Thanks for the backup POTUS....Not!

[Aspman]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyy ... r-of-need/

It was a headline I never expected to read: “US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute.” Washington has declined to back Britain in its dispute with Argentina over drilling rights in the waters surrounding the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands. President Obama’s position is one of strict neutrality, refusing to take sides.

In '82 Regan helped out with intelligence, public backing and allowed the UK military access to the latest Sidewinder missiles.

Hopefully the next UK gov will let Washington know that an alliance is a two way agreement and we should look after our own a bit more.

This Obama chap is not coming across well at all, unimpressive in internal politics and a fair-weather friend to his allies. I'm sure the USA can stand on it's own, but does it really want to?

An apt comment

“A huge slap in the face for Brown from his friend Barrack.” Flightpath

It was an absolute hoot when the Prime Mentalist went to Washington and sanctimoniously proffered the holy, sacramental pen-holder made out of the timbers of an RN anti-slavery patrol ship to Saint Obama

And in return he gets all those Hollywood films on Dvd from Amazon which can’t even be played on equipment sold in the UK.

Classic

[Aspman]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nileg ... falklands/

Hillary Clinton’s dire performance in Buenos Aires was not only an appalling display of appeasement towards a corrupt and authoritarian anti-American regime, which barely has the support of 20 percent of the Argentinian people. It was also an astonishing betrayal of the United Kingdom by her closest ally, and yet another slap in the face for Britain from the Obama administration.

[keezel]

It seems his foreign policy is a little lacking.

This isn't something new or surprising. I believe this was well known even in the primaries. Everyone was so concerned about the economy that they overlooked his weakness in foreign policy, where Hillary or McCain would have undoubtedly done a better job.

Then again, McCain didn't appear to have a clue about economics...not a great trait when the economy is collapsing.

I hope this does not cripple the US's relationship with Europe too badly. He definitely needs to learn how to support our allies.

*edit*

After reading a bit and reading the transcript, it appears to me that Sec. Clinton is trying to stay out of the fight. It sounds like she is deliberately encouraging the countries to sit down and "negotiate", while actively remaining uninvolved and not stating an opinion. Perhaps she should be supporting the UK but this appears to be a disagreement between two countries on a matter of sovereignty. Why should the US have any say whatsoever on this matter?

Now, if the UK actually goes to WAR, that's another matter. The US would be obliged to support them, IMHO.

[|3lack|ce]

Hillary is being the typical fence-rider in this. OF COURSE we always want to see 'peaceful resolutions' to any problem - what could make a pundit look better politically?

If it goes to war (as it did back in the 1980's as I remember) the US will do exactly what it did under Reagan - not a blessed thing (and let the UK whip some Argentinian arse again), or they'll take the 'high moral ground' and try to mediate. Of the two I personally hope for non-action, but Obama might not be able to keep his fingers out of that pie.

Please don't be too pissed at the US over it - I promise that not everyone agrees with this administration or its policies.

[Aspman]

The thing is, as far as the UK is concerned there is nothing to negotiate.

The UK has held the Falklands since before Argentina existed as a nation, their claim to the islands rests on it being closer to Argentina than Britain and that some Spaniards were there a 100 years before the UK and Argentinians are ethnically Spanish.
In that case the UK and Mexico have sovereignty over large parts of the USA.

Regan did support the UK in the war in '82. Not only with intelligence sharing but by providing the UK with some advanced weaponry ahead of some of it's domestic forces.

The UK really needs to stop kowtowing to Obama and agreeing with everything his administration asks. Maybe the Uk needs to leave him hanging in the air a few times to let him know that an alliance is a two way street. The USA gov has been pushing it's luck since Obamamania started.

Yes we could kick Argentina's ass if it came to it. But we'd probably have to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq to do it.

Intentional or not it's pissing off a lot of people
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 047282.ece

[DaFoxx]

IF it came to a full on shooting match, we are in a different world to 82
then we had 80, read it, 80 marines in the islands, now we have fortress Falklands, 4000 troops on base there, plus the infastructure to withstand any assault from any potential opposition in the area, and for marine assault, there is only the U.S. and the U.K who have the ability to do this anyway, as stated the Argentinian forces landed unopposed last time, not so much an assault, more a ferry crossing

but if shooting starts then we would have to draw forces from middle east to use there, as our forces are not sufficient to fight a single war, let alone get us involved in two conflicts at opposite sides of the globe

and as ever, it all comes down to mineral resources

but as Asp says, we were there way before the Argentinian concept existed, if we could just get the Irish / Argentinians [there are a LOT of those there, feck knows why, but I believe the Irish would prefer to live anywhere apart from feckin Ireland] to love us again , then maybe we could just tell 'em to march on Beunos Aires, and save us th ehassle

but remember that the location and wind patterns down there mean nuclear options could well come into serious consideration, which would save us all a lot of time, and also provide the world with a rather large pile of ready roasted beef too

[Harbinger]

Personally, I'm stunned that Obama has not advocated military support for the British with the Falklands. I guess he's too busy pounding the war drums in the middle east. I would seem he prefers the blood of people who speak Urdu, Pushtan, Arabic, and Persian over the blood of Spanish speakers.

I wish Obama would take this stance on every single U.S.A. military engagement, conflict, encampment, base, operation, meddling, murdering, etc. etc. ordeal it has functioning in 75% of the countries of the world.

I say that I like the British. I say that I have no quarrel or qualms with Argentinians. I say, let them decide for themselves.

This is probably why I'm very seriously contemplating ex-patriating to Switzerland should New Hampshire or Texas not seceed first.

[|3lack|ce]

Still hoping that direction for Texas Harb, but I don't see it happening anytime soon unfortunately. I WILL say, however, that US Economic downturns always incite the secessionist movement down here and this time is no different. Personally, I'm seriously considering becoming an ExPat in Amsterdam. I like their concept of freedom.