You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #99: Oil War II: South America is already in motion.... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
99. Oil War II: South America is already in motion....
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 11:47 AM by Peace Patriot
1. They will not attack Iran

Bushites are cowards. They attack the weak. Iran is not weak, and its oil is critically important to China's economy. China, not Fallon, has been blocking an attack on Iran. (Fallon just looked at the realities--who we would be turning into deadly enemies. China holds a big chunk of U.S. debt paper and other things over Bushites' heads, and has nukes and zillions of soldiers.) I think the saber rattling against Iran is to protect the Exxon Mobil & co. oil contracts that the Bushites imposed on the Iraqis. To keep Iran out of Iraq. Even if you understand that the Bush Junta is treasonous--have no loyalty to the U.S.A.--and are the operatives of a sort of floating country--an international financial empire made up of global corporate predators, that has no borders--the colossal mess that nuking Iran would bring about would not benefit this "floating country." They could nuke its nukes, but they couldn't KEEP HOLD OF the country OR ITS OIL FIELDS. Anyway, the U.S. is on the point of financial collapse, due to their massive looting and mismanagement (to benefit the "floating country" and disable the great American progressive majority). We can nuke Iran. We cannot afford to occupy it. And we're talking about a HEALTHY country (unlike sanctioned, no-fly-zone bombed Iraq) with strong defenses.

2. They have a plan to regain control of the oil in the Andes region, and it has begun

There are four easier military targets--but not easy in other ways--in South America, with lots and lots of oil: Venezuela, Ecuador (both members of OPEC), Bolivia (lots of gas, some oil--and a white separatist movement to split off the gas/oil rich provinces, funded by the Bushites, in motion as we speak), and Argentina (big oil find there recently, and a strong ally of the other three). All have democratic, leftist (majorityist) governments, with goals of social justice, using the country's resources to benefit the poor and regional self-determination. The Bushites have tried every trick in their dirty playbook (and have spent lots and lots of our money) to break up this viper's nest of peace, prosperity and decent government, which sits on so much oil--to no avail.

But there have many signs and portents, recently, that a plan, which I think is being orchestrated by Donald Rumsfeld, is coming to fruition, to cause major trouble in South America, with the goal of regaining global corporate predator control of the Andes oil fields.

The recent border incident between Colombia (fascist government, $5 BILLION in Bush/U.S. military aid) and Ecuador may have been an attempt to spark the violence needed to destabilize the region. Cooler heads prevailed. Chavez in particular saw what was developing and pulled back. Ecuador's president was absolutely livid. Chavez had gotten six hostages released from the FARC this year--at Colombia's invitation, actually--and had started a peace process to end Colombia's 40+ year civil war, which the Bushites have been stoking with billions in military aid. Ecuador's President, Rafael Correa, and the presidents of France, Argentina and Venezuela, were negotiating the release of 12 more hostages, when Colombia--using U.S. ordnance, U.S. surveillance, and probably U.S. aircraft out of the U.S. base in Manta, Ecuador--BOMBED and sent troops into a location just over the border in Ecuador, where the chief FARC hostage negotiator was located, killing him and 22 others, in their sleep. A war between Ecuador and Colombia was very possible at that point--but was headed off. Ecuador borders Colombia to the south, Venezuela to the north, and Colombia has made previous incursions into both, spraying small peasant farmers with pesticides and killing innocent people (which Colombia's security forces and paramilitaries are notorious for). The potential for further incidents is great.

Another situation that could be made to spin out of control exists in Bolivia--and it is there that I expect major trouble, and possible U.S. military intervention this year, possibly in May and into the summer (affecting the November election? --quite possibly). The white separatists want to split four gas/oil-rich provinces off from the central government of Evo Morales, the first indigenous president of Bolivia (a largely indigenous country), to deny benefit of those resources to the poor majority. They are being funded by USAID-NED and covert budgets. They may declare their "independence" this May, and, if Morales uses Bolivian troops to try to hold the country together, they may ask for U.S. military support for their "independence." In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Rumsfeld urges "swift action" by the U.S. in support of "friends and allies" in South America.* The Bushites don't have any "friends and allies" in South America, except Colombia, and fascist thugs planning coups within leftist democracies, particularly Venezuela and Bolivia (probably also Ecuador and Argentina).

Rumsfeld could combine U.S. air support and surveillance with local armed rightwing militias (the white supremecists in Bolivia), and paramilitaries and mercenaries (Blackwater) from Colombia, to create a fascist enclave and launching pad, in Bolivia, which would combine with Colombia, to start serious destabilization of the region. A split-up of Bolivia would create chaos (and rage) within the OAS, and many opportunities for "divide and conquer" tactics. To Rumsfeld, chaos = opportunity. Along with economic warfare recently begun by Exxon Mobil against Venezuela, some leftist governments could fall, to be replaced with fascist governments that would turn the oil fields back over to the multinationals.

I could go on and on about all the "signs and portents" that this plan is real, and has begun. But I'm just going to mention only one more of them. Hugo Chavez has been painted as a "dictator" by the Bush Junta and its lapdog corporate news monopolies. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is plainly obvious to me, and to anyone who knows the facts (and who respects facts). I have studied Venezuela and South America intensely. I know what the majority of its people think of Chavez. I know what other leaders think of Chavez. I have studied Venezuela's election system (which puts our own to shame for its transparency). I have sought out all sorts of alternative information sources. Chavez is NOT a "dictator." Not even close to being one. ALL the rightwing "talking points" about it are false. And yet, the brainwashing about this is endemic in the U.S. And I have not seen anything like this disinformation campaign since the one about Iraq's WMDs. A 100% lie, that most Americans think is, a) true, or b) partially true.

WHY would they go to all this trouble, to promulgate a total lie about this South American president if they were not intending a hot war against him in the near future?

The lie is not intended to convince us--but rather (as with Iraq's WMDs) to fool us long enough to get this done. To confuse us. To put us to sleep. To make us not care very much if we hear of disturbances in South America, or of some controversial U.S. military action at the request of people who merely want their "independence," or to defend Colombia against that "dictator" Chavez (in some further incident created by the Bush/U.S. military).

And once again, this plan--although it, too, will ultimately fail, in my opinion--is EASIER than nuking Iran and trying to hold onto it. It is more complicated, in many ways--because most of South America has gone leftist and democratic. But the new notions of the Bolivarians for regional integration and political/economic cooperation are still fragile. They're successful but they're new--on a continent that has never really cooperated before. Countries like Brazil and Chile, both with leftist governments--and with Brazil's president a friend and ally of Chavez--are conflicted, due to "free trade" deals. They are benefiting from the Bolivarians' bold new ideas, but they might cave in a serious Bushite/Bolivarian confrontation. Venezuela and Ecuador are pretty well defended, but the "war" Rumsfeld has in mind may not be a head-on war, but rather a backdoor war, through Colombia and separatist Bolivia.

For instance, what would Chavez or Correa do, to help Evo Morales, and defend Bolivia's territorial integrity against a separatist war? What would Brazil do, with those separatist provinces right on its border? Would Argentina, a strong Morales ally, bordering Bolivia, get involved? What would Paraguay do--with a center-right government, but one seriously threatened this year, by the campaign for president of beloved "bishop of the poor," Fernando Lugo? Paraguay joined the Bank of the South, a Chavez-inspired project. The separatist provinces are in close proximity to Paraguay. Would they let U.S. troops or mercenaries use the U.S. air base in Paraguay to help the separatists? The potential for chaos--disturbance, anger, divided loyalties, civil disorder, and every kind of conflict, are very great. This is Rumsfeld's M.O.


*"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chvez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07

Good description of the military situation:

Uribe's criminal associations (Bushites' pal in Colombia)

Recommended sites: (very informative) (hilarious AND informative)

Recommended video:
"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" (Irish filmmakers' documentary about the U.S.-backed violent rightwing coup attempt against the Chavez government in 2002; really tells you what's what in that country.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC