Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_851
The neutrality issue is no different to the attitude in the 80's so fair enough, although we did get some badly needed sidewinders from the US.
As to resilience, I'm not so sure.
Maybe its dormancy is what I find so bloody frustrating.
|
Well, if I recall correctly, Reagan provided logistical and transport support during the Falklands war and the US has ALWAYS backed Britain's stance that they hold sovereignty over the Falklands. There has been no question where the US stood on the issue until the Obama administration.
I could see such a change in public position if the administration wanted to send a hard message to Britain for Britain not backing the US on something. Even allies throw diplomatic shots across each other's bows once in a while. Doesn't seem to be the case here though. Of course, we have no idea what is going on between the two countries in diplomatic back channels.
Yeah, Dutch, you all will still fight....we see your soccer games
.
Splitter
EDIT: If I recall correctly, the Falklands had the West's last bayonet charge until British troops did it AGAIN in Iraq. That's guts. I think I would rather be in a firefight than square off in a bayonet fight.