Correa to Bush: send us your troops or 'shut up'

[ensho]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080314/wl_afp/ecuadorusspaincolombiadiplomacy&printer=1


Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa told US President George W. Bush on Friday to either send US troops to the border with Colombia or "shut up," in response to criticism that Ecuador harbors Colombian rebels.

"Mr Bush, bring over your soldiers, let your soldiers be the ones who get killed at the southern border with Colombia," Correa said two weeks after Bogota raided a Colombian rebel camp inside Ecuador killing a top rebel leader.

"Lets see if American citizens will accept such a tremendous barbarity. Otherwise, shut up and try to understand what's happening in Latin America," the Ecuadoran leader added.

Correa's challenge followed implied criticism of Ecuador by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, when she said Thursday during a visit to Brazil that "responsible states" should not let their territory be used by "terrorists."

The leaders of Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela -- which backed Quito in its week-long border row that nearly degenerated into military conflict -- defused the crisis shaking hands at a Rio Group summit a week ago in Santo Domingo.
-snip-
--------------------------------------


I like the way Correa gets right to the point

[90-percent]

1. nice discourse

It's wonderful when world leaders have so little respect for GWB they publicly tell him to "shut up".

Not much longer until we read about Chavez or Ahmadiniajad telling Bush to "eat shit and die, mutha fucka!"

-90% Jimmy

[ensho]

2. and we shall deserve everything negative that comes our way

we did not stop the neo cons

and we still have not stopped the neo cons

[Peace Patriot]

4. Chavez has harmed no one, invaded no one, jailed no one unfairly, and has

run a scrupulously lawful, PROGRESSIVE government for ten years.

His country is a member of OPEC. It is his OBLIGATION, as president, to maintain good relations with other OPEC countries. Venezuela is an independent, sovereign country, with the right to make friends and form relationships with other countries that benefit its people. Chavez was elected--in an election system that puts our own to shame for its transparency--to, among other things, conduct foreign relations. He is good friends with Brazil's president, Lula da Silva, with Argentina's president, Cristina Fernandez da Kirchner, with Bolivia's president, Evo Morales, with Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, and with Nicaragua's president, Daniel Ortega, and has good relations with Uruguay's president, Tabare Vasquez, Chile's president, Michele Batchelet, with the RIGHTWING president of France (with whom he was working closely to free FARC hostages), with the center/right leaders of Paraguay, with China (working on an oil deal) and with numerous others.

There have been high profile, friendly, mutually beneficial meetings and events between Chavez and many of these leaders, that are news in South America, but somehow never get headlines here. It is a completely distorted picture of Chavez and Venezuela to group him with Ahmadiniajad, and paint him as a warmonger ("eat shit and die, mutha fucka!"). It's like the AP 'news' stories that invariably describe him as "the leftist president of Venezuela, friend of Fidel Castro."

And I will give you just one example of why Chavez meeting with, and being friendly with, Ahmadiniajad might prove beneficial. The Chavez government recently proposed 69 Constitutional amendments for a VOTE OF THE PEOPLE in Venezuela. Among them was an amendment for equal rights for gays and women. These amendments lost in a very close vote (50.7% to 49.3%)--more than likely influenced by Venezuela's particularly rightwing Catholic clergy. The Chavistas are PROGRESSIVES. They oppose sexual and every other kind of oppression. Why presume that Ahmadiniajad will influence Chavez and Venezuelan society rather than the other way around? Is it not possible that extending a hand in friendship to the Iranians--who are targeted for nuking by the Bushites--might help liberalize Iran, or at least reduce fear and paranoia in Iran, to prevent rash actions and encourage development of better policy?

If it's Israel you're worried about, the Bushites don't care about Israel. They would expose Israelis to a nuclear war, and at the least to strong retaliation that could conceivably annihilate their small country, to get Iran's oil. That is all Bushites care about. That's all they care about in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina--destabilizing these countries with large infusions of USAID-NED cash and covert budget money (OUR money) to topple their democratic governments and restore global corporate predator control of their oil.

Diplomacy, peace, trade--these are the answers to everyone's safety and prosperity--not the "eat shit and die, mutha fucka!" attitude, which you so unfairly and wrongfully ascribe to Hugo Chavez. That is Bush's attitude. That is the attitude promoted by the war profiteers here, in Israel and in Colombia. That is the attitude that will bring more catastrophe.

Chavez provided free and low cost heating oil to America's poor, in several states. Is that "eat shit and die, mutha fucka!"? Or is that a good example of what our own government should be doing? He doesn't hate us. He hates Bush, or rather Bushitism. And I'm with him on that. Neither he nor his supporters nor their strong allies throughout South America have ever hated the people of the United States. But they have good reason to hate what our government has done in our name on their continent. They are trying to undo that damage, now, with real democracy, social justice and regional self-determination. In fact, they are showing us the way OUT of fascist dictatorship BACK TO democracy. Don't fall for this demonization of their leaders. It is 100% bullshit--in the interest of greed and war.

[90-percent]

5. Misunderstanding

I was making a point. I kind of like Chavez and I clearly see how American MSM demonizes him at every turn. Anybody that waves a Noam Chomsky book at the UN is OK by me.

It would have been better if I picked some names of world leaders that truly are flaky, like Kim Yong Ill over at North Korea. He's pretty wacky.

My point was the insults pointed in the direction of GWB shows how much the world disrespects us and also, if any world leader deserved to be insulted, it is indeed GWB.

I've been buying all my gas at Citgo for years.

-90% Jimmy

[Peace Patriot]

7. Thanks for clarifying your remarks! I'm just so sick of this demonization of

Chavez. It is such a goddamned lie, and so PERVASIVE among our people. It needs to be countered repeatedly. These kind of lies--Iraq WMD lies, total lies--do not have the purpose of convincing people, because, once people learn the facts, reason kicks in. So the purpose is to prevent people from learning the facts--and this is the scary part--until some nefarious purpose is achieved. To put people to sleep, to make them not care. Thus, when they parade around in their codpieces and declare, "Mission Accomplished," they really mean it. Their mission was to invade Iraq, and thus get us trapped there, while they imposed harmful oil contracts on a puppet government. They did not, in fact, convince most Americans that invading Iraq was justified. FIFTY-SIX percent of the American people opposed it, in Feb 03, just before the invasion (NYT poll; other polls 54-55%)--when a lot of people were still unsure about the WMDs. But they created a narrative of lies sufficient to confuse us, to keep us dormant, while they "accomplished" their "mission." And I greatly fear that the intense propaganda about Chavez has a similar purpose--and there is, indeed, much evidence that the Bushites are going to cause major trouble in South America before the year is out. They are after the Andes oil fields (Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina).

So if I'm touchy on this Bushite propaganda point--and your comment did seem to promote it--forgive me. Sorry I misinterpreted you.

[90-percent]

8. No biggie

I'm almost 54 and went to my first war protest in my life in January 03 down in DC. Froze my ass off that cold day, but so did a few hundred thousand others.*

I'd do it again in spite of the ineffectiveness, but this time in World history had the largest War Protests world wide in recorded human history!

And to this day no one in America knows it.

Amy Goodman of democracy Now compiled news analysis in the run up to Iraq. Out of about 94 major news articles, only four had any material from the anti war side. Talk about the MSM drumbeat! And your figure of 56% against the War before it started is staggering.

Remarkable how your perspective can change once you inject FACTS into the discussion. Unfortunately, facts are in short supply when so many get their information from Rush or Hannity.

Peace Out, Bro!

-90% Jimmy

*(I received a draft lottery number in 1972, the year the draft was canceled. I was so goddamned lucky!!!!! I have no doubt I would not have survived if I had to serve. I'm emotionally unfit to serve in an army.)

PS - Mr. Patriot, your posts are magnificent. I yield the floor for your discourse!

[otohara]

3. The World Cares Not

what Bush and his warmongers have to say. Obama said yesterday when a man referenced the AP story about China responding to human rights criticism by US. China said the US has no right to say anything after creating the worst human tragedy in Iraq. Obama said, plus it's hard to criticize when you owe trillions of dollars also.

[Poiuyt]

6. I thought this was going to be a thread about Chick Corea

After reading it, I was reminded of the time Bush asked the president of Brazil if Brazil had any blacks living there.