will usa stand by uk, when argentina & other sth american country's attack the Falkland's?

No.

The USA is part of the OAS (Organization of American States), and an attack on one is an attack on them all. As happened last time, the US cannot help the UK - at least, not overtly. The US stayed out, and I expect they will if there is a next time as well.

I was in the Canadian Army for the last invasion, and the guys in my squadron would have volunteered without hesitation. Canada is not part of the OAS, so we could have gone. But, the Brits had the SAS, the Royal Marines, and the Gurkhas, along with several other incredibly good fighting regiments, so they did not need us.

No and Obama has already made it clear that he thinks it's a dispute between UK and Argentina and no one else. The US is unlikely to even think about open support for UK should the Argentine be stupid enough to try landing forces on the Falklands.

Look don't want to make too much of it, but the UK is armed and ready on the Falklands and the RAF have three Eurofighters down there - these do mach2+ and can be airborne in about 5 seconds. Also lots of ground to air missiles and stuff like that. Plus at sea the RN got destroyers etc.

If you want the bottom line, UK has nuke and the Argies don't - but then they probably think we would not use them. . . .wrong.

Would you want them to help? In a small place like the Falklands, the usual American Tactic of blow everything & everyone up first, ask questions later probably won't work too well.

BTW, the British had already fought & won the Battle of Britain, thus keeping out the Germans, well before the USA got involved in WW2. And it is worth remembering, The United States was founded by thirteen British colonies located along the Atlantic seaboard. They would all be speaking French not English if it wasn't for the British! There's some truth for you Block Me II

I imagine that the same would happen as last time - the US would help Britain by providing military intelligence but not actual forces.

There won´t be a war anyway, no-one in Argentina wants one, including the President herself, and even if they did attack the islands it is another leap of logic to suggest that other Latin American countries will join in - aside from Venezuela of course! Other South American countries will want nothing to do with a war, especially one led by Chavez.

It´s useful to point out that the only ones actually talking about war are the British media, and to a lesser extent the British government (if only to assuage any fears in the islands themselves).

It doesn't matter.

Our forces are still better than anything Argentina has in terms of training and professionalism at least. Hopefully we will also have enough equipment to do the job.

the usa would be foolish to get involved in a war with fellow american nation in favour of an old part of the british empire

Seems like Argentina tried that once before. It didn't work out too well then and I doubt it will work out well now.

You can see the following documents : “Masserano to Grimaldi ; 4 december of 1770 , Simancas, General Archive , Estate Departament ;Masserano to Grimaldi , december 9 of 1770 , in the same archive ; Harris to Weymouth , november 26 y 17 december , in Public Record Office , London, Estate Papers; Proyecto f Declaration Chaiseaul to Masserano , december 3 of 1770 , Archive Ministery of foreigner Relations , France ; Choiseaul to Grimaldi , december 10 of 1770 in the same archive ;Choisseaul to Ossun , december 10 of 1770 in the same archive ; Masserano to Grimaldi , december 11 , of 1770 , General Archive from Simancas ; Francois to Choiseaul , december 14 of 1770 , Archive Ministery foreigner Rationships, France ;Masserano to Grimaldi , december 18, , 19, 21, 22, 28 and 31 from 1770, Genral Archive of Simancas ; Francois to Choiseaul , december 22, Archive Ministery of Foreigner Rations, France ; Grimaldi to Masserano , december 6, 17, 20 and 31 , from 1770 , Genral Archive of Simancas .

Ossun to Choiseaul , 10, 20, and 24 , december , from 1770, Archive of Ministery foreigner Relations , France ; Choiseaul to Grimaldi , december 19 of 1770 , same archive ; Grimaldi to Choiseaul , december 24 of 1770 , same archive , Ossun to Choiseaul , december 10, 20 and 24 from 1770 , Archive foreigner Ministery , France ; Choiseaul to Grimaldi , december 19 , same archive ; Luis XV to Carlos III, december 21 of 1770, same archive ; Carlos III to Luis XV , January 2 , from 1771, same archive ; Grimaldi to Masserano , january 2 , 1770 , Simancas, general Archive .

Lord Rotchford to Lord Grant , St. James february 11 of 1774 , etc.

This is false: The truth history of falklAnds islands(LONDON SCHOLL), BBC, CNN UK.PRESS

On 10 June 1770, having discovered the British at Port Egmont, Spain attacked the establishment and

expelled the British garrison; Britain and Spain came close to war, which was in the end averted by an

agreement signed in January 1771 in which Port Egmont was restored to Britain.

The Argentine 2007 pamphlets say (English p. 1, Spanish p. 4) that the agreement contained:

… a Declaration by which Spain restored Port Egmont to the British in order to save the honour of

the King of England, making express reservation of its [= Spanish] sovereignty over the whole of

the Malvinas Islands, and also of an Acceptance of this Declaration in which Great Britain

remained silent as to the Spanish reservation of rights.

That is untrue. Such a reservation of Spanish rights had originally been proposed in December 1770

during the negotiations, stating that the agreement “cannot prejudice the anterior rights of the king of

Spain to those islands”,4 but at British insistence this was removed from the final text of the Anglo-

Spanish agreement. The agreement as actually s igned in London on 22 January 1771 merely stated:

… that the engagement of his said Catholick Majesty [the king of Spain], to restore to his

Britannick Majesty the possession of the port and fort called Egmont, cannot nor ought in any wise

to affect the question of the prior right of sovereignty of the Malouine islands, otherwise called

Falkland’s Islands. 5

In other words, the question of the prior right of sovereignty was left as it had been before the dispute –

both countries’ rights were left untouched, Britain’s as well as Spain’s. That was confirmed by Dr Samuel

Johnson, the major British literary figure of the second half of the 18th century, in one of the most famous

pieces of writing on the Falkland Islands. 6 However, Argentina has constantly repeated a false version of

There will not be a war. They won't try that one again. But, hypothetically, if they did invade, America should come and help us. It would make up for us helping them out so many times. Not that we would need them, of course.

Traditionally the US does not support the UK until the US is attacked.

They even traded with Hitler when he was herding Jews into ghettos and bombing Britain..