what's with south america and their chronical lack of funds to have a proper navy?

what's with south america and their chronical lack of funds to have a proper navy? brasil, peru, argentina, chile etc have a long history of neglecting their own shipyards, buying obsolete stuff from the bongs, selling them off for peanuts shortly after because they can't maintain them and then only keep a small patrol fleet of brown water/coastal rustbuckets that couldn't possibly protect their interests if threatened. which is counterintuitive considering their enormous coastlines and vast sovereign waters.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All of their adversaries are on their land borders

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because they are poor shitholes meaning they simply don't have that much funding for a proper navy, not helped by the fact as a poor shitholes they don't really do much outside their own areas meaning any navy activity outside of river boats will be extremely limited to begin with so there really isn't much of a point, that and you also have to factor in what funds they do get will be fricked with due to rampant corruption

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    used to be different
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_American_dreadnought_race

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >each of those were either made by england or USA
      no, it used to be the same astoday

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >made by the UK or USA***
        it's not just England, c**t
        Also, that wasn't OP's question, they asked about the chronic lack of funds, not shipbuilding capability.
        The South American nations were RICH as frick in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and could afford to maintain large navies in what was essentially a dick measuring contest.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          nobody cares about the moron add ons that swear they're oh so different from ingerland

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            mentally moronic post

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Anon, the Rio de Janeiro is a textbook example of what happened with those countries. Built by a british shipyard, caused the brazilian gov to almost go bankrupt, sold to the ottomans, which ceded it back to England, and renamed it Agincourt. This dick measuring contest was just that, a pointless waste of money they couldn't afford to lose.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This has always been the case though. Most of the IJN that defeated Russia was made by the UK and France.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >why can't poor people afford expensive things?
    Truly a mystery

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >brown
    That's why.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As with everything south america related, only brazil and chile are decent and try to maintain a somewhat modern force, the rest suck/don't matter

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I read this a long while ago, but the reason they have such a small navy is just to hold on untill help from allied nations (US) arrive. You really think the soviets/Russia or China would try anything on America's backyard?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No, I'm pretty sure OP had it right. They build fleets because it's a status thing and then let them rot because it's expensive. Actual defense from powers on other continents doesn't even factor into it. If China sent a fleet to Peru or some shit, they wouldn't have to hold it off until US aid arrived, the Chinese fleet wouldn't even make it across the Pacific.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The only south american country that could really benefit from a powerful navy would be argentina, but they had their shit pushed in last time so they're unlikely to bother.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's funny is that the royal navy was in such a sorry state after cuts and the draconian thatcherite administration that when they entered war with argentina over the Falklands they both were roughly on the same level, with argentina boasting a far bigger navy of modernized vessels. Bongs lost many more ships than argentinians, but the latter lost more important vessels like the belgrano. And while the Falklands war finally kicked the brits in the nuts hard enough to sway them into finally modernize their navy, argentina never recovered, and now their fleet is arguably in a worse state than the russian black sea fleet, which is a fricking achievement.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >and now their fleet is arguably in a worse state than the russian black sea fleet, which is a fricking achievement.
      As bad as the state of the russian navy is, the black sea fleet could probably still kick in the shit of any third world navy.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Individually most probably, but if the entire subcontinent just ganged up like most hispanics do whenever they go feral they would win.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    South America was wealthy back when they were run by Europeans. As that went away and power went further and further into the hands of the non-white majorities those nations fell into squalor as everything that the nations did have in terms of economic output got squandered on corruption which is the normal state of affairs in low-IQ populations. Of course colonial rule was also corrupt — no one is going to share anything with low-IQ peasants and instead just exploit them as farm animals — but they could at least manage the productive sectors of their economies.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We really don't need them, most og our navies are quite pro-american and geared up to work in tandem with the 4th Fleet of there was a real threat to the region, comie shifts aside, the rest is just destroying the odd pirate or narco vessel and chasing away chink fishery fleets from our waters.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    a navy is kinda pointless for most south american nations, since the biggest naval threat they face is illegal chinese fishing, most nations focus on the army to combat drug trafficking, deal with internal guerrillas in the countries that still have them. and for the countries that share a border with venezuela, deter them from doing anything stupid.

    Brazil is the only south american nation actually upgrading its navy, they have a program to build a nuclear submarine and another one for a new class of frigates, both are based on already existing foreign designs so id be really surprised if they manage to frick it up.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >South America is ungovernable by us. All anyone can do among South Americans is emigrate. Our America will always and ever fall into the hands of vulgar tyrants. Those who served the revolution have merely plowed the sea. Jesus Christ, Don Quixote and I: three greatest fools of history.
    Regards, the only guy to ever get close to making sense of the continent

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The United States appear to be destined by Providence to plague America with misery in the name of liberty.
      I guess he had already figured out US would use LATAM as a way to get all the fixes puritans elites often covet (beaches, sugar, coffee, sweet fruits, alcohol, prostitutes, drugs...).

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kys

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Yes. Geography.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Was discussing the part about the need for a navy. People think brazilian beaches when they think south american coastline but a lot of it is rocky with shitty currents along the coast. The Andes and Amazon make an unavigable clusterfrick of insanity in any armed conflict. Most /k/ino we'd get out of this decade is probably Chile-Argentina tank combat in some of the flatlands in that region

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They could blast and dredge out usuable ports. That would cost a lot, and a lot of money usually just means it disappearing into someone’s picket in low-IQ countries. It’s not just matter of finding the money, because Brazil has plenty — the a matter of finding the political interest in spending the money into something that isn’t going to into someone’s pockets. In a higher IQ population a strong middle-class appears that can organize into effective political blocks which force elites and oligarchs to share, ie, play by the rules. When the population is stupid the middle class is marginalized and the oligarchs just do what they want only checked by other elites. So if one section of elites wants to launch a strong naval policy and do things like build ports and strong navies, other elites will just pocket the money — so there is in effect no port and no navy.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >only keep a small patrol fleet of brown water/coastal rustbuckets that couldn't possibly protect their interests if threatened
    What interests? You mean pirates? I guess current navies are enough to fend off those, as somebody else already elaborated, there's not much to protect to begin with as most commerce is done by land, you ought to know what mercosur and similar shit are.
    Now if you meant other countries then, what'd be the point? Over 2 centuries the USA have pretty much guaranteed the sovereignity of latin america just bc they don't want potential enemies like europeans/communists placing bases on their backyard.
    As somebody else already written in the thread, there are better ways to spend c**t money than building a navy which won't see much use/action.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >He doesn't know about the dreadnought race of South America
    Let me put it like this for you - if you're a regional power, a small navy is still a huge force multiplier when your opposition doesn't have that. South America at the end of the 19th and start of the 20th century was in an interesting place with the three nations in the south all coming into their own through exports, interactions with foreign powers, and industrialization. Argentina, Brazil and Chile (The ABC) all had reasons to build a navy, and it all came down to their borders.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_American_dreadnought_race - good summary

    Suffice it to say though the basics went like this:
    >Brazil wishes to be big swinging dick in the region, to do so it needs the biggest dick ship
    >Order the most powerful dreadnought battleship ever built at the time, the Minas Giras
    >This makes Argentina order two of their own to compete with it and Brazil goes for a sister ship
    >Chile wants to order one because they and Argentina have border disputes and had a naval arms race before this, but are too poor to do it and not sure if buying now or later would be better
    >Funding keeps Brazil from getting a third
    >Chile who's stayed out of it so far orders two super dreadnoughts (Basically better faster bigger gunned, the modern battleship) from the brits once they come into some money
    >WW1 happens, Chile doesn't get its two BB's and one ends up converted into an aircraft carrier by the brits
    >By the time they get the battleship they ordered after the war, the Brazilians and Argentinian dreadnoughts are super obsolete and dogshit leaving Chile with the best battleship in South America by doing nothing
    >They keep it operating for a long time too as the navies of the other two powers flounder, until it's just not practical to do so any longer and nobody is making new battleships so it never gets replaced

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    OP, I think if you look at each and every South American state and try to develop a use case for a large navy, you'll find that for the most part there just isn't much they could likely accomplish with one. If you then considered the opportunity cost of buying that navy versus investing in domestic infrastructure or whatever other investment, I'd guess it would just looks like a bad use of the resources. And I suspect this exact thing is what has happened across the continent in the person of the various national leaderships. So, realistically only need enough to deter/repel likely naval action from your main enemies - whom you also share a land border with anyway.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      And so this is how you end up with Brazil having a helicopter carrier, 6 frigates, and 4 submarines. What exactly could they possibly get with more? If there's some threat external to the Americas coming in, the US is going to come save the day anyway.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    can't speak for other countries but for Argentina it was a combination of Malvinas and the dictatorship, political disinterest, economic decline and the status of the continent.

    first: the war fricked up procurement because of embargos until the 90s. even then the navy had ambitious plans to acquire 2 new destroyes, 5 submarines, a multi-purpose ship, to keep the carrier and the MEKO corvettes and frigates were designed with modularity in mind so they were going to be able to stay competitive for a while.

    but then the second problem appeared: the political class of the country was understandably mad about the 70s and the subsequent military uprisings against the trials for crimes during the Dictatorship, so both Peronism and the UCR (our main parties) silently agreed to reduce the power of the armed forces. this saw the share of GDP of the budgets fall hard from the excessive 5% the military had granted themselves to around 1% of GDP and shit like the amount of submarines getting butchered and nothing ever getting going.

    then from 2003 to 2015 Peronism shifted left and that further weakened the political position of the armed forces and the most far left elements of Peronism (the ex montoneros) weren't precisely fond of the armed forces so the sidelining continued.

    now the current government defense minister is a lackey of the security minister who belongs to the "republican proposal" or PRO party. they are neoliberals and were in power during 2015-2019 and they have a different view of the armed forces as an anti-narco "police+" so the current focus is not going to be on destroyers and submarines but patrol ships and Aircraft.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      third: the country had hyperinflation in the late 80s, the country collapsed thanks to the 1:1 exchange rate in 2001 and since 2011 we've been snowballing into further chaos thank to the economic cavemen we've had for rulers. this means the already small budget falls even harder in the face of devaluations and fall of government revenue.

      and finally, "conflict hypothesis": this continent has been extremely diplomatically peaceful since the 80s when Brazil and us stopped suspecting the other was secretly trying to nuke them so aside from a small border standoff with Chile and malvinas (which is outside of our capacity and will) there's not really much need for armed forces in the short term, which means our politicians see them as toys or useless.

      so with all this and very rampant corruption you have the perfect wienertail for a navy that is essentially a shadow of its former self and quickly falling apart. there are plans of modernization (FREMMs/MEKO A400 as destroyers, 209NG/Scorpene to rebuild the submarine force, new amphibious vehicles, LDPs/LSTs and the much desired multipurpose ship) but without the money and political will there's little to do.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      third: the country had hyperinflation in the late 80s, the country collapsed thanks to the 1:1 exchange rate in 2001 and since 2011 we've been snowballing into further chaos thank to the economic cavemen we've had for rulers. this means the already small budget falls even harder in the face of devaluations and fall of government revenue.

      and finally, "conflict hypothesis": this continent has been extremely diplomatically peaceful since the 80s when Brazil and us stopped suspecting the other was secretly trying to nuke them so aside from a small border standoff with Chile and malvinas (which is outside of our capacity and will) there's not really much need for armed forces in the short term, which means our politicians see them as toys or useless.

      so with all this and very rampant corruption you have the perfect wienertail for a navy that is essentially a shadow of its former self and quickly falling apart. there are plans of modernization (FREMMs/MEKO A400 as destroyers, 209NG/Scorpene to rebuild the submarine force, new amphibious vehicles, LDPs/LSTs and the much desired multipurpose ship) but without the money and political will there's little to do.

      how is an Argie so smart?
      did you manage to get out anon? I hope you did, for your sake.
      I genuinely feel sorry for you fellas, Argentina would be a great place if not for its moronicly corrupt leadership.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *