Regional bloc says Ecuador's sovereignty was violated

[bemildred]

Source: IHT

CARACAS, Venezuela: The Organization of American States approved a resolution on Wednesday declaring the Colombian military raid into Ecuador a violation of sovereignty, in a move aimed at easing a diplomatic crisis in the Andes involving Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela.

The resolution was approved in Washington after talks in which the United States was the hemisphere's only nation explicitly supporting Colombia, a top Bush administration ally. The measure stopped short of condemning Colombia for the raid, which took place on Saturday and killed 24 guerrillas, including a senior commander of the rebel group FARC in Colombia.

---

Chávez added that he had been discussing the dispute with President Nicolas Sarkozy of France. France has been relying on Chávez's mediation to try to free Ingrid Betancourt, a captive of the FARC with dual French and Colombian citizenship who was once a candidate for president of Colombia.

---

The resolution approved on Wednesday requires José Miguel Insulza, the secretary general of the Organization of American States, to form a commission to travel to Sucombios Province in Ecuador and across the border in Putumayo Province in Colombia to investigate the raid and determine ways of repairing ties between the countries.


Read more: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/06/america/06venez.php

[sabbat hunter]

1. Columbia

Made a mistake in going across the Ecuador border, but FARC is a terror organization that kidnaps civilians, whether they are citizens of Columbia or not.

Venezuela, Columbia, Ecuador should all unite in wiping out that group instead of fighting amongst each other.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Chavez is starting to strike me as...

A left-wing, latino George W. Bush. I hope I am mistaken.

[stox]

3. I wouldn't underestimate Hugo

I suspect he is a lot smarter than GWB, and possibly more dangerous.

[Hulk]

6. That isn't saying much.....

The chimp is probably in the lower 1% of dumb asses in this country. What a strange coincidence that he is LEADING the country.

[Warpy]

4. If he were that, he wouldn't be talking

His army would be on their way to Bogota.

[Bacchus39]

31. they wouldn't make it past Cúcuta

n/t

[Andrushka]

10. In what way?

What an absurd thing to say.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

11. Absurd?

The man is increasingly bellicose. Not just with the US, but now with his neighbors. I find bellicosity, on the part of the leaders of countries more than a little disturbing.

I do not deny him his props for what he was confronted with and what he has accomplished in Venezuela. I just think he's spoiling for a fight, in the same way and for the same reasons that Dear Leader has spent his tenure spoiling for one. I also think he gave a lot away about himself with his bit to get rid of presidential term limits.

[Andrushka]

13. Oh, I see

Chavez is like *.

Not Uribe with his illegal military actions. Chavez.


:eyes:

[Peace Patriot]

20. Bush/U.S. arms Colombia to the teeth with BILLIONS of our tax dollars in military aid,

Colombia sends bombs and soldiers into Ecuador and murders the CHIEF HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR of the FARC guerrillas with the Presidents of France, Ecuador and Venezuela, and everybody who was with him--21 people--in their sleep, thus destroying all hope of further hostage releases and peace talks in Colombia's FORTY-plus year civil war...and CHAVEZ is "bellicose"?

Chavez has been trying to negotiate a peace, as have the Presidents of France, Ecuador, Argentina, Brazil and others. He has gotten the FARC to release six hostages this year. Rafeal Correa said he was about to get 12 more hostages released by THE GUY THEY JUST KILLED IN HIS SLEEP, Raul Reyes.

And CHAVEZ is bellicose?

Understand, Alvaro Uribe, President of the Bush Cartel client state of Colombia, and his fascist compadres in the Colombia military and closely associated rightwing paramilitary death squads, are DEPENDENT upon the BILLIONS of dollars from OUR pocketbooks, to maintain power in a divided country. This civil war has been going on for decades. The last time a peace was negotiated, and FARC guerrillas demobilized, the Colombian government then massacred everybody who laid down their arms--some 500 leftist politicians were systematically murdered, and thousands of people who voted for them were tortured and killed. Uribe and cohorts DON'T WANT PEACE.

And CHAVEZ is the one who is bellicose?

"I just think he's spoiling for a fight..."---Tandalayo_Scheisskopf

WHO is "spoiling for a fight"? The guy who just got six hostages released, and has been trying to broker a peace in Colombia?

WHO is "spoiling for a fight"? THESE people?

--------------

Chavez, freed FARC hostages call for political solution to Colombian conflict
February 29th 2008, by Kiraz Janicke - Venezuelanalysis.com
Luis Eladio Pérez and Gloria Polanco speaking at the press conference in Caracas (Reuters)

Caracas, March 1, 2008 (venezuelanalysis.com) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has called for international mediation group to negotiate a humanitarian accord in neighboring Colombia, after a successful Venezuelan led humanitarian mission secured the release of four former legislators held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), on Wednesday.

During a telephone call to state owned VTV Thursday, Chavez indicated that France, Ecuador, Brazil and Argentina as well as the Organization of American States support such a move. It is "essential" that Venezuela is part of any international mediation group, because "the FARC have demonstrated that they don't believe in anyone else," he added.

In a communiqué, released minutes after the hostage handover the FARC said this would be the last unilateral hostage release. The FARC reiterated their longstanding call for a military free zone as a precondition for any further negotiations for a humanitarian exchange of 40 remaining high profile hostages for 500 imprisoned guerrillas. However, the Colombian government immediately rejected this proposal.

Chavez said the desire for peace by the majority of Colombians and that the pressure of world opinion would force Uribe to change his position.

"President Uribe is going to have to change his position. Everybody is in agreement except for Uribe, " he declared.

Speaking at a press conference in Caracas on Thursday night, the former Colombian legislators, Luis Eladio Pérez, Jorge Gechem, Orlando Beltrán and Gloria Polanco, also spoke out in favor of a military free zone to facilitate a humanitarian exchange.

"I publicly challenge President Alvaro Uribe to demonstrate the success of his policy of democratic security and clear the military from the municipalities of Pradera and Florida and after 45 days the Armed Forces can recuperate this territory," Perez said after his liberation. "The solution is political, Mr. President Uribe," he repeated twice during the press conference.

"If you persist in the foolishness of insisting on a military rescue you are going to receive, Mr President Uribe, 40 or 50 corpses. It is absurd to think of a military rescue with the conditions that we had in captivity. There would be a massacre," Pérez stressed.

He revealed that the four recently liberated ex legislators have a proposal to present "to President Uribe, the President (of France Nicholas) Sarkozy and, of course, to President (of Venezuela, Hugo) Chavez." This proposal would only be made public after the three heads of state had been informed, he said.

Pérez who classified the FARC as a "political military group who use terrorist practices" also referred to former Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt, captured by the guerrillas in 2001, who he said is in a "very bad state of health."

In a message released in 2003 demonstrating Betancourt's proof of life, the former presidential candidate indicated that she was opposed any form of military rescue, as she feared a repeat of the tragedy that occurred in May that year when ex governor of Antioquia, Gilberto Echeverri, and the del ex Defense Minister, Guillermo Gaviria, died during a botched military rescue ordered by Uribe.

Betancourt maintains this position Perez said, however she is also conscious "of the high risk and lack of commitment of the President of the Republic."

In contrast Betancourt calls for a political solution to the conflict based on the Geneva Convention and believes that "fundamentally President Uribe has to recognize the political status of the FARC guerrillas," Perez said.

Pérez also affirmed that after an attempted escape, Betancourt, "remained chained up during the night," and her captors, "humiliated her, obliged her to walk barefoot, tied her to trees and rationed her food."

Ex congressman Orlando Beltrán condemned "all terrorist acts, wherever they come from. I condemn the terrorism of the FARC, of the paramilitaries and the terrorism of the State." He pointed out that Colombia "is the only country in the world that has disappeared an entire political movement, more than six thousand leaders of Unión Patriótica were disappeared, to speak only of this case."

Under a previous peace accord in the 1980's the FARC demobilized and formed Unión Patriótica, however after they laid down their arms thousands of former guerrillas were hunted down by paramilitaries, backed by the Colombian state, and massacred, forcing them back into the armed struggle.

Beltrán added that the Colombian State "has to assume responsibility and understand that they must create the conditions to achieve a humanitarian accord. I don't understand why, when make these handovers in a unilateral manner, they say they are not going to clear the military from a centimeter of the national territory."

Gloria Polanco asserted, "It is necessary to reach the heart of President Uribe, to speak to him, to explain, because he has to understand that if he does not clear the military from Pradera and Florida, which is what the FARC ask, our comrades will die in captivity."

"I am asking for a humanitarian accord, because they have to place value on life, not on a piece of land, not on a piece of territory," she said.

All four ex-legislators confirmed that they would participate in an international day of action organized by human rights organizations on March 6 in protest against paramilitary violence in Colombia. Uribe has condemned the protest scheduled to take place in some 150 cities around the world, claiming it is organized by the FARC.

(emphasis added)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3213
(Note: Venezuela Analysis is a Fair Use web site.)

---------------------------

I'll tell you who is "spoiling for a fight"...

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants** Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

and

Exxon Mobil--which just took one of the actions that Rumsfeld lays out, in his war plan--economic warfare against Venezuela--by seeking to freeze $12 billion of Venezuela's assets, in a dispute over Venezuela's 60% share in its own oil (--a deal that Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP and even Chevron has agreed to). Exxon Mobil--which last quarter reported the highest earnings of any U.S. corp, ever--can spare a few billions (which they say the poor of Venezuela owe them). What they want is to DESTABILIZE Venezuela, preparatory to this Rumsfeld plot, which we see unfolding before our very eyes, to destabilize the REGION, and grab all or some of the rich oil fields in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia (also gas) and Argentina (big oil find there, recently), which all now have DEMOCRATIC, leftist (majorityist) governments, with goals of social justice and regional self-determination, and are all strongly allied with each other, and with other leftist governments, such as Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Nicaragua.

"Prominent British Figures Call on ExxonMobil to Respect Venezuelan Sovereignty"
February 28th 2008, by Venezuelan Information Centre
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3209

**NOTE: WHO is "bellicose"? WHO is "spoiling for a fight"? WHO is a "tyrant"?

-----------------------

Additional reading....

Uribe’s Colombia is destabilizing a New Latin America
March 4th 2008, by James J. Brittain and R. James Sacouman
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3233

Plan Colombia: The Real Destabilizing Force in South America
March 4th 2008, by Carlos Martinez - Global Exchange Venezuela Program
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3231

Washington’s role in the current conflict between Colombia, Venezuela and Ecuador
March 3rd 2008, by Cory Fischer-Hoffman - Upside Down World
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3224

Recommended: www.BoRev.net (hilarious AND informative)
Also recommended: "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" - Irish filmmakers'documentary on Venezuela (available at YouTube and at www.axisoflogic.com)

PLEASE GET INFORMED!

[MaryCeleste]

63. Actually Venezuela is the leading military power in the region

Chavez sent over 10,000 soldiers with armor to "defend" a border that has not been attacked. Hopefully the machismo does not get the best of his good sense and he keeps them in Venezuela

[Judi Lynn]

67. Oh, now you're just trying to scare us! Look at these figures. They don't agree with you.

Defense Spending in Latin America
By The Associated Press

Tuesday, May 30, 2006


(05-30) 12:25 PDT , (AP) --


Some of the top spenders on defense in Latin America last year:


_ Brazil: $13.2 billion, regular defense budget.


_ Colombia: $6.3 billion, includes regular defense budget, other military spending, costs of police agencies and U.S. military aid.


_ Chile: $3.8 billion , includes defense budget, additional military funding and costs for national police.


_ Mexico: $3.1 billion , defense budget.


_ Argentina: $1.7 billion , defense budget.


_ Venezuela: $1.4 billion, regular defense budget. Does not include other defense deals paid from outside the budget.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/05/30/international/i122541D29.DTL&type=politics

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Leading military power, smallest budget? How does that work?

[MaryCeleste]

72. Try an authoratitive source, like Janes online

Not everything is in the published budgets. The 1.4 doesn't even cover the airplane deal a while back.

[Judi Lynn]

74. Maybe you could post your info. from that source, since so many of us don't have a subscription. n/t

[MaryCeleste]

80. Here is another from a mix of sources...Faux and Pravada

How far apart can you get?

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/16-06-2006/82082-Venezuela-0

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334852,00.html which contains this summary: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334849,00.html which was derived from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/venezuela/army-equipment.htm

Note that I am not endorsing the analysis, just the raw numbers. Janes is also referenced in the article.

[Judi Lynn]

81. I've been poisoned! Why would you use those sources?

The Global Security source is all Greek to me. Sorry.

I feel satisfied with the results I got by googling for "Military Budget" "Latin America" which I posted. It looked exactly similar to other ones I've seen, too.

(For future reference, you'll probably want to get serious and avoid paying any attention to trash like Fox. Doesn't a quick look at their news people even tell you anything? Please! Use some judgement. They are all twisted clowns.)

[MaryCeleste]

86. Beacuse the data is right even if the analysis sucks

Chavez has been pouring serious money into his military. Pravda and Fox both support that (multiple sources with different agendas saying the same thing makes for believability). Much more than the budget number indicated.

The tabular data is derived from GlobalsSecurity.org, which is regarded as accurate by most people and is not a government shill. I can't get to the Janes data from home and GS data is almost as good in most cases and agree in this one. It may be Greek to you but the number matter. Also the article you quoted even said that there were purchases not counted in the Venezuelan budget. All this was to support that Venezuela has the largest military presence in the region. 30 front line jet fighters, 60 total and 100,000 AKs, modern light armor and APCs. Chavez has quite a military presence, and more importantly one that is for projecting power not just border protection.

[Judi Lynn]

87. He had to get new planes because Bush made it impossible for him to repair the old ones from the U.S

That's why he had to go shopping for all new ones to replace the ones he had no way to fix any longer, since _Bush refused to allow parts to repair the old ones to be sold.

You're not going to enlighten anyone here. It has been discussed over and over with people who stopped in, in depth.

The 100,000 rifles, to replace the extremely old ones? Sounds reasonable in a right-wing country, by God.

As for a reason to defend his country? He would have no doubt been killed when he was taken at gunpoint by the coup plotters, and everyone knows _{George W. Bush} was behind that. We also know the various attempts to assassinate him, and the fact that Alvaro Uribe spent 6 hours in a meeting with him apologizing for the part his government played in one of the plots.

We are also aware that his intelligence chief, and campaign chairman, Jorge Noguera, who fled the country, was deeply involved in another plot with Venezuelan oligarchy members to assassinate him.

We are also aware of the 130 men found living in quarters at the Daktari ranch near Caracas, who were Colombian paramilitary members, many of them former military people, who were brought to Venezuela to break into the national guard army, steal enough weapons to arm 1,500 men, then go to the palace, seize it, and kill the President.

These men CONFESSED when they were arrested. Hugo Chavez allowed some of them to simply go home after a while. Turned them loose.

Oh, here's a list of military spending from Global Security. Venezuela? 1.6 billion. United States? 623 billion. Hmmmmm. Brazil? 9.9 billion. Chile? 3.9 Argentina? 1.8 Colombia? THREE POINT FIVE BILLION.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

Sorry, gotta run. I can come back and look for more versions of this later. I have a feeling I know what I'll find! It will undoubtedly look very similar to the TWO I found already.

[MaryCeleste]

89. *sigh* look at fielded forces...that is what matters

The budget number are clearly not reflecting the major purchases.

I am not saying that Chavez was wrong to buy what he has or anything like that. Just when you look at that order of battle, he is the big dog in the region.

[Bacchus39]

92. here is a graphic from the Washington post on Ven, Ecuador, Colombian military strength

you may have to register. from the raw numbers, Colombia has the edge. I don't know the capabilities of their respective armaments.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/03/06/GR2008030600179.html?sid=ST2008030600870

[MaryCeleste]

95. Its also not showing the SU-30s of the Hind Helos that have been reported as delivered

However its also not clear how many of the F-16s are flyable. The manpower numbers seems odd, unless there the reporting is different (counting reserves etc). Chavez did the militia thing a while back and is most likely not reporting them. Regardless the edge in armor and tactical aircraft is clear.

Another key element is training, and the US reportedly has a cadre in Colombia. Nothing in the M$M about what kind of outside training assistance Chavez is getting, if any.

Clearly any of the nations involved can mount a quick shallow strike into a neighbor. Colombia's was a mile into an undefended border with something less than 100 troops. Whether either can mount a longer attack and hold territory remains to be seen. It also will be interesting to see if any of them start to build defensive emplacement.

In reality this has little to do with the matter at hand (Colombia's violation of Ecuador's sovereignty). With my background, its a natural rabbit trail to pursue.

[Bacchus39]

96. Colombia has double the population of Ven nearly so their numbers reflect that

It would be a meaningless conflict. at most they would lob bombs at each other and then what??? I don't see Chavez's provocative actions being met in kind. Colombia is doing the wise thing in ignoring him.

a ground invasion by Venezuela would be folly. Colombia is at least equal in fire power and well ahead in forces and they would be defending their territory. just another publicity stunt by CHavez.

[MaryCeleste]

97. Hmmm, not so sure

Global Security is reporting different numbers for the Army (about half of the LAT), and much of their heavier weapons are WWII to Vietnam vintage (mortars, M-113s etc). Also, other than machismo, there is little to be gained by a counter incursion at this point. Other than bruised pride an sovereignty, Ecuador was not damaged by the raid. I expect things will get patched up in two-four weeks. Ecuador depends too heavily on Colombia for things to really breakdown. After a suitable period practicality will win out. There was a Time/CNN article that came out today that pointed out how Ecuador was keeping its options open much more so than Venezuela. Like I said in my last post, Order of Battle and such is what I once did, so I tend to look at things like that first.

Chavez is in control of the situation at this point. He seems to like the attention. Hopefully good sense will trump machismo and he will back off on the military front. If he does, the embargo against Colombia will too, especially if Eribe looks to be in trouble politically.

[Bacchus39]

99. I agree with you that it will blow over quickly

Colombia has already declined to fortify the border militarily. Chavez is the little boy who cries for attention.

Chavez is in control of the situation in Venezuela, well, in control I use loosely. Colombia could simply apologize for the strike in Ecuador and help calm the situation. they already achieved their objective in eliminating the FARC commander. they have nothing to lose by taking a step back either.

[LynnTheDem]

21. And getting rid of presidential term limits would make him just like...

Canada! And Britain!

A fate worse than a fate worse than George W. bUsh!

:eyes:

[MarkR1717]

23. Viva el dictator, long live the tyrants....

...Learn to love enslavement.

[LynnTheDem]

25. The Canadians & Brits seem to love their enslavement.

Along with all those people of all those other nations that do not have presidential term limits.

Of course, only the American system is true liberty & freedom for all. Everyone else is enslaved to them tyrants.

[MaryCeleste]

65. Funny acutally

Friends from there have tried to educate me on the machismo and posturing that is part and parcel of regional politics. What is bellicose and disturbing to us is not considered a big deal there. I too find that hard to believe, but apparently that is just how it is. Now I mostly laugh.

He is the military power in the region, and I think he is just looking for an excuse to use a little of it. 10,000 troops along a border that supplies him food. Hopefully he keeps them home.

[EFerrari]

30. He's the point man for push back against Bush among

the left leaning countries. And of course, the American press says he eats babies.

Remember, he was the one who managed to get those hostages free despite the Colombian governments attempts to shoot them dead before they were safe.

[struggle4progress]

5. Colombia intercepted traffic related to hostage-release plans to identify the location of

the FARC's hostage-release negotiator, then used the info to bomb another country to kill the fellow

Conclusion: Colombia really doesn't want the hostages released

[MaryCeleste]

57. Anything to back your hypothesis up?

Not saying its totally invalid, but there are some real leaps in there

[struggle4progress]

100. Alleged Chávez's call to Reyes revealed location of FARC camp

A phone call .. to .. Raúl Reyes revealed the location of the guerilla leader, according to Colombian intelligence reports radio station Radio Cadena Nacional (RCN) disclosed on Wednesday.

The phone call was made last Wednesday, February 27 .. Efe reported ...

Intelligence agencies detected the call ...

Reyes died in a bomb attack Colombian troops launched against his rebel camp in Ecuadorian territory ...

http://english.eluniversal.com/2008/03/05/en_colcd_art_alleged-chavezs-cal_05A1410439.shtml


March 6, 2008
FARC Leader’s Killing Sabotages Prisoner Exchange
by Garry Leech

Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe has done everything possible over the past six months to sabotage any possibility of a prisoner exchange between his government and the country’s largest leftist guerrilla group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). With the killing of FARC leader Raúl Reyes on March 1, he has likely finally succeeded. According to Colombian intelligence officials, it was a satellite telephone call from Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez to Reyes that revealed the FARC commander’s whereabouts. Chávez made the call to Reyes to thank the rebel commander for releasing the four congresspersons that the FARC had turned over to representatives of the Venezuelan government earlier that day. The fact that Colombia’s President Uribe decided to exploit a unilateral humanitarian gesture by the FARC and kill the rebel group’s second-in-command likely ensures that the guerrillas will no longer consider a prisoner exchange.

Ever since he assumed the presidency, Uribe has been reluctant to engage in any negotiations with the FARC, even prisoner exchange talks, for fear of lending political legitimacy to the guerrilla group. However, Chávez’s successes in obtaining the unilateral release of six FARC captives in little more than a month had left many Colombians—particularly the loved ones of those being held by the rebels—feeling cautiously optimistic that a prisoner exchange could in fact be negotiated. Following the latest handover of captives, according to a senior Colombian military officer, “Chávez was thrilled by the release of the hostages and called Reyes to tell him that everything went well.” That phone call provided the Colombian president with the opportunity he needed to sabotage any possibility of a prisoner exchange once and for all ...

http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia276.htm

[Judi Lynn]

60. I read an article in which Rafael Correa said something similar to your conclusion.

Pretty sure it was posted here, but I can't find it at the moment. (I recall reading Correa said that Uribe actually has no interesting in getting the hostages back, which goes without saying, considering his behavior. Not to mention the fact that if the hostages are returned, finally, they'd be that much closer to peace, which means Uribe would have to give up his HUGE foreign aid package he exacts from the U.S. taxpayers each year, billions and billions in the last several years, and it also means that _Bush would lose his instant access to a launching pad for any operations in South America he wants. He has run out of allies there, outside Colombia, and Peru.)

Here's something similar in an article I just read earlier:

Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa said Colombia's attack had thwarted Ecuador-FARC talks on the release of Colombian-French national Ingrid Betancourt, which was to have taken place later this month inside Ecuador.
(snip)

It was buried in this article, which has NOT been posted here, yet:

FARC frees four tourists it seized in January
13 hours ago

BOGOTA (AFP) — Colombian rebels have freed four tourists they seized in northwest Colombia in January but have held on to a university professor with Norwegian nationality, a military official told Colombian radio Wednesday.

"The Red Cross has informed me that through a humanitarian gesture it received four hostages" near Nuqui in Choco department, Marine Colonel Hector Aguas told Radio RCN.

Two of the six -- Onshuus Nino Alf, a professor at Bogota's University of the Andes who holds both Colombian and Norwegian nationality, and student Jorge Torres -- were not released, he said.

Those freed were businessman Jose Rodriguez; teacher Hernando Martinez; hotel owner Cesar Hoyos; and Nino's wife, biologist Maria Serrano.

Red Cross personnel were bringing the four to Quibdo, capital of Choco department, and said the freed hostages appeared to be healthy, Aguas said.

The Red Cross did not reveal where the handover took place or give any further details, he said.

In January, Aguas said that 19 tourists taking a boat tour of the Atrato river in Choco department were surrounded by guerrillas while on a shore and that the rebels separated six people who were led into the forest.

According to accounts, the guerrillas wore the insignia of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

The released hostages were not among the 39 being considered for a proposed hostage swap between FARC and the Colombian government.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jtaZvPSnDB9aj3Uo3y7AhnVocB3w

[Demeter]

Colombia Acting Under Bush Orders To Stir Up Trouble

Colombia is Bush's surrogate in South America--the only puppet left in American control. And it's costing us a pretty penny, as well as further destroying relations with that continent.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Knowing a tad about Latin American History

unless you have clear evidence, and Bush screaming we support Colombia ain't gonna cut it. I would not bet on that one

Flare ups do happen in that area of the world, and even wars, about once a decade or so... and the US hasn't had a hand in all of them... in fact most of them.

[Demeter]

8. dupe deleted

[arcos]

17. ARE YOU SERIES??!?!??11!!!?111???!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2959742&mesg_id=2959742

[EFerrari]

27. That's backwards. Colombia just murdered the man who had been brokering

not only the release of hostages but also a peace agreement.

They did it on purpose because the Colombian government has everything to lose from both.

[Bacchus39]

28. the man was a leader of the organization that took the hostages in the first place

what is their to negotiate?

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Why am I reminded of the Guatemalan Mexican Incident of 1985

to which I had a front row seat? (Don't expect most folks outside of Mexico to have a clue, hell many in Mexico don't today)

Anyhow, to cut to the chase, once the OAC (and in that case a talk down by two of the leading members of the UN SEC Council) the situation was tapped down and swept under the rug

I will not be too shocked if it goes that way and I do hope it goes that way.

Suffice it to say that Mexico and Guatemala also came this close to war... and we had quite a bit of military mobilizing.

[jzodda]

12. why doesn't anybody ask why FARC was allowed a base in Ecuador?

I don't see that question getting asked very much? FARC is now one of the largest drug traffickers in the world and is financed mostly through its cocaine business. So why did Ecuador allow such a base to exist? Why scream bloody murder when Columbia takes care of them? The Chavez aspect to this affair is disgusting. He has been heaping praise on FARC and its leaders when they are primarily a criminal mafia cocaine gang. He also likes to put himself into the middle of every event, but I don't think his people are that stupid. They will see it for what it is. He wants to distract people at home for the increasing economic woes by creating a border conflict to divert attention.

[Judi Lynn]

15. You need to get your facts straight on narco trafficking in Colombia, for christ's sake.

You would be doing yourself a real favor by learning about Latin American history and politics and the part the U.S. has played for decades in manipulating governments and overthrowing democratic elections.

Don't embarrass yourself by revealing how little you really understand about this. Spend some of your valuable time getting up to speed, and doing your homework, like so many Democrats at D.U.

[Bacchus39]

29. don't want to answer the question do you??

n/t

[FalconsRule]

34. Not until you

"do your homework!!!"

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Judi Lynn]

64. Hi, there. I have to admit I knew nothing whatsoever about Colombia until I started hearing personal

remarks over a series of YEARS from a Colombian man who got the hell out of there, after it got far worse than he could take, after having lived in Colombia his whole life. I heard his personal knowledge of even Alvaro Uribe going back years before he left to live in the U.S.

I had never heard of chainsaws being used to terrorize and slaughter people before this man. That's why it made such a deep impression on me.

Doesn't matter what you attempt to call me. Indicates you're up against a wall, apparently, that you want to go wild about it. Desperation. Insecurity.

I trust my original source, and I trust the material I have learned on my own since then. Thanks. :hi:

[arcos]

18. The FARC don't have a "base" in Ecuador... they have camps...

The same way they have camps all over the southern part of Colombia, and yes, in the border region, not only with Ecuador and Venezuela, but with Perú and Brazil too.

Very few countries can control their borders tightly... the US can't, Pakistan can't, Colombia can't, and so does Ecuador.

[Peace Patriot]

22. According to Rafael Correa, President of Ecuador, he was negotiating with

FARC's Raul Reyes, for the release of 12 more FARC hostages (including the most famous of them, Ingrid Betancourt), when...out of nowhere...Reyes' body parts got splattered all over the Colombia-Ecuador border, by the Colombian military.

So much for a peaceful settlement of Colombia's 40+ year civil war!

Raul Reyes' negotiations with the Presidents of France, Ecuador and Venezuela (also Argentina, I believe), were possibly why he and his group had camped out in the jungle about a mile inside Ecuador's border. They may have been trying to establish safe haven for releasing Betancourt. In fact, it's probably pure luck that Betancourt herself wasn't there. Uribe--Bush/Rumsfeld's tool--has denied safe ground to FARC for hostage releases. The first two hostages that Chavez got released reported that they were under fire as they departed Colombia.

How can this possibly be justified? Uribe initially ASKED Hugo Chavez to negotiate with the FARC, then, under intense pressure from Bush/Rumsfeld, abruptly tried to call a halt to the negotiations, while they were in progress, with, first two, and then four more hostages in transit to their freedom. The only reasonable conclusion you can make is that Uribe DOESN'T WANT THE HOSTAGES TO BE RELEASED. And if you know his history, the history of this conflict, and the M.O. of the Bush Junta, you know why. It's all about war profiteering, oil profiteering, slave labor profiteering, and Uribe/Bush Cartel weapons and drug trafficking.

-------

"The Chavez aspect to this affair is disgusting. He has been heaping praise on FARC and its leaders when they are primarily a criminal mafia cocaine gang. He also likes to put himself into the middle of every event, but I don't think his people are that stupid. They will see it for what it is. He wants to distract people at home for the increasing economic woes by creating a border conflict to divert attention." --jzodda

Gee, you sound just like Donald Rumsfeld? Are you?

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

[MarkR1717]

24. The FARC are great people...

...if they kidnap and murder people, it's only for their own good. Any country would be glad to have a FARC camp within their borders, and if they used it to attack others, or as a safe haven, so what. The Equadorian sovereignty comes first.

[Peace Patriot]

26. Rafael Correa, Ecuador's President, said that the Colombian government LIED to him

that they were in hot pursuit. Ecuador does not approve of the FARC guerrillas and has, in fact, shut down at least 20 FARC camps along its border. They permit hot pursuit, if the Colombian military is being shot at. But they do NOT permit Colombia to freely, at their will, BOMB and INVADE Ecuadoran territory, killing 21 people IN THEIR SLEEP--whoever they are!

As it turns out, the Colombians took this initiative, to INVADE ECUADOR, to murder the CHIEF HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR and the people who were with him--who could well have included Ingrid Betancourt and other hostages. They were given his location by the Bush/U.S. GOVERNMENT, so we are complicit in this invasion. And God knows what other support the Bushites are providing for Colombia's notorious security forces and rightwing paramilitary death squads.

The Colombian government has slaughtered THOUSANDS of union leaders, small peasant farmers, community organizers, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists, in their bloody 40+ year pogrom against the poor. That is WHY there is a FARC in Colombia. The last time FARC tried to demobilize and enter the political process, 400 of their ELECTED representatives in the national legislature were murdered, and thousands of the people who voted for them were tortured and murdered as well.

Yes, the FARC has killed people, and kidnapped people. It's a CIVIL WAR. How do you stop a 40+ year civil war? By more killing? By dashing the hopes of all the hostages and their families for a political settlement of this conflict? By violating the border of one of the governments trying to bring about peace?

You sound like Bush! We can go anywhere and murder, kidnap, torture and indefinitely detain anyone we like--pull them off the streets in Italy (sabotaging local anti-terrorist efforts!), grab kids holding a rifle as the U.S. bombs and invades Afghanistan and put them on the road to hell in Guantanamo Bay, arrest and torture thousands of innocents in Iraq, after slaughtering 1.2 million innocent people to get their oil, and waft people away in secret CIA flights to secret torture dungeons in eastern Europe, because why? Because SOMEBODY hurt us. That's Bush logic. Very convenient for war profiteers!

Yeah, people have been hurt in Colombia on both sides--and, according to every human rights organization on earth, the Colombian SECURITY FORCES and closely tied paramilitary death squads are responsible for most of the carnage. So, how do you stop it? More "scorched earth" against the poor of Colombia?

And WHO has killed more innocent people, in the last, oh, six years? Bush? Rumsfeld? Uribe? Uribe's relatives? Uribe's death squad pals? Or FARC? Or, for that matter, Al Qaeda? What's the score here, hm? Bush, Rumsfeld & co. = 1.2 million (not counting refugees, injured and sick--millions more). Uribe & co. = thousands. Al Qaeda = thousands (if they did 9/11; hundreds, if not). FARC = 20? 50? (AI says, of the union leaders murdered in Colombia, that Colombian security forces and associated paramilitaries have killed 95% of them; and the FARC has killed 2-3%, and those were probable collaborators with the Colombian security forces.)

WHO are the "terrorists"?

It's a hard reality to face, that our government is WORSE than the "terrorists" they accuse. Far worse. And their puppet, Colombia, was chosen as their puppet for a reason. They, too, are worse than the people they accuse.

Are we to have a world run by such people--Bush, Uribe--whose solution to every problem is MORE KILLING? Are we all now going to be living in a gangster world, where bombs, guns and bullets rule, and where war and rumors of war forever terrorize people into paying for MORE bombs, guns and bullets?

Uribe's sabotage of all of these other leaders' efforts at peace is very like Bush's sabotage of the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq, and like their refusal of Saddam Hussein's offer to step down and leave Iraq, on the eve of the war. Neither Bush nor Uribe wants peace. They thrive on war, on the armaments industry, and on exploitation of the poor and mass murder of the poor.

They are the PAST, let us hope--and are in the agonizing death throes of a class of people who have gone mad with greed and bloodshed. The MacBeth's among us must be retired to a madhouse, and the sane and the good must take up the challenge of creating a peaceful and just world. More killing never will.

[EFerrari]

32. Because it is murder?

And Hugo Chavez has been negotiating the release of hostages with FARC. He IS in the middle of this incident.

Don't worry. Those hostages will probably not be released now. Your government and the Colombian government have made sure of that. Wouldn't want to disrupt their money laundering!

[Bacchus39]

33. why doesn' the FARC let them go, they are the ones who kidnapped them?

n/t

[FalconsRule]

35. Why should they?

They are international superstars...seen by many as the "good" guys.

[Bacchus39]

54. yes, sympathy for the hostages doesn't seem to run too deep.

letting them go apparently is too much to ask.

[Judi Lynn]

14. OAS passes resolution on Colombian raid

updated 2 hours, 59 minutes ago
OAS passes resolution on Colombian raid

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Organization of American States passed a resolution Wednesday in hopes of easing tensions stemming from an attack into Ecuadoran territory by Colombia

Colombia's military attacked a rebel camp in neighboring Ecuador on Saturday. Since then, Ecuador has broken off relations with Colombia, and Venezuela says it has moved troops to its border with Colombia.

In the resolution, the OAS called the attack "a violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ecuador and of principles of international law" and noted that it led Ecuador to break relations with Colombia.

It ordered a commission, headed by OAS Secretary-General Jose Miguel Insulza and composed of four ambassadors designated by him, to visit both countries to investigate the matter, "and to propose formulas for bringing the two nations closer together."

More:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/03/05/oas.colombia/index.html?iref=hpmostpop

[Judi Lynn]

16. Colombia takes more heat from Latin America left

Colombia takes more heat from Latin America left
By Fiona Ortiz, CARACAS (Reuters) 6/03/2008 05:03

Latin America's leftist leaders heaped more criticism on Colombia, leaving it increasingly isolated on Thursday in a crisis that has threatened political stability in the Andes.

Colombia, the United States' closest ally in South America, set off a major diplomatic crisis on Saturday when its army crossed into Ecuador to kill Colombian Marxist guerrillas just across the border.

OPEC oil exporters and leftist allies Venezuela and Ecuador reacted by cutting off diplomatic relations, moving troops to their borders with Colombia and lambasting Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, who receives billions of dollars in military aid from the United States.

Argentine President Cristina Fernandez was in Caracas on Thursday to meet with anti-U.S. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. A day earlier, Chavez met with Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, in Caracas. Correa later travelled to Panama to continue his anti-Colombia lobbying tour.

More:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/latest/2008/03/06/colombia-takes-more-heat-from-latin-america-left-89520-20341287/

[arcos]

19. "Anti-Colombia" tour? wow...

Gotta love the media, huh?


:hi: hi Judi!

[Judi Lynn]

37. It seems they never sleep in their quest for control of public perception.

It's a real shame, isn't it, when their political designs replace our right for truthful information from our news media.
It's worse than spitting in our faces.

Good to see you, arcos! :hi:

[sabbat hunter]

36. kick

kicking

[Zorro]

38. FARC is a cancer

and its money is causing Ecuadorian social order to deteriorate.

[Judi Lynn]

39. OAS credibility is at stake in Ecuador-Colombia crisis

OAS credibility is at stake in Ecuador-Colombia crisis

www.chinaview.cn 2008-03-06 09:39:48

RIO DE JANEIRO, March 5 (Xinhua) -- Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said Wednesday that the credibility of the Organization of American States (OAS) would be at stake if it failed to solve the Ecuador-Colombia diplomatic crisis.

"The OAS needs to act quickly. That is important for its credibility," said the minister.

He added that if OAS did not come up with a solution, the impasse would be discussed at the 20th summit of the Rio Group, the permanent mechanism of political consultation and coordination for Latin America and the Caribbean, which will gather officials of 19 countries on March 7 in the Dominican Republic.

The summit was scheduled to discuss energy, natural catastrophes and development, but the regional crisis that has been brewing since Colombian forces destroyed a Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) camp in Ecuador Saturday, killing 21 rebels, including the group's No.2 leader Raul Reyes, may become the main debate on the agenda.

According to Amorim, the Brazilian government does not favor the involvement of the United States in the impasse, as it regards the affair as exclusively Latin America's.

More:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-03/06/content_7728445.htm

[MaryCeleste]

59. What credibility?

Its been a debating society since its inception with little effectivity. However if it defuses this situation, it may actually have been useful.

The reality at this point is this all revolves around Hugo Chavez, which is how he likes it. He and he alone will determine where it goes from here.

[EFerrari]

78. You're not looking beyond the media stereotype

to the situation on the ground.

And, it doesn't matter if he is The Narcissist From Hell if he can put together a coalition to counter predatory US policy, does it?

[Joanne98]

40. Colombia takes more heat from Latin America left

Source: Reuters


CARACAS (Reuters) - Latin America's leftist leaders heaped more criticism on Colombia, leaving it increasingly isolated on Thursday in a crisis that has threatened political stability in the Andes.

Colombia, the United States' closest ally in South America, set off a major diplomatic crisis on Saturday when its army crossed into Ecuador to kill Colombian Marxist guerrillas just across the border.

OPEC oil exporters and leftist allies Venezuela and Ecuador reacted by cutting off diplomatic relations, moving troops to their borders with Colombia and lambasting Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, who receives billions of dollars in military aid from the United States.

Argentine President Cristina Fernandez was in Caracas on Thursday to meet with anti-U.S. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. A day earlier, Chavez met with Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, in Caracas. Correa later traveled to Panama to continue his anti-Colombia lobbying tour.



Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0227633020080306

[LeftCoast]

41. Hmm...looks like the story is starting to get some media penetration here finally

The article even comes close to discussing how Columbia killed the hostage negotiator.

[Judi Lynn]

42. God forbid they should ever slip and include any part of the truth in their articles! n/t

[Dr.Phool]

43. Columbia trying to become the Israel of the south?

All those billions in military hardware have to be used for something. Like getting South America and Central America back in line with U.S. policy.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

47. Uh-huh.

:eyes:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

49. You've been alerted on.

eom

[MaryCeleste]

66. Actually Venezuela is better armed

[EFerrari]

44. I put a notice from the VIO which has a couple of requested actions

in this GD thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2965329&mesg_id=2966022

[PSPS]

46. Here we go agaiin. The "left," "leftist," is code for "Marxist."

Reuters always does this.

And the RW Columbian government is referred to as "the United States' closest ally in South America" instead of what it really is: bush's closest ally in South America.

[Judi Lynn]

52. People need to start seeing the pattern of constant repetition of emotionally charged terms from

Reuters, AP, and independent articles in the NY Times, Houston Chronicle, LA Times, etc. They follow identical formulas.

Sad!

[MaryCeleste]

71. Actually its from all sides, and we need to be evaluate critically all sources

be they US, Colombian, Venezuelan, or other international source.

[EFerrari]

75. That's not really true. The ongoing media campaign

against Chavez and other leftists leaders has no real cognate in Latin America where the media is largely owned by rich white collaborators.

[EFerrari]

82. A better term would be "BushCo's whore in Latin America". n/t

[Robbien]

48. Bush's response: He urges Congress to ratify NAFTA for Columbia

Heard pundits say it on CNBC earlier this morning.

Bush's standard in your face confrontational response.

[bemildred]

50. I guess the "Latin American left" is all of Latin America now. nt

[AlphaCentauri]

51. Here is an interview with Reyes and a video

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/05/18483800.php


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7YBRa2Gul0

In this video the Colombian army left the injure people unattended they did just pick two of the death persons. Some Mexicans who were conducting an investigation were kill in the incident.

[cliss]

53. I just read that Venezuela has placed an embargo

on all goods coming in from Colombia. This means that the imports are coming to a complete standstill from that country. Chavez might also freeze funds from Colombian companies in Venezuela. Chavez said "we might nationalize a few of them".

This is the ultimate check mate for Colombia. Venezuela should be able to get its imports from other countries. Venezuela is flush with cash from its oil exports. They should have no trouble getting products from other suppliers.

COLOMBIA on the other hand, is screwed. Their local companies will go ballistic because they will lose billions in trade. The president will be under tremendous pressure to back down since the other Latin American countries are in complete unison on this. Colombia will lose in this stalemate.

Also, the US is a very bad and unpredictable friend. Even though we give Uribe a lot of money, funding might become a little tough since the US is in trouble financially. So don't count on those big bucks for too much longer.

Uribe = Check mate.

[bemildred]

55. Yeah, I thought it was a sharp move.

I wonder where he got the idea of an embargo from? :think:

[cliss]

56. Let's make a bet.

Bet:
How long before Uribe capitulates?

I say 3 days (just long enough for the products to start rotting at the port of Caracas).
And the Colombian companies to start going ballistic.

Any other bets?

[bemildred]

58. I was thinking a week or two. I'll say two weeks. The 21st.

He's got the US breathing on him on the other side, and they own him.

[EFerrari]

62. Monday. BushCo has an election to steal and can't really be bothered

too much.

They already killed the negotiator. Their work is done for now.

[Judi Lynn]

70. No kidding! Isn't that hideous? He was the ONE PERSON they needed to get out of the way,

in order to keep the war going at full speed, and collecting their enjoyable, convenient, comforting, familiar THIRD LARGEST FOREIGN AID PACKAGE IN THE WORLD, which would be wildly reduced, unfortunately, if they had to settle for peace, instead.

[MaryCeleste]

69. Baring a military move by Chavez, it will all blow over in two weeks - no damage from the embargo

[EFerrari]

73. This won't blow over until Colombia has a real government.

You may be thinking in terms of military engagement but that's only one measure of the battle for Latin America. Right now, the leftists and democracy seems to be winning.

[MaryCeleste]

76. Disagree

Assuming no more military action by anyone, the noise will continue for a while, Eribe will do just enough to allow the machismo of Ecuador to be satisfied, the OAS will do little but claim credit, and things will resume.

Ecuador buys a lot of electricity from Columbia, some of which is passed on to Peru and others. They have been smart enough not to close their border.

Its hard to tell what Chavez will do. Right now he is the determining factor and the center of attention. He likes it that way. However, presuming good sense triumphs, he will back off with the military display and open the borders again.

Left vs right is really not the measure for the region. Its as much nationalism and machismo driving politics. There is also not a lot of solidarity to be found anywhere.

In other words, the things will be patched up and life will return to what it was before

[EFerrari]

77. There is no better description of the rifts in Latin America

than left v. right unless you want to frame it in terms of class.

It's not as much "nationalism and machismo" although it may sound that way to untuned ears. And if you don't see solidarity in the events of the last few days, I can't help you. The whole region united against U.S. tactics via their criticism of Colombia -- even the BushCo installed Mexican president.

Things will not be "patched up" in any way more than superficially. Our government's obsession with the Middle East has been a respite for Latin American democracy, not to mention, Latin American bodies.

BushCo fucked up. Again.

[Bacchus39]

85. you mean one acceptable to Hugo?

which of course would be acceptable to you.

[MaryCeleste]

98. How about pinging us in a couple of weeks and we can see where things are

[bemildred]

101. Damn I think you just won. Or anyway I lost.

Have a beer.
:beer:

[MaryCeleste]

68. I am more concerned about the troops beng massed by Chavez

He is the regions military power and has over 10,000 troops moving to the border with Colombia

[Judi Lynn]

79. Really hope this thing can be resolved. How many DU'ers remember the wonderful day they had

at Rafael Correa's inauguration? At least most of them had a great day.



Of course I'm joking. Uribe knew how much respect
he inspires in people, even at that auspicious event.

[EFerrari]

83. OMG! LOOK at that body language!

:rofl:

You nailed it, exactly, again, Judi Lynn!

:applause:

[Bacchus39]

84. I remember the day in December when Chavez was beat down by the Venezuelan voters

now that was a great day. wow, one picture in a moment of time, yeah that explains everything.

http://t2.images.live.com/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1540953277869&id=385801da0fd94fbfb0f4120f3d584e17





anyone know which way Colombia is???

[Solon]

88. And did Chavez try to override the people's vote?

No he did not, have you stopped calling him a dictator yet?

[Bacchus39]

90. I never called him a dictator, he was elected

Chavez wanted to overturn the results but the military wouldn't support him.

[Solon]

91. Apparently you haven't, but apparently you like using the term "dictatorial", which...

you seem to apply to every action Chavez takes as President. When Chavez sneezes, is that a "dictatorial" power grab?

[Bacchus39]

93. sure he has those aspirations, the recent referendum was an example

fortunately he was defeated. I'm sure he's not done though.

[Solon]

94. I don't see how getting rid of term limits is dictatorial...

generally speaking, I'm not in favor of such limits, as long as the election process is transparent, with secret ballot, etc. I have no problem with someone being re-elected an indefinite amount of times.

Did he overreach by trying to push so many different reforms in one package? Of course, but he wouldn't be the first democratically elected leader to try and fail to do that. What I really don't like is the fact that damned near all the criticism of Chavez I've seen has been hyperbole, exaggeration, or downright lies. I really can't take people seriously when they engage in these types of attacks. If you have a criticisms of Chavez's policies, then criticize those, to be honest, I don't even know what your goal is in opposing Chavez so fervently, do you really want the rich minority back in power in Venezuela?