Spanish political upset

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun Mar 14, 2004 5:18 pm

From the BBC:

Spain's ruling Popular Party has admitted an unexpected defeat in the country's general election with almost all the votes counted. The Socialists won 43% of the vote while the centre-right Popular Party has garnered 38%, reports say....The Socialist's party Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero is set to become Spain's new prime minister.

Officials say 63% of the electorate turned out to vote in the poll which ends eight years of conservative rule.

Analysts said people had turned out in bigger numbers than predicted in order to defy the bombers who carried out last Thursday's attacks. 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...

A BBC correspondent in Madrid says criticism of the way government ministers handled the initial investigation into the attacks may have lost them the election. But 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.

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. As he tried to address supporters, he was drowned out by cries of "manipulators", "liars" and "peace".

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

I admit, I was more impressed by what seemed to be the sheer imeptitude of the Spanish Socialist opposition, which couldn't seem to capitalize on the national disgust at the government's Iraq position. Polls were showing the election solidly in the Conservative camp once more, until this horrific series of bombings took place. It's as though people were simply waiting for something to galvanize them, which the opposition couldn't provide. Strange.

It also has to be said that debated evidence the Conservatives deliberately withheld information pointing to al-Qa'idah as a source for the bombings, while promoting the idea in public that ETA was responsible, severely damaged the government's credibility in the last few important days.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Sun Mar 14, 2004 5:50 pm

Excellent!

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 1:43 am

Originally posted by fable
It's as though people were simply waiting for something to galvanize them, which the opposition couldn't provide. Strange.

Another way of looking at it is, al-Qaeda turned the election for the Socialists. Proves also you can terrorize people and get what you want. A sad day for the whole world.

Sojourner · Post by **Sojourner** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 2:11 am

Weasel, the Spanish have a long history of dealing with terrorism, in particular, the ETA. I would not call them terrorised. I see this as a case of the Spanish having little tolerance for deception on the part of their government, and that they see this as an excuse to pull out of an unpopular war that many feel has little to do with fighting terrorism. Make no mistake - they're calling for the terrorists' blood. They just don't see them in Iraq.

Moonbiter · Post by **Moonbiter** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:05 am

78% of the population voted! Isn't that astonishing? That's something the rest of us should learn from. That, and the fact that the spaniards are putting their foot down on the lies and blindsiding regarding the war in Iraq. I don't much care for a socialist government, but if it means getting a few more war supporters out of office, I'm there. Only wish the Brits and my own countrymen would do the same... *sigh*

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 9:46 am

Spain may withdraw troops from Iraq

I got this link from a webpage that titled the Link as "Spain surrenders to al-Qaeda". Now I am all for aid in rebuilding the Country of Iraq, but not having the UN completely take over.

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said: "The war in Iraq was a disaster, the occupation of Iraq is a disaster."

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 9:49 am

Originally posted by Moonbiter
78% of the population voted! Isn't that astonishing? That's something the rest of us should learn from. <snip>

Well some of us [in Scandinavia that is] are very accustomed to such voting percentages.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:29 am

Originally posted by RandomThug
Now I am all for aid in rebuilding the Country of Iraq, but not having the UN completely take over.

Why would you say that? I'm not so naive as to believe that, with the UN in charge, all the violence and turmoil will stop, but I don't see anything wrong with the UN taking over.

Back to Spain: It's quite frightening to see that a group of terrorists can actually, and directly, change the political course of a country.

Sojourner · Post by **Sojourner** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:32 am

Like they did in the US?

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:40 am

Coot the following is a response I got from a friend in the Military

"Forget them wanting to come in after all this and take over and profit and get thier hands in this country, were the ones who fought for this were the ones who died for this"

I also know a few buddies who would love to get the hell outa Iraq and would welcome some UN help.

I guess the best way I can put it is, We sent our children to die for a cause we believed in. The world bands together around the idea of no Saddam equals a better world ( I believe ). It's our war, were paying for it with money and lives.. I would love help but this is our job to finish. I think the whole world should kick in rebuilding but were the Contractor.

Ahh hell mondays suck.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:45 am

Originally posted by Sojourner
Like they did in the US?

Yes... actually, 9/11 and the trainbombing in Spain changed the political direction of many nations.

@Thug: I understand the sentiments of US and British soldiers who risked (and still risk) their lives in that war.
But I still and strongly believe the UN should not have been kept out and that Bush and Blair should not have invaded Iraq without a UN mandate.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:05 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
I guess the best way I can put it is, We sent our children to die for a cause we believed in.

@RT, unless you know something that all the pollsters don't, wouldn't it be fairer to say that George Bush decided to invade and send US citizens for a cause he believed in? I think I remember reading polls everywhere that indicated a pretty evenly split US public on the idea of invading Iraq, even after the US government did a number hammering away at the public for more than a year. Some people went, and believed; some went, and didn't. That seems a bit more factual as a statement of what happened. It's a bit unfair to the parents who grieve over their dead sons in Iraq (not to mention all the Iraqi parents who lost tens of thousands of their own children during the invasion), and who didn't want them to go, but had no control over the situation, and have been shown occasionally in the media cursing George Bush's name. They're just as real as the ones who embraced Bush's cause, after all.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:27 pm

@Coot if we are to discuss the actions of my Country before the war I believe we might agree a little more, sure more support going in would have been great. But after the fact..

@Fable I understand the country as a whole did not believe in the same thing, but for that half that didn't want it, the other half did. And the sons of those who did, the ones who fight currently and want this. Not everyone is a victim to the Governments will, some people agree.

My issue is with my statement I take in mind those who wanted it, those who willingly serve thier country knowing what they must do, those who are proud of thier children in Iraq. My family(Brother's), my friends those who I respect dearly for what they do there in Iraq.

I believe (as do a whole bunch of other Americans) that this war has its justifications, and I am proud of all who serve thier friends and family. George Bush had me behind in this Iraqi War so no it wasn't just his decision.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:34 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
@Fable I understand the country as a whole did not believe in the same thing, but for that half that didn't want it, the other half did. And the sons of those who did, the ones who fight currently and want this. Not everyone is a victim to the Governments will, some people agree.

Nor did I imply they were. You wrote, "I guess the best way I can put it is, We sent our children to die for a cause we believed in." Which is all-inclusive. It assumes the grand "we," the combination of everybody believing in a cause. That's not the case, which is why I replied.

Nor did I reply that 100% were opposed to Bush. I wrote, "I think I remember reading polls everywhere that indicated a pretty evenly split US public on the idea of invading Iraq, even after the US government did a number hammering away at the public for more than a year." I'm advocating an honest statement of the even split in US citizens at the time of the Iraqi invasion, that's all.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:37 pm

'K Fable. My statement was wrong the whole "we" thing, your right. I guess I'll breath next time before responding.

Thanks for clarifying again heh

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:42 pm

Not a problem.

I disagree with you 100% over the issue of Iraq, but I would never, ever deny the sincerity, dedication, or goodwill of those who went to Iraq to fight--whether because they had to, or because they believed it was the right thing to do. And that is another, huge strike I chalk up against Bush; because if I am right, then he has used the idealism of others to send them to cause death and find their own deaths, without any good reason.

It is a bad business, no matter which of us is right.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:49 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
@Coot if we are to discuss the actions of my Country before the war

Well, we could discuss the 'actions' of MY country before the war... There were a lot of hefty debates in the Dutch parlement about whether or not to go along with the US and the UK. And finally it was decided that '...the Dutch government will support a war against Iraq, be it only politically, not military.' Once again, Dutch politics at it's best.

About 'fighting for what we believe in'... I'm not sure what people like Bush believe in. I don't want to start another Bushbashing, but I honestly cannot believe that Bush wanted to invade Iraq to free the people of Iraq or to rid the world of a dictator. I'm sorry, I just don't believe that our political leaders are that idealistic.
I do believe, however, that almost all wars are about politcal and economic influence... period.

Morlock · Post by **Morlock** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:51 pm

They lost the elections because of terror. Not the citizens were terrorized, but never the less- the terroists just changed the course of history.
And I find many of the protests against the government some of the stupidest things I've heard. They blame the governament, yet the terrorists are forgotten, as if 'we had it coming' for taking part in the war. Aznar isn't the bad guy here- and who on earth could blame him for immediately saying the ETA did it? they are the likely suspect. All of a sudden, they're saints for being wrongly blamed. It's like when Israel says Hamas did something and it turns ou it was Hizbullah. They're all murderers!
Minutes after 9/11 people said it looked like Bin-Laden, based on nothing but past experience. They just happened to be right that time. (or at leat are thought to be right)

Terror has won, if not as directly as usual.

Ahh hell mondays suck.

"Monday is a terrible way to spend a 1/7 of your week"
(courtesy of Morlock's ever growing quote page)

Sojourner · Post by **Sojourner** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 1:13 pm

Originally posted by fable
Not a problem. I disagree with you 100% over the issue of Iraq, but I would never, ever deny the sincerity, dedication, or goodwill of those who went to Iraq to fight--whether because they had to, or because they believed it was the right thing to do. And that is another, huge strike I chalk up against Bush; because if I am right, then he has used the idealism of others to send them to cause death and find their own deaths, without any good reason.

There's a reason for the old saying, "The road to H-ll is paved with good intentions."

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 1:22 pm

@Morlock horrible spam right here but I have to say it.

A way out west there was a fella, fella I want to tell you about, fella by the name of Jeff Lebowski. At least, that was the handle his lovin' parents gave him, but he never had much use for it himself. This Lebowski, he called himself the Dude. Now, Dude, that's a name no one would self-apply where I come from. But then, there was a lot about the Dude that didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. And a lot about where he lived, like- wise. But then again, maybe that's why I found the places'durned innarestin'.

I don't know about you, but I take
comfort in that. It's good knowin'
he's out there, the Dude, takin' her
easy for all us sinners. Shoosh. I
sure hope he makes The finals. Welp,
that about does her, wraps her all
up. Things seem to've worked out
pretty good for the Dude'n Walter,
and it was a purt good story, dontcha
think? Made me laugh to beat the
band. Parts, anyway. Course--I
didn't like seein' Donny go. But
then, happen to know that there's a
little Lebowski on the way. I guess
that's the way the whole durned human
comedy keeps perpetuatin' it-self,
down through the generations, westward
the wagons, across the sands a time
until-- aw, look at me, I'm ramblin'
again. Wal, uh hope you folks enjoyed
yourselves.