No War of the Triple Alliance

@Gonzalo - You seem to have overlooked Brazils expansionist goals which played a role in Brazils politics over the centuries and even in Brazils war with Paraguay. Even today some still comment that Brazil has expansionist goals.

I’m not overlooking it. I only said that by 1864 Brazil had no interest in annexing Uruguay nor declare war against Paraguay. I even said that the Brazilian intervention in Uruguay happened because the blancos threatened Brazilian interests there. At that time Brazil had “imperialist” desires in the Plata region, but not “expansionist”. That phase was over when the Argentines kicked our ass during the Cisplatine War. What I said is that the Brazilian interests and methods changed over time. We didn’t have interest of attack Paraguay in 1850 when there was an attack of Paraguayan forces against Brazilian soldiers, and we simply wouldn’t attack Paraguay in 1864 over the Uruguayan problems.

They say Brazil was like the US. For the US it was manifest destiny. Brazil followed a similar idea. To expand to the Pacific. Brazil was such a huge nation so why keep on expanding West without having properly exploited the territories to the East. Seems they expanded West into neighboring nations claims before those areas became heavily populated with citizens of those nations which would make Brazilian claims harder to recognize.

Please... Brazil never intended to expand to the Pacific. Why would we try to reach the Pacific, the most populated part of South America, with a people with a different language and that didn’t like us at all? After the loss of Uruguay, the Brazilian expansionist aims (and here I say truly “expansionists”) where at first to recognize only the borders of the Treaty of Madrid of 1750. Only that. The problem was to decide where those limits were laid, as shown by the examples of our claims against Argentina, Paraguay and Bolivia. With Argentina, for example, the problem was to decide if the river shown by the maps as the border was the Peperi-Guaçu (as we said) or the Chopim (as the Argentine said). With Paraguay, if the border was on the Apa River or the Branco River. The government didn’t even think about going to the Pacific. The USA went to the Pacific because the basically got a land inhabited only by natives and they had basically one weak enemy. We would need to go through a hell of a tropical forest and then invade the most populated area of South America and finally cross the highest mountains of the New World to get there. This is ASB.

Just look at the Western part of Amazonia. Supposedly Bolivia claimed it then Brazil annexed it in a treaty with Bolivia for Acre. But then look at what happened in Acre.

In Canada with the US gold miners going into the Yukon territory the Canadians decided to make Yukon a province that way the US would not annex it. Which is sort of what happened in Acre.

So sending people of other nations into another territory of another nation has been used plenty of times to annex that territory from the original nation.

The lands we bought from Bolivia were acquired during the war with Paraguay, when they were rule by the stupidest South American dictator ever, Mariano Melgarejo (you know, the man who raised an army to help Napoleon III against the Prussians and started to march from La Paz in direction to France). And he accepted to give them to us in exchange for two white horses and four medals. How could we not accept such deal?? And again, those lands were all within our claims originated from the Treaty of Madrid.
About the case of Acre, if you look at the history of that territory, you would see that, at first, the Brazilian government was against the separation of Acre from Bolivia. Even the Baron of Rio Branco, the Brazilian Chancellor at the time, said that Acre was rightfully Bolivian, and the Republic proclaimed at Porto Acre was illegal. But the complains of politicians from Amazonas, the existence of Brazilian citizens living there, and finally the rumours that Bolivia would give Acre as a private concession to an Anglo-American conglomerate made the government decide to annex it. It wasn’t something planned, but it was an opportunity that wouldn’t be lost.
And we never “sent” those people to Acre. They went there because they migrants, escaping from the droughts of Northeast to explore rubber in the Amazon. The government simply didn’t care for them, and if they had gone to hell the heads in Rio would think it would be better.

You say the Empire of Brazil did not want trouble with Paraguay which reminds me of what happened in modern times. Brazil having military excercises near the border with Paraguay. With such a huge nation with space to spare why have those excercises near the border of a supposedly friendly nation which is no threat. Its even against there constitution to start a war.

If you don’t know, the Brazilian-Paraguayan border is one of the greatest points from where drugs enter the territory of Brazil, and both sides of the border are almost ruled by “warlords” involved with the traffic. I say this because I’ve friends who made reports about the situation in the area and also I have friends and relatives who live and lived that. Personally I think it’s good to have more military presence in the region, and this has nothing to do with “expansionism”. I understand that the Paraguayan government might not like it, but frankly, I consider this as paranoia.

And then there is Guyana and which involved Cuba. When it was though Cuba was using Guyana has a jumping point to Angola the Brazilian military started concentrating near there border with that nation. Guyana is zero threat to Brazil so why do it.

You might know that, when that happened, Brazil was living under a right wing military dictatorship, and they were completely paranoid about Cuba. If it were reported that a wooden box with Cuban cigars was found on the sea near Fernando de Noronha, the government would likely send the entire Navy there. It had nothing to do with a threat from Guyana, it had do to with the fact that “fucking Cuban commies” where nearby.

And why so interested in taking side between Venezuela and Guyana. Brazil should have taken a middle approach and helped solve the problem instead of jumping on Guyanas bandwagon. At that time Venezuela claimed 1/3 of Guyana. Is it because its best to have a weak Guyana then a stronger Venezuela.

Taking side when? In the last incident between Venezuela and Guyana?

Do you see what I am getting at. Brazil, all big nations do this and many smaller nations would also if they could, have a hidden foreign policy which if it leads to expansion the better.

Sure, but there are limits to what they desire or not, and what they can or not, and Brazil surely never intended to reach the Pacific, and didn’t want to annex Uruguay in 1864 or declare a messy war with Paraguay without provocation. Have economical predominance? Of course, that would be good? But going to war? No one was seriously wanting it at that moment (planning, perhaps, but not desiring it).

I believe the only nation in South America that truly expanded because of true national concerns was Chile. Its such a narrow nation that it can be easily overrunned.

Not so easily, since they are defended by the greatest freaking mountain range they could get. :D

Today they are considered a regional power. Seems Paraguay is getting closer to Chile economically which could help break there dependence on Brazil and Argentina. Plus its nice to have a regional power has a friend. :D

URUPABOL any of you heard of it. It seems its being re-activated.

And I applaud any movement that leads to more integration between South American countries. Nowadays the things go in such direction that when one grows economically all the others also have greater developments.

And again, all this discussion is completely out of the OP. Anyone has more ideas of ITTL consequences for a non-existing War of the Triple Alliance?
 

maverick

Banned
And again, all this discussion is completely out of the OP. Anyone has more ideas of ITTL consequences for a non-existing War of the Triple Alliance?

Well, if Francisco Solano Lopez is still President ITTL, he would be succeeded by his son, Juan Francisco Solano Lopez, who could have lived and continued the Solano Lopez dynasty into the 20th century...

In Argentina, Marcos Paz does't die of Cholera, and assuming that leads to the Liberal party to remain united in 1868, he wins the Presidency that year as Mitre's successor...

Mitre of course still tries to return to the presidency in 1874, perhaps facing Adolfo Alsina, who might still support Avellaneda like he did with Sarmiento in 1868...

Although, I'm not sure about the status of the border issues between Argentina and Paraguay before the war
 
Although, I'm not sure about the status of the border issues between Argentina and Paraguay before the war

Me neither. It seems that the Argentine leaders changed constantly their oppinions about it. I'm not sure, but IIRC Argentina only officially claimed Missiones and the Chaco until the Pilcomayo. However, in 1857 the Brazilian Minister of Foreign Relations was at Paraná in order to try to reach a treaty regarding the Brazilian/Argentine borders, and he was informed that the government of the Confederation claimed all the right side of the Paraguay River until Bahia Blanca, at the border with Mato Grosso. And the original Treaty of the Triple Alliance also claimed all that territory as Argentine. So, even if the interest in all Western Chaco wasn't official, it surely existed.
 
If Paraguay had gotten a weak leader then Brazil and Argentina would be telling him how to run things. If he was a strong leader and believed in not paying attention to the other nations around him maybe Paraguay would continue existing and no major war. But they would need a strong military. But real democracy might have taken time to arrive. Chances are it would not have arrived until modern times like it really did.


@Gonzalo - Brazil has had an agressive foreign policy which has been hidden. Read what this Scottish writer who lives in Brazil says about it.

Read this: http://www.brazzil.com/2003/html/news/articles/may03/p129may03.htm

And Brazils wanting to expand to the Pacific is no lie.
A century ago, the baron of Rio Branco, the Brazilian foreign minister who forged his country's foreign policy for the 20th century, said, "Brazil must not dwell on what it has already accomplished; it must arrive hegemonically to the Pacific."
Fifty years later, the country's principal strategist, General Golbery do Couto e Silva, recommended the same course: "For the Brazil of today, there is only one path: expand or perish."
Got this quote from this informative article: http://www.brazzil.com/articles/162-march-2006/9554.html

Blog this is from a Blog on Brazil: http://benjamingedan.blogspot.com/2009/03/brazils-imperialism.html

What those articles say fits. Major nations tend to seek to exploit and or control there smaller or weaker neighbors. Brazil is no different from other larger nations.
 
@Gonzalo - Brazil has had an agressive foreign policy which has been hidden. Read what this Scottish writer who lives in Brazil says about it.

Read this: http://www.brazzil.com/2003/html/news/articles/may03/p129may03.htm


This is actually quite well written. But to put the rebellions of Palmares from the 17th century, Canudos from the 1890's, the Rebellion of Pernambuco of 1824 and the Civil War of 1932 all in the same sack I think is oversimplified. And believe that what happened in Acre more than 100 years ago can possibly happened again in Bolivia and Paraguay is quite naive. It would be the same as to say that Europe will have the same practices of the Imperialist Era, or that the USA will act like Theodoro Roosevelt again.


And Brazils wanting to expand to the Pacific is no lie.
Got this quote from this informative article: http://www.brazzil.com/articles/162-march-2006/9554.html

I don't know where he got the phrase of Rio Branco, and seriously, while Rio Branco was the Chancellor who most expanded Brazilian borders, he also always did it based on agreements and arbitrations, and based the Brazilian claims on the Treaty of Madrid everytime it was possible (the exception was Acre, by the reasons I gave above). Frankly if he said that he would be drunk. Even during the Acre Crisis he didn't want a war, because he knew the Brazilian Army was so bad that could lose even to Bolivia. And you can find that in English, on the book Soldier of the Pátria: A History of the Brazilian Army, 1889 - 1937, by Frank D. McCann (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004).

And Golbery didn't said anything about the Pacific. His quote about expansion was internal expansion, occupying areas considered "empty", as the Amazon (as a good right wing plotter military leader, he never cared for the enviroment). As is explained bellow in the article you pointed:

"This is only one historic example of how the 'march to the West' took place. During the military dictatorship that resulted from the coup d'état of 1964, in which Couto de Silva was one of the principal players, occupying the Amazon became official state policy along with what was called by a military strategist, 'Border Revitalization.'"

Expansion to the Pacific was completely impossible. I agree that Brazil could have expanded more towards West if we wanted it and had the opportunity of doing so. But reach the ocean was an impossibility, and any sand government knew that.


Ok, the guy is complaining that many lands in Uruguay are owned by Brazilians. And many bars here in Porto Alegre are owned by Uruguayans, and the Argentines own a lot of the commerce in Camboriu, Bombinhas, Porto Belo, Garopaba and Canasvieiras, but I don't think that my city will ever become Uruguayan, or coast of Santa Catarina will be Argentinian (well, maybe for some time in the summer). But Brazilians always owned huge quantities of land in Uruguay, basically because they are better than ours in Rio Grande do Sul, and everytime someone gets money enough buy lands there. But their sons become Uruguayans, and everything stays quiet.
Oh, and an Uruguayan company was bought by a Brazilian one is proof of Imperialism. Then I think that Brazil is going to belong to Portugal again, because Sonae bought the Nacional supermarkets. Oh no, poor Portuguese, they lost us the Spanish, because the greatest communications company here now is Telefonica. It's not a proof of Imperialism, is just global capitalism in action.

What those articles say fits. Major nations tend to seek to exploit and or control there smaller or weaker neighbors. Brazil is no different from other larger nations.

No, Brazil is no different, when we saw some weakeness on our neighbours that would give a benefit to us, we took the opportunity. What I say is that even the most crazy desires are limited by the capacities of a country and the resistence of those affected by these desires. That why I say that Brazil didn't want to annex Uruguay by 1864, nor wanted to reach the Pacific nor will try to annex parts of Bolivia or Paraguay. Some individuals would want it? Sure! Even in the USA there were people wanting to conquer all Mexico! But it doesn't mean the government agrees with it.

And again all this discussion has nothing to do with the question of the thread. Maybe such issues deserves other thread on Political Chat, but not here in this Forum.
 
And many bars here in Porto Alegre are owned by Uruguayans, and the Argentines own a lot of the commerce in Camboriu, Bombinhas, Porto Belo, Garopaba and Canasvieiras, but I don't think that my city will ever become Uruguayan, or coast of Santa Catarina will be Argentinian (well, maybe for some time in the summer)

They are a menace, these Argentinians. Their summer raids reach up to the beaches of Búzios. Our raids into Buenos Aires and Punta del Este can scarcely hold the tide. But no matter. Our legions of sacoleiros are ready to go again to Ciudad del Este, bringing back an assortment of plunder: cigarettes, falsified whisky and Chinese electronics...
 
They are a menace, these Argentinians. Their summer raids reach up to the beaches of Búzios. Our raids into Buenos Aires and Punta del Este can scarcely hold the tide. But no matter. Our legions of sacoleiros are ready to go again to Ciudad del Este, bringing back an assortment of plunder: cigarettes, falsified whisky and Chinese electronics...

I thought those were Japanese? :confused::rolleyes:
 

maverick

Banned
They are a menace, these Argentinians. Their summer raids reach up to the beaches of Búzios. Our raids into Buenos Aires and Punta del Este can scarcely hold the tide. But no matter. Our legions of sacoleiros are ready to go again to Ciudad del Este, bringing back an assortment of plunder: cigarettes, falsified whisky and Chinese electronics...

Damn! and our forces are divided between Miami and Camboriu! thankfully, the crisis will allow/force us to divert the ones from Florida to brazil once more...
 
Damn! and our forces are divided between Miami and Camboriu! thankfully, the crisis will allow/force us to divert the ones from Florida to brazil once more...

Fool! Before the summer comes, when your annual nomadic hordes again invade Camboriu, the green and yellow flag will be already waving over the mountains of Bariloche, thanks to our battalions of rude tourists who speak Portuguese with a fake random accent and believe they are speaking Spanish! :p
 

maverick

Banned
Fool! Before the summer comes, when your annual nomadic hordes again invade Camboriu, the green and yellow flag will be already waving over the mountains of Bariloche, thanks to our battalions of rude tourists who speak Portuguese with a fake random accent and believe they are speaking Spanish! :p

Damn! why did we have to split our forces between Punta del Este and Camboriu? I knew we shouldn't have sent our most obnoxious tourists to Uruguay! stealing towels, yelling at waiters and flipping off foreigners should be done only at one country at the time:rolleyes:
 
Fool! Before the summer comes, when your annual nomadic hordes again invade Camboriu, the green and yellow flag will be already waving over the mountains of Bariloche, thanks to our battalions of rude tourists who speak Portuguese with a fake random accent and believe they are speaking Spanish! :p

I thought the Sephardim already have that covered with their dialect of Spanish that, to Spaniards, would sound like they were speaking like Cervantes! :D

Oh well, I guess you always try recruting from the Québécois and have them pass off as speaking either Portuguese or Spanish with a Québec French accent. :p:cool:
 
Damn! why did we have to split our forces between Punta del Este and Camboriu? I knew we shouldn't have sent our most obnoxious tourists to Uruguay! stealing towels, yelling at waiters and flipping off foreigners should be done only at one country at the time:rolleyes:

Only tourists? Man, in Camboriu even those jugglers who ask money on the street corners are Argentines!

Of course, we compensate it by invading Buenos Aires. When I've been there in November I've heard so much the accent of São Paulo that I wanted to run away (if São Paulo is transferred to Buenos Aires, the combined weight of the egos of Paulistanos and Porteños would cause a mini black hole there).
 
Of course, we compensate it by invading Buenos Aires. When I've been there in November I've heard so much the accent of São Paulo that I wanted to run away (if São Paulo is transferred to Buenos Aires, the combined weight of the egos of Paulistanos and Porteños would cause a mini black hole there).

I guess you'd have a heart attack if you go to Québec, then - there is a huge Latin American community in Canada, with the big centres being Toronto and especially Montréal.
 

maverick

Banned
Only tourists? Man, in Camboriu even those jugglers who ask money on the street corners are Argentines!

Of course, we compensate it by invading Buenos Aires. When I've been there in November I've heard so much the accent of São Paulo that I wanted to run away (if São Paulo is transferred to Buenos Aires, the combined weight of the egos of Paulistanos and Porteños would cause a mini black hole there).

We of course counter the mini-black hole by selling free wine in Barcelona, which will force the transfer of Paris' population and rival the Sao-Paulo/BS-AS Hole...
 
They are a menace, these Argentinians. Their summer raids reach up to the beaches of Búzios. Our raids into Buenos Aires and Punta del Este can scarcely hold the tide. But no matter. Our legions of sacoleiros are ready to go again to Ciudad del Este, bringing back an assortment of plunder: cigarettes, falsified whisky and Chinese electronics...

Last time I checked, Ciudad del Este was in Paraguay, not Argentina.;)

Of course, there are so many Paraguayans living in Argentina that maybe someday we can merge in a new country. The Vicerroyalty of Rio de la Plata will be back:p:D
 

maverick

Banned
Last time I checked, Ciudad del Este was in Paraguay, not Argentina.;)

Of course, there are so many Paraguayans living in Argentina that maybe someday we can merge in a new country. The Vicerroyalty of Rio de la Plata will be back:p:D

Well, Tarija wants us back and Punta del Este is easily overrun by Argentines every year IIRC;):p
 
Last time I checked, Ciudad del Este was in Paraguay, not Argentina.;)

Of course, there are so many Paraguayans living in Argentina that maybe someday we can merge in a new country. The Vicerroyalty of Rio de la Plata will be back:p:D

Well, Tarija wants us back and Punta del Este is easily overrun by Argentines every year IIRC;):p

Well, I think we wouldn't be opposed to that, as long as the free duty shops in border remain oppened (you know, we need to buy cheap parfurms and eletrocnic devices somewhere :p).
 
Uruguay can only stand at the crossroads and hope that the raids into Punta del Este, Salto, Colonia del Sacrament, and La Paloma will cease. :(
 
Top