Tensión en frontera por despliegue de tropas venezolanas

El Duro · Foro Master

RE: More news...VENEZUELA ECUADOR VS COLOMBIA

X4v13r · Comandante

miguel wrote:

i struggle with this... 70 thousand people died in peru in the 80s due to sendero luminoso and the MRTA, so i am extremely empathetic to the colombian fight against FARC.

one side of me wants to say - the ends justify the means and colombia should do whatever it takes to strike at the terrorists.. the other side of me remembers that fujimori is on trial in peru for sending death squads (el grupo colina) out to eliminate "terrorists" - except they ended up killing many innocent people, and i support him going to jail over that.

in this case, all i can say is that it's a good thing that the strike was "targetted" and that they got the people they set out to get. it gets a lot messier when there's collateral damage.

i support colombia in their fight against the farc.. terrorism is despicable.

thats y i can't believe that people are more worry about him crossing to "attack ecuador"........ The bigger problem here is FARC being in Ecuador.

~X

miguel · TOP Guru

i struggle with this... 70 thousand people died in peru in the 80s due to sendero luminoso and the MRTA, so i am extremely empathetic to the colombian fight against FARC.

one side of me wants to say - the ends justify the means and colombia should do whatever it takes to strike at the terrorists.. the other side of me remembers that fujimori is on trial in peru for sending death squads (el grupo colina) out to eliminate "terrorists" - except they ended up killing many innocent people, and i support him going to jail over that.

in this case, all i can say is that it's a good thing that the strike was "targetted" and that they got the people they set out to get. it gets a lot messier when there's collateral damage.

i support colombia in their fight against the farc.. terrorism is despicable.

Toto · Nuevo

Creo yo que la accion de Uribe no fue estupida como muchos quieren creen, fue para mi opinion, una accion arrisgada e inteligente.

Como un buen jugador de poker, Uribe se las jugo.

Y digo arriegada porque se jugo la opcion de ir a una guerra con sus vecinos que perjudicaria la situacion de todos los paises latinoamericanos, pero al mismo tiempo fue inteligente porque logro dar un golpe grande a los terrositas (FARC) cuando estos se creian seguros en tierras ecuatorianas y desperto la duda entre las alianzas del gobierno de ecuador y venezuela con los terroristas, duda que puede ser ingonara por los paises latinos pero que preocupa a paises como Canada y la union europea al hacer negocios con estos paises o mandatarios.

Recordemos que a acepcion de chavez que igual que bush buscan controlar no solo la situacion de sus paises pero tambien las de los otros, Uribe esta actuando para el beneficion de los colombianos, lo cual es aceptable ya que el es el presidente de Colombia. Ademas el 80% de los colombianos apoyo la accion de Uribe en contra de los terroristas de la FARC en suelos ecuatorianos.

Y sobre los que creen que si el barril de petroleo sube de precio esto beneficia siempre a chavez, la verdad es que no es asi, el costo de sacar y refinar el "oro negro" sigue siendo muy bajo comparado al precio de venta del producto, y la razon que esto no beneficia a paises como venezuela y medio oriente que tienen grandes inversiones en el extracto, es que paises como Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, MExico y Canada (como el precio de venta esta tan alto) estan invirtiendo en nuevos pozos para sacar este sobreevaluado producto que todos nesesitamos.

En latinoamerica existen varios paises con petroleo en sus suelos, pero la diferencia antes era que los inversionistas tardarian muchos anos en recuperar su inversion, hoy en dia gracias a la guerra de Irak y otros factores, el precio de VENTA se ha sobreevaluado tanto que los inversionistas estan recuperando su inversion en tiempo record.

Lo cual es una de las razones por la cual el dolar canadiense a subido su valor, gracias al petroleo que se esta empezando a sacar y refinar en este pais, ademas no olvidemos que si bien Venezuela saca el petroleo, nesesita de las refinerias en EE UU para poder venderlo.

Toto

Chilenita · Comandante

El Duro wrote:

well they made their peace....

did u guys see correa faced when he had to shake uribe hands

Yes. I am glad they did. I never wanted war I just thought it was DISGUSTING of Uribe to think that this type of stupidity was okay. I am more than certain he got the message loud and clear from Presidents across LATIN AMERICA that his move was BEYOND STUPID!!!!!!! Bush must be pissed that his little chance of going after Chavez is gone. smile

Mastropiero · Guru

don_plyero wrote:

wow ive been stuck to the TV and the news ever since this **** happend

1st Maestro: mejor ni rebuzno de ti por que te acabo

uribe: my opinion? hes a lier and a killer (watch him on cnn espanol, hes white and shaking lol)

1st this isnt about la farc or if correa or chavez have any connections with la farc! its about colombia breaking rules and attacking the ecuadorian side

NO1 has any right to attack the country nextdoor ...doesnt matter if there going after la farc

2nd: uribe wants 2 take chavez 2 court jajajaja funny...colombia has been trying to make chavez look bad ever since he became the presedent

I HOPE COLOMBIA ENJOY THEIR 5.00 LETER 4 GAS

Luckily we have "Roberto" who gets the gas from Venezuela, cross the frontier like crossing Dufferin Ave without creating any international conflict and provide a great service experience for 2000 pesos/galon,

2000 Colombian "titeres" pesos = 1 USD?? Ecuadorian "anti imperialist" dollars

IF ANY1 WANTS TO ATTACK CORREA IN THIS SITE IM GONNA BE HERE TO RESPOND BACK
Go Blahblahyero, I'll be waiting in the Colombian Bakery for them too!!

Luckily everyone is happy and FARC leaders are keeping falling like crazy...so it was totally worthy.

El Duro · Foro Master

well they made their peace....

did u guys see correa faced when he had to shake uribe hands

don_plyero · Guru

wow ive been stuck to the TV and the news ever since this **** happend

1st Maestro: evileye

mejor ni ablo de ti por que te acabo

uribe: my opinion? furious

hes a lier and a killer (watch him on cnn espanol, hes white and shaking lol)

1st this isnt about la farc or if correa or chavez have any connections with la farc! its about colombia breaking rules and attacking the ecuadorian side

NO1 has any right to attack the country nextdoor ...doesnt matter if there going after la farc

2nd: biggrin

uribe wants 2 take chavez 2 court jajajaja funny...colombia has been trying to make chavez look bad ever since he became the presedent

I HOPE COLOMBIA ENJOY THEIR 5.00 LETER 4 GAS biggrin

IF ANY1 WANTS TO ATTACK CORREA IN THIS SITE IM GONNA BE HERE TO RESPOND BACK

biggrin

Alianza PAIS biggrin

PRINCESSA · TOP Guru

@ Chile -

YES of course I got my opinion (not to say it's Ecuador involved) & I voiced it already. I also see that many ppl have diffrent views & it's all cool, but like I mentioned before I think there is no issue & the big worry in my mind would be/is that we got guerillas/terrorist, etc in our land & unless we tackle this point the REAL/IMPORTANT the rest is beyond stupid (in my opinion) & we should start to let it rest & move forward.

Chilenita · Comandante

PRINCESSA wrote:
@ LG - Chile - Pls go article crazy. I know I won't be reading. LOL

but....but.....but it's a topic you have an opinion on....yes..no...maybe so....

Chilenita · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
Chilenita wrote:

..I am trying to bombard Prinny with info....

Yeah - she just LOVESSSS reading long-ass articles!!!

and so do I - - - not!!!

But the more I read the more I am getting into it!!! I hate politics!!!!

Oh shush you love it! Here is another interesting article. Interesting since he loves to talk about being "ANTI TERRORISM" so much - LMAO

Slap on the Wrist for Corporate Sponsors of Terrorism

Less than two weeks after 9/11, President George W. Bush and Secretary of the Treasury Paul ONeill held a joint press conference to announce that the war on terror would not only target terrorist groups, but also those who fund terrorism. Bush declared, If you do business with terrorists, if you support or sponsor them, you will not do business with the United States of America. ONeill followed Bush to the podium and announced, We will succeed in starving the terrorists of funding and shutting down the institutions that support or facilitate terrorism. And yet, despite these grandiose declarations, Cincinnati-based Chiquita Brands International evidently will not be shut down and will continue to do business in the United States despite pleading guilty last week to providing more than $1.7 million in funding over seven years to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), a right-wing group on the US State Departments list of foreign terrorist organizations.

Chiquita pleaded guilty to one count of doing business with a terrorist group and agreed to pay a fine of $25 million. Under the agreement, none of the companys executives will face criminal charges. Between 1997 and February 2004, Chiquita made more than 100 payments to the AUC, including over 50 payments totaling more than $850,000 after the State Department designated the paramilitary group a terrorist organization in September 2001. Prior to 1997, Chiquita had made payments to Colombias largest leftist guerrilla group the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), but that was before it was labeled a terrorist organization by the State Department.

Company officials met with AUC leader Carlos Castaño in 1997 and the paramilitary leader told them that he intended to drive the FARC from the Urabá region of Colombia and requested payments from Chiquita to fund his operations. Initially, the company made the payments by check, but following the AUCs inclusion on the State Departments list of foreign terrorist organizations Chiquita switched to paying the paramilitaries in cash. According to court documents, the payments to the AUC were reviewed and approved by eight top executives at the company. Furthermore, the executives continued to authorize the payments even after outside legal counsel had told them that the funding was illegal and should be stopped immediately.

Following the guilty plea, Chiquitas Chief Executive Officer Fernando Aguirre announced, The agreement reached with the [Department of Justice] today is in the best interests of the company. It is also in the best interests of company executives who for some reason are not facing criminal charges for funding terrorism.

Colombias President Alvaro Uribe has responded to calls from opposition lawmakers and is now considering requesting the extradition of Chiquita executives to stand trial in Colombia. Extradition should be from here to there and from there to here, said Uribe in reference to the Chiquita case and the fact that his government sends hundreds of Colombians every year to the United States to stand trial on drug trafficking charges.

It is doubtful that the Bush administration would consider sending US corporate executives to stand trial in Colombia even though their funding of the AUC undoubtedly contributed to the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of civilians in that country. If the Bush administration had any interest in living up to its bold announcements that it was serious about targeting those who fund terrorism then the Chiquita executives would already be in a US prison.

Questions have also been raised about the Bush administrations role in the companys payments to the AUC. Court documents revealed that Chiquita told the US Justice Department about the payments in 2003 and then continued to fund the paramilitary group for another ten months with the full knowledge of the Bush administration. Colombian Senator Jorge Robledo of the opposition Polo Democratico has asked, How much more does the US government know about payments to the paramilitaries? Opposition legislators in Colombia have also called for the re-opening of an illegal arms trafficking case in which Israeli arms dealers smuggled 3,000 rifles and 2.5 million rounds of ammunition into the country through Chiquitas port facility for delivery to the AUC in November 2001.

In sharp contrast to the Bush administrations failure to levy criminal charges against Chiquita executives, Denmarks government announced last week that it had charged seven workers from a local clothing company with funding terrorism because they pledged a portion of the companys profits from tee-shirt sales to support the radio station of the FARC, Colombias largest guerrilla group. Even though no money was actually transferred to the FARCand even if it had been, the amount would have paled in comparison to the $1.7 million Chiquita paid to the AUCthe seven Danes face up to six years in prison solely for their intent to send funds to a group on the EUs list of terrorist organizations.

The Bush administrations proverbial slap on the wrist of a US corporation that provided substantial funding to a group listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization raises serious questions about who is truly being targeted in the war on terror. Evidently, Chiquitas claims that it was only protecting its operations and employees justified its funding of terrorism in the eyes of the Bush administration.

Indeed, this case appears to set a legal precedent for other US corporations and their executives that are funding, or that decide in the future to fund, terrorist groups. If corporate executives determine that the profits earned sufficiently exceed the likely fine, then it makes good business sense to fund terrorism. In Chiquitas case, the $25 million fine amounts to a relatively small portion of the more than $200 million in profits that the company has earned since the AUC was designated a terrorist organization in 2001. Chiquitas fine also amounts to less than half of the $51.5 million that the company pocketed from the 2004 sale of its Colombian subsidiary, Banadex.

On the other hand, if an independent US journalist such as myself paid the FARC $1.7 million to ensure my safety while working in rebel-controlled regions, it is difficult to believe that my punishment would only be a fine that amounted to a small portion of my earnings over the past five years. There is little doubt in my mind that I would be charged with funding terrorism and locked away for a good number of years. The Chiquita case is further confirmation that the Bush administration is not a government of the people, but a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations.

PRINCESSA · TOP Guru

@ LG - Chile - Pls go article crazy. I know I won't be reading. LOL

LGigolo · Comandante

Chilenita wrote:

..I am trying to bombard Prinny with info....

Yeah - she just LOVESSSS reading long-ass articles!!! weirdface

and so do I - - - not!!!

But the more I read the more I am getting into it!!! I hate politics!!!! blankstare

Chilenita · Comandante

In my last post I just wanted to show that much of latin america agrees with how ridiculous this whole thing was. I will not bore you all with more articles from other countries such as Chile, Uruguay, bolivia and others. Latin America more united...it's kind of nice actually. Hopefully what comes out of this is the clear message that most condem this type of stupidness.

Chilenita · Comandante

Dogo wrote:
LGigolo wrote:
Chilenita wrote:

Who gives a rat's a ss what that sorry excuse for a woman thinks *puke*

I've heard DOGO say similar stuff in reference to you!

you guys shut up!! I am trying to bombard Prinny with info....

Argentina to lodge complaint over Colombia trespass to OAS

BUENOS AIRES, March 3 (Xinhua) -- Argentine Foreign Minister Jorge Taiana said Monday the country will present its strong rejection of any territorial trespassing in an extraordinary session of the Organization of American States (OAS) Tuesday.

Taiana was responding to questions by Argentine media about the three-way conflict between Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia, from Switzerland where he was attending a United Nations meeting.

The three nations became embroiled in a serious diplomatic conflict after Colombian police and soldiers killed 21 rebels of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) at a camp in Ecuador Saturday.

Ecuador says the operation was an act of aggression but Colombia describes it as "legitimate self-defense."

Taiana, who outlined Argentina's position after a meeting with his Ecuadorian counterpart Maria Isabel Salvador, said, "Respect for territorial sovereignty is an inviolable principle in international law. Nothing and no one can justify its violation."

He added that Argentina was taking action so that peace will not be denied and that Colombia's humanitarian process will be continued.

In the meantime, Argentina's Foreign Ministry has said in a statement that it is "very deeply worried by the evident violation of territorial sovereignty of a nation in the region like Ecuador."

The statement added that Argentina is involved in diplomatic work to coordinate positions among nations in the region.

Brazil condemns Colombia's Ecuador raid, urges apology

BRASILIA, March 3 (Reuters) - Brazil's foreign minister on Monday condemned a Colombian military strike on rebels inside Ecuador and called on Bogota to offer an explicit apology.

"The territorial violation is very serious and needs to be condemned," Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said in Brasilia. "Brazil condemns any territorial violation."

He also said the Colombian government should offer an "explicit" apology to contain the growing crisis prompted by the weekend raid, in which Colombian forces struck at a FARC rebel camp inside Ecuador.

Nicaragua says Colombia is a threat to region

MANAGUA, March 3 (Reuters) - Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, a former leftist guerrilla fighter, accused Colombia on Monday of becoming a threat to Latin America by killing a top rebel commander in Ecuador and disputing territory.

Colombian troops killed Raul Reyes, the No. 2 of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, on Saturday, in a severe blow to Latin America's oldest guerrilla insurgency.

Reyes was killed in Ecuador in an operation that included air strikes and fighting with rebels across the border.

"Colombia is becoming a factor of ... uncertainty for Latin America," said Ortega, a former Marxist revolutionary and U.S. Cold War foe who was voted back to power in late 2006.

Nicaragua is also at odds with Colombia over rich fishing waters in the Caribbean Sea.

The small Central American nation has recently stepped up navy patrols in waters also claimed by Colombia to protect local fishermen and ward off drug traffickers.

"We have to protect our sovereignty. You know the situation we have with Colombia," Ortega added. "Colombia is becoming a more serious problem for Latin America."

Ortega is a close ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, whose role in negotiating the release of FARC hostages has fueled tensions with Colombia.

Leftist allies Venezuela and Ecuador escalated the crisis with Colombia on Monday, cutting diplomatic ties after the Colombian raid inside Ecuador sparked troop deployments and warnings of war. (Reporting by Ivan Castro, writing Cyntia Barrera Diaz, editing by Jackie Frank)

Peru Asks OAS to Mediate Colombia Crisis

Lima, Mar 3 (Prensa Latina) Peruvian President Alan Garcia regarded the Colombian military incursion into Ecuador as unacceptable, and suggested the Organization of American States (OAS) to seek solutions to the crisis.

President Garcia said Monday that Colombia's invasion of Ecuadorian national territory to attack the guerrilla Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) violated Ecuadorian national sovereignty, and Bogota should apologize.

He suggested OAS should meet and establish clear commitments in defense of regional democracy, non-intervention, and collaboration in the struggle against terrorism.

Garcia announced he would call the presidents of Brazil, Panama and Chile, and the OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza to coordinate the meeting.

The Peruvian president also expressed concern that the crisis generated by the Colombian attack may affect this year's international summits in the region.

Peruvian Prime Minister Jorge del Castillo said they hoped the historic links between Ecuador and Colombia "will surmount any circumstantial differences and prevent a military escalation."

Del Castillo informed that President Garcia spoke with the Presidents of Ecuador and Colombia, Rafael Correa and Alvaro Uribe respectively, to try to calm them down.

Peruvian international analyst Ernesto Velitd noted that the Colombian attack was a hard punch to the unity of the Community of Andean Nations.

Dogo · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
Chilenita wrote:

Who gives a rat's a ss what that sorry excuse for a woman thinks *puke*

I've heard DOGO say similar stuff in reference to you!

LGigolo · Comandante

PRINCESSA wrote:

OMG the article posting's are getting crazy. I luv it.

We know you luv crazy - you're with X!

Chilenita · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
@Chilenita: as you may have noticed, I am not much for politics or get much into it... but found interesting how dirty Uribe's resume appears to be - at least according to the article. Hard to believe someone with such a dirty resume could get so high up there.

Hard to believe....I guess you haven't seen Bush's resume...or lack of one - lol.

THERE IS ALWAYS MORE TO THE STORY THAN MEETS THE EYE!!!

Here is another article worth the read

The Upside-Down World of Bush and Uribe: Slandering Chávez and the FARC

by Garry Leech

President George W. Bush yesterday declared, America fully supports Colombias democracy. We firmly oppose any acts of aggression that could destabilize the region. He then made clear that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávezs deployment of troops to the border with Colombia, which Bush labeled as provocative maneuvers, were the acts of aggression that the United States opposed. These statements represent a denial of reality that is extreme for even the Bush administration. After all, the origin of this crisis was Colombias military offensive into Ecuadorian territory. It was this blatant violation of national sovereignty that represents the act of aggression that could destabilize the region. And yet, Bush is painting the aggressor as the victim and a neighboring nation that has not violated the sovereignty of another country and seeks to defend itself against a similar attack as that endured by Ecuador as the provocateur. Bush is not alone in his politically-motivated assault on Chávez, the Uribe government in Colombia has also attacked the Venezuelan president and others with blatant lies and gross exaggerations.

On March 1, the Colombian military launched a cross-border air strike that killed Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) Commander Raúl Reyes and at least 16 other guerrillas while they were sleeping in their jungle camp located just over one mile inside Ecuador. US-supplied helicopters then transported Colombian troops across the border where they engaged in combat with the remaining guerrillas before retrieving Reyess body and the rebel commanders laptop computers.

Ecuadors President Rafael Correa quickly declared Colombias cross-border attack as the worst aggression suffered by Ecuador and proceeded to sever diplomatic ties with his countrys neighbor. For its part, the Colombian government responded with a distortion of logic befitting the Bush administration by acknowledging that its military did indeed launch an air strike and deploy troops across the border, but it simultaneously claimed that Colombia did not violate Ecuadors sovereignty. Eh? The Colombian government then declared that it acted in line with the principle of legitimate self-defense. Legitimate self-defense? At the time they were killed by the Colombian military, the victims were fast asleep in a foreign country.

The day after the assassination of Reyes, Colombias Vice-President Francisco Santos spoke at a United Nations conference on disarmament where he announced that evidence found on the FARC commanders laptop showed that the rebel group was seeking to obtain uranium to manufacture dirty bombs. According to Santos, Reyess laptop contained information from one commander to another indicating that FARC was apparently negotiating for radioactive material, the primary basis for generating dirty weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. He then suggested that this constituted a threat to the entire region by declaring that terrorist groups, based on the economic power of drug trafficking, constitute a serious threat not to just our country but to the entire Andean and Latin American region.

But when the documents from Reyess laptop were released to the media, they did not corroborate the vice-presidents allegations. In fact, the document related to the so-called dirty bomb was simply a communication from a lower-ranking FARC guerrilla to Reyes raising the possibility of purchasing 50 kilos of uranium and then selling it for a profit. There was absolutely no mention of using uranium to build a dirty bomb or any other sort of weapon. Meanwhile, mainstream media outlets, including the New York Times, have dutifully performed their role as propagandists for the US government by continuing to report that the FARC intends to build a dirty bomb even after the documents were made public.

Three days after the attack, the Colombian government also claimed that it had retrieved documents from Reyess laptop proving Venezuelas President Chávez had recently provided the FARC with $300 million in funding. Colombias President Uribe stated that, given this evidence, Colombia proposes to denounce the President of Venezuela Hugo Chávez in the International Criminal Court for sponsoring and financing genocide. The Colombian presidents pronouncement, in reality, had no legal basis and was little more than an irresponsible attempt to publicly discredit Chávez.

Firstly, the documents from Reyess laptop again fail to corroborate the Colombian governments allegations. The only documents that mention Chávez or his government directly illustrate that Venezuela sought to: include the FARC in an international group to analyze Colombias conflict; request documentation from the rebel group of civilian casualties caused by Colombian military attacks in FARC-controlled regions; persuade Latin American governments to help get the FARC removed from international terror lists. None of the above constitutes an illegal activity.

And secondly, the only amount that the communiqués mention is the number 300, without any reference to any currency, or any other type of, denomination. The Colombian government claims that the number 300 stands for $300 million. While the communiqués do suggest that the FARC was negotiating potential deals with someone in Venezuela, they imply that if the deals were to be consumated then the rebel group would receive some sort of merchandise that it could sell for a profit rather than a delivery of cash. Most importantly, none of the communiqués related to the 300re-named the dossier at one point in the communiquésmentioned Chávez or any other representative of the Venezuelan government. The communiqués, which were only discussions between FARC leaders, could have been referring to anybody in Venezuela. Ultimately, this amounts to very flimsy evidence upon which to publicly accuse a head of state of sponsoring and financing genocide.

And what about Uribes politically-charged claim that the FARC are responsible for committing genocide in Colombia? In actuality, it is a ludicrous and irresponsible charge intended to discredit both Chávez and the FARC. Under international law, genocide is defined as the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such. In no way can the FARCs actions be deemed genocide under this definition. The rebel group is seeking to achieve power in Colombia in order to restructure the political, economic and social institutions along socialist lines. And while the FARC has committed human rights abuses, it is impossible to construe them to be an attempt to destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

In the meantime, while President Bush distorts reality by portraying the aggressor as the victim, many other countries in the region have responded with far greater levels of clarity and integrity. Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Cuba and Nicaragua, among others, have condemned Colombia for its act of aggression against Ecuador and have refused to criticize Venezuela for deploying troops to its border to ensure that it does not become a target of its US-backed neighbor. These nations represent the voice of reason in the midst of this crisis as they challenge the lies and exagerations that constitute reality in the upside-down world of the US and Colombian governments.

PRINCESSA · TOP Guru

OMG the article posting's are getting crazy. I luv it.

LGigolo · Comandante

How it all went down, according to an article of Ecuadorean magazine Vistazo:

Tiro fijo a las FARC

En una evidente violación del territorio ecuatoriano, fuerzas colombianas bombardearon un campamento guerrillero matando al número dos y vocero de las FARC, Raúl Reyes. En respuesta Ecuador expulsó al embajador colombiano y rompió relaciones diplomáticas

El siete de agosto de 2002, mientras se posesionaba el presidente Álvaro Uribe Vélez, un misil lanzado por las FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia) casi arruina la fiesta. Los líderes guerrilleros sabían lo que se les venía e intentaron acabar, la víspera, con el enemigo potencial. Cuatro años más tarde la reelección de Uribe y su promesa de fortalecer la lucha contra las FARC se está convirtiendo en el principio del fin de esa organización que lleva 44 años de lucha armada en ese país.

Y mientras los subversivos pedían una zona desmilitarizada y concentraban esfuerzos en la liberación de secuestrados, en una operación coordinada con el gobierno de Venezuela, Uribe no daba tregua.

Su Policía y Fuerzas Armadas lograron cercar, bombardear y terminar con la vida del número dos de esa organización, Luis Edgar Devia Silva, mejor conocido como Raúl Reyes, el canciller de las FARC. Con él murieron otros 20 guerrilleros y quedaron heridas tres mujeres.

Lo insólito fue que el bombardeo ocurrió en territorio ecuatoriano sin que ninguna fuerza de seguridad nacional haya conocido y menos reaccionado a tiempo.

Solo después de que el presidente Uribe llamara a Correa para informarle que había bombardeado su territorio y dado de baja al hombre más visible de la guerrilla más antigua y más combatiente del continente, Ecuador reaccionó.

Ataque planificado
El viernes 29 de febrero, Raúl Reyes detectó que algo no andaba bien. El dinero que semanalmente le enviaban desde el secretariado general de las FARC, no había llegado. También sabía que cinco días antes, en el departamento de Boyacá, había sido capturado Martín Sombra, un insurgente que fundó siete frentes de las FARC.

Sombra, por sus 35 años en la guerrilla, es también visto como un líder histórico y, al igual que sus coidearios está acusado de secuestros, extorsiones y homicidios. Se dice que cuando fue capturado, Sombra regresaba de Venezuela, país donde circulaba sin restricciones.

Por su parte, Raúl Reyes, cuya presencia en territorio ecuatoriano había sido más de una vez mencionada por autoridades colombianas y otras tantas negada por las ecuatorianas, deambulaba por la selva junto a sus guardaespaldas y a su compañera, una supuesta hija de Manuel Marulanda, alias Tiro Fijo, el líder máximo de las FARC.

El dinero no le llegó el viernes debido a que en Puerto Leguísamo, a orillas del río Putumayo, la policía colombiana había capturado a una red que se encargaba de las finanzas y de dar seguridad avanzada a Reyes. Entre los detenidos, 10 hombres y cuatro mujeres, estaban Martha y su esposo Curso de leche, hermana y cuñado de Rubín Castañeda, el jefe militar del frente 48 de las FARC, el grupo armado irregular que ocupa la frontera colombo-ecuatoriana.

Así el cerco policial a Raúl Reyes se estrechaba y solo se esperaba alguna señal para confirmar su ubicación. La señal llegó el miércoles desde un teléfono satelital que reapareció tras dos meses de silencio. El teléfono había sido fijado electrónicamente luego de una entrevista que mantuvo con una senadora colombiana para coordinar el canje de rehenes a fines del año pasado. El resto solo fue la aplicación de estrategias militares. El asalto se programó en principio para el miércoles 27 de febrero, pero el anuncio de fuertes lluvias en la zona hizo que los pilotos militares no dieran garantías de éxito a la operación.

Aunque todo estaba listo, había un problema: Reyes había sido localizado en territorio ecuatoriano. Entonces, el presidente Uribe dio luz verde a la operación sin consultar a su homólogo Rafael Correa. Recién bien entrada la mañana del sábado 1 de marzo le comunicó que la Fuerza Aérea de Colombia había disparado sobre un campamento guerrillero en suelo ecuatoriano, matando a Raúl Reyes. También le dijo que fuerzas aerotransportadas habían ingresado luego a recoger el cadáver.

¿Reacción exagerada?
Cuando una patrulla militar ecuatoriana llegó al sitio, se comprobó la magnitud de la acción. Los guerrilleros no solo habían sido bombardeados en la madrugada, sino también abaleados desde tierra por grupos de élite que incursionaron buen tiempo antes del bombardeo (se calcula que 24 horas antes) y que solo esperaron las detonaciones para avanzar y rematar.

En el bombardeo participaron aviones brasileños Super Tucano que volando a dos mil pies de altura dejaron caer bombas de racimo sobre el campamento insurgente. En la acción terrestre murieron un militar colombiano y 21 guerrilleros.

A medida que se fueron conociendo más detalles de la incursión colombiana, la posición del presidente Rafael Correa se fue radicalizando. Primero llamó a consulta a nuestro embajador en Bogotá, luego expulsó del país al embajador colombiano y finalmente, el lunes rompió relaciones diplomáticas con Colombia.

Para el ex canciller Edgar Terán Terán, Partiendo de lo que se ha publicado considero que la primera reacción del presidente Rafael Correa fue muy prudente y adecuada. Pero entre esa exposición prudente y adecuada y las posteriores hay una enorme distancia. No conozco todos los hechos que hayan intervenido para ese cambio de actitud.

De su lado, el también ex canciller José Ayala Lasso considera Que la violación de la soberanía ha sido grave y en la reacción, Ecuador ha considerado las circunstancias dentro del pasado reciente en que Colombia ha incursionado en nuestro territorio en múltiples ocasiones y no ha pagado compensaciones ni ha pedido disculpas. Dentro de ese contexto el Gobierno ha actuado con firmeza para que se respete la soberanía nacional.

Para el gobierno de Colombia la incursión se dio como consecuencia de la lucha caliente que sus Fuerzas Armadas libran contra la guerrilla de las FARC. Para el Ecuador, el hecho no se dio en caliente y fue calificado de una masacre mientras los guerrilleros dormían.

En la historia reciente del Ecuador no se recuerda, ni durante las guerras con Perú en 1981 y 1995 que nuestro país haya expulsado a embajadores y menos que haya roto relaciones. Esta última medida habrá que evaluarla también desde el lado comercial. Para el Ecuador la relación más importante dentro de la Comunidad Andina de Naciones es con Colombia. Si las cosas se complican pudieran eventualmente perjudicar las relaciones comerciales, advierte el analista Guillermo Arosemena. En 2007 exportamos 650 millones de dólares a Colombia, principalmente arroz. Así mismo importamos 1.488 millones de dólares, donde el mayor componente 66 millones fue la energía eléctrica. Es que a través de la línea de transmisión Pasto-Quito recibimos un 15 por ciento de la energía eléctrica que consumimos en el país.

Finalmente, para Álvaro Uribe ha sido un triunfo dentro de su país y una crisis diplomática con sus vecinos. En tanto para las FARC se presume que es el inicio de su fin debido a que se ha desmitificado la invulnerabilidad de sus líderes.

El Duro · Foro Master

LGigolo wrote:
I agree - just to use an example of the soccer ball above: even to go "get the ball" at the neighbour's house, you ASK FOR PERMISSION before stepping on their grass.

I agree u don't go on someone back yard with out permission, u wait for them or u call them..

the reason colombia is not sending troops is cause they know what they did was wrong do u think that if they didn't do anything wrong they would just stand there and do nothing I don't think so... uribe is a pawn to the USA, and that is what is wrong with latin america, but u see the USA is pissed cause now most latin american countries are going to to socialist

-- Edited by El Duro at 13:19, 2008-03-06

LGigolo · Comandante

Correa llama a Uribe títere de EE.UU.

En Brasil el presidente Rafael Correa endureció su discurso contra su par colombiano, Álvaro Uribe.

El Jefe de Estado enfatizó que la soberanía de Ecuador no es negociable. Y sobre el presidente de Colombia, Álvaro Uribe, lo acusó de ser un títere e insinuó que el titiritero es Estados Unidos: sabemos quienes son los que hacen esas operaciones de inteligencia, dijo.

Sobre el respaldo incondicional de la primera potencia a Colombia, Correa manifestó que tenemos que tener claro que en la moral de los Estados Unidos lo correcto o incorrecto no es si es legal o ilegal, si se respetó derechos humanos o derechos internacionales, sino sencillamente si es incondicional, títere mío o no.

El Presidente ecuatoriano muy probablemente coincidirá este jueves con Uribe en la Cumbre de Río que se desarrollará en República Dominicana.

LGigolo · Comandante

@Chilenita: as you may have noticed, I am not much for politics or get much into it... but found interesting how dirty Uribe's resume appears to be - at least according to the article. Hard to believe someone with such a dirty resume could get so high up there.

LGigolo · Comandante

Mastropiero wrote:

Of course is a shame

As per the soccer ball example, to who should they ask permission if the owner is not there... are you telling me that you would stop playing, assume that you have lost the ball and end the game?
If that's what you would do...you probably has lived here to long and forgot the Latinoamerican set of mind. I wouldn't have any question about it, I know that I wouldn't be doing anything wrong, just going for my ball and not stopping the soccer game

Lgigolo, Chilenita, I understand what you are saying and is a SHAME it is...No one has said anything else, but sometimes you need to do stupid things like that, you can't be that close minded cause otherwise the world will go nowhere... sovereignity is not everything the whole ownership concept is too american

That's the huge difference with Europe, they are tottally different cultures languages and if you go there you don't feel those boundaries, you hardly know that has enter into another country. That should be the aim for us....but everytime seems harder with that stubborn positions.

You people only complain, complain...what is your solution LG? o Chilenita? Apart from an apology what else should be done? militarize the frontier....I beg you please!!!! tha's what you as an Ecuatorian should ask instead of Economical sanctions for the Colombian nation. I have been there twice in the last two years cause I like to go to Otavalo and buy crafts and artesanies, and it is very neglected...

I'm happy to hear from Ecuadorian people such as princessa, that's a forward thinking and to me it's reciprocal, if Peru would have grabbed Abimael Guzman in Colombian border I'm pretty sure Colombia wouldn't have reacted in the way mr. Danger did.

If Correa and Chavez wants to unify their countries, they should do it through internal actions that benefit their people as Uribe did not with this kind of false international protagonism....

Obviously if it's merely a soccerball and the owner is not at the house, I'd go and pick it up without waiting for consent... BUT, there is a huge difference between getting a soccer ball from the neighbour to using bombs in someone else's territory... I would doubt very much that the proper people could not have been contacted to obtain consent in Ecuador for Colombia's operation against FARC.

I think we all agree that what was done is not right - it wasn't. But like I said above, as well, what is done is done... An appology was made and I am not sure what else can be asked for... although the actions were not proper or "by the book", I don't think it warrant a WAR. I don't know what else could be asked for or what else should be done. hmm

Mastropiero · Guru

Of course is a shame

As per the soccer ball example, to who should they ask permission if the owner is not there... are you telling me that you would stop playing, assume that you have lost the ball and end the game?
If that's what you would do...you probably has lived here to long and forgot the Latinoamerican set of mind. I wouldn't have any question about it, I know that I wouldn't be doing anything wrong, just going for my ball and not stopping the soccer game

Lgigolo, Chilenita, I understand what you are saying and is a SHAME it is...No one has said anything else, but sometimes you need to do stupid things like that, you can't be that close minded cause otherwise the world will go nowhere... sovereignity is not everything the whole ownership concept is too american

That's the huge difference with Europe, they are tottally different cultures languages and if you go there you don't feel those boundaries, you hardly know that has enter into another country. That should be the aim for us....but everytime seems harder with that stubborn positions.

You people only complain, complain...what is your solution LG? o Chilenita? Apart from an apology what else should be done? militarize the frontier....I beg you please!!!! tha's what you as an Ecuatorian should ask instead of Economical sanctions for the Colombian nation. I have been there twice in the last two years cause I like to go to Otavalo and buy crafts and artesanies, and it is very neglected...

I'm happy to hear from Ecuadorian people such as princessa, that's a forward thinking and to me it's reciprocal, if Peru would have grabbed Abimael Guzman in Colombian border I'm pretty sure Colombia wouldn't have reacted in the way mr. Danger did.

If Correa and Chavez wants to unify their countries, they should do it through internal actions that benefit their people as Uribe did not with this kind of false international protagonism....

Danny_C · Guru

LGigolo wrote:
Danny_C wrote:

ecuador has other issues to worry about?
HELLYEAHH!!! last thing we need is rebels invading r major cities....
guerilla camps all over the boarder of northern ecuador and southern colombia is nothing new....when i was living there ..eso ya habia .....but like i said nothing major YET...

mind you.....there r already a s!it load of colombians that migrated to Quito from some time now...some r honest good people that just come to work and make a better life.....but alot of them r lowlifes drugies ..that steal mugg in large groups .....sorry but its true

There were always Colombians and Peruvians who emigrated to Ecuador - mas un despues de la dolarizacion de Ecuador. Unfortunately, some bad ass Colombian drug dealers gave Colombians a bad re****tion but like in any nation that has immigrants, hay de todo - buenos y malos, de cada pais... as there are good and bad Ecuadoreans here in Canada.

What I would not want to see happen is Farc moving deeper in Ecuador because of the heat at the borders.

well ya their bad re****tion sucks.....sucks even more to see that they continue to live up to that stereotype ....especially the ones who live in Quito have caused alot of s!it right after 2000 and up...like u said despues de la dolarizacion......

-- Edited by Danny_C at 12:55, 2008-03-06

Chilenita · Comandante

President Uribes Hidden Past

by Tom Feiling

Colombias President Alvaro Uribe is, by his own admission, a man of the right. Unlike most recent Colombian presidents, Uribe is from the land-owning class. He inherited huge swathes of cattle ranching land from his father Alberto Uribe, who was subject to an extradition warrant to face drug trafficking charges in the United States until he was killed in 1983, allegedly by leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas. Alvaro Uribe grew up with the children of Fabio Ochoa, three of who became leading players in Pablo Escobars Medellín cocaine cartel.

President Uribes credentials are impeccable. He was educated at Harvard and Oxford, is as sharp as a tack, and a very able bureaucrat. At the tender age of 26 he was elected mayor of Medellín, the second-largest city of Colombia. The citys elite in the 1980s was rich, corrupt and nepotistic, and they loved the young Uribe. But the new mayor was removed from office after only three months by a central government embarrassed by his public ties to the drug mafia. Uribe was then made Director of Civil Aviation, where he used his mandate to issue pilots licenses to Pablo Escobars fleet of light aircraft, which routinely flew cocaine to the United States.

In 1995, Uribe became governor of the Antioquia department, of which Medellín is the capital. The region became the testing ground for the institutionalization of paramilitary forces that he has now made a key plank of his presidency. Government-sponsored peasant associations called Convivirs were special private security and vigilance services, designed to group the civilian population alongside the Armed Forces.

Security forces and paramilitary groups enjoyed immunity from prosecution under Governor Uribe, and they used this immunity to launch a campaign of terror in Antioquia. Thousands of people were murdered, disappeared, detained and driven out of the region. In the town of San Jose de Apartadó for example, three of the Convivir leaders were well-known paramilitaries and had been trained by the Colombian Armys 17th Brigade. In 1998, representatives of more than 200 Convivir associations announced that they would unite with the paramilitary organization, the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), under its murderous leader Carlos Castaño.

When Uribe launched his campaign for president, the candidates paramilitary connections appeared to deter many journalists from examining the ties between drug gangs and the Uribe family. An exception was Noticias Uno, a current affairs program on the TV station Canal Uno. In April 2002, the program ran a series on alleged links between Uribe and the Medellín drug cartel. After the reports aired, unidentified men began calling the news station, threatening to kill the shows producer Ignacio Gómez, director Daniel Coronell, and Coronells 3-year-old daughter, who was flown out of the country soon thereafter. Gómez was also forced to flee Colombia and is currently living in exile.

Noticias Uno told the story of how in 1997, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seized 50,000 kilos of potassium permanganate from a ship docked in San Francisco. Potassium permanganate is a chemical used in the production of cocaine. The cargo was on its way to Colombia to be delivered to a company called GMP Chemical Products. The owner of GMP was Pedro Moreno Villa GMP, Uribes presidential campaign manager. The chemicals seized were sufficient to produce $15 billion worth of cocaine. The DEA confirmed that GMP was Colombias biggest importer of potassium permanganate between 1994 and 1998, when Uribe was governor of Medellin and Moreno Villa was his chief of staff.

As the Presidential race intensified, journalists became increasingly concerned that media bosses were threatening their editorial independence. Two powerful business groups with ties to the political establishment own RCN and Caracol, the biggest television and radio networks in Colombia. Journalists concerns were further heightened when Uribe picked a member of the Santos family, which owns the countrys most influential daily newspaper, to be his vice-president.

Despite his links to paramilitaries and drug cartels, Uribe won the presidency. But to call Uribes victory a landslideas many in and outside Colombia didis a gross distortion of the facts. Uribe received 53 percent of the official vote, but only 25 percent of the electorate voted. Many urban and middle class Colombians, who have been largely sheltered from the civil war, were thoroughly disillusioned by the peace process of outgoing-President Andrés Pastrana, and backed hardliner Uribe. But the election was hardly a fair one.

Mapiripán is the site of one of the worst paramilitary massacres to date, yet many of the towns residents voted for the paramilitary candidate, Uribe. Father Javier Giraldo of the Colombian human rights group Justicia y Paz was in Mapiripán on election day: There was a great deal of fraud. There were paramilitaries in the voting booths. They destroyed a lot of ballots. This was denounced to the Ombudsman, but nothing happened. Electoral fraud, widespread paramilitary threatsdenounced by virtually all the other candidates during the election campaignand the almost total decimation of the electoral left in the preceding decade all contributed to Uribes election victory.

Though Uribe has vowed that his democratic security platform will bring peace and security to all Colombians, statistics from the Trade Union School in Medellín show continued threats to trade unionists and human rights activists. The number of trade unionists killed in 2003 declined to a mere 90, suggesting that the paramilitaries were being reigned in a little. But the number of death threats issued were 20 percent higher, and death threats to trade unionists families were up by 30 percent. Police raids, mass detentions and forced disappearances are also all higher than the previous year.

Uribe is clamping down on the opposition, while sidling yet closer to the Republican White House in Washington. Uribe was the only South American leader to back President George W. Bushs invasion of Iraq. At the time, he even went so far as to invite the United States to invade Colombia. Uribe hopes to double the size of the Colombian Armed Forces, and has asked the United States for more helicopters and greater involvement in areas such as intelligence gathering. Many in the Bush administration are keen to see the United States expand its multi-billion dollar military investment in Plan Colombia. U.S. Army Lt. Gen. James T. Hill, for example, recently told a Senate committee, It would be a terrible loss if democracy failed in Colombia. You need to let me get on the ground.

But before that happens, the United States is pushing for Uribe to reign in his illegal paramilitary allies. The peasant militias and million-strong informers network that Uribe has launched are evidence of the way in which the paramilitary strategy is being institutionalized. Under the state of unrest that Uribe decreed upon assuming the presidency, the police and army were granted the right to detain citizens on the slightest suspicion of supporting the guerrillas, without evidence or legal counsel, and to enter peoples homes without a warrant.

As Bush and Uribe have both said time and again, in the war on terror there can be no neutrals. President Uribe has branded those NGOs that do claim to occupy a non-partisan position on the armed conflict political agitators in the service of terrorism, cowards who wrap themselves in the banner of human rights. Only pro-government, anti-guerrilla NGOs are being left untouched.

Uribes strategy is to bring the war out into the open, to declare social organizations illegal, and to use the army and police against them directly, while holding negotiations with the paramilitaries. Given the murderous tactics that Uribe is prepared to resort to, it is easy to understand why trade unionists and human rights defenders are inclined to feel despondent. It also makes the unquestioning support being offered Uribe by the U.S. and British governments all the more immoral.

LGigolo · Comandante

Otro articulo del diario Colombiano El Pais:

"El problema no está resuelto": Insulza
Elpais.com.co | EFE

El secretario general de la OEA, José Miguel Insulza, afirmó hoy que pese al acuerdo logrado ayer en el organismo, que reconoció que Colombia violó la soberanía de Ecuador, aún falta mucho para resolver el conflicto entre ambos países.

"El problema no está resuelto y tendremos que trabajar mucho para solucionarlo", subrayó Insulza, en declaraciones desde Washington a radio Cooperativa, respecto de la crisis que estalló el pasado 1 de marzo, cuando Raúl Reyes, el "número 2" de las Farc, resultó muerto en un ataque de las tropas colombianas en territorio ecuatoriano.

José Miguel Insulza, que encabezará una misión que examinará en el terreno los detalles del incidente, señaló que el interés del Consejo Permanente de la OEA "era tratar el tema sin echar leña al fuego", sino "bajando el nivel de la tensión entre ambos países".

Insulza fue cuestionado por la aparente ambigedad de la declaración aprobada este miércoles, que si bien reafirma que el territorio de un Estado es "jurisdicción inviolable", no condenó a Colombia por su acción en territorio ecuatoriano, aunque Bogotá nuevamente ofreció disculpas por su acción militar.

"No cabe sino declarar que ha habido una violación del artículo 21 de la carta de la OEA, pero al mismo tiempo el Consejo (Permanente) quiso buscar alguna forma de acercamiento, y probablemente por eso evitó las palabras duras", sostuvo al respecto.

A juicio del político chileno, sería "una gran cosa", que en la Cumbre del Grupo de Río, a celebrarse en República Dominicana este jueves y viernes, pudiera lograrse una reunión bilateral entre los Presidentes Rafael Correa y Álvaro Uribe, pero admitió no tener ninguna seguridad de que la misma se concrete.

Recalcó, sin embargo, que una cita entre ambos mandatarios ayudaría al propósito de la OEA de acercar las posiciones entre los dos paÍses.

"Tendremos que trabajar mucho -insistió-, para resolver primero el problema provocado entre Ecuador y Colombia, y luego examinar las causas que estuvieron detrás de él".

El funcionario subrayó la necesidad, para contribuir a la solución de la crisis, de "tratar de bajar la retórica inflamada" en la región, en alusión a las declaraciones del Presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Chávez.

LGigolo · Comandante

Chilenita wrote:

Who gives a rat's a ss what that sorry excuse for a woman thinks *puke*

I've heard DOGO say similar stuff in reference to you!

Dogo · Comandante

Chilenita wrote:
Dogo wrote:
@ chile
I guess your definition of invasion is different than mine
Mine is to invade with the purpose to conquer. Yours is 'don't step on my grass'

So Ecuador should say "so what"...."Colombia went a couple of miles into Ecuador to catch some "terrorists"....So what????? National soveriegnty and border control used to be reason enough to go to war. It's strange how sometimes national borders mean NOTHING to major world powers (the U.S's support of Contra bases in Costa Rica and Honduras) while other times , national borders must be protected at all costs (the Malvinas war).

Correa has yet to prove himself to be somebody that acts without JUST reason, so the fact that he has taken this far shows how serious he feels it to be. I am certain most presidents would react the same way if not worse. Bush defends Uribe YET imagine if Mexico's military crossed it's border.....yeah.......

Not everything is so black and white, chile. You are not considering the context of this "invasion" So you truly think that because they threw a bomb a couple of Ks over the border, that was to eliminate a bunch'a wackos, with no repercussion to Ecuadorians.... Ecuador should go to war with Colombia?

It's funny how the Ecuadorian government DID say "so what" when FARC crossed their border, and oddly enough, that is "ok". They should've blown them to hell right then and there

LGigolo · Comandante

Danny_C wrote:

ecuador has other issues to worry about?
HELLYEAHH!!! last thing we need is rebels invading r major cities....
guerilla camps all over the boarder of northern ecuador and southern colombia is nothing new....when i was living there ..eso ya habia .....but like i said nothing major YET...

mind you.....there r already a s!it load of colombians that migrated to Quito from some time now...some r honest good people that just come to work and make a better life.....but alot of them r lowlifes drugies ..that steal mugg in large groups .....sorry but its true

There were always Colombians and Peruvians who emigrated to Ecuador - mas un despues de la dolarizacion de Ecuador. Unfortunately, some bad ass Colombian drug dealers gave Colombians a bad re****tion but like in any nation that has immigrants, hay de todo - buenos y malos, de cada pais... as there are good and bad Ecuadoreans here in Canada.

What I would not want to see happen is Farc moving deeper in Ecuador because of the heat at the borders.

Chilenita · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
Articulo del diario Colombiano El Pais:

Crisis | 11:00 a.m.
Rice confía en que habrá una salida diplomática

Elpais.com.co-EFE

La secretaria de Estado de EE.UU., Condoleezza Rice, confió hoy en que haya "una salida diplomática" a la actual crisis de Colombia con Venezuela y Ecuador, y pidió que se vigile "el uso de las zonas fronterizas" por parte de las Farc.

"Confío en que habrá una salida diplomática", afirmó Rice en una conferencia de prensa tras una reunión de ministros de Exteriores de la OTAN, en la que recalcó el trabajo diplomático que se hace en el continente para resolver la crisis suscitada por la incursión militar colombiana contra un campamento de las Farc en Ecuador.

"La Organización de Estados Americanos está implicada, nosotros estamos implicados bilateralmente y los países de la región están implicados", detalló.

Rice recalcó que, independientemente de la marcha del proceso diplomático, "todos tienen que ser vigilantes sobre el uso de zonas fronterizas por parte de terroristas como las Farc".

ALIADO DE COLOMBIA Rice recordó que Colombia "es un muy buen amigo y aliado" de Estados Unidos, que apoya los esfuerzos para continuar la democratización y progreso económico de ese país, que "casi fue un estado fallido en 2000-2001". Insistió en que el Gobierno de Washington "lucha duramente" para lograr que el Congreso de su país ratifique el acuerdo de libre comercio con Colombia, lo que enviaría "una señal simbólica" a Bogotá.Incidió en que esa guerrilla "es una organización terrorista", por lo que "es extremadamente importante" impedir sus actividades.

Preguntada por las acusaciones de Colombia al presidente venezolano, Hugo Chávez, de "apoyar" a las Farc, Rice advirtió de que "nadie debería tratar con ellos" de forma que les suponga una ayuda.

En este sentido, mencionó el número "horriblemente alto" de personas que han muerto o han sido secuestradas en los últimos años por la acción de las Farc.

Who gives a rat's a ss what that sorry excuse for a woman thinks *puke*

Danny_C · Guru

ecuador has other issues to worry about?
HELLYEAHH!!! last thing we need is rebels invading r major cities....
guerilla camps all over the boarder of northern ecuador and southern colombia is nothing new....when i was living there ..eso ya habia .....but like i said nothing major YET...

mind you.....there r already a s!it load of colombians that migrated to Quito from some time now...some r honest good people that just come to work and make a better life.....but alot of them r lowlifes drugies ..that steal mugg in large groups .....sorry but its true

LGigolo · Comandante

Articulo del diario Colombiano El Pais:

Crisis | 11:00 a.m.
Rice confía en que habrá una salida diplomática

Elpais.com.co-EFE

La secretaria de Estado de EE.UU., Condoleezza Rice, confió hoy en que haya "una salida diplomática" a la actual crisis de Colombia con Venezuela y Ecuador, y pidió que se vigile "el uso de las zonas fronterizas" por parte de las Farc.

"Confío en que habrá una salida diplomática", afirmó Rice en una conferencia de prensa tras una reunión de ministros de Exteriores de la OTAN, en la que recalcó el trabajo diplomático que se hace en el continente para resolver la crisis suscitada por la incursión militar colombiana contra un campamento de las Farc en Ecuador.

"La Organización de Estados Americanos está implicada, nosotros estamos implicados bilateralmente y los países de la región están implicados", detalló.

Rice recalcó que, independientemente de la marcha del proceso diplomático, "todos tienen que ser vigilantes sobre el uso de zonas fronterizas por parte de terroristas como las Farc".

ALIADO DE COLOMBIA Rice recordó que Colombia "es un muy buen amigo y aliado" de Estados Unidos, que apoya los esfuerzos para continuar la democratización y progreso económico de ese país, que "casi fue un estado fallido en 2000-2001". Insistió en que el Gobierno de Washington "lucha duramente" para lograr que el Congreso de su país ratifique el acuerdo de libre comercio con Colombia, lo que enviaría "una señal simbólica" a Bogotá.Incidió en que esa guerrilla "es una organización terrorista", por lo que "es extremadamente importante" impedir sus actividades.

Preguntada por las acusaciones de Colombia al presidente venezolano, Hugo Chávez, de "apoyar" a las Farc, Rice advirtió de que "nadie debería tratar con ellos" de forma que les suponga una ayuda.

En este sentido, mencionó el número "horriblemente alto" de personas que han muerto o han sido secuestradas en los últimos años por la acción de las Farc.

LGigolo · Comandante

Tensión en frontera por despliegue de tropas venezolanas

Marzo 06, 2008
CARACAS | AFP

El Pentágono pide a Caracas no meterse en conflicto diplomático entre Quito y Bogotá.

Venezuela cumplió ayer un masivo despliegue militar de diez batallones a la frontera con Colombia, agitando temores de una escalada en el conflicto diplomático regional.

El general Jesús González, jefe del Comando Estratégico Operacional del Alto Mando Militar venezolano, dijo que por razones de seguridad no iba a informar la ubicación de las fuerzas militares ni el número de efectivos en los estados fronterizos de Apure, Táchira y Zulia. El presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, anunció la movilización de diez batallones, unos 6.000 hombres.

Pese a los despliegues de tropas de Ecuador y Venezuela a sus respectivas fronteras con Colombia, el vicepresidente de ese país, Francisco Santos, dijo ayer en Bruselas que no se enviarán fuerzas a sus fronteras.

Las operaciones colombianas fueron dirigidas por agentes del imperio estadounidense, aduciendo razones que bien pudieran ser esgrimidas como válidas para un similar comportamiento contra la soberanía de nuestro país, alertó el ministro de Defensa, Gustavo Rangel.

El presidente colombiano, Álvaro Uribe, denunció el martes que un comandante de las FARC, Iván Márquez, tendría un campamento en territorio venezolano, mientras que Radio Cadena Nacional (RCN) afirmó ayer, citando a un alto oficial de la inteligencia colombiana, que el despliege de tropas busca proteger al máximo jefe y fundador de las FARC, Manuel Marulanda, Tirofijo, que está refugiado en Venezuela, y evitar que hagan con él en territorio venezolano lo que hicieron con Reyes en Ecuador.

Un alto funcionario del Pentágono, el departamento de Defensa de EE.UU., también bajo anonimato, indicó ayer que el número de tropas venezolanas movilizadas no preocupa. Washington dijo que Colombia y Ecuador deben resolver entre ellos el conflicto desatado tras la operación castrense colombiana en suelo ecuatoriano y pidió a Venezuela que no se meta o fomente una acción militar.

Venezuela expulsó el lunes al embajador de Colombia y suspendió relaciones, mientras Ecuador rompió con Bogotá.

La frontera entre Colombia y Venezuela permanecerá abierta, aseguró el ministro de Defensa venezolano, Gustavo Rangel, aclarando al ministro de Agricultura y Tierras, Elías Jaua, quien anunció el cierre.

Balance militar
Colombia tiene el Ejército más numeroso de Sudamérica, aunque orientado al combate interno contra la guerrilla; Venezuela es el segundo país con mayor inversión militar en la región, mientras que Ecuador, que es el de menos combatientes, es el único de los tres que libró una guerra (el conflicto del Cenepa con Perú, en 1995), según el Observatorio de Seguridad Sudamericano.

Rocío San Miguel, de la Asociación Control Ciudadano para la Seguridad y Defensa, estima que además del equipo se debe considerar la experiencia de tropa y mandos, resaltando que los militares venezolanos tienen más de 100 años sin participar en un conflicto armado y no hay más de diez oficiales que hayan estado en una guerra en misiones de la ONU.

Venezuela es el cuarto país de Sudamérica en gasto militar y el segundo en inversión, con unos 5.000 millones de dólares en compras de aviones caza Sukhoi, helicópteros, sistemas de defensa aérea y fusiles Kaláshnikov a Rusia, aunque, según analistas, es equipo defensivo sin capacidad ofensiva.

El general retirado Raúl Salazar, primer ministro de Defensa del gobierno de Chávez, señaló que los países subdesarrollados como los nuestros, sin industria militar, no tienen capacidad de guerra regular por más de cuatro días, salvo una guerra irregular, de cuarta generación o asimétrica, que puede durar toda la vida.

Chilenita · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
Chilenita wrote:

LGigolo wrote:
I agree - just to use an example of the soccer ball above: even to go "get the ball" at the neighbour's house, you ASK FOR PERMISSION before stepping on their grass.

That is my point. You don't just do whatever the hell you want because the United States is backing you. They have plenty of FARC to worry about right inside colombia.

If permission was in fact NOT granted, I don't agree with and something should be done. But considering that they were not going against Ecuadoreans or Ecuador itself, I just don't think this justifies a WAR between countries. An appology was made openly... what else can Ecuador really ask for other than "don't do it again"? I mean, what is done is done - can't go back and erase what happened.

Obviously....what is done is done. There is little that can be done. It's just a shame that it happened.

LGigolo · Comandante

Chilenita wrote:

LGigolo wrote:
I agree - just to use an example of the soccer ball above: even to go "get the ball" at the neighbour's house, you ASK FOR PERMISSION before stepping on their grass.

That is my point. You don't just do whatever the hell you want because the United States is backing you. They have plenty of FARC to worry about right inside colombia.

If permission was in fact NOT granted, I don't agree with and something should be done. But considering that they were not going against Ecuadoreans or Ecuador itself, I just don't think this justifies a WAR between countries. An appology was made openly... what else can Ecuador really ask for other than "don't do it again"? I mean, what is done is done - can't go back and erase what happened.

Chilenita · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
I agree - just to use an example of the soccer ball above: even to go "get the ball" at the neighbour's house, you ASK FOR PERMISSION before stepping on their grass.

That is my point. You don't just do whatever the hell you want because the United States is backing you. They have plenty of FARC to worry about right inside colombia.

LGigolo · Comandante

I agree - just to use an example of the soccer ball above: even to go "get the ball" at the neighbour's house, you ASK FOR PERMISSION before stepping on their grass.

Chilenita · Comandante

LGigolo wrote:
Chilenita wrote:

Dogo wrote:
@ Pri: Nice... I also agree that Ecuadorians, if anything, should be happy that a big step was made in eliminating a menace so close to home
Granted they moved in Ecuadorian land (a 'stone throw' into ecuadorian land, btw) but there were no consecuences to Ecuadorians. An apologie is due, and that's it. Move on!
I also don't understand what the sending troops to the border is all about from Ecua and Venezuela. As if Colombia's intention is to invade Ecuador? or what? Obviously it's fueled by the craziness of Chavez. And Correa is being nothing more than his puppet
This guy is not going to have a happy ending. He'll either divide Latin America completely, or someone will shoot him before he gets to

"We don't want war, but we aren't going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master (of Colombia) ... to come to divide us."
How ironic

Dogo...ummmm they did just invade Ecuador soooooooooooo that would be the reason for sending troops to the border. I don't think that is wierd or anything and I am certain most countries would do at least that if not more. At this moment in time most South American countries are on the same team. Just take a look at the presidents and what side they belong on politically. I don't think too many countries would be happy with a simple "opps sorry our military crossed your borders"......

They may have invaded Ecuador; but they did not invade Ecuadoreans... they went after Farc IN ECUADOR. Should Correa/Ecuador not have approved it before hand, it IS not something most people will agree with, neither do I, really. BUT - we only know what we hear/read... Who is to say, that there was no behind closed doors / OFF THE RECORD approval by Ecuador (Correa)... but obviously, this could be kept hush hush so not to upset Farc and have Farc come after Ecuador themselves... no se, no mas digo - es otra posibilidad!

Uribe didn't ask for permission because he wasn't going to get it. He is an IDIOT and knew what he was doing. The reason for him having no fear is the US backing him. It's a shame. I am not talking about who they killed on the FARC side...whatever, if you are in a guerilla then you are prepared to die.....I am talking having no respect for another country and its borders!!!

X4v13r · Comandante

Chilenita wrote:

Dogo wrote:
@ chile
I guess your definition of invasion is different than mine
Mine is to invade with the purpose to conquer. Yours is 'don't step on my grass'

So Ecuador should say "so what"...."Colombia went a couple of miles into Ecuador to catch some "terrorists"....So what????? National soveriegnty and border control used to be reason enough to go to war. It's strange how sometimes national borders mean NOTHING to major world powers (the U.S's support of Contra bases in Costa Rica and Honduras) while other times , national borders must be protected at all costs (the Malvinas war).

Correa has yet to prove himself to be somebody that acts without JUST reason, so the fact that he has taken this far shows how serious he feels it to be. I am certain most presidents would react the same way if not worse. Bush defends Uribe YET imagine if Mexico's military crossed it's border.....yeah.......

wonder no more, here is ur answer

Mexican Army Crossing Border, Again!

I was looking at this just yesterday

~X

LGigolo · Comandante

Chilenita wrote:

Dogo wrote:
@ Pri: Nice... I also agree that Ecuadorians, if anything, should be happy that a big step was made in eliminating a menace so close to home
Granted they moved in Ecuadorian land (a 'stone throw' into ecuadorian land, btw) but there were no consecuences to Ecuadorians. An apologie is due, and that's it. Move on!
I also don't understand what the sending troops to the border is all about from Ecua and Venezuela. As if Colombia's intention is to invade Ecuador? or what? Obviously it's fueled by the craziness of Chavez. And Correa is being nothing more than his puppet
This guy is not going to have a happy ending. He'll either divide Latin America completely, or someone will shoot him before he gets to

"We don't want war, but we aren't going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master (of Colombia) ... to come to divide us."
How ironic

Dogo...ummmm they did just invade Ecuador soooooooooooo that would be the reason for sending troops to the border. I don't think that is wierd or anything and I am certain most countries would do at least that if not more. At this moment in time most South American countries are on the same team. Just take a look at the presidents and what side they belong on politically. I don't think too many countries would be happy with a simple "opps sorry our military crossed your borders"......

They may have invaded Ecuador; but they did not invade Ecuadoreans... they went after Farc IN ECUADOR. Should Correa/Ecuador not have approved it before hand, it IS not something most people will agree with, neither do I, really. BUT - we only know what we hear/read... Who is to say, that there was no behind closed doors / OFF THE RECORD approval by Ecuador (Correa)... but obviously, this could be kept hush hush so not to upset Farc and have Farc come after Ecuador themselves... no se, no mas digo - es otra posibilidad! hmm

Mastropiero · Guru

I know it is not over but, after OEA resolution is clear that no condemnation or action will be taken against us and that where my concern ends.

The sovereignty is not even an issue. Colombia acknowledged that they went to Ecuadorian soil to take him. (That version of the bombs dropped from the Colombian side is pure BS). Apologies has been issue, no single Ecuatorian was involved in the action, Colombia has not challenged any of those allegations.

It was just like when your soccer ball falls in your neighbours backyard and he is not around so you go and pick it up, now if he comes and see you there is obvious to be upset but does it means that you are going to steal his house or kidnapped the dog? No.

As a Ecuadorian I would be more concern knowing that the first person to know about the action was the president Correa and not the Army, and who inform him? Alvaro Uribe. The most dangerous areas that Colombia has are the frontiers and its because of that reason: That kill and hide that they do in Ecuador. So the idea of militarizing the frontier its actually a victory for Colombia cause the guerrilla wont have it so easy to cross the border and Colombia wont have anything to do with it.

I think Correa is going the wrong way:

He will be rejecting OEA resolution and is looking advice in Hugo Boss Chavez who wants to start a war with Colombia by any means. And thats a huge mistake that the Ecuadorian people will end up paying. Why??

- Colombia has the total support of US, Spain, France and all the European Union, and the outcome of a war would be very predictable.

- Chavez has sent 10000 troops to the border . Even though Colombia has the advantage of having the latest in war toys due to the ongoing internal conflict. Uribe wont be sending no even a soldier there, it is not our interest creating international conflicts. Colombia will let him cross our border and that would be the perfect excuse for US to go and get Chavez.

- Colombia will be reporting Chavez to the international Court of Justice for supporting terrorist groups and him and Correa will have either to proof that they are fighting them or grant them a belligerence status (I want to see how far their egos can go) cause if they do, they will be granting them legal status in Ecuador in Venezuela, and if they are not terrorist but only idealist revolutionaries why to be afraid of them right? Well, go and tell that to your people.

And of course creating enemies out of friends which I think is the worst part, cause I dont think the average Ecua a Chamozolano see us as their enemies (Im actually dating a Veneka) . And THE ONLY PLACE WERE I WANT TO SEE ECUADOR OR VENEZUELA BEATEN IS IN A SOCCER FIELD.

And we do it all the time :p

Chilenita · Comandante

Dogo wrote:
@ chile
I guess your definition of invasion is different than mine
Mine is to invade with the purpose to conquer. Yours is 'don't step on my grass'

So Ecuador should say "so what"...."Colombia went a couple of miles into Ecuador to catch some "terrorists"....So what????? National soveriegnty and border control used to be reason enough to go to war. It's strange how sometimes national borders mean NOTHING to major world powers (the U.S's support of Contra bases in Costa Rica and Honduras) while other times , national borders must be protected at all costs (the Malvinas war).

Correa has yet to prove himself to be somebody that acts without JUST reason, so the fact that he has taken this far shows how serious he feels it to be. I am certain most presidents would react the same way if not worse. Bush defends Uribe YET imagine if Mexico's military crossed it's border.....yeah.......

PRINCESSA · TOP Guru

Well I disagree that Bush tries to seperate us in Latin America.

I agere that Corerea is a puppet & therefore if he's involved he should take the consecuences from it.

I also agree that having so many troop in our borders is an exageration.

Ecaudor does have bigger issues RE: weather, cost of things goin sky rocket due to it. etc. that affectour ppl & in particular our poor ppl.

So we know that Colombia doesn't want to invade Ecuador & take over, we know it was not polite to just cross over without permission, we know all this, so wat the solution if an apology is not good enough??? WAR, Attn.

Anyhow I think we should focus on the issue that we had Farc in our lands & how that can affect us & that our President knew that & not in OMG I got violated & they attcaked us without notifying us.

Sorry but I don't agree & again like Chilenita said this is a topic that can go on & on forever & all will have diffrent opinions.

Dogo · Comandante

@ chile
I guess your definition of invasion is different than mine
Mine is to invade with the purpose to conquer. Yours is 'don't step on my grass'

LGigolo · Comandante

La OEA reconoce violación de la soberanía del Ecuador

Marzo 06, 2008
WASHINGTON, EE.UU. | AGENCIAS

El Secretario de la Organización armará la Comisión que visitará el sitio del bombardeo. Comisión investigará en Ecuador y Colombia.

Cancilleres de América se reunirán en 11 días.

Delegados felicitaron a los países por el acuerdo.

El Consejo Permanente de la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA) aprobó ayer una resolución que establece que el Gobierno colombiano violó la soberanía y la integridad territorial de Ecuador con una incursión militar el pasado sábado, así como los principios del derecho internacional.

Pese a que el texto no condena específicamente a Colombia, como lo pidió la canciller de Ecuador, María Isabel Salvador, dijo que el país está satisfecho; esto no significa que las relaciones diplomáticas se restablecerán de inmediato. Ecuador seguirá planteando su posición ante los foros internacionales, dijo.

Tras catorce horas de negociación, que se inició el martes por la noche y culminó ayer al mediodía, el Consejo Permanente de la OEA aprobó por unanimidad la resolución.

Pese a que el texto no condena específicamente a Colombia, como lo pidió la canciller de Ecuador, María Isabel Salvador, esta dijo que hoy la OEA ha superado una prueba histórica, que ratifica su razón de ser, pues este es un organismo llamado a velar por el mantenimiento de la paz y la seguridad hemisférica.

La resolución reafirma el principio de que el territorio de un Estado es inviolable y no puede ser objeto de ocupación militar ni de otras medidas de fuerza tomadas por otro Estado, directa o indirectamente, cualquiera que fuera el motivo, aun de manera temporal.

La crisis entre ambos países se generó por una acción de militares colombianos contra un campamento de las FARC en territorio ecuatoriano en la que falleció el número dos del grupo, Raúl Reyes.

La resolución establece, además, la creación de una comisión, encabezada por el secretario general de la OEA, José Miguel Insulza, e integrada por cuatro embajadores designados por este, que visitará ambos países (desde el próximo domingo) y elaborará un informe para la reunión de consulta de ministros de Relaciones Exteriores. La cita se realizará el 17 de marzo, en Washington, y su objetivo es que estos formulen recomendaciones.

El embajador colombiano ante la OEA, Carlos Ospina, expresó que Insulza tiene por delante una gran responsabilidad, ya que afronta una tarea compleja con una misión amplia y el objetivo básico de lograr un acercamiento entre ambas naciones.

Los miembros de la OEA felicitaron a Ecuador y Colombia y expresaron su esperanza de que se restablezcan las relaciones de hermandad.

Nicaragua aprovechó la resolución para reclamar el respeto de Colombia a su soberanía marítima en referencia al grupo de islas que reclama, mientras que Venezuela rechazó el Plan Colombia.

POSTURAS INICIALES

Ecuador
El Gobierno ecuatoriano había pedido que la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA) condene la violación a su soberanía por parte de Colombia. No aceptaría, según la canciller María Isabel Salvador, solo una disculpa.

También solicitó la formación de una comisión investigadora que viaje a ambos países para constatar los hechos. Finalmente, pidió que se convoque a una reunión de cancilleres de la región para el 11 de marzo, en Washington.

Colombia
El embajador de Colombia ante la OEA, Carlos Ospina, admitió que Colombia ingresó a territorio ecuatoriano, pero recalcó que el gobierno ya se había disculpado.

Ospina aceptó que se forme una comisión, pero no de investigación sino exploratoria.

Y estuvo de acuerdo con que se efectúe la reunión de cancilleres, aunque había planteado que sea después del 25 de marzo para que la comisión tenga tiempo de analizar a profundidad los hechos.

DETALLES: Estrategia

Giras
La ofensiva diplomática ecuatoriana se desarrolla en diferentes frentes. Mientras el presidente de la República, Rafael Correa, continúa con su gira por países de la región para plantear su rechazo a la incursión de Colombia en suelo ecuatoriano, sus ministros de Estado acuden a foros internacionales con el mismo objetivo.

Derechos humanos
El ministro de Justicia, Gustavo Jalkh, acudió a Ginebra a una sesión de alto nivel del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de la ONU, donde denunció la agresión y violación de la soberanía e integridad territorial por parte de las fuerzas armadas y policiales colombianas.

OPEP
En Viena, el ministro de Minas y Petróleo, Galo Chiriboga, expuso ante el presidente de turno de la OPEP, el argelino Chakib Jelil, la agresión que sufrió el país.

Yasuní-ITT
El embajador Francisco Carrión, enviado especial de Correa para promover el proyecto de protección de la Amazonía Yasuní-ITT, aprovechará su actual gira por Europa para explicar el tema a las autoridades de la Unión Europea, Bélgica, Luxemburgo, Alemania y España.

Chilenita · Comandante

Dogo wrote:
@ Pri: Nice... I also agree that Ecuadorians, if anything, should be happy that a big step was made in eliminating a menace so close to home
Granted they moved in Ecuadorian land (a 'stone throw' into ecuadorian land, btw) but there were no consecuences to Ecuadorians. An apologie is due, and that's it. Move on!
I also don't understand what the sending troops to the border is all about from Ecua and Venezuela. As if Colombia's intention is to invade Ecuador? or what? Obviously it's fueled by the craziness of Chavez. And Correa is being nothing more than his puppet
This guy is not going to have a happy ending. He'll either divide Latin America completely, or someone will shoot him before he gets to

"We don't want war, but we aren't going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master (of Colombia) ... to come to divide us."
How ironic

Dogo...ummmm they did just invade Ecuador soooooooooooo that would be the reason for sending troops to the border. I don't think that is wierd or anything and I am certain most countries would do at least that if not more. At this moment in time most South American countries are on the same team. Just take a look at the presidents and what side they belong on politically. I don't think too many countries would be happy with a simple "opps sorry our military crossed your borders"......

X4v13r · Comandante

I'm with Princessa and Dogo......
Ecuador needs to see what the real problem is here, and help Colombia Fight it, by that i don't mean going over to Colombia but by not letting this guys come into Ecuador like is their private playground.

~X

-- Edited by X4v13r at 10:43, 2008-03-06

Dogo · Comandante

@ Pri: Nice... I also agree that Ecuadorians, if anything, should be happy that a big step was made in eliminating a menace so close to home
Granted they moved in Ecuadorian land (a 'stone throw' into ecuadorian land, btw) but there were no consecuences to Ecuadorians. An apologie is due, and that's it. Move on!
I also don't understand what the sending troops to the border is all about from Ecua and Venezuela. As if Colombia's intention is to invade Ecuador? or what?

Obviously it's fueled by the craziness of Chavez. And Correa is being nothing more than his puppet
This guy is not going to have a happy ending. He'll either divide Latin America completely, or someone will shoot him before he gets to

"We don't want war, but we aren't going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master (of Colombia) ... to come to divide us."
How ironic