SA is naturally a great place to colonize. Full of beaches, forests, jungles, mountains, different climates, abundance of fresh water, oil, minerals, natural resources in general, etc. I think you meant it shouldn't have been discovered by incompetent iberians.
>plus sign on flag
>economy is negative
LITERALLY CANT MAKE THIS SHIT UP
POLA TONE KOKAINA, BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA
BALKANSKI RATNIK, PARAGVAJ, CETVORO PALO S'PET KILA.
DESET HILJADA VOJNIKA, OTMICE UBISTVA,
IZNUDE, ATENTATI, SVAKO REKET MORA DA PLATI.
Awful water quality, either hostile jungles or barren deserts, multitude of parasites, and metals and coal that are so deep underground that the native psychotic featherheads never made it past the stone age?
No fanx m8
>tfw all that stands between us and South America is a bunch of inhospitable jungles
I'd say mostly because it's has carried on from older times. Like, it just stayed even though is wrong.
Not to mention, the anti-USA ideals that many people all over the continent have (since the canal was basically a work of the US and because of the "The yanks stole the name America" thing).
if you read a book you'd know why things are how they are, fatty
Shut the fuck up Liu Kang. We are one continent and asians have no fucking business defining what is what.
Educate yourself, macaco.
And these are Amazonian Indians. The shittiest brand of native Americans aside from Patagonians (who were spartan tier warriors though, resisting Inca and Spaniard conquest for centuries)
Is that that how the outside world calls Mapuches?
I don't know about argentinian history with the natives, so maybe it's like that there, but here only the Mapuches seriously resisted (actually they still haven't given up, even if they're as mixed as the rest of the country at this point)
South of that wall of anger, conquest and genocide was laughably easy.