Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23
  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default Zapatero's Endorsement of Terror

    Days following the bombings Spain elected José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, an upset win for the country's opposition Socialists.

    On that day, a terror attack swayed a country's vote and gave terrorism a shot in the arm. Today, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero pledged to sever it's alliance with the US. Another win for terror.

    What is the message being sent around the world? Who's national elections are next? Will our own DHS raise the terror level to RED come November?

    This is a sad turn of events.


  2. #2
    Forum Member CaptOldTimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 1999
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    7,229

    Default

    Just another nut that didn't fall too far from the tree.


    He should be watched closer than a hawk.

  3. #3
    Forum Member stm4710's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,713

    Default

    1. We need to embargo Spain.
    2. We need to stop political asylum and immagraton from Spain.
    3. We need to allow the CIA back in the assination business.
    4. Deport Spanish citizens and students on a green card or visa.
    5. We need to re-elect President Bush to jump start the economy and finish what he started in Iraq.

    Let Spain sit in the same boat as France--you are either with us or against us, if you are against us we will not welcome you or your citizens here with open arms---tough noogies to you. Spain will now be the new Afganistan.

    Sorry if it seems hard edge, but I dont want to wake up another tuesday morning and see what I saw.
    I dont suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber gordoffemt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Greendale, IN, USA
    Posts
    290

    Default

    Another shining example of why President Bush needs to be re-elected. John Kerry is a socialist's best friend. He'd love to fall in line with France, Spain, and Germany and let the U.N. try to run the world.

    Do you want to live in that kind of world. Not me, brothers and sisters.
    Lt. D. Gordon
    Greendale Fire Department
    Greendale, IN

  5. #5
    Forum Member Lewiston2FF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Niagara Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    1,924

    Default Re: Zapatero's Endorsement of Terror

    Originally posted by E229Lt
    Days following the bombings Spain elected José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, an upset win for the country's opposition Socialists.

    On that day, a terror attack swayed a country's vote and gave terrorism a shot in the arm. Today, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero pledged to sever it's alliance with the US. Another win for terror.

    What is the message being sent around the world? Who's national elections are next? Will our own DHS raise the terror level to RED come November?

    This is a sad turn of events.
    A Sad turn of events indeed. As I found out the results of the Spanish elections I began thinking, "Isn't that what the terrorists wanted? This is really going to encourage them to try it again. Wait a minute, our elections are in November!"

    I hope you are wrong, but I fear you are not.
    Shawn M. Cecula
    Firefighter
    IACOJ Division of Fire and EMS

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default

    I'll be watching the upcoming Australian elections closely.

  7. #7
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    Again history repeats itself. Won't be long and it will be England vs. the rest of Europe.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber mcaldwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Panorama, British Columbia, Canada
    Posts
    3,022

    Default

    Don't be so sure about that England vs Europe thing.

    England and Italy are in a panic now too. I was watching several interviews on television last night, and they are sweating over their next set of elections as well.

    I highly doubt that an attack in the US would have the same knee-jerk effect, but I wouldn't count on that in England, or anywhere else in the world. While the US has been clearly committed all along, the rest of the Allies on-side have had a tenuous control of their population at best.
    Last edited by mcaldwell; 03-16-2004 at 06:48 PM.
    Never argue with an Idiot. They drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience!

    IACOJ

  9. #9
    Forum Member SFD13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Posts
    195

    Default

    You keep equating the war in Iraq, with the war terrorism. These are two entirely separate wars. Eighty percent of Spaniards opposed the Iraq war, now ninety percent want their troops brought home.

    Zapatero said he will pull Spanish troops out unless there is a UN mandate by June 30.

    1. We need to embargo Spain.
    Then I guess you better embargo Canada, France, Germany, China, Russia to name just a few that opposed the Iraq war.

    2. We need to stop political asylum and immagraton from Spain.
    I doubt there are many people seeking political asylum from a democratic country.

    3. We need to allow the CIA back in the assination business.
    So you are advocating killing democratically elected leaders that disagree with U.S. policy.

    4. Deport Spanish citizens and students on a green card or visa.
    Then I guess you better deport citizens from Canada, France, Germany, China, Russia to name just a few that opposed the Iraq war.

    5. We need to re-elect President Bush to jump start the economy and finish what he started in Iraq.


    Let Spain sit in the same boat as France--you are either with us or against us, if you are against us we will not welcome you or your citizens here with open arms---tough noogies to you. Spain will now be the new Afganistan.

    Sorry if it seems hard edge, but I dont want to wake up another tuesday morning and see what I saw.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northern Panhandle of WV
    Posts
    68

    Default VOTE BUSH

    I don't think the terrorists can change the outcome of an election here. I think Bush is going to be reelected. If a terrorist attack happens here before the November election, I would say Bush will definately be reelected. One of the main reasons I'll vote for "Bush again is because we'll all be safe. He did one hell of a job in the days after 9/11. That's why the liberals are so fired up over a 9/11 image in Bush's ads. Because they don't want people reminded that Bush handled 9/11 wonderfully. He was very confident, strong, and he took care of business. How would John Kerry have handled 9/11? The Taliban would still be in power and Al-Qaida would still be training hundreds of brainwashed Muslim fanatics in training camps in Afghanistan. This country would have been attacked again. There would be no terrorists in custody at Guatanomo Bay. Saddam would still be raping, killing and torturing people. Countries like Libya and Iran wouldn't be nearly as cooperative as they are now. The list goes on.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    I highly doubt that an attack in the US would have the same knee-jerk effect

    Knee jerk yes, but remember the U.S. generally knee jerks out, not in.

    This is an extremely dangerous and troubling precedent. I've said it here in the past, Europe & North America; Japan, Austraila, and a handful of others are the Western liberal democracies. Get away from the confusion of the words conservative & liberal in the US for right and left, we are all at heart liberal & democratic, sharing or adopting a western tradition descended from Greece & Rome.

    We can not give in, we can not yield to reactionary tribalism. Spain's election may be perceived as that (whether it was or not), and that's very dangerous.

    Keep the steady course. There was talk about how Saddam's plan for Iraqi resistance was to draw the U.S. into a Vietnam-like quagmire.

    In the past 363 days there have been 665 coalition fatal casualties.
    Hostile & Non-Hostile non-fatal casualties: 3241.

    Vietnam 1968 (height of Vietnam): 14,594 U.S. Killed-in-Action; 87,388 U.S. Wounded-in-Action (these are hostile-only, unlike Iraq which includes non-hostile casualties)

    Vietnam 1972 (year we finished withdrawing): 300 KIA, 3,936 WIA.

    (Interestingly from a EMS perspective...looks like they actually have a slightly lower "save" rate in Iraq for injured soldiers, I'm sure that's a multi-answer question from different statistics to different weapons, but interesting none the less since you'd expect from body armor to modern medicine the opposite to be true)

    Plus we have the ABC Poll:
    The poll -- the first nationwide poll in Iraq since the war -- was commissioned by ABC of the U.S., Britain's BBC, Germany's ARD and Japan's NHK.

    Some 57 percent of respondents said life was better now than under Saddam, against 19 percent who said it was worse

    http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...sprj.irq.poll/

    Yep, sky is falling in Iraq. Here's your helmet, chicken little.

    The Western world needs to realize that they have to stand united both in aid and defense. Forces of culture & money independent of any government are driving the world forward in the Western, Liberal traditions -- and this is butting up against leaders who don't want to lose their power to it. A world of change is a scary place, but the West throwing up their hands and saying they don't want to get involved will do nothing to stop threats of attacks from state or non-state organizations. It's not our governments colonizing, it's our ideas being adopted that threaten the tribal and traditional powers; those ideas will continue to be adopted by individuals and groups, and our governments must collectively stand up in support & defense of those spreading ideas.

    Matt
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  12. #12
    Forum Member BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Originally posted by ShuswapFireF
    You keep equating the war in Iraq, with the war terrorism. These are two entirely separate wars.
    Then why did Al Qaeda attack Spain? The video said it was because Spanish troops were part of the coalition forces in Iraq. No link there, hmmm?

    The Battle of Iraq is one part of the War on Terrorism. It's part of a wide-ranging plan to deny terrorists sources of monetary support, deny access to advanced WMD science and technology, and deny safe haven, AND it was a bold thrust to spark a fire of democracy and freedom in a despotic region that breeds terrorism.

    If the removal of Saddam Hussein was not part of the war on terror, then what was it? "Blood for oil"? Don't be silly.
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  13. #13
    Forum Member BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Originally posted by ShuswapFireF
    you are either with us or against us
    Another quote widely attributed to President Bush. Only one problem, he never said it.

    What he did say is, "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists." That, to me, says it all - the civilized nations of the world, which is the overwhelming majority of them, must stand together to oppose terrorism. Sitting on the sideline is not an option. You will not be spared because you do nothing, and your doing nothing may give terrorists safe haven. Your failure to take a stand against terrorism provides terrorists the opportunity to use your nation as a training base, a financial base, a recruitment pool, etc.

    Islamofascism has but one goal - the utter elimination of all other faiths and traditions, and the establishment of worldwide Sharia law. You cannot negotiate with that, you can not appease that, you can not pretend it's not there. That is why you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists. Get the quote right.
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber mohican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    850

    Default topic drift

    Originally posted by Dalmatian90

    (Interestingly from a EMS perspective...looks like they actually have a slightly lower "save" rate in Iraq for injured soldiers, I'm sure that's a multi-answer question from different statistics to different weapons, but interesting none the less since you'd expect from body armor to modern medicine the opposite to be true)

    I have heard and read of casualties while wearing body armor. A lot of it is that depending on body area hit, a lot of shock is transferred by the kevlar vest to the body. So while the vest may prevent thoracic or abdominal penetration by a bullet, it may still transfer shock to the organs. Seatbelts at times do the same thing. This mechanism of injury is not a reason to not wear the armor, or your seat belt. It's still the lesser of the evils.

    It stands to reason. A standard 9mm handgun will have 300 ft-lbs (approx) at the muzzle. At 50 yards, it might deliver 200 ft-lbs when it strikes, whether its a unprotected body or a vest. On the other hand, a rifle bullet, depending on caliber and range can deliver 1000 ft lbs and up. Even if the vest stops the round, some of the energy has to be transmited to the body.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber mohican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    850

    Default

    The Spanish Army now has a new multi tool
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  16. #16
    MembersZone Subscriber Firefighter430's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Virgilina, VA USA
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Here is one I posted in the off duty forum under Apathetic throng

    Mark Steyn : The Spanish dishonoured their dead
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...3/16/do1602.xml ^

    Posted on 03/15/2004 5:36:52 PM PST by Villain

    The Spanish dishonoured their dead By Mark Steyn (Filed: 16/03/2004)

    "When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, naturally they will like the strong horse." So said Osama bin Laden in his final video appearance two-and-a-half years ago. But even the late Osama might have been surprised to see the Spanish people, invited to choose between a strong horse and a weak horse, opt to make their general election an exercise in mass self-gelding.

    To be sure, there are all kinds of John Kerry-esque footnoted nuances to Sunday's stark numbers. One sympathises with those electors reported to be angry at the government's pathetic insistence, in the face of the emerging evidence, that Thursday's attack was the work of Eta, when it was obviously the jihad boys. One's sympathy, however, disappears with their decision to vote for a party committed to disengaging from the war against the jihadi. As Margaret Thatcher would have said: "This is no time to go wobbly, Manuel." But they did. And no one will remember the footnotes, the qualifications, the background - just the final score: terrorists toppled a European government.

    What was it all those party leaders used to drone robotically after IRA atrocities? We must never let the bullet and the bomb win out over the ballot and the bollocks. Something like that. In Spain, the bombers hijacked the ballot, and very decisively. The Socialist Workers' Party wouldn't have won, except for the terrorism.

    At the end of last week, American friends kept saying to me: "3/11 is Europe's 9/11. They get it now." I expressed scepticism. And I very much doubt whether March 11 will be a day that will live in infamy. Rather, March 14 seems likely to be the date bequeathed to posterity, in the way we remember those grim markers on the road to conflagration through the 1930s, the tactical surrenders that made disaster inevitable. All those umbrellas in the rain at Friday's marches proved to be pretty pictures for the cameras, nothing more. The rain in Spain falls mainly on the slain. In the three days between the slaughter and the vote, it was widely reported that the atrocity had been designed to influence the election. In allowing it to do so, the Spanish knowingly made Sunday a victory for appeasement and dishonoured their own dead.

    And, if it works in Spain, why not in Australia, Britain, Italy, Poland? In his 1996 "Declaration of War Against the Americans", Bin Laden cited Washington's feebleness in the face of the 1992 Aden hotel bombings and the Black Hawk Down business in Somalia in 1993: "You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew," he wrote. "The extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear." To the jihadis' way of thinking, on Thursday, the Spaniards were disgraced by Allah; on Sunday, they withdrew. The extent of their impotence and weaknesses is very clear.

    Or, as Simon Jenkins put it in a hilariously mistimed cover story for last Thursday's Spectator arguing that this terrorism business is a lot of twaddle got up by Blair and Bush: "Bombs kill and panic the panicky. But they do not undermine civilised society unless that society wants to be undermined." And there's no chance of that happening, right?

    Jenkins's argument, such as it is, is that a bomb here, a bomb there, nothing to get your knickers in a twist about : that's one thing we Europeans understand. But what he refuses to address is the shifting facts on the ground.

    Europe's home-grown terrorism problems take place among notably static populations, such as Ulster and the Basque country. One could make generally safe extrapolations about the likelihood of holding Northern Ireland to what HMG used to call an "acceptable level of violence".

    But in the same three decades as Ulster's "Troubles", the hitherto moderate Muslim populations of south Asia were radicalised by a politicised form of Islam; previously broadly unIslamic societies such as Nigeria became Islamified; and large Muslim populations settled in parts of Europe that had little or no experience of mass immigration.

    You can argue about what these trends mean, but surely not that they mean absolutely nothing, as Sir Simon and the Complaceniks assure us: nothing to see here, chaps; switch back to the Test and bring me another buttered crumpet; when Osama vows to avenge the "tragedy of Andalucia", it's just a bit of overheated campaign rhetoric, like Kerry calling Bush a "liar", that's all.

    For the non-complacent, the question is fast becoming whether "civilised society" in much of Europe is already too "undermined". Last Friday, for a brief moment, it looked as if a few brave editorialists on the Continent finally grasped that global terrorism is a real threat to Europe, and not just a Bush racket. But even then they weren't proposing that the Continent should rise up and prosecute the war, only that they be less snippy in their carping from the sidelines as America gets on with it. Spain was Washington's principal Continental ally, and what does that boil down to in practice? 1,300 troops. That's fewer than what the New Hampshire National Guard is contributing.

    The other day, the editor of Le Monde, writing in the Wall Street Journal, dismissed as utterly false the widespread belief among all Americans except John Kerry's campaign staff that France is a worthless ally: "Let us remember here," he wrote, "the involvement of French and German soldiers, among other European nationalities, in the operations launched in Afghanistan to pursue the Taliban, track down bin Laden and attempt to free the Afghans."

    Oh, put a baguette in it, will you? The Continentals didn't "launch" anything in Afghanistan. They showed up when the war was over - after the Taliban had been toppled and the Afghans liberated. And a few hundred Nato troops in post-combat mopping-up operations barely registers in the scale against the gazillions of Americans defending the Continent so that EU governments can blow their defence budgets on welfare programmes that make the citizens ever more enervated and dependent.

    The only fighting that there is going to be in Europe in the foreseeable future is civil war, and when that happens American infantrymen will want to be somewhere safer. Like Iraq. There are strong horses and weak horses, but right now western Europe is looking like a dead horse.
    "Illegitimis non carborundum."

    - Gen. Joseph Stilwell
    (Lat., "Don't let the *~#%&S grind you down.")

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber fallujahff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Eastern Shore, Va.
    Posts
    337

    Default

    (Interestingly from a EMS perspective...looks like they actually have a slightly lower "save" rate in Iraq for injured soldiers, I'm sure that's a multi-answer question from different statistics to different weapons, but interesting none the less since you'd expect from body armor to modern medicine the opposite to be true)
    They're not treating GSW's--they're treating a lot of explosive injuries (vehicle runs over booby trap, car bombs etc) which means concussion injury (which no flak jacket in the world can prevent).

    If you really look at the casualties, you'll see they're actually doing a pretty good job with shrapnel and GSW's. It's the bombings that are skewing the numbers a little. Remember also that they are in a conflict where bad guys are causing intentional injuries--a little different than the homebased EMS numbers where you are talking about non-intentional injury (car wrecks, falling etc).
    "When you are safe at home, you wish you were having an adventure-when you're having an adventure, you wish you were safe at home"

    --Thornton Wilder

  18. #18
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    You keep equating the war on Iraq with the war on terrorism. These are 2 seperate wars.
    This phrase has always interested me as I am unable to fully grasp this idea. Maybe this is just a differance of opinion, which is fine. However it does need to be brought up that Saddam Hussein did in fact sponsor terrorism on a national front. Up until the war started his government paid approximately $25,000 USD to the families of homicide bombers. Granted this was hamas and hezbollah, but they are still terrorist groups who have the same goals as al queda. It is known and widely agreed upon that al queda was involved in Iraq prior to our removal of saddam. To whatever extent they were in there is debatable, but never the less they were still there. How does Iraq not qualify in this war on terror then? It is sad to see Spain choose the course they have taken. Spain has allowed terrorists to choose their government for them. How should we treat them? I don't have an answer for that question,Spain is not a terrorist state. They only allow terrorists to influence them at this point. I do think it time to look at and reward those true allies of the United States with our friendship rather than those nations which are not committed to the stopage of terrorism.

  19. #19
    Disillusioned Subscriber Steamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    posted by jatkins7011: Remember also that they are in a conflict where bad guys are causing intentional injuries--a little different than the homebased EMS numbers where you are talking about non-intentional injury (car wrecks, falling etc).
    Maybe I'm reading something into it that's not there, but I think Dal may have been referencing "save rates" in Iraq when compared to those of the Vietnam era military casualties. If I'm wrong, Dal, I apologize.

    Along that line, I think pfd3501 has a valid observation. High velocity rifle rounds pack a hell of a wallop at impact. The 7.62 AK class round may be stopped by the Kevlar vests, but that shock wave will continue into the body, causing internal damage. It has essentially converted what would have been penetrating trauma type injuries to blunt force trauma. We all know that high velocity impacts don't have to penetrate to be fatal.

    That coupled with the use of explosives and the concussive force they create could easily account for the morbidity/mortality numbers we're seeing. Our civilian emergency responce systems and often treatments of various injuries are dramatically affected by what we see in the course of studies done of the effectiveness of our military's medical corps during times of conflict. I doubt this will be any different.
    Steve Gallagher
    IACOJ BOT
    ----------------------------
    "I don't apologize for anything. When I make a mistake, I take the blame and go on from there." - Woody Hayes

  20. #20
    Senior Member Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    Yeah Steamer, I just thought it was an interesting statistic, with many, many causes.

    It could very well be the methods of warfare, even guerilla warfare, are increasing in lethality. Look at bombs of WWII compared to today -- you *might* survive a near miss in WWII; today's cluster munitions pretty much mean there's no such thing as a near miss.

    I'd reckon the body armor does help some even on 'dead on' shots, at least spreading the impact so the jiggling isn't as concentrated, and probably helps a lot on grazing shots not allowing them to tear in.

    Anyway, just sumthin' I thought was curious with nearing 40 years of improvements since Vietnam.
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts