Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: the scotsman

I hope this is not true. Reduces my respect for Reagan.
On the bright side, he followed up with real support as an ally ought to.


2 posted on 12/28/2012 10:16:26 AM PST by Little Ray (Get back to work. Your urban masters need their EBTs refilled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Little Ray

Playing Devil’s Advocate...

Argentina in part based their seizure of the Falklands on an interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. Reagan knew he had a major battle on his hands with Soviet proxy states in Nicaragua and potentially elsewhere in Latin America. So perhaps he was trying to maintain some integrity in the Monroe Doctrine for those future battles?

Just thinking outside the box here.


4 posted on 12/28/2012 10:22:28 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Little Ray

There is always more to the story.
This could have been a “wink-and-nod” gesture by Reagan - - he may have been asked by the Argentina General to make the call in return for... who knows what?


5 posted on 12/28/2012 10:26:28 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Little Ray

Why would this turn you against Reagan.

It shows that even though he did not agree with an ally he stuck with that ally.
I don’t have to agree with everything a friend tells me or that he feels, but that doesn’t make me any less a friend.


9 posted on 12/28/2012 10:30:13 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Little Ray

It’s BUSH’S FAULT !


31 posted on 12/28/2012 11:25:09 AM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Little Ray

From what I know, it’s true, but I don’t believe President Reagan deserves criticism for it. Both the United Kingdom and Argentina were American allies at the time. The United States did not want to see two of its allies go to war and it was absolutely proper and in US interests to try and avoid that. It wasn’t in British interests, so Mrs Thatcher said no, but Reagan - rightly - had to give US interests higher priority than British interests. And when it became clear that war was not going to be avoided, and he had to pick a side, he picked Britain.

There is nothing wrong with trying to find a non-war solution to an international crisis, up to a certain point. I think Reagan got it right with the Falklands - he tried to broker a peaceful settlement, but when that failed, he threw his support behind the democracy over a dictatorship, behind those defending a people’s right to self determination, over an invading country, and behind an old and trusted ally with many shared values, over an ally of strategic convenience.


49 posted on 12/28/2012 3:12:36 PM PST by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Little Ray
I hope this is not true. Reduces my respect for Reagan.

Your post should read: "I hope this is not true. It would reduce my respect for Reagan."

Oh, it probably is only half-true. Like he said it, but Maggie knew he didn't mean it. That's called diplomacy.

Doesn't make sense based on everything else he did, does it.

57 posted on 12/28/2012 4:17:59 PM PST by BfloGuy (Workers and consumers are, of course, identical.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson