Most worthless US territorial acquisition

Aug 2014
207
New York, USA
#61
From all the posts it seems that Puerto Rico is the current "worthless" US territory. Just seems that everything is stacked against them, e.g. language, culture, economy, geography, leadership..... Too bad!
At least USVI is a nice vacation spot and is small enough that it doesn't really drain any resources from the US.
The situation with PR is ridiculous. They are simply too big to be kept in this current limbo status. There needs to be a referendum there for either independence or joining the US as a state and accepting full US governance. Every time they need hand outs or other benefits "they are Americans and US citizens", every time the Feds try to clean house there they are "independent and not a US state".
 
Likes: Futurist
Jul 2009
9,591
#62
At least USVI is a nice vacation spot and is small enough that it doesn't really drain any resources from the US.
The situation with PR is ridiculous. They are simply too big to be kept in this current limbo status. There needs to be a referendum there for either independence or joining the US as a state and accepting full US governance. Every time they need hand outs or other benefits "they are Americans and US citizens", every time the Feds try to clean house there they are "independent and not a US state".
Puerto Rico cannot be "cut loose" as an independent country. Geo-strategically, that could (and likely would) present another opportunity for foreign interference in a vital area of US interest. Another Cuba or Venezuela is not in US interests. The Monroe Doctrine was intended as a deterrent to European influence in the Western hemisphere. Now the Chinese are sniffing around everywhere in Latin America which is most definitely not in US interests.

Chinese interests are served by diversions of US attention and expenditure in our own "back yard." Their ultimate strategic imperative is driving the US out of Asia, and they will support any state entity or organization in the the Western Hemisphere that serves that purpose (US distraction = Chinese advantage). An independent P.R. would be a prime candidate to encourage anti-US attitude and policy, and for China to provide support and "military advice." I can just see replies concerning US "hypocrisy" and "what is fair is fair" and so on. None of that means anything in international politics where state interest is the only consideration.

With the current US administration, everything is viewed through the prism of transactional expense. POTUS looks at everything in terms of dollars, and strategy is evidently above his level. Unfortunately this administration - and much of its Congressional support - probably does not view Puerto Ricans as "real Americans." Therefore statehood is unilkely at this time. Not being able to foresee future developments, P.R. must remain as is.
 
Likes: Futurist
Aug 2014
207
New York, USA
#63
Puerto Rico cannot be "cut loose" as an independent country. Geo-strategically, that could (and likely would) present another opportunity for foreign interference in a vital area of US interest. Another Cuba or Venezuela is not in US interests. The Monroe Doctrine was intended as a deterrent to European influence in the Western hemisphere. Now the Chinese are sniffing around everywhere in Latin America which is most definitely not in US interests.

Chinese interests are served by diversions of US attention and expenditure in our own "back yard." Their ultimate strategic imperative is driving the US out of Asia, and they will support any state entity or organization in the the Western Hemisphere that serves that purpose (US distraction = Chinese advantage). An independent P.R. would be a prime candidate to encourage anti-US attitude and policy, and for China to provide support and "military advice." I can just see replies concerning US "hypocrisy" and "what is fair is fair" and so on. None of that means anything in international politics where state interest is the only consideration.

With the current US administration, everything is viewed through the prism of transactional expense. POTUS looks at everything in terms of dollars, and strategy is evidently above his level. Unfortunately this administration - and much of its Congressional support - probably does not view Puerto Ricans as "real Americans." Therefore statehood is unilkely at this time. Not being able to foresee future developments, P.R. must remain as is.
PR doesn't have any oil, so the situation is different compared to Venezuela. It is an island out in the ocean with a population of a largish city. Venezuela is a big country full of natural resources.
PR becoming another socialist sh*thole like a smaller version of Cuba would do absolutely nothing to the US. We can afford to keep them isolated just like Cubans for, frankly, forever, until they themselves change their minds.
If the Chinese want to spend their money to develop PR, that would only benefit us in the long run, since the US is obviously PR's natural trading partner. Even from a military standpoint, constructing an extra Ford supercarrier per year is worth more than keeping PR... and is cheaper.
You know what benefits China more? Us spending our defense budget on troops in Germany.
 
Jul 2009
9,591
#64
PR doesn't have any oil, so the situation is different compared to Venezuela. It is an island out in the ocean with a population of a largish city. Venezuela is a big country full of natural resources.
PR becoming another socialist sh*thole like a smaller version of Cuba would do absolutely nothing to the US. We can afford to keep them isolated just like Cubans for, frankly, forever, until they themselves change their minds.
If the Chinese want to spend their money to develop PR, that would only benefit us in the long run, since the US is obviously PR's natural trading partner. Even from a military standpoint, constructing an extra Ford supercarrier per year is worth more than keeping PR... and is cheaper.
You know what benefits China more? Us spending our defense budget on troops in Germany.
Grenada didn't have any oil either. Cuba doesn't have any oil. And the United States is Venezuela's natural trading partner. I think you are misreading the strategic implications, and the position in the post above is 'transactional' in fiscal terms (which is the current POTUS's view of virtually all public policy). I disagree with you.
 
Aug 2014
207
New York, USA
#65
Grenada didn't have any oil either. Cuba doesn't have any oil. And the United States is Venezuela's natural trading partner. I think you are misreading the strategic implications, and the position in the post above is 'transactional' in fiscal terms (which is the current POTUS's view of virtually all public policy). I disagree with you.
Invasion of Grenada was a mistake, and was even condemned by our close allies. Unless there is a genocide or other egregious human rights violations, US should only go in as part of UN sanctioned coalition.
Invasion of Vietnam a decade earlier was a mistake too. Now Vietnam is one of our partners in Asia, and the general sentiment is pro-American, even despite our mistake and failure to install "our guys" there.
Not making Russia our ally in 1991 was a mistake.
Invasion of Iraq was a mistake too.
Libya was a mistake.
Current embargo on Cuba, after USSR collapse, is a mistake.
All of these invasions undermine American moral authority and even our soft power. Forcing people through force to become our allies is completely different than changing their hearts and minds.
 
Last edited:

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
16,806
SoCal
#66
Invasion of Grenada was a mistake, and was even condemned by our close allies. Unless there is a genocide or other egregious human rights violations, US should only go in as part of UN sanctioned coalition.
Invasion of Vietnam a decade earlier was a mistake too. Now Vietnam is one of our partners in Asia, and the general sentiment is pro-American, even despite our mistake and failure to install "our guys" there.
Not making Russia our ally in 1991 was a mistake.
Invasion of Iraq was a mistake too.
Libya was a mistake.
Current embargo on Cuba, after USSR collapse, is a mistake.
All of these invasions undermine American moral authority and even our soft power. Forcing people through force to become our allies is completely different than changing their hearts and minds.
What about Afghanistan?
 
Aug 2014
207
New York, USA
#67
What about Afghanistan?
Afghanistan was sanctioned by UN and was a NATO coalition fight. It was a mistake to stay there as long as we did though. This war has been ongoing for almost 18 years now.
The new soldiers that will be serving there now were not even born when it started. Think about it.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
16,806
SoCal
#68
Afghanistan was sanctioned by UN and was a NATO coalition fight. It was a mistake to stay there as long as we did though. This war has been ongoing for almost 18 years now.
The new soldiers that will be serving there now were not even born when it started. Think about it.
Are you sure about the UN-sanctioned part?
 
Aug 2014
207
New York, USA
#69
Are you sure about the UN-sanctioned part?
Yes, since there was no objections from any security counsel members of the UN. Even Russia and China supported it. All UN resolutions concerning Afghanistan following 9/11 attacks were passed unanimously, with no countries even abstaining. There were no countries trying to object to NATO coalition invasion.
 
Likes: Futurist
Jun 2013
451
Connecticut
#70
At least USVI is a nice vacation spot and is small enough that it doesn't really drain any resources from the US.
The situation with PR is ridiculous. They are simply too big to be kept in this current limbo status. There needs to be a referendum there for either independence or joining the US as a state and accepting full US governance. Every time they need hand outs or other benefits "they are Americans and US citizens", every time the Feds try to clean house there they are "independent and not a US state".
The tern "limbo" unfortunately is the best definition at this time. Like I said unfortunately. As an independent country it would collapse immediately. The cause would be money, i.e. everything from their commerce and industry to infastructure and population. They just don't have the money, the labot force, the investments, etc. to survive.
 

Similar History Discussions