Donate SIGN UP

US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute.

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 12:06 Thu 25th Feb 2010 | News
21 Answers
http://www.timesonlin...as/article7040245.ece

The South American countries are backing Argentina, but our closest ally America, refuses to support us.

Not for the first time Britain stands alone.

Lessons should now be learned whenever anyone needs our help in the future, the cry should be,

"SOD OFF"
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 21rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't think the US, the UK or anyone else should be expected to base foreign policy on tit-for-tat deals.
They'll only get in the way.
The Americans haven't endorsed the Argentinians claim to the Falklands either.

Lessons should have been learned - Forget this sheep infested lump of guano, it is not worth another 253 British dying for. Unless their sacrifice in 1982 was to ensure we would have cheap enough petrol to drive to the cornershop in 2010?
-- answer removed --
Question Author
Rather a selfish attitude don't you think Gromit?

How would you feel if you, yourself lived on that "sheep infested lump of guano," eh?
-- answer removed --
I'll be honest AOG. I do not give a stuff about people living on the Falkland Islands.

I do not think it was worth 253 British lives.

I think spending £1.2billion on the war was a waste of money.

Selfish, I know.
Question Author
Would you have had the same attitude regarding, Poland, France, Belgium, Holland, Norway, Denmark or the Channel Isles, were they worth saving, was WW2 worth the money spent?

How about the Isle of Man, the Isle of White, the Scilly Isles, should we be prepared to defend these?
I'm sure we'd spend £1.2bn on rescuing the Britons captured by those Somali pirates.
-- answer removed --
It was worth defending ourselves from the Nazis because their views evil and they were clearly a threat to every man woman and child in this country.

Likewise, we wouldn't want any islands so close to the UK mainland to be occupied by an hostile force. However, The Channel Islands can gladly be given to the French, Falklands to the Argies and Gibralter to the Spanish. Their position was strategically important 500 years ago, but it is just sentimentality to hold on to them now.
Jesus Gromit. The people living on those islands are BRITISH!!!! They have as much right to expect defence from our government as you.
The soldiers, sailors and airmen that died, did so doing the most noble thing a military man can do - FIGHTING TO DEFEND THERE COUNTRY.

The sacrifice back then was for their countrymen, not for oil.
We captured and colonised those remote islands, for just one reason, to mount further invasions of the mainland near to them. They were handy garrisons.

Assuming we no longer intend to invade, French Spain or South America, their only reason for us having them is gone. Other than sentimentality.
Again Gromit, you are wrong. Those islands remain part of the nation because thats what the bennies want. They have repeatedly voted in favour of staying part of the UK (usually with majorities around 90% and turnout not far off 100%). Or are you saying that this government should cut off chunks of the nation to save money? If thats the case, then whats next in your eyes?
The US did not enter WWII until Dec 1941 and more than 2 years after the war started. They act from purely selfish interests. In fact we owed so much debt in money terms from that war we have just finished paying it off to them. Some friends?
I still wonder why Blair supported them to the hilt in Iraq but judging by his bank balance the picture is a bit clearer.
What's it to do with the USA anyway? Why should they have a say in it?
Question Author
Typical of Brown's government the guy who sold off the countries Gold, along with our ports and airports.

Perhaps Gromit has some inside information, perhaps he is right. the Channel Islands to the French, Falklands to the Argies and Gibralter to the Spanish.

Then lets get rid of Scotland, followed by Northern Ireland and then Wales.

Lovely jubbley and who know, in a couple of hundred years, we could send all the non English home and then we may get the chance to declare independence for England, just like these other countries did?
///Typical of Brown's government the guy who sold off the countries Gold, along with our ports and airports. ///

As opposed to the Tories who sold off the Utilities, Public Transport, etc

but I guess that that is different!
stuff the falkland islands lets give them to the argies. the time for colonisation is over and britain has no business being in this part of the world.
Ghetto Poet, do you think we should also give the Isle of Wight to Germany?

1 to 20 of 21rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.