posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 01:48 PM
Originally posted by solidshot
i have no problem helping america when they genuanly (sp) need help, what does annoy me is that during recent times what have we got back? for
instance iirc was it a case during the falklands war when the americans were asked for some basic help we were turned down "because it would make
their banana imports more expensive"
no we turned down help in the falklands for 3 reasons:-
1) the former USSR was watching britain closely during the cold war, so we had to prove we could hold our own should the USSR decide to attack britain
and not only that, we had to do it convincingly
! if we got help from america it would have made britain look weak.
2) america wasn't allowed to get involved anyway, the falklands belongs to the united kingdom, it was our job to get it back after the argentines
invaded (nobody elses), if america got involved a few eyebrows and questions would have been raised by other nations to WHY they got involved.
3) national pride.
back to this thread, as said previously i'm all for the 'son of star wars' being set up in britain (if it goes ahead), theres been talk about this
since the 80's but nothing as come about it yet, except a few failed tests (the last i heard)!!
but my flossophy is this, if the americans want to spend £$billions on the project and need british land for interceptor units, then let them do so
IMO...not only will it protect britain, we will also get paid for letting them set these bases up in britain.
[edit on 21-8-2006 by st3ve_o]