PDA

View Full Version : Why Colombia wants to join NATO?



naste.de.lumina
18th June 2013, 01:44
Hello friends.
Among the many important events lately, this news went somehow unnoticed by the general public.
Few official media gave some note about the reasons why Colombia's president to order the entry of Colombia as a NATO member.

The governments of South American countries are not at all pleased with this announcement, even after the Colombian government to clarify who is interested in being a "partner" and not a member of NATO and defined as "a storm in a glass of water," the reaction of some countries in the region.

I wonder if these little pieces of news released strategically are not ways to assess the repercussions and thus create strategies for a future announcement.
The argument used by the analyst in the Miami Herald on supporting the initiative is completely unreasonable.
The Octopus arms are spreading.


Colombia good fit for NATO

BY CARLOS ALBERTO MONTANER

President Juan Manuel Santos proposes to bring Colombia into NATO, even if it is through the back door. I think it’s a responsible initiative.

NATO is the most formidable military coalition in history. It was created by Harry Truman in 1949, in the middle of the Cold War, when the Soviet Union was going through its worst imperial spasm. Although named North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the institution does not take that geographic circumstance too seriously. Italy, Greece and Turkey reside in another neighborhood, yet they are members of NATO.

Actually, NATO was not created to make war but to prevent it. Truman, who read the classics and loved history, used to quote the Latin phrase “ Si vis pacen, para bellum” — If you wish peace, prepare for war. That’s what he did. He was under the influence of the strategic thinking of young diplomat George Kennan.

The Soviet Union had to be contained, without unleashing another world war, until the contradictions of collectivism, inefficiency and oppression could make it implode. That took a few decades, but it worked.

Colombia’s Santos has good reason to protect his country from the potential danger of a regional war. Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro has just announced the creation of a workers militia of 2 million soldiers. He wants to manufacture one of the largest armed corps in the world. It’s perfectly logical for his neighbors to be afraid.

Add to this the dozens of war planes, battle tanks and sophisticated antiaircraft weapons that Venezuela has spent years accumulating. Weapons that are not adequate to maintain domestic order or deal with a local enemy. They are devices designed to wage conventional wars, presumably against other countries.

There is a golden rule that usually regulates the modus operandi of armed forces: “Form defines function.” When armies grow, they overflow and become very dangerous. The moment the Cuban regime, with Soviet support, was able to build the most powerful army in Latin America, it leaped into African adventures and stayed there from 1975 to 1990 — the longest international military operation staged by any other military body in the Americas, including the United States.

The most economic way for Colombia to keep Venezuela from dragging it into a war — as threatened in the past by the late Hugo Chávez, who publicly ordered his generals to move tanks and artillery to the border — is to place itself under the symbolic protection of NATO.

The other two options are worse. One would be to do nothing and risk exposing Colombian society to an armed conflict, precisely because of government indifference to a real danger. The other would be to begin a costly arms race that would bleed the country dry.

As a consequence of the actions of communist narcoguerrillas, Colombia is already the Latin American country that spends the most in combat equipment in terms of its GNP (about 3.8 percent.) Why invest more money in guns when the needs of its society are huge?

NATO has a dissuasive and beneficial effect. In general, it prevents wars. Add to this a pedagogical factor: It induces better behavior among military men and, to a degree, generates greater subordination to civilian governments.

At least, that’s what Spanish socialist Prime Minister Felipe González presumed when he propitiated his country’s permanent association with NATO. He did so in the referendum held by his government in 1986, despite having rejected it in 1981, when he was a member of the opposition.

Bolivia’s Evo Morales has said that Santos’ initiative is a threat to his country. But Morales also said that the Roman Empire had attacked Bolivia. Looking at Evo Morales, one is reminded of the popular Colombian song, “ La Gota Fría” — The Cold Sweat — which tells of two folk musicians challenging each other. Sung by Carlos Vives, it notes: “How cultured could he be, when he was born in the cactus patch?”

That’s Moralito for you. Colombia needs to join NATO to, as the song says, “put an end to this mess.”


The Miami Herald - Colombia good fit for NATO (http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/10/3444019/colombia-good-fit-for-nato.html)

Kryztian
18th June 2013, 12:24
South America seems to be putting up a fair amount of resistance towards the Globalist powers. While Chavez was openly defiant against the U.S.A, Ecuador and Bolivia serves as a models of a more peaceful resistance. By giving asylum to ulian Assange in their London embassy, Ecuador has embarrassed the leaders of some supposedly democratic nations.

This Miami Herald makes it look as though Columbia is an innocent victim exposed to an aggressive Columbia. Here's a link to the bigger story:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-big-question-why-has-colombia-invaded-ecuador-and-why-is-venezuela-joining-the-fight-791263.html .

Ultimately, "they" are trying to frame the story as: you are either you are a communist/socialist who believes in government handouts for everyone in a society that provides no incentive or reward for hard work, or you "believe in free enterprise", and there is no middle ground. Of course, their system of "free enterprise" is one one where all the restrictions and the responsibilities seem to fall on the backs of the 99.99% and the "oppressive socialist" laws that have to be removed always benefit the 0.01%. And they are using NATO to back up their plutocracy with military force.

music
18th June 2013, 14:19
Capitalism + Communism = constructs of the elite.

Hegelian Dialectic - thesis + antithesis = synthesis (perhaps more Kant's idea than Hegel's)

Capitalism + Communism = NWO

The International Socialism of the NWO was first trialled as the National Socialism of 30s and 40s Germany.

But beware! Those who lambast the NWO brigade as "Marxists" or "Communists" are actually playing right into their hands.

It's a funny old divided world.

naste.de.lumina
18th June 2013, 15:34
The 'Ism', any of them are globalists doctrines.
All these doctrines are perfect and beautiful on paper, in the real world proved tragic.
Many economic crises and explorations become people of this region naturally skeptical and distrustful of their political leaders.
Colombia is the strong fist of the globalists in South America
It's just a matter of time for the cabal show arms and so on.

Chester
18th June 2013, 19:41
Me gusta mucho. Mi esposa Colombiana que vive en Medellin le gusta tambien.

I like this a lot. My Colombian wife who lives in Medellin likes this also.

Camilo
18th June 2013, 19:47
I would say that anything the Colombian government can do to protect the country from the permanent threat of the communist claw Cuba-Venezuela, is welcome by the people of Colombia.

naste.de.lumina
18th June 2013, 20:03
I would say that anything the Colombian government can do to protect the country from the permanent threat of the communist claw Cuba-Venezuela, is welcome by the people of Colombia.

I'm not convinced that the intention is to defend the so-called democratic countries against communist countries.
In any case we will wait to see how this news unfolds in the future.
Peace

P. S.: The U.S. Fourth Fleet was reactivated. Alone would be sufficient to deter all communist countries in the region with only small percentage of their forces.
The intention behind the appearances is what worries me.

Camilo
18th June 2013, 20:13
To defend the communist countries?....you totally misunderstood what I said: To protect Colombia (a democratic sovereign Nation) from the threat of communism (Cuba-Venezuela).

naste.de.lumina
18th June 2013, 20:20
To defend the communist countries?....you totally misunderstood what I said: To protect Colombia (a democratic sovereign Nation) from the threat of communism (Cuba-Venezuela).

Sorry, I wrote wrong.
fixed.

Operator
18th June 2013, 21:09
I'm not convinced that the intention is to defend the so-called democratic countries against communist countries.


I am by now convinced that it is NOT NATO's intention at all to defend democratic countries. NATO is abused as a
military world police force to secure interests of leading western industries (preferably sanctioned by the UN).

music
18th June 2013, 21:44
All "Isms", yes, are divisions. As the Rasta's say "we don't need no 'ism' schism". I agree that the self determination of any nation is very important, but let's be frank, the US has been screwing the South and Central Americas for years, and the globalist corporations also.

There could always be the reasoning (getting back to the OP) of "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer".