Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Newsweek: US On It's Way To 2nd Vietnam - Colombia  
User currently offlineBigo747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1724 times:

One of the major article on Newsweek's future prediction. This time is Colombia.

George W. Bush is expected to provide armed anti-terror battlion to Colombia later this year. However, by 2012, US will face the "2nd Vietnam" in Colombia.

Colombian Government will face isolations as the rebel group using most powerful armed force attacking Government site. Colombian rebel group, aka "terrorists" will kidnapping some consultants from US military, and eventually "carrying their dead bodies around". For those kidnapped, they'll be dissapeared in the Amazon Jungle.

Chaos will spread from Colombia to Peru, Ecuador, and Brasil, causing US to stuck in the mud like they did 25 years ago.

...Colombia itself begins to look like Somalia in the 1990s, “a state of outright warlordism,” as American professor Bruce Bagley once predicted. Narcoterrorists have not seized control of the state: Colombia still has an elected president, a standing Army. But America is in a new quagmire...



11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSean-SAN- From United States of America, joined Aug 2002, 772 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1710 times:

Any good history class will tell you the Central/South American countries are ripe with instability, and there is a history of the US going in and making changes to promote US interests. Ever listen to Bob Marley? Yep, some people don't like it, this time it's the "Columbian Rebels". Proposing "Chaos will spread ... to other S. American" countries" is a slippery slope argument with little justification. These types of wars are almost always contained in a small, local region/area.

-Sean




User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1678 times:

There's a small difference with Vietnam (or rather, several small differences).
- the majority of the population support the government.
- it's a lot closer to the US, making logistical support far easier
- the FARC don't have the full support of a neighbouring nation like the VC had the full support of North Vietnam (and was in fact an arm of the NVA).

There have been US troops in Colombia for a long time, mainly training and advising local forces at headquarters level and training facilities.
I think it's about time the US got more actively involved in destroying the operations of the druglords there, and IMO other countries should (if so invited) join the effort.
By destroying the coca plantations the problem is stopped at the source rather than having to be solved by cops picking up drugdealers in the streets all over the world and having to arrest the same addicts time after time for stealing in order to pay for cocaine.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineHepkat From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 2341 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1664 times:

Good grief, just legalize the damn drugs and wipe those druglords out of business overnight!

User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1668 times:

Yeah, legalization of drugs is the answer. Like we don't have enough problems with drunk drivers, pilots, ect., making access to drugs legal will only compound the problem, especially since the majority of people cannot learn to ration out such excesses. Just what I want to deal with, a coked up pilot, a stoned pilot or a pilot on acid (or a driver for that matter). Alcohol is enough to worry about.

User currently offlineEWRvirgin From United States of America, joined May 2001, 358 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1663 times:

There's a small difference with Vietnam (or rather, several small differences).
- the majority of the population support the government.
- it's a lot closer to the US, making logistical support far easier
- the FARC don't have the full support of a neighbouring nation like the VC had the full support of North Vietnam (and was in fact an arm of the NVA).


None of those were reasons why Vietnam was a failure, especially logistics.

That entire campaign was fought half-assed. It was really limited by politics and politicians in Washington. "Graduated response" and doing the absolute minimum to avoid defeat is what doomed the US in Vietnam. At the war's height there were more than 500,000 troops in Vietnam and about 1.3 million servicemen in that part of the world but only 50,000-60,000 of those were actually put into combat. I don't think many people know that.

If that war had been left to the generals and not to a handful of preppy civilian advisors and three presidents to micro-manage then not only would Vietnam have been a success but it would have probably cost far fewer lives, especially for the Vietnamese.


User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1645 times:

There was another important factor in Vietnam: imagery.

Vietnam was the first time TV viewers were treated to the gritty reality of war, thanks to the development of satellite relays and portable cameras in the '60s. At the same time, the media began to lose its fear of elected officials, and was beginning to push the old limits on what it could put on air or print. In the '50s, there was no way the media would have printed a photo of screaming children running from a napalm attack or video of a man being executed in public. By the late '60s and early '70s, the media was willing to give it a try.

The imagery shocked the public, leaving many of them dispirited. This translated into lower political support for the war. Sensing that neither the public nor the politicians back home were resolutely behind them, the troops' morale began to suffer.


User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1629 times:

Nicaragua. El Salvador. Panama. Now we add Columbia to another long littany of countries that are supposed to be our "next Viet Nam".

We've got 57,000 plus brave names on a black granite wall in DC that will scream at us forever that there will never be a "next Viet Nam". Whatever politics sent them there to die, their legacy will save the lives of countless young men(and women) who came after.....the message is your soldiers are your sons and daughters..... and you better have a goddamned good reason to send them off to die.

Loose Iraqi atom bombs smuggled into Los Angeles or Miami by terrorists may meet the criteria. A few kilos of coke doesnt.


User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1619 times:

I hate to break to you, but Colombia will be our third (or fourth) Vietnam. We're currently in our second one right now (War on Terrorism/Afghanistan) and the military reports sound eerily like does during Vietnam. The third will be an Iraqi campaign. All I have to say is that I sure hope that all of these wars won't lead to a return of the draft (Not for my sake, I'll more than likely be out of the age range they would want draftees to be, 25 and under), because that would literally start a civil conflict in our on country.

User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1610 times:

Srbmod wrote: "All I have to say is that I sure hope that all of these wars won't lead to a return of the draft"

It's very unlikely, except as an act of desperation.

Put yourself in a politician's shoes. Say Politician X voted for a draft. Later, he finds out both his own son and several sons of big campaign contributors are being drafted. The donors want their sons gotten out of it -- or else. Politician X also knows the media are watching him like hawks.

Does he let them be drafted, thus keeping the media off his back, but endangering his son's well-being and possibly watching his now ex-donors recruit and bankroll a primary opponent in the next election? With negative advertising to boot: "Politician X voted to tell your kids to go into a dangerous war zone. When you vote tomorrow, tell him where to go."

Or does he get them out of the draft, thus sparing his family the turmoil and relieving the donor pressure -- only to return to his district to this: "Coming up after the movie: This man bought his son a draft exemption with the help of Politician X. Why can't you? Find out why on Eyewitness News at 11."

(Then there's the matter of the Internet: If there were even the possibility of a draft, every draft opponent in sight would put up 'how-to' draft avoidance guides.)


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1597 times:

Well, in the same article, predicting what the world will look like in 2012, they predicted that there will be peace between the Israelis and Palestine.

So I don't think we should be too worried about their predictions about Columbia  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Charles


User currently offlineMarcus From Mexico, joined Apr 2001, 1808 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1576 times:

Columbia?.......the space shuttle?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!


Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Cougar Ace Update-On It's Way To Portland posted Fri Sep 8 2006 06:50:10 by L-188
Is It "on It's Way" Or "on Its Way"? posted Mon Jun 12 2006 12:57:40 by ZakHH
Jeanne Might Be On Its Way To Florida. posted Tue Sep 14 2004 20:53:23 by Flymia
On My Way To Getting Nowhere... posted Sat Jan 3 2004 04:19:17 by BR715-A1-30
Commonwealth Games Baton On It's Way posted Mon Mar 11 2002 16:13:57 by David_itl
5th Typhoon In 2001 On Its Way To Taiwan posted Tue Jul 10 2001 08:54:49 by Jiml1126
Typhoon Utor On Its Way To Hong Kong! posted Wed Jul 4 2001 14:23:34 by Hkgspotter1
Cheap Drink And Tobacco On Way To UK posted Sun Nov 12 2006 07:24:20 by Cosec59
Way To Go The Linz's! On Amazing Race! posted Wed Dec 14 2005 18:04:38 by AV8AJET
In What US States Is It Illegal To Turn Right/red? posted Sat Aug 13 2005 03:03:15 by Lnglive1011yyz