War brewing in Colombia . . .

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
I wouln't say that the crisis in South America is anywhere close to its climax or conclusion...

The FARC's Guardian Angel
Monday, March 10, 2008

Latin American nations and the Bush administration spent the past week loudly arguing over what censure, if any, Colombia should face for a bombing raid that killed one of the top leaders of the FARC terrorist group at a jungle camp in Ecuador. More quietly, they are just beginning to consider a far more serious and potentially explosive question: What to do about the revelation that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez forged a strategic alliance with the FARC aimed at Colombia's democratic government.

First reports of the documents recovered from laptops at the FARC camp spoke of promises by Chávez to deliver up to $300 million to a group renowned for kidnapping, drug trafficking and massacres of civilians; they also showed that Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa was prepared to remove from his own army officers who objected to the FARC's Ecuadoran bases.

But in their totality, the hundreds of pages of documents so far made public by Colombia paint an even more chilling picture. The raid appears to have preempted a breathtakingly ambitious "strategic plan" agreed on by Chávez and the FARC with the initial goal of gaining international recognition for a movement designated a terrorist organization by both the United States and Europe. Chávez then intended to force Colombian President Álvaro Uribe to negotiate a political settlement with the FARC, and to promote a candidate allied with Chávez and the FARC to take power from Uribe.

All this is laid out in a series of three e-mails sent in February to the FARC's top leaders by Iván Márquez and Rodrigo Granda, envoys who held a series of secret meetings with Chávez. Judging from the memos, Chávez did most of the talking: He outlined a five-stage plan for undermining Uribe's government, beginning with the release of several of the scores of hostages the FARC is holding.

The first e-mail, dated Feb. 8, discusses the money: It says that Chávez, whom they call "angel," "has the first 50 [million] available and has a plan to get us the remaining 200 in the course of the year." Chávez proposed sending the first "packet" of money "through the black market in order to avoid problems." He said more could be arranged by giving the FARC a quota of petroleum to sell abroad or gasoline to retail in Colombia or Venezuela.

Chávez then got to the plans that most interested him. He wanted the FARC to propose collecting all of its hostages in the open, possibly in Venezuela, for a proposed exchange for 500 FARC prisoners in Colombian jails. Chávez said he would travel to the area for a meeting with the FARC's top leader, Manuel Marulanda, and said the presidents of Ecuador, Nicaragua and Bolivia would accompany him. Meanwhile, Chávez said he would set up a new diplomatic group, composed of those countries and the FARC, plus Mexico, Brazil and Argentina, for the purpose of recognizing the FARC as a legitimate "belligerent" in Colombia and forcing Uribe into releasing its prisoners.

In "the early morning hours," the FARC envoys recounted in a Feb. 9 e-mail, Chávez reached the subject of whether the release of Ingrid Betancourt, a former Colombian presidential candidate who is the FARC's best-known hostage, would complicate his plan to back a pro-FARC alternative to Uribe. "He invites the FARC to participate in a few sessions of analysis he has laid out for following the Colombian political situation," the e-mail concluded.

Assuming these documents are authentic -- and it's hard to believe that the cerebral and calculating Uribe would knowingly hand over forgeries to the world media and the Organization of American States -- both the Bush administration and Latin American governments will have fateful decisions to make about Chávez. His reported actions are, first of all, a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373, passed in September 2001, which prohibits all states from providing financing or havens to terrorist organizations. More directly, the Colombian evidence would be more than enough to justify a State Department decision to cite Venezuela as a state sponsor of terrorism. Once cited, Venezuela would be subject to a number of automatic sanctions, some of which could complicate its continuing export of oil to the United States. A cutoff would temporarily inconvenience Americans -- and cripple Venezuela, which could have trouble selling its heavy oil in other markets.

For now, the Bush administration appears anxious to avoid this kind of confrontation. U.S. intelligence agencies are analyzing the Colombian evidence; officials say they will share any conclusions with key Latin American governments. Yet those governments have mostly shrunk from confronting Chávez in the past, and some have quietly urged Bush to take him on. If the president decides to ignore clear evidence that Venezuela has funded and conspired with an officially designated terrorist organization, he will flout what has been his first principle since Sept. 11, 2001.
There are some VERY serious decisions and potential ramifications "brewing"... it's a damn powderkeg.

If/when the charges are deemed legitimate, who among you will defend Chavez, and who will call for his head on a platter?

Inquiring minds want to know...
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74If/when the charges are deemed legitimate, who among you will defend Chavez, and who will call for his head on a platter?

Inquiring minds want to know...
Colombia is providing the infomratino.
Colombia is against Chavez.
Therefore any info from Columbia is suspect.

Asking the US verify the info is worthless.
They support Colombia

One could just ask Chavez if the information is the truth or ask to see a copy of his e-mail archives.

Souds like a reasonable approach.

 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,069
499
126
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: palehorse74If/when the charges are deemed legitimate, who among you will defend Chavez, and who will call for his head on a platter?

Inquiring minds want to know...
Colombia is providing the infomratino.
Colombia is against Chavez.
Therefore any info from Columbia is suspect.

Asking the US verify the info is worthless.
They support Colombia

One could just ask Chavez if the information is the truth or ask to see a copy of his e-mail archives.

Souds like a reasonable approach.
What is the color of the sky in your world? You do realize the laptop is being looked at by more than one entity right?

Does Sarbanes Oxly apply to Chavez? lol

His email archives will be sqeaky clean I am sure :D
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,422
4,805
126
This situation was more about Colombia's excursion into Ecuadorian territory than anything else. It seems obvious that Ecuador and Venezuela convinced Colombia not to do it again. It also seems obvious that Chavez is not, as some suggested, looking for any excuse to begin a wide scale War.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
This situation was more about Colombia's excursion into Ecuadorian territory than anything else. It seems obvious that Ecuador and Venezuela convinced Colombia not to do it again. It also seems obvious that Chavez is not, as some suggested, looking for any excuse to begin a wide scale War.
What if the evidence on the laptops turns out to be true? even the little we've seen shows a pattern of outright hostility on Chavez's part, and his tacet support of a known terrorist group.

His plans to fund and direct the overthrow of Colombia's government with the assistance of FARC and a large Central and South American coalition seem pretty damning to me...
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: palehorse74If/when the charges are deemed legitimate, who among you will defend Chavez, and who will call for his head on a platter?

Inquiring minds want to know...
Colombia is providing the infomratino.
Colombia is against Chavez.
Therefore any info from Columbia is suspect.

Asking the US verify the info is worthless.
They support Colombia

One could just ask Chavez if the information is the truth or ask to see a copy of his e-mail archives.

Souds like a reasonable approach.
Well, let us talk about the veracity of said information. It has already led to the capture of an arms trafficker in Thailand that was supplying the FARC. It led Chavez to stand down and to reconcile with Colombia`s President -- you know the one he called a criminal and a dog. Plus, the information is being looked at by experts of the OAS. Finally, neither the FARC nor anyone else has ever denied that the information was true.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: sandorski
This situation was more about Colombia's excursion into Ecuadorian territory than anything else. It seems obvious that Ecuador and Venezuela convinced Colombia not to do it again. It also seems obvious that Chavez is not, as some suggested, looking for any excuse to begin a wide scale War.
The whole flare-up over the excursion was simply because Correa and Chavez are allied in idealogy with the FARC. Border incursions happen all the time by accident or on purpose. If it was such a serious thing, then Ecuador and Venezuela would not have dropped it so quickly when the laptop information came out.

In reality, it was all politics. Chavez, Correa, AND Uribe all boosted their popularity at home, and Colombia was able to take out a mal parido that liked to molest little kids and organize terroristic activites.

Chavez, loves to talk of war and all the bad things he can do. He does it to quell domestic turmoil, and also because he has a gigantic mouth. I certainly never felt anything such as war would come out of this, but it was a serious situation because when troops are mobilized anything can happen. All it takes is just a little bit to worsen the entire situation.

I just find it hilarious that so many so called intellectuals in the US, Canada, and Europe have a problem with what Colombia did, yet they are ok that Chavez is close to starving his people, has destroyed democratic institutions, and generally is an egomaniac trying to dominate the continent. Very few people here in Colombia support the FARC or have a problem with Colombia getting Reyes. All the way from educated leaders to poor campesinos are happy to see the son of a bitch go. He was a stain on this beautiful country.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,422
4,805
126
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,422
4,805
126
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
31,700
5,687
126
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
Any nation that claims to be sovereign also claims responsibility for acts of war committed under its protection.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
Not when terrorists operate completely unhindered or with the support of the host nation. FARC is a narco-terrorist organization that needs to be destroyed, regardless of where they're sleeping. Ecuador and Venezuela have two acceptable choices: help destroy FARC, or get the fuck out of the way and STFU.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,422
4,805
126
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
Not when terrorists operate completely unhindered or with the support of the host nation. FARC is a narco-terrorist organization that needs to be destroyed, regardless of where they're sleeping. Ecuador and Venezuela have two acceptable choices: help destroy FARC, or get the fuck out of the way and STFU.
Negative. Crossing a Border without Pre-Authorization by te Nations = Act of War, no exceptions.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,422
4,805
126
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
Any nation that claims to be sovereign also claims responsibility for acts of war committed under its protection.
Then Columbia should Declare War.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
Not when terrorists operate completely unhindered or with the support of the host nation. FARC is a narco-terrorist organization that needs to be destroyed, regardless of where they're sleeping. Ecuador and Venezuela have two acceptable choices: help destroy FARC, or get the fuck out of the way and STFU.
Negative. Crossing a Border without Pre-Authorization by te Nations = Act of War, no exceptions.
Perhaps, but hosting and covertly supporting a narco-terrorist organization -- one that conducts attacks on the civilians in neighboring countries -- is also an act of war.

So, in this case, I'm on Colombia's side in their defense of innocent civilians against terrorist attack. FARC is no longer a group of ideological rebels with a political agenda. Instead, they've become a brutal group of raping, kidnapping, human and drug-smuggling, murdering, mutilating, scumsuckers, who need to be completely destroyed. Any government that willingly hosts and supports them must accept the consequences of such an immoral decision.

The Ecuadorian and Venezuelan governments can stick your "act of war" nonsense straight up their collective socialist asses.

See how that works?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,422
4,805
126
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: sandorski
No.
I *figured* you'd chime in with your typical silliness. I take it you refuse to read the Interpol report, eh? It would hurt your faith that believes in the goodness of leaders like Chavez simply because of their politics.

How sad, yet it is refreshing that you quickly replied when beckoned by a call of "fool."
The issue wasn't Chavez, it was Columbia's incursion into Equador's sovereign territory.
Colombia has every right to pursue terrorists that Ecuador and Venezuela continue to support and host within their territory.

On top of that, Chavez's direct connection with drug-smuggling, kidnapping, raping, murdering terrorists is despicable, criminal, and unforgivable.

Hopefully he'll be dead soon.
No they don't. One Nations jurisdiction stops at the other Nations Border.
Not when terrorists operate completely unhindered or with the support of the host nation. FARC is a narco-terrorist organization that needs to be destroyed, regardless of where they're sleeping. Ecuador and Venezuela have two acceptable choices: help destroy FARC, or get the fuck out of the way and STFU.
Negative. Crossing a Border without Pre-Authorization by te Nations = Act of War, no exceptions.
Perhaps, but hosting and covertly supporting a narco-terrorist organization -- one that conducts attacks on the civilians in neighboring countries -- is also an act of war.

So, in this case, I'm on Colombia's side in their defense of innocent civilians against terrorist attack. FARC is no longer a group of ideological rebels with a political agenda. Instead, they've become a brutal group of raping, kidnapping, human and drug-smuggling, murdering, mutilating, scumsuckers, who need to be completely destroyed. Any government that willingly hosts and supports them must accept the consequences of such an immoral decision.

The Ecuadorian and Venezuelan governments can stick your "act of war" nonsense straight up their collective socialist asses.

See how that works?
Doesn't change anything. :roll:

It is an Act of War, Columbia can Declare War, Appeal to the UN, or risk starting a War through its' violation of another's sovereign Territory. It is still unclear what ties the President of Equador has with FARC and so far, at least according to the new article, Chavez's ties are mostly rumour and not given credence by this article.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY