PDA

View Full Version : Falklands II?



Beorn
02-18-2010, 05:10 PM
Seeing as this (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12970) thread descended into madness, I thought it best to start afresh within the correct section and (hopefully) free of references to magical beings and uktra xenophobic nonsense.


Argentina toughens shipping rules in Falklands oil row (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8518982.stm)

Argentina has announced new controls on ships passing through its waters to the Falkland Islands in a growing dispute over British oil drilling plans.
A permit will now be needed by ships using Argentine waters en route to the Falklands, South Georgia or the South Sandwich Islands - all UK controlled.
Argentina has protested to the UK about oil exploration due to begin next week.
The UK Foreign Office said the Falkland Islands' waters were controlled by its authorities and would not be affected.
It seems odd the Argentinians are taking this all so badly. A good head on the shoulders would register that there is surplus economic benefits to be had with British oil excavations. Argentina will never have the control of the islands, as they simply don't belong to them, but they can certainly stake a claim to being first refusal for the creation of jobs entwined with any oil rigging and exploitation.


This isn't Falklands II (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/17/falkland-islands-oil-argentina-uk-sanctions)

It was Karl Marx who said "history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce" – and in the case of the abruptly reigniting dispute (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8518982.stm) over the Falkland Islands, aka Las Malvinas, there is reason to hope he was right. Argentina's latest protests, sparked by the prospect of an oil bonanza around the islands (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/17/shipping-argentina-falklands-tightened), could easily be dismissed as hot air. But that was the mistake Britain made last time, and almost 1,000 people paid with their lives.
The parallels with the runup to the 1982 war, echoing eerily down the years, are uncanny, although susceptible to exaggeration. The Iron Lady star of today's supposed sequel is not Britain's Margaret Thatcher. It is Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/29/argentina.jamessturcke), Argentina's president and wife of her immediate presidential predecessor, Néstor Kirchner. She once styled herself "Evita with a clenched fist". She has shown she's not scared of a fight.
Like Thatcher, Kirchner has spent much of her time in office battling trade unions while trying to resuscitate an indebted, moribund economy. Regional analysts say the government, dependent on continuing international support since the country's $100bn debt default in 2001 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/25/argentina.rorycarroll), is wary of unleashing a patriotic furore. But next year is presidential election year in Argentina.

Absolute madness when one considers the figures.

"Argentina's army and navy currently comprise 72,000 personnel. Its navy boasts three submarines, five destroyers and nine frigates (mostly secondhand), and a few patrol boats. The warships are armed with the feared Exocet missiles that inflicted so much damage in 1982. Argentina also has about 140 combat-capable aircraft, including Mirage fighters."

and yet on the Falklands themselves, the British have:

"...[protection] by a Royal Navy destroyer, Typhoon jet fighters and about 1,300 military personnel."

And on top of that several military reserves in various positions in close proximity which can be deployed in under a short period to hold off any attempt made by an average, ill experienced Argentinian army.

poiuytrewq0987
02-18-2010, 05:54 PM
Argentina is a country of 40 million, all the government need to do is conscript 1 million citizens and send them over to the Falklands.

Sol Invictus
02-18-2010, 05:55 PM
It won't happen. I don't think the British people will support an imperialist war with a western nation.

The Ripper
02-18-2010, 06:01 PM
It won't happen. I don't think the British people will support an imperialist war with a western nation.

1) Is their support needed?

2) I wouldn't put it past them.

hereward
02-18-2010, 06:01 PM
Dont see it happening, the only way the Argentines can get hold of the Falklands is via a weak British Government. As I mentioned before, the military view on the Falklands has changed, the air defense arrangements etc are totally different. I hear talk saying we are overstretched with regards to feet on the ground, but thats not the point, I cant see the Argentines breaching the defences. The Argies should play the long game, the likelyhood is that they will recieve it without a shot fired.

Beorn
02-18-2010, 06:15 PM
Argentina is a country of 40 million, all the government need to do is conscript 1 million citizens and send them over to the Falklands.

Change 'Argentina' for 'Great Britian' and '40 million' for '70 million' and suddenly your post looks pointless.


It won't happen. I don't think the British people will support an imperialist war with a western nation.

An invasion by Argentina would be the vote winning platform with which to take your party into office, or to ensure it sustains its continuation in office. The British public love nothing more than to hate another nation at a time of war. It may have had one million people march against it, but the Iraq war was not British territory with British citizens. The Falklands is, and it will be backed if invaded.

hereward
02-18-2010, 06:29 PM
Do not forget that the 1 million who marched against the war are not a representation of Home. Rent a mob, the international possee of 'students' , socialists and all forms of scum were present. If I went to a similar demo in Paris, I would expect a sizable number would not hail from France.

Óttar
02-18-2010, 07:54 PM
Maybe the US should invoke the Monroe Doctrine, but the Brits are our allies so we can modify it to mean Argentina cannot create waves in our hemisphere. The Americas for Americans indeed. ;)

"Let every power know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression and subversion anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know, that this hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house." :P

-JFK

RoyBatty
02-18-2010, 08:10 PM
Dont see it happening, the only way the Argentines can get hold of the Falklands is via a weak British Government. As I mentioned before, the military view on the Falklands has changed, the air defense arrangements etc are totally different. I hear talk saying we are overstretched with regards to feet on the ground, but thats not the point, I cant see the Argentines breaching the defences.


Agree. The Argies are hardly in financial or military shape for such a caper. If anything they look even worse off than when they last tried in the 1980's. I had a look at their Air Force equipment. It doesn't look to be up to scratch if they were serious about sinking ships (which they'd need to be) and doing a few bombing runs.



The Argies should play the long game, the likelyhood is that they will recieve it without a shot fired.

They'd never get it this way either. Not with all that oil there. Another major reason they won't get Malvinas without a fight is because the islands give Britain a claim on Antarctica for the day when the big scramble kicks off to mine and drill it to bits.

The only way they're going to get it is to kick the "Falklands Company" (or whoever runs the place) and the British military out and without a decent gameplan and a well equipped airforce they have little hope of doing so imo.

Beorn
02-20-2010, 02:54 PM
Falklands oil row dialogue sought by Argentina (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8525734.stm)

Argentina has said it wants dialogue with the UK in the row over planned British oil drilling around the Falkland Islands.Deputy Foreign Minister Victorio Taccetti added that Argentina could do little beyond the new controls it had imposed on shipping to the islands.
The UK has said the oil exploration conforms to international law.
An oil rig from the UK has arrived in the Falklands' waters, with drilling due to begin on Sunday.
Earlier this week, Argentina announced that special permits would be required by all ships heading from its ports or through its waters to the Falklands.

Skandi
02-20-2010, 07:15 PM
They are shooting themselves in the foot, if they decide that ships cannot leave their ports, well there are other countries who will be willing to take the money, The Most recent claim to the islands was ratified by the UN after a referendum, for the Argentinians to take them, they would have to provide a good reason for forcing people to live under a government not of their choice.
What they should be doing is being cooperative, our zone extends 200miles out, the rest could be considered theirs, they do not have the money to explore, but we do, and they can benefit from our exploration! Oil plays do not respect lines on maps.

And I think you'll find that the population of Britan will support a war again, after all this would be the first one in years that is actually in our own interest. But I doubt it will go that far.

Maleficarum
02-20-2010, 08:08 PM
I went to the Falklands in 1988 when I was in the Royal Air Force and it's a barren godforsaken place. Even then they knew that there were oil and minerals waiting to be plucked when the technology was available to get to them. As for the argies, fuck em, they broke the Geneva Convention in a number of ways, particularly concerning mines and minefields many of which are still there now.

My concern is that gorgon brown hasn't the backbone nor the will to stand up to them like the iron lady did.

Germanicus
02-20-2010, 09:07 PM
THE Prime Minister has said the UK is prepared to defend the Falklands.
Gordon Brown spoke out after a Navy warship sailed to the South Atlantic in a re-run of the 1982 Falklands conflict.

Type 42 destroyer HMS York was last night in waters off the islands' capital Port Stanley - spearheading a new British task force in the escalating oilfield drilling row with Argentina.
The PM today reasserted Britain's right to search for oil off the islands.

Speaking on the radio, he said: "This is oil drilling that is exploration for the future.

"It is perfectly within our rights to do this. I think the Argentinians actually understand that.

"I think you will find that we have made all the preparations that are necessary to make sure the Falkland Islanders are properly protected."

The survey vessel HMS Scott has also headed to the windswept isles off South America and is alongside the Royal Navy warship.
The giant oil supply tanker RFA Wave Ruler will be there soon.

And the three new arrivals, previously sailing elsewhere in the vast Atlantic, will make up a four-strong seaborne force with the Falklands' permanent patrol vessel HMS Clyde.

A senior Navy source said HMS York had been sent as a "deterrent" to Argentina as tensions between London and Buenos Aires rise over the drilling operation by four British-based oil firms, due to begin next week.

The source added: "She will discourage the Argentines from trying anything with our shipping.
"If they do, the Navy are there to stop them."

The Naval mission will evoke memories of Rod Stewart's song Sailing, which became associated with the Falklands War after being used as the theme tune to a BBC documentary about the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal.

Argentina, which still claims the Falklands and its surrounding seas despite its crushing defeat in the war, is furious at the Brits' plan to drill at least seven wells off the islands.

On Tuesday it tried to implement a blockade by issuing a decree banning any merchant ships from reaching the UK territories without its permission.

And last week it detained a cargo ship in a port near Buenos Aires, claiming it was ferrying steel oil pipes to the islands.
There are now more than 1,000 Armed Forces personnel in the region, plus four Eurofighter Typhoons, a Hercules transport plane, a Vickers VC10 refuelling aircraft and two Sea King helicopters.

Referring to the Navy's manoeuvring, the source said: "It has been done very quietly so as not to look too provocative.
"But the Argentines are in no doubt that we are there now."
Admirals are determined not to make the same mistake they did in 1982, when their plan to withdraw the Falklands' regular patrol boat encouraged General Galtieri's junta to invade.
Experts claim there could be 60BILLION barrels of black gold under the islands' coastal waters.
The Ocean Guardian drilling rig will arrive tomorrow after an 8,000-mile journey from Scotland.
And next week Desire Petroleum will become the first company to begin explorations at a potential field known as Liz.
They deny it is named after the Queen, but rather the wife of a company director.
Tory MP Andrew Rosindell last night called on the Government to tell Argentina's ambassador in Britain that the blockade bid is "unacceptable".
A Navy spokesman said: "The Government is fully committed to the South Atlantic Overseas Territories."

poiuytrewq0987
02-20-2010, 09:12 PM
Germanicus, the 2010 Falklands Conflict is really starting to heat up! I wonder if the Brazilians would lend the Argentinians military aid - they can divvy up the black gold drilled in the Falklands. One of the possible scenarios but also one of the most unlikely scenarios.

Germanicus
02-20-2010, 09:17 PM
Germanicus, the 2010 Falklands Conflict is really starting to heat up! I wonder if the Brazilians would lend the Argentinians military aid - they can divvy up the black gold drilled in the Falklands. One of the possible scenarios but also one of the most unlikely scenarios.


True..........but think on this; one of our subs could sail into every Brazilian harbour and sink every warship they have..the Argentinians will think about invading, but common sense will prevail.
Britain has fewer teeth now, but it's bite is still sharp?

Besides, Argentina knows that we play to win, enough said, what!

poiuytrewq0987
02-20-2010, 09:25 PM
True..........but think on this; one of our subs could sail into every Brazilian harbour and sink every warship they have..the Argentinians will think about invading, but common sense will prevail.
Britain has fewer teeth now, but it's bite is still sharp?

Besides, Argentina knows that we play to win, enough said, what!

Probably but you guys have only 12 submarines compared to Brazil's 5 submarines (and Argentina's 2 submarines) so that's not a large difference meaning you won't be able to sail into their harbors without opposition. If I am correct, the Brazilians have an aircraft carrier they could post nearby to the islands and carry out bombings with relative ease since there are only four fighters on the islands. If the Argentines want to take the Falklands then they would have to wipe out the opposition before reinforcements arrive but I don't think that's likely without Brazilian help.

hereward
02-20-2010, 09:42 PM
They can have 100, it does not matter, quality and execution every time. I would be shocked with Brazil joining Argentina on any venture, otherwise I'm not fussed.

poiuytrewq0987
02-20-2010, 09:46 PM
They can have 100, it does not matter, quality and execution every time. I would be shocked with Brazil joining Argentina on any venture, otherwise I'm not fussed.

Cristina just needs to play a bit of smart diplomacy then she will be able to get Brazil to join on her side. Then it's bye-bye to British control over the Falklands and surrounding territories.

hereward
02-20-2010, 09:55 PM
Military speaking, they cant do it, your hope lies with my leaders.

Beorn
02-20-2010, 10:00 PM
Cristina just needs to play a bit of smart diplomacy then she will be able to get Brazil to join on her side. Then it's bye-bye to British control over the Falklands and surrounding territories.

You forget many things in trying to guess the outcome of any military action, and that is the UN and America. One has an interest in playing to the hierachy of the top European nations, whilst the other is oil crazy and a somewhat long term ally of Britain in particular.

Maleficarum
02-20-2010, 10:28 PM
Argentina has neither the will nor the firepower to take the Falklands over . If the US failed to support the UK as they failed to do in 1982 it wouldn't make any difference. The US is neither a world superpower or a deciding factor anymore.

Osweo
02-20-2010, 10:54 PM
Argentina just wants some juicy concessions or whatever. Some bundle of readies. She'll probably get them; end of story.

Germanicus
02-21-2010, 12:56 PM
Cristina just needs to play a bit of smart diplomacy then she will be able to get Brazil to join on her side. Then it's bye-bye to British control over the Falklands and surrounding territories.


That will never happen, think on this, the lives lost in the last war over the Falkland territories would have been pointless, the British public would support any retalitory response against Argentina.
The Argentinians can make as much noise as they want, harrass our ships too, but when the gloves are off Britain will give Argentina a real bloody kicking.

Beorn
02-22-2010, 12:25 AM
British cruise ship tests Argentine blockade in Falklands (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/7279507/British-cruise-ship-tests-Argentine-blockade-in-Falklands.html)

Her decks boast sun loungers and golf simulators rather than machine guns and torpedoes, while those on board are more likely to be sipping G&Ts than rehearsing military drills. But today a British cruise ship is leading the charge in the latest stand-off over the Falklands, as it sails towards the harbour at Port Stanley in the first major test of Argentine resolve.

Last week the Argentine government, in response to a British company's planned exploration of oilfields off the Falkland coast, decreed that all ships travelling between Argentina and the Falklands must be granted permission from the Argentine government.
Observers noted that the decree could potentially ensnare all boats travelling to and from the Falkland islands – including the cruise ships that bring over 60,000 tourists annually to the remote rocky outcrops in the South Atlantic.

Yet two days after the decree was issued, the Star Princess set sail for the Falklands from the Argentine capital, Buenos Aires, with no demand for a permit from the Argentine authorities. It is due arrive in Port Stanley tomorrow, and then dock again in the Argentine port of Ushuaia, near Cape Horn, on Wednesday – and as of yet, there has still been no request to submit official paperwork.

a device
02-22-2010, 01:14 AM
Any chance of adding a poll to this (obviously popular) subject? ;)
I'd like to vote, before explaining my own opinion.

Guapo
02-22-2010, 01:23 AM
Maradona says "Bring it on"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk-kXwjASEE

Beorn
02-22-2010, 01:34 AM
LOL! Michael Owen says "you and what army?"


51AHO2Ufaho

Guapo
02-22-2010, 01:37 AM
LOL! Michael Owen says "you and what army?

God's army :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbbsytHDp2o

Beorn
02-22-2010, 01:50 AM
God's army :D

Since when did the army of God rely upon no morals and cheating?

England is God's chosen people. England doesn't play in white for nothing you know.

(Btw, this is a British thread but for the life of me I couldn't find a decent game against Argentina involving Wales or Scotland....:wink)

Beorn
02-22-2010, 11:26 PM
Poll now added :) (Thank you).

Imperivm
02-23-2010, 12:53 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm

:|

Falkata
02-23-2010, 04:31 PM
This is getting interesting, with Chavez, everything is possible :D

Osweo
02-23-2010, 10:14 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm

:|


Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez reiterated his support for Argentina.

The Ocean Guardian is in Falkland Islands waters
"We demand, and I think all of us should do the same, the withdrawal of the submarine platform, and that the English government... give that land back," he said.

Well, there hasn't been one of them for a good long while! :tongue

Loki
02-24-2010, 11:42 PM
Stupid opportunistic Argies. :rolleyes2:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/02/24/article-1253599-08743F36000005DC-294_468x318.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/02/24/article-1253599-086FF233000005DC-354_468x315.jpg

The Falklands belongs to the United Kingdom. Looks they did not learn their lesson in 1982. However, this time they may be empowered by circumstances: Chile supports them (in 1982 it supported the UK), and also Brazil and other Latin American countries. And, these days "colonialist relics" do not enjoy a lot of support on the world stage and popular sentiment. Things could get interesting ... I just hope the UK Govt stick to their guns.

a device
02-24-2010, 11:45 PM
Shit! After all that, I pressed the wrong option in the poll! :rolleyes:
I meant to vote for no aggression against the Argies. i.e. no help for the Falkland Islanders.

I thought that the 1,800 people who Maggi had so magnaminously spent billions of taxpayers' money on 'liberating', were actually indigenous Brits.
That was, till I spoke to Aptrgangr, and found out that these great British patriots are about as British as tortilla chips.

Hopefully, he or the Prussian will be here presently to provide the links which I have lost. :ohwell:

Loki
02-24-2010, 11:55 PM
... these great British patriots are about as British as tortilla chips.


According to Wikipedia:

Ethnic groups

61.3% Falkland Islander
29.0% British
2.6% Spaniard
0.6% Japanese
6.5% Chilean & Other

As for the "Falkland Islanders" ... they look like this apparently:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Falkland-Islanders.jpg/800px-Falkland-Islanders.jpg

i.e. probably primarily of British descent. There's only 3,105 of them anyway, which means that the population is arguably less important than the territory itself. Therefore, I would support the UK to keep the Falklands.

Guapo
02-25-2010, 12:11 AM
the population is arguably less important than the territory itself.

Conflicts like this have absolutely nothing to do with the populations from whatever region/country but rather strategic or economic importance. It would make good propaganda if the Islanders were being butchered by the evil Argies or whatever, that's all.

Beorn
02-25-2010, 12:13 AM
http://www.sartma.com/newsimages/220.jpg


MRS. SHORT'S CLASS: Harley Berntsen, Tansie Bonner, Joanne Butler, Danielle Caswell, Jane Clarke, Victoria Collier, Marc Courtney, Tom Elsby, Kelly Fiddes, Adam Henry, Toni Jacobsen, Shanice McCallum, David Philips, Drew Robertson, Kaylee Smith, Eva Valasquez, Dominic Watson, Zoe Whitney, and Terrance Browning.

One or two in there can be taken out straight away, but the majority are good British names. I suppose it depends upon what they (or should I say their parents) identify as.

http://www.sartma.com/newsimages/221.jpg
http://www.sartma.com/newsimages/222.jpg
http://www.sartma.com/newsimages/224.jpg
http://www.sartma.com/newsimages/225.jpg

http://www.sartma.com/art_281_14_96_1.html

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Falklands-youth.jpg

Must be said the lad in the cap looks Oriental

a device
02-25-2010, 09:31 PM
I suppose it depends upon what they (or should I say their parents) identify as.
I agree with that totally, mate. ;)


They also see themselves as no different from other immigrant nations including those of neighbouring South America:

“ We are as much a people as those in Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Chile and many other South American countries whose inhabitants are of principally European or African descent. (Councillor Mike Summers)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islanders

Argentina itself, has several distinct ethnic European enclaves. Of course, the German contingent is best known, but what about...?

Irish Argentines
http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/a2c014627/en/max/470/300/Celtic1982.jpg

Ukranian Argentines
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Ukrainianobera2.JPG/270px-Ukrainianobera2.JPG

Or Italian Argentines
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Reina_de_Italia_-_fiesta_del_inmigrante_-_Obera.png

The point I make is that there must come a cut off point, when these descendents of European emigres must accept that they live many a thousand of miles away from Mother Europe.

Amapola
02-25-2010, 09:41 PM
Malvinas hispanicas!!!

:embarrassed :)

a device
02-26-2010, 12:01 AM
Malvinas hispanicas!!!
Bless you!
A sachet of Lemsip extra strength will do you the world of good, compadre. :)

Amapola
02-26-2010, 09:07 AM
Bless you!
A sachet of Lemsip extra strength will do you the world of good, compadre. :)

I don't have a flu and you don't call a girl compadre :p

Kadu
02-26-2010, 09:32 AM
Fixed :)


Bless you!
A sachet of Lemsip extra strength will do you the world of good, comadre. :)

Treffie
02-26-2010, 09:49 AM
This is getting interesting, with Chavez, everything is possible :D

Argentina could lose all her credibility if they've got Chavez backing them :)


I agree with that totally, mate. ;)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islanders

Argentina itself, has several distinct ethnic European enclaves. Of course, the German contingent is best known, but what about...?

Irish Argentines
http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/a2c014627/en/max/470/300/Celtic1982.jpg

Ukranian Argentines
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Ukrainianobera2.JPG/270px-Ukrainianobera2.JPG

Or Italian Argentines
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Reina_de_Italia_-_fiesta_del_inmigrante_-_Obera.png

The point I make is that there must come a cut off point, when these descendents of European emigres must accept that they live many a thousand of miles away from Mother Europe.

You're missing out the Welsh (typical of the English :)) They introduced irrigation systems into Argentina and turned the unproductive Patagonia region (Chubut) into the main wheat growing area of the country.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/Gaimanfisherman.jpg

Peachy Carnahan
02-26-2010, 12:26 PM
Im sure we shall let the Argentinians have the Falklands back........as soon as the Spanish hand over the Canaries to Morocco.....:rolleyes:

Falkata
02-26-2010, 02:13 PM
Im sure we shall let the Argentinians have the Falklands back........as soon as the Spanish hand over the Canaries to Morocco.....:rolleyes:

:confused: Canaries are part of Spain since 1492, Morocco didnt even exist in those times. And Canary Islands have a population of more than 2 millions of ethnic spanish people :rolleyes:

skyhawk
02-27-2010, 12:43 AM
I am not interested in what the British or the Argentines have to say about the Falkland Islands.................I wanna know what the penguins think about the oil exploration going on there.........they were there before anyone :D

Majar
02-27-2010, 08:29 AM
I could care less as long as American money and troops stay out of your fight. Obama is keeping the U.S. neutral, one foreign policy move he has made I actually agree with. In general though, I support Argentina over the UK. :whistle:

Eldritch
02-27-2010, 10:44 AM
Falklanders (is that a real word?) consider themselves British, not Argentinean.

Latin American politics all too often involve creating imaginary problems, in order to distract people from real ones. Thats pretty much all there is to it, unless you want to join in on Wulfnowhere's pathetic fantasies of nuking Buenos Aires.

Maleficarum
02-27-2010, 11:14 AM
There was a world of difference back in 1982, Argentina was in a pretty grim condition with a military junta and an idiot running the country who needed a distraction from his ruining of the country.

Argentina is now much more stable and even though the predictable crowds (probably paid for) are burning the Union Jack etc I don't believe for a second that they will attempt to take the islands by force again. If they did indeed launch an attempted military operation their support would fall away immediately and they would find themselves isolated once more.

Lenny
02-28-2010, 10:57 AM
Argentina is not Bolivia (racially) or Chavista (politically).
Argentinians are racially-European.
So this conflict, [British-holdover-Colonialism] vs [Argentinian nationalism], is purely national and has no racial overtones.

I support Argentina because it is in their "territorial waters" (so to speak) and I'd prefer Argentina than today's multikulti-British get oil profits if any are to be had.

British people, imagine if Russia (or whatever) controlled the Shetlands (http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/3976/cheapflightsfromsumburg.gif)! How would you feel?

Beorn
02-28-2010, 12:47 PM
British people, imagine if Russia (or whatever) controlled the Shetlands (http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/3976/cheapflightsfromsumburg.gif)! How would you feel?

I would continue on with my life without a care in the world. Happy in the knowledge that some obscure place in the sea which has little sunshine and plenty of rain, and gargantuan amounts of wind to blow your very soul away is still not on my list of places I wish to visit or indeed think to own.

Oh, but there's oil involved now and my country is running itself into the ground under a hopeless female president. She thinks the islands will be the solution to all our problems.

Attack! Baa! Attack! Baa! Attack! Baa!

Lenny
02-28-2010, 01:05 PM
I would continue on with my life without a care in the world. Happy in the knowledge that some obscure place in the sea which has little sunshine and plenty of rain, and gargantuan amounts of wind to blow your very soul away is still not on my list of places I wish to visit or indeed think to own.

Oh, but there's oil involved now and my country is running itself into the ground under a hopeless female president. She thinks the islands will be the solution to all our problems.

Attack! Baa! Attack! Baa! Attack! Baa!
Your position is that a country has no rights to its own oil because of a peculiar holdover of the colonial era.

This is like the USA forbidding to allow Cuba to harvest any of the oil offshore near Cuba's own Guantanamo Bay.

Beorn
02-28-2010, 01:09 PM
Your position is that a country has no rights to its own oil because of a peculiar holdover of the colonial era.

It isn't their oil. It is Falkland Islanders oil.

Lenny
02-28-2010, 01:15 PM
It isn't their oil. It is Falkland Islanders oil.
OK then - all North Sea oil profits for Britain should be invested in the Shetlands and should go nowhere else.

Beorn
02-28-2010, 01:17 PM
OK then - all North Sea oil profits for Britain should be invested in the Shetlands and should go nowhere else.

Welcome to my world. :D

I'd love the Shetland Islands to attain independence and grow fat and rich off of the profits of the North Sea oil which is in their sector.

Lenny
02-28-2010, 01:18 PM
Welcome to my world. :D

I'd love the Shetland Islands to attain independence and grow fat and rich off of the profits of the North Sea oil which is in their sector.
Wait a minute - so you are serious about Falkland independence?

Beorn
02-28-2010, 01:26 PM
Wait a minute - so you are serious about Falkland independence?

:icon_yes:

There will be a wealth of British property which will no doubt be fought over post-independence, mainly by Scotland and England. Scotland will no doubt wish to retain control over the Falklands in order to carry on with their oil interests. I would prefer England to extend to these peoples the choice of independence.

hereward
02-28-2010, 02:46 PM
[British people, imagine if Russia (or whatever) controlled the Shetlands! How would you feel?

It cannot be imagined because modern history would be completely different.
The Shetlanders would also have to be of mostly Russian descent, with them wanting to remain part of Russia.


OK then - all North Sea oil profits for Britain should be invested in the Shetlands and should go nowhere else.

Not a comparison, Shetlands 'territorial waters' do not amount to all of Great Britains north sea oil deposits. The Shetlands is not analogous to the Falklands.

The Falklands are not a colonial hang over, the islands people wish to remain part of G.B, they are a self governing part of G.B.
Until the people wish to be part of Argentina, the Falklands will remain British.
Maybe you desire for the inhabitants removal, if this were to happen, then maybe those that inhabit the U.S.A should be removed.

The Lawspeaker
02-28-2010, 02:50 PM
I think that I would know a deal that the Argies cannot possibly resist. They can have the Falklands.. but only if Britain can use all the resources, if the population is moved to any place in Britain they desire.. and all will get a villa and a mountain retreat (all of course at the expense of the Argies) and the Argies can then buy the islands, minus resources, per meter, for the same fair price that one meter in the City of London would cost you.

Phil75231
02-28-2010, 03:16 PM
Still, what pro-Argentine population does exist in The Falklands? None that I'm aware of. People have lived there for generations. I say let the Falklanders do what they want.

Osweo
02-28-2010, 11:50 PM
Wooo! I found some maps:
First of all, let's see just how massive Argentina is:
http://eldib.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/falklands-map-a.gif
- Ginormous. With tons of coastline. And if oil is only in that small fraction of it that's near the Falklands, then Tough Shit.

And how far away are the islands from the mainland?
http://www.flexiport.com/images/Falklands_Jeremy_3.jpg
Miles and miles!
Oh, and what is Argentina doing on Tierra del Fuego?!? Shouldn't that belong to Chile??!! :p

Okay, now where's the oil?
http://www.offshore.no/admin/ewebeditpro2/upload/FOGL%20licences%20Falklands.gif
Hoho! It's on the FAR side of the islands, RIGHT out in the Ocean!

And how far do British rights extend?
http://www.offshore.no/admin/ewebeditpro2/upload/FalklandFOGL1.gif
Looks fair enough. Argentina can fuck right off, and interfering third-party outsiders all the more so.

Nationalitist
03-01-2010, 12:40 AM
Yes to poll option #2 and #4.

poiuytrewq0987
03-01-2010, 12:48 AM
Wooo! I found some maps:
First of all, let's see just how massive Argentina is:

- Ginormous. With tons of coastline. And if oil is only in that small fraction of it that's near the Falklands, then Tough Shit.

Oil isn't everywhere, otherwise it wouldn't be called black gold.


And how far away are the islands from the mainland?

Miles and miles! Compared to the distance between the British Isles and Argentina?


Oh, and what is Argentina doing on Tierra del Fuego?!? Shouldn't that belong to Chile??!! :pChile is only 30% to 50% European, I couldn't care less about them.


Okay, now where's the oil?

Hoho! It's on the FAR side of the islands, RIGHT out in the Ocean! It's on the eastern coast of the Falklands, which is still very close to Argentina compared to the distance between that piece of ocean and the British Isles.


And how far do British rights extend?Again, the distance between the Isles and Argentina?


Looks fair enough. Argentina can fuck right off, and interfering third-party outsiders all the more so.You need to fuck off, where do you get the right to go anywhere in the world and claim territory that is not yours? Just because the British have invaded and settled the Falklands does not make the Falklands yours.

Plus the oil obtained from the Falklands for Argentina would help the country even more so. If the oil was obtained for the British Empire. The funds gained from it would be used to pay for imperialist wars like Afghanistan, Iraq and soon-to-be Iran, et cetera...

Beorn
03-01-2010, 01:12 AM
where do you get the right to go anywhere in the world and claim territory that is not yours?

Where do you get the right to tell people who belong on the Falklands which country they should belong to?


Just because the British have invaded and settled the Falklands does not make the Falklands yours.

It does. :)

Falkata
03-01-2010, 01:14 AM
If the british took the islands in the XIX century using the force, I think Argentina has the right to try the same... It´s not very logical in my opinion to invade a land, conquer it and then protest when others want to do the same

The Lawspeaker
03-01-2010, 01:16 AM
And then Britain has the same right to destroy any invader- using any weapon that is at her disposal.

Osweo
03-01-2010, 01:22 AM
You need to fuck off, where do you get the right to go anywhere in the world and claim territory that is not yours? Just because the British have invaded and settled the Falklands does not make the Falklands yours.
Hehe, you really need to fuck off, as you clearly know fuck all about it. You and твою мать. It was over two hundred years ago, Argentina didn't really exist at the time. It doesn't matter how far it is, what matters is the status quo, and that is that the place is British ruled, and Argentina got a few hundred of its boys killed last time it invaded. Oh, and see that island off the west coast of England? 'Ireland' I believe it's called. By your idiot logic, Britain ought to conquer it again. Proximity is a shit thing to base a claim on.

Plus the oil obtained from the Falklands for Argentina would help the country even more so. If the oil was obtained for the British Empire. The funds gained from it would be used to pay for imperialist wars like Afghanistan, Iraq and soon-to-be Iran, et cetera...
Argentina is not desperately poor. They have plenty of other resources. And the average Argentinian would get none of the proceeds, I'm sure.

If you are so in need of pointless irredentist causes to occupy you, concentrate on Dobrudja, Eastern Thrace, Salonika and FYROM, and mind your own business when it comes to places barely a handful of Bulgars have ever even set foot on.

Falkata
03-01-2010, 01:23 AM
And then Britain has the same right to destroy any invader- using any weapon that is at her disposal.

True also

Beorn
03-01-2010, 01:25 AM
If the british took the islands in the XIX century using the force, I think Argentina has the right to try the same...

Quicky from Wiki as it is late. :)

"As a result of economic pressures resulting from the forthcoming American Revolutionary War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War), the United Kingdom decided to withdraw unilaterally from many of her overseas settlements, including Port Egmont, in 1774.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-19)[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-20) Upon her withdrawal in 1776 the UK left behind a plaque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commemorative_plaque)Buenos Aires (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buenos_Aires) as part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viceroyalty_of_the_Rio_de_la_Plata). On leaving in 1811, Spain also left behind a plaque asserting her claims. asserting her claims. From 1776 until 1811 Spain maintained a settlement administered from
On 6 November 1820, Colonel David Jewett (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Jewett) raised the flag of the United Provinces of the River Plate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Provinces_of_the_River_Plate) (Argentina) at Port Louis. Jewett was an American sailor and privateer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer) in the employment of Buenos Aires businessman Patrick Lynch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Lynch_%28Argentina%29#Descendants) to captain his ship, the frigate Heroína (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroina) (Lynch had obtained a corsair licence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_marque) from the Buenos Aires Supreme Director Jose Rondeau). Jewett had put into the islands the previous month, following a disastrous eight month voyage with most of his crew disabled by scurvy and disease. After resting in the islands and repairing his ship he returned to Buenos Aires.
In 1828 the Argentines founded a settlement and a penal colony. United States warships destroyed this settlement in 1831 after the Argentine governor of the islands Luis Vernet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Vernet) seized US seal hunting ships during a dispute over fishing rights. Escaped prisoners and pirates were left behind. In November 1832, Argentina sent another governor who was killed in a mutiny.
In January 1833, British forces returned and informed the Argentine commander that they intended to reassert British sovereignty. The existing settlers were allowed to remain, with an Irish member of Vernet's settlement, William Dickson, appointed as the Islands' governor. Vernet's deputy, Matthew Brisbane, returned later that year and was informed that the British had no objections to the continuation of Vernet's business ventures provided there was no interference with British control.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-21)[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-22)[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-23)[25]" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-24)

[/URL]













[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-24"] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-24)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands#cite_note-24)

Falkata
03-01-2010, 01:35 AM
That´s the english version :D, wiki spanish version tells a different story

"Las Malvinas quedaron desiertas hasta 1820, siendo sólo visitadas por barcos balleneros de diversas nacionalidades.
Una vez establecida la independencia argentina de la corona española, las islas pasaron a ser de soberanía argentina. En 1820 el gobierno de Buenos Aires envió una fragata a tomar posesión y reafirmar sus derechos. Durante el inicio de dicha soberanía, las Islas Malvinas dependían políticamente del Gobierno de Buenos Aires y eran utilizadas como lugar de reclusión de delincuentes peligrosos. "
(...)
El 2 de enero de 1833 entró en la bahía la nave de guerra británica Clio y su comandante Onslow comunicó al jefe argentino que iba a reafirmar la soberanía británica y retomar posesión de las islas en nombre del rey de Inglaterra. Pinedo no se consideró en condiciones de resistir y optó por embarcar a sus hombres. Al día siguiente desembarcaron las fuerzas británicas, izaron el pabellón inglés y arriaron el que había dejado Pinedo, que abandonó al día siguiente las aguas de la isla y fondeó en la rada interior del puerto de Buenos Aires el 15 de enero, e informó al día siguiente al gobierno de lo ocurrido.
La prensa de Buenos Aires atacó irritada a los autores del atentado; protestaron los representantes, los ciudadanos, el gobierno, el embajador argentino en Londres, Manuel Moreno; se pidió entonces una reparación, pero no se ha logrado nada y las Malvinas siguen bajo el dominio de Gran Bretaña.

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islas_Malvinas

poiuytrewq0987
03-01-2010, 01:38 AM
Hehe, you really need to fuck off, as you clearly know fuck all about it. You and твою мать. It was over two hundred years ago, Argentina didn't really exist at the time. It doesn't matter how far it is, what matters is the status quo, and that is that the place is British ruled, and Argentina got a few hundred of its boys killed last time it invaded. Oh, and see that island off the west coast of England? 'Ireland' I believe it's called. By your idiot logic, Britain ought to conquer it again. Proximity is a shit thing to base a claim on.

Argentina is not desperately poor. They have plenty of other resources. And the average Argentinian would get none of the proceeds, I'm sure.

If you are so in need of pointless irredentist causes to occupy you, concentrate on Dobrudja, Eastern Thrace, Salonika and FYROM, and mind your own business when it comes to places barely a handful of Bulgars have ever even set foot on.

Just because we've never had an empire that extended beyond outside of Europe doesn't make me a fool on foreign affairs. :thumb001:

Osweo
03-01-2010, 01:55 AM
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islas_Malvinas

QUE?!?!?

Oh.... Ahem:

The Falklands were deserted until 1820, being only visited by whalers of different nationalities.
Once Argentina had won independence from the Spanish crown, the islands came under Argentine sovereignty. In 1820 the Buenos Aires government sent a frigate to take possession and assert their rights. During the beginning of this sovereignty, the Falkland Islands were politically dependent on the Government of Buenos Aires and were used as a places of confinement for dangerous offenders. "
(...)
On January 2, 1833 the British warship Clio entered the bay and its commander Onslow informed the Argentine governor he was there to reassert British sovereignty and retake possession of the islands for the King of England. Pinedo considered resistance futile and decided to evacuate his men. The next day, British forces landed, hoisted the British flag and hauled down that which had been left by Pinedo, who left the waters of the island the next day to anchor in the port of Buenos Aires on 15 January and make his report to the government on the incident.
The Buenos Aires press angrily attacked the perpetrators of the attack, protested representatives, citizens, government, the Argentine ambassador in London, Manuel Moreno, then reparations were requested, but nothing was achieved and the Falklands remain under the dominion of Great Britain.

How ironic that the warship was named after the Muse of History... :p
I'm sure she's rolling her eyes at the contributions Wikipedia has made to her discipline. ;)

Imperivm
03-01-2010, 10:31 AM
I recall that the Falklands are right on the edge of the "DMZ" that extends to about 300 miles? DMZ being a international law that states a land mass must be within the 300 odd miles for a claim to be made to it, if already in possession of somebody else? So forget everything else, they have very very loose claims to the islands....

(I'm not sure if DMZ is the right term, I know its DMZ something) :S

The Ripper
03-01-2010, 10:43 AM
DMZ = demilitarized zone.

Imperivm
03-01-2010, 10:52 AM
Yes I know, but there is a term that is similar to DMZ but with regards to claiming islands.. I just can't remember it's name and was hoping somebody else did.

Beorn
03-21-2010, 12:12 AM
Argentine Falklands veterans threaten to invade islands over Britain's 'pirate' oil exploration (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1258952/Argentine-Falklands-veterans-threaten-invade-islands-Britains-pirate-oil-exploration.html)

Argentine Falklands war veterans have threatened to invade the islands if Britain does not give up sovereignty.
Soldiers warned of a rerun of the 1982 conflict in a chilling message to Gordon Brown's government today.
The threat came after diplomatic tensions between Britain and Argentina mounted as oil exploration in the Falklands continued and a Navy submarine was apparently dispatched to the area.




LOL! Just LOL!

The Lawspeaker
03-21-2010, 12:18 AM
Ask British veterans to volunteer for it's defense.
The war of the grandfathers is on...

poiuytrewq0987
03-21-2010, 03:43 PM
LOL! Just LOL!



All hail the great warriors of the Argentine Empire!

Albion
11-27-2010, 09:28 AM
Argentina is a country of 40 million, all the government need to do is conscript 1 million citizens and send them over to the Falklands.

Britain is a country of 65 million, go figure smart arse.


Cristina just needs to play a bit of smart diplomacy then she will be able to get Brazil to join on her side. Then it's bye-bye to British control over the Falklands and surrounding territories.

We can defend them from banana republics, don't worry.


You need to fuck off, where do you get the right to go anywhere in the world and claim territory that is not yours? Just because the British have invaded and settled the Falklands does not make the Falklands yours.

Plus the oil obtained from the Falklands for Argentina would help the country even more so. If the oil was obtained for the British Empire. The funds gained from it would be used to pay for imperialist wars like Afghanistan, Iraq and soon-to-be Iran, et cetera...

Learn the concept of Tierra Nullis.

Sundqvist
05-29-2020, 08:14 PM
what a nice thread, isn't it?