Castro sympathized with the Colombian ELN, yet convinced them to disarm and enter a peace process.

Similarly, Chavez sympathized with the FARC, but always urged them to end the guerrilla war.

But Chavez's task was more difficult than Castro's. Because the last time FARC voluntarily tried to form a political party (Patriotic Union Party)…their politicians were slaughtered by paramilitaries. And since then, they have degenerated into a bunch of paranoid unreasonable thugs.

So you had Chavez making public calls to downgrade FARC to “belligerent” insurgent actors. Essentially asking the world to let the FARC keep weapons, in exchange for release of hostages and end to terror.

I strongly urge American journalists to get a clue.
They act as if Chavez's call for the FARC to end the guerilla war was “U TURN”.

In fact, as far back as 2005, Chavez condemned the Soviet Union & Che's tactics:
…….
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/907
…….
“…we cannot resort to state capitalism, which would be the same perversion of the Soviet Union. We must reclaim socialism as a thesis, a project and a path, but a new type of socialism, a humanist one, which puts humans and not machines or the state ahead of everything.”

He added that in spite of his admiration for Argentine revolutionary Che Guevara, he said Che's methods are not applicable. “That thesis of one, two, or three Vietnams, did not work, especially in Venezuela.”
………

And even this January 2008, he re-affirmed his position on live television:
……..
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/...
……..
“I do not agree with the armed struggle, and that is one of the things that I want to talk to (FARC leader) Marulanda about.”
……..

While one can well imagine their trauma, at minimum for being held against their will, but they don't look so bad. I'm sure there is more to hear from them, in terms of their treatment. Still they don't look like they were subjected to American detention practices, Guantanamo and elsewhere.