Unless the U.S. acts, and acts quickly, to strengthen our allies in Latin America economically, Chávez will engulf them all.
On March 1, Colombian armed forces carried out an attack on a FARC (Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces) camp just over the Colombian border, inside Ecuador.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Zedd
Clav,
I didn't say that the word guerrilla was a 70's construct. I said it was used as spin in the 70's. It was used to tug at people emotionally then. Conservatives often used the term to try and depict the commie bad guys. When the word was used, we were supposed to think that they were evil. Are you caught up now?
That notion was clear to me then and I was a child.
Hmmm it could mean too many nails up there.
77 - troll
...why does Uribe have so little support from any of his three southern neighbors - ?
78 - Clavos
Zedd: Bottom line, it happens all of the time.
Fifth grader: "But everybody gets body piercings, Mom!!"
79 - Clavos
When the word was used, we were supposed to think that they were evil.
Maybe in South Africa, but here it simply refers to a type of warfare (and warrior), including the tactics of the American revolutionaries, which most Americans don't consider to have been evil.
80 - troll
dunno Clavos...in the 60s and 70s in the Northeast US the word definitely carried emotional tones and was used for 'propaganda purposes' - just like terrorist today
81 - Clavos
troll, the etymology of the word is Spanish, guerrillero which, as you know, simply means "warrior."
People can put whatever emotional freight they choose on a word. I was (and am) using it to describe the type of warfare FARC wages; they are not, after all, conventional infantry troops.
The colonials fought a guerrilla action against the Redcoats; in fact, when I was in Vietnam I used to marvel at how stupid our military leadership was in that they couldn't see the (to me) obvious parallel between the NVA/Vietcong's and our own Colonial troops' tactics, and instead insisted on being as stupid as the Brits were in the eighteenth century.
The Brits lost back then, and so did we in 'Nam.
Which may go to prove West Point isn't all it's cracked up to be.
82 - Clavos
troll re #77:
Ecuador is a Chavez ally. 'Nuff said.
Peru and Brasil have concerns centered around the staggering drug trade and Uribe's efforts (which have included incursions into their territories) to quell it. Ironically, much of the drug business is run by FARC, who use it to finance their activities.
83 - Zedd
Clavos,
You are more a foreigner than I am. I keep telling you, I grew up here. When it was used, in the 70's, when I was a child, I was here.
Perhaps you have a Latin American perspective on the connotation. The reason that that term is not used anymore, especially among those who deal with social issues is because it is loaded. Now you know.
84 - troll
(geeze - I forgot about Peru...good thing Martha's not here to drag me over the coals for my unforgivable ignorance)
correction to 77: 4 southern neighbors
85 - Zedd
Clavos,
You really miss what I have been saying. Partly because I thought I didn't have to elaborate. I took the glib route.
I suppose I took your comments to be more so a news report and not an editorial comment. I really meant it when I said "so what".
You haven't elaborated on what these actions do. Do they destabilize the region? What do you forecast for the future because of this maneuver? I say this because countries support rebel forces all of the time. It's what governments do. It's what they have always done. Venezuela is a nation so it is doing what nations do. I am missing what the point is.
It seems to me that you approach things from the stand point that everyone has their place and only certain people or entities are "allowed" to play certain roles; that we are all in agreement as to who gets to do what and those who veer from their role (the subordinate positions) are nervy and need to re-align themselves (or behave). Your take and previous comments on class and structure supports my perception. Your objections are often supported by an unspoken "supposed to" premise and your consistent acquiescence on these boards also stirs me to this assumption. Hence I reply to you saying that people are people. Venezuela by taking this course of action, follows a set pattern of conduct by nations (good guys and bad guys) from all civilizations through time. Thus I say, SO.
I would be happy to be educated on what you think Chavez's action will do to the region.
86 - silver surfer
Clav's right, the term guerrilla IS Spanish, and the etymoloogy comes from the old German occupiers of Hispania in the 5th century AD.
It was used to describe the warfare fought by irregulars (Spaniards and Portuguese) and the forerunners of special frorces units and raiders (British) fighting alongside the Portuguese, British and Spanish regulars against Napoleon's France during the Peninsula War in the early 1800s.
Americans might disagree, but it was regarded as the first large-scale guerrilla campaign. It also passed into common English-language military usage from there through the Poms.
Guerrilla actually means small war.
They won, too, by the way. The French had no answer to it, much like the Redcoats in America and the Americans in Vietnam. Interestingly, the British learned from their experience in the American revolution while the US military seemed to have forgotten it by the time Vietnam rolled around 200 years later.
The Penisnular War led to the (first) fall of Napoleon. Although the British and Portuguese and to a lesser extent their Spanish allies engaged the French in some very large-scale pitched regular battles in the style of Waterloo (which was later) and won some stupendous but costly victories, much of the campaigning was done as a harassing kind of warfare. The British engaged rifle companies (Green Jackets) to scout around and ambush the French, while Spanish insurgents harassed the Frogs at every turn (literally).
From an American historical perspective, it's also why the British regarded the War of 1812 as a sideshow to the European continental battles and why they were so pissed off at the US for starting it; at the time, the Poms were literally fighting for democracy and their very existence and way of life against a nasty enemy bent of total conquest in a war on the scale of the later American Civil War. They felt Americans had taken a sly and opportunistic swipe at them while their backs were to the wall. They were right too, IMO, so America getting its first military commeuppance was probably a nice bit of get-square justice ... (sorry guys, but it's always good to have the other perspective don't ya think?)
Anyone interested in this stuff should read the Sharpe books - kind of an army equivalent of the Hornblower books, set in the British Army during the Peninsular War in roughly the same period as Hornblower.
The author, Bernard Cornwell, does his historical analysis very well, and you can see as the series progresses how the guerilla actions become the preferred method of fighting what became a very bloody war and which probably saved continental Europe from Bonapartism at its brutal peak. Kind of like a 19th century Nazism.
It's great period action, and expertly researched. The TV series starring Sean Bean and available in the US on DVD wasn't bad either.
Just thought I'd throw me two-bob's worth in ...
87 - Zedd
The point was not what it's etymology is but what the connotation is in our culture. Hence the word "spin".
88 - silver surfer
Also, expanding on the theme of Zedd and others in relation to usage, the earliest common use of the word in English was to describe a group of people who had been involved in a genuine and just war of liberation ... not bad, or evil, at all.
The opposite.
89 - Zedd
Depends on who is using the word SS. Again, people in the Social Sciences tend to shy away from the term now.
90 - Ruvy
Actually, after she got some sleep, Zedd came up with a good point.
I know I can guess at what I think the consequences of the Venezuelans trying to undermine their neighbors would be - but it would be good if you did spell out the consequences for us.
I'd like to know if your suspicions run in tandem with mine, for example.
91 - Franco
Guerrilla warfare is a warfare tactic. Period.
The term clearly identifies this warfare tactic and does no more or less.
Guerrillero is the Spanish word for guerrilla fighter, while in Spanish-speaking countries guerrilla as a noun usually means guerrilla army (for example, la guerrilla de las FARC would translate roughly as "the FARC guerrilla group") because of their fighting tactic. It is inconsequential if you have a positive or negative connotation to the meaning, including FARA or any other group using this warfare tactic.
Foreign support in the form of soldiers, or weapons, or sanctuary, or statements of sympathy for the guerrillas, can greatly increase the chances of victory.
Foreign sanctuaries not only add heavily to guerrilla chances, furnishing weapons, supplies, materials and training bases. Such shelter can benefit from international law, particularly if the sponsoring government is successful in concealing its support and in claiming "plausible denial" for attacks by operatives based in its territory.
It is not a US propaganda word. Is in not US spin. To insinuate or claim that is either itself pure propaganda and spin, or a lack of understanding of this historical warfare tactic, or both. It most recent historical US association it was applied to enimies of the United States as it is currenly applied to FARC.
If you still what to argue that fact you can take it up with Che Guevara and Mao Zedong, just to name a few, in recent history who have written books on it. “Guerrilla Warfare”, by Che Guevara 1969, and Mao Tse-tung, 1937.
Additionally, guerrilla tactics were summarized into the Mini-manual of the Urban Guerrilla in 1969 by Carlos Marighella. This text was once banned in several countries including the United States. This is probably the most comprehensive and informative book on guerrilla strategy ever published, and is available free online. Texts by Che Guevara and Mao Zedong on guerrilla warfare are also available.
This warfare tactit goes back hundreds of years and has been applied in both application and practice far longer then our short life spans current positive or negative assimilation. For those who have difficulty in connotation neutrality, allow yourself the luxury of opening up your limited live span perception to the larger picture. The following link my help.
Guerrilla Warfare
For those who can't do that and or like to play social science command word games, you are the true propaganda spin-doctors.
92 - Zedd
Franco,
You simply don't understand the discussion. Let it go.
Words evolve. Accept it. Learn what the connotation is and use it in the proper context knowing your audience. Selah!
93 - Franco
I, along with many in this thread are using it in its proper context. It is not us who can not let go of improper context.
I can not speak for the others who are in agreement with me on the true contest of Guerrilla Warfare. Bur if you are going to choose to engage me in this discussion, I am going to continue to use the correct context “Guerrilla Warfare” whether you like in or not.
94 - Franco
"Franco, You simply don't understand the discussion. Let it go."
Zedd, I can not speak for the others who are in agreement with me on the true context of Guerrilla Warfare. But if you are going to choose to engage me in this discussion, I am going to continue to use the correct context “Guerrilla Warfare”, whether you like in or not.
95 - Clavos
"Franco, You simply don't understand the discussion. Let it go."
Al contrario, Zedd. He understands it far better than you do.
96 - Zedd
You are not letting it go.
Stop yourself.
97 - Franco
Zedd, you say......
"Trumping up charges and attacking a nation yourself, overthrowing the government and manipulating who is in power and how they rule, all with the plan of changing their culture to become like yours is wrong".
Then is #61 Clavos responds to your statement,
"That is EXACTLY what Chávez is doing in Colombia.",
My question is, why do you not recognize that Chavez is doing exactly what you say is wrong?
98 - Zedd
Franco,
I really want to discuss substance. I know I approach things tongue-in-cheek but I do that because these exchanges are a release of sorts. I am highly stressed. However it is important that I am not tit for tatting. I have to discuss matters that build me or at least allow me to exercise or intrigue the senses. Perhaps you missed my point (it was simple) and you need to go back and read. However, I am not a guy. I don't need to play the dozen as we call it. I lack the testosterone to care.
Now, do you have a reason why Venezuela's actions are so deplorable? If so, tell me and we can discuss.
99 - Franco
Well to start with Zedd, I see Chavez doing all the things you say are wrong.
Now who is Chavez? Well in the current escalating situation is everything. Does he care about people, I think so, in his less then fully developed character format. Does he care about power, I think he has become a full-blown hard core addict. Those that have had the power have talk about it after the fact, and they say it can be like nothing else on earth.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is way a government of checks and balances is so important. Chavez has trimmed out most of the checks and balances out of his government. That is way he is so dangerous.
One of his best friends and Defense Minister General Raul Baduel who has been one of Chavezs closest comrades for over 30 years, and who helped Chavez back into power after the 2002 coup, has lost all faith in Chavez because of his lust for power
I will just say this much in this post so you can comment so far..
100 - Ruvy
Clavos,
I repeat my suggestion of #90.
Outline for the reading public the negative consequences of allowing Chávez to go unchecked. Zedd's point was simply that Chávez is doing what any other potentate with the ability to interfere in his neighbor's affairs would do.
What negative consequences flow from sitting on one's hands and doing nothing to stop him?
I'm not arguing here. I can guess negative consequences myself. And I have plenty of nasty ideas. I want to know if my guesses match yours. After all, Clavos, it is your neighborhood, and I'm just a "dumb gringo" looking in at the situation from a third of a world away.
101 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, I grew up in the US and elsewhere in the 60s and 70s and I don't remember guerilla ever being a lodaded term or exclusively applied to bad guys. It's a specific technical term for a type of warfare. In college lectures Francis Marion and Benedict Arnold are discussed for their techniques of guerilla warfare in the Revolutionary War as heroes. The Contras were on our side and regularly described as guerillas. So were the Afghans fighting the Soviet occupation. Italian and French partisans in WW2 engaged in guerilla warfare against the Nazis. The exclusively negative connotations of the term are mostly in your head.
Dave
102 - Clavos
Ruvy,
As Dan Miller pointed out in #46 above, Chavez has already ruined Venezuela economically; no mean feat when you consider he's sitting on the largest oil deposits outside of the Middle East. Yet, due to his ineptitude and repressive rule, the trained, educated people necessary to run the oil production facilities are leaving in droves; oil revenues are plummeting, and he's spending enormous sums of money on arms (including big ticket items like fighters).
He promised the poor people the moon and the sky, yet years into his regime, they're still poor, only now, because of his mistakes with the economy which have created severe shortages of foodstuffs (thanks to price controls), they have no food, either. Before, they were poor, but they ate. Today, money that might have fed them now goes to Cuba ($2 Billion a year), Bolivia, and Ecuador.
The educated, skilled, trained and entrepreneurial Venezuelans are pouring out of the country, taking their brains and training with them. There are more than 100,000 here in Miami, with more arriving every day. Many more are going to the more stable, progressive LatAm countries like Mexico and Chile.
He's plunging the country that had the potential of being the richest in Latin America, surpassing even Mexico, into abject poverty and economic ruin.
And now he's attempting to overthrow the legally elected democratic government of a very prosperous (for LatAm) neighboring country. You do the math, Ruvy; what do you think will happen to Colombia?
And, he won't stop there, he's already made that crystal clear; ultimately, he wants control of the entire continent.
And that's not all, folks! He's also cozying up to the worst tyrant in your neighborhood, Ahmadinejad, as well as to the Russians and the Chinese.
But, the main point I was making had nothing to do with the future; it's the fact that right now he's interfering in the internal affairs of another nation; an act which is prohibited in all international law, and which is also condemned by every Democratic nation on the planet; something which, when the US does it (as in Iraq), the entire world condemns US (probably justifiably), but when this rat bastard thug in Venezuela does the same thing, everybody wants to give him a pass.
If WE plotted to overthrow the Colombian government, everybody in the world, starting with the comic opera UN, would be condemning us. How do I know that? Because it happens every time we do something like that. Talk about a double standard!
It ain't rocket surgery, Ruvy...
103 - Irene Wagner
"United, we are going to help defeat U.S. imperialism, and that's why...they get worried in Washington when they see the two of us shaking hands."
Chavez and Ahmadinejad? Before I read your well-written article, I thought it was something Dave Nalle claimed to have overheard at a Republican Party soiree "infiltrated" by Ron Paul supporters.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
104 - Dan Miller
When in Venezuela several years ago, a friend told me that when the gods created Venezuela, they gave her beautiful mountains, crystal clear streams, fertile land, wonderful people, lots of oil for exploitation, and a bunch of other good stuff. Then, one of the minor gods pointed out that Venezuela had been given far too much, in comparison with other countries. The rest of the gods agreed, and created her government to balance things out.
Methinks they went a tad too far.
Dan
105 - Franco
The problems that exist in the Venezuela today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.
Eleanor Roosevelt said it 50 years ago;
"We must prevent human tragedy rather than run around trying to save ourselves after an event has already occurred. Unfortunately, history clearly shows that we arrive at catastrophe by failing to meet the situation, by failing to act when we should have acted. The opportunity passes us by and the next disaster is always more difficult and compounded than the last one."
106 - Jimmy the Spiv
"We must prevent human tragedy rather than run around trying to save ourselves after an event has already occurred. Unfortunately, history clearly shows that we arrive at catastrophe by failing to meet the situation, by failing to act when we should have acted."
Eleanor must have seen 9/11 coming.
If only the US had acted as though it actually respected human rights throughout the world.
107 - Zedd
Dave,
On the term. You don't keep up with social issues, at least judging from your comments. You are totally oblivious to social issues. You only perk up after something has been discussed for generations and watered down, warped and disheveled. If it has something to do with money or some trumped up political football you are well versed (by then it is a none issue really) but you wouldn't have known that. You are clueless in this area. I don't think you value social issues (real ones not the Fox variety)
108 - Zedd
Franco,
Does Bush care about people? Probably not as much as Chavez. Does he care about power? I think everyone who seeks high office does.
Now can you give me something to chew on?
109 - Clavos
Chavez started caring about the people??
Really caring?? Beyond lip service?
Bwahahahahahaha!!
Good one, Zedd!
Hehe...
110 - Zedd
Clavos,
I know it serves a purpose to completely demonize those that you don't agree with but doing so causes your views to be discounted because they are under considered. Your comments are missing the layers that are always present when it comes to social phenomenon. He can care about the people but have a distorted view on how to create a society that benefits them. It's just that simple. Comprende?
111 - Clavos
He can care about the people but have a distorted view on how to create a society that benefits them.
Or, he can simply be a thug who found a way to enrich himself and grab the power he craves by deceiving the people and using them to help him gain office.
The evidence overwhelmingly points to the latter.
112 - Clavos
Oh, and BTW:
I don't have to "demonize" him. He does that very well on his own.
All I have to do is report it.
113 - Franco
GIVE THEM AN INCH & THEY'LL TAKE A MILE
Never was this idiom more appropriate in this thread than then with you Zedd.
I obliged you your attempt to get out of commenting and defending some of your previous accretions that many in this thread asked you to defend and you would not.
I obliged your wishes for me to skip over your defending them as I thought it would make you more comfortable in openning up this dissection on a rational footing.
I obliged your request for me to begin opening up this platform, which I did. Then low and behold, instead of your meeting me half way you respond with spin, side step, sputter sputter, fart, ad homineman, and denial as if saying, ah that aut to work for me.
If you want to pretend you can't put 2 and 2 together that's your call, but then by your own call the obliging party is over and were back to square one.
You say.....Now can you give me something to chew on?
Without misinterpreting your last comment as a pass, how about you’re chewing on defending your own statement for us, which several have asked you to do. A statement you made, you framed, and you accreted as argument into this thread.
Defend your following statement it in light of what Chavez is doing.
"Trumping up charges and attacking a nation yourself, overthrowing the government and manipulating who is in power and how they rule, all with the plan of changing their culture to become like yours is wrong".
Can you chew defensively on that for us? If you can't, which would also be your call, you have no credibility.
So what’s it going to be? We're waiting.....
114 - Franco
#107 " Jimmy the Spiv
"If only the US had acted as though it actually respected human rights throughout the world."
IYO
115 - Franco
Zedd, make a self help note to yourself on your “things to do today” list.
Look in mirror and repeat 3 times.......“I know it serves a purpose to completely demonize those that you don't agree with but doing so causes your views to be discounted because they are under considered.”
116 - Franco
This one has been going under the radar.
Argentina’s Defence Minister announced on Thursday a budget boost and promised a significant increase in the number of aircraft for the Air Force
“The budget boost will represent a 54% increase over 2007, for training and for the recovery of Air Force equipment and material”, said Defence minister Nilda Garré.
She also revealed that Argentina together with “friendly countries” from the region was in the process of an ambitious initiative to recover Air Forces manufacturing capacity.
Um……That nebulous reference to links with “friendly countries” is worrying. Is that a reference to Venezuela?
The only world News News source I could find on this at Merco Press, Uruguay
Found the heads up on Desicritics
117 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, out of curiousity, do you ever admit that you're wrong?
Depends on who is using the word SS. Again, people in the Social Sciences tend to shy away from the term now.
Zedd, I taught college history for years. No one was shying away from using the term 'gurerilla warfare' in our department, and last I checked History is one of the social sciences.
The negative connotation you keep talking about really does exist primarily in your head.
Dave
118 - Clavos
Franco,
Venezuela and Argentina have had a number of joint projects going back through the years into the Kirchner (Nestor) administration in Argentina, so I'm not surprised that Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner would continue the relationship. Unquestionably, the two countries consider each other "friendly," and have for years.
The two have had pacts wherein Venezuela supplied fuel to Argentina in exchange for food; they had an agreement to jointly produce and market natural gas from fields in Venezuela, both are members of South America's trading bloc Mercosur, etc.
All that said, I've never heard, until you brought it up, of a military-based relationship between the two before.
Please keep us posted as you explore the issue.
119 - Franco
Ah yes Clavos, Venezuelas many pacts with Argentina indeed.
Lets not forget the "suitcase scandal"
120 - troll
Dave says - I grew up in the US and elsewhere in the 60s and 70s and I don't remember guerilla ever being a lodaded term...
it is always reassuring to find more evidence that Dave and I grew up in alternate realities together
121 - Dave Nalle
Well, I was raised by and around lefties, Troll. I imagine they thought the guerillas were the good guys most of the time. Given that 'guerilla' is a specific descriptive term which doesn't carry any denotative weight at all, it seems foolish to tack irrelevant connotations onto it. It's too good a word to waste that way.
Dave
122 - Zedd
Dave,
Just say, "OH, I didn't know". That's all. It's getting uncomfortably embarrassing.
123 - pleasexcuetheinterruption
Cindy, M.A.S.H. the TV show is IMO the best sitcom ever created.
I LOVE M.A.S.H.!!!! Especially the earlier episodes. Movie is good too.
124 - pleasexcuetheinterruption
Dave, One of the key things about WW was that when they presented conservatives they treated them like human beings, not like abstracts of evil with a label slapped on them. In the real world the left is usually not that empathetic and just stereotypes instead of making any attempt to see things from the other point of view.
Dave
Loved the WW too. You hit it right on. Even though the politics of the show favored the democrats, both sides were legitimate actors with legitimate agendas. They just disagreed. It would be great if real life was like that too.
125 - pleasexcuetheinterruption
On the absurd argument over the connotations of guerilla.. I think you will find any high school history text-book in the country currently uses the word free of any negative connotations. Nor do any political science works I have read. Both fields are social sciences. I have never had the impression guerilla carries negative connotations. You're imagining it Zedd.