BF2S Forums US drugs official accuses Chavez

Dilbert_X wrote:

2. Unless and until those "bioweapons" get dropped, you have no argument about that.

The stories are that its already happened, maybe, maybe not, I have no idea.
The US is certainly requiring South American countries to use herbicides

But why are US politicians so desperate to use use bioweapons in foreign countries?
Sounds like a reason for China to invade you and hang your President

1. The US isn't "requiring" any South American country to do anything. If they do it, it's of their own volition.

2. I don't think anyone's "desperate" to "use bioweapons in foreign countries". But it was a cute try.

Dilbert_X wrote:

1. The US isn't "requiring" any South American country to do anything. If they do it, it's of their own volition.

Except Columbia need to do it if they want U$1.3bn in military aid. I should have said bribing.

So when is foreign aid not considered "bribing" in your mind? Do you have sourcing that states that the military aid was contingent upon Colombia using defoliants?

Dilbert_X wrote:

2. I don't think anyone's "desperate" to "use bioweapons in foreign countries". But it was a cute try.

'That same week, the House of Representatives passed a provision to a bill requiring that the very same fungus be sprayed in “a major drug-producing country,” such as Colombia. The bill’s sponsor was Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) and its most vocal supporter was his colleague Dan Burton (R-Ind.), who has been promoting the fungus for almost a decade as key to winning the drug war. '
A ten year campaign to use bio-weapons abroad seems fairly intense - I recommend a limited airstrike - ie carpet bomb Indiana, maybe tactical nukes to be certain

So one guy promoting its use equates to the entire government being "desperate" to use them?

Dilbert_X wrote:

Yup, pretty sure, I'll retrieve it later.

Please do, since those agreements generally aren't for public release.

Dilbert_X wrote:

So one guy promoting its use equates to the entire government being "desperate" to use them?

I didn't say the entire govt, I said 'US politicians' on the subject of fusarium. And its not 'one guy', its two, plus whever voted for it.
Since it got passed can we assume it was more than half the govt?

I'm sorry...you said "US politicians" not the whole government. It could very well have been buried in any of a number of bills either related or completely unrelated to drug enforcement.

Maybe Columbia is already using Fusarium, maybe not
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/101700-01.htm
'Fusarium oxysporum is categorised in the draft of the Protocol to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention as 'a biological agent for war,'' '

The herbicides are unsuitable anyway, according to the manufacturer - Monsanto - who made agent orange.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=669
'However, even Monsanto's own warnings point to toxicity: "Roundup will kill almost any green plant that is actively growing. Roundup should not be applied to bodies of water such as ponds, lakes or streams as Roundup can be harmful to certain aquatic organisms. After an area has been sprayed with Roundup, people and pets (such as cats and dogs) should stay out of the area until it is thoroughly dry. We recommend that grazing animals such as horses, cattle, sheep, goats, rabbits, tortoises and fowl remain out of the treated area for two weeks. If Roundup is used to control undesirable plants around fruit or nut trees, or grapevines, allow twenty-one days before eating the fruits or nuts."'

Oh great - Afghanistan is next
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2007/Af … 4oct07.htm
'The recent appointment of a former US ambassador to Colombia as envoy to Kabul is seen as the most overt move by Washington to ensure that spraying takes place in Afghanistan. William Wood, who has acquired the nickname "Chemical Bill" among British and other NATO officials for his fervent belief in [Roundup] chemical spraying, was in the team which implemented "Plan Colombia", which involved aerial spraying in the Latin American state in an attempt to eliminate cocaine production.'

Rand corporation did this analysis of drug control, for the US army no less.
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Cocaine … nd1994.htm
Interesting how treatment and domestic enforcement are many times cheaper than source country control.
Graph shows millions of dollars spending required to reduce US domestic cocaine consumption by 1%.

So just in terms of cost effectiveness its useless to spray S America and now Asia with poisons

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-01-27 22:28:57)