Skip to comments.UK: No talks on Falklands, [PM] David Cameron tells Argentina
Posted on 06/26/2010 4:02:07 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
David Cameron is set to restate "robustly" Britain's sovereignty over the Falkland Islands in unscheduled talks with the Argentine president at the G20 gathering of world leaders.
British sources said the Prime Minister would starkly turn down a fresh request from Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner for talks on the issue as tensions rose once again between the two nations.
Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner
Mr Cameron was expected to make his point to Ms Kirchner either during an official leaders' dinner at the Toronto summit last night or at some point in the "margins" of official discussions on Sunday.
A source close to Mr Cameron said: "He will be robust. He will make the point again that our position on the sovereignty of the Falklands has not changed and will not change."
Tensions have risen since Rockhopper, a British drilling company, announced "potential signs" of oil in Falkland Island waters - although they did not say that commercial quantities were present.
British sources say Argentina has used the find as a pretext to "revisit the sovereignty issue". Last week a United Nations committee passed a non-binding resolution calling for the two countries to restart talks.
Mr Cameron was telling Ms Kirchner there would be no talks so long as Islanders said they still wanted to be governed by Britain under the internationally recognised legal principle of "self determination."
Since the 10-week Falklands War in 1982, which claimed 257 British and 649 Argentinians, Argentina has continued to claim sovereignty over the islands and officially refers to them as "Las Malvinas."
The US recognises Britain's "administration" of the Falklands, stopping short of fully endorsing its sovereignty.
Some observers were surprised that Mr Cameron was ready to use his first attendance at a major international gathering to
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
“Don’t make us come over there and kick your ass again.”
Happy to remind them about Sandy Woodward, Jeremy Moore, Col. Jones and Sgt. McKay. A lot has changed in 28 years but never underestimate the British.
I would guess the Brit’s are not counting on any Intell regarding invasion fleets from Argentina from President Obozo and the VP Dolt.
Do they even have a carrier these days
Not to mention friends like Ron Reagan and the people who elected him. They liked the Obamaites during our election campaign and will have to live with them just like the american Jews will have to live with the Obamaite Israeli policies.
“This is not Thatcher’s Britain. It’s highly unlikey the Brits could prevail in another military campaign. They lack the Naval assets they had back in the 80’s.”
...which is exactly why there is new saber-rattling.
Nice to say but this time the government of the United States, and its Supreme Leader is siding with the Argentines.
Considering that England no longer has even that pathetic remnant of a once mighty deep water Navy, they ought to mind their English manners.
This time Argentina might just kick their ass off again for good.
So do the argies. And this time, they would be facing more than a mere score of Royal Marines like they did last time they invaded. They would be facing over 1,000 troops (most of them battle-hardened from a stint or two in Helmand), a Squadron of Eurofighters, artillery, and AAA missile batteries, at least one warship, as well as the local FIDF acting as an auxiliary to the main garrison.
The airbase at RAF Mount Pleasant also means that more men and equipment could be strategically airlifted in during the rise in tensions that would precede an invasion...
Way to Go Cameron, now if only you could get Hong Kong back from the Chinese..!
Hmm...does the UK still have a navy?
UK has a new PM.
So, if a bet were to be laid . . . .?
The UK still has three of these I believe... One is in reserve and may need 18 months to reactivate.
Jump jet mini-carriers - but that is what they had in 1982 as well...
No blood for oil. ;’)