[Grug]

Indeed.

One of the groups already claimed they did it, and is demanding that Australia pull out our troops from Iraq.
When are they going to learn, that it never works!? Never in the past, and never in the future will this kind of gutless act cause a nation to meet demands.

Black Wolf, hopefully instead of capturing and trialing them the government will just send in a squad of SAS and smite their asses into the ground...

It is interesting that they had to attack us from within another country...

- Grug

[Black Wolf]

Originally posted by Grug

Black Wolf, hopefully instead of capturing and trialing them the government will just send in a squad of SAS and smite their asses into the ground...

Sounds reasonable to me. And if they whinge about it, we just cut off their aid and chuck up some trade embargoes for a year or so. That should shut them up nicely.

[Setekh]

*nods in silence*

Threads merged.

[SA22C]

Originally posted by Grug
Indeed.

One of the groups already claimed they did it, and is demanding that Australia pull out our troops from Iraq.
When are they going to learn, that it never works!? Never in the past, and never in the future will this kind of gutless act cause a nation to meet demands.

Umm, does Spain ring a bell?

[Grug]

That was in exceptional circumstances...

Western Powers work on making decisions based on their own reasons. Bombing an embassy is not going to in any way change the outcome of our decisions...

They should consider what they would do if similar tactics were placed on them.
Look at the Israily / Palestinian conflict. They retaliate with bombings because of bombings. It will never end. Its just an endless bloodbath...

[Bobboau]

unless one side manages to totaly kill the other

[Ace]

Originally posted by SA22C


Umm, does Spain ring a bell?

Spain did not pull out of Iraq because of the attack on them. They pulled out because public support in Spain was not for the war in the first place, and the people elected an anti-war candiate.

However, the idea that terrorists influenced weak willed spaniards seems to be an illusion that a lot of people want to believe.

If the attack didn't occur, there would have been another scapegoat for the so called "liberal media" here in the US.

Funny how people claim to love democracy and sovereignty and claim to respect it. But once those free people have a different opinion from your own they're hated. What ever happened to the ideal of "I don't agree with you, but I'll defend your right to have an opinion to the death?"

[karajorma]

Even with an anti-war govenment the Spaniards were idiots to pull out of Iraq. By doing so they made the terrorists think that they can influence things by doing this sort of thing.

What they should have done is have the new prime minister say that terrorist activity like this wouldn't change their policy and then kept the troops in a few more months.

I know that the elected party had promised to bring the troops home but by doing it so quickly he sent out completely the wrong message.  

If they start getting bombings in their moroccan colonies they may realise their mistake.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by an0n
Ex-****ing-cuse me?

The BBC is the only 'big player' news organization in the world that'll openly call the government a bunch of cu[color=23423][/color]nts.

They're quite possibly the most non-biased news organization in the world.

mmm ya.

[vyper]

[q]I know that the elected party had promised to bring the troops home but by doing it so quickly he sent out completely the wrong message. [/q]

Which makes you wonder who backed the Spanish bombings...

[q]What ever happened to the ideal of "I don't agree with you, but I'll defend your right to have an opinion to the death?"[/q]

Don't worry some of us still believe it.

[Grug]

Originally posted by Bobboau
unless one side manages to totaly kill the other

More likely when both of them are totaly killed out...

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by karajorma
Even with an anti-war govenment the Spaniards were idiots to pull out of Iraq. By doing so they made the terrorists think that they can influence things by doing this sort of thing.

What they should have done is have the new prime minister say that terrorist activity like this wouldn't change their policy and then kept the troops in a few more months.

I know that the elected party had promised to bring the troops home but by doing it so quickly he sent out completely the wrong message.  

If they start getting bombings in their moroccan colonies they may realise their mistake.

I think it was part of the elected governments election manifesto that they would pull the troops out if elected.  So they didn't actually change their policy.

Albeit, had the existing government not so completely botched up by throwing accusations at ETA to deflect criticism, they might have still held on.  They basically sent out a message that they were ashamed of their involvement of in Iraq, and wanted to avoid that issue (whereas they could have claimed the attacks as a form of vindication as to why they had to help rebuild Iraq to thwart these people, etc).

(that said, you're still talking 90% of the public against the war)

[karajorma]

Originally posted by aldo_14
I think it was part of the elected governments election manifesto that they would pull the troops out if elected.  So they didn't actually change their policy.

Did they actually say they would do it immediately though? If not they could have simply delayed the announcement a couple of months.

ETA for instance may have gotten the message that the new government is weak. And that is not a good message to give out.

[Rictor]

should I point out that Aznar was, and this is in his own words, a "independent Falangist", which would place him within ideological spitting distance of Franco. He deserved to lose.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by karajorma


Did they actually say they would do it immediately though? If not they could have simply delayed the announcement a couple of months.

ETA for instance may have gotten the message that the new government is weak. And that is not a good message to give out.

so basically, someone who had neither the support of the peope nor of the current governement did something incredibly stupid, but that they should let a few months pass before correcting this mistake, becuase it would send the wrong message, right?

I don't think that what happened in Spain shows that terrorism works, its just shows that Spainards were against the war in the first place. If it happened in a nation that supported the war, like America (and lets face it, America is just about the only nation, aside from maybe Israel, in which the actual population was pro-war), what would result is not withdrawl but escalation.

My thinking is that if a country is against the war, and I don't mean the government but rather the people, than withdrawing troops at the first oppurtunity is the sane course of action. The Phillipines for example, or Spain. They shouldn't be there in the first place, so why sacrifice their lives for someone else's gain?

[karajorma]

You might not think it. Do you think Osama said "Oh well they were planning to pull out any way. Let's not bother with any of those terror attacks cause they don't work"?