Colombian here. There are 3 kinds of people against the agreement:
1) The people who just base their arguments on what they see on tweets and memes. Those are the same who won't read the agreement paper and who haven't read about how Ireland and Rwanda solved their conflicts and how they prospered afterwards. Those are the ones who see 'shooting them all' as something physically plausible.
2) Then there are the ones who are more responsible and actually read the agreement paper. These ones will counterargument in more intelligent ways. However, all of this group's arguments converge to the fact that they are ignoring that this is the most realistic, achievable and actionable version of the agreement. They're heavily sceptical about FARC's intentions and they would like everything to be renegotiated.
3) Finally, the ones who have a huge emotional investment in the topic because their family has been directly affected by FARC. This is the group which I personally comprehend the most, but still think they are not seeing the big picture. There's no such thing as a perfect peace and FARC will evolve into smaller rebel groups. But if we have been able to combat the big group, imagine what we can do against a smaller version of it.
doozy I'm assuming you haven't read the agreement. I invite you to read the parts that explain how there will be a transitional justice mechanism that'll not only subside FARC victims but will become an investment in infrastructure, education, etc.
I also invite you to read the part that talks about how FARC will get participation in politics. There are currently 102 seats in the senate and only 5 additional ones will be given to FARC. They will also get 5 seats in the Reprsentatives Chamber, out of the current 165.
When Colombia successfully negotiated a peace treatment with another marxist guerilla in the '90s (M-19) and they became the 'Unión Patriótica' party they got 15 seats and forward to 2016, we're not Venezuela 2.0. Our economy has done pretty well actually.
1) The people who just base their arguments on what they see on tweets and memes. Those are the same who won't read the agreement paper and who haven't read about how Ireland and Rwanda solved their conflicts and how they prospered afterwards. Those are the ones who see 'shooting them all' as something physically plausible.
2) Then there are the ones who are more responsible and actually read the agreement paper. These ones will counterargument in more intelligent ways. However, all of this group's arguments converge to the fact that they are ignoring that this is the most realistic, achievable and actionable version of the agreement. They're heavily sceptical about FARC's intentions and they would like everything to be renegotiated.
3) Finally, the ones who have a huge emotional investment in the topic because their family has been directly affected by FARC. This is the group which I personally comprehend the most, but still think they are not seeing the big picture. There's no such thing as a perfect peace and FARC will evolve into smaller rebel groups. But if we have been able to combat the big group, imagine what we can do against a smaller version of it.
doozy I'm assuming you haven't read the agreement. I invite you to read the parts that explain how there will be a transitional justice mechanism that'll not only subside FARC victims but will become an investment in infrastructure, education, etc.
I also invite you to read the part that talks about how FARC will get participation in politics. There are currently 102 seats in the senate and only 5 additional ones will be given to FARC. They will also get 5 seats in the Reprsentatives Chamber, out of the current 165.
When Colombia successfully negotiated a peace treatment with another marxist guerilla in the '90s (M-19) and they became the 'Unión Patriótica' party they got 15 seats and forward to 2016, we're not Venezuela 2.0. Our economy has done pretty well actually.