{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/21/2013 4:15:37 PM
11
What is it with the Brits and the Falklands? This is the second time in my life that you guys started shooting at them...
English
-
Well, basically the Falkland islands have been British since before Argentina was a country. The inhabitants of the island self-identify as British - most vehemently so. In 1982 the Argentinians invaded British sovereign territory in an attempt to seize the islands. We nailed them. Now they are making a bunch of noise because sabre rattling enables them to draw attention away from their hideously bad internal affairs. For some reason the USA feels that supporting Argentina's calls for negotiation over the future of a group of people who are intensely British is a good idea (here's an idea: you give Alaska back to the Russians, then we'll talk about the Falklands)
-
Can't compare Alaska to the Falklands since the US bought Alaska from the Russians. 2 different scenario's.
-
Indeed, but the other analogy I considered was Hawaii, and I couldn't for the life of me think of any country that might have any sort of claim to that... Alaska is a weak example, but it serves its intended purpose: give our Yankee friends a suitably ridiculous territorial claim on American soil so they can hopefully come a bit closer to understanding just how retarded the Argentinians are.
-
Edited by Dustin: 1/21/2013 6:27:48 PMIf you're talking about history, every square inch of America was fought over between the Spanish, French, British, Mexicans, Japanese and probably a few more I'm forgetting. Now-a-days, I don't really know of any country pressing claims on the mainland or one of the territories, well unless you count our embassies and military bases scattered around the world, and the Iraqi so desperately wanted us to leave their country, same with Afghanistan now.
-
Edited by lonepaul2441: 1/21/2013 4:42:59 PMYou could have just used Texas considering the war between the US/Texas and Mexico to mark the border. But I get your point.
-
We started shooting at the Falklands? What are you talking about? We had 1 war to recapture them and last year Argentina raised tensions on them again, both time's America has said "We want you both to discuss what happens to the islands". In the OP the US is warning china not to "Undermine Japanese administration" talk about shafting your strongest ally.
-
So, America wanting a diplomatic solution between the United Kingdom and Argentina is bad? I guess the reasoning is that Japan is under a greater threat from China than Britain is from Argentina. Though, what with the latest trend of British territories ceasing to be British territories, I can see why'd you be concerned. Even if it does come to war, do you really need US assistance to defeat Argentina? I doubt it would be any harder this time around.
-
That's not the point. America should be more than willing to back Britain in its territory claims, instead of buddying up to Argentina to try and improve or keep good relations. America did secretly give the UK some new missiles to use in the Falkland war only to keep the UK sweet. Britain is the USA's strongest and arguably most important ally, if America keeps messing us around its going to lose a powerful ally, many people over here are sick of your government butting in. Right now the USA wants Britain in Europe for its OWN interests, but ignores the right of the British people to choose what they want. People over here are getting incredibly sick of it and it could ruin Anglo - American relations.
-
So, you're sick of us "butting in," and to remedy that, you want us to butt in?
-
Edited by Dustin: 1/21/2013 6:35:31 PM[quote]So, you're sick of us "butting in," and to remedy that, you want us to butt in?[/quote]This. Right now we have a liberal administration which will be less likely to involve itself in matters like these, but in a conservative administration they'd 'world police' these disputes. I don't think you're left with the bigger stick no matter who's in power at the moment, but if you want to spend 700 billion dollars a year on your military, then maybe you can reap the benefits (however I wouldn't advise of this).
-
No and no.
