Comments on: Brazil Spearheads UNASUR Defense Council, but in a Surprise move, Colombia Withdraws

By: Daniel Cruz

Daniel Cruz — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 06:57:01 +0000

Oh, and here's my one cent piece of advice to you: try not to sound too keen when defending Uribe's negativism and obstructionism. The guy is up to his ears in the paramilitary shitpool, seemingly endless numbers of his associates are now in jail for their ties to paramilitary groups and narcolords, their mercenaries of choice, presently accused of killing thousands of innocent Colombians in the name of their holy crusade against FARC. And while FARC are nothing less than brutal murderers and terrorist, every one in Colombia knows their paramilitary president is no better, and perhaps even worse.

Get your facts straight, open your eyes, breathe in, and try to smell to volcano of monkey crap you are sitting on, buddy!

By: Daniel Cruz

Daniel Cruz — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 06:49:55 +0000

What would the US do if Mexican fighter planes crossed the border to destroy a Zetas training camp in Texas??? Wouldn't the US invade Mexico immediately??? Wouldn't it, at the very least, send the National Guard to protect the border??? Well, Venezuela and Ecuador did just that, send their troops to the border to protect it. Your 'allegedly' allegation about them supporting FARC is just that, a baseless allegation for which you provide not a single piece of evidence. Therefore, though you sound like a smart fellow, your logic goes not beyond the end of your nose, Nathan. You definitely have a great space in front of you to improve.

By: Daniel Cruz

Daniel Cruz — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 06:44:27 +0000

FARC laptops?

Your whole argument is based in CIA-doctored laptops?

You are stomping your feet on thin ice, Nathan.

US intervention in South America is loudly clear and evident if you read your history.

All blithe by itself…

By: Nathan Gill

Nathan Gill — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 21:25:51 +0000

The story did not seem very non-partisan. I think your article makes too many assumptions and lacks a firm grasp of the political situation in South America and the region today.

Specifically, I disagree with you when you say, “Washington’s activation of the Fourth Fleet must be interpreted in Brasília as a partial response to Brazil’s armament drive and its de facto influence over the region.”

Considering that Brazil purchases a large portion of these arms from the US, it would be surprising if that were the interpretation in Brasilia. Where did you get this idea from?

Also, I think your portrayal of Uribe as negative and obstructionist is unfair. His hesitance is understandable given the alleged connections between the FARC and the governments of Ecuador and Venezuela. Until the issue is resolved his decision seems prudent to say the least.

Finally, you assert that “The recent 180 degree turn in Colombia’s policy highlights the depth of the Bush administration’s financial tug on Bogotá”

First, Colombia still supports Unasur, it merely did not sign on to the Defense Council. Second, it seems much more plausible that the information contained in the FARC laptops led to Colombia’s hesitance to join the CSD rather than any US arm-twisting.

I don’t think you sufficiently appreciate the fact that both Ecuador and Venezuela deployed troops to the Colombian border three months ago and have allegedly supported the FARC. These facts seem serious enough to merit consideration before blithely accusing the US of more intervention in South American affairs.

Nathan Gill
Southern Affairs