Is Argentina being sabotaged from abroad?

Dougie

Registered
When you put supposed narcos and human traffickers in your cabinet, why do you need the US to sabotage you?

All these gringos who think they are being woke by defending the Ks and blaming the Soros, Paul Singer and the "globalist jews" of US for the problems in Argentina are quite literally the opposite of progressive.
 

antipodean

Registered
When you put supposed narcos and human traffickers in your cabinet, why do you need the US to sabotage you?

All these gringos who think they are being woke by defending the Ks and blaming the Soros, Paul Singer and the "globalist jews" of US for the problems in Argentina are quite literally the opposite of progressive.

But it’s all good, she’s a vegan and sociologist so how could she possibly spread hatred and intolerance, support mafias and the entrapment of people in poverty?

I am dubious of the character of the gringos (and many Argentines...) who claim to be woke and defend this administration. From my observations over time, many have no problem using the dollar blue, not declaring the income or wealth, buying illegal substances, not leaving a gratuity to a waiter earning $0.70 an hour and then complaining that their cortado cost them more than $0.80, bringing in an iPhone without paying the tax, hiring a maid in the black or doing brunch where staff are paid in the black. But yes, it is the free market that is evil and exploitative and these little imperfections we see today are just temporary blips on the way to a utopian paradise....
 

Redpossum

Registered
Deep breath, guys, deep breath.

I started this thread to try to get away from the arguments over on the "Cristina" thread where I was asked to explain what I said about sabotage from the outside. Unfortunately, (but predictably), that argument promptly moved over here.

I am sincerely troubled by the anger and obvious hatred displayed by some of the remarks here. Can we please dial it back about 5 notches, and try to stay a bit more calm and at least civil, if not polite? Comparing people to Hitler has no place in polite conversation. If you want to rant and rave like that, please take it to another thread. Obviously I have no authority to insist, I'm just making a polite request. Please.

Political discourse in the USA has gotten wildly out of control, but there's no need to bring that here. Some of us, (ahem!), came here in part to escape that. Less hatred, less raging anger, more courtesy. Please.
 

Sequoia1321

Registered

But it’s all good, she’s a vegan and sociologist so how could she possibly spread hatred and intolerance, support mafias and the entrapment of people in poverty?

I am dubious of the character of the gringos (and many Argentines...) who claim to be woke and defend this administration. From my observations over time, many have no problem using the dollar blue, not declaring the income or wealth, buying illegal substances, not leaving a gratuity to a waiter earning $0.70 an hour and then complaining that their cortado cost them more than $0.80, bringing in an iPhone without paying the tax, hiring a maid in the black or doing brunch where staff are paid in the black. But yes, it is the free market that is evil and exploitative and these little imperfections we see today are just temporary blips on the way to a utopian paradise....
Who’s vegan?
 

antipodean

Registered
Who’s vegan?
The person in the video who published it on their social network and made a point about talking about her veganism, profession and progressivism to justify her hate speech toward what is by international standards a pretty centrist and boring political party with progressive views of their own, and at the same time justify her support of another political party (who coincidentally is pushing the creation of mega pig farms here in Argentina exclusively to export to China.)
 

Dougie

Registered
Deep breath, guys, deep breath.

I started this thread to try to get away from the arguments over on the "Cristina" thread where I was asked to explain what I said about sabotage from the outside. Unfortunately, (but predictably), that argument promptly moved over here.

I am sincerely troubled by the anger and obvious hatred displayed by some of the remarks here. Can we please dial it back about 5 notches, and try to stay a bit more calm and at least civil, if not polite? Comparing people to Hitler has no place in polite conversation. If you want to rant and rave like that, please take it to another thread. Obviously I have no authority to insist, I'm just making a polite request. Please.

Political discourse in the USA has gotten wildly out of control, but there's no need to bring that here. Some of us, (ahem!), came here in part to escape that. Less hatred, less raging anger, more courtesy. Please.
Sir, do you believe that Anibal Fernandez, Juan Manzur, and Gildo Insfran are all fine gentlemen who are being sabotaged by outside forces?
 

Redpossum

Registered
Sir, do you believe that Anibal Fernandez, Juan Manzur, and Gildo Insfran are all fine gentlemen who are being sabotaged by outside forces?
No, of course not. They are not fine, and they are certainly not gentlemen. But that doesn't mean that you and I have to descend to their level.

As I'm sure you are aware, I am talking about Argentina as a nation, across the broad sweep of its history.

Creatures of a day! What is anyone?
What is anyone not? A dream of a shadow
Is our mortal being. But when there comes to men
A gleam of splendour given of heaven,
Then rests on them a light of glory
And blessed are their days.

(from Pythian 8) by Pindaros of Thebes, fifth century BC

All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,


(From As You Like It) by William Shakespeare, First Folio 1623 AD
 

camberiu

Registered
Argentina once had a surprisingly robust shipbuilding industry, but now just buys second-hand ships, which are mysteriously offered on amazingly attractive terms. This PDF document is a very detailed comparison of shipbuilding in Argentina and Brazil, also showing US figures as a baseline in some graphs. Basically shipbuilding in Argentina has been flatlined since 1980.
Since your original PDF superficially contrasted Brazil building submarines while Argentina buys low end off-shore patrol vessels, let me tell you a little story about the South American submarine race, which has broad parallels with the de-industrialization of Argentina, which you bale at least partially on malicious foreign intervention.



Back in 2019, it was announced that the Brazilian Navy would transfer four of its domestically build, German designed Type 209 submarines to the Armada Argentina. As the Brazilian Type 209 subs are gradually replaced by the new (also domestically build) Riachuelo class, they will be transferred to Argentina. This is an unexpected and rather ironic end to a submarine building race between the two countries that started in the late 70s. In many ways, it is the retelling of the tale of the the Hare vs the Tortoise.

It all started back in the late 70s, when Brazil and Argentina, both governed by right-wing military juntas, were bitter geo-political regional rivals jockeying for dominance over the South Atlantic. Argentina decided to embark on an incredibly ambitious program to acquire the know-how and capability to build advanced diesel-electric submarines domestically, with the ultimate goal of eventually developing its own native nuclear sub. For that, Argentina reached out to a shipyard in then West Germany and laid out a series of requirements for what would become the TR-1700 project. The TR-1700 class was the largest and most ambitious non-nuclear submarines of the era, vastly outclassing any other sub deployed South of the Equator at the time. Even the West German Navy, the country where the submarines were being designed, did not possess vessels as capable as the TR-1700 at the time.

The idea was that the first two subs of the class would be build in Germany and the other four would be build in Argentina. It was a very aggressive and audacious plan. The TR-1700 was an extremely complex and advanced piece of engineering, requiring very advanced metallurgy, machinery and manufacturing techniques to be build. It was also very expensive. But the Argentines felt confided that they could tackle the challenge.

Seeing their regional arch rivals embark in such a project that would give them the ability to dominate the South Atlantic, the Brazilian government had no choice but to also start a domestic submarine program. However, lacking the audacity and self confidence of its neighbors, and having a long tradition of steady gradual progress instead of attempts of leaps of engineering, Brazil opted for a much more conservative approach: The domestic production of the much more simple German designed Type-209 submarine. Unlike the TR-1700, the 209 was much less ambitious, being half of the size of its Argentine counterpart and not nearly as advanced. It was also a tested and proven design, and well within the industrial (and financial) capabilities possessed by Brazil at the time. If the TR-1700 was to be considered the equivalent of the Porsche of the conventional submarines, the 209 was the Toyota Camry. However, in the early 80s, a massive economic crisis, triggered by Mexico's Debt default, devastated the economies of Latin America. Government programs budget were slashed to the bone and the submarine programs of both Brazil and Argentina were heavily affected.

Because the Brazilian program was less ambitious, cheaper and required less development of new manufacturing technologies, even with severe budget cuts, the Brazilian Navy was able to slow down the project enough without having to kill it. Despite many delays due to budget cuts, eventually the first Type 209 submarine for the Brazilian Navy was build in Germany. The others were successfully build locally at the Arsenal da Marinha, in Rio de Janeiro, giving Brazil true know how on submarine manufacturing. Based on the acquired knowledge, a new more advanced class of submarines (The Tikuna Class) was developed domestically and build without foreign oversight or assistance. Brazil now had the know-how of advanced conventional submarine manufacturing techniques. Those techniques are the basis being applied to Brazil's future nuclear powered submarine, the SN Alvaro de Alberto. Meanwhile, the Argentine side did not fare so well. The combination of the economic crisis with the overall high price and complexity of their program meant that even putting the program into basic life support was too costly for Argentina and ultimately doomed the entire program. The ARA Santa Fe and Santiago del Estero which were meant to be build domestically in Argentina were left unfinished on an local shipyard and only the two subs built in Germany were delivered: The ARA Santa Cruz and ARA San Juan. Worse, the acquisition of fabrication know-how did not take place and Argentina did not developed the much desired technological capability of designing and building submarines domestically.

And now, 40 years later, Argentina will be receiving used Type-209 submarines from Brazil, to replace the subs that were originally expected to compete against, the TR-1700.

I doubt that anyone from either country involved in these projects back then expected this to be the outcome of the submarine race of the late 70s and 80s in the South Atlantic.

By the way, the journeys of The Fábrica Argentina de Aviones SA (FAdeA) and EMBRAER follow a very similar story, with very similar tropes.
 

Wade K.

Registered
Not sure what you’re implying there, that socialist leanings won’t become a big fish, that 45 million population can’t become a big fish? If Britain became a big fish as the British Empire then it’s some evidence that it can happen with small countries as well. Also, they can become a big fish by creating a union with regional powers, or even with far away powers perhaps, sort of like what we have with NATO, EU, if you’re part of that system than you’re a more powerful country, sure not the boss of the whole thing maybe, but sort of like a state in the USA, so in that case that would make you a part of a big fish rather than the prey of a big fish. Even let’s say a country is not on the potential threat radar of a predatory culture of a strong country, the fact is that a predatory culture will do what it does, prey on others, both internationally, corporately, and personally, in the transactions or interactions where this predatory mentality is involved. We’re talking about here basically a culture, and it can exert its force in multiple ways. For example, if you’r a minority in the USA chances are you’ll be getting extra mistreated by people who see you as their prey for lack of a better word. And if these predatory people are in positions of power, such as president, congressman, solider, beaurocrat, businessman, etc., they’re going to be exerting their predatory tendencies on those “others.” So these predatory injustices are a constant happening and not necessarily just based on whether this country is a big fish or not or can become a big fish in the future.
The British began their empire when Europe had 25% of the world's population. They had the manpower and technology to win wars. And as their empire grew they incorporated locals into their military. But we're talking about Argentina. You seem to be implying that Argentina would be just as prominent a country as the UK or Italy or Canada if only the big boys would let them. Manufacturing and resources and agriculture give a country prominence these days. Argentina has the agriculture but its own government is relying heavily on it to pay for its mismanagement. A lot has to happen for Argentina to be much more highly regarded and that starts with paying its bills. Until then...
 
Top