Are the US courts stirring the Argentinan pot?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Are the US courts stirring the Argentinan pot?

1 · 2 · Next
Author Message
WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8521
Credit: 23,141,480
RAC: 15,769
United Kingdom
Message 1309187 - Posted: 23 Nov 2012, 9:27:06 UTC

Argentina willing to go to U.S. Supreme Court in bond row

(Reuters) - Argentina will appeal a U.S federal court ruling ordering it to pay $1.33 billion to holdout bond investors, the government said on Thursday, vowing to fight "judicial colonialism" all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.


P. S. Couldn't resist the title after the last Argentinian thread that is closed.

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1309226 - Posted: 23 Nov 2012, 12:04:08 UTC

Yes I noticed that the last Argentinian thread got closed back in July. Until now there was no reason to replace it, no matter, we'll just start this new one. It's of special importance to the UK, and it will be discussed. Argentina is still seen as pretty much a banana republic by most of the world, although that is not strictly true. Argentina

What is true, is that it has an unstable political scene with many military coups in its history. Investing financially in such a country has to be seen as highly risky at best. This is just political posturing by a desperate administration.



Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 10276
Credit: 1,530,392
RAC: 255
United Kingdom
Message 1309230 - Posted: 23 Nov 2012, 12:11:10 UTC

No wonder the "Malvinas" are back on the menu!
____________

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8521
Credit: 23,141,480
RAC: 15,769
United Kingdom
Message 1309500 - Posted: 23 Nov 2012, 23:02:55 UTC

Now the motorcycling world gets involved.

MotoGP postpones Argentinian round due to political rows

Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 10276
Credit: 1,530,392
RAC: 255
United Kingdom
Message 1310117 - Posted: 25 Nov 2012, 10:25:26 UTC

A nice comment made about the Argentian President: -

"This is the way she [Kirchner] operates. It’s just cheap and nasty politics from a cheap and nasty politician."

Full story
____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1310124 - Posted: 25 Nov 2012, 10:42:27 UTC

That comment was made by Simon Weston. I would think that at the time he made it, and given his background, he was a bit upset.

Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the conflict, said: ‘I think that the cruise companies should stand up and say, “If you behave like that to us we’re not going to visit Argentina, we’ll close our office and the much needed revenue will go”.

A fair response.

‘It is shameful that elements within a large country like Argentina should seek to strangle the economy of a small group of Islands. Such action benefits nobody and only condemns those who lend it support. We have made this very clear to the government of Argentina. We will take every necessary measure to support the Falkland Islanders.’

Foreign Office statement above.

Details of the new round of Falklands hostilities broke hours after the funeral of Sir Rex Hunt, the doughty governor of the islands during the 1982 war.

That was of course why it happened. More Sabre rattling.



Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 10276
Credit: 1,530,392
RAC: 255
United Kingdom
Message 1310126 - Posted: 25 Nov 2012, 10:51:26 UTC

Agree with the sabre rattling, but as the past has already proven, those sabres do end up cutting rather than rattle.

If that happens, just who is going to retake the islands? Our lot?

What with? No carriers, no long range bombers & can you see the Euro Army doing it?

With the way the EU is working on the financial crisis with their useless summits, one would be looking at years before any military agreement would be forthcoming!

The Yanks certainly hasn't helped by cancelling their tours - their only thoughta are the loss of $$$$$.
____________

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8521
Credit: 23,141,480
RAC: 15,769
United Kingdom
Message 1310128 - Posted: 25 Nov 2012, 11:11:13 UTC - in response to Message 1310126.

Agree with the sabre rattling, but as the past has already proven, those sabres do end up cutting rather than rattle.

If that happens, just who is going to retake the islands? Our lot?

What with? No carriers, no long range bombers & can you see the Euro Army doing it?

With the way the EU is working on the financial crisis with their useless summits, one would be looking at years before any military agreement would be forthcoming!

The Yanks certainly hasn't helped by cancelling their tours - their only thoughta are the loss of $$$$$.

The latest report I saw on the Argentian Forces said that for the most part, because of their economic position, that they do not have the capability to perform another invasion.

For one very important reason, they are still operating the same aircraft as they had in the 1980's and the few aircraft we do have down there are more than a match for them.

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1310131 - Posted: 25 Nov 2012, 11:21:25 UTC

The attacks were made by the hardline Left-wing group Quebracho. They were not done directly by the Argentine government, although it is pretty obvious that they didn't lift a finger to stop it, and were quite happy to look the other way. It was clearly in reaction to the funeral of past Governor Rex Hunt. There were similar happenings when Prince William went there for helicopter training. All along, Argentina always feels that it has to make a response back, when anything significant happens that reminds them that they lost the war.

You can be quite sure that the MOD have been keeping close tabs on the situation out there for many years. Modern surveillance would alert them immediately to any kind of military build up, and they would react accordingly. For obvious reasons they never comment upon the deployment of submarines and surface vessels, or locations of aircraft, but it would be very likely that within hours, there would be a pre-planned response. Yes, we don't have the means to mount a task Force like we did before any more, but 30 years later, perhaps we won't need one :-)





Profile James Sotherden
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 8555
Credit: 31,509,491
RAC: 57,528
United States
Message 1310274 - Posted: 25 Nov 2012, 19:46:54 UTC

I have to ask that with the tensions between the U.K. and Argentina why did you guys retire an aircraft carrier before your new one came online?

Seems to me you should have a couple of air squadrons right on the Island also.

But submarines can be an equalizer.
____________

Old James

Horacio
Send message
Joined: 14 Jan 00
Posts: 536
Credit: 69,521,295
RAC: 97,192
Argentina
Message 1310348 - Posted: 26 Nov 2012, 0:27:56 UTC - in response to Message 1310274.

I have to ask that with the tensions between the U.K. and Argentina why did you guys retire an aircraft carrier before your new one came online?

Seems to me you should have a couple of air squadrons right on the Island also.

But submarines can be an equalizer.

Knowing how things work here, even a fish boat will be enough to keep the islands safe... ;D
I'm pretty sure, that both countries, or better said, politicians from both countries are using all this steamy discussions just to divert atention from other things... Grab a bag of popcorn and watch the next episode tomorrow at the same time in the same channel...

Oh, by the way, to those "vultures" that want their money back... good luck... knowing how stubborn our president is, they are not going to get their money not even breaking her legs and arms... (or the legs and arms of the rest of us, which is the most probable thing that's going to happen).
____________

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,628,916
RAC: 582
United States
Message 1310565 - Posted: 26 Nov 2012, 19:34:00 UTC

In the end the U.S. MUST maintain good relations with Argentina. There is too much coffee at stake!! The british might opt for tea instead, but that is simply not an option here.
____________

Janice

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1310575 - Posted: 26 Nov 2012, 20:16:28 UTC

Horacio,

Firstly let me thank you very much for contributing to this thread. Secondly, let me assure you at once, that the people of the UK do not bear any animosity towards you and your fellow countrymen. The conflict is a political one between our two governments. We have also not forgotten that in the past conflict, 649 Argentine military personnel died. We remember them as loyal to their country as indeed our troops were to us.

Knowing how things work here, even a fish boat will be enough to keep the islands safe... ;D

I think the MOD is fully appraised upon your military capability.

I'm pretty sure, that both countries, or better said, politicians from both countries are using all this steamy discussions just to divert atention from other things... Grab a bag of popcorn and watch the next episode tomorrow at the same time in the same channel...

You would be about right. Your current President, Cristina Elisabet Fernández de Kirchner, has severe economic and political problems at home to deal with. She also knows full well that to avoid conflict with the hard left spinter groups like Quebracho, she needs to make periodic claims to the Malvinas. Our own PM is in mid-term, a traditional kicking time, and is struggling with Europe.

Oh, by the way, to those "vultures" that want their money back... good luck... knowing how stubborn our president is, they are not going to get their money not even breaking her legs and arms...

Investing money in Argentina was always going to be a risky business.

(or the legs and arms of the rest of us, which is the most probable thing that's going to happen).

Thatis what the rest of the free world is afraid of.

At the end of the day it is down to the Islanders themselves to determine their future. There will be a referendum on 10/11th March 2013, to let them vote upon it.




Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1310581 - Posted: 26 Nov 2012, 20:40:18 UTC

I have to ask that with the tensions between the U.K. and Argentina why did you guys retire an aircraft carrier before your new one came online?

James,

Our current government inherited the worst peacetime debt since WWII from the Labour party. Cuts have had to be made across all sorts of Government departments, and the MOD was no exception. The 2010 Strategic Defence Review came to the conclusion that the UK did not need it's own independent deterrent force. It was argued that wars and conflicts in the future would not be between two individual countries, such as in 1982, but a coalition of countries against a common enemy, as we saw in Iraq, and Libya, and pobably will do in Syria and Iran.

I personally think that they were wrong, and it was just a simple cost cutting exercise under another name. I have already gone on record as saying that the decision to scrap the Harriers and the Ark Royal, was the most bone headed, idiotic, short sighted, and stupid decision that there ever could have been. OK, they were all due for end of life in 2016 anyway, but as one that helped to build the Harriers in the 1970's I know damn well, that given spares and maintenance, they could easily have gone on for another 10 years. Why do you think the USMC snapped them all up at a bargain price?

Seems to me you should have a couple of air squadrons right on the Island also

There is "adequate" air support already there and more that can be called up at short notice.

But submarines can be an equalizer.

We have a permanent nuclear sub presence in the South Atlantic and always have had.


Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12154
Credit: 6,433,700
RAC: 8,090
United States
Message 1310595 - Posted: 26 Nov 2012, 21:28:22 UTC - in response to Message 1310581.
Last modified: 26 Nov 2012, 21:29:44 UTC

I have to ask that with the tensions between the U.K. and Argentina why did you guys retire an aircraft carrier before your new one came online?

James,

Our current government inherited the worst peacetime debt since WWII from the Labour party. Cuts have had to be made across all sorts of Government departments, and the MOD was no exception. The 2010 Strategic Defence Review came to the conclusion that the UK did not need it's own independent deterrent force. It was argued that wars and conflicts in the future would not be between two individual countries, such as in 1982, but a coalition of countries against a common enemy, as we saw in Iraq, and Libya, and pobably will do in Syria and Iran.

Translation: The USA will just have to run its printing presses faster to fund our defense, because we are broke and ran out of paper and ink.

Note: China isn't playing the game.

Observation: Last time the world wound down its military but a couple countries didn't go along we had a World War.

Prediction: Crystal ball says "Learn Mandarin"

<ED> Yes a tad O/T re: Argentina. Sorry in advance.
____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1310605 - Posted: 26 Nov 2012, 22:15:37 UTC

Prediction: Crystal ball says "Learn Mandarin"

Prediction: Next world war China Vs Islam

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,654,360
RAC: 3,010
United States
Message 1310871 - Posted: 27 Nov 2012, 23:39:04 UTC - in response to Message 1310581.

Our current government inherited the worst peacetime debt since WWII from the Labour party.

Cameron become PM on 11th May 2010, the UK Fiscal Year 2009 ended on March 31st 2010, at the end of FY 2009 UK public debt as a percentage of GDP stood at 44.26, at the end of FY 2010 it stood at 52.08, and end of FY 2011 at 59.97% GDP. Looks like, if your statement was true, the coalition will be able to rob Labour of the record soon enough.

However, it's not true, for no FY between 1917 and 1970 was UK debt less than 60% GDP. As there was more than one government between 1945 and 1970, using debt as a %age of GDP as the measure, all inherited worse peacetime debts than the coalition inherited from Labour. Also, UK troops in Afghanistan might take offense at your statement that the last election occurred during peacetime.

Source.

Alternatively, play this and substitute the word "Republican" with "Conservative".

____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31148
Credit: 11,362,437
RAC: 21,447
United Kingdom
Message 1310978 - Posted: 28 Nov 2012, 10:49:49 UTC

The statement by the incoming coalition government quoted by me was meant to refer to the Budget deficit



Also, UK troops in Afghanistan might take offense at your statement that the last election occurred during peacetime.

Now you're just being picky. I specifically referred to WWII. Of course we have had other conflicts since then.
    1950 Korea
    1956 Suez
    1964 Aden
    1965 Borneo
    1982 Falklands
    1991 Gulf War 1
    1999 Kosovo
    2000 Sierra Leone
    2003 Gulf War 2
    2012 Afganistan


Did we get out of bed the wrong side today? I'm sending Sirius some liver pills for Christmas, sounds like I'd better send you some as well.



Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 10276
Credit: 1,530,392
RAC: 255
United Kingdom
Message 1310979 - Posted: 28 Nov 2012, 10:57:38 UTC - in response to Message 1310978.

The statement by the incoming coalition government quoted by me was meant to refer to the Budget deficit



Also, UK troops in Afghanistan might take offense at your statement that the last election occurred during peacetime.

Now you're just being picky. I specifically referred to WWII. Of course we have had other conflicts since then.
    1950 Korea
    1956 Suez
    1964 Aden
    1965 Borneo
    1982 Falklands
    1991 Gulf War 1
    1999 Kosovo
    2000 Sierra Leone
    2001 Afghanistan
    2003 Gulf War 2


Did we get out of bed the wrong side today? I'm sending Sirius some liver pills for Christmas, sounds like I'd better send you some as well.



Better take some yourself as you got one wrong & left out an "H".
____________

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8521
Credit: 23,141,480
RAC: 15,769
United Kingdom
Message 1310991 - Posted: 28 Nov 2012, 11:34:08 UTC

1968 was the only year in the 20th Century that a British soldier didn't die in Action.

1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Are the US courts stirring the Argentinan pot?

Copyright © 2014 University of California