Bush junta (war) policy in South America takes two more blows! What will Obama do?

[Peace Patriot]

The two most recent blows (among many) to Bushite South American policy are as follows:

1. Evo Morales' smashing (67.5%) victory in the referendum on his presidency last Sunday, and Inca Kola's analysis of the election results, showing the weakness of the fascist separatist movement, may put the final kabosh on Bushite plans to stoke up civil war in three resource-rich countries: test-case Bolivia (gas and oil), Venezuela (oil), and Ecuador (oil).

Analysis of the Bolivian vote:
http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/2008/08/bolivia-recall-referendum-final-numbers.html

Rafael Correa, president of Ecuador, has stated that the Bushites have a three-country strategy to split off the oil-rich provinces (Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador), and create fascist mini-states in control of the oil. The Bushites have reconstituted the U.S. 4th Fleet, to roam around off the Caribbean coast of Venezuela, and, indeed, off the Venezuelan province of Zulia (where most of Venezuela's oil is), where there is a fascist separatist movement afoot, and which is conveniently adjacent to Colombia, the biggest troublemaker in the region, with one of the worst human rights records on earth, and larded with $6 BILLION in military aid through Bushite fingers. Evo's big win on Sunday--in which he increased his original margin as president (54%--what would be described as a landslide in the U.S., and was considered remarkable in fractious Bolivia) by a whopping 13.5% (his final total Sunday-67.5%!). This was a vote for unity, and a vote against Bushite interference, as well as a huge endorsement of Morales' government. And he did much better than expected in departments where the secession movement was said to be strong.

Morales' victory, combined with Brazil's and Argentina's avowal not to recognize or trade with separatist provinces in Bolivia (they are Bolivia's biggest gas customers), and leftist Fernando Lugo's remarkable presidential win in neighboring Paraguay, indicate that the Bush-backed secessionist project is unworkable, and this may retard plans for similar tactics in Venezuela and Ecuador.


2. Yesterday, leftist Fernando Lugo (the beloved "bishop of the poor") was inaugurated as president of Paraguay, ending 61 years of rightwing rule (much of it a U.S.-supported, heinous dictatorship), and likely putting the kabosh on a probable Bushite plan to use Paraguay as the staging area to shuttle U.S. military or other (Blackwater?) support to the secessionists in the eastern provinces of Bolivia (where secessionist sentiment is strongest--but, as Inca Kola points out, not nearly as strong as the secessionist leaders and their corporate 'news' monopoly shills have tried to assert). President Lugo has said that he wants the U.S. military out of his country. His inauguration was the occasion for what looked like a summit of all the leftist leaders of the continent (save one*): Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Ecuador's Rafael Correa, Bolivia's Evo Morales, Argentina's Cristina Fernandez, Brazil's Lula da Silva and Chile's Michele Batchelet all attended the inauguration. Lugo made a point of stressing his approval of the social justice policies of Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia, in particular, and embraced these three leaders.

-----

And here's why the Bush junta is failing in its predation against South America (or one of the main reasons): strong cooperation among these leftist countries.

Brazil and Venezuela recently pledged billions of dollars in a loan to Bolivia, to build a road from the Atlantic to the Pacific, through Bolivia--a road that will benefit the economies of Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Chile, Argentina and others in the region. It will also boost trade with Asia.

Venezuela just pledged to provide Paraguay with all the oil that it needs, on a low interest, long term basis, as it has done for other very poor countries. (Paraguay has only one resource--hydroelectric power. It is one of the poorest countries in South America.)

Brazil's president has been jawboning hydroelectic interests to re-negotiate its contracts with Paraguay, to give Paraguay a higher profit. (Paraguay got fleeced on the old contracts.)

Chile's president recently settled a 130 year old dispute with Bolivia, by granting Bolivia access to the Pacific. (Combined with the new transcontinental road, this will be a boon to trade from the interior and in the region as a whole.)

And, as I mentioned above, both Brazil and Argentina have stated that they will not buy gas from the separatists in Bolivia--a move that indicated solidarity with Morales' government, and is an example of the strength, cooperation and confidence of this rather amazing, peaceful, democratic, leftist revolution that has swept South America, and that is moving all countries swiftly toward creation of a South American "Common Market."

Barack Obama holds the rather retro view that Latin America needs U.S. leadership, and proposes to flood Latin America with Peace Corps volunteers and aid money. He also avers that Hugo Chavez is a dangerous "demagogue" and "authoritarian," an opinion that is not shared by any of these leaders. For instance, Lula da Silva recently said, "You can criticize Chavez on a lot of things, but not on democracy." And it seems a bit arrogant for a U.S. presidential candidate, whose own election could easily--EASILY!--be stolen by the fuckwad rightwing corporations who own and control the 'TRADE SECRET' code by which all of our votes are tabulated, to be criticizing the choice of the voters of Venezuela, which holds elections that put our own to shame for their transparency. It is not South America that needs our leadership; it is we who need South America's leadership--on transparent vote counting, on social justice, on putting badass corporations in their place, on restoring our sovereignty as a people, and on peaceful cooperation with others.

Will Obama pursue this hostile policy toward South America, or wink and look the other way if the Bush Cartel makes a move for Venezuela's or Ecuador's oil (using Colombian forces, Blackwater and local fascists, all of whom our tax dollars have armed)? I don't know. He's a hard man to read, running for president in difficult, fascist coup circumstances.

I just want to note this: Brazil has proposed a common defense, in the context of the South American "Common Market," neither thing--the market or the defense--to include the U.S. Brazil is a fairly corporate-friendly country (compared to some of the others), and in fact made a deal with the Bushites on biofuels (something that the campesinos and environmental groups have descried). If Brazil--one of the most U.S. corporate-friendly countries in South America--sees a need for South America to defend itself, that is a sign of serious alienation between the two halves of the western hemisphere--alienation that could easily become permanent. South America has only one potential enemy--the U.S., which has time and again interfered, often brutally, in South American affairs.

No matter what Barack Obama feels that he has to say to the dangerous anti-Castro mafia in Miami, it is time for the U.S. to make peace with South America--and all of Latin America--and to begin respectful cooperation with these DEMOCRATIC countries. The majorities in South American countries have baffled Bushite war and exploitation schemes time and again. They stopped the Bush-backed coup in Venezuela. They just elected a leftist in Paraguay, of all places! They stopped an effort by the U.S. to instigate a war between Colombia and Ecuador this year (concerning which Brazil's president called Chavez "the great peacemaker.") They have elected leftists all over the continent, and this trend will soon manifest in Central America. (Nicaragua elected Sandinista Daniel Ortega as president, who is allied with the Bolivarian countries; El Salvador will be next, with an FMLN candidate; Guatemala just elected its first progressive government, ever; and Mexico's leftist lost the presidential election by only 0.05%, and will be back.)

These countries are pulling together, as democratic countries should. If Diebold & brethren (s)elect McCain, it will be a quick road to permanent alienation between north and south. If Obama voters manage to outvote the election theft machines, will it make any difference, or will the global corporate predators who rule over us go on stealing other peoples' oil (or trying to), with our military, or with militaries and paramilitaries funded by our tax dollars? Are they going to bring the Oil War home to this hemisphere, no matter who gets elected or (s)elected?

Most North Americans don't know how serious this situation is--both economically and militarily--and how important the events are, that I've described above: Evo's victory; Lugo's victory and inauguration; and the unity of these leaders. Our people have been kept in the dark. All I can say is: seek out alternative news sources, and get informed. Two that I particularly recommend are: www.venezuelanalysis.com (very informative), and www.BoRev.net (hilarious and informative). (Laughing ain't bad, no matter how serious the situation is.)

-------------------------


*(I'm not sure if Tabare Vasquez, president of Uruguay, attended Lugo's inauguration. Uruguay is part of this large leftist alliance in South America.)

Note: Last December, Donald Rumsfeld urged "swift action" by the U.S. in support of "friends and allies" in South America. I think he meant the fascist cells planning civil war and secession within Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador. I also think he is doing strategic planning for this oil war. You wondered what "the butcher of Baghdad" was up to his "retirement"? He seems to have Venezuela on his mind:
"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

[DCKit]

1. Obama will open diplomatic talks and normalize relations.

He's an educated - an earned, not a purchased or (legacy) bequeathed degree - Democrat with excellent management skills.

The people he's surrounded himself with, the tenor of his campaign and his relatively brief, yet stellar history all speak volumes about his potential. Not to mention the fact that he speaks fluent English.

"More of the Same" isn't in the cards for an Obama Presidency.

[Peace Patriot]

3. I read his Miami speech, and it's hard to tell if it's going to be "more of the same."

I understand what you're saying--he's very intelligent, a brilliant organizer if his campaign is any guide, and a brilliant speaker, and I do think his heart is in the right place, but someone on his staff advised him to say that Hugo Chavez is a dangerous demagogue and authoritarian, though they stopped short of "dictator." None of these charges are true. So, for starters, he said a real stupid thing, that all of the leaders of South America know isn't true, about someone whom many of the leaders consider not only a great president of Venezuela and an important regional leader, but a personal friend.

And his statements about Latin America needing U.S.leadership were just plain insulting.

It's clear that he was pandering to the Miami mafia. On the other hand, he was taking them a message that no politician has dared to take there before--that he will actually sit down in diplomatic negotiations with Cuba.

So....I reiterate, it's hard to tell what he will do, and what he really believes. I hear "Cold War" rhetoric, but hey, 'we'll negotiate, we come in peace.'

But what's to 'negotiate'? South America has gone well beyond being told what to do by the U.S. They are not offending or harming us in any way. There is nothing they can stop doing that is a negotiating point. Not even Cuba. Cuba is doing absolutely nothing to harm us. The U.S. is the one doing the harm--with sanctions that should long ago have been lifted. What our global corporate predators want these countries to do is bend over. They won't. Not South America. And by bend over I mean something very specific: Exxon Mobil wants to go back to a world in which Venezuela gives them 90% of the oil profits, rather than the 40% that the Chavez government negotiated with the multinationals. Exxon Mobil alone walked out of those negotiations, and went into court and tried to grab $12 billion of Venezuela's assets--and lost. So they want to take food out of the mouths of the poor, and cast children out of school, and deprive the poor of medical care, to fatten their bloated coffers. They don't believe in negotiation. They believe in taking by force. And if they set something up to do that--like their plot in Zulia--will Obama support it, wink at it or oppose it?

I think he knows well what the constraints on him will be. He can't oppose it. He may well wink at it. And if they set it up well enough, he may be obliged to support it with troops and gunboats.

So, say Obama wants to head off such an Exxon Mobil plot. He sits down with Chavez and says, 'Give Exxon Mobil 20% more profits and I will talk them out of instigating a civil war in Zulia.' And Chavez says, 'Why should I agree to that? All of South America, except your jerkface fascists in Colombia, will come to my defense. You will have to nuke us to get Zulia. Are you really going to do that?'

Checkmate. The U.S. has nothing but threats and violence, and putrid exploitation, to offer. That's what the Bushites have done to us. And that's the position that Obama will be in, and why his pledge to "talk to our enemies" is such a...I was going to say, a crock, but it's more like a mask Obama puts on--a form of deception (possibly self-deception--I don't know). Venezuela is not our "enemy." Chavez is merely defending their sovereignty and their rights against a multinational--and, indeed, against a multinational who is our enemy, as well as the enemy of the Venezuelan people. But our government speaks for the multinational, not for us. That is the problem. And that problem is not going to go away, with the wave of a magic Obama wand.

He may wish to negotiate--but he has nothing, really, to offer. They don't want "U.S. leadership." They don't want Peace Corps volunteers. We don't want more consulates spying on them. They are sick unto death of the corrupt U.S. "war on drugs." The other day a bunch of farmers in Bolivia kicked the USAID out of their district, because rather than helping the farmers (grow other crops than coca leaves), the Americans were pocketing the money, and, as the farmers put it, "living in hotels with swimming pools." They said 'We don't want your money; our own government can take care of it. Go away!' They furthermore have their own methods of dealing with the cocaine (as opposed to coca leaf) trade. The U.S. has no understanding of the local culture, or what a sane drug policy is all about. They are there to loot, to spy and to bully. And the South Americans clearly don't want "free trade" and World Bank loans, which have decimated their economies, environments and societies. The oil democracies have plenty of cash, and they are spreading it around, helping poorer countries. What's to negotiate? They don't like our ideas. They don't like our corruption. They don't like our bullying and our utterly hypocritical superior attitude. They don't hate Americans, as a general rule. But they will not be pushed around any more, and they are savvy to our 'aid,' our lies and our bad intentions.

Obama may wish to come in peace, but the multinationals that hold his fate in their hands are not peaceful entities. Look at Iraq!

Parts of Central America (Panama, Costa Rica, Mexico) have bent over. Obama can negotiate with them, and try to get them to bend over some more--until they're so bent over that they crack and start electing leftists to straighten up their backs. Basically, the Democratic/Republican "carrot and stick" are not working in most of Latin America: The Republicans threaten and employ violence, then the Democrats 'come in peace' and expect to negotiate with cowed, frightened, and in some cases greedy parties. But most South Americans, and some Central Americans, have got onto this gig, and they will no longer be played in this way.

So, when Obama says he will "talk to our enemies," he not only mis-identifies the enemies, he misunderstands the situation entirely. South America is going for a South American "Common Market," without the U.S. The plan is to eventually make it a Latin American "Common Market." They want to be free of us. And, in short order, in my opinion, it will be the U.S. who is in need, and who will want to--and need to--join them in cooperative, respectful, mutually beneficial trade.

In thinking about Obama, I cannot avoid referring to some of the lessons I've learned about Democratic politicians. My first one was searing. In my first vote for President, I voted for the candidate who advertised himself as "the peace candidate"--LBJ. Two million deaths later, I knew that I had been lied to, big time. Lesson: beware of Democrats bearing peace. Then, a Democratic Congress passed a law forbidding the Reagan regime from waging war on Nicaragua. Reagan broke the law, and the Democrats slapped wrists, and wouldn't touch Reagan for that, or for his actually much more heinous crimes in Guatemala. Lesson: Democrats won't hold fascist Republicans accountable for unjust, illegal or even genocidal war, because maybe they really want those wars but are too chicken to cop to it?

And, finally, Clinton laid all the ground work, softening up Iraq for the Bush invasion--with no-fly zone bombings and cruel sanctions that took the lives of thousands of children. By the time Bush invaded, and bombed the shit out of Baghdad, he was doing so to a nearly defenseless nation, with no air force, and a battered army with many youngsters, some barely more than children. The sanctions decimated one of the few, viable secular societies in the Middle East, which paid its teachers and other professionals very well, and maintained civil order and infrastructure. Yeah, they had a dictator, but none of his crimes are the equal of George Bush's crimes. We had no right whatsoever to invade that country. Clinton set it up. Bush/Cheney did it. And the Democratic Congress of '06, instead of doing what they were elected to do, ESCALATED that war, with more troops and billions more in funding, for Bush/Cheney to keep killing Iraqis until they sign the oil contracts.

So, what am I to think of Barack Obama's promise to end the Iraq occupation? Mark my words: We are in Iraq for the duration--until the oil is gone. The U.S. military has to protect those contracts, cuz that's what it was all about. There's no way he can not defend Exxon Mobil & brethren. They will kill him if he doesn't, or destroy him some other way, and get themselves a presidential operative who will do their bidding. I think he knows this, and is just shining us on, about leaving Iraq. He will likely scale down the occupation force, and push the U.S. installed government and conscripted Iraqis to take over some of that protection--and Obame has outright said that he intends to move the Forever War to Afghanistan.

He is certainly more intelligent that Bush or McCain, and I have no doubt will run a cleaner operation, but he cannot buck the war profiteers and other global corporate predators who rule our land.

And the same for South American oil. The multinationals think it's theirs. They expect Obama to help them take it. And he has no cards to play in taking it peacefully. That leaves him in a very rough spot, if his intentions are good--which I suspect is true. If he's a friggin genius diplomat and leader--and he could be; I won't rule it out--and if he is very courageous, indeed, he might free us all from the true tyrants in this situation--Exxon Mobil & brethren, and allied war profiteers--and start a REAL negotiation to integrate northern and southern economies, in a fair and equitable and mutually beneficial way. Working together, the western hemisphere could be a powerhouse economic block, and could almost single-handedly save the planet as well. But that's a bit pie-in-the-sky, based on Obama's performance thus far. I think he thinks we can be fair to everybody, and make Exxon Mobil happy, too. He throws a sop at them, calling Chavez a demagogue--and is also sort of hedging his bets--but HOPES to smooth it all over. If Iraq is any guide, they don't do smooth. And they certainly don't do fair and equitable. They do death and destruction, to get what they want. And they have grown used to the President of the U.S. anticipating their needs, and rushing to torture and kill as many people as it takes to accomplish their goals.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I think Obama is a good guy, but the odds against him--as to true diplomacy and true peace, and also true justice--are very great, and we already see him bending to that reality, for survival's sake. It is understandable, Lord knows. But what his presidency--if he is successful--will mean, as to the prospect for change and reform in this country, it is very difficult to say.

[Judi Lynn]

4. Every politician running for national office seems to end up in Miami, as well as senators like

Lieberman, the former New Hampshire Republican idiot, Bob Smith, the New Jersey Senator, Bob Torricelli, thrown out for corruption, the New Jersey Presidential candidate, Bill Bradley, North Carolina monster Jesse Helms, Indiana Congressman Dan Burton, Texas fool Tom DeLay, even former President Bill Clinton, and so many others all make their pitiful pilgrimages there, hats in hand, to kiss up to the evil little radical reactionary Batista government-in-exile, the violent Miami members of the Cuban American National Foundation, which has been running U.S. foreign policy toward Cuba, and Latin America since the 1980's, for sure, once Ronald Reagan started courting their campaign funds, and their control of the voting block in South Florida. You may recall this is also the scummy cabal Richard Nixon used for his Watergate Burglars, and Operation Condor, hunting and killing leftists all over South America, and Reagan/Bush used for the war on Nicaragua.

Taking time out from their routine of terrorizing Cubans on the island, some of these terrorists also went to VietNam and assisted in some of the torture, etc. for the South Vietnamese, and made bonds with some of the South VietNamese government officials and "entreprenuers" which persisted when they moved to the United States.

Courting that voting block, and getting those big campaign contributions from South Florida has made a whore of nearly every American running for national office. Some politicians like Robert Torricelli have even changed their official position on Cuba 100% as soon as the Miami Batistianos got their claws into them.

John Ashcroft changed his position of favoring the removal of the embargo on Cuba totally as soon as _{George W. Bush} appointed him as the head of his Justice Department. It changed totally in the twinkling of an eye, as Ashcroft made his stand public in his debate with Missouri's Governor Mel Carnahan right before Mel Carnahan was killed in his small airplane, and Ashcroft was appointed within a couple of months to the Justice Department. Why? _{George W. Bush,} just like his father, who has been in bed with them since BEFORE the Bay of Pigs, and just like his brother Jeb, is totally Miami Mafia mobbed up to his eyebrows, and stocked his entire administration with these clowns. They're all over the place in Washington.

Congress funnels millions and millions to Miami each year to be destributed one way or another to the handful of paid "dissidents" they maintain in Havana, and Congress funnels at least $30,000,000.00 per year to Miami to be used in the yearly budget of TV and Radio Marti, two propaganda channels beamed directly into Cuba from stations manned by Miami Cubans, programmed by Miami Cubans, employing Miami Cubans, with Miami Cuban guests on, like the fathers of the Miami Republican Congresspeople Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, having conversations about how great Cuba was when they were in charge (Diaz-Balart was a former company lawyer for the United Fruit Company, until they decided he could serve their interests better if he became a Congressman, then he became the Cuban Speaker of the House of Representatives, then a Senator, and finally a Cabinet member of bloody dictator Fulgencio Batista.

So Cubans, if they gave a flying #### enough to listen could have heard the old #### blasting away, day after day about how how his friend, the Mafia-loving, death-squad using Fulgencio Batista ran such a wonderful government, and how happy everyone used to be before the revolution, and the embargo, and the regular attacks from Miami terrorists! And we get to pay for this monstrous misuse of U.S. taxpayers' dollars, and all our politicians are involved in the great chase to South Miami to get those goddamned dollars back in the form of contributions, and VOTES!

John McCain was there on Monday, AGAIN. He was also there in the last couple of weeks. _{George W. Bush} was in Miami well over 20 times in his first term.

They all go down there, shake their fists in the direction of Havana, and yell, "I'm going to #### him like he's never been ####ed," while the crowd goes wild, and throws our own money at them. Cool, huh? As long as an American President lets them set the pace for trying to harm as many leftists south of the U.S. as possible, they promise to faithfully support these politicians 'til their dying breaths, lavish funds on them, and votes. They have controlled the state of Florida for years.

They even got to John Kerry. He didn't dare try to buck them.

Occassionally a U.S. politician will attempt to stand up to them, like former Colorado Democratic Congressman David Skaggs:

Dealing from principle --- ex-Representative Skaggs

However, in 1993, former Representative David Skaggs (D-CO), in an attempt to trim unnecessary budgetary spending targeted for the Martis, was able to convince his House brethren to block funding for the two operations --- a measure which did not meet the same success in the Senate, where it was inevitably defeated. Skaggs paid a high price for his bold move, and came under withering fire from anti-Havana hardliners. Marti’s congressional supporters, led by none other than treasury plunderer Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart responded with a stark warning that revenge would be exacted on those who might threaten the continuation of the Marti operation, making an example of Skaggs by attempting to slash federal funding for projects in his home district. However, Skaggs refused to give up the fight, and he continued his campaign against the project, in particular its television component, until he retired in 1998. Skaggs admitted, "You know that if you kick the Cuba issue, you're going to have a bad day.” As a result of his personal experience, the Miami New Times reported in a November 12, 1998 article that Skaggs bitterly expressed outrage at the “corruption of United States policy that is inherent in our Cuba policy,” explaining, “by corruption I mean the untoward influence of a relatively small segment of the population in Florida and the money that small segment of the population brings to bear, and how it distorts the policy choices this government makes.”

http://cubajournal.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_archive.html

Diaz Balart told him he would destroy every Colorado project he held dear, and he found a way to do it. Then Diaz-Balart got the Cuban American National Foundation to sponsor ads in Colorado newspapers informing the voters that David Skaggs had been responsible for losing those projects, and Skaggs' career went into the dumper.

They also have a remarkably VIOLENT history. The FBI named Miami the "Terror Capital of the United States," at one point when they were at the zenith of their use of plastique explosive C4 on the Cubans who dared to moderate in their opinion of Cuba and the idea of normalizing relations with the island.

Undoubtedly a lot of politicians have simply been afraid to ignore them, knowing there's a real crowd of moderate and leftist and suspected leftist people in the next world sent there by the Miami Cuban reactionaries.

Who knows what any politician really would think of creating decent national policy toward Latin America if they didn't have these idiot ghouls and fanatics breathing down their necks?

As the old ones die off, the next ones up are not as radical, and more people have moved into South Florida who are NOT Cubans or right-wing Venezuelans or fascists from other Latin American countries. That hard right rabid, racist, fascist knot of Latin American nazis is starting to be diluted, somewhat. Once their dominance is broken, and that's going to happen, the Miami reactionaries can kiss their control of U.S. foreign policy goodbye. They'll never see it again.

Smart politicians would recognize this is underway even now, and would start stepping back from sucking up to these bloated dragons.

Maybe that will happen with Obama, once he has been around long enough to finally get a good long look at what's been going on there, and make a civilized choice to tune them out.

Our whole policy has to be reworked. Surely they're starting to suspect Latin America simply isn't willing to undergo another round of Dirty Wars on "leftists," people thrown from airplanes, babies torn from imprisoned leftist mothers' wombs and given to military friends as rewards (the mothers themselves flung into the ocean from great heights) endless torture, terrorism and pure genocide in blowing away entire villages of native citizens.

The world has known about this history. The only ones who don't are average American citizens. We've been purposely kept in darkness, like a nation of Helen Kellers, and our corporate media has been the agent of this ignorance. Uninformed, anaware, no one was likely to disapprove until 30 years later or so, when it was far, far too late, and the poisonous hold the fascists had on the world was far more deeply embedded, harder to remove.

Probably all progress will have to come a little at a time. There's probably nothing HUGE one President can do quickly, and it may take a series of very small steps.

With any luck at all, maybe the next human President we get will start making the intelligent, enlightened small moves needed to get us out of the moral chasm carved out by our fascist Republican Presidents. We can't get any lower than we are now.

[Peace Patriot]

8. Wow, Judi Lynn, thank you for this amazing rant, naming the names of the complicit

and the bought!

Your take on this situation (Miami mafia lock on U.S. L/A policy) is so enlightening and erudite! Thank you for all your amazing knowledge and efforts to inform others!

I'm afraid that most people in the U.S. haven't a clue about what's gone on in Florida (nor of the taxpayer welfare that is given to these fascist murderers and evildoers, nor their consequent untoward influence in Washtingon), and Latin America, to most of our compatriots, is just one big, vaguely troublesome BLANK ON THE MAP, barely grazing their consciousness. To them, half the western hemisphere doesn't really exist!

Well, that "southern cone" is about to roar like a lion, in my opinion. They are peacefully, democratically, and swiftly banding together in a South American "Common Market," and Bushite (and also Clinton) policy has both been pushing them to do this, and has been oblivious to the long term consequences to the people of the U.S. (and to U.S. business interests--the good, the bad and the ugly). It's going to be South America's century, not ours. Every time they tried to remove Hugo Chavez from his democratically achieved office--by violent rightwing coup, by the oil professionals' strike, by the U.S.-funded recall election, etc.--they steeled the Chavistas' will (the will of the majority) to kick Exxon Mobil the fuck out of their country, and every time they have tried similar crap in other South American countries, they had the same result: the election of MORE leftists, for one thing; and the leftist president of Ecuador determined to evict the U.S. military from the Manta air base in Ecuador; the new leftist president of Paraguay wanting the U.S. military out of his country; the Bolivians rejecting the corrupt, failed, murderous U.S. "war on drugs," and ejecting Bechtel corp. from Bolivia; the Bushites telling South American leaders that they must "isolate" Chavez and the president of Argentina replying, "But he is by brother!"; the Bushites and their rancid corpo media calling Chavez a "dictator" and the president of Brazil saying, "You can criticize Chavez on a lot of things, but not on democracy!", and thereafter proposing a South American common defense to go along with the South American "Common Market," neither thing to include the U.S. And more. Much more. The Bank of the South (perhaps Chavez's most important initiative) basically pushing the U.S.-dominated World Bank/IMF out of the region. No more U.S.-plundered economies! Financing will be regionally controlled and social justice friendly.

This is the reality that Obama is going to have to face. McBush won't face it all. He'll use the gunboats (recently un-mothballed by the Bush junta), and/or Colombian/private mercenary forces, to try to grab some of the oil, and re-impose U.S. dictation in some places--a project that is doomed to fail, and that will permanently alienate north and south. Will Obama's "talk to our enemies," peaceful, diplomatic approach--for all its arrogance--at least repair some of the damage to north/south relations, and lay some groundwork for a future of peaceful, cooperative, mutually beneficial interaction? I don't know. He first of all has to get elected (--and there are already indications that Diebold & brethren intend to steal it); secondly, he has to get out the "big stick" (as Teddy Roosevelt called t), and bust some of these fuckwad corpos who have dragged us into their global corporate resource war (with no benefit to us)--this Obama is unlikely to do, given what is, in truth, the greatly curtailed power of the U.S. president (for all Bush/Cheney's executive 'signing statements' and other tyrannies); and thirdly, his policy needs to be shaped to the new reality, articulated best by Bolivia's Evo Morales: "We want partners, not bosses." U.S. corpos have had their way in South American in the past. No more!

The U.S. military cannot even control Iraq--with most of the U.S. military ensconced in Iraq or in the region. They balked at attacking Iran, because Iran is better defended, and if they attack Iran, what then? They don't have the troops--or the U.S. FUNDS to buy the mercenaries--to occupy it. And they've lost control of Afghanistan. What makes the Bushites believe that they can militarily control the oil in South America (by their latest gambit of trying to split off the oil provinces into fascist mini-states--the U.S.-funded secessionist movement in Bolivia, and also in Venezuela's and Ecuador's oil rich provinces)? They can't. Virtually the entire continent has gone leftist, and these new leaders will not put up with it. Nor can they control the U.S. itself, by bringing the nazi boot down. They are NUTS--desperate, bankrupt ($10 TRILLION deficit), and without support, at home and abroad.

This is the DEAD END that the anti-Castro Miami mafia has led us into, in Latin America. And it is the DEAD END that the NeoCons have led us into in the Middle East. The U.S. cannot 'occupy' the world! We need to get off oil, repair our relations with other countries, restore (true) peace and (true) democracy as our goals, and save the planet, if we can. Obama may turn out to be the miracle-maker who can do this. It is not knowable, at this point, whether he really understands our situation, or what he intends to do about it (or, of course, whether he will succeed).

[roody]

2. No hay mal que por bien no venga!

The silver lining of U.S. military adventures is that there is little left for S. America.

[Judi Lynn]

7. Many millions of people are hoping this is true, undoubtedly! n/t

[malaise]

5. Until the US realizes that it does not own the planet

and the rest of us do not live for US national interests, I expect little change. Obama will opt for diplomacy over bombs. That's a start.

[Judi Lynn]

6. It does seem he's certainly far saner, far more honorable than the others.

Imagine, a sane, honorable President. What a SHOCK!