Support NeoGAF

[Ahasverus]

I can't even, I'm in shock. The practical part of the accord was MAGICAL, like, really, unbelievable, like, it fixed so damned much, especially about unproductive and abandoned lands. It was the political concessions which were hatdd, but the actual legislation the accords included was much needed. People just won't vote in favor if it doesn't directly benefits them.

So you know, the Christian community has blood on its hands, it was those congregations which pushed these big numbers because teh communist gayz were coming (the accords included gender and sexual orientation guarantees).

 

[Anticol]

Don't be short sighted, people here voted no to the agreements, not to peace. The current agreement was the easiest, shorter path to peace, the best path for everyone involved? we will never know. Things are simple, current president just has to bring the opposition (the No promoters) to the negotiations team, when, if this happens, FARC will have to demonstrate if their will for the nations peace was true by renegotiating whatever colombians thought was not fair in the current agreement.

M8, you voted no for peace not for the agreements. They already said they won't renegotiate again the agreements so now what? You voted for no, what is your alternative?

If they go back to the conflict will you be one of the first to enrol and go foght them or will you remain at home watching the news and sending the poor to die for you?

 

[Deleted member 80556]

M8, you voted no for peace not for the agreements. They already said they won't renegotiate again the agreements so now what? You voted for no, what is your alternative?

If they go back to the conflict will you be one of the first to enrol and go foght them or will you remain at home watching the news and sending the poor to die for you?

I know feelings are running high, but both sides say that they will go back to the negotiating table. Whether that gives something better, worse or nothing at all, remains to be seen.

 

[Y2Kev]

I think something of this scale needs democratic legitimacy. Both sides need to know that the will of the people was there; it empowers those arguing for peace and weakens the position of those wanting to return to war. Unfortunately, the reason that a referendum has democratic legitimacy is because sometimes it doesn't go the way those who called it want. That's what happened in Colombia. That doesn't mean the referendum shouldn't have been called; it absolutely should have been. It just means that sometimes, life is bitterly cruel and unfair.

Wasn't the President democratically elected? Shouldn't that have granted this legitimacy considering I'm going to assume this was one of the main planks of his election campaign? Who is to decide what "scale" should require a referendum?

I'm sure I would feel otherwise if I were on the other side of this, but it's pretty clear that one "side" continually wins these referendum questions.

I don't know what the peace negotiation process looks like but is there any possibility the government goes back for a new deal very quickly or was this a years-in-the-making process?

 

[Deleted member 80556]

I don't know what the peace negotiation process looks like but is there any possibility the government goes back for a new deal very quickly or was this a years-in-the-making process?

To be honest, I don't know. The opposition always criticized everything in the peace deal, so I don't know what they'll want changed.

The deal was like 4 years in the making. Maybe 5, I can't remember.

EDIT: The popularity of the president is pretty low precisely because of the deals (and well, he is not charismatic at all compared to other leaders, he was also unlucky to be the president when the price of oil, our main exportation, went down, putting us in an economic crisis). The No side has run a pretty well done campaign, with the main media giving them most of the attention, and the population that supports the No leader is pretty big compared to others.

 

[Iksenpets]

Maybe Colombia just really wanted the U.K. to not feel along in being the only country to have a terrible referendum this year. I mean, holy shit, who votes against a peace treaty??

 

[Cerium]

So the US population isn't smart? Or UK? Or Brazil? Evidenced by previous elections (in different issues).

The US doesn't have direct democracy except at the state level which can still be overturned by the feds (thanks Supremacy Clause).

 

[Regulus Tera]

jesus christ Colombia


EDIT: What's even the point of a representative democracy if you are gonna put an issue as complicated as peace negotations up to a public referendum?

 

[ilbambino]

You have NO way of knowing that. The Greek Cypriots voted to reject a reunification agreement with the northern Turkish Cypriots some years back stating they could get a better deal and the island remains divided to this day. OTOH the people of Northern Ireland chose to support their own peace process that envisioned former paramilitaries (many of whom had committed terrible atrocities) entering politics on the condition they gave up their guns. Today NI is a peaceful place, free of the terrorist violence that plagued in for decades. Many of those former gunmen are sitting in the regional parliament and making laws.

This was probably the best chance for peace in a generation and approximately one half of those who voted chose the route of continued war. Not smart.

There is always uncentainty in all life choices, you also don't know what will happen, so before pointing fingers, it is better to wait and see what develops out of these results.

I'm not asking you how I should've voted, I'm asking you to show your arguments for No. This is a discussion board after all.

My main arguments against the agreement were:

1. The pardon level granted to high level FARC officials. I have no problem with a pardon to "Low - Level"FARC members, as most of them were part of FARC against their will or due to the circunstances they faced, but i believe high levels officers should be sent to jail at least for some time, as they ordered several things that led to crimes against humanity.

2. The creation of a parallel justice system which wouldn't offer enough warranties to persons, companies, etc, which could be pointed by a comission as responsibles for the conflict, and those pointed individuals couldn't recur to the ordinary justice to clean their names, as the agreement forfeits it.

There are other things, but for me, these were my biggest deal breaker issues with the agreement.

 

[Ahasverus]

My main arguments against the agreement were:

1. The pardon level granted to high level FARC officials. I have no problem with a pardon to "Low - Level"FARC members, as most of them were part of FARC against their will or due to the circunstances they faced, but i believe high levels officers should be sent to jail at least for some time, as they ordered several things that led to crimes against humanity.

2. The creation of a parallel justice system which wouldn't offer enough warranties to persons, companies, etc, which could be pointed by a comission as responsibles for the conflict, and those pointed individuals couldn't recur to the ordinary justice to clean their names, as the agreement forfeits it.

There are other things, but for me, these were my biggest deal breaker issues with the agreement.

So two things what wouldn't affect you personally besides some vague sense of self justice won over the practical reforms in agriculture, drug fight and victims reparations that would have helped millions of poor people. Ok.gif

There is always uncentainty in all life choices, you also don't know what will happen, so before pointing fingers, it is better to wait and see what develops out of these results

It's nice when you are able to "wait and see" behind a keyboard and not in the middle of the Vaupes jungle with an assault rifle on your hands like my soldier cousin and millions of others.

 

[djplaeskool]

The ceasefire is still in place right?
Shouldn't they be able to renegotiate the terms so it's more generally palatable?

 

[Corronchilejano]

Caloto Si 72,9% No 27%
Cajibio Si 71,1% No 28%
Miraflores Si 85% No 14%
Silvia Si 73% No 23%
Barbacoas Si 73% No 26%
Tumaco Si 71% No 28,8%
San Vicente del Caguan Si 62% No 37%
Apartado Si 52% No 47%
Mitú Si 77% No 22%
Valle del Guamez Si 86% No 13%
Macarena 73% No 39%
Puerto Asis Si 57% No 42%
Turbo Si 56% No 43%
Toribio Si 84% No 15%
Y el mejor: Bojaya Si: 96% No:4%

 

[Ahasverus]

The ceasefire is still in place right?
Shouldn't they be able to renegotiate the terms so it's more generally palatable?

Imagine you're any of the parts, and have devoted 5 years to a painful negotiation that was for nothing. Would you start over and take the risk, again?

Caloto Si 72,9% No 27%
Cajibio Si 71,1% No 28%
Miraflores Si 85% No 14%
Silvia Si 73% No 23%
Barbacoas Si 73% No 26%
Tumaco Si 71% No 28,8%
San Vicente del Caguan Si 62% No 37%
Apartado Si 52% No 47%
Mitú Si 77% No 22%
Valle del Guamez Si 86% No 13%
Macarena 73% No 39%
Puerto Asis Si 57% No 42%
Turbo Si 56% No 43%
Toribio Si 84% No 15%
Y el mejor: Bojaya Si: 96% No:4%

Heartbreaking.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Oh wow, this feels anti-climatic

 

[ilbambino]

The ceasefire is still in place right?
Shouldn't they be able to renegotiate the terms so it's more generally palatable?

Yeah, it is still in place, and will continue like that according to the president.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

My main arguments against the agreement were:

1. The pardon level granted to high level FARC officials. I have no problem with a pardon to "Low - Level"FARC members, as most of them were part of FARC against their will or due to the circunstances they faced, but i believe high levels officers should be sent to jail at least for some time, as they ordered several things that led to crimes against humanity.

2. The creation of a parallel justice system which wouldn't offer enough warranties to persons, companies, etc, which could be pointed by a comission as responsibles for the conflict, and those pointed individuals couldn't recur to the ordinary justice to clean their names, as the agreement forfeits it.

There are other things, but for me, these were my biggest deal breaker issues with the agreement.

You are dreaming if you think that the FARC will change number 1. They will have amnesty, you can't have perfect justice and peace in such a conflict. Read one of the posts a I quoted a while back.

Number 2 can be improved, although the government had already said that they would not prosecute companies and individuals who were force to pay for the conflict.

EDIT: I think you're also ignoring the fact that the elections were heavily politicized in order for Centro Democratico to have something to run on in the 2018 election, after their big loss in the latest mid-terms. Centro Democratico will prolong the process as far as they can in order to say that they were the ones who brought peace and unity to the country. Essentially securing their political power for years. And there's a political leader in there who probably should've been judged for crimes against humanity as well, if we're talking about that.

 

[sibarraz]

Imagine you're any of the parts, and have devoted 5 years to a painful negotiation that was for nothing. Would you start over and take the risk, again?

Heartbreaking.

If both sides want peace why not. Even the FARC leader said that they are still aiming for peace. You are talking like peace will never be achieved.

 

[Linkark07]

I mean, the most important thing is peace needs to happen but after all the cruel and horrible things FARC has done to people, many of them deserve to spend the rest of their lifetime behind bars instead of become a political party. Honestly, I can understand why no won.

 

[lalugubregondola]

There is always uncentainty in all life choices, you also don't know what will happen, so before pointing fingers, it is better to wait and see what develops out of these results.



My main arguments against the agreement were:

1. The pardon level granted to high level FARC officials. I have no problem with a pardon to "Low - Level"FARC members, as most of them were part of FARC against their will or due to the circunstances they faced, but i believe high levels officers should be sent to jail at least for some time, as they ordered several things that led to crimes against humanity.

2. The creation of a parallel justice system which wouldn't offer enough warranties to persons, companies, etc, which could be pointed by a comission as responsibles for the conflict, and those pointed individuals couldn't recur to the ordinary justice to clean their names, as the agreement forfeits it.

There are other things, but for me, these were my biggest deal breaker issues with the agreement.

The thing is that these issues are the main reason there is a conversation to end the war in the first place. I mean, I hope if the agreement gets reworked there is more clarity about them but ending the violence was more important and practical to me. Now we are stuck in the power struggle between Uribe and Santos for the next presidency, so the chances of another deal with FARC are slim.

 

[Ahasverus]

I mean, I understand that peace needs to happen but after all the cruel and horrible things FARC has done to people, many of them deserve to spend the rest of their lifetime behind bars instead of become a political party. Honestly, I can understand why no won.

No you don't, see this list:

Caloto Si 72,9% No 27%
Cajibio Si 71,1% No 28%
Miraflores Si 85% No 14%
Silvia Si 73% No 23%
Barbacoas Si 73% No 26%
Tumaco Si 71% No 28,8%
San Vicente del Caguan Si 62% No 37%
Apartado Si 52% No 47%
Mitú Si 77% No 22%
Valle del Guamez Si 86% No 13%
Macarena 73% No 39%
Puerto Asis Si 57% No 42%
Turbo Si 56% No 43%
Toribio Si 84% No 15%
Y el mejor: Bojaya Si: 96% No:4%

It's a list of towns, little, poor villages that were the scenario for the greatest massacres in Colombian history. They were the real participants of the war and they overwhelmingly said yes.

The NO won because of armchair politicians, rich entitled people affiliated to the ultra right wing party and christian churches afraid of gender and sexual orientation protections.

 

[ilbambino]

The thing is that these issues are the main reason there is a conversation to end the war in the first place. I mean, I hope if the agreement gets reworked there is more clarity about them but ending the violence was more important and practical to me. Now we are stuck in the power struggle between Uribe and Santos for the next presidency, so the chances of another deal with FARC are slim.

I sincerily expected the YES to win, and by a big margin. I think in the end, a lot of people didn't read the agreements and simply found in the plesbicito the way to punish the president, and you can see that his low popularity was the most exploited point by the people who campaigned for the NO.

 

[Ahasverus]

The taxi drivers union voted no because the government allowed Uber. That's how serious people took this. This is a shit country, plain and simple. Or more like, the most beautiful country in the world, with the worst people inside.

 

[andythinkpad]

Wow that's pretty big news. The current president is screwed.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

The taxi drivers union voted no because the government allowed Uber. That's how serious people took this. This is a shit country, plain and simple. Or more like, the most beautiful country in the world, with the worst people inside.

Oh right. They did. And Uber is still pretty much illegal. Taxi drivers are still beating up Uber drivers, and cops are still filing fines against Uber drivers.

Wow that's pretty big news. The current president is screwed.

Nah, he's on his last term. It's the country that's fucked if the No strategy of "renegotiation" doesn't pan out.

 

[Dierce]

I mean, the most important thing is peace needs to happen but after all the cruel and horrible things FARC has done to people, many of them deserve to spend the rest of their lifetime behind bars instead of become a political party. Honestly, I can understand why no won.

No won because the people least effected by the violence dislike seeing the poor progress. That is why many who were actually victims approved the peace deal. The wealthy doesn't care about them and guess what, the violence starts again and they wont be effected in the least.

 

[MrChocolate]

The US doesn't have direct democracy except at the state level which can still be overturned by the feds (thanks Supremacy Clause).

Since Bush got elected twice (the first one actually losing by popular vote) means that direct democracy is indeed the best method.

 

[dave is ok]

I mean, the most important thing is peace needs to happen but after all the cruel and horrible things FARC has done to people, many of them deserve to spend the rest of their lifetime behind bars instead of become a political party. Honestly, I can understand why no won.

This is basically how I feel about it

I don't blame people who want to see war criminals behind bars and not running for office.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

No won because the people least effected by the violence dislike seeing the poor progress. That is why many who were actually victims approved the peace deal. The wealthy doesn't care about them and guess what, the violence starts again and they wont be effected in the least.

If violence starts again, the rich people who voted No will smugly say "We were right!" while honking in their 200 million pesos cars (that BTW just happened in Medellin), all while the poor will have their children killed and their houses destroyed. EDIT: What's worrisome is that people are really missing the forest for the trees. The forest being the victims who could have seen their lives benefited with no more conflict and an infusion of money in infrastructure and social development.

 

[iancamilosanchez]

Hey people, I'm Colombian, 17 years old, pretty impressed reading these Thread, the international attention is real. What I wanted to say is that the younger generations, including me, are the ones who will get the country in the future, and as Brexit, we are letting the old ones to vote for concerns we care about, and it's true, the Departments (aka States) most affected by war, voted YES, while on my city, which hasn't been affected at all by war, votes NO, and that's frustrating, because we rejected the screamings and dreams of the real victims. The ICON of war Boyaja, one of the most affected towns in the forgotten Department, got a 95.78% of votes for Yes.

 

[Eternal Gamer]

Wtf Colombia, people who voted "No" dropped tha ball so hard on this, really, in a negotiation por peace you have to assume that some things need to stay behind if you want to go forward.

 

[WAR recon zero]

Well

Thank god no won, because YES promoters are being civil.

If YES won, they would be on the streets stirring up shit.

Santos said that the cease fire will continue. Farc says that they want peace and unarmed politics. Let's see

 

[labx]

Well

Thank god no won, because YES promoters are being civil.

If YES won, they would be on the streets stirring up shit.

Santos said that the cease fire will continue. Farc says that they want peace and unarmed politics. Let's see

Spot on. Even the ones that voted for the NO, are surprised. They were saying that everything was rigged, bla bla bla... Even they are in shock. I like what Santos said ("los escucho"). And Santos has make a TERRIBLE JOB, but nice move.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

Spot on. Even the ones that voted for the NO, are surprised. They were saying that everything was rigged, bla bla bla... Even they are in shock. I like what Santos said ("los escucho"). And Santos has make a TERRIBLE JOB, but nice move.

Yeah, Uribe was calling foul earlier on, calling fraud. First thing that Santos did was recognize the legitimacy of the election. People don't see that though.

 

[labx]

Yeah, Uribe was calling foul earlier on, calling fraud. First thing that Santos did was recognize the legitimacy of the election. People don't see that though.

Yes, people are SO biased with the corruption in this country that they can't even tell what isn't corrupt anymore. The corrupts complain about corruption, and when they don't see it, they are scared.

O como diría mi papá

Tanto rayo matando vaquitas

 

[Coriolanus]

The taxi drivers union voted no because the government allowed Uber. That's how serious people took this. This is a shit country, plain and simple. Or more like, the most beautiful country in the world, with the worst people inside.

heh. argentinians and brazilians say the same thing about their countries.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

One thing that is also painfully clear, we need better survey organizations and that publish more constantly. Supposedly there were 'secret' polls from this week that showed that No had won popularity.

We need a Colombian equivalent of fivethirtyeight.com

 

[Ether_Snake]

I think if a second referendum is called Yes will win by a good margin, but it will take probably over a year to get one. There is probably a lot more pro-Yes who didn't vote than the opposite.

 

[Ahasverus]

heh. argentinians and brazilians say the same thing about their countries.

Latin america is objectively the most beautiful land on earth. It's a shame we're descendants of murderers and thieves. We're just screwed from the genetic side. Damn, I'm mad.

 

[mantidor]

So I had this big ass post but quoting in mobile is a pain in the ass, so for now about this post here, as a Colombian with family and friends in Meta, Casanare and others

THIS HERE IS ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT.

 

[WAR recon zero]

3 ways this can pan out

1. Santos ignores the voting and signs the deal. He has the constitutional power to do so, but now he's weakened politically.

2. Santos and Farc negotiate a separate deal with less concessions. Possibly the farc heads will stat in exile while new figures rise to compete democratically. Hopefully they don't get exterminated like in the 80s (google UNION PATRIOTICA GENOCIDIO)

3. Farc gtfo and returns to the jungle, giving the NO parties legitimacy and we regress 15 years.

 

[Ahasverus]

3 ways this can pan out

1. Santos ignores the voting and signs the deal. He has the constitutional power to do so, but now he's weakened politically.

2. Santos and Farc negotiate a separate deal with less concessions. Possibly the farc heads will stat in exile while new figures rise to compete democratically. Hopefully they don't get exterminated like in the 80s (google UNION PATRIOTICA GENOCIDIO)

3. Farc gtfo and returns to the jungle, giving the NO parties legitimacy and we regress 15 years.

If I were him I'd take the first option. He's politically done anyway. He won't, though, the court wouldn't let him. I suppose Maria Fernanda Cabal and Paloma Valencia will get in charge now.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

I honestly think there will be a fourth option.

Santos plays the political game of giving the opposition more say in the agreements, not much is changed except wording, the deal is signed without a referendum.

I think if a second referendum is called Yes will win by a good margin, but it will take probably over a year to get one. There is probably a lot more pro-Yes who didn't vote than the opposite.

Definitely. Being outside of hurricane season will probably be a must for the government, and doing better and more active campaigning will be a must if another referendum must be called.

Doubt people who didn't vote thinking Yes was going to win will stay home if there's a second shot. The situation doesn't feel as helpless as Brexit though. There are certain unknowns here, but perhaps we can still reach a good resolution for all.

So I had this big ass post but quoting in mobile is a pain in the ass, so for now about this post here, as a Colombian with family and friends in Meta, Casanare and others

THIS HERE IS ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT.

Hear, hear, man. I'm suprised to see so many Colombian Gaffers I recognized. Feel like I'm in family here, heh.

 

[WAR recon zero]

The Cristian pastors demand to be part of the conversations. They had their victory on their homosexuality agenda.

Not joking

 

[labx]

3 ways this can pan out

1. Santos ignores the voting and signs the deal. He has the constitutional power to do so, but now he's weakened politically.

2. Santos and Farc negotiate a separate deal with less concessions. Possibly the farc heads will stat in exile while new figures rise to compete democratically. Hopefully they don't get exterminated like in the 80s (google UNION PATRIOTICA GENOCIDIO)

3. Farc gtfo and returns to the jungle, giving the NO parties legitimacy and we regress 15 years.

2.

1, he is done.
3. FARC EP, UP and all the guerrillas in here, fought for this kind of thing. They are old. They are done too. That is why they are "guerrilleros" or "narcotraficantes" or "terroristas", for half century they fought for a political niche and now they have it.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

The Cristian pastors demand to be part of the conversations. They had their victory on their homosexuality agenda.

Not joking

Fuck no, this country is secularized for fuck's sakes.

Man, if the Pope had backed Yes...

He's already said he's not coming until the Peace Deal is finalized (he had previously said he'd come in March).

 

[Ahasverus]

The Cristian pastors demand to be part of the conversations. They had their victory on their homosexuality agenda.

Not joking

This makes me fume. Soon I'll be a pariah in my own country. Fuck that stupid fuck of Alejandro Ordoñez, guy is Ted Cruz only actually poweful. Fuck that guy for reviving the religious right. And fuck Alvaro Uribe for courting him and his loons.

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

The people always get what they deserve. It might sound a little heartless but democracy is a bitch sometimes. Hopefully they can salvage this somehow.

 

[s_mirage]

Oh FFS, this is more ridiculous than Brexit. A majority of 0.4%, out of a 37% turnout, wrecks the deal? Yet more proof that direct democracy is a really bad idea.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

The people always get what they deserve. It might sound a little heartless but democracy is a bitch sometimes. Hopefully they can salvage this somehow.

The people who voted Yes are the ones who suffered the most. Most of the No population is far from the conflict zone.

 

[Pau]

No won because the people least effected by the violence dislike seeing the poor progress. That is why many who were actually victims approved the peace deal. The wealthy doesn't care about them and guess what, the violence starts again and they wont be effected in the least.

And those who are affected will use it as an excuse to not help out the poor anyways because it'll be giving in to their violent demand.