Falkland Islands' Sovereignty Threatened?

[Farnhamia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars

You got ninja'd by Internationalizt, we're already memeing it.

Are you sure you want to twit me like that? IB's post can disappear, you know. *summons Guards* So can you.

[Herargon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars

You got ninja'd by Internationalizt, we're already memeing it.

/offtopic

Uh, who is Internationalizt? I don't see his username here...

/ontopic

I think the fact that the French held the Falklands for only around a year, and the British far more longer, is enough to conclude that the Argentinians do not need to complain about the Falklands.

[The Enclave Government]

You got ninja'd by Internationalizt, we're already memeing it.

Are you sure you want to twit me like that? IB's post can disappear, you know. *summons Guards* So can you.

[Farnhamia]

Are you sure you want to twit me like that? IB's post can disappear, you know. *summons Guards* So can you.

But we digress.

[Emerald Ilses Empire]

Alrighty...So here is my take on this

1. Great Britain has had De Facto control over the Falkland islands for hundreds of years now.
2. Living standards and the economic situation overall is significantly better in Great Britain than Argentina
3. The current inhabitants of the Falkland Islands overwhelmingly voted for remaining in Great Britain's control
4. Argentina has attempted to invade and conquer the Falkland Islands, and failed.
5. The UN has never condemned either Argentina's nor UK's possession and/or claims to the Falkland islands
6. Tracing any substantial amount of "original inhabitants' of the island from hundreds years ago is nigh impossible.
7. Many of the original claims on the island, such as any regarding Spanish citizens and Spanish founded cities, were founded and can only be correctly claimed by Spain, and if Spain forfeits or does not press the claim, no other nation inherits Spain's claims. Only claims made by the same nation (though can be done under different regimes) can realistically be considered legitimate.
8. The actual value of the islands is minimal, with it's previous value heavily based on being a supply base.

Even if the Argentinian claims are considered legitimate, Great Britain has maintained complete De Facto control over the islands for so long now, it could in itself be considered legitimate on that fact alone. Using a few vague and controversial documents hundreds of years old about remote islands that few regarded important can hardly be used to override the will of people currently living in the islands. Like an earlier post said, we are no longer in the middle ages. We shouldn't use ancient papers to justify fighting over lands now. One war was already fought over this island, people died, and nothing changed. Continuing this fighting, whether over internet or in the UN, is a waste of time.

[The Enclave Government]

You got ninja'd by Internationalizt, we're already memeing it.

/offtopic

Uh, who is Internationalizt? I don't see his username here...

/ontopic

I think the fact that the French held the Falklands for only around a year, and the British far more longer, is enough to conclude that the Argentinians do not need to complain about the Falklands.

*Imperializt Russia.

Is of sorry.

Anyway, that's something a colonist would say.

/s

Seriously though, both practically and arguably morally, no way Argentina will (or should) have the Falklands back.

[The Enclave Government]

Alrighty...So here is my take on this

1. Great Britain has had De Facto control over the Falkland islands for hundreds of years now.
2. Living standards and the economic situation overall is significantly better in Great Britain than Argentina
3. The current inhabitants of the Falkland Islands overwhelmingly voted for remaining in Great Britain's control
4. Argentina has attempted to invade and conquer the Falkland Islands, and failed.
5. The UN has never condemned either Argentina's nor UK's possession and/or claims to the Falkland islands
6. Tracing any substantial amount of "original inhabitants' of the island from hundreds years ago is nigh impossible.
7. Many of the original claims on the island, such as any regarding Spanish citizens and Spanish founded cities, were founded and can only be correctly claimed by Spain, and if Spain forfeits or does not press the claim, no other nation inherits Spain's claims. Only claims made by the same nation (though can be done under different regimes) can realistically be considered legitimate.
8. The actual value of the islands is minimal, with it's previous value heavily based on being a supply base.

Even if the Argentinian claims are considered legitimate, Great Britain has maintained complete De Facto control over the islands for so long now, it could in itself be considered legitimate on that fact alone. Using a few vague and controversial documents hundreds of years old about remote islands that few regarded important can hardly be used to override the will of people currently living in the islands. Like an earlier post said, we are no longer in the middle ages. We shouldn't use ancient papers to justify fighting over lands now. One war was already fought over this island, people died, and nothing changed. Continuing this fighting, whether over internet or in the UN, is a waste of time.

That's both a good message and may invalidate many of the wars in the Middle East

[Paredonia]

/offtopic

Uh, who is Internationalizt? I don't see his username here...

/ontopic

I think the fact that the French held the Falklands for only around a year, and the British far more longer, is enough to conclude that the Argentinians do not need to complain about the Falklands.

*Imperializt Russia.

Is of sorry.

Anyway, that's something a colonist would say.

/s

Seriously though, both practically and arguably morally, no way Argentina will (or should) have the Falklands back.

It's not a case of Argentina getting them back, since they never had the Falklands in the first place.

[The Alma Mater]

*Imperializt Russia.

Is of sorry.

Anyway, that's something a colonist would say.

/s

Seriously though, both practically and arguably morally, no way Argentina will (or should) have the Falklands back.

It's not a case of Argentina getting them back, since they never had the Falklands in the first place.

Well, they had them for a few days...

[Cymrea]

It's not a case of Argentina getting them back, since they never had the Falklands in the first place.

Well, they had them for a few days...

And paid quite the rental fee for it.

[Ifreann]

Everyone needs to be liberated from the evil west.

Spoken like a true privileged Western kid

No, it's fine, I checked my privilege this morning.

---

Congratulations, you can copy paste shit from Wikipedia (didn't even read tho)



That's kind of not my point.



lol you don't even know me



When they take the form of colonialism, kind of.



lol no

Well, least your intentions have been made evident. Behaviour aside, you're a waste of time. Back to my whisky and hot cocoa.

I believe gin and tonic is the traditional drink of the colonialist.

---

Everyone needs to be liberated from the evil west.

And we all now what lies west of the Falklands.

...fish?

---

CoD is people shooting cods at each other

it's a vital difference and part of the cultural heritage of the franchise

Hrm. I believe your right. Clearly the only solution is to change it up a bit and shoot bass at each other. That'll tip the scales.

Bass cannon? Bass cannon.

[The Enclave Government]

Hrm. I believe your right. Clearly the only solution is to change it up a bit and shoot bass at each other. That'll tip the scales.

Bass cannon? Bass cannon.

nein

we must simply use Battlebass as an alternative

instead of shooting bass at each other, you drive & fly bass that shoot bass missiles. you also lob bass at your enemies since unlike cods, bass are very fat and are not pinpoint accurate and must account for their fatness

[Ifreann]

Bass cannon? Bass cannon.

nein

we must simply use Battlebass as an alternative

instead of shooting bass at each other, you drive & fly bass that shoot bass missiles. you also lob bass at your enemies since unlike cods, bass are very fat and are not pinpoint accurate and must account for their fatness

I would play this game.

[The Enclave Government]

nein

we must simply use Battlebass as an alternative

instead of shooting bass at each other, you drive & fly bass that shoot bass missiles. you also lob bass at your enemies since unlike cods, bass are very fat and are not pinpoint accurate and must account for their fatness

I would play this game.

As would many, but sales are down due to the poor reception of Battlebass Bassline, which replaced the bass military with fishermen and bass. players widely reported feeling let down by whacking bass with sticks rather then flying bass jets and dropping bass bombs

[Indo-Malaysia]

WTF is "biological British"?

When a British settle another part of the world he does not change his etnicity. He and his descendants remain British. Australians for instance are mostly biological British people.

So, we are all now apparently Biologically African according to him. Now, lets make this guy happy by making this scenario happen:

All the Native Animals across the world should deport all the Humans back to Africa for their 'oppressive colonialism'.

[Frogtopia]

So long as the government of Argentina rattles its sabre in order to court favourable domestic public opinion, get used to us rightfully treating them like one.

Argentina has always claimed it, during good and during bad times. Argentina does not use it in order to court favourable domestic public opinion. What you say is a much-said farce.

This is wrong by all accounts, Leopoldo Galtieri the president of Argentina at the time of the Falklands war had a very dire issue, i.e. the public were not happy with him and he feared losing the next election.

Now being an old war horse he does the only thing he knows how to do i.e. he invades the Falklands and lo and behold he becomes the number one candidate for the next election, with Argentines cheering his name in the streets, if that is not courting domestic public opinion I don't know what is.

On the actual matter of the OP (inevitably, this will become a UK v Argentina thread), I have some faith in Macri not using this to further division.

My personal view is that we should share the oil exploration and drilling equitably with Argentina.

My persoanl view is that the Malvinas are Argentine and that Great Britain should get 0% of the revenue. Moreover, what you say is impossible because an Argentinian court ruled the drillings illegal.

Unfortunately the Malvinas regard them selves as part of Great Britain and want to remain that way, tough if you want it to change, also due to the fact that the drillings will not be happening in Argentine territory the drillings our outside Argentine laws

[Novus America]

...

Congratulations, you can copy paste shit from Wikipedia (didn't even read tho)

They have a well-functioning, autonomous, liberal democratic government of their own and from what I gather they're quite glad with it.

That's kind of not my point.

By that logic you're a Spanish settler, living in stolen indigenous lands nonetheless. What an outdated logic.

lol you don't even know me

Oh, so any population changes past 1500 are illegitimate?

When they take the form of colonialism, kind of.

Discounting the fact that according to your own definition ("in detriment of the native population"), they're not settlers.

lol no

So throw the Argetinians out of the Americas then? Being descendent from colonists does not mean you lose rights. We are all colonists outside of Africa.

[Novus America]

But do the Islanders need liberation if they don't feel oppressed? They seem rather content with, and rather afraid of, British and Argentine rule respectively.

The entirety of the islands' population is comprised of settlers so that's to be expected. That, however, doesn't make the colony-metropolis relationship any more ethic or justifiable.

The Argentina's population are "settlers" as well...

[Novus America]

Not likely, considering the autonomy Argentina gives its provinces.

Considering that Argentina has refused to give the islanders any say in the matter despite a representative from the islands giving Kirchner an invitation literally by hand, I doubt that Argentina has the best wishes of the Falklanders in mind.

Also the Falklands would not be a seperate province...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tierra_ ... _Argentina

[Risottia]

When a British settle another part of the world he does not change his etnicity. He and his descendants remain British. Australians for instance are mostly biological British people.

So, we are all now apparently Biologically African according to him. Now, lets make this guy happy by making this scenario happen:

All the Native Animals across the world should deport all the Humans back to Africa for their 'oppressive colonialism'.

Nope.

Humans belong to the clade Exafroplacentalia, so no Africa for humans. GIB GONDWANACLAY BACK TO AFROTHERIABALL!

[Indo-Malaysia]

So, we are all now apparently Biologically African according to him. Now, lets make this guy happy by making this scenario happen:

All the Native Animals across the world should deport all the Humans back to Africa for their 'oppressive colonialism'.

Nope.

Humans belong to the clade Exafroplacentalia, so no Africa for humans. GIB GONDWANACLAY BACK TO AFROTHERIABALL!

I thought the clade was Synapsida.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

That's definitely not it. They have a claim that goes back to the 19th century.



The relationship between the UK and the Falklands is inherently unequal in favor of the metropolis. That's colonialism and it's a bad thing.

The British claim to sovereignty dates from 1690, the first British settlements were in 1765, and the United Kingdom has exercised de facto sovereignty over the archipelago almost continuously since 1833. Argentina disputes this claim, having been in de facto control of the islands for a non-continuous two-year period between 1829 and 1833. The dispute escalated in 1982, when Argentina invaded the islands, precipitating the Falklands War.

Two years. Two-fucking years. Are we going to lay-out claims that France legally holds sovereignty over Mexico for their intervention and the establishment of the short-lived 4-year long Second Mexican Empire?

I would be fine with France holding sovereignty over Mexico over that.

[Geilinor]

Argentina has refused invitations to talk with the islanders, and Argentina wants to take the land for no better reason than that it's close to them. How is this not colonialism?

That's definitely not it. They have a claim that goes back to the 19th century.

The British claim to the islands goes back to the 17th century.

[Camelza]

And we all now what lies west of the Falklands.

...fish?

Fish don't lie.

[Dooom35796821595]

...fish?

Fish don't lie.

Fish only lie!