So much for European sophistication.

And second: Pato, you disgusting chimpmunk ‘hoo, you give a bad name to carbon based lifeforms. We voted for what we wanted and not for what you liked, get over it.

We all knew we were not safe after the WTC attack. We still know we will not be safe with or without troops in Iraq. But do not talk me of how much safer the world has become in this last twelvemonth, OK? Not right now, please.

Many people in Europe feel that the US have created many terrorists in the past who later have gone out of control (for example, Bin Laden). They also think US current way of fighting terrorism is not effective, because although it kills terrorists, it creates many more (good for vengueance, bad for solving a problem).

And no, practically nobody were thinking in Iraq when we went to vote in such high numbers. We were thinking that we had to show the terrorists we are not afraid of them so we would vote.

But of course, many were thinking also that the government had lied and, in spite of their success in economic issues and against the internal terrorists, they deserved to be punished.

Would you want a liar to be your president?

We neither.

Here and in one or two other sites one can find some glimmerings of understanding of what actually occurred during the election. But by and large the American view seems to be that only our elections are worthy of respect(!) and that elections in other democratic countries are only respectable insofar as they support American policy.

Gee, I wish we were as sensitive to our leaders’ lies as Spain has shown itself to be with respect to Aznar’s last-minute evasions.

Matthew Parris, a [London] Times columnist and previously a Conservative MP, is always worth reading:

“The appeasement I mean is not the cheap accusation with which our Prime Minister insults the Spanish electorate. I mean the appeasement of Washington. It is not too late for the British Tories, nor for the Right more widely across the Western world, to start distancing themselves from a doctrine that in Spain has just cost the most successful conservative party in Europe a general election.” - from: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-1044541,00.html

Actually, that was Randy McDonald objecting to the fool, although I second the opinion. While I think the Spanish electorate made a serious mistake the other day, emotions were running high. Two days after 9/11, I’m pretty sure I would have voted for nuking Mecca and setting up concentration camps as an initial counter-move, so I can’t very well heap the sort of nastiness expressed above on the Spanish for having made what I see as a hasty error.

In any case, as I’ve noted elsewhere, most of the overwrought nonsense spouted by politicians in public is merely posturing for the masses. I doubt that this will have much negative impact on the actual level of cooperation, certainly not nearly as much as the fact of the bombing itself will tend to increase it.

Bernard Guerrero

Agreed Bernard. But what was the old saying: “sticks and stones and Goma 2 may break my bones, but words will never hurt me”.

Or: “better criticised than ignored”.

Also I think its useful to get these arguments up on the table. It may serve as a kind of therapy, and it helps to see where we all are.

I mean venting their anger on Europeans (isn’t there something Oedipul here?) may be one way for many Americans to handle their grief. I think over here we have broad enough shoulders to take this in our stride.

Good point, so lets wait and see what they are.

I think if you read my posts you will see I have *never* been saying this.

In fact I hung out till the end with the possibility of Eta involvement (I haven’t even discounted it in some form completely yet, we still don’t know where they got the Goma 2 from).

My point has always been that it was all the earlier lying which mislead people into thinking they were lying now.

Unfortunately lying, or ‘lying’, as we know is rather too frequent in our democracies, and this is one of the weaknesses which does make us vulnerable to terrorism. We need politicians of a different calibre.

In fact ‘lying’ in politics isn’t new in Spain either: go back to the affair of the GAL which was what gave the PP their first victory. This time it was the PSOE who were perceived as having lied.

Now you could argue that Zapatero has already started ‘lying’: he has said he intends to take the troops out.

If I understand this, it is saying that it was the Spanish who were responsible for 09/11. Interesting perspective. Is there a doctor to hand?