Falkland/Malvinas Islands Debate- Your Opinion?

[Condunum]

Hopefully their navy will be up to it, should it happen again. Like most nations, the Brits cut military funding when possible. Always in the vain hope that trouble will not raise it's ugly head...at least until they get re-elected.

Unlikely to happen. Both sides are severely limited by economic constraints, though the UK does retain a advantage by still maintaining it's delusion of being a world naval power.

World naval power or not, it has the full capability to sweep Argentina.

[Machtergreifung]

Unlikely to happen. Both sides are severely limited by economic constraints, though the UK does retain a advantage by still maintaining it's delusion of being a world naval power.

World naval power or not, it has the full capability to sweep Argentina.

Only because Britain bothers to fund their navy.

[Democratic Koyro]

World naval power or not, it has the full capability to sweep Argentina.

Only because Britain bothers to fund their navy.

The Navy (as well as the Army and Air Force) is fairly underfunded for the demands the Government has for it. It really needs a boost in spending so it can get additional ships, resources and manpower. But they cut defence spending for whatever reason while still demanding the same operational capacity. Quite unreasonable really.

[Malkora]

I am offended by your lack of a "Uruguay" option in the poll. As has been clearly shown, Uruguay has the best claim over it. Except for Britain. And France. And everyone except Argentina.

[Condunum]

World naval power or not, it has the full capability to sweep Argentina.

Only because Britain bothers to fund their navy.

And that matters why?

[Machtergreifung]

Only because Britain bothers to fund their navy.

The Navy (as well as the Army and Air Force) is fairly underfunded for the demands the Government has for it. It really needs a boost in spending so it can get additional ships, resources and manpower. But they cut defence spending for whatever reason while still demanding the same operational capacity. Quite unreasonable really.

Question: What need has Britain for maintaining its present naval structure (ie, attempting to have some power projection and failing badly at it).

Only because Britain bothers to fund their navy.

And that matters why?

Because Argentina doesn't.

[Condunum]

The Navy (as well as the Army and Air Force) is fairly underfunded for the demands the Government has for it. It really needs a boost in spending so it can get additional ships, resources and manpower. But they cut defence spending for whatever reason while still demanding the same operational capacity. Quite unreasonable really.

Question: What need has Britain for maintaining its present naval structure (ie, attempting to have some power projection and failing badly at it).

And that matters why?

Because Argentina doesn't.

Again, that matters why? You're not making any contention to the point, so the retort is pretty useless.

[The divided]

results are in:

Yes 1513 99.7%
No 3 0.2%
Invalid: 1 0.1%

Pretty damning result for the Argentineans

[Olivaero]

results are in:

Yes 1513 99.7%
No 3 0.2%
Invalid: 1 0.1%

Pretty damning result for the Argentineans

What a surprise...

[Democratic Koyro]

results are in:

Yes 1513 99.7%
No 3 0.2%
Invalid: 1 0.1%

Pretty damning result for the Argentineans

Waiting for Kirchner to rant about ballot stuffing, corrupt counting or some other horseshit.

[Liriena]

results are in:

Yes 1513 99.7%
No 3 0.2%
Invalid: 1 0.1%

Pretty damning result for the Argentineans

Waiting for Kirchner to rant about ballot stuffing, corrupt counting or some other horseshit.

Actually, the Kirchner administration has already said what they think about the referendum:

They do not recognize the Falklanders' right to self-determination. In the eyes of the Kirchner administration, they are illegal immigrants in Argentine territory.

[Regnum Dominae]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/world/ame ... eferendum/

More than 99% of voters said yes, according to Darren Christie, public relations manager for the Falklands Islands government. Just three people voted no. Turnout was 92%.

Wow.

[Regnum Dominae]

Waiting for Kirchner to rant about ballot stuffing, corrupt counting or some other horseshit.

Actually, the Kirchner administration has already said what they think about the referendum:

They do not recognize the Falklanders' right to self-determination. In the eyes of the Kirchner administration, they are illegal immigrants in Argentine territory.

Sauce?

[Democratic Koyro]

Actually, the Kirchner administration has already said what they think about the referendum:

They do not recognize the Falklanders' right to self-determination. In the eyes of the Kirchner administration, they are illegal immigrants in Argentine territory.

Sauce?

Now, for an actual source.

Argentina maintained that the vote was illegal and that islanders -- an "implanted people" -- have no voice in a dispute that must be settled bilaterally.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/falkland-is ... z2NIJa0gww

[Liriena]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/world/americas/falklands-referendum/

More than 99% of voters said yes, according to Darren Christie, public relations manager for the Falklands Islands government. Just three people voted no. Turnout was 92%.

Wow.

Those three people were probably just trolling.

[Regnum Dominae]

Sauce?

Now, for an actual source.

Argentina maintained that the vote was illegal and that islanders -- an "implanted people" -- have no voice in a dispute that must be settled bilaterally.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/falkland-is ... z2NIJa0gww

The fuck, Kirchner?

[Regnum Dominae]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/world/americas/falklands-referendum/

More than 99% of voters said yes, according to Darren Christie, public relations manager for the Falklands Islands government. Just three people voted no. Turnout was 92%.

Wow.

Those three people were probably just trolling.

That's what I was thinking.

[Liriena]

Now, for an actual source.

The fuck, Kirchner?

Kirchner cares a lot about human rights...except for those filthy Falklanders.

[Liriena]

It pains me to see that, even in the comments section of the most pro-British newspaper in Argentina, the nationalistic idiots are a majority.

I swear, if I hear a fellow Argie call the Falklanders "pirates" one more time, I'm relinquishing my citizenship...



...shit.


Well, time to learn "God save the Queen".

[Libertarian California]

Why do the Argentinians want the Falklands so bad? It's not like there is a massive oil/gold reserve underneath them?

From what I can tell, all there is there is just a few thousands Brits.

[The Corparation]

It pains me to see that, even in the comments section of the most pro-British newspaper in Argentina, the nationalistic idiots are a majority.

I swear, if I hear a fellow Argie call the Falklanders "pirates" one more time, I'm relinquishing my citizenship...



...shit.


Well, time to learn "God save the Queen".

My advice is to prove them right by moving to the Falklands and engaging in actual piracy. Both media piracy and conventional nautical piracy. Just to keep all your bases covered.

[Schmiegelland]

Argentina maintained that the vote was illegal and that islanders -- an "implanted people" -- have no voice in a dispute that must be settled bilaterally.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/falkland-is ... z2NIJa0gww

I mean...that is just... Why do the Argentinians have to wet their pants over a 4,700 square mile island(s) with a population of 2,800! (Comparison- USA=3,794,000 square miles) And, they are all BRITISH. B.R.I.T.I.S.H. BRITISH. Why doesn't Argentina get that!

A sign at the Argentine-Brazilian border, translated into English, proclaims "The Malvinas are Argentine". Signs like this exist throughout Argentina.

[Liriena]

Why do the Argentinians want the Falklands so bad? It's not like there is a massive oil/gold reserve underneath them?

From what I can tell, all there is there is just a few thousands Brits.

There IS oil in the surrounding sea...but the claim is far older than the discovery of said oil reserves.

Basically? It's a matter of national pride: Traditionally, Argentina has claimed the Falklands as a territory they inherited from Spain and colonized for a short while, before the colony itself imploded and the British (who also had a valid claim for sovereignity over the islands) took over.

Ever since then, it had been an endless dickwaving contest between two best friends...until the Military Junta in 1982 decided to pull a North Korea.

[Liriena]

Argentina maintained that the vote was illegal and that islanders -- an "implanted people" -- have no voice in a dispute that must be settled bilaterally.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/falkland-is ... z2NIJa0gww

I mean...that is just... Why do the Argentinians have to wet their pants over a 4,700 square mile island(s) with a population of 2,800! (Comparison- USA=3,794,000 square miles) And, they are all BRITISH. B.R.I.T.I.S.H. BRITISH. Why doesn't Argentina get that!

A sign at the Argentine-Brazilian border, translated into English, proclaims "The Malvinas are Argentine". Signs like this exist throughout Argentina.

It's part of our culture. Heck, it's part of our Constitution.
And, pretty much in the same way as Korean Reunification in North Korea, it's always an effective slogan to use to boost patriotism.

[Condunum]

results are in:

Yes 1513 99.7%
No 3 0.2%
Invalid: 1 0.1%

Pretty damning result for the Argentineans

That looks far too divided to make any decision on the issue.

Edit: also, contention to those numbers.
According to this, the vote as 98.8% yes of 1517 voters.