The 11 point swing in the electorate after the bombing towards a leader who declared that he would retreat from Iraq is just a coincidence. Why didn't they think Aznar sucked the day before the bombing?

A leader who, apparently, will send his troops into Iraq if the U.N. is in charge, a bizarre concept that I have always found completely unexplainable.

What exactly changes if Kofi Annan is calling the shots in Iraq? The insurgents flee in fear? Stop bombing roads and hotels? Or do they cheer and throw away their weapons because now the occupiers have blue helmets? Has anyone at all looked at the U.N. record in this area?

It goes without saying that socialists have a lot of trouble with reasoning, or they probably wouldn't be socialists in the first place, but I can't figure that out at all.

Well, I digress.

If you are right, and the Spanish vote was not an attempt to make the terrorists leave them alone, and the terrorists do not see it as such, then there should be no further attacks of this kind, specifically designed to affect a nation's internal politics and policies. And Spain will never receive any further demands or be attacked again.

"victory for the terrorists?" The terrorists, who engineered this specifically to split Spain off from the coalition, sure as hell think it was.

I guess we'll see.