|
about what the US government is up to, with its $7 BILLION in military aid to the narco-thugs running Colombia, U.S. military occupation of at least seven bases in Colombia, U.S. military use of all civilian infrastructure in Colombia, total diplomatic immunity for all U.S. soldiers and U.S. military 'contractors,' no matter what they do in Colombia, U.S. military bases on the Dutch islands right off Venezuela's oil coast, U.S. reconstitution of the 4th Fleet in the Caribbean (mothballed since WW II), U.S. military bases in Honduras secured with a fascist coup assisted by the Pentagon, beefed up U.S. military bases in Panama, U.S. military maneuvers pending in demilitarized Costa Rica, and other evidence of Pentagon war plans.
We who pay are not privy to our war planners' secretly designed and secretly negotiated war plans. Neither are the leaders of Venezuela, but they have a duty to gather reliable intelligence and to protect Venezuela, and they are certainly aware that Venezuela is a U.S. target.
On other hand, like any country that sees the U.S. war machine assembling on its borders, I would understand their getting a bit edgy. Have they misinterpreted their intelligence? Are they jumpy because the U.S. traditionally perpetrates coups at election time (upcoming National Assembly elections in Venezuela), or because transitions of power in Colombia would make any reasonable person edgy?
These two things, in combination with the US military buildup, make ME worried: Uribe's crap about the FARC in Venezuela, and the identity of the incoming leader in Colombia--former Defense Minister Santos, who has said that he would not hesitate to invade Venezuela in pursuit of the FARC. Venezuelan authorities surely know quite a bit more about the situation than I do, including more about Uribe-Santos and about U.S. political/military activities. That doesn't mean they are infallible.
Since you are so sure that a U.S./Colombia attack on Venezuela is NOT going to occur, perhaps you would answer these questions:
Why would Colombia suddenly blame their 40+ year civil war with the FARC guerrillas on Venezuela?
As many knowledgeable people (including the head of the OAS) have pointed out, everybody knows that the Venezuela/Colombia border is porous, that both right and left paramilitary groups, and just plain drug traffickers (as well as traffickers in ordinary contraband--such as gasoline and food)--are constantly crisscrossing the border, that neither Colombian nor Venezuelan authorities have good control of their borders, and that, in addition, thousands of peasant refugees from Colombia's military have been pouring over the border into Venezuela, adding to the disorder. If there WERE FARC guerillas on Venezuela's side of the border, it would be no surprise to anybody. So why is it suddenly Venezuela's fault?
And why would anybody believe that Venezuela would welcome any part of this chaos and disorder, or would invite an attack by the U.S./Colombia, by permitting leftist paramilitaries to gather on Venezuelan territory? Also, IF Venezuela is doing that, how stupid would FARC soldiers have to be, to camp out in the open on beaches and in meadows, to be photographed by Colombia? Don't they KNOW what happened to Raul Reyes (and 24 other sleeping people)? Really, this is not a rhetorical question. How stupid would FARC guerrillas have to be, to do that? And how stupid would the Venezuelan government and military have to be, to let them do it? If Venezuela were really "harboring" FARC guerrillas, wouldn't they HIDE them? You don't think that Venezuela is AWARE that their territory is under constant high tech surveillance?
The U.S./Colombia dropped ten 500 lb U.S. "smart bombs" on Raul Reyes' camp, just inside Ecuador's border, AT NIGHT, with pinpoint accuracy. They are tracking the FARC with high tech surveillance equipment. The FARC know this. Venezuela knows this. Everybody knows this. And we are supposed to believe that Venezuela is compromising its own security in this way? They have shown no indications of this kind of stupidity before. Why would it suddenly arise now?
Finally, what do YOU think the U.S. military occupation of seven bases in Colombia, this $7 BILLION in U.S. military aid to Colombia, and other big U.S. military expenditures in Latin America, are FOR? What has Colombia's civil war to do with us? What use has militarism been in stopping drug traffic (if you are going to mention that laughable excuse)? What business is it of the U.S. military to be planning "full spectrum" military activities in South America? What is the "threat"? To whom?
And if it is NOT for aggressive re-taking of South America's oil reserves, on behalf of Exxon Mobil & brethren, and other aggressive purposes--re-conquest of other resources (forests, gas, water, lithium), control of the labor force and re-installation of U.S. puppet leaders--then why all this huge expense? Is it mere war profiteering? Again, this is not a rhetorical question. What is this huge expense FOR? Mere bully power? Or what? Is it just habit? The U.S. can't get out of the habit of spending billions on militarism?
To me it appears that the U.S./Colombia bombing of the FARC camp just inside Ecuador's border, back in 2008, was intended to end all hope for a peaceful settlement of Colombia's decades-long civil war, and perhaps to start a war with Venezuela/Ecuador, then and there. There are two many powers involved that are addicted to U.S. taxpayer money--including war profiteers here and in Colombia. In Colombia, this long civil war is the military's gravy train. The same is true here--of this and other conflicts. And now we have numerous private military 'contractors' sucking on the U.S. taxpayer tit as well. It is in the Colombian military's interest to prolong, AND to expand, this conflict--to turn it into a regional war. As for the U.S., its motives for current interference in Latin America are the same as they have ever been--economic exploitation--over a century of such interference, some of it very bloody-handed, indeed. Add to this the blatant war profiteering, encouraged by the Bushwhacks, with virtually no opposition here, and you have an extremely corrupt situation, for one thing, and a potentially explosive situation, for another, FED BY U.S. militarist policies and lust for oil, in particular. This great war machine is a great sucker of oil. The Bushwhacks' "Project For A New American Century" was all about oil.
What do YOU think this is all about--if not war profiteering, oil profiteering and use of the U.S. war machine for corporate purposes? You think our mighty empire gives a goddamn about a few FARC guerrillas camped over the border in Venezuela? Why would Uribe suddenly level this charge? Personal reasons? (I'm sure he has much to fear if CIA protection is removed.) Is he doing U.S. bidding? The Colombian military's bidding? Is he doing it FOR Santos? In spite of Santos? Does he have a personal financial interest in sabotaging Colombia/Venezuela economic agreements that he himself negotiated?
Please don't bother replying if you're going to take the Washington Post's disinformationist line that Uribe is just this honest guy who wants to exterminate FARC guerrillas and "keep Colombia safe." That is utterly absurd considering that Colombian prosecutors and judges are on his tail, and have long been investigating him and his cohorts (some of whom have already been prosecuted and put in jail) for their ties to rightwing death squads, drug trafficking and other crimes. It's like saying that all Bush Jr. wanted to do was "to keep us safe." Extreme absurdity.
But if you have something less absurd to say, please say it. The rightwing view of this matter seems no less jingoistic and self-serving to me than Bush Jr's "WMDs in Iraq." 'Chavez is a dictator,' ergo 'it's all Chavez's fault.' Chavez is facing National Assembly elections, ergo 'it's just electioneering.' 'Chavez is the aggressor' (--though it is Colombia with $7 BILLION in U.S. military aid and the U.S. military occupying its bases, Venezuela is down the list at about No. 6 on regional military spending). This view seems to suspend reality--to build one rightwing "talking point" upon another. It seems STUPID and propagandistic. So prove to me that it isn't.
|