War brewing in Colombia . . .

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
346
126
Originally posted by: Andres3605
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
..because Colombia Illegally crossed into Equador's sovereign Territory.
I believe his point was in asking wtf that had to do with Chavez and Venezuela? I think you know the answer, but you're too intellectually dishonest to say so.

Here, let me help you out: Chavez was stark raving mad that his best buddies in FARC were attacked by Colombia. So, in a facade of solidarity -- with narco-terrorist rapist murderers, mind you -- Chavez decided to flex his muscles. In doing so, he hoped that his leftist butt-buddies throughout the region, such as Correa, would see him as some sort of socialist messiah.

After all, Chavez's lifelong dream is to rule over all of South America.

If Chavez had no ties with FARC, he had no business getting involved in an incident involving Ecuador and Colombia.

There, now you know.

GG.
Maybe, or perhaps it was all too close; Colombia and Venezuela don't get along at the best of times; close ties with Ecuador; or many other reasons. The fact still remains: Colombia violated the sovereign territory of Ecuador.
Actually Pre Chavez the relations have been very good, His life term goal is to reunite the Grand Colombia under his socialist rule and to challenge "the empire itself", his biggest obstacle the firm democratic opposition of the Colombian president and the 83% of the Colombian population that support him.

His answer is support to a hostile take over by FARC by any means, he even did a national minute of silent when Reyes died, they are his allies and he will fight other countries for them, this incident was the only answer Colombia had in their hand, they gave Ecuador more than 30 reports of FARC bases with coordinates in their soil which went ignored in the past year, is the obligation of an army to protect their population at any cost.
We have a situation in which neither side is perfect.

In Colombia, there is a serious problem of high concentration of wealth, and a history of terrorism by paramilitary groups.

I don't see any of the anti-FARC posts say one word about the problems on the other side.

John Kennedy made the point:

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
 

Andres3605

Senior member
Nov 14, 2004
927
0
71
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Andres3605
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: sandorski
..because Colombia Illegally crossed into Equador's sovereign Territory.
I believe his point was in asking wtf that had to do with Chavez and Venezuela? I think you know the answer, but you're too intellectually dishonest to say so.

Here, let me help you out: Chavez was stark raving mad that his best buddies in FARC were attacked by Colombia. So, in a facade of solidarity -- with narco-terrorist rapist murderers, mind you -- Chavez decided to flex his muscles. In doing so, he hoped that his leftist butt-buddies throughout the region, such as Correa, would see him as some sort of socialist messiah.

After all, Chavez's lifelong dream is to rule over all of South America.

If Chavez had no ties with FARC, he had no business getting involved in an incident involving Ecuador and Colombia.

There, now you know.

GG.
Maybe, or perhaps it was all too close; Colombia and Venezuela don't get along at the best of times; close ties with Ecuador; or many other reasons. The fact still remains: Colombia violated the sovereign territory of Ecuador.
Actually Pre Chavez the relations have been very good, His life term goal is to reunite the Grand Colombia under his socialist rule and to challenge "the empire itself", his biggest obstacle the firm democratic opposition of the Colombian president and the 83% of the Colombian population that support him.

His answer is support to a hostile take over by FARC by any means, he even did a national minute of silent when Reyes died, they are his allies and he will fight other countries for them, this incident was the only answer Colombia had in their hand, they gave Ecuador more than 30 reports of FARC bases with coordinates in their soil which went ignored in the past year, is the obligation of an army to protect their population at any cost.
We have a situation in which neither side is perfect.

In Colombia, there is a serious problem of high concentration of wealth, and a history of terrorism by paramilitary groups.

I don't see any of the anti-FARC posts say one word about the problems on the other side.

John Kennedy made the point:

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
FARC and ELN started in the mid 50s as a group with political vision and their objectives were just government and military ones, when they got in contact with the cocaine production and selling they lost their political goals and their preferred targets became the mid and low class population, their extortive kidnapping rigs and selective killings were a great secondary income after drug trafficking and from representing the needed they passed to be just another criminal group with goals of easy fortune at any cost.


The Paras started as a protective response to the kidnappings, bombings, selective killings done by the FARC and ELN and as the guerrilla groups it lost their cause and political identity when they got into the drug trafficking business and they learned how profitable it was (1000% return on investment).

If by the last quote you justify the guerrilla terrorist actts, you are very mistaken, this is not a revolution this is just a criminal organization using terror tactics.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY