Chavez and Correa get Colombian denouncement
- added March 4, 2008
- 22 responses
-
-
-
- mattbrawn
- added this
-
-
- related topics
-
- Colombia (133)
- Venezuela (97)
- Hugo Chavez (73)
- Ecuador (35)
- Alvaro Uribe (8)
The Colombian President Alvaro Uribe has said today that he is to denounce Venezuela's Hugo Chavez in an international court after Venezuela and Ecuador both cut diplomatic ties with Bogota, which was followed by their troops being ordered to their neighbour's frontier.
Both Chavez and Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa have been accused as having allegiances with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC guerrillas by Colombia, accusations that were triggered by a Colombian raid that killed a top guerilla boss.
The Colombian President spoke out on his country's actions, saying:
"Colombia proposes to denounce the President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez in the International Criminal Court for sponsoring and financing genocide."
Both Chavez and Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa have been accused as having allegiances with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC guerrillas by Colombia, accusations that were triggered by a Colombian raid that killed a top guerilla boss.
The Colombian President spoke out on his country's actions, saying:
"Colombia proposes to denounce the President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez in the International Criminal Court for sponsoring and financing genocide."
-
For more information on the developing issue, check out this post. -
The Colombian President has also said he is to ask the International Criminal Court to bring genocide charges against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. -
Think about this....Ecuador and Venezuela both have a huge amounts of Colombians living in their countries. If a war would start, are Colombians going to fight for their home land or their resident country. Internal problems with the common Colombian living in the next house. Ecuador has to be careful.
-
Ridiculous... and Colombia isn't guilty of genocide for the ongoing raids and destruction in the countryside at the hands of the AUC? Please.
Both the FARC and the AUC both are responsible for atrocities, and there's just as much of Wayuu indian blood (and coke) on the government's hands for supporting the AUC. I find this claim by Uribe to be very hard to swallow. -
I agree both the FARC and the AUC have blood in their hands this claim by Uribe is foolish. I neither for or against Chavez, but if Uribe is going to make a claim to the International Criminal Court he should also be prepared to face similar charges.
-
International news~be more aware about the FACT that Chavez was communicating with the Farc to release hostages and they where doing so. Now, because finally Colombia did something, the Farc is not going to release any more hostages. Understand!
-
Saying that Colombia is as guilty as Venezuela, or Ecuador, or US, or Iceland, or Micronesia doesn't solve anything... talking and diplomatic manners should be the first option always and as Colombia broke international rules, venezuelan goverment's attitude hasn't been the best one. As I'm always saying, taking extreme ways can never be a good option. Grays, the world is made of grays, once we can understand that it may be the time to take sides.
-
blaming someone for genocidal atrocities, conveniently finding incriminating documents in a raid, the question of oil....
wait a minute...i saw this movie before...and it ends with a stronger industrial military complex, more civilians dead, and tons of displacement. YAY!! oh yea...not to mention higher prices at the pump!
Diplomacy? HAHA...our form of diplomacy starts with apaches and clusters and ends with disposing of depleted uranium and a growing homeless veteran population. -
Columbia is a puppet of the United States Neocon Administration. They have been a puppet government since Reagan and the Iran/Contra affair.
The US backs Columbia because they support Capitalism and its steamroller mentality of oppression. Chavez and Corea are both leftist socialist leaning leaders who are fighting capitalism and the oil power elite who wish to control South America and exploit their mineral resources and not give the people anything for it. Oh yeah there would be a few millionaires and maybe a billionaire or two living in Ecuador or Venezuela and/ or Columbia that would benefit from the natural resource exploitation, but those benefits will not be trickling down any funds to the indigenous peoples of South America.
The only resource to make any real money for many indigenous peoples is Cocaine. This is similar to the situation in Afghanistan were the indigenous peoples grow poppies to produce opium and heroine because they are being shut out of the so called legitimate economic game.
If you won't play by our rules than we are going to fuck you up. That is the message the indigenous peoples have been hearing from ages ago.
I support any effort that is aimed at keeping
Capitalism in check.
I have always said and I believe strongly that Capitalism must be balanced by Socialism. There are many happy and prosperous Socialist Democracies in the world. Socialism is not a bad word or an evil thing. It has been vilified by capitalist die hards through their media that they control.
Wake up people can't you see what is really going on in Ecuador and Venezuela? They are fighting for autonomy from the Zeitgeist. Unfortunately, Chavez is an egomaniac on top of being a socialist and his daily 6 hour broadcasts are extremely narcissistic. That is why he is mostly unpalatable to the American public and he can easily be portrayed as a lefty lunatic because of his eccentricities.
But at the heart of the matter is economic autonomy and preservation of the environment and making the capitalists pay a fair price for the resources they are exploiting; not pennies on the dollar.
This whole war on drugs thing is part of this situation. The miserable failure that the endless perpetual war on drugs. Just like the latest miserable failure; the endless war on terror. -
These wars only serve the pockets of a few.
-
I'm a venezuelan guy living in Venezuela, so I can give my opinion about this subject from the inside... I'm pretty surprised of how you people think that the fact of having a terrible president as George W. Bush and a historical lack of respect for the country's authonomy (specially latin americans ones) can justify a guy like Chavez.
The most logical thing anyone should do is not seeing Chavez as a black or whihe President because he, as anyone else, is a regular person with lots of grays. He has given a wide range of benefits to HIS people (I repeat, HIS people) and has used the venezuelan politics' past errors as an excuse to break through as some kind of saviour. He is the best example of a charismatic leader, as Webber wrote some time, and he depends on people support, but that doesn't make him inmediately democratic. He has won several elections because he has a huge amount of people in here.
With him there are the ones who no one ever worried about, those minorities that in fact are majorities, but he has done a completely anti democratic thing: Exclude the ones who don't think like him and just do his job for the people who think as he does. He has had many crashes with journalist that have criticized him, even those that once were his prote'ges' and he just keeps on repeating that the opposition represents an old habit that should vanish, the opposition is essencially anti-democratic for him, and that is a fact.
Here the freedom of speech is more regulated than in US, where you can have things that you probably don't consider extraordinary, like Lil'Bush (for saying something kind of stupid) but are just unconceiveble for us in here..... well, I really don't want to bother you anymore, but I needed to tell you something:
There's nothing reliable in the extremes of nothing... thinking in black or white is always a mistake and much more in the world we are living... Hope you reply and I'd be pleased to interact with you, cause I'm completely new on Current. Write me! Thanks -
Good to hear from a person with a real point of view and opinion. Anyways, it's b'ness on both ends and everyone forgets that Colombia killed 16 soldiers and left them to rot in foreign land. They grabbed only one person to show the dead body as a trophy. No respect to Ecuador. Colombia has puppies that act diplomacy with the United States and does what ever the drug lords want.......B'ness! I hope I don't get cancer now.....
-
Don't forget that colombia was also spraying chemicals in Ecuadorian lands to "destroy" cocaine plantations. The spraying cause deaths and diaseses to the Ecuadorian countryside people. This happen mid-last year and president Correa sent a complaint to Colombia. No respect towards Ecuador. Governments don't care and brute force is needed to get some respect.
I hope I don't get cancer now. -
Democracy and capitalism is only a dream and not real in S.Americans countries with history of corruption.
-
The guerrilla issue is too complicated as for trying to understand it so lightly. Colombia's goverment has commited several mistakes and are indeed kind of an Empire's puppet, that's for sure, but that doesn't justify the things that FARC has done. Do you know that in 2000 Pastrana's administration gave them a military-free zone? Did the guerrilla used that chance to promote their "ideal" of a clean state, a land fulfill of justice? Ehm... nope... It ended by being another place to take hostages, to recruit children, to keep on selling drugs (cause Paramilitares and Guerrilla are equaly dirty on this subject). What I mean is, once again, things are not black or white, here are no goods and bads, here we must try to identify our reality, our social reality and get to a point where war and confrontation won't be the options and that is too difficult with presidents as Uribe or Chavez, that's for sure.
-
I wouldn't be so sure of what you're saying about the impossibility to have democracy in here. Countries as Chile, and in their own way, Brazil, are starting to show us that here may be some way to do things better.
-
I just want to clear this point though I've repeated it before, I'm not saying that Colombia is an angelical country neither that their goverment should be an example, I'm just saying that their mistakes do not justify the "macho" meassures taken by Chavez. Ecuador, instead, is in the legal way, not shouting nonsenses. I mean, in first place, why did Chavez have to get involved in this? I know it's not ilegal but it's part of a well-known strategy, distract venezuelans from their (our) internal problems by arguin war, conflict, conspiration, and anything he can come up with
-
Didn't Chavez get involved to negotiate the release of hostages?
-
Yes, he was. He has repeated several times that he is pro-guerrilla, so he has... let's say "good" relations with them. I completely support his negociations to release the hostages, but I'm against the massive propaganda he has done about it. But once again, anything that can be done to free more of those people is something essentially good
-
"anything that can be done to free more of those people is something essentially good"
Diplomacy is the answer...and so far Chavez has been the only one to actually negotiate in that manner. Yes or No?
I appreciate and respect your position Marcelvt. I agree that the only way to combat an industrial military complex is with peace. Unfortunately, as Americans, we have witnessed every advocate of peace in our history get assassinated by the warmongers. -
blindeye... I wouldn't be so sure about the diplomatic manners of Chavez. Several points are not clear, as the not confirmed reunions between him and some FARC leaders at the goverment house in Caracas, just for give you one example.
Beside that, there have been othe diplomatic negotiations in the past (Colombia's goverment have not bomb the guerrilla all the time) and many times FARC have had fail to fulfill their promises.
Again, I don't know if pure diplomacy is the way to describe Chavez negotiations, but yes, it has been the cleanest act of Chavez in the last year.
Let me tell you something, here in Venezuela the official numbers of... whatever... the facts, the official sources are a complete mistery. Journalism as something that can aproach truth to the people is quite difficult in here, so there are a lot of questions still unanswered about many important subjects. These negotiations aren't the exception.
Once again, I support Chavez' measures about the hostages freedom because they have been successful, and that's enough. Talking about adjectives might be risky.
Thanks for talk about this blindeye, I'm new in Custom and I'm loving the respect that rule every discussion.
peace out -
Yes, thank you Marcel...
Here's a link to an article I found to be an interesting perspective as well, from Human Rights Watch.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/02/01/colomb17975.htm
Maybe others can find it somewhat enlightening as well? I can only hope...
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
