|
In the past 2 days the islanders of the Falklands / Islas Malvinas, voted for which country they wanted to be part and it was win by a huge % for the British. More info in the link below.
Falklands referendum: Voters choose to remain UK territory.
The people of the Falkland Islands have voted overwhelmingly in favour of remaining a UK overseas territory.
Of 1,517 votes cast in the two-day referendum - on a turnout of more than 90% - 1,513 were in favour, while just three votes were against.
It follows pressure from Argentina over its claims to the islands, 31 years after the Falklands War with the UK.
The UK government welcomed the result and urged "all countries" to accept it and "support" the islanders.
There was a turnout of more than 90% from 1,672 British citizens eligible to vote in a population of about 2,900.
Dick Sawle, a member of the island's legislative assembly, said it was an "absolutely phenomenal result which will send out the strongest possible message to the rest of the world about our right to self-determination - a right that was fought for in 1982, and which we have honoured tonight."
'Big news'
Carolina Barros, editor of the Buenos Aires Herald, said the referendum result was "quite a blow and big news for any Argentine saying that the Malvinas islands belong to Argentina, or that the islanders living there are an implanted population".
"I don't think it's going to change the mind of the government," she said. "It might change the mind of the Argentines.
"Most of the Argentines think that the territory, the land, belongs to the Argentine map. But most of the Argentines, I think, think that the islanders are entitled to believe or feel themselves like the true inhabitants of the islands after almost nine generations."
Election observers from different countries oversaw the vote, including representatives of Chile and Mexico - despite an Argentine request for Latin American countries not to take part.
Argentine forces invaded the Falkland Islands on 2 April 1982. The garrison of the UK's Royal Marines was overwhelmed and other British South Atlantic territories including South Georgia were also seized.
In two months of fighting, 255 British and about 650 Argentine servicemen were killed, along with three Falklands civilians, before Argentine forces surrendered.
Two sides to a story
º Argentina says it inherited the islands from the Spanish crown in 1767 and the islands were seized by Britain in 1833.
º But Britain says it had long previously established a settlement there and never relinquished sovereignty.
º It says it has continuously inhabited and administered the islands since 1833.
Link: Falklands referendum: Voters choose to remain UK territory.
|
Was this ever really doubted?
|
On March 12 2013 12:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Was this ever really doubted?
Still most Argentinians think this means nothing, so i dont think its the end of Argetina claiming for the lands.
|
Isn't most of population at this point are British or former British navy base personnel which would make any sort of referendum like that one silly?
|
On March 12 2013 13:07 kukarachaa wrote:
Isn't most of population at this point are British or former British navy base personnel which would make any sort of referendum like that one silly?
Armed forces personnel are not allowed to vote if i understand properly, the people of the islands are offspring from islanders who settled in the 19th century.
|
Argentinians tend to disregard this type of information on the account of being "asking British people if they want to stay British or not" which is obviously biased.
I've always thought they're rightfully British, but I don't handle enough information to really argue for or against it.
|
$200 billion in oil reserves.
3,000 people.
$66,666,666.66 in reserves per person.
And that's what it's all about.
|
Brittain did the same thing with all of Brazil's islands, it was a major push to gain control in the south atlantic, but we got our navy toghether and zerged every single island and sent those brits back home.
Later on we ended up paying all the debt portugal owed england, but at least we kept out islands.
|
I always tried to stay out of this debate, but the islanders themselves want to still remain an overseas colony of Britain, and in interviews I've read they consider themselves falklanders first and then british next. I guess my point is, they seem to have their own personal distinct identity, and what gives me as a British citizen of England any right to say otherwise, the same goes Argentinians who live on the main land.
Put it this way, if the island was undoubtedly a part of Argentinian sovereign and the inhabitants of the island wanted to be independent, would it be right to stop them? Me thinks not.
|
The existence of nations is stupid anyway, it's only a restrictive concept. But if the people want to be considered part of our miserable land, then Argentina should stop trying to make them happier.
If we gave the Falklands to Argentina, why shouldn't France give Corsica to Italy? Or Turkey give Istanbul to Greece? There are millions of terretorial disputes all over the world, the UN really should look into settling them once and for all.
|
Most of the debate boils down to Argentinians saying that the Islands are theirs, and neglecting all surveys that say that the islanders want to remain British. The British side is more like, we <3 your reserves, lets let the islanders speak for themselves because we know they would rather be backed by our government than Argentina's. The people have spoken, we are passed the point of "neo-colonialism" in the Falklands, at least in my opinion.
EDIT:
On March 12 2013 13:28 Larkin wrote:
The existence of nations is stupid anyway, it's only a restrictive concept. But if the people want to be considered part of our miserable land, then Argentina should stop trying to make them happier.
If we gave the Falklands to Argentina, why shouldn't France give Corsica to Italy? Or Turkey give Istanbul to Greece? There are millions of terretorial disputes all over the world, the UN really should look into settling them once and for all.
I really think that this is way over the top nihilism. The idea of nations is not stupid, I don't know how you came to that concept or idea. Furthermore, the UN does not have any kind of power like that, the UN is just a facilitator for debate. In fact, the UN was created originally for the U.S. to have a leg up on Communism (despite the facade it put on as a world mediator), and not for the purpose it serves in more recent times after the CCP was considered the accepted Chinese government.
|
From the POV of the Argentinians that want the Falklands to somehow go back to Argentina's hands, its all a matter of justince, the UK took the islands by force from Argentina way back in the day, they did a major push towards the south atlantic to secure strategic bases, and they stole islands from many countries, including Brazil and argentina.
Brazil took em back, but Argentina didnt (and couldnt afaik), the british promtly used that location as they intended, a strategic base in the south atlantic, it was not interesting for weak Argentina to attack the British for such a meaningless island back in the day.
Fast foward 100 years, and theres WWI and WWII and the feeling of entitlement towards the island grew, as the feeling of Britains power and moral claim to the island faded from the mind of the populace.
Obviously by then theres only brits living in the island, and the territory has effectively been colonized by them, even if it was stolen before it.
Fast foward a few more decades and you have govts discovering that the south atlantic coast is probably rich with oil, and suddenly acquiring the island becomes that much more important for argentina big oil insterest.
Then you have the Falklands war, and then argentina elects cristina which basically is a crazy bitch and shes ruining the country and trying to get all the monsters out of the closet to blame them for their failures, so she prefers to further delve in this lost cause (specially since they recently found lots of oil over there), in a desperate move because she basically doesnt have the competence to do something that would be actually usefull.
Its that bad, I cry for you argentina.
|
On March 12 2013 13:58 D10 wrote:
From the POV of the Argentinians that want the Falklands to somehow go back to Argentina's hands, its all a matter of justince, the UK took the islands by force from Argentina way back in the day, they did a major push towards the south atlantic to secure strategic bases, and they stole islands from many countries, including Brazil and argentina.
Brazil took em back, but Argentina didnt (and couldnt afaik), the british promtly used that location as they intended, a strategic base in the south atlantic, it was not interesting for weak Argentina to attack the British for such a meaningless island back in the day.
Fast foward 100 years, and theres WWI and WWII and the feeling of entitlement towards the island grew, as the feeling of Britains power and moral claim to the island faded from the mind of the populace.
Obviously by then theres only brits living in the island, and the territory has effectively been colonized by them, even if it was stolen before it.
Fast foward a few more decades and you have govts discovering that the south atlantic coast is probably rich with oil, and suddenly acquiring the island becomes that much more important for argentina big oil insterest.
Then you have the Falklands war, and then argentina elects cristina which basically is a crazy bitch and shes ruining the country and trying to get all the monsters out of the closet to blame them for their failures, so she prefers to further delve in this lost cause (specially since they recently found lots of oil over there), in a desperate move because she basically doesnt have the competence to do something that would be actually usefull.
Its that bad, I cry for you argentina.
The Falklands war was before any oil was discovered, i believe the oil discovery has only been in the past few years.
|
Why would anyone there want to be part of a country like Argentina?
|
On March 12 2013 13:21 Kerotan wrote:
I always tried to stay out of this debate, but the islanders themselves want to still remain an overseas colony of Britain, and in interviews I've read they consider themselves falklanders first and then british next. I guess my point is, they seem to have their own personal distinct identity, and what gives me as a British citizen of England any right to say otherwise, the same goes Argentinians who live on the main land.
Put it this way, if the island was undoubtedly a part of Argentinian sovereign and the inhabitants of the island wanted to be independent, would it be right to stop them? Me thinks not.
Ok. Imagine this situation. You come home one night to find there are a group of people you don't know in your house. You want them to leave, they want to stay.
So they have a vote. The majority vote for staying in your house.
Looks legit.
|
United States42866 Posts
On March 12 2013 13:14 mordk wrote:
Argentinians tend to disregard this type of information on the account of being "asking British people if they want to stay British or not" which is obviously biased.
I've always thought they're rightfully British, but I don't handle enough information to really argue for or against it.
As biased as Britain claiming a piece of mainland Argentina as a part of Britain and then, when the Argentinians living their protested, dismissing it as "naturally the Argentinians think they should live in Argentina".
Their claim to it is based upon having a country near it which, as we tried with Ireland and Hitler tried with the entire world, isn't actually a very good claim when the people there already have a country. It was settled hundreds of years ago, it belongs to the people living there and wouldn't even be a contentious issue if the junta hadn't tried to stir up some nationalist feeling by invading it.
It sucks that some conscripts lost their lives invading a foreign country and nobody wants them to have died for nothing but unfortunately they did.
|
United States42866 Posts
On March 12 2013 14:20 Rezudox wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2013 13:21 Kerotan wrote:
I always tried to stay out of this debate, but the islanders themselves want to still remain an overseas colony of Britain, and in interviews I've read they consider themselves falklanders first and then british next. I guess my point is, they seem to have their own personal distinct identity, and what gives me as a British citizen of England any right to say otherwise, the same goes Argentinians who live on the main land.
Put it this way, if the island was undoubtedly a part of Argentinian sovereign and the inhabitants of the island wanted to be independent, would it be right to stop them? Me thinks not. Ok. Imagine this situation. You come home one night to find there are a group of people you don't know in your house. You want them to leave, they want to stay. So they have a vote. The majority vote for staying in your house and so they all stay. Looks legit.
That is a terrible metaphor for what happened. Try this one.
You come home one night and discover that you have a neighbour. And not like a neighbour where you share a wall in a terraced house, he's got a detatched house with a few acres of land between you and him. And he's lived there all his life and was born there, as was his father, grandfather and so forth back for hundreds of years. But your family is pretty fucked up and you need to distract them from that so you decide his house should be yours and try and take it by force. His big brother comes round and forcibly evicts you from his house but lets you keep your house and you're so discredited by this that your kids rise up and it's actually the catalyst for the best thing to ever happen in your house but for some reason your kids still have this lingering feeling that that other house ought to be theirs. By this point the neighbour's family is getting quite tired of all this bullshit so they get together and all collectively declare that they don't want to be part of your family just in case anyone anywhere had any doubt.
|
It was pretty much a foregone conclusion. Nobody expected a pro-Argentina result, and the islanders have confirmed their wishes once more. They want to remain British.
The most annoying thing about the whole thing, honestly, is the constant claims of colonialism from Argentinian politicians. Apparently, claiming the islands when we've owned them for centuries (and owned them since before Argentina existed as a country...) and the islanders themselves want to be British is colonial. Ironically Argentina is the one behaving colonial when they are demanding the islands regardless of the wishes of the islanders. Sadly this irony seems lost on the vast majority of the country.
It will probably solve nothing and Argentina will maintain their claims, but hopefully it will keep the UN on our side during this rigmarole. Hopefully Christina will stop rabble-rousing and actually get on with running the country.
|
Part of me believes that someone, somewhere is just artificially inflating offshore oil 'reserves' or conflating the total amount of oil under the seabed with 'recoverable reserves'--e.g. the amount of oil available. I felt it when the USGS was pushing up the value of South China Sea oil and gas reserves (400 billion barrels--really?) and I feel it today. I'd be inclined to call it a conspiracy, but I can't see in my head who would benefit from triggering multiple naval arms races across the globe, given how closely naval strength is linked with the ability to disable opposing C4ISR systems and hence risk nuclear war.
|
United States42866 Posts
Basically no Argentinians have ever lived on the island. They have literally no claim beyond "Spain used to claim them and we're kinda like Spain, do you guys even speak Spanish?" and "look at a map, we're kinda close".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
