Falklands War part 2?

[RabidMongoose]

We can stop right there. You're just repeating yourself. Let me know when you have a reason RELEVANT TO THE FALKLANDS that it's going to be any different than 1982.

The global environment is relevant to the Falklands. Moreover, we have the demonstrated shift in State Department positions and a statement of neutrality.

Again:
As for my facts, there was already CoW's State Department position. You have nothing, so I am asking for facts that show that the US is misrepresenting its own position and that it is actually not neutral despite the State Department's own statements.

You seem to be getting angry again.

 

[Howard]

prime example why P&N is totally retarded

 

[CanOWorms]

There is no way the Obama Administration is going to turn their backs on the U.K. less then a year before a presidential election. It ain't going to happen. Yeah, yeah they'll say this and that and try to act as disinterested 3rd parties, but Obama can't take the public relations hit. Face it, there are very, very, very few Americans that hate the U.K.

even if we have 2 of them that post the shit out of this forum

It's not about hating the UK. I don't think Americans, and particularly this president in this political environment, love the UK to that degree.

It's not even in the interests of the US to aid the UK in any potential engagement. I think many people attach a sort of racial or ethnic interest to it though. That sort of interest is on the wane.

 

[Infohawk]

The global environment is relevant to the Falklands.

Try using the word because in your sentences...

Moreover, we have the demonstrated shift in State Department positions and a statement of neutrality.

Who is we? Are you guys a team?

There is no shift. It's the same position as before the Falklands war in the 1980s. But you're just repeating yourself. No point discussing anything if you just repeat yourself.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Try using the word because in your sentences...


Who is we? Are you guys a team?

There is no shift. It's the same position as before the Falklands war in the 1980s. But you're just repeating yourself. No point discussing anything if you just repeat yourself.

Of course there is a shift to neutrality, read the article and statements from post #56.

You seem to be getting very angry again.

I think it's pretty clear that you have almost nothing to support your completely unfounded position that the US is essentially intentionally misrepresenting its neutrality. I don't think that you, Infohawk, have more insight in US foreign policy than the US State Department.

Again (and I have to repeat myself because you haven't supported your position with anything):
As for my facts, there was already CoW's State Department position. You have nothing, so I am asking for facts that show that the US is misrepresenting its own position and that it is actually not neutral despite the State Department's own statements.

 

[Infohawk]

Are you and Cow a team? Who was that "we" you were referring to?

 

[CanOWorms]

Of course there is a shift to neutrality, read the article and statements from post #56.

You seem to be getting very angry again.

I think it's pretty clear that you have almost nothing to support your completely unfounded position that the US is essentially intentionally misrepresenting its neutrality. I don't think that you, Infohawk, have more insight in US foreign policy than the US State Department.

Again (and I have to repeat myself because you haven't supported your position with anything):
As for my facts, there was already CoW's State Department position. You have nothing, so I am asking for facts that show that the US is misrepresenting its own position and that it is actually not neutral despite the State Department's own statements.

I think you should leave him alone. He's obviously tired and agitated. It's difficult for some people to mentally process reality.

The simple fact is that the US position is Argentina's position rather than what the UK seeks. It is what it is.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Are you and Cow a team? Who was that "we" you were referring to?

Just a general 'we.'

Again:
As for my facts, there was already CoW's State Department position. You have nothing, so I am asking for facts that show that the US is misrepresenting its own position and that it is actually not neutral despite the State Department's own statements.

Infohawk, why do you feel that the US State Department is issuing intentionally misleading statements? Or is this no longer your position?

 

[Infohawk]

Just a general 'we.'

Huh? What is a general "we"? Is that like a royal "we"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_plural

I wouldn't expect that from you of all people.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I think you should leave him alone. He's obviously tired and agitated. It's difficult for some people to mentally process reality.

The simple fact is that the US position is Argentina's position rather than what the UK seeks. It is what it is.

I can tell that he is getting angry and petulant, but I'm not going to allow his anger and immaturity to take me down to his level. I am here for serious discourse and honestly would like to explore how he thinks that the US is intentionally misleading on this issue of neutrality.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Huh? What is a general "we"? Is that like a royal "we"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_plural

I wouldn't expect that from you of all people.

How is this related to the issue of the Malvinas? Please try to stay on topic.

For example, can you please provide some factual basis for your apparent indication that the US State Department is issuing intentionally misleading statements of neutrality with regard to the Malvinas?

 

[Infohawk]

How is this related to the issue of the Malvinas? Please try to stay on topic.

I need to know who I'm debating the issues with don't I? If you and COW are on a team I should know. Because usually, different posters don't have the exact same position and it is dangerous to assume one is presenting evidence for the other. But you guys seem to be different.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I need to know who I'm debating the issues with don't I? If you and COW are on a team I should know. Because usually, different posters don't have the exact same position and it is dangerous to assume one is presenting evidence for the other. But you guys seem to be different.

You and I are obviously discussing this issue since we are responding to each other's posts. Again, try to stay on-topic please. I cannot speak for anyone else as to whether they agree with me or do not agree with me and so forth.


I will repost my last question:
For example, can you please provide some factual basis for your apparent indication that the US State Department is issuing intentionally misleading statements of neutrality with regard to the Malvinas?

 

[monovillage]

I think that there are even fewer Americans who would even want to have the US involved in the mess. The US would most likely stay neutral, IMO. If the UK wants to maintain its colonies, then it will almost certainly have to do it on its own.

In fact does the U.S. have a base in the area? ahh interesting.......

http://www.nuevamayoria.com/english/research/defensa/icdefe150801.htm

Now may be a good time to establish one.

 

[Infohawk]

You and I are obviously discussing this issue since we are responding to each other's posts. Again, try to stay on-topic please. I cannot speak for anyone else as to whether they agree with me or do not agree with me and so forth.

Then maybe you shouldn't say things like "we have shown..." (And why wouldn't you be a team since you two always have EXACTLY the same positions?)

Anyway, I'm not interested in repeating myself. For example, your last question is loaded and makes false assumptions about my position that I've specifically pointed out to you.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Then maybe you shouldn't say things like "we have shown..." (And why wouldn't you be a team since you two always have EXACTLY the same positions?)

Anyway, I'm not interested in repeating myself. For example, your last question is loaded and makes false assumptions about my position that I've specifically pointed out to you.

How have I made false assumptions?

Let's see, do you not admit to the following:
1. The US has made an APPEARANCE of neutrality.
2. The US isn't actually neutral and would support the UK.

Thus, the natural consequence of these statements is that the US has intentionally misrepresented its position of neutrality in the publicly released statements from the State Department.

Thus, I have to ask you: Can you please provide some factual basis for your apparent indication that the US State Department is issuing intentionally misleading statements of neutrality with regard to the Malvinas?

This is essentially the position that you have taken, Infohawk and I am merely asking you to please stay on topic and discuss your assertion.

 

[CanOWorms]

In fact does the U.S. have a base in the area? ahh interesting.......

http://www.nuevamayoria.com/english/research/defensa/icdefe150801.htm

Now may be a good time to establish one.

In the Malvinas? That would never happen. It would disrupt US relations with much of South America.

 

[RabidMongoose]

In fact does the U.S. have a base in the area? ahh interesting.......

http://www.nuevamayoria.com/english/research/defensa/icdefe150801.htm

Now may be a good time to establish one.

Hmm interesting, I wonder if Argentina will offer a base to the US if it feels that it will gain US favor with regard to the Malvinas.

 

[monovillage]

Hmm interesting, I wonder if Argentina will offer a base to the US if it feels that it will gain US favor with regard to the Malvinas.

Why bother? A ready made place in the Falklands would do nicely.

 

[monovillage]

In the Malvinas? That would never happen. It would disrupt US relations with much of South America.

Honestly? Like we care?

 

[CanOWorms]

Honestly? Like we care?

Obviously the administration cares, hence its support for Argentina and the rest of the South American states. It's also smart to consider, especially due to Brazil being next door and its growing prominence on the world stage.

 

[monovillage]

Obviously the administration cares, hence its support for Argentina and the rest of the South American states. It's also smart to consider, especially due to Brazil being next door and its growing prominence on the world stage.

Oh yeah, that'll be a new experience, a U.S. Administration reversing support because of political pressure at home. I bet that's never happened before.

 

[CanOWorms]

Oh yeah, that'll be a new experience, a U.S. Administration reversing support because of political pressure at home. I bet that's never happened before.

You really think there will be pressure to engage in a war to preserve a crumbling foreign Empire? In the current climate, I suggest that the administration's position would be subjected to little political pressure.

Maybe we will see what happens since the UK does not seem to be accepting the international position of bilateral talks regarding the sovereignty of the Malvinas.

 

[monovillage]

You really think there will be pressure to engage in a war to preserve a crumbling foreign Empire? In the current climate, I suggest that the administration's position would be subjected to little political pressure.

Maybe we will see what happens since the UK does not seem to be accepting the international position of bilateral talks regarding the sovereignty of the Malvinas.

Engage in a war? Give me a break, we could send a little league team and a crop duster down to the Falklands and Argentina would stay at home. It's Argentina dude.

 

[monovillage]

Maybe we will see what happens since the UK does not seem to be accepting the international position of bilateral talks regarding the sovereignty of the Malvinas.

You know my neighbor parks his car closer to my house then his own. I've asked him to have international bilateral talks about who really owns it. I know he bought it, insured it, made payments on it and even washes it, but it's closer to my house so I think I should own it now.

You going to wish me luck or tell me i'm being an idiot for trying to take something that isn't mine?