CyclopsRock
Member
It's not like the US left the UK out to dry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events...icially_comes_down_on_the_side_of_the_British
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_war#Position_of_third_party_countries
but this is going off-topic
Whilst I appreciate the US sold us some missiles and allowed us to use Ascension, it does somewhat blow smoke at the idea that 'an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us', especially given how ridiculously close we came to losing that conflict. We struggled to maintain a blue water navy group so far from home, and had the US for involved, the whole thing could have been over much quicker and with a diminished loss of both British and Argentine lives, but they didn't. And I don't blame them - there were complex politics going on with regards to the Contras, the Monroe doctrine and even the international prestige of NATO, to show that it has effective members beyond the US. But let's not pretend we have some sort of mutual defence pact or something, either with The US specially out NATO generally, whatever the official rules are.