What's Happening in Our Own Backyard?

[Adam's Apple]

We'd Better Heed Our Own Backyard
By James P. Pinkerton, Newsday
May 4, 2006

For the United States, the second most important foreign policy developments are occurring in South America. Maybe soon, the most important.

The news from Bolivia - a country that is nationalizing, or, if you prefer, stealing, foreign-owned assets - is just the latest in a string of anti-capitalist, anti-American developments in South America. In recent years, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Chile have all elected left-leaning governments, determined to reverse "globalization" and thwart American influence. And similar governments are likely to win soon in Peru and Mexico.

In particular, the oil-empowered Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez, an avowed fan of Cuba's Fidel Castro, is emerging as a genuine U.S. enemy. Americans, of course, have been mostly preoccupied with the Middle East, but the problems to our south - trade, energy, immigration, narcotics trafficking - are likely to worsen as North-South cooperation worsens.

And one of these days a Latin country will emerge as a serious military power, thus ending America's fortuitous two-century-long monopoly of force in this hemisphere.

for full article:
http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion...0,5808516.column?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

 

[Diuretic]

Democracy's a bitch

 

[CSM]

We'd Better Heed Our Own Backyard
By James P. Pinkerton, Newsday
May 4, 2006

For the United States, the second most important foreign policy developments are occurring in South America. Maybe soon, the most important.

The news from Bolivia - a country that is nationalizing, or, if you prefer, stealing, foreign-owned assets - is just the latest in a string of anti-capitalist, anti-American developments in South America. In recent years, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Chile have all elected left-leaning governments, determined to reverse "globalization" and thwart American influence. And similar governments are likely to win soon in Peru and Mexico.

In particular, the oil-empowered Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez, an avowed fan of Cuba's Fidel Castro, is emerging as a genuine U.S. enemy. Americans, of course, have been mostly preoccupied with the Middle East, but the problems to our south - trade, energy, immigration, narcotics trafficking - are likely to worsen as North-South cooperation worsens.

And one of these days a Latin country will emerge as a serious military power, thus ending America's fortuitous two-century-long monopoly of force in this hemisphere.

for full article:
http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion...0,5808516.column?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

Pure speculation on my part but I think that most of those South American countries that are headed for despotism will eventually fail. The problem with countries with "high demand" resources (like oil) is that their economies are vulnerable. Without a great degree of diversification, they are at the mercy of the global community.

 

[Diuretic]

Pure speculation on my part but I think that most of those South American countries that are headed for despotism will eventually fail. The problem with countries with "high demand" resources (like oil) is that their economies are vulnerable. Without a great degree of diversification, they are at the mercy of the global community.

I don't get the connection. I agree with your point that any economy with its eggs in one basket is facing potential problems, but I don't get where that connects with the first part of your post.

 

[Adam's Apple]

Pure speculation on my part but I think that most of those South American countries that are headed for despotism will eventually fail.

I hope your speculation turns out to be correct, but I fear there is much more going on in South America than just an issue over oil.

 

[Mr.Conley]

Don't underestimate oil, that's how Chavez is financing the policies.

This whole South America thing is a big screw up on Bush's part. If we can't even keep the peace on our own turf, then we're screwed.

 

[Diuretic]

It's not your turf, South America consists of sovereign nations. Your turf ends at your borders (well Puerto Rico and a few other places are part of it as well).

 

[Mr.Conley]

Hmmm... how about our realm of influence? Or dominion? Keeping South America loyal and prosperous is important to our nation and the world.

 

[Diuretic]

Of course it is. This current worry about South America will pass as reality sets in in the various countries there.

Lula is no threat, he's got a few internal worries of his own but he's not going to turn Brazil into a pariah state any day soon. Same goes for Morales in Bolivia. He isn't the bogeyman that some think. No point in pissing off the multinationals if you haven't got the infrastructure to get your natural resources to market. May as well be pissing in the wind if he thinks he can boot them out.

Chavez, well Chavez is giving Bush the finger. He's not all that diplomatic and he doesn't give a rat's arse about it (although I think for a head of state he is pretty bloody rude at times, no call for that). He'll get over it and settle down to running his country in the real world.

Countries are only loyal to each other if there's something in it for them. Foreign policy is about mutual self-interest.

 

[Annie]

It's not your turf, South America consists of sovereign nations. Your turf ends at your borders (well Puerto Rico and a few other places are part of it as well).

Actually, our Southern border at the present time does not seem to be fixed. Question is, will Mexico move south or north? I guess our armies will decide?

 

[Annie]

Links at site:

http://procynic.blogspot.com/2006/05/is-hugo-chavez-behind-illegal.html

Sunday, May 07, 2006
Is Hugo Chavez behind the illegal immigration rallies?

I've been pondering this scenario for several weeks now, in conjunction with what to do about illegal immigration.

Most of the recent demonstration have been prganized at least in part by International ANSWER, a Stalinist, anti-US group with ties to Kim Jong Il's North Korea, Fidel Castro's Cuba and, worse yet, Ramsey Clark. So hostile arethey to the US that many of their allies in organizing these rallies have felt compelled to distance tehmselves from ANSWER.

Meanwhile, we have Castro ally Hugo Chavez in Venezuela trying to put the squeeze on US oil supplies by threatening to cut Venezuelan oil shipments to the US and generally driving up oil prices.

Now, remember my earlier post on the upcoming Mexican presidential elections. Mexico is a huge oil supplier to the US, and Chavez ally Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (known as AMLO) is in the running. Dick Morris broke down the dynamics of the race here. An ally Chuavez basically lets Chavez run things, as Evo Morales is proving in Bolivia.

Now, if AMLO wins the Mexican election, then Chavez will be positioned on the US southern border. If you think Vicente Fox is causing trouble there now, you ain't seen nuthin' yet. Even worse, Chavez would be in control of a large percentage of the US supply of oil.

So Chavez wants AMLO to win, and AMLO would probably cheat to do so. Problem is that Mexicans hate Chavez, and AMLO's association with Chavez has badly hurt him in the polls.

This is where ANSWER's illegal alien protests come in. I'll let Morris explain:

Lopez Obrador has attacked U.S. attempts to restrict Mexican immigration and will benefit tremendously if Congress alienates the Mexican electorate. A recent survey by John Zogby found that two-thirds of Mexicans feel Americans are racist and biased against them. A harsh shift in U.S. immigration policies could fuel a leftist victory in Mexico.

Mexicans are deeply offended by the idea of a wall designed to keep them out. Building a wall on the boarder without also starting a guest-worker program will play badly in Mexico. A wall with a guest-worker program might go down better, particularly if the legislation didn't include punitive provisions making illegal immigration a felony.

Inertia normally guides American politics. Nothing is done about anything unless a problem is perceived. While it is true that the issue of illegal immigration had been bubbling under the surface for some time now, the perception really was not there until these rallies started. Now, there a backlash brewing against the illegal aliens/colonists. The rallies have not won support, but hostility from the American public.

Which is probably what the rallies ultimate organizers, ANSWER and possibly Chavez himself, wanted. Forget the illegals. ANSWER may believe that if it can prompt this backlash against the people it's purportedly trying to help, then it can get Chavez ally AMLO elected in Mexico and cause tremendous damage to the US.

The Mexican election is July 2. Assuming my own idea for the invasion and annexation of Mexico continues to not gain traction, we may want to wait until after July 2 to push for tougher security measures at the border.

posted by ProCynic @ 7:24 PM

 

[Mr.Conley]

Of course it is. This current worry about South America will pass as reality sets in in the various countries there.

Lula is no threat, he's got a few internal worries of his own but he's not going to turn Brazil into a pariah state any day soon. Same goes for Morales in Bolivia. He isn't the bogeyman that some think. No point in pissing off the multinationals if you haven't got the infrastructure to get your natural resources to market. May as well be pissing in the wind if he thinks he can boot them out.

Chavez, well Chavez is giving Bush the finger. He's not all that diplomatic and he doesn't give a rat's arse about it (although I think for a head of state he is pretty bloody rude at times, no call for that). He'll get over it and settle down to running his country in the real world.

Countries are only loyal to each other if there's something in it for them. Foreign policy is about mutual self-interest.

Exactly, we're not in charge, but we can influence things. Greatly influence thing. At least ideally.

I agree with you on Brazil. If anything we should be pushing for closer ties between the US and Brazil as well as Argentina. Both are major pillars of South America and the developing world. Plus, if we don't win them, China will.

I'm taking a wait and see approach with Bolivia. I think your probably right on the oil, but it's still too early to tell.

I disagree with you on Chavez. He has been, "giving Bush the finger," for a while now. A lot of his popularity back home is based on his defiance to the US. Personally, I'm amazed Chavez is still in power because of all the coruption and misconduct emerging in Caracas. Did you know their murder rate has quadrupled? If he wasn't sitting on all that oil...

 

[D'ster]

If Hispanics were not such uneducated, corrupt and violent people,

there welcome to "America" would be greater.

 

[Diuretic]

I disagree with you on Chavez. He has been, "giving Bush the finger," for a while now. A lot of his popularity back home is based on his defiance to the US. Personally, I'm amazed Chavez is still in power because of all the coruption and misconduct emerging in Caracas. Did you know their murder rate has quadrupled? If he wasn't sitting on all that oil...

No I wasn't aware of that - I shall bear it in mind though.
I think that Chavez can stop being the boofhead now though. If he keeps up the personal insults he will eventually caricature himself and it does detract from the gravitas of being a head of state. He's had his teenage rebellion years as the boss, time to be mature now.

 

[Said1]

If Hispanics were not such uneducated, corrupt and violent people,

there welcome to "America" would be greater.

You're really Big D, aren't you?

 

[D'ster]

You're really Big D, aren't you?

Are you asking me if I have a "really Big D"?

 

[Mr.Conley]

If Hispanics were not such uneducated, corrupt and violent people,

there welcome to "America" would be greater.

Yea!!! I love unqualified generalizations that put down an entire group of people.

 

[Said1]

Are you asking me if I have a "really Big D"?

Yes. A really big D, stamped in the middle of your forehead. Instead of an L.

 

[D'ster]

Yes. A really big D, stamped in the middle of your forehead. Instead of an L.

Good thing you did not personaly attack my family, you would have been banned!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No I wasn't aware of that - I shall bear it in mind though.
I think that Chavez can stop being the boofhead now though. If he keeps up the personal insults he will eventually caricature himself and it does detract from the gravitas of being a head of state. He's had his teenage rebellion years as the boss, time to be mature now.

Dream on. He's a thuggish strong man, intelligent too, he wants nothing but power. Intelligence and maturity has nothing to do with it. Many grown men are commited to evil, communism, and mindless anti-americanism. We won't just "grow out of it", putz.