Reply #6: They call many of them "Forward Operating Locations" (FOLs) not "bases." [View All]

[Peace Patriot]

And that makes no difference as to the SOVEREIGNTY and AUTONOMY of the countries where they are located. You think the U.S. "Southern Command" consults the people of the Antilles as to their spying activities and other plans? They don't even consult us--those paying for it!

http://www.southcom.mil/appssc/factfiles.php?id=63

With drones and other aircraft, at least SEVEN bases and/or FOL's in Colombia, and bases or FOLs in Panama, Honduras, El Savador and now Costa Rica, and the 4th Fleet in the Caribbean--to mention just the bare outlines of the Pentagon's presence in the Caribbean/Central America region--they don't need a "significant US military presence on the ground" in the Antilles. That is the point of all these FOLs. A USAF document described it all as preparing the U.S. for "full spectrum military activities" in Latin America, to deal with, among other things (such "drug trafficking," etc.), "anti-U.S. countries."

So whether they call the parts of the NETWORK "bases" or "FOLs" is not important. What is important is how many of them there are, where they are, their ability to coordinate "full spectrum military activities" and Pentagon and U.S. war profiteer intentions.

Those activities--whatever they are now, or whatever they will be in the future--will NOT have the consent of the people whose countries have been the launching pads for those activities.

This is an extremely sensitive issue in Latin America, and this is WHY it is an extremely sensitive issue. Once U.S. bases or FOL's are there, they have no control. They have ceded their sovereignty and even their fate to military forces outside of their control. Even in Colombia--where dissent can't cost you your life--there is significant dissent on this issue. The Colombian Supreme Court just ruled the most recent U.S./Colombian military agreement unconstitutional--and it also caused an uproar elsewhere in Latin America. The Mercosur trade group makes the presence of foreign military in the country a bar to membership. It is a sovereignty issue, and Aruba and Curacao don't have sovereignty on this issue. The Netherlands has kept control. And I doubt that even the people of the Netherlands have much (or any) control over what the Pentagon does. They could find themselves dragged into a U.S. war via secret shenanigans of their own power elite-all the way across the Atlantic in Europe.

Is the U.S. not currently engaged in two wars? Did the U.S. not pre-emptively strike another country with carpet bombing of a virtually defenseless city, mass slaughter, invasion and occupation? How can we know, how can the people of the Netherlands know, how can the people of the Dutch Antilles know, that activation of these U.S. military forces in the Caribbean/Central America is not being done at this very moment? (Given the intensity of the anti-Chavez propaganda, you gotta wonder--truly.) But whatever the Pentagon has sketched in, on its Big Dartboard, the issue is SOVEREIGNTY. Do you want to be dragged into a U.S. war? If not, step one would be to evict the U.S. military from your country. Period. Because, if you don't, your sovereignty is a joke. You have no control over the matter.