analogy to US military action in Iraq than the pouring gasoline one.

  13. shark Avatar

    Both hen and shark ignore the Aznar government’s attempts to blame ETA for the Madrid bombings
    Ask Al-Qaeda if they’re making that distinction…

  14. KMK Avatar

    I commented below in your Will our election protect us? post. I find these views and analysis selfish and one sided no matter how delicately put. Anzar lied to his people and tried to manipulate the election. They voted him out democratically. Why is it believed the new party will turn a blind eye to terrorism? Just because they want to pull out of Iraq in June? The majority of Spain did not want to go to war. Do you think they were happy to be singled out as a weak link, ripe for an attack? Is this really how we intend to represent ourselves to the Spanish people, our allies? Good God, I am appalled.

  15. hen Avatar

    let me see if i have this right swopa — you say that despite Aznar’s gov being ahead before the bombing, due to the fact that they blamed ETA first and concentrated on that aspect, which seems reasonable, and it now appears to either have been Islamists or Islamists working with ETA THAT is why the Spainish voted in the appeasement Socialist gov. Do i have that correct? Do you also truly believe that?
    I remember after 9/11 within the first few days of the attack all we heard was “can’t blame the Muslims after all OKC was by …..” do you remember that?
    Saying the Spanish people voted in the Socialists to punish Aznar for not immediately blaming the Islamists is pure fiction.

  16. Blue Eyed Devil Avatar
    Blue Eyed Devil

    It seems we can now and maybe always could divide Eurasia into the FACE Cultures of the East and the ASS cultures of the West. Have these people no shame. Jesus! This was unilateral surrender. I don’t think even the Koreans would be this stupid. I expect this level of craven behavior from the Greeks and the French. But silly me I never thought the Spaniards would reach out so quickly to lift the robes of the invaders. What happens when no one from AQ shows up to sign the surrender documents. Do you think the Looney Left really believes the illogical crap they spew? Or does chronic deconstruction and the required dissembling cause brain damage. Perhaps the EcoPeeps should look into the long term exposure to chalk dust. Peace through surrender with the likes of AQ the ultimate IslamoFascists?? Are they delusional??
    Regards,
    Tim H.
    Filthy American

  17. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Well, the “appeasement” nonsense has apparently already been disposed of. There’s something else about this post puzzles me, though. Looking at it, I see two major themes:
    – We absolutely must not allow the terrorists to think their tactics dictate our policies, since that would be capitulation / appeasement / what have you;
    – The entire world must therefore follow Bush’s policy prescriptions, because al-Qaeda has de facto crowned him world leader.
    Am I the only one who sees a wee bit of a contradiction there?
    And colour me unsurprised to see Brooks distorting Romano Prodi’s comment. Here’s what Prodi actually said:
    Mr Prodi said Europe needed also to focus on “soft security” and work to develop co-operation with neighbouring countries…
    “It is clear that force alone cannot win the fight against terrorism. Europe’s response must be more wide-ranging than the American reaction.”
    Brooks deserves to be called on his distortion, and I hope Jeff won’t reproduce it without correcting it.
    Nobody, not even the biggest anti-war, anti-Bush activist can argue that we have[sic] done trememdous good in Iraq.
    I take it this is supposed to say “nobody can argue we haven’t done tremendous good in Iraq.” Well, except for the roughly half of Iraqis who don’t seem to think so… that’s roughly half. After living with “children’s gulags” and “rape rooms.” Not impressive, particularly if Saddam’s regime was supposed to have been horrific enough to justify its immediate removal at the expense of some ten thousand+ lives.
    That said, I’m not merely sniping at the poll shark is talking about, which does show a genuine window of hope for the US to stabilize Iraq if it manages to meet Iraqis’ high expectations. With Bush in charge, let’s just say that “if” is looking pretty big to me…

  18. KMK Avatar

    Belief that events can be mastered is the root of most political misfortune. Your all giving in to knee jerk reactions — the same thing you have accused the Spanish of.
    Read this interview with Nicolas Checa, a former adviser to the Zapatero campaign.
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/international/jan-june04/madrid_3-15.html
    What decided the election?
    MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Checa, what is your reading of what was the number one thing behind the outcome? In other words, was it Aznar’s support for the war against Bush or those people, or was it this public perception that he was trying to withhold information about who was behind the bombing?
    NICOLAS CHECA: Margaret, I really think what the key issue here is the handling or mishandling of public information in the 48 hours after the tragic events of last Thursday. I think it bears mentioning that the election was a statistical dead heat, according to public polls the morning of the tragedy on Thursday morning well within the margin of error, one or two points. And it was really not until Saturday evening, as Keith in your set-up shared with us, that the government decided to come forward with information as to the arrest of these five suspects linked to al-Qaida.
    As an example, it took a personal call from Prime Minister Elect Zapatero to the interior minister, the Spanish homeland security secretary, informing him that the Socialist Party was aware of the arrest and that he was prepared to move forward with that information. It took that kind of information to get the current government to come forward and announce to the country at large that in fact it was not the ETA lead that would generate success down the road in the investigation, but rather the al-Qaida route.
    Blair has already spoken with Zapatero
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1169695,00.html
    Stop reacting and start reading.

  19. belloscm Avatar
    belloscm

    So much for European “sophistication” and nuance. If the Spainards believe that their election of a Socialist government represents anything other than act of appeasement to both their friends and enemies, they are fools. Just like those who think that the Islamists have an asking price or that an “accomodation” can be arranged.
    The enemies of western civilization know that the Spanairds have thrown in the towel. No mas! they cried.

  20. hen Avatar

    “It is clear that force alone cannot win the fight against terrorism. Europe’s response must be more wide-ranging than the American reaction.”
    uh huh – that’s what we are doing? force only? well la-de-dah and here i am thinking we are going after the money men, we are trying to shut down the radical mosques, we are trying to prop up democracies in the ME, we have told the “palestinians” that with democracy will come a state, we have gone repeatedly to the UN for their support…but noo i guess i am wrong: all We are doing is using force — how silly of me.

  21. shark Avatar

    A point that has been made before, but bears repeating:
    Put the “appeasement” angle aside- they elected socialists.
    Scary either way…

  22. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    A Spanish voter speaks out:
    . . . the PP knew that their antiterrorist policy (against ETA) was one of its main winning cards, and they didn’t hesitate to blatantly manipulate the 11-M attack, suppressing information, calling people to demonstrate against ETA, knowing all the while that the Antiterrorist Information Brigade had as good as discarded ETA authorship a few hours after the attack. The antiterrorist police heads even threatened to resign at the madness of it all, and this was leaked to the opposition and the press. And all the while the state TVE showing documentaries about ETA activities right until late Saturday night, on the eve of the election, and failing to report live on Minister Acebes informing about the Al-Q line of investigation which he had been forced to acknowledge – forced by his own angered police heads and by the media which had all the information but was withholding it just long enough for the Minister to do the decent thing. This heartless manipulation of the dead for political gain clinched it – it was the last straw, it galvanised a portion of apathetic socialist voters who would have otherwise abstained, galvanised first-time voters, and galvanised Izquierda Unida voters (which include communists) who opted for heaping their vote on the PSOE for a higher chance of defeating Aznar (IU lost 5 seats because of that). In Spain, government change has always been heralded by a higher participation of voters. In a nutshell, many Spaniards felt badly abused, and acted accordingly. So, yes, 11-M influenced the vote, but not because we are overcome by fear, or because we think that we can avert further attacks, but because we will only put up with so much lying and manipulation, and especially not when it is the dead and their families that are being heartlessly and shamelessly manipulated.
    Amen to that. (Link here.

  23. billg Avatar

    Swopa, terrorism is not a disease to be cured, nor is it a fire to be put out.
    I am not ignoring the factors — real or perceived — that appear to motivate some people to assuage their grievances via acts of terror. Where injustice is real, it needs to be remedied. One effect of those remedies may be less terror in the future.
    However, I am saying this: No grievance can justifiy engaging in terrorism. Those who engage in terror are solely and completely responsibile for their actions. No one else, even those who may be directly contributing to the perceived injustice that the terrorists cite, bears any moral or ethical responsibility for those acts of terror.
    Terrorists want us to believe that we, ourselves, are to blame for the attacks they inflict on us. That is folly. All individuals are responsibile for their own actions. We must blame terrorists for terror.

  24. verdadera Avatar
    verdadera

    Nicolas Checa, a former adviser to the Zapatero campaign, it took a personal call … Zapatero … to get the current government to come forward.
    This is how spinners manipulate the press. How do you substantiate this or refute this? How do we know the true sequence of events, when the call took place, what the investigators timetable was? Is it not conceivable that the announcement of arrests could have been delayed to allow investigators to try and widen the net?
    I’m sorry, it was clear from the get go that Islamic fundamentalists were a suspect in the bombing. Yes, information was not entirely clear and forthcoming in the immediate hours after the event, is it ever? It appears to me that Spaniards allowed themselves to be manipulated about being manipulated.

  25. WhoMan Avatar

    “It is clear that using force is not the answer to resolving the conflict with terrorists.” Does he really think capitulation or negotiation works better?”
    I don’t understand this logic. It is the mentality of if-you-don’t-think-this-way-
    then-you-must-think-that-way.
    I happen to believe that using force is not the answer, but I also believe using force with some thoughts is!

  26. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    I’m sorry, it was clear from the get go that Islamic fundamentalists were a suspect in the bombing.
    And apparently, clear from the get go that Aznar didn’t want to admit it. Which is precisely the point Checa is making. Hence the disgust of Spaniards with Aznar.
    It appears to me that Spaniards allowed themselves to be manipulated about being manipulated.
    How PoMo of you. Out of curiosity, how do you substantiate or refute this?

  27. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    I happen to believe that using force is not the answer, but I also believe using force with some thoughts is!
    Yep. Not to mention that Prodi’s actual quote was different from Brooks’ distortion, as noted above. Taken on that sentence alone, Prodi could be accused of oversimplifying, but not of dismissing “force” out of hand.

  28. alex f Avatar

    In case you were wondering exactly who John Kerry’s foreign leaders were:
    http://www.foreignleaders4kerry.com

  29. Joe Peden Avatar
    Joe Peden

    Shelly, you can vote any way you want. Then you might want to look at the consequences of how you vote. Do you?

  30. shark Avatar

    The American people have a right to know what foreign leaders kerry has been talking to.
    What has he promised them for their support? Can it possibly undermine our current relations with them? Is he doing some sort of negotiating he is no position to be doing? What deals were made- if any? We deserve to know this.
    And after you tell me that…can you please tell me when Kerry will stop being AWOL from the Senate?

  31. Patricia Avatar
    Patricia

    First, my sympathies to the Spanish posters in their hours and days of grief.
    To vote out a government as a symbolic gesture against the Iraq war though ignores the fact that Spain, indeed all Western countries, were already in the “war” long before the American invasion of Iraq: the enemy just hadn’t lit the fuses yet. We were all targets, we all still are targets. Surely you don’t think the terror cells packed up and left the day after Spain’s election?
    Would that it were so easy to defeat such an enemy with only a ballot box.

  32. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    First, my sympathies to the Spanish posters in their hours and days of grief. . .
    Sympathies whose sincerity is hard to buy, given that you then go on to repeat the insulting, craven, self-serving and sickening “appeasement” argument. This is getting old. Fast.
    alex f: Ah ha! The perfidy of Black Jacques Chirac and Hitler Schroeder is revealed at last! Of course they’re exactly the same as Kim Jong Il! A million thank yous for foiling their dastardly plot to gain Power through the Unpatriotic John Kerry and his Liberal Fifth Column!

  33. shark Avatar

    Sympathies whose sincerity is hard to buy, given that you then go on to repeat the insulting, craven, self-serving and sickening “appeasement” argument. This is getting old. Fast.
    Then go elsewhere.
    The two positions- sympathy for Spain and “distaste” for their electoral choice aren’t mutually exclusive…

  34. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    The two positions- sympathy for Spain and “distaste” for their electoral choice aren’t mutually exclusive…
    Nor should “distaste” for their electoral choice be mututally exclusive of actually paying some attention to what they have to say about it. That’s what pisses me off more than anything else — even Jeff seems to have shifted from listening mode into braying mode.

  35. Dimmy Karras Avatar

    Who knew there were so many experts on Spanish politics writing on the blogs! I’ve been absolutely astounded these past few days.

  36. Wind Rose Hotel Avatar

    I think David Brooks is speaking the harsh truth about the Spanish election …

  37. Franky Avatar

    I can’t believe that people are spitting venom at the Spanish for voting out someone who decided to play politics with the Madrid explosion (blaming ETA when all indications pointed the other way). So bascially according to this, any leader who supported the war in Iraq can’t be voted out without the accusation of appeasement?

  38. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    –billg, your analogy is completely wrong. When doctors try to understand the causes of a disease like cancer, are they blaming the victims? No, they’re just trying to find a solution that works.–
    It’s their history, Swopa. I doesn’t work.

  39. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    –Mr Prodi said Europe needed also to focus on “soft security” and work to develop co-operation with neighbouring countries…
    “It is clear that force alone cannot win the fight against terrorism. Europe’s response must be more wide-ranging than the American reaction.” —
    And just what have they been doing the past 3 years that they decide NOW to develop cooperation?
    Besides, isn’t Prodi going to be running for something?
    And wasn’t it him who wanted to make CEO’s homes treated as businesses are treated with regard to search warrants?

  40. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    And what happens if ETA did have a hand in the bombings?
    It’ll be ignored.
    —
    As to isolation, nature of the beast especially since the end of the Cold War. Spain suffered the sling and arrows of words once upon a time, too. They haven’t forgotten who they once were and hope to be again.

  41. shark Avatar

    Nor should “distaste” for their electoral choice be mututally exclusive of actually paying some attention to what they have to say about it. That’s what pisses me off more than anything else
    fair enough, but once again, I seriously doubt that Al Qaeda is drawing any distinctions…

  42. KMK Avatar

    Basta!
    This is ridiculous. If you can read Spanish go here and take your pick from the newspapers.
    http://newslink.org/euspan.html
    If you can’t these two are in English. Read what they read as it happened. The ETA was blamed up down and sideways. After the ETA said they hadn’t done it they kept spinning claiming the ETA was afraid of reprisals.
    http://www.costablanca-news.com/front.htm
    http://www.surinenglish.com/index.php

  43. billg Avatar

    Sandy P.:
    That was no analogy. I believe terrorism is caused by people who decide to commit acts of terror. Terror is not caused by the real or perceived injustices or “crimes” terrorists point to in an effort to justify their actions.
    Terror does not happen unless individuals choose to make it happen. Whatever their reasons, they are solely to blame.
    Real injustice demands a remedy. Views on what constitututes “justice” differ and are often mutally exclusive, however. Therefore, terrorism will not be eliminated by striving for justice, since one person’s justice may well be another person’s injustice.
    My perfectly just world, for example, may strike you as openly unjust. If so, you would have a right to work toward for your own self-interest, but you would have no right to commit acts of terror. No such right exists. Acts of terror must be considered in isolation from the proclaimed motives of the terrorists.

  44. onecent Avatar

    So bascially according to this, any leader who supported the war in Iraq can’t be voted out without the accusation of appeasement?………shouldn’t be voted out under circumstances like the Spanish syndrome would be good advice.
    The fanatics are now emboldened by the success they had in Spain. France has received threats(from today’s Drudge)demanding they repeal their headscarf ban.
    http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8991515%255E1702,00.html
    The Spanish vote has had the profound effect of weakening the French on this position. Because the terrorist now know, that after the Louve is leveled, the French will demand appeasers to reverse the ban. I don’t think that Blair will get the terrorist’s endorsement, so London might lose some lives and real estate when they make their displeasure know. Knowing the terrorists want many of the things that are on Kerry’s agenda(the useless UN and French back in the picture, terrorism as a police action, and a record of intelligence and defense cut voting) voting for him borders on being a useful idiot. Thank the Spanish.

  45. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    No grievance can justifiy engaging in terrorism.
    But terrorists can thrive and recruit based on justified grievances. You’re asking the wrong question here, I think. The point Swopa was making isn’t “are the terrorists justified?” but “how do you serve your own interests best in fighting them”? If you rule out political strategy in advance as inherently being “capitulation” or “appeasement,” you grant the terrorists an easy win on the battlefield of ideas — the most important front in fighting an insurgent network.

  46. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    The fanatics are now emboldened by the success they had in Spain. [absurd chain of speculation snipped]
    onecent, have you ever heard the phrase “correlation is not causation”?

  47. Franky Avatar

    I’m aware of the terrible precedent of the elections, but I’m sick of this rampant xenophobia here. There were good reasons to vote him out. He took the country in to a war that 90% (need to verify, but know it’s very high) of the population opposed. Some warned that it would make Spain a target. It did. On top of all, Aznar then played the dirtiest politics, stalling, sending his interior minister out to swear it was in fact ETA.
    You don’t think those are grounds enough for the government to be voted out?
    If you’re intellecutally honest, I’m pretty sure most would agree that those factors in the abstract would be sufficient cause for a change of government. But it seems many here are not being fair, only demanding of the Spanish that they do right by America.
    Spanish don’t have to vote for the sake of America, just as the American people are not required to listen to a near consesus in the rest of the world when they decide between Kerry and Bush.

  48. verdadera Avatar
    verdadera

    editorial from the Arab News (allahpundit)
    “There simply was no cover-up. After Thursday, the Interior Ministry mounted press conferences with unprecedented frequency trying to pass on the facts as they became known, something unheard-of in any other democracy. Among these was the discovery of the white van with seven detonators and an audiotape with verses from the Qur

  49. billg Avatar

    Slack, I haven’t ruled out anything.
    The notion of “justified grievances” begs the question of what is justified? There is, and can be, no single, universal agreement on what is just (as I said above.) What amounts to perceived justice for one person often comes at the price of real injury inflicted on another.
    Presunably, terrorists believe they are respndng to “justified grievances”. Whether or not I, you, or anyone else, agrees with them is irrelevant. Their actions are impossible to justify. People are responsible for their behavior. We cannot absolve individuals of responsibility for the actions by imagining that their actions were forced on them willy-nilly, by their social and religious environment.
    You are wrong to assert that the “battlefield of ideas” is the most important arena to confront terror. Because the person who has decided to engage in terror has abandoned any discourse about ideas, it is pointless to attempt to engage that person in dialogue.
    Please stop trying to convince everyone that the victims of terror are responsible for terror. That is indefensible. Terror is caused by people who commit terror. They all had a choice; they chose to kill. For that, there is only one response.

  50. onecent Avatar

    Doctor Slack, blah and all of the other names that you go by(I’ve caught on: “Man of straw”, “straw men” usage under various names), take a hike.
    We’ve subdued Robert(left picking his nose in the upper latitudes), folks, should Doctor Slack(age 18 at most when you pick that moniker) continue soiling dialogue here?
    No response to any of your stupid pedantic rants, little fella, as promised, but a public service warning to not feed narcissists.
    Ignore. it will go away.

  51. Carl in N.H. Avatar
    Carl in N.H.

    Franky,
    Many here are hardly simply “xenophobic” in pointing out some obvious contradictions and consequences of the vote in Al-Andalusia:
    1. If the Al-Andalusians were so anti-Aznar to start with, why was the PP leading the polls prior to the bombings ?
    2. We hear many people saying they were pissed off because the PP was “spinning”. I’m hardly impressed with that, as the Socialists were spinning equally hard.
    3. In re point 1: it will be clear to the terrorists that they have a good chance of influencing elections via mass slaughter. So, many other citizens in other countries are likely to die as a consequence. I realize that Al-Andalusians can’t be expected to overcome their knee-jerk reactions by thinking about potential future consequences for people in other countries, but this is a real consequence.
    Just a tip:
    Accusations of xenophobic bias and statements such as “If you’re intellecutally honest” (a transparent rhetorical trick clearly intending to mean “if you don’t agree with me you’re stupid.”) will take away from the effect of your argument in a setting such as this. This is not a high school debate class.

  52. Mork Avatar

    Jeff, of all the gutless, quisling bullshit you have posted over the past few days, this takes the cake.
    If America is isolated from the rest of the world, it will not be because the rest of the world has any sympathy for Al Qaeda, or because it is not resolved to fight real terrorists, but because no one but the American war party still believes that the war in Iraq was part of the war against Islamic terror.
    What’s more, people have had a gutful of the American administration and, in the case of Australia and Britain, at least, their own governments, trying to browbeat them into accepting that it does in the face of the evidence before their eyes.
    In Australia, Howard will lose in November. Blair will be lucky to survive the year. What then, Jeff? Will Al Qaeda have won?
    My arse.
    People of your ilk have gone past being a necessary part of an important debate: the hostile insistence that anyone who doesn’t accept the war party’s priorities without reservation is somehow sympathetic to terrorism serves only to corrode people’s willingness to identify with each other and consider themselves part of a common struggle.
    If there is a fifth column operating in the west, it is those whose behavior serves only to divide and discredit our response to terrorism.
    In short, the only sensible response to anyone who tries to tell me that I have to vote their way or Al Qaeda wins (other than telling them to go fuck themselves) is the one that the Spanish people gave on Sunday.

  53. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Doctor Slack, blah and all of the other names that you go by
    Because how could more than one person possibly disagree with you or use the words “straw” and “man” in a sentence? Aren’t you a bright spark.
    Ignore. it will go away.
    Yes, ignore! Ignore! Fingers in ears! LALALALALA-I-can’t-hear-you! Thanks for demonstrating the freeper reaction to outbreaks of dialogue.
    There is, and can be, no single, universal agreement on what is just (as I said above.)
    Quite true. Unfortunately, that doesn’t render the question irrelevant. There can be no single, universal agreement on virtually everything — but politics goes on, and that’s a reality we have to live with.
    Presunably, terrorists believe they are respndng to “justified grievances”.
    What the terrorists believe isn’t strictly relevant. It’s what their audience can plausibly be made to believe that’s at issue.
    Let me use a concrete example. During the Malayan Emergency, Gen. Miles Templer turned the fortunes of the British by applying a carrot-and-stick approach. He seemingly “caved” to key social demands of the communist insurgents by instituting free schooling for children of all ethnicities, and by putting the country on a path to independence from foreign rule. At the same time, he went hard after the insurgents themselves, who with their key popular demands nullified were left fighting for a range of profoundly unpopular ideas which had been de-linked from their political cause.
    It worked. The insurgents were isolated and eventually beaten. And it worked because the British learned to adapt, to use politics as well as force and to abandon the tactic of merely haranguing the Malayans about the evils of the “left.”
    The lack of that kind of savvy ultimately doomed America’s efforts in Vietnam. It didn’t have to be that way, and it doesn’t have to be that way now. I’m not saying the situations are precisely analogous, but what I am saying is that there’s a troubling lack of an effective political dimension in the current American effort.

  54. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Mork: well said.

  55. verdadera Avatar
    verdadera

    I still love the Spaniards, I’ll still drink their wine, I’ll run with the bulls.
    On to the next story, move over Mullahs. The Iranians are taking it to the streets.

  56. Vicky Avatar

    Slacker
    So I guess as a woman I should just start wearing my Burqa since that is what the islamist / terrorist want, right? I mean that is another way other than force to stop the terrorism!

  57. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    So I guess as a woman I should just start wearing my Burqa since that is what the islamist / terrorist want, right?
    That’s right, Vick. Any argument for political prudence must automatically mean we should adopt each and every element of Salafi ideology, right down to its dress codes. Your logic is completely compelling.
    Of course, you know what that line of reasoning means. After Iraq, the US pulled its troops from Saudi Arabia, caving to a key al Qaeda demand. So, you see, the war is over and Osama has won. Burqas for everybody!
    … or, here’s an idea. Maybe you need to wrap your head around the concept that a single concession, made for your own purposes, doesn’t necessarily constitute “victory” for your opponent. Hmmm?

  58. Franky Avatar

    “This is not a high school debate class.”
    Yeah you appear right. I don’t remember as much condescension in high school debating class.
    go and look at the comments over the past days “cowards” “appeasers” are some of the more reprintable comments I remember.
    1) It was a last-minute vindication of the warnings the anti-war people had said in the run-up to this war. (Warning speculation ahead) People felt that maybe the anti-war crowd had over-hyped the threat of making Spain a target, and the bombing confirmed the direst warnings of the anti-war crowd.
    And I think democracy has been better served by a leader being voted out after taking his country in to a war the vast majority of people opposed, than him being re-elected.
    2) To assert “A” and say it loudly and “A” proves true, does that count as spinning?
    3) Yes, as I suggested I’m aware of the precedence of the actions. But this goes to the core of the whole war on terror. I don’t trust any of these leaders who are fighting for us. I’m a textbook example of someone who would support a war on violent fundamentalism and other superstitions, but I’m not going to give Bush, Blair etc a blank check to do what they want, which is essentially what the pro-war crowd here demands. Again, “with us or against us”. Think back on your life and remember all the times you’ve been presented with that choice. The person making it rarely had a good argument and hence used pressure.
    But I, like I imagine many Spaniards, cannot embrace the leaders of this war on terro when we see invasions of countries totally unrelated to terrorism, the absolute unqualified support of a war criminal in the Israeli PM’s chair (I’m no fan of Arafat either, but then my tax dollars to the tune of over $3 billion don’t go to Arafat year in year out – so forgive me for being more preoccupied by the person my government is supporting ahead of any other government in the world).
    If the US was serious about undermining the support for terrorism, it would insist on an equitable solution between Israel and Palestinians. If the US would stand up to Sharon and do that, then I would know they were serious about this. And again, I repeat: see a just agreement in Israel and Palestine and watch the non-hardcore support for AQ melt away. And I must admit that all the super hawks on Israel I blame for this current situation. The anger that Palestine conjures up in Muslims is incalculable, and all those who demand the keeping of settlements (again mostly lived in by people as fundamentalist as the worst of any other religion) are to me keeping the embers of terrorism alive.
    But our government is patently not interested in these goals. 15 hijackers from Saudi Arabia and we invade Iraq. Major funders come from Saudi Arabia, not one cent from Iraq, we invade Iraq.
    The US administration is using the war on terror to advance political goals that are unrelated to making us safer and eliminating the dogs of AQ.

  59. Vicky Avatar

    Slacker
    So you agree then that we shouldn’t address the demands of the terrorists; since their grievances include that we don’t bow down to Allah 5 times a day?

  60. Franky Avatar

    Onecent.
    Just out of interest, what type of person would try and get other people to stop talking to a particular poster on an exchange of ideas. You may not agree with Slack, but he’s always responded with arguments despite others personally insulting him. Why would you seek to banish that person?

  61. onecent Avatar

    Why would you seek to banish that person?.
    Banish? It’s a democracy. Let others decide. I’ve expressed my suspicions
    Persons……. slack, blah, Robert and you….my bet is that they are all they same……
    but he’s always responded with arguments…..that’s the point, like a manic speed dialer. go count. and, franky, so concerned about slack, just what’s your care unless you are one of his many incarnations. this is getting real stupid. isn’t it?
    jeff j……how long are you going to let this thug hijack your comments?

  62. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    So you agree then that we shouldn’t address the demands of the terrorists; since their grievances include that we don’t bow down to Allah 5 times a day?
    That’s right, Vick. All grievances were created exactly the same! And any tactic that addresses one of them must, obviously, amount to nothing less than total surrender and a conversion to the enemies ideology. Now you’re getting it!
    Of course, as per my post above, that means you must agitate for Bush to put troops back in Saudi Arabia right now lest he “address” a terrorist demand. Better get cracking… after you’re done praying to Mecca, of course, because as we both know he’s already surrendered. Let me know how it goes.
    I have homework to do as well, of course. Since Britain used political strategies during the Malaya Emergency, it’s patently obvious that they must have gone Maoist in 1950s and that the whole of British history since has been a sham. I’m off to contact the Political Commissar for the District of London and let him know you’ve deciphered the truth. I’ll report back later.

  63. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Damn, onecent’s gone genuinely paranoid. You know… I hate to say it, but it’s kind of fun to watch.
    Yes, I am everywhere, onecent. I am legion. I am every poster who has ever dared to disagree with you. You cannot escape me!
    *maniacal cackling laugh*

  64. Franky Avatar

    “That’s the point”?
    Were you embarrassed immediately after pressing “post”? So to be clear: THE POINT is that he posts a lot. And that somehow makes you so mad that you stick your hand up really quick and ask Teacher Jeff for the poster to be put out of the class?
    I don’t know if he’s coming in under different names and don’t really care (although I admit I don’t really see what the point of posting under multiple names is).
    I think Jeff’s blog has become really interesting of late as it is a genuine interchange of different viewpoints, unlike Atrios or Nicedoggie.net, and more the majority of people have been doing it in a respectful manner which ensures the debate continues and both parties hopefully learn something new….and the sad thing is that this appears to really threaten you.
    And by the way I’ll take you up on that bet, so hopefully you’ll be a little slower in making groundless accusations in the future. There’s a quick way to get the answer: ask Jeff where the comments are coming from (although unlike you I’m a little embarrassed to draw Jeff into something so puerile).

  65. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >Damn, onecent’s gone genuinely paranoid. You know… I hate to say it, but it’s kind of fun to watch.
    Yeah it is fun to watch their heads explode.

  66. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >So you agree then that we shouldn’t address the demands of the terrorists;
    You don’t address the demands of terrorists. As soon as they become terrorists, their grievences become a moot issue. What does need to be addressed however, are the grievences of the Arab people before they become disenfranchised and feel that their only recourse is to resort to terrorism.

  67. billg Avatar

    Most often, I find myself disagreeing with Robert, but he’s close to the truth when he says “… As soon as they become terrorists, their grievences become a moot issue.”
    The issues don’t necessarily become moot, but our response to terror must not be influenced by the motives that prompt it. We must clearly state, and act accordingly, that terror and terrorists will be dealt with separately from the issues they claim motivate their crimes.

  68. Andrea Harris Avatar

    You know what? McClelland, Slack, Mork, and the other whosits who make up the mockers and debasers who frequent this place: you are giving Jarvis’ blog the DU/Freeper flavor you claim to abhor. I sometimes wonder how creeps like you can look at yourselves in the mirror. I know what sort of people you are. For all your brave talk about fascists and lies, you are the same sort of people who have stood in the way of freedom for as long as that concept has existed in human history. In a totalitarian country you’d be the ones who spy on your neighbors so you can denounce them for extra favors and ration cards. Sick and disgusting.
    Guys, it is useless to debate, or even address, these trolls. All they do is repeat the same crap; their only desire is to take over a blogs comment section (it gives them some sort of jones).

  69. Mork Avatar

    In a totalitarian country you’d be the ones who spy on your neighbors so you can denounce them for extra favors and ration cards.
    Andrea, you are the one who insists that it’s immoral to question, let alone vote against, the government.
    I think you should start looking for totalitarian impulses a little closer to home.

  70. Robert McClelland Avatar

    > that terror and terrorists will be dealt with separately from the issues they claim motivate their crimes.
    But dealing with those issues is what is not being done. For instance, it’s not just terrorists who oppose the presence of foreign troops in their lands but because that is one of the terrorists issues, the non-terrorists are ignored. There is a whole segment of the world’s population whose grievances are being ignored simply because those grievance are shared by a small percentage of that population who resort to terrorism.

  71. Carl in N.H. Avatar
    Carl in N.H.

    Franky:
    The fact, or at least the impression, remains that the bombs directly influenced the Spanish election. Yeah, sure, “Yay for democracy”. However, let’s ignore the effect this will have on other innocents in other democracies when election time comes around. Yay for democracy, pity about the dead and mangled commuters. And ignore that Islamic cleric chuckling to himself.
    We are now *in* a war on violent fundamentalism. I don’t see anybody “here” (where? on this blog?) demanding a blank check for Bush or Blair. If you support war on violent fundamentalism, but have a valid criticism of the tactics and strategy, fine. Nobody is demanding silent acceptance of every policy. But, “used pressure” ? What are you talking about ? Have Ashcroft’s Jackbooted Stormtroopers been menacing you recently ? Okay, cheap shot, scratch that.
    I take it to mean you opposed the Iraq invasion. So, it seems to me you are saying that because Bush did something you oppose it implies that a) it is the wrong strategy and b) somehow you were pressured into going along with it. Perhaps *you* are wrong, is that not a possibility ?
    This particular blog entry is about Spain/Al-Andalus, not Iraq, but, one small question: if you believe that Iraq is totally unrelated to terrorism, please clarify why so many voters in Spain made the connection and caved in to the terrorists ?
    I will ignore your statements about Israel. I disagree, and if you are so willing to display your ignorance about the history of that issue, both recent and more distant, I would rather let you embarass yourself alone.
    Except for one thing: if the Israel / Palestine issue was so central to support for AQ, why did AQ only start mentioning it since 9/11/01 ?

  72. billg Avatar

    Robert, those grievances were being ignored, or dealt with, long before modern terrorism appeared. You are still making the assumption that everyone’s grievances must be assuaged.
    The world is not an altruistic place, and humans are not an altrustic species. We — as individuals and as nations — work toward our own self-interest and our own advantage. That’s why we accord those few who are truely altruistic special status.
    If, for instance, the people of Saudi Arabia do not want U.S. troops on their soil, they have the option of asking the U.S. to leave. If the current Saudi regime will not do that, the Saudi people have the option of changing the Saudi government. The U.S. should continue to act in what it determines is its own best interests. (That might, for instance, include leaving Saudi Arabia when the Saudis want the U.S. to stay. Or, leaving when asked.)
    The Saudi people, I’ll suggest, ought to begin to act in their own best interests, rather than falsely blame everyone but themselves for their problem.
    There is no reason to avoid one course of policy simply because it addresses the alleged grievances of terrorists, but there is no reason to do the opposite, either.

  73. Andrea Harris Avatar

    “Andrea, you are the one who insists that it’s immoral to question, let alone vote against, the government.”
    Oh yeah? Link to where I said that, you supercilious sack of excrement.

  74. Mork Avatar

    Andrea – try the first post on your blog (although no doubt you will want to quibble that all you are saying is that it is immoral for Spanish people to vote against their government).
    Either way, don’t forget to wipe the spittle off your screen.

  75. Diana Avatar

    Can somebody please explain this to me?
    Why can’t the warbloggers admit upfront that Aznar’s joining the Coalition put the Spanish people in a vulnerable position?
    Why is that so difficult to do?

  76. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >Why is that so difficult to do?
    C’mon, they still can’t even admit that Saddam didn’t have any WMDs.

  77. Robert McClelland Avatar

    >If, for instance, the people of Saudi Arabia do not want U.S. troops on their soil, they have the option of asking the U.S. to leave.
    They did after the first Gulf War and the US response was that the Saudi government–that doesn’t represent their people–wanted them there.
    >If the current Saudi regime will not do that, the Saudi people have the option of changing the Saudi government.
    How? Were they supposed to do that through violent revolution while the US was there propping up the Saudi regime?
    >The U.S. should continue to act in what it determines is its own best interests.
    That’s right, they do. Even when it comes at the expense of someone else and that is the problem.

  78. Diana Avatar

    Robert–don’t change the subject! They take any opportunity to evade the point, and they’ll just run away with this and start another useless tangent about WMDs….
    I asked a pointed question, now let’s hear from a warblogger an answer.
    C’mon warbloggers, answer!

  79. Franky Avatar

    “Yay for democracy, pity about the dead and mangled commuters.”
    Voters around the world who are now becoming the unwitting battlefield for this war on terrorism could say the same about US elections. In fact to take this to its logical extreme, you could also say the same to the 200+ dead in Karbala.
    “We are now *in* a war on violent fundamentalism. I don’t see anybody “here” (where? on this blog?) demanding a blank check for Bush or Blair.”
    This whole thread is filled with demands for blankchecks on the leaders of the war on terror. Takes you into a war on terror the country disapproves? well re-elect him.
    Just look above and imagine if there’s another terrorist attack before November’s elections. The call will be to all who support Kerry (another person I can’t stand) that they are “appeasers”. There’s even a post a bit above this one that expressly makes the point. And this is before an attack in March.
    I don’t believe the US govt is physically pressuring people, so I can’t really respond to that argument. I do believe however that this govt is not doing all it can to end support for terrorism, and once again I return to the issue of a fair settlement in Palestine (and to clarify: that means a viable independent state free of Israeli control in all pre-67 territories)
    “This particular blog entry is about Spain/Al-Andalus, not Iraq, but, one small question: if you believe that Iraq is totally unrelated to terrorism, please clarify why so many voters in Spain made the connection and caved in to the terrorists ?”
    Because as anti-war protestors warned attacking Iraq will create tens of thousands of more terrorists. Unfortunately it was a prophetic warning that went unheeded.
    AQ despised the govt of Iraq, as they do the ruling elite of Saudi Arabia, but to invade Arab countries is a reminder to them of colonialism, something they consider the most humiliating episode of Muslim history. I take the attitude of big boo-hoo that AQ’s feelings are hurt, but what does worry me is that by once again embarking on what looks to many like a colonial adventure WE ARE RADICALISING PEOPLE WHO DIDN’T HAVE TO BE RADICALISED.
    “I will ignore your statements about Israel. I disagree, and if you are so willing to display your ignorance about the history of that issue, both recent and more distant, I would rather let you embarass yourself alone.”
    Well, considering I didn’t mention any facts in my post, but posited an opinion on the situation, I don’t see how I could have exposed my “ignorance”. Perhaps you were looking for another word?
    “Except for one thing: if the Israel / Palestine issue was so central to support for AQ, why did AQ only start mentioning it since 9/11/01 ?”
    Simply not true. I mean this isn’t a case of “this is my opinion, and that’s yours”. This is simply not true. As long as Osama has been making statements he’s tied together getting rid of troops from Saudi and the situation in Palestine. I don’t want to be insulting, but I do question your knowledge of the region if you think anyone in any Middle East country could aspire to be a spokesman for anything and not mention the issue of Palestine. It is the central question in the region (hence the corrupt dictatorships were able to rally people behind them under the call of their mission to free palestine – every single Arab leader has to pay lip-service to the idea of freeing Palestine, even though in reality they treated the palestinies only marginally less shoddy than the Israelis).

  80. Trump Avatar

    What does need to be addressed however, are the grievences of the Arab people before they become disenfranchised and feel that their only recourse is to resort to terrorism.

    What a sack of crap. The “greviances” of the Arabs are nothing more than a captive populace being whipped up against Israel and the US by their dictators/theocrats who know it’s easier to have them hate us then to have them look around and notice that they’re living like sh*t.
    So if we want to address the grievances of Arabs, what we need to do is do what we did un Iraq….regime change
    And seriously….fu*k their grievances. If they want to compare lists of beefs, we can show them one also

  81. Trump Avatar

    C’mon, they still can’t even admit that Saddam didn’t have any WMDs
    Engaging in legality or technicality.
    He had the programs. He had the capability to restart those programs and reacquire WMD in a short time frame.
    You’re ok with that?

  82. Diana Avatar

    I’m still waiting….

  83. Diana Avatar

    I told you Robert, you bring up a side issue and they run away with it…
    Trump: did Spanish involvement in the Iraq war put Spanish civilians at risk?
    Yes or no. This should be s simple one.
    Answer it.

  84. Charlie (Colorado) Avatar
    Charlie (Colorado)

    Why can’t the warbloggers admit upfront that Aznar’s joining the Coalition put the Spanish people in a vulnerable position?
    Why is that so difficult to do?
    Because we don’t think it’s so. The French have had their own troubles; the German tourists in Morocco have been getting killed off and on; the Greeks are running scared. None of them were at all helpful to the US. Bali was attacked — theoretically to get at Australians. Hotels in Indonesia get blown up, theoretically because they’re “American” hotels, even though the bombs kill lots of Indonesians. If Spain was particularly vulnerable, then how do we explain the anti-war countries being targets?
    I’ve no doubt you’ll come up with a way.

  85. Diana Avatar

    Fine, if the bombing didn’t have anything to do with Iraq, then how is voting the Socialists into power “appeasement”?

  86. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Yes. Very good question.
    And good to see Andrea is still keeping us supplied with unintentional humour at her own expense.

  87. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Oh, and if Vicky’s still reading the thread: the Political Commissar of London is stonewalling me. He keeps pretending to be a simple greengrocer who has no idea that he lives in a secretly Maoist dictatorship. How’re you coming with the Saudi Arabia project?

  88. Andrea Harris Avatar

    I see, Mork, that you continue to sidestep and equivocate when asked to prove something. LIAR.
    Diana: Aznar didn’t put Spain in a “vulnerable” position, they were already in a vulnerable position. We are all in a vulnerable position. You are living in a dream world if you think it is possible for a government to make their country “safe” from terrorism by caving to their demands, or whatever it is you think Aznar should have done instead.
    As for Dr. Slack: yawn.

  89. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    I see, Mork, that you continue to sidestep and equivocate when asked to prove something.
    Who do you think you’re kidding? He pointed to the first post on your blog. (This one, remember? Where you say “who needs these millstones around our necks and burdens on our backs?”) Of course that’s an attempt to imply that voting against your government’s wishes is immoral. And of course Mork was right to call you on it. And of course now you have to bluster and shrill in lieu of an actual response.
    (I think you should use CAPS more, though. And try calling people NAMES more often. That puts you in a great position to moralize at other posters about the tone and content of their arguments. Keep it up.)

  90. Diana Avatar

    Aznar didn’t put Spain in a “vulnerable” position, they were already in a vulnerable position. We are all in a vulnerable position.
    Andrea, I congratulate you for contributing an answser that doesn’t depend on insults, invective, and failed sarcasm. That’s significant personal progress and I congratulate you on it. Moving along, let’s take a look at your logic.
    Either a response to the bombing was appeasement or it wasn’t. If we are all vulnerable to AQ attacks, and if electing a Socialist or a Conservative is irrelevant to our vulnerability to AQ attacks, then what is the direct causal relationship between electing a Socialist or a Conservative to power and being attacked by AQ?
    Please explain that one to me.

  91. ElvenPhoenix Avatar
    ElvenPhoenix

    Per CNN:
    “MADRID, Spain (CNN) — A document published months before national elections reveals al Qaeda planned to separate Spain from its allies by carrying out terror attacks.
    A December posting on an Internet message board used by al Qaeda and its sympathizers and obtained by CNN, spells out a plan to topple the pro-U.S. government.”
    Answering the question regarding the intention of AQ regarding the Spanish Elections…

  92. Diana Avatar

    PS meant to write, “Either the response to the bombing…”

  93. Diana Avatar

    Elven, do you think that Aznar’s commitment of Spanish troops in Iraq put Spain’s citizens at particular risk?

  94. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    A posting on a message board is supposed to be evidence of al Qaeda’s intentions?
    Can we therefore conclude that this website is evidence of Bush’s intentions?

  95. KMK Avatar

    Iain Murray has done the numbers in his column up for TCS. http://www.techcentralstation.com/031704F.html “It is clear, therefore, that the Spanish elections hinged on the feelings of those 3 million extra voters, less than a tenth of the voting population.” Go read it the numbers do not suggest appeasement at all.
    He goes on to point to an opinion poll from the BBC http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3513704.stm “(It is worth bearing in mind that the fieldwork for the poll was undertaken 10-12 March, so reaction to the Madrid bombing would be included therein. The British media reported the possible Al Qaeda connection very early on). Almost 70 percent reject the allegation that the Labour Government lied to them about WMDs, and only 15 percent subscribe to the oft-repeated theory that the war was all about oil. Majorities continue to believe that war is the right approach in the event of various circumstances that could be described as pre-emptive, such as when a nation possesses WMDs (59%), harbors terrorists (51%) or commits atrocities (55%).”
    The right comments seems to be acting like chicken little siting the appeasement sky is falling. I can’t subscribe to it. The left comments have gone off track quite a bit and I can’t subscribe to that either. The personal attacks on commentaries are pointless and detract from the overall conversation. I know I won’t be the only liberal voting for Bush this year but the right is feeding Al Qaeda by suggesting they forced a Western government out of office. If anything this latest attack in Spain should shore up support for the international fight against AQ not pull the coalition apart.

  96. andy obuoforibo Avatar
    andy obuoforibo

    Were Americans “craven” when they called for a pull out of Somalia after the “Blackhawk down” incident? Or were they simply getting themselves out of “another man’s war”. The bottom line is these people in Spain see this new war on terror as another man’s fight. Thye say to themselves, we had to fight our own terrorists, who helped us? I personally disagree with this attitude, but I can see its logic. So now, when their government’s involvement in the perceived “other man’s fight” leads to catastrophe at home, of course they will call it a day.
    Does that make them cowards. No. It makes them self-interested, but shortsighted. I cannot fault any country’s self-interest (the country that sacrifices self-interest too quickly is run by fools, and will never be a world leader). I do however believe they made an easy mistake, thinking they can actually sit out this conflict.

  97. andy obuoforibo Avatar
    andy obuoforibo

    As for the issue of “understanding the causes of terrorism”:
    Terrorist groups (like any other non-gov player) requires at least implicit tolerance from the citizenry. What causes this tolerance, sympath, or even outright support? Grievances of the populace which the terrorists appear to share, and which thus lend their acts, no matter how despicable, an air of legitimacy (village folk loved Robin Hood the tax-hating-thief, South Africans hailed Mandela United, the Apartheid-fighting hoodlums). We all know terrorists must be isolated from that support base (GW’s winning over hearts and minds). Understanding grievances, and expressing to the citizenry a willingness to redress them AFTER the militants have been destroyed (not retired, not ceasefire, utter annihilation) will serve as such a cleave. You will see the people hand over their erstwhile heroes. My whole life I have seen repressive regimes use these tactics against insurgents in my homeland. It’s about time the forces of good borrow them.

  98. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    My whole life I have seen repressive regimes use these tactics against insurgents in my homeland. It’s about time the forces of good borrow them.
    Andy, this is an interesting point, but there are a couple of potential problems I can see:
    1. What if the insurgents are playing on a populace that has ceased to believe in promises that their grievances will be addressed after terrorism ends — particularly if those promises have actually been betrayed in the past?
    2. Doesn’t waiting until after terrorism ends give a virtual veto on the process of actually addressing the grievances to the terrorists?

  99. Andrea Harris Avatar

    You know what, Diana? It occurs to me that I don’t owe you diddlysquat. So I am not going to respond to you as if you were some sort of authority, or as if I valued your opinion. I don’t value it; I think you are the sort of person who would criticize the cut of a man’s mourning clothes at his mother’s funeral. So you can take your patronizing attitude towards me and everyone else here and disappear out of blog-land like you periodically do, to the relief of I suspect many. (There — that should supply the personal attacks and ad hominems that I mistakenly left out of my post above; so sorry, thanks for reminding me!)
    And by the way, Mork, you said this:

    Andrea, you are the one who insists that it’s immoral to question, let alone vote against, the government.

    That is a generality; you said nothing specific about Spain or any other country or any election — as far as I knew you were slapping me with the usual fascist-jackboot-wearer label. As a matter of fact, I do indeed believe that people who vote for a Socialist government for any reason are making a less moral choice, considering the track record of other socialist governments in the past. But still, I do not particularly believe that lack of morality led sixty-something percent of Spanish voters to choose as they did; I merely believe that they made a mistake, and that it will come back to bite them in the hind end one of these days. For one thing, they have now, despite all their protestations to the contrary, shown themselves to be amenable to blackmail by terrorist attack. They have shown themselves to be cowards when it comes to keeping their word, and hypocrites if the word they gave (to support the coalition efforts) was given with their collective fingers crossed behind their backs. And if indeed the people of Spain felt themselves to have been coerced unfairly into helping the coalition, then I don’t want their unwillingly given help. That is what I said in my post, which is clear to anyone who can read straightforward English; it’s only distorted minds who look for hidden meanings in their breakfast cereal who seem unable to read. Is saying we don’t need allies like this wrong? I guess in your twisted and sick world it is.
    So: I do not and never did claim anywhere that it is “immoral to question, let alone vote against, the government” and you cannot prove that I did without destroying the English language. This is the weakest in your many lame attempts to slander me; congratulations for sinking to a new pathetic low.

  100. Franky Avatar

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/nm/20040317/wl_nm/security_spain_truce_dc&e=2&ncid=721
    right, so let’s just be clear about the Blog headline if Bush wins in November
    “US: A Nation of Nelville Chamberlains”
    Somehow when it’s the US, I’m guessing that people will want to qualify; “well not all voted that way, so it’s unfair to slander a whole nation”
    (and by the way, I’m not sure if I believe this story above, but if I wanted to create a war of civilizations, as so many blog experts – erroneously in my opinion – claim AQ wants, if I was Osama I would seriously be hoping for a Bush victory)

  101. Franky Avatar

    “And if Zapatero doesn’t withdraw from Iraq, Spain will be targeted again.”
    http://andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2004_03_14_dish_archive.html#107958358324180714
    I get the feeling the pro-war movement are threatening demcoracy as much as AQ. So now pro-war people are demanding that an elected government, that ran specifically on an anti-war platform, stay in a war that 90% of people oppose as some sort of gesture. I find it harder and harder to even listen to this type of sh!t.

  102. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Well, I tried to repost an example of Andrea telling someone they’ve “made a mistake,” but it seems to have run afoul of Jeff’s obscenity guidelines. Not too surprising.