Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama neutral on Maldives or should that be Malvinas??

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Obama neutral on Maldives or should that be Malvinas??

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...the-falklands/

    President Obama says that the USA is neutral on the question of British Sovereignty on the Maldives - (read Malvinas - or to those Islanders apparently to be evicted at sometime in the future - Falklands).

  • #2
    Originally posted by Scupio View Post
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...the-falklands/

    President Obama says that the USA is neutral on the question of British Sovereignty on the Maldives - (read Malvinas - or to those Islanders apparently to be evicted at sometime in the future - Falklands).
    That is deeply embarrassing and as far as I am concerned, there is no need to even discuss the matter with Argentina. As I have pointed out before, Buenos Aires is quite simply out of line on this issue and do not have a leg to stand on and I hope that the President reconsiders his position. It is true that the USA will not attend the Summit of the Americas thanks to our unchanging position vis a vis Castro's Cuba, and rightly so. However there should not be any neutrality in regards to the Falklands either; the islanders clearly have a right to remain British.
    Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

    Initiated Chief Petty Officer
    Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

    Comment


    • #3
      Shameful. I apologize on behalf of all Americans for this assclown in the White House. We will do our best to try and kick him out come November.

      Comment


      • #4
        He does realise that if he does this the next country that's going to come knocking is Mexico looking for Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California back?

        He is of course entitled to his own opinion. But before he casts his pearls of wisdom before the swine of history he might be better to remember that old African proverb.
        "opinions are like arseholes. Everyones got one and most of them stink"

        Once he has absorbed the information and thoroughly assessed it. I think he will understand why he personally, has been added to that great British tradition the goyourself list.

        Well it's not like he's there for ever. Shame really. He is only going to go down in history a the US's first black president and not it's first good black president.

        Silly question at one time a bit of Brit bashing used to go down well in the US around election time. Any chance he's trying to tap into that?
        "Sometimes its better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness" T Pratchett

        Comment


        • #5
          The US also declared it had no opinion on the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border dispute in 1990; that was mistakenly taken as a green light by Saddam to invade.

          In the unlikely event that Argentina did invade the islands again, the US would side with the British.
          Silent Hunter UK
          Member of Phoenix Roleplaying

          Personal Blog

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ChrisF1987 View Post
            Shameful. I apologize on behalf of all Americans for this assclown in the White House. We will do our best to try and kick him out come November.
            I'll second this comment

            Comment


            • #7
              I opened the link, and all I saw was talk about the Falklands, not the Malvinas or Maldives.

              Being President of the U.S., Obama has no requirement to stick up for the Brits in the Malvinas/Falklands any more than he does for the French in French Guiana. The U.S. has no dog in that fight, and we owe no one any apology for the political vagaries of our system. It's ours, and we have to live with it.
              dit: Lirelou

              Phong trần mi một lưỡi gươm, Những loi gi o ti cơm s g!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Scupio View Post
                http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...the-falklands/

                President Obama says that the USA is neutral on the question of British Sovereignty on the Maldives - (read Malvinas - or to those Islanders apparently to be evicted at sometime in the future - Falklands).


                This is the Maldives.




                This is the Malvinas.


                Sort of hard to mix the two up.
                "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                youre entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                Comment


                • #9
                  President Obama's stance is much the same as RR's.

                  http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB374/

                  "Washington, D.C., April 1, 2012 The United States secretly supported the United Kingdom during the early days of the Falklands/Malvinas Island war of 1982, while publicly adopting a neutral stance and acting as a disinterested mediator in the conflict, according to recently declassified U.S. documents posted today by the National Security Archive.

                  On the 30th anniversary of the war, the Archive published a series of memoranda of conversation, intelligence reports, and cables revealing the secret communications between the United States and Britain, and the United States and Argentina during the conflict.

                  At a meeting in London on April 8, 1982, shortly after the war began, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher expressed concern to U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig about President Ronald Reagan's recent public statements of impartiality. In response, according to a previously secret memorandum of the conversation."

                  Why is it that now days people expect to read or see every little detail in the news? Get real people.

                  Why don't Navy squids follow the golden rule?

                  Chris, just apologize for yourself thank you. You seem to be commenting on a subject that you only know from the latest headlines and not the past.
                  "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                  Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                  youre entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Errrr shouldn't the US be neutral in such matters anyway ?

                    Dunno where the Maldives come into it, Lirelou, but we call them the Falklands, Argentina calls them the Malvinas.
                    Indyref2 - still, "Yes."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I guess it depends on whether you see the Falkland Isles as British land that is just a bit far away from other British lands, or a sort of British colonial possession, or overseas territory, or anything less than proper homeland.
                      But even in the later case, wouldn't a hostile takeover attempt, like in 1982, trigger the NATO alliance?
                      Reaction to the 2016 Munich shootings:
                      Europe: "We are shocked and support you in these harsh times, we stand by you."
                      USA: "We will check people from Germany extra-hard and it is your own damn fault for being so stupid."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                        Why don't Navy squids follow the golden rule?
                        Call me irresponsible but for once I would like our politicians to grow some nuts John. We do not owe Argentina doodly squat while we have had long ties to Britain; the US Navy is very much the child of the Royal Navy mon frere, we did not learn our tricks from a German. Just because Ronnie did it does not excuse Obama doing it too but I will agree what is being publicly spoken is probably for general consumption.
                        Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

                        Initiated Chief Petty Officer
                        Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Acheron View Post
                          I guess it depends on whether you see the Falkland Isles as British land that is just a bit far away from other British lands, or a sort of British colonial possession, or overseas territory, or anything less than proper homeland.
                          But even in the later case, wouldn't a hostile takeover attempt, like in 1982, trigger the NATO alliance?

                          That's the question. I'm not sure of the fine print in the NATO, but if it says the rest of NATO is required to come to their aid. I don't think I'd like to be wearing an Argie uniform then.
                          "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                          Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                          youre entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            NATO was set up to defend Europe against Soviet expansion, and has never been viewed as applying to the Americas. For the Americas, we have the Rio Pact, whose military alliance is not presently active though conferences are held. Ergo, Argentina is not a U.S. Ally, though it would be if the Rio Pact were in effect.

                            As for the U.S. automatically siding with Great Britain, that idea strains the imagination. Great Britain has her interests, and we have our own. We do not always agree despite the fact we have long been allies. Siding with Great Britain in a war with Argentina over the Malvinas would be about the dumbest thing any American president could do and would destroy whatever credibility we have in Latin America.

                            Ace, I'm well aware of what Great Britain calls the islands, but a good friend of mine commanded an Argentine Marine battalion there, and I happen to know from first hand testimony that the British Paras held the Argie Marines in high respect.

                            By the way, Brasil's position was much like Ronald Reagan's. The Brazilians officially supported Argentina, but British military aircraft with in-flight problems were allowed to land in Brasil for repairs. (When I asked a Brazilian military acquaintance to describe such a 'problem', he replied: "Coffee. Sometimes a flight crew would run out of coffee. You know, pilots can't fly without coffee, so we permitted them to land. After all, we produce the finest coffee in the world.) {true tale, though not so sure of the facts behind it.}
                            Last edited by lirelou; 02 May 12, 15:22.
                            dit: Lirelou

                            Phong trần mi một lưỡi gươm, Những loi gi o ti cơm s g!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yet NATO is fighting in Afghanistan, which is well outside of Europe, as a result of the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks.

                              After standing with the US as a result of 2001 and after backing the US up over Iraq in 2003 - both with military contributions that got actively 'stuck in' - what thanks does Britain get? The Falklands is hardly the biggest issue in the Americas and I fail to see US support for the self-determination of the islanders causing a significant dip in relations with Latin America which is not a homogeneous entity and not all may necessarily side with Argentina. American support for the British in the Falklands, I suspect, must have been known despite not being made obvious. Caspar Weinberger did receive a knighthood in 1987 for the close military cooperation between Britain and the US which the Falklands War was a major part of.

                              Yes, each nations have their own interest but nations are run by humans who are not beings that make decisions and judgements based solely on cold and calculated interest. It misses out the human element which is something that plays an important part in world politics. Never underestimate the power of a long standing ally that shares a broadly similar culture and speaks the same language allowing you to talk to them straight away over an issue without a translator.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X