Ortega on FARC KIlling

Submitted by fyl on 2 March, 2008 - 20:34.
Reuters reports on Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega's comments regarding the Colombian military killing FARC's Raul Reyes. Reyes was considered the number two person in FARC.

Whether you are supportive of the U.S.-backed Uribe government of Columbia or FARC, there is an issue with the killing of Reyes. It took place in Ecuador.

Colombia's military said on Saturday its troops had killed Raul Reyes, one of seven members of the FARC secretariat, in a severe blow to Latin America's oldest guerrilla insurgency.

The article seems to de-emphasize the fact that the action took place in Ecuador and, well, the government of Ecuador isn't exactly happy with Colombian military actions within its country.

‹ Linux Invasion Lucky Nica clings to go-fast boat in Caribbean ›
( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

the boston globe....

Submitted by Che Guevara on 25 March, 2008 - 06:25.

The assassination of Reyes was used as a pretext by Chávez and his ideological acolytes to gain political capital from a pseudocrisis and through the international media, at the expense of those suffering at the hands of criminal organizations.

The international media must focus on FARC and expose it for what it is really is: a money-making criminal organization involved in drug-trafficking, kidnapping, and other illicit activities and devoid of any political ideology that it may have had at its inception.

After experiencing four decades of violent conflict and thousands of victims, Colombia is trying to reclaim its sovereignty from criminals. Instead of condemning Uribe and praising outlaws, Colombia's neighbors and Latin America's populist leaders should assist Uribe in helping to defeat this scourge, which continues to destabilize the region. There is nothing politically legitimate about the FARC's activities; it is pure criminality.

http://tinyurl. com/2jve67

http://www.boston. com/bostonglobe/ editorial_ opinion/oped/ articles/ 2008/03/24/ ending_the_ unrelenting_ scourge_in_ colombia/

when government grows, liberty yields, thomas jefferson

Things have changed

Submitted by fyl on 25 June, 2008 - 12:43.

Since this post, Chavez has called for FARC to disolve, stating that armed conflict is no longer the answer in Colombia. Things change quickly.

I read it too

Submitted by fyl on 25 March, 2008 - 06:54.

I read the same article but elected not to post the link because it is another "this is only a piece of it" story. What it says is probably true—for as far as it goes. But, let's just take a stab at one piece.

I don't have real popularity numbers for the Uribe government and, because of FARC and more, they would be hard to obtain. FARC controls territory within Colombia and I doubt you can get honest poll results from there. But, on the other hand, Uribe has a very handy tool to make him popular where he wants to be—lots and lots of U.S. money in the form of military aid.

We also know that lots of money is made in Colombia in the illegal drug business and while FARC is certainly a player, it is not the only one. While what is happening today is harder to find out than what was happening we know, for example, that lots of coca paste from Colombia was being processed by Oliver North's boys to, depending on who you ask, help fund the Contras or line the pockets of people such as George Bush and Bill Clinton and/or associates. One (of many) credible sources is Cele Castillo.

If FARC vanished overnight and usanos (and, to a lesser extent, others in the world) all went to cocaine drug detox overnight, Uribe would lose a substantial chunk of Colombia's income. While I buy sunflower oil from Colombia, I just don't think that is going to pay the bills.

So, there is just one more small piece of the picture. For NL, why do we care?

  1. Historically, how drug money related to Colombia was used to fund a war against the Nicaraguan government.
  2. Nicaragua is currently one of the victim countries on the path of cocaine from Colombia to the U.S.
  3. The U.S.-funded "war economy" of Colombia makes the country operate very differently from virtually all if not all other countries in the region.

That last point is possibly the most significant. While there is cocaine use in Nicaragua, Costa Rica, ... it is far from a "serious drug problem". Dealing with trans-shipment becomes an expense for these countries. For Colombia, it is an income source both for sale of cocaine itself and the externally-funded war economy.

Any change, for example, legalization of cocaine in the whole world, would result in benefits for most countries (tax revenue, decreased enforcement costs, decreased crime, ...) except Colombia. And that conclusion has nothing to do with FARC.

well thought

Submitted by Che Guevara on 25 March, 2008 - 07:19.

well thought out response. i think farc would suffer if drugs were legalized... i was surprised at the conclusion of the boston globe piece, bc i would suspet that paper is liberal...

when government grows, liberty yields, thomas jefferson

Well I hope this murderer

Submitted by Leon on 3 March, 2008 - 01:43.

Well I hope this murderer rests in hell but I doubt even hell wants cowards there. These "brothers" of Daniel and Hugo lost tract of what they are fighting for many years ago. Now there are just a bunch of capitalist pigs running a multi million dollar business selling drugs. Hey I don't blame them it costs money to buy AK-47 to give to children so they can kill other children.

Good for Colombia, they are suppose to play by the rules while Hugo and Ecuador's president do not have to? What kind of bull is that. They are given safe haven across the border or should I say the kill innocent women and children then run across the border like cowards to avoid a fight.

If these are such great revolution brothers why not stand and fight in the country they want to change instead of running away like little girls to have Tio Hugo protect them?

Just what the world needs another war, this one just to distract the people of Venezuela since they can not even buy milk due to their successful revolution.

This will directly effect Nicaragua, monkey see monkey do. It took Daniel all of three hours to make his stupid comment of the day about this. However in his defense you could barely see Hugo pulling the strings attached to his mouth from behind this time, they are getting better at this. Thank god I have only a few fays left here.

Viva Colombia (and all the beautiful women there)

Same as 1978 and 79.

Submitted by nicalink on 25 June, 2008 - 11:53.

This is the same thing that many Cuban trained and Cuban backed Sandinistas did in 78 and 79. They would attack Nicaragua and then retreat to Costa Rica where they were hiding. They would leave the local guerrillas in Nicaragua to fend for themselves and get killed off. Then they would do the same again.

And the Contras

Submitted by fyl on 25 June, 2008 - 12:41.

As did the Contras in both Costa Rica and Honduras during the 1980s. I expect the Ecuador issue was a lot more like Costa Rica for the Contras where their presence was passive in a remote area rather than by permission in Honduras.

All that said, if you are in hot persuit and cross the border, the country you invade might accept it. But, the raid on FARC within Ecuador was not hot persuit. The Colombian government should have initially gone to the government of Ecuador and, if it did not get resolution, to an international body such as the OAS or UN.

one man's

Submitted by Che Guevara on 2 March, 2008 - 21:21.

terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, said by someone, i don't know....there is no right and wrong, only different. my dear liberal momma.

when government grows, liberty yields, thomas jefferson

Agree 100%. In certain

Submitted by stubrummen on 24 June, 2008 - 17:38.

Agree 100%. In certain countries we are the terrorists (and by "we" I mean anyone)