ALLIES pay the price for US' mistake

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by mrbitterness, Mar 19, 2004.

  1. mrbitterness
    Offline

    mrbitterness Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    50
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +1
    The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is.

    1) Indonesia sorry, not Australia, with the Bali Bombings.
    2) British sites were hit alongside synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey.
    3) Now it's Madrid, Spain.

    The Arabs were at fault. The Al-Qaeda.
     
  2. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    Bali is in Indonesia. That's close to Australia but very different

    They were not allied with the us at the time of the Bali bombings in which 202 people died, on going to war in Iraq. In fact they were vocal about their opposition to the us's commitment to war.

    The British Embassy was hit in Turkey, a country which has for some time given US jets permission to fly over its air space to maintain the Iraqi no-fly zone. Other than that, Turkey was relatively neutral or negative to the Iraq war. The bombings of the synagogues and the british embassy actually turned public opinion in turkey further against the terrorists.

    It remains to be seen wether there will be any successful terrorist attacks right before elections in the UK, or other of the strongly allied countries. South Korea is currentl in turmoil, but that results from internal allegations of corruption.

    But then I think you should also include the thousands of us troops who have been wounded in Iraq, the 570 that have died in Iraq, the hundreds of thousands that have served or are now serving in Iraq, when you discuss who pays the price for Iraqi freedom.


    If Al Queda is reacting so heinously to our deposition of Iraq, were we really that far off the mark?

    The decisive overthrow and capture of saddam hasn't born out possession of WMD, but their is certainly evidence of efforts to maintain wmd programs which would be revivable with the lifting of sanctions. Simultaneously, there is also mounting evidence that shows that saddam was involved in destroying the sanctions by using them to funnel a war chest out of the country at the same time that his people starved, which he blamed on the sanctions. From the outside, it appeared that the sanctions were responsible for starvation. Now we know the Iraqi government was engaged in a policy of sabotaging them with the goal of ending them. Without the war that would have inevitably happened. When that happened, the wmd programs would have easily resumed.

    The victory in Iraq led to the final surrender by Lybia of its MASSIVE wmd programs, after the action of the UK and the US. This simultaneously led to the exposure of the A.Q. Kahn nuclear proliferation ring, which went from Europe to Malaysia. Currently Iranians are rioting against their fictitious democracy. Kurds are taking a stand in Syria. Because the US is in Iraq and Afghanistan and has supported the overthrow of its dictatorship, it is now in a position to substantively aid revolt in Syria and Iran, should it come to that.

    So yes I agree, the Spaniards have paid the price for their alliance to the US, and dearly. I do not wish that upon anybody, however, I think there is a good case to be made that their support was not in vain.
     
  3. Comrade
    Offline

    Comrade Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,873
    Thanks Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Seattle, WA.
    Ratings:
    +167
    :clap:
     
  4. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,576
    Thanks Received:
    8,171
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,219
    I still havent decided which is worse for the Spanish yet. Having to suffer from the bombings or having to suffer under socialist rule.
     
  5. Palestinian Jew
    Offline

    Palestinian Jew Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2003
    Messages:
    903
    Thanks Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Fayetteville
    Ratings:
    +18
    I'd rather suffer under a socialist gov't than one that tries to distort the facts and spin everything for political gain, which is what the conservative party there did after the attack. And I'm pretty damn sure that the attack was much worse than socialist rule.
     
  6. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    :laugh: Your qoute from bubba says it all. No socialist government has ever existed without spin, lies and condescension. Spin everything did they? Really?
     
  7. Comrade
    Offline

    Comrade Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,873
    Thanks Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Seattle, WA.
    Ratings:
    +167
    A few details on the socialist spin in Spain over the Madrid bombing.

    The spin hinged upon the PP "deception" over the true source of the Madrid bombing, a media blitz culmunating in popular demonstrations against the apparent lies of the Aznar party.


    Attack and election timeline:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_11,_2004_Madrid_attacks#The_attacks


    Any major protests against government deception occurred on May 12th, the day AFTER the bombing, at the behest of the left. Acebes named the ETA as the culprit in the first few hours, and this was not an unreasonable assumption given the prior facts:

    Despite these initial accusations, the first directly linked Aznar statement came that afternoon:

    The socialist party leader is also on record at this time using the same uncertain conviction:

    Still on that first day:


    Once the Aznar government announced the van, apparently the few hours needed to first link that to the bombing with certainty, and perhaps another few hours to pursue any immediate suspects without tipping them off by publically announcing it’s discovery, became the basis of the the “coverup conspiracy” brilliantly crafted by the socialist party as it’s “smoking gun” against the Aznar government.

    Aspects of the unfolding investigation which specifically implicated Islamic orgins were announced by the Aznar government over the following pre-election days, and yet this initial call of “coverup” remained the rallying cry of the left.

    Such tactics were not lost on the most hard core backers of the PPOE.

    :p:

    So where is the deception? A delay of several hours in broadcasting key evidence seems to be the BIG ISSUE.

    So let’s recap:

    1. Initial suspicion of the ETA in the first few hours, while premature, was never disputed by either party.

    2. Later evidence first revealed to Spain’s public by Acebes contraverted his own initial assumption.

    3. Further claims by the Aznar government of ETA involvement ceased entirely, and evidence announced by the same government well before the election day all led credence to Islamic orgins.

    4. Despite the timeliness of such revelations, and the foregone conclusion of an Islamic orgin now continually pursued in both action and words by the Aznar government, the left continued to the take to the streets to denounced Aznar’s continuing “coverup”.

    5. The media of the left perpetuated such allegation by continuing to propose the Aznar government was "hiding something". This, despite their announcement in the days following of arrests and video all clearly pointing to Islamic involvement. The spin applied was that such new developments were only forthcoming due to the massive “outrage” over the continued “deception” the Aznar government somehow still perpetuated, despite any public statements to contrary.

    And most importantly not one person in Spain really questioned really why it was supposedly vital for Aznar to deny Al-Qaida as the attacker in the first place.

    The Socialists must have assigned Aznar a motive for this. What reasonable motive could apply?

    Is it a foregone conclusion that Spain would appease such an attack by voting out the government aggressively active in the WOT?

    And assuming Aznar’s role in Iraq wasn’t related to the war on terror, as the Spanish Socialist party claimed, why did Al-Qaida specifically target Spain over this policy? Call me crazy but when the terrorists attack you over something maybe you are doing something right, eh?

    If Al-Qaida’s role was supposed to be hidden by Aznar, doesn't that assume the voters of Spain are appeasing cowards?
     
  8. kcmcdonald
    Online

    kcmcdonald Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Yes the voters of spain are appeasers. some might say that Anzar's govt. was going to lose the elections anyway but all the polls I saw the day of the bombing had Anzar's party still holding on to a majority. After the attacks the Socialists won a major upset and turned the ocuntry 180 degres around. Instead of fighting terror in Iraq and the middleeast now it will be fought in spain. the Govt went from proactive, to reactive. All of this because the spainish people couldn't stomach another attack. so instead of steeping up actions and opperations the spanish have called timeout and are going to quit not even half way through the game.
     
  9. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    Excellent summation comrade.:beer:
     
  10. Bry
    Offline

    Bry Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    489
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +3
    er, yeah, talk about spin. Castro, and all. The bit about the demonstrations prior to the elections is nice but it was not associated with any political party, and therefore was perfectly legal. Too bad the only source you actually list is wikipedia.

    Here's what the wikipedia article which you refrence says about the government's response:

    :rolleyes: sounds like it's all on the up and up, eh?

    Here's what the same article says about Aznar's first intervention:

    A far cry what you are indicating, Aznar maintained that ETA was the primary suspect. While he conspicuously left out the name ETA from his discourse, it was plain to every Spaniard listening that he was talking about ETA. That's all well and good, but the fact is that all of the evidence, including leaks from the CNI which the government has since coroberated indicated that the culprits were Islamic extremists, dating from the tape of the Koran in the truck that was found on the 11th. Acebes, in his famous second pronouncement on the day of the bombing, the pronouncement which you say was essentially a retraction of his earlier statements the the culprit was most certainly ETA, downplayed the significance of the tape, saying it was a tape you could buy anywhere which was essentially for pedogogical use for anyone interested in Arabic and the Koran. In spite of this new information, the only real information released up to that point, Acebes maintained that the primary suspect continued to be ETA, although leaks were already being made public that the CNI believed from the beginning that the attacks were from Islamic Extremists. Spain is currently being asked to submit to investigations from the European Community because of false information that was passed between the CNI and Intelligence organizations of other European nations. Spin it however you want, comrade, you're analysis is a house of cards. None of the information that has surfaced since the attacks has suggested the involvement of ETA, but the Government, in all of its interventions, stated inequivocably that ETA was the primary suspect, not just before the Spanish public, but also before the international media, and before other intelligence services in the European Union and the UN.

    Now, for your sumup.

    Acebes never "contraverted" his initial assuption, rather he maintained that ETA continued to be the primary suspect. At least you are spelling his name correctly now.

    In all of the government releases prior to the election, evidence indicating Islamic extremists was downplayed, and ETA was beat like a drum. There is no evidence to the contrary, as I gather from your inability to produce any.

    At any point do you become embarassed for the crap you spew? Again, ANY government quote indicating that Islamic fundamentalists were the primary suspect, prior to Sunday, the day of the elections, would be nice.

    Even after the arrests, the government was emphasizing the possibility of ETA responsibility.

    Here is the actual timeline. It's in Spanish, of course.


    from:
    http://www.cadenaser.com/articulo.html?xref=20040313csrcsrnac_16&type=Tes&anchor=

    The first time the government in any way acknowledges that ETA might not be the primary suspect is at 8:00, Saturday evening, after the arrests of three Morroquis and two Indian nationals, at which point Acebes says (I'm translating from the quote represented above) "There is a very good line of investigation that is being followed, but we do not renounce any other line of investigation nor connections nor colaborations, we will see where this line leads us." If that's your idea of setting the record straight, You'd better think twice.
     

Share This Page