Sweden Stops Venezuelan Arms Sales.

[niallmac]

Because Amerika has to keep a handle on folks sending weapons to really violent
nations and stuff.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5243880.stm

[Demeter]

1. Somebody Else Will Do It, Not To Worry

What insanity!

[niallmac]

6. What did Venezuela do to deserve an embargo?

I look at what is going on today and to think we put our
foot down when it comes to Venezuela!
Monty Python would reject this script as
to ridiculous for comedy.

[1932]

19. haven't supported war on terrorism, according to article.

[niallmac]

24. They don't support our 1984 Fascism? The Bastards! n/t

[anotherdrew]

31. they're not buying from us, even if we let them, they wouldn't be buying

that's all it takes for bushgang retaliation.

[jpkenny]

63. Time Venezuelans to learn to make their own defensive weapons

and build an economy around preparing themselves for aggression from the US. They need to be careful about CIA, M16, and Mossad operatives withing their country in key posts who will be working hard now to sow the seeds of destablization in an effort to stop Hugo from helping Cuba also.

[Judi Lynn]

65. Seems like a pretty good time to start it up, doesn't it?

Welcome to D.U., jpkenny.

[Judi Lynn]

2. Didn't know Bush had gone this far....

From the article:

Saab says it cannot continue sales of anti-aircraft and anti-tank devices to Venezuela because of a US arms embargo against President Chavez's government.

Saab subsidiary Bofors has supplied Venezuela's armed forces for 20 years.

Under the terms of the American restrictions, no factory in the world may sell weapons to Venezuela that contain components made in the US.

Bofors will cut its commercial ties to Venezuela on 1 October, complying with the strict embargo put in place by Washington back in May.

The Swedes have in the past sold anti-aircraft missiles, rocket launchers and anti-tank rifles to Venezuela worth around $150m (£80m).
(snip)

I hope someone finally puts that piece of #### in his place. He has had it coming for years. Our own little emperor, and our corporate media prostrates itself at his tiny feet to enable him by giving him carte blanche from the very, very first, even during his campaign.

Sick, twisted, scummy bastards.

Edit: spelling error corrected.

[niallmac]

4. Even though I know your holding back (ha)

I agree completely with your take on this.

[Judi Lynn]

7. Contemptible situation, isn't it? n/t

[54anickel]

22. WOW!!! We're arrogant, aren't we? No factory in the WORLD! If a

country doesn't comply fully with US anti-terrorism efforts, then it's no arms for you.

I had no idea the US went this far, or that we had that much power. So, when do we bomb Russia and China for selling "arms" to Venezuela? Bushco is just bat-shit these days.

[midnight]

48. Best leagal minds in the world and this is how they use it.

They write contracts like this.

[alaric520]

35. US Components

The articles seems to suggests that Sweden cannot sell products to Venezuela which include US components. Do all swedish arms have US components? Some additional information regarding the sale of swedish arms which include no US components might be useful.


The US tried to do the same thing to spain. Spain just took out the US components. Sweden should show some spine and do the same. Venezuela is only a threat to the US oil industry's executive compensation packages.

[mbperrin]

37. Saab is 100% owned by GM since 2000.

I'm guessing that since it is a US company, that all components are by default US. I think the real handle here is on GM, rather than the Swedish government.

Just to add a bit of info. Since the US spends nearly as much as all the world combined on arms, this all does seem just a tad bit crazy, doesn't it?

[nolabels]

44. Effing cOrporations again and spewed by cOrporate media

If anyone had any doubt about the grip of fascism on the rest of the world, study what is really taking place here in this article and thread. Thanks again the heads up mbperrin

[alaric520]

49. Saab Auto Unit is 100% owned by GM

Saab sold the auto unit to GM but I'm fairly confident GM does not own saab aerospace or any other part of Saab.

Plus GM even wants to get rid of the auto unit of saab. I hope they do. Saab is a better fit for someone like BMW.

[mbperrin]

71. You're right about GM and the autos, so I looked closer. Carlyle Group

owns an interest in the defense part of SAAB through United Defense Industries. Wikipedia has a great article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Defense

snip>UDI was subject to a takeover bid by rival General Dynamics in 1997 but instead chose a (lower) bid from private equity firm The Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group floated the company in 2001 but retained a share of the company.<

Lots more at the link. I had the wrong corp, but right country after all! Carlyke, yikes!

[Pavulon]

3. I'm sure the (cough) russians

will be happy to sell.

[Judi Lynn]

5. (cough) No doubt. n/t

[saigon68]

14. The chinese have plenty of stuff to sell too

The Chimp wouldn't dare tell them to stop either.

He wouldn't get his new Ginzu knife collection shipped if he did

[Judi Lynn]

21. No more adorable Pandas for the National Zoo

like little Tai Shan shown at his first birthday with his mother, Mei Xiang, as they contemplate their huge fruit ice treat July 24.



No Pandas, no Ginzu knives, no more chances to go to China and make an ass of himself again and again.

[Renew Deal]

8. Why is Venezuala stockpiling weapons?

I think this is a fair question. It seems like I read something about Venezuala and weapons every other week. What are they doing with this stuff?

[Henny Penny]

10. Something tells me they fear an attack... from a country

some ways north... Any ideas??

[Renew Deal]

11. Ireland?

[Henny Penny]

12. could be....!

[struggle4progress]

17. US spending is about 40% of the worldwide military budget:

in 2005, "we" (I mean US) spent $522 billion on the military, which translates to about $1770 per person; the second biggest spender (China) spend $62.5 billion in 2005 or about $48 per person. Venezuela typically spends something like $1.5 billion annually or $60 per person.

http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spend...
http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002244.php
http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff01212006.html
http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-in-the-press/may-200... -

I ain't sleepless with worry about the "threat" posed by Venezuela ...

[Judi Lynn]

18. Thanks for adding a little perspective. You can see what happens

when people prefer to disregard it!

[Renew Deal]

27. God forbid anyone questions Saint Chavez

I know. I know...

[Renew Deal]

26. Fine

but you didn't answer the question.

[struggle4progress]

34. The military budget data don't seem to support the assumptions

which underlie your question ...

[Renew Deal]

45. The military budget data provided is irrelevant.

Venezuala is amassing weapons. Their military spending increased in 2005. They have apparantly signed a deal for $3 Billion in new military expenditures which is about double what they spend it 2005 alone. So once again, why is Venezuala amassing weapons?

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/07/venezuela-r...

[High Plains]

50. That's a pretty goddamned stupid question.

Could it be because the world's largest and most aggressive superpower, with a long history of trying to overthrow governments it doesn't like, is making ugly noises toward Venezuala?

[Zhade]

54. Yes.

NT!

[struggle4progress]

79. According to your own link, Venezuela is buying new jets because US ...

... stopped Israel from supplying replacement parts for the jets they currently have, and the $3 billion figure you cite is listed as speculative.

Although you apparently want to represent this as if Venezuela has just doubled its defense spending, such deals are typically multiyear affairs and wouldn't normally be accounted in toto as monies spent in the year the deal was inked.

[struggle4progress]

81. How could comparative data possibly be irrelevant? You want to ..

.. argue that there's some alarming military expenditure in Venezuela. One of Venezuela's neighbors, Brazil, typically spends about $13 billion annually or about $70 per person; another neighbor, Colombia, may have increased its spending from $3 billion to $6 billion in the last five years, which is something between $70 and $135 per person.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.h...
http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-in-the-press/may-200... -

Then, there's the United States:

... if you count just the costs of the National Defense budget function, the approximate $538 billion we spend is $29 billion more than the $509 billion the entire rest of the world spends ... http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/defense_budget_tutorial.htm

... The USA is responsible for 48 per cent of the world total, distantly followed by the UK, France, Japan and China with 4-5 per cent each ... http://www.sipri.org/contents/milap/milex/mex_trends.ht...

These figures are just the beginning of the war-profiteering story:

Annual CRS Report Shows Five Year High in Weapons Sales

... The United States remains the world's largest exporter of arms to developing nations and leads all countries in both arms transfer agreements and arms deliveries in 2004 ... The United States and Russia together accounted for nearly 60 percent of all agreements with the developing world ... The primary market for U.S. arms in the developing world continues to be the Near East, and the United States remains the largest arms exporter to the region (defined as Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen) ... While the Near East transfers remain fairly steady, Asia has recently emerged as the primary overall destination for arms within the developing world, accounting for 49.2 percent of agreements between 2001 and 2004. This is due in large part to India’s rank in 2004 as the leading purchaser of arms in the developing world, with $5.7 billion in agreements ... http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?documentid=3129...

Up in arms: India helps drive global weapons trade to $50 billion
By Thom Shanker in Washington
August 31, 2005

Military weapons sales worldwide jumped last year to the highest level since 2000, driven by arms deals with developing nations, especially India, Saudi Arabia and China, according to a US government study.

The total of arms sales and weapons transfer agreements to both industrialised and developing nations was nearly $US37 billion (about $50 billion) in 2004.

That was the highest total since 2000, when sales reached $US42.1 billion - far above the 2003 figure of $US28.5 billion.

The US dominated, signing deals worth $US12.4 billion in 2004 - 33.5 per cent of the value of all deals worldwide ...
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/up-in-arms-india-helps...

So we might ask: why is the US arming the world? why is the US arming the Middle East? and what does top buyer India want with all those weapons?

[Tight_rope]

59. I want my $1770 back. I can spend it on better ways to protect myself.

And I don't want to fucking raincheck

[Herkdrvr]

69. More perspective...

China can license-manufacture a Russian-designed Su-27 fighter for about $10-20 million US per airplane in their government-run plants. A new-build Boeing F-15 runs around $55 million, and the new F-22 costs around $96 million each.

Plants that make bicycle parts also make missile parts in China. Another way they can affordably produce weaponry. Altogether, in US dollars, China outpaces the US in arms (considering what their supplies and systems would cost if bought from another source). Much of many other countries' military spending is actually paid for by the US.

[Bacchus39]

29. funnel them to their friends in the FARC in Colombia?

certainly more plausible than an invasion from the USA.

[Zhade]

55. Yeah, especially when Chavez has never done that, while the U.S...

...has backed a failed, bloody coup attempt during which the people rose up to stop the coup two days after the overthrowers ripped up the Venezuelan constitution (literally).

[anotherdrew]

32. oh come on, you hear the reports because bush wants you to . n/t

[Marie26]

42. Chavez thinks the US

wants to attack him. And who knows? Maybe he's right about that.

[Zhade]

56. U.S. already tacitly supported one failed coup attempt.

So you're on the right track!

[Marie26]

58. But

Chavez seems to be on the wrong track. In South America, we don't take over w/tanks & wars, we just use an assassination or funded "resistance group" to accomplish the same thing. I'm not sure what he thinks amassing these weapons will accomplish.

[Judi Lynn]

60. That ploy has failed BIG time in Venezuela for Bush.

You may have noticed posters do post articles referring to a build-up of bases in South America in the vulnerable countries, and how could you miss the incursions which started coming across the boarder into Venezuela from Colombia a year or two ago, from the one strong _Bush ally, Alvaro Uribe?

Please take time to read these things which come along,and then start researching them so you'll know what posters are discussing.

They've already caught a group numbering over 100 armed paramilitaries from Colombia at a ranch owned by Cuban-Venezuelan opposition leader, Roberto Alonso, near Caracas. The paramilitaries confessed they were hired by the Venezuelan opposition. Many were jailed, many were sent home.

When they find they are getting caught too often, and not killing all the people they want to kill, they will graduate to big stuff, obviously.

Some idiots imagine Venezuela shouldn't be prepared for that.

[Marie26]

61. Whatever

Please don't patronize me. I've lived in Latin America & am aware of the history of the region. Historically, coups & assassinations are how the US gets its way in Latin America. I don't care how many bases we build, the US doesn't have the forces to take over Venezuela. And it doesn't even need to. All it needs to do is get a new leader who's more favorable to US policy. This is usually CIA paramilitary stuff, not military stuff. I think anyone who really thinks that we're about to militarily take over Venezuela is pretty delusional at this point. What's more likely, IMO, is a coup, assassination or a covert paramilitary operation funded by the US. That's got very little to do with bases.

[Judi Lynn]

64. With any luck at all those doors are closing for Bush.

That pResident has shown he doesn't operate the way previous U.S. Presidents have operated.

He has a low patience threshhold, will NOT plan, doesn't seem to have any interest in doing more complex, more time-consuming things, but would rather go for the quick fix, and he's an absolute slave to his ego.

He has no hesitation in squandering the lives of other people, and would never consider skimping if another war could get him the satisfaction of a satisfying victory. He doesn't do diplomacy, or truly grown-up manly things. He does violent, childish things.

You saw him overthrow Haiti quickly and easily, training the killers in Ecuador before sending them to creep across the border from the Domincan Republic into Haiti. You've seen Afghanistan, and Iraq.

Did you notice he was trolling the water immediately off Venezuela with his war games? Venezuelans certainly did.

[NoodleyAppendage]

51. Because they are afraid and the world is beset with Neocon MADMEN.

Chavez is doing what any sane person would do. He's seeking to protect his interests from the expansionist/delusional Neocons that have thrown the world into chaos.

J

[Zhade]

53. Oh, I dunno. One U.S.-backed coup attempt so far...

...multiple failed attempts to remove Chavez from his democratically-elected office (Carter Center signed off on the elections) - I'd say "in case they're needed for defense".

[krispos42]

82. Probably upgrading the basics

The basic army stuff is probably due for an upgrade. Chavez seems to be keeping his purchases on the easy-to-use level and avoiding the fancy, expensive, special-use stuff. He's not trying to build a marine landing force, for example, but upgrading the common army equipment is not unreasonable. New assault rifles, updated anti-armor missiles and rockets, anti-aircraft artillery, mortars and artillery, even trucks and armored personnel carriers, are not unreasonable. This is all core stuff that a decent army needs. And even if the hardware is bought from overseas, a smart leader would make sure that the munitions factories are local so that an arms embargo would not leave his military short of ammo.

How decrepid is the Venezuelen military now? That is the question. Is his making up for years of having a poorly trained and ill-equipped military?

Presumably Chavez is trying to make up for years of neglect, both in the military and the economy, as well as social programs. With oil nearing $80 a barrel he's probably taking advantage of the gravy train while it lasts.

[darkism]

9. Sweden has no reason to be manufacturing any weapons.

As a peace-loving nation, they should find different sources of income than exporting tools of death.

[1932]

20. Tell Saab...they're the manufacturers.

[Peace Patriot]

13. An embargo is an act of war. Venezuela has a case for sanctions against

the US by the UN, and for retaliatory boycotts. There has already been grave interference--the Bushites no doubt had a hand in the 2002 attempted coup (at the least, they publicly welcomed it), and in the subsequent oil professionals' strike, and contributed OUR money to fund the opposition in the failed Recall election (the most heavily monitored election in history--which Chavez handily won), in violation of Venezuelan law. Then there is the White House frequent diner Pat Robertson's death threat.

What has Venezuela done to deserve any of this? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING--except to hold free and fair elections. That's a crime and a threat in the Bushites' eyes.

Anyway, I'm not all that up on international law, but an embargo is a serious business. I'm surprised Sweden is going along with it. They must have lots of money at risk in Bushite/US contracts. I hope it sparks a controversy there about arms dealing.

The Bush junta has put these smaller oil rivals into a state of fear--with threats and saber-rattling--so that they feel the need to arm themselves, and it's hard to fault them. It is one of the scummier of the scumbag things they've done.

Venezuela will no doubt get the arms it feels it needs from someone else. And the arms dealers win again. Cheney & buds likely have fingers in ALL the arms trading, and are torn on this one. Their goal seems to be to strip the small countries who are sitting on oil reserves of any defenses--with Iraq, by installing Saddam and arming him with chem/bio weapons to use against Iran (so they will smash each other up), then enticing Saddam to invade Kuwait, then smashing the Iraqi army, then imposing crippling sanctions, and, when Saddam threatened to switch to euros (in oil trading), bombing the hell out of a country that had no air force. In Iran, where nukes would be a deterrent, demonizing them, and plotting with Israel to invade. Now Venezuela--which has done no harm to anyone. (Nor has Iran, for that matter.) It's interesting they've done nothing to No. Korea, which probably IS something of a threat, because of its unstable leader. Could the reason be that No. Korea has no oil? (It may also partly be because So. Korea opposes violent "regime change" against No. Korea--sensible government there--anti-Bush).

When you think about this list of countries slated for violent "regime change," and Venezuela's obvious presence on this list (put on hold, for the moment, because of the widespread leftist revolution in Latin America, and the Iraq disaster), the scam becomes very apparent. Also the motive: grabbing all oil reserves.

Again, I wonder how Sweden can go along with this--and I hope there is big political trouble in it for the current government.

[darkism]

25. The Swedish government also ordered the takedown of The Pirate Bay...

...and Piratbyrån after pressure from the U.S., despite the fact that Swedish law makes such intervention quite illegal.

Sweden is above this sort of behavior, they just need to learn to tell America to butt out of their business more often...though it still bothers me that they allow private manufacture of weapons in their country.

[Vidar]

15. Sweden's better than thi, but i can understand pressure.

It just makes another arms sale for the Russians,

[AX10]

16. Well then, Russia and China will sell them the weapons.

[killbotfactory]

23. Anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons

I wonder why would the US not want them to have these?

[Renew Deal]

28. I wonder why Venezuala wants them.

Isn't that a more interesting question?

[1932]

30. Because they don't want to end up like Panama '89

[Zhade]

57. Why does Canada want weapons?

I mean, they have a military for defense.

OH, there it is - defense against a country that already approved of a violent but utterly failed coup attempt against the democratically-elected Chavez.

So, why do you believe Venezuela shouldn't be allowed to prepare a defense against another attempt?

[killbotfactory]

72. They are obviously going to be using defense weapons to attack

Florida and Columbia.

[Judi Lynn]

36. Bush wants to have the least amount of expense involved if and when

he finds a way to attack Venezuela.

I'm posting this info. from another thread I posted this on today BECAUSE it shows very good reasons why Venezuela would believe it needs more weapons:

07/22/05 - - This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associates Mary Donohue and Melissa Nepomiachi.

• On June 1, 2005 the Paraguayan National Congress entered into an agreement with Washington that allows U.S. troops to enter into Paraguay for an 18-month period.

• The troops will help train Paraguayan officials to deal with narcotrafficking, terrorism, government corruption and domestic health issues.

• The agreement grants the U.S. troops legal immunity from possible offenses committed during their stay.

• Washington has long sought similar immunity for its troops in the Southern Cone, but Argentina and Brazil have firmly restricted granting such judicial liberty to U.S. troops.

• Bolivian officials and its press are also speaking out against the agreement, fearing the U.S. presence as a means to control the petroleum and natural gas sources in their country.

• Though Asunción and Washington claim that the U.S. has no intentions of establishing a permanent base in Paraguay, history shows a strange resemblance between the current situation in Paraguay and the development of the Manta base in Ecuador from a “temporary” facility into a major base.

Paraguay and the United States recently entered into an agreement that allows U.S. military personnel to enter Paraguay to train officials in counter-terrorism and anti-narcotrafficking measures. According to the Head of Social Communication of the Paraguayan Armed Forces Col. Elio Flores, these U.S. Special Forces units will be working with the National AntiDrugs Secretariat, the Presidential Escort Regiment and the Air Transport Brigade. The U.S. will also provide financial assistance to help stabilize Paraguayan agencies which will be collaborating with U.S. authorities and institute a military-led initiative to provide health care services to the country’s poor in the northeast region of Canindeyu. Jose Ruiz, Public Affairs officer for the U.S. Armed Forces Southern Command office, told COHA that “some military training will be operational in nature,” and the goal is to better equip Paraguayans to deal with the threats of narcotrafficking, terrorism, government corruption and poverty. A contingent of 500 U.S. troops headed by seven officials arrived in Paraguay on July 1 with planes, weapons, equipment and ammunition. This group is the first of at least 13 U.S. units set to enter Paraguay until the agreement expires December 31, 2006.
(snip)

Over 80 million dollars has been invested in the base in Manta, Ecuador which is now one of the best-equipped airports in Latin America. Yet much controversy has arisen over the influence U.S. military officials have in the region. At first, the Pentagon presented Manta as a dusty, archaic facility which it would operate solely for anti-drug and weather monitoring functions. Washington asserted that the base would function only for daytime use and would not permanently house U.S. personnel. Only a few days later the Pentagon clarified its original statement and outlined its full mission for Manta, which was to serve as a major U.S. military base tasked with a variety of security-related missions.
(snip)

While it is clear that direct U.S. interests in the region subsided after the Cold War, and even came to a staggering halt after September 11, the United States is once again at work trying to build a quasi-military grid in Latin America. By entering into an agreement with Paraguayan officials, the U.S. will be able to successfully keep an eye out for the political unrest in Bolivia, maintain an influence in the highly sensitive Triple Border region and monitor activities of the de-facto left leaning alliance. Up to now Washington has expressed concern for the leftist regimes in Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina and Venezuela, with the likelihood that Bolivia, Ecuador and Mexico (if Lopez Obrador triumphs in that country’s 2006 elections) might join. While Paraguay alone exclusively has made an agreement that could very well infringe on its judicial power and ultimate sovereignty, the entire South American region could soon feel the after-effects of its domestic decision. Argentina and Brazil have successfully held off the U.S. military forces from gaining immunity in the area, but after several failed attempts to acquire a South American base of power, the U.S. now has a road paved for them by Paraguay’s 18-month agreement.
(snip/)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9541.ht...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Who can possibly ignore the fact Colombia is THIRD in line on the list of recipients of U.S. foreign aid, right behind Israel and Egypt? Who can overlook the fact Colombian paramilitaries have been making raids across the border into Venezuela for a long time, killing off officials, political people, etc.

Who can forget the fact that the Venezuelan government, acting on information provided by a tip, went to a ranch owned by a Cuban "exile," Roberto Alonso, next door to a ranch owned by media mogul and Bush family friend, Gustavo Cisneros, near Caracas, not close to the border, and found over 100 Colombian paramilitaries who confessed they had been hired to involve themselves in some mayhem in Caracas? They found a lot of ammunition and weapons, as well, of course.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A quick article on the paramilitaries: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0517-04.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,1213445,00...





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In March 2003, the first clashes between the Venezuelan military and the Colombian army and paramilitaries took place on the Colombia-Venezuela border. The symbolism was striking: Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez, was at the head of a country trying to make a 'Bolivarian Revolution', strengthening the public sector, social programs, independent political organizations, and a foreign policy independent from the United States. Alvaro Uribe Velez, meanwhile, was the candidate of Colombia's traditional landowning elite, military, and big business interests tied to the United States. Uribe had asked the US, without any irony, to do to Colombia what they were doing in Iraq. Chavez had gone on Venezuelan television and shown photos of the civilian victims of US aerial bomardment in Afghanistan. For their 'Bolivarian Revolution', Venezuelans were punished with a coup attempt in April 2002 and a 'National Strike' that devastated their economy. Now the Colombian military was being used against them, an attempt to start a war between Colombia and Venezuela that would be destructive of the aspirations of the people of both countries. The clashes continued in December 2003, as members of the Venezuelan National Guard were killed by Colombian paramilitaries in repeated incursions into Venezuelan territory.
(snip/...)

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=9...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sorry to post it twice, but it's apparent a poster or two will refuse to acknowledge there's a reason for Venezuela to protect itself. That simply couldn't be more absurd.

[ConcernedCanuk]

39. I'll respond to this again, cuz I think it is VERY important to note

.
.
.

(Thanks for the map JL - it puts a great light on the situation . . )

Paraguay is almost in the centre of south America, and that is where the USA is building a Military base

It will NOT be a temporary base as they claim - they almost never are

and it will have Nukes

Count on it

(sigh)

[Marie26]

43. We're building a base

in Paraguay? When is it opening?

[ConcernedCanuk]

46. We're building a base in Paraguay? When is it opening? - how about 2005???

.
.
.

Bolivia Worries About New U.S. Base In Paraguay

Congressman Cardozo to head a delegation to go to the border zone.

07/11/05 "El Deber" - - The installation of a military base on Paraguayan territory, some 200 kilometers from the border of Bolivia, created worry yesterday in the Legislature, to the point that a commission of the Lower House announced an investigation.

Willman Cardozo, Congressman for Tarija, on the border with Paraguay, where is located the largest reserves of Natural Gas in the country, urged the Government to open an investigation and solicit information from the Embassy of Paraguay in La Paz.

"The Executive must open an immediate investigation and the Ministry of Defense must assume it role for the preservation of the nation's integrity" demanded the Legislator, who is to lead the delegation to the border area next week.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9448.ht...

___________________________________________________________________

The US Military Descends on Paraguay

Written by Benjamin Dangl, The Nation

Wednesday, 26 July 2006



While hitchhiking across Paraguay a few years ago, I met welcoming farmers who let me camp in their backyards. I eventually arrived in Ciudad del Este, known for its black markets and loose borders. Now the city and farmers I met are caught in the crossfire of the US military's "war on terror."

On May 26, 2005, the Paraguayan Senate allowed US troops to train their Paraguayan counterparts until December 2006, when the Paraguayan Senate can vote to extend the troops' stay. The United States had threatened to cut off millions in aid to the country if Paraguay did not grant the troops entry. In July 2005 hundreds of US soldiers arrived with planes, weapons and ammunition. Washington's funding for counterterrorism efforts in Paraguay soon doubled, and protests against the military presence hit the streets.

http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/860 /

[Judi Lynn]

52. Great article, from a tremendous author.

Very depressing content, however, and people need to know about it, as it's being done in our names, right under our noses by the _Bush administration. From the aricle:

Like Castillo, Palau said there is an association between the US military presence and the increased violence against campesinos. "They are teaching counterinsurgency classes, preparing the Paraguayan troops to fight internal enemies," he told me. He said it's common knowledge that the US troops and the Paraguayan troops are conducting operations together. "All the Paraguayan press is talking about this."
(snip)

Pretty familiar story when a right-wing pResident slimes his way into the White House. What a fiendish pity.

[Marie26]

62. Paraguay is nowhere near Venezuela.

It'd be closer for the US to attack from Florida. It's worrisome that the US is doing this, but we've built bases in other SA countries before. I just can't see this base being about Chavez. The paramilitary operations in Columbia are pretty suspicious & I wouldn't be surprised if the US has something to do with that. But you're pairing these two articles together like one is directly related to the other. And I don't see that. The US already has bases in areas much closer to Venezuela, like Aruba, El Salvador, Honduras, etc. And why would we put a nuke in Paraguay, exactly? Thanks a lot for the info. It's interesting, even if I don't agree w/some of the conclusions you've reached about it.

[Judi Lynn]

66. That's why I included an article on the Ecuador base. n/t

[ConcernedCanuk]

67. USA ain't just after Venezuela - they want the CONTINENT!

.
.
.

USA needs Water, Lumber, livestock, etc., etc. . . - whatever anyone else has got that the USA wants or needs, - they'll take it if they can.

So a military base in the middle of South America is paramount to further their PNAC agenda.

USA has over a dozen military bases under construction in Iraq - and they are all on, or AHEAD OF SCHEDULE - unlike their promises for hospitals, schools, power utilities and so on

priorities ya know . . .

(sigh)

[htuttle]

68. Actually, they used to control the continent, but lost most of it recently

I think the powers-that-be imagine that they will get it back someday, but I think that's highly unlikely at this point. Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[Marie26]

70. Hyperbole

You haven't given a compelling reason why the US will intitute this continent-wide occupation. We need water, lumber, etc., we buy it. That's the whole concept of international trade. You haven't explained how a base in SA furthers the PNAC agenda - how does this help us take lumber & livestock? Or what a nuke in Paraguay accomplishes. And you've jumped to the bases in Iraq for some reason. The thing is, we are building a ton of bases in Iraq & pulling all our troops to Iraq, and concentrating on a brewing Mideast war. The US is too occupied w/Iraq at this point to invade South America. Chavez is the least of our worries right now.

[ConcernedCanuk]

73. Hyperbole , really? - then why the base?

.
.
.

Canada has fought for years to get paid for lumber, even with WTO decisions in our favor the USA baulks at paying a fair price, so now we are dealing with China, Russia, Venezuela - same with our oil/gas/steel/beef, etc. - we get cheated by the USA - have for decades.

The USA DON'T pay, they steal

But maybe they only do that with Canada . . . .

I've only lived here for over half a century

Whadda I know . .

[Marie26]

74. We have bases EVERYWHERE.

The US has bases in over 60 countries. Are we planning on invading those 60 countries? No. We don't need to. We've already established global dominance. Yeah, that's right, the US has a huge trade advantage in the WTO because we're so powerful. So why would we need to invade a country to get the benefits we already have? Same thing w/Canada - do you think the US is going to invade Canada? Doesn't seem like it. Then what does a WTO decision have to do with anything? You're just proving that the US has many, many, other means of getting what it wants.

[ConcernedCanuk]

75. Actually, the USA has bases in over 120 countries

.
.
.

"At Least Seven Hundred Foreign Bases

It's not easy to assess the size or exact value of our empire of bases. Official records on these subjects are misleading, although instructive. According to the Defense Department's annual "Base Structure Report" for fiscal year 2003, which itemizes foreign and domestic U.S. military real estate, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries and has another 6,000 bases in the United States"

/snip/

The real reason for constructing this new ring of American bases along the equator is to expand our empire and reinforce our military domination of the world.

/snip/
______________________________________________________________________

I suggest you read the whole article before responding

and yeah,

I realize that the USA DOES have other ways of "getting what it wants"

It's called the FBI, CIA, or "black ops" etc.

USA is aiming for global domination

and winning

(sigh)

[Judi Lynn]

76. Make that 132 countries.

Obviously, if the U.S. has a base in a country, that country has accepted the base.

Some of us realize these bases have always been used to collect personel, weapons, etc. which can then be MOBILIZED to use against OTHER countries. It's not that hard to grasp. The practise goes back quite a while. When a country turns hostile against the U.S. which has a base, as in Uzbekistan, they ask the U.S. to leave.

Why are you fighting everyone who believes Venezuela has in every way the right to protect itself as does every other country?

Just let it go. You can be sure there is NO WAY you can win here. Maybe you should try your luck at a right-wing board.

[Marie26]

77. You've misunderstood

Yeah, that's right, I must be a Freeper because I don't believe that the US is about to invade Venezuela. You, who believes that the US is about to take over all of South America w/zero troops to spare, are being totally reasonable. I don't really care how evil the necons are, they eventually run into reality too. We aren't going to invade Venezuela, or all of South America, or Uzbekistan, because there are no. troops. left. So have we invaded Uzbekistan? Have we invaded the 120 countries we have bases in? Of course not. It's just that the US is a superpower & we have bases all over the world. But you're saying that this particular Paraguay base proves that the US is planning to invade Venezuela, which is over 2000 miles away, when it doesn't show that at all. WHEN DID I EVER SAY VENEZUELA CAN'T BUY WEAPONS? Search real hard, & you can't find it. You're just trying to twist my words, or maybe you can't understand my words, I don't know. Venezuela can buy all the weapons it wants, & it has the right to do so. I'm simply stating that a US invasion of Venezuela is extremely implausible, despite all your efforts to make it seem pending.

[Judi Lynn]

47. They've been coming and going already.

Dark Armies, Secret Bases, and Rummy, Oh My!
Conn Hallinan | November 21, 2005

Editor: John Gershman, IRC

Foreign Policy In Focus www.fpif.org

It would be easy to make fun of President Bush's recent fiasco at the 4th Summit of the Americas in Mar del Plata, Argentina. His grand plan for a free trade zone reaching from the Artic Circle to Tierra del Fuego was soundly rejected by nations fed up with the economic and social chaos wrought by neoliberalism. At a press conference, South American journalists asked him rude questions about Karl Rove. And the President ended the whole debacle by uttering what may be the most trenchant observation the man has ever made on Latin America: “Wow! Brazil is big!”

But there is nothing amusing about an enormous U.S. base less than 120 miles from the Bolivian border, or the explosive growth of U.S.-financed mercenary armies that are doing everything from training the military in Paraguay and Ecuador to calling in air attacks against guerillas in Colombia. Indeed, it is feeling a little like the run up to the ‘60s and ‘70s, when Washington-sponsored military dictatorships dominated most of the continent, and dark armies ruled the night.
(snip)

U.S. Special Forces began arriving this past summer at Paraguay's Mariscal Estigarribia air base, a sprawling complex built in 1982 during the reign of dictator Alfredo Stroessner. Argentinean journalists who got a peek at the place say the airfield can handle B-52 bombers and Galaxy C-5 cargo planes. It also has a huge radar system, vast hangers, and can house up to 16,000 troops. The air base is larger than the international airport at the capital city, Asuncion .

Some 500 special forces arrived July 1 for a three-month counterterrorism training exercise, code named Operation Commando Force 6.

Paraguayan denials that Mariscal Estigarribia is now a U.S. base have met with considerable skepticism by Brazil and Argentina . There is a disturbing resemblance between U.S. denials about Mariscal Estigarribia, and similar disclaimers made by the Pentagon about Eloy Alfaro airbase in Manta , Ecuador . The United States claimed the Manta base was a “dirt strip” used for weather surveillance. When local journalists revealed its size, however, the United States admitted the base harbored thousands of mercenaries and hundreds of U.S. troops, and Washington had signed a 10-year basing agreement with Ecuador .

The Eloy Alfaro base is used to rotate U.S. troops in and out of Columbia, and to house an immense network of private corporations who do most of the military's dirty work in Columbia. According to the Miami Herald , U.S. mercenaries armed with M-16s have gotten into fire fights with guerrillas in southern Columbia, and American civilians working for Air Scan International of Florida called in air strikes that killed 19 civilians and wounded 25 others in the town of Santo Domingo.

The base is crawling with U.S. civilians—many of them retired military—working for Military Professional Resources Inc., Virginia Electronics, DynCorp, Lockheed Martin (the world's largest arms maker), Northrop Grumman, TRW, and dozens of others.

It was U.S. intelligence agents working out of Manta who fingered Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia leader Ricardo Palmera last year, and several leaders of the U.S.-supported coup against Haitian President Bertram Aristide spent several months there before launching the 2004 coup that exiled Aristide to South Africa.
(snip/...)

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2939

[enigma000]

33. I thought the US didn't have any power or influence anymore

Must be a last gasp of a dying empire.

[dipsydoodle]

40. No power or influence ?

Not true. Can generally be relied upon to piss people off.

[Peace Patriot]

38. When the Bushites demonize a democratically elected government,

and put them a category with No. Korea, because they're sitting on a sea of oil, it's time for that democratic government to think of self-defense. It would be malfeasance not to. Venezuela has long had an army and modest defenses. The Bushites are moving to DENY them their right as a sovereign people to defend themselves, if attacked--with the Bush junta as the LIKELIEST attacker. What's to understand here? The Venezuelans are NOT a militaristic people, and have harmed NO ONE. Their elections are the most heavily monitored--by outside, independent agencies--in the world. Our own elections could not bear that--or any--scrutiny. So it is the BUSHITES who are making an issue of Venezuela's defenses. They are DENYING them parts to service PAST purchased hardware, and pressuring other manufacturers of arms to deny replacements. It is an embargo. And it is WRONG. Where are these policies coming from--except from the oil companies who have to pay their fair share of taxes now in Venezuela--by DEMOCRATIC decree! No more free ride! No more exploitation! The Bushites want to BREAK THAT DEMOCRATIC CONTROL--and have tried every devious means to do so. And the things that they've done are STEPS toward war. They have tried to destabilize Venezuela's democracy, and have failed. What's NEXT?

There are idiots on this board who do "hit and run" posts on Chavez and Venezuela--NEVER contributing to the discussion, ALWAYS spouting brief, uninformed opinions, or leering suggestive questions--suggestive of Venezuelan hostility or ill intent. And it's ignorance and know-nothingism, from what I can see--or else they are paid agents of the oil corporations. There are hazards to having an open forum. This is one of them.

For those who are seeking information, I suggest: www.venezuelanalysis.com . A well-written, pro-Chavez site--and a good counter-balance to the disinformation from Freepers and from our war profiteering corporate news monopolies.

[Marie26]

41. So who will sell

Venezuela arms now? Hmmm. Could it be - Iran? China? IMO, we have driven Venezuela toward these states & then we whine about their alliances.

[VegasWolf]

78. Stupid on Sweden's part. Long after this AmeriKKKan maladministration is

gone, Sweden will be missing the sales proceeds of this money. Russia and China, way too powerful to worry about the pathetic little Bush will gladly supply the orders.

[citizen snips]

80. I am sure they find somewhere else to buy from