Falkland islands protest outside Brit embassy in BA

[Risottia]

As a Falklander I can proudly call my self British and a foriegn government has NO right to take that away from me. The argument that I should move to the UK is false. The Islands are my home and the home of my fathers and my fathers fathers. There much fear over here its like in Loord of te Rings or something (staring across the sea were someone wants to attack you), its frighting to know that a forign army wants to take your home life an liberty. It also might interest you that I lived througth the lastthe occupation was terrible. I am now a reservist in the FIDF so if you want to take my home your going to go through a whole company of my mates.

I think we have right to remain British and as long as a draw breath I shall be British.

Even when in ten years time you will be totaly economicaly dependant on Argentina for basic goods?

Switzerland is likewise "dependent" on the EU for basic goods, considering that everything they import must be produced or pass through the EU (ok, Liechtenstein). Should Switzerland enter the EU even if they don't want to?
No, because there's a thing called "good neighbourhood" and it's not like Switzerland doesn't pay for the goods it imports.

[Samuraikoku]

Hablás español....espero que no seas argentino.....que sos? un patriota o un cipayo? VENDEPATRIA! Si sos latinóamericano me das igual de asco....

Es fácil hablar y hacerse el malo por Internet.

[Beringovia]

Like Finland and Australia, Argentina isn't even a real country.

On what basis are any of them not "real"?

[Machtergreifung]

Even when in ten years time you will be totaly economicaly dependant on Argentina for basic goods?

Switzerland is likewise "dependent" on the EU for basic goods, considering that everything they import must be produced or pass through the EU (ok, Liechtenstein). Should Switzerland enter the EU even if they don't want to?
No, because there's a thing called "good neighbourhood" and it's not like Switzerland doesn't pay for the goods it imports.

You picked a bad example. The Swiss have several neighbours, so they have several nations to agree with over import/export rights.

The Falklands lack that option. Everything, and by that I mean food, mail and tourists, will end up coming to the Falklands via Buenios Aries in ten years. Perhaps Montivedo might get a slice also, but the fact remains that the islands will remain economically tied to South America, regardless of whatever posturing Britain does.

[Risottia]

Switzerland is likewise "dependent" on the EU for basic goods, considering that everything they import must be produced or pass through the EU (ok, Liechtenstein). Should Switzerland enter the EU even if they don't want to?
No, because there's a thing called "good neighbourhood" and it's not like Switzerland doesn't pay for the goods it imports.

You picked a bad example. The Swiss have several neighbours,

Italy (EU). France (EU). Austria (EU). Germany (EU). The EU forms a single market area with common regulations, so, about trade, it's as if it were a single country.
Of course, there's Liecthenstein as I already pointed out: non-EU, but really, it's basically the 24th Canton... it even uses the Sfr as currency, and it's smaller than Glarus!

[Malgrave]

You picked a bad example. The Swiss have several neighbours,

Italy (EU). France (EU). Austria (EU). Germany (EU). The EU forms a single market area with common regulations, so, about trade, it's as if it were a single country.
Of course, there's Liecthenstein as I already pointed out: non-EU, but really, it's basically the 24th Canton... it even uses the Sfr as currency, and it's smaller than Glarus!

I also don't think the international community will be too happy with Argentina illegally blockading viable trade to the Falkland Islanders and it won't do much to sway said islanders opinion to one that is Pro-Argentine.

[Rio Cana]

An Island occupied by people claiming to be russian is divided to give unoccupied land to the Chinese?

Considering these are river Islands the shape will change in the future. What does that mean for the Island inhabitants? Is any populated area of the island always going to be Russian?
All I see is a good short term sollution. One side needs to cave in and if you have no people wanting to be citizens on that Island I would say the person who should cave in is you.

I was under the impression that the island was uninhabited, but I could be mistaken. Still, it isn't quite the same situation, since the inhabitants would only have to relocate a couple of miles to be back in Mother Russia.

Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island had a Russian population. I have been trying to find the exact number but have not been able to find it.

I do know that there is a Russian village on the island called Ussuriysk. It is considered to be part of the greater suburbs of the Russian City of Khabarovsk which is located 30 km. from the Chinese border. Khabarovsk is the second largest populated city in the Russian Far East with over half a million people.

The Chinese got one uninhabited island and the Western half of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island while the Russians kept the populated Eastern half of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island. There was resistance from the Russians living on that island. They did not want to move. So in the end it was agreed that China would get the uninhabited parts while Russia would keep the inhabited parts. A treaty was signed so all issues that concern the Chinese -Russian border have been solved for good.

Map showing location of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island.


This compromise could set an example for Argentina and the UK. When it came to solving the 4300 long kilometer border issue between China and Russia, the Russians had over 1000 experts trying to solve this. The Chinese probably also had many experts.

And concerning the islands eroding and one day no longer being there read this about how they are solving the erosion problem. It is the second story on that page.
http://lands-sale.com/rubric/ussuri/0

[Machtergreifung]

You picked a bad example. The Swiss have several neighbours,

Italy (EU). France (EU). Austria (EU). Germany (EU). The EU forms a single market area with common regulations, so, about trade, it's as if it were a single country.
Of course, there's Liecthenstein as I already pointed out: non-EU, but really, it's basically the 24th Canton... it even uses the Sfr as currency, and it's smaller than Glarus!

Now, the problem is that the Falklands-
1. Are so islolated from Britain
2. Have no huge export sector.
3. Have few communication links outside of Argentina
4. Are dependant on Argentina for everything including the daily papers.


The Swiss comparison would work if the EU happened to hate Switzerland, and to get into Switzerland you had no choice but to go through Germany. Which you don't. The Falklands will be entirely dependant on Argentina for all imports/exports.

[Machtergreifung]

Italy (EU). France (EU). Austria (EU). Germany (EU). The EU forms a single market area with common regulations, so, about trade, it's as if it were a single country.
Of course, there's Liecthenstein as I already pointed out: non-EU, but really, it's basically the 24th Canton... it even uses the Sfr as currency, and it's smaller than Glarus!

I also don't think the international community will be too happy with Argentina illegally blockading viable trade to the Falkland Islanders and it won't do much to sway said islanders opinion to one that is Pro-Argentine.

It doesnt need to be that extreme. If Argentina stopped the flights from BA, it kills tourism, and if they send tarrifs on Falkland products sky-high, its economic ruin for the island.

[Kouralia]

2. Have no huge export sector.

WHat about that oil which sparked this whole resurgance?

That's be a pretty good export.

[The Realm of God]

Italy (EU). France (EU). Austria (EU). Germany (EU). The EU forms a single market area with common regulations, so, about trade, it's as if it were a single country.
Of course, there's Liecthenstein as I already pointed out: non-EU, but really, it's basically the 24th Canton... it even uses the Sfr as currency, and it's smaller than Glarus!

Now, the problem is that the Falklands-
1. Are so islolated from Britain
2. Have no huge export sector.
3. Have few communication links outside of Argentina
4. Are dependant on Argentina for everything including the daily papers.


The Swiss comparison would work if the EU happened to hate Switzerland, and to get into Switzerland you had no choice but to go through Germany. Which you don't. The Falklands will be entirely dependant on Argentina for all imports/exports.

Yes but as the Falklander last page said he does not want to be part of Argentina

[Fartsniffage]

I also don't think the international community will be too happy with Argentina illegally blockading viable trade to the Falkland Islanders and it won't do much to sway said islanders opinion to one that is Pro-Argentine.

It doesnt need to be that extreme. If Argentina stopped the flights from BA, it kills tourism, and if they send tarrifs on Falkland products sky-high, its economic ruin for the island.

All that is probably true.

It still doesn't change that fact that it would be unlikely to endear Argentina to the Kelpers or the rest of the world. It just makes them look like a bully.

[Malgrave]

I also don't think the international community will be too happy with Argentina illegally blockading viable trade to the Falkland Islanders and it won't do much to sway said islanders opinion to one that is Pro-Argentine.

It doesnt need to be that extreme. If Argentina stopped the flights from BA, it kills tourism, and if they send tarrifs on Falkland products sky-high, its economic ruin for the island.

Whilst making Argentina look bad in the international community and enforcing the belief of the Falkland Islands that joining Argentina is a massive no.

[The Realm of God]

This shows us blockades and economic bullying does not work.

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

and for our Argentine friends

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloqueo_de_Berlín

[Malgrave]

I was under the impression that the island was uninhabited, but I could be mistaken. Still, it isn't quite the same situation, since the inhabitants would only have to relocate a couple of miles to be back in Mother Russia.

Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island had a Russian population. I have been trying to find the exact number but have not been able to find it.

I do know that there is a Russian village on the island called Ussuriysk. It is considered to be part of the greater suburbs of the Russian City of Khabarovsk which is located 30 km. from the Chinese border. Khabarovsk is the second largest populated city in the Russian Far East with over half a million people.

The Chinese got one uninhabited island and the Western half of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island while the Russians kept the populated Eastern half of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island. There was resistance from the Russians living on that island. They did not want to move. So in the end it was agreed that China would get the uninhabited parts while Russia would keep the inhabited parts. A treaty was signed so all issues that concern the Chinese -Russian border have been solved for good.

Map showing location of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island.


This compromise could set an example for Argentina and the UK. When it came to solving the 4300 long kilometer border issue between China and Russia, the Russians had over 1000 experts trying to solve this. The Chinese probably also had many experts.

And concerning the islands eroding and one day no longer being there read this about how they are solving the erosion problem. It is the second story on that page.
http://lands-sale.com/rubric/ussuri/0

You should actually learn about the Bolshoi Islands history in comparison to the Falkland Islands and you'll find out that they are nothing alike. I'll copy and earlier post on the subject.

- The Soviet Union occupied the islands from China illegally in the 1920's and as such Russia were at an immediate disadvantage in any diplomatic negotiations about the future of the islands, the amount of people in the island is not important. The British Empire on the other hand never invaded the Falkland Islands and the situation can be explained by quoting history previously posted by Bwitain.

In 1764, French navigator and military commander Louis Antoine de Bougainville founded the first settlement on Berkeley Sound, in present-day Port Louis, East Falkland. In 1765, British captain John Byron explored and claimed Saunders Island on West Falkland, where he named the harbour Port Egmont and a settlement was constructed in 1766. Unaware of the French presence, Byron claimed the island group for King George III. Spain acquired the French colony in 1767 and placed it under a governor subordinate to the Buenos Aires colonial administration. In 1770, Spain attacked Port Egmont and expelled the British presence, bringing the two countries to the brink of war. War was avoided by a peace treaty and the British return to Port Egmont.

In 1774, economic pressures leading up to the American Revolutionary War forced Great Britain to withdraw from many overseas settlements. Upon withdrawal the British left behind a plaque asserting her continued claim. Spain maintained its governor until 1806 who, on his departure, left behind a plaque asserting Spanish claims. The remaining settlers were withdrawn by the United Provinces of the River Plate in 1811.

Spain have a greater claim to the Falkland Islands then Argentina and if I remember correctly Uruguay also hold a great claim to the Falkland Islands then Argentina. You also have to remember that the people to the Falklands don't wish to be part of Argentina.

[Machtergreifung]

This shows us blockades and economic bullying does not work.

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

and for our Argentine friends

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloqueo_de_Berlín

1. Britain does not have the airlift capacity.
2. Britain cannot justify the cost.
3. The Falklands are so geographicaly isolated that it would be a extreme pressure on the infrastructure to manage it.
4. Why fly it in when you can send it by boat? Even if it is still too expensive to make economic sense...

It doesnt need to be that extreme. If Argentina stopped the flights from BA, it kills tourism, and if they send tarrifs on Falkland products sky-high, its economic ruin for the island.

All that is probably true.

It still doesn't change that fact that it would be unlikely to endear Argentina to the Kelpers or the rest of the world. It just makes them look like a bully.

Yes, beacause asking for the Falklands back nicely has got Argentina somewhere...

2. Have no huge export sector.

WHat about that oil which sparked this whole resurgance?

That's be a pretty good export.

What about the fact that all those workers and ships will need mainland Argentina for replenishment and shore leave?

Now, the problem is that the Falklands-
1. Are so islolated from Britain
2. Have no huge export sector.
3. Have few communication links outside of Argentina
4. Are dependant on Argentina for everything including the daily papers.


The Swiss comparison would work if the EU happened to hate Switzerland, and to get into Switzerland you had no choice but to go through Germany. Which you don't. The Falklands will be entirely dependant on Argentina for all imports/exports.

Yes but as the Falklander last page said he does not want to be part of Argentina

So what? Switzerland might not be part of the EU, but they are dependant on them all the same.

[Fartsniffage]

Yes, beacause asking for the Falklands back nicely has got Argentina somewhere...

It might had done had they not attacked in '82.

Britain had asked them to negotiate several times prior to that and been refused.

[Unchecked Expansion]

So what? Switzerland might not be part of the EU, but they are dependant on them all the same.

That's still not an argument for Falklanders ever wanting to be Argentinian.
Of course, a blockade can be considered an act of war. So it's not going to happen.

[Fnordgasm 5]

Yes, beacause asking for the Falklands back nicely has got Argentina somewhere...

In 1947, 1948 and 1955 the UK offered to take the dispute to the International Court of Justice for mediation. Each time Argentina refused.

[SD_Film Artists]

This compromise could set an example for Argentina and the UK.

'sounds too much like appeasement. Why give parts of the Falklands to a country who tried to invade us [Argentina] when we could give it to a nation which hasn't? Say...Georgia. Not that it makes any sense giving it to Georgia, but it makes much more sense than Argentina.

[Fartsniffage]

Yes, beacause asking for the Falklands back nicely has got Argentina somewhere...

In 1947, 1948 and 1955 the UK offered to take the dispute to the International Court of Justice for mediation. Each time Argentina refused.

Thank you for providing the dates. I couldn't remember them.

P.S. I like your signature.

[Fnordgasm 5]

In 1947, 1948 and 1955 the UK offered to take the dispute to the International Court of Justice for mediation. Each time Argentina refused.

Thank you for providing the dates. I couldn't remember them.

P.S. I like your signature.

I looked them up on wikipedia but you're welcome nonetheless..

P.S. Thank you. It took a lot of effort to come up with something that really showed people what I'm all about. I was originally going to go with "Fnordgasm 5 is a cock." and then I toyed with idea of "Fnordgasm 5 is a dick." but twat just suits me, you know?

[Machtergreifung]

So what? Switzerland might not be part of the EU, but they are dependant on them all the same.

That's still not an argument for Falklanders ever wanting to be Argentinian.
Of course, a blockade can be considered an act of war. So it's not going to happen.

Why blockade? Just raise tarrifs and prices of all services to the Falklands. Pretty soon it makes no economic sense to stay on the islands as food and import/exports are too expensive. People leave in droves, and the Argies can move in.

Yes, beacause asking for the Falklands back nicely has got Argentina somewhere...

In 1947, 1948 and 1955 the UK offered to take the dispute to the International Court of Justice for mediation. Each time Argentina refused.

As the British were wanting to save face by some daft idea simmilar to Hong Kong, while the Argentines just wanted the islands back.

This compromise could set an example for Argentina and the UK.

'sounds too much like appeasement. Why give parts of the Falklands to a country who tried to invade us [Argentina] when we could give it to a nation which hasn't? Say...Georgia. Not that it makes any sense giving it to Georgia, but it makes much more sense than Argentina.

Hardly.

The Argentines tried and failed to get them back, so now they ask nicely, and Britain will give them back if they invest in the island and protect the islander in a way that Britain cannot.

[Solar]

I also don't think the international community will be too happy with Argentina illegally blockading viable trade to the Falkland Islanders and it won't do much to sway said islanders opinion to one that is Pro-Argentine.

It doesnt need to be that extreme. If Argentina stopped the flights from BA, it kills tourism, and if they send tarrifs on Falkland products sky-high, its economic ruin for the island.

True, but it would still be wrong for Argentina to do it. The US could ruin the Canadian economy with similar measures, but that does not make it right. And the US has just as much if not more claim to Canada.

To counteract this, the British should try to better develop the Falkland economy, make it more self-sufficient, and increase trade links between the Falklands and South Africa and Chile.

These irredentist based claims that are causing much global instability are utterly ridiculous and dangerous. Imagine if all the European countries tried to reclaim every piece of land they or their predecessors once controlled.

Argentina has no legitimate claim at all. Even if they did once control it, that still gives them no right to reclaim it. Claiming a historical right is even less legitimate (multiple states and groups can claim a similar conflicting right to any piece of land in the world, so EVERY border would be in dispute), and the Argentine claim is dubious at best. If everyone followed the Argentine example of arbitrarily claiming nearby land the world would be in dire straits. The Argentinians sound like Stalin, Mussolini or Adolf Hitler (or the PRC). Such behavior is no longer acceptable in the modern world.

[Malgrave]

This shows us blockades and economic bullying does not work.

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

and for our Argentine friends

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloqueo_de_Berlín

1. Britain does not have the airlift capacity.
2. Britain cannot justify the cost.
3. The Falklands are so geographicaly isolated that it would be a extreme pressure on the infrastructure to manage it.
4. Why fly it in when you can send it by boat? Even if it is still too expensive to make economic sense...

I don't think that was the point. I think the point was the Argentine copying a move the Soviet Union did to stave the population of West Berlin into a state of humanitarian and economic crisis is not exactly a move that would make them many friends in the international community and one that would further isolate them from even their most important economic allies like Brazil.

I doubt the United States and fellow members of the European Union and NATO would allow the people of the Falkland Islands to be blackmailed into handing over their sovereignty against their will and could easily move transport vessels to assist the people of the Falkland Islands or place diplomatic pressure on regional nations to fill the gap left over by Argentinian trade. I suspect even China would not support this blockade considering they view access to markets in the European Union as more important as economic links to the Argentine economy no matter their current relation.

Expensive does not come into it. The Berlin Airlift was expensive especially during the tough economic times the British and other European nations were going through and the mass disarment the Americans were going through as well. You just have to keep a steady rate of supplies going on long enough to make your enemy look idiotic both nationally and internationally something that would easily be done to Argentina given the right support by NATO and EU members.

I also thank Fnordgasm for preventing the information on the times that the United Kingdom has tried to resolve this conflict diplomatically.