Inexcusable

Barack Obama sides with Argentina in their dispute with Great Britain over the Falkland Islands.  Even though Britain is our closest and most important ally.  Even though the residents of the Falklands consider themselves part of Britain and want no part of Argentina.  Even though Argentina invaded the Falklands in 1982 and Britain had to fight a war to get them back.

Fausta calls it "Another slap in the face for Britain."

I cannot think of any possible justification for this change in US policy.  None.

I got in big trouble for saying this earlier, but no one actually refuted it, they just called me "uncivil."  Let's look at some of the major foreign policy actions of the Obama administration:

• Sides with an anti-American ally of Hugo Chavez in an attempt to illegally seize dictatorial rule of pro-American Honduras.
• Sides with the Palestinians over pro-America Israel.
• Sides with Russia in reneging on a promise to put missile defense installations in Poland and Czechia.
• Sides with the anti-American Iranian government against pro-America protesters.
• Now sides with Argentina over the Falklands against our best and most loyal ally, Great Britain.

 Note that I am giving Obama a pass on Egypt.  That was a tough call, turning against an America-supporting tyrant and hoping the people will choose someone other than the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood as the next rulers of Egypt. But Syria is not a tough call, and he's doing nothing to help the protesters there.

So, I'll ask: what is the pattern in these foreign policy actions?  How are these positions even supposed to benefit the US?

Or is even asking the questions "uncivil?"