In this morning’s Washington Times, Sara Carter (quickly becoming one of my favorite reporters over there) writes that “US Foes target Latin America”
Iran, Cuba and Venezuela are working together against the U.S. by undermining democracy in Latin America, allowing trafficking of illegal drugs and creating safe havens for extremist groups, intelligence officials said.
Testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Tuesday, National Intelligence Director Michael McConnell said that influence from the three countries — led respectively by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez — has spilled into Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador, which “are pursuing agendas that undercut checks and balances” of democratic governments.
She goes on to write;
“We’ve known for some time that Islamic extremists groups were gaining momentum and exploiting the region,” said one U.S. federal law-enforcement official, on the condition of anonymity, who worked drug operations in Central America. “Iran is no exception — now with Cuba and Venezuela, the door is open.”
Web sites advocating Hezbollah and other Islamic extremist groups in Central America are used to recruit members and espouse extremist ideology.
On one Web page — now removed from the Internet — “Hezbollah Latin America” displayed photographs of members, with their faces covered and weapons raised. The Web site contained links to Hezbollah group members in Venezuela, El Salvador, Argentina and as north as Chiapas, Mexico.
Regular readers of this blog will remember the link to Jungle Mom that I’ve posted several times over the past several months referring to Hezbollah influence among the indigenous people of Venezuela’s interior after Chavez forced Christian missionaries out of the country.
Unless we build the wall and start enforcing border securing, these Latins influenced by terrorist organizations will have the ability to blend into our own population and strike without a bit of hinderance.
If that’s not terrifying enough for you, try this;
In 2005, Venezuela became a major transient route for South American — predominantly Colombian — cocaine destined for the U.S. market and it continues to grow, U.S. intelligence officials said.
Mr. Chavez’s lack of counterdrug cooperation “undermines efforts by other countries, particularly Colombia, by giving traffickers access to alternative routes and transit points Chavez is likely to remain unengaged on the counternarcotics front unless the drug trade is perceived to damage his international image or threaten his political longevity,” Mr. McConnell said.”Military cooperation between Tehran and Caracas is growing,” Mr. McConnell testified. “There are growing signs of anxiety among Venezuela’s neighbors about this military buildup.”
Coca-chewing Chavez and crackhead Ahmadinjad supplying our own drug addicts with druga and using the money against us (where are all of those Libertarians who say that drug use is a personal preference and don’t harm society).
But any war against drugs must be prefaced with secure borders. It’ll be up to the next president since this one has been a bit out-to-lunch on that one. And it’ll take a sturdily-spined Congress to force the next Administration to do what needs to be done.
As it stands now, the only people willing to stand up to Chavez and his cronies seems to be Exxon-Mobil.
Good piece, first of all. However, I think the primary responsibility for insecurity and lack of stability throughout Latin America is in large part due our American disregard for the region ever since hanging Colonel Ollie North out to dry.
We’ve known about the problems and issues for years and ignored them. We could have won the war on drugs in the USA long ago if crooked politicians and special interests (such as prison corporations) didn’t have a vested interest in keeping the drugs flowing. You think commercialized prisons are going to help solve criminal problems or create them? Name me a single market that thinks it will get ahead by eliminating its customer base rather than trying to grab a larger market share (of society in the prison system’s case).
The tri-border area of Paraguay has long been a haven for Hezbollah and narco-terrorists…again, all things we’ve known about and ignored while focusing on the Middle East for the past two decades. I am a former Republican who has many Libertarian beliefs, yet I am a hawk’s hawk and would love to see drug dealers swinging from ropes in trees around the country. Not all Libertarians think it is in the best interest of society to have everyone hooked on crack. Personally, it seems to me more Republicans and Democrats are OK with that notion—it is their two parties after all that keep America polarized and at each others throats so that the people will not hold leaders, policies, and government inefficiency accountable.
Recall that it was the Bush administration that just recently ignored efforts by the people of Venezuela (and by military leaders of the country) to oust Chavez. Bush and his administration WANT a bogeyman in the brush. When the American public tires of fighting in the sand, we’ll need somewhere else to focus.
As a vet, I’m all for kicking ass and taking names when it comes to our enemies. But China has been supplying weapons and training to South American nations while the Bush administration sits on its ass and does nothing. Republicans aren’t any more defenders of American security than anyone else. Recall that it was Rumsfeld’s dumb ass that got us in the situation we face in Iraq today because he went against the wisdom military leaders suggested to him, in order to try his ridiculously vain light and fast policy. Look where that left us. Granted he had lots of help by the most incompetent civilian administrator you could conceive of. It’s as if the entire Bush administration never cracked a history book.
The Republicans WANT illegal immigration, which is why they do nothing about it. Look at McCain…even though he’s a fellow vet, he’s willing to sell America out and toss our sovereignty away. Mexico is the biggest national security threat America faces, not Al Qaeda. Sure, Islamic extremists need to be dealt with, but what nation will we be fighting in the desert for if we have given it away to foreign invaders who never even had to fire a shot?
And Republicans don’t want us to get away from fossil fuels anytime soon. They don’t seem to grasp the simple concept that using multiple renewable energy sources and alleviating our oil addiction makes America stronger and more secure, freer to exercise foreign policy in our best interests rather than in the interest of not offending those nations which support our enemies.
Do I think Democrats are any better? Hell no.
But if securing our borders is so important to so many Republicans, then why the hell aren’t they voting for Ron Paul? He’s the ONLY candidate who will close the border and deal with illegal immigration and legal immigration both, and they all know it. The problem is that so many Republicans have their heads so far up their fourth point of contact they would rather choose any party candidate who offers them more of business-as-usual shinola by crooked politicians rather that see a candidate elected who will restore American sovereignty, security, dignity and respect. Yeah, I’m a Ron Paul supporter.
But I’d also love to get a bunch of fellow vets together and head down south to get our groove on in the yongle.
The perception that Libertarians want anything other than an America that adheres to the Constitution preserves civil liberties is usually a misinformed perception by those who have been reading too much crap journalism by the major media outlets. Libertarians don’t want isolationism, but we do want secure borders and less involvement where other nations in their own regions of the world ought to be putting out greater effort and taking more responsibility.
Anyway, love the blog. Sorry to have rambled. You have a lot of good posts and good points to make. I agree with the need to secure our borders yesterday and to address regional security. As an afore-mentioned hawk’s hawk (neocons are wussbags compared to me) I think we ought to be be gearing up for military action in Mexico if their government refuses to address the issues that make it a security threat to America. Why bother fighting a war overseas when we have an enemy threat just across the border?
If you’re curious, I mentioned blogged about the same thing as the piece in the Washington Post about 8 months ago, as well as other interesting trends. It’s been well known since as far back as 2005 and probably earlier. Mexico is the true nexus of threats to our nation: drugs, illegal immigration, terrorism, terrorist infiltration, Zapatista insurgents setting up their northern campaign along the US border and more.
The Mexican Threat To America (Terrorists, Drug Cartels, Russia, Cuba, And Red Dawn)
http://errantmind.wordpress.com/2007/05/26/mexican-threat/
Hope the link is allowable, as I think it ties right in with your post, and I hope you’ll check it out. Take care and good evening to you!
Good, thoughtful post, Sean. I hope I’ll see more. The only real thing I’d differ with you about is that you confuse Republican voters with Republicans in Congress. It was the Republican voters that shut down the amnesty bill a few months back while Republicans in Congress were mostly ready to cave to it.