Africa of all continents knows that if a company doesn't have their own army, they can either hire mercenaries or bribe governments into lending them theirs.

~J

Exactly. And even a fraction of 40 mil can hire an awful lot of mercs.

Hardly. It's not like the Romanian government was going to load up a few ships with troops and sail them round to Dar es Salaam, yes I know they officially moved the capital back in the 70s, like a group of overarmed bailiffs. If you want the money back then you hire a bunch of lawyers instead. Does the Tanzanian government have any cash or holdings in another country like say the US? Then you sue them in US court and get yourself those holdings awarded to you. At least that's how I understand the system to generally work.

Thanks for the tip, actually. A friend of mine explained to me how important investing is for one's future. I'm 24 years old now, but as soon as I get positive income I plan to start investing all the way so that I'm not screwed when I'm 60. With your advice, I can invest with more security if I invest in booze, which I like anyway.

So how's the US debt going, these days, btw?

US Debt Clock.

Pretty much.

That was my point. sure the odds of the investors getting 40 million is negligible but if they just get $8 million it's a 100% return on investment.

The owners of the fund are keeping themselves secret, would you like to be known as the bastard who starved thousands of Africans who went without food because the government was paying you instead of buying grain?

I agree on international debt. They borrowed money, they should expect to pay it back if they want to be taken serriously BUT if a government decided to forgive the debt to try and help the ocuntry along, that's their call, but this is governments selling the debt instead of just forgiving it.

Here's another idea for a run, knowledge of such a deal going down would certianly be insider trading, worth a lot.

If the country decided to forgive the debt because they did not see themselves being able to recover their money, and then someone offered them a better deal, why not? If they decided to cut their loses and someone offered them partial compensation, I know what I'd take.

Governments forgive debt because they do not see the point in throwing good money after bad trying to recover the bad debt.

So what exactly is the bond market then?

"GREG PALAST: Here's how the vultures got Zambia. In 1979, Romania lent them $15 million. By 1998, Zambia was broke, so Romania offered to write off the entire debt for just $3 million. But before the deal was final, a vulture swooped in, and somehow snatched Romania’s cheap offer for his own company.

Michael Sheehan and his associates are now suing Zambia, not for the $3 million they paid, but for the original debt, plus interest: $42 million. But even bigger money is to be made in the US courtrooms, where Sheehan and others are asking for hundreds of millions of dollars from several desperately poor nations."
www.matheba.net

Please do not take off-hand comments read on dumpshock forums as investment advice. Consider sitting down with a professional financial advisor (like maybe Snow Fox...) whose background you have looked into, and hire that person to create a sound investment strategy and financial lifestyle analysis with you, rather than simply trying to get hot stock tips from such people.

Whether you use a professional financial advisor or not, the most important investment you can make is your time and effort to educate yourself on various business and financial options and strategies available.

Yeah, the actual article is pretty difficult to read without wanting to vomit. It has such obvious biases and fallcies throughout. But the parts I quoted were mostly factual and relavent to this discussion.

There's also this, from Wikipedia: Vulture Funds

Although why would you bother wasting them on bloody Tanzania, the place is a complete dirt hole with little in the way to recommend itself. Now if you wanted to knock over a country then you need to look for somewhere that's small, low population, fairly backwards and with valuable natural resources.

The perfect example of this would have to be somewhere like Equatorial Guinea. Small - just 28,051 km² with a population of 504,000, backwards - military dictatorship with most of the population on less than a dollar a day and large proven oil reserves. Has an army of only 1,400 and paramilitary police of 400, no navy to speak of and bugger all air force so get yourself properly prepared and they shouldn't be much of a problem since their training is for crap and they've no vehicles.

Figure a team of a couple hundred mercenaries should be able to do the job nicely. Maybe have a word with whatever Executive Outcomes became and see whether you can hire something exceedingly vicious like a Mi-24 Hind as backup. Should probably also hire another hundred or so expatriate Guineans as mercenaries and train them up to competency so they can act as the public face of the 'democratic revolution'. They'll cost peanuts compared to the westerners and can garrison/hold ground that the professionals have taken.

Then you've got to think about what you're going to do after you've shot up most of the military, seized key sites like telephone exchanges and radio/television broadcasters, killed off the President for Life and his family, rounded up most of the senior government and military figures and taken over the place. You've got your expat locals standing about out in public smiling and looking nicely ethnic, so you've then got to start bribing people. Most of the country's on less than a dollar a day, so with a population of 504,000 and an average family size of 5 give each household 100 dollars in cash. Costs you about 10,080,000 dollars so it's a hefty up front cost but I would think it'll get the locals firmly on side. Offer the mid-ranking officers and beauracrats that you've promoted to fill the posts of the senior people you just purged say five or ten thousand dollars as well. Back it up with a broadcast program talking about how the new government is going to share the oil wealth unlike the last lot as well. Alternatively just bribe the senior people and count on the large quantities of forearms and explosives you're holding to carry the tide of public opinion.

Whilst that's going on you need to wheel out the native Guinean that you've previously arranged to install as President. You did do that right? Have El Presidente go on camera to prattle on for a bit about how bad the old government was blah blah blah, corruption and theft etc etc, introduction of democracy as soon as possible and legitimate use of the oil revenues yada yada yada. Get him on the phone to the major diplomatic players like the permanent Security Council members and any countries with large local investments to reassure them the oil will keep flowing and that you'll respect their holdings. Should probably also talk to the UN and say whatever they want to hear as well.

Then quietly declare a state of emergency and martial law 'until peace has been restored' and a year/two year transitional government slash government of national unity to get the country back on its feet. Then get him to sign the official contracts that give you a small concession in the oil fields and wrap the whole thing up and retire quietly.

Edit: And even though this was straight off the top off my head, if seems I've been giving this a lot of subconscious thought apparently. And I haven't even read The Dogs of War in ages either.

How dare you! Democracy Now!?! Biased!?!

Never.

I can't help thinking that FlakJacket's idea is still far too complicated. Plus it violates the rule that you don't put your own money into a coup. You get the U.S. to pay for it.

Hm... I'm not sure...

How do you think the U.S. government functions? Foreign governments (*ahem* PRC) just have more cash to throw into the mix, and some, well... owe us (Saudi Arabia).

Or else they just hemorrage through it with a combination of corruption and incompetence and develop a sense of entitelment after years of recieving aid.

I think that today even international humanitarian NGOs agree that monitoring, evaluation, and accountability are very, very key, or else the above can easily happen.

The difference is the US has a lot of reasons and a lot of tools to avoid selling out to that degree. No one wants that to happen. If the US is called on its debt, the entire world economy goes down the tubes. If the US opens its soil to corporations, the entire world takes a turn for the worst.

On the other hand, no one cares about Tanzania. If Tanzania goes down the tubes, it just means the Romanians lose a few million they basically wrote off anyway. If Tanzania goes corporate, it just means they get the questionable industries the rest of the world doesn't want to host for one reason or another.