Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34476)	3/15/2004 12:28:57 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793656

Outside assistance, I would suspect. AQ or derivative, probably. Or have enough of the Spanish voters been reading the NYT and because of that reading, believing that the Bush Administration is wrong, lies, and all the other false statements...? What is the population of radical Muslims in Spain? Do they all have internet and cell phones?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34476)	3/15/2004 4:56:59 AM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793656

Perhaps nothing changed. The AQ managed to get one of their plots to fruition in a Western country. They were stymied in the West several times since 9/11. The general idea is to attack anyone anywhere who is vulnerable and not part of them. Outside of a few places AQ types are thin on the ground and most local franchises don't have a lot of talent. They do what they can. Hence the number of stupid attacks. In the Spanish case there was some talent and luck. AQ exported a lot of talent to Europe pre 9/11. Spain was a logical target because its security services have been doing a pretty good job of rolling up some AQ cells and of course the government supported the US in its ME venture. These people this time managed to maintain their security. I expect they'll try the same thing on the Brits for their election. And on the US for its election. If I were the US security mavens I'd be very concerned because the election date is fixed. With the Brits it's much trickier for the terrorists because elections there can be called at any time and the campaign is short. Also the Brits are very sensitized to parcels so it wouldn't surprise me if the attack there, if it comes, might be of a different nature - think Guy Fawkes - and much bigger, if the terrorists can manage it, because of the greater British government support of the US. What's not yet clear about the Spain attack is whether it was actually a suicide attack. It's also not clear whether the Spain attack was carried out with Basque separatist support or N African terrorist support. I think part of the luck for the terrorists was the reaction of the Spanish government which tried to spin things to its electoral advantage before it had information and got caught out. Bad move with an event of this importance. It may have cost them the election. why does one politically smart and (unfortunately) successful attack follow two years of politically witless attacks? What changed?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34476)	3/15/2004 5:22:12 AM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793656

Anything's possible. But the real question remains - why does one politically smart and (unfortunately) successful attack follow two years of politically witless attacks? I cannot answer your question as I disagree with the premise. With decentralization of command, aq's leaders have been enabled to plan and execute operations they deem feasible in their individual areas of operation. Viewed from this perspective, I believe the attacks all make sense...though I agree they do not always appear to be linked in a rational way, the attacks you listed were certainly effective. From my pov all terrorist attacks are politically incorrect.I don't know what a politically correct terrorist attack looks like.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34476)	3/15/2004 7:40:38 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793656

What changed? Good help is getting harder to find?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34476)	3/15/2004 9:42:12 AM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 793656

why does one politically smart and (unfortunately) successful attack follow two years of politically witless attacks? I think the assumption that it was a smart attack is questionable. If Aznar's government had not responded by initially blaming ETA, there is little doubt in my mind that his party would have won. The fact is that by blaming ETA, Aznar alienated enough voters to make a difference. AQ got lucky, is all. If Aznar had used the attack to buttress his party's position on Iraq and terrorism, arguing that the fact that lots of citizens who presumably were opposed to his policies were killed in the blasts, he may have very well convinced a number of them to vote for his party. By blaming ETA without a bit of evidence, he undoubtedly pissed not an inconsiderable number of Basque voters and others who might have been wavering or undecided. I wouldn't say that AQ acted brilliantly--its pattern is to act witlessly. Handled differently, it had the potential to be another witless act. It was Aznar who was stupid. AQ could not have possibly predicted Aznar's assinine reaction.