You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20896050
Face it, the islanders see themselves as British. There endeth the argument until they see themselves as Argentinian. What is that woman's problem with comprehending this?
I though you meant the cheap kitchen people.
It's just political posturing to keep the Argentinian proles voting for her. Standard sabre-rattling type stuff. I suppose they may also argue that if they shipped in a few thousand Argentinians then the self-determination argument would swing in their favour. Much like the British did when the Flaklands were last colonised. Not sure if there were any natives originally...
When luck and voodoo economics run out, you are left clutching at anniversary straws, perhaps?
It's a point of principal on both sides.
Oh, and the fishing rights and the the abundance of oil and gas reserves to be found in the territorial waters.
But mainly principal.
Is she also petitioning the Spanish to give back the vast swathes of South America "stolen" by the Conquistadors? 😉
Nope. Thought not.
I always thought it a bit rich that a colonial country is whingeing about colonialism.
The Argentines on the Islands were expelled by the Royal Navy and the United Kingdom subsequently began a population implantation process similar to that applied to other territories under colonial rule
such as errrrrrrrrr argentina ?
handing over sovereignty in the falklands isn't about ending colonialism, it's about transfering colonial ownership.
You have to love the irony.
Her claim on the islands is based on them being inherited from Spain....another famous colonial power, so it's ok for Spain to claim these islands and then end up giving them to Argentina but not for the UK to have any kind of colonial claim on them?
She may also want to look in a mirror, she doesn't look south American to me....not like an indigenous south American anyway....I'd wager her ancestry is via Spain too.
Tricky business this preaching about colonial era nonsense....her country is founded on Spanish colonialism and now she wants to exercise Argentine colonialism over disputed islands.
Is she also petitioning the Spanish to give back the vast swathes of South America "stolen" by the Conquistadors?
This
The only thing it's about is oil and gas.
I like the part where she claims the islands were inherited from Spain, then mentions the islands proximity to Argentina. Using this rationale, surely the islands should not have been Spain's to give.
Been done a million times but if they were attacked again could we hold them?
Ps this is just a cue for the people who know about these things to talk about rockets and planes.
Can we start a fund to club together and place some rebuttal ads in the Argentine papers? That might shut her up..
Been done a million times but if they were attacked again could we hold them?
I believe that the UK was accused by Argentina of warmongering after replacing the Tornadoes stationed down there with Eurofighters, and sending a T45 down there on a 'routine' exercise / patrol.
Despite all that warmongering, no war happened.
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland Isles . Trying to keep them British has been a massive waste of taxpayers money over the years . Had Argentina used diplomacy rather than military force in 1982 Britain was prepared to hand them over .The comment from somebody in government at the time that " seduction was encouraged but rape was unacceptable " sums up the position of the British Government at the time .
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland Isles
Interesting logic. Flawed, but interesting, nonetheless.
Two words.
Self determination.
But yes would we/they be so bothered if it wasnt for the prospect of the oil, gas & fishing?
Im not so sure...
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland Isles .
Does that mean I own my neighbour's holiday home?
peterfile - Member
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland Isles .
Does that mean I own my neighbour's holiday home?
Yes unless they are Spanish or had been on holiday there 500 years ago.
It should certainly mean I own the house I'm renting - I definitely live nearer to it (i.e. in it), wrt our landlady.
Interesting logic. Flawed, but interesting, nonetheless.
Because all the other logic on here is perfect I suppose .
Have you seen what she is doing to Argentina? Shes royally ****ing the country right up. She has NO interest in liberating the Falklands- its like using 'terrorists live next door to you' as used by US/UK governments to scare populace from their governments **** ups..
What was the last line she used? Financial colonialism to justify her latest move on the markets at home....
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland Isles
Correct
See what it says at the bottom?
[img] 
[/img]
Because all the other logic on here is perfect I suppose .
I refer you to a fundamental human right:
Self determination.
Not sure what difference it makes to anyone who doesn't live there.
It's not like they'll be coming for the Isle of Wight next.
Meanwhile, in a damp, musty garret room in Edinburgh.....
😉
Not sure what difference it makes to anyone who doesn't live there.
Eeeeegggzzzakkkkllyyy!!!
Meanwhile, in a damp, musty garret room in Edinburgh.....
The impotent rage of the chagossians?
I miss TJ on these threads, still ernie will be along soon to tell us about how popular she is and that the UK parties can only dream of that kind of approval.....
still ernie will be along soon to tell us about how popular she is and that the UK parties can only dream of that kind of approval
Shortly followed by him saying you're putting words in his mouth, no doubt
Wow, even when he can't be here to defend himself, people still want to have a go.
Presumably she's still trying to distract from this sentiment:
http://news.sky.com/story/1009144/argentina-protests-over-cristina-fernandez
Thing that got me was that I heard England was on the tip
of giving the Falklands back but then Argentina invaded.
Also no doubt the Politicians use the agenda to get voted in power
and thats why its raised its ugly head again
Remembering the 80s conflict- it rescued to unpopular despots from ignomy ,both Thatcher and Galtieri were low in the opoinion polls , cue flag waving , cheesy patriotic gestures and an expensive war that we are still paying for .As in so many areas of life we seem to be repeating the eighties
its just pointless political posturing
and really doesnt deserve the coverage it gets
still im sure it rattles plenty of blazer wearing codgers enough that they have to rant about it to their long suffering wife from behind their copy of the telegraph over poached eggs and smoked salmon of a morning
(ive actually seen this happen except it was a H&S gone mad rant)
still im sure it rattles plenty of blazer wearing codgers enough that they have to rant about it to their long suffering wife from behind their copy of the telegraph over poached eggs and smoked salmon of a morning
😆
Been done a million times but if they were attacked again could we hold them?
Ps this is just a cue for the people who know about these things to talk about rockets and planes
I was thinking about this. If we had the political will to sink a dozen Belgrano's I think yes we could.
There are enough British troops there to hold off any sort of airbourne invasion, so Argentina parachuting a force in wouldn't work.
We have enough submarines that we could stop any ships reaching the islands, if we had the will to sink them all. A seabourne invasion is out. I think yes, we could hold them.
If the worst happened could we retake them again? I doubt it, not without borrowing a carrier or two from somewhere (it's all very well the government saying we could share the French ones but would they send one down to the south Atlantic at the first sign of trouble? I doubt it)
.
If I were Argentinian how would I go about invading? I think the best plan would be a massive sea-bourne invasion, but not with boats or ships, I'm thinking of 'Caspian sea-monster-stlye' echranoplans, they would be ideal for something like this. Very difficult for our submarines to attack and without a carrier there very hard for us to attack at all. They could bring in large number of men very quickly, en mass, and the advantage of them over an invasion by paratroops is the quantity of armour and artillery they could carry too. If Argentina is secretly building a couple of dozen of those we would be in trouble.
.
.
.
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland Isles
I believe Spain say the same about Gibralter. But oddly enough, not about those islands they have off the coast of Morrocco and who's name I can't remember.
Also, if you follow this logic would you propose giving the channel islands to France or invading Ireland?
I still don't understand what she wants to negotiate about. The islanders consider themselves British, the UK government considers the islands to be British, the Argentinians consider them to be Argentinian.
Not a huge amount of middle ground for negotiating there.
I still don't understand what she wants to negotiate about
Enough Oil to get them out of economic sh**e really. It's quite simple really. It has nothing to do with what they say.
I really DGAS about the Islands but have to say we're about to get back from Afganistan and Iraq thousands of troops with now't to do (and we won't use them to fix UK roads or infrastructure) so why not shuv'em down there?
Think it's all a waste of money, not like we'll ever utilise the Oil/Gas reserves or fishing come to that. And who are we actually protecting here, Penguins and a couple of hundred folks planted on the Islands to make them look "populated"
I'll give £5.00 for them.. that'll solve the posturing.
Enough Oil to get them out of economic sh**e really. It's quite simple really. It has nothing to do with what they say.
I know that's what it's really about. But that aside, there's not a huge amount of room to share sovereignty.
Anyone else reckon that she's just seen some figures for the Argentine economy that would make George Osbourne look competent?
"Quick! We need a distraction! I know! We've not gobbed off about las Malvinas for a few months. Organise me a press conference, will you?"
Just a look at the map will tell you who has more rights to the Falkland IslesI believe Spain say the same about Gibralter. But oddly enough, not about those islands they have off the coast of Morrocco and who's name I can't remember.
Also, if you follow this logic would you propose giving the channel islands to France or invading Ireland
The Channel Islands are nearer to France but they sit between France and England which is different to them being on the other side of the world .
If you follow your logic why did Britain let China take over the running of Hong Kong , perhaps you think we should have sent a task force round there to teach them a lesson .
Face it, the islanders see themselves as British. There endeth the argument until they see themselves as Argentinian. What is that woman's problem with comprehending this?
could you remind me exactly when the UK gave them self determination and what the UN considers the Falklands to be and the rules of self determination for settled colonies [ you wont like it though]
PS they only because UK citizens in 1983 and we also listed them as a non self governing territory till roughly the same time as well - god we loved our people there didnt we and oh how we gave them self determination for we respect human rights- bit like we respected the self determination of the all Ireland vote we promised after WW1 - oh hold on those bastards voted against us so we best partition the country and claim the self determination of the Ulster plantation folk we put there to be loyal to us- lets get all jingoistic now folks and rattle those sabres about noble princiles we are upholding 😕
Like many places where we [and others] have taken territories we wont give them back [ whether we have a legitimate claim or not] and we will use all sorts of "noble" reasons to explain why a lump of rock on the other side of the world is ours.
Of course they want to remain British [ despite only recently being granted this right by us] as why settle a place if you dont put loyal subjects there ??- its their job to do this and the Loyalist in Ulster are still doing it some 400 years on GAWD bless em. Its not a good principle to use here as the Cornwall example will show.
Throw in some jingoism, attack those who disagree BOOOM we have a STW thread - you goaders sure miss them so much so that months on you are still mocking- its tragic.
re self determination - if a foreign force invaded Cornwall plonked a million folk there how much weight would you give to self determination of this population Zokes? What does the UN say
Enjoy your patriotism and defence for colonialist expansionist using noble terms that had no bearing on why it became "ours" and why we kept it.
I still don't understand what she wants to negotiate about. The islanders consider themselves British, the UK government considers the islands to be British, the Argentinians consider them to be Argentinian.Not a huge amount of middle ground for negotiating there.
Dual sovereignty would appear to be the middle ground there .
This all kicked off in the last few years when oil exploration started. Once it's getting extracted your too late to cash in hence the ramping up (along with their own economic issues)
kimbers - Memberstill im sure it rattles plenty of blazer wearing codgers enough that they have to rant about it to their long suffering wife from behind their copy of the telegraph over poached eggs and smoked salmon of a morning
(ive actually seen this happen except it was a H&S gone mad rant)
Someone in the family, was it?
At the end of the day the Argentinians know they can't retake the Falklands by force.
So all this is just a bit of jingoistic posturing
Enjoy your patriotism and defence for colonialist expansionist using noble terms that had no bearing on why it became "ours" and why we kept it.
I agree with some of your sentiment JY but the thing is I don't think Argentina really has a much better claim than we do. I suppose some kind of agreement to share resources could be a way forward.
Do a deal.
Falklands want to stay British. Scotland don't.
Give them Scotland instead.
So all this is just a bit of jingoistic posturing
If the Falklands wasn't there the Government would tell the people that Aliens are about to land/Brazil is threatening them/there are insurgents in the land..
Ramsey, I was just taking it to the logical extreem, not necessarily advocating an invasion of Ireland. Just saying that proximity is not the only deciding factor of soveinty.
(see Kalliningrad for a non-British example, that's still Russian)
And Hong Kong was very different, we had agreed to return it and they didn't invade it. And there's no oil there.
.
Also, as someone alluded to above, if a territory is colonised so that the colonisers become the majority population should they have a say in the running of the place? Am I talking about the million foreigners in Cornwall Junkyard refers to? Or the population Britain sent to the Falklands? Or most of the population of Argentina who are of Spanish descent? Pots and kettles.
IT was an uninhabited rock originally GRum so we can argue no one has claim - I would of course argue no one has the right to ownership of land
However its hard to see how we came to have an island on the other side of the world and it not be colonial expansion.
We can debate distance to territory [ loads of anomalies as we have done it before]. We can all agree its some distance from our territorial waters of the UK. Dont think we would be giving up on our claim were the situation reversed and the same sabre rattlers defending us would be the irrate Argentinians still "going on about it and never learning".
Odd how the two most vociferous groups on both sides are the most alike in outlook- says something about humanity and loving your country.
TBH if there was no oil gas or minerals and they had racked up a huge bill with some undesirables I can see the arguments being reversed 🙂
The islanders should ask the Argentinians if they want to become part of The Falklands...
TBH if there was no oil gas or minerals and they had racked up a huge bill with some undesirables I can see the arguments being reversed
The oil and gas argument is often touted but judging by the experience of The Falkland Oil and Gas Company there may not be as much and it may not be as easy to extract as they would have you believe .
Enjoy your patriotism and defence for colonialist expansionist using noble terms
sorry jy are you addressing that towards zokes or cristina fernandez de kirchner ?
what puzzles me is that normally rational people get so consumed by post colonial guilt over the falklands that they lose sight of the fact that argentina are no less colonialists in all of this then the uk.
let the penguins have them back.
You can argue WHY it's ours all you want but it currently has British sovereignty. We also hang onto Gibraltar. Spain hangs onto the Canaries, Ceuta and Melilla and even "fought" with Morocco over Perejil Island in 2002.
Even better, Argentina has similar island enclaves; Isla Martín García (in Uruguayan territorial waters) in the Río de la Plata plus Apipé and Entre Ríos (Paraguayan territorial waters) and a few other smaller ones. Surely they should be handing these back before moaning about the Falklands?
There's literally hundreds of these little anomalies scattered around the world, yet most people just get on with it.
Give it to the penguins.
And the sheep.
Then let them fight it out.
We could make a fortune selling arms to both sides.
Argentina would be in charge now if they hadn't invaded.
We were just writing out the gift tag and looking for the Sellotape before they landed last time.
But they so wanted to look tough and blew it.
If you follow your logic why did Britain let China take over the running of Hong Kong , perhaps you think we should have sent a task force round there to teach them a lesson .
Something to do with a lease running out I think.
sorry jy are you addressing that towards zokes or cristina fernandez de kirchner ?
Have a wild stab in the dark 😉
Its a reasonable point you make but we just get tied up in anomalies - we can go on increasing the distance from the mainland till we agree its suddenly becomes a colony
Fact remains its on the other side of the world and it is part of our former Empire. Their geographical claim is thousand of miles better than ours = of course anomalies exist - do you think we would swap them the Channel Isles or give them Anglesey?
Ps nice dig
normally rational people get so consumed by post colonial guilt over the falklands
Yes considering slavery and subjugation we did this is what I feel most guilt about when I am hand wringing etc 😛
Sadly, Argentina cannot be relied on for too many things (wine, beef, beautiful people, scenery, economic case studies * apart) but come the 3 January, they [i]can[/i] be relied on to stimulate a classic STW thread. How many pages this time - at least an 8!
* at least Greece can learn the lessons from Argentina of how domestic politicians and society, multi-national organisations and international finance can combine to screw a society for well over a century. Such a waste and a pity!
On top of the usual reasons for the 3/1 annual sabre rattling, I am sure CK also resents that the international spotlight in 2012 shifted N of Brazil to Mexico rather than South.
if a foreign force invaded Cornwall plonked a million folk there how much weight would you give to self determination of this population Zokes?
Y'see, that's the issue. The Falklands weren't taken by force. Straw man.
(Besides which, I know a number of Cornish who would happily cede from the Crown)
jy, it wasn't meant as a dig.
there are a million and one reasons to feel bad about the british empire and i know of none to feel good about, however the horrors of the british empire and the situation in the falklands are not comparable.
Nice deflection there Zokes , refusal to address the point and an attempt to discuss whether the Falklands were taken by force - they were over and over again by both sides till we won and settled it with our folk]:roll:
You are better than this and you do have the intellectual capability to discuss 🙄
Its a straw man to claim I said that the Cornish thought example was just like the Falklands.
Do you think self determinism is a fine principle to apply in that scenario?
Once we accept, as we must surely do, that it is not always an ok principle we can debate hit in relation to the Falklands. Given when we gave them this right an d the UK citizenship i look forward to your next deflected answer
Poor Zokes, really poor.
I am genuinely disappointed 😳
People have opinions there are good points to both sides of the argument no point just putting your head in the sands when someone makes one that counters you view.
EDIT:
jy, it wasn't meant as a dig.
I did not take it as one ,my reply was meant to be a humorous [ if slightly serious one]
Fernández de Kirchner’s been adulated in the past with comparisons to Evita, the defender of the working classes in the 40’s - 50‘s, however in recent months the masses are now showing widespread discontent with general strikes and uprisings in response to a worsening economy with stubbornly high inflation. Perhaps this explains the timing of her ‘open letter’. CFdK’s continued flare-ups are a barometer of her difficulties in dealing with problems at home. They're nothing more than a cynical and unsophisticated attempt to curry favour by stirring the nationalistic feelings of the Argentine electorate.
There's a huge amount of obfuscation going on in your posts JY.
On the one hand, the Falklands were taken without force nearly 200 years ago, thus making it long since anyone actually affected by their colonisation would care. On the other, you're hypothetically plonking 1m people in a place currently occupied by over 500,000 people. Slightly different.
So, straw men aside, no, I don't see how we can agree on the fact that the principal of self determination of a people is not always sacrosanct.
There may be a just argument as to whether or not the Falkland Islanders constitute a 'people', but as the vast majority of them were born there, I reckon that's as good an argument as any other metric.
Do we really believe in self determination?
I'm no expert on the history of an Ireland but surely the majority of Irish wanted their Island independent.
If the Cornish want to be independent would we let them.
We seem to be eventully stumbling towards an independence vote for Scotland. If we care what the locals think why didn't Scotland get an independence vote in the 1980s or 1960s.
What happaems of one of Britains ethnic communities suddenly says the majority of people in this town have their ethinic origins in Country X, so we would like the sovereignty of this town handed over to that country. Would we all be saying well self determination thats the most important thing
so as long as you invade and settle [ anywhere not just the Falklands Isles]for long enough then self determination is still sacrosanct[ why did it take us so long to give it to them then ?] and how this situation came to be is irrelevant- do I really need to explain why that is not a sound principle for all scenarios? REALLY?
Israel should invade Palestine[ some more ] and then have a vote eh and it will all be all right I assume by that "metric" and Job done eh
Yah for self determination
Are you campaigning for respect for the All Ireland vote for a unified Ireland - is the UK government?
The principle you deem sacrosanct is not universally applied by our govt and our colonies.
It is obvious a planted population will be loyal but it is not obvious that this self determination is a just "metric" in all scenarios.
Hence I keep giving you examples, to ignore, where it would not be just.
Clearly if we don't believe in self determination then we should just hand the Falklands back to the original natives.
they are all dead [ and not human]
So what alternative to self-determination do you suggest in that case?
The ‘who did it belong to originally’ argument is ridiculous reductionism. If that were to be taken forward we’d have whole nations displaced and millions of peoples stateless! Lets just be sensible and deal with the here and now ... as grum said earlier, maybe look at mutually productive compromises.
they are all dead [ and not human]
might as well let them stay in the hands of the current residents then, eh?
It's about the 300 million barrels under there that Rockhopper have found. I expect when it all quiets down we'll hear of new finds from Falkland Oil and Gas too. They've given up on one well but there are several other sites.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/oct/19/falklands-start-producing-oil-2017-rockhopper
oh they you ask me all the questions but answer none game
Tempting 😉
Nah You first.
Like all the problems of Imperialism be it N Ireland, Taiwan, Israel etc there is no simple solution
It is clear that the islanders want to remain so we wont be giving them up
its clear that the argentinians wont stop asking /demanding.
I ageee with a Grum so bi partisan arrangement is what is required in all these situations and some establishment of common ground between the "enemies"
Of course I have no idea what this and doubt anyone else does.
re self determination - do we allow Argentinians to live there Could they just settle it more than us k and have a vote - would seem to make all sides happy 😉
Zokes if you want a reply explain sacrosanct self determination in the examples given - really I did expect better of you never had you down for this type of poster 🙄
really I did expect better of you never had you down for this type of poster
The passive-aggressive ad-hom?
who ? you or me 😕
No i respect Zokes and he usually discusses the issues and the points made - I did not expect him to not discuss them and ignore any points that counter his view- not least hen he also mocks TJ for this- he is one step away from saying he has answered the question 😀
he says it is sacrosanct so it is not unreasonable to expect him to explain why in the cases cited it would apply after all its sacrosanct so should be easy.
IMHO its obvious its not but I thought he would have at least accepted this point or argued his case.
For clarity it is not meant to be an ad hom but i can see why it could be taken as such
re self determination - do we allow Argentinians to live there Could they just settle it more than us k and have a vote - would seem to make all sides happy
I believe there is something called immigration control. Pretty much the same way you or I couldn't just start living in Argentina and colonise it. It appears that there wasn't effective immigration control on the islands back in the 1800s
oh they you ask me all the questions but answer none game
Actually, my question about just leaving it with the current inhabitants was sort of my OP, hence the title and content.
And please don't stoop the the ad-hominem. This thread's much more peaceful thanks to the notable absence of a few.