Author Topic: *sigh*  (Read 350 times)

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
*sigh*
« on: February 25, 2002, 12:37:59 PM »
"SAN VICENTE DEL CAGUAN, Colombia (AP) -- A candidate in Colombia's upcoming presidential elections was abducted by leftist guerrillas as she was traveling to a former rebel-controlled town, her campaign spokeswoman said Sunday.

Former Sen. Ingrid Betancourt and campaign manager Clara Rojas were kidnapped Saturday by rebels with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia -- known by its Spanish acronym FARC -- spokeswoman Diana Rodriguez told The Associated Press.

Rodriguez said the rebels released three men who had accompanied Betancourt and her aide. The three were at an army base in the city of Florencia, Rodriguez said. She said the three men, including a French photographer and a Colombian cameraman, were unharmed. Their names were not immediately known.

  MORE STORIES  
Colombian president pledges to keep ex-rebel zone safe  
 
 
Colombian rebels criticize government  
 
 
 
 
 
Betancourt, 40, had left Florencia on Saturday afternoon by car for the former rebel town of San Vicente del Caguan, which army troops captured earlier in the day.

Colombia's government said it had warned Betancourt not to make the trip because it was too dangerous. Officials had turned down requests by Betancourt for ground and air transportation to San Vicente, about 170 miles (250 kilometers) south of Bogota.

Interior Minister Armando Estrada stressed that the government was searching for Betancourt and doing what it could to establish security in the war zone.

"It is good that politicians are doing what they can to draw support for their campaigns and their causes ... but it was not necessary to make that trip in those conditions," Estrada said, asking other candidates to refrain from visiting the area for the moment.

Two other presidential candidates, Noemi Sanin and Horacio Serpa, heeded the military's warning and postponed visits to San Vicente, the government said.

"I join all Colombians in hoping for her freedom," Sanin said in an interview Sunday with RCN radio. "Our situation is difficult. ... Terrorism and threats to security [in Colombia] are endless."

Betancourt was last seen at 3 p.m. Saturday at an army checkpoint on the road. An army commander there urged her party not to continue, the government said.

Betancourt had planned to meet with San Vicente Mayor Nestor Leon Ramirez, a member of her political party. She had told reporters she was determined to stage a rally in San Vicente for "respect for human rights."

Betancourt's husband, Juan Carlos Lecompte, said his wife felt she needed to be with the people of San Vicente "during the good and the bad."

San Vicente was the capital of a swath of southern Colombia controlled by the FARC until Thursday. President Andres Pastrana had ceded the zone to the leftist rebels in 1998 in hopes of brokering an end to Colombia's 38-year war.

Citing repeated FARC attacks on military and civilian targets, Pastrana ordered the military to reoccupy the area, and troops entered San Vicente at dawn Saturday.

Betancourt is a severe critic of the rebels but had received little support in presidential polls.

She was one of four presidential candidates who traveled into guerrilla territory in February to cajole rebel and government peace negotiators to make progress.

"What were you thinking when you decided to join the guerrillas?" she asked rebel leaders during a nationally televised forum in the zone in February. "Did you think the guerrillas would be involved in cocaine?"

-CNN

For those of you who dont know what's going on:

1) For more than 50 years Colombia has had a serious problem with marxist guerillas. They were marxist up until the late 70's, when they became narco-guerrillas.

2) In the 90's the weak gov. LOANED, GAVE AWAY an area the size of SWITZERLAND to the guerillas in an attempt to make some sort of peace agreement. Since the early 80's the gov. has tried and tried and tried to make peace, but only succeeded with one of the guerrilla groups, the M-19 movement. Ironically, the M-19 seemed to be the only remaining paramilitary group that were doing what they were doing for political reasons. The are now a legal political party, and one of their top leaders is involved in Gov. issues and has even been governor of one of our "states" (Departamentos).

3) While this territory was "loaned" and alleged "peace talks" went underway, the FARC and ELN (the 2 most powerful groups) kept on attacking towns, blowing stuff up, kidnapping, killing and terrorizing the population. It was a classical case of what had been going on since the early 80's: Gov. wants to talk, guerillas send token guys to talk with but with no real intention to make any peace, and instead make demands upon demands on the gov. to make THEIR (the guerillas) bussiness "easier".

For feks sake, the region the gov. loaned them was THE hotbed for cocaine processing.  WOW, how  the hell the gov. demilitarized and ceased activity in that region because the guerrillas ASKED for it is BEYOND me.

4) For the first time in 50 years a president makes a real decision, albeit probably the only one in his entire life. Pastrana has finally realized, after almost 2 years, that the Guerrillas dont want any peace. He sent in a force to attack the guerrillas in the demilitarized zone, sending those scumbags to the 9th level of hell and shoving them out of the area. LEAD is what those people understand.

5) Now this moronic woman running to be president, against ALL common sense and advice , visits without any protection an area FILLED with *very* pissed off guerrillas.

She wont get out of it alive. Not unless the gov. gives the guerrillas another big concession in return. And the gov. doesnt give a damn about her (rightfully, what an idiot!). Any chances she had (lol 1%) of winning an election just dissapeared. Not that it will matter, she's dead anyway.

IMO, we shouldve just evacuated the civilian population and asked the US to drop an H-bomb. Wouldve been much quicker and effective. The trees will grow back in a few years.

RANT OFF

Offline Octavius

  • Skinner Team
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6651
*sigh*
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2002, 01:03:34 PM »
ELN... same group mentioned in the movie "Proof of Life" with Russel Crowe?   Funded by the Soviets til the 70s when cash flow was cut and then turned to drugs, kidnapping, and other activities to make ends meet?  I haven't read much concerning this so if I'm wrong please correct me.  

What exactly are the demands of the FARC and the ELN?  What is their purpose for randomly 'blowing things up'?  They stand for nothing but gaining wealth through cocaine.... either they perverted their cause or they're one screwy group of people.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2002, 01:08:11 PM by Octavius »
octavius
Fat Drunk BasTards (forum)

"bastard coated bastards with bastard filling?  delicious!"
Guest of the ++Blue Knights++[/size]

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18803
*sigh*
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2002, 01:23:31 PM »
Napalm comes to mind. The big "C" is a problem we could reign in with about 25% of the total sorties we've put airborne over the past 5 months...
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Animal

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5027
*sigh*
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2002, 01:29:38 PM »
They are as much terrorists as the Taliban or other groups, and more so than the Palestinians, something should be done about them.
And if the Columbian goverment cant, someone else has to get rid of the scumbags.

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
*sigh*
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2002, 02:48:03 PM »
"What exactly are the demands of the FARC and the ELN"

They both claim to be fighting "for the people"..while they kill them and make the lives of the poor hell ('cause the rich have either fled or hired their own protection..or the gov. gives them protection).

Both want ludicrous political reforms. Reforms which would severely lower the army's capability to fight THEM back, reforms that would give THEIR people toejamloads of money and benefits. "They" want stuff for themselves, not for the poor they say they fight for. These groups started as marxist armed political parties, like Che Guevara and Castro were in their time, but then the drug trade and the fading of the "cause" when Castro and Che were no more turned them into nothing more than tools for the drug lords used to guard their drug fields and operations , to destabilize the police and government and to terrorize bussinesses and people into collaborating with them and their trade.

Here's an analogy for you, you will be the gov. i'll be the FARC/ELN

You: Lets sit down and talk
Me: Ok. But we demand you stop attacking us in this region *point to current drug factory about to be overrun by military* while we talk.
You: Sure we can do that.

2 weeks later, I have moved all the drug produced and all the equipment to another location.

You: We've been discussin this for 2 weeks, im sure we can get to an agreement.
Me: Sorry, you definetely are not interested in peace, you want us to give up without a struggle. Goodbye.

a month later the same drug factory is found by the army

Me: We would like to talk with you.
You: Sure we can do that.
Me: but you have to remove all forces in *this* area so our negotiators can contact our leaders without fear of being captured by the army.
You: Sure.

ad naseum.

In the meantime of course, even while they talk, they keep blowing up oil pipelines, kidnapping people (mostly those who are mid-low or middle class) for ransom, keep assassinating employees from companies that didnt pay their protection money at random, and they keep murdering entire families and towns when they SUSPECT they sympathise with the militias (militias are also guerrillas, but formed BY the victims of the guerrillas to fight them back.. and they do a MUCH better job than the army to kill those scumbags, for they take NO prisioners. Unfortunately, they've become JUST like the guerrillas, killing those they THINK collaborate with FARC/ELN. Go figure.).

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
*sigh*
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2002, 03:00:51 PM »
{sarcasm on} Ahhh, but legalizing this drug would solve all of our problems!{sarcasm off}

Offline Udie at Work

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 311
*sigh*
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2002, 03:25:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
{sarcasm on} Ahhh, but legalizing this drug would solve all of our problems!{sarcasm off}




 Well Cocaine isn't one of the drugs I wish they'd make legal, but it would stop these people dead in their tracks.  Either that or what Eagler said.....

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
*sigh*
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2002, 10:11:13 PM »
Demand here in the US creates these animals. We should all be ashamed.
Coca is the largest cash crop in some areas. Why grow anything else? The only way to end this is to make it less profitable for the drug lords. The legalization debate takes some interesting twists, but overall it might solve more problems than it would create.
ie.
1. Lower profits. Legal drugs cannot cost as miuch as illegal drugs.
2. Crime due to trafficking and sales is eliminated.
3. Coca becomes a regulated and cheap commodity, like bananas. Don't often hear about banana lords.
4. Distribution is controlled and taxed similar to cigarette sales. Taxes can go towards education and the elimination of the demand.
5. Look at the example set by prohibition....prohibition ended and so did the cash flow to the mobs from alcohol sales and distribution.

I don't do drugs, but this sure sounds like an idea worth investigating.

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
*sigh*
« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2002, 10:16:03 PM »
Quote
4. Distribution is controlled and taxed similar to cigarette sales. Taxes can go towards education and the elimination of the demand.


Hmmm... alcohol and cigarettes still sell quite well in spite of the taxes. Elimination of demand is a pipe dream.

One could also argue that the junk food that MacDonalds (and their ilk) sell kills more people annually than cigarettes. Why don't we tax that?
sand

Offline the_hegemon

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 143
      • http://127.0.0.1
*sigh*
« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2002, 10:50:48 PM »
Becuase McDonalds has not been determined by the state of California, or the Surgeon General of the US, to be hazardous to your health (but they should have a long time ago :) )

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
*sigh*
« Reply #10 on: February 28, 2002, 12:22:58 AM »
Legalizing it is in no way a solution. You just open the way for the current and future addicts to screw themselves more, and the people that legalizing is supposed to "put out of the market" by making prices lower...these people already are toejamting $1k bills, all that would do is allow them to put up legalized drug "factories" and sell them in countries where its NOT legalized.

Plus California would turn cannabbis green overnight!