Ok, I don't get it. Many people in the world think Iraq had no direct or indirect ties to terrorism, even though Saddam was sending checks to homicide bombers in Israel, and didn't understand why the US removed Saddam from power after 12 years of snubbing his nose at the UN's numerous resolutions.

Ok, I have one question, if Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, neither directly nor indirectly, why now are you guys saying that the attack on 3/11 DID have something to do with the war in Iraq? It seems some of you are speaking out of both sides of your mouths.

Very well said Booklady. People also must remember that the United States was never attacked by Germany yet we declared war on Germany as well. A nation can't defend itself from only direct attacks and expect to survive, it must defend itself from ALL attacks, to include the allies of the enemy that attacked it's borders and cities.

I am not a Republican or a Democrat. I am a Libertarian. I have decided to take the Republican's side on this issue in the States this one time because I feel the Libertarian's policy of isolationism is one that would put this, or any other country, at great danger. Guys, you can't close up your doors and think that it will keep you safe. There comes a time when you must take a stand and defend your right to be.

OK, for those who don't (want to) get it:
Iraq didn't have links to terrorists BEFORE the invasion.
It was the invasion what caused terrorists to BE INTERESTED in the Iraqui 'cause'. And to target the allies among which unfortunately Spain...WAS.
Fortunately the new gov. will withdraw troops from Iraq in 2 months.
And for those that think that yesterday's election was a sign of cowardy, didn't you watch your beloved CNN Fri 15 at 19h CET?
That's all I have to say.
Don't worry, I wont call you cowards when KERRY wins the election.

Iraq did have ties to terrorism before the invasion. An Iraqi top intelligence official met with Atta in Prague before 9/11 and Saddam was paying Homicide bombers in Israel. Saddam knew he couldn't succeed in a frontal assault so, as any other weaker military would do, he decided guerrilla tactics, Ie. funding terrorists. He may have been running Iraq as a secular state, one that is night and day to the religious fundamentalist terrorists, but, as they say, an enemy of my enemy is my friend. Red China and the USSR were our allies during WWII due to a common goal.

Thanks Kevin, in response to your question:
Logic indicates that there was a connection does it not? The peaceniks here in the States pushed the concept that there was absolutely no connection between Al Qaeda and Saddan Hussein. Well here is your answer, they very clearly stated that they were punishing Spain for their involvement in Iraq.

Of course, you can put your head in the ground and hope nothing else happens, but we must remember that Osama still believes that the issue of "Andalucia" is still unresolved. Spain is involved, whether it wants to or not.

Regarding the elections: First we must remember that not all the Spanish people voted for Zapatero, many believe as we do that there is more at stake here. The war is worldwide, and Al Qaeda is bringing it to our doors.

Second, the vote for PSOE really reflected the Spanish feelings toward a party that they long have felt alienated. As noted before most of the Spaniards were angry at Spain joining the coalition in the first place. Then when there was the misinformation about the perpretarators, ETA being named as the initial perpretrator, ans later finding out otherwise, that angered some voters into changing their votes.

I would not call the Spaniards cowards. I personally think that they are making a mistake. They and the other Europeans must understand that these folks want the utter destruction of our culture.

Nobody called anyone in Spain "cowards" - just that the election handed the terrorists another victory. That's not disputible.

However, if there's a terrorist incident in the US just before the election you'll see a major difference in the US electorates reaction. Bush will win by a landslide.

I wish marches alone and good intentions would stop these murderers, but they won't. But maybe this appeasement will take them off your doorstep for awhile.

Fup

Fup

"just that the election handed the terrorists another victory"

That IS disputible because it's not true.
It makes me terribly sad that someone thinks like this.
Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY had in mind the terrorists' will when they headed for the election.
There were endless rows of electors with things clear in their mind.
If we had not voted, THEN the terrorists would have won.
BUT WE VOTED, and had the highest number of votes of the last 25 years.
Aznars gov has made a lot of mistakes, and it has been punished, that's how it works.
If you don't believe in Spain's democracy, then I'll keep my right not to believe in America's.
And I will remind you how George W won his election.

Yes, Bush WON the election after the Democrats TRIED to steal it. I know, I know, you hear differently. Of course, you hear differently from Democratic sources. Al Gore tried to have military absentee ballots thrown out; did you hear that?

Well, OK.
I don't want to talk about US inner problems, it's Spain what we are talking about.
The matter is that you are suggesting that yesterday's election was influenced by the terrorists, and that is something I won't admit.
Terrorism has been around here for 30 years, and that hasn't undermined our will.

The election has been influenced by the former gov's errors and attitude.
The only thing that has influenced ME and SOME MILLIONS is the pathetic intend of the gov. to put the blame on ETA for electoral reasons.
It's the use and abuse of the media.
And of course, the participation on an ILLEGAL war.

Aznar is the only one who was influenced by the terrorists, and that's why he has lost the election.
Spanish electors aren't sheep.

Thanks God, our troops will soon return.

When did I say that? You have me confused with someone else.

....and the war in Iraq is far from Illegal. We, and the coalition of the willing, did what the UN didn't have the intestinal fortitude to do.

Quite true!
It was not for you, Kevin...