- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Good News: We’re Supporting Argentina’s Claim To The Falklands & Arming Them
Posted on 4/25/26 at 7:08 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 4/25/26 at 7:08 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
My Heroine, Maggie Thatcher, is rolling in her grave.
Her England has been raped and honor killed by its current leadership and favorite immigrants.
0
Posted on 4/25/26 at 7:29 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Milei might be the ally of certain US factions, but I'm failing to see the benefit of trading Atlanticism for something where Argentina would be relevant geopolitically
We are now in 2026 and I'm wondering if you can provide a list of what Great Britain has provided the United States over the past 250 years in terms of either defense or any other action that has been a significant benefit to the United States
Personally, I cannot think of any but I can think of trillions of dollars and bloodshed from the United States that benefited Britain
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:20 am to davyjones
quote:
Or are you just playing dumb and pretending it doesn’t make sense, ostensibly to insinuate that I’m not making any sense with my post?
You have an incredibly strange syntax.
quote:
Unfortunately, either way it’s a pretty bad look for you. Just stop and think about your conundrum for a few moments before you immediately fire off another post without forethought and make it worse.
Lol.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:26 am to Tom288
quote:
Tell me what Britain and Europe offers us as Allies...what exactly, do they provide?
Trade, technology, military integration, among many other things. As a large union, historical geopolitical issues are smoothed over, which is what allows the US to take North Atlantic security as a given as well as European security more generally. If we want to compete against Europe rather than be allies with them, that does not portend good things.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:28 am to crazy4lsu
Incredibly strange syntax. Ok. As long as that means something in your mind. I don’t think anyone that knows their way around syntax will follow, but whatever floats your boat, friend.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:41 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
This is a bad move by Starmer
ftfy
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:45 am to LuckyTiger
We don't need to change our support. Truth is, England doesn't have the ability to defend it and Argentina doesn't have the ability to take it. We should just say it's up to y'all and stay out of it.
As someone stated, Argentina never possessed or inhabited the islands. The majority of the people are British. Morally, it should remain British.
But Britain has done what it has done lately so it doesn't deserve our support
But let's be real. No one is invading anyone
As someone stated, Argentina never possessed or inhabited the islands. The majority of the people are British. Morally, it should remain British.
But Britain has done what it has done lately so it doesn't deserve our support
But let's be real. No one is invading anyone
This post was edited on 4/25/26 at 12:13 pm
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:47 am to jizzle6609
quote:
Firstly give them time. They, like Poland, are on the rise. Argentina has a massive coastline and motivated leader.
They are not on the rise in any sense. They are a geographically isolated country which has not shown any interest in fixing their military issues. They have no pressing geopolitical need, it appears Argentine society at large is mostly indifferent to the military, and they have to fix their funding issues before I can take this 'rise' rhetoric seriously.
To illustrate how unserious the Argentines are, they decommissioned their entire Mirage III fleet in 2015, and up until relatively recently, the only attack aircraft they had was a A-4AR, and at certain points, of the 30 or so jets they had, they had less than 10 jets fully operational.
Countries like Spain and Canada spend 10x more and I believe the projected budget for the next year in Argentina includes a budget increase only to account for inflation, which is just not going to be enough money. You can insist they are 'on the rise' all you want. The proof has to come from the Argentines themselves.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:48 am to LuckyTiger
quote:
We’re Supporting Argentina’s Claim To The Falklands & Arming Them
Ww3 rolls on ...
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:49 am to davyjones
quote:
Incredibly strange syntax. Ok. As long as that means something in your mind. I don’t think anyone that knows their way around syntax will follow, but whatever floats your boat, friend.
Yeah, it is just some very weird sentence structures. It's like you are trying very hard to write your thoughts down earnestly and what comes out is not dissimilar to someone who is retarded. Now run along little dude.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:54 am to crazy4lsu
True. And their economy is dwarfed by the UK.
But, they had to fix their economy before they could think about building a decent military. In that sense they are on the right track. In 2020 their GDP was $385b today. by 2025 it was $680b.
But, they had to fix their economy before they could think about building a decent military. In that sense they are on the right track. In 2020 their GDP was $385b today. by 2025 it was $680b.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 11:54 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
I think The Iron Lady would be more furious at what's become of her homeland.
Indeed. Thatcher isn’t rolling over in her grave because of Trump. She’s rolling over on her grave because of these abominations:
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:01 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
You are dismissing the ability of China to negatively impact the U.S.
Nope.
quote:
Additionally, via belt and road, they can absorb that market loss to a manageable degree.
I mean, they can due to the weird nature of their half-open/half-closed economy. And that initiative at this point exists more in the minds of think tanks than it does in actual, meaningful leverage, which was the entire point.
quote:
Until rare earths are mined in subsequent volume, and magnet production hits / surpasses benchmarks, this dynamic will continue.
The key is going to be materials engineering. The US is still far ahead in that field, but there are other hard limitations, like I mentioned in my post elsewhere.
quote:
Oil is China’s only vulnerability.
It is our countermeasure.
Yes, but given our lack of interest in curbing Russia exports, focusing on Hormuz is a half-measure. In 2025, Russia provided China with 91 million tons of crude, which was 50% of Russia's total production. This past February, the Chinese imported 17% more crude from Russia than they did in February of 2025, with Russian exports to India dropping by 20%. If it is our 'countermeasure' which should leverage it in a maximalist fashion. We have not done so.
quote:
Connect the dots…or not.
You should do the same.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:10 pm to crazy4lsu
Yeah, so I reviewed the sentence structure, and all I see is pretty simple stuff, no complicated substance, no complicated structure, certainly nothing like what you’re describing. In fact, it’s a bit unusual for someone to admit that they’re having difficulty with simple material as we have here. Basically, you confirmed that you’re a lightweight goon.
Now, you going to admit again that you’re having trouble with basic English? May as well get a tattoo on your forehead that says “imbecile.”
Now, you going to admit again that you’re having trouble with basic English? May as well get a tattoo on your forehead that says “imbecile.”
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:10 pm to JimEverett
quote:
True. And their economy is dwarfed by the UK.
But, they had to fix their economy before they could think about building a decent military. In that sense they are on the right track. In 2020 their GDP was $385b today. by 2025 it was $680b.
They have a very very long way to go. And given that Argentina is so isolated, outside of the Falklands issue, I am extremely skeptical you can find broad public support for increased military spending. For example, in 2017, Argentine GDP was $643b, but their spending was still only 0.85% of GDP.
The reality of military spending year on year is that poor spending or non-existent spending one year causes you to spend more in the future. It is not fiscally responsible to have a low military budget. It is just kicking the can down the road where eventually you have to spend a lot more to fix problems. Even countries with robust military spending suffer from this issue, as one poor procurement cycle (such as the USN's Littoral Combat Ship) can cause further budget and procurement issues decades onward. The relationship between spending and fixing issues is not linear.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:12 pm to davyjones
Oh no, I am a lightweight goon! You have been melting for a few posts now man. You are pussy soft and very dumb. Either engage with points substantively or don't. I'm not going to placate your feelings little guy.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:16 pm to crazy4lsu
“Melting” 
You do know everyone else can see all this, right?
**People other than your 3 or 4 friends who affirm and reaffirm each other with your upvotes and downvotes, that is.
You do know everyone else can see all this, right? **People other than your 3 or 4 friends who affirm and reaffirm each other with your upvotes and downvotes, that is.
This post was edited on 4/25/26 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:17 pm to dafif
quote:
We are now in 2026 and I'm wondering if you can provide a list of what Great Britain has provided the United States over the past 250 years in terms of either defense or any other action that has been a significant benefit to the United States
Well, the US and the UK have not been allies for that stretch. For a long time, they were our main competition in North America as well as the North Atlantic. They also served as a barrier to entry to Mediterranean politics. The fact that the North Atlantic is no longer an area where the US has to expend resources against the UK is a massive win. Working together in the North Atlantic (which really occurred once the UK retreated from North America to focus on other possessions) has been so central to American foreign policy that even a policy of competing in the Arctic is based on assuming that the North Atlantic is not an area where the US has to needlessly expend anything.
Again, if we want a world where we are not allied with the UK, and instead we compete with them, that is a situation where the externalities are worse than what we have right now. Why would anyone willingly cast aside the UK if the UK is one procurement cycle away from competing with the US again?
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:19 pm to davyjones
Yeah dude. Either stop menstruating and stay on topic or continue whining that you misread my initial post so thoroughly that now I think you are retarded.
Posted on 4/27/26 at 2:25 pm to SCLibertarian
Since when do “libertarians” believe in allies? I thought we wanted peace?
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News