Spain to pull all troops out of Iraq

[Guest MikeSC]

So a nation that chooses to change it's government to one that isn't in lockstep with the Bush administration is suddenly a terrorist sympathizer? Spain is withdrawing it's troops from Iraq, I've read or heard nothing about it withdrawing it's support on the war on terror.

When you allow a terrorist group to completely change your gov't (if it WAS ETA who did it, the PP would be in power still), then yes, you're a toadie appeaser.

This is a good point, the Spanish have used there Democratic right to change their their government, a right this war on terror is being fought to protect, and because the result dosen't go the way you want you piss and moan and belittle them. It was their choice, and no matter what influenced that decsion, it has been made, you just have to accept it.

The column I posted is dead-on with this. They are hoping that if they lie low, they will be attacked last. They showed terrorists that if they attack, they can cause countries to lose heart and quit the struggle --- which is what they want in the first place.

 

The UK will be targeted next, most likely.

-=Mike

[Highland 0]

The column also implies that if Bush is not re-elected then it's a victory for the terrorists.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Hey... ummm, I thought Al-Qaeda had no connection whatsoever with Iraq.....

[Zorin Industries 0]

Hey... ummm, I thought Al-Qaeda had no connection whatsoever with Iraq.....

Their Muslims under U.S. occupation, its a strong cause for al-Qaeda, offically affiliated or not

[NoCalMike 0]

What does pulling out of Iraq have to do with being against the war on terrorism? The war on Iraq is a completely different war. That said, Spain is still dumb for letting terrorist action dictate how they are going to act.

[Guest Cerebus]

What does pulling out of Iraq have to do with being against the war on terrorism?  The war on Iraq is a completely different war.

I've noticed you say that every time Iraq is mentioned with the war on terror. I don't know what you mean, you just throw it out with no explination.

[Ripper 0]

What does pulling out of Iraq have to do with being against the war on terrorism?  The war on Iraq is a completely different war.

I've noticed you say that every time Iraq is mentioned with the war on terror. I don't know what you mean, you just throw it out with no explination.

because it is the genius tactic used by polititions to meld the two together. Now the Bush administration have never said that Iraq and Saddam had anything to do with 9-11(as a matter of fact, they have said pretty bluntly that they didn't) yet everytime the Iraq war was brought up (or leading to it) 9-11 was shouted all through the speech so to draw a parallel between the two. Kinda subliminal messages. And if they are called on it, they can say "Now we never said that Iraq had something to do with the terroist attacks." You really have to appreciate that kind of slyness.

[Ripper 0]

And I know if people started attacking the American mainland I would find confort if the Military stayed IN FUCKING IRAQ.

 

I mean, if terrorist are attacking Spain, wouldn't be a great idea to, you know...HAVE YOUR MILITARY IN SPAIN? Last I checked, our president said that the war in Iraq was over. WHY should they stay? They have problems in their own country to handle.

 

And seriously, anyone calling spain cowards after they lost lives in Iraq is a fucking idiot. "Oh they are pussies for fighting with us for only most of the war and during the rebuilding and not staying until we said that we should be done." The fuck ever.

[Guest Cerebus]

That's bull. Just because a country was or was not involved in 9/11 (and, admittedly, if Iraq assisted, it may have been in a very loose fasion) does not mean its free from the "war on terror." Indonesia has a lot of radical islamic groups with very close ties to Al Queda for example. You're telling me, that fighting the JI in Indonesia, just to use an example, has nothing to do with the "war on terror" just because they probably didn't have anything to do with 9/11?

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

The PP totally fucked up.

 

They claimed and claimed it was the ETA, even after the arrests of Morroccan suspects.

 

I've heard that there was a momentum shift in the perception of blaming the ETA, even after those arrests. Basically, it politicized the dealings.

 

Sorta like if there's a bomb that goes off in London, and the ruling party blames the IRA, but it was AQ.

 

As for the fact that 90% of people didn't support the war. It wasn't quite enough to push the PP out of power, until the time they screwed up in reaction to the attacks.

 

And, there was a surge of younger voters as well.

 

One thing I noticed on a wire report that some of you haven't noticed, apparently.

 

SPANISH troops will be pulled out of Iraq if there is no change there by June 30.

 

That is the date is the US has promised to transfer sovereignty to a provisional government, Spain's Prime Minister-elect Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said today.

 

(..)

 

He added that Spain's 1300 troops sent to Iraq would "evidentally" be pulled out if there is no change there by June 30

 

So.. what are you guys getting up in arms about?

 

Spain threatening to eventually pull out if the US can't keep a promise?

 

OMG BASTARDS

 

Damn their hides for considering eventually pulling out in 3 months!

[Guest Cerebus]

I agree with Rob. It was a close election to begin with and the final vote swun by only 9% not a huge rush, but in an election as close as this it can make a difference (just ask Gore). It is probable that many of the people who changed their minds did so on suspicion that the PP was manipulating things (i.e. claiming ETA involvement without proper proof) and there was a memo supposedly written by a PP officer telling PP members to constantly reiterate that this was probably an ETA bombing and not an Al-Queda one.

[NoCalMike 0]

What does pulling out of Iraq have to do with being against the war on terrorism?  The war on Iraq is a completely different war.

I've noticed you say that every time Iraq is mentioned with the war on terror. I don't know what you mean, you just throw it out with no explination.

Me for me personally, I just don't buy into the fact that the War on Iraq has anything to do with "The War on Terrorism" The war on iraq is something that Bush had been working towards doing and making happen since he sat down for the first time in the oval office, as where the "war on terrorism" was a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11. I can agree with the "war on terrorism" in theory, yet at the same time be against the war in Iraq, because IMO, they just simply aren't the same beast, and like Ripper said, it has kind of slyly been manipulated to the american people that they are one in the same which is false.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

The War on Terror and the War in Iraq are not quite joined together.

 

The War on Terror is noble in it's intent, but lacking on how it can be won.

 

How do you win a war over an action?

 

There's no real end-plan in regards to the WoT.

 

Although, I do think that Bin Laden is an asshole who is using AQ to further his own interests, and using various issues to get support.

 

There are signs to knowing when the war in Iraq has ceased. That moment may have already passed. It might come when the new government is in power. Or when the attacks are squelched.

 

When it comes to the reasons for the War. It was either a massive lie, or a huge failure in regards of intelligence gathering, either due to bias or whatever else.

 

There's some justification if the top reason was 'the liberation of Iraqis'. Although, the question is "If Iraqis deserve liberation, shouldn't we go on to liberate the Burmese, the Iranians, the Chinese". That wouldn't work.

 

Attacking them so they wouldn't become a threat is a shoddy reason to do something. If I beat someone up first since they might think of doing the same to me, I'd need some good solid proof that he was doing that. I haven't checked, but have we dug up anything suggesting Iraq was thinking of attacking our troops or our people?

 

Yeah, the Hussein regime was horrible. It's just even the best reasons for ridding the world of it will involve our own interests. Unless we're gonna go into Myanmar.

[Guest Cerebus]

What does pulling out of Iraq have to do with being against the war on terrorism?  The war on Iraq is a completely different war.

I've noticed you say that every time Iraq is mentioned with the war on terror. I don't know what you mean, you just throw it out with no explination.

Me for me personally, I just don't buy into the fact that the War on Iraq has anything to do with "The War on Terrorism" The war on iraq is something that Bush had been working towards doing and making happen since he sat down for the first time in the oval office, as where the "war on terrorism" was a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11. I can agree with the "war on terrorism" in theory, yet at the same time be against the war in Iraq, because IMO, they just simply aren't the same beast, and like Ripper said, it has kind of slyly been manipulated to the american people that they are one in the same which is false.

Hmm...I disagree but its off topic anyway. You got my contact info below, if you want to talk about it further don't be shy.

[NoCalMike 0]

What does pulling out of Iraq have to do with being against the war on terrorism?  The war on Iraq is a completely different war.

I've noticed you say that every time Iraq is mentioned with the war on terror. I don't know what you mean, you just throw it out with no explination.

Me for me personally, I just don't buy into the fact that the War on Iraq has anything to do with "The War on Terrorism" The war on iraq is something that Bush had been working towards doing and making happen since he sat down for the first time in the oval office, as where the "war on terrorism" was a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11. I can agree with the "war on terrorism" in theory, yet at the same time be against the war in Iraq, because IMO, they just simply aren't the same beast, and like Ripper said, it has kind of slyly been manipulated to the american people that they are one in the same which is false.

Hmm...I disagree but its off topic anyway. You got my contact info below, if you want to talk about it further don't be shy.

*crawls under his bed* shoo shoo......go away, I am too shy....

[Skywarp! 0]

Do you think that the Spaniard's reactions are ones of fear, or that of anger towards the elected officials that got them into the mess they're into, which would validate the recent election?

[Guest cobainwasmurdered]

EUROPE IS FULL OF INFIDELS in their eyes. They'd kill them if they get the chance.

 

And since Spain is pulling out entirely, I say we don't prevent them from getting the chance.

 

Way to win that war on terror.

If you won't fight for yourself, why the hell should ANYBODY risk their lives doing it for you?

-=Mike

so you're in the army then Mike?

 

What? You're not?

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

EUROPE IS FULL OF INFIDELS in their eyes. They'd kill them if they get the chance.

 

And since Spain is pulling out entirely, I say we don't prevent them from getting the chance.

 

Way to win that war on terror.

If you won't fight for yourself, why the hell should ANYBODY risk their lives doing it for you?

-=Mike

so you're in the army then Mike?

 

What? You're not?

Mike only wants to abandon Spain and risk losing the gateway to the mediterrainean.

 

He's reasonable.

 

[Highland 0]

I believe I posted earlier that the ETA was responible. I stand corrected on that detail.

[Guest hunger4unger]

Do you think that the Spaniard's reactions are ones of fear, or that of anger towards the elected officials that got them into the mess they're into, which would validate the recent election?

It not a case of fear. It's a case of the Spanish people not wanting anything to do with an illegal and unjust invasion of Iraq. The majority of Spaniards didn't want their troops tp go into Iraq without UN backing but the previous government did it anyway - now the Spanish people have elected a government that are going to do things the right way. Alied troops should never have gone to Iraq without clear independent proof of WMD in the first place. The Iraqi invasion has caused more problems in the middle east (except for the US oil companies) than it has been worth.

 

For anyone to say that the Spanish are "pussys" for wanting out is seriously out of touch. The French aren't even "pussys" for not agreeing to join in. It may not happen in America, but in other democracies, politicians and leaders sometimes actually do what the people they serve ask them to do. Good on the Spanish.

 

America should stick to busting Al Quada training camps and arresting Al Queda members and stay out of Iraq, Iran, Syria (don't think they aren't going to be next). Terrorism is now a huge problem and it doesn't need fueling any further.

 

Again, kudos to Spain.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

its fairly standard practice in democracies for voters to vote for the other party en masse when they are upset over something the current incumbant party does.

if a week before the 04 election, Bush did something the american people just hated or they thought was stupid (or just the perception of it), the majority of moderates would probably vote for kerry en masse.

 

If people had thought that Bush had handled 9/11's aftermath horribly (he handled it well imo), and the election was a week later, you can bet Bush would have been gone too.

 

Its standard practice in political systems ruled by two parties (though looking at the numbers, it doesnt seem QUITE two party as the US, with other parties getting a few single digit percentages, but the two parties were definetly the big ones).

 

I think it was a dumb move, but they're a democracy. Let them do what they want and if it bites them in the ass, 'tis their own fault.

[EricMM 0]

h4u where do you think we'll find the terrorist training camps and cells? America?

[Guest Brian]

Didn't we find one in Oregon? Or was it Idaho?

[Guest MikeSC]

EUROPE IS FULL OF INFIDELS in their eyes. They'd kill them if they get the chance.

 

And since Spain is pulling out entirely, I say we don't prevent them from getting the chance.

 

Way to win that war on terror.

If you won't fight for yourself, why the hell should ANYBODY risk their lives doing it for you?

-=Mike

so you're in the army then Mike?

 

What? You're not?

Ah, irrelevancy rears its ugly head. Groovy.

Mike only wants to abandon Spain and risk losing the gateway to the mediterrainean.

 

He's reasonable.

No. The Spanish voters are voting out of cowardice and their gov't has no intention, whatsoever, of doing anything about this. They will become another Saudi Arabia, basically doing whatever terrorists say in order to appease them further.

 

Terrorists have learned that in Western Europe, you can change governments to ones you like with a little violence. God knows Spain's actions couldn't POSSIBLY encourage the terrorists to fight a bit more.

-=Mike

[tommytomlin 0]

Maybe Spain just didn't think it was worth risking another 130 lives for a war that was never in their national interest to begin with?

 

Deposing Saddam was great, I think it should have been done years ago, but how did it make Spain safer? Wouldn't Spain have been better off focusing their resources on their own counter-terrorist measures than engaging in a war which 90% of their public opposed?

 

How come the United States claims to fights for democracy worldwide, but when Spain exercises its democracy, they get branded cowards and traitors?

[Guest MikeSC]

Maybe Spain just didn't think it was worth risking another 130 lives for a war that was never in their national interest to begin with?

 

Deposing Saddam was great, I think it should have been done years ago, but how did it make Spain safer? Wouldn't Spain have been better off focusing their resources on their own counter-terrorist measures than engaging in a war which 90% of their public opposed?

 

How come the United States claims to fights for democracy worldwide, but when Spain exercises its democracy, they get branded cowards and traitors?

Because they ARE cowards. They have every right to be.

 

They've had 50 years of the U.S protecting them and, like the rest of W. Europe (outside of U.K), they are incapable of handling bad situations thrown at them. They wish to believe that diplomacy will always work because they've always had US to bail them out when it does not. They want to believe that the terrorists CARE that they don't support us.

 

News flash: THEY DO NOT CARE. YOU ARE INFIDELS, TOO. IF THEY CAN KILL YOU, THEY WILL DO SO HAPPILY.

 

As somebody said, when we were attacked, we deposed 2 evil governments.

When Spain was attacked, they deposed their own.

 

Yup, THAT is great thinking there.

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

their gov't has no intention, whatsoever, of doing anything about this.

 

Cite please??

 

Please.. bring up SOMETHING mentioning the new government abandoning efforts to punish the people responsible.

 

Come on..

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Why do they even need to have Spanish troops in Iraq? Wasn't the "end of major combat" declared by a certain person several months ago?

[Guest MikeSC]

their gov't has no intention, whatsoever, of doing anything about this.

 

Cite please??

 

Please.. bring up SOMETHING mentioning the new government abandoning efforts to punish the people responsible.

 

Come on..

They're pulling out of Iraq, period, in June. The entire effort there was a "disaster". Iraqi dissidents have been recruiting Al Qaeda for a while now.

 

Again, when we were bombed, we toppled 2 evil regimes.

When they were bombed, they toppled themselves.

 

Spain: A Real Profile in Craven Cowardice

Why do they even need to have Spanish troops in Iraq? Wasn't the "end of major combat" declared by a certain person several months ago?

And God knows NO war ever had fighting after it officially ended.

 

Care to ask how long some Japanese soldiers fought AFTER World War II ended?

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

They're pulling out of Iraq, period, in June.

 

So, you acknowledge that America's promised transition on June 30th won't happen?

 

Since that's the condition for the "eventual pull out" of Spanish troops and all.

 

The entire effort there was a "disaster". Iraqi dissidents have been recruiting Al Qaeda for a while now.

 

Cite please..

 

Again, when we were bombed, we toppled 2 evil regimes.

When they were bombed, they toppled themselves.

 

When we were "bombed", we lost 3,000 people. We also had a target to go after. We toppled the Taliban because they wouldn't hand over Osama bin Laden.

 

When they were bombed, they lost 200 people. And what do you expect them to do? topple the King of Morrocco? First, there's no way they could react on the level of the US. Second, their government botched the reaction to the attacks.

 

Care to ask how long some Japanese soldiers fought AFTER World War II ended?

 

I'd say that's a biiiit different Mike. Alot of the soldiers who kept fighting were the ones who either didn't know the war was over, or refused to believe it. And it was over a larger area. Like with the single soldier on some island.

 

Care to cite any big attacks on the US by Japanese holdouts after the Japanese surrender?

 

Oh yeah Mike.. you'll need to add Honduras onto the list of "EVIL NATIONS"

 

source

 

Like Spain, Honduras to pull troops from Iraq

 

BY FREDDY CUEVAS

ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Honduras plans to follow the lead of Spain and withdraw its 370 troops from Iraq by the end of June, Defence Secretary Federico Breve said today.

 

The decision marked an about-face from a day earlier when President Ricardo Maduro said Honduran forces would stay.

 

Today's announcement "coincides with the decision of the prime minister-elect of the Spanish government," Breve said.

 

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, the Socialist candidate who won Spain's elections Sunday, described the Iraq invasion as an error and said he would recall Spanish troops from Iraq by June 30 unless the United Nations assumes control of multinational military operations there.

 

As suspicion mounted that Al Qaeda was behind Thursday's terror attacks in Madrid that killed 201 people and wounded 1,600, there was mounting criticism of outgoing Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar for being too closely allied to the United States and making Spain a terrorist target.

 

Honduras, El Salvador and Nicaragua all have sent soldiers to the Spanish-led Plus Ultra Brigade to do humanitarian and peacekeeping work.

 

Salvadoran Defence Secretary Juan Martinez said today that his country would keep its troops in Iraq no matter what.

 

"We have to follow through with what our government decided," Martinez said.

 

Honduras sent its first contingent of 370 soldiers to Iraq in August, and replaced it with a second group of the same size last month. The country had said from the beginning it would only commit its troops for a year.

 

El Salvador sent its first group of 360 soldiers to help the Ultra Plus Brigade last August. A replacement group of 380 soldiers arrived last month, and is scheduled to stay until this August.

 

Whether additional troops are sent after that may depend on the outcome of Sunday's presidential elections.

 

Current Salvadoran President Francisco Flores has stressed that the help it sent to Iraq is in thanks for the international community's backing of the 1992 peace accords that ended El Salvador's 12-year civil war.

 

Nicaragua sent about 115 soldiers, mostly sappers and medical personnel, last September to join the brigade. Those troops have since returned, and the government announced last month that it could not afford to send a second contingent.

 

All three countries announced Monday that they were tightening security at major ports, airports and several embassies that might be vulnerable to attack