Spain's Election blow to Bush's war on terror

[Bombtrack]

Election blow to Bush's war on terror
By Isambard Wilkinson in Madrid
(Filed: 15/03/2004)


Spain's socialists defeated the conservative government in the general election last night, delivering a serious blow to the American-led war on terror.

The government was swept from power amid public disenchantment with its policy on Iraq and its conduct following the Madrid train bombings, in which 200 people were killed and 1,400 injured. It persisted in blaming the Basque extremist group Eta.


Supporters of the Socialists celebrate victory in Madrid
Now there are growing indications that al-Qa'eda bombers carried out the Madrid massacre in an attempt to influence the election result...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/03/15/welec15.xml&sSheet=/
portal/2004/03/15/ixportaltop.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=29596
--------

I for one, and I'm probably in the minority here, don't think that 1,300 Spanish troops pulling out is a good thing. I do have internationalist views, but I also am nationalistic enough to rather have Spanish troops than more American troops in danger

[Birthmark]

1. I don't know if it's good or bad.

What I do know is that it is the business of the Spanish people.

I understand your point, too, though.

[OKNancy]

2. 1300 troops

not 13,000.

[bambo53]

3. 1300 troops

Spain has 1300 troops in Iraq. What a big coalition we have

[punpirate]

4. Note the source...

... The Telegraph.

Note, too, that the article has framed the issue as one of a "blow" to the "war on terror." And yet, a particularly large part of the election dynamic in Spain had to do with the war against Iraq, which did not have anything to do with fighting terrorism.

The Spanish populace was profoundly against involvement in Bush's war, and it's clear from this election that they see the latest attack as retribution for their government's decision to support Bush.

If the US has to supply additional troops because the Spanish withdraw theirs, then whose fault is that? Spain's, or the Bush administration's?

[fujiyama]

5. It's their own...

decision to do what they want with THEIR troops. We shouldn't be relying on other nations to help fix the mess we started.

[Q]

6. "...rather have Spanish troops than more American troops in danger"

- This is Bush's* war for oil and empire....and it's friggin illegal according to national and international laws. Why would you have the citizens of other countries die for an unnecessary war started by an unelected president?

[Gore1FL]

7. I don't see how it hurts the terror war

-- nly the faked terror war.

[LeahMira]

8. Internationalize the effort in Iraq.

I also am nationalistic enough to rather have Spanish troops than more American troops in danger

I'd guess that the Spanish people would rather have American troops in danger than their own young men.

The new government has said that Spain will send troops to support an international force if their support is requested.

If you'd prefer that American troops not be in danger, blame your pResident for refusing to wait long enough to get international support for his invasion.

Many young men refused to serve in Vietnam. They accepted jail or exile rather than support an unjust war. True, that was when a draft was in place. Still, there are choices now.

[guscano]

9. A point of view from a Spaniard

After reading the posts, I have noticed something that hasn´t been told and is very important. We the Spanish people have not only voted against Aznar for his policy toward Iraq and the friendship with bush in the so called “War on terror”.

Besides having to suffer the results of Aznar´s support to Bush (200 dead and 1,400 wounded) what the Spanish people could not stand was the fact that the government tried to lie to all of us blaming ETA for the attacks, hiding and delaying important information pointing to Al-Quaeda that we needed to know before the polls opened.

We all perceived that the government was trying to do the same as Bush on the 9/11 attacks and on the Iraq invasion: deceiving and lying. Our president Aznar even said that those who thought ETA was not behing the attacks was a terrorist. Does it sound familiar to you americans? (Either you are with us or against us). We just said NO, we will not take it. That is what I´m mostly happy about, that we didn´t swallow the lies of our government, we did not fall into the manipulation of these Bush cronies. And we kicked them out of office.

You should have seen the marches the night before the elections. People gathered spontaneously asking to know the truth. No political parties where behind. Just the people. Thousands of them.

I hope that the message the rest of the world receives is that Bush´s policy is NOT the way to deal with terrorism. (We have experience with terrorism, suffering it for more than 30 years). Violence only brings violence, as we have sadly seen in Madrid. Only world justice will bring peace.

Today I´m proud again to be a spaniard.

[truthspeaker]

11. You should be proud!

I thought it was weird to blame ETA when they usually attack police and government targets. Kudos to Spain for throwing the bums out!

[ulysses]

12. welcome, guscano!

Good to hear from someone who's actually there. Stick around! :hi:

[dbt]

13. Welcome to DU, guscano!

Please take every opportunity inform us brainwashed Americans about the situation in Spain!

:hi:
dbt
(Citizen of a Rogue Nation)

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

15. This half-Spaniard is happy to read this

:yourock:

And welcome to DU :toast:

[OKNancy]

16. If you are still reading

Please write CNN and other US news outlets with this...it would be really great for them to get the straight story.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

18. guscano has an e-mail link if you want to say hi to him (nt)

[0007]

20. Happy to hear from you guscano

Thank you for joining the march toward PEACE

[newyawker99]

21. Hi guscano!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Bridget Burke]

10. War on Terror (TM)

Blair was pushing this on a speech the BBCAMERICA thought we needed to see live one morning not long ago. He certainly speaks better then chimp--but there were still holes in his logic.

We need to give up freedoms, bomb & invade other countries, and not mind when our own are killed & wounded. Because, see, we're in a WAR!!! Bush is running on it & so is Blair. 9/11 = Iraq (even though there was no connection). The War on Terror is also the war against WMD's. Those WMD's that had no part in 9/11 or Spain's recent tragedy; the same WMD's that were not found in Iraq. Facts about the events of 9/11 are still unclear--mostly because of the late-starting investigation that Bush has stonewalled at every opportunity.

But they keep beating the drums of WAR, without really doing what could be done to lessen terror. The Spaniards didn't let their government get away with it.

I also dislike having American troops in danger. Let's bring them home.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

14. "I also am nationalistic enough to rather have Spanish troops

...than more American troops in danger"

Funny, I'd rather it be the other way around. Wonder why?

Or better yet, shall we minimize the danger for EVERYONE EQUALLY?

[truthspeaker]

17. I am ethical enough...

not to expect Spanish troops to die for the mistakes of an American president.

[Jack Rabbit]

19. The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with fighting terrorism

Everybody should know that by now.

Al Qaida has not been defeated; far from it. Osama's thugs have uncorked no less than four major attacks since the end of the Iraq invasion: two in Riyadh, one in Istanbul and this one in Madrid.

The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with fighting terrorism. Saddam had nothing of value he could give to terrorists and didn't even have a close association with any, least of all Osama.

It seems improbable to me that Bush didn't know the real facts. The junta's selling of the war was not based on faulty intelligence for which the CIA is responsible, but deliberate disinformation for which the White House is. It was, in fact, a colonial misadventure that could never be sold had its real purpose been discussed openly.

The problem for Aznar was that he supported the invasion of Iraq as part of the war on terror. Whether Aznar was part of a conspiracy to deceive the world or just another Bushie dupe probably didn't matter to Spanish voters. The point is that he allowed Spain to be misused by Bush. Spaniards were already upset with him about that. Some of the biggest anti-war rallies last year were held in Spain; public opinion surveys in Spain showed opposition to the invasion overwhelming. It was clear then that Aznar's backing of Bush and his war had no popular support.

What the bombings in Madrid last week underscored is how ineffective the invasion of Iraq was toward the end of defeating al Qaida. It is true that al Qaida probably would not have attacked Spain had Aznar not committed his support for Bush. However, no political leader can look the citizens of his country in the eye and say that the treat of terror was alleviated in any way by invading Iraq.

Aznar foolishly allowed Spain to become involved in ill-conceived war that was not a battle Spaniards needed to fight. Spanish voters were right to punish his party.