Poverty in Argentina soars to over 50% as Milei’s austerity measures hit hard

Mike Hoxbig said:
Apart from that, like the rest of the world they've grown half a spine and started ignoring him. Everyone gave in to his demands at the start of his presidency when the US still had a decent relationship with most countries. The Iran war threw that out..
Click to expand...
lol.
They just handed over the Chagos Islands with zero hesitation.
 
Deep down resources that can flow across a theoretical/legal boundary suffer from the 'Tragedy of the Commons'.

I imagine the warning comes because it's almost impossible to defend oil on one side from flowing across that legal border.

So what will happen unless the international convention of not drilling close to the border isn't respected?

The Tragedy of the Commons' predicts both will begin to exploit that resource to exhaustion before the other one can.

It's why resources tend to fall into a state of depletion. The principle of property ownership applies. If you don't define and defend your borders properly, the resource will tend to be exploited.

 
Mike Hoxbig said:
You're right, same thing. What are we thinking...
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was worse because the Chagos had a strategic US base on it, whilst the Falklands is on the arse tip of South America whilst being near one of the most treacherous regions of ocean in the world.

That was why the falklands really wasn't much of a hullabaloo for the US.
 
konfab said:
Yeah, it was worse because the Chagos had a strategic US base on it, whilst the Falklands is on the arse tip of South America whilst being near one of the most treacherous regions of ocean in the world.

That was why the falklands really wasn't much of a hullabaloo for the US.
Click to expand...
Oil reserves vs some random US base, I wonder which one is more valuable.

Also TIL that having an army base present gives you governing authority. The US can suck on a fat one anyway, that base was shared with the UK (who actually governed the place). I don't see the US crying over changes in government everywhere else they have bases...
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Oil reserves vs some random US base, I wonder which one is more valuable...
Click to expand...
There are plenty of other places you can get oil from. Chagros is right in the middle of the Indian Ocean, it can support logistical and strategic operations for the Middle East, or anywhere in the Indian Ocean.
 
konfab said:
There are plenty of other places you can get oil from. Chagros is right in the middle of the Indian Ocean, it can support logistical and strategic operations for the Middle East, or anywhere in the Indian Ocean.
Click to expand...
See edit. Even if you remove that factor, whoever governs Chagos is none of the US's concern unless they were governing it, which they weren't. If they want to maintain their presence then they will have to negotiate with the new government, like they do with literally every other country. They don't have a right to be there, they are allowed to be there...
 
Last edited:
Mike Hoxbig said:
See edit. Even if you remove that factor, whoever governs Chagros is none of the US's concern unless they were governing it, which they weren't. If they want to maintain their presence then they will have to negotiate with the new government, like they do with literally every other country. They don't have a right to be there, they are allowed to be there...
Click to expand...
If they handed it over to a non-friendly country, they lose the base.

UK did them a dirty with that for zero reason.
 
konfab said:
There are plenty of other places you can get oil from. Chagros is right in the middle of the Indian Ocean, it can support logistical and strategic operations for the Middle East, or anywhere in the Indian Ocean.
Click to expand...

There's an ICJ ruling stating that Chagos should be under Mauritian control. Chagos is also only inhabited by military personnel.

The Falklands have been controlled by Britain since before Argentina's existence - Argentina has absolutely no claim to it. And the local population overwhelmingly wants to remain British.

You can't compare the two simply because they're islands.
 
vigras rojara said:
There's an ICJ ruling stating that Chagos should be under Mauritian control. Chagos is also only inhabited by military personnel.

The Falklands have been controlled by Britain since before Argentina's existence - Argentina has absolutely no claim to it. And the local population overwhelmingly wants to remain British.

You can't compare the two simply because they're islands.
Click to expand...
They are closer than you might think. Both had zero native populations.
 
konfab said:
They are closer than you might think. Both had zero native populations.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, your libertarian hero ain't bailing himself out via the Falklands. 😂

Edit: The reason he's trying it on now is because he's up for re-election next year I think, so he's on a popularity push. And of course as we know he needs orange man, who thankfully is heading towards the downside of his blundering time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X