US involvement in Columbian raid into Ecuador
Columbia basically said told Chavez that if your not going to police your own territory we will do it for you to protect Columbia.
This also sends a message to Chavez, to remind him of his weaknesses. .
Actually Colombia made their assault in Ecuador, not Venezuela, so I am not sure about sending some message to Chavez to police his territory.
And it seems to me that if we were involved what limited benefit we get from knocking out a handful of FARC people (there are thousands of them) is offset by the fact that Chavez and others get to holler about US meddling in South American affairs which most of the countries down there resent.
There are militant groups like FARC all over the world. Some of them are terrorists, some of these groups view themselves as revolutionaries as did our forefathers. I dont know enough to know which ones have legitimate causes and which ones do not. From what little I know about FARC, they are bad guys if for no other reason because of their kidnapping escapades.
I dont see the benefit to us getting involved in these fights, particularly when it involves one country crossing borders into another.
I also wonder who approves this type of action. Does it go up to the president? Can the president, without approval from congress, involve us in what might be consdiered an act of war? Suppose Spain and Portugal were at odds, could the president approve a clandestine operation wherein we helped the Portuguese make a military strike in Spain? how would that be different than helping Colombia mount a militray raid in Ecuador(if we did)?