The War of the Triple Alliance (1864-1870)

Oct 2016
1,051
Merryland
#31
I'm not really sure what the point of this thread is, but I have to express my amazement that this is not a more well-known war: The War of the Triple Alliance 1864-1870.
Latin America seems forgotten and ignored by much of the world.
quote attributed to Kissinger; 'South America is a dagger pointed at the heart of Antarctica.'

USA untouchable by neighbors. South America too weak (relatively) and remote to have much impact on rest of world.
I can tell you that even here in the USA this war is barely remembered.
 
Nov 2010
7,410
Cornwall
#32
Latin America seems forgotten and ignored by much of the world.
quote attributed to Kissinger; 'South America is a dagger pointed at the heart of Antarctica.'

USA untouchable by neighbors. South America too weak (relatively) and remote to have much impact on rest of world.
I can tell you that even here in the USA this war is barely remembered.
With the greatest of respect, save some worthy and erudite posters on here, USA folk are not generally noted for looking outward on the wider world

Also why are you talking in terms of 'untouchable' and 'weak'? As if 'South America' - a load of individual states - should be attacking USA?

Latin America is much talked about in Spain (and Portugal) for obvious reasons. If not in USA
 
Likes: Tulius
Oct 2016
1,051
Merryland
#33
With the greatest of respect, save some worthy and erudite posters on here, USA folk are not generally noted for looking outward on the wider world

Also why are you talking in terms of 'untouchable' and 'weak'? As if 'South America' - a load of individual states - should be attacking USA?
in re; impact on rest of world.
nobody in Latin America has an economy large enough for global impact.
ditto military.
nobody in Latin America has anything like the naval resources for overseas combat. the only major country they could conceivably threaten (militarily) is the USA, only since a Latin army could theoretically attack by land. but we all know that will never happen.
LA produces a lot of useful products, mostly rubber and foodstuffs, but nothing strategic like oil.
LA produces its share of writers and other artists and film entertainment but I'm not aware of any major international impact.
conclusion, Latin America collectively has little global impact.
this is not an insult, just a summary of the situation.
if I'm missing something about Latin America's importance feel free to correct me.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,843
Sydney
#34
Latin America has others advantage , so far they seems well on the way to reconquer California , Arizona and Texas
Karma maybe
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,890
Portugal
#35
LA produces a lot of useful products, mostly rubber and foodstuffs, but nothing strategic like oil.
Venezuela? Brazil, Colombia, Mexico among other smaller producers… They just don’t use turbans, but there is a lot of oil there.

Considering that Latin America is a huge territorial area of the planet, with a significant population, that was the concern of many powers for centuries, I find it surprising that someone states that it doesn’t have impact to the rest of the world.

Even for the USA it has been constantly a concern, with a Monroe Doctrine, numeral political and military interventions in the short story of the USA (even prior to 1898 the USA made more than thirty military interventions just in Mexico and the Caribbean region), and more recently a it is a constant concern due to the migrant flux. Not forgetting that there are parts and communities in the USA that culturally are Latin-American. Furthermore we have there an economy that is among the 10 biggest world economies: Brazil, a country that also has most of the biggest lung of the planet: the Amazonia.

So, I don’t see how it isn’t relevant! For the world, for Europe, for the USA.
 
Oct 2016
1,051
Merryland
#36
So, I don’t see how it isn’t relevant! For the world, for Europe, for the USA.
we'll have to agree to disagree.
I just don't see any nation in the Americas south of the USA having much of a global footprint. most of what goes on, it seems, is intraregional.
I'll certainly concede that the events in Venezuela have impact as they involve 1) oil; 2) communist expansion; and 3) Russia and China (and Cuba).
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,890
Portugal
#37
we'll have to agree to disagree.

I just don't see any nation in the Americas south of the USA having much of a global footprint. most of what goes on, it seems, is intraregional.
I'll certainly concede that the events in Venezuela have impact as they involve 1) oil; 2) communist expansion; and 3) Russia and China (and Cuba).
Fair enough, that sentence that you quoted was my opinion. And it is a good thing that the humans don’t agree in all (another opinion).

What was not an opinion, but factual data that I stated, was that there are countries in Latin America that are oil producers (Venezuela, Brazil, Colombia…), that Brazil is among the 10 biggest economies in the world, in a GDP ranking, bigger for instance than Canada or Russia, that the Amazonia is a producer of oxygen relevant to the planet’s ecological equilibrium, and that Latin America was constantly a concern for the USA administrations, since the 19th century.

If we consider this things important or not that is a question of opinion and is there that we can agree to disagree.
 

Similar History Discussions