MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
South Atlantic Air-bridge to the Falklands restricted to certain nationalities
The South Atlantic Air-bridge linking RAF Brize Norton in the UK with the Falkland Islands will no longer fly nationals from a list of countries and although no specific reasons were given, the release underlines that the “Ministry of Defense places the greatest importance on the security of its people, facilities and operations”. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesArgentinians should be added to that list.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 10:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ 1
Mar 06th, 2015 - 10:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0You beat me to it.
I do think 'Spain' ought to be banned as well. It would be easy for a dual nationality argie to creep in that way.
@1,
Mar 06th, 2015 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0l second the motion.
We have group of Russian scientists who have lived here for years and have FI residency, hopefully they will still be able to fly.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 01
Mar 06th, 2015 - 12:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0agree.
and i second the motion, which is increasingly stronger, of restricting the wonderful argentinian airspace to any flight that goes to or from the islets.
you want to go to chile...then take a transpolar flight.
All enemies of the free British Falkland Islands should be black-listed- in the first place.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 12:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Philippe
anyway, except the relatives of the fallen soldiers, who the fuck would want to go to those stinky islets?
Mar 06th, 2015 - 12:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0i mean you have to be a masochist or an imbecile deluded by a 3rd class tourism agency.
they are doing a wonderful service to the people of belarus, china, egypt, iran, libya, north korea, russia, syria, ukraine, and vietnam.
well done.
'the Ministry of Defense places the greatest importance...“
Mar 06th, 2015 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You mean ”...the Ministry of DEFENCE..” surely? Even if the reporter is an American, 'Defence' in this context is a proper name.
#7
Mar 06th, 2015 - 01:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are very contrary.
You at one time moan that about the Falklands, yet obsess over them in a way only the agies do.
Is it a recurring itching topic with your analyst?
@1 Add Scotland too since they tried to defect!
Mar 06th, 2015 - 01:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“i mean you have to be a masochist or an imbecile deluded by a 3rd class tourism agency.”
Mar 06th, 2015 - 01:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Or a product of a 3rd rate education system and a blatantly hypocritical and mendacious curriculum. As in you, and all your fellow easily lead citizens.
Power to the Prince of Wales – as new carrier receives first mighty engine
Mar 06th, 2015 - 01:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/12565
Prince of Wales latest pictures.
The first of two huge gas turbines which will be the ship’s main power plant has been lowered into place on HMS Prince of Wales.
The Rolls-Royce MT30 engine generates enough power to meet the needs of a town of 70,000 inhabitants, like Burnley
[][--issued on Thursday, with immediate effect,--[][
Speaks for itself,
Someone has been naughty
7@ perhaps has been discovered hiding in the wheel house...lol
Paul : The RAF flies to a lot more places than “ those stinking islets ”.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Brize Norton is busier than Ezeiza , but then again , that's not hard , it's not run by la Campola ....
Comment removed by the editor.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 02:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 014
Mar 06th, 2015 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps because not all South American People's are quite as obsessed, evil, and arrogant as Argentinians. Chile and Uruguay pay lip service to Argentine demands as does Brazil to a lesser extent. At the end of the day the UK has to have confidence in its relations with LatAm, we have a lot to offer in trade and are known as a fair and reasonable Country with whom to do business.
This action is, of course, quite sensible. Most of the countries on the list, in some way or another, are in diplomatic and/or political conflict with the European Union and NATO.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 03:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How disappointing !!!...what a pity. I anxiously read the article waiting for an unilateral decision to see Argentina and the mainland included in the list. I imagined, for a moment, that the UK would quit the use of Argentine and would return to direct flights to London airspace ... but I was too naive. The islanders, and the UK, will continue (as always) begging favors to their hated and despised neighbors ... it is clearly a love-hate relationship. Argentina lives without the islands, but the islands do not want to live without Argentina ..
Mar 06th, 2015 - 04:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0pgerman, pauly, I see your nutty president is now making another territorial claim - http://newsthump.com/2013/03/14/argentina-asserts-rights-over-vatican-city/
Mar 06th, 2015 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Bahahahaha
Please keep the door open for us poor Chileanos, who support the FIG administration despite our official goverment position.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 04:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#17
Mar 06th, 2015 - 06:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes. of course it would be an inconvenience if the LAN flights were suspended and it would be hard on the relatives of the Argentine war dead. However one way round that problem would be to disinter the bodies and ship them back to Argentina. If this was not agreeable to the Argentine govt. then they could be taken out to the beautiful Mar Argentina and given a burial at sea with full military honours. I'm not sure of how there could be any Arg. military participation as it appears that you have no vessels that could safely make the trip AND return.
The Islanders would then have no need to have anything to do with Argentina ever again.
@20
Mar 06th, 2015 - 06:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There are some British cemeteries in Argentina, I remember having gone to one that is in Buenos Aires City. May your proposal, to exhume human remains and send them by boat, be extended to them too?
I don't have such bad taste and I prefer to solve my problems with the living people. It is a matter of education and cultural values. The living people can defend themselves.
It is quite clear that Argentina lives without the islands, but the islands do not want to live without Argentina ..
The MOD has not stated why these restrictions are being applied,
Mar 06th, 2015 - 08:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0or what countries are affected,
but no doubt we all will find out soon,.
How many Belorussians do you think get on a plane at fucking Brize Norton!!!!!!
Mar 06th, 2015 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeesh, is this a real story?
And will get more interesting.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@12 Briton
Mar 06th, 2015 - 08:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Great link. Please keep it up. Cheers.
That's ok,
Mar 06th, 2015 - 08:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I cant find any information on the MODs South Atlantic Air-bridge to the Falklands , anywhere,
Briton
Mar 06th, 2015 - 09:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The MoD has given us a precise list of which nationals are restricted and the reason why; it just hasn't been reported on MP. I am not too concerned about this at all as there will be a sort of “visa” system whereby if a person of a restricted nationality needs to come for reasons beneficial to the islands i.e. Fisheries scientists, they just have to be cleared.
#11 There was a lot of jocks fought and died for FI,and were at the building of MPA
Mar 06th, 2015 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@21 pgerman
Mar 06th, 2015 - 09:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is a difference. The British don't use their dead to try and foster some type of territorial claim on Argentina, the same can't be said of Argentina can it?
The Argentine government are a despicable bunch who USE Argentina's war dead for political purposes whilst at the same time completely IGNORING the demands of those veterans who survived the war and want justice AGAINST Argentina for being abused and tortured during the war by their own officers.
So there is a difference. Most people on here wouldn't countenance such disrespect to the war dead of ANY nation, yet Argentina is constantly does it to their own.
Shameful, isn't it?
And if Argentina continues to disrespect, not only its own war dead but the Falkland Islanders like this, then it is only natural that people get angry and demand that the bodies be repatriated back to Argentina.
After all if it was legal to claim territory because it had soldiers buried there then the UK could claim Argentina couldn't it?
Face it pgerman, its all Argentina's fault. It's about time Argentina grew up and accepted it.
29 LEPelotudo
Mar 06th, 2015 - 09:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you are not too bright and not too educated, no?
there are hundreds of british soldiers buried in buenos aires, since the time of the invasiones inglesas and vuelta de obligado.
and of course, nobody in his right mind would have thought in repatriating them.
only a piece of shite like you could think that.
anyway,repatriating the argentine deads would be a solution to break all kind of relations between the bloque latinoamericano and the islets and england.
bye bye punta arenas, your conection with “civilization”.
benny-hillbillies...lol
There's no Latin American bloc. The UK is happily trading and dealing with many countries in the region.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 11:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Go ahead Argentina, block overflying. It's only been threatened for so long now that we all yawn.
Pgerman, who said we want to live with and have any connections with Argentina? We are quite happy with NONE - we know that any would come with a load of political baggage attatched - se happily we have none.
Mar 06th, 2015 - 11:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Paulcedron - Funny that 1500 or so tourists from different countries spent in the reason of Us$5000 and more for a 10-14 day wildlife holiday in the islands each year then.
Funny too that having Stanley of a south American cruise destination SELLS tickets - far more popular than any Argentine port according to the travel companies.
17 pgerman
Mar 07th, 2015 - 12:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0The innocent passage of an aircraft across a third party's airspace isn't 'begging favours', you crazy fool. It's just a basic courtesy that every country extends to almost every other country. That's because in this modern world, we actually are all interconnected. It's necessary to keep the wheels turning. Every country with any sense and any responsibility towards its citizens knows this.
There have been a few times in recent years when people from Argentina would have liked to have chartered a plane to the Falklands and haven't been allowed to do it, because of your own stupid ban on charter flights to the Falklands overflying Argentina. You haven't realised that banning flights is not beneficial for either side; it's not about begging favours, but about mutual benefit.
The real story here is, no matter what the Republic does. The UK has the will, means and ability to reinforce the islands when ever it wishes.
Mar 07th, 2015 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0A couple of combat veteran infantry battalions is a different proposition to under armed brave Royal Marines.
@33
Mar 07th, 2015 - 02:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina was quite naif and stupid assisting FI people when they were a poor and forgotten colony of the UK. Free ER, cheap energy and air connections, a paved runway built by Argentina....After the war a Royal Navy icebreaker docked in Puerto Belgrano (would you believe that?) due to a fire, TdF had to assist some tourists of a ship because the FI authorities denied any help....
Are you asking for a “basic courtesy” to Argentina? Why on the hell would argentine people have “basic courtesy” to FI people? or to the UK? The UK is a rich country (that spends millions of GPB in keeping the FI Garrison) so any GBP spent in keeping the current political status of the FI won't hurt it's economy. In addition, it would avoid potential inconveniences with RAF planes flying over argentine territory. Or with stupid peronists bothering FI people to make trouble. I definitely would cancel any authorization to connet the FI with the continent.
It might be time that both part grow up. Argentine people must forget the FI claim and the UK must forget any cooperation with the continent to get cheaper services and goods. Acting as if both would not exist might be the best for both sides. Don't you think so?
“ bloque latinoamericano ”
Mar 07th, 2015 - 03:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0PMSL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahaha!
Never seen such a disunited 'bloc/bloque' in all my life, and all my historical/political research.
Chile is a massive friend of the UK and I hear rumours that Vnzla will be expelled from MercoSur... What happened to ALBA now the oil-price dropped?
bwahahahaha!
oh, peruvian-cedron, you are too funny! Thank you for my daily laughs (at you).
arf! arf!
And the Air-Bridge remains.
The F.I. still British.
Argentina is the laughing-stock of the world.
Plus ça change!
Pgerman says:
Mar 07th, 2015 - 06:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0“...UK must forget any cooperation with the continent to get cheaper services and goods.”
I say that there is more to the continent than Argentina (contrary to their egos).
There can be plenty of cooperation between the Falkland Islands and South America. No matter how much Argentina attempts to stop it.
Argentina did that in an attempt to appeal to the falkland islanders with the blessing of the uk goverment who wanted to get rid of the islands.
Mar 07th, 2015 - 08:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Unfortunatly the freebies didnt cover up the fact argentina had a murderous incompetant junta that would only be attractive to a certain type of older german and the cia who didnt have to live under its rule.
Since you invaded and were defeated the chances of you getting your mitts on the islands are slightly better than say the japanese navy setting up a naval base at pearl harbour but only just
@30 paulcedron
Mar 07th, 2015 - 09:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0You muppet try actually READING my post before you post and prove to everyone just how stupid you are.
@35 pgerman
How impotent you sound, and jealous and petulant.
Argentina could be ONE of the richest nations on the planet. The reason you aren't is because of ARGENTINA and no one else. All you ever do is blame someone else for you own failings. Grow up and accept responsibility.
Oh and if you love Argentina so much why don't YOU live there and live with the consequences of mismanagement and corruption? Why do you support such people who are raping Argentina? Who are making Argentina poor and are allowing children to starve to death?
The British have no problem with anyone in the Americas, not even Argentina. The only problem comes from Argentina itself. Yet the Chileans, Brazilians, Columbians and Uruguayans are more than happy to trade with the UK AND with the Falkland Islanders.
Argentina doesn't get to say squat about what other sovereign nations do, it is weak, without influence and considered the village idiot of South America. All your Latin American 'brothers' think so, they say one thing to placate the dribbling madman in the corner and then do the exact opposite.
No wonder you are frustrated. All your life you have been brainwashed into believing that IF only Argentina had the Falkland Islands all your problems would be magically solved.
Face it, even when the British were basically ignoring the Falkland Islanders you couldn't persuade them to join Argentina. You've had 33 yrs to woo the Islanders to your point of view and prove that you aren't like the Junta. But all you've done is alienate them further and PROVE that Argentina IS STILL the Junta in attitude and arrogance. Fortunately as Argentina is impotent and can't do anything other than crawl, cry, lie and BEG anyone who will listen. Nowadays the only people who listen are dictatorships who placate you with words whilst robbing you blind.
@39 LEPRecon,
Mar 07th, 2015 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Bravo, bravo, encore!
My thoughts, exactly.
Get lost, pgerman.
We don't need or want you & we don't need or want your silly country.
Go away & cry in the corner.
Losers.
@40 lsolde
Mar 07th, 2015 - 10:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0I have my moments. ;)
As for the airbridge is must really rankle the Argentinians that the Falkland Islanders don't actually need the LAN flight (although I'm sure it is useful), and that should the Argentine government get all p!ssey again and try to stop it that the Falkland Islands will continue with normal jogging.
No matter what the trolls on here say, it is Argentina that desperately wants to maintain that flight, as they see it as a tenuous link to their mythical 'malvinas', just like the bodies of those poor Argentine boys in the cemetery on the Falklands. Always used for political purposes, never treated with the respect and dignity that they deserve. Many of them have even been denied their identity due to the evil of the Argentine military, and the Argentine government, who are still using them like a political football.
Every Argentine citizen should hold their government accountable for these actions, but they don't. Most of them stand on the sidelines and applaud these evil politicians who are robbing them blind.
Argentina has got the government it's people wants and no doubt deserves. The decent Argentine people must hold their heads in anguish for having to put up with it.
#21
Mar 07th, 2015 - 10:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0My solution was to help the bereaved parents of the dead. If your solution is to deny them the chance of visiting their graves, then surely it makes sense to have them returned to Argentina. I am not suggesting returning them in the hold of a cattle ship but with dignity, back to the country of their birth.
Failing that, a burial at sea would seem appropriate . Many UK servicemen were buried at sea in Falkland's waters so I don't sea any disrespect to Argentinian dead if this was carried out. It would stop a bone of contention between the two countries.
As to the burial of British servicemen in Argentina,their relatives had no say in where they were buried. The majority would have preferred them to be brought back to the UK but the MOD refused this. It's only since 1982 that the repatriation of the dead has been sanctioned.
The Argentinian war dead have been used as a political football by your government. If they had really cared about the bereaved families then they would have had the remains returned shortly after the cessation of hostilities.
Should we also examine burial records in the UK and return Argentinian remains to B.A. ?
Of course not . My suggestion was to circumvent the hatred and hostility by Argentina to the Falkland Islands. This would remove a running sore and leave the Argentine government free to pursue the vindictive policy they wish to follow.
@35
Mar 07th, 2015 - 11:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why indeed should anybody expect Argenteena to behave like an adult? It hasn't gotten its own way!
35 pgerman
Mar 07th, 2015 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Where exactly are you going with this? Are you proposing banning any international flights that originate in the UK? Or maybe overflying by airlines flying between Europe and Santiago? Do you expect the UK to reciprocate?
You are completely missing the point of 'basic courtesy'. It is the customary form of interactions the world over because it benefits all parties. You might want to sever all ties between South America and the Falklands, but you do not speak for everyone, and particularly not veterans and families.
As for the assistance to vessels in distress thing, what are you proposing? If an Argentine vessel on the high seas caught fire and the nearest place was Stanley, wouldn't you hope that we provided assistance? We definitely would, because it's the right thing to do.
You need to rethink your definition of 'growing up'. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'lalalalala' in an effort to pretend we don't exist isn't it.
LEPelotudo
Mar 07th, 2015 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“blablabla...then it is only natural that people get angry and demand that the bodies be repatriated back to Argentina.”
reading your post?
now, did you say that or not?
again, you are not too bright, no?.
and what argentinian soldiers demand is none of your business.
you, basura, should demand a serious investigation about all the war crimes committed by the english during the guerra de malvinas, iraq war, afghan war and the list goes on.
but you are too coward for that.
45 paulcedron
Mar 07th, 2015 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0' you are not too bright, no?.'
Are you actually capable of framing an argument? All I can see in any of your posts is you telling people they are not very bright, and then showing that you haven't got the IQ to recognise intelligence when you encounter it.
Why don't you just drop the juvenile insults and try putting together a sensible argument? Because until you do, calling people 'stupid' just gives us all a chuckle.
#46
Mar 07th, 2015 - 02:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You may as well ask the sun to rise in the east!
27 Jo Bloggs
Mar 07th, 2015 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks for the reply,
Sound fair enough…
,,,,,,,,,,
30 paulcedron
Says--you are not too bright and not too educated, no?
From the very man , who is not too bright either.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
35 pgerman
Argentina was quite naïf and stupid assisting FI people when they were a poor and forgotten colony of the UK
,,,
Now that is just plain stupid and childish,
Perhaps if nations of the world took the same attitude, where would they be today=including Argentina,
Very childish and arrogant
..
@44
Mar 08th, 2015 - 02:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Where exactly are you going with this?” I'm going exactly that I agree with those (either from the United kingdom or from Argentina) who prefer that argentine people would not be allow to be in the planes that fly to the FI. I mean to extend this banning to argentine people. I also agree in the position of not having any contact between Argentina and the FI. Not even in the weekly flights.
“Do you expect the UK to reciprocate?” I do not expect anything from the UK but it won't bother me if they want to ban all argentine flights in its territory.
“You are completely missing the point of 'basic courtesy'. It is the customary form of interactions the world over because it benefits all parties”. Argentina gets not any benefits from the current status of the FI. Just to the contrary, promoting bonds between the FI and Argentina will help the UK and the FI.
“You might want to sever all ties between South America and the Falklands, but you do not speak for everyone, and particularly not veterans and families.” In this point you are right but during several years (after the war) they were not allowed to visit the FI. Nobody in the FI seemed to care that.
“If an Argentine vessel on the high seas caught fire and the nearest place was Stanley, wouldn't you hope that we provided assistance? We definitely would, because it's the right thing to do.” It might be but the REALLITY was that Argentina has always been forced to assist those in trouble in the South Atlantic Ocean. (and don't forget that some sick tourist were not allowed to put a foot in FI ground....)
BOTH PARTIES need to rethink the definition of 'growing up'. The best situation for both parties, the United Kingdom and Argentina, in the South Atlantic Ocean is to pretend that each other doesn't exist. To avoid troubles and wrong messages.
As I have already mentioned the United Kingdom is a rich country with a huge defense budget. Investing additional money in the FI won't harm it.
@ pgerman
Mar 08th, 2015 - 03:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Whilst it would defiantly be better for Islanders and probably Argentina too, for there to be no contact of any kind, or traversing of airspace.
It is not possible for Argentina block or cancel the strong links that exist between the Islands and other LatNam countries.
And that’s the rub, isn’t it.
The rest of S. America will do nothing to support you.
As for your war dead, someone should remind your government that those men died wearing Argentinian uniforms, fighting Argentina’s war. The British have paid them far more respect than this Argy government ever has.
CFK & Co has used them as a political football. Even you know this is true.
In the not too distant, the Islands will have a deep water port with all the trimmings, be self-sufficient in renewable energy, growing all the necessary in solar powered greenhouses.
Have a thriving fishing industry, when your part of the Mar Argentino is picked clean. You have no way to defend it.
Probably have their own shipping/cruise line, operate their own airline, flying round Argentina.
And be the gateway to Antarctica, which let’s face it is where the future lies.
Where do you suppose Argentina is going to be???
Best you fuck the shut up mate, you’re just making yourself look diputs
@44 pgerman
Mar 08th, 2015 - 08:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0As usual you ignore the FACTS.
1stly the UK has NO PROBLEM with Argentina. It is Argentina that has the PROBLEM.
2ndly it is Argentina that is desperate to keep the LAN flights as they believe this tenuous link somehow helps their 'malvinas' fantasy.
3rdly Argentines are not banned from the South Atlantic air bridge, and even if they were, so what? They can always catch the weekly LAN flight if they are that desperate to visit the Falklands.
4thly Why would Argentina be 'FORCED' to assist people in trouble at sea? I wouldn't have thought that they had to be forced, I would've thought that they did it out of basic human decency. Are you saying that Argentinians aren't decent? Talk about changing your tune.
5thly Strange that, isn't it, that immediately AFTER the war the Falkland Islanders weren't keen on having Argentines visit. I mean Argentina had only invaded their homes, wrecked the place, and no one was sure whether you Argentines wouldn't try to have another pop. ALL ARGENTINA'S FAULT. But like mature and decent human beings, the Falkland Islands Government recognised that the families of Argentine fallen would want to visit and allowed it. Common decency - something YOU appear to be lacking.
6thly The only people who need to grow up is Argentina and YOU pgerman. The UK and the FI have no problem with either South America OR Argentina. The only problems arise from YOUR government using its FALSE sovereignty claims to the Falklands to distract the people from their ruination of Argentina.
But since all of these 'claims' by Argentina are childish, transparent and so obviously made up, the rest of the world continues normal jogging, whilst Argentina continues to destroy itself.
The UK and the Falkland Islands will be around long after Argentina has imploded and ceases to exist. The way things are going in Argentina it won't be too much longer now.
Truth hurts doesn't it, pgerman?
Each time paulcedron appears with offensive remarks in these columns then all of us should report the alleged abuse to the moderator in the hope that his nonsense ceases to arrive.
Mar 08th, 2015 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 049 pgerman
Mar 08th, 2015 - 03:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In which parallel universe is pretending someone doesn't exist 'grown up' behaviour? Pretending is for children.
Are you seriously suggesting that anyone, any civilised person or nation in the entire world, should have a policy of denying assistance to those in dire need? If so, you are one seriously twisted individual. Fortunately, even your government doesn't agree with that.
Your country exists as part of a community. You have neighbours on all sides, and whether you like it or not, you have to get on with them. Bullying them, threatening them, disrupting their communications and infringing on their sovereign rights to conduct their international relations as they see fit is not 'grown up' behaviour. It's pathetic, petulant and ultimately destructive. it doesn't get you any nearer to getting your hands on the Falkland Islands and just really pisses everyone off.
I still cannot understand why every single time some topics are discussed some British people are offended, nervous and end up insulting. This happens every single time when discussing the cost of the garrison at Port Stanley, when discussing the distant past (and the presence of United Kingdom and Spain in the region) and when discussing relations between Argentina and the United Kingdom.
Mar 08th, 2015 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have no problems with the Latin American continent having good relationships with FI. I have no problem with the UK doing businesses and having diplomatic relations with the continent at all.
I support the idea that direct contacts between Argentina and the United Kingdom in the FI bring no benefits to both of the parties. So the best, the most logical thing, is to stop all contacts and each of both sides acts as if the other did not exist.
Taking into account the opinions written in this forum by the islanders and British people about Argentina and argentine people that should not be a problam at all. Who wants to regularly deal with a neighbor of the hell?
All the advantages seem to be the British side in the Islands, fishing, oil, proximity to Antarctica, political stability and military security. It is enviable but that does not matter for the Argentine. You do not need us at all ...so why being upset to kknow that you must have to move forward in your lives without contact with Argentina?
Argentina needs of its neighbors and has excellent relations with all of them except the UK but can go ahead without it perfectly well (the UK is not nowadays what it used to be in the past) and only a few will mourn the absence of mutual contact.
Why is it so difficult to understand this for you? perhaps you prefer the ongoing dispute? Having bothering incidents with veterans of the War? Are you masochists? Or it suits your victimization?
@ pgerman
Mar 08th, 2015 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As to the cost of the garrison, well it simple terms if they were not there then they would be somewhere else, not much if any of a cost saving simply moving them so not much of a cost in keeping them there.
Besides that the Islands have proved to be very useful for all sorts of training, with the space and conditions ideal for arduous and complicated exercises involving all 3 services.
Besides that, what you say would be the basis of an agreement to “live and let live”.
Except you know as well as we do that no Argy government would keep to it.
This alleged dispute is not being kept alive by either the Fl or Brit governments, but by Argy governments using it as an “opiate for the masses” every time they experience difficulties (usually economic) at home.
It is not an issue, it is a button that they hardwire into you at an early age, so that later on, at any time they like they can push it, and you all run around like sheep bleating about “Las Malvinas”, ignoring the fact that you are on your way to the Kebab shop.
Only when you stop indoctrinating your population, turning out Fraggles like Paulito, is this going to end for you.
Meanwhile it would be a shame to waste the sport it offers, idiot bating.
54@
Mar 08th, 2015 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A simple question then,
do you believe the Falkland's islanders have a right to determine who governs them,
have a right , not only to independence but a right to live in peace and harmony with its neighbour's.
if you do//and the argentine government , CFK also had thought that way,
peace would come,
if not we/you are back to square one.
,,,,,,,,,,,
anyway perhaps this would help CFKs fantasy...
The Unelected President
Jean-Claude Juncker
The man YOU/WE cannot vote for or against, and most have probably never even heard of has Spoken=
Create an EU army to keep back the Russians, Jean-Claude Juncker suggests
European Commission president says pooling Europe's defence resources could help send a message to Vladimir Putin
Jean-Claude Juncker said pooling the defence resources of the 28 EU nations could help send a message to Vladimir Putin that its borders would be protected.
However the move was panned by the UK Independence Party who warned the move would be a “tragedy for the UK”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11457872/Create-an-EU-army-to-keep-back-the-Russians-Jean-Claude-Juncker-suggests.html
@56
Mar 08th, 2015 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are wrong. Budgets are not estimated on the concept that “f they were not there then they would be somewhere else”. This is a false statement. Anyway I don't care about the Garrison, just to the contrary, I would love to know that the United Kingdom is wasting the double of the money in it. The more money they waste in the FI the better.
I don't care about CFK or the Argentine government. They are just a buch of corrupts that want to steal money. You are quite luck that people like her rules Argentina. I would like to see my enemy ruled by her....
The best thing for Argentine interests (and FI interests) is to build a new “Berlin Wall” between us in the middle of the Ocean. You will have to take care of your bussines and we will have to take care of ours. No direct flights, no ER assistances, no cooperation, no tourist vessel conections...this is the best way to deal with this issue.
I do not understand why British ships and planes have to be hanging around Patagonia and sticking their noses in southern part of Argentina. No any British boat, or plane, should approach Argentine shores as no Argentine ship, or plane, approach the Falkland Islands... you should do the same .... stay far away.....
wrong number we thinks...
Mar 08th, 2015 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0bruton
Mar 08th, 2015 - 09:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0thinking is an alien concept for you bruton.
and it is wethinks.
got it?
@57 pgerman
Mar 08th, 2015 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No budgets are budgets, but at the end of the day the troops have to be stationed somewhere, and the Falkland Islands has some of the best training areas in the world. So from a monetary point of view it makes sense to train there.
We British tax payers are touched that YOU lose so much sleep over where OUR tax money goes. But we British tax payers are very, very happy to see our tax money being used in this way.
It's economical you see. We get to defend the Falklands from the fascist Argentine lunatics AND our troops get to train and test their equipment in some of the best terrain going.
So it's a win-win and at no extra cost. :D
pgerman, as WE keep pointing out to you (you must be blind or stupid to not have picked up on this by now) the UK and the Falklanders have NO PROBLEM with Argentina.
It is Argentina that has the problem, and a self created problem at that. Now, I know that your Argentine VICTIM mentality is just waiting for the British to cut off ties with Argentina so you can scream around the world at how the 'nasty' Brits are 'picking' on you. But we won't play you game. Is that why you are annoyed? If Argentina wants to break off diplomatic relations with the British then so be it, let them. But they won't make any political capital out of it.
As for your last paragraph you really show your ignorance. Any plane or ship can go wherever the hell it wants as long as it stays in international airspace or water. NO ONE can deny anyone that.
So the British have the right to tool up and down the coast of Argentina, whether by air or sea, as long as they stay in international airspace or water. Argentina can do the same around the Falklands. In fact, Argentina has 'tested' the Falklands air defences many times (making your last paragraph a lie) many times over the last 32 years.
Oh and Argentina couldn't stay away from the Falklands topic because what else would your politicians do to distract the people from their corruption?
57 pgerman
Mar 08th, 2015 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The advantages are clearly not all on the British side. Otherwise, Argentina would do as you suggest.
However, more sensible people than you have realised that there is no gain to Argentina from disrupting cruise ship itineraries, no advantage in stopping the scheduled flights, none whatsoever in harassing shipping going to and from Punta and Montevideo and most of all, nothing but an international outcry in store if you ever thought about denying passage to medical flights.
I hope you aren't contemplating a career as a diplomat. Your solution is only the 'best way' if you're an idiot.
My guess is that there will soon be a regime change in Argentina and there will be a subtle change of climate regarding the Falklands, probably starting with a resumption of under- the- radar cooperation over fisheries management. It's clearly in Argentina's best interests to do this.
I have to say I'm a bit confused; do you want the Falklands to become part of Argentina? Only if you do, I can't see how you will ever achieve it if you never have any contact with either the UK of the islands.
I also have to tell you that you are misunderstanding what we want. No-one wants any kind of ties with Argentina.We just want you to stop interfering in our business with other countries.
@61
Mar 08th, 2015 - 11:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Please, don't try to tell me what would be better for Argentina.
Argentine government, due to some personal interests of CFK, prefers to let things as they are but this doesn't mean that are the best for our interests.
Take for instance that what you call “harassing shippings going to and from Punta and Montevideo” has the goal of making them waste additional money in a larger trip that finally would impact in the profits of the whole operation and the payment of the Fisheries Licenses. The same concept would be applicable in the case of “disrupting cruise ship itineraries”.
All these allows the United kingdom to play “internationally” the role of the victim so both sides seem to take advantage of this situation.
The current regime will stop ruling the country this year (thank to the national Constitution that is a legacy of our founder fathers' that you, and some ignorant argentine, consider “genocides”) but this doen't mean anything since nothing seem that will change regarding the FI issue.
To the contrary what you might think I also would love to make bussines with the UK (I love its culture too) but based on the concept that it is an “european country” not our close neighbour.
If great to read that you in the FI don't want any ties with Argentina..let start working in this direction.
bruton
Mar 09th, 2015 - 12:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0thinking is an alien concept for you bruton.
and it is wethinks.
got it
paulie , paulie,
@ pgerman
Mar 09th, 2015 - 02:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0I’ll say it again, as you are obviously hard of hearing, or understanding:
“What you say would be the basis of an agreement to “live and let live”.
”Except you know as well as we do that no Argy government would keep to it”.
Just as you know why.
As for “based on the concept that it is an “european country” not our close neighbour”.
Unbelievable comment from an Italian speaking bad Spanish, living on land recently conquered from Native Americans.
The S. Atlantic was British Territory long before you Creoles conquered and ethnically cleansed Patagonia and TDF to become our neighbours in that part of the world.
You are the “new kids on the block” down there not us.
You already have “a Berlin wall” down there, let’s see just how long you manage to stay your side of it.
Pgerman - I don't understand all your issues about communications between the Islands and Argentina?
Mar 09th, 2015 - 02:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0There are none anyway - other than a flight once a month by Lan via RioGallegos each way to allow your veterans and families to visit.
You want to stop that- no probs close RioGallegos airport to that flight - you stop it- the only people it will hurt are your own folks.
That is the only one.
We have a shipping link to Punta Arenas - you cannot stop that as it uses Int waters and an Int Treaty regulated Straits of Magellan.
We have a shipping link with Montevideo- you cannot stop that either as it goes through Int waters as well.
We have an aiurlink with Chile- yes you could stop that by withdrawing the overflight permit - but it would be Argentina who would loose the most long term and look stupid in the eyes of the world and be publically an aggressive bully much to the embarrassment of your Latin American neighbours.
Cruise Ships? - come off it - your President tried that stunt 2 years ago - and it backfired in her face - so has now been quietly dropped. Just like the way the cruise ships dropped Argentina and not the Falklands when she tried it!
2 P&O World Cruises cancelled all Arg calls - but came to the falklands.
P&O Princess Cruises - dropped Ushuaia and went to Punta Arenas instead.
Holland&America - dropped P.Madryn at times and cleared Ushuaia officially for Chile- crossed the borderline in the Beagle Channel,halted engines, took on the Chilean Customs who promptly stamped them - IN - and Out again as they sailed on the Falklands.
Shall I go on?
4 brianF.I (#)
Mar 09th, 2015 - 07:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ We have group of Russian scientists who have lived here for years and have FI residency, hopefully they will still be able to fly.”
I love hearing these litttle insights into the F.I.
Thanks!
--
Everybody, I have decided to stop wating my time on paul-cedron. Just ignore and/or report for abuse.
Because abuse is all he does. Getting a little tiresome now, no?
62 pgerman
Mar 09th, 2015 - 08:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0'Please, don't try to tell me what would be better for Argentina. ' ?? Why not? You and your country never seem to tire of telling us what would be best for us. In fact, isn't it your whole approach? You can tell us what is in our 'interests' but not listen to our 'wishes'?
And I know why you interfere with our shipping (or try to). I'm telling you that this is inconsistent with your 'no contact, no interference' approach. You said you don't care if we have links with Chile and Uruguay. Fine, so leave us in peace to get on with it. We don't 'play the role of victim'; we are victims. So just stop doing it.
@62 pgerman
Mar 09th, 2015 - 08:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0“All these allows the United kingdom to play “internationally” the role of the victim so both sides seem to take advantage of this situation.”
Talk about transference. Show ONE case where the UK has taken on the role of the 'victim'. An actual case with an actual link.
You Argentines obviously believe that everyone's motives and drives are the same as your own. Only they're not.
In your mind you cannot understand WHY the UK spends so much money defending the Falklands. You don't understand that you cannot put a monetary value on freedom and self-determination.
You don't understand why the UK wouldn't just take the Falkland Islands oil revenue (when it starts pouring in), because in Argentina that is what your government would do. The UK recognises the Falklands Islanders have the right to any revenue that comes from these ventures because the natural resources are theirs and not ours.
You just don't understand why the UK doesn't throw hissy fits every time Argentina does something, because that is the standard operating procedure in Argentina: shouting and screaming and getting all emotional about it.
Your politicians tool around the world begging countries to support them over their mythical malvinas, yet at best all they get is a statement saying that there should be a peaceful resolution to any dispute, and then your government immediately makes an arse out of itself (and Argentina) by publicly announcing that (insert country name here) supports Argentina, when all evidence is actually to the contrary.
Yet the British do not tool around the world. We have a softly-softly approach. We don't demand anything from anyone, and allow countries to see the truth for themselves. We certainly don't spend every waking moment worrying about the Falklands, because we know that they are British, they are well defended, and they will remain British until the Islanders say otherwise.
Like children you CAN'T understand how a grown ups mind works.
@68 LEPRecon,
Mar 09th, 2015 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Again, l must congratulate you on your well thought out reply to yet another Argentine idiot who seethes with frustration & barely controlled hatred.
They definitely DO NOT like to be defeated & beaten.
They DO however, desperately want to get “even” & will lie, twist & turn until they do.
What a shower of gullible fools.
@ pgerman,
You have NO HOPE, mate of ever getting your thieving paws on the Falklands.
Get over it(but l don't care if you don't!), snigger.
@64...to 69
Mar 09th, 2015 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At this point it is quite clear that you are acting the very same way peronists do. You cannot tolerate a different opinion without loosing your temper and start insulting....
I hope one day I can find someone from the United Kingdom that can write freely and in a respectfull way about the future of both countries (and the Islands of course).
70@
Mar 09th, 2015 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0NO, what you are after is someone who thinks Argentina should have the lot,
when will you people ever learn, just leave the islanders alone to run themselves, what they do , who they talk to , who they associate with , has nothing but nothing to do with Argentina, full stop.........
,,,
General Election 2015: How each party compares on defence policy
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11458816/General-Election-2015-How-each-party-compares-on-defence-policy.html
Conservatives
The Conservatives have already presided over huge cuts to defence spending, with the size of the British Army's supply of regular soldiers plummeting from 102,000 to just 82,000. There is also a threat of an extra 40 per cent cut to numbers to as low as 50,000 troops. If that were to be the case, it would mean the smallest Army since the 1770s,
Labour
A Labour Government would not guarantee that defence spending is pegged to two per cent of national income, Ed Balls has said. Instead, the party has committed itself to an immediate strategic defence review if it wins power. He said that while “it is really important that we live up to our international responsibilities” he said that a Labour government “would continue to cut spending
Liberal Democrats
“Defending the future and not the past
: ”The threats the UK faces in the 21st century are very different from those of the past.
But what do the coalition partners of the Lib Dems think about their defence policies? according to Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary. “The only area of defence Liberal Democrats are interested in is downgrading our continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent for a part-time deterrent sitting in a dockyard,” he warned. “In a dangerous world, that is truly dangerous thinking.”
The Lib Dems have said that they think it is “sensible” for the UK to share and pool resources with other EU and Nato members Lib Dems' priorities when it comes to defence. They also advocate a nuclear-free world, which woul
@ 71 Briton
Mar 09th, 2015 - 09:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The way the LibDems are going it will be a “LibDem free world” after the 7th May and good riddance too.
Clegg and his Spanish wife will be able to go back to the EU, just in time for a total economic collapse of the Euro, spoke as OOOOrro in Uruguay. Out of the mouths of babes!
@62 pgerman
Mar 09th, 2015 - 10:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”To the contrary what you might think I also would love to make bussines with the UK (I love its culture too) but based on the concept that it is an “european country” not our close neighbour.”
And once again the assumption that the South Atlantic is the exclusive preserve of the implanted Italo-Iberian populations of South America. How does that work, exactly?
70 pgerman
Mar 09th, 2015 - 11:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Where was the insult in my post?
I just answered yours with a couple of counter-arguments. There were no insults and no loss of temper. It would be a sad day when I cared enough what anyone from Argentina wrote to lose my temper over it!
General Election 2015: How each party compares on defence policy
Mar 09th, 2015 - 11:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11458816/General-Election-2015-How-each-party-compares-on-defence-policy.html
UKIP
In stark contrast to the Conservatives and Labour, Nigel Farage has indicated that Ukip will actually increase defence spending to £50billion – despite protesting that the UK is far too involved in “foreign” wars.
The party has made it one of its key priorities,
Green Party
Radical defence policies from the Green Party include “immediate and unconditional” nuclear disarmament and reducing the defence budget to focus only on “security” whilst cutting back on military interventions. They are the ultimate promoters of peace: one idea includes using “town twinning” and exchange visits to promote cultural relations with foreign countries.
Abolishing the army is among the most controversial of their ideas. Armed Forces' personnel would be redistributed to “policing fishing quotas, piracy and oceanic environmental regulations”. On its website, the party adds: “Any threat of invasion that might arise in the future is so remote that realignment of the UK military and defence preparations would be possible long before any invasion occurred.”
Britain will leave NATO and end the special relationship with the US. Army bases will be turned into nature reserves and the arms industry “converted” to producing windturbines.
What do critics make of it all? ”The Green Party is a Looney Tunes alliance of druids and trots
Scottish National Party
A left-wing plot is simmering. That's right: the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party have said that they will form a post-election pact to force Ed Miliband to abandon Trident, the nuclear deterrence
72 ChrisR
yes you are right,
mind you the nutty greens are abt,
yet the papers still ridicule the UKIP yet it seems to be the only one, as of yet to try and fix the defence .
This is scandalous. While the US had to prop up the British air bridge to Afghanistan they were operating an air bridge to their colonies in order to support their own tin pot imperial ends. With allies such as this we do not need enemies. The US needs to get out of NATO now!
Mar 11th, 2015 - 02:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0@76
Mar 11th, 2015 - 08:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0“While the US had to prop up the British air bridge to Afghanistan”
The USA wanted us in Afghanistan-what's the problem?
Do you understand the concept of allies?
“ in order to support their own tin pot imperial ends.”
More accurately, to deter Argentina's tin pot imperialist ambitions.
@76 Hepatia,
Mar 11th, 2015 - 09:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0We've got colonies?
We had colonies, thats a long time ago.
The US still has colonies.
USVI, Guam, Puerto Rico, even Hawaii(although they call it a “state”).
But the US probably supports us in Afghanistan because they like us & really we're the only friend they've got!
The US designed NATO, but why does all this affect a malvinista like you?
Haven't you got enough to worry about at home?
But you're right, it IS scandalous. lol
76 Hepatia
Mar 11th, 2015 - 11:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0the USA have been propping up Argentina for decades,.
go back to sleep.
#76 because acsenion island and Diego Garcia are both British islands
Mar 11th, 2015 - 12:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#766
Mar 11th, 2015 - 01:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You really are an ignorant woman !!
Would you care to explain your remark.?
My local airport hosts about 10/14 C-130's for the US air bridge to Afghanistan/Iraq, in addition RAF Mildenhall supplies tanker aircraft.
RAF Fairford also hosts B-52'S AND B-2's which have been used for strikes against both countries, Our bases in Cyprus supply intelligence from intercepted messages in the Middle East.
The RAF's air bridge is run from Brize Norton with RAF Akrotiri as a staging post. However, the deployments are about finished so the flights are mainly about returning equipment.
If the US wanted to dump the UK as you suggest then it would also be the big loser. They would have to vacate Ascension Island and Diego Garcia.
Remove all their bases from the UK. , have no access to the N.E.Atlantic, remove all their listening posts in the UK and lose the only reliable ally they have. Again as a supporter of Argentina that would suit you down to the ground. You could even be their new best chum and ally.
76
Mar 11th, 2015 - 01:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0like most brainwashed argies just come on here, throw questions or insults then run away,
they just want to see the reaction.
fools they were , fools they are.
http://en.mercopress.com/2015/03/06/south-atlantic-air-bridge-to-the-falklands-restricted-to-certain-nationalities#comment385256: But I do understand the concept of allies. That is why I suggested that the US get out of NATO.
Mar 12th, 2015 - 02:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0Rather than attempt to expand upon my position in a format that is limited to 2000 characters I will post links to two articles which broadly summarize my argument:
http://en.mercopress.com/2015/03/06/south-atlantic-air-bridge-to-the-falklands-restricted-to-certain-nationalities#comment385256:
http://en.mercopress.com/2015/03/06/south-atlantic-air-bridge-to-the-falklands-restricted-to-certain-nationalities#comment385256:
Both these articles reflect on the British follies in the Malvinas and the constant complaints that the US will not support them in their occupation.
paulcedron: 300 British Redcoats lie buried in a mass grave under Calle 5 De Julio in downtown Buenos Aires. They were killed fighting civilian militias that had taken up arms in the name of the resistance and placed under the command of patriots seeking independence from Spain. I wonder where the British and French dead of the 1845-1850 Anglo-French Blockade of Buenos Aires are buried?
Mar 12th, 2015 - 06:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0@83 Hepatia,
Mar 12th, 2015 - 09:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0You however do not make US foreign policy.
lf the US does decide to withdraw into isolationism, then as Clyde15 says above, kindly vacate all your bases etc from British territory, we'll withdraw our troops from America's wars & end all co-operation.
This, of course, would suit malvinistas like your good self, down to the ground.
So kindly stop trying to drive a wedge between the US & the UK.
As you are not American, you really have no say in the matter.
Don't know why l'm even bothering to reply to you.
You're not as silly as paulcedron, but are far nastier.
#83
Mar 12th, 2015 - 10:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0But I do understand the concept of allies. That is why I suggested that the US get out of NATO
Obviously, you don't.
83 Hepatia
Mar 12th, 2015 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0sleep time.
I have read both of these “reports”. It makes a fundamental mistake in thinking that the USA is being an altruistic “friend” to the UK.
Mar 12th, 2015 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The USA shamelessly uses the UK for moral back-up when it wants to act militarily on the world stage.
When the cold war was at it's height, it was stated that the USA would rather fight the war in Europe than at home.
We were the “patsy's” hosting ICBM radars that gave the USA 30 minutes warning of attack and which gave us 4 minutes.
You stationed nuclear bases at the Holy Loch and Greenham Common which again put us first in the firing line.
The article you quote assumed that the cold war is over. Dream on !
The US is in NATO to primarily protect the USA, NOT it's allies.
Even if the USA quit NATO, it would not make the slightest difference to your attitude to the Falklands. You are an apologist for Argentina.
Maybe we should start a movement for the return of the Hawaiian islands to the indigenous peoples after the USA “stole” them.
We could add a few others to this list.
no offence but--
Mar 12th, 2015 - 02:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I do believe that we do have a special relationship with the Americans,
But, it is not political, but military,
They are two different things,
Politically the Americans support themselves and money / power rules,
The brits are not to popular as proved time and time again, amongst other things as the Falklands
None backing of sovereignty, the giving of nuclear secrets of British subs to the Russians, and many other things,
But we could spend years arguing points, good and bad,
I think sometimes we deserve what we get in that by reducing and forever cutting, slashing
And wholesale destruction of British military on the cheap by lazy selfish incompetent politicians ,that the Americans will fill any and all gaps in our defences,
This is like a disease with Europe lately,
If we were stronger and more powerful we would and could stand up without the Americans,
Instead we can’t even defend our own shoreline without help,
Just saying like,,
Ps, yes we are powerfully in our own way, but like a tube of smarties,
The tube is basically strong, but its hollow.??
http://en.mercopress.com/2015/03/06/south-atlantic-air-bridge-to-the-falklands-restricted-to-certain-nationalities#comment385553: From your post I can only conclude one of two possibilities:
Mar 13th, 2015 - 02:16 am - Link - Report abuse 01) You have not read and understood the articles; or,
2) you believe that the US and the UK have no common interests in the world.
In the case of 1) only you can address that. But if you believe 2) to be true then on what possible basis can you support any present alliance - including the NATO treaty?
The US has and will never be an isolationist country. However, after a period of implementing a policy which may be described as 'Pivot to Europe', the US is currently reverting to a traditional policy of look west with the Pivot to Asia. This is entirely appropriate since Europe is slowly atrophying and it is not in the interests of the US to be saddled with 'allies' such as these.
In order to make itself 'relevant' the British have adopted a policy of subservience to the US. Indeed British right wingers, such as yourself, seem to believe that in order to exist it is necessary for the British countries to cling as tightly as possible to the US skirts. This is a policy that the US will never adopt, and has never adopted, in relation to any other country. And we do not respect those countries that do. This lack of appreciation of this basic fact is the source of your misunderstandings with respect to US - UK relations.
Finally, I appear nasty to you simply because my main national security interest is that of the US, not of Europe. My apparent nastiness is a measure of how those two national interests are divergent - both historically and currently.
@90 Hepatia,
Mar 13th, 2015 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0All of your assumptions, are just that……assumption & your opinion.
Most of your reply has little basis in fact.
The USA was indeed an isolationist nation in the early part of both World Wars.
l professed no opinion on NATO.
l said rather that the Americans had pressed for its formation.
l have no idea where you got the impression that l supported it…another assumption?
l have no doubt that the US is focusing on Asia, so?
Europe is also focusing on Asia.
lt is only your opinion & the speaker of the articles that you posted(& maybe some others, but certainly not all), that the British are making themselves“subservient” to the USA.
Do you speak for all 320million or so Americans?
l'll forget your label of“right winger”because really you have little idea of my politics.
l called you nasty because of your remarks about the deaths of British Soldiers killed fighting America's lmperialistic wars.
No other reason. you are assuming again.
Finally l must congratulate you for not repeating your amusing, but wholey ridiculous mantra about someone returning something to someone else within 25 years.
Hepatia / British Bomber, you are neither from the USA nor the UK.
Mar 13th, 2015 - 10:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0Please stop pretending otherwise.
@92 ilsen,
Mar 13th, 2015 - 10:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0l've decided to stop feeding the troll.
From now on, l'll just laugh when Hepatia spins its b/s.
Allow me to be first.
Mar 13th, 2015 - 07:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 090 Hepatia ==ha ha .
@90
Mar 13th, 2015 - 08:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“In order to make itself 'relevant' the British have adopted a policy of subservience to the US.”
As in the UK did not agree to join the USA in Syria recently and in Vietnam in the 1960s?
@91 Isolde
“Finally l must congratulate you for not repeating your amusing, but wholey ridiculous mantra about someone returning something to someone else within 25 years.”
I'm disappointed. The scratched record gives so much laughter when that mantra is repeated, that the joke repeated by Hepatia never goes stale.
The record player must be bust. Still it is amazing and possibly interesting (?) that Hepatia's narrative is expanding beyond perpetual monotony, as I thought it must be a robot.
@95 Pete Bog,
Mar 13th, 2015 - 09:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Some Americans(only some)still hold it against us & the Canadians for not sending troops to Vietnam.
Glad we never got involved in that quagmire.
Hepatia is just trying to cause disruption.
lts a troll.
Without the Americans reequipping the 200,000 remaining British surrender monkeys of Dunkirk (Lol 100,000 went into cages), the German Army would've easily captured Britain. It was the English Channel that saved Britain, not the RAF during the Battle of Britain.
Mar 14th, 2015 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://en.mercopress.com/2015/03/06/south-atlantic-air-bridge-to-the-falklands-restricted-to-certain-nationalities#comment385708: I see now. Your definition of “isolationist” is that the US would not act as a British potted plant. You should have made this clear earlier.
Mar 14th, 2015 - 02:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0The situation before both WWI and WWI is that the interests of the US were not best served by fighting a war in order to prop up a corrupt British and French Empires . It is bizarre that you would think otherwise!
In the event it was (and is) plain that the entry into the European war in 1917 was a strategic mistake. It would have been better for the US to remain completely out and let the belligerents so weaken each other that, at the conclusion of fighting, we could have just walked in and imposed our will - at least WRT Western Europe. That is, the status of Europe WRT the US that existed in 1946 could have existed in, say, 1921.
In order not to repeat the mistake in 1939 - 1940 it was necessary for the US to defeat, in a geopolitical sense, the British. This was effected by the Atlantic Charter.
It is a fact that the US was so completely involved in the world before WWII that both the Japanese and German Empires found it necessary to declare war on the US in 1941. Had you forgotten that?
The articles I posted are from the Cato Institute. I will leave you to figure out the significance of that. I will only add that these views are held far more widely than that particular constituency.
Any deaths of British soldiers caused by “fighting America's Imperialistic wars” is solely the responsibility of the British government. The British have become so subservient that they are like little children who blame their parents for some misfortune in their lives. Grow up!
@98 Hepatia,
Mar 14th, 2015 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0l would say that you are the one who needs to grow up.
Twister of facts, dodging the issue & deflecting -truly a prominent Argentine trait.
l did say that l wouldn't reply to anymore of your bile, but you are just so full of hatred for us, l thought that l would just let you know that.
Anyway thats your cross & you will have to bear it.
lt does stunt your spiritual growth though.
So l will no longer argue with you, take that how you like.
l have many friends & relations in the USA & l know that none of them think like you do.
lf they do & are covering it up - to what purpose?
You sit & stew in your little New York(named after York, England!)apartment, the next time that l am in the USA, l'll take one of my cousin's horses out for a ride in the beautiful state of Wyoming.
Have fun, oh & the British still have the Falklands, which will NEVER become Argentine.
@ 98 Hepatitus
Mar 14th, 2015 - 05:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Cato Institute! HA, HA, HA, HA.
I always knew you were stupid, but I have to admit I didn't know how FUNNY you are. You know this is now the GOP mouthpiece don't you?
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-kochs-v-cato-winners-and-losers
As Bartlett put it, “It’s clear to me that the Kochs have abandoned libertarianism and essentially thrown in totally with the G.O.P. They are putting in place a structure that will gradually erode Cato’s independence and move it closer to the American Enterprise Institute and Heritage Foundation.”
GOP!!!! Ha, ha, ha, ha.
The “teapot” party!!! Ha, ha, ha.
Some Americans(only some)still hold it against us & the Canadians for not sending troops to Vietnam
Mar 14th, 2015 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Some say, that this was a consequence of the SUEZ affair.
.
@101 Briton,
Mar 14th, 2015 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0l agree Briton, it probably was.
The USA refused to back us in 1957 & for all we know may very well have forced us to back off.
So we decided not to back them in Vietnam.
So much for Hepatia's“subservience”. lol!
Us common folk will never know what is hatched behind closed doors.
#102
Mar 14th, 2015 - 11:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They certainly did force us to back off. Eisenhower was furious. Financial sanctions were threatened. Then decades later they decide to take Israel's side against Egypt.
At least we had the good sense to keep out of the Vietnam war.
Johnson pleaded with the Wilson govt. but thank god he said NO, the British public would not stand for it.
We were successful in keeping out the communist takeover in Malaya and they should have taken advice from us, but the USA knows it all, got bogged down in the debacle of Vietnam and eventually had to withdraw ignominiously and leave the North to takeover. Countless lives were wasted for no gains.
@ 103 Clyde15
Mar 15th, 2015 - 07:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Vietnam disaster is what you always get when you have US Military Intelligence (the biggest oxymoron on the planet) involved in it, whatever “it” is.
Somalia was another example.
@103 Clyde15,
Mar 15th, 2015 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0lf you can get hold of a book “U-Boat Killer” by Captain Donald Maclntyre, its a ver good read.
As the title suggests he was Captain of an escort destroyer on the Atlantic convoys.
ln the book, he describes how when America entered the war they sustained so many losses due to inexperience that the Germans called that period as “the Second Happy Time”
The British had been, at last, after crippling losses, been getting on top of the U-Boats & had specialised their escort ships to deal with mainly submarines.
We offered to lend some of our specialised anti-submarine vessels & their experienced crews to the USN until they came up to speed & it was angrily rejected by their Admiral King(who really hated us for some reason?)even though a lot of American officers welcomed the idea.
As a consequence, American losses grew even higher until they learned themselves how to combat the U-Boats.
They didn't even blackout their coastal cities, which silhouetted their coastal merchant shipping to the submarines.
Ahard lesson to learn, made worse because the Admiral wasn't going to get help from the “Limeys”.
How many American lives were lost because of him?
#105
Mar 15th, 2015 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Read it years ago ! Again, a colleague I worked with in 1970 was a yeoman in one of MacIntyres escort group in WW2 and regaled us with tales of a life on the ocean wave.
The same thing happened with the USAAF in WW2. The 8th AIR FORCE thought they would breeze across into Germany, unescorted , in daylight and win the war. They ignored warnings from the RAF that they could not do this without taking heavy casualties and the inevitable happened . Thousands of young men's lives were sacrificed for a Gung Ho attitude....and then they learned.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!