|
On September 07 2019 18:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Bloomberg reports Ivanka Trump brought some money "for roads" in Argentina. Show nested quote +Ivanka Trump Visits Troubled Argentina, Bringing Cash for Roads
The U.S. government approved $400 million in financing for Argentina’s road network during a visit by Ivanka Trump, the U.S. President’s daughter and adviser, to the Latin American country that’s struggling with a financial crisis on the eve of presidential elections.
The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), an agency of the U.S. government tasked with helping American businesses...will bankroll around 430 miles of roads in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Cordoba and Mendoza, according to a statement from Argentina’s Transport Ministry.
The announcement comes less than eight weeks away from an election which President Mauricio Macri, a personal friend of U.S. President Donald Trump, looks set to lose to leftist opposition candidate Alberto Fernandez. www.bloomberg.comArgentinians face a tough choice imo. Vote for Trump's friend Macri and keep getting the crumbs of US businesses that are coming to exploit them, or vote for the leftist and risk aid turning to sanctions and a US backed coup/candidate on the horizon. Not to mention US support for more money from the IMF (which promises austerity anyway) disappears too if they vote for the leftist candidate. Despite all that, it seems they are still going to and kudos to them for their bravery.
The US will not put sanctions on any candidate. The IMF will not lend any more money to Argentina, as we agreed a couple of pages back Macri is the Argentinian version of a "Rhino", who fooled the IMF for money. Not again.
Their economy is going to keep falling apart despite who they elect. Maybe slower with Macri, but fucked nontheless.
US aid here is just a bandage, to help sway the election prolly but won't work; Macri just failed too spectacularly.
|
On September 07 2019 21:10 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2019 18:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Bloomberg reports Ivanka Trump brought some money "for roads" in Argentina. Ivanka Trump Visits Troubled Argentina, Bringing Cash for Roads
The U.S. government approved $400 million in financing for Argentina’s road network during a visit by Ivanka Trump, the U.S. President’s daughter and adviser, to the Latin American country that’s struggling with a financial crisis on the eve of presidential elections.
The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), an agency of the U.S. government tasked with helping American businesses...will bankroll around 430 miles of roads in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Cordoba and Mendoza, according to a statement from Argentina’s Transport Ministry.
The announcement comes less than eight weeks away from an election which President Mauricio Macri, a personal friend of U.S. President Donald Trump, looks set to lose to leftist opposition candidate Alberto Fernandez. www.bloomberg.comArgentinians face a tough choice imo. Vote for Trump's friend Macri and keep getting the crumbs of US businesses that are coming to exploit them, or vote for the leftist and risk aid turning to sanctions and a US backed coup/candidate on the horizon. Not to mention US support for more money from the IMF (which promises austerity anyway) disappears too if they vote for the leftist candidate. Despite all that, it seems they are still going to and kudos to them for their bravery. The US will not put sanctions on any candidate. The IMF will not lend any more money to Argentina, as we agreed a couple of pages back Macri is the Argentinian version of a "Rhino", who fooled the IMF for money. Not again. Their economy is going to keep falling apart despite who they elect. Maybe slower with Macri, but fucked nontheless. US aid here is just a bandage, to help sway the election prolly but won't work; Macri just failed too spectacularly.
I was suggesting that if Fernandez wins, that instead of aid and support, it's likely the US drops it's support and potentially adds sanctions (accelerating economic problems). Particularly because their camp has joined Mexico and others calling for a return to talks in Venezuela (makes sense to me since Guaido has predictably failed).
I agree the money is definitely the US blatantly attempting to interfere in a foreign election (undermining all the people who claimed their obsession with Russia's fb posts was because of foreign interference in elections).
A rino (from your perspective at least) enjoying such support from the US Republican leader also provides some interesting insight to the state of US politics.
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 06:46 JimmiC wrote:
I think there is a pretty big difference between saying "we will give this government economic support but not that government" and creating bots and so on to influence social media.
One is overt and just how countries operate one is subterfuge.
Just to be clear, you actually think the US doesn't have bots on social media influencing perception lol? You might want to read up on Quantumbot and JTRIG/GCHQ (which is a British example of literally doing that in Argentina).
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 07:29 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2019 06:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 08 2019 06:46 JimmiC wrote:
I think there is a pretty big difference between saying "we will give this government economic support but not that government" and creating bots and so on to influence social media.
One is overt and just how countries operate one is subterfuge. Just to be clear, you actually think the US doesn't have bots on social media influencing perception lol? You might want to read up on Quantumbot and JTRIG/GCHQ (which is a British example of literally doing that in Argentina). My point was , and keep in mind I dont like trump, that giving money above board is international relations and happens all the time. It is not the équivalent of what you said.
It's clearly an attempt to influence the election, though if you ask them it's not, so it's worse (considering we [practically any country with internet does] have the social media trolls and such too) imo.
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 07:46 JimmiC wrote:
Russia and the states relationship is confusing to say the least since sometimes Putin and Trump seem buddy, buddy and in other ways the US and Russia still appear to be fighting their proxy battles over influence.
I have no doubt the US, China, Russia, Turkey, and a host of others are trying to get in the government that they think will be most favorable to them.
So what was the big difference you were talking about and what difference does it make?
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 07:53 JimmiC wrote:
One is above board foriegn relations and one is subterfuge. As I said above. And as aaid on the other thread, everything is not a 11 and this article is a 1, no conspiracy.
So you're arguing it's not trying to influence the election or that lying about it and saying it's not isn't subterfuge?
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 08:24 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2019 07:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 08 2019 07:53 JimmiC wrote:
One is above board foriegn relations and one is subterfuge. As I said above. And as aaid on the other thread, everything is not a 11 and this article is a 1, no conspiracy. So you're arguing it's not trying to influence the election or that lying about it and saying it's not isn't subterfuge? I'm saying the same thing I said in my first response to your first post. Why are you also trying to turn this into an 11.
You said:
I think there is a pretty big difference between saying "we will give this government economic support but not that government" and creating bots and so on to influence social media.
One is overt and just how countries operate one is subterfuge.
So I'm trying to understand that difference. So I asked is it that you're arguing that ""we will give this government economic support but not that government" weeks before the election isn't trying to influence the election or that when they say it's not, it's not subterfuge?
|
|
|
Just demonstrating you both made a poorly formed/thought out arguments.
As for Guaido it's not looking good. Called this coming.
The case is based on audio recordings purported to involve a US administration official urging an advisor to Guaido to "deliver the Esequibo" to Exxon Mobil and other multinationals
State prosecutors successfully petitioned the country's all-powerful Constituent Assembly to lift Guaido's parliamentary immunity in April. He already faces several other charges, including one of "usurping the functions of the president".
Question is what his main sponsor (The US) will do if their demands to not arrest him aren't listened to.
Guaido's main international sponsor, the United States, has warned Venezuelan authorities against any attempt to arrest him.
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 11:46 JimmiC wrote:
No I didn’t and no you didn’t, you said there was US lead coup, which looks like it never will come.
Indeed I did:
I'm saying you are oblivious to how you (not "you" but this line of argument or worse) are helping Trump (I should clarify it's not even Trump but the neocons running his FP here) set up Guaido as a puppet and/or patsy and have no plan for what to do if Guaido (or chaos) is worse than Maduro
|
|
|
On September 08 2019 12:11 JimmiC wrote:
Well I mean you said a lot of things. But I was talking about the crux of your argument that caused you to repeatedly talk down and insult me over. And now is pretty clear was never the plan.
Also it really makes me laugh how any report you read that you think agree s with you, you treat like the gospel. Any one that disagrees, even from a source that was gospel tge other day, propaganda. Its a odd habit to only read tge news for proof you're "right"
The US attempt to force the world and Venezuela to recognize Guaido as president of Venezuela was both real and failed (not that they've given up just yet though).
My argument from the start was that it was a US sponsored attempt to remove Maduro from power(and secure private business interests from their puppet) and was increasingly likely to fail the more we learned about it.
I suspect whatever you're talking about is something you imagined my position to be but your assertion won't come with a citation.
The "over 50 countries" include the ones the US has previously installed leaders in, close allies, and a bunch of countries that have no intention of backing up the US threat should Guaido have been or be arrested for his crimes. The other ~140 that still never recognized Guaido would be the ones they were trying to convince.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
