British irate over Hillary comments on Falklands

posted at 10:12 am on March 2, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

The Obama administration continued its “smart power” efforts with America’s closest ally by demanding that the UK negotiate with Argentina over the Falkland Islands.  Hillary Clinton appeared with Argentina’s President Kristina Kirchner yesterday for a press conference in which she pushed for talks to settle the status of the islands — which the British already consider completely settled now.  Nile Gardiner calls Hillary’s comments a “slap in the face” to the UK.

First, the transcript of the presser:

QUESTION: (In Spanish)
And for the Secretary, it’s about the Falklands. The – President Fernandez talked about possible friendly mediation. Would the U.S. be considered – would the U.S. (inaudible) consider some kind of mediation role between the UK and Argentina over the Falklands? Thank you.

PRESIDENT DE KIRCHNER: (Via interpreter) (Inaudible) what we have (inaudible) by both countries as a friendly country of both Argentina and the UK, so as to get both countries to sit down at the table and address these negotiations within the framework of the UN resolutions strictly. We do not want to move away from that in any letter whatsoever, any comma, of what has been stated by dozens of UN resolutions and resolutions by its decolonization committee. That’s the only thing we’ve asked for, just to have them sit down at the table and negotiate. I don’t think that’s too much, really, in a very conflicted and controversial world, complex in terms.

SECRETARY CLINTON: And we agree. We would like to see Argentina and the United Kingdom sit down and resolve the issues between them across the table in a peaceful, productive way.

And another:

QUESTION: (In Spanish)
Interpreter: The journalist was just asking how the U.S. intends to negotiate to get the United Kingdom to sit at the table and address the Malvinas issue.

SECRETARY CLINTON: As to the first point, we want very much to encourage both countries to sit down. Now, we cannot make either one do so, but we think it is the right way to proceed. So we will be saying this publicly, as I have been, and we will continue to encourage exactly the kind of discussion across the table that needs to take place.

Except, of course, that Britain doesn’t believe there is any need to talk about it at all.  Until a few decades ago, no one seriously challenged British sovereignty on the island.  Argentina started a war over them in the 1980s, which Margaret Thatcher ended decisively.  As far as London is concerned, that ended the discussion rather neatly, especially since the residents of the Falklands apparently prefer the status quo.

Gardiner wonders what Hillary was thinking:

Clinton has demonstrated, not the first time, strikingly poor judgment as Secretary of State. While currying favour with a third rate kleptocracy in Latin America, she is alienating America’s most loyal and valuable friend at a critically important time. She also underestimates the resolve of the British people, who will never negotiate the future of the Falkland Islands. If the Argentines want the Falklands they will have to fight for them, and if they choose to do so they will be emphatically defeated, just as they were in 1982. Hillary Clinton can cry for Argentina if she wants to, but the Falklands will be forever British.

Maybe this White House hasn’t recalled this yet, but the British are fighting alongside of us in Afghanistan, where we desperately need them to stay.   If Britain suddenly discovers a need to deploy to the Falklands, especially because of American meddling, I’m quite certain London would need little encouragement to redeploy from their NATO commitment to do so.

When Obama ran for office, he claimed he wanted to restore our standing with our allies.  Who knew he was such a history buff?  It seems that Obama wants to restore our standing with the British to its status … in 1812.

Update: Reader Sajid A corrects me on a point originally in this post, which is that the British were not the first to occupy the Falklands:

France established a colony at Port St. Louis, on East Falkland‘s Berkeley Sound coast in 1764. The French name Îles Malouines was given to the islands – malouin being the adjective for the Bretonport of Saint-Malo. The Spanish name Islas Malvinas is a translation of the French name.”

I’ve removed that passage.  Thanks to Sajid for the correction.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

***
Socialist/Communist government=good.
Democratic government=bad.
Hillary Clinton=good.
Condi Rice=bad.
Selling out liberty=good.
Defending liberty=bad.
Comrade Obama=good.
Maggie Thatcher=bad.
***
I think I’m starting to see a pattern emerge through the fog!
***
Argentine landing craft=good.
U.K. nuclear sub with torpedo=bad.
General Belgrano cruiser=sunk!
Argentine plane with Exocet missile=good.
Harrier with sidewinder=bad.
***
Patriot systems on highest mountain=really bad!
***
Cue the Patriots–you would be amazed at how bad an airplane flies after a hit. Send back the sub. And throw in a few F-16′s for taking out any landing craft from 800 miles away. The “iron maiden” lady in Argentina may be doing Falkland II to distract the peons from the economic failures in her socialist paradise. And Hugo Chavez may be arming them soon. And don’t count on the U.S.A.–missiles, bombs, and torpedoes work a lot better than words do–they are the true “smart power” items that nobody can ignore.
***
Ask Winston Churchill what he thought about “negotiations” with evil–it worked out so well in the late 1930′s and early 1940′s.
***
John Bibb
***

rocketman on March 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM

–I don’t think that anyone in Mexico really thinks Mexico has a claim on Texas.
Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 11:54 AM

As usual Jimbo, you’re wrong.

A Zogby poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agreed with the statement, “The territory of the Southwest U.S. rightfully belongs to Mexico,”

angryed on March 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM

When you spend your time in 5 star hotels, you rarely do see the problems in a country.

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 12:19 PM

TheBigOldDog on March 2, 2010 at 12:14 PM

Keep in mind that was al-Guarniad (a paper that has employed members of the Muslim Brotherhood, for example). Legitimate British papers like the Times and Telegraph were a little more professional.

PimFortuynsGhost on March 2, 2010 at 12:20 PM

A Zogby poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agreed with the statement, “The territory of the Southwest U.S. rightfully belongs to Mexico,”

angryed on March 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM

One of the reasons why the US got into WWI was we intercepted a communique from Germany to the govt of Mexico, offering them a deal. If they attacked the US, after the war, Germany would give them the southwest territories back.

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Telling the parties to sit down and talk is not getting in their business in a practical sense. That’s just a nice way of saying ‘Resolve this peacefully’.

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:13 PM

“Resolve this peacefully”…or what? The problem with thinking that the resolution to all the problems in the world is by simply sitting down and talking is that you haven’t thought it through. What happens when the talks break down? When one side walks out? What you’ve actually created is an even bigger problem than by simply not sitting down to talk about an already resolved issue.

Trafalgar on March 2, 2010 at 12:20 PM

But now Argentina (with either the government or the militias, etc.) has less propaganda material to make people think that the U.S. and Great Britian are the evil imperialists.

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:13 PM

Oh goodie! I was so worried what the Argentinians might say about us. I am so relieved now. So when they get their asses kicked again trying to take a British property by force because we gave them a false sense of encouragement, I won’t have to worry what they might say about us.

TheBigOldDog on March 2, 2010 at 12:21 PM

Luckily, Hillary comes off looking like a schmuck. Oh Ann…

JiangxiDad on March 2, 2010 at 12:22 PM

Argentinians are insufferable wankers. They have a first world arrogance and a squalid third world country.

If you’re going to behave as if your country bestrides the world like the Colossus of Rhodes, your country should at least have some serious achievements to take pride in. The U.S. went to the moon and has been a dominant economic and military power for a century. The Brits once were masters of 2/5 of the world and didn’t do that bad a job of ruling it. Hell even the Canadians can take pride in punching above their weight in both world wars and giving us William Shatner.

Argentinians? What the hell have these people ever done but harbor Nazis, worship a prostitute and her corrupt statist husband, and be in a perpetual state of economic collapse?

Mike Honcho on March 2, 2010 at 12:22 PM

–I don’t think that anyone in Mexico really thinks Mexico has a claim on Texas. Texas won the first war war before it became part of the US and the US again beat Mexico after Texas became part of the US. Now, “hopes for…” is a different story.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 11:54 AM

You are very misinformed. This is a prime talking point for La Raza and a reason they give for their open border position.

Have you really not heard of “Reconquistadora”? It’s a battle cry for immigration marches!

petunia on March 2, 2010 at 12:23 PM

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Obviously Jimbo didn’t learn about the Zimmermann Note when studying for his degree in “Transgender Transgressive Dance.”

PimFortuynsGhost on March 2, 2010 at 12:23 PM

Argentinians? What the hell have these people ever done but harbor Nazis, worship a prostitute and her corrupt statist husband, and be in a perpetual state of economic collapse?

Mike Honcho on March 2, 2010 at 12:22 PM

They did it all with style.

JiangxiDad on March 2, 2010 at 12:24 PM

Sitting down and talking sure was effective in preventing WWII.

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Telling the parties to sit down and talk is not getting in their business in a practical sense. That’s just a nice way of saying ‘Resolve this peacefully’.


ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:13 PM

ckoeber, I want your house. Lets sit down and negotiate it. Who do you want as the mediator? I want MarkTheGreat.

barnone on March 2, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Surely you don’t think President Obama would display an executive trait like delegating decision making, do you? :)

baldilocks on March 2, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Not at all. But it wouldn’t surprise me if she shared his view on this. I’d really like to see all post-colonial lefties in North America go back to wherever their ancestors came from to reduce the PC crap we have to deal. They never want to put their own money where their mouths are, just yours and mine.

ProfessorMiao on March 2, 2010 at 12:30 PM

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:13 PM

One component missing from this discussion is Argentina’s desire to take this dispute to the U.N. The U.K. has clearly stated there will be no discussion on the settled issue of the Falklands, Argentina wants the U.N. involved, and suddenly Clinton interjects the U.S. in by (at least implicitly) favoring negotiations.

In diplomatic circles, that is clearly taking sides- and not with our close allies the Brits.

cs89 on March 2, 2010 at 12:31 PM

You know,if Argentina would nourish the remaining spark of western civilization that threatens to be extinguished here and in Europe, I’d give ‘em the Falklands. Western Civ. existed long before the modern western welfare state. The latter’s demise doesn’t have to include the former, does it? And since the Argentines aren’t actually doing anything with Argentina this century, maybe they could save the world.

JiangxiDad on March 2, 2010 at 12:35 PM

As for Argentina not dropping it’s claim, you are correct. But now Argentina (with either the government or the militias, etc.) has less propaganda material to make people think that the U.S. and Great Britian are the evil imperialists.

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:13 PM

I guess you’ve never heard of a dissatisfied party to such ‘negotiations’ whining about bad faith. Britain has no intent to negotiate its sovereignty over the Falklands. Why should it pretend to? So it can be accused of bad faith later on down the road?

ProfessorMiao on March 2, 2010 at 12:37 PM

Argentinians? What the hell have these people ever done but harbor Nazis, worship a prostitute and her corrupt statist husband, and be in a perpetual state of economic collapse?

Mike Honcho on March 2, 2010 at 12:22 PM
They did it all with style.

JiangxiDad on March 2, 2010 at 12:24 PM

H@ll yes, they invented the tango!

ProfessorMiao on March 2, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Telling the parties to sit down and talk is not getting in their business in a practical sense. That’s just a nice way of saying ‘Resolve this peacefully’.


ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:13 PM
ckoeber, I want your house. Lets sit down and negotiate it. Who do you want as the mediator? I want MarkTheGreat.

barnone on March 2, 2010 at 12:27 PM

To perfect the analogy, Ed or Allah would have to tell you and ckoeber to sit down and negotiate over your claim. That should be fun. Let us know how it works out!

ProfessorMiao on March 2, 2010 at 12:39 PM

The British are negotiating with Argentina but NOT about sovereignty. This is about access to resources on the sea shelf and there is room for compromise.

Hillary and Obama seem neutral on the main issue which will irritate the British but it is no different from Haig and Reagan. One submarine will stop all the BS.

I’m going to Argentina this month and will not hesitate to wear my England jersey. The two countries remain friends despite this dispute which always seems to accompany hard times in Argentina.

lexhamfox on March 2, 2010 at 12:40 PM

If the British can get pissed off with “Everyone sit down and talk things over.” then they are pretty immature.

I’m curious. What is immature about asserting one’s own property and ownership rights?

Look, one side of the dispute feels that this issue isn’t settled so you cannot say the conflict/matter is over. If we said “Hey, British PM said this is a done deal” that would only make the Argentineans angrier.

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 11:12 AM

There is a fundamental principle you seem to keep forgetting while on this wild crusade to ‘not want to anger any parties involved.’ Ownership, posession, and/or sovereignty are not up for negotiations no matter how bad the non owner or geographic looter wishes grab someone else’s land. It matters not if the potential land grabber gets ‘angry’ about it. The anger is not justified.

Either a third party mediator respects what is just or recuses itself. Giving lip service to theft is not an option on moral grounds.

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 12:42 PM

They do say the sheep population was nearly wiped out after the 1982 war, when the British all took war brides home!!

Trafalgar on March 2, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Those war brides were HOT though. Ewes to be strippers.

katy the mean old lady on March 2, 2010 at 12:51 PM

I was stationed in England during the Falklands War. It was all the Brits ever talked about–it dominated 2/3 of every newscast. And why shouldn’t it have? It’s their property, & they have the right to defend it.

jgapinoy on March 2, 2010 at 12:52 PM

OT:

I know there are many who absolutely hate Mitt Romney. I supported him in 2008 and think we would be far better off right now if he had won the POTUS. But I don’t know if I will support him or someone else in 2012 he is so polarizing especially… oh never mind.

I just read an excerpt from his book. I am hoping that it might change some minds on how he is such an evil phony or whatever.

This story encapsulates the American exceptionalism that Obama and the left are so adamantly against:

During my tenure as governor of Massachusetts, I had the opportunity to join a small group of people in meeting Shimon Peres, Israel’s former prime minister and current president. In casual conversation, someone asked him what he thought about the ongoing conflict in Iraq. Given his American audience, I expected him to respond diplomatically but with a degree of criticism. But what he said caught me very much by surprise.

“First, I must put something in context,” he began. “America is unique in the history of the world. In the history of the world, whenever there has been war, the nation that is victorious has taken land from the nation that has been defeated— land has always been the basis of wealth on our planet.

Only one nation in history, and this during the last century, was willing to lay down hundreds of thousands of lives and take no land in its victory— no land from Germany, no land from Japan. America. America is unique in the history of the world for its willingness to sacrifice so many lives of its precious sons and daughters for liberty, not solely for itself but also for its friends.”

Everyone in the room was silent for a moment, and no one pressed him further on his opinion about Iraq. I was deeply moved. And I was reminded of former secretary of state Colin Powell’s observation that the only land America took after World War II was what was needed to bury our dead.

I keep wondering if we are Rome. If we are bound to fail because our prosperity breeds corruption in our government. But at least in this way we are nothing like Rome.

petunia on March 2, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Smash their pearls
Trash their world
That’s my girl!

Heckuva job there, Hill!

juanito on March 2, 2010 at 1:01 PM

The two countries remain friends despite this dispute which always seems to accompany hard times in Argentina.

lexhamfox on March 2, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Gee, good thing they’re friendly. I’d hate to think how many British destroyers or merchant ships they would have sunk with exocets if they actually disliked each other.

TheBigOldDog on March 2, 2010 at 1:03 PM

If memory serves, the “negotiations” ended in 1982 when Maggie Thatcher directed the Brit military to kick the asses of the Argentines.

oldleprechaun on March 2, 2010 at 1:03 PM

If we said “Hey, British PM said this is a done deal” that would only make the Argentineans angrier.

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 11:12 AM

It is a done deal – has been for a while – and who cares what the Argentinians think?

I think The Precedent needs to go down and see what is really happening in Argentina. He should take 3 or 4 years and go live there, like a peasant, absorbing the situation. It’s a great sacrifice, but the US is willing to issue the Indonesian Imbecile a one-way ticket to help with his “research” (which Harvard and Yale and Princeton can all give him doctorates for, so you can call him “Dr. Dr. Dr. Indonesian Imbecile”).

neurosculptor on March 2, 2010 at 1:05 PM

SOROS: Barry I’ve got some drilling I need to get started in the South Atlantic and I’m working on a deal with the Argentinian Babe….

BARRY OBAMA: No problem George I’ll put Rahm and Hillary right on it.

PRESTO……Britain must surrender/negotiate over the Falklands.

PappyD61 on March 2, 2010 at 1:08 PM

I think Hillary was just channeling James T. Kirk. “I’m gettin’ tired a gettin’ pushed around by you penny-ante operators—YOU’RE A PENNY-ANTE OPERATOR! Siddown!”

Chris_Balsz on March 2, 2010 at 1:15 PM

Work on your strawmen, Einstein. Hawaii =/= Falklands.

Dark-Star on March 2, 2010 at 10:40 AM

According to a couple of rocket scientists at CNN, Hawaii = the Galapagos Islands.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2010 at 1:18 PM

Actually Hawaii is in the news again with that Akaka bill. It has passed the House for the 3rd time. It has never passed the Senate (but look who controls it now) and President Obama has said he would sign it. Cedes 1.8 million acres etc etc to the Native Hawaians.

journeyintothewhirlwind on March 2, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Both O’bama and Uncle Joe Biden voted as “Senators” in favor of this bill in the past. And its own sponsor admitted that its passage could eventually allow Hawai’i to secede from the US.

In other words, the same Democrats who went after Sarah Palin’s husband for advocating secession happily supported a bill that would allow another state to do the same thing.

Move along, folks, no double standard here…

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2010 at 1:21 PM

I keep wondering if we are Rome. If we are bound to fail because our prosperity breeds corruption in our government. But at least in this way we are nothing like Rome.

petunia on March 2, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Freedom is Man’s Natural State. But in the confines of society, it is a perishable thing. A Free People must have among many things uncompromising responsibility not only to themselves but to one another, otherwise they soon no longer become free. They degenerate into corrupt people who crap on their neighbors lawn, who grow fat and lazy, who delve deep into all the vices and forget the Virtues that are necessary to perpetuate Freedom.

We saw this in Rome. Rome fell because the Freedom the people enjoyed corrupted them. The women forgot their republican Duty to bear Sons to defend the Republic, they instead married rich old men and slept around. The men forgot their duty to Fight for the Republic and farmed it out to Barbarians. The people forgot about Private property and began to demand ‘Entitlements’ such as Food and Entertainment. All helped along by Greedy Politicians who were all to willing to accrue personal power at the Republic’s expense.

This will be out epitaph unless we have a Cultural Revolution.

Holger on March 2, 2010 at 1:22 PM

OK, so just say ‘F*ck off’ and walk away?

And screw OUR trade relations with Argentina? In this economy?

ckoeber on March 2, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Walk away? Why? We should be condemning Argentina for it’s aggression.

Count to 10 on March 2, 2010 at 1:22 PM

I don’t know what it is, maybe the history of Britain liking Regan/Bush?
But Obama has been dissing Britain from the beginning…I don’t think Obama understands history. He thinks only in terms of himself and the immediate response and accolades he receives.
Argentina is thrilled, and Britain is reserved…or maybe it’s that Britain already has a king…

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:30 PM

I don’t think that anyone in Mexico really thinks Mexico has a claim on Texas. Texas won the first war war before it became part of the US and the US again beat Mexico after Texas became part of the US. Now, “hopes for…” is a different story.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 11:54 AM

Please tell me that this is a joke and you are not this ignorant on the world around you. Even Sarah Palin is able to explain that Mexico considers much of the Southwest “on loan” to the gringos. And not just individuals but whole aspects of public policy in the Mexican government. Again, please tell me that this was just a joke.

highhopes on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

The problem with this thread is placing the name Obama in the same sentence as the name Thatcher…

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

I don’t know what it is, maybe the history of Britain liking Regan/Bush?
But Obama has been dissing Britain from the beginning…

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:30 PM

It has nothing to do with Reagan or Bush. The Precedent is a third worlder bent on exacting revenge on the first world. The Precedent hates Britain for the same reason he hates us, because they are part of the West.

neurosculptor on March 2, 2010 at 1:38 PM

How dare we offer a hope for negotiation on a matter upon which Her Majesty’s Government, democratically elected to convey the wishes of the British public, has not commented.

Da noive.

Chris_Balsz on March 2, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Prof Miao – thanks for mentioning the tango.

I’d like to mention Juan Fangio.

Regards All!

Archie Noble on March 2, 2010 at 1:39 PM

This will be out epitaph unless we have a Cultural Revolution.

Holger on March 2, 2010 at 1:22 PM

But we are better than Rome! Our power is built, not just on the superiority of our capitalist ideology that empowers our own people, but on our commitment to protect the weak nations against the ravenous and strong ones.

We are losing our faith in our exceptionalism. Our unique place in the history of the world! We are the only ones who figured out that our own freedom is safer if it is shared with others!

This model of government and economics works! For the first time in history a country can dominate without subjugating others.

But we are throwing it away with our laziness. So many want to turn over the hard parts of freedom to the government.

And that could be the end of our social experiment.

petunia on March 2, 2010 at 1:41 PM

I don’t know what it is, maybe the history of Britain liking Regan/Bush?
But Obama has been dissing Britain from the beginning…I don’t think Obama understands history. He thinks only in terms of himself and the immediate response and accolades he receives.
Argentina is thrilled, and Britain is reserved…or maybe it’s that Britain already has a king…

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 1:30 PM

Again, it’s the UK’s colonial history–to include that in Kenya–for which Obama is getting revenge.

baldilocks on March 2, 2010 at 1:55 PM

I was stationed in England during the Falklands War. It was all the Brits ever talked about–it dominated 2/3 of every newscast. And why shouldn’t it have? It’s their property, & they have the right to defend it.

jgapinoy on March 2, 2010 at 12:52 PM

–Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 PM

Again, it’s the UK’s colonial history–to include that in Kenya–for which Obama is getting revenge.

baldilocks on March 2, 2010 at 1:55 PM

That and academia generally admires the socialist utopias of South America while they lump North America and Western Europe in the “that which must be destroyed” camp.

highhopes on March 2, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Yeah. The existence of Irish people makes the two situations rather different, though.

sandberg on March 2, 2010 at 2:08 PM

1. “SOROS: Barry I’ve got some drilling I need to get started in the South Atlantic and I’m working on a deal with the Argentinian Babe”

Soros has an interest in the huge Brazillian oil and gas find. The US has loaned Brazil billions to help develop the resource.

2. The Brits now have a more robust presence in the Falklands than in 1982.

davod on March 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Please tell me that this is a joke and you are not this ignorant on the world around you. Even Sarah Palin is able to explain that Mexico considers much of the Southwest “on loan” to the gringos. And not just individuals but whole aspects of public policy in the Mexican government. Again, please tell me that this was just a joke.

highhopes on March 2, 2010 at 1:32 PM

–Not a joke, but I think we’re looking at it differently. The stuff you (and others) linked to were articles saying that this group (from the 60s) would fight for land “rightfully theirs.” Nothing in those materials shows what land that is. And the other link suggested that reunification would be done socially, rather than militarily. I don’t think that’s a “claim” on the US.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM

–Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 PM

The island, Northern Ireland, or Republic of…?

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM

It’s an active claim, at least among ‘chicano” groups north of the border, demonstrated by maps showing Mexico reaching to Montana.

Chris_Balsz on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

You are very misinformed. This is a prime talking point for La Raza and a reason they give for their open border position.

Have you really not heard of “Reconquistadora”? It’s a battle cry for immigration marches!

petunia on March 2, 2010 at 12:23 PM

Here’s what I’m reading from their website:

Q: Does NCLR believe in open borders?
A: No. NCLR does not and has never advocated open borders. We believe that the U.S. is a sovereign country with the right to control its borders. We care a great deal about how our borders are enforced; NCLR has long argued that enforcement at the border and in the interior must be conducted in a way that maximizes effectiveness without undercutting our values as a nation. We are especially troubled that more than a decade of increased enforcement measures along the U.S.-Mexico border have resulted in a steep increase in the number of border deaths without much impact in deterring migration. NCLR takes the position that any border enforcement policies must be both effective and humane.

Q: Does NCLR advocate unlimited immigrant admissions?
A: No. Immigration to the United States is currently restricted, and NCLR supports these restrictions. In order to come legally as an immigrant, you must be sponsored by an employer (in a “highly-skilled” profession) or by a close family member, such as a spouse, parent, adult son or daughter, or sibling. NCLR supports these visa categories, and is working to ensure that all immigration can take place legally.

Q: What are NCLR’s policy positions on immigration reform?
A: NCLR supports comprehensive immigration reforms that combine reasonable enforcement with reduction in family immigration backlogs, a legal path for future immigrant workers, and a path to citizenship for those living and working in the U.S. For further information, see our issue brief: Immigration Reform: Comprehensive Solutions to Complex Problems.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

“Resolve this peacefully”…or what? The problem with thinking that the resolution to all the problems in the world is by simply sitting down and talking is that you haven’t thought it through. What happens when the talks break down? When one side walks out? What you’ve actually created is an even bigger problem than by simply not sitting down to talk about an already resolved issue.

Trafalgar on March 2, 2010 at 12:20 PM

“Diplomacy should be a job left to diplomats.” Ambassador Robert Fox, “A Taste of Armageddon”, Star Trek TOS.

Shortly after he said that, the people whom he thought he was “negotiating” with took him hostage in order to kill him.

Del Dolemonte on March 2, 2010 at 2:16 PM

–Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 PM
The island, Northern Ireland, or Republic of…?

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 2:12 PM

–I think it was limited to Northern Ireland, not Southern.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 2:16 PM

–Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 PM

The Falklands don’t want to be a part of Argentina.

Holger on March 2, 2010 at 2:17 PM

It’s an active claim, at least among ‘chicano” groups north of the border, demonstrated by maps showing Mexico reaching to Montana.

Chris_Balsz on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

‘Aztlan’ movements, I believe (if I recall correctly), have support in La Raza as well.

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 2:21 PM

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 2:15 PM

They lie and you propagate the lies. This reminds of the idiots, many of whom were illegal idiots, who carried Mexican flags for their demonstrations in support of illegals. THey also loved the credo, “We didn’t cross the border. The Border crossed us.” What could that possibly mean, jimbo? Perhaps the English in that sentiment is too complicated for you to figure out.

But, you can proudly claim that they don’t do that anymore … as they saw the backlash against thier idiocy was intense.

You are either a useful idiot or an active enemy of US sovereignty. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you’re a useful idiot.

neurosculptor on March 2, 2010 at 2:23 PM

–Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 PM

So much ignorance.
Britain never claimed ownership of Ireland. They claimed ownership of N. Ireland. And most people who lived in N. Ireland had no desire to be forceably joined to the rest of Ireland. They wanted to remain part of Britain.

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 2:24 PM

Clinton has demonstrated, not the first time, strikingly poor judgment as Secretary of State. While currying favour with a third rate kleptocracy in Latin America, she is alienating America’s most loyal and valuable friend at a critically important time.

Yea right…Palin is the stupid one…..

The reality of liberal idiocy and the joke of “smart power” in all of it’s beauty for the world to see….again.

The Obama administration should just concentrate on kissing Ahmadinejad and Putin’s a$$ since that is what they do best.

Baxter Greene on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

“We didn’t cross the border. The Border crossed us.”

Yeah, there are plenty of people with that sentiment, many of them illegals.

But there are also many Hispanic American citizens who have no interest whatsoever in being governed by the nation of Mexico.

I don’t know which group is bigger, though. I suspect the latter, when you get right down to it, but I don’t know.

sandberg on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

How long ago was it that Argentina had to nationalize all private retirement accounts?

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Based on what I’ve read, the announcement came in late ’08. I believe some of it was to have taken place in late ’08 into ’09. I haven’t seen much about it lately, however, considering how huge of a deal this is.

Tak_Bulgogi on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

–I think it was limited to Northern Ireland, not Southern.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 2:16 PM

There are historical and ownership claims to this, however. Argentina has proximity only. I don’t see how one is applicable to the other.

anuts on March 2, 2010 at 2:29 PM

Maybe Hillary is shilling for a Nobel Prize of her own…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 2, 2010 at 2:33 PM

So much ignorance.
Britain never claimed ownership of Ireland.

Um, yes, it did. British rule of Southern Ireland was ended by the 1916 uprising.

They claimed ownership of N. Ireland.

They claimed all of Ireland, but the Irish republicans only succeeded in overthrowing them in the South, but not in the North, which they retained.

And most people who lived in N. Ireland had no desire to be forceably joined to the rest of Ireland. They wanted to remain part of Britain.

Actually, the split is close to 50-50, which has made it a particularly thorny problem, although it seems to have settled down lately, thankfully.

sandberg on March 2, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Argentinians? What the hell have these people ever done but harbor Nazis, worship a prostitute and her corrupt statist husband, and be in a perpetual state of economic collapse?

And hand-balls.

This such a non issue. The islands were uninhabited when discovered by Europeans. Argetina has the weakest claim of any nation that has a history in the Falklands. Why, because they are closer? Rubbish.

Do cankles and Obowma want to bring France and Spain to the table to? Do we do this all over the world? Fools.

A better analogy would be the US trying to “claim” Bermuda.

reaganaut on March 2, 2010 at 2:57 PM

–Course didn’t they say the same thing about Ireland a while ago?

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 1:58 PM

Is “everything” the same to you?
You can’t differentiate between different actions in history?
You actually think the Falklands, and Ireland, are the same?
You thing Falklands=Ireland…north or south…see where your limited knowledge falls apart at the slightest bit of understanding?
So if Cuba wants Puerto Rico, we should just give it up to them?

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 2:58 PM

This is a very simple issue here in the UK- not only do the islanders wish to remain British but 258 servicemen were killed in the Falklands War preventing the unhinged aggression of the Argentinians. That blood was not spilled for nothing and the so-called “smart power” of Hillary and Obama should have realised that if they had the slightest clue.

Obama’s initial interjection was enough to anger the British, myself included, Hillary has just twisted the knife in the wound. Right now, a lot of people are asking themselves why the UK should continue to send men to die and be disabled for the sake of the “American war” in Afghanistan- why support America when she won’t support us over a completely ridiculous claim like this? While many of us realise that the fight against jihadists is for the sake of us all, not everyone sees it that way. Obama and Hillary are not only goading on a spurious sovereignty claim but they have grievously insulted one of their closest allies.

Jay Mac on March 2, 2010 at 3:03 PM

So much ignorance.
Britain never claimed ownership of Ireland.
Um, yes, it did. British rule of Southern Ireland was ended by the 1916 uprising.

They claimed ownership of N. Ireland.
They claimed all of Ireland, but the Irish republicans only succeeded in overthrowing them in the South, but not in the North, which they retained.

sandberg on March 2, 2010 at 2:36 PM

–You’re right, I was wrong. Thanks.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 3:05 PM

So if Cuba wants Puerto Rico, we should just give it up to them?

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 2:58 PM

–Have you ever been to Puerto Rico? Do you know how bad their economy has been in the last few years since Section 936 of the Tax Code was changed.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

“We didn’t cross the border. The Border crossed us.”

Here is a good taste of what NCLR supports:

“My immigrant va#ina is angry” and other militant May Day moments

By Michelle Malkin • May 3, 2008 10:59 AM

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/03/my-immigrant-vagina-is-angry-and-other-militant-may-day-moments/?print=1


Whose land is it?

By Michelle Malkin • April 24, 2006 07:51 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/2006/04/24/whose-land-is-it/?print=1

Welcome to San Diego, Mexico.:


Top 10 reasons McCain should repudiate the National Council of La Raza

By Michelle Malkin • May 6, 2008 11:00 AM

I told you yesterday about John McCain’s plans to speak to the National Council of La Raza (The Race) in July. Here are the top 10 reasons he should repudiate the radical open borders, speech-squelching group that he has long embraced:


10. La Raza supports driver’s licenses for illegal aliens.

9. La Raza supports in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding US citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants.


8. La Raza opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state, and federal authorities.


7. La Raza sponsors militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars, including the “Aztlan Academy” in Tucson, AZ, the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, AZ, and Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School in St. Paul, Minn.

6. La Raza gives mainstream cover to a poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA), which the late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized as “a radical racist group…[and] one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West.”

5. La Raza opposes a secure fence on the southern border.


4. Former La Raza president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton’s Hispanic outreach advisor said this:

“US English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks.” He was referring to US English the nation’s oldest, largest citizens’ action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States.

La Raza also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms “illegal” and “amnesty.”


3. La Raza is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch immigration enforcement leaders and has called for TV and cable TV networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves–in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes.


2. La Raza has consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn.


1. The National Council of La Raza means The National Council of “The Race,” for God’s sake.


Their signature slogan, chanted at pro-illegal alien rallies from coast to coast, is “La raza unida nunca sera vencida.”

“A united [Hispanic] race will never be defeated.”

What possible good will come out of a GOP presidential candidate giving legitimacy and credibility to a sovereignty-undermining, assimilation-rejecting, law-defying group that calls itself “The Race?”

Baxter Greene on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Um, yes, it did. British rule of Southern Ireland was ended by the 1916 uprising.
–The Rising did not end British rule. Depending on your perspective the Rising was either the first shot of a new war or one of a much longer struggle for independence by a particularly militant (and at times vituperative) segment of a wider Irish nationalist movement. It certainly set Ireland on the path to be what it is today but the Anglo-Irish Treaty – a response to the violence sparked by the Rising – laid the groundwork for a gradual drift from fully-fledged member of the Commonwealth to independent Republic. Ireland remained a Dominion of the Empire until the 1937 Referendum to replace the constitution of the Free State.

How is this relevant to Argentina’s claim to the Falklands? I’m not sure but in the Ireland of 1916, as in the Argentina of today, there was a great diversity of opinion over Irish claims against Britain (keep in mind how many Irishmen volunteered to be Imperial soldiers, architects, doctors, and policemen). It remains to be seen whether Mrs. Kirchner, like the Irish revolutionaries of 1916, really speak for the majority of Argentines – and further still whether that is a good thing. She certainly doesn’t represent the views of the lion’s share of Falklands Islanders.

Grunchy Cranola on March 2, 2010 at 3:09 PM

–Have you ever been to Puerto Rico? Do you know how bad their economy has been in the last few years since Section 936 of the Tax Code was changed.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Distraction through irrelevancy.
Well played sir.

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Jimbo3:

You’re right, I was wrong. Thanks.

No worries, just setting the record straight.

Grunchy Cranola:

The Rising did not end British rule.

You’re right, I was wrong. Thanks.

:)

sandberg on March 2, 2010 at 3:24 PM

Shrillary and Obama will never understand (though to his shame, Biden does but doesn’t care) the mindset of a warrior or a commander-in-chief:

if it’s ours, it’s worth protecting; if it’s worth protecting, it’s worth dying for; once someone has died for it, it becomes a sacred trust. While the object, right or territory may once have had no value, it is now imbued with value by the price one of your own has paid for it in blood.

No politician should be able to salute a military family and promise them that their child/father/husband/sister/mom will have no purpose in their sacrifice other than to demonstrate the poor leadership of their commander-in-chief.

That’s what Shrillary has just done to the Brits. Apparently she thinks that those who made a military sacrifice have as short a memory as the American media and electorate.

So I guess it’s a good thing Bill passed up his opportunities to lead the world against terrorism; he would have quit the battles halfway through.

rwenger43 on March 2, 2010 at 3:50 PM

–Have you ever been to Puerto Rico? Do you know how bad their economy has been in the last few years since Section 936 of the Tax Code was changed.

Jimbo3 on March 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM

So what you are saying is…I am right, you are wrong, and look at the shiny object.
Britain should give up control of Falklands, like we should give up Puerto Rico…but then we could take over Bermuda…
But then the territories of Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and Yukon in Canada can be taken over by us, since they are just territories…but then who gets these?
American Samoa
Guam
Northern Mariana Islands
U.S. Virgin Islands
By your standards, all territories are “open season”…better sit back and let the adults figure this out.
Britain has territorial rights…Argentina backs off or China gets Guam and American Samoa…

right2bright on March 2, 2010 at 3:56 PM

remember when bill was first elected the dems were calling her the “smartest woman in the world”

I live in NY and she was an ineffective senator and she is a total failure as sec of state. not too smart

georgealbert on March 2, 2010 at 4:03 PM

This is a very simple issue here in the UK- not only do the islanders wish to remain British but 258 servicemen were killed in the Falklands War preventing the unhinged aggression of the Argentinians. That blood was not spilled for nothing and the so-called “smart power” of Hillary and Obama should have realised that if they had the slightest clue.

Obama’s initial interjection was enough to anger the British, myself included, Hillary has just twisted the knife in the wound. Right now, a lot of people are asking themselves why the UK should continue to send men to die and be disabled for the sake of the “American war” in Afghanistan- why support America when she won’t support us over a completely ridiculous claim like this? While many of us realise that the fight against jihadists is for the sake of us all, not everyone sees it that way. Obama and Hillary are not only goading on a spurious sovereignty claim but they have grievously insulted one of their closest allies.

Jay Mac on March 2, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Thanks Jay Mac. I knew their was something really odd about SUDDENLY the Falklands are an issue.
 
Watch closely. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. This is about forcing a failure in A-stan. Follow me the road takes a jig.
By getting the Brits to back out, ( maybe not even officially but by scaling back and slowing down it’s the same effect) our troops are more at risk. That stinks. Murtha’s slow bleed is still going on. That stinks twice. The “new” ROE. I won’t describe the stench on those as we are in mixed company. Whatever and whenever L’il Barry Obooboo can make the nation he hates the most suffer the most, that’s what he’s in the game for. Most days he just does what Soros says. Some days he enjoys it.

Blacksmith8 on March 2, 2010 at 4:16 PM

In the scale of Obama’s favorite leftist despots, Argentina outranks Britain…

JIMV on March 2, 2010 at 4:18 PM

Three of my grandfathers’ brothers (from Cork – that’s in Ireland, for the Democrats reading) signed up to fight for the Empire in WW1. Other brothers were nationalists and dead against their involvement. The situation in Ireland was highly complex, to reduce it to four legs good, two legs bad morality is a foolish. The situation with the Falklands, on the other hand, is as simple as simple could be.

Clinton must know that she and the Argies will get nowhere with this. Clearly she has decided to piss us off for some reason. Congratulations love. Enjoy the new-look NATO with Italian tanks and French soldiers.

thedarknight on March 2, 2010 at 4:20 PM

Too bad the British didn’t pound on Obama’s communist father a little harder.

TexasJew on March 2, 2010 at 4:25 PM

This is sad. For the first time I am scared and embarassed for my country.
It doesn’t surprise me one bit that Obama is destroying my country through financial means but what does surprise me is the complete ineptitude by this administration on foreign policy. Here goes the ever campaigning Obama on his world apology tour while totally pissing off allies over and over. It is nuts and embarassing. So now the ever bowing maniac and company have pretty much alienated the US.

ORconservative on March 2, 2010 at 4:29 PM

lion’s share of Falklands Islanders.

Grunchy Cranola on March 2, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Good one ; )

BL@KBIRD on March 2, 2010 at 4:52 PM

I’m thinking than an RN SSN with a full load of Tomahawk missiles would eliminate just about any Argie air power by attacking their airfields. The same SSN would decimate any naval/amphib attack on the Falklands. Two such SSNs would make the Falklands almost invulnerable.

I’m thinking that a Gordon Brown, sinking in the polls, might reach back and rekindle some Brit patriotic pride.Like my most vivid memory of the Falklands War, the departure of the Royal Gurkha Rifles for the Falklands. A video I’ll always remember with the streets lined with thousands waving the Union Jack. The Falklands made Maggie Thatch and the UK serious players in world politics back then. Maybe it’s time for a sequel.

xkaydet65 on March 2, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Great Britian should just transfer all the troops they have in Afghanistan to the Falkands. They could call it the Hillary Redeployment.

MB4 on March 2, 2010 at 5:29 PM

On behalf of the United States, I’d like to apologize to our friends in the U.K. And to the folks over there who were fans of the Obama team, allow me to take this opportunity to say “we tried to warn you.”

hawksruleva on March 2, 2010 at 5:33 PM

How long ago was it that Argentina had to nationalize all private retirement accounts?

MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2010 at 12:16 PM

You’re not trying to say Argentina is using the Falklands to distract its people from severe economic problems at home, are you? That would be very cynical of you. Surely no government would cook up a critical situation in order to distract people.

Say, hows that H1N1 pandemic going? Did it go the way of global warming?

hawksruleva on March 2, 2010 at 5:41 PM

My kid is living in Argentina right now and they are really nice people, but I do have to say that I side with Great Britain on this one.

WyoMike on March 2, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Maybe this White House hasn’t recalled this yet, but the British are fighting alongside of us in Afghanistan, where we desperately need them to stay. If Britain suddenly discovers a need to deploy to the Falklands, especially because of American meddling, I’m quite certain London would need little encouragement to redeploy from their NATO commitment to do so.

Any chance they could want a British pullout as an excuse to leave Afghanistan?

clement on March 2, 2010 at 6:55 PM

UK is in Afghanistan because of a treaty obligation.

UK stayed out of Vietnam, Panama and invested in Castro’s Cuba and the Ayatollah’s Iran, because it had no treaty commitments to the contrary.

The Brits are well aware of the difference between historic sentiment, immediate interest, and legal duty.

That is why the British “outrage” does not extend to any member of the UK govt. actually expressing “outrage”. Their comment is consistently, “no comment”.

If any Brit feels outrage that an American secretary of state supports UN negotiations between the UK and a nation you defeated in war, reflect that your country lost the war to shut up US Secretaries of State. Twice.

If it suits American interests in our hemisphere for Hillary to call for pointless negotiations over your territory, bully for her. I don’t recall the Queen sending urgent telegrams for each US President to stop sending envoys to Israel for the same purpose.

Send Margaret Thatcher to the UN. She seems fit enough to say “No” for four hours, and for the afternoon session she can pointedly nap.

Chris_Balsz on March 2, 2010 at 6:56 PM

What is it with the Obama administration and continually siding with South American socialists? The only reason why the Argentine Government is rattling its sabre about the Falklands again is because they’re broke and need something to distract the people of Argentina from the crappy job they’re doing running the country. Also the discovery of oil near the Falklands is a big part of the equation on this and I wouldn’t be surprised if a certain billionaire was involved and actively encouraging the administration to get in the middle of the dispute.

Hellrider on March 2, 2010 at 7:06 PM

To give one inch to the Argentinians on the issue of the Falklands would be the greatest dishonour to the memory of all those British soldiers who gave their lives in defence of the islands and its British inhabitants so that the Falklanders could live in a democratic and free society and not as second class citizens in a Latin American banana socialist republic.

Jabba The Cat on March 2, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Where is the outrage from British leadership? Obama and Clinton are both fully aware what a scared puppy Brown really is.

Birdseye on March 2, 2010 at 9:10 PM

Obama is not a very smart man.

He proves it every day.

Clinton wouldn’t spout this garbage without Obama telling her to do so. I’ll bet even she is furious with him half the time.

scotash on March 2, 2010 at 9:19 PM

remember when bill was first elected the dems were calling her the “smartest woman in the world”

I live in NY and she was an ineffective senator and she is a total failure as sec of state. not too smart

georgealbert on March 2, 2010 at 4:03 PM

-
NY dittos – You can only fake it for so long. Like BHO, she is unqualified, and it shows more and more every day.

diogenes on March 2, 2010 at 10:58 PM

This is worth a replay…Either a liar or delusional.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=68124

diogenes on March 2, 2010 at 11:19 PM

No, no, no, obama and co. said SHART diplomacy.

As in, ” that’s a load of shart!”

Hard Right on March 2, 2010 at 11:35 PM

While I disagree with Hillary, it seems that we see a bit of a Divine sense of humor, as in: “England, you keep cozying up to Hamas, etc, and keep pressuring Israel to give up land it gained via hard fighting……. So, now, how does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot?”

By the way, for those old enough to remember: Even though Reagan supported the British efforts against the Argentinians, that old conservative icon, Senator Jesse Helms, did not! Ironic, that Hillary is practically following the lead of Helms on this.

sanantonian on March 2, 2010 at 11:40 PM

Argentina is a city, not a country.
Hillary is a fool, not a secretary of state.
If Obama doesn’t correct her gaffe, he is an idiot, not a president.

virgo on March 3, 2010 at 2:22 AM

I’ve been to the Falklands. Argentina too. The Argentines mined large portions of the islands when they occupied them, prior to the British arriving to take them back.

The islanders are still suffering from those mines. the soil is so rocky that all of the modern minesweeping schemes don’t work. They would love to have more help on this.

The islands remind me of Scotland, as do the Islanders. Great People. UK heritage all the way. They will fight off the Argentines themselves next time, if they have to.

Jimmy Doolittle on March 3, 2010 at 2:26 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5