The Falklands

[Marc]

The Argies are unbelievable.
Do they think they will get any where with this behaviour?

Oh and America, after we back you with everything, thanks for speaking out against them, goes to show who need's who more I guess.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/new...rning.html

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/falklands-row-s...06943.html

[stu]

I believe that the people of the Falklands should determine their own future. They would have to be be pretty stupid to choose Argentinian rule.

However it's funny how the British politicians didn't believe in self determintion when it came to Hong Kong which is now ruled by China and not the UK.

[Marc]

I believe that the people of the Falklands should determine their own future. They would have to be be pretty stupid to choose Argentinian rule.

However it's funny how the British politicians didn't believe in self determintion when it came to Hong Kong which is now ruled by China and not the UK.

Hong Kong was a colony, not a territory, a completely different thing altogether.

A colony is land not belonging to us, hence given back.

[jimbopdxus]

Wow? Why drag us Yanks into it? I did not realize there was that much animosity. We had to claw and fight out from under British rule 250+ years ago and since became a trusted ally. We showed up in droves to rescue in WWII and " unlike Americans who never experienced the horror of such political unrest as they have it?" Wow. A history review is needed! (posted by a Yank!?)

Then the comment: "Oh and America, after we back you with everything, thanks for speaking out against them, goes to show who need's who more I guess." Do you think for one moment that we would not stand behind the Brits on this? Really?

Also, after the history of GAYS in Argentina, it would be a disaster if the Falklands fell to Argentina Rule! Let's take a careful look at this before rushing into something that may not exists. Remember that Faulklanders said NO!!! So an invasion by Argentina would be considered just that, a agressive invasion. It would become a United Nations issue and the UN would never allow that invasion to happen.

Am I wrong? Did I miss something? I usually do...

[Marc]

OK history update.. the REAL version
America only entered ww2, AFTER they were attacked 2 thirds of the way through after hiding their heads in the sand for 3 years, and it certainly wasn't a rescue, a help yes, a rescue no.
The United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, India, and others, would have finished to the same conclusion.

Perhaps I could mention ww1?
It seems American forgets it happened.

It always amazes me how Americans always pop up with the WW2 thing.

Lets talk The Falklands war, in which we sent our Navy around the world to fight and liberate the islands, taking weeks to get there.

We asked America to lend us equipment, so we could liberate the Islands weeks earlier, America refused, saying it was nothing to do with them.

Now, Argentina is beating the war drum, they have been condemned by Australia, Poland, even France and Germany.
Not a peep from America.
The only time America pops up, is when it directly benefits them.

Libya, last year, Britain and France patrolled the skies and provided support to the rebels, America sent a General to watch.

Syria, now, America is sitting on it's hands, yet Britain is trying to get a UN mandate allowing military force to protect the civilians.
It's sad when France, the old enemy, is backing us, yet the so called 'special friend' is remaining silent.

Not that American forces not being involved is a bad thing, nearly 40% of British deaths in Afghanistan has been caused by a direct result or the Americans dropping bombs in the wrong place.

The 'special relationship' is all one way.

The UN will not interfere with the Falklands issues, just like in the 80s.
The UN has been demanding we talk to the Argies for years, we say no chance, the UN says ok.

[stu]

Hong Kong was a colony, not a territory, a completely different thing altogether.

A colony is land not belonging to us, hence given back.

Do they not have a right to self determination?

[Marc]

Do they not have a right to self determination?

Morally, yes.

Legally No.

Why is this even an issue for you?
Surely you understand the difference?

[stu]

The issue is we fought a war for the liberation of the Falklands but gave up Hong Kong without much fuss.

If the International Court of Justice decided that the Falklands were Argentinian do you think it should be handed over to Argentina?

Does the USA still belong to the UK because we never consented to their independance?

[gilhooly]

PM Margaret McThatcher gave us a slendid little war in the Falklands.

President Barry O'Bama wants us to have a splendid little war in Iran.

If Jerry Adams and Ian Paisley can sit down and talk like civilized men, we should all try it.

God bless Bill Clinton and George Mitchell for the Good Friday Agreement. I like seeing the Irish behave like human beings. Wars are usually fought by arrogant assholes who don't give a shit about who gets killed.

I still remember the guys I graduated with from Parris Island on 1/4/69. Recently I asked if anyone remembered how many Americans were killed in Vietnam. I got a lot of blank looks. What war in Vietnam? Was there a war in Vietnam? I never heard of a war in Vietnam. On behalf of my friends Twyford, Pennebacher and Griffiths who died at Danang in 1969, all living people who support war belong in hell.

[stu]

gilhooly, I agree with your sentiment about war in general. I don't know if the Vietnam war was about the American paranoia about communism or their need to go to war but in retrospect it seems a pretty stupid war (especially considering the Americans lost and the Commies didn't take over the world). However if you turned on the news one morning and found out that Japan had invaded Hawaii and had no intention of leaving how do you think the situation would be resolved?