From the Daily Star in Lebanon:
We are in for a very rough ride if terror groups were now to become emboldened and attack civilians in Western countries in order to change their governments through democratic elections, as happened in Spain. On the other hand, it could be argued that the right-wing Spanish government of former Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar was the anomaly that was grotesquely out of touch with its public opinion, given that a vast majority of Spaniards opposed their government’s joining the US and UK in attacking Iraq. Here’s another question that should be added to the appeasement debate: Did the new Spanish government appease Islamist terrorism, or did the former Spanish government first appease American neoconservatism?Good question.
Good question, indeed. Last time I checked, American neoconservatives are against targeting civilians. When countries such as UK or Australia join the US anti-terrorist efforts, is it because of the alliance? (if so, how come France didn’t give a damn about the alliance?) Or it is because we think that terrorism is an atrosity worse than war?
Also, a minor point: neither Bush, nor Cheney, nor Rumsfeld, nor Rice are neocons. So if you want to stay in touch with reality, it is a good idea to stay away from the whole neocon conspiracy paranoya.
Otherwise, this is an interesting site. I found it through Raed’s blog.
American people should know that one of Zapatero electoral promises was to withdraw troops from Irak. It is not an answer to the attaks, it is to fullfil the Spanish people desire of not intervene in Bush’s administration error of invading a country based in lies. Before the war everybody here knew that all that was being told was not true. We are not that manipulable. Please consider that the winner of this story should be peace. And that is what spanish people strongly wishes. The question goes beyond political analisis…
Ivan Lenin—