Madrid train blast [Archive] - THE WRITERS FORUM

!@#$%

03-11-2004, 06:50 PM

Spain's PM vows to catch bombers

Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar has vowed that those responsible for the train bomb attacks in Madrid will be hunted down and punished.

Ten bombs exploded without warning on trains at three stations during the morning rush hour, killing 190 people and wounding more than 1,200.

Mr Aznar made it clear he believed the armed Basque separatist group Eta was behind the co-ordinated blasts.

But a political group close to Eta denied that it carried out the attacks.

Campaigning for Sunday's general election in Spain has been suspended, and three days of national mourning have been declared.

Who is to blame?

In a national address, Mr Aznar urged Spaniards to take to streets in protest at the attacks on their capital - and some have already heeded this call.

"Terrorism is not blind," he said.

"These terrorists wanted to cause as much damage as possible. It is a massacre. They have killed many people simply for being Spanish."

He added: "The criminals who have caused so many deaths today will be arrested... We will succeed in finishing off the terrorist band."

"Terrorist band" is a term normally used by the government to describe Eta.

'Arab resistance' blamed

Other government ministers - and much of the country's media - have explicitly linked Eta to the attacks.

Spanish anti-terrorist sources quoted by the AFP news agency said the explosive used in the attacks on four commuter trains was of a kind habitually used by Eta.

They said the devices appeared to have been set off by remote control.

There were no warnings issued ahead of the explosions.

BBC diplomatic correspondent Barnaby Mason says that if Eta was responsible, the simultaneous attacks mark an unprecedented increase in scale, ruthlessness and co-ordination.

Some observers say the bombings bear the hallmarks of the Islamic militant network al-Qaeda, which has threatened revenge on Spain for its government's backing of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

And the leader of the banned Basque political party Batasuna, Arnaldo Otegi, blamed "Arab resistance".

"Eta has always issued a warning whenever it left a bomb to explode," he said, adding: "Spain maintains occupation forces in Iraq and we should not forget that it had a responsibility for the war in Iraq."

According to an unconfirmed report carried by the Canadian-based English-language website called Jihad Unspun, a previously unknown group called the Lions of al-Mufridun has claimed responsibility.

The website said the group was "made up of Moroccan, Algerian and Tunisian operatives, with suspected links to al-Qaeda".

Panic and chaos

The bombings are being described as the most deadly terror attack in Europe since Pan-Am Flight 103 was blown out of the sky by a bomb above the Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988, and the worst in Spanish history.

They struck between 0730 and 0800 local time (0630-0700GMT) as trains brought thousands of people to work in the capital.

Where the blasts happened

The main attack was at one of Madrid's major stations, Atocha, in the city centre.

Explosions hit a train as it was entering the huge interchange shortly after 0630 GMT, while other blasts went off on a train as it was passing Tellez street just outside the terminal.

Emergency numbers for relatives

(00 34) 900 200 222
(00 34) 915 767 000

Bombs also tore into carriages on trains at El Pozo and Santa Eugenia stations.

"People started to scream and run, some bumping into each other," Juani Fernandez, a civil servant who was on a platform at Atocha when the bombs went off, told the Associated Press.

"I saw people with blood pouring from them, people on the ground."

Three other devices hidden in backpacks were defused by police explosives experts.

Helicopters and dozens of ambulances ferried victims to hospitals, while appeals for blood donations were broadcast on national radio.

"It was butchery on a brutal scale," said Juan Redondo, an inspector for Madrid Firefighting Department. "This catastrophe goes beyond the imaginable."

Political and religious leaders across the world have condemned the attacks, with many describing them as an attack on democracy.

US President George W Bush said it was a "vicious act of terrorism" and telephoned Mr Aznar and King Juan Carlos to express his condolences.

MAIN ETA ATTACKS

July 2003: Bomb attacks in Alicante and Benidorm, 13 injured. Further explosion at Santander airport days later
Jan, Feb 2000: Car bombs explode in Madrid and the Basque capital Vitoria
June 1998: Car bomb kills Popular Party councillor Manuel Zamarreno
July 1997: ETA kidnaps and kills Basque councillor Miguel Angel Blanco
June 1987: 21 shoppers are killed in an attack on a Barcelona supermarket
1980: In ETA's bloodiest year, 118 people are killed
Dec 1973: Assassination of Prime Minister Admiral Luis Carrero Blanco

...source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3502218.stm

SteveAustin

03-11-2004, 06:58 PM

Ok, I just checked the BBC site.

link to article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3502218.stm)

According to an unconfirmed report carried by the Canadian-based English-language website called Jihad Unspun, a previously unknown group called the Lions of al-Mufridun has claimed responsibility.

The website said the group was "made up of Moroccan, Algerian and Tunisian operatives, with suspected links to al-Qaeda".

It sounds like all the Spaniards are ignoring ETA's normal MOA and blaming them, while people outside of the country are linking it to Al Quaeda.

This article also mentioned that there were 10 blasts...but some were defused.

RIP
I'll never understand the killing of innocent citizens

Three other devices hidden in backpacks were defused by police explosives experts.

imported_Tesseract

03-11-2004, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by JeffLebowski
Tesseract, it appears you have something to say about the ETA organization. If you do not wish to post here you can go ahead and email me.

No and no, i aint got something specific to say about ETA, i have no problem saying my opinion publically and most of all i aint attacking 360 in any way.

My view on it, is that i get really pissed with two things, one is terrorism and second is the reasons that cause terrorism.
Behind every major terrorist group there was a serious demand and a series of govermental fuck ups over innocent people. You think palestinians are having a goodtime and one day said "hey! wouldnt it be fun to strap a shitload of dynamite all over me and go blast in the middle of a mall?"....we all know its not like that.
For gods shake dont let this be misunderstood, when i say i feel bad for them and the innocent people they kill, i mean it to the point that it disgusts the fuck out of me.

And all that 'associated with al-quida" shit is just bogus...in inter-goverment relationships you see the US selling weapons to Iraq just years ago, israelis offering protection to turkey, russians digging other countries nuclear waste in their soil....and you expect terrorist groups to not being linked at eachother? where the fuck you think they buy from.

thats all, all coins have two sides.

GnomeToys

03-11-2004, 07:19 PM

Deeply sorry to everyone in Spain, especially those with relatives/friends/loved ones on the trains.

How long will it be before Bush uses this as an excuse to go to war with some completely unrelated country? Has he already?

imported_Tesseract

03-11-2004, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by GnomeToys

How long will it be before Bush uses this as an excuse to go to war with some completely unrelated country? Has he already?

Unfortunatelly, this time it seems like its the other way around...

Dr. Dazzle

03-11-2004, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by GnomeToys
How long will it be before Bush uses this as an excuse to go to war with some completely unrelated country? Has he already?

I was thinking the same thing. Look out, evil North Africa.....

ares

03-11-2004, 07:33 PM

The only consolation for those who survived - and it is not likely to ease their suffering much - is that three more bombs, apparently timed to detonate as emergency services arrived at the scene of the first wave of explosions, were discovered by police and destroyed in controlled explosions.

Taken from this article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/spain/article/0,2763,1167300,00.html). I read that, and was shocked. Its one thing to kill hundreds of innocent civilians, but to have more explosives set to go off when the paramedics arrive... I'm really at a loss for words.

!@#$%

03-11-2004, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by Tesseract

And all that 'associated with al-quida" shit is just bogus...in inter-goverment relationships you see the US selling weapons to Iraq just years ago, israelis offering protection to turkey, russians digging other countries nuclear waste in their soil....and you expect terrorist groups to not being linked at eachother? where the fuck you think they buy from.

thats all, all coins have two sides.

not enough people realize how interconnected everything is.
when [american] people think bin laden, they don't also think 'CIA trained', which they should..

when americans say 'why is the u.s. even in haiti?' they don't realize that the american government loved aristide, then kidnapped him when shit got outta control

or that america installed saddam hussein
(this is why i get fury fucking us when i hear people like Dickwad Bremer saying that hussein brutalized the iraqii people for 30 years...which would mean he started immediately after being handed the reigns by the U.S.)

this shit goes on and on and on.
i too am disgusted by the cycle of violence being perpetuated in, now, almost every part of the world..

is this the beginning of the end or something????

..........GNOMETOYS....

yes!!!
Bush has already started undermining the government of oil-rich VENEZUELA
(and don't forget about the covert marine ops in Haiti)

cmeup

03-11-2004, 07:43 PM

they just said on the news they found a van full of detonators and arabic tapes with sayings on them or some shit...

Crimsøn

03-11-2004, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by CILONE/SK
Not only because they kill people to make their point, but because most of them are not open to other peoples ideas and they want to make everyone like them. With them it is either their way or death, that is fucked up.

Sounds awfully familiar.

This shit sucks.
RIP

Vlad

03-11-2004, 07:54 PM

Saw this news live at a pub, cant say how shooked i was. Terrible

RIP

krs702

03-11-2004, 08:01 PM

i'm not shocked this happened
check it out in america public transportation is so vulnerable if your a writer you know how easy it is to get into yards, tunnels, light rail paths..

!@#$%

03-11-2004, 09:39 PM

Purported Qaeda Letter Claims Spain Bombings
39 minutes ago

DUBAI (Reuters) - A letter purporting to come from Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network claimed responsibility for train bombings in Spain on Thursday, calling them strikes against "crusaders," a London-based Arabic newspaper said.

The Spanish government has said Basque separatists were the main suspect in the bombings of four trains early on Thursday that killed 190 people.

But the country's interior minister held open the possibility of a militant Islamist link on Thursday evening when he told a newspaper conference that a suspect van had been found containing detonators and an Arabic-language tape. He said, however, militant Basque separatists remained chief suspects.

The London-based al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper faxed to Reuters' Dubai bureau a copy of a letter purporting to come from the "Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades." The group aligns itself to al Qaeda, blamed by Washington for September 2001 attacks on the United States.

"We have succeeded in infiltrating the heart of crusader Europe and struck one of the bases of the crusader alliance," said the letter which called the attacks "Operation Death Trains."

There was no way of authenticating the letter.

The newspaper received similar letters from the same brigade claiming responsibility on behalf of al Qaeda for a November bombing of two synagogues in Turkey and the August bombing of the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad.

Spain backed the United States in its invasion of Iraq, drawing the opprobrium of militant Islamist groups.

Snack1

03-11-2004, 10:02 PM

oh fuck

fuck the terrorism
rip all victims

fuck why they choose trainsystem

!@#$%

03-11-2004, 10:29 PM

Arab Paper Gets Spain Bombing Claim
By MAAMOUN YOUSSEF
CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - The Arabic newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi said Thursday it had received a claim of responsibility for the Madrid train bombings issued in the name of al-Qaida.
The five-page e-mail claim, signed by the shadowy Brigade of Abu Hafs al-Masri, was received at the paper's London offices. It said the brigade's ``death squad'' had penetrated ``one of the pillars of the crusade alliance, Spain,'' and carried out what it called Operation Death Trains.

``This is part of settling old accounts with Spain, the crusader, and America's ally in its war against Islam,'' the claim said.
Referring to Spain's Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, the statement asked: ``Aznar, where is America? Who will protect you, Britain, Japan, Italy and others from us?''
The newspaper faxed the claim to The Associated Press office in Cairo.

The statement warned the United States that a major strike is approaching.

``We announce the good news for the Muslims in the world that the strike of the black wind of death, the expected strike against America, is now at its final stage - 90 percent ready - and it is coming soon, by God's will,'' the claim said.

Asked about the claim of responsibility, White House spokesman Sean McCormack said ``we've seen the news reports and we're going to determine what the facts are.''

The message also referred to last year's attack on Italian paramilitary police serving in the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.

``When we attacked the Italian troops in Nasiriyah and sent you and America's agents an ultimatum to withdraw from the anti-Islam alliance, you did not understand the the message. Now we have made it clear and hope that this time you will understand,'' the statement said.

``We, at the Abu Hafs brigades, have not felt sad for the so-called civilians,'' the statement in an apparent reference to the hundreds of casualties in Thursday's attacks in Madrid.

``Is it OK for you to kill our children, women, old people and youth in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Kashmir? And is it forbidden to us to kill yours?'' the claim asked.

The statement said another al-Qaida squad, Jund al-Quds or Soldiers of Jerusalem, had carried out Tuesday night's attack on a Masonic lodge in Istanbul, Turkey.

``All the Masons would have been killed but there was a technical fault. So because God wished it, only three were killed,'' the statement said.

In the attack, two suicide bombers opened fire in the lodge's dining hall, killing a waiter and wounding five other people. The attackers then detonated rudimentary explosives. One assailant died in the blast while the other was severely wounded.

CinchedWaist

03-11-2004, 10:43 PM

I don't even know what to say about this all.
All these events just keep on happening and happening...
its seems inevitable that its all going to reach some kind of hugely drastic climax.

cmeup

03-11-2004, 10:46 PM

Originally posted by #^%!#^%:

The statement warned the United States that a major strike is approaching.

``We announce the good news for the Muslims in the world that the strike of the black wind of death, the expected strike against America, is now at its final stage - 90 percent ready - and it is coming soon, by God's will,'' the claim said.

well, we're all fucked.

:( :o

Dr. Dazzle

03-11-2004, 10:49 PM

Originally posted by E MARTYR
well, we're all fucked.

Yes, yes you are......

But if the war on Iraq is the new motive....they're are a bunch of places at risk.

I am so fucking glad Canada stayed out of that shit....

cmeup

03-11-2004, 10:56 PM

Originally posted by Dr. Dazzle
Yes, yes you are......

But if the war on Iraq is the new motive....they're are a bunch of places at risk.

I am so fucking glad Canada stayed out of that shit....

now dazzle, i know we've had our differences on the board and whatnot, but you got a couch for good ole teaser if he has to fleeola the country on the quick tip right?

;) :D :lol:

imported_suburbian bum

03-11-2004, 10:56 PM

Bleh, this makes me sad. I feel really bad for the people in Spain. Shit...
RIP...

villain

03-11-2004, 11:11 PM

Terrible....

I don't think this was al queda though. Doesn't fit with their tactics. Al Quedas beef is not with innocent people and they have plainly stated this which is why they opt for decapitation attacks as cleanly as possible.... and I think they understand that intimidation tactics don't work in countries with strong governmental influence. This seems like a hate crime to me. Could be wrong though.

nomadawhat

03-11-2004, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by villain

I don't think this was al queda though. Doesn't fit with their tactics. Al Quedas beef is not with innocent people and they have plainly stated this

:confused: :confused: :confused:

!@#$%

03-11-2004, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by villain
Terrible....

I don't think this was al queda though. Doesn't fit with their tactics. Al Quedas beef is not with innocent people and they have plainly stated this which is why they opt for decapitation attacks as cleanly as possible.... and I think they understand that intimidation tactics don't work in countries with strong governmental influence. This seems like a hate crime to me. Could be wrong though.

just as in sept 11, al-qaeda doesn't think of civilians as innocent.
they think that because the sapnish government was with the war (even though the people weren't) the people are fair game..

there have been other al-qaeda attacks on innocent people
including in saudi arabia
and africa

from cnn.com (May 13th 2003)
Bergen: No question, attack was al Qaeda
(CNN) -- Suicide bombings Monday night at three housing compounds in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killed at least 20 people -- including seven Americans, the Saudi Interior Ministry said. Nine bombers also died. Government officials suspect the attacks were conducted by al Qaeda terrorists. (Full story)

CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen, author of the best-selling book, "Holy War Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden," discussed the attacks with CNN's Bill Hemmer.

HEMMER: Peter Bergen has studied al Qaeda for several years. Do these attacks look like the work of al Qaeda to you?

BERGEN: No question about it. Simultaneous attacks, they went into these compounds with shooting, which they did in the U.S. Embassy bombing attacks in eastern Africa in 1998. Then the bombs went off. Also there is some indication that there may have been initial explosions to bring people out and then another explosion to perhaps kill more people. This also happened in the U.S. Embassy attacks in Africa.

Al Qaeda itself said last week in an interview, one of al Qaeda's spokesmen, in an Arabic magazine published in London that they were planning more attacks. And clearly, this is one of those attacks. There's just an absence of other groups that would be capable of carrying out these coordinated attacks.

and from an interview with bin Laden in 2002
link... http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/sout...ript/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/05/binladen.transcript/index.html)

Q [interrupting]: How about the killing of innocent civilians?

BIN LADEN: The killing of innocent civilians, as America and some intellectuals claim, is really very strange talk. Who said that our children and civilians are not innocent and that shedding their blood is justified? That it is lesser in degree? When we kill their innocents, the entire world from east to west screams at us, and America rallies its allies, agents, and the sons of its agents. Who said that our blood is not blood, but theirs is? Who made this pronouncement? Who has been getting killed in our countries for decades? More than 1 million children, more than 1 million children died in Iraq and others are still dying. Why do we not hear someone screaming or condemning, or even someone's words of consolation or condolence?

How come millions of Muslims are being killed? Where are the experts, the writers, the scholars and the freedom fighters, where are the ones who have an ounce a faith in them? They react only if we kill American civilians, and every day we are being killed, children are being killed in Palestine. We should review the books. Human nature makes people stand with the powerful without noticing it. When they talk about us, they know we won't respond to them. In the past, an Arab king once killed an ordinary Arab man. The people started wondering how come kings have the right to kill people just like that. Then the victim's brother went and killed the king in revenge. People were disappointed with the young man and asked him, "How could you kill a king for your brother?" The man said, "My brother is my king." We consider all our children in Palestine to be kings.

We kill the kings of the infidels, kings of the crusaders, and civilian infidels in exchange for those of our children they kill. This is permissible in law and intellectually.

Q: So what you are saying is that this is a type of reciprocal treatment. They kill our innocents, so we kill their innocents.

BIN LADEN: So we kill their innocents, and I say it is permissible in law and intellectually, because those who spoke on this matter spoke from a juridical perspective.

Q: What is their position?

BIN LADEN: That it is not permissible. They spoke of evidence that the Messenger of God forbade the killing of women and children. This is true.

[Break in tape.]

Q: This is exactly what I'm asking about.

BIN LADEN: However, this prohibition of the killing of children and innocents is not absolute. It is not absolute. There are other texts that restrict it.

I agree that the Prophet Mohammed forbade the killing of babies and women. That is true, but this is not absolute. There is a saying, "If the infidels killed women and children on purpose, we shouldn't shy way from treating them in the same way to stop them from doing it again." The men that God helped [attack, on September 11] did not intend to kill babies; they intended to destroy the strongest military power in the world, to attack the Pentagon that houses more than 64,000 employees, a military center that houses the strength and the military intelligence.

Q: How about the twin towers?

BIN LADEN: The towers are an economic power and not a children's school. Those that were there are men that supported the biggest economic power in the world. They have to review their books. We will do as they do. If they kill our women and our innocent people, we will kill their women and their innocent people until they stop.

Q: Media organizations as well as intelligence information says that you run a big network in some 40 to 50 countries. There is information that al Qaeda is very influential and powerful and it is behind attacks and Islamic foundations and terrorist organizations. How much is al Qaeda dependent on Osama Bin Laden?

BIN LADEN: This has nothing to do with this poor servant of God, nor with the al Qaeda organization. We are the children of an Islamic nation whose leader is Mohammed.

We have one religion, one God, one book, one prophet, one nation. Our book teaches us to be brothers of a faith. All the Muslims are brothers. The name "al Qaeda" was established a long time ago by mere chance. The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri established the training camps for our mujahedeen against Russia's terrorism. We used to call the training camp al Qaeda [meaning "the base" in English]. And the name stayed. We speak about the conscience of the nation; we are the sons of the nation. We brothers in Islam from the Middle East, Philippines, Malaysia, India, Pakistan and as far as Mauritania.

Those men who sacrificed themselves in New York and Washington, they are the spokesmen of the nation's conscience. They are the nation's conscience that saw they have to avenge against the oppression.

Not all terrorism is cursed; some terrorism is blessed. A thief, a criminal, for example feels terrorized by the police. So, do we say to the policeman, "You are a terrorist"? No. Police terrorism against criminals is a blessed terrorism because it will prevent the criminal from repeating his deed. America and Israel exercise the condemned terrorism. We practice the good terrorism which stops them from killing our children in Palestine and elsewhere.

cmeup

03-11-2004, 11:40 PM

this whole situation is getting way out of hand.

what do you guys think is going to have to happen for it all to stop?

what do you think they will try to attack in the U.S. if there is another attack? which landmarks or targets do you think they'll go for?

Dick Quickwood

03-11-2004, 11:54 PM

and just the other day i was wondering about the transit "bombing" scene in spain

Æ°

03-11-2004, 11:59 PM

The superpower of the world is making an attempt to invoke armageddon.

26SidedCube

03-12-2004, 12:02 AM

Horrible. My sympathy to the families and friends
who will suffer because of this.

Originally posted by !@#$%
is this the beginning of the end or something????

Not to sound too knee-jerk, but this is exactly
what my friend and I were talking about last
night. Verbatim.

Sure, there's always been war and conflict and
innocent lives being lost but it's never been as
easy as it is right now to completely wipe-out
hundreds (this attack) if not millions (nuclear/
chem warfare) of people with a single attack.
I shit you not.. it must have been only a few
hours before this actually took place I was
saying that it seems the rate that shit's been
hitting the fan is starting to seem exponential.

I think we might just get to see the end, not
to get any hopes up.

26SidedCube

03-12-2004, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by Æ°
The superpower of the world is making an attempt to invoke armageddon.

Yeah, it's not human nature and the entire world
in general not being able to work with one another.
Nah...

It's the US. Just the US, because had Canada,
Germany, or China came to be the controller
of the majority of the world's money we'd all
be holding hands and linking continents in an
international koom-by-ah circle.

villain

03-12-2004, 12:23 AM

Well !@#$% Do you work for the CIA or something?
I said it wasn't likely al queda. They are probably a 90% political and 10% religious fanatics. But mostly politically motivated. Of course they come from strong tribal backgrounds and have with them strong codes of honor. They are not exactly metrosexuals. So yes I can see how they would think we owe them innocent blood, as he stated there himself. Fanatical terrorism I suppose would have been more likely to happen in Spain because it is a long contested land between muslim/christian faiths. Not only that but I'm sure al queda would not like what it saw as a betrayal by spain which dishonors their code as well.

Isn't that bombing you are refering to in saudi arabia also the one where bremer barely escaped with his life? Besides there was probably strong religious motivation for that as well because al queda cannot stand the mere thought of american troops in the holy land.

Another thing to consider is that terrorists of all creeds and kinds could be motivated by al queda whether related or not and it is far too easy to blame al queda for everything these days. This is a strong scapegoat for any organization working beyond the spectacle.

Teaser: If we want to stop this madness we have to stop aggressions obviously. And being the bigger man we should step down first since they ARE technically on the defensive. And our buddies isreal as well need to chill the fuck out with their empire building.

DREDZ

03-12-2004, 12:30 AM

a friend of mine was traveling around spain a couple of weeks ago
...im glad she came back before that shit went down.

villain

03-12-2004, 12:44 AM

True... it's easy these days for a handful of individuals to cause mass destruction. That's why it's so much more important for us to live in a global village. Big brother cannot track and trap all the terrorists. They can lay and wait in hiding for decades, they will get their revenge. We must make peace. We cannot have the all seeing eye of the illuminati control all the chaotic variations and possibilities it must be done on a localized personal individual and subjective level. We must feel a part of these greater forces that influence the way the world turns. Or else feel denied and bitter.

T.T Boy

03-12-2004, 02:59 AM

i hope every one i know in madrid is ok. i hope anyone here who has family there is ok. rest in peace.

this is such a stupid act of terrorism, spainish people are just not waring infadels like these punk asses think. its so sad it happened to such a beautiful culture and country. sad to happen to any country and culture. i dont know about you guys, but im fucking tired of this infadel calling, not showing your face pussy ass terrorism shit.

villain

03-12-2004, 03:17 AM

Well what do you expect them to do? Amass an army and directly confront us? They aren't stupid.
There is no longer a 1st world/2nd world/3rd world. There is only one world. A world ruled by capital. There is no longer anything to excuse our actions like "holding off the commies". It's just very plain now our exploitation of the world and it's people and resources. And for what? We are not in an arms race anymore. There is no good excuse for our actions anymore.
After world war 2 the united states decided to come out of isolationism and get involved in world affairs again. Heavily involved. Now it is the dominant player. So why keep dominating?
Capitalism defeated communist Idealism but obviously capital doesn't know when to stop. When the war is over. It has taken on a life of it's own. A mind of it's own. All we can hope for now is for people to own up to some ideals within themselves and reign in this capitalism with what little governmental power we have left, before it's too late.
We are in turbulent times. Progress has outsteps the bounds and laws of this world. So are we going to ride this bullet train into hell or are we going to do something about it.

Terrorism is just a symptom of the problem.

fethasmcgraw

03-12-2004, 03:18 AM

the shit has hit the fan

TheoHuxtable

03-12-2004, 03:26 AM

26SidedCube

03-12-2004, 03:26 AM

Originally posted by villain
Well what do you expect them to do? Amass an army and directly confront us? They aren't stupid.
There is no longer a 1st world/2nd world/3rd world. There is only one world. A world ruled by capital. There is no longer anything to excuse our actions like "holding off the commies". It's just very plain now our exploitation of the world and it's people and resources. And for what? We are not in an arms race anymore. There is no good excuse for our actions anymore.
After world war 2 the united states decided to come out of isolationism and get involved in world affairs again. Heavily involved. Now it is the dominant player. So why keep dominating?
Capitalism defeated communist Idealism but obviously capital doesn't know when to stop. When the war is over. It has taken on a life of it's own. A mind of it's own. All we can hope for now is for people to own up to some ideals within themselves and reign in this capitalism with what little governmental power we have left, before it's too late.
We are in turbulent times. Progress has outsteps the bounds and laws of this world. So are we going to ride this bullet train into hell or are we going to do something about it.

Terrorism is just a symptom of the problem.

Perfectly put.

villain

03-12-2004, 03:29 AM

Originally posted by TheoHuxtable
What are you, insane? What about September 11th? The majority of Al Qaeda attacks have killed mostly civilians.

innocent civilians were killed BUT they were collateral damage to the intended targets.

Thx 26sidedcube. Good to see people addressing things other than whats on the surface.

T.T Boy

03-12-2004, 03:29 AM

dude, things are fucked up, but that gives no one the right to kill innocent people, it gives no one the right to bomb anything. terrorism is not the answer, besides, what was the message behind this attack? trains and train passengers are evil capitalist pig dogs? what? please explain this to me. if i dont like something, i dont go blow it up. it is a pure gutless move in a country such as this. no one is being opressed in spain. no ones territory is being annexed, no one innocent is being killed at the hands of the spanish people.

villain

03-12-2004, 03:31 AM

If terrorists REALLY wanted to fuck us all over they would just have to put anthrax or a single milligram of plutonium in the resevoirs....

TheoHuxtable

03-12-2004, 03:39 AM

Originally posted by villain
innocent civilians were killed BUT they were collateral damage to the intended targets.

Thx 26sidedcube. Good to see people addressing things other than whats on the surface.

I'm pretty sure if Bin Laden had a choice to destroy the building with no one in it or destroy it while it's filled to capacity, he'd choose the latter.

Bin Laden wanted to kill as many people as possible in those attacks. It went right along with destroying the building, destroying the airplanes, bringing the economy in a temporary slump, and most importantly the psychological after-effects that linger on for years to come. None of that is "collateral damage". It all works into the hand of the terrorists.

villain

03-12-2004, 03:40 AM

Originally posted by T.T Boy
dude, things are fucked up, but that gives no one the right to kill innocent people, it gives no one the right to bomb anything. terrorism is not the answer, besides, what was the message behind this attack? trains and train passengers are evil capitalist pig dogs? what? please explain this to me. if i dont like something, i dont go blow it up. it is a pure gutless move in a country such as this. no one is being opressed in spain. no ones territory is being annexed, no one innocent is being killed at the hands of the spanish people.

I have no idea what would warrant this attack on spain by their actions RECENTLY. They certainly have a history of colonization and exploitation. But recently I don't know. Which is why I said that it didn't seem like al queda and not politically motivated.

TheoHuxtable

03-12-2004, 03:47 AM

Originally posted by villain
I have no idea what would warrant this attack on spain by their actions RECENTLY. They certainly have a history of colonization and exploitation. But recently I don't know. Which is why I said that it didn't seem like al queda and not politically motivated.

Well, Spain was our staunchest supporter in Iraq next to the United Kingdom. Also I believe Spain and Islam had a history of feuding centuries ago... in fact a large portion of Spain became part of the Islamic Empire centuries back. I doubt any of that has anything to do with the recent bombings though. But it is the closest Western European nation to the Islamic/Arab world.

villain

03-12-2004, 03:51 AM

Originally posted by TheoHuxtable
I'm pretty sure if Bin Laden had a choice to destroy the building with no one in it or destroy it while it's filled to capacity, he'd choose the latter.

Bin Laden wanted to kill as many people as possible in those attacks. It went right along with destroying the building, destroying the airplanes, bringing the economy in a temporary slump, and most importantly the psychological after-effects that linger on for years to come. None of that is "collateral damage". It all works into the hand of the terrorists.

It's the World Trade Center. Of course he wanted to kill SOME of the people in there. Why would he just destroy the buildings? There would just be a change in base of operations.
And I think if people step back and look at their wording, more often than not and by just about everyone, people refer to the killing of INNOCENT people. And the pentagon attacks are hardly ever referred to at all! I think we can see part of the problem just by looking at ourselves. We are implying to ourselves that there are people who deserved that fate. I've seen it everywhere on TV, in the papers. The same thing with the oklahoma city bombings. Much of the emphasis was on the children who had died in the nursury.
We have killed a million people in Iraq over the last ten years. Most of them children! We are the cause of the deaths of millions of people in Sudan. We are occupying their holy land. We have abandoned them. We have played deadly games with them. We have stripped them of all their belongings.
This was bound to happen sooner or later. And they are going to get at us any and every way they can.

cmeup

03-12-2004, 04:03 AM

we need to retreat and just chill in the good ole USA for awhile.

time to destroy and rebuild on the home front.

duh-rye-won

03-12-2004, 04:10 AM

Originally posted by Dr. Dazzle
Yes, yes you are......

But if the war on Iraq is the new motive....they're are a bunch of places at risk.

I am so fucking glad Canada stayed out of that shit....

yeah, it's a good thing you guys didn't send in your military. oh, wait...

imported_Europe

03-12-2004, 06:55 AM

The date fits right in: March 11th, excatly two and a half year after September 11th.

3-11

9-11

This situation will be all Im following the next couple of days.

T.T Boy

03-12-2004, 07:46 AM

somehow i dont think they are getting payback for the conquering of south america.

TheoHuxtable

03-12-2004, 07:57 AM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by TheoHuxtable
I'm pretty sure if Bin Laden had a choice to destroy the building with no one in it or destroy it while it's filled to capacity, he'd choose the latter.

Bin Laden wanted to kill as many people as possible in those attacks. It went right along with destroying the building, destroying the airplanes, bringing the economy in a temporary slump, and most importantly the psychological after-effects that linger on for years to come. None of that is "collateral damage". It all works into the hand of the terrorists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by villain
It's the World Trade Center.

Of course, we know what the name of the building is called. Jesus Christ. You should've further "corrected" me and told me the "airplanes" were UNITED AIRLINES and AMERICAN AIRLINES, and that the "economy in a temporary slump" was specifically the U.S. ECONOMY that would be put in a slump.

Of course he wanted to kill SOME of the people in there. Why would he just destroy the buildings? There would just be a change in base of operations.

I'm just refuting what you said earlier. You made ludicrous claims that al Qaeda didn't target innocent people and that the people who died in the WTC were simply "collateral damage". I said that's not true, that killing innocents is part of al Qaeda's strategy. Then here you are contradicting yourself and saying "of course he wanted to kill some of the people".

And I think if people step back and look at their wording, more often than not and by just about everyone, people refer to the killing of INNOCENT people. And the pentagon attacks are hardly ever referred to at all! I think we can see part of the problem just by looking at ourselves. We are implying to ourselves that there are people who deserved that fate. I've seen it everywhere on TV, in the papers. The same thing with the oklahoma city bombings. Much of the emphasis was on the children who had died in the nursury.
We have killed a million people in Iraq over the last ten years. Most of them children! We are the cause of the deaths of millions of people in Sudan. We are occupying their holy land. We have abandoned them. We have played deadly games with them. We have stripped them of all their belongings.
This was bound to happen sooner or later. And they are going to get at us any and every way they can. [/B]

gfreshsushi

03-12-2004, 07:59 AM

i know this may not be appropriate, but does anyone else think this quote is hilarious?

Originally posted by !@#$%
...and carried out what it called Operation Death Trains.

sorry, it was just the first thing i saw in the article.

spain was rad. glad i saw it. beautiful place and friendly people. this is a really fucked situation.

suckout

03-12-2004, 09:13 AM

R.I.P all who died in the attacks.

i saw a spanish graf tape the other day, and the train system must have been one of the most vulnerable in western europe, wholecars in stations, all that kind of shit, so im not surprised that the train system was chosen as a way to attack.
first turkey then this. shits getting closer and closer to home.
wont be long till theres an attack in London. i wonder how much support the iraq war has generated for terrorism.

TheoHuxtable

03-12-2004, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by suckout
R.I.P all who died in the attacks.

i saw a spanish graf tape the other day, and the train system must have been one of the most vulnerable in western europe, wholecars in stations, all that kind of shit, so im not surprised that the train system was chosen as a way to attack.
first turkey then this. shits getting closer and closer to home.
wont be long till theres an attack in London. i wonder how much support the iraq war has generated for terrorism.

Yeah the Brits seem a little past due for an attack. Not saying it to offend, it's just that the Brits are the strongest US ally so you guys seem like a viable target for them. I don't think you've ever had one on your home soil have you? You guys did get bombed in Saudi Arabia like last year I think.

imported_Europe

03-12-2004, 01:02 PM

This is not going to go away, this will have consequences all over Europe.
And it could have happened any where, as writers, we all know how easy it is to access trains, lines and yards. So this is also a big blow to trainwriting worldwide.

se_FOUR

03-12-2004, 01:11 PM

Originally posted by TheoHuxtable
Yeah the Brits seem a little past due for an attack. Not saying it to offend, it's just that the Brits are the strongest US ally so you guys seem like a viable target for them. I don't think you've ever had one on your home soil have you? You guys did get bombed in Saudi Arabia like last year I think.

Yeah plus with the largest Muslim population in the western world...The IRA did their fair share tho

$360

03-12-2004, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by T.T Boy
not showing your face pussy ass terrorism shit.

DEE38

03-12-2004, 03:08 PM

fucking shit, i can't believe this also.

i keep telling my self, god handles dumbasses like that but shit... just shit..

and everyone all over the world was afraid to go on a plane... now its to ride the train......... then next buses... then their own cars.. then bicycles...... then walk outside.......... the be INSIDE..

the victims=r.i.p.

villain

03-12-2004, 03:20 PM

Strange I was admiring the graff on european trains just the night before now that you mention it. From the looks of things it would seem that they were passengers who deposited the bombs and set them off by remote control. Shouldn't be long before they dig up surveillance tapes of the of the people whos bag bombs were disarmed. Then they will have a better idea of who did this.
TheoHuxtable: Okay innocents were killed yes. But that was not their primary purpose. That's all I'm saying.

BROWNer

03-12-2004, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by Tesseract
word to that, its close to impossible to be ETA since they always* warn before the hit and they always* claim responsibility...remember spain was one of the biggest supporters of the war against iraq in europe. I smell something from that direction.
Alltogether, this is fuckin insane, rest in peace people.

the spaniards are still putting this on the ETA. the al qaeda spin is out and everyone else is blaming al qaeda, but not the spanish government. hmm?

!@#$%

03-12-2004, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by villain
If terrorists REALLY wanted to fuck us all over they would just have to put anthrax or a single milligram of plutonium in the resevoirs....

water supplies are hard to fuck with because whatever contaminent was applied would be incredibly diluted..(that's why a small amount of contaminants are already present in drinking water, like lead and arsenic)
radioactive materials are disposed of right down the drain all the time.
and plutonium is tough to come by.

i may not work for the CIA, but i am a scientist, and i'm informed.

do not forget, while their agenda may be political, it is to turn politics into, and be governed by, religious fanatacism

imported_Tesseract

03-12-2004, 04:12 PM

Originally posted by BROWNer
the spaniards are still putting this on the ETA. the al qaeda spin is out and everyone else is blaming al qaeda, but not the spanish government. hmm?

i'll second the hmm

!@#$%

03-12-2004, 04:19 PM

from...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3504950.stm

Last Updated: Friday, 12 March, 2004, 16:10 GMT

Spain casts wide net for bombers

Madrid - and many other cities - came to a standstill for the silence

Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar says all possible angles will be investigated to catch those responsible for the Madrid bomb blasts.

At least 198 people died and 1,400 were wounded in the bomb attacks on commuter trains on Thursday morning.

"No line of investigation will be ruled out," Mr Aznar said, just before Spaniards held a five-minute silence.

Clues found so far seem to implicate either the militant Basque separatist group Eta or Islamic radicals.

The BBC's Danny Wood in Madrid says the deathtoll is set to rise, as hospital staff are trying to save the lives of more than 100 people with serious injuries.

Spain is observing three days of official mourning for those who died in bombings, the worst in Europe for 15 years.

Flags are at half-mast and schools and other public institutions have closed. Political parties have halted campaigning for Sunday's general election.

Cities across Spain came to a standstill at midday to mark an official period of silence for the victims.

Spanish press blame Eta

Large demonstrations against terrorism are planned for Friday evening and vigils and protests have already been held all over Spain, including in the city of Bilbao in the Basque heartland.

The Italian and French prime ministers, Silvio Berlusconi and Jean-Pierre Raffarin, and EU chief Romano Prodi are flying in to attend the rallies, which will begin at 1900 local time (1800GMT).

Italy - a supporter of the US-led war in Iraq along with Spain - has increased security in case the attacks were linked to opponents of the invasion.

France has also raised its own security level and Portugal has boosted checks along its border with Spain.

Conflicting evidence

Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio earlier said everything appeared to implicate Eta in the attacks, with "very strong clues" and "very strong precedents" backing that view.

The group has previously targeted the Spanish railway system and two Eta suspects were arrested last month driving a truck loaded with more than 500kg of explosives headed for Madrid.

But on Thursday the interior minister said a stolen van had been found near the route of the trains containing detonators and a recording of Koranic verses - possibly indicating Islamic militant involvement.

A message purportedly from the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades was also sent to a UK-based Arabic newspaper saying it had attacked "America's ally in its war against Islam" on behalf of al-Qaeda.

Spanish editorial writers are demanding answers before voters go to the polls, because the culprits' identity might influence people's choice of party.

The ruling Popular Party campaigned on a hardline stance against Eta, but it also defied popular opposition by supporting the US-led war against Iraq - which may have triggered an attack by al-Qaeda.

Mr Aznar, who survived an Eta car bombing in 1995, is due to step down after a new government is formed.

He said no fanatical minority - whether religious or ethnic - that was driven by murderous impulses would be allowed to threaten Spain's democracy.

imported_Europe

03-12-2004, 05:59 PM

ETA has now officicially denied any involment with yesterdays bombings...

Check out www.farsta.tk (http://www.farsta.tk) for a spanish train update

TheoHuxtable

03-12-2004, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by Europe
ETA has now officicially denied any involment with yesterdays bombings...

Check out www.farsta.tk (http://www.farsta.tk) for a spanish train update

Yo the European train scene is the shit! One of the reasons why that's next on my list of destinations. It's just like NYC in the 70's and 80's before The Great Buff. In L.A. we got somewhat of a new subway and above-ground rail system but there ain't shit on them! It'd be nice to get a train writing culture started out here but it's probably too strict out here and too hard to get into the yards. I got a list of all the addresses to all the MTA bus and train yards in L.A. if anybody needs em, come holla.

Dr. Dazzle

03-12-2004, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by JeffLebowski
[img]http://photos.fotango.com/p/eba00349997f00000013.jpg'>

I saw this picture on the news......very eerie seeing a mangled train behind it.....

imported_Europe

03-12-2004, 09:19 PM

^
Yeah, I saw it too...

square

03-12-2004, 10:23 PM

``Is it OK for you to kill our children, women, old people and youth in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Kashmir? And is it forbidden to us to kill yours?'' the claim asked.

has everyone missed the point, or what? an eye for an eye. if one western civilian was to be killed for every islamic civilian killed by westerners, the number of bombings would be much higher.

not saying that killing innocent people is justified...im just saying that its EQUALLY unjustified on both sides.

like seeking said, every coin has two sides....choosing to look at only one is ignorant.

!@#$%

03-12-2004, 10:30 PM

The attack occurred exactly 2 1/2 years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States — and there 911 days in between the terror attacks in Madrid and those in New York and Washington. It also was Europe's worst terror attack since the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jetliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, killed 270 people.

i like to see as many perspectives, as many sides to a story as i can.

this means i feel horror at terrorist activites everywhere
and empathy, sympathy, condolences for the victims and their families

it's surprising to me how many people are down to defend al-qaeda's actions..

considering that they do not represent every oppressed people or every group the united states has wrongfully persecuted..

i am not naive enough to deny the reasoning behind terrorism
but that doesn't make it alright.

i am just as opposed to these attacks as i was to the invasion of iraq

our government has killed thousands of innocent people over the years.
that doesn't mean more should die in vengeance.
i also don't believe every arab who has been vicitmized agrees with what al-qaeda is doing.

an ironic thing, in november 2000, while having thanksgiving dinner with my family, i started talking about the determination i read in an interview with a terrorist (few had heard of yet) ..bin laden..i went on to talk about what an intelligent guy this was, and that his motivation was truly frightening..
i used to have respect for the guy's abilities, as a leader and as an activist..then he abandoned his military targets (remember u.s.s. cole?) and went to civilians..

i can denounce terrorism with a clear conscience.
i'm educated about Uncle Sam's own terrorist activities.
and i am still hoping binladen burns in hell.

[img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20040313/mdf494823.jpg'>

villain

03-12-2004, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by !@#$%
The attack occurred exactly 2 1/2 years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States — and there 911 days in between the terror attacks in Madrid and those in New York and Washington. It also was Europe's worst terror attack since the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jetliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, killed 270 people.

Yo, you are FREAKIN ME OUT with this shit! Wtf!?!?!

villain

03-12-2004, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by !@#$%
water supplies are hard to fuck with because whatever contaminent was applied would be incredibly diluted..(that's why a small amount of contaminants are already present in drinking water, like lead and arsenic)
radioactive materials are disposed of right down the drain all the time.
and plutonium is tough to come by.

i may not work for the CIA, but i am a scientist, and i'm informed.

do not forget, while their agenda may be political, it is to turn politics into, and be governed by, religious fanatacism

Hmmm... Well I heard this on the news during the craze after 9-11. I'll take the word of a scientist over a reporter.

villain

03-12-2004, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by BROWNer
the spaniards are still putting this on the ETA. the al qaeda spin is out and everyone else is blaming al qaeda, but not the spanish government. hmm?

Hmm... Yes, well people are always inclined to blame their closest enemy. Who knows. Like Mr Aznar said, not to rule anything out.

villain

03-13-2004, 02:12 AM

This is my second attempt at posting this. (why do the big posts and letters always have to fuck up?)
So anyways, I hope noone thinks I am actually defending terrorism here. I'm trying to present the other side of the coin because, if I don't, who will? Not many. I feel it is my duty to present the other side of the coin in order for a fair and impartial judgement.

Because of increasing chaos and entropy within the united states we are sending younger and younger people to prison. Do you not think, that if conditions worsen, we wouldn't execute a minor? This is an example of how laws are arbitrary and relative. This is why we also have martial law. So beyond all these specifics, would you not agree that the most fundamental law is do unto others as you would have them do unto you? We try however to make sure that the right person is punished for the crime. We are after all supposed to be treated fairly and as indiviuals. But often we see when dealing with outsiders we like to lump them together into one giant, writhing mass of flesh. :crazy: We use blanket terms like "russian", "iraqi", "isreali", "palestinian". (Here is a good cliff note: Notice how ALL the palestinians are being treated unfairly) It's easy to get caught up in some kind of blind hatred.

So I guess the real question is how are we, as mere innocent civilians, responsible for this mess?

Well I don't know. I sure as hell didn't put Bush into power. And I don't think many of us ultimately had a say in that either. But I guess we are in a sense responsible for our government and/or corporations actions. Unfortunately an uninformed people cannot make an informed decision so we often just take our advice from the "experts" without really questioning what they say, because hey, after all, it's their JOB! I'm not getting paid for this bullshit! But unfortunately we have a tremendous workload on us to search for the truth. I think it was one of Hitlers strategies to get the germans all riled up and then find a point of blame for their problems, the jews.

So anyways, here's my proposition. I want to make a poster to inform the people. I want it to have a big eye catching headline like WANTED: For crimes against humanity!
And then have like a CIA dossier on Bush. Have like a profile set up like mugshots and pertinant information listed below like business ties to halliburton and previous stock interest in Enron etc. It could be the size of like a trading card. Maybe we could even make trading cards too. But I think we should do the whole administration. It would be fun and cool. It could be the flipside of the iraqis most wanted cards.
I also want a sitrep map on the poster as well. It could have maps of iraq and afghanistan showing key points of trouble like the pipeline in afghanistan to the dabhol powerplant and we could have like halliburton flags flying over iraqi oil refineries etc.
So I would appreciate it if yall would help me out. We could start a thread for this or something with our contributions on it. Maybe BROWNer could do some intel gathering and maybe Mams would help do some photoshoping of the map and profiles or whatever. Or find good pics for the profiles i guess. I would even give you guys like $20 for any significant work. Whooptie doo. But I think this would be a cool thing to do though. Especially now cause alot of people are like wtf is going on here and they suspect stuff but aren't sure what direction to look in. This is where we could step in. This would be especially useful so close to election time. We could change the course of HISTORY! We could even instill an era of more personal involvement in government as well as a fair and balanced system. We could usher in an era of peace and reign for 1000 years! Yeah we rule! Rock on!
We could just post them up while we are busting tags and bombs around town. Think about it if we had a majority participation of this board we would definately be making some heads turn and gears turn within.
So whaddyall think?

DREDZ

03-13-2004, 02:23 AM

Originally posted by DEE38
fucking shit, i can't believe this also.

i keep telling my self, god handles dumbasses like that but shit... just shit..

and everyone all over the world was afraid to go on a plane... now its to ride the train......... then next buses... then their own cars.. then bicycles...... then walk outside.......... the be INSIDE..

the victims=r.i.p.
i feel you

...there have been incidents in some countries of terrorists hilacking buses and innocent passengers being executed.

KaBar2

03-13-2004, 08:24 AM

I don't think the ETA did this. Not so much that they aren't capable of killing innocent civilians (they are) but it doesn't fit their established MO. They always call before a bomb attack, sometimes multiple calls.

This smells like Al Quaeda to me.

Of course, everybody mourns the loss of life. It's tragic, and horrible. But Al Quaeda attacks where the target is soft, and Spain was a pretty easy-going kind of place, compared to say, Chicago or New York.

Something tells me that the Spaniards are going to be in the forefront of the next attacks on Al Quaeda. We won't have to ship terrorist suspects to Guantanamo Bay anymore. Spain will be glad to help us incarcerate and interrogate suspected Al Quaeda terrorists, just like Eygpt is. And Spain is a lot closer to North Africa than is Cuba.

It's just a matter of time before they hit the continental U.S. again. And when they do, the American people will be furious. Up until now, Americans have been sort of luke-warm on the war on terrorism, but once Al Quaeda commits a follow-up terrorist act in the U.S., I think John Q. Public is going to have blood in his eye.

I'm sure the undercover CIA guys have been working overtime on the wet work, but now that Al Quaeda hit Spain, the Spanish intelligence services will be smoking bad guys everywhere.

TheoHuxtable

03-13-2004, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by KaBar2
I don't think the ETA did this. Not so much that they aren't capable of killing innocent civilians (they are) but it doesn't fit their established MO. They always call before a bomb attack, sometimes multiple calls.

This smells like Al Quaeda to me.

Of course, everybody mourns the loss of life. It's tragic, and horrible. But Al Quaeda attacks where the target is soft, and Spain was a pretty easy-going kind of place, compared to say, Chicago or New York.

Something tells me that the Spaniards are going to be in the forefront of the next attacks on Al Quaeda. We won't have to ship terrorist suspects to Guantanamo Bay anymore. Spain will be glad to help us incarcerate and interrogate suspected Al Quaeda terrorists, just like Eygpt is. And Spain is a lot closer to North Africa than is Cuba.

It's just a matter of time before they hit the continental U.S. again. And when they do, the American people will be furious. Up until now, Americans have been sort of luke-warm on the war on terrorism, but once Al Quaeda commits a follow-up terrorist act in the U.S., I think John Q. Public is going to have blood in his eye.

I'm sure the undercover CIA guys have been working overtime on the wet work, but now that Al Quaeda hit Spain, the Spanish intelligence services will be smoking bad guys everywhere.

I think Islamic groups as a whole are losing their support worldwide and are desperate. They don't have as strong a support as they did prior to 9/11... I mean recently Islamic-related bombings have killed more Muslims than anybody; specifically in Iraq, Afghanistan, and a while back in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Now Muslims are starting to turn against these extremists.

KaBar how old are you by the way? I remember that post where you said you'll be dead in 25 years or something like that. I can't imagine you being like 60.

cmeup

03-13-2004, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by KaBar2
It's just a matter of time before they hit the continental U.S. again. And when they do, the American people will be furious. Up until now, Americans have been sort of luke-warm on the war on terrorism, but once Al Quaeda commits a follow-up terrorist act in the U.S., I think John Q. Public is going to have blood in his eye.

A-FUCKING-MEN.

even though some will say that "they struck again because we invaded iraq and bla bla bla" i still think al queda would have struck again reguardless of whether or not we waged war in iraq...

which to me is a perfect example of why we SHOULD be in iraq, trying to hunt down these terrorist.

ps- although suddam might not have been working directly with osama (although i think he was) ...he was still a huge source of money if and when they needed it im sure...

26SidedCube

03-13-2004, 09:05 AM

Imagine if you were planning on hitting some
daytime hollows there on your way to or from
school/work that day and you got sidetracked
(no pun intended) and held up in line buying a
coffee and a danish. Heebeegeebees.

I guess there's no real way to point any fingers
here. They hate our ('westerners') way of
life because by any of our military's indications
we hate them for their way of life. Then they
proceed to hate countries that do business
with us based on the fact that money is a
neccessarily evil in todays world... while
meanwhile half the reason they have the
arms and training they do is because of their
economical past with us. Those deals went
sour and left them high and dry; because in
the end everyone is only looking to cover
their own ass. So what do you do? Kill yourself
and others for the sake of your cause, which
is all you've got left. Makes sense to me.

Human nature's a sumomabitch.

KaBar2

03-13-2004, 09:54 AM

The worst part of the war on terrorism is not the actual military operations or the "black ops." The worst part is the damage done to the American people's toleration for inapproprioate, intrusive, security counter-measures. I worry that once we have a Department of Homeland Security and people accept their existance and operations, we will be saddled with their encroachments on our liberty and the Bill of Rights forever.

imported_sofarok

03-13-2004, 01:52 PM

MADRID, Spain - Police on Saturday searched for three men seen in ski masks carrying backpacks toward the line where trains were bombed

villain

03-13-2004, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by E MARTYR
A-FUCKING-MEN.

even though some will say that "they struck again because we invaded iraq and bla bla bla" i still think al queda would have struck again reguardless of whether or not we waged war in iraq...

which to me is a perfect example of why we SHOULD be in iraq, trying to hunt down these terrorist.

ps- although suddam might not have been working directly with osama (although i think he was) ...he was still a huge source of money if and when they needed it im sure...

Uhh... Dude, there was no terrorists in Iraq. Saddam was an enemy of fundamentalism. There are terrorists there now, only because Saddam is not in power and we are there.

adderall

03-13-2004, 05:57 PM

another step closer to total lockdown

cmeup

03-13-2004, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by villain
Uhh... Dude, there was no terrorists in Iraq. Saddam was an enemy of fundamentalism. There are terrorists there now, only because Saddam is not in power and we are there.

no terrorists in iraq? i doubt that...

villain

03-13-2004, 06:50 PM

Yes emartyr... why don't you do some homework and look for other threads on this subject or even read a book on it?

BROWNer

03-13-2004, 06:56 PM

no, the worst part is the perpetuation of creating legitimate grievances abroad through extreme violence and economic rape with a blindly consenting population.

GnomeToys

03-13-2004, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by E MARTYR
no terrorists in iraq? i doubt that...

You doubt wrong. Iraq had about as much to do with terrorism as we have to do with peacekeeping.

KaBar2

03-14-2004, 07:50 AM

Syria has long since been a fucking problem child in the Middle East. They dominate Lebanon, because the Lebanese government is too weak to impose order and control over the Palestinians living there, and cannot control the various Mafia-like factions that operate within Lebanon and especially within Beirut. After the horrific battle of Beirut, and the occupation of southern Lebanon by the Israelis, and the arming of the South Lebanese Army (Christians) by the Israelis, there was a big power vacuum, because the central government had pretty much dematerialized, so Syria moved in to establish and control the "Green Line" demilitarized zone.

Even though they are there, in serious force, terrorism continues. They support and sponsor Islamic terrorist groups. They allow them to train in Syria, they give them weapons and explosives, they allow them to come and go unimpeded--in short, they are a nest of terrorist vipers.

I predict Syria is next on the hit parade.

You guys saw what happened with Libya. Ghaddaffi saw the handwriting on the wall, and decided he's better off as no threat to the U.S. and western Europe than he would be as molecules suspended in the air over a huge cruise missle crater.

Terrorism doesn't just occur out of thin air--somebody has to SUPPORT and FOSTER it. It doesn't matter if we get the suicide bomber pawns or the terrorist gunmen themselves or not. We need to go after the people who give the orders, and in a big way. The Mafia calls this "cowboying" a target. They don't just kill the guy quietly and in private--they blow his shit up in front of the whole world, to let everybody know. It's "counter-terrorism." Guys like Ghaddaffi are enjoying life plenty. They do not want to be bombed in the middle of the night by half the U.S. Air Force. So now, he wants to be our pal.

imported_Tesseract

03-14-2004, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by BROWNer
no, the worst part is the perpetuation of creating legitimate grievances abroad through extreme violence and economic rape with a blindly consenting population.

imported_Tesseract

03-14-2004, 08:48 PM

So as you know or may not, as i type they have elections in Spain. Just a week ago gallops had Aznar winning again and the socialdemocrats running second. Right now the exit polls (15%) show Aznar losing.
If you note that Aznar was in favor of the iraq invasion while spaniards had the biggest antiwar rallies in europe and the fact that Aznar tried to put the heat on ETA over this while its now proven that it was Bin Ladin you realise that the spanish people are impeaching him for very obvious reasons.
Go Spaniards!

imported_Tesseract

03-14-2004, 09:17 PM

Spanish opposition in early lead
Spain's opposition Socialist party appears to be taking the lead in the general election with 30% of votes counted, exit polls show.

The Socialists have won 44% of the vote while the Popular Party has garnered 36%, reports say.

The poll has been clouded by claims that al-Qaeda carried out the Madrid bomb attacks that killed 200 people.

Two television polls put the Socialists ahead, while a third indicates a lead for the government.

Officials said turnout was 62.9% just before voting ended - higher than the 55.5% at the same time in 2000's poll.

EXIT POLLS
State television: Socialists (SPOE): 154-158 seats; Popular Party (PP): 150-154 seats
Cadena Ser radio: SPOE: 151-159; PP: 154-160
Telecino television: SPOE: 141 seats; PP: 169 seats
Total number of seats: 350
Analysts said people had turned out in bigger numbers to defy the bombers who carried out last Thursday's attacks in Madrid.

It had been thought a higher turnout would favour left-wing parties.

Investigation

Investigations continue into who was behind the bombings.

Initially, the government was adamant the Basque separatist organisation Eta was responsible for the bombings, but now it has been forced to admit that al-Qaeda has become the top suspect, the BBC's Richard Galpin in Madrid says.

This comes after a videotaped claim of responsibility by a man identifying himself as al-Qaeda's military spokesman in Europe.

Spain's Interior Minister Angel Acebes said European intelligence services had been unable to identify the man, named as Abu Dujan al-Afgani.

Before the tape's existence was made public, thousands of Spaniards took to the streets accusing the government of downplaying an al-Qaeda link for fear of losing votes.

Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio told the BBC Eta was still a strong suspect, and said police were not ruling out a possible collaboration between Eta and al-Qaeda.

Three Moroccans and two Indians are being held in connection with the attacks.

Germany has called an urgent meeting of EU interior ministers to discuss the situation.

Turnout

Polls opened at 0900 local time (0800 GMT), and queues formed almost immediately.

Black ribbons hung from polling booths and voters' lapels. Most voters at polling stations near the attack scenes spent a few moments at candle and floral shrines laid out for the victims.

Cayetano Abad, one of the 1,500 wounded in last Thursday's attacks, was driven to a polling station in an ambulance.

"I've come to show that everything carries on, that we cannot stand idle," he said, bandaged and wearing a neck brace.

Tensions were reportedly high as people debated which political party should take the country forward in the wake of the attacks.

Heated arguments broke out in polling stations across the city, and continued at newspaper stands, cafes and on street corners.

In some cases, police were called to keep the peace.

Some voters said they stayed up all night listening to the radio, hoping to glean some information to decide which way to vote.

Duty to vote

Many people admitted they had not planned to vote until the bombings.

"I have two friends who have never voted in their lives and they're going to vote in this one," said 41-year-old businessman Carlos Bermudez.

Outgoing Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and his wife were booed and jostled as they arrived to cast their votes in central Madrid an hour after polling began.

I wanted to feel a little bit better, because at home I can't do anything
Madrid protester
As he tried to address supporters, he was drowned out by cries of "manipulators", "liars" and "peace".

Mariano Rajoy - who is to succeed Mr Aznar if their Popular Party (PP) is returned to office - was also forced to find cover after youths hurled abuse as he turned up to vote.

The videotape was found in a litter bin on Saturday following an anonymous tip-off to a Madrid television station.

In the video, a man speaking Arabic with a Moroccan accent says the attacks were revenge for Spain's "collaboration with the criminals Bush and his allies".

The Spanish government backed the US-led invasion of Iraq last year despite polls showing 90% opposition to it from the Spanish public.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...ope/3511280.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/europe/3511280.stm)

Published: 2004/03/14 20:51:26 GMT

villain

03-14-2004, 09:49 PM

This is an extrordinary example of what I was talking about with the intimidation tactics of terrorism. The government by going against the will of the people have weakened themselves and left their own people to suffer for this. I had no idea the Spanish government had let themselves into such a weakened position. After all Europe is very liberal. I think they have been strongarmed into dealing with Bush. I think we are still more divided here in the US but the government is weakening itself by dragging on these endless and questionable wars.

From a national security standpoint, Kabar, Syria would seem the way to go but I think we should weigh in the economic factors. I think invading Afghanistan was probably 70% national security and 30% an economic target. Invading Iraq has been practically 100% economic and has fuck all to do with national security. Cleaning up Syria (we don't really need to invade countries to police them up anymore for the most part) would be almost purely an act of national security. But then again invading venezuala is a tantalizing economic target for bush. And what was all this Haiti madness about anyways? Perhaps it was to prime the public to be aware of instabilities in our lower hemisphere?

26SidedCube

03-14-2004, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by Tesseract
So as you know or may not, as i type they have elections in Spain. Just a week ago gallops had Aznar winning again and the socialdemocrats running second. Right now the exit polls (15%) show Aznar losing.
If you note that Aznar was in favor of the iraq invasion while spaniards had the biggest antiwar rallies in europe and the fact that Aznar tried to put the heat on ETA over this while its now proven that it was Bin Ladin you realise that the spanish people are impeaching him for very obvious reasons.
Go Spaniards!

I'm not trying to get deep into this because I
may have just read that wrong but...

You don't think Spain would have been a
potential target for terrorism regardless of
their supporting the war in Iraq at some
point or another? Spain is pretty damn
Westernized... which is what I was under
the impression al Qaeda was waging war
against... Western Culture.

For the people to say 'Well, it's the US's bed,
let them lie in it' is short-sighted and counter
progressive. Not that waging unjust wars is
in any way forward movement, as it's the
reason we're in this situation in the first place...
but you have to consider that all this bullshit
has been building up for some 30-40 years
now and up until this point the American public
has be near blind to the positions our leaders
decisions have been putting us in. Though I'm
sure it seems quite the contrary, I doubt if
given the choice between cheap gas prices
and an leaving a section of the globe unstable
and in poverty the bulk of the public would
pick the latter when educated on the reprocussions.

You have to remember, we're the spoiled
little brother of the world... we're learning
this as we go along. Being that I never chose
to be an American citizen and I was born into
the bullshit it'd be comforting to know the
world was starting to understand what it feels
like to know your ass could be taken out for
walking down the street (I live in nyc, if you
don't already know that) or getting on a train
for the decisions you had no hand in. Not that
I'm that self-important. I think it'd be pretty
unique to go out in a terrorist attack but I'm
only 21 years old.. I've still got some shit I'd
like to do before I'm blown off the face of the
planet. Nahmsayin?

And I'm not a patriot, trust me. The US blowing
up countries that have nothing to do with the
attack is not a solution... but don't you think
something has to be done?

Okay, I got kinda deep into it.

Edit: Yes. They should protest the war in Iraq
based on it's having nothing to do with terrorism,
but you can't say taking Husein out of power
was a bad thing to support.

26SidedCube

03-14-2004, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by villain
Invading Iraq has been practically 100% economic and has fuck all to do with national security.

5 points.

villain

03-14-2004, 10:17 PM

What we should have done in iraq was end sanctions and allow the middle class to grow again so that the cosmopolitan lifestyle would ease the tensions between tribes... Eventually Saddam would have been voted out of power just as we would have all liked.

imported_Tesseract

03-14-2004, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by 26SidedCube
I'm not trying to get deep into this because I
may have just read that wrong but...

You don't think Spain would have been a
potential target for terrorism regardless of
their supporting the war in Iraq at some
point or another? Spain is pretty damn
Westernized... which is what I was under
the impression al Qaeda was waging war
against... Western Culture.

This is true to a general extend, for fanatic muslims every western thing is a potential target. However, there is an hierarchy over targets othrewise they'be hitting all of westerns weak-spots that wouldnt be much of a 'victory' to begin with. The two strongest supporters on the war against iraq were the UK and Spain, hitting London is close to imposible right now, so i guess spain was #2. After all its stated clearly in that tape they found:
In the video, a man speaking Arabic with a Moroccan accent says the attacks were revenge for Spain's "collaboration with the criminals Bush and his allies"

Its a clear cut case to me and it serves a point if you see the outcome of the spanish elections..people impeached Aznar for being Bush friendly and causing so much drama as a consequence...you think the next party in power will be so close and friendly with Bush's foreign politics? i really doubt it.

I wanted to post an interview today, but could find it translated. It was in a greek paper and it was with Omar Bakri (the leader of an islamic group and suposed to be the voice of bin ladin in the UK).
Dude said that if greece will maintain its neutral position on those issues (greece was the president of the EU while the war in iraq begun and practically tried to keep the unity between the two pro and anti groups)
Bin Ladin will most likely wont hit during the olympic games that are by nature a target against the west.
So you see that right now we play hide n' seek...its a clear warning.

Bottom line for me is that Bush's politics failed in everysingle way, besides making money, and now the world has to pay for the damage...clap clap

imported_Tesseract

03-14-2004, 10:29 PM

OMAR BAKRI (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/biography/Bakri_Muhammad.html)

26SidedCube

03-15-2004, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Tesseract
Bottom line for me is that Bush's politics failed in everysingle way, besides making money, and now the world has to pay for the damage...clap clap

Well yeah, that's a given.

:cool:

villain

03-15-2004, 01:54 AM

Let's all thank Bush for making the world a safer place from terrorism.
Ready?
1
2
3
FUCK YOU!

BROWNer

03-15-2004, 03:04 PM

Spain's new government to pull troops out of Iraq
Last Updated Mon, 15 Mar 2004 8:10:45

MADRID - Spain's new Socialist government said Monday that it would pull 1,300 peacekeepers out of Iraq, as evidence mounted that al-Qaeda was responsible for bomb attacks that killed 200 people on the eve of general elections.

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero
(AP photo)

"The Spanish troops which are in Iraq will be returning home," Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said in one of his first interviews after his party defeated the ruling Popular Party on Sunday.

He said plans will be solidified once he is sworn in as prime minister and has a chance to consult with defence officials and allies.

The Socialist victory was labelled an upset that was not expected before 10 bombs went off in commuter trains in and around Madrid on Thursday. A total of 200 people died and 1,500 were injured.

Al-Qaeda, which has claimed responsibility for the attack, said it targeted Spaniards because their government had supported the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

* FROM MARCH 14, 2004: Madrid bombing suspect known for al-Qaeda connections

Zapatero said the Spanish troops will likely come home before June 30, when the U.S. administration is scheduled to hand power back to Iraqis.

Spain had been been due to take charge of a stabilization force in central south Iraq on July 1.

Poland's envoy to NATO, Jerzy Nowak, said Monday that his country is willing to stay in command of the force until the end of 2004 if Spain withraws its troops.

Zapatero, 43, asked the crowd gathered to cheer his election victory to join him in a minute of silence to remember the train bombing victims.

"At this moment I think of the lives that were broken by terror on Thursday," he said.

"My most immediate priority will be to fight terrorism."

Opinion polls going into Sunday's vote showed as many as 90 per cent of Spaniards opposed the war against Iraq and Spain's continuing role in military activities there.

Spanish voters at a polling station.
(AP photo)

Voters turned out in large numbers, many wearing black arm-bands in remembrance of the bombing victims.

Some of them accused President Jose Maria Aznar of manipulating public opinion by immediately blaming the bombings on the Basque separatist group ETA, despite evidence to the contrary.

With 99 per cent of the vote counted, the Socialists were on track to win 164 seats in the country's 350-seat parliament, just shy of an absolute majority.

The ruling conservative Popular Party was tipped to win 148 seats.

The Socialist party ran Spain from 1982 to 1996, but was defeated that year in the face of corruption allegations.

Cracked Ass

03-15-2004, 06:30 PM

A little off topic, but Are2 -
The lethal dose of plutonium is so small that a milligram in even a fairly large water supply would be a very serious problem. Plutonium is the most toxic substance known to man. Obviously you're right on about it being a little tough to obtain.

!@#$%

03-15-2004, 06:36 PM

^that's why i added the 'tough to obtain' disclaimer with the dilution factor.
dilution is an extremely important factor in most contaminants, especially all that would feasibly be available
(after all, at my old job, radioactive tridium and iodide waste was disposed of down the drain..i bet even P-32 and S-35 get dumped into water supplies)

but don't take my word for it..

from: A Perspective on the Dangers of Plutonium
W. G. Sutcliffe, R. H. Condit, W. G. Mansfield, D. S. Myers, D. W. Layton, and P. W. Murphy

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

April 14, 1995

Following the seizure of 10 ounces of plutonium at the Munich airport in August 1994, some press accounts stated that terrorists could kill "hundreds of thousands of people" by introducing plutonium into a municipal water supply. In response to such incorrect and misleading statements, we describe the acute and long-term health effects that can arise from ingesting or inhaling various amounts of plutonium. Our estimates indicate that plutonium introduced into drinking water supplies would produce a radiation dose much less than normal background, and could kill only a very few people (by inducing cancers that might take years to appear). We also estimate the (considerably greater) risks associated with the inhalation of plutonium, clarifying press claims that "a tiny speck ... can cause lung cancer." We estimate the number of people that might die of cancer if terrorists were to introduce plutonium into the atmosphere in a large city. This paper provides a scientific perspective for evaluating possible terrorist threats.

source:
http://www.llnl.gov/csts/publications/sutcliffe/

imported_Tesseract

03-15-2004, 06:42 PM

Man, Aznar will not be remembered as a good president...in the last year he showed complete apathy and tried to cover up one of the biggest ecological disasters, backed up Bush while his people didnt, and tried to mislead them and put the blame on ETA over this....dude fucked up

villain

03-15-2004, 08:05 PM

eh... i still don't like low dosage levels of accumulating irradiated metal and water and whatever else.... food, and powerlines and airwaves. Not to mention all the ozone holes we have now. Is it hot in here? I need to make a tinfoil hat. :scowl:

villain

03-15-2004, 08:18 PM

Here are some premiere examples of our fortuitous campaign against the plague of terrorism.... No not really....

[img]http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v82/agentarcana/againstwariniraqpg52.jpg'>

GnomeToys

03-15-2004, 08:37 PM

At least we can take comfort in the steady, reliable plummet of the stock market.

BROWNer

03-16-2004, 05:41 AM

New Spanish PM threatens to pull troops from Iraq
Tue, 16 Mar 2004 0:06:11

MADRID - Spain's prime minister-designate, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has threatened to withdraw 1,300 Spanish soldiers serving in Iraq. Zapatero says it will happen by July, if the United Nations doesn't take over operations in the country.

Zapatero's Socialist party won a surprise victory in Sunday's national elections, which were held in the shadow of last week's bombings in Madrid.

"The war in Iraq was a huge disaster, the occupation continues to be a huge disaster," said Zapatero on Spanish radio. "It only generated more violence and hatred and the lesson has to be taken."

Zapatero went on to suggest U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are liars, and promised to pull Spain's troops out of Iraq if the coalition won't hand over operations to the UN.

It was hardly the actions of a leader trying to build international bridges.

But Manuela Mesa of Madrid's Centre for Peace Studies applauds Zapatero's honesty. "We think it's very important to do it as quick as possible and if Spain's government want to be there, it should be there with the United Nations' agreement."

All indications are that Spain is in for a radical shakeup that will significantly shift its spot on the world stage. The man expected to become Spain's new foreign minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, says it's time to rethink the country's entire partnership with the United States.

"Trying to check what has been done rightly, or what has been done wrongly, and then we have to imagine a different policy, a different instrument to fight terror. If we continue the way it has been trying to defeat terror we will never succeed," he said.

Those sentiments may drive Spain back into the more familiar arms of its neighbours in Germany and France. But some conservatives in those countries are criticizing the election result, saying Spaniards are appeasing the very extremists who killed and injured so many.

Retired Spanish diplomat Fernando Schwartz rejects that claim. He believes outgoing Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar brought defeat on himself by ignoring widespread opposition to the war in Iraq.

After last Thursday, Schwartz says, he saw old sentiments gaining new strength. "The bombs opened the flesh, opened the wound. Suddenly the pent-up feeling that we had been betrayed a year ago by going to war had been dormant there like an old infection suddenly, boom, it came out."

The pace of events in Spain has been swift. Over just four days, citizens have borne the shock of a terrible tragedy, marched by the millions united in grief, watched as smaller groups railed in anger against their own government and then tossed that government out of office.

Spain's incoming government faces the challenge of consoling the nation even as it reconsiders the fundamental question of its place in the world.
http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/MSN/2004/03/15/spain040315
.

hottnickels

03-16-2004, 06:19 AM

i'm not surprised at all..
i was there for a lot of protests, public opinion clearly opposed the war..
then this.

but...
it sends a scary message

imported_Tesseract

03-16-2004, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by hottnickels
i'm not surprised at all..
i was there for a lot of protests, public opinion clearly opposed the war..
then this.

but...
it sends a scary message

I dunno how scary the message is...if Bush remains in power it sure is cause it creates a whole new system of balances and a big difference inside the west...if Kerry wins i think that the whole Iraq thing will be qualified as one of the biggest mistakes and a new perspective will be set.

Whats very interesting with spain right now is that its one of the few occasions that the people really talks and has the power to dictate pollitics. After that line up of events, they burned Aznar to the ground for very specific reasons and on the othre hand their message is too loud to be ignored...i mean, after all that, even if the socialists wanted to back up bush or stay in Iraq they simply wouldnt be able to back it up and stay in power.

To take this a bit further, its kinda positive to me that when a global fuckup occurs on that scale the people really bunch up and have their way...bye bye Bush, you'll be noted in history as the worse president of the superpower.

BROWNer

03-16-2004, 03:12 PM

dude, whats this 'revolutionary struggle' shit?

imported_Tesseract

03-16-2004, 03:17 PM

uhoh

message: lost in translation

please repeat.

loginfo:28263/Hy334

hottnickels

03-16-2004, 04:20 PM

i just think it sets a dangerous standard when a terrorist act
(clearly a very well timed one)
seems to have such tremendous sway over public and political opinion.

it's a damn shame that so many people put bush and aznar in power in the first place..
the world just seems to be really divided, bwetween extremes, and getting worse all the time..

it just gives a big morale boost to terrorist organizations everywhere.

it's confounding.
because i am pleased with the election results...and the likely next outcome, withdrawal of spanish troops from iraq..

i dunno what the fuck to think

imported_Tesseract

03-16-2004, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by hottnickels
i just think it sets a dangerous standard when a terrorist act
(clearly a very well timed one)
seems to have such tremendous sway over public and political opinion.

it's a damn shame that so many people put bush and aznar in power in the first place..
the world just seems to be really divided, bwetween extremes, and getting worse all the time..

it just gives a big morale boost to terrorist organizations everywhere.

see, this is the point where i disagree.I believe that all this is a consequence on a govermental scale than the effects of terrorism....of course they take good advantage from it, but if you check who really milked the shit out of the situation you get goverments, not terrorist groups

hottnickels

03-16-2004, 04:42 PM

i think everyone is guilty:

the people, i mean, let's face it, aznar was elected, bush came close..i mean, he came really close!! close enough to win anyway..

the governments are guilty..
in the past, for turning the middle east into what it is
in the present, for the perpetuation of the cycle of violence

the terrorists are fucking guilty too.
for obvious reasons.

i'm not sympathetic to anyone but vicitms anymore i guess.
that freaks me out a little.

it's ok to disagree, but be aware, you're disagreeing with someone who isn't even sure what she thinks except we're all going to hell in a handbasket

...and i still think it sets a scary precedent that this kind of action can get the terror group what it wants.

villain

03-16-2004, 04:42 PM

Knowing that they could have hit any place or any time it is really a sort of mercy for this to be politically motivated.... since the worst terrorists and the worst types of terrorism is religious extremism.
This was a message that could not be ignored. Do you think there would have been the same kind of response had they attacked a symbolic target?
It is tactically proven that intimidation tactics work with weak government. Because the people are not aligned with the government. I would like to think that a decapitation attack would have been more appropriate. But it would seem that if that were to happen Aznar would be seen as a martyr rather than the lying rat he is. It's really too bad. Spain seems like a nice place to live. I know that just about anywhere in the US if someone left their bag as soon as they left someone would have been rummaging through it or just take the whole thing. At least we know now that spain is not condemned any longer by the muslim world. Maybe I should move there. But canada's closer.
I mean these terrorists they don't give a damn. They are out for blood. If you are in the wrong with them they will do whatever it takes to get at you. Elections or not. It was about vengeance.... tempered by politics. It was a way to end this. At least in spain.

imported_Tesseract

03-16-2004, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by hottnickels

it's ok to disagree, but be aware, you're disagreeing with someone who isn't even sure what she thinks except we're all going to hell in a handbasket

...and i still think it sets a scary precedent that this kind of action can get the terror group what it wants.

haha, no i agree..i mean...i'm just saying that i dont think that a terrorist group has the power to do whatever it wants...if by this situation bush aznar and blair will go down i dont give a fuck and theres a good reason for it.
I dont think that sep11 made americans hate bush when it hapenned, nor did countless other terror acts, the situation in spain had to do with Aznar misleading his own people, whole different story.
If spaniards were in favor of the iraq war they wouldnt impeach him.
Principle number one of a democracy is to respect what the majority wants rather than palying you personal agenta nomatter what.

i agree that everyone is guilty and that the terrosism boost is scary as fuck, however it pisses me off in both ends, having organised democratic goverments on top of the blame.

hottnickels

03-16-2004, 04:59 PM

exactly.
which is why i keep saying that if bush is reeelected, i'm leaving..
the government here has a lot of blame to share in

and with its recent track record i can't go along with a majority that is in favor of that kind of 'democracy'

good for spain??

aarrggh!!
that is why it pisses me off so much!
i was in spian last year..the public was clearly anti war!
those fucking coward terrorists should risk their shit going after military targets!!

TheoHuxtable

03-16-2004, 05:06 PM

Personally I felt America had the legal obligation to invade Afghanistan to take the Taliban out of power and decapitate the base of al Qaeda and to go after bin Laden. They attacked us, and like any nation that gets attacked, we had the right to self-defense.

However I do not support this bogus war in Iraq. They did nothing to us and this war was created over false pretenses. And even with the overwhelming facts of the lies stacked against the Bush Administration, they still act like they did nothing wrong. Instead they backtrack and either say "we went by the intelligence that was given to us", or that "it doesn't matter, we got rid of an evil dictator."

It doesn't matter! The intelligence was WRONG. We know that FALSE intelligence was given to you. But the fact still remains that we went to war over false pretenses. And as far as "well we got rid of an evil regime, look at the bright side". Sure, personally I feel a democracy would be better for Iraq. But at the same time, we do not have the moral obligation to change a country's government simply because we don't agree with their form of government! Isn't that along the same lines of empire building?

Technically the Bush Administration could be tried for war crimes in front of an international tribunal. But it'll never happen because we're "America", the strongest most intimidating/influential nation on the planet.

Saddam illegally disobeyed orders by the United Nations, and made an unwarranted invasion of Kuwait back in 1990. We illegally disobeyed orders by the United Nations, and made an unwarranted invasion of Iraq. There is no difference. And yet we condemned Iraq.

Bush is by far the dumbest and most irrational president in the history of the United States. Since WWI America to the world seemed pretty much like a morally respected powerful nation that helped out other countries in need. Bush shattered all of those years it took to build that reputation with this war. But with this unwarranted invasion of a sovereign nation, people now look at the U.S. as being an evil imperialistic empire. And it's sad to see so many ultra-patriotic Americans be so blind to the facts and accuse people like me as being "anti-American". If anything it's pro-American to speak out if you see something that isn't morally right.

I hope Kerry wins and he appoints Dean as his VP. It would make me no happier than to see Bush thrown out of office because I know that's the last thing he's expecting/wanting.

hottnickels

03-16-2004, 05:14 PM

the u.s. worked hard to get itself exempt from war crimes tribunals, and has fought hard to maintain that disgusting, hypocritical privilege

the rest of the world is not happy about that..

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FC16Aa04.html

imported_Tesseract

03-17-2004, 02:26 PM

uhoh (http://sport.guardian.co.uk/olympics/story/0,10308,1166055,00.html)

!@#$%

03-17-2004, 03:33 PM

...so i was reading the olympics security article, when i noticed a link to the side on this article..

Political fallout likely to embolden al-Qaida

Armed guards are planned for Olympic athletes, but the US presidential election campaign is seen as prime target for attack

.....Al-Qaida and its sympathisers will be emboldened by the impact of what is now assumed to be its first attack in western Europe. The governing party has lost the election and Spain is planning to pull its troops out of Iraq.

If the Madrid atrocity was the work of al-Qaida, Spain will have become the first country "to have a prime minister owing his position to Bin Laden", said Jonathan Eyal, the director of studies at the Royal United ....

ouch.

KaBar2

03-18-2004, 10:28 AM

the outcome of the election in Spain, nor their obviously sincere reaction to the terrorist bombings. It is very difficult for me to accept that the Spanish people could be so easily whipped down and would cower before a bunch of chickenshit terrorists. I just cannot imagine that the Spanish people are not screaming with rage to attack the terrorists who did this. What kind of unbelieveable pussies can they be?

Obviously, I was wrong about Spain. I don't like it.

I would hope that if the same thing happened in the U.S. that the American people would come together in solidarity and resolve to erradicate Al Quaeda and all of their fellow-travelers from the face of the earth. But what the fuck, maybe I'm wrong about the American people too. I would REALLY hate that.

imported_Tesseract

03-18-2004, 10:59 AM

Kabar, it aint like that at all...

Calling them pussies is stupid concidering that they have dealt with terrorism in their own soil for decades...that alone should make you more cautious when you try to brake down their motives and choices....As far as the pollitical outcome, note that spaniards held the biggest anti-war protests in the european union...in democratic terms Aznar abused their trust over this and paid the cost...if the people of spain dont want to participate in this war it only takes a dictator to send'em in and finally bring the war back home.
Aznar's presidency was full of thorns those late 2 years...a huge ecological disaster that was dealt carelessly and a big fuckin war the majority didnt approve...what more do you need to get impeached?

I dont like the idea of terrorists dictating pollitics at all but in this case its more like the last drop than the actuall reason.

And 9/11 was waaay worse than what happened in spain, how did bush deal with it? 2 wars and i see terrorists more powerfull than they where...what was the success over afganistan and whats the success over Iraq?...horseshit.
US's foreign pollitics amped things even more.
I live in a city that might be blown to pieces this summer over Bush's oilhunt...come and tell me who i have to blame if it comes to that?

So i hope you're wrong, and i hope british and americans impeach their leaders for misleading them and leveling up the risk for everyone.

villain

03-18-2004, 01:14 PM

Another thing my boy who lives in spain said about this situation is that Aznar and the PP didn't recognize alot of the different ethnicities and provinces in spain like navarra and the catalans (which is where I think that delightful catalina salad dressing must come from, anyways) etc. He said the arabs don't even have a right to vote there.
The socialists however would unite spain into a single federation, which I'm sure would ease ethnic divides within spain. And of course pull troops out of iraq.
All in all I think spain did a good thing and I hope it inspires other countries to join in and not be strongarmed by Bush.

And yes, what on earth does it take to impeach someone!?!? Too bad we can't vote for impeachment. We put him in there, we should be able to take him out.a

!@#$%

03-18-2004, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by Tesseract
Kabar, it aint like that at all...
...As far as the pollitical outcome, note that spaniards held the biggest anti-war protests in the european union...
Aznar's presidency was full of thorns those late 2 years...a huge ecological disaster that was dealt carelessly and a big fuckin war the majority didnt approve...what more do you need to get impeached?

I dont like the idea of terrorists dictating pollitics at all but in this case its more like the last drop than the actuall reason.
.

yeah.
i was IN spain last march.
public opinion was OBVIOUSLY, OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST the government's position..

there were big ass ADS in a lot of subway stations with a close up photo of a child.
the child had a GAS NOZZLE held to its head like a GUN BARREL.
the top of the ad stated
"BUSH. AZNAR. BLAIR.
NO A LA GUERRA."

i saw MANY anti-war protests, some of them huge, while i was there

NO ONE had beef with me because i was american (or for any other reason)

i love spain.

BROWNer

03-18-2004, 03:51 PM

yea, typical kabar.
throwing aznar on his ass was coming. spaniards
exercised a little thing called 'democracy'.
by your logic, a war on terrorism, or an attack means
a population should veto its political involvment. right.
i'm also loving the crude insults in lieu of an extemely devastating
event. fuckin' right on guy.
a day and half before the election, 11MILLION spaniards took to
the streets to make their feelings known about the attacks
and their revulsion to terrorism. when's the last time you did somethin'
like that?
most of spain was against the war in iraq precisely becuz they
felt it would take the heat off the war on terrorism. they know the
difference between the war in iraq, and a war on al qaeda, unlike *some
arrogant, head in the sand americans.
you got cobwebs on your headpiece.

cmeup

03-18-2004, 05:52 PM

i just had a great political conversation with a muslim man (a great friend of our family (sisters friend's dad) that we havent seen for awhile) and it was awesome.

I never really saw it this way until he talked to us for awhile, but he was telling us about how like other countries are smaller right, so they are more involved in their goverments because they have to be in a way, because it dictates so much of their lives because of what the goverment does.

and since the people have a better understanding of whats going on, they can keep closer attention on their goverment, unlike here, where we are so busy and concerned about ourselves (meaning as long as we have a car, and gas for the car, and a job and money and food and shit like that) that we really dont care what the goverment is up to, as long as we can still live our little happy lifestyles...

it really got me thinking, that we are pretty blind as to what our goverment is really up to, although i think in some ways thats a good thing, because to live the way we do we probally do have to do some shady things, to get by, but in a lot of ways we should be more concerned with how our goverment handles things, because one day down the road, the script could flip and we could be a third world country. (doubtful but you never know)

he was also telling us about how he wished that the iraqi people got the opportunity to pull down the saddam statue instead of US troops, and it brought tears to his eyes.

and he was talking about how the people dont really care who runs the oil fields, because they know one way or another its still going to be sold to others reguardless.

he also talked about the isreali (sp?) / palestine conflict...

it was very interesting hear his points of view, because him and his family are muslim and pretty religious, and he is also a very intelligent man. i thoroughly enjoyed talking to him.

anywho...

Poop Man Bob

03-21-2004, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by BROWNer
yea, typical kabar.
throwing aznar on his ass was coming. spaniards
exercised a little thing called 'democracy'.
by your logic, a war on terrorism, or an attack means
a population should veto its political involvment. right.
i'm also loving the crude insults in lieu of an extemely devastating
event. fuckin' right on guy.
a day and half before the election, 11MILLION spaniards took to
the streets to make their feelings known about the attacks
and their revulsion to terrorism. when's the last time you did somethin'
like that?
most of spain was against the war in iraq precisely becuz they
felt it would take the heat off the war on terrorism. they know the
difference between the war in iraq, and a war on al qaeda, unlike *some
arrogant, head in the sand americans.
you got cobwebs on your headpiece.

Bumping this quote in anticipation of a never-to-come response by our resident gun humper, Kabar.

KaBar2

03-23-2004, 08:49 AM

Eleven million Spaniards marched in the streets to demand that Spain pull out their 1,100 soldiers, is that correct?

Those eleven million Spanish citizens should have been mobbing the recruiting offices of the Spanish Army, demanding to be sent to Iraq.

Like that would ever happen.

Terrorists like Al Quaeda want one thing and one thing only: POWER. They want control, over the Muslims in their own countries, and over as much of the western world as they can get. When you see the word Islamist, you should be thinking "Nazi." They will only get worse and worse, with each victory like the Spanish elections. They will never produce a democratic society that recognizes the rights of religious minorities, of women, of any of the things that 99.99% of the people on this board hold dear. Drinking alcohol of any type is enough to get you beaten with fan belts (Afghanistan under the Taliban), possession of a TV or a VCR gets you arrested and held without trial. Adultery results in prison, if you're lucky. Hell, in Saudi Arabia, they EXECUTED A SAUDI PRINCESS (a member of the Royal family, no less!) with a pistol shot, then beheaded her, for trying to run away with her Saudi boyfriend. The boyfriend was beheaded in a public execution, cold turkey. If you steal something, they cut off your hand. What do you suppose you'd get for grafitti? Rack a can of paint--CHOP.

What the fuck is wrong with you guys? If these motherfuckers were to somehow take over the U.S., you people would be the very first ones to face their firing squads. All democratic nations should be pouring troops into Iraq and Afghanistan, not cowering because of one lousy train bombing. Hell, the Nazis levelled half of London, killing thousands, and the Brits came swarming out of there like a hornet's nest (armed with a shitload American rifles, mind you.) The radical Islamists hate everything about western culture. They will never be mollified. Given the chance, they would be overjoyed to see Spain enslaved under Sharia, just as it was hundreds of years ago.

We either erradicate them now, while they are relatively weak, or we fight a real war with them twenty or thirty years from now. Personally, I think we should pour a serious, no-holds-barred effort into eliminating their movement completely. The argument that by killing a few of them now we create more terrorists is a fallacy. Those people would have eventually become terrorists anyway. If they announce now, that just means we have a chance of getting them now. I do not think we should release captured terrorists anytime soon, but I DO believe we should publicize the shitty conditions in which they will be held for years. Anybody we catch twice gets "life without parole in a Guantanamo dog cage," in the custody of the U.S. Marines. No Paradise for you , baby, just growing old day after day in Camp X-Ray.

Terrorists held prisoner should be subjected to intense, unrelenting re-education. Their guards should be 50-50 male and female NCO's, commanded by female Marine officers. They should be forced to obey women in command, since they hate women so much. (Marines obey their officers, regardless of the officer's gender.)

The United States should stop fucking around and get serious about rebuilding Iraq. The loss of 500 or 600 soldiers (or for that matter 5,000 or 6,000) is TRIFLING compared to past wars. We lost 3,000 Marines the first day during the invasion of Okinawa. The Civil War cost us millions of soldiers. It was worth it.

Wars are waged by soldiers. Waging war is dangerous and everybody knows it. The problem with Iraq is that we need about ten times as many soldiers there as we have, to crush the resistance with overwhelming numbers. The way things are now, they are nickle and diming us because we do not genuinely control the battlefield.

They see mercy as weakness. It is better, in the Middle East, to be hated and feared, than hated and held in contempt. You guys are always talking about "gangsta this" and "gangsta that." Well, invading Iraq is REALLY gangsta, and not some two-bit neighborhood thug with a cheap nine millimeter either. All the whining should come to a halt and the U.S. should GO GET THESE TRAIN-BOMBING COWARDS WHERE THEY LIVE. Oh, wait. We're already doing that.

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 09:03 AM

you tell them kabar. good post.

ps- this guy seems to be highly informed.

grasshoppa

03-23-2004, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by BROWNer
a day and half before the election, 11MILLION spaniards took to
the streets to make their feelings known about the attacks
and their revulsion to terrorism. when's the last time you did somethin'
like that...

...they know thedifference between the war in iraq, and a war on al qaeda, unlike *some arrogant, head in the sand americans.
you got cobwebs on your headpiece.

who are you to criticize? if civil disobedience or political activism was any standard for nobility, stalin and hitler would be your chum buddies. no? more then 5.5MILLION germans died defending what they thought was righteous. millions more russians died then what spain experienced with it's clam bake.

democracy should always remain true to the idea of majority rule, minority rights. if the people of spain truly believe that passivity is any means of resolution, then they have the complete authority and will to change that. but it has been proven that popular opinion does not always reflect what is right or what is infinitely good for the people. if spain ultimately submits to the terrorists and pulls out it's military i highly doubt the arrogance of victory will not bubble to the top of the terrorists ego.

[img]http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v81/grasshoppa/kabar.gif'>

[img]http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v81/grasshoppa/kabar.gif'>

[img]http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v81/grasshoppa/kabar.gif'>

grasshoppa

03-23-2004, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by Tesseract
And 9/11 was waaay worse than what happened in spain, how did bush deal with it? 2 wars and i see terrorists more powerfull than they where...what was the success over afganistan and whats the success over Iraq?...horseshit.

that's a fucking HUGE complacent remark on your part tess.

you can't measure deterrence anymore then you can measure failure.

and if the destruction of potentially hundreds of thousands of small arms, explosives, and other hazardous materials is not enough to say that lives were saved, i think you missed the whole point of the war.

this president will not be around much longer, i'll concede that. that's entirely due to a nation divided on a controversial election in which people choose to dissent rather then cooperate. it's cool to hate bush. it's mainstream.

imported_Tesseract

03-23-2004, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by grasshoppa
that's a fucking HUGE complacent remark on your part tess.

you can't measure deterrence anymore then you can measure failure.

and if the destruction of potentially hundreds of thousands of small arms, explosives, and other hazardous materials is not enough to say that lives were saved, i think you missed the whole point of the war.

this president will not be around much longer, i'll concede that. that's entirely due to a nation divided on a controversial election in which people choose to dissent rather then cooperate. it's cool to hate bush. it's mainstream.

Are you insane? Of course i missed the whole point of this war...If i remember correctly it was the destruction of WMD's that Saddam had stashed...A PROVEN LIE...now if you claim that your answer against terrorism is the destuction of small arms, explosives and other hazardous materials with the cost of your soldiers dying everysingle day for a year now you obviously need to reevaluate "deterrence" and "failure"

I just cant believe you just said that...

i wont even comment the mainstream comment...

Mr Milk85

03-23-2004, 01:13 PM

BROWNer

03-23-2004, 02:39 PM

i'm not sure how to respond to the heap of crap i just read.
the thread is about spain, and a major attack on spain.
it seems to be a real thick headed chore to distinguish between
things these days...iraq=terrorism..activism=hitler(nnniiiice buddy)...
spain exercised some democracy.it seems clear to me you guys,
from what i've just read, have complete contempt for this.
beyond that, i'm lovin' 'islamist=nazi'..HAHA. kabar, you're like
some drunken fool swinging your arms at every dark skinned person
in the bar and missing by a mile. do you really believe putting a massive
target on muslims the world over, and just blasting away is gonna make
things better? terrorism is fucked up and a serious, disturbing problem.
but..and this is the fundamental problem with the US. you can't solve
all your problems with military brutality. and that's just too bad, cuz you sure
have enough of it to pass around. it's a fairly simple equation..you bomb people and fuck with their lives and you create legitimate, deep grievances. go ahead now and read that as me defending terrorism or some other bullshit.

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 02:45 PM

BROWNER-

I understand that you acknowledge that terrorism is fucked up, and you arent fond of the war in iraq, or of president bush correct?

that being said, i'd like to hear what you think has got to happen (in detail) to resolve all of these problems...

-terrorism
-what to do about osama bin ladin / al queda?
-if another president is elected or put in office, what he should do in the future reguarding this situation and how to improve our situation with other nations or whatever else you think he should do, id like to hear your opinion.
-the palestine / isreali conflict (i know this is off topic, but id still like your input on the matter) describing a possible solution to the problem.

i'd like a in depth reply to the above questions, based on what you see the solution being for all of these problems.

Poop Man Bob

03-23-2004, 02:50 PM

And please solve world hunger, the scarcity of water, and discrimination. Thank you, BROWNz.

And if you can't formulate a detailed and cohesive answer to all of these problems, it proves you shouldn't be allowed to have any opinions re: the current state of the world's affairs. Solve them all at once, or shut up.

BROWNer

03-23-2004, 02:51 PM

i don't have time for indepth.
nor do i have a whole bunch of answers growing on
my answer tree.

*if i have time later, maybe.
it'll just fall on deaf ears.

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by Poop Man Bob
And please solve world hunger, the scarcity of water, and discrimination. Thank you, BROWNz.

And if you can't formulate a detailed and cohesive answer to all of these problems, it proves you shouldn't be allowed to have any opinions re: the current state of the world's affairs. Solve them all at once, or shut up.

come on poops... its not like that, but everytime i see one of these threads, its always someone bashing the other side, and then saying why they think this or that SHOULDNT be going down a certain way, but they never offer a solution to the problem.

and since im so misinformed, id just like to hear some of you more informed people's opinions for solutions.

thats all.

Poop Man Bob

03-23-2004, 03:06 PM

Point taken.

grasshoppa

03-23-2004, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by J.HollaBack
come on poops... its not like that, but everytime i see one of these threads, its always someone bashing the other side, and then saying why they think this or that SHOULDNT be going down a certain way, but they never offer a solution to the problem.

and since im so misinformed, id just like to hear some of you more informed people's opinions for solutions.

thats all.

i completely agree. tease is only asking you bner to give your proposal for resolution. 4000 some odd posts and you don't have the time? pffft.

what should be done about the nutty fundamentalists? should they just be ignored while spain meanders a socialist resolution and commits years to impartiality without realizing and misbelieving they are still a target? i seriously don't know what you, or any other liberals think. the question is ignored far more then any other topic on this debate. please, please inform us.

i caught an article in the local newspaper this morning in which it mentions that hamas has vowed revenge towards not only iseral but also the u.s. even though the u.s. has repeatedly announced it had no forewarning of the assassination and absolutely no involvement. these boisterous and imprudent threats are exactly what has come and will continue to surface so long as the terrorists believe they have some existence. it is a doctrine of war they will apply to anything that disagrees with their beliefs, or more likely "wants." was 9/11 provoked? hardly to the point of cause and effect. and that is all the evidence you need to realize that terrorist warfare is malignantly menacing and should be dealt with immediately and not left to indecisive politicians or to "play it by ear" agendas.

and please keep my posts in context. i don't want to have to be so overly spoken and detailed that i have to hold your hand while you read my posts.

!@#$%

03-23-2004, 05:36 PM

for one thing, the united states has to realize that it bears at least partial responsibility for the creation of terrorist and fundamentalist groups..

there is a long and sordid history in the united states of covert ops.
we have fucked over a lot impoverished and downtrodden peoples.

the united states needs to at least reduce its support of the israeli army.
and reign in the extent of the deployment of troops in the world.
(and where troops are stationed, they need to treat the native people with respect, and abide by their laws)

...we need to foster as many positive relations with people of volatile nations
there needs to be human intelligence to defeat terrorists.
which we can only get by treating people with respect, helping them rebuild their countries, not turn them into warzones and abandon them when our military objectives are completed..

if you don't believe the united states is the biggest terrorist who has ever existed, trying to impose her doctrine on the rest of the world by brute force, then read Killing hope by William Blum, open your eyes..

learn about the israel - palestine conflict.
there's a few threads on it..
and the united states giving israel some 6 BILLION in aid PER YEAR
for armed defense
after planting israelis in the palestinian nation post wwII

read 'A Peace to End All Peace'
about the creation of the modern middle east post wwII
and the fact that the middle east was a peaceful area prior to being drawn into that war.

www.killinghope.com (http://www.killinghope.com)

US foreign policy is brutal.

grasshoppa

03-23-2004, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by !@#$%
...we need to foster as many positive relations with people of volatile nations
there needs to be human intelligence to defeat terrorists.
which we can only get by treating people with respect, helping them rebuild their countries, not turn them into warzones and abandon them when our military objectives are completed...

is that not what we are doing now? to completely pull out as spain has done should be condemned, right?

a few acts of american brutality should not be representative of the american people, just as the suicide bombings should not be representative of middle easterners. and i believe it has been proven that the american troops have shown a great deal of patience and composure with people that are trying to kill them daily.

right now i'm reading howard zinn's "The People's History of the United States"
[img]http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0060528427.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg'>
so i'll look into those titles when i get the time. please believe i'm not someone new to the united states' history of politics and economics. but i am still someone who believes in freedom and democracy, something the iraqi people could not experience till now.

!@#$%

03-23-2004, 08:16 PM

no!
i do not think that is what we are doing.

look at afghanistan.
our military presence there is low.
the country is in shambles.
they have nothing.
we went in and bombed it, we destroyed the taliban, now we are pretty much looking for laden and that's it.
what about nation building?
soldiers are still dying there.

in iraq, we cannot wait to hand over control to a provisional authority the u.s. handpicked, june 30!!?? who are they kidding. ...and who even knows when elections will actually happen....meanwhile, the american people get fucked by the contractors handpicked by the DOD to rebuild.

uhhh....there are other exemples..
should we really get into all that?

haiti?

or what of our ignorance of what is going on in the Congo RIGHT NOW???
what of democracy for the people of somalia??
(who were backed by al-qaeda for real, not just for lies)

why do some nations get bombed and abandoned, others ignored altogether?
why is ther no consistency in american policy for the rest of the world to look to?
what nations consider is friendly?
where is the humint??
why do people hate our government so much?
are people really that naive that they think everyone is happy??

in the economist opinion poll, about HALF of iraqis polled said they were WORSE off than a year ago..(www.economist.com (http://www.economist.com)) the poll was done by iraqi news outlets

did anyone ask themselves...
can democracy be forced on a nation?
isn't democrcy a demand of the people?
is that a demand they'd make?
a lot of iraqis don't want democracy.
they want an autocrat or a religious government.
what will bush do when they get themselve an ayatollah??
bomb again!!??

2cents.

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 08:55 PM

!@#$%-

I agree with you about the united states playing some kind of role in creating terrorism, however, although i dont know every country we've ever invaded or bombed etc etc, i would think we went and did those things a) because it was somewhat necessary and B) other parts of the world somewhat wanted us to handle the situation. I might be wrong on that, but I that's what im assuming.

now that ive acknowledged that the US was definately a part of the problem in the creation of terrorism, what are some steps that should be taken in trying to resolve terrorism?

just as slavery was a problem, and has since been acknowledged as being something that was horribly wrong, simply acknowledging it as a problem isnt going to make up for the past or make the problem go away. Now we have to think of solutions for the problem.

About pulling our troops out all over the world like you said, how is that going to help anything? The only thing I see that doing is giving the wreckless people in that land more opportunity to rise up against whoever they happen to be rising up against (whether they are terrorist, crazy groups of people, etc) so i cant see how that's a good solution.

And that's the main point that I've been trying to point out, it seems like no matter what we or anyone else does, some of these problems are never going to end, there is no solution, ESPECIALLY in some of these peoples eyes (those with the problem).

like the palestine / isreali conflict for example...

it seems to me (although im not highly informed on the situation as yall know) that both sides think that they are entitled to land or something else, (once again i'm not positive on that) and will never agree on a "solution" to end all the violence and what have you. That is normally when i come out with my "comical relief" that is kind of retarded and stupid. Because the way i see it, these people are so stubborn and set in their ways, that it's like they enjoy fighting and killing one another...

I mean, I would think / hope that they'd be smart enough to know that there is only so much land to fight over, and I dont care who pushed who off of the land, or what was lost or gained to the other side, they need to as a whole come up with a solution to give some land back, or draw a final line in the land, divide it up as best they can that is fair, AND BE DONE WITH IT.

It boggles my mind how they act like they want every inch of land ever taken from them back, which as far as im concerned, it seems like they're never going to get back anyways, I don't see why they'd continue fighting an endless battle, rather than just acknowledging its a fucked up situation that they lost their land and all, but it would be better to get SOME land back, and hopefully agree upon something PEACEFULLY.

that's where i get frusterated with matters and seem to spit out my retardisms which I know aggrivate others that are trying to stay on topic, but it just frusterates me and at that point i aim for comic relief. which i apoligize for now, but that's my reasoning for it.

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 08:58 PM

Originally posted by !@#$%
uhhh....there are other exemples..
should we really get into all that?

haiti?

or what of our ignorance of what is going on in the Congo RIGHT NOW???
what of democracy for the people of somalia??
(who were backed by al-qaeda for real, not just for lies)

why do some nations get bombed and abandoned, others ignored altogether?
why is ther no consistency in american policy for the rest of the world to look to?
what nations consider is friendly?

you named a bunch of other countries that are having problems to correct? are you saying that we should help them to?

because i thought you wanted to pull out of the countries that we are in now? I'm confused.

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 09:14 PM

ps- !@#$%

is this the book you mentioned above:

[img]http://a1204.g.akamai.net/7/1204/1401/03122214011/images.barnesandnoble.com/images/7220000/7222393.jpg'>

I plan on getting it, the other one you recommended, and the one that grasshoppa is reading as well.

/going to get -somewhat- informed.

!@#$%

03-23-2004, 10:34 PM

thats the book..
it's very educational, a tough read, thick with info and historical data.

my point is that their is no consistency to u.s. foreign policy.
peoples who are truly beaten down, countries where genocide is taking place now, we are not helping them..

but we decided to 'help' iraq..
the time for that long ago, maybe when WE installed saddam hussein in the 70's..
bullshit. on top of bullshit, it sucks.

we weren't helping iraq. bush wanted revenge and cheap oil.
it was a mistake.
we can't leave now, the place is in chaos.

but places where humans are desperate for u.s. help, like africa, are ignored (because they don't have resources we need cheap)

i'm sick of our hypocrisy..
i hate the imperialist doctrine.
it needs to end.
i'm down to help those that need and want it..
we've got so much money.
but the battles we fight are not to antion build
or improve quality of life.
that is why we are CREATING HATRED and thus, more terrorism

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by !@#$%
thats the book..
it's very educational, a tough read, thick with info and historical data.

my point is that their is no consistency to u.s. foreign policy.
peoples who are truly beaten down, countries where genocide is taking place now, we are not helping them..

but we decided to 'help' iraq..

first off, i got that book, and the one grasshoppa recommended or is reading rather. They are really big books (for me especially) going to take months on end to read them, but im motivated now. I'm going to come back in here as an educated nut shortly... ;) :smiles:

about "helping" iraq... you act like we just up and decided that we'd go over there and start helping them... we're over there "helping them" if thats what you want to call it, because we brought a war to them... the helping part is from the aftermath of the war, its not like we're just over there lending a helping hand.

those other countries that you mentioned that need our help... sure thats true and it would be nice to help everyone, but we didn't cause their problems. (we might have, i dont know, but im saying there is a difference between helping them and helping iraq, since we brought another war to iraq).

;)

!@#$%

03-23-2004, 11:33 PM

yes, but why did we go to war in the first place?

that was what i was referring to when i said we 'helped' them.
i say that sarcastically, we have not helped them, we blew their infrastructure to bits to accomplish a goal WE wanted.

that's the difference.

we decided what was best for iraq, then blew the fuck out of it, now we are sort of rebuilding, but so much is fucked, so many terrorists have flooded in there, not a whole lot is being effectively accomplished..

people in those other countries, they are begging us for help, and we are standing by and doing nothing because why?
they have nothing to offer us.

that's the ONLY reason we battled hussein..to accomplish bush's vengeance, and lust for cheap oil...

!@#$%

03-23-2004, 11:36 PM

a country we are helping, that also wants our help, is israel.

too bad they are using our help to crush the opposition with force

israel engages in terrorist acts too.
but we continue to aid them..it's disgusting.

our foreign policy is totally fucked.

read killing hope too.
it's an eye popper.

www.killinghope.com (http://www.killinghope.com)

J.HollaBack

03-23-2004, 11:46 PM

gotcha.

well personally, im all for cheap oil. hehe.

another thing i dont understand about this oil contreversy is, people act like bush is going to make a billion dollars off it even if he did control it. which to me seems silly. first off he'd be assasinated if that was true (that he was getting super rich off the oil) and two i dont think it could legally go down that way anyways.

i was talking about this with that islamic friend of ours, and i dont see why everyone (other countries) is so up in arms about us possibly controlling the iraqi oil fields.

from what he said, the iraqi people dont really care who is running the operation, because no matter what the oil is going to be sold to others no matter who is in charge. i think he said something about the only thing they want out of it is some say in the matter, or i froget exactly what he said, but it wasn't to much to ask for im sure.

But the way I see it, if we were in charge of the oil fields, and regulating good oil prices for everyone (other countries included) not only would the operation be ran smoothly by good people who know what they are doing (that being us) and if we did it right, and maybe even cut some countries some slack / dicounts for the oil... it would improve our relationships with them.

what do you think?

also, i know we've blown a lot of shit up over there, and the people are in tons of turmoil, but i hope that one day things will get back in order, and this shit will be for the better, and i'm betting that they'll be better off than before.

!@#$%

03-23-2004, 11:56 PM

what gives us the right to go into another country and take over their natural resources??
just because we think we're better?!

who the fuck do we think we are!?

that's retarded.

what if europe stomped wisconsin because they felt france deserved to regulate the cheese industry?

ridiculous i know, but so is a war for oil.

the iraqi DO care about their natural resources.
this is the wealth of their country.
don't be so naive. to think that muslim iraqis would be ok with modern western christian power taking their industry over.

what about OPEC???
they regulate oil

or do you just think it would be cool if the u.s. controlled everything, and we'd all get along...
where do you think al-qaeda came from?

****YO..this is getting off topic.
there's already a ton of threads about shit like this..
you should bump a few if you wanna keep talking about iraq.

villain

03-24-2004, 12:55 AM

Whoo... !@#$% you've been talking up a storm! Good job! Though I'd say you take it a lil easier on tease, I seriously think he is trying to honestly understand these issues but granted he's still got some fucked up ideas.

Right, why not bump some of these other threads on iraq? Seems like people just start flaming outta nowhere and we already got the answers down pat. I think they just wait for the sun to go down or something so they can change into werewolves....

And now on to address kabar....

TEARZ

03-24-2004, 01:17 AM

Originally posted by !@#$%
what if europe stomped wisconsin because they felt france deserved to regulate the cheese industry?

now THAT would be a justified war. ;)
hilarious.
i'm impressed with the tease/!@#$% conversation... good job tease for thinking, good job !@#$% for sticking with the dude.

26SidedCube

03-24-2004, 01:17 AM

Not to interrupt with useless shit :lick:...

But damn... Tease flexing that refined shit.
Rock on.

BROWNer

03-24-2004, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by grasshoppa
tease is only asking you bner to give your proposal for resolution. 4000 some odd posts and you don't have the time? pffft.

blahblahblah. thanks for pointing that out.
i honestly do not have time to e-spar with you.
i've done my fair share, ask kabar. or any of the MIA pro
war chumps that used to come here. funny how they disappeared.

i'm kinda curious why the onus is on myself and others to delineate some of the hugely obvious problems with the 'war on terror' pt2.
i'm glad you're reading zinn though.

villain

03-24-2004, 01:56 AM

Kabar, kabar, kabar.... I have always respected your opinions alot, but this is the worst, most uninformed, prejudiced rant I've ever heard you say... and quite frankly I am dissappointed, like when Kobe is pulled up on rape charges.

Originally posted by KaBar2
Eleven million Spaniards marched in the streets to demand that Spain pull out their 1,100 soldiers, is that correct?

Those eleven million Spanish citizens should have been mobbing the recruiting offices of the Spanish Army, demanding to be sent to Iraq.

Like that would ever happen.

Terrorists like Al Quaeda want one thing and one thing only: POWER. They want control, over the Muslims in their own countries, and over as much of the western world as they can get. When you see the word Islamist, you should be thinking "Nazi." They will only get worse and worse, with each victory like the Spanish elections. They will never produce a democratic society that recognizes the rights of religious minorities, of women, of any of the things that 99.99% of the people on this board hold dear. Drinking alcohol of any type is enough to get you beaten with fan belts (Afghanistan under the Taliban), possession of a TV or a VCR gets you arrested and held without trial. Adultery results in prison, if you're lucky. Hell, in Saudi Arabia, they EXECUTED A SAUDI PRINCESS (a member of the Royal family, no less!) with a pistol shot, then beheaded her, for trying to run away with her Saudi boyfriend. The boyfriend was beheaded in a public execution, cold turkey. If you steal something, they cut off your hand. What do you suppose you'd get for grafitti? Rack a can of paint--CHOP.

Well Kabar we are all well aware of the extreme forms of government that exist(ed) in the middle east. These ideas are given far more attention than they are probably worth because it has become an instrument of justifying our own questionable behavior. WE here in America can get a minimum sentence of 7 years in violent, drug ridden prisons for grand theft. It doesn't seem so far away from chopping hands off.
Royal families the WORLD over are very, very picky about their interloping. Just look at Romeo and Juliet for crying out loud.
Oh so I can't drink alchohol? Oh no! I would honestly rather be smoking hashish, and that is illegal here.
Naziism and Terrorism. Both dreaded isms. So is capitalism by the way.
You have failed to acknowledge the good things in the middle east. Turkey, Jordan, etc... But shit happens, like the coup in Iraq when Saddam took power with CIA backing.... Iraq was on it's way to becoming an oasis of peace in the middle east. Shit happens, like the assassination of Sadat. It just takes a real asshole to make shit happen. I'm afraid your words have made all muslims look bad. LET'S NOT FORGET WE PUT AL QUEDA IN POWER! Precisely because they are the badasses that they are. If you would look at the other threads on these subjects you would see our intimate relations with them up until fairly recent times.

What the fuck is wrong with you guys? If these motherfuckers were to somehow take over the U.S., you people would be the very first ones to face their firing squads. All democratic nations should be pouring troops into Iraq and Afghanistan, not cowering because of one lousy train bombing. Hell, the Nazis levelled half of London, killing thousands, and the Brits came swarming out of there like a hornet's nest (armed with a shitload American rifles, mind you.) The radical Islamists hate everything about western culture. They will never be mollified. Given the chance, they would be overjoyed to see Spain enslaved under Sharia, just as it was hundreds of years ago.

We either erradicate them now, while they are relatively weak, or we fight a real war with them twenty or thirty years from now. Personally, I think we should pour a serious, no-holds-barred effort into eliminating their movement completely. The argument that by killing a few of them now we create more terrorists is a fallacy. Those people would have eventually become terrorists anyway. If they announce now, that just means we have a chance of getting them now. I do not think we should release captured terrorists anytime soon, but I DO believe we should publicize the shitty conditions in which they will be held for years. Anybody we catch twice gets "life without parole in a Guantanamo dog cage," in the custody of the U.S. Marines. No Paradise for you , baby, just growing old day after day in Camp X-Ray.

You cannot confront a faceless enemy! It is precisely why they fight like this because they cannot muster a direct confrontation! All we are doing by rolling the entire military over there and razing all hell is radicalising moderate (and probably even pacifists!) muslims. Put yourself in THEIR shoes for the love of god! Imagine that the west texas militia carried out a bombing attack in well... lets say Pakistan. Then pakistan flys hundreds of sorties over texas daily bombing the ever loving god out of everything, then sends in a wave of tanks and ground forces to fuck shit up even more.... then they leave texas a fucking ruins and imposes sanctions upon them which starves a million children in texas... and every once in a while you have cruise missles flying the fuck out of nowhere and blowing shit up and on the forth of july some crazy raghead in office gets his jollies by shooting more cruise missles at texas in some sadistic celebration. Then some other motherfucker bombs pakistan for being a bunch of punks and after fucking them up they decide to declare war on TEXAS again! Then it's essentially the same thing all over a fuckin gain. So how the fuck would YOU feel!?!
If people spain doesn't want to support the united states in doing this, then good for them. They were probably muscled into it in the first place.

Terrorists held prisoner should be subjected to intense, unrelenting re-education. Their guards should be 50-50 male and female NCO's, commanded by female Marine officers. They should be forced to obey women in command, since they hate women so much. (Marines obey their officers, regardless of the officer's gender.)

The United States should stop fucking around and get serious about rebuilding Iraq. The loss of 500 or 600 soldiers (or for that matter 5,000 or 6,000) is TRIFLING compared to past wars. We lost 3,000 Marines the first day during the invasion of Okinawa. The Civil War cost us millions of soldiers. It was worth it.

Wars are waged by soldiers. Waging war is dangerous and everybody knows it. The problem with Iraq is that we need about ten times as many soldiers there as we have, to crush the resistance with overwhelming numbers. The way things are now, they are nickle and diming us because we do not genuinely control the battlefield.

You are right about we should be getting on the ball in rebuilding Iraq, but we don't need more and more troops over there. This is not how guerilla war is fought. Guerilla war is shoot, move, communicate.... it requires agility and intelligence. Not brute force. The sheer amount of violence, civilian casualties, and collateral damage and certainly radicalized more than we had faced in the beginning. And besides that our troops are stretched to the absolute limits, taxed, tired and getting very angry.

They see mercy as weakness. It is better, in the Middle East, to be hated and feared, than hated and held in contempt. You guys are always talking about "gangsta this" and "gangsta that." Well, invading Iraq is REALLY gangsta, and not some two-bit neighborhood thug with a cheap nine millimeter either. All the whining should come to a halt and the U.S. should GO GET THESE TRAIN-BOMBING COWARDS WHERE THEY LIVE. Oh, wait. We're already doing that.

More generalizations.... gangsta? Writers have more than a few differences with gang taggers.
OH KABAR YOU ARE SO BADASS YOU SHOVED YOUR MASSIVE COCK INTO THAT SHITHOLE SANDBOX AND IT STARTED GUSHING AN ORGY OF OIL! YOU ARE SO COOL MAN!

God I can't beleive you said this piece of trash.... Nothing but a vapid diatribe justifying nothing but your own insane desires....

villain

03-24-2004, 01:59 AM

imported_El Mamerro

03-24-2004, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by BROWNer
blahblahblah. thanks for pointing that out.
i honestly do not have time to e-spar with you.
i've done my fair share, ask kabar. or any of the MIA pro
war chumps that used to come here. funny how they disappeared.

i'm kinda curious why the onus is on myself and others to delineate some of the hugely obvious problems with the 'war on terror' pt2.
i'm glad you're reading zinn though.

I'm gonna have to give grasshoppa some credit here. The guy sounds like he may have an idea of what he's talking about, maybe he'll be able to offer up some discussion the others weren't able to. Personally, I feel like on many occasions others weren't even given a decent chance cause it immediately became a 5-on-1 slugfest, and the matters turned to personal attacks too quickly (easy to get frustrated when arguing against 5 people at a time). Sorry to say, I feel your above brush-off comment seems to want to go in that direction as well. I have always argued for the need of an intelligent opposing view to give the discussion real validity, and even at times toyed with the idea of playing devil's advocate, but it's too big of an endeavour, and it's hard to be motivated about defending a side I don't agree with in the first place. I just know, because I've witnessed it, that for every argument presented on this board on the left side of things, there is a strong counter-argument from the right, and these types of discussions bear fruit much more juicy than the roundtable of agreement we usually have here.

The onus isn't on yourself and others to delineate the problems... as far as I know the problems have been endlessly delineated and explained in these discussions. The guy is asking for solutions, something that I'm gonna have to agree hasn't been as readily offered as problem definitions. !@#$% is starting to touch upon some ideas and principles (admitting we have some blame in the creation of terrorism), but we still have a long way to go to define viable answers with the same degree of detail we have defined problems. More importantly, we should try to steer away from the inclination to offer solutions as "could-have-been-avoided-by" statements. It's essential we direct these discussions towards actual problem-solving if we really want to make them worthwhile. Let's get the ball rolling.

imported_El Mamerro

03-24-2004, 02:28 AM

That Kabar rant, I might add, is exactly what I DIDN'T mean when I suggested "strong counter-argument".

villain

03-24-2004, 02:42 AM

El Mammero: Perhaps you are right about grasshoppa. However I didn't notice anything of merit personally in what he said. Perhaps I was a little harsh.. hahahahaha oops. I squashed it....
Maybe I'm wrong but it seems to me that the right cannot put up a decent argument. For example, I was watching the 9/11 investigation today on CNN and there were no hotbutton topics explicitly brought up in the first place.... When asked about why we didn't do something about Al Queda sooner, the response was basically because they didn't feel it was worth launching a missle to destroy these training camps. ??? See what I mean? They also said that the terrorists tended to melt away when opposition came. Well isn't that still a problem? Much of the defense was verbose rhetoric and generalizations that would easily loose someone not following closely enough. I was mainly disappointed that all the dirt that brought a need for these investigations in the first place wasn't addressed.... then again this has been ongoing (even though I haven't heard anything about it in some MONTHS!) and I may have missed all that great juicy action.

That is great that you want to work on solutions. I too feel weary from these arguments that seem to be a rehash of the same things. It is definately time to work on solutions. I've proposed such things before but it never really caught on. Perhaps it's all these run on tangents and thread hijackings.... Perhaps we do need a thread solely dedicated to solutions.
Alas I'm nearing the end of my rope and must get up early tommorow.... I shall hand the mantle off to your capable hands.

BROWNer

03-24-2004, 02:50 AM

hold up.
i'm not slammin' the dude or negating his
right to ask questions and reply, or get
some gang up thing going.
props for reading zinn.
the 'brush off' is gonna have to ride, i
do not have time to get into a detailed
tit for tat. i like details and well written
replies in threads like this. that said,
i've said it before, and i've indicated that
i think a real good starting point is stop
bombing and intervening in other countries.
you fuck with people, you create legitimate
grievance. that's just gonna have to suffice
for now.
i'll try to get back in here when i have a
bit more free time.
and i misspoke there with the onus bit...
it should read that the onus for defending
peaceful resolutions to problems should
not be on all of us 'liberals'. or somethin'
to that effect. not tryin' to sound pissy..
i'm real tired right now.

villain

03-24-2004, 03:15 AM

One more thing about the 911 investigation... There was alot of the blame game that has been going on for soooo long now. Blaming the CIA, blaming elements within the CIA.... And outside of the program of course we've got people blaming British Intelligence, what else? I think it's convienient for them to blame intelligence cause you can't put a finger on someone in the cloak and dagger corporations. It's like a garbage disposal.
And what's with liberals just coming up with peaceful resolutions yeah? I don't quite understand these labels in the first place. I have never considered myself liberal, or democratic for that matter. I did however donate money to Kerry, that is because he's the only one with a remote chance of winning that aligns with my goals for the most part.
Heh... wondering when that much anticipated BROWNer discourse is coming along....

J.HollaBack

03-24-2004, 03:22 AM

i absolutely HATE conspiracy theory bullshit...

as far as 9/11 is concerned, i dont think they knew anything about it, or helped to plan it, or whatever else weirdos think up that might have happened.

that being said, i do think there is a good chance that we might have been warned before hand, and not taken the threat seriously, but come on now! HONESTLY who in their right mind would have thought terrorists were going to HIJACK one of our own planes, and turn them into bombs against us?

i dont know about you, but i wouldn't have EVER expected that or believed someone if they told me that.

it was a brilliant ploy i admit, but nobody saw that one coming...

JeffLebowski

03-24-2004, 03:06 PM

ID.IE.IP.

Wednesday, March 24, 2004 Posted: 8:21 AM EST (1321 GMT)

MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- World leaders, including 14 prime ministers, gathered for a state funeral in Madrid for the victims of the March 11 terrorist bombings.

Many of the leaders also met with incoming Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who says he intends to pull Spain's troops from Iraq if the U.N. does not take a central role.

Spain's royal family, headed by King Juan Carlos, led mourners at Wednesday's service, which began with midday Mass at Almudena Cathedral on a cold overcast day.

Though Spaniards have endured decades of Basque separatist attacks, the March 11 terror strikes were the worst against a Western country since the September 11 attacks in the United States.

The bombings of crowded commuter trains during morning rush hour have been dubbed "Spain's 9/11."

On Tuesday, four more suspects -- three Moroccan men and a Spaniard -- were charged in association with the train bombings. The death toll was also revised Tuesday to 190. Originally it was thought 202 had died in the bombings. (Full story)

Presiding over Wednesday's Mass was the archbishop of Madrid, Cardinal Antonio Rouco Varela.

"We have cried, and we have cried together," Rouco Varela told the congregation. An enormous white sheet bearing a black ribbon of mourning hung behind the altar.

"Great pain has filled your lives and those of your families since that black day in which brutal terrorist violence, planned and executed with unspeakable cruelty, ended the lives of your most beloved," Rouco Varela said.

"From the very first moment -- that of the anguished search and the evitable identification of your loved ones -- your pain became the pain of our dear city of Madrid, of Spain, and very quickly, of the whole world," he added.

It is the first state funeral for people outside the royal family in the history of Spain's new democracy, restored after former dictator Francisco Franco died in 1975.

In attendance were about 500 relatives of the victims.

Also attending were British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Britain's Prince Charles, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, French President Jacques Chirac, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and more than a dozen other heads of state or government.

Former Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori also attended.

Blair and Zapatero met for 55 minutes ahead of the funeral.

Miguel Angel Moratinos, the incoming Spanish foreign minister, said the two leaders talked about mutual concerns including the war on terrorism and Iraq.

According to Moratinos, Zapatero repeated his intention to pull 1,300 Spanish troops from Iraq if coalition forces are not placed under U.N. control.

Zapatero then met with Leszek Miller, the Polish prime minister.

The newly elected Socialist leader criticized the war in Iraq during his election campaign. The proposed troop withdrawal also may come up when Powell meets with Zapatero.

Zapatero last week rejected an appeal from U.S. President George W. Bush to stand by the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.

Zapatero also is meeting with Chirac and Schroeder.

Before the Mass got under way, one unidentified man in the congregation screamed, "Mr. Aznar, I hold you responsible for the death of my daughter," The Associated Press reported.

He was referring to outgoing Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, whom many Spaniards accuse of provoking the March 11 bombings by supporting the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Extra security was in place for the service, with personnel boosted at Madrid's two airports as well as roads leading to the city and the route the official motorcades took to the cathedral.

The Mass brought much of Madrid to a standstill.

Giant television screens were erected in several popular locations in the city to carry the ceremony live.

A monitor was also been set up in Puerta del Sol -- a bustling plaza where one of several makeshift memorials to the victims sprang up the day after the bombings.

The memorial there features a sea of red candles as well as photographs, notes, newspaper clippings and flowers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2004 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

IR.II.IP.

soulkillers

03-24-2004, 09:16 PM

i am not a religous person what so ever but i hope that the people involed get to meet there maker and meet the countless innocent people they have killed once they are in the after life i lost a family memeber in 911 and this is the same stuff all over again but for someone else its sad
its sad to say that as a americanthat my beloved country is playing both sides of the terroist fence. plus our countryhs track record of giving a countryt money then spending more money to blow it up lives on.

BROWNer

03-25-2004, 12:16 AM

so where is everyone today?

here's some meandering and rambling thoughts, hopefully there are
some nuggets worth discussing in some capacity..if not, well then, i'm
really sorry to disappoint:
first of all, i prefer to think of western issues as one
big ball of wax, interconnections and correlations. for me
to talk about the war on terrorism waged by the US, you need to bear
in mind alot of other things. too many to name.
i think we are in urgent and seriously perilous times and
the rate at which things are so carelessly being done
is really quite astonishing. i'm not so sure your average
westerner feels that way, or if they do, it's this really kind of
distant, unchangeable thing that you are powerless to affect.
how come?

iraq: this was and is pure bullshit, and we all know it.
i remember listening to the radio the night it started, and
feeling this huge surge of rage and disgust.
for the most part, my issue with the iraq war is the way
it has been framed for consumption(and the sociological
spin off) and the motivations behind it.
you guys have no solution, nor do
i really have one, it is so fucked beyond comprehension
that it seems laughable to even try. should US forces
pull out? hand over power to the UN? or just leave the shit
and fuck off? right. not much of an option there.
grin and bear it? one viable option with real results:
come november, all of you in this thread better vote and kick
bush and his cronies to the curb. in fact, it should happen right now,
spanish style. that in itself is a good start.
but you already knew that..

afghanistan: more bullshit. another instance of might makes right.
alot of innocent people got shredded in afghanistan, the US promised them
gold, and look at it now....a big pile of shit. what else should have been done?
golly....
its hard to measure the success of afghanistan really, or the WOT for that matter.
resources that went to iraq would've been far better used hunting down
terrorists.
mamerro, you don't want these 'could have been avoided'
statements as solutions, but i'm afraid those are about the only
ones i can think of. maybe you've got some answers? love to hear 'em,
you too grasshoppa, villain, all you dudes.
maybe if people hear about this shit enough, there won't be
any more 'could have been avoided' scenarios. it gets real
tired thinking up all the shit that is coming down the pike due to
idiot policy. the simple answers don't exist.
at some point as well, i think greed and class needs to come into this and the
corporate grip on western democracies. i'll pass on that for now, but think
that could be a very interesting discussion.
whenever i start thinking about this whole thing since 9/11, i always
remember bush coming out and telling people to go spend their
sorrows away. and i remember how not a single question was asked
as to why it happened...in the mainstream media, none. squat.
it's still probably one of the most important questions that the west
needs to answer.

terrorists: yea, they fucking suck. even the word terrorist sucks. even
the way it gets thrown around sucks. it should be terrosucks.
a real solid distinction needs to be made though. guerrillas are now
referred to as terrorists. peaceful protestors fall into this category for
right wing nuts too. there's probably e-terrorists.
the real deal ones need to be stopped and soon. i have meek solutions
for this...try to understand the sociological and historical context of a terrorist
mind set. they aren't born terrorists. and they are apparently extremely intelligent
and clever. could it be that they have the capacity of a give and take compromise?
hard to say unless there is another front opened up besides gunship communications.

saudi arabia: big, huge, fat ass problem. interesting as well. we are all pally pally with them. most of you probly
know this, but the bush/royal saud connection is very fucking ill.
this tidbit is also ill. james baker, a great pal of the bush crew and the saudi's, is a principal of bechtel. bechtel, as we all know, was the major beneficiery of the reconstruction contracts in iraq. baker also heads up baker botts, a law firm. families of sept 11 have brought a $1trillion lawsuit against the saudi royal family. the law firm representing the saudi's? baker botts.
open the vaults on this shit. answers within, guaranteed.

pakistan: big problem, but we're pals in one way or the other. you gotta wonder what is up with the bush team and musharref sometimes. the head nuke scientist confesses he's part of a covert tech transfer of nukes to leading 'terrorist' regimes.
he gets a pat on the back. head of the isi resigns shortly after 9/11 when the fbi exposes a money transfer from him to mohammed atta. you think this guy is well placed or not? the week leading up to 9/11, dude is sippin' latte's with george tenet and colin powell(one of them anyhow). why isn't this out in the open?
how does al zawhiri escape through 'tunnels' recently?

finally, its my opinion that western populations, especially the US populace, needs to get off its lazy ass and start putting major pressure on its political system and start really getting in peoples faces. enough of the excuses that you shouldn't blame citizens of america for the way it's country behaves. it's supposed to be a democracy. get with it. not that we're any great shit, but in canada, we have a nationally broadcast show called 'this hour has 22 minutes'. on it, one of the actors puts on a suit and tie, pretends he is a reporter, and approaches any and all of our public servants and sticks them with the most uncomfortable political questions you can imagine. it's fucking rad.
pick this apart, add to it, negate it, whatever.
does this get the ball rolling?

i sure hope some of you have something to add.

BROWNer

03-25-2004, 12:25 AM

ps-there is so much more that can be touched upon, and in
much greater depth.
i'll try and get back here and add more if it pops in my
head.

imported_El Mamerro

03-25-2004, 02:49 AM

See, that's what I'm talking about. You touched on a whole bunch of different points, which would be cumbersome to try to discuss all at once (megalong posts), although they, are as you described, very much interconnected.

So, Iraq... doesn't take half a brain to know that removal of Bush from office is absolutely imperative. I am, however, a bit worried about Kerry's managing of the shitstorm that will be handed to him if he wins. I'm rooting like crazy from the guy, but I'm severely worried that I'm doing so without truly believing in him, only truly believing in NOT Bush, which in a way feels like I'm setting myself up for a big disappointment. One more mistake can make a shit situation even worse, and we'll never hear the end of Republicans doing the same thing to Kerry that we are doing to Bush (and which they did to Clinton before, still do actually, trying to pin the 9/11 blame on him, and so on). That said, I agree with you... this thing has gone so completely out of hand its almost impossible to begin formulating a solution. I'm sorta leaning towards allowing the UN to take over, but I'd be way more enthusiastic about it if the US hadn't gone through such great pains to discredit and render them somewhat irrelevant in the eyes of many. It must have worked, cause now I'M unsure if they'd be able to handle the situation correctly... but I'd rather place my trust in the global community than the US alone.

But rather than keep on going on the list, let's stick to the thread topic for now: Spain. Is pulling out the best idea for them? I want to say "They shouldn't have supported them in the first place", but that's a could-have-been-avoided-by statement. I was initially ecstatic by the success of the Socialist party and believed that a strategy would be put in place to deal with the presence of their soldiers in Iraq, but as soon as I heard what it was (near-immediate pullout), I was again very concerned. On the one hand, I'm incredibly glad that less soldiers will have to face unnecessary dangers and death, and I'm happy that one more nation has stood up and said "This is fucking bullshit, I'm out", but I am deeply troubled by the possibilty of terrorists taking this as a victory on their part to influence foreign government decisions, therefore giving them even more confidence that their methods are effective and reliable. I believe the time for pulling out is long past, and that if the Iraq situation is hoping to reach even the slightest photons of the very dim pinprick of light at the end of the tunnel, it needs as much international support for reconstruction and leadership installation as it possibly can. Good job USA for ensuring this may never happen... it's time to admit you fucked up and you wanna be friends again.

Shit, I ran out of steam.

SteveAustin

03-25-2004, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by El Mamerro
I'm happy that one more nation has stood up and said "This is fucking bullshit, I'm out", but I am deeply troubled by the possibilty of terrorists taking this as a victory on their part to influence foreign government decisions, therefore giving them even more confidence that their methods are effective and reliable.

These are my thoughts exactly. Throw in the fact that the socialist party wasn't "supposed" to win and I can see Terrorists throwing in another W in the win category. This of course will only encourage them to do more damage which in turn could make other countries pull out their support and troops and only give them more "W's".

I think this is only the tip of the iceberg as far as terrorism is concerned in Europe.

BROWNer

03-25-2004, 03:47 PM

maybe the US needs to have it's 'cake' and eat it.
this guy chris hedges put out a book a couple years ago, and he
talks about the trends of american acceptance of wars, the
collective sociological impact and stuff....after vietnam, americans
were really starting to think deeply about war and they were
humbled by it, maybe iraq will be the same. shitty way to find
out, but..

in spain, i think that people will just have to deal with
whatever results their democratic decisions have. they want their
guys out, so be it. i see the logic that it legitimizes the terrorist
tactics, and i agree, it's scary as hell..

KaBar2

03-26-2004, 10:02 AM

As I am sure you guys are aware, we do not live in a "democracy" and never have. It is a constitutional republic, with a democratic form of government. We elect representatives, they do the governing, and we are suppose to enjoy a great degree of freedom, democracy, etc, etc. But, in many ways this is a sham.

For instance, what if they had held truly democratic elections in 1932 Germany, and the DAP won, fair and square? What if all the horrors and excesses of the Nazis had each been put to a vote, and given the green by a clear, legal majority of the German people? It wouldn't matter--they would still be Nazis, democratically-elected or not, and we would still have been forced to take them down.

The new government put in place after the war was by no means democratic. Germany was under Allied military occupation. There was some Nazi resistance (the "Wolverines," among others) but eventually, the tremendous crush of Allied military might sitting right square in the middle of everything brought an end to Nazi Germany once and for all. The first governmental agencies were run by volunteers, usually German businessmen, or former low-level Nazi officials. PLENTY of Nazis got shot in a ditch for resisting or being uncooperative, which, of course, is exactly the same shit that THEY had been doing. The Soviets marched thousands to firing squads. In the end, Germany made a remarkable recovery, with our help. They are or at least were, an ally in NATO. Did we keep Germany just because we conquered their sorry Nazi asses? NO, we did not. Within ten years (1955---I was five) they were independent (and more-or-less democratic socialist) again.

We won't keep Iraq, either. Someday, ten or twenty years down the road, Iraq will be a secular Muslim state, maybe like Turkey. It will be years and years before Iraq will be able to democratically elect a government that is not dominated by crazy, fundamentalist Muslims. Is that good for the Iraqis? Nope. They are incapable, at this point, of producing a democratic-style government. If there is an election, the haters will win by a landslide. Hello, Taliban.

The U.S. achieved a lot of what happened in post-war Germany by controlling (at first) what was taught in German schools. We should work with Iraqi educators and do the same thing, to some extent, in Iraq. All governments control education, to one extent or another. To allow some anti-social, anti-American force to control Iraqi schools is stupid.

If Kerry wins, it will be interesting to see how he tries to get disengaged from Iraq. My bet is that he won't be able to disengage. The Vietnam veteran turned war protestor may find himself in exactly the same situation President Johnson found himself in. Now is that ironic, or what?

BTW, the militia movement thoroughly discussed the possibility of commercial airliners being used for terrorist attacks by Muslim extremists LONG before 9/11. Everybody thought they were crazy. They have done a lot of investigation of things like the Waco Massacre and the OKC bombing tragedy. But, of course, because their conclusions differ from the Government's conclusions, everybody thinks they're crazy.

The Spanish train bombing was a straight-forward piece of work. I'm surprised we haven't seen twenty or thirty more in every country that helped the U.S. And we probably will, eventually, especially if they achieve any more political successes like the outcome of the Spanish elections.

PalestineOne

03-26-2004, 11:18 AM

KaBar,
you said "crazy fundamentalist Muslims" will take over Iraq sooner or later. and then called them "haters". I just wanted to point out that I am a Muslim man and I find that offensive, innapropriate, and disrespectful.
Other coutnries probably think we in America are "crazy fundamentalist Christians" adn "haters" as well, and admit it, thats an offensive disrespectfull way to view one another, and does not help.
one of the few things I liked about Marx was that he pointed out that commoners of completely different religions and cultures have more in common with each other than with theyre own seperate political leaders. KaBar, me and you have more in common than Bush and you, or the writers behind JewsWeek and U.S. Jews and World Report do. peace!

26SidedCube

03-26-2004, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by El Mamerro
But rather than keep on going on the list, let's stick to the thread topic for now: Spain.

Woke up for a minute, I'll post my 4 cents.

Well, you pretty much hit the nail on the head
as far as how I feel about Spain's knee-jerk
reaction to the attack. Terrorism is a leaky
roof situation: One day you make notice a
wet spot on the ceiling and pay it no mind,
one day that roof might start dripping on you
but you can still put it on the backburner and
shake your fist at the people who laid your
shingles, but one day, having sat on your ass
long enough that roof is going to collapse into
your living room crushing your family dead
with a mouthful of buffalo wings and a face
full of TGIF. Example? Three letters: WTC.

That being said, and me being tired...
Maybe their pulling out of Iraq will purge
them of any wrong-doing in the eyes of
those declaring Jihad, only time will tell.
The fact remains that Spain, like much
of Europe, is much more Westernized than
they care to admit and I've been under the
impression that's what the Jihad was being
declared on in the first place...

All I know is that taking an isolationist stand
in todays (exponentially) shrinking world is
as irresponsible and dangerous as arbitrarily
invading countries for the sake of spreading
your form of government. While I recognize
as much as any of you that Bush is an unfit
leader/ the all-consuming spawn of Lucifer
himself, I have to also say that Spain is not
helping, as leaders in the Middle East are not
helping. As I said: The world is shrinking,
there's no way around it. While those in the
Middle East may want to have nothing to do
with our shallow, bottom-feeding way of life
and we here may want nothing to do with
their religiously fundamental way of life we
are ALL going to have to start acknowledging
that the rest of the world is out there and that
we've all stepped on some toes in the past,
have been greedy, and have only been as
good as our flaws as humans have allowed
us to be... or else, soon enough, there won't
be much left for anyone to complain about.

Mind my rant, I'll let the brains get back to this stuff. I'm tired.

PalestineOne

03-26-2004, 12:08 PM

dammit stop refering to the Middle East as a bunch of "religious fundamentalists." Thats bullshit propoganda from CNN and U.S. News and World Report and Fox and Newsweek. Just because they might be viewed as as having "more faith" or a dtronger respect or belief in God, and maybe because Islam requires devotion such as praying 5 times a day (by the way Christians are required to do almost all the things Muslims are, such as abstinence, no killing or stealing, etc.. attend religious gathering which is Church). But its messed up and compeltely wrong to just say "they" as if even theres no new born babies and the slutty 17 year old girsl and the 40 year old losers. So is it suddenly wrong to faithfully believ in God and His word? when did that happen? God doesnt say in the Koran to "kill non believers, or kill Christians, or Kill Americans or whatever" it DOESNT SAY THAT IN THE KORAN, IT DOESNT SAY THAT. ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE. CNN is a baaaaad source of news. it may be convenient o catch up on whatever happened on a mass scale, but it is baaad for opinions and reports and such.

ISLAM IS PEACE. ISLAM IS PEACE.
ISLAM IS PEACE. ISLAM IS PEACE.

26SidedCube

03-26-2004, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by PalestineOne
So is it suddenly wrong to faithfully believ in God and His word?

Quackshot.

villain

03-27-2004, 12:22 AM

I think many of you are missing a point I brought up earlier. The fact that these attacks were politically motivated. Sure it is frightening that it may embolden similar such attacks but at least the reason remains clear. They have shown that they are capable of striking any place at any time. They could have just as easily stuck some HUGE social event if their motivations were of pure hate and vengeance. Casualties would easily have been quadrupled. This was a rude awakening. But we are awake nonetheless.
The same could be said for 9-11 in a sense. They could have struck the superbowl. But they didn't. These attacks are politically motivated.
They didn't want Spain in Iraq. In light of all the bullshit the Bush administration pulled to go to Iraq and take over, that seems like a reasonable request. But given the stakes are so high the reasonable request has been twisted into an unreasonable demand. And that is the problem. We are beyond reason. We are beyond diplomacy. And that is President George W. Bush's job.

26SidedCube

03-27-2004, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by villain
I think many of you are missing a point I brought up earlier. The fact that these attacks were politically motivated. Sure it is frightening that it may embolden similar such attacks but at least the reason remains clear. They have shown that they are capable of striking any place at any time. They could have just as easily stuck some HUGE social event if their motivations were of pure hate and vengeance. Casualties would easily have been quadrupled. This was a rude awakening. But we are awake nonetheless.
The same could be said for 9-11 in a sense. They could have struck the superbowl. But they didn't. These attacks are politically motivated.
They didn't want Spain in Iraq. In light of all the bullshit the Bush administration pulled to go to Iraq and take over, that seems like a reasonable request. But given the stakes are so high the reasonable request has been twisted into an unreasonable demand. And that is the problem. We are beyond reason. We are beyond diplomacy. And that is President George W. Bush's job.

I'm sorry, but they attacked commuter trains.
How is this any different than attacking the
Super Bowl or Disneyland? Had they gone
and leveled a US embassy in Spain or perhaps
something more clearly connected to Spain's
support of our monetary ventures into Iraq
I could see how that would hold up, but how
is a public transit at peak times with bombs
set to go off when police/medical aid arrived
'clearly politically motivated' outside of their
saying it was politically motivated?

I think you're on point with what you're saying,
but I have to ask... sorry.

villain

03-27-2004, 12:34 AM

How would they smuggle bombs into the embassy?
Sure it's not perfect but we don't have perfect solutions and all the answers either....
We are talking about a motley crew of terrorists here, not a SPECOPS unit....

26SidedCube

03-27-2004, 12:55 AM

Originally posted by villain
How would they smuggle bombs into the embassy?
Sure it's not perfect but we don't have perfect solutions and all the answers either....
We are talking about a motley crew of terrorists here, not a SPECOPS unit....

Yeah, I'm not expert and I don't expect you
to have any more concrete answers, either...
but couldn't they have just loaded all those
explosives into a van and drove it directly into
the embassy/any more directly related building
or area? I suppose they got their point across,
just the same though... but public trains and
the WTC are a few degrees off as far as symbolism goes.

Part of me wants to believe the attack was
entirely war-support realted... but part of
me still clings to the fact that Spain is a
pretty Western Culture and their pulling out
of Iraq may not expunge them from being
a potential target in the future.

All I've got is speculation. Kill me.

villain

03-27-2004, 01:07 AM

Yes it is not fun shooting in the dark.

Well maybe this would better be described as political hatred... nothing in this world is absolute. It WAS however primarily political...

26SidedCube

03-27-2004, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by villain
Yes it is not fun shooting in the dark.

Well maybe this would better be described as political hatred... nothing in this world is absolute. It WAS however primarily political...

[img]http://www.bigfootgaming.com/images/win_khunnu-compass.gif'>

Point taken.

BROWNer

03-27-2004, 01:43 AM

spain is not safe anymore than any other westernized nation.
just becuz they booted a guy that had clear contempt for
democracy, doesn't mean spain is now 'soft' on terrorism..
i think the contrary will be true. you'll see spain putting alot
of effort and resources into security and they will
open up their own front to deal with terrorism, without the
lame guidance of the WOT's leader.
also, i think we need to understand that violence on a war
scale, and violence on a terrorism scale are not very different.
both are fundamentally a form of extreme communication, and
both say basically the same thing...so......when the US invaded
iraq, and the toll of innocent death is now figured at around 10 grand,
well, there ain't much difference to the receiving population is there?
when israel gunships a neighborhood in palestine, there is virtually
zero difference between that and a palestinian walking onto a bus
and blowing it to shitballs.
we need to start realizing that every action has a reaction. violence creates more
violence. i don't know if humans are truly capable of anything
different...but........i hope so, and we'll never know unless we give it a real
sincere try.

villain

03-27-2004, 02:37 AM

That's one thing that worried me is that this incident would inflame the ethnic divisions in Spain. But the Socialists have proposed making spain a federation and to acknowledge all it's provinces and peoples. We'll see how this goes...

Dick Quickwood

03-27-2004, 11:47 AM

[img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040326/capt.ny11603260115.rice_commission_ny116.jpg'>

imported_Tesseract

03-27-2004, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by BROWNer
spain is not safe anymore than any other westernized nation.
just becuz they booted a guy that had clear contempt for
democracy, doesn't mean spain is now 'soft' on terrorism..
i think the contrary will be true. you'll see spain putting alot
of effort and resources into security and they will
open up their own front to deal with terrorism, without the
lame guidance of the WOT's leader.
also, i think we need to understand that violence on a war
scale, and violence on a terrorism scale are not very different.
both are fundamentally a form of extreme communication, and
both say basically the same thing...so......when the US invaded
iraq, and the toll of innocent death is now figured at around 10 grand,
well, there ain't much difference to the receiving population is there?
when israel gunships a neighborhood in palestine, there is virtually
zero difference between that and a palestinian walking onto a bus
and blowing it to shitballs.
we need to start realizing that every action has a reaction. violence creates more
violence. i don't know if humans are truly capable of anything
different...but........i hope so, and we'll never know unless we give it a real
sincere try.

well, it looks like i missed all the action in here but its always nice to agree with the brown....

villain

03-27-2004, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by BROWNer

we need to start realizing that every action has a reaction. violence creates more
violence. i don't know if humans are truly capable of anything
different...but........i hope so, and we'll never know unless we give it a real
sincere try.

This pretty much sums it up for me. But I also say it's the big guy who has to step down and make concessions because it's the big guy running things and setting the example.

KaBar2

03-28-2004, 08:34 AM

I have no problem with the Muslim religion, in fact I work with several Muslims, and had a Muslim neighbor who went with me a few times to militia activities. He decided it was too much risk attending gatherings and opted out, but he did some of the stuff they talked about: stockpiling food and ammunition, etc. We had a good time doing target practice and shooting silhouettes in "Hogan's Alley."

My neighbor didn't drink alcohol. No problem. My neighbor didn't eat pork. No problem. My neighbor attended a mosque and observed Muslim religious holidays. No problem.

But if my neighbor decided to start beating women on the street with a fan belt because they didn't cover up their hair, that would have been a BIG ASS problem. Because he is free to do whatever he pleases, worship as he pleases, eat what he pleases, marry who he pleases, but he is NOT permitted to force other people to obey the rules of his religion if they don't wish to do so. Neither am I. Nobody is.

Thinking that one has the one and only understanding about what God is, and what rules He wants us to follow, and believing that all the rules were written down in a holy Book thousands of years ago is known as "fundamentalism." Thinking that one somehow has the right to beat everyone else into submission to those rules can reasonably be called "crazy fundamentalism." That is no slur against Islam.

My neighbor is an OBEDIENT, DEVOUT MUSLIM. When we would hang out, he drank Diet Pepsi, and I drank Miller Lite. His next door neighbor was Jewish. No problem, we all got along fine, in fact the Jewish guy was a Harley rider and used to help me work on my motorcycle.

In my opinion, trying to force one's religion on others is offensive. And so is prohibiting others from worshipping as they see fit. Killing people because they are of another religion is a vicious, bigoted crime against humanity. Mulims may walk the streets of America as free and equal citizens. But people in Middle Eastern, Muslim countries are in constant danger of being attacked by crazy fundamentalists if they choose to worship differently than Islam. This is what happens when people are denied the right to keep and bear arms, and when Government supports one religion over another.

Every western country has thousands, if not millions, of Muslim immigrants. Twenty years ago, I had never seen a single mosque or any sort of Buddhist temple, Sikh temple, etc. Churches, sure. Synagogues, a few. No mosques.

Today, within walking distance of my home there are four or five large mosques and Islamic schools, some of them in shopping centers. I think that's great. No problem. But the day that the Baptists start telling me I can't drink alcohol, or the Jews start telling me I can't eat pork, or the Muslims start telling me I can't smoke cigarettes in the daylight during Ramadan---THAT is the day I will have a problem. Worship however you please, and everyone else will do the same. Try to prevent people from living as they please within the Law--you will see tremendous opposition.

aPirate

03-28-2004, 09:20 AM

a thoroughly interesting thread. thanks to all the contributors.

the bombings in madrid heavily sadden me. as do those in iraq. a number of issues have been raised in the thread that i feel compelled to address and i hope my input will inspire meaningful debate.

as a term, 'the war of terror', does not sit well with me. it seems to embody many aspects that are resulting in our current global terrorist activity. the term cleverly polarizes war and terror, where as already alluded by villain, both share violence on such horrific scale that terror is ensuing regardless of motivation. the polarization also denies much of the historic and political complexity, as in we now have the good vs. the bad. when really, as this is thread itself is testament, attempting to define good violence and good death is a rather difficult undertaking. perhaps effective in a country who engaged in the most international military aggression of the late century, the term appeals to an american sensibility, the very same that rationalizes such aggression with belief in a moral high ground. i can not foresee how the scale of global violence will decline if such terminology truly describes the western worlds attempt to forge peace.

perhaps a trivial concern in the sad circumstance, but i'm interested in how others perceive the madrid bombings will affect graffiti and it's existence on public transport. as much of graffiti relies upon the penetrability of train/tram/freight yards, a)how long do you think such access will remain viable if terrorists continue to use such vehiclesb)would you be prepared to jeopardise this aspect of graffiti for greater commuter security?

p.s KaBar2, much of your argument in the last post is quite sound and consequently negates your main point. can you see similarities in what you find unacceptable regarding religion and the rights of the individual, and those actions of western countries and the rights of individual nations?

KaBar2

04-06-2004, 09:28 AM

Too bad---there was a lot of good stuff on this thread.

To jump-start this discussion again, I don't see how the sound reasoning of my last post negates anything. Saddam Hussein, whom we "created" as a foil against Iran, over twenty years ago, is a horrible, brutal, murderous monster. The U.S. government has probably been trying to figure out a way to put the genie back in the bottle ever since the end of the 8-year-long Iran-Iraq War. I think President Bush held Saddam personally responsible for the assassination attempt upon his father's life during that trip to the Middle East. Even Bill Clinton hated Saddam, it's just that there wasn't that much that he could do.

Iraq should have been dealt with decisively in 1991. When I found out that George H.W. Bush cut a deal with Saudi Arabia to save Arab face (they did not want any major Middle Eastern city invaded and conquered by "infidels") I was highly pissed. Even in Kuwait, where we SAVED THEIR BUNNY RABBIT ASSES, they insisted that Saudi forces enter Kuwait City first. So, after the Allied forces (read "U.S. and UK") smashed their way through Iraqi defenses and sent the Iraqis scurrying like rats, they then halted on the outskirts of Kuwait City, and the pussified Saudis, who had not done any significant fighting whatsoever, drove into the city like conquering heroes. While the Iraqis were in Kuwait, they robbed and raped and murdered people by the hundreds. Middle Eastern TV never mentioned that. The U.S. forces did ALL the heavy lifting. Middle Eastern TV never mentioned that. They hailed the Saudi poseurs as if they had driven out the Iraqis with just a little U.S. help.

This shit in Fallujah is more of the same arrogant shit. In my opinion, the U.S. Marines ought to FLATTEN the fucking place as an object lesson to all the fascist motherfuckers who want to resist a legitimate, democratic, constitutional government. They say that 4 out of 5 people in Fallujah support the insurgents. Fine. The ones that don't better get the fuck out of there in a hurry, because I got a feeling the place is about to get hosed down in a big way. The Marines have the place surrounded. If the Iraqis had any sense, they would stop fucking around and get cooperative.

I predict the Marines will cut the place in several slices with fixed-wing air support and helicopter gunships, and then crush resistance in each piece of the pie, one by one, with tanks, artillery and ground troops. This is what the Marines do best. They have been begging the government to take the gloves off for a long time. The Iraqi insurgents in Fallujah ought to catch a clue, because they are about to be eradicated.

Riding around in thin-skinned vehicles getting shot up piecemeal is not the Marine Corps way of doing things. They are about annihilation of the enemy, not "peacekeeping." And they have a serious grudge about the four American contract security guys (read "mercenaries") killed last week. The rank-and-file Marines identify strongly with those four security contractors. And now it's time for some payback.

TALL_HOUSE

11-09-2006, 11:41 AM