3 ms·

This resource shortage problem can be reduced to a CIA problem/task.

paganel 4y ago
- avgcorrection 4y ago
  Bolivia has had instability in their leadership in recent years. So the US can just say that the most reactionary faction/party is the true Bolivian leadership and that the US just wants to help get rid of the usurpers.
  - glandium 4y ago
    It wouldn't be the first time the US gets involved in Bolivia. I happen to recently have stumbled upon a short document on Wikileaks that sported "Bolivia", "cocaine coup", "CIA", and I shit you not, "Unification Church" and "SS veteran Klaus Barbie" all in the same paragraph.
  - PicassoCTs 4y ago
    Has that ever worked out in the long term though? Some of the fiercest enemies of the us were forged that way (IRAN, whole south america). The imbeciles with three letters are a liability in a multipolar world, driving potential allies towards perceived "underdog" opponents. That whole dirty game did not even work during the cold war. Most victories were economic prep ups for countries sliding towards the opposition, the whole regime take over propelled a ton of countries towards a opposition that would have otherwise just stayed neutral and independent from ex-colonial powers. Without the colonial powers and the CIA pushing, there would have never been a domino effect to take note off.
jonnybgood 4y ago
It’s more a Department of State problem. You know the whole CIA stuff in the region is quite often used by populist politicians, particularly the left-leaning ones. If the US tried to pull what it did before, it’s effectively diplomatic suicide in the entire region. The US wants to establish some sense of goodwill in the region. Why? Because China. The US is competing with China in lithium extraction in the region. Despite the US having better tech at lithium extraction, China is doing everything it can to gobble it all up by throwing money around.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- avgcorrection 4y ago
  I hate when populist politicans deploy the truth like that.

avgcorrection 4y ago
Bolivia has had instability in their leadership in recent years. So the US can just say that the most reactionary faction/party is the true Bolivian leadership and that the US just wants to help get rid of the usurpers.
- glandium 4y ago
  It wouldn't be the first time the US gets involved in Bolivia. I happen to recently have stumbled upon a short document on Wikileaks that sported "Bolivia", "cocaine coup", "CIA", and I shit you not, "Unification Church" and "SS veteran Klaus Barbie" all in the same paragraph.
- PicassoCTs 4y ago
  Has that ever worked out in the long term though? Some of the fiercest enemies of the us were forged that way (IRAN, whole south america). The imbeciles with three letters are a liability in a multipolar world, driving potential allies towards perceived "underdog" opponents. That whole dirty game did not even work during the cold war. Most victories were economic prep ups for countries sliding towards the opposition, the whole regime take over propelled a ton of countries towards a opposition that would have otherwise just stayed neutral and independent from ex-colonial powers. Without the colonial powers and the CIA pushing, there would have never been a domino effect to take note off.

It’s more a Department of State problem. You know the whole CIA stuff in the region is quite often used by populist politicians, particularly the left-leaning ones. If the US tried to pull what it did before, it’s effectively diplomatic suicide in the entire region. The US wants to establish some sense of goodwill in the region. Why? Because China. The US is competing with China in lithium extraction in the region. Despite the US having better tech at lithium extraction, China is doing everything it can to gobble it all up by throwing money around.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
avgcorrection 4y ago
I hate when populist politicans deploy the truth like that.