|
On June 17 2012 20:30 Rassy wrote:
When letting the islanders vote on it, there should be 3 options.
1-british
2-argentinian
3-independant.
It would be kinda funny if the islands where so rich with oil that it would be like a 2nd kuweit and the people would vote independant.
Nearly everyone in favor of letting the people vote would suddenly find it a terrible idea.
@below: yes people might fear that but i guess they could be safe.
If they realy got lot of oil they can just buy american protection like the gulf states.
We have to asume that they wont be invaded, i wanted to give this example just to show people that manny only like the idea of voting, because they expect the vote to be favourable.
I think most people predict at least 95% vote in favour of being British but i dunno if that is with an independent option, but still my understanding is the islanders are very grateful for Britain liberating them from Argentina 30 years ago.
|
On June 17 2012 15:10 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 07:03 hypercube wrote:On June 17 2012 06:13 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Britain cared about the islands before oil exploration was done, so why do people keep talking about oil? Oh wait... because oil is the bogeyman. Number one straw to grasp if you want to disagree and express your knee-jerk antipathy, but don't really have a reason why. Must be oil! That's a weird line of reasoning. If it wasn't for natural resources this would be a non-issue. It would be something like Gibraltar: a low level nuisance for the countries involved completely ignored by everyone else. This materialistic deterministic view of international politics leaves much to be desired; it isn't comprehensive and it's importance is exaggerated and it misses the forest for the trees. It's a relic of Marxist theory - one of the few still given credence by anyone - where everything is explained by economic interests and pressures, or they are at least paramount. Oil is not the reason or even a reason Britain won't give them up and it isn't the reason Argentina wants them.
I don't know exactly what you mean by materialistic deterministic view. The question isn't why Argentina claims the Falklands or the UK won't give it up. It's quite rare for countries to give up territory or claims over significant amount of territory.
But economic factors strongly influence how actively they'll pursue their claims. That's not an ideological position. It's just common sense.
|
On June 17 2012 20:52 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 15:10 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 17 2012 07:03 hypercube wrote:On June 17 2012 06:13 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Britain cared about the islands before oil exploration was done, so why do people keep talking about oil? Oh wait... because oil is the bogeyman. Number one straw to grasp if you want to disagree and express your knee-jerk antipathy, but don't really have a reason why. Must be oil! That's a weird line of reasoning. If it wasn't for natural resources this would be a non-issue. It would be something like Gibraltar: a low level nuisance for the countries involved completely ignored by everyone else. This materialistic deterministic view of international politics leaves much to be desired; it isn't comprehensive and it's importance is exaggerated and it misses the forest for the trees. It's a relic of Marxist theory - one of the few still given credence by anyone - where everything is explained by economic interests and pressures, or they are at least paramount. Oil is not the reason or even a reason Britain won't give them up and it isn't the reason Argentina wants them. I don't know exactly what you mean by materialistic deterministic view. The question isn't why Argentina claims the Falklands or the UK won't give it up. It's quite rare for countries to give up territory or claims over significant amount of territory. But economic factors strongly influence how actively they'll pursue their claims. That's not an ideological position. It's just common sense.
As as I said before though, the main point is that the Falklands are independent and the British government couldn't legally give them to Argentina if they wanted to.
As for Gibraltar, the Spanish still seem kind of pissed about that, it's why the Spanish queen refused to attend the Diamond Jubilee celebtrations.
|
On June 16 2012 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:from the china thread: Show nested quote +On June 15 2012 13:22 dAPhREAk wrote:
why does every political thread turn into a pro/con-US debate?
Fair point.. accept my apology
I was referring to This
|
Northern Ireland163 Posts
On June 17 2012 07:49 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 06:54 philly5man wrote:
Although I'm British I don't really care about the Falklands remaining British - but logically it seems that they are British, and that's that? Not in Argentinian waters and inhabited almost entirely by British people.
Why don't we lay claim to Ireland? Sure it's got a lot of Irish people there but it's pretty nearby so let's give it a(nother) shot. Fair enough, let Ireland have a vote like the Falklands has had. See if they want to be part of England.. -_-
Yeah, the vast majority of us in the North wish to remain part of the UK. Even more so when the Euro went kaboooooom xD
|
Stupid war. Should be part of Argentina.
|
On June 18 2012 05:20 Psychobabas wrote:
Stupid war. Should be part of Argentina.
Reasons why? And blame the war on Argentina.
|
The Falklands currently belong to the British.
The people of the Falklands predominately want to remain this way.
I see no problem.
|
There is no discussion about this, everything is simple:
1. Kirchner just wants votes from Argentina public.
2. UK doesn't want to give up a strategic (military) position in South America.
3. The islanders are raised as englishmen, they feel themselves as englishmen and do rather stay with UK.
Did you know that there is a little part of France in South America too? French Guyana is french territory, right above Brazil. Funny thing is, we never ever hear news about them, only once I think I read somewhere about illegal importation/exportation stuff.
EU is watching us closely D:
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
It's obviously a political stunt from the argentinian government. Draw attention away from home and rally support by making a common enemy. As for those supporting their claims, the islands were uninhabited when the europeans came over. The british colonised it, and the residents of today want to remain british. So, what exactly is the problem?
|
I vagely recall reading an interview with some sort of former argentinean minister from the time of the war, in which he said something a long the lines that they were negotiating a way to get the islands from the UK and it was going pretty smoothly. Until the junta decided it was a good idea to declare war.
I'll see if I can find a link, I remember thinking it was very interesting.
|
On June 18 2012 05:38 fabiano wrote:
There is no discussion about this, everything is simple:
1. Kirchner just wants votes from Argentina public.
2. UK doesn't want to give up a strategic (military) position in South America.
3. The islanders are raised as englishmen, they feel themselves as englishmen and do rather stay with UK.
Did you know that there is a little part of France in South America too? French Guyana is french territory, right above Brazil. Funny thing is, we never ever hear news about them, only once I think I read somewhere about illegal importation/exportation stuff.
EU is watching us closely D:
Doesn't France have a space launch site there or something? I remember seeing it on Discovery Channel, they were talking about escape hatches and stuff. And would make sense because it's at the Equator.
Give the islanders what they want. Stay in Britain.
|
On June 18 2012 05:45 Telcontar wrote:
It's obviously a political stunt from the argentinian government. Draw attention away from home and rally support by making a common enemy. As for those supporting their claims, the islands were uninhabited when the europeans came over. The british colonised it, and the residents of today want to remain british. So, what exactly is the problem?
I have the oddest feeling of deja vu... could have sworn I saw this exact thing posted in the thread somewhere 
|
On June 17 2012 08:37 autosuggested wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 06:54 philly5man wrote:
Why don't we lay claim to Ireland? Sure it's got a lot of Irish people there but it's pretty nearby so let's give it a(nother) shot. Hey buddy, let sleeping dogs lie! Eight hundred years and all that. 
Alright, alright, I'll give it a rest this time. Wanna team up and get Iceland?
|
You do realize Iceland is property of Denmark?
|
The simple solution has already been brought up in this thread, let them vote on it.
|
On June 18 2012 05:45 Telcontar wrote:
It's obviously a political stunt from the argentinian government. Draw attention away from home and rally support by making a common enemy. As for those supporting their claims, the islands were uninhabited when the europeans came over. The british colonised it, and the residents of today want to remain british. So, what exactly is the problem?
To be honest, 1982 was a political stunt as well... The president is just using this the same way Bush used Terrorists to get re-elected. It probably will work, as I remember reading an interview about this Argentinian academic which said that anyone that disagrees with the whole Las Malvinas cause, it deemed unpatriotic.
What is the Argentinian equivalent to "USA USA USA"?
Note: I'm not American bashing. I lived in the US during Bush's re election and was just very surprised how many other issues got clouded by the Foreign treat stuff. Bush strat. of vote for me and I will keep you safe clearly worked. I just think Argentina used of the foreign treat is very similar
|
On June 18 2012 05:20 Psychobabas wrote:
Stupid war. Should be part of Argentina.
Hilarious how many foreigners are supporting the British in this and then we have a Brit who says it should be part of Argentina! Their propaganda must have gotten to you. What matters is the wishes of the islanders, just as the UK gave independence eventually to all the commonwealth nations that wanted it, there would be no problem giving them independence if they wanted it. If I were a Falklander there is no way I would prefer to be Argentinian over British! The Argies keep accusing the Brits of wanting imperialism and oil, the Brits would be just as fierce defending the Falklands if they were a barren strip of desert, if populated by subjects of the British crown. There is a special unity between the members of the commonwealth and the UK, you have to admit the sentimentality is enjoyable. The commonwealth showed its support and unity with the UK in the 2nd world war, it was a glorious thing to behold.
|
On June 18 2012 23:39 sc4k wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 05:20 Psychobabas wrote:
Stupid war. Should be part of Argentina. Hilarious how many foreigners are supporting the British in this and then we have a Brit who says it should be part of Argentina! Their propaganda must have gotten to you. What matters is the wishes of the islanders, just as the UK gave independence eventually to all the commonwealth nations that wanted it, there would be no problem giving them independence if they wanted it. If I were a Falklander there is no way I would prefer to be Argentinian over British! The Argies keep accusing the Brits of wanting imperialism and oil, the Brits would be just as fierce defending the Falklands if they were a barren strip of desert, if populated by subjects of the British crown. There is a special unity between the members of the commonwealth and the UK, you have to admit the sentimentality is enjoyable. The commonwealth showed its support and unity with the UK in the 2nd world war, it was a glorious thing to behold.
Their propaganda must have gotten to you
Just because he has a different opinion than you doesn't mean that he is brainwashed.
Most of the commonwealth wasn't independent during WW2, they had no option!
They didn't give them the freedom because they were feeling nice, only because they knew they eventually would lose them and it would be more beneficial to go out in good terms.
Plus as you live in the country that ran the commonwealth countries before independence its easy not to realise how oppressed people felt being part of a colony. Hence the feeling of unity might not be so mutual as you think it is.
P.S.: I think Falklands should be British but, no offence, you wrote a non-point above.
|
So it is was a uninhabited piece of rock in no one's territorial waters?
And now you have a population there made almost entirely out of people of British decent, who all support remaining British territory, as opposed to becoming a part of Argentina, who invaded them and tried to force them into living a different life?
And in the past, no one but possibly one single guy has wanted to become a part of Argentina?
So why are people trying to support Argentina oppressing and occupying the islands?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
