Tilting at terrorists | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (2)
belb
recycle
...and 342 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614103
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
Tilting at terrorists
 

offline Nora on 2004-05-20 11:38 [#01198062]
Points: 214 Status: Addict



Debra J. Saunders
Tuesday, May 18, 2004



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


"I DON'T partake in the very stupid and elementary
anti-Americanism" that has infected some parts of Europe,
said the former Spanish prime minister, Jose Maria Aznar, as
he met with San Francisco journalists Friday. Superpowers
have been hated throughout history, he added. Porque?
Because they're superpowers.

There was a time when the Spanish were dominant, Aznar
noted, and they "weren't very popular." Ditto the French and
the Brits -- "and now it's your turn."

Aznar was in California to receive an award from Chapman
University in Southern California. He gave interviews around
the state, which resulted in a few short stories and this
column.

When a European leader doesn't bash the Bush administration,
it is not news. When he dismisses European values as "stupid
and elementary," it's not news. (If he had called Bush
stupid and elementary, that would be news.)

If a European leader is able to put America's situation in
historical context, if he can recognize that America's woes
are not entirely of President Bush's making, if he is
willing to risk the blood of his precious countrymen to
support an American-led war in Iraq, then he's not
front-page material.

On the other hand, it is news when Our Betters in Europe
criticize American policies. Hence stories on Aznar's visit
dutifully reported his remarks about the Abu Ghraib prison
abuses. (Aznar didn't bring up the subject -- he was asked.)
And stop the presses: Aznar denounced the mistreatment of
prisoners.

It would have been news if Aznar had trashed Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld -- except he didn't.

It would have been big news if Aznar said he regretted
supporting Bush on Iraq -- except he didn't.

It also was not big news when Spain, Denmark, the
Netherlands, Portugal, Italy and the United Kingdom joined
the international coalition fighting in Iraq. The anti-war
crowd


 

offline Nora on 2004-05-20 11:38 [#01198064]
Points: 214 Status: Addict



dismissed their presence as mere window dressing.

Never mind that more than 100 soldiers from allied countries
have lost their lives in Iraq. Critics scoffed at the very
word coalition. Until March 14. Then Spanish voters, spooked
by the lethal terrorist bombing in Madrid that killed 191
people on March 11, turned on Aznar's Popular Party,
rejected Aznar's designated successor for the prime
minister's post and elected Socialist Jose Luis Rodriguez
Zapatero, who had promised to withdraw Spanish troops from
Iraq.

It was news when Zapatero began to recall the Spanish forces
because it meant that the coalition (that critics previously
never recognized as a coalition) was falling apart.

Aznar is a practical man. "Pragmatic intelligent politicians
don't fight against realities," he said, "We just confront
with reality. We deal with reality."

The reality, alas, is not pretty and confronting it is not
easy. The left uses Zapatero's election as a stunning
example of how Bush has turned Europeans against America.
Aznar knows that Zapatero's election is a stunning example
of rewarding violence by giving terrorists exactly what they
wanted: a regime change that would result in Spanish troops
leaving Iraq. After killing 191 innocents and injuring some
2,000 others, they got it.

Now Aznar believes that the Islamic terrorists will try to
influence elections in other countries, including the United
States. "If they were able to do it in Spain, why wouldn't
they try to do it elsewhere?" he asked.

Why not indeed? It worked in Madrid.

And after the next attack, how will the world react? Will
the survivors blame the big country? Or will they blame the
men who deliberately planted the weapons that killed
children and civilians?

E-mail Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com.



 

offline X-tomatic from ze war room on 2004-05-20 11:39 [#01198066]
Points: 2901 Status: Lurker



LAZY_TITLE


 

offline hepburnenthorpe from sydney (Australia) on 2004-05-20 11:41 [#01198070]
Points: 1365 Status: Lurker | Followup to Nora: #01198064



who cares...go write for a paper or something. i come here
for idle chit chat not more war news. post this crap
somewhere else.


 

offline sneakattack on 2004-05-20 11:42 [#01198072]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to hepburnenthorpe: #01198070



I'm glad you got rid of that fucking einstein avatar. clap
clap


 

offline goDel from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2004-05-21 01:41 [#01199600]
Points: 10225 Status: Lurker | Followup to Nora: #01198062



thx for posting this. i think the good thing about this
article is that succeeds to describe things, which in the
current media seem destined to be blown up, in a more
realistic way. or perhaps it's the way it places the current
situation in a broader context, broader than the average
news-article.
you wrote this?


 

offline happy cycling from berlin on 2004-05-21 02:19 [#01199660]
Points: 2786 Status: Regular



wrong. wrong wrong wrong.


 


Messageboard index