Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Falklands nonsense again?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Aussiegunner Reply

    "Ah, the famous US talent for geography shines through again...

    ...If I as an Australian comment on British/US relations over the Falklands, the fact that Australia doesn’t have a battle group in Afghanistan (incidentally, I think we should) is irrelevant to whether or not I should comment."


    Geography? I was referring to Australia sending a battlegroup to the FALKLANDS. You think the FALKLANDS so important then convince your government to defend it.

    This remains a FALKLANDS thread...

    "...Everybody else in the 9/11 attacks were just collateral damage..."

    Painfully tacky. Tell that to their families.

    "...The British only made themselves targets when they went to war for America..."

    Well, if it was only for the ol' U.S.A. and nothing to do with them then the British should have stayed home. I presume most weren't as short-sighted about Al Qaeda as you.

    You'll have to ask the Brits. I won't speak for their reason. Nor should you.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

    Comment


    • #32
      "Geography? I was referring to Australia sending a battlegroup to the FALKLANDS. You think the FALKLANDS so important then convince your government to defend it.

      This remains a FALKLANDS thread..."

      I'm not going to answer the rest of your post as Tarek has asked us to stop, but I will respond to this point because it is directed at my country. First, you'll have to excuse me but I got confused about which war you wanted us to send a battle group to. It tends to happen when somebody is acting like a petulant child, throwing around insults, it does nothing for the communication.

      Secondly, who the hell are you to tell us that we wouldn't help the British out if they requested it? They are a treaty party with us in the Five Powers Defence Agreement and we have fought side by side wars dating back before there was any US/British special relationship. Proportionate to our population there has probably been more Australian blood spilt in conflicts where we have fought beside the British than just about any of their other allies. Whats more I reckon if the British asked for our help in defending their soveriegn territory and citizens that the majority of Australians would want us to be there for them. I can't speak for our Government right now as they are pinkos (pretty much like yours) but the previous one would have put in for our friends in the UK, and I would hope and expect future ones to as well.

      So my message to you my friend is GET OVER YOURSELF, America might be leading the way in creating geopolitical stability right now but it hasn't always been that way. Whats more as your power wanes reletive to others, you might find that the contribution of smaller allies makes the difference in conflicts fought where you don't enjoy your current dominance. Treat your best friends with contempt and you might just find yourselves without them when you need them.
      "There is no such thing as society" - Margaret Thatcher

      Comment


      • #33
        Ah well, playing peacemaker in a heated thread like this never worked so I might as well engage. :)

        First of all, Aussiegunner, I understood S2 fine when he made the comment about stationing a battlegroup off the coast of the Falklands so why couldn't you?

        Then you try to cover up your mistake by saying, "It tends to happen when somebody is acting like a petulant child, throwing around insults, it does nothing for the communication.", when in fact, the only insult so far in this thread were thrown around by you:

        Originally posted by Aussiegunner View Post
        Ah, the famous US talent for geography shines through again.
        This thread was doing fine until the remark by Gun Grape, which angered tankie (rightfully so) but then you exacerbated it by stating that the GWOT was nothing but an operation designed to protect Americans, which, also rightfully, pissed off S2.

        So please tell us again, for the record, that you stand by this statement:

        Originally posted by Aussiegunner View Post
        The basic argument that both of you have made about the Global War on Terror being more than an operation to protect Americans is rubbish.
        See, I believe in the WOT and happen to believe we're doing the right thing, not just for Americans, but for the world when we sacrifice our fine men and women of the armed forces and for you to say that, in essence, GB is being used to just "protect" Americans, well it just pisses me off.

        Do other Brits on this board feel that way also? I really want to know.

        tankie?
        Dave?
        snapper?

        Are we being immensely helped by the other ABCA countries wrt world matters?

        Bet your ass we are.

        But for you to hint that that help is one way is pure and utter bullshit. The other ABCA countries have prospered just as much as we have from this relationship and unlike you, I'm sure GB, Canada and Australia has weighed the pros and cons of standing with America and deemed the hemorrhaging of their fine armed men and women in armed forces in battle acceptable.

        You seem to explain away any future lack of action by your government by saying they are "pinkos" but at the same time, fault us and our inaction because we have a similar "pinko" government.

        The statement Obama made last year wrt the Falklands was one of the dumbest thing I've ever heard any of our president make and I can very much understand the Brit's resentment towards it.

        Regarding the Falklands war, the U.S. stayed neutral officially because of the power struggle between Jean Kirkpatrick and Casper Weinberger.

        Kirkpatrick thought we shouldn't alienate our South American allies because Argentina was one of our greatest allies to stem the flow of communism in S.A. while Weinberger thought prudent to show support for our greatest ally.

        Reagan thought prudent to remain "neutral" but helped the Brits overtly (latest Sidewinder missiles) and, more importantly, covertly (intel, sat pics......etc).

        Nothing much has changed in 30 years.

        The Americans WILL officially remain neutral if another dust up develops between the Brit and Argies for the same reason(s). They are one of the most important allies down south to stem the Russian and Chaves's influence.

        But I have no doubt the Americans will help in similar matters, if not more overtly, in any future conflicts in and around the Falklands.

        The Brits might be pissed off at us now but I have no doubt things will "return to normal" as soon as that idiot leaves the Oval Office.

        It takes more than a few years of idiotic policies to destroy the relationship enjoyed by the ABCA countries.

        I'm just sorry you feel that relationship is a one way street.....

        By the way, what the hell are we talking about here?

        The Brits might have a hell of a time taking back the Falklands (if it is taken over again) but the Argies will never be able to take it in the first place.
        Last edited by YellowFever; 12 Dec 11,, 11:31.

        Comment


        • #34
          YF. The questions I have been asked over the years are..."Why are we (the Brits) in Afghanistan, it has nothing to do with us". Answer. To protect us from global terrorism. "But they have never attacked us" Other comments: "The Americans have one act of terrorism and then draw us into their war" " We were fighting a conflict in NIreland for 30 yrs and they never helped us, in fact they armed the terrorist" "Where were they when Libya kicked off? Did they help us?" ...and it goes on.

          I find our problem is the Government have never explained why the British are at war, there has never been an explanation that people understand. The vast majority of people do not know why we are fighting in A'stan....or anywhere else for that matter.

          Comment


          • #35
            YF, if you think I am the only one throwing insults then you clearly don't know what stfu means. As for the rest of it, all have to say is that yes .... I do think that US allies like Britain and Australia should be in the middle east helping out the US. This is because I believe in helping out our mates. Don't fool yourself that the primary purpose is anything but to protect Americans though. If your allies decided not to go the US still would have, just at higher cost to it in blood and treasure. We could have just left you to look after youselves, but we didn't because it is right for us to do what we can to protect our mates. However, the fact that makes the opinion that is being expressed here, that the US should abandon its closest and most loyal ally if help was needed, is a disgusting indictment on the attititude of those expressing it. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Ps, I note that nobody has answered my point about what the US would have done if the attacks had been on London. Telling really.
            Last edited by Aussiegunner; 12 Dec 11,, 12:55.
            "There is no such thing as society" - Margaret Thatcher

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Aussiegunner View Post
              I note that nobody has answered my point about what the US would have done if the attacks had been on London.
              We had had a few over the years.

              WORST BOMB ATTACKS IN UK

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by dave lukins View Post
                We had had a few over the years.

                WORST BOMB ATTACKS IN UK
                Well IRA was internal issue and I doubt if UK would have accepted any help wrt to IRA.

                As for AQ's attacks, USA is helping you wholeheartedly, I guess.

                Can we chill this.

                UK haven't openly asked for help from anyone the last time. If they come openly asking help from USA, I am sure it will be granted. If they come covertly, it will be the same.

                Argentinian elections are over, so I guess the noise from there will mute in the next months.

                Wonder why this escalated so much (over here).
                Last edited by Doktor; 12 Dec 11,, 13:15.
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • #38
                  The fishing rights and oil exploration is the money Argentine sees as its' own I think. I don't really see them getting Falklands.
                  Analysis - Falklands oil hopes survive Desire's setback | Reuters
                  If they can pump 2000 barrels per day at some date in the future and boost it to say 10000 barrels a day perhaps belligerence in Argentina goes up a few notches.

                  Also the EEZ filing for fishing rights is heating things up a bit. My guess is the issue hasn't been resolved for 200+ years and unless there is something economic that forces it Argentina will not give up the claim.

                  Technically I think if UK were ever to incorporate Falklands as primary juristinction like the French did with their overseas territories, they could ship products from the Falklands to Argentina (assuming those products are banned) and then assert trade violations of Argentina pushing EU to retaliate along with it which would detonate Argentine economy by punitive tarriffs through the WTO. The best approach would be to create a distillery in the Falklands have the product shipped to Argentina, it being banned and retaliate by blocking WTO wine shipments from Argentina to the U.S. and Europe on margin this would be very damaging.

                  Anyways.
                  Originally from Sochi, Russia.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    IMO, I dont see Argentina getting the Faulklands anymore then China is getting Taiwan, the US Cuba or anyone else. I bet this stops once the Brits assert themselves.
                    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by dave lukins View Post
                      YF. The questions I have been asked over the years are..."Why are we (the Brits) in Afghanistan, it has nothing to do with us". Answer. To protect us from global terrorism. "But they have never attacked us" Other comments: "The Americans have one act of terrorism and then draw us into their war" " We were fighting a conflict in NIreland for 30 yrs and they never helped us, in fact they armed the terrorist" "Where were they when Libya kicked off? Did they help us?" ...and it goes on.

                      I find our problem is the Government have never explained why the British are at war, there has never been an explanation that people understand. The vast majority of people do not know why we are fighting in A'stan....or anywhere else for that matter.
                      Believe me, Dave, we have similar people here asking the same questions.

                      My question was, how do YOU, tankie and snapper feel regarding this matter.

                      Do you feel you're in Afghanistan just to protect American lives or do you believe in what we're doing there is the right thing to do.

                      Does the WOT help everybody or was it created for American interest only?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Aussiegunner View Post
                        YF, if you think I am the only one throwing insults then you clearly don't know what stfu means. As for the rest of it, all have to say is that yes .... I do think that US allies like Britain and Australia should be in the middle east helping out the US. This is because I believe in helping out our mates. Don't fool yourself that the primary purpose is anything but to protect Americans though. If your allies decided not to go the US still would have, just at higher cost to it in blood and treasure. We could have just left you to look after youselves, but we didn't because it is right for us to do what we can to protect our mates. However, the fact that makes the opinion that is being expressed here, that the US should abandon its closest and most loyal ally if help was needed, is a disgusting indictment on the attititude of those expressing it. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Ps, I note that nobody has answered my point about what the US would have done if the attacks had been on London. Telling really.
                        Yes, we could've gone in without you guys but we didn't. The real question is did the other ABCA countries have their arms twisted to go in with us or did they do so of their own free will. According to the Colonel, Canada, at least were.falling over themselves to be involved in the WOT. I don't think it would've been that much different with your country or the Brits. At the risk of being told to "get over myself", we are still the dominant military and economic power in the world. It doesn't hurt anything to have the biggest kid on the block owe you a favor or two, especially if what they're doing is something we believe in as well.

                        I'm guessing all those factors were taken into account before you guys helped us. How the war is being executed is open to debate but the war itself is good for the western world.

                        To say that you guys are involved in the WOT just to help us, I believe, is a bunch of crock.

                        To get back on topic, how do you know there isn't an understanding in place for us to help the Brits if there is another dust up around Falklands? What makes you think the Brits even want a public support from the US? Politics being what they are, maybe they don't want any overt support from us because it gives the impression that big brother US is coming to the Brit's rescue? The Brits unfairly have a reputation of being the American lapdogs amongst some idiot governments around the world and a public support by Obama will exacerbate that view amongst them.

                        Why are you so sure the Brits wants public support from us wrt this matter?

                        Maybe they are eyeing this as the perfect opportunity to reassert themsleves as a global power.
                        Last edited by YellowFever; 12 Dec 11,, 18:24.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by YellowFever View Post
                          Believe me, Dave, we have similar people here asking the same questions.

                          My question was, how do YOU, tankie and snapper feel regarding this matter.

                          Do you feel you're in Afghanistan just to protect American lives or do you believe in what we're doing there is the right thing to do.

                          Does the WOT help everybody or was it created for American interest only?
                          Yella, yes, its global not an American gig only , every nation has a duty to participate and take action , not just sit back n watch . But we are not there just to protect American lives , hows that .

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by tankie View Post
                            Yella, yes, its global not an American gig only , every nation has a duty to participate and take action , not just sit back n watch . But we are not there just to protect American lives , hows that .
                            Never doubted you, tankie.

                            I rib you alot but I've always respected you and your world views.

                            I'm just a little peeved that someone else that I respect have that view.

                            And if ou copy/paste what I wrote about respecting you in any other thread, I'm going to tip you over from your trike. ;)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Dude,you really have an existential drama.What's the point?A-stan is almost over.What's done is done.

                              You mention doing the right thing.WTH was done right in the first place?You guys came with one idiocy after another and the rest have been equally idiotic to buy all the crap.Or bastard enough to pretend that.
                              Look at Georgia.They sent their best brigade in Iraq just in time to miss their own war.Do you think for a moment those soldiers were anything than a currency to buy your favor?Which of course didn't worked.Or do you think Poland actually cares about A-stan or Iraq?All they want is your troops shielding them from the Russians.
                              I don't really give a damn about whatever right or wrong.We scratched your back when you asked for.We expect you to scratch ours when we need that.We think we have common interests and that's why we're talking in the first place.If that presumtion turns to be false,good bye and have a nice life.
                              Overall you have ~ 3 million troops(active ,reserve,NG).The beloved motherland has~ 75000 of which ~2000 were engaged in combat.Do the math and see the proportion you need to send if we ask for.Nothing more,nothing less. Depending on the situation we might not need men but certain capabilities.

                              If it sounds harsh,sorry.I was kinda pi$$ed at Gun Grape's comment.I'm in an anti-american,anti-imperialist mood.And I just lost my dog,a loyal friend since I was 7.
                              Last edited by Mihais; 12 Dec 11,, 18:48.
                              Those who know don't speak
                              He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post

                                If, as you state, You have trouble defending that outpost "In the best of times" maybe its time to case your colors and give that last outpost up.
                                We can't. We have hero's buried there.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X