Politics Argentina going crazy?

Chilly

Chilly

Balls of steel
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,047
A country thats's been exploited for a long time nationalising foreign held assets seems reasonable to me. Imagine somewhere like Nigeria if it got it's act together. It wouldnt need any investment to exploit it's oil and would simply take over everything and keep the money.
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,564
Chilly said:
A country thats's been exploited for a long time nationalising foreign held assets seems reasonable to me. Imagine somewhere like Nigeria if it got it's act together. It wouldnt need any investment to exploit it's oil and would simply take over everything and keep the money.
Click to expand...

Yeah but that's a massive over-simplification. Its one thing to nationalise an asset, its another to be able to actually run the companies effectively and continue to invest in them, especially in the short-term. You end up like Venezuela, all they've done in swap US foreign contractors for Chinese ones, because when they nationalised their oil industry (and telecoms and a bunch of others), the original owners were all kicked out, but they also lost loads of their local talent, who didn't relish the prospect of massive pay cuts in Hugo's brave new socialist utopia, so they all buggered off to Panama and Mexico. In swoops China with "technical assistance" (in exchange for first dibs on the oil) and you're back to square one, or worse.

Also, in general terms, nationalised industries tend to suck. We have a whole post-war experience that shows that, and we're hardly the only ones.
 
cHodAX

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
Chilly said:
A country thats's been exploited for a long time nationalising foreign held assets seems reasonable to me. Imagine somewhere like Nigeria if it got it's act together. It wouldnt need any investment to exploit it's oil and would simply take over everything and keep the money.
Click to expand...

Those foreign investors pumped billions into building up those assets though, you can't let private enterprise in and take thier money to modernise but then at a time of your choosing kick them out and nationalise those assets. It is theft, plain and simple. Argentina need to stump up the cash to cover REPSOL's investment and losses, if not they will see an end to new investments from overseas and also possible sanctions from the E.U.
 
Chilly

Chilly

Balls of steel
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,047
cHodAX said:
Those foreign investors pumped billions into building up those assets though, you can't let private enterprise in and take thier money to modernise but then at a time of your choosing kick them out and nationalise those assets. It is theft, plain and simple. Argentina need to stump up the cash to cover REPSOL's investment and losses, if not they will see an end to new investments from overseas and also possible sanctions from the E.U.
Click to expand...

It may well be theft, but when a government does it, it is by definition legal (ignoring international treaty shenanigans). Frankly, I'd like to see more anarchy like this. Default on your debts, kick out the foreigners digging up your diamonds! My pension is already shit, I don't care.
 
Aada

Aada

Part of the furniture
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
6,716
I'm sure America would send a Aircraft carrier to the island if we needed it, F22 Raptors biatch!
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,564
Aada said:
I'm sure America would send a Aircraft carrier to the island if we needed it, F22 Raptors biatch!
Click to expand...

F-22s are land-based aircraft
 
cHodAX

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
Aada said:
I'm sure America would send a Aircraft carrier to the island if we needed it, F22 Raptors biatch!
Click to expand...

They needed us back in 1982 because of the cold war and even then they didn't help us, infact they tried to broker a dead where we would eventually hand back the islands or share sovereignty iirc. In 2012 they don't need us very much at all, infact the need the mineral wealth of South America much much more.
 
soze

soze

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
12,508
America would not help because all of South America would back the Argies and the Yanks would not want to piss them off. Some one mentioned that the French might have to help us with a Air Craft carrier but that made me sad because the surrender monkeys have better kit :(
 
rynnor

rynnor

Rockhound
Moderator
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
9,353
On the wargaming front Brazil could take out the type 45 rather easily with its advanced electric submarines.

They could use the same fleet to land ground troops - I dont think its likely tho.
 
cHodAX

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
soze said:
America would not help because all of South America would back the Argies and the Yanks would not want to piss them off. Some one mentioned that the French might have to help us with a Air Craft carrier but that made me sad because the surrender monkeys have better kit :(
Click to expand...

Sad isn't it, will be even worse when we hit the 82,000 military number before 2020, then we will be in really bad shape at sea, on land and in the air.
 
cHodAX

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
Never went through though did it? Was supposed to be a done deal 18 months ago but we still have 2 carrier builds on the books.
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,564
cHodAX said:
Never went through though did it? Was supposed to be a done deal 18 months ago but we still have 2 carrier builds on the books.
Click to expand...

A typical clever wheeze thought up by politicians but no-one bothered to ask the techies. The F-35C chosen by the RN at the time is too heavy for the French carriers (its not true, as stated in the Indie article, that French planes couldn't fly off the British carriers, the Rafale would do just fine).

Latest idiocy from Whitehall is we're going to dump the F-35C and go for the more expensive and less capable VTOL F-35B instead because BAE reckon it will cost too much to fit catapults to the new carriers (no conflict of interest there of course, oh no).
 
cHodAX

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
Yeah the VTOL does seem pointless, the performance falloff is not worth the compromise and by going catapult launch we have carriers that our allies can land on.
 
soze

soze

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
12,508
My friends who are big into planes see the choice of the F-35 which America are gimping to sell us over the Euro Fighter alternative as a massive waste of money anyway.
 
cHodAX

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
soze said:
My friends who are big into planes see the choice of the F-35 which America are gimping to sell us over the Euro Fighter alternative as a massive waste of money anyway.
Click to expand...

When you look at what any potential enemy could put in the air then I have to agree, better to have 200 cheaper and very slightly less capable airplanes than 100 overpriced and unproven airplanes. Maybe that is why India went for Rafale instead of Eurofighter?
 
Ctuchik

Ctuchik

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
10,467
To bad they didn't wait and got the Gripen NG instead. :)
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,564
soze said:
My friends who are big into planes see the choice of the F-35 which America are gimping to sell us over the Euro Fighter alternative as a massive waste of money anyway.
Click to expand...

Eurofighters can't take off from carriers, so its an apples and oranges comparison
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,564
cHodAX said:
When you look at what any potential enemy could put in the air then I have to agree, better to have 200 cheaper and very slightly less capable airplanes than 100 overpriced and unproven airplanes. Maybe that is why India went for Rafale instead of Eurofighter?
Click to expand...

To be honest, defence procurement in India has less to do with the quality of the aircraft and more to do with the level of technology transfer India gets out of the deal. Their mish-mash of Russian and western designs is actually a logistical nightmare that any sensible airforce would avoid, but the bigger picture (the development of their indigenous aerospace industry) is what makes them put up with it.

Ctuchik said:
To bad they didn't wait and got the Gripen NG instead. :)
Click to expand...

Totally different weight class to the Rafale/Typhoon; single engined v twin, lower range and weapons loadout. The analogy would be Gripen is like an F-16, Typhoon is like an F-15 (Rafale is sort of a 3/4 F-15).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top Bottom