Traffickers Infiltrate Military in Colombia

john_stark says on Sep 8, 2007, 08:59:

When I suggest that the Colombian conflict will continue for another 40 years, people scoff. Stuff like this just shows how right I am. And how futile it is to think that the Colombian army will ever defeat the FARC. Hell some of them ARE the FARC.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Sep 8, 2007, 09:22:

First, it's a relatively positive thing that it's the state itself which discovered and revealed these breaches, including arresting those who have been identified as responsible so far. That might temporarily improve things and reduce corruption, even if there's no lasting solution.

But, on the other hand, infiltration by the drug lords has little to do with the conflict. It has more to do with the existence of the drug trade and its illegality, which requires using millions of dollars for corruption here and abroad, due to the ineffective prohibition policies that are in place.

Infiltration by the guerrillas is indeed tied to the conflict, which means it'll continue along with it. But this isn't a one-sided affair, as the state also infiltrates the guerrillas, employs informants and so forth. It's all part of the intelligence, counter-intelligence and counter-counter-intelligence side of the war, not a unilateral FARC move.

john_stark: Maybe because you're trying to make a prediction about events whose future is complex and uncertain. It could last 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 or 100 years, depending on what happens and what solutions are available. Or none of the above, for that matter. It's pretty useless to state "it will continue for X years", unless you have a crystal ball.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

john_stark says on Sep 8, 2007, 10:52:

If there was a line in Vegas that you could bet on how long it would last, I'd be putting money on it lasting another 40. When you go to Colombia, you don't find anyone who has any interest in fighting the FARC, nada, zero, zilch. Everybody's looking out for Number 1 and the only people who end up in the Colombian army are those poor slobs who are unlucky enough or too poor to buy their way out of it. The average Colombian has no interest in defeating the FARC except in theory - if it affects them or costs them anything they won't do it. No will, no way!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

pilotguy says on Sep 8, 2007, 11:12:

I absolutely agree with John, there is little patriotism here. Not really sure why that is the case.
I have a nephew. went to naval academy. After graduation, they assigned him to river interdiction patrols. HIs father immediately bought him out of military. 2 weeks after graduation from Naval Academy here in Colombia. Joe

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Sep 8, 2007, 11:50:

john_stark: Well, it's your own money you're taking to Vegas, after all. I prefer not to bet at all, since Colombian history does take many unpredictable turns and I certainly don't have a crystal ball here.

As for patriotism, measuring that only by how many people are willing to join the army and fight FARC is a bit questionable, plus how much that affects the outcome (if at all) is also debatable. Wars aren't necessarily won by the most "patriotic" side, you know, as many other factors are also present (it'd be interesting to compare who was more "patriotic" in several other conflicts and who was actually the winner).

Yeah, most people aren't terribly, personally concerned with defeating FARC because most urban dwellers don't see it as an immediate threat in light of a thousand other daily concerns. In the more rural areas, on the other hand, that varies.

But when FARC's relative threat level rises so has the amount of people affected by it, including some willing to make sacrifices, whether personal (joining the army, giving information) or merely political (voting Uribe in) and economical. See the increase in tax payments (in particular the so-called "war tax") and in the number of voluntary/professional recruits (almost half the army by now, though the rest are still conscripts).

Not representative of the whole population, you might say, but that's not the main point either. Defeating FARC, or in general taking the conflict to an end (any end, not only military victory), isn't a matter of numbers alone, but how you use the resources (political, economic or military) in any given context. Which is why it's not very predictable by just focusing on mere "patriotism".

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lowell says on Sep 8, 2007, 11:57:

patriotism, my family doesent know who colombia got its independance from

Alfred E. Newman. "What. Me Worry?"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lowell says on Sep 8, 2007, 12:00:

at times I feel that I have more pride and inerest in colombia than my family.

Alfred E. Newman. "What. Me Worry?"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lowell says on Sep 8, 2007, 12:15:

Drugs, people want to use them. Remove restrictions and lets see what happens. Billions worldwide spent on the fight. Politics, politics .politics.. feed the fat man

Alfred E. Newman. "What. Me Worry?"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jinksmiester says on Sep 8, 2007, 12:42:

As starky has said ..i agree, the war will be a long time coming to an end...to much money and to manny greedy hands that want a slice of it.To much corruption

A man is not old until regret takes the place of dreams

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Frank Rizzo says on Sep 9, 2007, 07:16:

No doubt John Stark is correct, except it'll be even longer. Just because there is a "war on drugs" doesn't mean that they want to "win" the war. The machine is funded on one side by tax that can be looted by elected polititions (criminals). The other side is ran by people who farm and sell a white powder and fund their side with that money.

Both have guns, both are killing people. The actually both need each other.

History has shown that things like this will continue until there is some major planet change like when Greece fell and Rome rose. (Rome really just borrowed all the technology, etc. from the Greeks)....so dark ages began (though Rome continued to profit from Greek technology). Once Rome fell the known world went into the dark ages.

This is the only type of change that would stop the war in colombia.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Sep 9, 2007, 09:31:

Keeping in mind that the war in Colombia and the "war on drugs" are two entirely different -though they have become related- phenomenons...

Greece didn't fall all at once due to some "major planet change", but rather due to a series of historical developments that a specialized historian would be able to explain much better than I. Nor, apparently, were the ages after the fall of Rome as "dark" as it has become stereotypical to portray them in popular culture. That's based on some pretty old history, literally, while newer interpretations and investigations have come to shed a different light on things by now.

But your bringing this up, Frank, kind of helps illustrate one thing: Europe, Asia and other parts of the world have gone through many times of conflict, both long and short, whose end could not have been accurately and consciously predicted by all the people who lived through them.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Frank Rizzo says on Sep 9, 2007, 09:53:

Hi Juan..I really wish I knew more about this part of history. I've been doing some reading lately... It's very interesting..and it actually may have been "dark" as the atmosphere could have been clouded by volcanic dust for hundredes of years. And from what i'm reading, rome really did not contribute to the technology advancement, just used what they got from the greeks...so the so callled "dark ages" began with the fall of Greece...and continued until 1676 (1650) roughly.....

The really interesting part is that a large volcanic eruption may have actually caused the whole thing.

I'm interested in this stuff so if you've got some reading material, please let me know..

0 funny, 0 helpful.