Say it ain't so...
I'll grant you that Bush has been more aggressive than Gore would have been in response to 9/11. I'll even grant you that making a muddled mess of Iraq won't help our popularity rankings among that Al Queda faithful. I'll even grant you that Al Queda probably hates us a notch or two more since our actions in Iraq.
However, let us not believe the lie that Spain believes. The lie that any action we take will have an effect on how Al Queda views us. Maybe because we responded to 9/11 in Afghanistan and abused prisoners in Abu Ghraib they hate us on a scale of, say, 97 out of 100. What we forget is that they hated us 95 out of 100 to begin with. We didn't incite any particularly new hatred in Al Queda.
A Kerry victory means exactly this to Al Queda: "Good, now they won't be attacking us anymore as we plan our next terrorist activities."
They hated us when Clinton was President too, remember? The only difference is Bush did something about it. I'm not defending the war in Iraq, because I hate to support unwinnable arguments and I'm not in favor of it, but there it is.
The Left is trying to sell us on the idea that we can somehow reason with Al Queda (the religious zealots? the ones who behead Americans for entertainment? The ones who blew up American vessels when Clinton (democrat, right?) was President? Ring a bell?) if we have the right leader in office. THEN, they want us to believe that John Kerry is the right leader. Then again, maybe he is the right leader. Spain needed leadership that could change views at whim, and Kerry has proven he can do that.
All Spain did was delay the inevitable. If the time comes that Al Queda wins victories over the US and UK, Spain is still on their list, just cowed and humbled for now.
I take that back. The other thing Spain did was guarantee an attack inside the United States by Al Queda before the November election. Wonderful. Great to see you're safe, Spain.
And in spite of all that, I still don't know who I'm going to vote for in November. I suspect it won't be Bush or Kerry, unless I can get some compelling reason to vote for either of the lesser-of-two-evil candidates.
I toyed with voting for Nader, because I'm pro-environment and of course he's going to lose, but a vote is a sign of who you support, not an attempt to be on the winning team. But then I heard Nader speak and a crazy man who agrees with you on one topic is not who you want as Pres.
So my vote is still up for grabs. I suspect I will not vote for President, but will vote for the other offices. Not because I don't support the democratic process... I encourage everyone to get out and vote... but because by not voting for Bush or Kerry, it will be a vote of negative support for both of them, yes?
Refute any point you want, but the core message of this post remains true: Al Queda hates us by definition. Whoever leads America will lead the Great Satan of Al Queda thought. They will attack us because that's what terrorists do. Especially the crazy ones.