Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Falkland Islands: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Tell Argentina to STFU

1111214161724

Posts

  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Venkman90 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    This is exactly what I was looking for in this thread. By using the Socratic method throughout the thread to make people think hard about their preconceptions and challenge them, I've made a user produce a well argued commentary on the situation that makes perfect sense. I was on the british side all along. My work here is done.

    RqSsN.gif

    Thanks man, I'm glad I was able to pull off this whole argumentative tightrope act and blow your mind in the process. Your support means a lot to me.

    You were just being an annoying troll, contributing nothing else than willful ignorance. It's not a tightrope act to simply ignore counterpoints and keep repeating bullshit. Don't let it get to your head.

  • Bogart wrote: »
    Sargasso, you are not the modern Socrates, and your posts here do not adhere to the Socratic method. They are of different method, that of 'making wild claims with no proof, little reliance on facts and heavy reliance on silly analogies.' We will call it the "Sargasso Method".

    How can you be so bitter as to flatly deny the pedagogical value of my work? Did I not help you strengthen your dialectical skills by challenging your heartfelt assumptions, and then letting you seal the cracks in your reasoning by yourself? Did I not help you attain wisdom in all aspects of the Malvinas crisis?

    Flame_Shot.gif Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a year. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life!
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
  • Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Venkman90 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    This is exactly what I was looking for in this thread. By using the Socratic method throughout the thread to make people think hard about their preconceptions and challenge them, I've made a user produce a well argued commentary on the situation that makes perfect sense. I was on the british side all along. My work here is done.

    RqSsN.gif

    Thanks man, I'm glad I was able to pull off this whole argumentative tightrope act and blow your mind in the process. Your support means a lot to me.

    You were just being an annoying troll, contributing nothing else than willful ignorance. It's not a tightrope act to simply ignore counterpoints and keep repeating bullshit. Don't let it get to your head.

    Bold words coming from a user who is trying to steer the discussion towards irrelevant topics such as Karelia. Is Scandinavia in the south atlantic, next to the Americas? Does it have anything to do with Britain's and Argentina's territorial claims? I didn't think so.

    Flame_Shot.gif Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a year. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life!
  • PhyphorPhyphor Building Planet Busters Tasting FruitRegistered User regular
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Venkman90 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    This is exactly what I was looking for in this thread. By using the Socratic method throughout the thread to make people think hard about their preconceptions and challenge them, I've made a user produce a well argued commentary on the situation that makes perfect sense. I was on the british side all along. My work here is done.

    RqSsN.gif

    Thanks man, I'm glad I was able to pull off this whole argumentative tightrope act and blow your mind in the process. Your support means a lot to me.

    You were just being an annoying troll, contributing nothing else than willful ignorance. It's not a tightrope act to simply ignore counterpoints and keep repeating bullshit. Don't let it get to your head.

    Bold words coming from a user who is trying to steer the discussion towards irrelevant topics such as Karelia. Is Scandinavia in the south atlantic, next to the Americas? Does it have anything to do with Britain's and Argentina's territorial claims? I didn't think so.

    Says the troll who brought up Tibet... which might actually be further away?

    Magic Box
    Academician Prokhor "Phyphor" Zakharov, Chief Scientist of China, Provost of the University of Planet - SE++ Megagame
  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Venkman90 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    This is exactly what I was looking for in this thread. By using the Socratic method throughout the thread to make people think hard about their preconceptions and challenge them, I've made a user produce a well argued commentary on the situation that makes perfect sense. I was on the british side all along. My work here is done.

    RqSsN.gif

    Thanks man, I'm glad I was able to pull off this whole argumentative tightrope act and blow your mind in the process. Your support means a lot to me.

    You were just being an annoying troll, contributing nothing else than willful ignorance. It's not a tightrope act to simply ignore counterpoints and keep repeating bullshit. Don't let it get to your head.

    Bold words coming from a user who is trying to steer the discussion towards irrelevant topics such as Karelia. Is Scandinavia in the south atlantic, next to the Americas? Does it have anything to do with Britain's and Argentina's territorial claims? I didn't think so.

    I responded to a post, stating why Karelia shouldn't in my opinion be on his list, and I justified my position on the issue. It was meant as a one-off post, and not a thread derail, whereas you're more or less getting off on this wannabe-Socrates persona you've manufactured in your mind. Too bad you're the only one buying into the act.

    This, on the other hand is steering the discussion away from the Falklands, so I won't say anything more on this issue.

    PS: Finland isn't a part of Scandinavia, check your facts. It's surprisingly illuminating to actually find out how things are in the real world.

    Rhan9 on
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    No, it provides an answer that satisfies you without much in the way of proof. Why are you assuming that everyone from Goose Green went to Port Stanley?

    Because Port Stanley was the only place PoWs were sent (where they were then mostly delivered by the Canberra to their home country).

    This is so matter-of-fact to me that I'm not even sure what to say.

    With Love and Courage
  • Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Venkman90 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    This is exactly what I was looking for in this thread. By using the Socratic method throughout the thread to make people think hard about their preconceptions and challenge them, I've made a user produce a well argued commentary on the situation that makes perfect sense. I was on the british side all along. My work here is done.

    RqSsN.gif

    Thanks man, I'm glad I was able to pull off this whole argumentative tightrope act and blow your mind in the process. Your support means a lot to me.

    You were just being an annoying troll, contributing nothing else than willful ignorance. It's not a tightrope act to simply ignore counterpoints and keep repeating bullshit. Don't let it get to your head.

    Bold words coming from a user who is trying to steer the discussion towards irrelevant topics such as Karelia. Is Scandinavia in the south atlantic, next to the Americas? Does it have anything to do with Britain's and Argentina's territorial claims? I didn't think so.

    I responded to a post, stating why Karelia shouldn't in my opinion be on his list, and I justified my position on the issue. It was meant as a one-off post, and not a thread derail, whereas you're more or less getting off on this wannabe-Socrates persona you've manufactured in your mind. Too bad you're the only one buying into the act.

    This, on the other hand is steering the discussion away from the Falklands, so I won't say anything more on this issue.

    At least my "persona" as you call it is non-violent, whereas your delusion of being a freedom fighter for finland is based on brazen and dismissive racism towards the russian people, a civilization whose existence predates the Finn's by many centuries and who is constructed on a complex ensemble of cultures stretching from the heart of Europe to the depths of Asia.

    Flame_Shot.gif Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a year. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life!
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    Sargass wrote:
    your delusion of being a freedom fighter for finland is based on brazen and dismissive racism towards the russian people
    o_O What the shit?

  • The Fourth EstateThe Fourth Estate Registered User regular
    I think we can safely say Sargasso is a troll at this point.

    steam_sig.png
  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Venkman90 wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    This is exactly what I was looking for in this thread. By using the Socratic method throughout the thread to make people think hard about their preconceptions and challenge them, I've made a user produce a well argued commentary on the situation that makes perfect sense. I was on the british side all along. My work here is done.

    RqSsN.gif

    Thanks man, I'm glad I was able to pull off this whole argumentative tightrope act and blow your mind in the process. Your support means a lot to me.

    You were just being an annoying troll, contributing nothing else than willful ignorance. It's not a tightrope act to simply ignore counterpoints and keep repeating bullshit. Don't let it get to your head.

    Bold words coming from a user who is trying to steer the discussion towards irrelevant topics such as Karelia. Is Scandinavia in the south atlantic, next to the Americas? Does it have anything to do with Britain's and Argentina's territorial claims? I didn't think so.

    I responded to a post, stating why Karelia shouldn't in my opinion be on his list, and I justified my position on the issue. It was meant as a one-off post, and not a thread derail, whereas you're more or less getting off on this wannabe-Socrates persona you've manufactured in your mind. Too bad you're the only one buying into the act.

    This, on the other hand is steering the discussion away from the Falklands, so I won't say anything more on this issue.

    At least my "persona" as you call it is non-violent, whereas your delusion of being a freedom fighter for finland is based on brazen and dismissive racism towards the russian people, a civilization whose existence predates the Finn's by many centuries and who is constructed on a complex ensemble of cultures stretching from the heart of Europe to the depths of Asia.

    I don't think your reading comprehension is quite up to par. I never said anything about fighting, and I just stated the facts of the matter in question. I have nothing against the Russian people, who have always been as much the victims of their government as the foreigners their government has invaded. The current inhabitants didn't originally get any choice about moving there, making them as much victims as the expelled Finns.

    I will maintain, however, that the Russian government has been, is, and will be a collection of shitheads. From the Tsars to USSR to the current clusterfuck. At least these days they're not as eager for summary executions of their own people as in the past.

    At no point have I been racist towards the Russians themselves. Now, did you understand this, or do I need to write it all in simplified English for better comprehension?

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    I think we can safely say Sargasso is a troll at this point.

    He has a nice avatar though. I like his avatar.

  • I think we can safely say Sargasso is a troll at this point.

    Et tu, Fourth Estate?

    Flame_Shot.gif Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a year. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life!
  • WildcatWildcat Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    No, it provides an answer that satisfies you without much in the way of proof. Why are you assuming that everyone from Goose Green went to Port Stanley?

    Because Port Stanley was the only place PoWs were sent (where they were then mostly delivered by the Canberra to their home country).

    This is so matter-of-fact to me that I'm not even sure what to say.
    Less than half were repatriated by the Canberra, as far as I'm aware, but that's a moot point.

  • spool32 wrote: »
    I think we can safely say Sargasso is a troll at this point.

    He has a nice avatar though. I like his avatar.

    Well at least I've found one sensible person. That said, I must bid you all farewell, as I've mentioned before, my work is done here.

    Flame_Shot.gif Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a year. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life!
  • Venkman90Venkman90 Registered User regular
    Sargasso wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I think we can safely say Sargasso is a troll at this point.

    He has a nice avatar though. I like his avatar.

    Well at least I've found one sensible person. That said, I must bid you all farewell, as I've mentioned before, my work is done here.

    I have no idea what a view mods take here on this kind of thing, but they are at least aware of it now.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    Nobody actually believes that you're going to stop posting in this thread. People who say that always return.

  • WildcatWildcat Registered User regular
    Hot news, but I need to know what Katy Perry and Justin Bieber think about it too before I am capable of forming my own opinion.

  • BogartBogart I Will Cure You Registered User, Moderator mod

    I like the fact that he claims to be speaking on behalf of the British people. Really, Mozzer? What have you got coming out that you want to promote? It's like one of Elton John's incribly well-timed 'controversial' comments about Madonna or something just happening to coincide with a new album.

    It's hardly the first incredibly stupid thing Moz has said. I doubt it'll be the last.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    Wildcat wrote: »
    Hot news, but I need to know what Katy Perry and Justin Bieber think about it too before I am capable of forming my own opinion.

    Quick, get a roundtable panel with Taylor Swift, Anna Pacquin, Shia LaBeouf, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas.

  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Why does anyone give a shit about what celebrities think anyhow? It's not like they're celebrities because they are particularly well versed in history, law, or otherwise blindingly intelligent/insightful.

    More to the point, why do their opinions get so much publicity?

    Eh, maybe it's just me, but presenting all sides of an issue is something I'll never understand. Sometimes people are just wrong about some things, like the stupid debates on US channels where they put a real scientist and some bible scholar together to debate whether the bloody climate is actually getting warmer.

    Rhan9 on
  • Venkman90Venkman90 Registered User regular
    He was in Argentina as well, seems like him playing to the crowd, plus he always has been a socialist dickwad who hated Thatcher and anything relating to her.

  • Rhan9Rhan9 Registered User regular
    Hey now, nothing wrong with socialism. It's done Northern Europe plenty good. :P
    Not disputing the dickwad comment though.

  • Venkman90Venkman90 Registered User regular
    Irony is I lean that way myself sometimes, just not to the level idiots like Morrisey do, who never mentions him being a multi-millionaire.

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Wildcat wrote: »
    Hot news, but I need to know what Katy Perry and Justin Bieber think about it too before I am capable of forming my own opinion.

    Quick, get a roundtable panel with Taylor Swift, Anna Pacquin, Shia LaBeouf, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas.
    “I call it treason against rock 'n' roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics. ... When I was a kid and my parents started talking about politics, I'd run to my room and put on the Rolling Stones as loud as I could. So when I see all these rock stars up there talking politics, it makes me sick. .... If you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal.”
    ― Alice Cooper

  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    The Ender wrote: »
    Wait, what? You're accusing Britain of murdering 100 Argentine POWs?

    About that many, yes. It's not even something that is disputed, to my knowledge. 'Well, war is Hell you know' was essentially the excuse given by Thatcher's government for the unethical & illegal actions taken during the Falklands campaign.
    And yes, they were conscripts. When you're fighting against conscripts are you not supposed to fight back? What bearing on the war does the Argentine army being mostly conscripts make?

    And hey, looking at the armament of the Belgrano it seems that they had some Sea Cat missiles and anti aircraft guns. Hardly antique cannon.

    You certainly can fight back and I would expect you to; I have no animosity towards the various amphibious assaults in and of themselves, and the legitimacy of the operation is pretty plain. But you can't execute PoWs or non-combatants, and in my mind it makes things considerably worse when the people you're fighting are doing it because otherwise they'll be killed by their own CO and / or the local police when they go home, and then you go and celebrate a job well done rather than mourning a terrible human tragedy.

    The Sea Cats are ship-to-air weapons, not anti-ship missiles. Belgrando's primary armaments were her guns.

    No offence but this is absolute prize grade horse manure. Every word. The UK's war against Argentina was extremely restricted and contained. Not one shell or missile was fired outside the combat zone around the island itself. The fact you're using a fucking sun headline as evidence of the UKs moral guilt sickens me. You may as well judge America on nothing but Fox news.

    As far as the General Belgrando goes, I don't give a fuck if it was armed with slingshots, a shell fired from an old cannon will still kill you. Lets not lose sight of who started the war here, if you don't want to lose a ship don't start a fucking war and send it into a combat zone. There is no ethical dilemma at all, they were soldiers fighting a war and their ship was a critical military asset we had to destroy.

    As far as the soldiers being conscripts goes, well that sucks for them but again there is no moral dilemma, they were soldiers invading our land. By your logic we would be wrong for shooting at Nazis. I'd also like to see something other than your word that the UK made 100 POW's "disappear".

    EDIT: I don't need to add that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your flimsy reasoning for accusing the UK of war crimes is frankly insulting.

    Casual on
    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
    Winky wrote: »
    Corgis are totally the white people of dogs
  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular

    On another note, I don't want to be around when Tube sees this.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
    Winky wrote: »
    Corgis are totally the white people of dogs
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I love the Falklands ... thing because it helps separate the people who actually pay attention and care from those who just side against the bigger country out of reflex.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Aw, stupid cold, making me sleep all day and miss the fun...

    So another stupid celebrity has come out and said something stupid, huh?

    Well, I guess him and Sean Penn can hang out with that Megadeath idiot who endorsed Santorum.

    I'm going to have to defend the sinking of the Belgrado, war is hell. If Argentina didn't want its shit sunk they shouldn't have invaded and occupied someone else's territory.

    Also, I'm a bit offended that he assumed everyone on this board is an Anglo-Saxon... especially since I'm pretty sure that calling someone that makes as much sense as calling someone an Etruscan...

    Lh96QHG.png
  • KalkinoKalkino Buttons Londres Registered User regular
    This has been an interesting couple of pages I must say. The whole idea that an imperial state somehow has less moral virtue than a colonial settler state with regards to lands briefly settled by colonialists, citizens of a different imperial powers, several centuries later certainly is a strange one to me and I say this as a citizen of Her Majesty's glorious realm of New Zealand, proud former colonial ruler of Western Samoa, the Cook Islands, Nauru, Tokelau and Nuie

    Freedom for the Northern Isles!
  • valhalla130valhalla130 13 Dark Shield Perceives the GodsRegistered User regular
    Sargasso wrote: »
    Bogart wrote: »
    Sargasso wrote: »
    It's simple to understand, though, it's just the rule of first comers, first keepers. Technically the spaniards and the french were first but they abandoned the island.

    I don't know why you are trying to troll me on argentina, I am not argentinian myself, I just think the current situation is unfair to them. If you say the whole nation of argentina is illegitimate because some natives were there in the past, then the same can be said of every nation on earth. The english would be illegitimate because they are on celtic land. The celts are illegitimate because they are on neanderthal land. And so on to infinity. Your argument, while seemingly clever and sarcastic, is illogical.

    Except it isn't my argument. It's yours. According to you a dozen guys from Argentina (and more from other countries) left behind when the Argentine penal colony was abandoned constitute the rightful owners of the island. If that's true, then the rightful owners of Argentina (and yes, pretty much every other country) aren't the guys there now. Why is the Falklands a special case for you? Why give that 'back' but no other land?

    Besides, if it's first come, first served then Britain never left. We staked a claim there before Argentina was even a country.

    And seriously, if you can't see the difference between what's happening right now in Tibet and Britain claiming the islands after all but 12 Argentines leave two hundred years ago then I don't know what to say to you.

    But the malvinas were uninhabitated before the europeans who would later call themselves the argentinians arrived. That is why the situation is particular. If there were natives from long ago I would never even have brought this issue up, since as you pointed out my whole premise would have been flawed.

    As for the whole Tibet thing, I do realize the facts are different but the underlying illegitimacy is the same. The difference is one of scale, not one of premise.

    To be honest, all of this probably won't matter in the long run but I'm just tired of seeing southerners get bullied into submission. I didn't mean to lash out like that, but you can't get heard otherwise.

    I couldn't agree more! I'm tired of southerners being bullied into submission too!!! The SOUTH SHALL RISE AGAIN!!!

    I'm from Georgia. :)

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Let's get to twerk! The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    edited March 2012
    As an American, I think its patently ridiculous to claim the "indigenous rights" of Argentina over an island three hundred miles off its coast.

    Maybe if there had been a massive Native American population on the Falklands that the British had exiled to Argentina there'd be room for some discussion of resettlement. But the native Falklanders are waddling around just fine in their fancy tuxedos.

    AManFromEarth on
    Lh96QHG.png
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    The Ender wrote: »
    ARA.Belgrano.sunk.svg

    That's the position of the Royal Navy vs the two Argentinian patrols. Note the direction of Belgrano's route; does that look to you like she was on her way to intercept the British task force?

    Irrelevant. In war all enemy military assets are fair game. The Brits could have bombed military bases on the Argentinian mainland and been justified in doing so. Not that I'm saying they should have.

    enc0re on
  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    ARA.Belgrano.sunk.svg

    That's the position of the Royal Navy vs the two Argentinian patrols. Note the direction of Belgrano's route; does that look to you like she was on her way to intercept the British task force?

    Irrelevant. In war all enemy military assets are fair game. The Brits could have bombed military bases on the Argentinian mainland and been justified in doing so. Not that I'm saying they should have.

    I agree. It is completely irrelevant whether she was advancing in to the British flotilla all guns blazing or steaming away on fire with everyone waving their arms and screaming. There is no international law or convention saying you can't shoot at military targets if they're not advancing. Yes ender, war is shitty and people die, but I find your entire attitude painfully naive.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
    Winky wrote: »
    Corgis are totally the white people of dogs
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    ARA.Belgrano.sunk.svg

    That's the position of the Royal Navy vs the two Argentinian patrols. Note the direction of Belgrano's route; does that look to you like she was on her way to intercept the British task force?

    Irrelevant. In war all enemy military assets are fair game. The Brits could have bombed military bases on the Argentinian mainland and been justified in doing so. Not that I'm saying they should have.

    Lets not forget that all it would have taken to change the direction was a turn of the wheel and in a few hours they would be right back to threatening the task force.

    Its also not like that hasn't been done. There where several times in history where ships sailed in the wrong direction for a few hours to throw the enemy of the scent. Leyte Gulf was a prime example.

    The Belgrano was threat to the british task force and would have remained so until it was safely back in port. Even then it could have set out to sea and fight.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • lu tzelu tze Registered User
    edited March 2012
    spool32 wrote: »
    Wildcat wrote: »
    Hot news, but I need to know what Katy Perry and Justin Bieber think about it too before I am capable of forming my own opinion.

    Quick, get a roundtable panel with Taylor Swift, Anna Pacquin, Shia LaBeouf, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas.
    “I call it treason against rock 'n' roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics. ... When I was a kid and my parents started talking about politics, I'd run to my room and put on the Rolling Stones as loud as I could. So when I see all these rock stars up there talking politics, it makes me sick. .... If you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal.”
    ― Alice Cooper
    As usual, Alice Cooper is the fucking man.

    Which is ironic since he wears makeup and has a girl's name...

    lu tze on
    World's best janitor
  • LolkenLolken Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    Dis' wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    I imagine the US is trying to walk a thin line here between maintaining their sphere of influence in the Americas and keeping the UK happy.

    But really, they probably figure Britain can bust it's own heads on this matter.

    I imagine the keeping the UK happy is as low on the USAs priority list as it's always been. Don't take this as a snarky Brit hating all Americans because I'm not like that but traditionally the US government looks after number one. Obviously there are plenty of American people who are sympathetic to the British side here but the US government will not make an enemy out of a place they regard as their back yard to support the UK.

    Right, but they won't piss off the Brits either since they are a valuable ally.

    Haha the US has been happy dicking over their allies since the revolutionary war, and has pretty much laughed off any British protests or requests on military actions or trade policy since WW2. Heck we can't even get the US embassy to pay the congestion charge whilst our embassy pays all the tolls they get.

    Which is exactly why the USA supported Argentina's claim to the Falklands in 1983.

    "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton.

    "Money tends to corrupt, and lots of money corrupts lotsely" - Me.
  • Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    No, it provides an answer that satisfies you without much in the way of proof. Why are you assuming that everyone from Goose Green went to Port Stanley?

    Because Port Stanley was the only place PoWs were sent (where they were then mostly delivered by the Canberra to their home country).

    This is so matter-of-fact to me that I'm not even sure what to say.

    Would that number have included any prisoners evacuated to the hospital ships? There were well over 100 Argentine soldiers wounded during the battle.

  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    Or Argentine soldiers who somehow got out of going back to Argentina.

    I figure I could take a bear.
This discussion has been closed.