|
Title: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: Michael B on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM Andres died yesterday. He did not get to see his father.
Title: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: Pete E on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by Michael B on Dec 20, 2001
The FARC and ELN need to be snuffed from the earth,just like Osama Bin Laden.I hope they are high on our list after we take out Saddam Housien. Pete Title: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: Raptor on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by Pete E on Dec 20, 2001
One of the best posts I've seen here. Kill them all. Title: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: beattledog on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by Pete E on Dec 20, 2001
I was watching the fox channel 24 hours news channel a few evenings ago and one of the former Secretariies of the State was saying that Colombia may be our next target of terriosm. Beattledog Title: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: El Diablo on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC st..., posted by beattledog on Dec 20, 2001
Don't misunderstand this, the terrorism in Colombia is horrible and I wish it would end someday soon. I know President Bush has talked about going after terrorist groups around the world and I applaud that. Despite the FARC, ELN and AUC being on the recent short list, for all practical purposes I think it's more likely we would concentrate our efforts on Islamic terrorist groups that are exporting their terror to the United States and elsewhere. The FARC and ELN, are terrorist groups of a different sort. I think there would be a fire storm of opposition in Congress if we involved ourself in Colombia's internal civil war. El Diablo Title: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: Pete E on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by El Diablo on Dec 20, 2001
HD, Of course the middle eastern terrorist threat is number one priority right now.Just like we should get a little more done in Afganistan before we take on the big threat,Iraq. And I´m not suggesting that the US get involved with troops in Colombia,but we should give them all the support they need,including air support. I agree with the guy below who thinks drugs should be legalized.I think our "Plan Colombia"was using the drug issue as a reason to help the Colombians.That was the Chickens---Clinton approach.Drugs are a problem because they finance the rebels,but the real problem is the rebels.After 30 years they have turned a cause into a business and a criminal way of life.Perhaps we have a little more determination to help wherever we can to get rid of terrorists before they bite us on the A-- again also.Maybe we finally got some cojones in the white house.Maybe after our recent experience we can get a little more honest and agree to help the Colombians because it is what is needed for their country and the Americas.First the Colombians have to face the issue.Are they going to let a small group of people terrorize their country and wreck their economy or are they finally willing to do something about it?I was recently observing what nice people Colombians are(I´m in Cali Now).The 98% who are victims seem unwilling to take on the 2% who are the problem. Latin America,our closest neighbors,need our support,both economically and militarily,and we need them to have a free democratic government.The downside could be worse than it already is and its pretty bad already. Pete Title: I meant ED ,not HD.Was that a slip from the past. Post by: Pete E on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM Title: DRUG..... Post by: Hoda on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by El Diablo on Dec 20, 2001
imports should be considered a terrorist threat. With all due respects to those who have lost family & friends to terroristic acts (myself included). How many lives have been lost because of DRUGS exported throughout the world! I'm talking about lives on both sides, here & in Colombia. We all know, that FARC & the ELN are pissing in their pants, after seeing what happened to the Taliban. When the U.S. REALLY GET'S PISSED OFF!!! If the U.S. was to give the Colombian Army 20% of the effort it gave the Norhtern & Eastern alliances in terms of air & intelligence support, FARC & the ELN would cease to exist.... Hoda.... Title: DRUG..... Post by: El Diablo on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to DRUG....., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
Hey HODA, Interesting point you make. I think an argument could be made for some types of imports being considered a terrorist threat but in the case of drugs it might be a hard sell. I personally look at the whole drug business as primarily a domestic problem here in the States. Is it the supply of cocaine in Colombia and Peru that creates the demand or is the demand for cocaine in the United States that creates the supply? I think it's primarily a demand problem and therefore we may in fact be more culpable than the Colombians. Did you see the movie Traffic? I thought it was an interesting look into the complex problems of the drug trade. I was watching one of those news talk shows recently. I think it was the O'Reilly Factor. Anyway, William Bennet (former drug czar from mid 80's) was the guest talking on some subject I've forgotten. At some point though, the discussion moved to the war on drugs. Bennett made some kind of throw away comment indicating his hands were often tied when he was czar. He indicated he had more ambitious plans but they were never acted on because other cabinet members believed the political fallout would be too great. O'Reilly picked up on this statement and began pressing him for some details. Bennet was reluctant but he did finally offer an example which I found fascinating. He talked about a plan he had to bomb every cocaine manufacturing facility in Colombia with U.S. fighters. He claimed that he had the support of the Colombian government and the intelligence to identify where all the facilities were. He further claimed that the strikes could be accomplished quickly and would eliminate the cartels ability to manufacture for an entire year. He said the intelligence is there today also but as before the political will does not exist to do anything. Although this interview was pre Sept 11th, I agree and don't believe there is the political will to enter into any conflict with Colombia. Any conflict with Colombia is likely to be perceived as entering into the domestic politics of a sovereighn nation. I agree totally with Cali Vets assesment and as much as I'd like the U.S. to go in and kick butt, I think the Colombians will have to solve this one. El Diablo Title: We already.... Post by: Hoda on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to DRUG....., posted by El Diablo on Dec 21, 2001
have U.S. personel on the ground (Remember, my trip to Tumaco?). Let's release the hounds "Daisey Cutters, F-series jets & C130 Gunships)...end of story, KISS THE BABY FARC, ELN & AUC!!! Hoda.... Title: We already.... Post by: El Diablo on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to We already...., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
Hey Hoda, This is just my opinion but we have troops all over the world and in many countries but that doesn't necessarily mean that we'd directly enter into one of their internal conflicts. We might provide training and some weapons but I personally would be really surprised to see United States soldiers at war with the FARC and ELN. You and I have friends and loved ones in Colombia, for us it's not a civil war but a trajedy of greed and terrible injustices. But is this the view of your ordinary American, probably not. The typical American views Colombia as a drug country ONLY and has little sympathy for their plight. The Republican party which is in control of foreign policy for the most part, has two primary camps when it comes to waging war. One camp has always been somewhat isolationist but made an exception for communism. They were willing to take on the Soviet threat wherever they perceived it to be around the world. With the Soviet collapse this group is rather isolationist today. The other group, the Country Club Republicans if you will, are less isolationist and see an active involvement were U.S. interests are perceived to be. The best example of this is the Middle East. Our interests here are Isreal and oil. The unfortunate thing about Colombia is that is not perceived as a vital U.S. interest and because of this there's really not much support to involve ourself in their internal affairs. Maybe things will be different after September 11. I hope so!! El Diablo Title: Kill, Kill, Kill violence the solution to the drug problem Post by: WarPig on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to We already...., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
incredible thought process you have. lets murder Colombian peasants so drug gangs in the US don't kill each other. lets destroy the Colombian forest and agricultural land so there is less cocaine available for our greedy little noses. and we ruin the Colombian economy while we are at it. By the way, less cocaine=higher demand=more violence. lets not even mention the practical political ramifications of bombing civilians in a Hispanic country which is the largest minority in the US and where each party is desparately courting the Hispanic vote. how about this idea. legalize cocaine. drive down the price. undercut the criminal business end of it. remove the criminality, remove the violence. Title: Another thing... Post by: Hoda on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Kill, Kill, Kill violence the solutio..., posted by WarPig on Dec 21, 2001
I'll have to check, but I don't believe that Colombians are the largest latin minority in the U.S. Colombia has so many other natural resources, that haven't been tapped in regards to it's economic power. Here's a little fact, that I wasn't aware of til some time ago. Colombia provides anywhere between 27 & 41 percent of the fresh cut flowers, that are sold in the U.S. We've only scratched the surface of the jungles, which are rich in medicimal treatments. So destroying the jungles would be counter-productive to the human race (I wish, those fools in Brazil, would realize this).I know, you see what I'm trying to say. Peace....Hoda p.s. the "Warpig" handle is definitly not appropriate to your point of view. Title: Re: Another thing... Post by: WarPig on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Another thing..., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
I am not sure I understand what the "largest latin minority" means. I would think that the largest nationalities of latin people in the US are of Mexican, Puertorican, and Cuban descent. I was aware of the flower business in Colombia. I have an American friend who grew up there and his parents "farm" flowers if that is the correct term. yes, the handle Warpig seems more suitable for your point of view in the previous posts as well as other people who posted in this thread. it is sarcasm. Title: My bad... Post by: Hoda on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Another thing..., posted by WarPig on Dec 21, 2001
I mis-read your post. I thought you were saying, that Colombians were the largest latin minority. Mal, is that you....LOL!!! Title: Not against the peasants, only the profiteers... Post by: Hoda on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Kill, Kill, Kill violence the solutio..., posted by WarPig on Dec 21, 2001
Sir, My apologies if my post was too simplistic in regards to solving the drug problem, that plagues the U.S. as well as Colombia. From my numerous visits and discussions with Colombians over the years. It is quite evident, that there are many hands in the cocaine pie. Simply bombing the fields is not the answer. The possible solution will be multi-pronged. No doubt about that. My lady has relatives that were run out of the hills because the didn't want to be part of the problem. The market is here & growing in leaps & bounds in both western & eastern europe. I truely believe, if the Colombian army could protect the peasants, they would abandon growing cocoa. I can tell by your reaction, your closeness to the "forgotten" part of the equation. If there was a way the U.S. & Europe could protect the peasants, the supply would go down. Those who bother with that B.S. outside of Colombia would be forced to quit & go cold turkey. Treatment is part of the equation, which has been overlooked. My initial post, which came from the heart, is about the bastards who are profiting from the distribution. My sincere apologies to you, if you interpreted my post as a "bomb only" solution. I'm quite sure you know, that the civil war ended many years ago. This war/confrontation is about $$$$$. Nothing more, nothing less. I do have a problem about legalization. There is no pass evidence to show that legalization would drive the cost down. I've seen, you've seen, we've all seen, the problem drug addiction has caused. I feel that legalization would increase usage. If you wish to share your knowledge on or off the board about this topic. I would be more than happy to rap with you about... Hoda... Title: Driving the price down & related thoughts Post by: Michael B on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Not against the peasants, only the profi..., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
Hoda, you say "There is no pass (sic) evidence to show that legalization would drive the cost down." May I suggest that you go to any liquor store in your city and notice the prices. You can buy a 1/5 (OK, a 750, ja ja) of cheap booze for $6.00 to $8.00 (depending on local taxes), the better stuff for $12.00-$15.00. You make what, $25.00-$30.00 an hour? So in 12 minutes you earn enough to buy a bottle of known quality and purity. Now, let's look at the USA in the 1920's. Liquor is illegal---not to say it doesn't exist, it's just illegal. In fact, it's practicaly running in the gutters, and in the process making $$$millons for big time organized crime. So despite being illegal, it's still readily availble, but of unknown quality and purity, for $2.00 a 1/5---but the prevailing wage of the day is $4.00 per DAY, so one would have to work 4 to 5 HOURS to buy the same size bottle of (probably not as good) liquor. Now if THAT isn't evidence that legalization drives the cost down, what DO you consider evidence? Also, during the "War on Booze", the Federal government was trampling the rights of citizens and certain law enforcement agencies were growing rich and fat off the "this was used in a crime" property that they were confiscating from citizens (and often this becomes their ACTUAL goal, despite their STATED goal of "protecting the people"). And more than a few indivual cops, procecutors and judges were also getting rich and fat from graft and corruption. And since "Joe Citizen" doesn't really consider drinking a "real" crime anyway (heck, he does it himself sometimes, and he doesn't consider HIMSELF a criminal), but he DOES see all the hipocracy(spelling?) and crooked cops, and he looses respect for them and also the other laws they are suppossed to be enforcing. Now, it could just be ME, but does anybody ELSE see any similarity to the current "War on Drugs"? Title: No problem Mike.... Post by: Hoda on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Driving the price down & related th..., posted by Michael B on Dec 22, 2001
I just think, that the dynamics (social,political,eco) are different than those of the alcohol prohibition period. BTW...I can live with the 95%...LOL Peace...Hoda Title: Re: Driving the price down & related thoughts Post by: BenKramer on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Driving the price down & related th..., posted by Michael B on Dec 22, 2001
Just because something is illegal does not make the demand go away. It actually creates a demand. In my little town in Ohio where I live closeby it is easier for a 17 year old kid to buy a bag of marijuana or a joint than it is a six pack of beer. If there was no black market demand for drugs it would make it harder for under age users to buy. I am sure there alot of drug dealers out there that hope drugs are never legalized cause they are making tons of money selling drugs. Another angle is the government buisness of crime and the prison system. It creates thousands of jobs for the government and to keep taxing the heck out of the public. They seem to be constantly building prisons here in Ohio. The reasons stated above are the reason I am a Libertarian. Title: Daisy cutter bombs have no "peasant safe mechanism" that I am aware of Post by: WarPig on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Not against the peasants, only the profi..., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
it is my understanding that they are the most powerful non-nuclear bomb in existence. they destroy quarter mile WIDE swaths of surface area. or is it mile WIDE? I am not an expert in military weapons. remove the profit then you remove the violence as Calivet stated. undercut the drug dealer. will this result in more US addicts and a flood of cocaine on the streets? more than likely you would see some short term increase in usage. can we regulate it like alcohol but even more strictly?? probably. can we make it more or less socially unacceptable like cigarettes?? yes. will it happen?? no I have no special knowledge on the subject, other than my personal belief that the death and corruption of the drug trade is a result of it being an illegal enterprise rather than caused by the drug itself. not to mention the social, personal, and financial cost of incarcerating users and small time dealers Title: Hold the phone!!!!!!! Post by: Hoda on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Daisy cutter bombs have no "peasant..., posted by WarPig on Dec 21, 2001
Short-term increases in addiction? Regulate distribution much like alcohol??? You're noble your post in regard to the protection of peasants against wholesale bombing. But you're crazier than all out doors for even considering the above to be a REAL WORLD scenario!!! Part of my work, is dealing with the REAL WORLD effects of drugs in the community. Stick to protecting the innocent civilians from the bombs. I see, that you don't have any experience in protecting the "Non-Bombing" civilians of this equations... Later... Title: Re: Hold the phone!!!!!!! Post by: pack on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Hold the phone!!!!!!!, posted by Hoda on Dec 22, 2001
Warpig , Hoda is right. You seem to worry alot about your buddies in the colombian jungle growing poison for our children,and terrorizing the innocent colombian people? Title: Re: Not against the peasants, only the profiteers... Post by: Cali vet on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Not against the peasants, only the profi..., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
That's a little better. I thought you'd really gone off the deep end or stayed up nights watching "Proof of Live" too many times. However I'm strongly in favor of controled legalization. As long as there is a huge and highly profitable American demand coca will be grown by peasants and marketed by mafioso. If not in Colombia then in Peru again or Bolivia or Ecuador etc. etc. The fact is the Colombian people suffer enormously because of the demand in our country. You could nuke the whole country, guerilla, paras and innocents alike and within one growing season the supply would be right there again from a different country. The only solution is to take the profit out of it. Title: Re: Re: Not against the peasants, only the profiteers... Post by: pack on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Not against the peasants, only the p..., posted by Cali vet on Dec 21, 2001
yes take the profit out of it...but that still doesnt solve the problem...the dope would still be here. Title: defining the drug problem Post by: WarPig on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Not against the peasants, only t..., posted by pack on Dec 21, 2001
I do not believe the drug itself is the problem, in this case cocaine. If the drug was the problem cigarattes and alcohol should have been made illegal long ago. Remember prohibition. it didn't work. we are simply repeating history. I do not hear about many cocaine overdoses compared to drunk driving accidents or cancer. the death, violence, and the economic and social costs of the drug BUSINESS is the greater problem as I see it. The drug is still there now. we have not erradicated it. Title: Cocaine is NOT THE PROBLEM...WTF?????? Post by: Hoda on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to defining the drug problem, posted by WarPig on Dec 22, 2001
Check yourself dude!!! Legalize it, HOW???? Control it, HOW??? Under aged CHILDREN have access to alcohol & cigarettes! And they are CONTROLLED!!!!! I can see it now, lemme have a six-pack, some marlboro's and a 3 gram party pack....S.O.S!!!! LATER.... Title: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: pack on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to defining the drug problem, posted by WarPig on Dec 22, 2001
drugs are bad news...period! drugs cause great damage to our youth and the society as a whole! drugs are illigal! and for good reasons.thats the facts! live with it...i dont see the law changing anytime soon. Title: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: BenKramer on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: defining the drug problem, posted by pack on Dec 22, 2001
Hi Pack, Right on man,the FARC and the dealers in this country are on your side cause they want to keep making that dough. And another thing, where would the CIA make its cash to fund all the covert ops it carrys on all over the world ? Can you tell me that ? Best Reguards, Ben Title: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: pack on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: defining the drug problem, posted by BenKramer on Dec 22, 2001
they're not on my side! ok lets just legalize it...hey lets legalize everything...i mean hey lets just sell it in stores so anyone can walk in and buy it...yea what the h$$L lets sell everything, anything goes ...right ..lets do it!!! lets all be free totallly completely free! like Berkley...lets have it all right? that way everyone can have access to drugs ...maybe we can start a whole new generation of druggies here...wouldnt that be nice! we could have parks like they do in some countries were the druggies line up everyday for their ration of dope ...then they walk( stagger) over to a bench and trip all day instead of contributing to society...yea sounds like a perfect place to raise kids. yea i agree with you ...lets just legalize everything. Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: BenKramer on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem, posted by pack on Dec 22, 2001
Hey Pack, I got a real charge out that one. The truth is does not make a difference if a substance is legal or illegal people will find a way to get it. Just like booze during Prohibition. You CANNOT legislate morality. I suppose if it was your preference it would be illegal to have sex outside of marrige ? It really does not matter if you prefer it or not. There would be no way to enforce it just like booze or drugs. Millions of people smoke pot every day even thought its illegal. Sorry man, I have to agree that we just disagree on this issue. I am sure the day will come when pot is legal even though it will not benefit me cause I dont smoke that junk. Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: pack on December 22, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug proble..., posted by BenKramer on Dec 22, 2001
WELL NOW... what are we talking here...are we talking pot? or are we talking crack,heroin, and other junkie stuffs? are you saying legalize pot? or legalize all drugs? Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: BenKramer on December 23, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug pr..., posted by pack on Dec 22, 2001
Pack, I was just using pot as an example, cause its more widely used. Whether or not a substance is illegal it does NOT stop someone from using it or aquiring it. Plain and simple, people dont check the law before they decide to start snorting cocaine. I am sure that crack, heroin and cocaine is harder to get in the smaller cities and towns that it is in the big cities. Another point that I would like to make is that some the drugs the Pysch Dr hand out is no better or worse than crack cocaine. Reguards, Ben Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: pack on December 23, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the dru..., posted by BenKramer on Dec 23, 2001
drugs = illegal + harm to youth + harm to society. the line must be drawn somewhere, that somewhere is drugs, if you grow/produce drugs,traffic drugs,push drugs,use drugs...you are braking the law..period! all the other talk is just that..talk. Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: BenKramer on December 23, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the..., posted by pack on Dec 23, 2001
Right Pack, the laws didnt work during Prohibition and they dont work now. Thats the point I am trying to make. The law difinitely creates a black market so kids can get drugs whether thy are breaking the law or not!!! Gee, I wonder which one of us will have the last word on this argument ??? Reguards, Ben Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining the drug problem Post by: pack on December 23, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: defining..., posted by BenKramer on Dec 23, 2001
well if that is your whole argument then i'll go back to what i said way back at the beginning...there has to be some point , some place where the line is drawn...and society will decide where and when that line will be drawn and right now the line is drawn at NO DRUGS. do we draw the line at pot is ok but no crack allowed, or do we allow pot and crack but no meth is allowed? or do we just throw out all laws and rules and say anything and everything goes ...smoke ,snort, inject whatever you want ..open it all up..sell it all in stores...we could have all kinds of goodies...how about a " smack pack ", you could buy premixed or make your own., and at christmas time you could give it as gifts? just think of the market out there Bong stores popping up all over, kids could stop in and get a hit on the way to school. i think its ok just the way it is now...its against the law. Title: Re: Kill, Kill, Kill violence the solution to the drug problem Post by: pack on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Kill, Kill, Kill violence the solutio..., posted by WarPig on Dec 21, 2001
they are the ones doing the kill kill kill...so your answer is legalize cocaine huh? Title: yepif alcohol and cigarrettes can be legal why not cocaine?? Post by: WarPig on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Kill, Kill, Kill violence the sol..., posted by pack on Dec 21, 2001
or is it better to continue the charade of the drug war??? is death and/or imprisonment your solution?? so Colombians are killing Colombians, now you want the US to start killing Colombians?? Title: Re: yepif alcohol and cigarrettes can be legal why not cocaine?? Post by: pack on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to yepif alcohol and cigarrettes can be leg..., posted by WarPig on Dec 21, 2001
why are you putting words in my mouth? i dont recall making any of those statements? why dont you go have another puff puff puff! Title: Re: DRUG..... Post by: pack on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to DRUG....., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
its long over due! lets hear it for the daisy cutter! Title: Excellent choice, Pack.... Post by: Hoda on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: DRUG....., posted by pack on Dec 21, 2001
If we drop a few of those (daisy cutters) around the drug fields. FARC, ELN & the AUC, would be pulling the drug plants out by hand, begging for us to stop bombing them...LOL! The Taliban thought the mountains would protect them against the bombings....NOT!!! Me thinks, the jungle would be a tad bit more vunerable...heheh LOL....Hoda Title: Re: Excellent choice, Pack.... Post by: pack on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Excellent choice, Pack...., posted by Hoda on Dec 21, 2001
yup a few daisys , couple b-1s, support for colombian army ,end of story! meanwhile crackdown on american pushers,kill two birds at same time. Title: Excellent choice, Pack.... Post by: Hoda on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: DRUG....., posted by pack on Dec 21, 2001
If we drop a few of those (daisy cutters) around the drug fields. FARC, ELN & the AUC, would be pulling the drug plants out by hand, begging for us to stop bombing them...LOL! The Taliban thought the mountains would protect them against the bombings....NOT!!! Me thinks, the jungle would be a tad bit more vunerable...heheh LOL....Hoda Title: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: pack on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by El Diablo on Dec 20, 2001
i dont think colombia is next on the list...but they are on the list . Title: Re: Post by: Cali vet on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by El Diablo on Dec 20, 2001
Well that is true. We (the US) will not be intervening militarily in Colombia. Not unless the FARC/ELN/AUC directly threaten terrorist acts on our shores and none of those groups have any interest whatsoever in doing that. The beef of the two guerilla groups is with the Colombian govt. The FARC seem to want to be a controlling factor in that govt. but are reluctant to make any serious agreements because they are making money hand over fist with their drug and kidnap industries. The ELN are much smaller, don't have the big coca tax money behind them and are somewhat more radical than the FARC because they have less to gain or lose. The AUC and Carlos Castrano are at all out war with both guerilla factions and their modis operendi is sheer terror and intimidation produced by the ghastliest slaughter, chainsaws etc. of country people who "might" provide aide and succor to the guerilla. The AUC also fight the guerillas for coca income. All this makes for a disastrous and seemingly insoluble situation but not one that directly threatens the US. Any US Special Forces strikes would be untenable. We all know that probobley half the population there has relatives in the US. It would be like sending US strike forces to Isreal. The US also has a huge phobia regarding junlge battlegrounds. Anyway Andres Pastrana has been a huge failure in dealing with the guerillas. Colombians can hope for a president with a strong hand in the next election, someone like Fujimori of Peru who effectively crushed the Sendero Luminoso. That is if they don't mind him sticking his hand in the cookie jar which brings us back to why groups like the ELN exist. Title: I totally Agree... n/t Post by: El Diablo on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM Title: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: pack on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by Pete E on Dec 20, 2001
the bush administration has been dropping alot of hints lately that FARC ELN and others in colombia are on their list. Title: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: pack on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by Pete E on Dec 20, 2001
the bush administration has been dropping alot of hints lately that FARC ELN and others in colombia are on their list. Title: Re: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: jDave on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC st..., posted by pack on Dec 20, 2001
Question: If the Bush administration does target these groups doesn't that mean they will start targeting more Americans that visit colombia Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FARC style Post by: pack on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re: Re: "Good Deeds"---FAR..., posted by jDave on Dec 21, 2001
they already target americans. i think they will be to busy running for cover. Title: Re: Post by: john_paul32177 on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to "Good Deeds"---FARC style, posted by Michael B on Dec 20, 2001
im so sorry to hear that. i wonder what did the farc won with that. hopefully is not that they have killed his father and not wanting to let the genie out of the bottle. Title: Re: Re: Post by: Wasp on December 20, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re:, posted by john_paul32177 on Dec 20, 2001
That's the take on someone i've been communicating with down there. FARC had already killed the father. Title: Re: Re: Re: Post by: john_paul32177 on December 21, 2001, 05:00:00 AM ... in response to Re: Re:, posted by Wasp on Dec 20, 2001
well im sorry to hear that but that was my take since day one. as a matter of fact i was down in colombia just last month and there was this man that even offered himself in exchange for the father and they didnt even received an answer |