Why was Sean Penn wading into the Argentina/ uk Faulklands issue?

[Kayano]

He just made himself look like a total tit. I don't even understand what it has to do with him?!

He is a tit, isn't he?

I enjoyed him quite literally wading in the Mississippi when he took a boat trip to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina and loaded it with so many other worthies that it sank.

Cause he's massively intelligent and is probably right - and it's one of his 'causes' and he's using the platform of being famous to draw attention to it.

He really didn't come across as massively intelligent...

Famous people spend quite a lot of time being agreed with, they start to believe that their opinions are weighty and important
I don't know what he said about anything, but i'm just making the general point that slebs of his stature don't spend a lot of time being slagged by their mates and told they are misinformed and dim like me sometimes

Because he's thick.
Because he's a nob.

Both?

He thinks its "colonist" of Britain to rule The Falklands. Well seeing as The Falklands have never belonged to Argentina why wouldn't it be colonist of Argentina to rule over them?

Surely by this thinking then its colonist of America to rule over Hawaii?

Last I saw The Falklanders were very happy with the staus quo.

He should concentrate more on his acting than matters of politics. Cos lord knows he needs lessons. He's pretty shit.

He is not thick no matter what you think of his views on this. He is essentially taking sides which is what this sort of thing does.

OK, but he comes across as thick by saying that Country A has no right to Country X so instead Country X should be given to Country B who also has no right to them even though Country X wants to belong to Country A.

Makes no sense.

I think he was agreeing with the stance that the uk are 'militarising the waters' around the falklands which is being seen as antagonistic

He has proved it's possible to not be as thick as you sound, oh and to be a complete tit as well.

Not if you agree with him though!

He may want to ask the people who live on the Falklands what they want to do before jumping into a very contentious argument.

There might well be an argument for the Falklands to become a independent county (though the people of the Falklands seem happy as things are now) but it is ridiculous to think that argentina should own them instead.

I don't think he has even considered them!

I think Cameron has said that any time The Falklanders want to become independent or even become part of Argentina then they only have to say and the UK won't stand in their way. I don't see them calling a referendum/

Its coming up to the 30 year anniversary of The Falkland War, Argentina are becoming increasingly vocal about wanting the islands. Its no suprise UK have sent an aircraft carrier there (at least I think they've sent an aircraft carrier there).

'I think he was agreeing with the stance that the uk are 'militarising the waters'

Maybe he should take a look at his own country first. I dont give a crap about the Falklands but when people stick their beaks in I get al bothered

This is the reason why I don't buy Sunday newspapers.

I don't give a crap about what actors think.

I was bout to say because he is a nob, but someone else has beaten me to it. Who gives a flying fuck what he thinks?

As for militarising the waters - there is always a ship down there, so what is new?

I don't mind actors/famous people using their celebrity to raise awareness of issues. But I'd rather they pick issues where there is mass starvation or huge human right crimes, etc.

Maybe choosing a country that has been invaded against their will and thousands of civillians killed, etc might be a better use of energy.

Because he is a left wing progressive?

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100136703/sean-penn%E2%80%99s-bizarre-anti-british-rant-is-laughable-even-by-hollywood-standards/

Viva, we've sent a destroyer albeit our best which if press reports are true can sit there happily picking off the Argentine aircraft should Argentina be foolish enough to try.

We don't have any aircraft carriers anymore which makes defending the island practically impossible given the geography. Impossible if they take the airfield.

Allegedly we've a nuclear sub in the area which the Argies aren't happy about either, which may/may not be true but then to be honest if I were DC, I'd have one sat there.

I don't really think we can say that one ship is militarising the waters and even if it were, they're our waters to militarise.

This would be a good time to have an aircraft carrier floating in the region....wasn't the brightest of moves to scrap all of them!

Thanks for clearing that up. I thought I'd heard we didn't have any aircraft carriers left and had to rely on boring France's one or somethings was a bit confused when I thought I'd heard we were sending one to Falklands.

Well, I think he should look in the mirror before he starts accusing others of over-stepping any marks.

Fed up of lefty-boys getting all indignant on behalf of people they don't know the first thing about whilst not keeping their own side of the street clean.

Niceguy - the Argies wouldn't have a scooby if we have a boat in the area or not. Nearly PMSL when they claimed to have photos of Vanguard off the Falklands - the whole point of a submarine is that it submerges, and I don't think cameras have been invented yet that can penetrate quite that deep. Furthermore, Vanguard wouldn't have surfaced if she's on patrol. and neither would have any of the T boats if they were there.

Submariners do it deeper!

Agree scary. It'd be pretty bizzare for the sub to be pootling along the top of the waves for a photo to be taken when the whole point of the thing is to be underwater....

Viva, I think there was some agreement to borrow France's aircraft carrier but it's a bit of a stupid agreement IMO since our planes can't take off from them and I can't see them letting us take it into a combat zone anyway.