Spain as a nation is nearly a developing country...

They lived high on gold stolen from the native americans, but that basically meant that they neglected the industrial development that France, Germany and GB went through.

Once the poverty hit, they had revolutions and wasted years and years on internal fighting and corruption.

Spain doesn't realisticly have the stamina to wage any kind of prolonged war. Pulling out when the terrorists hit them was just a good (bad) excuse for the sitting government. They feared to fail reelection if they stayed.

But public hysteria when you take a soldier onto the camera and threaten to kill them is just ridiculous. Each soldier sent to a warzone is by definition expendable, hopefully not, but when the chips are down his job is to fight the enemy and possibly die.

Noone stops a war if a soldier is killed in action. But slap a camera on it and broadcast is across the world and civilians go nuts.

I'm not certain that its healthy for democracy to develop into pasifistic ideology where any action outside already democratic areas are a non option.

Of which? The Geneva convention should be obvious (Gitmo, and various speaches to the effect of "we don't have to"). The Patriot Act is an example... just read the thing... it gives powers to the FBI that are rather frightening (along with other organizations).

JaronK

Yeah, Spain threw all the principles it supposedly invades countries and kills tens of thousands for completely out of the window ("freedom", "liberties", and all that). Spain now routinely arrests innocents off the streets because it cannot sort out middle eastern names and tortures them for a year before dumping them somewhere in the Balkans and telling them they'll come back to them, should they ever talk to the press. Spain has a policy of shoot first and ask no questions in Iraq. RIGHT.

What values does the US today stand for? Freedom, liberty, pursuit of happyness? Hardly. Gitmo, gunning down civilians in Iraq, greed and the lies used to justify the invasion in the first place is more like it. Sad but true. Terrorists 1, America 0.

You see, this is as much a moral as a military/policing struggle. You have to win over people. And by behaving like the US does right now, that is sure to fail.

Ahm ... the inquisition was a good thing now? Jeez, what kind of country has America turned into ...

That's a pretty serious allegation. I'd like to see proof, and I don't mean a conspiracy theory website.

Oh, we do ask questions. But I'm more concerned for my soldiers' safety than I am for that of terrorists. If someone is approaching a checkpoint and fails to stop, shoot 'em. Sad if they were innocent, but clearly Darwinian. If they had a bomb or something, that's another American who lives another day.

Sure. Is the guardian good enough? Or maybe the BBC? (More BBC)

DARWINIAN? Who the fuck do you people think you are?

Oh sure, I can see their problem. But gunning down anything that moves too fast won't help either, will it?

And Critas, sure, it's the America haters. Nevermind that you guys started derailing this thread by bitching about how Europe didn't have enough resolve. Fuck you.

That's a joke, isn't it?

Yeah, yeah. "You guys" derailed the thread. Lump 'em all together, and lash out at all Americans because some Americans said something you didn't like on an internet forum. That makes about as much sense as blowing up all Westerners because some Westerners meddled in your politics, doesn't it? Damn, it's easy to lump people together and hate them for the actions of the few, isn't it? Golly, I wonder how the world got into the state it's in.

You're bashing all Americans. Me? I'm talking about you specifically being a hate-filled fuckstick. I'm not pointing fingers at any massive group of people I've decided to hate. I'm pointing a finger at one person -- I'm holding a specific individual responsible for his actions. Demanding accountability isn't the same as prejudice.

This thread didn't last two pages before you, the individual to whom I'm speaking, got the ball rolling with a condescending, patronizing, post that started with "Dear Americans," and proceeded to explain to us how Poppa Hermit thinks every individual in the world (but, more specifically, the wayward Americans) has to deal with this sort of thing. You started the generalizations, you started the sarcasm and lumping together of forum-goers, you started the lump of shit rolling downhill with your nationalistic condescension. You, as an individual, are now disliked be me, as an individual.

See that? Pure, clean, hatred on a personal level. I'm not hating all Europeans because of you, or all people who end their user name in "it" or anyone who doesn't use capital letters in their user name, or anything but you, and it's directed at you very specifically for things I can very very easily blame on you. You, on the other hand, have spent the last two pages insulting an entire nation of people (or, at the very very least, those of us from that nation that also happen to read Dumpshock), and you're hating on that group of people for things not every individual in that group of people is responsible for. You're lumping people together, blaming the many for the supposed sins of the few, and calling it a day.

That's the difference between us. That's also the difference between two guys getting a brawl, and one religion or nationality declaring a no-quarter war on another. My flavor of hatred ends, at most, with a murder. Your brand can end in race wars.

So fuck off. Or at least realize what a hypocritical fuckstick you're being, by even daring to post on a thread that's supposed to be mourning London's dead.

I disagree. And I am not an American. You cannot apply democratic ideals to combat the lowest common denominator of human behavior and expect to win. If fear is what the enemy wish to create, then let us see how they like being paid with their own coin.

From I live, the American government did not turn its back on democratic values. They finally realised that democratic values have inadequate protection. War is nothing more than sanctioned murder. In war, there are no rules. If you wish to play by the rules, you might win only if your enemy agrees to play by the same rules. In the war on terror, you think the terrorists are going to play by your civilised rules? Are you that naive?

I am not justifying murder. I am saying it is not only necessary but will be crucial if democracy is to survive. Democracy is the sheep. Terror is the wolf and Gitmo (as an example) is the sheepdog. Just because the sheepdog and the wolf are related, is the shepard going to put the sheep out to graze without the sheepdog? History tells me that people respond to fear. "Let them hate as long as they fear."

I wouldn't think of doing that. I'd say that paying terrorists back with terror is done in the name of anyone who wants democracy to survive and anyone who expects democracy without those measures are guilty of hypocrisy. Or at the very least, trying to have their cake and eat it.

When a sheep prevents the sheepdog from attacking the wolf, it deserves to be bitten.

Sure, if that's the way you want to spin it. I have no objection to well-reasoned military action at this time, since we've already fucked up enough to have created situations beyond the point of reasonable restoration through peaceful means (and I'm not talking about anything that happened in the last decade, either), but it's human nature to say "well, he's doing these horrible things so it's ok for me to as well". I'll point out that this applies not just to US policies, but also to anyone who may oppose them but who is at this point not being violent about it.

If these measures are indeed necessary, then I'm prepared to write democracy off.

How about when the sheepdog just starts tearing the sheep apart every time the wolf gives it a minute's pause?

~J

You shoot that dog and get a new one. But do not expect me to shoot the dog that bites the sheep that doesn't know to run when the wolf is around. I'd probably shoot that sheep and eat it myself.