Bomb attack in Madrid

LegacyUser

Originally posted by vorbis
1916 failed daithi, read up on your history. History has shown that only when the terrorists have significant as in majority support of the population, do they succeed. Otherwise they lack recruitment grounds and support. In I would say all of the above, significant support existed for the terrorist's aims. In cases like Eta, there is very little support. Its also the reason why the IRA will never succeed in the north.

1916 might have 'failed' but gave rise to the terrorist campaign of independence which led to the sate you now reside in

sovtek

Originally posted by vorbis
1916 failed daithi,

Is that why there is now a Republic?

History has shown that only when the terrorists have significant as in majority support of the population, do they succeed.

True

Otherwise they lack recruitment grounds and support.

I'd also agree with that.

In I would say all of the above, significant support existed for the terrorist's aims.

Yup
And there is possibly alot of support for Al-Quaeda's cause whilst not for their tactics. When their victim's government's act equally atrocious in response though...I'd hazard that might change.

vibe666

i doubt very much if ireland is on bin laden's shit list just yet, after all the IRA were bombing the uk when old beardy head was still wearing that headscarf round his arse so that has to count for something.

wouldn't be booking that tour of london just yet though, unless you're quick and you want to see it while it's still in one piece.

plastic paddy btw. mostly scottish, although i grew up in england (from 3 months) but my g/f's irish and i've been here 2 years now and sit firmly on this side of the uk/ireland fence politically.

also worth mentioning that england did exactly the same thign to scotland a long time before they did it to eire, we just didn't fight back quite so well. (no football analogies pls.:D)

shotamoose

Originally posted by Sand
Imperialism is bandied about to slur just about any country or group of countries out there. It doesnt really mean anything anymore because its so devalued through overuse.

Or just maybe it's a term applied to countries that built or build empires.

Nah, that's silly. Best put "imperialism" in quotation marks from now on, since there's obviously no such thing.

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse

What I could'nt believe yesterday is how so many prominant politicains were blaming ETA immediately. Personally I cant understand it b/c it serves no benefit to their cause.

Actually that didnt was with me at all, was I the only one? I doubt it.
The quick blame on ETA seemed plausible early on when the casualty figures were smaller and the enormity of what happened was not as clear.

Blaming ETA in my view could have been a strategy to deny Alqueda the oxygen of the publicity of having carried out such a devestating attack on a "friend" of America.
If it was it wouldn't have taken account of journalists capabilities and the fact that it was not going to be very plausible when the enormity of the event became clear.

Theres no way ETA would be so stupid or so clever and stupid imho to have planted those bombs.
They would have known downright well , of the capacity for death and injury that no warning bombs would cause in such an area crowded with commuters and the subsequent out cry amongst even their supporters..

Cork

Originally posted by Earthman

Theres no way ETA would be so stupid or so clever and stupid imho to have planted those bombs.
They would have known downright well , of the capacity for death and injury that no warning bombs would cause in such an area crowded with commuters and the subsequent out cry amongst even their supporters..

It is hard to know.

The Basque country is economically booming. They have their own assembly, police force, power to raise taxes & their language is used in the schools.

But they still have ETA.

Was it ETA? I don't know.

Information & training is shared amongst such organisations. I really dn't have the words to express my outrage at this carnage. Targeting people going to work and college.

Originally posted by Cork

Information & training is shared amongst such organisations. I really dn't have the words to express my outrage at this carnage. Targeting people going to work and college.

Information and training may be shared between the likes of the IRA and ETA, but I'd have a lot of doubts if there are eta fighters sharing quarters in the hills of afghanistan.

They have only death in common.

Cork

Originally posted by Earthman
Information and training may be shared between the likes of the IRA and ETA, but I'd have a lot of doubts if there are eta fighters sharing quarters in the hills of afghanistan.

They have only death in common.

Point taken.

AmenToThat

Originally posted by Earthman
Actually that didnt was with me at all, was I the only one? I doubt it.
The quick blame on ETA seemed plausible early on when the casualty figures were smaller and the enormity of what happened was not as clear.

Blaming ETA in my view could have been a strategy to deny Alqueda the oxygen of the publicity of having carried out such a devestating attack on a "friend" of America.
If it was it wouldn't have taken account of journalists capabilities and the fact that it was not going to be very plausible when the enormity of the event became clear.

Personally I think it may turn out to be even more cynical than that
I have a feeling ETA was blamed because of the elections on sunday because the ruling party actively supported the war in Iraq while the majority of Spanish people(Im open to correction on this) apposed the war.
Can you imagen the impact it might have on voting trends on sunday if it was al quida associates who bombed Madrid as a revenge for Spains involvment in Iraq and the wider war on terror

Heathen

i really hate the way innocent people loose their lives over "politics"


.... my heart goes out to the people of spain.....

martarg

Personally I think it may turn out to be even more cynical than that
I have a feeling ETA was blamed because of the elections on sunday because the ruling party actively supported the war in Iraq while the majority of Spanish people(Im open to correction on this) apposed the war.
Can you imagen the impact it might have on voting trends on sunday if it was al quida associates who bombed Madrid as a revenge for Spains involvment in Iraq and the wider war on terror

Well, I am not going to try and argue the Al-Qaeda - ETA business again, because this is a deaf-and-dumb dialogue, and only time will tell, but I just would like to point out that perhaps the reason some people can be so sceptical about anyone's motives to blame ETA is because ETA is not something they have been living with. At a distance, people are still cool enough to be rational and analytical, and question everything, but we cannot. It is very hard to explain all this to someone who may be sorry for the deaths, but does not share our personal grief and our desperation to eradicate terrorism from our lives after thirty-five years. We have learnt to blame ETA every time something like this happens, because it is always them (call it a stimulus-response situation if you like), and the fact that we have done so now is only natural. We did not have to wait for the government to manipulate our little brains into thinking that it was ETA, believe me, ETA was first and foremost in everyone's thoughts as soon as we heard of the explosions, because we have learnt to believe them capable of anything, and because we knew they were preparing for something like this.

There is evidence of both ETA and Al Qaeda presence in this, and everybody gives more credit to the side they feel more strongly about. While people in Ireland or the US cannot be personally concerned if this was ETA, the possibility that it may have been Al Qaeda prompts the question "who's next?", and in a sense brings the issue nearer to your hearts. Personally, at this moment I would not be surprised if this was a collaborative work. Someone posted an article on the connection ETA-Al Qaeda yesterday, and some experts have said that ETA members had recently travelled to Iraq. Even if ETA is not about religion, I think a common "enemy" is enough to prompt alliances between terrorist organisations, and right now ETA needs all the help they can get. But well, as I said, time will tell.

As regards the political advantage issue, I think that in the most cynical view of things this is a game everybody is playing. Accusing someone of taking political advantage of a grievous situation is a very effective way of setting public opinion against them and reap the benefits. It happens every time in Spain, and the bloodier the attack, the louder the cries that the government is taking advantage. There are many, many things I don't like about this government, starting with Iraq, and ending with their general attitude, and I would be perfectly ready to believe it if someone mentioned to me exactly how they are actively doing this. A consequence is not the same as an objective. If people would quit that sort of hobby horses and show more concern for people than for the polls, we would fare better....

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Cork

Originally posted by daveirl
It's not an unfair comparison to make at all. The IRA have had links with ETA, just like they have with FARC. Therefore any links between ETA or FARC bombings and the IRA are legitimate. Any links between the IRA and Al'Quaeda are false to the best of my knowledge.

Supporting ETA, is supporting killing the democratically elected officials of Spain. So yes I think Sinn Féin support for ETA is a problem.

If it was a problem for SF - did a political repreentative from spanish party with links to ETA address the recent SF Ard Fheis?

What links IRA, ETA and Al Quenda is their scant regard for human life. Whether that is plant bombs on trains, planes, trash cans, hotels or retail outlets.

Johnny 5

Originally posted by daveirl
It's not an unfair comparison to make at all. The IRA have had links with ETA, just like they have with FARC. Therefore any links between ETA or FARC bombings and the IRA are legitimate. Any links between the IRA and Al'Quaeda are false to the best of my knowledge.

Supporting ETA, is supporting killing the democratically elected officials of Spain. So yes I think Sinn Féin support for ETA is a problem.

For the record I think it's Al'Qaeda and always thought that.

1916 didn't really work, nor was it accepted by the population. Now the War of Independence that's a different story.

Again, your speculating, none of these have been proven. Yes, SF have sent representatives to the Basque homeland, and the Batasuna have done likewise, but that doesn't constitute ETA-IRA collusion. And of course, there have been no proven links with FARC either. Even if there was, the bomb in Madrid had nothing to do with the IRA, bringing them up in this thread is just ludicris.

I too support the cause for independence for the Basque people, and monument was implying this also, but you seem to think he signalled his support for ETA?

And for the record, I think it was Al Qaeda too.

Vader

What happened in madrid was a tradgidy, I think thats the first thing that needs to be said. Personnally I think it was an islamic group rather than ETA. It makes no sense from a political point of veiw for ETA and bar the type of dynamite its not their mo.

I think its dispicable the way the spanish gov wont even consider other posibilities. It stinks of capatilising on the situation for political gain.

I havent read the the whole thread, I dont really have the time to post in politics that I used to, but the whole IRA-ETA thing is the reason I came here. When I saw that \BS\Proparganda\Scare tactics\Hate mongering on Sky news I was appalled.
ETA probably didnt carry out the attacks and the IRA even if it was ETA would have had no involvement in the attacks.

Does the IRA have links to ETA? yes. Do they carry out joint opperations? no.
They share information and give political support, thats about it.

The IRA are on cease fire and Sky news was wrong to imply anything else. I think very little of SN coverage of IRaq, American politics and NI. They are a disgrace.

Spain participated in an act of terrorism in Iraq and are now the victums of an islamic attack. It is hypocritical to watch ppl on the news saying we want peace not war, and we want an end to terrorism. The war in Iraq was terrorism. There is no other definition of "Shock and awe". IT WAS AN ILLEGAL WAR.
If I was a spaniard I would vote against the gov which went against the will of the ppl and brought about this disaster.

I cant believe it was ETA, but maybe its a new splinter group. Such a group will not gain the support of the Basque ppl. On that note I would aslo like to say that the suppression of political parties, no matter what their alledged links it undemocratic and illegal. The Basque ppl need to be listened to.

David-[RLD]-

Originally posted by daveirl
1916 didn't really work, nor was it accepted by the population. Now the War of Independence that's a different story.

ok.. so the sudden rocketing popularity of Sinn Féin after the execution of the leaders had nothing to do with gaining independence. Yeah I see your point. Perfectly logical. :rolleyes:

gurramok

I cant believe it was ETA, but maybe its a new splinter group. Such a group will not gain the support of the Basque ppl

Now 5 people(Moroccan and Indian) arrested over unexploded bomb, sounds like Moroccan islamic link to bombs being investigated.

Johnny 5

The egg is certainly on your face ReefBreak, you were so damn sure too!!!

LegacyUser

Originally posted by daveirl

Supporting ETA, is supporting killing the democratically elected officials of Spain. So yes I think Sinn Féin support for ETA is a problem.

he said whats wrong with supporting their cause, not their actions, theres a difference

1916 didn't really work, nor was it accepted by the population. Now the War of Independence that's a different story.

so the difference between legitimacy and terrorism is a count of hands, interesting point !

vorbis

vader would you listen to yourself? You're saying that Spain should have formulated their foreign policy so that they didn't offend Al Qaeda. I have not problem with people being against the war. However using reasons like we shouldn't upset the terrorist organisations are a bit morally defunct in my view.

As for 1916, true the execution of the leaders did galvanise public sympathy. However, this was more an issue of brutality than the uprising actually succeding by itself. The introduction of conscription by the British was also another major factor. Also the point about public support referred to the country that the terrorists are trying to take over. Neither ETA or Al Qaeda have widespread support in Spain.

Also whats with the Sinn Fein sympathisers? They seem to reject any criticism of SF out of hand. It would be very logical to assume that links between Batisuna and SF would mean links between ETA and the IRA.

AmenToThat

As has been said earlier three Moroccans and two with Indian backrounds have been arrested tonight in connection with one of the bombs that failed to detonate and apparently a video tape from Al Qaida has been found claiming the attack because of Spains support for Bush and his allies!

Why the hell did this turn into a thread about the IRA?

Some people on here really need to learn to think for themselves and not believe everything Sky news tells them!

Ill stand by what I said earlier, the minute I heard about the horrible events in Madrid I thought it was Al Qaida and believed that the speed and ferocity with which the Spanish government tried to blame ETA was because of a fear of a backlash at the polls un Sunday!
IF, and it is still an if, as no one has been charged or convicted yet then shame on the evil bombers and shame on the Spanish government for trying to turn it into an electoral advantage!

GuanYin

Originally posted by AmenToThat

Ill stand by what I said earlier, the minute I heard about the horrible events in Madrid I thought it was Al Qaida and believed that the speed and ferocity with which the Spanish government tried to blame ETA was because of a fear of a backlash at the polls un Sunday!
IF, and it is still an if, as no one has been charged or convicted yet then shame on the evil bombers and shame on the Spanish government for trying to turn it into an electoral advantage!

Pretyy much sums up my viewpoint from the start.

Johnny5, regardless of who did it, there are no winners here, so gloating is perhaps in poor taste.

I would urge people not to jump to Sky News's conclusions so quickly. I noticed on the evening of the incident they started broadcasting reports out of Bilbao, talk about laying your cards on the table for all to see.

It's looking increasingly unlikely that ETA were behind this. If it is AQ, I think that the backlash for all involved in the war, both politically and in terms of security, may be very bad indeed.

[edit] 'AL QAEDA have claimed responsability for the attack it now seems. Its not quite clear if the spanish gov are accepting that the tapes claiming the attack are legit, but the interior ministry seems to be inferring as much.

Ro

Euronews No Comment 12-03-04

Johnny 5

Originally posted by syke
Johnny5, regardless of who did it, there are no winners here, so gloating is perhaps in poor taste.

Perhaps it came across as that, but it wasn't my intent. Our friend ReefBreak wasted about 20 posts during this thread condemning ETA for the bombing, the IRA for their connections, SF for it's 'connections' to Batasuna and people who support their cause.

What we should be wondering now though is why the Spanish government were so quick to blame ETA even though there was substantial evidence to point to an Al Qaeda connection. I have the feeling politics were involved in this.

Hopefully the 'popular party' as they call themselves, get what they deserve out of todays general election.

It's reminiscent of Georgey Bush using September 11th in his campaign ads.

vorbis

Johnny 5, a bit of perspective please. If there was a bombing in the North most people would assume one of the crackpot terrorist groups (IRA, INLA etc.) were to blame. Was it unreasonable for the Spanish governemtn to assume that the ONLY group committing terrorist attacks in Spain was to blame for a terrorist attack? If you can't see that, then I'd say you're blinded by some personal agenda.

BarryFry

Whether the bombing was by ETA or Al-Qaeda, if the Spanish allow the bombings to influence the outcome of their election (as now looks likely) then the terrorists will have won. And if indeed the terrorists have won on this occasion, then the one thing the Spanish can look forward to is lots more bombs, because it will have been demonstrated that bombing is an effective way to influence Spanish politics.

As for the idea that this is "revenge" for the Coalition attacks on Iraq - well, how many Iraqis have been arrested? None! Iraq is just an excuse. If Iraq had never been invaded, then the bombing would have been in response to the EU trading with Israel, or western oil firms dominating the middle-east, or western cosmetic firms selling make-up to muslim women. Al-Qaeda's agenda is to remove ALL western influence from the islamic world. It is not a position we can even begin to negotiate with, even if we wanted to.

Now, if an Iraqi nationalist group claimed responsibility for this, I would at least understand the logic, even if I was appalled at the consequences. But Al-Qaeda do NOT represent the people of Iraq, do NOT represent the Arab world and do NOT represent muslims in general. They represent a much smaller core of support amongst their "people" than IRA and ETA (minorities themselves) could ever claim. They represent a small number of purist psychopaths, and dignifying them any more only aggrandises and encourages them.

martarg

What we should be wondering now though is why the Spanish government were so quick to blame ETA even though there was substantial evidence to point to an Al Qaeda connection. I have the feeling politics were involved in this.

Johnny 5, a bit of perspective please. If there was a bombing in the North most people would assume one of the crackpot terrorist groups (IRA, INLA etc.) were to blame. Was it unreasonable for the Spanish governemtn to assume that the ONLY group committing terrorist attacks in Spain was to blame for a terrorist attack? If you can't see that, then I'd say you're blinded by some personal agenda.

Thank you, vorbis : o ))) .... Johnny5, it happens that the second person to appear on TV to charge against ETA for the bombing, and pretty strongly for him as well, was Mr Ibarreche himself, the head of the nationalist government in the Basque Country. Perhaps it was not such an odd supposition if even Basque nationalists "jumped" to that conclusion at first.


On the other hand, many people these days have been repeating that the government has tried to gain political advantage from this, and that they are withdrawing information. Considering that arrests took place barely forty-eight hours after the bombing, and that there was information about the van from day one, I fail to see how exactly this has happened... I have been pretty non-committal in politics all my life and I hate to be seen defending any particular side, but I am dying for a political opposition that can persuade me of things, and does not limit itself to shout slogans and send off supporters to hiss and insult democratically-elected politicians and attack their party's offices, especially on the day of "reflection", when all electoral activities are supposed to be suspended. CNN has been calling that "spontaneous peaceful demonstrations", but they certainly were neither spontaneous nor peaceful. At times like these I realise that we have not evolved as much as we thought from Franco's days....

Vader

Originally posted by vorbis
vader would you listen to yourself? You're saying that Spain should have formulated their foreign policy so that they didn't offend Al Qaeda

Yes thats what I said :rolleyes: ...... dumbass

GuanYin

Originally posted by Vader
Yes thats what I said :rolleyes: ...... dumbass

Bit of civility goes a long way.



In fairness to Vader, I don't think thats exactly what he was suggesting. I think he was merely stating that the Spanish government took part in a campaign that was and is heavily regarded as unjustified and strongly opposed by the Spanish people.

The Allied forces called the civilian casualties "collateral damage" which is a political way of saying victims of acts against the innocent people of Iraq.

Perhaps terrorism is too strong a word, but their live swere certainly worth no more or less than thos ein Madris or the US, but this I think is totally off topic, I digress.

Even still, perhaps less personal abuse Vader?

shotamoose

The way I see it, there is at least a strong possibility that last week's bombings were carried out not by ETA but by Al-Qaeda or similar. Which would make the almost instant fingering of ETA by Spanish government figures incorrect.

So what does that mean for this story :

29 Feb 2004 16:53:30 GMT
Spain says seizure of huge truck bomb averts massacre

MADRID, Feb 29 (Reuters) - Spanish police averted a possible massacre by intercepting a van carrying more than 500 kg (1,100 lb) of explosives on Sunday that Basque separatist guerrillas ETA planned to detonate in Madrid, the government said.

Two suspected ETA members were arrested in the early morning police operation, which came two weeks before a general election and 11 days after ETA declared a partial ceasefire limited to the northeastern region of Catalonia.

Isn't it likely that if ETA didn't carry out last week's bombings, then the guys they arrested on Feb 29 weren't ETA either? Has anyone heard anything more about these two?

Of course, it could still turn out that both ETA was behind both jobs after all.