Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Examiner)   Chavez gets PWNd by Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe   (examiner.com ) divider line
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

29964 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Aug 2009 at 6:16 PM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



351 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2009-08-11 08:35:02 PM  
olddinosaur: At least one guy sees what I see: Chavez is a megalomaniac with eyes on a bigger prize than just Venezuela; he wants to establish himself as the President of the United States of South America, and dictator-for-life of the region, much like Castro did in Cuba.

And much like what Saddam Hussein tried to do in Iraq.
 
2009-08-11 08:35:31 PM  
Under Pinochet, much of the country's resources were sold off to foreign private interests that proved devastating to the indigenous populous. Unions were destroyed. How is that good for any nation? Again, look at modern economic policies and their effect on Africa--its killing the whole continent. The outcome of the economic policies of S. America have become what is basically economic imperialism.

Just to let you know globalization and competitive advantage is not economic imperialism. Please read Baghwati, or Adam Smith for that matter. Were the industries privatized? Yes. Were they more efficient and produced greater returns not only in wages but in ancillary growth that itself was the product of more efficiently run core industries? Yes.

Just because Toyota is Japanese doesn't mean I get my panties in a twist when they sell more cars in the US. If Toyota has figured out how to make a better car at a better price, why should I care where the home office is? Do auto-workers in Japanese owned auto-plants make as much as in US owned auto-plants? Nope. And yet I don't really feel like my fellow Americans are being kept down by man in Tokyo.

I live in a community where we welcomed Japanese car makers and have benefited from it as other industries have grown up or relocated to participate in the economic activity. Ironically, the presence of the Nissan plant spawned the construction of a GM owned Saturn plant. So instead of forcing out domestic business, it actually ended up re-enforcing it.

If the existing industry and commerce meets the needs of the community and does so efficiently, Then there is rarely any room for foreign competition to inject itself. If there is a more efficient way of using the resources and addressing the needs of the market, why not embrace it to your own benefit?
 
2009-08-11 08:36:22 PM  

electronicmaji: So we will kill them. Proudly.


I got no problem with any of that. Both sides are serious civilian-murdering, drug dealing scum.

It's just that left-leaning politicians have, for years and years, glad-handled the leftist "rebels" while tarring the "defence forces" as murderers, which the right-leaning politicans have defended the "defence forces" as necessary against the "evil" left wing drug dealers.

It's a little hard to listen to Uribe slamming Chavez when Uribe himself has had a long (and profitable?) connection to the AUC.

I don't often play the "both sides are bad!" card, but in this case it seems to fit.
 
2009-08-11 08:36:39 PM  

Yomoxu: From a pragmatic point of view, they were/are doing what any great power did/does. Look at the Chinese buying up every natural resource from the Andes to Africa to Australia and buying influence and power with each new mine.


Pragmatically, sure. Agreed.

But China doesn't go around touting itself as a nation "conceived in liberty, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

We had some big words to live up to we totally did not follow, given our actions.

Corporations raped Latin America, and we stood by.

Democratic governments, some actually patterned after the US, influenced by US policies were toppled because they weren't the "right" kind of democracy.

And the CIA-led intervention, attacks, pitting citizenry against each other: inexcusable.

This is why Latin America is so screwed up. We'll never know if the problems you're referring to that were already there would have had an impact.

We never got to see that outcome.

Sorry, man, knowing about that sad history really irritates me...and people think Reagan was some sort of saint...Kennedy, too, for that matter....
 
2009-08-11 08:37:45 PM  

RemyDuron: Sir Charles: brainiac-dumdum: How a nation (the US) can call one man a hero (Reagan) and accuse another man of supporting terrorism (Chavez) for nearly identical actions is beyond me.

I must have missed the part where Reagan nationalized _everything_.

/you know who else nationalized everything?

That is, by far, the least bad thing Chavez did. Nothing wrong with a country nationalizing its oil IMO, those are natural resources that belong to the whole country, no reason they should let private companies profit off them.



Is the U.S. gov't building the drilling rigs? Are the people working those fields gov't employees? Not to my knowledge... Private individuals are investing their own money to drill for the oil and are making gazillions through their own risk and investment, not the government's. Just for that, oil production/refining in the U.S. should not be nationalized.
 
2009-08-11 08:39:11 PM  

Yomoxu: CygnusDarius: CommandantVonThrash: Yomoxu: whidbey: Yomoxu: I wasn't attempting to make an argument, actually. As a Colombian, I'm annoyed that everyone seems to think they know better than the native.

I'm annoyed that the "native" tends to ignore or flat-out deny the adverse effects of decades of illegal US intervention in Latin America.

While I'm sure it makes you feel better that all of South America is the United States' fault, it's unfortunately not. We've been like that since independence, with more civil wars, real wars, and what have you than I can count. I can't even honestly say that US intervention has magnified anything that was not already FUBAR; if anything, it was one more blip of misfortune that just created a convenient scapegoat in our undeniably arrogant and condescending northern neighbor.

Haha, I like the way this bean-eater thinks!

You're doing a great job Pablo. Have a TV.

... And then, there's trolling.

Let him troll. I will have a bandeja paisa, and pity him for being unable to eat good beans.


Heh, I was making a joke about the condescending American bit, no offense meant.

But you can't fool me, I've had Colombian food.

/Way better than Venezuelan food though.
 
2009-08-11 08:39:15 PM  

Loadmaster: olddinosaur: At least one guy sees what I see: Chavez is a megalomaniac with eyes on a bigger prize than just Venezuela; he wants to establish himself as the President of the United States of South America, and dictator-for-life of the region, much like Castro did in Cuba.

And much like what Saddam Hussein tried to do in Iraq.


Well, technically he was successful in being dictator for life.
 
2009-08-11 08:41:22 PM  

whidbey: Gotta wonder if Colombia is speaking as a sovereign nation here, or as a near-puppet of the US with the billions we send them under the aegis of the bogus drug war.

Damn hard to tell.


Or as a splintered "nation" carved up by drug cartels, rightist paramilitary groups, leftist guerrilla armies, terrorized peasants trying to survive between the three of them, and a corrupt government supported by a so-called "military" that only serves whichever of the thugs is paying them more this week.

The last semi-honest politician may have been Gaviria in around 1990 before Escobar was taken down; but really, Colombia has always been about murder first, murder second, drugs third, and then more murder.
 
2009-08-11 08:43:38 PM  
some of the ramifications of globalization is that it widens rich/poor divide. more often then not globalization results in exploitation of indigenous people and resources. Read Mike Davis. But then again, you seem to prefer the perspective of an economist.
 
2009-08-11 08:44:28 PM  
I think what America could learn is that we can't give that speech.

If Obama gave it, FOX News would be on immediately, alternately claiming him weak for not reacting with the military and for encouraging Chavez by even acknowledging his existence.

Accompanied by hyper-inflated bellowing and a shot of someone interrupting a health care town hall.

Class dismissed.
 
2009-08-11 08:44:32 PM  

Gyrfalcon: whidbey: Gotta wonder if Colombia is speaking as a sovereign nation here, or as a near-puppet of the US with the billions we send them under the aegis of the bogus drug war.

Damn hard to tell.

Or as a splintered "nation" carved up by drug cartels, rightist paramilitary groups, leftist guerrilla armies, terrorized peasants trying to survive between the three of them, and a corrupt government supported by a so-called "military" that only serves whichever of the thugs is paying them more this week.

The last semi-honest politician may have been Gaviria in around 1990 before Escobar was taken down; but really, Colombia has always been about murder first, murder second, drugs third, and then more murder.


Agreed. Like Heather Mills, he really doesn't have much of a leg to stand on...

What a tool.
 
2009-08-11 08:46:32 PM  

JQPublic: I heard Reagan invented Swine Flu.


that was Ford
 
2009-08-11 08:47:23 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: Once again, I'm contrasting the American opinion about Reagan w/ the American opinion about Chavez.

It is relevant whether you understand that relevance or not.


My opinion of Hugo Chavez, and dare I say the opinion of many Americans, is based on objective facts & reports about his regime.

- "Rocket launchers sold to Venezuela went to FARC" (AP)
- "Chavez mentions tanks if ally loses Venezuela vote" (Reuters)
- "Rights Suffer Under Chávez" (Human Rights Watch)
- "Freedom of Expression in Danger in Venezuela" (Amnesty International)
- "34 broadcast media shut down at government's behest" (Reporters Without Borders)
- "The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR) is deeply concerned about the deterioration of the situation of freedom of expression in Venezuela" (Organization of American States)
 
2009-08-11 08:48:03 PM  

whidbey: Yomoxu: From a pragmatic point of view, they were/are doing what any great power did/does. Look at the Chinese buying up every natural resource from the Andes to Africa to Australia and buying influence and power with each new mine.

Pragmatically, sure. Agreed.

But China doesn't go around touting itself as a nation "conceived in liberty, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

We had some big words to live up to we totally did not follow, given our actions.

Corporations raped Latin America, and we stood by.

Democratic governments, some actually patterned after the US, influenced by US policies were toppled because they weren't the "right" kind of democracy.

And the CIA-led intervention, attacks, pitting citizenry against each other: inexcusable.

This is why Latin America is so screwed up. We'll never know if the problems you're referring to that were already there would have had an impact.

We never got to see that outcome.

Sorry, man, knowing about that sad history really irritates me...and people think Reagan was some sort of saint...Kennedy, too, for that matter....


Yes we did do some farked up things in Latin America. However the situation that spawned a majority of their issues had nothing to do with the US. Many of the attitudes including the vulnerability of democracies in that region to one-party or military coup date back to the colonial era.

The Encomenderos and the Captaincies were not a US invention, nor was official corruption. The popular catch phrase of colonial Latin America for government officials was , "I obey, but do not comply" Meaning that regardless of whatever the rule of law said, viceroys and large landowners were going to do whatever they wanted anyway.

The Spanish government actually codified a process in which corruption was accounted for as a cost of doing business for the colonial viceroy and taxes levied on the bribes by an official Spanish auditor.

Did we take advantage of some of these things. Yep. But don't say that the US is somehow responsible for the state of all of Latin America's ills. We didn't create the strong men or the juntas, we just used gave them a better reason than the Soviets to point their guns someplace else.
 
2009-08-11 08:48:19 PM  

whidbey: Kennedy, too, for that matter....


Ramen.

Wilson as well.
 
2009-08-11 08:49:14 PM  

Rimjob: brainiac-dumdum: Once again, I'm contrasting the American opinion about Reagan w/ the American opinion about Chavez.

It is relevant whether you understand that relevance or not.

My opinion of Hugo Chavez, and dare I say the opinion of many Americans, is based on objective facts & reports about his regime.

- "Rocket launchers sold to Venezuela went to FARC" (AP)
- "Chavez mentions tanks if ally loses Venezuela vote" (Reuters)
- "Rights Suffer Under Chávez" (Human Rights Watch)
- "Freedom of Expression in Danger in Venezuela" (Amnesty International)
- "34 broadcast media shut down at government's behest" (Reporters Without Borders)
- "The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR) is deeply concerned about the deterioration of the situation of freedom of expression in Venezuela" (Organization of American States)


Go do some reading about the crimes of Reagan now.
 
2009-08-11 08:52:26 PM  
Somebody's obsessed with Reagan.
 
2009-08-11 08:53:33 PM  

Pubby: Did we take advantage of some of these things. Yep. But don't say that the US is somehow responsible for the state of all of Latin America's ills


I am saying that. We had a responsibility to the region.

And in every example you gave, we could have helped the people instead of doing nothing short of declaring war on them.

And nobody seriously thinks the reasons we did intervene was because of the Soviets.

We meddled because of the reasons I stated earlier: we did not agree with the form of democracy the people chose.
 
2009-08-11 08:56:54 PM  

electronicmaji: doomfistinc: DNRTFA.
That being said, the president of one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and a top cocaine producer, who is constantly battling with well-funded private armies, can't talk shiat about any other sovereign state.

Farking political circus. Performances with actors. Instead of uniting for the greater good of Central and South America, let us debate asinine bullshiat to keep the leader's base happy.

I can guarantee that their political base PLUS opposition party members and apolitical citizens would be much happier if there were a continent wide effort to destroy the cartels.

Legalize production of marijuana (the biggest commodity being fought over), negotiate with more liberal US states to at least decriminalize, especially near the border. If no American entity wants to play along, fine. Mexico will become America's Netherlands.

Legalization and regulation will lead to peace in that area of the world.

Until that day comes, these corrupt politicians will continue to bicker and sling mud while engaging in futile efforts to eradicate farms and factories.

Everything going wrong down there can be chalked up to drugs and the stupid-as-shiat US led "War on Drugs".

Can't buy guns if you don't have your dope backing your operations. Can't pay your soldiers on top of that. The farmers start growing legal, quality greens instead of coca. The system the cartels have relied on for years collapses.

Sorry for the ramble, if too long, here is a paraphrase:
Legalizing at least marijuana cuts in to cartel profits enormously. It is very hard to run guns, wage war, and smuggle people without dope money backing you.

After legalization of the herb, we can see what works and what doesn't and implement our findings in to controlling other substances; further depleting the funds to wage war.

Its corruption at the highest levels, and drugs. Of course, the good ol' US of A would never let a real leader step up and stand tall. Personally, I admire Chavez. He's been investing in public works and community improvement since he took office. He took factories and plantations away from exploitative multinational corporations, and he has the balls and oil supplies to tell us to leave his country alone.

Knowing fark though, I will not be agreed with.

/That was a rant and a half
//No offense taken to tl;dr

Colombia is hardly the Most corrupt country anymore.

And Uribe has EVERY right to talk about Chavez when Chavez is giving money and weapons to Leftist Guerrila Terrorists within Colombia.

Chavez is undermining COLOMBIAS SOVEREIGNITY!


And Bush undermined that of Afghanistan and Iraq, plus didn't even bother to finish the job on one of 'em
Try again please.
 
2009-08-11 08:59:23 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: whidbey: Kennedy, too, for that matter....

Ramen.

Wilson as well.


Yeah, funny how those poor childlike Latin American people just couldn't take care of themselves without us...we sure showed them...
 
2009-08-11 09:01:08 PM  

notq: US Secretary of State Clinton's Micro-Management of the Corporation that Funds the Honduras Coup Regime

Records Demonstrate that the Secretary Has Hands-On Control of the Fund that Gave $6.5 Million to the Regime After the June 28 Coup

The US funded and committed the coup against Honduras


Sorry, but the first paragraph has "... $11 million U.S. dollars ..." If the writer is too stupid to understand that you don't use "dollars" when you have a dollar sign, the rest of his screed will be too stupid to waste my time on.
 
2009-08-11 09:01:12 PM  

whidbey: electronicmaji: Of course you made it worse, you outlawed our crash crop and made it go underground.

But looking at the past can't stop the issues we have now. We must stop the drug trade.

I don't see how you can be pissed off at the abusive foreign policy instituted by the US all while continuing to support that policy.

This makes no sense.

How about this:

what IF the billions spent in the War on Drugs debacle would have been used to actually help the people of Colombia instead of declaring war on them because they were forced by economic policies to grow even more coca?


The FARC pretty much control the drug trade now, so your point is moot. That war has been going on for at least 50 years and isn't going to stop until someone comes out on top...by killing everyone on the other side.
Deal with the drug problem on our side of the border first...supply/demand.
/Of course I don't have any bright ideas how to do that...
//sounds good though
 
2009-08-11 09:03:49 PM  

neomatt: Deal with the drug problem on our side of the border first...supply/demand.
/Of course I don't have any bright ideas how to do that...
//sounds good though


Not really. I truly believe that if we stop meddling and trying to control countries like Colombia, the problems will take care of themselves.

People aren't going to stop using drugs.
 
2009-08-11 09:03:57 PM  

whidbey: We meddled because of the reasons I stated earlier: we did not agree with the form of democracy the people chose.


What form of democracy would that be exactly? Name me one regime in Latin America that was a functional and stable representative democracy before the mid 20th century? And, with the obvious exceptions of Honduras and Chile (fruit and copper respectively) where was the US kicking the little guy down to reap in those big bucks?

With regards to worrying about the Soviets. What is it exactly that you think goes through a country's mind when their arch-enemy tries to park a bunch of nukes right off their coast? Then later, that arch-enemy starts supporting rebel movements in the same region. My guess is that the country in question, gripped by visions of a looming encirclement, not unlike the one they have put around their enemy to significant effect, would prompt somewhat knee-jerk reactions with regards to giving away guns and money like they were going out of style.
 
2009-08-11 09:04:33 PM  

whidbey: Yeah, funny how those poor childlike Latin American people just couldn't take care of themselves without us...we sure showed them...


I think the problem is that parts of the world don't want to be like us.

Which is completely retarded because we're awesome and the rest of the world is much better for us being around.

And we as a nation cannot comprehend why people wouldn't want to be awesome like us.
 
2009-08-11 09:05:35 PM  

whidbey: what IF the billions spent in the War on Drugs debacle would have been used to actually help the people of Colombia instead of declaring war on them because they were forced by economic policies to grow even more coca


Such advanced objective thinking has no place in government policy making.
 
2009-08-11 09:05:41 PM  

Yomoxu: Let him troll. I will have a bandeja paisa, and pity him for being unable to eat good beans.


Well, there's some ceviche in the fridge, along with a little bit of cahuamanta, too.

/I like beans, but only for breakfast, though
 
2009-08-11 09:07:34 PM  

Bill_Wick's_Friend: electronicmaji: So we will kill them. Proudly.

I got no problem with any of that. Both sides are serious civilian-murdering, drug dealing scum.

It's just that left-leaning politicians have, for years and years, glad-handled the leftist "rebels" while tarring the "defence forces" as murderers, which the right-leaning politicans have defended the "defence forces" as necessary against the "evil" left wing drug dealers.

It's a little hard to listen to Uribe slamming Chavez when Uribe himself has had a long (and profitable?) connection to the AUC.

I don't often play the "both sides are bad!" card, but in this case it seems to fit.


Only in the sense that he killed the bastards who killed his father. There is a running bet on how long he will keep alive the biatch who actually pulled the trigger.

whidbey: Yomoxu: From a pragmatic point of view, they were/are doing what any great power did/does. Look at the Chinese buying up every natural resource from the Andes to Africa to Australia and buying influence and power with each new mine.

Pragmatically, sure. Agreed.

But China doesn't go around touting itself as a nation "conceived in liberty, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

We had some big words to live up to we totally did not follow, given our actions.

Corporations raped Latin America, and we stood by.

Democratic governments, some actually patterned after the US, influenced by US policies were toppled because they weren't the "right" kind of democracy.

And the CIA-led intervention, attacks, pitting citizenry against each other: inexcusable.

This is why Latin America is so screwed up. We'll never know if the problems you're referring to that were already there would have had an impact.

We never got to see that outcome.

Sorry, man, knowing about that sad history really irritates me...and people think Reagan was some sort of saint...Kennedy, too, for that matter....


I doubt anything would be different. Instead of blaming the United States, we'd blame each other or some such. Though the corporate rape part is very frustrating.

And don't knock Kennedy! A large neighborhood that his Peace Corps helped create in Bogota is named for him. And Reagan actually gave us money to fight, so it's hard to be hard on him from my biased point of view.

CommandantVonThrash: Yomoxu: CygnusDarius: CommandantVonThrash: Yomoxu: whidbey: Yomoxu: I wasn't attempting to make an argument, actually. As a Colombian, I'm annoyed that everyone seems to think they know better than the native.

I'm annoyed that the "native" tends to ignore or flat-out deny the adverse effects of decades of illegal US intervention in Latin America.

While I'm sure it makes you feel better that all of South America is the United States' fault, it's unfortunately not. We've been like that since independence, with more civil wars, real wars, and what have you than I can count. I can't even honestly say that US intervention has magnified anything that was not already FUBAR; if anything, it was one more blip of misfortune that just created a convenient scapegoat in our undeniably arrogant and condescending northern neighbor.

Haha, I like the way this bean-eater thinks!

You're doing a great job Pablo. Have a TV.

... And then, there's trolling.

Let him troll. I will have a bandeja paisa, and pity him for being unable to eat good beans.

Heh, I was making a joke about the condescending American bit, no offense meant.

But you can't fool me, I've had Colombian food.

/Way better than Venezuelan food though.


Agreed!
 
2009-08-11 09:09:01 PM  

CommandantVonThrash: doomfistinc: DNRTFA.
That being said, the president of one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and a top cocaine producer, who is constantly battling with well-funded private armies, can't talk shiat about any other sovereign state.

Sure he can. Colombia is consistently lower...much lower than Venezuela in global corruption rankings from the various agencies that rank them. Colombia does very well for a South American country (68 on the 2007 Transparency International List) and Venezuela does poorly by any standard (162...out of 179)

You're either still thinking of the 'old' Colombia, or you're stupid enough to swallow the swill coming from the mouth of one of the world's most corrupt leaders. Either way, rethink.


You're probably right on the stats. I haven't looked in a long time.
I'm coming from a viewpoint of growing up poor as shiat, and now living my adult life poor as shiat. Food stamps and all baby.
No politician is perfect, or any sort of open book (transparency), but I tend to root for the people who improve the quality of life for lower class citizens.

Castro sure as hell wasn't a nice dude or someone who's philosophies should be imitated, but in general, residents of Cuba are happy as pigs in shiat about their quality of medical care, and what can't be bought in gov't sanctioned stores usually gets delivered door to door by "criminals".

I've talked to a lot of Cubans who tell me that basically the country is split. Many are ready to take up arms and start yet another revolution. On the other hand, many are more than happy to keep the status quo when it comes to medical care, and they can get illegal items daily without any problem.

IMHO, which I don't consider to mean much, I'd rather have some of the best health care in the world for free and a black market for other stuff than to continue to be uninsured and STILL buying things off the black market.

Black market goods WITH healthcare, or black market goods WITHOUT healthcare.

But I guess I'm willing to see the good side of things in a country that the US has been screwing in the cornhole lube-less for decades. If it weren't for embargoes, Cuba would be a thriving tropical tourist destination

Just the 2c of a close-to-homeless person who has a wonderful, caring family to take me in during my dark hours
 
2009-08-11 09:10:52 PM  

mandingueiro: some of the ramifications of globalization is that it widens rich/poor divide. more often then not globalization results in exploitation of indigenous people and resources. Read Mike Davis. But then again, you seem to prefer the perspective of an economist.


I apologize if I seem overly analytical in the matter, but it would seem that where it is proven that superior forms of production lead to increased prosperity, Indigenous peoples should thrive just as easily. The Basques are a good example. Bilbao's prosperity helps to keep alive an ethnic group that by all rights should have been simply absorbed into the the larger and more populous Castillian majority. The same applies the Barcelona and the Catalans. Economic prosperity enlivens cultures and gives them new avenues to express themselves and strengthen their unique identity.

The exception that occurs with many indigenous peoples is a firm understanding of property rights. Without a firm social commitment to the rights of individuals to acquire and own property in their own right very often attempts at economic progress produce mediocre results if at all.
 
2009-08-11 09:11:58 PM  

CygnusDarius: Yomoxu: Let him troll. I will have a bandeja paisa, and pity him for being unable to eat good beans.

Well, there's some ceviche in the fridge, along with a little bit of cahuamanta, too.

/I like beans, but only for breakfast, though


What about a delicious sancocho? Or perhaps some chorizo as well!
 
2009-08-11 09:12:25 PM  

whidbey: electronicmaji: Of course you made it worse, you outlawed our crash crop and made it go underground.

But looking at the past can't stop the issues we have now. We must stop the drug trade.

I don't see how you can be pissed off at the abusive foreign policy instituted by the US all while continuing to support that policy.

This makes no sense.

How about this:

what IF the billions spent in the War on Drugs debacle would have been used to actually help the people of Colombia instead of declaring war on them because they were forced by economic policies to grow even more coca?


It would of been nice BACK THEN but for now the narcotrafickers are violent bastard thugs and MUST BE KILLED.
 
2009-08-11 09:15:20 PM  

Bill_Wick's_Friend: electronicmaji: So we will kill them. Proudly.

I got no problem with any of that. Both sides are serious civilian-murdering, drug dealing scum.

It's just that left-leaning politicians have, for years and years, glad-handled the leftist "rebels" while tarring the "defence forces" as murderers, which the right-leaning politicans have defended the "defence forces" as necessary against the "evil" left wing drug dealers.

It's a little hard to listen to Uribe slamming Chavez when Uribe himself has had a long (and profitable?) connection to the AUC.

I don't often play the "both sides are bad!" card, but in this case it seems to fit.


Uribe has no connection to the AUC, and he has never stooped to defend them.

Just because some members of his party gained power with help of the AUC, does not mean Uribe has any connection with them.

Sorry, guilt by association does not fly in Colombia. If Uribe had any connection with the AUC he would be out of office, you don't know how quickly we get pissed off by things like that. Just look at Samper.
 
2009-08-11 09:15:25 PM  

electronicmaji: whidbey: electronicmaji: Of course you made it worse, you outlawed our crash crop and made it go underground.

But looking at the past can't stop the issues we have now. We must stop the drug trade.

I don't see how you can be pissed off at the abusive foreign policy instituted by the US all while continuing to support that policy.

This makes no sense.

How about this:

what IF the billions spent in the War on Drugs debacle would have been used to actually help the people of Colombia instead of declaring war on them because they were forced by economic policies to grow even more coca?

It would of been nice BACK THEN but for now the narcotrafickers are violent bastard thugs and MUST BE KILLED.


Haven't you heard? We supply the farmers with banana and coffee crops whilst their farms are hundreds of miles away from the nearest legit crop market!
Far better than growing a field of coca, chopping it up, putting it into a solvent, drying it out, and walking a few miles to the nearest coca market where the product sells for probably a few hundred times that of bananas.
Jeez our government is genius
 
2009-08-11 09:17:31 PM  

Gyrfalcon: whidbey: Gotta wonder if Colombia is speaking as a sovereign nation here, or as a near-puppet of the US with the billions we send them under the aegis of the bogus drug war.

Damn hard to tell.

Or as a splintered "nation" carved up by drug cartels, rightist paramilitary groups, leftist guerrilla armies, terrorized peasants trying to survive between the three of them, and a corrupt government supported by a so-called "military" that only serves whichever of the thugs is paying them more this week.

The last semi-honest politician may have been Gaviria in around 1990 before Escobar was taken down; but really, Colombia has always been about murder first, murder second, drugs third, and then more murder.


Except the Paramilitaries are Demobilized, the FARC is practically destroyed, and the ELN are i Demobilization peace talks.

The only thing that remains is the Military, whose abuse of power is being investigated and military members are being PUT IN JAIL FOR IT.

That is a first for Colombia.

Once again, foreigners have no idea about the situation in Colombia.
 
2009-08-11 09:19:20 PM  

Pubby: What form of democracy would that be exactly? Name me one regime in Latin America that was a functional and stable representative democracy before the mid 20th century?


I was actually talking about the period from the 1950s to the present, and I'm sure you're aware that there were fledgling democracies that were toppled because of US involvement.

With regards to worrying about the Soviets. What is it exactly that you think goes through a country's mind when their arch-enemy tries to park a bunch of nukes right off their coast?

The Cuban Missile Crisis had little to do with what happened in Guatemala, Honduras Nicaragua or El Salvador. I find the comparison disingenuous.

Then later, that arch-enemy starts supporting rebel movements in the same region

Because the US did whatever it could to shut those movements down. Not just rebels, but popularly-elected governments. If we were "concerned" about the Soviets, using military muscle against the countries in question certainly was not the solution.

Seriously, I can't even believe we're arguing this. Are you trying to somehow lessen the impacts of this country's wrongdoing? History shows what we did, and it's inexcusable.

If you're trying to tout a pragmatic angle, then we're hypocrites that don't believe in our own words.

Yomoxu: And don't knock Kennedy!


I am knocking Kennedy. He was part the problem, too. He really wasn't your friend, given the CIA operations that occurred on his watch.

And Reagan actually gave us money to fight, so it's hard to be hard on him from my biased point of view.

See, this just amazes me. Reagan illegal military action against your people, ignored international law doing it, god knows how many innocents died because of it, and yet you praise this.

That's mind-boggling to me, given the easy access to the history.

He was no friend to you, either. He was your enemy.
 
2009-08-11 09:19:32 PM  

doomfistinc: electronicmaji: doomfistinc: DNRTFA.
That being said, the president of one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and a top cocaine producer, who is constantly battling with well-funded private armies, can't talk shiat about any other sovereign state.

Farking political circus. Performances with actors. Instead of uniting for the greater good of Central and South America, let us debate asinine bullshiat to keep the leader's base happy.

I can guarantee that their political base PLUS opposition party members and apolitical citizens would be much happier if there were a continent wide effort to destroy the cartels.

Legalize production of marijuana (the biggest commodity being fought over), negotiate with more liberal US states to at least decriminalize, especially near the border. If no American entity wants to play along, fine. Mexico will become America's Netherlands.

Legalization and regulation will lead to peace in that area of the world.

Until that day comes, these corrupt politicians will continue to bicker and sling mud while engaging in futile efforts to eradicate farms and factories.

Everything going wrong down there can be chalked up to drugs and the stupid-as-shiat US led "War on Drugs".

Can't buy guns if you don't have your dope backing your operations. Can't pay your soldiers on top of that. The farmers start growing legal, quality greens instead of coca. The system the cartels have relied on for years collapses.

Sorry for the ramble, if too long, here is a paraphrase:
Legalizing at least marijuana cuts in to cartel profits enormously. It is very hard to run guns, wage war, and smuggle people without dope money backing you.

After legalization of the herb, we can see what works and what doesn't and implement our findings in to controlling other substances; further depleting the funds to wage war.

Its corruption at the highest levels, and drugs. Of course, the good ol' US of A would never let a real leader step up and stand tall. Personally, I admire Chavez. He's been investing in public works and community improvement since he took office. He took factories and plantations away from exploitative multinational corporations, and he has the balls and oil supplies to tell us to leave his country alone.

Knowing fark though, I will not be agreed with.

/That was a rant and a half
//No offense taken to tl;dr

Colombia is hardly the Most corrupt country anymore.

And Uribe has EVERY right to talk about Chavez when Chavez is giving money and weapons to Leftist Guerrila Terrorists within Colombia.

Chavez is undermining COLOMBIAS SOVEREIGNITY!

And Bush undermined that of Afghanistan and Iraq, plus didn't even bother to finish the job on one of 'em
Try again please.


WHAT
THEfark
DOES
THIS
HAVE
TO
DO
WITH
BUSH?
 
2009-08-11 09:20:14 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: Rimjob: brainiac-dumdum: How a nation (the US) can call one man a hero (Reagan) and accuse another man of supporting terrorism (Chavez) for nearly identical actions is beyond me.

I'm no fan of Ronald Reagan, but when did the Reagan Administration shut down radio & television stations because they broadcast stuff he didn't like, or tell workers they had to be registered Republicans or risk being fired?

Again, Reagan is considered heroic by many in our nation for his actions in S America. Actions similar to what Chavez is now doing w/ FARC that get him branded, and rightly so, as supporting terrorism.

While the Chavez/Reagan comparison is not valid in all aspects, it is valid w/ respect to terrorism in Latin America.


It's valid in respect to you making the most retarded comparison I've read in a long time.
 
2009-08-11 09:20:36 PM  

electronicmaji: It would of been nice BACK THEN but for now the narcotrafickers are violent bastard thugs and MUST BE KILLED.


Not with US tax dollars. If you want a bloodbath, do it yourself.
 
2009-08-11 09:20:50 PM  

electronicmaji: Once again, foreigners have no idea about the situation in Colombia.


Once again, many people in the thread, such as myself, were not commenting on the current state of Colombia, but were instead commenting on the disconnect between the American opinion of Reagan and the American opinion of Chavez.
 
2009-08-11 09:21:39 PM  

inconnu: brainiac-dumdum: Rimjob: brainiac-dumdum: How a nation (the US) can call one man a hero (Reagan) and accuse another man of supporting terrorism (Chavez) for nearly identical actions is beyond me.

I'm no fan of Ronald Reagan, but when did the Reagan Administration shut down radio & television stations because they broadcast stuff he didn't like, or tell workers they had to be registered Republicans or risk being fired?

Again, Reagan is considered heroic by many in our nation for his actions in S America. Actions similar to what Chavez is now doing w/ FARC that get him branded, and rightly so, as supporting terrorism.

While the Chavez/Reagan comparison is not valid in all aspects, it is valid w/ respect to terrorism in Latin America.

It's valid in respect to you making the most retarded comparison I've read in a long time.


why is that comparison retarded?
 
2009-08-11 09:22:58 PM  

doomfistinc: electronicmaji: whidbey: electronicmaji: Of course you made it worse, you outlawed our crash crop and made it go underground.

But looking at the past can't stop the issues we have now. We must stop the drug trade.

I don't see how you can be pissed off at the abusive foreign policy instituted by the US all while continuing to support that policy.

This makes no sense.

How about this:

what IF the billions spent in the War on Drugs debacle would have been used to actually help the people of Colombia instead of declaring war on them because they were forced by economic policies to grow even more coca?

It would of been nice BACK THEN but for now the narcotrafickers are violent bastard thugs and MUST BE KILLED.

Haven't you heard? We supply the farmers with banana and coffee crops whilst their farms are hundreds of miles away from the nearest legit crop market!
Far better than growing a field of coca, chopping it up, putting it into a solvent, drying it out, and walking a few miles to the nearest coca market where the product sells for probably a few hundred times that of bananas.
Jeez our government is genius


Once again, the farmers who do grow cocaine and marijuana in Colombia are defended by the FARC.

They won't be doing that anytime soon if they want to live.
 
2009-08-11 09:23:18 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: why is that comparison retarded?


I didn't like it, either, and it's kind of backfiring on you here.

Chavez is nothing like Reagan was.
 
2009-08-11 09:24:38 PM  

whidbey: electronicmaji: It would of been nice BACK THEN but for now the narcotrafickers are violent bastard thugs and MUST BE KILLED.

Not with US tax dollars. If you want a bloodbath, do it yourself.


They are already being killed with tax dollars.

This is like killing memeber of Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. Everyone supports it.
 
2009-08-11 09:25:20 PM  

Yomoxu: What about a delicious sancocho? Or perhaps some chorizo as well!


The closest thing we have to sancocho 'round these parts is cocido, or Gallina Pinta (new window), but chorizo is good for any time!.

/Actually, there's a butcher shop near my old house that sells some damn fine chorizo
//And carnitas, too
 
2009-08-11 09:25:32 PM  

whidbey: brainiac-dumdum: why is that comparison retarded?

I didn't like it, either, and it's kind of backfiring on you here.

Chavez is nothing like Reagan was.


I was pointing out that here Reagan is considered a hero for his actions in S America , and Chavez is considered a monster for similar actions in the US.

I don't understand how people can think Reagan is a hero while Chavez is a monster.
 
2009-08-11 09:25:34 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: electronicmaji: Once again, foreigners have no idea about the situation in Colombia.

Once again, many people in the thread, such as myself, were not commenting on the current state of Colombia, but were instead commenting on the disconnect between the American opinion of Reagan and the American opinion of Chavez.


Heres the disconnect.

REAGAN WAS A AMERICAN PRESIDENT.

CHAVEZ IS A VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT.

Reagan didn't farking rewrite the god damn constitution and shut down the radio stations either.
 
2009-08-11 09:28:27 PM  

electronicmaji: brainiac-dumdum: electronicmaji: Once again, foreigners have no idea about the situation in Colombia.

Once again, many people in the thread, such as myself, were not commenting on the current state of Colombia, but were instead commenting on the disconnect between the American opinion of Reagan and the American opinion of Chavez.

Heres the disconnect.

REAGAN WAS A AMERICAN PRESIDENT.

CHAVEZ IS A VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT.

Reagan didn't farking rewrite the god damn constitution and shut down the radio stations either.


Reagan supported terrorism in S America. The speech attacks Chavez for supporting terrorism in S America.

Why is Chavez a monster and while Reagan avoids that label in America? Patriotism? That's pathetic and simple minded.
 
2009-08-11 09:29:21 PM  
Wow, that speech was magnificent. Good for him and his country.
 
2009-08-11 09:31:29 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: electronicmaji: brainiac-dumdum: electronicmaji: Once again, foreigners have no idea about the situation in Colombia.

Once again, many people in the thread, such as myself, were not commenting on the current state of Colombia, but were instead commenting on the disconnect between the American opinion of Reagan and the American opinion of Chavez.

Heres the disconnect.

REAGAN WAS A AMERICAN PRESIDENT.

CHAVEZ IS A VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT.

Reagan didn't farking rewrite the god damn constitution and shut down the radio stations either.

Reagan supported terrorism in S America. The speech attacks Chavez for supporting terrorism in S America.

Why is Chavez a monster and while Reagan avoids that label in America? Patriotism? That's pathetic and simple minded.


Because when the President does it it's not illegal.
 
Displayed 50 of 351 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report