I don’t really like the action itself. I would not say it is justified by Trump perspective or by people’s perspective. Rather, it is an action which does make sense on an economical and geopolitical level. Now, whether it was a good moment to take this action, whether Americans want this and whether this is morally acceptable - I’m not getting into. I’m not American, you do you and take your own decisions and vote whomever you wish.

I really do not like that this has happened. But that is me. I have many friends in Argentina, and I don’t think this will be good for them. However, this does not look to me as Trump trying to steal money from the government as has been said here above and in other comments, but a rather valid decision with it’s motivations and reasons.

Oh sorry I missed the last part. This is clearly not done to help the people of Argentina.

This is to tell that such actions are of fundamental importance for the US government and population. If the US had no strong influence over other countries, it’s economy would be way worse and its people in worse conditions. As such, to sustain such level of wealth it is necessary for the US to perform actions such as this one to maintain and gain influence over other countries. To be able to use their natural resources as if they were American, to reap the benefits of their people working in their countries.

This is what I meant to say. This action is reasonable for the US under the system it is currently working in. To make sure I made no mistakes, I searched what a straw men argument is. From what I understood it refers to refuting an argument by sustaining something unrelated. I do not believe what I wrote is unrelated. The fact that this action has been done to acquire influence in Argentina is what I’ve been writing the whole time.

Sure, that is internal politics. Go ahead and take part in the no kings day. Protest against your government and change it. I’m not American, I don’t know in detail what the president can or can not do. It is completely fine that you don’t agree with his decision. Hell, I really do not like this either. What I’ve been doing is explain the rationale behind the decision. There is a reason behind this choice and it is not that Trump wants to steal money from the government.

Do I like the US intervening more and more in other countries? No, I really do not like it. But frankly that is not just about Trump.

I’m not sure what you mean by straw men, it feels to me that we’re missing each other somewhere in the discussion.

I’m sure you can find a little bit of value out of a gold crown with 1300 diamonds. The article never says the stolen items have no value, it says they are priceless, as such of a high value which can not be quantified. I guess it is the word “priceless” you’re focusing on.

This move seems very much to the benefit of the US and to the detriment of Argentina. Argentinians will pay dearly for this. Now, if you want to close your eyes and act like the US is a third world country nobody cares about go ahead. If you don’t want to see how the US relies on influence in other countries to sustain it’s wealth, that is ok.

Thank you for the reference. I would consider this an investment by the government, at that it does not appear to be a bad one at all. Even though I really despise the implications behind it, it is a justified and rational choice.

The US relies on influence on external countries and foreign investments. Do you think the US is rich because of their great manufacturing and exports? I live in Europe and own basically nothing made in the US. Not because I’m against it, there just isn’t anything made in the US to buy. It’s been a long time US products are just software and websites, but most wealth comes from other sources.

I do not like your government, and I despise they cut government spending and social spending. I believe this will cause plenty problems in your country. However, this decision seems completely justified. The US will probably get back way more than those 40 billions, by opening mines and acquiring local industries. I believe your country is quite interested in lithium, that is a good source for it. Together with Bolivia, who has elections today and is already decided to sell off swats of its resources in exchange of some dollars for a year or two of economic stability.

Why do you think those objects have no value? These people are clearly very experienced, probably they already had a buyer before the heist. This stuff is sold for lots of money.

I’m not sure, the article does not say so. Regardless, my analysis is independent from this fact. My main point is that this is not Trump stealing money from the government, but rather Trump investing money to gain a strong influence on a country that has always been rich and full of resources.

I imagine the guy really needed some help and was not able to find it.

I just wonder what did they think when he asked for such t-shirt to be made.

How does a VPN help if you are entering your ID number?

Cool I guess, but I don’t really see the value of this… We’re not really analysing a stable trend. I’m not sure governments are that simple to predict as just forecasting based on past data.

Yes, I prefer them to wait for releases. Often those releases don’t really have such changes that are fundamental to my workflow but at times do have the potential to disrupt it. On my workstation I always wait a while before updating anyway, as I did experience problems upgrading from time to time.

Not sure what you’re talking about. I’m not American, but this action is pretty clear to me. Milei came into power promising to resolve the economic crisis of Argentina through extreme liberalisation of economy and with stronger bonds with the USA. The USA indeed benefits from these bonds, through the privatisation of companies and natural resources as well as the possibility to act as a foreign investor. However, the economic crisis has not been resolved: life is expensive and salaries are low. This year there are elections in Argentina, there is the possibility of a change of government to a party which may not be so friendly to the USA. By giving Milei a large sum of money Trump gets more support from Milei directly (and probably some favours and concessions) as well as a higher chance that Milei gets reelected. With that money Milei can give subsidies and enact reforms which the people will appreciate and point out how his reforms worked out, as well as show that his bonds with the USA are beneficial to the country.

You say Trump is draining the economy of USA for his personal gain, but this very much does not seem the case. Looking at the history of Latin America this looks much more as a small investment to drain the Argentinian economy.