Spain will pull its troops out of Iraq (!!!)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57707-2004Mar14.html

Spain's Socialist Party Defeats Popular Party

Elections Come 72 Hours After Worst Terrorist Attacks in Country's History

By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, March 14, 2004; 6:29 PM

MADRID, March 14 -- Casting their ballots against the bloody backdrop of the worst terrorist attacks in this country's history, Spaniards voted Sunday to oust the ruling Popular Party of outgoing Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, blaming his staunch backing of the American war in Iraq for the bombings that left 200 people dead.

In a stunning political upset, voters chose to give power to the opposition Socialist Party, whose leader, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has promised to immediately withdraw Spain's 1,300 troops from Iraq, orient Spain's foreign policy away from the United States and restore good relations with anti-war European allies, France and Germany.

...more...

that's how democracy works.

bad news for Chimpy...

My heart goes out for Spain and their recent bombing and loss of life...but on the other hand I am happy that they stood up and used the power of the vote to show the leaders who's really in charge...

Dam I can't wait until November...!!

I can just hear now the Bush Admin touting a proposed pullout of troops as a victory for terror...

This has to hurt Bush immensely...

Why isn't the U.S.....

Oh wait, Shrub is our prez.

...stability of Iraq one way or the other.

I'm relieved that the Spaniards were already united against involvement in the US invasion and occupation before the train bombs.

It would not do anyone any good for the withdrawal of support for US policies to be seen as resulting from the horrible bombing.

Bombing should never be seen as 'successful.'

That just makes it an accepted tactic.

pulling Spanish troops out of Iraq, long before the bombing.

Fact is, EIGHTY PERCENT of Spaniards opposed their government's participation in the invasion - the largest turnouts by population to the antiwar demonstrations of last year were in Spain. Aznar forced the Spanish into this mess, recklessly endangering the people. They paid the price in blood for his govt's contempt for democracy. If Spain pulls out of Iraq now (a position the Socialists had before the bombing), this is merely an acknowledgement of what the popular will has all along been. If this looks "weak," too bad; should Spain take the bombing as a reason to stay IN Iraq, would that be strong?!

Iraq is stabilized?

I think we better expect lots of dead American civilians in early November. I don't think I'll travel that week.

Do you think this was "a victory for Al Qaeda"?

I think they're pretty proud of themselves right now. I'd imagine they are thinking they got rid of one of the leaders who invaded Iraq.

I would assume they will repeat the same tactic against us. I won't be travelling the weekend before our election just in case.

dedicates Spain's resources to fighting terrorism, not oil wars unrelated to terrorism.

The reason given for those despicable attacks was Spain's much earlier role in the crusades. One thing we Westerners don't get about Islamic militants; they have looong memories and never let go of a grudge (like Serbs and Croats fighting over a war that took place in the 15th century).

what the new socialist plus coalition will actually do may be infinite.

At this point, if I was a Spanish soldier in Iraq, I wouldn't exactly be packing my gear, in other words. Time will tell.

I think he's learned a little something from the Popular Party's failure to respect what the people think.

My only point is that no policy decision has been made yet, so the thread title posted by Pitt is misleading.

be offered payola? Will he take it? Will 11 more Spanish youth be killed before they leave, if they do? Will their pullout mean that deaths that would have gone to Spain will be added to ours?

Just contemptuously asking in general. How can the world take anymore killing? Why do we not evolve? Why don't we believe in the Christian phrase Peace on Earth and the multi-cultural saying of May God Go With You/God Be Willing? Are we failures?

My praise goes out to the Spanish people for gathering peacefully and expressing their feelings. Thank you and congratulations for mobilizing. We're too busy over here either trying to find jobs or too tired after working at our more physical jobs and our second jobs.

Mmmmmmm... delicious electoral smackdown!

I just hope * doesn't right away replace those 1,300 troops with more of ours - assuming we even have any more.

That's a big how-ya-do to the Bushwa policies. :-)

One down!!!!!! Yeee-Haw!!!

I really wish that the Al-Queada train bombing wouldn't have tainted this election though. I really wanted it to be a clear referendum not marred with terrorist attacks. I think the people would have voted Asnar out anyway, but now everyone can blame the attacks saying "The Terrorists Won"...

When you oppose what 90% of the people want, you get your ass tossed out. That should be the message, not "Al-Queada Won"

"Conservative" aka reactionary governments should be a little more careful how they play the terror card. It can bite you in the ass.

The point, it seems to me, is that at some point in the past Zapatero promised to remove the troops immediately. This was not a post election statement of policy, but a campaign promise.

Prediction: Zapatero will use fighting terrorism as a reason for changing that policy and keeping troops in Iraq. Which will, of course, be little more than capitulation to US financial blackmail.

If Spanish troops are pulled from Iraq, it will be after June 30, and supposedly in accordance with Iraqi sovereignty.

Thinking about being the first to publically pull out of bush*'s little coalition, is going to cause bush* to really put the thumbscrews on real hard.

http://classics.mit.edu/Thucydides/pelopwar.3.third.html

"I have often before now been convinced that a democracy is incapable of empire, and never more so than by your present change of mind in the matter of Mitylene. Fears or plots being unknown to you in your daily relations with each other, you feel just the same with regard to your allies, ... whose obedience is ensured not by your suicidal concessions, but by the superiority given you by your own strength, and not their loyalty.

...

"I proceed to show that no one state has ever injured you as much as Mitylene. I can make allowance for those who revolt because they cannot bear our empire, or who have been forced to do so by the enemy. But for those who possessed an island with fortifications; who could fear our enemies only by sea, and there had their own force of galleys to protect them; who were independent and held in the highest honour by you - to act as these have done, this is not revolt - revolt implies oppression; it is deliberate and wanton aggression; an attempt to ruin us by siding with our bitterest enemies; a worse offence than a war undertaken on their own account in the acquisition of power.

...

Consider therefore: if you subject to the same punishment the ally who is forced to rebel by the enemy, and him who does so by his own free choice, which of them, think you, is there that will not rebel upon the slightest pretext; when the reward of success is freedom, and the penalty of failure nothing so very terrible? ... Their offence was not involuntary, but of malice and deliberate; and mercy is only for unwilling offenders. I therefore, now as before, persist against your reversing your first decision, or giving way to the three failings most fatal to empire - pity, sentiment, and indulgence. Compassion is due to those who can reciprocate the feeling, not to those who will never pity us in return, but are our natural and necessary foes:

...

To sum up shortly, I say that if you follow my advice you will do what is just towards the Mitylenians, and at the same time expedient; ... For if they were right in rebelling, you must be wrong in ruling. However, if, right or wrong, you determine to rule, you must carry out your principle and punish the Mitylenians as your interest requires; or else you must give up your empire and cultivate honesty without danger.

Nothing much new under the sun.

....."some point in the past"! :crazy:

Prediction, you are wrong! :evilgrin:

What makes you think everyone who runs for office is as dishonest as Bush* was during his campaign when he made all the promises he subsequently broke? :shrug:

whoa!

This is a blow to bushco which bodes well for the future, however I am afraid the troop shortage will have to be made up by us in the short term. Even if it's only 1%, it is 1,300 more of our boys put in harms way.

All in all, good news. Hopefully after Nov. 2, we can work to get Spanish troops back in as a part of a UN peacekeeping force that is truly a coalition and get the bulk of our people out of there.

serve in rear guard capacity - supply stations, the nuts and bolts, and are mostly out of the way of the violence. The Brits are, of course, the exception.

And the reason for that would be??????

BING, BING

So that they don't lose popular support at home due to casualties and drop out of the coalition of the "willing."

I suppose that this does follow al quaida's pattern of hitting the UN and Iraqi's who are complicit. Getting rid of the allies first, as they were not as thrilled to be a part of this crap in the first place as the muricans. The game is afoot and our leaders are horribly deficient.

It's a very weird dichotomy. I DON'T want to see our troops die and we should NEVER have been there in the first place, I think of Mari's stepson and all the others, and my own 18 year old son planning on college and what if....???? Even at a supply station or mostly out of the way. However, I also realize that every blow against the boy king will result in the hastening of his downfall and in the long term there is NOTHING more important for this species, IMHO.

have their own territory in harm's way too.

:toast:

I want to see the next WH press briefing. Oh, the spinning Scottie will try! But the top is going to fall over this time...

Wait until you hear an elected official announce the policy in fact before you do your celebrating.

In a stunning political upset, voters chose to give power to the opposition Socialist Party, whose leader, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has promised to immediately withdraw Spain's 1,300 troops from Iraq, orient Spain's foreign policy away from the United States and restore good relations with anti-war European allies, France and Germany.

HAS promised. That could mean six months ago, or yesterday. It is not clear. That he was elected is one part of the sentence. That he has made a promise in the past is another.

The statement "Spain WILL pull troops from Iraq" is not true until an elected official says, with power and the force of policy behind the statement, that the pull-out will be implemented. To date, nobody has said that.

All the WP article says is that Zapatero has made that promise in the past. Whether he keeps it is another story altogether.

"has promised to immediately" sure sounds to me like he made that statement today. But I'll grant you that Zapatero could have said something like "if elected, has promised to immediately" sometime in the past. We'll have to wait and see, I guess.

How "has promised to immediately" signals "today" is not at all clear. The writer could have very easily stated "In a speech after the results were clear, Zapatero promised to immediately withdraw...etc."

That is not what the article says. Moreover, even given its current form, the word "has" is the key operator - it signals some past promise rather than a current statement.

Are we quibbling? Certainly. The point is that the article does not say what the thread title implies.

http://www.thinkspain.com/news/noticia.asp?CodNoticia=2803

Says he's pulling out June 30, if UN forces aren't in place by then. If they are, he'll allow soldiers to remain to support the international peacekeepers.

So, far from there being a statement of "immediate withdrawal," we already have several qualifications, the first being a date in the future (June 30, and the shift of sovereignty), which is far from immediate, the second is a condition which could lead to the continued involvement of Spanish troops.

In other words, Zapatero HAS PROMISED TO IMMEDIATELY WITHDRAW troops, and Zapatero has ALSO MADE OTHER STATEMENTS which change and qualify that promise.

Good. Now we're getting somewhere.

June 30th, unless UN troops in charge.

Their tour of duty ends June 30.SUPPOSEDLY. Unless he pulls a Bush.

.....renege on his promise. What's up? :shrug:

After all, he's NOT Bush*! :evilgrin:

He might actually listen to the will of his people. :)

I am simply pointing out to people who read the article as if it were declaring a done deal that the deal is by no means done. Critical reading, is all. A bunch of folks on this thread are offering up their YAHOOS! as if the Spanish troops were packing up. The article simply doesn't say that.

against the war last year? that`s what happens to a bush ass licker. if the brits don`t stop the attack on them tony will be the next. it`s coming tony-you`d better stop it for the sake of the british people.

I have to worry about our troops as there is no way that bush is going to get UN or NATO backing and pulling out 1300 troops means that our troops are in greater peril and more of our soldiers have to go in more than likely. Its a catch-22.

I hope some good comes out of this though and those who blindly support bush will start to take a harder look at his policies and will question that administration's rhetoric. I'm an optimist!

and it is great Spain sees Bush's war was wrong, it is bad news for our troops. They are already stretched thin enough and many will have to go back to Iraq sooner. My husband isn't even back from Iraq yet and is already hearing rumors of when he will RETURN to Iraq.

As Windy said, it's a catch-22.

What? About one percent?

600 or so casualties on the American side is also "a drop in the bucket," but it shows how regrettable Bush's policy is. If Spain withdraws, Kerry will have SOOOOO much ammunition against Bush's diplomatic failures!@ How can you not be elated?!

It means more Americans will be sent to take up the slack. And what about the Iraqi dead?

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

This will pressure other European countries to follow suit and maybe make withdrawal of troops look like a reasonable position in this backwards f___ing country I'm living in.

Links, please, as to which European nations will send troops to Iraq to make up the difference?

And then it'll mean more than 1,300 more young Americans sent to make up the difference?

Most of the non-American troops are doing rear-echelon support work away from most of the violence. If 1,300 American soldiers get pulled off the front line patrol work to operate ammo dumps or handle paperwork, I see that as 1,300 guys who will probably survive the war.

I assumed from the post that I was wrong, so I didn't say it. Guess I'm not wrong. Thanks, Billy.

I knew guys doing rear-echelon support in Vietnam who were seriously wounded. Means nothing.

A coalition nation refusing to continue this occupation is the reality. Should they stay? I'm not sure where you are headed here.

I have no answers. Do you? Remembering Vietnam, I weep. And plan to vote for Kucinich on Tuesday.

meaning the European countries like Poland and Italy will withdraw. Yeah, Americans will make up the difference; but I'm confident that voters will realize what a shithole Iraq is in quickly and call for American withdrawal soon after.

*Edit-and call for a UN peacekeeping effort.

Where? Alabama? California?

This is not good news.. Especially with Both candidates talking about keeping the troops there.. and Kerry promising to increase them..

It just means more of our guys go... its not "great news"...

Spain had only a symbolic role in the war, as did Poland. And this is a symbolic failure for Bush.

And is Kerry actually promising to increase them? Bush hasn't even promised to increase them. I'd like to see a credible source for that.

That's 1200 guys doing a job that will need to be picked up my someone else... On a national scale.. it's symbolic.. to the troops on the ground.. and those who could be deployed to make up the difference.. its not symbolic at all...

1200 Spanish soldiers or 1200 American soldiers, a human life is worth the same whether it's Spanish or American. I'm just glad that this is going to prove what kind of tenuous "international" support Bush got, and you should be too.

We know international support is tenuous. Why do you think France Germany, Russia, Turkey, Kuwait, etc., didn't support *'s crusade? They knew it was wrong. Numbnuts only got the support he did because he twisted arms. Tony Blair's reasoning, I cannot account for without becoming vicious.

The ball is going to start rolling down! As for Blair, what he has done is an insult to the Socialist International.

Very little. News from Spain is far down on the realm of importance in what I see in my morning newspapers -- and I live in Chicago, a major city.

I could be going.. It's what I signed up for.. so I'm not complaining.. but I would rather have more help.. especially with my candidate wanting to send in 40K more troops... NOT less help. If Kerry was promising to pull out and not increase.. I might agree with you.

He wants to add 40K to active duty services to take the strain off reservists and currently deployed actives. How's he's gonna get those 40K in his first 100 days is a mystery to me, but he hasn't said he'll enlarge US presence in Iraq.

I didnt realize Kerry's plan was to have those troops chilling here in the U.S.A.... When I read about the addition.. I guess they would be deployed in one of the 150 +/- countries the USA has troops in...

Reading this article
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/28/DEMOCRATS.TMP

I see he didnt expressly state they would be going to Iraq or other places.. I just processed out people for Kosovo)...
like I had thought .. the headline of the SF Gate Article and other I've found are kinda misleading..

That said.. I KNOW they will be going places. No One is getting pulled out of anywhere any time soon... but you believe what you want.

Btw ..I agree with the addition.. The forces are stretched very thin.

They're for relief, to do rotations without turning the poor guys back around as soon as they come home, like Dubya's doing now. From Kerry's website:

40,000 Active-Duty Troops.

Kerry is calling to add 40,000 troops to the active-duty Army. The United States should add the equivalent of a current division, about 20,000 combat troops, to the active duty Army. Under Kerry’s plan the United States should also add an additional 20,000 individuals to the active force with specialties in post-conflict skills, such as civil affairs and the military police in order to relieve the excessive burden on our reservists.

Relieve Pressure on Service Members.

The buildup, which will require time to implement, will relieve the mismatch between active and reserve capabilities and also allow us to thank returning reservists when they rotate out of Iraq in 3 to 9 months—not just with our gratitude but with a reasonable assurance that they will not have to again deploy to Iraq in the immediate future.

As far as what I believe... I'm not vouching for the guy, just giving his stated reasons for the personnel increase. I have no idea what Kerry will do once in office.

They had names on them, 11 Spanish names and 9 Polish names. These bags were for the memorial for the war dead we are having Friday. One luminario for each dead soldier, and massed luminarios for Iraqi dead.

I don't want to have to pick up any more bags next year.Good for Zapatero, for knowing what is right.

the troops there will do the work of more people. My husband did the work of 3-4 people in Iraq and never got to sleep more than 4 hours a night. People should feel more conflicted about this announcement, not pure joy. It is good in some ways, but while Bush is still president, our soldiers will stay there indefinitely.

has been "Is this a practice run for the US General Election?" That's how paranoid the bush* administrations has made me. Yeah, I know, gimme my tinfoil hat.

Frankly, I can't decide whether to feel hopeful because the voters of Spain repudiated their government over this nonsense...or fearful that after seeing that we won't get to have an election at all. :tinfoilhat:

Can we keep this in the realm of reality?

Mike

but I'm gonna cut you some slack because you only joined DU today. The fact is there has been plenty of discussion about what would happen to elections in this country if there was a terrorist attack right before the General Election. Hell, the head of Homeland Security has mused publicly about how democracy probably wouldn't survive another major terrorist attack (which frankly scared the hell outta me).

the election results should get Tony Blair's attention. I think his next election is in 2005.

and the fear of them would help make it happen. Not a good thing.
Same here in the US.

Thank goodness we still have Papua and Latvia in the coaltion!

Yes, yes, yes. Do you realize what an important juncture this is?? It's the direct assertion that Bush's FAKE war caused them to be victims. It's a "fuck you message" to be heard in Great Britain and around the world. It's what's going to get people in those nations after the balls of these goddamn Bush ass kissers. It's poltical death time for these knee jerk leaders. AND, it's one ugly fucker for Bush---now, goddamn it Kerry, get out there and play it for everything it's worth. Tell America we need international cooperation to get terror under control but because of Bush' lying, fake war, we have turned the whole world against us. GO with with Kerry, GO.

The water is on full now, no more trickles. The world is waking up from a coma it's been in since 2001. This is more important then most people I think, think.

This “sudden” reversal in the Spanish government will snowball over Europe. Look at the voter turnout! UK is next. You know * administration knew this to be trouble if you heard C. Rice on Meet the Press this morning talking about the elections today in Spain. She was pretty much telling Spain’s citizens they would be stupid to remove the current government. She was trying to bully them in to keeping the status quo. But you know what, people are sick of the constant fear tactic these “free world” leaders are trying to keep going.

Socialist’s in power in Spain, yay! I encourage everyone that can to protest this Saturday on the one year anniversary of the protest last year. It's more important now then ever because people will see this AFTER the bombing not only as a protest against war, but a protest against FEAR, that even with terrorism and bombings we will not be afraid anymore and that it's time for a change!

I'm not a big fan of socialists being in power anywhere.

Mike

don't all equate to communism as is implied every day on some air wave on a call-in show.

Some are accused of being a socialist even if the so-called socialist only believes what we were taught about - For the people, By the people, Of the people.

just like the ones in Germany and France.

First I meant the Socialist party as opposed to the Populist (aka Spain’s neo-cons). Second, I’m a Democrat too BUT I do know what socialist are and not the propagandized version spoon feed to me in school and America’s form fitted "one size fits all" society. Anyways I don’t want to start a socialist debate just know this party in Spain is on OUR side in this fight to reclaim a world that was heading towards a rational and progressive future until 2000.

the Cold War era. Since the USSR was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, we associate the term with Stalin. The Socialist International, of which the Spanish Socialists are a member, was in fact created to thwart the appeal of communism in western Europe. Of course FAUX would have you believe that there's no middle ground and that you're either a Bushite or a "Communazi-Islamofascist."

..I can categorically state that I do not associate the USSR with Stalin. In fact, I don't specifically remember him, since he died when I was all of four. Used to laugh my ass off at the "Better Red Than Dead" propoganda they showed us at school.

I also have spent time with Communist friends in Germany.

I don't either. I associate it with the brave soldiers who fought and died to destroy Hitler long before America decided to invade Normandy. I'm just saying that the propaganda has caused "socialist" to become a bad word in American politics.

and his coalition of the billing b.s. as a way to make it look like the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with Al Qaeda.

This is important because Spain, as a nation, has spoken and said that the majority of its citizens do not want to ally with Bush (and Bush, btw, is NOT the United States), but instead chooses to unite with European nations who will not be Bush's toadies.

Blair is in a heap of trouble already within his own party, and I bet they would like to replace him to keep the Tories from gaining any opposition strength.

This election has implications for Blair, too, even though the UK doesn't always see eye to eye with the continent.

This election also comes after Perle and Frum's book which calls France out as an enemy of the U.S. because they won't say how far when Bush says bend over.

This election is also important because, a year ago this month, TEN MILLION people around the world came out in opposition to the illegal invasion of Iraq.

Bush called us a "focus group." or some such bullshit.

Well, see what one focus group can do to a Bush puppet?

the U$ has and still is.

BTW, welcome to DU!

were opposed to going to war in Iraq and the Government went anyway totally against the wishes of the vast majority of the people. I believe America is the same way. When we were in the build up to war stage here our representatives kept saying they were getting thousands of letters a day saying no war but they voted for war anyway. Their day is coming.

for the USA to follow.

Now that we're there, we should be doing everything, including bringing in any and all allies we can get, to restore order

If the cabal didn't require all of the riches and the control and if they would turn it over to the world, the world could probably solve it and there may not be as much to solve. If our cabal continues to imperialize and monopolize and exploit, it will go on forever with our youth and their families doing the primary suffering...all the while our country keeps on crumbling financially and morally.

9-11 could have been avoided in more ways than intelligence gathering - it could have been avoided with intelligence and sincerity.

People all over the earth want peace.

If given an authentic opportunity and with the ability to listen and hear, things could change...they'll change when we acknowledge that we are no longer rich, no longer wish to impose our will, or if there is nuclear destruction resulting from our agenda.

you said If given an authentic opportunity and with the ability to listen and hear, things could change

that cannot be the case unless dictators are removed, sometimes this necessitates force

promolgated a coup d'etat!
Bu$hco is the representative of laissez-faire neo-liberal capitalist corporate dictatorship that has killed a hell of a lot of people the world over. Can we have a bloody revolution in the U$?

IF, IF, IF Spanish troops pull out of Iraq, it will be a MAJOR BLOW to Bush/Blair blowhards

..didn't support this war and the leaders who cowed to the US got booted for it. Not a big surprise.

the article suggests a "stunning political upset" in other words, despite the war, the vote was gonna go the other way... now but for the bombings, how much did they influence the votes? and if they did, do the terrorists now control democracy?

This result was coming regardless. The bombing of the train probably made the situation worse for Anzar by pushing more people into the arms of the Socialists on the logic of that Anzar has made Spain a target and less safe, but I think that he would have lost if there wasn't a bombing. In fact, I wish it went that way. Then we would have seen that hit the front pages TODAY and shell-shock BushCo.

I bookmark your site and will be a listening fan. I love it!!

Thank you for your hard work.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

False dilemma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The logical fallacy of false dilemma, also known as false dichotomy, either/or dilemma or bifurcation, is to set up two alternative points of view as if they were the only options, when they are not.

Examples:


Either creationism must be true or Darwin's theory of evolution must be true. Therefore, if it is shown that Darwin's theory is false, then creationism must be true.
This argument is fallacious because its premise fails to recognize that there are many other possibilities than just Darwin's views and creationism.

False dilemmas are also common in politics. They are often hidden in (rhetorical) questions, and then become akin to the fallacy of many questions, as in:

Will you re-elect Lyndon Johnson, or face nuclear holocaust?

You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists.
"Seeing something in black and white" is also an example of a false dilemma.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

get lost you fascist punk loser.

the only winners here are the citizens of spain, especially those that will get to keep their arms, legs, and eyes because they took a crap on your cohort.

you've worked for your $5.80 an hour, but you ain't earned it. you've swayed no one, and you don't even have any co-workers to join and support you. at least tell your employer you need a couple more e-mail addy's so you can join multiple times and respond to yourself. you know, kinda like masturbation...at least fantasize about someone else...geez.

Still no sale....keep trying, though.

the attack.

the fear was that the attack would give more votes to the PP (the Franco-associated conservatives...Franco, fwiw, was a fascist, if you recall the Spanish Civil War, which our nation did not enter to aid Spain, though some of our citizens did go fight there...remember Hemmingway?)

So, no, this election is not a win for the terrorists.

If the PP had won, suddenly gaining support because of fear in Spain after the attacks, would you then spin it as...see...the terrorist attack showed we need fascist leaders during this time?

The majority of the Spanish population had already let their leaders know, before the invasion, that they did not support an alliance with Bush to go to war.

This vote just seemed to show that the Spanish people weren't willing to let a momentary fear dissuade them from democracy.

You just don't get it, do you? Aznar is out because he FAILED TO PROTECT HIS PEOPLE. The war on Iraq has shifted valuable resources AWAY from fighting terror. Again; if A =B, and B sometimes =C, then A DOES NOT always =C. Think.

It is time to figure out how the countries foolish enough to be drawn into this by BFEE (including of course the U.S.) can quickly disengage from Iraq, with the least amount of further damage. There must be no more dreams of empire - a quick orderly withdrawal, with whatever political assistance the U.N. can provide to help Iraq with a new government, is in order. Then, unfortunately, we have to hope for the best and let the Iraqis work out their own future.

Leave the US alone holding the ball. The US needs to fail in Iraq to prevent it from happening ever again.

Take THAT, Bush - you evil fuck!

Would be nice to see that happen in THIS country and perhaps Britain as well.

He said he´d pull out by June 30th UNLESS there was a UN mandate to stay. Big difference.

- 30th of June for logistic necessity
- Unlikely UN mandate for legality

I am sure there will be a lot of deal-making until then. The socialists have to form a coalition government, and it could get interesting. That's not to undermine the excellence of the election results, but maybe we should not be celebrating just yet...

V

:)

Ignore the people and they'll throw you out at the next election.