Terrorist attack in Spain

*turning the screws a bit further*

My boys are only there where they're supposed to be.
What's this fascination with my boys anyway ? You're not getting any of it. Or them. And stay away from my arse, you yankee ******.

I see you've managed to learn something from the Colonial past.
Can't talk, can't think, can wave a gun about a bit ... thank <insert deity of choice> we have you lot pissing all over the little countries eh. And all that for our safety ? My, what a beautiful gesture ...

And all that from behind your computer screen ? Impressive. :thumb:

PS: Should I have included smileys ? Naaah, he won't figure it out with or without them. Let's see how far we can take this wind-up ...

Naaah, not worth the bother anyway. Winding up morons is sooooo yesteryear :)


Oh and my condoleances to any and every victim's family.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HardCode
Spain's PM-elect just sent a message to the world that terrorism works...sad.

---

Its not about what the terroists want. Its what the citizens want, the majority of which don't fancy being blown up on their way to work one morning.

I'm not sure this whole war on terroism is the right way.:rolleyes: In my opinion it will only create more terrorists, I think maybe the governments should start addressing the reasons why otherwise normal people with families and loved ones are persuaded to kill hundreds of innocent people in the name of their beliefs.

There is something drastically wrong with society, if only we knew what:mad:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HardCode
You are absolutely correct. In 1941, the Yanks and their opinionated opinions should have stayed out of Europe's business....

---

...just as the French should have pulled their ships and soldiers out of asisting the US in their war against Britain over 200 years ago.
..and those pesky Spaniards should not have interefered with helping the French assist the US in defeating the Brits at the same time.

If you believe this is all about settlement of previous "debts", then let's get down and dirty and analyse it...

Here's a starter: Without the Europeans, where would the US be now?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaffer
...just as the French should have pulled their ships and soldiers out of asisting the US in their war against Britain over 200 years ago.
..and those pesky Spaniards should not have interefered with helping the French assist the US in defeating the Brits at the same time.

If you believe this is all about settlement of previous "debts", then let's get down and dirty and analyse it...

Here's a starter: Without the Europeans, where would the US be now?

---

Sitting round fires, living in Wig Wams, herding buffallo and generally having a stress free life smoking pipes. They'd probably be socialising with the Mayans had they not already been slaughtered earlier....

funny thing is that English is from the same Germanic linguistic tree as German.
Soooo ... in a way, we are already speaking German.

Alles klar ja ?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RSINGH
Sitting round fires, living in Wig Wams, herding buffallo and generally having a stress free life smoking pipes. They'd probably be socialising with the Mayans had they not already been slaughtered earlier....

---

... instead of being a small minority of people repressed in their own country, who have become one of the most separated and poorest communities in the world.

I can feel a song coming on...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HardCode
Spain's PM-elect just sent a message to the world that terrorism works...sad.

---

I don't see any difference in the US and the Al Qaeda as far as involvement is concerned. If you don't side with the US you are in the axis of evil and next in the line of fire. If you don't side with Al Qaeda they blow up things in your country.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
I don't see any difference in the US and the Al Qaeda as far as involvement is concerned. If you don't side with the US you are in the axis of evil and next in the line of fire.
.

---

not a shred of logic ever comes out of your mouth ..

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaffer

Here's a starter: Without the Europeans, where would the US be now?

---

well, that way you might want to thank Africa for european civilization in the first place...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally Pipp
[B]*turning the screws a bit further*

My boys are only there where they're supposed to be.
What's this fascination with my boys anyway ? You're not getting any of it. Or them. And stay away from my arse, you yankee ******.

---

we all know what you use that carrot for, no need to be ashamed Wally

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OrdinaryGuy
not a shred of logic ever comes out of your mouth ..

---

Will you be my deputy, then? I am thinking of running for Bush's place :p

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
Will you be my deputy, then? I am thinking of running for Bush's place :p

---

:rolleyes:
Indian elections aren't any better are they?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
I don't see any difference in the US and the Al Qaeda as far as involvement is concerned. If you don't side with the US you are in the axis of evil and next in the line of fire. If you don't side with Al Qaeda they blow up things in your country.

.

---

Stop having breakfast in the morning! Your infadel action is against my religious beliefs!! Stop it of i'll blow up your garage!!!

if you stop having breakfast in the morning because of my neighborly advice, it'll show me my advice works. Maybe i can try it with the other neighbor.

And maybe i can ask you to prevent you wife from showing too much legs and hair...

What the new leaders of Spain is doing now is carefully not to look as if they are acting in appeasement (talking about UN.. and so forth), but also crefully rebutting President Bush's administration belligerent tendency.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OrdinaryGuy
:rolleyes:
Indian elections aren't any better are they?

---

At least we have leaders who don't get emotional every time, and try to promote peace, even at a cost, with even the most hated enemy nations. Sometimes I thank God we have such old people occupying the top positions, because they have gone through their life and learnt some very important lessons they put into practice. If we had some young blood at the helm, the Kargill war would have swiftly turned into a nuclear war. In fact we would probably not have survived through the earlier conflicts to even reach the Kargill stage. One or the other nation would have been wiped out much before that. But fortunately we have people who know that violence doesn't solve everything. Reaching for the heart is much better than reaching for your gun.

Don't you ever wonder with all those flaws in our election system, we are still able to elect people who extend a peace offer to our most hatred enemy? Do you even have any idea what a radical change in atmosphere the recent Cricket series has brought in the relations of the two countries and the attitude of the people? Lastly do you know the courage it takes to swallow all those losses and to take all that criticism and still know that peace cannot be won by violence?

Thank God we don't need to fingerprint our guests. Thank Gd we don't need to profile our guests based on their races. Thank God we don't need sniffer dogs and metal detectors and policemen thronging our trains looking for explosives, because we still have people who believe a dialogue works better than a fight.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by W01fgang
Stop having breakfast in the morning! Your infadel action is against my religious beliefs!! Stop it of i'll blow up your garage!!!

if you stop having breakfast in the morning because of my neighborly advice, it'll show me my advice works. Maybe i can try it with the other neighbor.

And maybe i can ask you to prevent you wife from showing too much legs and hair...

What the new leaders of Spain is doing now is carefully not to look as if they are acting in appeasement (talking about UN.. and so forth), but also crefully rebutting President Bush's administration belligerent tendency.

---

And maybe I should be allowed to drive on whichever side of the road I see fit?

They are laws of those countries, if you got any problems with how they frame and implement their laws, get the fook out of that country and never visit it. Calling them evil because they don't have democracy and because you can't make any sense out of any laws they might have simply shows you are intolerant and ignorant of other people's and other governments' right to self-rule. Read the reaction of Saudi Arabia's prince to the US's plans of reforming the Middle East. The US is poking its nose too far deep into others' affairs, and it's actually time somebody bit that long nose. Or maybe Al Qaeda should really say the US is evil because it doesn't follow Al Qaeda's style of rule and it should overthrow the US government and implement its own rule in the US. I don't see any difference there...

.

Nice - an Al Qaeda sympathizer.

well, in your worldview that's just about anyone who doesn't follow the US propaganda machine, isn't it ? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shawn N
Nice - an Al Qaeda sympathizer.

---

He's just trying to say. Why should countries like the US and the UK have the right to decide who is right and who is wrong.

The majority of us believe that terrorism is wrong but that doesn't make the cause they are fighting for wrong. In my opinion the ones who are in the wrong are the leadsers such as Osama Bin Laden who convince young people to blow themselves up and kill other people in support of his beliefs. I'm sure he wouldn't be willing to do the same.

Older people do have more wisdom but they sometimes retain more animosity towards others. They have age old arguments and hatred and pass it on to the younger generations who really have no reason too.

For a country that is very unstable you are very good at ignoring it. The fact that you are still in an unstable peace with Pakistan and never seem to make any progress on proper stable peace shows how little your people really care. :rolleyes:

yeah, we all know an all-out nuclear war is the solution.

What does Al Qaeda want? Really. What is the source of all this hatred? Because we're infidels? Because we're on their Holy Land?

Remember the fact that the only reason we got on that land in the first place (Saudia) is because Iraq had annexed Kuwait and the US went in to protect SA (and the US interests in the kingdom) and then move Iraq out of Kuwait.

The difference between the US and Al Qaeda (I have to clear this up for the blind) is that Al Qaeda attacks anything, anybody, any two certain buildings if you know what I mean. What can you say in comparison?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally Pipp
yeah, we all know an all-out nuclear war is the solution.

---

Or we could just keep letting them kill civilians. Luckily our leader isn't as much as a pacifist as you are.

What should the States've done after the 9/11 attack?

The question is what he should've done before 11/9.

Perhaps listen to his aides like Richard Clarke whose office tried to warn him.

Why was their any need for a warning? What was the US doing at the time before 9/11 to constitute the attacks?

well you tell me ... if a security advisor with a track record of 30 years wants to tell the incumbent president there may be threats from overseas months before the attacks do occur, don't you think you should take it at the very least seriously ?

Yeap, I sure do. Now, what was the reasoning behind the attacks? I'm not trying to be cute and asking when I really know the answer.

My only idea is the "infidel" occupation of Muslim territory which I think anyone should have a problem with.

Mostly that plus the ongoing palestinian problem, corrupt governments who enrich themselves on petrodollars in the region, the "Western bad influence" (their words, not mine) on a deeply islamic region etc ...

A nice explosive gumbo of reasons where b'stards like Bin Laden have taken advantage of to justify terrorism. Not passing judgement here, mind you.

A bit like the Church in the Bible belt telling people what to do and not to listen to the other "devils", meanwhile enriching themselves, spreading their word etc ...

The only difference is that they're not terrorists (insofar that they haven't killed anyone) but their modus operandi is the same : religious zeal presented as salvation to the people and, also important, people swallowing it for there's little else to believe in.
And they should know that an eye-for-an-eye doesn't work on these people. A better way is taking away the breeding grounds so that their influence doesn't spread. That means diplomacy, cooperation and help. Not to terrorists but to the people.
And not telling them to uprise and drop them like a stone afterwards.

So, in a way, by putting two and two together, "terrorism" experts around the globe should've (and maybe did) know(n) that these fanatics aren't shy of suicide attacks opn whatever magnitude.
And if one of your trusted advisors then tells you something is brewing you damn well listen and take it seriously.

Yea that's what I thought...too bad. These guys just don't realize that it's not their call on who can/cannot be on the ground. It's the government's and if SA or Kuwait or whoever else says it's OK for the US to be on their Holy Soil, then tough titty - that's the way it is.

As far as taking away their breeding grounds, I'd say that that was Bush's plan with Iraq. Hopefully, after the US pulls out in June there won't be any other invasions.

With the attacks still coming in I'd say there's still a big breeding ground. Even in Afghanistan. But certainly in all the surrounding countries.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shawn N
What does Al Qaeda want? Really. What is the source of all this hatred? Because we're infidels? Because we're on their Holy Land?

Remember the fact that the only reason we got on that land in the first place (Saudia) is because Iraq had annexed Kuwait and the US went in to protect SA (and the US interests in the kingdom) and then move Iraq out of Kuwait.

The difference between the US and Al Qaeda (I have to clear this up for the blind) is that Al Qaeda attacks anything, anybody, any two certain buildings if you know what I mean. What can you say in comparison?

---

Maybe the answers lie in the selfish foreign policy followed by the US government of first raising and supporting Al Qaeda to fight off the Russians in Afghanistan, and then trying to eliminate it once their need was over? And of trying to intervene in almost every country's internal affairs?

Since the cultures of the Muslims and the Christians are in a stark contrast, this type of an intervention would prove even more dangerous.

From the reactions of the Spanish PM (or President?) - elect, and the Saudi Arabian prince, it's clear countries are going to rebel against the US policies of intervention.

And I simply don't buy your argument that Al Qaeda attacks anything and anybody. Ironically we could actually say that (and even a blind man who is intelligent can tell you that) Al Qaeda has always hit its targets, while the US has many a times missed their targets, or simply got their targets wrong. Assuming the present Iraqi violence has been spurred by Al Qaeda, compare their attacks against the US soldiers firing indiscriminately at cars which refused to stop at checkpoints for various reasons, the misbehaving missiles which landed miles away from their intended targets, tanks which fired on the wrong hotels etc. etc. etc. You can simply see the 9/11 attacks as a masterly plan of sending terror waves down the spine of the most powerful nation on the earth. I have no doubt that attack will go down in the history of combat and warfare as perhaps the finest display of coordination and planning of an attack.

If it indeed is a "war" on terrorism, I guess Al Qaeda or whoever is organizing these attacks, is much more superior to the US forces in Iraq. Even after the capture of Saddam Hussein himself and the killing of his two sons, the attackers haven't relented. Even the killing of civilians has a purpose for them and I guess they are pretty much achieving what they want through every attack.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BodwadUK
Older people do have more wisdom but they sometimes retain more animosity towards others. They have age old arguments and hatred and pass it on to the younger generations who really have no reason too.

For a country that is very unstable you are very good at ignoring it. The fact that you are still in an unstable peace with Pakistan and never seem to make any progress on proper stable peace shows how little your people really care. :rolleyes:

---

LOL How little people care about the relations?? Surely you have only been watching cricket news, if at all. Even the cricket news would tell you how the Indian and Pakistani supporters cheered up their own teams AND without any violent acts.

We are getting daily reports from the sports journalists travelling with the team of the generosity and hospitality that's being showered upon them by the Pakistani people. It's nothing short of a red-carpet welcome. And when you take into account the "unstable" relations we have had with Pakistan in the near past, this change is nothing short of a miracle. That takes a tremendous amount of self-restraint and patience and also a tremendous belief that war cannot solve any problems. And the credit for this change goes equally to our PM and the Pakistani President. Remember, insurgency into J&K is still on from Pakistan's side. But if we had retaliated with force, we would land in the same situation as Israel and Palestine today. I wonder if these two countries will even be around a few years down the line, if they continue warring like this.

And as far as the treatment given to Indian tourists in Pakistan is concerned, it's abundantly clear that the common man doesn't want war. It's only the political parties in both countries which are not ready to accept peace, because the very existence of such political parties as the Nationalist Congress Party and the Hurriyat Conference in J&K depends upon keeping the valley burning.

I would anytime prefer a sixty year old prime minister who knows self-restraint and patience than a young one who seems to be more trigger-happy.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
You can simply see the 9/11 attacks as a masterly plan of sending terror waves down the spine of the most powerful nation on the earth. I have no doubt that attack will go down in the history of combat and warfare as perhaps the finest display of coordination and planning of an attack.

---

You cannot say that killing loads of innocent suvillians is a fine display or planning and co-ordination. If people want to die for their countries then they will join the armed forces. If they do not then they have a right to live in a peaceful and secure environment and not have to live in fear of becoming the victim of other peoples disagreements.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shawn N
Yea that's what I thought...too bad. These guys just don't realize that it's not their call on who can/cannot be on the ground. It's the government's and if SA or Kuwait or whoever else says it's OK for the US to be on their Holy Soil, then tough titty - that's the way it is.

As far as taking away their breeding grounds, I'd say that that was Bush's plan with Iraq. Hopefully, after the US pulls out in June there won't be any other invasions.

---

I guess it's been established that the Saddam regime had no links whatsoever with Al Qaeda. In that situation I find it hard to believe Iraq was a breeding ground for terrorists. It's more likely that nations like Syria have been harbouring them, and they have entered Iraq only after the US invasion.

.

why can't you say that ? It took them years to plot, to train and to coordinate all their actions. It didn't happen overnight, you know.
I'm not justifying them in any way but calling them unplanned is a grossly underestimating their determination and zeal.
And makes them all the more dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by visualAd
You cannot say that killing loads of innocent suvillians is a fine display or planning and co-ordination. If people want to die for their countries then they will join the armed forces. If they do not then they have a right to live in a peaceful and secure environment and not have to live in fear of becoming the victim of other peoples disagreements.

---

I knew someone would misquote me.

Consider this: Al Qaeda has set itself a goal (assuming it's behind the Iraq attacks). The goal is to scare the hell out of the Iraqis, prevent them from cooperating with the US forces, drive the US forces out and push Iraq into anarchy. Going by their actions, they are doing pretty fine.

Remember I have not said if their goals are good or bad, desirable or undesirable.


Interestingly, since the US is the occupying force in Iraq, and they have overthrown the government in Iraq, isn't it the obligation of the US forces to protect the innocent Iraqis who "have a right to live in a peaceful and secure environment and not have to live in fear of becoming the victim of other peoples disagreements" as you call it?

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
Interestingly, since the US is the occupying force in Iraq, and they have overthrown the government in Iraq, isn't it the obligation of the US forces to protect the innocent Iraqis who "have a right to live in a peaceful and secure environment and not have to live in fear of becoming the victim of other peoples disagreements" as you call it?

---

Yes it is. Which is why in my opinion the US, UK, Spain and their alles should not have gone to war. The only good thing to come out of it was they over threw Saddam. The only other purpose this war can serve is to create more bitterness and hatred against the west and thus more terrorists. So not only have innocent Iraqi's become victims but also the British, Spanish and American survillians who had no part in this war.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by visualAd
Yes it is. Which is why in my opinion the US, UK, Spain and their alles should not have gone to war. The only good thing to come out of it was they over threw Saddam. The only other purpose this war can serve is to create more bitterness and hatred against the west and thus more terrorists. So not only have innocent Iraqi's become victims but also the British, Spanish and American survillians who had no part in this war.

---

Agreed. Looking at the lives lost every day, one might actually wonder if this is not a greater cost to pay than to have a dictator and keep him in check.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
Agreed. Looking at the lives lost every day, one might actually wonder if this is not a greater cost to pay than to have a dictator and keep him in check.

.

---

How would you respond to the polls showing the Iraqis with such optimistic outlooks for the future?

ABCNEWS.com : Poll: Iraqis Report Better Postwar Life

Poll finds life better for most after Saddam - Iraq - www.theage.com.au

But does the fact that this is US led make the Iraqi opinion worthless?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shawn N
How would you respond to the polls showing the Iraqis with such optimistic outlooks for the future?

ABCNEWS.com : Poll: Iraqis Report Better Postwar Life

Poll finds life better for most after Saddam - Iraq - www.theage.com.au

But does the fact that this is US led make the Iraqi opinion worthless?

---

It doesn't make it worthless, and I shall even say that this has been possible only because Saddam was removed. But just pause and think about how many of these aspiring young people will survive the violence in Iraq? The entire responsibility for the continuing violence in Iraq is on the US and its haste in invading Iraq, its arrogance that it didn't need international support and its mistaken assumptions about the whole war. It simply didn't do much than put their troops on the Iraqi soil and tell them to march to Baghdad. After Baghdad fell, they didn't know what to do. The power vaccuum, no time plan, and almost zero anticipation of this violence point to a sloppy strategy by the US.

So we must also consider the fact that the violence has not abated, and while in the initial stages the targets were the US forces, now the civilians are the targets. I think most of those hopefuls will find that after the US forces have left, Iraq has landed in an even worse situation than under Saddam's rule, because now there will be complete anarchy. To avoid a complete anarchy the only way out is to establish a stooge government, whose strings are with the US, which is even worse.

I guess the US government has probably thought through the situation till this point, where they cannot end their occupation even if they had to, because then Iraq will fall to pieces, and the world will have to back them up just to keep Iraq from disintegrating. What has probably gone wrong is the mounting casualties, increasing violence and still no global support. If at all the US wanted to invade and occupy Iraq, it should have thought through all the possible scenarios.

The so-called democracy will soon fall to pieces after US leaves Iraq, because all the factions like the Shias, Sunnis and the Kurds and others are going to fight amongst each other openly to capture power. And that will prove even more beneficial to organizations such as Al Qaeda. And to maintain democracy all the parties will request the US to leave some kind of military force in Iraq, which means the US will have installed a puppet government there. Again that's beneficial to Al Qaeda.

If your government didn't think of the present scenario and indeed didn't anticipate a quick victory, it's too stupid to be called a super power.

.