Donald I, emperor of the world.

[Ian H]

I think it's been said here before, but S America has always been under the US boot. Nominally independent nations such as Venezuela, Columbia, Nicaragua have always been subject to sanctions and covert interference. Cuba is the only country to have successfully withstood the US pressure (so far), and has suffered accordingly.

 

[CXRAndy]

It is true Venezuelan crude oil is much more difficult to refine.

The USA has the refineries on its southern border from previous dealings with Venezuela. If the price is right for each barrel it is still a viable source to refine.

Russia can pretty much kiss its money goodbye

 

[Blazing Saddles]

It’s not only that Venezuela crude is more difficult to refine, it’s what it can be used for after refinement: I have read it’s diesel and asphalt.
In which case it’s of limited use.

 

[BoldonLad]

I think it's been said here before, but S America has always been under the US boot. Nominally independent nations such as Venezuela, Columbia, Nicaragua have always been subject to sanctions and covert interference. Cuba is the only country to have successfully withstood the US pressure (so far), and has suffered accordingly.

It is easy to understand how the US can (and has) interfered in various South American Countries, since the USA has been/is militarily and industrially stronger than all of them (note I said, understand, not condone).

To me, the interesting point is WHY did the USA gain ascendancy?

At the point European invaders arrived (say c1500 onwards), what is now the USA was not, as far as I know, "stronger" than any of the South American Countries (or, than what is now Canada).

 

[CXRAndy]

It’s not only that Venezuela crude is more difficult to refine, it’s what it can be used for after refinement: I have read it’s diesel and asphalt.
In which case it’s of limited use.

It may sound like limited use, but USA alone consumes 4 million barrels per day of diesel, around half of their petrol consumption.

Asphalt is very useful for making and repairing roads. Maybe the UK could get in on the action, considering how shịt our roads are.

Starmer will have to do a lot of arse licking- IU common practice for him

 

[CXRAndy]

It is easy to understand how the US can (and has) interfered in various South American Countries, since the USA has been/is militarily and industrially stronger than all of them (note I said, understand, not condone).

To me, the interesting point is WHY did the USA gain ascendancy?

At the point European invaders arrived (say c1500 onwards), what is now the USA was not, as far as I know, "stronger" than any of the South American Countries (or, than what is now Canada).

Top gear aptly covered the problem years they said they were lazy and feckless.

 

[Pblakeney]

It is easy to understand how the US can (and has) interfered in various South American Countries, since the USA has been/is militarily and industrially stronger than all of them (note I said, understand, not condone).

To me, the interesting point is WHY did the USA gain ascendancy?

At the point European invaders arrived (say c1500 onwards), what is now the USA was not, as far as I know, "stronger" than any of the South American Countries (or, than what is now Canada).

20th century politics and selling to war torn countries as a worldwide answer.
To address South America then their problems are largely self inflicted. Imo.

 

[All uphill]

It is easy to understand how the US can (and has) interfered in various South American Countries, since the USA has been/is militarily and industrially stronger than all of them (note I said, understand, not condone).

To me, the interesting point is WHY did the USA gain ascendancy?

At the point European invaders arrived (say c1500 onwards), what is now the USA was not, as far as I know, "stronger" than any of the South American Countries (or, than what is now Canada).

My grandmother (born 1876) talked a lot about Argentina. It was seen as an up-and-coming country around 1900, a viable competitor to The UK, Germany and France

I suspect the USA got off to roaring growth on the back of vast agricultural lands, slaves to work the land and a developing railroad to deliver the goods

 

[BoldonLad]

20th century politics and selling to war torn countries as a worldwide answer.
To address South America then their problems are largely self inflicted. Imo.

Yes, I know that is/was the outcome, but

- why did the USA gain the ability to make and sell all this stuff, when the others did not, given that approximately 400-500 years earlier, they all started more or less at the same time"level"?

- why were the South American Countries inclined to "self-inflict", while the USA did not (until now arguably)

 

[BoldonLad]

My grandmother (born 1876) talked a lot about Argentina. It was seen as an up-and-coming country around 1900, a viable competitor to The UK, Germany and France

I suspect the USA got off to roaring growth on the back of vast agricultural lands, slaves to work the land and a developing railroad to deliver the goods

Why did Argentina (say) lag behind the USA?, they had the resources (possibly other than slaves), neither country had railways or other "infrastructure" initially.

 

[Pblakeney]

Yes, I know that is/was the outcome, but

- why did the USA gain the ability to make and sell all this stuff, when the others did not, given that approximately 400-500 years earlier, they all started more or less at the same time"level"?

- why were the South American Countries inclined to "self-inflict", while the USA did not (until now arguably)

After the Civil War how many wars have been fought in the US? How many coups have there been? Civil unrest?
Stability leads to success. Something that seems to have been forgotten.

 

[briantrumpet]

My grandmother (born 1876) talked a lot about Argentina. It was seen as an up-and-coming country around 1900, a viable competitor to The UK, Germany and France

I think it still was in the 1920s, when a family friend (b.1922, d. 2023) was there at school... not sure why the family moved there before coming back to England (or why they came back).

 

[BoldonLad]

After the Civil War how many wars have been fought in the US? How many coups have there been? Civil unrest?
Stability leads to success. Something that seems to have been forgotten.

OK, I can buy that. Why did none of the South American Countries enjoy "stability" (I get that in the more recent times, USA may have been a destabilising influence, but, the USA did not start off as a "super power".

 

[Pblakeney]

OK, I can buy that. Why did none of the South American Countries enjoy "stability" (I get that in the more recent times, USA may have been a destabilising influence, but, the USA did not start off as a "super power".

South American politics are not my forte but they always seem to be in a state of disarray. As I said, self inflicted.
The elephant in the room for "super power" is nuclear weapons.

 

[PurplePenguin]

South American politics are not my forte but they always seem to be in a state of disarray. As I said, self inflicted.
The elephant in the room for "super power" is nuclear weapons.

They're not that bad when compared to the rest of the world. Aside from Argentina and Uruguay the geography is not that favourable. For example, the west coast is mostly desert, then it's mountains, then it's jungle.