Reagan and Thatcher phone conversation

hi all

first of all im sorry if this has been posted.
I did a search but didnt come up with anything.

This business with argentina yet again is getting annoying.
Honestly this is infantile bull, are the argies going to just piss and moan,
or are they going to make the first move.
Seems like we are nipping it in the bud this time, with all troop movements and that.
So much is happening lately and to be honest, its getting bloody scary.
With the term "history repeats itself" i can see why.
From my point of view it seems that the allies and the axis are grouping,
much like prior events leading up to both world wars.

But, as the last 2 world wars unfolded, there was still certain countries that remained neutral (for their own reasons cough).
Im also interested with the "EVENTS" that brought some neutral countries into the game.

Ok, earlier on, a post mentioned something about argentina and american steel.
So i did a little internet search and came up with a conversation between thatcher and reagan.
Ive never read nor heard of this convo.

Id just like to say that my mother introduced me to some old b/w movies (years ago)
and a great film she showed me was "Kings Row".
Then wen i was told after the film that, that was reagan i was a little shocked lol.
I thought what good bloody actor, no wonder he was elected haha.

Any way members
how far do you think this will esculate,
is it just peeing in the wind, or 2 neanderthal countries banging their chests like apes.
Time will tell i suppose.

Ok heres a couple of extracts from the phone conversation between thatcher and reagan.

The document shows Thatcher was determined to deliver a crushing victory to avenge British losses. Her response to the peace initiative left the president stammering on the transatlantic hotline. At one stage a clearly heated Thatcher demanded to know what Reagan would do if Alaska had been invaded and the United States had suffered casualties recapturing it.

A SECRET transcript of a telephone conversation between Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan has revealed how the former president tried to persuade the prime minister to stop the Falklands war as British troops were advancing on Port Stanley.

“I wonder if anyone over there realises, I'd like to ask them. Just supposing Alaska was invaded ...” asked Thatcher. “Now you've put all your people up there to retake it and someone suggested that a contact could come in ... you wouldn't do it.”

“No, no, although, Margaret, I have to say I don't quite think Alaska is a similar situation” said Reagan.

“More or less so,” snapped Thatcher. Reagan feared the pending rout of Argentine forces in the south Atlantic would destabilise the region, damaging Washington's battle against left-wing regimes in Latin America.

But Thatcher, with barely concealed impatience, scotched the plan with a verbal explosion. Reagan could barely get a word in as the prime ministe gushed out a torrent of dismissal. “I didn't lose some of my best ships and some of my finest lives, to leave quietly under a ceasefire without the Argentines withdrawing,” she said.

“Oh. Oh, Margaret, that is part of this, as I understand it ...” stammered Reagan, trying to outline a Brazilian peace plan. It called for a ceasefire, Argentine withdrawal and a third-party peace-keeping force in the disputed islands. “Ron, I'm not handing over ... I'm not handing over the island now,” insisted Thatcher. “I can't lose the lives and blood of our soldiers to hand the islands over to a contact. It's not possible.

source
www.margaretthatcher.org...

"But Margaret, think of the children...I could send Nancy down there with some SAY NO TO DRUGS bumper stickers. Than should clear the problem right up."

reply to post by NuminousCosmos


cant respond, accept
hahahahaha

given she was a pretty straight talking woman and it was election time i'd hate to be ronny when she answered the phone and since its been british territory since the 1800's its hardly suprising that she'd want not to roll over and play dead

and here i thought it was a XXX phone call from Regan to Thatcher...sheez..oh well back to porn surfing...



On a side not, its always interesting to read how leaders discuss lives and the loss of lives over a piece of land, or should i say oil

reply to post by cerebralassassins


sorry to dissapoint you haha
but...yeh it is interesting
all i think of reagan is
"stuttering stanly" lol

Man that chick was tough as nails.

Gotta respect her even if you didnt agree with her policies.

Originally posted by nightbringr
Man that chick was tough as nails.

Gotta respect her even if you didnt agree with her policies.

alot of her policys in the day were frowned upon
poll tax springs to mind, then the protesting followed
not long after poll tax, it was changed to council tax
but at least 2 good points of hers
allowed working class familys to buy their council homes (reduced cost)
and
did not back down to argentina nor reagans chit chat

Originally posted by davesmart

Originally posted by nightbringr
Man that chick was tough as nails.

Gotta respect her even if you didnt agree with her policies.

alot of her policys in the day were frowned upon
poll tax springs to mind, then the protesting followed
not long after poll tax, it was changed to council tax
but at least 2 good points of hers
allowed working class familys to buy their council homes (reduced cost)
and
did not back down to argentina nor reagans chit chat

Allowed? do you not understand that "The lady who was not for turning" had already destroyed much of England's industrial base by being far to cosy with the bankers, aka a bilderberger herself, aka high levels of taxation/ interest rates, while every grain of public building money came from those same taxes due by everybody to some degree or another. The woman is not to be admired, but seen simply as another manipulatee of the Bilderbergers. As for reduced cost, that is/was a market based cost, not the actual cost of building at any given time.

The argies should just accept the Falklands are never going to belong to them and never have belonged to them.if they are stupid enough to try and take them using force again.then so be it.we have an astute class submarine and a type 45 destroyer.and a lot more equipment and supply's stock piled on the islands.that type 45 destroyer can pretty much destroy anything that comes with in 60 miles of it.i don't think Argentina would even make it onto the Falklands.plus if we really wanted we could drag france into the conflict as we have a joint navy now.infact we could probably set the whole of nato with the exception of america on the argies and sit back and watch the sparks fly

reply to post by davesmart

Kinda makes one wonder just what may be hidden away down there that she was so adamant about protecting beyond their honor.

reply to post by TerryMcGuire


given it was election time and a good victory in a war would secure her the easiest election win ever and the knowledge that theres oil in the area even if it was hard to get to but with the knowledge that the north sea oil fields wouldnt last forever so ensuring a continuation of tax revenue in the long term