- 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: The US appears to be aligning itself with Argentina over the UK
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:13 pm to hawgfaninc
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:13 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
The shifting world order continues
Almost every European is the same as the TDS riddled people in our country and in Canada. Do we anticipate this will ever change? They want to be like they are and likely will be for the rest of your life.
0
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:17 pm to hawgfaninc
Argentina has massive nat gas fields
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:18 pm to Penrod
quote:"To the hilt" is a misnomer. Given close Chief-of-State relationships, we did "tilt our neutrality," as we did years before during lend-lease. But what was our declared and official diplomatic position throughout? Again, the neutral position is the same we've held for two centuries.
No, we were not neutral when the UK and Argentina went to war over the Falklands. We supported the UK to the hilt, even lending them ships iirc.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:21 pm to Penrod
quote:
even lending them ships iirc.
We did not.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:26 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
"To the hilt" is a misnomer. Given close Chief-of-State relationships, we did "tilt our neutrality," as we did years before during lend-lease. But what was our declared and official diplomatic position throughout?
This.
Meanwhile, the French were selling the Argentina Exocet missiles.
My friend served in the British Navy in that War. Two ships in his group were sunk. His ship was nearly hit quite a few times.
FWIW, He said that the UK is either going to explode, or implode. He predicts the latter, as he said that Britain is pretty much done for.
This post was edited on 4/25/26 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:29 pm to hawgfaninc
We should take the Virgin Islands as back payment.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:30 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
We did not.
You are right.
quote:
No, the United States did not officially lend a ship to the United Kingdom during the 1982 Falklands Conflict, but they did prepare a contingency plan to loan an aircraft carrier. Key Points on U.S. Naval Assistance (1982): Contingency Plan: The Reagan administration prepared to loan a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier—specifically the USS Iwo Jima (an amphibious assault ship capable of carrying Harrier jets)—if the Royal Navy lost one of their two carriers (HMS Hermes or HMS Invincible).
My 40 year old memories failed me.
But this is not the action of a neutral country.
This post was edited on 4/25/26 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:34 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
"To the hilt" is a misnomer. Given close Chief-of-State relationships, we did "tilt our neutrality," as we did years before during lend-lease. But what was our declared and official diplomatic position throughout? Again, the neutral position is the same we've held for two centuries.
quote:
During the 1982 Falklands War, the United States provided crucial, often covert, support to the United Kingdom, moving from initial neutral mediation to active assistance. Under President Reagan, the US supplied vital intelligence, advanced AIM-9L Sidewinder missiles, logistical aid (including fuel via Ascension Island), and offered a Navy vessel (USS Guam) if a British carrier was lost. Sandboxx Sandboxx +4 Key assistance provided by the US included: Logistics and Facilities: The US offered extensive use of the Ascension Island air and naval staging area. They provided massive amounts of fuel—nearly 50 million liters of aviation fuel—and diverted a tanker to refuel British ships. Key Military Key Military +2 Intelligence: The NSA provided critical signals intelligence to GCHQ, while American intelligence shared satellite data on Argentine ship movements. Some reports indicate that up to 98% of British intelligence on Argentine movements was provided by the US. Quora Quora +2 Weaponry: The US provided 100 AIM-9L Sidewinder missiles, which were far superior to earlier models and crucial for British air superiority. They also supplied FIM-92 Stinger hand-held missiles. Time Magazine Time Magazine +2 Contingency Planning: The Reagan administration, particularly Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, planned to loan the USS Guam (helicopter carrier) if a British aircraft carrier was lost. USNI News USNI News +1 Diplomatic Support: While initially trying to mediate, the US eventually provided strong diplomatic support to the UK, including an embargo on Argentine military supplies.
“To the hilt” was indeed going too far. “Tilting our neutrality” is too far the other way.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:36 pm to Penrod
quote:
But this is not the action of a neutral country.
We are neutral with respect to the Falklands issue. But we are far closer allies with the British. We have no such association with the Argentines and likely won't in the future.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:38 pm to tide06
quote:
I don’t understand what we share in common with NATO or how that alliance benefits America under a Trump administration?
Deterrence of Soviet expansion during the Cold War and a unified opposition to the Warsaw Pact and to prevent another European empire building war (i.e. Germany). It pre-supposed one common enemy. It worked with the soviets. Then it expanded and expanded and expanded. The question is whether or not it’s still relevant post-cold war.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:47 pm to dinner roll
quote:
Deterrence of Soviet expansion during the Cold War and a unified opposition to the Warsaw Pact and to prevent another European empire building war (i.e. Germany).
Sure, that made total sense until the fall of the Soviet Union.
quote:
It pre-supposed one common enemy.
Yeah see this is my concern. The globalists running the EU are in my opinion the biggest threat to American culture, economic interests and the rights granted to us as individuals under the constitution.
So as I see it the people running EU block are themselves the threat so an alliance with them unless it’s a predicate to subvert their power and bring them back towards traditional western values is antithetical to what our (MAGA/AF) interests are moving forward both politically and economically absent a reset on their part.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 12:53 pm to hawgfaninc
Good, The Islamic Republic of England is not our ally.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 2:07 pm to hawgfaninc
Won't they just respond by going through with the plan to give away Diego Garcia if we enable Argentina to move on The Falklands?
Posted on 4/25/26 at 2:37 pm to hawgfaninc
UK declined started at the end of WW1. They have essentially thrown us out in favor of the EU since the Korean War, a steady shift to a one Europe policy they thought it would dominate. It was a bad call.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 3:14 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
FWIW, He said that the UK is either going to explode, or implode. He predicts the latter, as he said that Britain is pretty much done for.
What do these situations look like, and the predictable end results?
Posted on 4/25/26 at 3:21 pm to phaz
quote:frick'em let's take it too.
Won't they just respond by going through with the plan to give away Diego Garcia if we enable Argentina to move on The Falklands?
And put a base at the southern tip of the Western Hemisphere.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 3:28 pm to phaz
quote:
Won't they just respond by going through with the plan to give away Diego Garcia if we enable Argentina to move on The Falklands?
Doing this could present as a strategic threat to the US. And an ally doing this indicates their desire to change their strategic relationship with us for the worse. Would we just pull off of that island considering another emerging power like China would fill that vacuum?
And I wonder if they thing everything will be all better when Trump concludes his term and some nit wit democrat is elected?
Posted on 4/25/26 at 3:52 pm to Penrod
quote:Again, there was but one purpose to my post.
“To the hilt” was indeed going too far. “Tilting our neutrality” is too far the other way.
That was to point out the OFFICIAL diplomatic status of the US in UK-Falkland relations HAS NOT CHANGED ...
Those reading the OP might assume otherwise.
Whatever actions we took in the Falklands War, we never claimed to shed our neutrality.
That was the sole point I was making.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 4:14 pm to hawgfaninc
Argentina gave us Manu Ginobili. The UK gave us Michael Olowakandi.
Trump respects game.
Trump respects game.
Posted on 4/25/26 at 4:47 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Whatever actions we took in the Falklands War, we never claimed to shed our neutrality.
That was the sole point I was making.
Sometimes I need to be hit upside the head.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News