Colombia-Ecuador-Venezuela crisis

catefrances

Cosmo wrote:

...
Another bad decision... we re-wrote the book on pre-emptive attacks. We are now in a tough bargaining position to argue against a Venezuelean pre-emptive attack... when we are guilty of the same thing, right? You're right... we are in probably deeply involved in this mess.
And how is it that nations like Japan are never dragged into messes like this? Is it because they are following the common sense approach of George Washington and steering clear of foriegn political entanglements and just trade with these countries?

japan is not allowed to do anything. they've been effectly hamstrung since...well, you know when.

Hollyweird

Cosmo wrote:

...
Another bad decision... we re-wrote the book on pre-emptive attacks. We are now in a tough bargaining position to argue against a Venezuelean pre-emptive attack... when we are guilty of the same thing, right? You're right... we are in probably deeply involved in this mess.
And how is it that nations like Japan are never dragged into messes like this? Is it because they are following the common sense approach of George Washington and steering clear of foriegn political entanglements and just trade with these countries?

Sorry but was Venezuala bombed? Not aware of a mutual defense treaty with Ecuador so this is more bluster from Chavez. He has no dog in this fight and the more he protests the more it feels like he may have been fully embarrassed by this if any of the allegations re: Farc are true.

CaterinaA

It has been interesting to read your perspective and how you are all unable to stay away from the pro-US/anti-US analysis.

They way we, most Latin Americans, see it, yes Colombia was wrong in disrespecting Ecuador's sovereignty and it should be condemned. This will probably happen today at OEA's emergency summit. This whole deal, regardless of what Rafael Correa says, just to pander to Chavez, is a bilateral conflict and should remain that way.

Chavez is overreacting, no Venezuelan border was compromised at any moment. Seriously, why did Venezuela's government was the first to cry wolf? Is because of the content of Raul Reyes computers?

Chavez keeps talking about how Bush is the devil and the US is the empire of evil, etc, etc; yet he behaves in a strikingly similar fashion. Menacing with preemptive attacks, interferring between Colombia and Ecuador's diplomatic affairs. All he's achieved is messing the field and increasing the tension between Ecuador and Colombia. Did any of you heard his speech on Sunday afternoon? He was talking on his radio show and just like he was ordering some delivery pizza he told the Minister of Defense to deploy 10 batallions and tanks and planes to the border.

If he wants to be the XXIst century version of Simón Bolívar, he should behave like a statesman and try to mediate instead of adding more flame. Chavez should be trying to cool off the tensions and the rethoric, but of course, he's done the exact opposite.

One more thing, if Chavez is sooooo fond of the FARC victims, why on earth did he asked for a minute of silence as a tribute to the deceased guerrilleros? FARC has kidnapped and killed Venezuelans as well, yet they've never received this level of respect. If Chavez is serious about being the greatest democrat of this world, why does he pays homage to a guerilla organization that has tried to destroy Colombia's democracy for more than half a century. FARC currently has almost 1000 people held hostage, most of them have been kidnapped to get money from their families.

Chavez is just trying to deviate the attention from Venezuela's domestic problems: shortages of basic goods and staples and his diminishing popularity.

And what do you guys say to the evidence that could prove what we've already known in Latin America for some time now: Chavez gives money to the FARC and he's paid them to liberate hostages.

Cosmo

Hollyweird wrote:

Sorry but was Venezuala bombed? Not aware of a mutual defense treaty with Ecuador so this is more bluster from Chavez. He has no dog in this fight and the more he protests the more it feels like he may have been fully embarrassed by this if any of the allegations re: Farc are true.

Was the U.S. bombed by Iraq?
Like it or not... Chavez can pull a George W. on the rest of us by claiming the security of his nation is at hand and a pre-emptive attack is justified. He can use a page out of the Bush/Cheney playbook and there is no way we can argue or protest it because we wrote the book.
That is my point.

pouch15

CaterinaA wrote:

Chavez is just trying to deviate the attention from Venezuela's domestic problems: shortages of basic goods and staples and his diminishing popularity.
.

You got it there,thats what left winged aimed for the masses dictators do!!! Deviate attention from a real economic crisis. Well said.


PD arriba la academia

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Hollyweird wrote:

Too bad we threw that rule out like 100 years ago. We are so totally behind this Columbia deal. We have been propping them up since Bush 1. It will be interesting to see how this pans out. Right now it's just a ridiculous propaganda war between Chavez and the U.S. That laptop shit is just crazy! By all accounts there was nothing but little bits of bodies left after the attack and yet this magic laptop survives with WMD shit on it? Wow! That's all I got to say. The ones that are being forgotten in this whole discussion is...um...Ecuador. Last I heard they were the ones that got bombed and they ain't threatening people with Russian Jets. What up with all that? Crazy. The Columbians may have pulled the trigger but you know this our game plan.

reminds me of some airplanes (and their contents) that got completely incinerated, yet a paper passport somehow miraculously survived and was legible, and only one type of persons passport in particular In light of everything else "freak of nature" that happened...quite simply astonishing indeed. The laws of the universe seems to warp out and behave in an almost completely and utterly unbelievable fashion the second the CIA seems to get involved... With such astronomical odds in their favor, why don't more CIA agents win the lottery is what I'm wondering...hehe

Hollyweird

Cosmo wrote:

...
Another bad decision... we re-wrote the book on pre-emptive attacks. We are now in a tough bargaining position to argue against a Venezuelean pre-emptive attack... when we are guilty of the same thing, right? You're right... we are in probably deeply involved in this mess.
And how is it that nations like Japan are never dragged into messes like this? Is it because they are following the common sense approach of George Washington and steering clear of foriegn political entanglements and just trade with these countries?

For real? Japan? They had that whole colonial expedition called World War 2 which culminated in Mushroom clouds. Might have something to do with not wanting to send Japanees troops abroad since that was their last experience doing so. It's also a part of their constiution....which we wrote

Hollyweird

Cosmo wrote:

...
Another bad decision... we re-wrote the book on pre-emptive attacks. We are now in a tough bargaining position to argue against a Venezuelean pre-emptive attack... when we are guilty of the same thing, right? You're right... we are in probably deeply involved in this mess.
And how is it that nations like Japan are never dragged into messes like this? Is it because they are following the common sense approach of George Washington and steering clear of foriegn political entanglements and just trade with these countries?

For real? Japan? They had that whole colonial expedition called World War 2 which culminated in Mushroom clouds. Might have something to do with not wanting to send Japanees troops abroad since that was their last experience doing so. It's also a part of their constiution....which we wrote

Nevermind

Hollyweird wrote:

For real? Japan? They had that whole colonial expedition called World War 2 which culminated in Mushroom clouds. Might have something to do with not wanting to send Japanees troops abroad since that was their last experience doing so. It's also a part of their constiution....which we wrote

Do you always have to post the same thing twice?

Hollyweird

CaterinaA wrote:

It has been interesting to read your perspective and how you are all unable to stay away from the pro-US/anti-US analysis.

They way we, most Latin Americans, see it, yes Colombia was wrong in disrespecting Ecuador's sovereignty and it should be condemned. This will probably happen today at OEA's emergency summit. This whole deal, regardless of what Rafael Correa says, just to pander to Chavez, is a bilateral conflict and should remain that way.

Chavez is overreacting, no Venezuelan border was compromised at any moment. Seriously, why did Venezuela's government was the first to cry wolf? Is because of the content of Raul Reyes computers?

Chavez keeps talking about how Bush is the devil and the US is the empire of evil, etc, etc; yet he behaves in a strikingly similar fashion. Menacing with preemptive attacks, interferring between Colombia and Ecuador's diplomatic affairs. All he's achieved is messing the field and increasing the tension between Ecuador and Colombia. Did any of you heard his speech on Sunday afternoon? He was talking on his radio show and just like he was ordering some delivery pizza he told the Minister of Defense to deploy 10 batallions and tanks and planes to the border.

If he wants to be the XXIst century version of Simón Bolívar, he should behave like a statesman and try to mediate instead of adding more flame. Chavez should be trying to cool off the tensions and the rethoric, but of course, he's done the exact opposite.

One more thing, if Chavez is sooooo fond of the FARC victims, why on earth did he asked for a minute of silence as a tribute to the deceased guerrilleros? FARC has kidnapped and killed Venezuelans as well, yet they've never received this level of respect. If Chavez is serious about being the greatest democrat of this world, why does he pays homage to a guerilla organization that has tried to destroy Colombia's democracy for more than half a century. FARC currently has almost 1000 people held hostage, most of them have been kidnapped to get money from their families.

Chavez is just trying to deviate the attention from Venezuela's domestic problems: shortages of basic goods and staples and his diminishing popularity.

And what do you guys say to the evidence that could prove what we've already known in Latin America for some time now: Chavez gives money to the FARC and he's paid them to liberate hostages.

OMG facts! From someone who actually lives on the continent. You realize now that 3/4 of the people on this board think Simon Bolivar is that dude from American Idol. Well said Caterina and hopefully are North American, European, and Australian friends understand what you are saying. Chavez has no dog in this fight at all and as you say he is intentionally stoking the flame of war for his own personal agenda. Reality is that Venezuela has a very small standing army and probably very few operating tanks so it's all talk, but it's dangerous talk for the whole continent. We were in Peru and Buenos Aires last year and my cousin is travelling your country right now and pray that someone muzzles Mr. Chavez soon. Buena Suerta.

Hollyweird

Nevermind wrote:

Do you always have to post the same thing twice?

I was waiting for someone to complain. fucked up browser. no control over it. Its not a plea for attention I promise. You will probably see this message again......right below here

Hollyweird

Nevermind wrote:

Do you always have to post the same thing twice?

I was waiting for someone to complain. fucked up browser. no control over it. Its not a plea for attention I promise. You will probably see this message again......right below here

Cosmo

Hollyweird wrote:

For real? Japan? They had that whole colonial expedition called World War 2 which culminated in Mushroom clouds. Might have something to do with not wanting to send Japanees troops abroad since that was their last experience doing so. It's also a part of their constiution....which we wrote

...
You know... we are talking about the Japan of today... and not the Japan of 80 years ago, right? Are you saying that Japan does not engage with South America or the Middle East in commerce? They do not buy banana or light crude oil? Why does anyone need to deploy troops abroad... for commerce?

Commy

Hollyweird wrote:

OMG facts! From someone who actually lives on the continent. You realize now that 3/4 of the people on this board think Simon Bolivar is that dude from American Idol. Well said Caterina and hopefully are North American, European, and Australian friends understand what you are saying. Chavez has no dog in this fight at all and as you say he is intentionally stoking the flame of war for his own personal agenda. Reality is that Venezuela has a very small standing army and probably very few operating tanks so it's all talk, but it's dangerous talk for the whole continent. We were in Peru and Buenos Aires last year and my cousin is travelling your country right now and pray that someone muzzles Mr. Chavez soon. Buena Suerta.

If Chavez is giving money to FARC he has every right to do so. WHat we do know is the Clinton administration gave the Columbian military (and paramilitaries) $2 billion in military aid. These are guys that go into a village, round up all the men, and torture and burn them alive in front of the rest of the village, as a reminder not to fuck with Colombia. True story. The paramilitaries are basically death squads running around the country, with ties to the Columbian military...former offiers and so on end up working with the paramilitaries. ANd all of this is done with support and knowledge of the US authorities. Also called state sponsored terrorism.

CaterinaA

Commy wrote:

If Chavez is giving money to FARC he has every right to do so. WHat we do know is the Clinton administration gave the Columbian military (and paramilitaries) $2 billion in military aid. These are guys that go into a village, round up all the men, and torture and burn them alive in front of the rest of the village, as a reminder not to fuck with Colombia. True story. The paramilitaries are basically death squads running around the country, with ties to the Columbian military...former offiers and so on end up working with the paramilitaries. ANd all of this is done with support and knowledge of the US authorities. Also called state sponsored terrorism.

So, just because someone (the Clinton administration) gave money to a terrorist organization it's OK for Chavez to do the same?

And what makes you think that Chavez has the right to do whatever he feels like with Venezuelans' money? Because, keep in mind that whatever money Chavez gives it is money from tax and oil revenues, hence, Venezuelans' revenues, not Chavez. If he wants to fund guerillas with his own personal fortune, then fine, he'll still be sponsoring a guerilla organization, but at least it won't be with everybody elses money.

Yes, the paramilitars are as vicious as FARC, so? Following your line of thought, Venezuela is also sponsoring terrorism. Or, since the FARC are more in line with your ideology it is OK?

Commy

CaterinaA wrote:

So, just because someone (the Clinton administration) gave money to a terrorist organization it's OK for Chavez to do the same?

And what makes you think that Chavez has the right to do whatever he feels like with Venezuelans' money? Because, keep in mind that whatever money Chavez gives it is money from tax and oil revenues, hence, Venezuelans' revenues, not Chavez. If he wants to fund guerillas with his own personal fortune, then fine, he'll still be sponsoring a guerilla organization, but at least it won't be with everybody elses money.

Yes, the paramilitars are as vicious as FARC, so? Following your line of thought, Venezuela is also sponsoring terrorism. Or, since the FARC are more in line with your ideology it is OK?

resisting tyranny and brutality is ok yes.

CaterinaA

Commy wrote:

resisting tyranny and brutality is ok yes.

Well, you failed to answer any of my questions. However, regardles of how vicious they were, at least paramilitars have given up their fight. On the contrary, FARC nowadays is just another branch of drug-trafficking.

However, do you think it is OK for Chavez to give money to an organization that currently has almost 1000 people kidnapped, and less than a 100 of those are politicians or public figures. The rest are just regular folks, for whom large amounts of money are being asked? Have you ever been to Colombia? Have you ever known people whose relatives have been kidnapped and/or killed by the FARC, for money and no other reason? Do you have any idea of the damage the FARC have generated to Colombia? Are you aware of the fact the FARC are extremely unpopular in Colombia, not even Cuba currently supports them anymore.

Commy

CaterinaA wrote:

Well, you failed to answer any of my questions. However, regardles of how vicious they were, at least paramilitars have given up their fight. On the contrary, FARC nowadays is just another branch of drug-trafficking.

However, do you think it is OK for Chavez to give money to an organization that currently has almost 1000 people kidnapped, and less than a 100 of those are politicians or public figures. The rest are just regular folks, for whom large amounts of money are being asked? Have you ever been to Colombia? Have you ever known people whose relatives have been kidnapped and/or killed by the FARC, for money and no other reason? Do you have any idea of the damage the FARC have generated to Colombia? Are you aware of the fact the FARC are extremely unpopular in Colombia, not even Cuba currently supports them anymore.

I haven't seen any proof that Chavez has funded FARC, it wouldn't surpirse me, but I haven't seen any evidence of that. That said, US involvement in South America has been barbaric, violent, bloody. The US has turned what should be a VERY prosperous continent into a poor region run by corporations and tyrants. Every now and then figures and groups emerge that resist the status quo-and since it really can't get much worse, most of the time these individuals and groups get my support.

But it does seem FARC has turned from a revalutionary organization into gang of criminals worried more about ransom money than any social change, so it is hard to support them for now.

CaterinaA

Commy wrote:

I haven't seen any proof that Chavez has funded FARC, it wouldn't surpirse me, but I haven't seen any evidence of that. That said, US involvement in South America has been barbaric, violent, bloody. The US has turned what should be a VERY prosperous continent into a poor region run by corporations and tyrants. Every now and then figures and groups emerge that resist the status quo-and since it really can't get much worse, most of the time these individuals and groups get my support.

But it does seem FARC has turned from a revalutionary organization into gang of criminals worried more about ransom money than any social change, so it is hard to support them for now.

Well, Colombia's chief of the police presented evidence from Raul Reyes (FARC nº2) computer, and called for international observers to check such evidence.

Yes, the US has intervened in our region -but so did the Soviet Union and Europe, at the same extent I might say- however, if South America has not fulfilled it potential it is mainly because of the incompetents that have ruled the region for so many years. To put the blame on the US, is actually an easy escapegoat for our politicians' mistakes and shortcomings. We, South Americans, are the ones to blame for not being as prosperous as we could be, simply because in most cases we've failed to elect honest politicians. furthermore, we've been lousy citizens by failing to held our elected officials accountable for their wrongdoings. There are exceptions, of course, like Costa Rica (which is actually in Central America), Chile, Uruguay and, lately Brazil. These countries prove that when you have responsible politicians and sound country projects good things can be accomplished.

Commy

CaterinaA wrote:

Well, Colombia's chief of the police presented evidence from Raul Reyes (FARC nº2) computer, and called for international observers to check such evidence.

Yes, the US has intervened in our region -but so did the Soviet Union and Europe, at the same extent I might say- however, if South America has not fulfilled it potential it is mainly because of the incompetents that have ruled the region for so many years. To put the blame on the US, is actually an easy escapegoat for our politicians' mistakes and shortcomings. We, South Americans, are the ones to blame for not being as prosperous as we could be, simply because in most cases we've failed to elect honest politicians. furthermore, we've been lousy citizens by failing to held our elected officials accountable for their wrongdoings. There are exceptions, of course, like Costa Rica (which is actually in Central America), Chile, Uruguay and, lately Brazil. These countries prove that when you have responsible politicians and sound country projects good things can be accomplished.

There are factors during elections that affect the outcome.

For one, the US spent more than the combined democratic and republican campaign finances in the US on one election in south america, in the 90's.

In Nicauragua they had the contras. They hit soft targets. churches, schools, radio stations. When the people elected the Sandanistas the Contras went even further, torturing civilians, killing children. After a decade of terror the people voted teh US business candidate4 and the atrocities subsided.


These are just 2 examples. There are dozens. It really isnt' your fault, I dont' blame the people for choosing poverty over terror.