Bush is under fire from all sides for the killings in Spain. Pundits are opining that our foreign policy is in trouble and it is all Bush's fault. The solution for Mr. Bush is obvious really. He should bomb Spain.
Rather than kill 200 people he should kill maybe 300 or so to show our power. Then, before the Spanish have time to bury their dead, he should release a grainy, low quality video saying that if the Spanish do not return Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar to power we will bomb them again. If history is our guide, we will be rewarded with a U.S. friendly administration.
There are many benefits to this approach. Certainly the Europeans will finally agree with Mr. Bush's foreign policy, the Spanish will realize that appeasing the United States is more expedient than appeasing terrorists and it saves all that time wasted with diplomacy and other such nonsense. Further, one bomb rack on a F/A-18 probably costs less than sending Colin Powell and his entourage over to discuss things.
Mr. Bush has been wasting time with the U.N. and trying to convince the world that terrorism is wrong. All his arguments have fallen on deaf ears. It is however, not too late for him to save himself. Simply beat the terrorists at their own game. It is a strategy the whole world can finally agree on.
Forget the whole good vs evil / right vs wrong crap. Just start bombing. They'll love us for it.
All of this of course begs the question, why stop at Spain? When Jacques Chirac's reelection is at hand, a single bomber could insure the French see us as an ally again. German elections are always fun to watch anyway, why not let a few kilotons fly their way?
This may seem an outlandish idea that is without merit, but remember... It worked in Spain.



Comments (6)
I was thinking something al... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Rodney Dill | March 17, 2004 11:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I was thinking something along that line. Very good satire. It's troubling that Spain can be controlled by a group that is attacking its populace.
1. Posted by Rodney Dill | March 17, 2004 11:57 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 17, 2004 11:57
2. Posted by Harvey | March 17, 2004 11:59 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I agree with Rodney. Laser guided targeting on this post
2. Posted by Harvey | March 17, 2004 11:59 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 17, 2004 11:59
3. Posted by Jay Tea | March 17, 2004 1:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Excellent post, Kevin. Jonathan Swift would be proud of your modest diplomatic proposal.
J.
3. Posted by Jay Tea | March 17, 2004 1:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 17, 2004 13:25
4. Posted by Kevin | March 17, 2004 4:13 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I wish I could take credit, but that's all Paul!
4. Posted by Kevin | March 17, 2004 4:13 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 17, 2004 16:13
5. Posted by kenny | March 17, 2004 4:42 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"It worked in Spain."
You mean the way the party that was ahead in the polls on the day before the bombing won the election after the bombing ?
5. Posted by kenny | March 17, 2004 4:42 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 17, 2004 16:42
6. Posted by Paul | March 18, 2004 8:26 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Whether they wanted to appease the terrorists before the bombing or after is irrelevant.
They have chosen to appease the terrorists. Even if your point were correct, the bombing reinforced their beliefs rather than dissuading them.
Those with any sense of history realize the stupidity of that move. Those without, apparently think it is a good idea.
6. Posted by Paul | March 18, 2004 8:26 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 18, 2004 08:26