Will We Face a Madrid Mistake?

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | [March 18, 2004] | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Congressman Billybob]

Spain has just had its own 9/11, literally. The population of the US is almost eight times as large as that of Spain. So a fair comparison is that on 3/11 Spain suffered the equivalent of 1,600 dead and 12,000 injured. And in response to that, Spain has retreated from the war against terror. Does the US face the possibility of a Madrid mistake, especially in the weeks leading up to the November presidential election?

I had the extreme displeasure last week of hearing Professor Beau Grosscup of California State University at Chico, arguing on TV that we should “understand” the position of the terrorists, and on that basis we should “negotiate” with them. The host of the program on which this educated fool appeared missed the opportunity to ask the good professor whether we should have negotiated with Emperor Tojo, or with Der Fuhrer Adolf Hitler, because that’s exactly where his views would have led sixty years ago.

Grosscup is a “Professor of International Relations.” To have a clue about how anyone could look at modern history as he does, here is the title of his doctoral dissertation: “Isolationism and American Foreign Policy. A study of the debate over isolationist trends in US foreign policy, utilizing a Wittgensteinian scheme of explication and a comparative analysis of Chinese, Japanese, British and US foreign policies.” As Tom Lehrer once said of mathematicians, it is important to understand “how they got that way.”

The situation in Spain prior to its 3/11 bombings was that Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar’s Popular Party was headed for a close but solid win. Mr. Aznar, who had been a staunch ally of the US and a supporter of the war on terrorism, was expected to hand the reins of government over to his hand-picked successor. Then came the attacks. Three days later the Spaniards voted out the Popular Party and handed the government over to the Socialist, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who had announced in advance that he would pull Spain’s token 1,500 troops out of Iraq. It was, as many commentators have pointed out, a “clear win for the terrorists.”

What if anything does the Spanish experience suggest, as Americans approach our own election in the fall?

Terrorism is not a new phenomenon. There are various types of terrorists, but they share one common characteristic. They will murder Americans in the largest numbers they can, with the goal of forcing the US to change various of its foreign policies. (Some have “loftier” goals, which are either the destruction of America, or the destruction of Western Civilization generally.) The principal source of terrorists is Al Qaeda, plus support from some nations like Iran, the Palestinian Authority, and Syria, and apparently in cooperation with other groups like ETA, and the IRA. Because of their common intent and methods, I describe them collectively as “the terrorists.”

What is the experience of the terrorists in attacks on Americans? It’s almost universal that America can be backed off, with the blood of its own citizens and soldiers. The Beirut Airport bombing: President Reagan ordered the retreat. The Somalia slaughter: Bill Clinton ordered the retreat. The respective bombings of the Khobar Towers and the USS Cole: Bill Clinton did relatively nothing in response.

Based on experience, terrorists could take the American response to 9/11 – to fight back vigorously – as an exception to the general rule that America is a paper tiger. They could well conclude that another series of attacks, culminating with multiple events of mass murder in the weeks before our election, could produce a Madrid result in the US.

This assumption requires only two preconditions: that the American election is close, and that if John Kerry should defeat President Bush, American policy will then retreat from all-out assault on the terrorists. My personal view is that the 2004 election will not be close, and that President Bush will be reelected in an Electoral College landslide. But only a few commentators share that view. Therefore, until and unless polls close to the election should show that a landslide is in the offing, take it as true that the election will be close.

Then the question of whether the terrorists will attack again in the US with intent to change American foreign policy depends primarily on the apparent views of John Kerry, the soon-to-be Democrat candidate for President. Kerry’s mantra is “multinationalism.” But in his hands that word does not mean what the dictionary says, “involving several, or many, nations.”

The terrorists have just used mass murder to pick off Spain from the list of nations supporting the war on terror (unless NAME changes his stated position). The proposed withdrawal of Spain has taken down two of three Central American nations which follow Spain’s lead. But the war on terror still involves about 50 nations. It was, and is, multinational.

The Kerry position is explained more in his references to the United Nations. To date, to the extent that his position on this or any other subject can be pinned down, Kerry wants the US to cease being a global leader and instead to act against terrorism only if the UN first takes a decisive stand. The history of the United Nations, and of its failed predecessor the League of Nations, is almost universal in that it will not act decisively on the subject of war. The only exception is the Korean War, when the USSR quit the Security Council in a huff, China was still represented by an anti-communist government, and the resolution to go to war in Korea therefore passed.

That exception has no application today. To wait for decisive action by the UN is simply a more “nuanced” form of retreat. When, not if, the UN failed to act, the US would then begin its retreat, in a Kerry administration. We would then have our own Madrid mistake.

So, with the sad example of Spain fresh in mind, and given the current situation in the American presidential election, it’s logical to expect the terrorists to do the following: Send four or so independent teams into the US (through Canada or Mexico, take your choice). Each team would have a separate assignment with no knowledge of any of the others, except they would have a single target date for the attacks. Clearly, the terrorists have the money for the quarter-million dollar or so stake for each mission, and have the expendable men to form the attack teams.

Since 9/11, all terrorist attacks on American interests have occurred overseas. There are good reasons for that. Security on the home front is better than anywhere else in the world. Technology is better. The various federal and state police agencies are better trained and more reliable than those elsewhere in the world. American interests everywhere in the world are “soft targets” compared to targets in the US.

But if the operational goal of the terrorists is to bloody the nose of America, as it has just done with Spain, they must attack in Washington, D.C., the heart of the enemy. I don’t think such attacks, if they come, will be restricted to D.C. But the Capitol will be on the short list, with perhaps multiple teams assigned there to assure at least one “success.”

Because security is best on the home front, the terrorists are reluctant to attack here. They have lost more of their assets and personnel in (failed) attempts in the US in the past year than in their more “successful” such attacks in Iraq. The terrorists are inflicting a higher blood price when they commit their efforts elsewhere in the world, than in the US. They would have to have some promise of a Spanish result here, to commit to new and massive attacks on American soil.

What can we do, as Americans, to lower the odds that such attacks will be made here in an effort to change our foreign policies? There are only two steps to change that equation in the minds of the terrorists. One is to smoke out the position of candidate Kerry, which could be a long and laborious task as recent events demonstrate; to get him to commit to continuing the war on terrorism REGARDLESS of what the UN does or doesn’t do.

Failing that, the only other alternative is to bury candidate Kerry in the polls, so it is clear even to the terrorists that he will not possibly be elected. That way, no attacks here could possibly change American foreign policy to their benefit. The terrorists need to know, well in advance of the 2004 election, that they cannot force us to make the Madrid mistake.

To begin the process of (partially) inoculating ourselves against such attacks based on such thinking by the terrorists, this question needs to be asked of candidate Kerry at every possible opportunity, until a clear and absolute answer emerges:

“Senator Kerry, if terrorists launch multiple and major attacks in Washington, D.C. and other cities in the days or weeks leading up to the November election, what precise steps would you take as President in response to such attacks if you are elected? Please discuss Spain in your answer.”

I believe that at least some members of the press will recognize the critical nature of this subject, and will ask this question until a clear answer is obtained. Since thousands of American lives are potentially at risk, I hope the entire American press will not fail on this point. Most will. Let’s see if some leaders arises in the American press.

- 30 -

About the Author: John Armor is an author and columnist on politics and history. He currently has an Exploratory Committee to run for Congress.

- 30 -

©) 2004, Congressman Billybob & John Armor. All rights reserved.

[UltraKonservativen]

Excellent analysis.
The event in Spain showed that the left was prepared for a response to an attack. Thousands of "PAZ" signs were printed, the street marches were instantly organized, everyone had flag with a black ribbon or a PSOE flag. They used the pain of the attack to their advantage. the timing was perfect since neither the government nor the people could refelct on what had happened.
I would think that the effectiveness of pre election attack would be enhanced by attacking "anti-bush" cities like San Francisco so the media could play up the so called spontaneous demonstrations.

[Congressman Billybob]

Thank you for your vote of confidence. There is, however, a long and difficult road from being able to be a good Congresscritter, and winning the election to become a Congresscritter. LOL.

John / Billybob

[Constitution Day]

NC ping!
Please FRmail me if you want to be added to or removed from this North Carolina ping list.

[MeekOneGOP]

Thank you Congressman Billyboy ! Excellent article !

Will We Face a Madrid Mistake?

Excerpt:

I had the extreme displeasure last week of hearing Professor Beau Grosscup of California State University at Chico, arguing on TV that we should “understand” the position of the terrorists, and on that basis we should “negotiate” with them. The host of the program on which this educated fool appeared missed the opportunity to ask the good professor whether we should have negotiated with Emperor Tojo, or with Der Fuhrer Adolf Hitler, because that’s exactly where his views would have led sixty years ago.

Grosscup is a “Professor of International Relations.” To have a clue about how anyone could look at modern history as he does, here is the title of his doctoral dissertation: “Isolationism and American Foreign Policy. A study of the debate over isolationist trends in US foreign policy, utilizing a Wittgensteinian scheme of explication and a comparative analysis of Chinese, Japanese, British and US foreign policies.” As Tom Lehrer once said of mathematicians, it is important to understand “how they got that way.”

The situation in Spain prior to its 3/11 bombings was that Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar’s Popular Party was headed for a close but solid win. Mr. Aznar, who had been a staunch ally of the US and a supporter of the war on terrorism, was expected to hand the reins of government over to his hand-picked successor. Then came the attacks. Three days later the Spaniards voted out the Popular Party and handed the government over to the Socialist, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who had announced in advance that he would pull Spain’s token 1,500 troops out of Iraq. It was, as many commentators have pointed out, a “clear win for the terrorists.”

What if anything does the Spanish experience suggest, as Americans approach our own election in the fall?

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[onyx]

BUMP

[Bahbah]

"President Bush will be reelected in an Electoral College landslide..."

From your lips (or pen) to God's ears.

[Sunsong]

I think we need to pass some legislation that *if* there is a terrorist act right before an election in this country that the election will be moved to a future date.

Now that we have seen what happened in Spain we ned to make sure that it won't happen here!

[dirtboy]

I had the extreme displeasure last week of hearing Professor Beau Grosscup of California State University at Chico, arguing on TV that we should “understand” the position of the terrorists,

I agree wholeheartedly. The position of the terrorists is easy to understand. They want to kill us and destroy modern liberal democracy.

and on that basis we should “negotiate” with them

That's easy, too. Lots and lots of weapons and hard men to track them down and eliminate them.

Wow, we're doing that already. I guess Grosscup isn't really serious, then...

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

After the debacle in Spain, our general election in November this year will come down to one thing:

Will Americans fell safer sleeping at night with George Bush or John Kerry in the White House?
That's the one thing I'm hearing from a lot of people.

[Alamo-Girl]

Bump!

[blackie]

Congressman Billybob ~ death to all terrorists ~ bump!

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

[eureka!]

"Hope you find this worthwhile"

Absolutely. The Spanish election was a huge setback in the WOT and the left is going to run with it. W & the allies need to come down harder and harder. Unleash hell in the war we cannot see via spooks, independant contractors and opportunistic bad guys...

[blackie]

John F'n Kerry is a lying traitor!

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

[mtbopfuyn]

Seems Prof. Grosscup is isolating himself in his classroom when he should be hiking in the hills along the Afghanistan border in hopes of bringing mutual understanding to those cave dwellers.

[Travis McGee]

History is going to turn on this calculation. The islamofascists may make one of history's great miscalculations if they commit a terrorist atrocity before the November election. Even if Kerry wins, a lame duck President Bush could be fearsome in his retaliation, beyond anything the black moon-god rock worshippers have ever contemplated.

[Gritty]

Your usual excellent article, Congressman, filled with clear-headed analysis.

I agree with your two suppositions, but have a personal and less than optimistic view on each...

There are only two steps...

One is to smoke out the position of candidate Kerry,... to get him to commit to continuing the war on terrorism REGARDLESS of what the UN does or doesn’t do.

IMHO, unlikely on either account.

Kerry has already clearly stated (over decades of "service") his position on such things. He and his allies are very clever at disguise and will continue to be successful (remember the clintons). Nobody on his side (which includes most of the media) cares to bright-line his exposed position. Their efforts will instead be to attack Bush and debunk the facts as part of the paid "Republican Attack Machine". The vasty middle of voters in American politics listens and reads the major media (viz. leftists), and large numbers will never perceive the contradictions - if they even care deeply.

Failing that, the only other alternative is to bury candidate Kerry in the polls, so it is clear even to the terrorists that he will not possibly be elected.

Again, unlikely. Polls can, and will, be rigged and skewed. The pollsters will ensure this race is a "photo-finish" right up to the end. It gets themselves more attention and lots of repeat business.

Remember, the Spanish polls swung about 10 points in the last three days. The terrorists, no matter what our polls say, will think they can pull the same thing here. I doubt Bush and Kerry will ever be more than 5 pts apart.

A devastating terrorist attack will certainly be scheduled, and will likely be executed to whatever results. Like the Socialists, the Democrats will surely be ready for an immediate response to pin that tail on Bush. I seriously doubt the Republicans will try and use it to political advantage and will be attending funerals instead of rallies.

The hatred against George Bush goes beyond the normal political give-and-take of an election. This one is vicious and revenge-driven. I see the hatred daily in the newpaper stories, in letters-to-the editor, on numerous TV channels, and hear it spoken openly in coffee shops and restaurants.

The campaign against Bush will be driven by hatred, not facts. A large terrorist attack will only make the volume and hatred louder, as in Spain. You cannot reason with terrorists or Liberals. Both are emotion and agenda driven.

The mushy middle voter will go with whichever slogans seem the "best" for him and his personal peace, safety and comfort. They will not be driven by "vision". Only the 40% already solidly in the Bush camp will be driven by that. You can see that in Bush's large slippage in the polls as the leftist propaganda machine takes effect.

Much of the middle live in a state of political confusion, and don't bother tham with the uncomfortable facts. They will vote for whichever side makes them feel most comfortable and offers them the most stuff. An awful terrorist act may signal it's time for a change to many of these weak-kneed middle-grounders. They may want to forget the War and return to things as "normal". After all, many flags have become faded and the "We Will Never Forget" stickers are disappearing.

I anticipate a close election.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

AMEN! He IS a lying TRAITOR! As is Kennedy, Clinton..and the rest who got us into the mess we are trying to get out of!

That ANY American thinks otherwise is astounding!

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

The Hardliners in Iran sure were happy!! The article about the e-mail is EXTREMELY enlightening to terrorists! But imagine what is going through the minds of the Freedom Fighters? Many of them will die if Kerry wins.

[blackie]

It's astounding to me that some people don't understand that we're at war ~ with the most vicious, unprincipled antagonists we've ever faced!

It's a war to the death ~ theirs or ours!

Some of the sniveling whiners here on FR would like to see us lose the war on terror!

Keep you powder dry and be ever vigilant!

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, snivelers, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~