U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-03-2016, 05:26 AM
 
Location: London, UK
2,408 posts, read 1,245,050 times
Reputation: 1321

Advertisements

Landmark peace deal with Farc rebels rejected in shock referendum result



Voters in Colombia have rejected a landmark peace deal with Farc rebels in a shock referendum result, with 50.2% voting against it.
The deal was signed last week by President Juan Manuel Santos and Farc leader Timoleon Jimenez after nearly four years of negotiations.
But it needed to be ratified by Colombians in order to come into force.
Addressing the nation, President Santos said he accepted the result but would continue working to achieve peace.


Source: Colombia referendum: Voters reject Farc peace deal - BBC News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-03-2016, 05:30 AM
 
Location: London, UK
2,408 posts, read 1,245,050 times
Reputation: 1321
I voted no but never thought we would clinch it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2016, 09:04 AM
 
Location: Canada
4,289 posts, read 3,937,233 times
Reputation: 2936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pueblofuerte View Post
I voted no but never thought we would clinch it.

May I ask what your reason for voting no was?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2016, 09:29 AM
 
Location: Brazil
1,237 posts, read 922,946 times
Reputation: 641
I suppose the reason is so obvious...
Congratulations Colombia!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2016, 04:20 PM
 
590 posts, read 395,359 times
Reputation: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Falcon View Post
I suppose the reason is so obvious...
Congratulations Colombia!!
don't celebrate too much. We will renegotiate it in the next few months, everyone wants it, we don't want more war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2016, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
6,549 posts, read 4,681,236 times
Reputation: 4293
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanLuis View Post
May I ask what your reason for voting no was?
I read it somewhere that says the deal included granting seats to this FARC thing (that totally sounds like fart) in the Parliament and the voter turnout rate was like less than 40%, one'd think that the number would be twice as large given how much coverage it's gotten.

I know nothing about Colombia, but maybe it was not exactly black and white, war and peace? Though 1 of the Colombian Facebook friends of mine (I only have like, 3) did switch his profile picture to darkness, so I guess he's not too happy with the results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2016, 12:19 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
2,422 posts, read 1,326,154 times
Reputation: 2718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic View Post
I read it somewhere that says the deal included granting seats to this FARC thing (that totally sounds like fart) in the Parliament and the voter turnout rate was like less than 40%, one'd think that the number would be twice as large given how much coverage it's gotten.

I know nothing about Colombia, but maybe it was not exactly black and white, war and peace? Though 1 of the Colombian Facebook friends of mine (I only have like, 3) did switch his profile picture to darkness, so I guess he's not too happy with the results.
Colombia has a Congress not a Parliament. You are right about the low turnout (38%). In the 2014 Presidential election, the first round resulted in a turnout of roughly a 40%. The second round of voting the turnout increased to almost 48%.

Some reporting indicates that the turnout was lower than average along the Caribbean coast where drenching rains from Hurricane Matthew may have kept many voters at home. Support for the peace deal was very high in this region. In such a close race it could have made a difference.

In the long run, the rejection of the deal might be a good thing, IF both sides (for and against) can find some middle ground and move forward with a re-worked deal that has a broader acceptance of the Colombian public. Much harder to implement a peace deal when the margin of victory (or defeat) is so close.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/colombia...els-1475451463
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2016, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Somewhere
8,071 posts, read 5,076,881 times
Reputation: 5654
Quote:
Originally Posted by joacocanal View Post
don't celebrate too much. We will renegotiate it in the next few months, everyone wants it, we don't want more war.
Some people voted against the plebicito because their immaculate idol Alvarito Uribito told them to do so.

Uribito thinks he is still the president and gave like an hour speech after the vote was announced. Uribito said that one of the reasons it needed to be rejected was because international investment would decrease He needs to go away. If he really wanted peace, he already had 8 years to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks View Post
In the long run, the rejection of the deal might be a good thing, IF both sides (for and against) can find some middle ground and move forward with a re-worked deal that has a broader acceptance of the Colombian public. Much harder to implement a peace deal when the margin of victory (or defeat) is so close.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/colombia...els-1475451463
Not going to happen.

Uribe was already invited to negotiate and he said no. This is a narcissist dictator-wanna be who wanted to change Colombian constitution to extend his presidency indefinitely. His only interest is to make himself look like a God and protect the paramilitaries.

Colombian president can't run for third term, high court rules
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americ...ia.uribe.elex/

Quote:
The Colombian Constitutional Court ruled Friday against holding a referendum that could have cleared the way for President Alvaro Uribe to run for a third consecutive term.
Friday's decision struck down a measure passed last year by a vote of 85-5 by the House of Representatives that would have allowed Colombians to vote on a referendum on whether a president can serve three consecutive terms.
The Senate had passed a similar bill.
Uribe, a conservative, was elected in 2002 to a single four-year term allowed by the 1991 constitution. A constitutional amendment in 2005 allowed him to run for a second term in May 2006.

Last edited by Sugah Ray; 10-04-2016 at 02:24 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2016, 03:00 PM
 
Location: NYntarctica
11,258 posts, read 5,755,032 times
Reputation: 4142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks View Post
Colombia has a Congress not a Parliament. You are right about the low turnout (38%). In the 2014 Presidential election, the first round resulted in a turnout of roughly a 40%. The second round of voting the turnout increased to almost 48%.

Some reporting indicates that the turnout was lower than average along the Caribbean coast where drenching rains from Hurricane Matthew may have kept many voters at home. Support for the peace deal was very high in this region. In such a close race it could have made a difference.

In the long run, the rejection of the deal might be a good thing, IF both sides (for and against) can find some middle ground and move forward with a re-worked deal that has a broader acceptance of the Colombian public. Much harder to implement a peace deal when the margin of victory (or defeat) is so close.


Colombian Voters Reject Peace Deal With FARC Rebels - WSJ
I believe only a tiny part of the Caribbean coast was affected, Barranquilla, Santa Marta, and the Guajira peninsula. I dont think the amount of people here could overturn the decision
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2016, 05:23 PM
 
Location: London, UK
2,408 posts, read 1,245,050 times
Reputation: 1321
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanLuis View Post
May I ask what your reason for voting no was?
Four main reasons:

1. Although the objectives of the accord were noble, it doesn't need a negotiation with narco-trafficking kidnappers and extortionists for it to be put in place. The objectives can be done by the government alone without the FARC, the FARC are one of the obstacles to the government realizing these objectives (although corruption and a lack of conviction within the government itself plays a hand also).

2. The fact that sentences were dramatically reduced to practically nothing upon a confession of the atrocities committed by assailants on both sides. This would've been a circus show and little justice would have been served.

3. Anyone who confesses or has evidence against them in committing atrocities should be barred from public office forever.

4. It will bring more corruption into government rather than reduce it as the FARC will never set aside the millions of dollars they earn in drug trafficking. Watch Ross Kemp's Extreme world: Colombia (televised on British TV this weekend gone) filmed in the worst affected city of Buenaventura thanks to joint FARC and Paramilitary drug cartels. The ideology the FARC promote is a joke, its just a smokescreen.

Not as contentious as the 4 before but...
5. I don't agree with just giving away seats in the senate. These should be voted for, however, I can understand that this is sometimes a given in any peace process but I still don't like it - especially if its permanent seats which was never really clear to me whether they could be voted out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top