Cannabis News Students for Sensible Drug Policy
  Congress Challenges Cost of 'Unwinnable' Drugs War
Posted by FoM on July 22, 2001 at 17:20:25 PT
By David Adams in Miami 
Source: The Times 

justice The Bush Administration’s controversial strategy to end the production of cocaine and heroin in Latin America is under fresh attack from members on both sides of the US Congress, anxious about a deepening involvement in a war some deem unwinnable.

Tomorrow the Administration is expected to be challenged over the mounting cost of its Colombia policy when Congress debates the latest $676 million (£473 million) regional counter-narcotics aid package. That comes on top of the $1.3 billion Congress approved last year to launch “Plan Colombia”.


Several amendments, to be heard tomorrow, will attempt to slash the anti-drugs budget as well as strictly limiting the use of funds. Critics are especially alarmed by a new provision to suspend the legal cap of 300 on the number of civilian contractors Washington can deploy in Colombia. Some see this as a subtle attempt to increase the US presence there by using non-military personnel, with overtones of a Vietnam-style build-up.

Critics say civilian contractors are less accountable to Congress than US troops or government employees.

Sanho Tree, a director at the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies, said: “They are using private contractors because there isn’t the political support at home for sending our own troops. You could have unlimited numbers of people being sent down there and nobody would know.”

Administration officials say there is a practical and far less devious explanation for lifting the cap. They point out that contractors perform various tasks, including implementing US-funded programmes for alternative development and human rights.

Officials say that as Plan Colombia money flows in with the delivery of US-supplied Black Hawk helicopters later this year, the cap could hamper their efforts. American contractors will be needed to provide maintenance on the aircraft.

Despite concern about the viability of the drugs war, Congress is likely to back the Administration. Michael Shifter, of the Washington-based Inter-American Dialogue, said: “There’s no momentum to disengage. There is a commitment but I think there is a lack of confidence that this is going to be successful.”

Source: The Times (UK)
Author: David Adams in Miami
Published: Monday, July 23, 2001
Copyright: 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd.
Website: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/
Contact: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/section/0,,79,00.html

Related Articles & Web Site:

Colombia Drug War News
http://freedomtoexhale.com/colombia.htm

Bush To Raise 'Private Army' in Drugs War
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10378.shtml

Hoover Recommends Cures for Colombia
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10353.shtml

Drug War Could Escalate
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10346.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #8 posted by dddd on July 24, 2001 at 06:19:28 PT
1984
The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt . . . To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. - George Orwell, 1984


[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #7 posted by freedom fighter on July 23, 2001 at 22:07:25 PT
Man,
Kap, and the others..


We all know it is gonna be reealll badddd!

I am just so ever sad!

ff

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #6 posted by Sudaca on July 23, 2001 at 09:09:04 PT
???
"The Bush Administration’s controversial strategy to end the production of cocaine and heroin in Latin America is under fresh attack from members on both sides of the US Congress, anxious about a deepening involvement in a war some deem unwinnable."

Of course if this were honest reporting there would be mention that this policy was crafted a few years back. I'm glad Bush is taking some heat for the crap, but I believe that once the political leverage which this represents has been used up it'll never show up again as an issue. I mean, how long do you think Senate will push on Plan Colombia once the expected concessions come through?

If the most revered legislators really cared about this they wouldn't have approved Plan Colombia by a hundred to one odds when it was introduced on the table only what, a couple of years ago?

None of what's happened since was unexpected or unforseeable.

This is just a pail of BS

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by dedbr on July 23, 2001 at 06:02:45 PT:

The Next Step?
A few Americans will get shot,and we'll have crying mothers on the T.V. news.Then some represenative will come foward and utter the immortal words,"They started it,lets finish it."

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on July 23, 2001 at 05:15:08 PT:

Push is coming to shove
"Several amendments, to be heard tomorrow, will attempt to slash the anti-drugs budget as well as strictly limiting the use of funds. Critics are especially alarmed by a new provision to suspend the legal cap of 300 on the number of civilian contractors Washington can deploy in Colombia. Some see this as a subtle attempt to increase the US presence there by using non-military personnel, with overtones of a Vietnam-style build-up.

Critics say civilian contractors are less accountable to Congress than US troops or government employees."

But it's not just what being done; it's how it's being done as well that's especially worrisome:

from an earlier CNews article:
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread10335.shtml

"But what did come as a shock was the discovery of language in the bill (apparently inserted late in the game by Foreign Operations subcommittee chairman Jim Kolbe) that not only gives the Bush Administration authority to send as many private military specialists as it wants to Colombia, but to send them in as heavily armed as they want--and with broad rules of engagement.

According to the bill, the $676 million will only be available as long as it's "without regard to section 3204(b)(1)(B) of Public Law 106-246..."

See how this is happening? Legislative blather, which few Americans have the time or patience to wade through, is being used to camouflage a very dangerous escalation of the conflict throughout the entire region.

This should lay to rest the doubts anyone may have concerning the 'candidness' of the Bush administration. Jes' like his spook-agency running Pappy, W has learned his lessons well. He knows that many Americans old enough to remember Viet Nam are understandably leery of - as E. Johnson pointed out - 'mission creep'. It happened in Somalia - and it looks like it's happening in the Andean Region.

Congress is finally having to realize it can no longer engage in waffling; it either stands up to this nonsense - and by derivation, face the issue of the DrugWar's effects upon the 'home front' - or 'grunt and roll over' for Georgie Too. It either starts to look very sharply at the DrugWar - or it gives up forever any say in it.

One last thing: the armed thugs in Somalia preferred the designation of..."technicals". I suppose it sounds better than 'hired guns'. And since they had the monopoly on force, for the most part, who was going to argue?

But they were armed thugs answerable to no one but their paymasters.

The mercs we have in Colombia are called 'contractors'.

Need I state the obvious?



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #3 posted by hey on July 22, 2001 at 21:11:14 PT
I wonder,
How much did this "operation" cost?
What a friggin waste. These kinds of operations are demonstrated on an hour-to-hour basis. This has been happening for alot o' years, when, When??? do we say, "Enough?"
I don't know...it's just a thought.


[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #2 posted by E. Johnson on July 22, 2001 at 21:00:16 PT
Can we say MISSION CREEP?
Where will it stop?



[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #1 posted by lookinside on July 22, 2001 at 17:30:53 PT:

lies...
and they know we know that they are lying...and they are
daring us to do anything about it...


[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on July 22, 2001 at 17:20:25