Forum menu
Me thinks Sean has been watching Braveheart with his Jew hating friend.
British forces returned and requested the Argentine garrison leave
True then AND many years after ownership had been established.
the UN is clear the Falklands is a colony and the rights of the people to self determination are not to be considered as they were planted there and are not indigenous
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/south-american-block-on-falkland-registered-vessels#post-3300853
No chance. Nowhere near it in fact.
Answer me this question, Junky: if the UK controlling the Falklands is colonialism, wouldn't Argentina controlling the Falklands also be colonialism? If you're deciding between one colonial master or another, shouldn't the will of the colonists be taken into account?
TandemJeremy - Member
which did not give them right of abode in the UK
Your point?
They don't want to abide in the UK, they want to abide in the Falklands
Good point - should send all the settlers back to Spain where they came from and let the indigenous population have Argentina back.Or wasn't that what you meant?
So if Israel did what i suggested it would be right then ..or is that not what you meant 😉
It is clearly a complicated issue and one where it will be difficult to find universal principles where by we could impose some world order based on some arbitrary date or time. Nonetheless I am sure even you can see the point I was making.
The proximity is interesting as well - we did this on the other thread and someone wants to know how close is ok..it seems clear without imperial intervention Argentina would "own" the Falklands due to proximity and for us to claim it is a ludicrous as them to claim the Isle of white
yes other anomalies exist and we cannot re write the entire map but this principle is hardly a difficult one to understand
Basically some want to apply their is oil lets keep it
some want to say we settled it,it is mile away so lets give it back
Some say let the people [we planted there] decide
All of these principles have some weight to them and none can be completely ignored you must decide which you put most weight to his
Whichever you choose we can give counter situations
Obviously this is STW so lets just argue and score points from one another for the 4th?? time in one month on the same subject.. I am sure this time someone will change their mind and concede ground…..this is what STW is know for
aracer you need to address that complex philosophical conundrum, to the UN
and consider the question in light of my views above
It is always easier to just ask snipey questions form the sidelines that state your own view
STW in groundhog day shocka
A bit of reading around the subject and I don't see that Argentina has a particularly better claim to them than the UK(though I don't think we actually "claim" them do we? Just support their right for self governance under our protection) - both are pretty vague to say the least. Their upside is that they are quite a bit closer (although the original poster making similarity claims to the IOW showed a bit of geographical ineptness - they are A LOT further away than that!) and the UK's upside is that the current residents would like things to stay as they are.
Bit of a mess though generally.
Ultimately if it kicks off do we have the capability to keep them?
Are the islanders EU citizens? Will be nice to have a bit of backing from our European partners.
.it seems clear without [b]imperial[/b] intervention Argentina would "own" the Falklands due to proximity and for us to claim it is a ludicrous as them to claim the Isle of white
Have you read up much on the history of "Argentina"? That's a nation that only exists because of "imperial" intervention and is predominately made of up of a populous of imperial descendants who still speak the mother tongue of their previous imperial governors. Both (Argentina and Falklands) are the product of imperial meddling from Europe so why should it seem obvious for one to subsume the other just because of size? It all adds to the mess.
In the absence of a compelling and convincing reason for a change then, the status quo must prevail. (rockin all over the world)
some want to say we settled it,it is mile away so lets give it back
Give it back to who, Spain?
There has never been a legitimate Argentinian claim to the islands, the best they can come up with is proximity which is no claim at all.
The UN [i]request[/i] that the UK and Argentina open talks to establish sovereignty. That is it, it makes no judgement at all on who has the most legitimate claim (standard non-committal UN fare).
It is obvious that this isn't going to happen and particularly now there's something in it for the UK (oil).
So Sean Penn, South America and TJ can moan until the cows return, it just doesn't matter. The FI will remain a UK concern.
I still haven't the foggiest what the UN, Argentina, or anyone else expect to get out of talks. They will probably go somewhere along the lines of:
Argentina: "We'd quite like control of the islands"
UK: "We'd rather you didn't"
UN: "Could you share?"
UK and Argentina: (in unison) "No!"
Just to add that IMHO, the UK would do well for relations in the area if Argentina got a small cut of proceeds from the oil. Spread the wealth a little.
The proximity is interesting as well - we did this on the other thread and someone wants to know how close is ok..it seems clear without imperial intervention Argentina would "own" the Falklands due to proximity and for us to claim it is a ludicrous as them to claim the Isle of white
Isn't Chile virtually the same distance?
In the absence of a compelling and convincing reason for a change then, the status quo must prevail.
I think so
[quoteHow would you feel if Argentina claimed the Isle of Wight?
pissed because i live here!
Just to add that IMHO, the UK would do well for relations in the area if Argentina got a small cut of proceeds from the oil. Spread the wealth a little.
Problem is, I don't think Argentina would accept that.
Not 100% Cameron would give it either :-/
Even as a card carrying pinko lefty, I'd say in the absence of a proper prior ownership claim, the fact that a previous administration tried to take them by force and most importantly the populations will remain as is, then the current situation is how it should stay.
Not sure what the comparisons with Diego Garcia are in aid of - all it shows is that our governments are capable of being unpleasant when it suits them. Not exactly news. It's probably fair to say they care more about the oil than the islanders in this case, but at least the result is the 'right' thing.
Sean Penn is a man who makes a living from standing where he's told to stand and say what he's been told to say.
Look at my face.
Am I bovvered. 🙄
3 thoughts.
1) Do you have a flag? [url]
2) It's all Th*tcher's fault
and
3) Not sure that someone with two Academy Awards could be described as being 'not very good' at acting.
Malvinas - we should have a scrap. Whoever wins gets them, until someone next wants a scrap about them. Fight! Fight! Fight!
I see Sean will be at the ceremony to hand over his country to the red* Indians.
*Edit
Why, have India made a claim on them too?
India was created by the British..
India was created by the British..
I was lied to - my geography teacher told me it was formed by plate tectonics!
There was an interesting analysis of the situation in the Guardian yesterday, basically suggesting that Kirchner is posturing to try and deflect from the reality of her domestic situation, which is that she's a 2nd term president of a country who's economy is flagging, and doesn't want the vultures circling any earlier than necessary.
All the analysis of Argentina's military capabilities I've come across seems to suggest that they don't have the capacity to mount an invasion of the Falklands against the current British garrison as they lack a counter to the Typhoons based there, and don't have the means to defend a seaborne invasion fleet against the Royal Navy's hk subs. If that's an accurate analysis, then I can't imagine the Argentinian military are desperate for Kirchner to pick a real fight.
What's the Spanish for [i]"do not feed the troll"[/i]
[i]What's the Spanish for "do not feed the troll"[/i]
'effeffefeffeffeff Chris Waddle' ?
Think we have as good a claim as anyone.
Borders, who owns what, who should have what, is all open to question. History has shown that things change, peoples move, countries rise and fall, polulations expand contract, are forcibly moved, willingly move.
Some countries expand, others fall apart.
For now its ours, and when Scotland becomes independent, we should get a portion of it, preferrably the bit with the oil! 😉
You should have heard the Argentine Foreign Ministers speach to the UN. It was one BIG troll.
On another note Sean who? Im going to go off and google his films. Sounds very familiar but can't remember his recent work.
Ah! Carlito's Way and Being John Malkovich.
Ultimately if it kicks off do we have the capability to keep them?
Basically yes. Also I would fully expect the US to 'lend' us a load of hardware as they did last time. They only got ashore last time because they took everyone by surprise - there is now some decent defences in place.
The Argie Foreign Minister tried painting a picture of UK capability to hit Peru/Brazil etc with its Nuclear Submarines....obviously designed to scare and shock any neighbouring countries against the Brits..there is now some decent defences in place.
Thing is, we don't even want to fight the Argentinas. Just to beat them at football 😆
I hope the UN doesn't 'order' us to fight it out in a football game..
Didn't the French give us a hand the last time as well, by 'losing' the Argentinian order for more Exocets - might be an idea if CMD went and played kiss and make up with Sarkozy, just in case.
[i]we don't even want to fight the Argentinas[/i]
The squaddies probably do. Starting fights in pubs is all well and good but you can't beat a proper scrap with no police around.
Hopefully the Argentinians have secured another battleship by now or the lads in the RN will be very disappointed...
sharkbait - MemberUltimately if it kicks off do we have the capability to keep them?
Basically yes. Also I would fully expect the US to 'lend' us a load of hardware as they did last time. They only got ashore last time because they took everyone by surprise - there is now some decent defences in place
What did the US lend us last time? Do you mean in 1982 or WWII
Should I support The Falklands
Do they even have a football team?
I hope the UN doesn't 'order' us to fight it out in a football game..
A football match would absolutely be the best way to decide ownership of Falklandia.
Everyone likes a game of football.
We could replay the match every 4 years to see who wins ownership of the place for the next term.
This is also the way that general elections should be decided.
The squaddies probably do. Starting fights in pubs is all well and good but you can't beat a proper scrap with no police around.
😆
You should have heard the Argentine Foreign Ministers speach to the UN. It was one BIG troll.
you are the BBC chief political correspondent and i claim my £5
FFS like anyone believes you listened to that Hora ..Lies, damn lies and Hora posts 🙄
A football match would absolutely be the best way to decide ownership of Falklandia.
Except that we'd be screwed; at least we do the warmongering thing fairly effectively...
When one of my mates was stationed in the Falklands, he was so bored they used to entertain themselves by racing penguins across minefields, and betting on them.
Perhaps we could settle it like that. Start with 20 each, then see who runs out first. It'd be a better idea than football. We'd be in with a chance
Bit cruel on the penguins, mind. Use the soldiers, it's what they're for.
Not really on topic I know but I've always been fascinated by Argentina. It's the first World Cup I can remember and it seemed so exciting and exotic
I was eleven during the Falklands war and lived in Helensburgh which is close to the Faslane submarine base in Scotland. Most of the kids I was at school with had Dads in the Navy some of whom went to the Falklands (HMS Conqueror). We were on a primary seven school trip in North Wales when the HMS Coventry was sunk and all the boys seemed to understand the magnitude of what it meant.
Anyway, In 2004 I crossed the border into Argentina from Bolivia at a little desert outpost way up in the north (Vilazon- close to Sala de Uyuni). The border crossing was marked only by a small woooden porta-cabin and we got there on dirt roads in a minibus/taxi. You went in one side of the hut(Bolivia) and came out the other side(Argentina). Inside the cabin it was really bare. There were a couple of soldiers, a table and a big map of South America on the wall. There were about seven other people waiting in line to have their passports checked and stamped. When it was my turn the official saw my uk passport pointed to the Falkland Islands on the big map and says to me "Hey! Las Malvinas' to which I reply pointing to my hand Hey!'the hand of god''Maradona' the bloke laughs and stamps my passport and I go on my way.
I found Argentina a beautiful country and the people I met were very friendly and helpful and the steaks and wine were bloody good too!
What did the US lend us last time?
Satellite time
it was more of a gift I would have thought
It's all about prospecting for oil this time. I predict that it will get nasty.
More interesting that what the Americans lent us last time was the little favour the Russians did for us....!
...And the arms dealers who disappeared....
Tell us more.....
What did the US lend us last time?
AIM-9L Sidewinder missiles, which gave the Sea Harriers a massive edge over the Argentine air force.
I remember hearing that Ronnie Reagan was quite keen to supply forces to assist the UK in getting the Falklands back too, but Margaret Thatcher wanted to demonstrate that the UK could fight its own wars. I don't know how true that is, though.