Socialist claim victory in Spain

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Sava
It's really sad when people so blinded by political ideology can't admit they are wrong. AZNAR COULD NOT KEEP SPAIN SAFE... that's why his government is gone.

AND NEITHER CAN THE PSOE! You are just stuck in your own stupidity.. I mean clear out your damn ears and go ***** and moan about somebody else's country.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap
Given that the fight vs AQ is happening in Europe and Afghanistan, I fail to see how pulling 1300 men form Iraq hurts Spain's war on AQ.

there is some pretty compelling evidence that they are operating in Iraq NOW. Before the invasion is a different story as far as evidence, but post invasion is even now acknowledged by AQ that they are there. If Spain wants to take on AQ outside of their own boarders, then staying in Iraq is the thing to do. If they are making a post invasion political statement that they are willing to let the war come to them and fight on the homeland then the new government is spot on. Wonder if 80% would support that line of thought if it was presented to them?

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by GePap


I am sorry, but it is lovely for the Spaniards who support the right, besides getting rid of things that would identify them as being from Spain, moan about how their country has been sold out by their own people! Damn those stupid voters! Things were better under the Franco dictatorship, no doubt!

GePap, don´t put in my mouth words that I have not said. If the Spanish people choose to be cowards that´s ok for me. I will respect it. But I have the right the have a different opinion. Or am I forbidden?

So typical of the left to accuse the right of its faults...

At least it will be funny to watch the incompetence of Zapatero furing those 4 years

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


The PP means = Stronger approach towards terrorism
The PSOE means = Weaker approach towards terrorism

Not even borne out by recent Spanish history:

'1983-87

(P.S.O.E. elected 1982)

Gal, the anti-terrorist liberation group, is set up to fight a dirty war against Eta. Its agents carry out assassinations of known Eta members (and several who were not), kidnappings, bombings and torture, killing 27 people during the 80s.

1987

21 shoppers are killed when a bomb hits a Barcelona supermarket. Eta apologises for a "mistake."

1988-95

Judge Baltasar Garzon begins to look at links between the P.S.O.E. government and Gal. It emerges that Gal groups were made up entirely of mercenaries recruited by two policemen using public funds. The P.S.O.E. prime minister, Felipe Gonzalez, denies that he authorised their actions, but the scandal taints the ailing Socialist P.S.O.E. administration.'

Yeah, those soft lefties.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by molly bloom


Not even borne out by recent Spanish history:

'1983-87

(P.S.O.E. elected 1982)

Gal, the anti-terrorist liberation group, is set up to fight a dirty war against Eta. Its agents carry out assassinations of known Eta members (and several who were not), kidnappings, bombings and torture, killing 27 people during the 80s.

Yup, and most of the time they killed the wrong people.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
No.

Then you have a writing comprehension problem too.

I'm thinking about burning it.

Go ahead. Remember, do it in your waste paper basket, right before going to sleep.

You have the reading comprehension of a five year old.

OOF, the brilliant logic of Poly's greatest debater!

Liberation issues again. If all the coalition partners pull out, Al Qaeda will see an opportunity to exploit the situation and we will have tons of terrorists everywhere.

Unlike today, where, with the cooliion there, there are tons of terorrist everywhere as is (heck, since no one could have stopped the attack in Madrid...or 9/11, or Balui bombing, or the Istanbul bombings, or or or).

Maybe you forget what the new gov said fezzikins-they will leave Iraq if by the end of June there is no new UN mandate to give a greater role to the UN. You also forget that the handover of autonomy is also schedules for June.

But you forget a lot Fezziekins, don;t you?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


AND NEITHER CAN THE PSOE! You are just stuck in your own stupidity.. I mean clear out your damn ears and go ***** and moan about somebody else's country.

nah... as I said, you are entertaining

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by General Ludd
If the attack had resulted in a huge swing towards the PP, would people still be crying over spain giving into terrorism and leting it effect their vote?

In that case, 11-M would have been our Pearl Harbour, or even our 11-S. Now it´s too pretentious to compare it to such important dates.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Sava
It's really sad when people so blinded by political ideology can't admit they are wrong. AZNAR COULD NOT KEEP SPAIN SAFE... that's why his government is gone.

Such a statement applies to anybody else. It's not like it is easy to prevent a terrorist attack. The catastrophe may well have happened under any other government.

To think the attack was the only issue on which the Spaniards voted is an insult to them. Like every other people in a democracy, they voted on other things. Aznar's pro free-market policies, hardline policies against terror groups and affiliated, alignment with the US in Iraq, and other issues, determined the vote of MILLIONS before the attack.
If anything, the attack changed the mind of swing voters. Those who support PP's ideology did vote PP, and those who support PSOE's ideology did vote PSOE, no matter the attack.

Just look at Giancarlo and OliverFA here: they were going to vote PP prior to the attacks and they did. And I assume Jasev, Alfonso and others were decided to vote PSOE prior to the attacks as well.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by GePap
Unlike today, where, with the cooliion there, there are tons of terorrist everywhere as is (heck, since no one could have stopped the attack in Madrid...or 9/11, or Balui bombing, or the Istanbul bombings, or or or).

Maybe you forget what the new gov said fezzikins-they will leave Iraq if by the end of June there is no new UN mandate to give a greater role to the UN. You also forget that the handover of autonomy is also schedules for June.

But you forget a lot Fezziekins, don;t you?

You might aswell go after those who do the attacks instead of trying to stop them. I agree you need some defense. But you also need some offense. Like in American football. If you have no defense, you will get clobbered. If you have no offense forget about making any points.

But we cannot pull out once we hand over the authority... they don't have an adequate defense apparatus set up yet.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap
they will leave Iraq if by the end of June there is no new UN mandate to give a greater role to the UN. You also forget that the handover of autonomy is also schedules for June.

Is Spain saying that they will now trust their own security to the UN? Will they not deploy beyond their boarders in self defense unless mandated by the UN? Does P.S.O.E. have the 1st clue on foriegn policy? Inquiring minds want to know...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Yup, and most of the time they killed the wrong people.

Just admit you were wrong for once.

Unless you think those E.T.A. members killed during the P.S.O.E.'s period of government were killed with kindness- they overdosed on churros and chocolate, pigs' ears and manzanilla, I suppose.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Such a statement applies to anybody else. It's not like it is easy to prevent a terrorist attack. The catastrophe may well have happened under any other government.

To think the attack was the only issue on which the Spaniards voted is an insult to them. Like every other people in a democracy, they voted on other things. Aznar's pro free-market policies, hardline policies against terror groups and affiliated, alignment with the US in Iraq, and other issues, determined the vote of MILLIONS before the attack.
If anything, the attack changed the mind of swing voters. Those who support PP's ideology did vote PP, and those who support PSOE's ideology did vote PSOE, no matter the attack.

Just look at Giancarlo and OliverFA here: they were going to vote PP prior to the attacks and they did. And I assume Jasev, Alfonso and others were decided to vote PSOE prior to the attacks as well.

The PSOE honestly isn't really that much different than the PP when it comes to the economy, as I said the economic minister is going to most likely be a former BBVA banker.

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


there is some pretty compelling evidence that they are operating in Iraq NOW. Before the invasion is a different story as far as evidence, but post invasion is even now acknowledged by AQ that they are there. If Spain wants to take on AQ outside of their own boarders, then staying in Iraq is the thing to do. If they are making a post invasion political statement that they are willing to let the war come to them and fight on the homeland then the new government is spot on. Wonder if 80% would support that line of thought if it was presented to them?

Sorry, but sell a product using false advertisement, don;t be surprised when customers return the goods.
I love self-perpetuating wars! Lets go fight AQ in Iraq! wait, there are none..wait, they came in after we came in! We must continue to fight AQ!

Notice how the goverment of Spain has said they will keep troops in Spain if the UN is given a wider mandate..you know, the same thing for example India asked for when contemplating sending 17,000 troops a few months back.

Problem with relying on a "coolition of the willing" as opposed to a real international mandate-things fall apart when the willing don;t care anymore.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Such a statement applies to anybody else. It's not like it is easy to prevent a terrorist attack. The catastrophe may well have happened under any other government.

To think the attack was the only issue on which the Spaniards voted is an insult to them. Like every other people in a democracy, they voted on other things. Aznar's pro free-market policies, hardline policies against terror groups and affiliated, alignment with the US in Iraq, and other issues, determined the vote of MILLIONS before the attack.
If anything, the attack changed the mind of swing voters. Those who support PP's ideology did vote PP, and those who support PSOE's ideology did vote PSOE, no matter the attack.

Just look at Giancarlo and OliverFA here: they were going to vote PP prior to the attacks and they did. And I assume Jasev, Alfonso and others were decided to vote PSOE prior to the attacks as well.

I agree there were other issues that caused Aznar to get the boot... but the national security failure that led to the bombings (and the preceding provocation) was the straw that broke the camel's back.

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


Is Spain saying that they will now trust their own security to the UN? Will they not deploy beyond their boarders in self defense unless mandated by the UN? Does P.S.O.E. have the 1st clue on foriegn policy? Inquiring minds want to know...

Oh, the anti-UN trolls are back..I missed them.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Sava
I agree there were other issues that caused Aznar to get the boot... but the national security failure that led to the bombings (and the preceding provocation) was the straw that broke the camel's back.

National security failure? What are you? Stupid? Nobody could of stopped the attacks. The Spanish police and Civil Guard are prepared for bombs and terrorism and have been for many years. It was just logistically impossible to have cops in every single place of the country and in every soft target. So please spare me the bullshit.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Spiffor

To think the attack was the only issue on which the Spaniards voted is an insult to them. Like every other people in a democracy, they voted on other things.

With PP polling ahead of PSOE before the bombings, then one could assume that this issue was the swing issue. If it was, then AQ acting most certainly influenced the election. Is that a bad thing in and of itself? No. The problem I have comes with the proximity of the election to the bombing. An emotional vote may have well been reconsidered after time for reflection. Obviously, with PP leading in the polls, the other issues were on their side pre-bombing.

[Sava]

Originally posted by PLATO


With PP polling ahead of PSOE before the bombings, then one could assume that this issue was the swing issue. If it was, then AQ acting most certainly influenced the election. Is that a bad thing in and of itself? No. The problem I have comes with the proximity of the election to the bombing. An emotional vote may have well been reconsidered after time for reflection. Obviously, with PP leading in the polls, the other issues were on their side pre-bombing.

Howard Dean was polling ahead in Iowa before the voting... polls don't mean ****.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


Oh, the anti-UN trolls are back..I missed them.

Me too.
(Obviously )

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Sava
Howard Dean was polling ahead in Iowa before the voting... polls don't mean ****.

In some incidences you are correct, but Sava, you know that they usually have merit.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by GePap


Oh, the anti-UN trolls are back..I missed them.

Well GePap- you have to agree- Bushbaby didn't know diddly squat about foreign policy.

You have to assume that a Spanish Socialist is going to be of the same stamp as an American Republican- after all, the similarities are so striking.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by OliverFA
Well... for starting he is going to retire Spanish troops from Irak.

Later, he will continue aligning with France and Germany to criticize Mr. Bush for everything he does.

I hope Blair can make he change her mind, but I doubt.

Well, this has nothing to do with fighting terrorism, so I fail to see what this is doing here.

He will stop fighting the root of terrorism, so terrorism is in better condition now.

What do you call "fighting the root of terrorism?". Since it is obvious the brutal secular regime of Iraq wasn't the root of Muslim terrorism, what did Aznar do to fight the roots of terrorism, that Zapatero won't do?

And coward Spanish will suffer the loss of liberty of increased security measures

Such a reaction is something I would expect from any government after such an attack. Do you think the PP wouldn't have put these security measures in place?

It´s impossible to protect everything. Supermarkets, football stadiums, buses, cinemas, schools...

Indeed. But then again, what is the difference between Zapatero and Aznar in this regard?

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by Spiffor
it is pretty stupid to say this attack was Aznar's fault, or the next attack will be Zapatero's fault (as I expect you and OliverFa to say when it'll happen).

It will be funny to have things to blame Zapatero for (I mean, even more things that the improper way in which he has arrived to the governement).

But of course, if there is a new attack, Zapatero will not be responsible of the attack itself, but of not attacking terrorism at its root.

You can say that Aznar is "responsible" for the attack in one way. Is his government hadn´t pursued terrorism so effectively, the target would have been another government. Spain would have passed not detected by terrorism. But this would have been something temporal, because at the end, when(if) the big countries fall the small ones will follow. Spain has choosen to follow the path of the allies in the years just before the Second World War, when they thought they could make Hitler content with some concesions.

[Sava]

Originally posted by PLATO
In some incidences you are correct, but Sava, you know that they usually have merit.

I know when I'm being stupid and when I'm not

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Supermajority? Laughable. 9 million still voted for the PP and they are going to be the unhappy ones.

9,5 in fact. The PP just lost a bit more than 0,5 millions of votes. It was the PSOE who won 3 more millions (all that people who decided to vote). So "the people" have not been supermajority against the PP.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by PLATO
With PP polling ahead of PSOE before the bombings, then one could assume that this issue was the swing issue. If it was, then AQ acting most certainly influenced the election. Is that a bad thing in and of itself? No. The problem I have comes with the proximity of the election to the bombing. An emotional vote may have well been reconsidered after time for reflection. Obviously, with PP leading in the polls, the other issues were on their side pre-bombing.

Sava's answer is good, but since I wrote something about it back in page 11...

Originally posted by Spiffor

This is the fallacy you conservatoves are convinced of. If anything, Spain has shown us yesterday evening that their polls are usually inaccurate: the opinion polls conducted on election day didn't give us a clear picture (two polls believed the PP won, one poll believed the PSOE won), and we could have no definitive answer of the winner at 20:00.
So, how can you assert "the people were set to reelect the PP"? Based on the oh-so-trustworthy polls that show a tiny difference one week ago?

I wouldn't build an arguments solely a grounds as shaky as last week's polls. Really.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Sava
I know when I'm being stupid and when I'm not

Oh good.. so how much of a percentage is it when you're being stupid.. 90%? 95%? 99.9%?

Well I'm late for class. Talk to you later.

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by PLATO
there is some pretty compelling evidence that they are operating in Iraq NOW. Before the invasion is a different story as far as evidence, but post invasion is even now acknowledged by AQ that they are there. If Spain wants to take on AQ outside of their own boarders, then staying in Iraq is the thing to do. If they are making a post invasion political statement that they are willing to let the war come to them and fight on the homeland then the new government is spot on. Wonder if 80% would support that line of thought if it was presented to them?

They would say this is a lie invented by the right and support it. They would hope AQ went somewhere else before Spain and let that somewhere else fight the battle for them while they stay safe at home.

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by Spiffor
To think the attack was the only issue on which the Spaniards voted is an insult to them. Like every other people in a democracy, they voted on other things.

Sure. That´s why results changed so unexpectedly.

Just look at Giancarlo and OliverFA here: they were going to vote PP prior to the attacks and they did. And I assume Jasev, Alfonso and others were decided to vote PSOE prior to the attacks as well.

You are partially right. People who had their vote decided didn´t change it. People who had decided not to vote o who were trying to decide did. That can be easily seen by the increase in the participation while PP has lost only 500,000 votes (that´s the "punishment"?) and the communists lost many votes who went to PSOE. But mainly what PSOE got was many votes of people who wouldn not have voted. So, we can like it or not, but terrorists changed the result.