Stephanie Jackter - 3-22-2003 at 12:07 PM
From the Miami Herald. 3-20-03
Andres Oppenheimer: The Oppenheimer Report
War could do harm in Latin America
ATLANTA - There are three major reasons why the U.S.-led war on Iraq may hurt Latin America over the next two years, even if it results in a quick
U.S. victory.
Judging from what I heard during a conference on Latin America organized by the Carter Center and attended by Latin American officials and 10 former
presidents earlier this week, there is a near consensus that the war will hurt Latin America both politically and economically. Among the reasons:
WAR ISSUES
First, the war -- and the postwar effort -- will keep the Bush administration's attention focused on the Persian Gulf for much of the remainder of
President Bush's first term. That means that the ambitious Latin American agenda pushed by Bush before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks will fade into
near oblivion.
''The war will put us further on the margins,'' Bolivia's vice president, Carlos Mesa, told me. ``If we were relatively unimportant for the United
States before the war, we will be even more unimportant from now on.''
Even if the war is short and Saddam Hussein is deposed in one month, the United States would have to lead a reconstruction process, which would
probably take at least six months to put in place.
Then, as part of its postwar diplomatic damage control efforts, the Bush administration would most likely call a Middle East conference to solve the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict in early 2004.
By then, Washington would be fully immersed in the 2004 presidential elections, and most foreign policy initiatives would be put off. Which means
that, whether Bush is reelected or not, the United States might not resurrect its Latin America agenda -- an expansion of free trade and U.S.
incentives for democratic countries -- until 2005.
Second, the Iraq war is likely to worsen the world's economic slump. This will hurt Latin America, which depends heavily on exports to the United
States and Europe.
Even oil exporters such as Mexico and Ecuador, which would benefit from a short-term rise in oil prices, are likely to see exports other than oil drop
because of a world recession. And virtually all Latin American countries may feel a further tightening of foreign loans, foreign investments, and
remittances from their migrant workers living in the United States.
Third, the war on Iraq may strain diplomatic relations between the United States and Latin America, where virtually all big countries -- except
Colombia -- have come out against the war.
Earlier this week, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the United States was ''disappointed'' with Mexico and Chile's refusal to give
Bush its critical votes at the 15-member United Nations Security Council.
Well-placed officials tell me Secretary of State Colin Powell has significantly cooled a friendly relationship with Mexican Foreign Minister Luis
Ernesto Derbez.
''What Mexico did does not put that country on the road to leadership, but on the road to irrelevance,'' said Juan Del Aguila, a political scientist
at Atlanta's Emory University.
IN OPPOSITION
Mexico and Canada's opposition to President Bush's war plans has fueled speculation in foreign policy circles that, in the event of a successful war,
a victorious Bush would drop his earlier plans for strengthening the Canada-U.S.-Mexico partnership, and instead build a new U.S.-Britain-Spain axis
that would extend into the U.S.-dependent Eastern European states that support the war.
Suggesting that the recent spat at the U.N. Security Council may not leave hard feelings, Chile's Interior minister, Jos? Miguel Insulza, told me the
failure to find a diplomatic solution through the United Nations ''is a closed chapter.'' If the United States emerges from the war without holding
grudges, ''there could be a second chapter'' of Latin American cooperation, he said.
Stephanie Jackter - 3-24-2003 at 06:08 PM
Things do always seem to come full circle, huh Grover. 200 years from Imperial reign to Imperial reign.
Did you hear Bush just finally moseyed on over to ask congress for the 80 BILLION dollars he predicts the first year of this war will cost? The real
cost will make that incredible figure look like small potatoes. No war has ever come in under budget and this certainly won't be the first.
How many starving mouths could that kind of money feed? How many dying Africans could be saved? The numbers just boggle my mind.
And merrily we roll along. - Stephanie
Dave - 3-24-2003 at 09:16 PM
"Our system is broken because it only represents a few."
Our system only represents the few who care enough to participate.
Last election less than 50% of those eligible voted. Of those that did how many actually participated in the nomination process?
When was the last time you went to a precinct meeting or campaigned for a candidate?
Our system isn't broken.....it's rusty.
Stephanie Jackter - 3-25-2003 at 12:05 AM
OK You asked for it, Dave. You got it. When was the last time I went to a precinct committee meeting? After standing on street corners for months
getting thousands of signatures to recall ex-Governor Mecham (87), and registering over two thousand people to vote single-handedly, I decided it was
time to get involved with the Democratic Party as a precinct committee person. I lasted about three or four months till the stench of party politics
made me so sick I could take no more and quit. The final straw was when then Senator Chuy Higuera came to the meeting drunk off his butt and could
barely even speak in his congressional update, then bee-lined it to the bar next door. I sat there stymied as the meeting continued without missing
a beat. The next month I went in and suggested that we needed a representative in Congress that could stay sober long enough to represent our
interests. I was then stone-walled and black-balled by same group, proving once again the old addage "He may be an a-hole, but he's our a-hole!". I
got the last laugh a few months later when he was indicted in a sting by the Attorney General's office where he was caught on tape taking a big bribe
to allow gambling interests in Arizona. He wanted the shrimp concession too. Must have had some buds in Guaymas.
So, there. Party politics is rotten to the core. Trust me on that one. I'm now an independent, and have still never missed a vote, but I'm a lot
poorer than I was just a few years ago as my money seems to have evaporated into the ether with the decline in the stock market. But, see, I don't
believe money just evaporates. I believe it now just resides in another pocket.
Stats have it that 5% of the people in this country posess around 80% of the wealth of the country. What do you make of that, Dave? I can vote in
every election till I turn ninety and not make a dimes worth of difference in where the money goes. It's in the hands of an aristocracy that preys
off the labor of the common man and woman and even more so off those common men and women who live in other countries without minimal protection
against corporate robbery.
Rant over.......for today. :roll:
Dave - 3-25-2003 at 05:55 PM
"Party politics is rotten to the core. "
I never said it wasn't. Neither is it easy. But the only way to affect change short of anarchy is through the process.
How do you think the Christian right and ultra-conservatives came to dictate republican policy? One vote, one precinct at a time.
"Tip" said it best. "All politics is local". Once you control a party at a grassroots level you can run a monkey for president. The rest of the
populace will follow along lock step. Back that up with judicial support at the highest level and the monkey wins.
Regarding your comments about the stock market:
The market is a zero sum game. For every winner there is a looser. A gamblers paradise and only those in the know consistently make any dough. It
ain't fair but neither is life.
JESSE - 3-25-2003 at 08:46 PM
Bush wont win reelection.
FrankO - 3-26-2003 at 12:18 PM
Unless people who are disgruntled vote it is hard to unseat an incumbent......I always vote not only becuase it is a right hard fought for and easily
lost but also so I have the right to b-tch. All others, well, they can just pipe down.
David K - 3-26-2003 at 09:34 PM
The funny thing is when a democrat uses U.S. troops (without U.N. approval) it is just fine... i.e. no protestors. To show respect for the decisions
the president made, Republicans didn't march in the street and disrupt lives when we invaded Somalia or Kosovo... even though it was perhaps a mistake
to do so .
The people protesing, are not against 'war' (otherwise they would have protested during the last president's term). They are against George W. Bush,
simply because he is a Republican. 
It is now past time to protest going to Iraq... we are there, like it or not. Now is the time to support the troops. If you don't, that's just more
Republican voters you will help create.
Kind of like the way Clinton helped create Republican majorities in congress...:roll: