Is it only a coincidence that Cuba and Venezuela simultaneously offered Russia military access to their homelands? Or did they?
There have been a few news articles recently concerning the possible use of Cuban and Venezuelan territory for the construction of Russian military bases. The New York Times noted:President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela said his country would be willing to host Russian bases there, the Russian news agency Interfax reported. “Russia has enough resources to secure its presence in different parts of the world. If Russian armed forces would like to be present in Venezuela, they will be welcomed warmly,” Mr. Chávez told reporters on Tuesday, in response to a question about whether Russia could put bases in Venezuela. “We will raise flags, beat drums and sing songs, because our allies will come, with whom we have a common worldview,” said Mr. Chávez, who was in Moscow for talks with President Dmitri A. Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin.According to an article by the Chinese news agency, Xinhua, which cites Reuters: the offer of a "warm welcome" was made in response to a question from a journalist at a press conference with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Pablo
Dave,
Oh do you mean the same Bob Barr that participated in the socialist witch hunt a few days ago. Is that the Bob Barr you are referring to bucko?
Forgive me, I do recall another post where you said you were going to vote for McCain. In either event, I still stand by the statement Davey boy.
As for your argument with Deano, about troops in Russia in 1918, I am just gonna sit back and see (if Deano's claim is true) the great literary politico Dave Nalle make a public retraction!
By the way Deano buddy, I am still waiting for you to admit that I was right about Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands being in the SS. I know it will be a cold day in hell before I get you to admit that you not only were incorrect but quite rude in your assertion that I was off the wall about it. I wasn't and provided numerous references to support my claim bucko. Not only was I right, I attempted to be civil to you and sent you an email about it, to which your reply was extremely rude and condescending.
27 - Tom
The Americans are such hypocrites. It's O.K. for the US to put missiles in Russia's back yard and when they threaten to do the same we scream "New Cold War". It is just hard for many fearing Americans to see that the US is the destabilizing force in the world, not Russia. I wish America went after tax cheating oligarchs like the Russians do. Truman Capote said; "If you don't think it's about the money, it's about the money! Go US military industrial complex!
28 - bliffle
It's just chess moves: you create new threats against your opponent whenever possible, which is usually when opponent fails to sufficiently increase his threats. Usually, chess games are lost, not won, when one player crumbles under the threats.
Unfortunately, the current administration seems to know nothing about such strategy, as their only chess move is to kick the board over, but it doesn't work because opponent and all observers remember exactly where the pieces were.
29 - Pablo
The USA hypocritical ya say? I could not agree more!
Particularly with reference to weapons of mass destruction, as in being the only country in the history of the world to use them to murder over 100,000 human beings, the vast majority of them civilians. Yes I could not agree more Tom.
However hypocrisy is getting about as American as apple pie these days, as is fascism.
30 - sane
Just FYI, Russia or any other power for that matter, has the same right as the US to put up any kind of base anywhere if invited. I just hope they do.
31 - Joaquin
Dave,
Very cute but doesn't make it: your comment, "USAID has been trying to overthrow Chavez? With what, food shipments?" For your info, the USAID, founded in 1961 as part of JFK's "alliance for Pogress" program in Latin America was officially - and ostensibly - established to provide huamnitarian aid and totally refrain from military aid or facilitating military actions. So one can understand why you, like myriad other misinformed Americans can make such a comment. But in 1962-1964, the USAID, with the complicity and abetting of other branches of the US govt. began violating that key part of its founding charter - like other parts of the Alliance for Progress - by aidiing in the overthrow of another democratically elected government, the Joao Goulart govt. in Brazil, Since then, the USAID has been used, primarily as a condiut for CIA money, to overthrow govts. the US oligarchy and govt. does not like. Indeed, as at least one former CIA officer has testified, among the "humanitarian aid" the USAID has been providing foreign countries, particularly in Latin America, are instruments of torture. The USAID in fact provided the post-Goulart dictatorship in Brazil with electroshock torture equipment, which was used, under the supervision of the late US CIA Officer Dan Mitrione (later himself kidnapped and killed by the Uruguayan Tupamaros - karma at work it seems!) to torture scores of Brazilians for their left political views and activities, none of which qualified as "terrorist." In the same way, USAID has been used as a conduit for CIA money and has acted on its own to similarly fund "opposition,"or the political "putas" - entirely from the supplanted US-supported oligarchs - who ruled (or misruled) Venezuela since 1958 as a duopoly, and who want their old positions of power back. So Dave, show us where or when the USAID provided ANY truly humanitarian aid, in good faith, to Venezuela since 2000.
32 - Mikhail
Living in Moscow the last 10 years everything has changed. Life is much much better and easier because of Putin(Look at economy look at Income I'm Happy and many Russians are happy and have money and travel. I see to much U.S propoganda on the internet against Russia but honestly i ignore it now because anything Russia does is evil and anything U.S does is good/free and correct. U.S Put missile shield in Eastern Europe and expanding NATO closer to Russia border is ok??? Russia puts nuclear bombers in cuba it crosses red line??? This shows how bad the U.S government is. I don't have much against the people of U.S but day by day on the streets of Moscow i see people creating hate towards the U.S because of its aggressive stance towards Russia.
And Dave i really do hope you take a look at the perfect America whose economy is in a lot of trouble. From a person actually living in Russia i say to you Zhri govno i zdohni!
33 - Joaquin
Mikhail (July 28 @ 22:55)
As a long-time student of Russia and before that the Soviet Union,- and as I am married to a Russian-Ukranian with lots of contact from Russia proper - I have to say that you are quite fortunate to be in the position you are. I understand that a lot of Russians are still struggling economically. But I also must agree with you that things have gotten better, and the fac that there are people still struggling there is an indicator of the continuing long-term effects of the harmful and economically toxic policies of the bad old days of the Yesltsin administration. I agree that Putin has straightened out a lot of the mess that Yeltsin and his crowd created with their sheepishly pro-Western neoliberal policies, the same neoliberal policies Washington pushed on Latin America and which, like in Russia in the 1990's, failed catastrophically. It is precisely these policies that the current governments of Venezuela, Ecuador, and Nicaragua are trying to reverse and protect their countries from, and which the Argentines have, under center-left governments, also successfully reversed, much to the chagrin of the oligarchs in Washington BC ... er, excuse me ..., DC. I agree that Russia and Russians are today doing better precisely because Putin reversed the Yeltsin crowd's neoliberal havniok policies, again to the chagrin and anger of the Washington crowd (both Democrats and Republicans alike!), and which is why Mr. Putin whas been and contiues being so demonized by Washington and the corporate US media.
Although I've been around on this beautiful planet a long time, and have studied history and politics for at least the last 35 years, and should by now have developed very thick skin, I still cannot get used to the prevailing double-standards of the US policymaking establishment and media, especially in the area of foreign policy - again on the part of BOTH corporate parties, the Dems. and Repubs. alike! I never fail to bristle with indignation when I see, read, or hear US officials and punditocrats whine and froth whenever Russia or any other country so much as contemplates taking necessary proactive steps to militarily or otherwise defend what's theirs and in their legitimate interests - e.g. Chavez's steps to keep US-sponsored subversion in check in his country, or Russia defending its perimeter in Eastern Europe and south Central Asia, or for those 1980's veteran activists, the efforts of the Sandinista government in Nicaragua to seek arms and alliances to defend their country against relentless US attacks on all fronts. All the while, however, who's been provocatively setting up their bases, missile bases, and shields around other powers' perimeters? Who's been carrying out the most sophisticated campaigns of subversion against other governments, friends and adversaries alike? Whos' been promoting balkanization in other countries i.e. Kosovo in Serbia, or Santa Cruz in Bolivia? And who's been nakedly carrying - or seeking to carry out - "regime changes" around the globe?
Again, If Mr. Chavez even half-jokingly offered to host Russian bases in Venezuela, given US behavior towards him and his government over the last 9 years, he's acting quite rationally in defending and safeguarding his country and his government aginst very real outside threats.
Druziem!
34 - Mikhail
Joaquin(July 28, 2008 @ 23:53PM)
I agree with pretty much everything you have written and are a smart person.
In terms of Living Standards in Russia you are right i am quite lucky living in Moscow but things are good in the large cities. Moscow is the most expensive city in the world which makes it very difficult for people outside it to move and adjust as they lose all there money very quickly. Ill give you some examples
Levels of GDP per capita in Moscow are around nearly $30,000USD the same as in many parts of Europe already. GDP per capita in the country as a whole at $14,700 USD per capita but growing at a much faster rate than in Moscow. If everything is stable the GDP per Capita by 2013 is estimated at being 25,000USD. Outside Moscow life is somewhat difficult as well but Russian HDI is rated in the High Category with all the "Western World" countries.
By the end of 2008 Russia will be the third largest economy in Europe, overtaking France and reaching a GDP in PPP terms of over $2 trln. Two years thereafter, i calculate that the country will overtake the UK and then start to challenge Germany for preeminence in Europe.
But i agree with you in all areas
A weak Russia=Democratic
A Strong Russia= Evil/Communist Regime
35 - Dave Nalle
Well, Mikhail, I can see how you'd be happy with the Putin regime. He's found a way to bring some prosperity back to the select few by reinstituting a lot of the top-down statist control which characterized the old Stalinist regime. For those in a priveleged position that's a pretty good deal. Maybe a kinder, gentler Stalinism is basically better for Russia than the chaos of the pre-Putin period. Maybe Russia can't be ruled any other way.
As for Russia being democratic, that boat has sailed. It's back to being an oligarchy, and that's true whether it's powerful or weak. Putin is fully aware that democracy gets in the way of order in a country which has never really been naturally inclined towards democracy.
Dave
36 - Condor
Is it my imagination or do all Russian bloggers write like a cheap hollywood script for a B movie. You'll have to excuse me, but looking over the thread... I'm thinking we have a pile of lurkers or 1 or 2, not unlike our friend Jamil.... there is just too much similarity in writing styles, paraphrasing... not to mention the dropped prepositions to give it a feeling of mediocre command of english.
It's too obvious.
Now, if I'm wrong here's my apology:
Bash the US all you want. My dad fought in WWII and fought his butt off, your parents and/or grandparents were happy not to have the 3rd Reich regime or the Imperial Japanese as the controlling authority in your lives. And although Patton never got his wish, you had Stalin and the others to guide you and keep you under the thumb of his and subsequent regimes.
Despite all of that... If, in fact the world has a such a dim view of the U.S. then exercise your rights to abstain from visiting the U.S., receiving aid from the U.S., coming to U.S. to work legally or illegally), or to receive education. After a global boycott of anything U.S., we will have received the hint, and probably have a much nicer country in spite of your protests.
Do we have a deal?
37 - Condor
Oh, and one more point.
Thanks for bringing this up Joaquin; USAID was instituted under the JFK administration, which like most things JFK... set the tone for most of the cold war. JFK was sanctified after his death, and in the U.S., it's been hands off as far as the days of "Camelot" is concerned, but be advised... and again Joaquin clearly points this out.
JFK had a keen interest in special operations. Entities like USAID, Peace Corp, USOM, and a myriad of other "extensions of good will" had other assignments besides the "official" designators. But, in all fairness, other countries used identicle tactics of farce, to which only the sheeple in the respective countries were ignorant of.
I witnessed USOM's operation in Southeast Asia, it was quite impressive, hardly claudestine (except to the general polulace back the U.S.). The big 3 all had stuff going on, face it... it was Cold War, we all lived through it, the governments waged it.
And obviously from this thread the scars are still evident.
If we can't resolve it, or if we continuously bring the flem of history up in our throats, lets just bid adieu. Go our separate ways, not communicate, leave each other alone, and isolate. Technology will allow us to isolate yet verify; correct?
Why not. You all are obviously sick of the U.S. and the citizens of the U.S. are sick of putting up with a lot crap from other countries.... and stymied that our government keeps on pushing the agenda. A lot of us are wrapped up in our lives, providing for our families, keeping our nose to the grindstone and out of trouble and what do we get? A government that throws our tax dollars at other countries, who really don't give a shit. I guess familiarilty does, in fact breed contempt. Why are we (the U.S.) so concerned about the welfare of people who don't give a shit?
We're not the nanny here, they have their own government to take care of them. The live in systems that provide (or are supposed to) provide everything to everyone from womb to tomb. Those people in those countries are set, for-get-about-it.... let's go isolationist and grow from within. Secure the borders, keep to ourselves.
George Washington advocated isolation. Maybe it's time to listen. My traveling days are done, I've been all over the globe. And the U.S. is still the place for me to hang the hat. I think I'll keep the hat on the hook and stay right here.
Good night Boris, good night Natasha... say hello to Rocky and Bullwinkle for me.
xoxoxo
38 - Ruvy
Good night Boris, good night Natasha... say hello to Rocky and Bullwinkle for me.
Smart move, condor. This is just the kind of Amero-centered bullshit attitude that earns Americans brickbats the world over - including here in Israel.
You don't have to like Russians, but for the most part you don't have to live with them. I do. When you live with them, you learn that there is a lot more to them than vodka and commie propaganda.
And you learn that the world does not stop at the Pacific or Atlantic Ocean, and a lot bigger than the narrow views of the mainstream American media and the fools who worship at their feet....
But you want to stay in America and isolate yourself from the world. You are 120 years too late. The world will not let you. So, get used to the world with its foreign noise and stink. To the world, you stink, too.
39 - javier
this is typical cia psy-ops propoganda intended to influence public opinion in the u.s. the venezuelen constitution prohibits foreign military bases and cuba does not need russia to defend it. this story came from a dubious source, and the fact that it has been promoted by the a.p. and other compromised international news spigots convinces me that it is b.s. nothing to see here. don't worry dave, the russians are not coming.
40 - Dave Nalle
Y'know I was just going to suggest that some of the russian commenters here might be part of their psyops/shillblogging opreation. Seems more believable tham the CIA theory.
Dave
41 - STM
Dave Nalle: "And Vovka, you're completely insane. You don't make more peace through even more militaristic posturing."
Lol. Gotcha. An armed society is a polite society, Dave, isn't that what you always say?? :)
42 - Condor
"Smart move, condor. This is just the kind of Amero-centered bullshit attitude that earns Americans brickbats the world over - including here in Israel." Ruvy
I ment to say "Moose and Squirrial"
And you are more than welcome for the billions U.S. dollars that are poured into Israel yearly to prop up their defense industry... Ungrateful?
Then my point in both comment 36 and 37 has been validated.
I'm not arguing that familiarity does not breed contempt, nor am I arguing that countries do not necessarily enjoy the foreign aid packages. What I am promoting is that, if a country doesn't like or dispises the aid, the U.S. should pull it. Send more to countries that need the medical aid, or the wells dug, or the food brought in.
Your country Ruvy, would probably do just fine without the aid, especially if your country feels the way you obviously do.
And one more thing... do not fear the Russians, do not fear the Soviets (they are still out there). In fact, don't fear anything. Fear incapacitates the ability to think and to act. When you live in fear, you piss yourself on a continuous bases. And yes Ruvy, in case you're wondering, I've got a few war stories too.
43 - Clavos
cuba does not need russia to defend it.
You're right there. There's nothing in Cuba that would entice another nation to invade it.
But Cuba does need Russia (or Venezuela, or somebody) to support it.
44 - Franco
#17 " Ruvy
"the axis of Iran, Venezuela and Russia, with China backing up North Korea. This is the group of foreign powers who face America and who can threaten it in a new cold war."
Correction Ruvy, not "can threaten" they "are and have been threatening" and it has been going on a long time.
"And you learn that the world does not stop at the Pacific or Atlantic Ocean, and a lot bigger than the narrow views of the mainstream American media and the fools who worship at their feet."
I have to agree. Being a American who grow up in Los Angeles California in the 1950's through the 1990's (love the place) and conducting international trade and eventually moving to Chile in 2000 where I have lived the past 8 years, one gets a much larger perspective on the world.
When I see the US media speak or the Congress for that matter, I see a group of so called leaders, the supposedly best we can offer in their field look like obtuse nitwits. It is embarrassing to see how how obtuse they appear to the rest of the world. The MSM is really quite a circus act!
What is heartening for me Ruvy here in Chile though, is even thou the Chilean see this too, they over look it as they see so much more real value in every human endeavor coming out of the USA.
What is disheartening for me Ruvy, is I do not see this same Chilean sprit coming from you out of Israel.
45 - Joaquin
As I rummaged through old e-mail to clean up my in-box, I ran into another item on this subject of the putative - and now more apparently prematurely assumed - prspect of Russian bases in Venezuela, an aritcle by Daniel Cancel on Boomber.com of July 28, 2008: "Chavez said if Russian navy ships were to arrive in Venezuelan ports they would be welcome, and said the reactivation of the U.S. Navy's Fourth Fleet to patrol the Caribbean is a threat to Venezuela and the region." There are two points raised in this sentence: First, in the last part of the sentence, the reactivation of the US Navy's 4th Fleet is a most provocative move of which Mr. Chavez - and really all Latin Americans concerned with the respect of their sovereignty - should and must be most concerned. As I understand it, the 4th Fleet, primarlily a World War II expedient for hemisphereic defense against the European fascists and Japanse militarists with whom the Hemisphere (excepting Argentina) were actively at war, was stood down in the 1950's since that war had ended, and despite the Cold War that followed it, was not projected to be reactivated save if REAL war threatened. As crazy as our leaders were during that chapter in our history (especially JFK, Nixon, and Reagan), as far as I know none of them looked to reactivate the fleet, not even dirung those tense days of late October 1962. Hence its reactivation now by our adolescent-in-chief, especially now as election time rolls around, is of most serious concern, to Mr. Chavez and really to us as well.
The second, and most immediately important point in this on-going conversation is in the first part of the sentence, namely: "Chavez said if Russian navy ships were to arrive in Venezuelan ports they would be welcome,...." Mr. Chavez said ONLY hat Russian navy ships would be welcome should they call on Venezuelan ports, just as British or Canadian ships would surely be welcomed in US ports should they need to call on them. There is NOTHING here about bases! Neither in, nor behind, nor in front of, above, or below that key phrase. This seems to reinforce the thesis put forth by several contributors, and which I myself hold, that Dan Miller's article - at least its title, is at least obliquely intended to lead the reading public to jump to paranoiac conclusions of a Russo-Venezuelan trheat to US national security. In my 3 and half decades of reading the US media, I have long learned that this is the all-too-typical M.O. of the US corporate media, which especially over the last 25 years has become more of another branch for the executive branch of the US govt.
46 - Condor
Joaquin, I agree however I would like to throw in a couple of personal points (the inference is mine).
1. I do not see any threat from the Russians or the Chavezista's. (note: I know many Venezuelan citizens, and they do not share any affection for Mr. Chavez).
2. The media's M.O. is to sell advertising. Given that corporate goal of enabling the bottom line, we can always expect sensationalized news or broadcasting. And only the sensational news will be brought to our immediate attention, to wit, Britany, Paris, Chavez... Market share is going internet for a reason, as traditional news sources are rife with "breaking news" that isn't breaking, nor is it really important. That is until some event really newsworthy breaks, then the agencies usually quit treading water and recycle about 4 hours of news repeatedly for 2 weeks. Then it's OJ trial mode until we just shut off the news and play solitaire on the laptop.
We used to say that the newspapers buy ink by the barrel and have to pay the bills, hence the reporting suffered. But overtime, it's become the advertising dollars driving the bus.
Gotta go and Make it a good one!
47 - Franco
#45 " Joaquin
Joaquin, post #45 is based on fallacies.
The US has very close allies in Latin America and the Caribbean that welcome US efforts to protect their sovereign interests in the wake of the antics of Hugo Chavez and the Castro brothers. Its just not something that is going to be spoon feed you in 35 years or reading US MSM.
Countries like Brazil, Columbia, Chile, Peru, all have serious “in your face” reasons to be concern that it is in fact Chavez, not the US, the will not respect their sovereignty.
Even within the countries that Chavez wants everyone to think are going his way, Ecuador and Bolivia, and last but not least, even within Chavez’s own Venezuela, there has been, and continues to be, ever growing opposition to him and his other 2 side kick Latin Presidents who will never pull ecconomic reform together for their people when surendering to the likes of Chavez. The insight and skills are not there and the people are being taken for a ride to no ware as the reast of free market Latin America is on a boom.
Bolivia has been torn in half, Ecuador's economy has now been set up to tank by making it debendent on Chavez leed up to MECR trade block, while the people in these countires watch Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Peru economies growing more ecconomicly sound everyday with their interantial free traid agreements.
If Chavez wants to play serious games with his other Latin American neighbor states and tries to cover it up by claiming he needs to protect himself from the US, that is his call, but his revolution at home has already stated to unravel.
This has not deterred Chavez from continually messing with other neigbor states, nor has it lead to any increase of respect for his other Latin American neighbors when they complain to him about his meddling with their sovereignty.
His Latin neighbors watch him as he spends billions on Russian military land, sea, and air equipment, i.e., 7 new Russian submarines, 30 or 40 MIG’s, 2 AK-103 factories, and multiple batteries of anti-aircraft missiles all on order for Chavez and his continental revolution.
When Chavez claims they are to fend of the US, his neighbors aren't buying it because they know it is his bull shit cover story, because they know, just as the US knows, that the book dose not read that way on the inside.
Joaquin, you really need to get out more.
There are a lot more countries in Latin America that see Chavez as a major threat to their sovereignty then they do the U.S. Navy's Fourth Fleet.
Now why is it that Russia always sides with the wackos who are against counties that are not opressive and are doing very well on free market ecconomics and or what to break away from their style of free market oppression (just like Chavez) as Russia is doing to countires in Europe right now and playing the same oil weapon over Europe as Putin plays over Europe. That has been Russia’s unbroken record from day one and they are still militarally packing and backing the counties that play this game right along with them. Talk about major powers messing with sovereign states.
Now if you don’t like the fact that these other Latin American states don’t like or trust Chavez, or Russia’s intentions with Chavez, then that is another issue all together.
If that is the case, at least have the balls to address that instead of the weak kneed leftist US bashing, which has been so over played to the point that the pendulum has already started it swing back. If you don’t see that, just keep standing in its way.
48 - Joaquin
Franco
I'll address the last point first. To begin, where do you get the notion that most Latn American countries see Mr. Chavez and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela as a greater threat to their soveriegnty than the US? Give some solid evidence and I'll consider taking your claim seriously and address it as such. Second, why is it then that Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Paraguay have kept friendly and collaborative ties with Venezuela, and Argentina along with the avovementioned plus several others have been establishing or looking to establish alternatives like MERCOSUR, ALBA, and even a regionan non-US and non-EU dominated regional banking institution? For the sake of argument, supposing many Latin Americans do see Chavez as a threat, who owns, controls, or materially influences the bulk of the Western world's media, including the Latin American media? The US-dominated media conglomerates. My understanding is, the last time I was informd of this, that only 6 mega-conglomerates (almost all US-dominated or influenced) hold not just the Western world's media but most of theat of the world, with exception of the independents, which fortunately appear to be growing, but not in the Americas but in Eurasia. Then, there's the critical factor of the local oligarchies tied to US and European transnational capitalism, many including local media. Then there are the governments, especially ones like Colombia, El Salvador, and Peru, bought, paid for, and sold by US and European capital as well as Washington. Read your Latin America History. Indeed, Colombia, the third biggest recepient of US aid (almost all military) in the world, next to Israel and Egypt, a country where death squads have been terrorizing the population and killing labor, student, and social justice leders and activista and with one of the worst human rights records in the hemisphere and the world, that country (of which I am a native by the way) has shown to be more of a therat and violator to neighborng countries' sovereignty than Venezuela has to any of its neighbors. Finally, as for fragmentatiojn in Bolivia, it is the Bolivian overwhelmingly white (and therefore anti-indigenous and thus anti-Morales) right wing concentrated in Santa Cruz, instigated by US NGO's and of course our CIA that's been balkanizing that country.
To tother things, your "Now why is it that Russia always sides with the wackos who are against counties that are not opressive and are doing very well on free market ecconomics and or what to break away from their style of free market oppression (just like Chavez) as Russia is doing to countires in Europe right now and playing the same oil weapon over Europe as Putin plays over Europe. That has been Russia's unbroken record from day one and they are still militarally packing and backing the counties that play this game right along with them. Talk about major powers messing with sovereign states." bit, well, here's proof of the pudding of what I intimated about the noxious and deceitful influence of mush of the world's media. Lastly, as for your "Joaquin, you really need to get out more." gem, as previously indicated, not only was I born abroad, but over the last 20 years I have not only travelled abroad (too many countries to list)but I've studied and worked abroad over the last 18 for stretches of 3-4 months, and in some cases going back for 2nd and 3rd tours of work (Spain, Russia, Ukraine, some examples). Maybe it;s you bud who need s to get aout more, and not just as a tourist seeking fun and diversion, but engaged in productive and positive pursuits as I was. Indeed, this is the first year I'vbe spent entirely in my home in California USA which I love, in 4 years and I love staying home for a change. Now I can in more relaxed fashion absorb and process not just what I've expereinced and seen abroad, but can more deeply read reports from around the world with a more informed eye and mind, and NOT from MSM or UP or API, or the New York or LA Slimes... er, excuse me, Times.
So come out from your sandbox dear friend.
JJD ;-)
49 - Joaquin
Oh yes, Franco, few things I forgot to address. First, "Countries like Brazil, Columbia, Chile, Peru,..." with the exeption of Brazil, all countries with the bought, paid for, and sold govts I referred to earlier (it's COLOMBIA, not Columbia by the way). As for Chile, read a non-commercial media history of Chile, whose people and history suffered one of the harshest trajectories in the region after the overthrow of their democratically elected and supported Popular Unity govt, of Dr. Salvador Allende on - of all dates - 9/11 of 1973 - yes, the OTHER 9/11 by the way! - and the Pinochet dictatorship which killed some 3200 Chileans, including ones outside of Chile like Orlando Letelier in Washgington, DC, and "disappeared" a much larger number of them, and which implemented the region's first neoliberal economic regime you seem to extol at the end of the bayonet. Hence one can understand why that country may be distancing itself from Venezuela. As for Brazil, Mr. Lula may indeed be keeping a safe distance, but note that he has not and I think will not come out explicitly against the Bolivarian government because he knows, has previously worked with, and respects Messrs. Chavez, Correa, and Morales, not to mention the Castros. I suspect Mr. Lula, a spresident of South America's leading regional power is merely trying to appear "responsible" as the US/Western-dominated plastic corporate multnational media constantly misdefines the term, but nothing more. As for the "oppsition" in Venezuela, I've been speaking ad nauseam on this point in some detail since I entered this conversation, and frankly it's a bit irritating to have to repeat the lecture to inattentive students in the back of the classroom who spend class time doodling, text messaging, and otherwise farting around. So at the risk of imposing yet another impossible assignment on you, I will simply refer you to two books by Eva Golinger, The Chavez Code and Bush vs. Chavez, as well as reading some independent alternaive press for a change. Lastly, on your bit on "while the people in these countires watch Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Peru economies growing more ecconomicly sound everyday with their interantial free traid agreements." (that's TRADE, not traid, by the way, and also, what on earth is "interantial?"). The implosion of the neoliberal experiments-in-error in South America in the 1990s' led Argentina and several other countries to sensibly jettison that model you extol like one very bad experience, and, like Russia has done as well, they have sensibly been reinstating more local state control of their economy and assets, and doing all the better for it. Finally, assume you live in the US. If you do, and assuming you actually work for a living as I and most normal people do, do you REALLY want free trade agreements concluded between the US and mafia regimes like Colombia's? In practical terms that would mean more US jobs - possibly including your own! - being exported there to be "given" to poor Colombians at a fraction of a fraction of the wages those companies paid US workers in arrangements enforced not only by the structural poverty of 70% of Colombians but also draconianly enforced by the paramilitares death squads that see to it that no one organizes, unionizes, and otherwise "causes touble" or disrupt the unjust "peace." A real deal isn't it?
So Franco my dear, it is your post #47 that's based on phallusies, ... er, excus me, fallacies.
Cheers ;-)
50 - Joaquin
Franco, again,
You can start with The Nation, VenezuelAnalysis, Scoop and Granma. Just some alternative sites to fill you in, my friend.
51 - Dave Nalle
That would be a bigass US socialist magazine, a Chavista front site, a far-left New Zealand newspaper (you couldn't find one in this hemisphere?) and a link that doesn't work at all.
As an alternative, try finding out some of the truth at VCrisis.
Dave
52 - Clavos
The link that doesn't work is to pinche Fidel's version of Pravda (i.e., another commie rag), Granma, and the link doesn't work, because it was incorrectly type; it's in cuba, so the letter before the slash should be a "u," (as in cuba), not an "o."
This is it.
53 - Ruvy
Your country Ruvy, would probably do just fine without the aid, especially if your country feels the way you obviously do.
You are very right. We do not need American aid, and I have been saying that for as long as I've been commenting on this site. But the criminals who are the "power-holders", bought out by the United States and beholden to its evil regime (not its decent people but its evil regime - there is a difference), feel otherwise.
American "aid" is a mechanism for imperial control.
Better that we should use the Tavor or the Galil rifle, than the M16. Better we should stick to using our Uzis as well.
In fact, don't fear anything. Fear incapacitates the ability to think and to act. When you live in fear, you piss yourself on a continuous bases.
We agree on this. It is the basis of a very famous song amongst us, about how the world is very narrow bridge....
54 - Clavos
I'm not Franco, but i couldn't let this one slide:
do you REALLY want free trade agreements concluded between the US and mafia regimes like Colombia's?
In a word: Yes. Alvaro Uribe's administration is not only not a "mafia regime," it is one of our staunchest allies in the region.
In practical terms that would mean more US jobs - possibly including your own! - being exported there....
In the short term, perhaps, but, at the same time increased exports to trading partners and access to inexpensive raw materials from those same trading partners will enable more manufacturing here in the US. In addition, the rising cost of fuel and the falling dollar are combining to begin to entice some US companies that had outsourced offshore to move operations back to the US in order to remain competitive, thus re-establishing manufacturing jobs here; the likelihood of jobs moving offshore is now reduced in part by high fuel prices, which will likely remain high from now on.
Oh, and BTW, Joaquín, Franco lives and works in Chile.
55 - Ruvy
For you, Condor,
Tomorrow I'll Return Home.
56 - Joaquin
Clavos my friend, si sabes tanto, then type it in right - the Granma site, nd as for your "it was incorrectly type" it's "typed" just FYI. And Davy baby ..., and you too Clavos (BTW, you might have the manhood to use your real name) and Franco, YES, these are all commie Chavista-Fidelista-Sandinista or what have you sites and rags. Precisely the point! Open your minds to different points of view besides the canned corporate tripe that comes out of our corporate media. You might learn something surprising and constructive.
Clavos again: As for your bit, "Alvaro Uribe's administration is not only not a "mafia regime," it is one of our staunchest allies in the region." It is PRECISELY because he is such a US toady that Uribe's regime is so corrupt - and it's BECAUSE it's such a mafia regime that our adolescent-in-chief in DC is so close to Uribe and his mob. Just some recent Colombian history: Wherever Alvaro Uribe has had the misfortuen of governing, as mayor of Medellin (xoxoxo, as governor of the Department of Antioquia, and now as assassin-in-chief of Colombia, there have followed the misplacements and massacres o hundreds of thousands of POOR rural Colombians, the kind of poeple that brainwashed couch potato beer-heaads here don't give a damn about. Indeed, in 1982 or '83 he was forced to step down as Medellin mayor after being photographed with some of the local coke capos, including one of the Ochoas. I can go on some more, if you like, but later.
Finally, as for Franco living and working in Chile ... it only compounds his errors all the more!
Cheers! ;-)
57 - Clavos
Clavos my friend, si sabes tanto, then type it in right...
ji,ji,ji.
You tell me this in a comment replete with typos?
People who live in grass houses...
Clavos (BTW, you might have the manhood to use your real name)
Sure. On the internet.
Soy cabrón. Soy chingón. ¿Pero pendejo?
No, Joaquín.
58 - Joaquin
Clavos, I'd beg to differ on your closing remarks, especially if you REALLY buy that tripe about "free trade" particularly with Uribe's mafia regime. In your penultimate interrogatory sentence, well ... you've said it!
59 - Clavos
J,
In your penultimate interrogatory sentence, well ... you've said it!
Yet, I'm not posting under my own name - but then, you probably aren't either.
In re Uribe: In the (probably apocryphal) words of FDR, "He may be an SOB, but at least he's our SOB."
The bottom line on trade is,
the more the merrier...
I would like to see China and the US become VERY close trading partners; much more so than now.
There are 2 BILLION of them, many of whom are becoming more and more affluent by the day.
The world's biggest market - bar none.
Henry Ford had the right idea - pay 'em enough to buy your product.
60 - Ruvy
What is heartening for me Ruvy here in Chile though, is even thou the Chilean see this too, they over look it as they see so much more real value in every human endeavor coming out of the USA.
What is disheartening for me Ruvy, is I do not see this same Chilean sprit coming from you out of Israel.
What is even more disheartening to me is that the government here is stupider, if this is really possible, than the idiots in Washington AND follows its lead like so many retarded pigs wallowing in the feces of the mother pig, thinking it is mud....
It is hard to have any spirit of hope when we see Israeli police acting in concert with Arabs to harass and arrest Jews in Judea and Samaria, and to generally suppress free speech in this land. The Ministry of Internal security stains the uniforms of policemen here daily with the shit they authorize.
So, Franco, all you will generally see out of me is contempt and scorn - the bastards who are idiots in America are only surpassed by the idiots who are "power-holders" in Israel. American "power-holders" may deserve the hanging rope for treason - but Israeli "power-holders" CERTAINLY do.
You'll see some of that "Chilean spirit" coming out of me when I get to hang me a few traitors here.
61 - MAOZ
Ruvy (#60), a policeman's uniform can't be stained by the Ministry of Internal Security if the individual policeman will refuse to go along with the staining.
Unrelated to that observation -- Ruvy, did you happen to see the recent Lazer Beams post re EMP?
62 - Ruvy
MAOZ,
A long time ago, I read of warnings that the Iranians might try to use an EMP on the States. They might have even been in one of the comments in one of my own articles here. As for Rabbi Brody, this is the same rabbi who believes Obama will win, you know. Go to the Dreaming of Moshiach website and look at the entry for 3 August, and follow it through its links...
It gets interesting....
Ruvy
63 - Dr Dreadful
It is hard to have any spirit of hope when we see Israeli police acting in concert with Arabs [...] to generally suppress free speech in this land.
Then how come I'm reading this?
64 - Ruvy
DD,
Have you ever heard of the "Protestant work ethic"?
There is no such animal in Israel. In this country, dictatorship is light-handed because the would-be tyrants are lazy. If there were a Protestant work ethic, the secret police would have long ago dragged me into some back room for a "discussion". But for me to post here is not a real threat to anybody that is perceived. The minute I start posting in Hebrew, however....
Of course, you know the price of obtaining a "Protestant work ethic", don't you? Lots and lots of Protestants; that's an unacceptable price to all of us here - except the Protestant missionaries....
65 - Les Slater
"Then how come I'm reading this?"
I reposted an article from Gaza or West Bank about Israel's water policy on DECNotes when I working at DEC in the late 80s. DEC employees in Israel had this available to them. Someone from Israeli State security protested this to DEC who in turn asked me to remove the article. Since the article did not violate DEC policy I respectfully declined. The article stayed. It may have had something to do with me being fired shortly after but there were many other issues also.
66 - Joaquin
Clavos my friend ...
"The bottom line on trade is,
the more the merrier...," "Henry Ford had the right idea - pay 'em enough to buy your product."
The problem with this thesis is that it's faulty, based on phallussies ... er, excuse me, fallacies: "Trade," as you call it, with US and Western toady regimes like Uribe's mafia regime holding my native country hostage is that it consists of:
1. US-based transnationals exporting US jobs to these countries, putting people here in the US out of work who used to make $8 to $11 dollars an hour to make Nikes so that Nike can then pay Colombian or East Asian workers 0.75c an hour, or less.
2. Those shoes, costing perhaps $4.00 to make are then imported to the US or other "first world" countries and sold for $150.00 or $200.00.
3. That means that Nike, or whoever, DOESN'T have to "pay 'em enough to buy your product." Get all the work (economic value - and lifeblood!) out of these workers but NOT have to pay thenm enough to buy the goddamned products since THEY were NOT the intended market in the first place; they were just intended to be the human chattel to produce it, while Phil Knight pockets the profits and laughs all the way to the bank.
So Clavos my friend ... "Soy cabrón. Soy chingón. ¿Pero pendejo?" I have to answer that last one in the affirmative! But then I suspect you're just another brainwashed gusano hiding out in southern Florida. Saque la cabeza del culo!
Viva Chavez, Viva Castro, viva una nueva Colombia!
Hasta nunca!
67 - Clavos
And yet, J, the more trade that exists between your "native country" and the US, the richer both economies become.
But, como buen comunista, you don't accept that, which is fine, because in LatAm, you commies are losing, big time.
Viva Fidel, indeed. The man took the wealthiest, most vibrant economy in the Caribbean and destroyed it; driving out all the people with talent, education, intelligence, and energy, and made it dependent on charity for survival; first, from the Soviet Union, and now El Chango Chavez. Yeah, he's a great leader alright.
And, despite enormous petrowealth, Chavez is ruining Venezuela just as effectively as Fidel sank the Pearl of The Antilles. You commies certainly are great leaders and even better economists...
Oh, and FYI: No soy Gusano; I can (and do) return to my (non-communist) country anytime.
68 - Joaquin
Clavos buddy,
I assume you're a fairly intelligent chap, y que me estas tomando el pelo (that you're pulling my leg), and that your narrative is really a farcical comedy act - pues nadie puede ser tan pendejo (nobody can be so foolish) as to belive the jive about trade the way you insist you do.
"...the more trade that exists between your "native country" and the US, the richer both economies become." This is true only at the topmost levels de los puros ricachones (of the rich fat cat oligarchs) of both countries, because the working people - the REAL producers - of both countries are getting the shaft. I already went over that in past postings - and thus need not spend my precious time and energy repeating. I assume you work for a living. As a colleague recently observed to me, among people who are not major league independently wealthy, those who are right wingers are only so until their own pocketbooks are affected.
Now, first lesson, Junior. On your "Viva Fidel, indeed. The man took the wealthiest, most vibrant economy in the Caribbean and destroyed it;" The most vibrant economy indeed, if you are a rackeeteer or a putero (whoremaster and whoremonger). Yes, Fidel did indeed drive out the mob operations of Santo Traficante and Meyer Lansky, who along with el gordo Batista owned Cuba's pre-revolutionary economy from Havana, which is why the late Vice President Dick Nixon turned to them in 1960 to help the CIA and the gusanos who also got thrown out, or more so, left Cuba on their own after their ill-gotten wealth was confiscated and redistributed under INRI, to attempt to murder Fidel, Raul, Che, and 2 other top men of the revolutionary Cuban leadership. After these and other vice operations were closed down, the revolutionary govt. then took some 12,000 former prostitutes and rehabilitated them, including training them in new, more honorable, and socially needed trades and occupations like textiles, etc. At the REAL life level, the pre-revolutionary economy you refer to was anything but vibrant. The bulk of the population, the rural peasants in teh sugar sector, were condemned to the "dry" or "down" seasons between harvests during which many endured severely lean times, and the conditions that came with them, like infant and child mortalities. The revolution eliminated all that and everyone in Cuba is employed YEAR ROUND, perhaps not living luxuriously, but certainly having their basic needs met.
As to Fidel "driving out all the people with talent, education, intelligence, and energy, and made it dependent on charity for survival;" again, these people left on their own accord, belonging to the "Other Cuba" the wealthy, overwhelmingly criollo or white MINORITY bourgeois Cuba. The majority of Cuba today is radically different (black, mestizo, "lower class" white) from the gusanos who abandoned the country. As the late Chilean singer and comrade Victor jara aptly observed in one of hs songs before he was brutally murdered by the rigt wing Chilean regime, "siempre los ricos fueron extrangeros, que se vayan a Miami con sus tias ..." (the wealthy of our country have always been foreigners at heart, let them go off to Miami to join their aunties). This undoubtedly was yet one more difficulty the revolution had to contend with, the socialist reconstruction of the country without the needed talent and expertise, but they made do as they could.
Next lesson, your "And, despite enormous petrowealth, Chavez is ruining Venezuela just as effectively as Fidel sank the Pearl of The Antilles" bit. If anyone is running anything down to the ground in Venezuela, it's the unpatriotic right wing of that country, Venezuela's own variant of gusanos. After the failed April 2002 coup attemt against Pres. Chavez, a conjunction of US "non-governmental organizations" (NGO's) with money passed to them by the US State Dept and USAID, and financing Venezuelan "civic groups" (gusanos' rings)and private media staged on Dec. 2, 2002 a "strike" that focused pricipally on crippling Venezuela's petroleum industry. The "strike" wich was morr accurately a LOCKOUT since it was a strike by bosses - keeping many honest laborers out of work! - lasted 64 days to early 2003, severely disrupted PDVSA (Venezuela's state oil company) operations in not only providing Venezuelans' domestic oil needs, but also meeting foreign contractual obligations - Venezuela actually had to BUY OIL FROM ABROAD to meet the latter! - and ultimately cost the Venezuelan economy $10 BILLION USD of damage! Yet even with this and the myriad ramifications fro Venezuelans, Chavez handily survived the "referendum" of 2004 (yet another US-gusano creation to try - unsucccessfully - oust Mr. Chavez). This "strike" strategem was one that was more successfully used earlier in Nicaragua against the FSLN (Sandinista govt.), which in turn was borrowed from the original one used against Salvador Allende's Popular Unity govt. leading to the Pinchet coup on Sepetember 11, 1973 - yes, the OTHER 9/11!. But it failed in Venezuela. However, the economic damage has been substantial and has inflicted long term consequences. The same I might add has been done against Cuba - with variations - over the past 46 years. The excuse used to be "the Russians" but after the disappearnce of the USSR, the noose was tightened even more by the Helms-Burton Act and subsequent US policy. As one former CIA case officer has pointed out, in reference to Nicaragua in the 1980's but really also to Cuba, Chile, and now Venezuela as well, that the the US, the most powerful nation set out deliberately to disrupt and destroy the target country's economy, and inevitabley these actions are bound to have an effect.
Yet despite all this, Venezuela, and in particular Cuba have been able to not only survive but make positive progress in key areas. In Cuba, for example, illiteracy, which afflics other "free" Latin American nations like a plague, has been wiped out. Cuba indeed has more per capita teachers, doctors, and health workers than any other country in the world. To wit, the life expectancy, which prior to the revolution was 59 years, has been increased by about 20 years for men and women - in 2005-2007, it attained the rate of 77.97 years for both genders: 76 years for men, and 80.02 for women. This by the way is much higher than anywhere else in Latin America, and higher than even many US cities like LA, New York, and Washington BC ... er, excuse me DC., and in some rural areas like Las Tunas it's even up to 79.28 years for both genders. They ahve also gone as far as making strides in the areas treating and nearly curing cancer and other deadly diseases, strides deprived to us in the "free world" by the 46 year long blockade, not to mentin the AMA an dthe pharmas. These and other accomplishments have been made by the Cuban socialist revolution, contrary to your perile claim that Castro and the revolution "made [Cuba] dependent on charity for survival;" the USSR is gone and the Cuban socialist revolution is still there and going forward. So about Castro and the revolutionary leadership, well ... you yourself said it: "he's a great leader alright."!
Finally, Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador, and other Latin American countries, including non-revolutionary ones, are going forward in coming up with positive and productive regional alternatives, which I might add, operate along what you call "realistic" capitalist lines, only difference being that these countries have the sense enough to put limits on the application of capitalist principles and mechanisms so as to insure that the region's social needs are met and its sovereignty protected and respected. This is particularly true in the area of petroleum, inside and outside Venezuela. As W.T. Whitney observed in the July 26-August 1, 2008 issue of People's Weekly World (yes, a commie rag, no apologies!): "Increasingly in Latin America, oil production serves social and political ends. And barriers are up putting hydrocarbon resources off limits to norther predators. That's where the [recent US] dispatch of [the US Navy's 4th Fleet (see my earlier entries)] fits in,...." which is what started this whole debate in the first place. And so Mr. Chavez has every right, and acts sensibly in securing and and preparing Russian Sukhoi fighter jets. He certainly knows what he's doing for based on the history of US and Western intervention in the hemisphere leaves him little choice.
So I make no apologies in hailing and giving my "vvas" to messrs. Fidel and Raul Castro, Mr. Chavez, Mr. Correa, Mr. Ortega, Mr. Morales, and Mr. Lula and Mrs. Fernandez (of Argentina).
Cheers! ;-)
69 - Clavos
the revolutionary govt. then took some 12,000 former prostitutes and rehabilitated them, including training them in new, more honorable, and socially needed trades and occupations like textiles, etc.
And yet, today there are more jineteras than ever on the island...
As to Fidel "driving out all the people with talent, education, intelligence, and energy, and made it dependent on charity for survival;" again, these people left on their own accord, belonging to the "Other Cuba" the wealthy, overwhelmingly criollo or white MINORITY bourgeois Cuba.
In other words, the people who actually WORKED and created work for others, like the Godoys and the Bacardis; the doctors, lawyers and businesspeople whose property the so-called revolution STOLE, and the many who were imprisoned, like Armando Valladares, whose only crime was to refuse put a plaque with a Marxist slogan on his desk; for which "crime" he languished in fidel's prisons for 25 years.
The revolution eliminated all that and everyone in Cuba is employed YEAR ROUND, perhaps not living luxuriously, but certainly having their basic needs met.
Oh really? They're starving to death; they don't even get as much as a 1/2 kilo (1.1 lbs) of meat a month-no protein. What little food they do get, they have to stand in line for for days, while the commie elite shop in dollar stores, prohibited to guajiros, in which the shelves are loaded with food and luxuries from all over the world.
Next lesson, your "And, despite enormous petrowealth, Chavez is ruining Venezuela just as effectively as Fidel sank the Pearl of The Antilles" bit. If anyone is running anything down to the ground in Venezuela, it's the unpatriotic right wing of that country, Venezuela's own variant of gusanos.
Only Chavez has control of the petrodollars, and only Chavez decides where and how many get spent. As a result, Venezuela's inflation rate is second only to Zimbabwe's in the entire world. He's ruining the economy of what could have been one of the most prosperous countries in the world, all by himself.
In Cuba, for example, illiteracy, which afflics other "free" Latin American nations like a plague, has been wiped out. Cuba indeed has more per capita teachers, doctors, and health workers than any other country in the world. To wit, the life expectancy, which prior to the revolution was 59 years, has been increased by about 20 years for men and women - in 2005-2007, it attained the rate of 77.97 years for both genders: 76 years for men, and 80.02 for women.
According to fidel's propaganda machine, and not verified, except by socialist NGOs and left wing amurricans.
They ahve also gone as far as making strides in the areas treating and nearly curing cancer and other deadly diseases...
I personally know well two different Cuban doctors, who don't know each other. They tell the same story: the training is good, and modeled after US medical schools; after that, it's all downhill, with not enough medicines available to treat everyone, antiquated and insufficient equipment, severe rationing of medical care for the people. But again, the commie elite have a nice, well-stocked and staffed hospital with state-of-the-art equipment to be treated at, and even so fidel brought russian and Spanish doctors to Cuba to treat him, because his own weren't up to the task.
contrary to your perile claim that Castro and the revolution "made [Cuba] dependent on charity for survival;" the USSR is gone and the Cuban socialist revolution is still there and going forward.
Then explain the necessity for the $2 billion a year "allowance" the soviets gave fidelito, which now comes from Chavez, helping to exacerbate Venezuela's inflation?
Wake up, Joaquin. Communism is dead. It never was a good economic system to begin with, and the crapheads who have run it in every socialist country made it even worse.
One last point. I spent 30 years in the air transportation industry. During the 1990s, I operated several charter flights per week between Miami and several Cuban cities. The flights were legally permitted by both Treasury's OFAC and the Cuban government. During that period, I traveled frequently to Cuba on business. I know what I saw there, and it wasn't pretty. The infrastructure is crumbling everywhere, and there is extreme poverty. The people are afraid of their own shadows, and prostitution is rampant, especially in Varadero, where the meager tourist facilities are located.
70 - Joaquin
Clavos, hello again!
First, on the jineteras: At least now these ladies in Cuba have the dignity of plying their trade on their own terms and keeping all their earnings, as opposed to before when they were exploited by their mobster or mob-dominated alcahuetes (pimps) who invariably appropriated all their earnings, passed on to them a mere fraction of it as "allowance," and then pocketed the much larger rest. Now these women can work on their own terms. I'm far from being puritan in this area. Indeed, I think the Dutch have the right idea when it comes to the sex trade: make it a legitimate, over-ground business which qualifies for trade unionization, social security benefits, and a retirement pension. In that respect, I agree that socialist governments could be more enlightened and not as puritanical as they tend to be in the area of public sexuality. Indeed, original Marxism Leninism did not take these puritanical lines, as shown by Marx's and Engels's writings, as well as the early policies towards birth control, abortion, divorce, etc. of the Soviet Russian government between 1918 and 1929 or so. Communism, and a good bulk of the left in general eventually took more puritanical lines as a result of two things: the strong persistence of the noxious Judaeo-Christian heritage still clinging to European and American socialist movements, and the reversing of the earlier more enlightened positions in Soviet socialism and the atavistic reversion to the bad old Judaeo-Christian heritage during the Stalin years. In any case, the bottom line is that today's jineteras work under better conditions, including much greater medical safety (as opposed to teh perennial dangers of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases threatening sex workers and their clients alike here in Bush's "abstinence only utopia, or more accurately, dystopia) than their capitalistically exploited pre-revolutunary sisters ever did.
Next, on Armando Valladares. You picked one hell of a poster boy, didn't you? A real "human rights hero" with a kitty of lurid stories to tell ("Against Hope"), which not only have made him a best seller, but have also, among other things, netted him the US ambassadorship to the UN Human Rights Commission, leadership in Human Rights watch, kudos from the likes of the Reagans, and miraculous US citizenship, as one description put it, "by a special Act of Congress," something the average poor Salvadoran or Haitian would-be refugee fleeing for their VERY LIVES threatened by infinitely more malevolent dicktatorships which happen to be friends of the US ruling oligarchy can never even remotely hope for. Under Valladares's leadership and influence, The UNHRC focused its scrutiny on Cuba's alleged human rights abuses. In 1988 or so, in the wake of Valladares's allegations, the UN also opened up an investigation to verify his claims, and lo and behold, the investigating UN delegation found NO EVIDENCE to support Valladares's allegations, and Valladares's pet project found itself hardly able to sustain the scrutiny consequently focused on it by the UN. This, in turn had a rather harmful subsequent effect on the credibility of the US on the issue of human rights abuses in that US's single-minded focus on Cuba, under Valladares's influence, was often at the exclusion of comparable or worse human rights violations by human rights violators who happened to be US allies and friends - e.g. Israel, Colombia, Pinochet's Chile, then-still-apartheid South Africa, etc. And of course, Valladares's own performance in the human rights community was also negatively impacted in that his own (arguably understandable) antipahy towards the Castro government, as one observer noted, "left him with little interest in pursuing OTHER [human rights] violators, particularly of the non-Communist sort." Yes, he spent 22 years in Cuban prisons, but not because of, as it's been claimed,ad nauseam, "refusing to put a pro-Castro, pro-Communist plaque" on his desk (that claim has not been satisfactorily verified), but Valladares, along with Carlos Alberto Montaner, was arrested for engaging in activities against the Cuban revolutionary government sponsored by an anti-revolutionary cell known to carry out terrorist activities, to which Montaner also belonged. Nice try, but do pick a better poster child next time, will you bubba!
Next, as for yor comments on Cuba's medical system: "the training is good, and modeled after US medical schools; after that, it's all downhill, with not enough medicines available to treat everyone, antiquated and insufficient equipment, severe rationing of medical care for the people." Pues descubriste la agua tibia (duh!). What other conditions can you expect from the draconian blockade Cuba has been under for the last 46 years, under which Cuba, instead of being able to obtain equipment, medicines, supplies, etc. from the US (90 miles away) must instead get them from China, Japan, and formerly the eastern and central European socialist bloc and the USSR. The Cubans, for their part would LOVE to get what they need from the US and to trade with the US freely. But it is Washington, whose whore politicians have are repeatedly bought and sold like the putas (in the most undignified sense) they are (in BOTH parties - that's bi-partisanship for you!)- just as they're also bought and sold by the Israel lobby - by the gusanos at the Cuban American National Foundation(CANF), it is THAT Washington that's being the cosmic dickhead and asshole by shutting revolutionary Cuba out. The Cubans, again, work hard to make do with what they do have, often with impressive results.
Contrast the data concerning the medical system here in "freedom's home" and "bravery's land:"
* The US scored 65 out of a posssible 100 in the areas of health outcomes, quality of care, access, efficiancy, and equity.
* In 2007, 42% of all working age adults in the US were either uninsured or under-insured, a more than 7% increase from 2006. As for equity, African Americans and Latinos as well as the very poor of ANY race and the elderly, or the especially needy are often subjected to long waits, substandard treatment, and unnecesary hospitalizartions that could be relatively easily avoidable with adequate early stages care or adequate preventive care.
* According to a recent report by the Commonwealth Fund, which focuses on health policy reform, it noted the following:
- The US fell from 15th to last among 19 industrialized nations on premature PREVENTABLE deaths.
- While the US has some of the best-equipped hositals and best-trained physicians in the world, providing extarordinary care, MILLIONS OF US PEOPLE CANNOT BENEFIT FROM THIS.
- As for "efficiency," even as defined by the often twisted standards of capitalism, health insurance administrative costs account for BILLIONS of dollars, which CAN be reduced by $51 BILLION to $102 BILLION if the US changed its system to a single-payer (yes, socialized!) system, like even capitalist countries such as Australia, Finland, and Japan have, and who therefore SPEND THE LEAST on administrative costs.
Well, enough said on medicine.
As for your "Wake up, Joaquin. Communism is dead," bit, communism, or more accurately, revolutionary socialism, is FAR FROM DEAD! One of the beauties of Marxism Leninism is that it's a LIVING body of theory and praxis and is open and flexible to respond to various conditions, recognizing that life itself changes and cannot be held by textbookish theory alone, a truth that the more enlighteed Marxist Leninists will easily grasp, but which unfortunately, I must admit, has all too often escaped a good part of the Left - again, due to a carry-over residue of the Manichean Judaeo-Christian heritage that has brainwashed western civilization (including eastern Europe as well) with the cosmological illusion that everything is either black or white, taking no account of the much more vast gray nuances in between. Unfortunatly too much of Cuba's socialism has been modeled along the lines of the Manicahean Soviet "first draft" which in some ways worked, but which eventually fell (something that, by the way, even the chief architect of Cuba's socialist structure, Che Guevara, in fact predicted as early as 1963 after visiting the eastern and central European socialist countries and the USSR, and coming away rather negatively impressed. But in the wake of Che's departure from Cuba in 1965, and his eventual death in 1967, Cuba's revolutionary govt. more fully modeled itself after the Soviet model). If you look at Venezuela today, however, you see that they are NOT copying the Cuban model sheepishly, as neither the Nicaraguan Sandinistas did in the 1980's- interesteingly, at Fidel Castro's own recommendation. In both countries a private sector consisted of the majority of the economy, but with the understanding that the ultimate foundation of society and the economic structuere were ultimately socialist. Even Soviet Russia in Lenin's day also took this creative path in the form of the New Economic Policy (NEP) of 1921-1928 in which the space for a degree of private enterprise was opened to vitalize the economy (as Soviet Russia was still the only socialist island in a capitalist ocean). But while this economy made some concessions to market economics, the underlying understanding was that the ultimate, most fundamental foundation of the country was, in the final analysis, SOCIALIST and the capitalist sector was ultimately subordinate to it. I could go on, but only at the risk of making this perhaps too tedious for you, so I will stop here.
J.
71 - Franco
#48 " Joaquin
Joaquin, I see you’re a stickler for spelling and not bashful about kindly pointing out ALL my mistakes. Thank you and I would be more then happy to reciprocate.
Joaquin sez....."as for your "Joaquin, you really need to get out more." gem, not only was I born abroad, but over the last 20 years I have not only travelled abroad (too many countries to list) but I've studied and worked abroad over the last 18 for stretches of 3-4 months, and in some cases going back for 2nd and 3rd tours of work (Spain, Russia, Ukraine, some examples). Maybe it;s you bud who need s to get out more and not just as a tourist seeking fun and diversion, but engaged in productive and positive pursuits as I was. So come out from your sandbox dear friend.
”
Joaquin, that’s traveled not (travelled) and that’s it’s not (it,s) (-:
I have been both working and living day in and day out, year after year, with all classes of people of South American the past 16 years engaged with them in productive and positive pursuits. However, I solute your 3-4 month travel stays here and there.
"Why is it then that Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Paraguay have kept friendly and collaborative ties with Venezuela, and Argentina along with the avovementioned plus several others have been establishing or looking to establish alternatives like MERCOSUR, ALBA, and even a regionan non-US and non-EU dominated regional banking institution?"
Joaquin, that’s aforementioned, not (avoveentiioned), and it’s regional not (regionan).
All countries in SA have tried, and keep trying Joaquin, to keep friendly and collaborative ties with each other, including with Venezuela, including your native country Colombia. Don’t you up in California try to keep openly friendly relations with your neighbors’ even if secretly they may not be your favorites?
Now as for both the MERCOSUR/ALBA regional trading pacts, and a non-US and non-EU dominated regional banking institution, there is everything right about doing this. I support it.
This kind of positive principled economic trading program helps all of the people of SA trade their goods and services within the region. This would make SA work more like the US when trading between states. In the US there is no mountain of paper work, or a 20-30% mountain of taxation to move goods from California to Colorado, or any other state in the US. SA people really dig this idea just as the European have. Oh, wait, did I bring up something that the world likes about the US, excuse me.
The idea for a regional trading pact is not a new concept for SA. Now while this may appear to some people to be a Chavez concept, it is not. SA has been talking about something like this for decades. It’s only being spear headed now because Chavez has seen a special opportunity for himself in it and has thus picked up the ball. A noble man with a noble cause you say? Well let’s take a closer look.
Chavez has been insisting that the SA trade pact is made into a vehicle to channel hate for the US by using the pact as a regional anti-US cold war trading block. He has been pushing and bulling all other states to abandon all Trade Agreements with the US as a prerequisite to joining a SA trading pack. What had, and has been holding things up, is several states already have existing trade agreements with the US that they want to keep, and several more states that don’t currently have trade agreements with the US what them. Oh, those US free trade rat bastards say Joaquin and Chavez!
Now while Chavez has succeeded in finding a few radically like-minded state leaders who support his anti- US cold war trading block, most all other SA states, including a large portion of the Venezuelan population, just want the SA trading package to move forward with its own noble concept without the US cold war hate agenda attached to it.
Who can Chavez count on for support…………the usual suspects.
(1) Cuba and the Castro brothers " need I say more.
(2) Nicaragua and President Daniel Ortega " a Communist/Castro mentor.
(3) Bolivia and President Evo Morales. " a Chavez mentor and yes man.
Now as for Ecuador and President Rafael Correa, while you Joaquin would have us believe Correa is all lovey dovey with Chavez, it is not as you portray it. In Correa’s case we have both a significantly more skilled and educated leader then the Castor/Chavez/Ortega/Morales ilk. President Correa is a US educated economist who is more of his own man. He what’s to keep options open as he goes about maximizing his skills at building a better state. Now he sees big money in the friendly oil fields of Venezuela, and he is playing his cards smart right now with Chavez. He is watching closely both Chavez’s consistent attempts at his ever increasing power grab while at the same time watching the equally ever increasing unrest Chavez faces within his own country for doing it.
Now yes, Correa is hard leftist, but Correa is walking the fence and keeping everything open for him like a cat, ready to jump when and where is has to. Correa knows that if the Venezuelan opposition should take control of Venezuela, he wants to be on good graces with them too. Theirs big money of them their fields of black gold.
It should also be noted that Correa had to finally tell Chavez (when Chavez was insisting he support his anti-US SA Trading pact cold war agenda) that he was keeping Ecuador’s options open concerning signing on to any future Free Trade Agreements with the US. He was able to move out from under the pressure of Chavez on the coat tails of Chile, Peru (a bordering state) who have already signed Free Trades Agreements with the US " and - Colombia and Panama who both want to sign up with the US right now.. Additionally Correa throw Chavez an anti-US bone of peace by telling the US Ecuador would not be allowing the US to use its Military bases in the war on drugs.
"where do you get the notion that most Latn American countries see Mr. Chavez and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela as a greater threat to their soveriegnty than the US?"
Joaquin, that’s Latin not (Latn)“and it's sovereignty not (soveriegnty). (-:
Regional perceptions have deep roots. They stem from within the regional historical struggles of each state from this long time developing part of the world. It is the historical events between states that define them to themselves in the region and to others, and the faces of each states heroes are printed on its money.
International perceptions of SA (people outside the region) are coming from audiences that are not familiar with the intricacy of historical perspectives. While most all of the people of SA know who our Georgia Washington and Abraham Lincoln are, we don’t know who their heroes are, why, and each state has their own list.
Hugo Chavez knows SA regional history and he recklessly uses it a leverage and plays on this between states to try and get his way. This dangerous bulling all goes on under the radar screen of the NA and European media, but it sets off very serious alarms down here and that is exactly what Chavez wants it to do.
It is from within these under the table threats that I support my contention that Chavez and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela as a greater threat to other SA states sovereignty than the US?
"For the sake of argument, supposing many Latin Americans do see Chavez as a threat, who owns, controls, or materially influences the bulk of the Western world's media, including the Latin American media? The US-dominated media conglomerates. My understanding is, the last time I was informd of this, that only 6 mega-conglomerates (almost all US-dominated or influenced) hold not just the Western world's media but most of theat of the world, with exception of the independents, which fortunately appear to be growing, but not in the Americas but in Eurasia."
Joaquin, that’s informed not (informd), and it’s rest not (theat)
"Then, there's the critical factor of the local oligarchies tied to US and European transnational capitalism, many including local media."
You can’t hang your argument on the news media, none of them put food on the table or closes on your back, you have to do that for yourself.
Whether you like it our not, free market capitalism works and if the major EU media and US push this agenda so be it. But your ignoring the fact that these major media outlets are pushing a more left then right slant. But in either case, no one is getting arrested for saying either.
But I will say this in your suport for other independent media. Here in SA their is a 24 hour non US and not EU major news media. The Cuban news channel where you get to watch approved state media talking heads tell you how wonderful the Cuban people have it and how wonderful the Venezualen people will have it. But if some one tried to use this Cuban State media outlet to say anything in opposition to its state talking heads they would be arrested and jailed for up to 30 years. Is this the kind of independent media you had in mind Joaquin?
And besides your fallacy, all free people have open access to the internet where thy can get news perspective from all over the world. So your point is mute.
“Then there are the governments, especially ones like Colombia, El Salvador, and Peru, bought, paid for, and sold by US and European capital as well as Washington. Read your Latin America History.”
Then there are the governments, especially ones like Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Argentina, bought, paid for, and sold by Communist capital and arms as well as Caracas/Moscow. Read your current Latin American History.
“Indeed, Colombia, the third biggest recepient of US aid (almost all military) in the world, next to Israel and Egypt, a country where death squads have been terrorizing the population and killing labor, student, and social justice leders and activista and with one of the worst human rights records in the hemisphere and the world, that country (of which I am a native by the way) has shown to be more of a therat and violator to neighborng countries' sovereignty than Venezuela has to any of its neighbors.”
Joaquin, that’s recipient not (recepient) and that’s leaders not (leders) and it’ threat not (therat) and it’s neighboring not (neighborng)
Spoken like a true comrade. But like all true comrades, your entitled to your opinions but not you’re own facts.
Indeed, Colombian communist FARC, is the biggest recipient of communist drug running aid, (almost all military) in the world, where death squads have been terrorizing and killing the population, students, and democratic leaders and activists, elected government officials, and with the worst human rights records in the hemisphere and the world, and has shown to be more of a threat and violator to neighboring countries sovereignty than Colombia has to any of its neighbors.
FARC is a barbaric communist terrorist organization existing within the Colombian borders that both Chavez and Castro have supported for years, and which the governments of Nicaragua, Bolivia and Ecuador have publicly expressed support for, oh excuse me, until they got there hand caught in the FARC cookie jar.
If you are truly a native of Colombia and can not admit this about FARC, what dose this make you?
72 - Franco
#56 "Joaquin
"Wherever Alvaro Uribe has had the misfortuen of governing, as mayor of Medellin (xoxoxo, as governor of the Department of Antioquia, and now as assassin-in-chief of Colombia, there have followed the misplacements and massacres o hundreds of thousands of POOR rural Colombians"
Joaquin, that’s misfortune not (misfortuen)
That is a totally faults and misleading statement. There is absolutely no incentive what so ever for Atvaro Uribe to go after and kill any Colombians unless they are militant FARC. Now if you want to call FARC poor rural Colombians go right ahead, but it only shows two things.
(1) You are just as a deceptive red as FARC (2) The only one being deceived is you.
Uribe is tough and relentless of FARC, that is true. And while that may piss off Castor, Chavez and you, I support him and the tax dollars he needs to break its back.
73 - Joaquin
Hey Franco, que milagro!
I see you caught on to my sense of humour ... you know, the spelling bit. I must admit it was quite amusing and it gave a good chuckle. To pay the devil his due, I must concede touché to you!
Now that we've got the niceties out of the way, let's get to more substantial matters, Junior.
First, concerning Latin America and its nascent US-free alliance system. After the necessary step of cutting through a lot of the revoltura (tangled mess) that afflicted much of your narrative here, and in the rest of your discourse, I must open up with an apt quote by one of the most respected historical figures in America (yes junior, America consists NOT ONLY of the USA), Simon Bolívar made on 5 August, 1819:
"...los Estados Unidos que parecen destinados por la Providencia para plagar la América de miserias a nombre de la Libertad." or " ... the United States is destined to plague the Americas with misery in the name of Liberty."
Seems like even Bolívar recognized the nature of teh beast of US capitalist imperialism, though at the time it was chiefly British capitalism/neo-imperialism which had Latin America under economic bondage. So the kind of US-free regional alliances we're looking at are nothing new, nor has it involved exclusively what you seem to consider "bad boy" states; Brazil's Mr. Lula and Argentina's Ms. Fernandez have also been pulling in this direction and both also spoke up strongly against the recent resurrection and re-deployment of the US 4th Fleet, both considering the move as aggressive and hostile on the part of the US. And it seems Paraguay is also pulling in this direction as well. I spoke to this in sufficient detail in earlier postings with Clavos (my posting # 68), as I also spoke on the subject of the REAL nature of US-propagated and US-dominated capitalist "free trade" policy (my posting #66). I should not have to speak to these again. On this point, your:
"This kind of positive principled economic trading program helps all of the people of SA trade their goods and services within the region. This would make SA work more like the US when trading between states. In the US there is no mountain of paper work, or a 20-30% mountain of taxation to move goods from California to Colorado, or any other state in the US. SA people really dig this idea just as the European have. Oh, wait, did I bring up something that the world likes about the US, excuse me."
is just so much revoltura (conflation of incomparables, comparing of apples and oranges)capped with a touch of puerile semi-whine at the end, just as your mish-mosh on media and media coverage is.
I do agree with you on one point, namely:
"While most all of the people of SA know who our Georgia Washington and Abraham Lincoln are, we don't know who their heroes are, why, and each state has their own list." (by the way, it's GEORGE Washington, not -LOL- 'Georgia' ... sorry but I found that one impossible to resist!)
Yes, it seems that educated Latin Americans (the few there are in those countries outside Cuba) like educated people everywhere else but in the US know more about the history of the USA than North Americans know and learn about the histories of other countries or world history in general. Indeed, many don't even have a good grasp of the history of the USA itself. THAT'S part of, and a classic symptom of the problem: The last 35 years of rapidly globalizing US-dominated capitalism has been having a most deleterious consequences on the USA itsef effectively "third world-izing" it; particularly in areas like it's rapidly deteriorating educational system and public infrastructure. Indeed, the ante-deluvian we have currently in the White House is the apotheosis of this nightmarish state of affairs.
Now, to the mafia regime that currently is holding my native country hostage, the FARC, and my Colombian nationality, which you seem to want to impugn, another short history lesson, junior:
The armed ELN and FARC insurgencies have indeed committed their fair share of outrages, which in my view are counter-productive in the long run, but I also recognize that they have been systematically forced into those positions by the Colombian establishment with no small help and egging on from its US backers. In this sense, the 700 or so hostages the FARC still holds and those who've died at their hand are effectively collateral damage in a 60-year civil war in which the right-wing forces of the ruling oligarchies and their US sponsors have ALWAYS been the initiators, provocateurs, and have ALWAYS kept the push going. But for the sake of perspective, whatever outrages (kidnappings primarily, but others as well)the ELN and FARC have perpetrated, they pale in comparison to the percentage of human rights violations committed by the right-wing forces of the ruling oligarchies, namely the AUC (the grossly mis-named "Self Defense" Forces), which since the US-sponsored Plan Colombia has been operating (2000-2005) have racked up from roughly 65% to 80% of the total abuses, and the left insurgencies do not come close to those right-wing forces in terms of the latter's sheer barbaraity and gratuitous cruelty (ever hear of the "corbata" for example?). And while the most notorious of the lefty insurgencies' outrages have been the kidnappings and long holdings of these hostages in captivity - numbering again about 700 selectively targeted from almost exclusively the upper and upper-middle classes - they do not come close to the MILLIONS of predominantly poor rural and often colored people the right wing forces have been SYSTEMATICALLY displacing, dispossessing, and massacring in the most barbarous fashion. This may sound like an impersonal and inhuman way to view all those very human casualties, but it's the type of military calculus and impersonally military terms imposed on the larger situation by no one except "our" side, the forces of the Colombian establishment and its US backers.
The current situation in Colombia is a key part of the JFK-created "Alliance for Progress" program, namely it's counter-insurgecy mission initiated in 1962 and placed under the direction of US Colonel William Yarborough, who recommended the use of death squads. Over the past 46 years, the modes of operation of this program have included, but not been limitd to, ethnic and social "cleansings," that is getting rid of "troublemakers" or "subversives" as well as the unsightly "deshechables" or "disposables", i.e. the poor, homeless, and the street children known as "gamines", just kill them and get them out of sight and out of mind. That's why if you go to Bogotá today, there are "no gamines" or very few other "human eyesores", they've all been purged away, but the structural problems that engender these "human eyesores" still fester and persist.
As for the FARC: In the mid 1980's (1984)when Belisario Betancur (conservative) tentatively made an opening of the historically closed political process, the FARC along with the PCC (Colombian Communist Party) and other non-FARC and non-PCC left forces formed the Union Patriotica (UP)to bring the struggle for popular self-defense and social struggle for social change out of the armed guerrilla war and into the peaceful, civilian political process. But within the first year or 2, right-wing thugs and sicarios (killers) killed some 500 UP activists and politicians, inlcluding mayors, city council members, and a presidential candidate, Jaime Pardo Leal. Indeed, as the UP made political gains in various parts of Colombu=ia in 1988, the right-wing masacres were stepped up - with the complicity of the establishment and state, killing plitical figures, judicial investigators, and others, in all eventually some 3,000 UP people were assassinated. The FARC's only real crime in all this was in recognizing, as none of the other left forces were able or willing to,that the Colombian establishment and the oligarchs it served were NEVER interested in a peaceful polititical solution in which they might have to share power and benefits with other forces representing the underrepresented and historically excluded classes and groups, and in recognizing this, never making the mistake of disarming as other insurgencies, like the M19 did, to their own peril. Finally, the FARC's being"narco guerrillas" is a red herring and a label falsely foisted on the Guerrilla Army, the product of US Ambassador Lewis Tambs, who not only discouraged peaceful political solutions to both the civil war and to the narco coke problem, but came up with the term "narco guerrillas" for the FARC in 1984 to paint them as a criminal outfit rather than a political insurgency so as to deprive them of any negotiating role or authority and keep them out of the political pale as "criminals". In reality, the FARC's only connection with cocaine has been to tax it, the way they taxed EVERYTHING ELSE within the aresa they controlled. The most they did in this regard was setting rules for market transactins - again in the areas they controlled - but unlike the right wing narcos and their establishment supporters, they did not directly supervise the production of coke or secure, let alone control distribution networks abroad. The FARC in other words is nothing like a cartel.
As for the mobster-in-chief Uribe, that will be for later, as ther's a lot to say but I need to get some rest.
Hasta luego cocodrilo!
74 - Clavos
Words, words, words.
You're very glib, J, as are most commies.
But, unfortunately, in your case they are all "sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Only a commie could twist history to the degree you do, making the most free and prosperous culture in the history of the hemisphere the villain in hemispheric affairs.
Your marxist rhetoric, is, as is all such, tiresome, boring, and most significantly, total bullshit.
We kicked your ass in the cold war, and there's still plenty of fight left in the "Don't Tread on Me" viper.
We are and will continue to do so, even as the hordes of balseros continue to risk their lives to come to the "shining city on the hill," while the additional hordes of my countrymen continue to pour over the Southern border, seeking the "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness" unattainable en las patrias. And that, amigo, is the real proof of whose system is better.
There has never been a regime anywhere in LatAm that has ever given more than lip service to ending of exploitation of the campesino. None have ever really given a rat's ass about them, not Bolivar, or Juarez, nor Dom Pedro. Not O'Higgins, or San Martin; none of them, and especially not the exploiters of today: Chavez, the Castro brothers, Correa and Morales.
75 - Joaquin
Hello Franco, I'm back. Pues tengo que cumplir un compromiso (I must keep a commintment)r.e. Alvaro Uribe.
Having awakened fully rested, I will address this assassin- and dope pusher-in-chief who now unfortunately sits in Nariño Palace, and afterwards, will address a couple of new points that were brought up, and then get back to professional and family matters.
I will, however, preface by wrapping up one more thing on the FARC and its primary historical pattern of operation: The territories they've come to control over the last 44 years at various times have been previously sparsely populated areas which the Bogotá government never administered in the first place, and continued to neglect until the hundreds of thousands of poor people fleeing the partisan violence or being massively expropriated by the oligarchy's forces in the more prosperous highlands began filling these nelected territories to survive and eke out a living. The FARC then moved in and introduced the only semblance of government and administartion these areas had known, often providing social services and much-needed infrastructure. It was then after this that the paras (right-wing paramilitaries) at the behest of the ruling oligarchies in Bogotá, Medellin, etc., mounted attack on these areas and taking over, with the fulsome support of the US, and by this method then bringing these areas under Bogotá's governance - minus the social services they used to get from the FARC. And if the areas are specially profitable, they are opened up to transnational capitalists, including Colombian narcos tied to the right wing and the oligarchy. Today heading this godamned enterprise is our subject, Uribe.
Uribe's father, Alberto Uribe Sierra was like many other middle class Medellinians, deep in debt, until in the mid 1970's "catapulted him to wealth and influence as a politica broker, real estate intermediary, and 'recognized trafficker." (Forrest Hylton) In addition, Urobe Sierra is also connected to the Ochoa narco family by marriage. With this backing, the then-30 year-old Alvaro Uribe Vélez was appointed mayor of Medellin, but was quckly removed by the then-governor of Antioquia after Uribe jr. was publicly photographed with coke capos at Pablo Escobar's estate. He seems to have surrounded himself with these shadowy figures as neighbors (Salvatore Mancuso, a leading para and AUC figure), associates (Pedro Juan Moreno Villa, a campaign advisor and leading importer into Colombia of potassium permanganate, a key chemical in the processing of cocaine, according to the US DEA), and friends and family. Later, during his two year tenure as governor of Antioquia, Uribe set out to legalize the anti-guerrilla militias, the Convivirs, one of the precursors of the AUC, and who during these same 2 years displaced some 200,000 peasants. During this same period, the department (Antioquia) accounted for some "18% of displaced people nation-wide, more than any other department" (Hylton)In addition, Uribe's governorship brought a 400% increase in the homicide rate in the department. Already high when he took over as governor in 1994, (400) in the 4 "banana" municipalities under his jurisdiction, the homicide rate shot up afterwards: 800 in 1995; 1,200 in 1996; and AFTER HIS LEAVING office, it WENT DOWN to 700 in 1997, and dipped again to 300 in 1998. As for the dope traffic as an alleged FARC racket, it was none other than Carlos Castaño head AUC capo who publicly admitted in 2000 that 70% of AUC's revenues came from this trade, while Colombia's ambassador to the US estimtes it at 75% (how did he know?). Indeed, thre was a synergy btween Castaño and Uribe, and Casstaño said after Uribe won the Colombian presidency in 2002 that he was "the man closest to our philosophy." As president, Uribe's main strategy was three-fold:
1. Declaring "peace" and that there was "no civil war" thereby, first, obliterating the political need to have to deal as he should with the paras.
2. By way of the above, the left insurgencies were then further put out of the political pale and locked into the categories of "criminals" and "terrorists", and not just the armed insurgencies, but ANY OTHER persons or formations or groups seeking social and economic equity such as labor unionists, student leaders, human rigts activists, etc. By classifying this state of affairs as "peace" Uribe is also left free to attack ALL of them as "terrorists" and "criminals" as he has been doing, and NOT face political pressure to negotiate or even acknowledge let alone talk to any of them. It is this latter strategy and philosophy that underlies Uribe's current "democratic peace" agenda.
3. Legalizing the para forces by first entering into "negotiations" with them and offering them "amnesty", anothe rway of INSTITUTIONALIZING them into the official state apparatus. Hence, the paras won Colombia's congressional elections in 2006, with more than a little help from their armed friends still "on the outside" who "nudged" the vote from reluctant or unwilling voters.
Now Uribe is trying to finnagle a third presidential term, against the Constitution - indeed, his second term was already unconstitutional - to continue his right-wing agenda. As even the former head of Colombia's DAS (their CIA, FBI, DEA thrown into one) Ramiro Bejareno put it in 2006,
"Uribe has made Colombia's society one tht is professing the culture of paramilitarism ... In Colombia, we are headed toward a mafia state."
Enough on Uribe. Now to other things.
Clavos, r.e. your: "We kicked your ass in the cold war, and there's still plenty of fight left in the "Don't Tread on Me" viper."
You've put it quite well. Historically the forces for social change and social justice have always preferrred to work peacefully and openly. It is only the violence and repression visited upon them by the ruling status quos that obligate the progressive forces to turn to clandestinity and armed struggle. The violence of a country's revolutionary forces is the mirror-index of the violence of its existing status quo. Such is clearly the case in Colombia.
As for your: "There has never been a regime anywhere in LatAm that has ever given more than lip service to ending of exploitation of the campesino. None have ever really given a rat's ass about them, not Bolivar, or Juarez, nor Dom Pedro. Not O'Higgins, or San Martin; none of them,"
Interesting folks you mentioned here, and I must say you're right to some extent. Aside from being the national liberators (from Spain though not from British capitalism/neo-imperialism) of Latin America, they were also representative of the the-emerging predominantly criollo (white) comprador bourgeoisie tied to European - chiefly British - capitalism. Indeed, let's start with Benito Juarez, althogh he was a full-blooded Zapotec Inian, he was raised as white criollo as could be by criollo guardians, and grew up to think, talk, and act bourgeois criollo. As governor of Oaxaca, he refused to side with or even consider the plight of his fellow Indians as they were being expropriated of their communal lands (ejidos). When he and his forces ousted Empeor Maximilian in 1867 - the latter who actually DID MORE than anyone in Mexico at that time to better the lot of rural Indians and peasants under his 1865 Provisional Statute - Juarez restored this system of rural plunder and in this and several other ways paved the way for the much hated Porfirio Diaz dictatorship of 1884-1911. As for Bolívar, as he began the Great Colombia's independence campaign he found himself FORCED to make the emancipation of black African slaves part of the independence agenda if he and his movement were to receive material help from the Republic of Haiti, and if he hoped to attarct badly needed fighters to his ranks. But initially, part of the Great Colombian criollos' agenda for independence included their the-purported "right" to own humans as chattel property; it was considered among the "rights" of the Atlantic bourgeoisie. But Bolívar had to backtrack on that one to secure Haitian aid and to attract Blacks to his ranks.
Indeed, Spanish America abolished slavery between 1815 and 1840, long before the US did (1865). Even the notoriously autocratic Russia abolished serfdom pefore the US abolished slavery (1861). The only exceptions in the hemisphere were Cuba (196 during the fight with pain for independence) and Brazil 1889). Indeed, Colombia between 1840 and 1885 had the strongest and most advanced tradition of popular democracy (albeit bourgeois) of ANY part of the Atlantic world. But as Colombia's propertied oligarchs found themselves challenged by teh demands of the lower often colored masses, they took control and clamped down, and have continued stubbornly clamping down ever since. Indeed, as Forrest Hylton, an expert on Colombia put it, the war in Colombia today is the apotheosis of historically frustrated and long-overdue social revolution, which the oligarchies, and their supporters in the US have made, and continue to make impossible by peaceful means.
I have other things to tend to now, and my only parting words are "he who has an ear, let her/him hear." All others, well, allá con ustedes (have it your way).