# The Falklands



## Sukerkin (Feb 16, 2012)

So, are the Falklands British or not?  Here is an article laying out the bare bones of the lying Argentinian self-serving propaganda machine, desperate for an 'event' as re-election beckons and the truth ... or rather, more prosaically, the British point of view:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17045169

Is there another war in the offing?  As before the brave Argies wait until there is a build down in British power-projection strength before rattling their sabres.  We took them by surprise last time by having the will to retain that which is ours.  Will we have the same backbone again?

Oh and Sean Penn?  This is for you :bird:.  Stick to acting rather than political commentary.


----------



## billc (Feb 16, 2012)

Hmmm...what to say...what to say.  You have my support Sukerkin, and :2xbird: to sean penn from me as well.


----------



## Sukerkin (Feb 16, 2012)

Here is Mr Penn having his minute before the microphones:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17025000

Perhaps I do him a disservice, having just watched the delivery rather than reading the words, as he seemed really ill at ease there, as if he was performing for his 'host' (why was he there anyhow?).  He's entitled to his opinion and to express that opinion (however much it grates my chops ) but, simply put, he is just plain wrong on this.

I believe this fellow speaks with rather more gravitas, even if he doesn't have Oscar plaudits:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17065995


----------



## billc (Feb 16, 2012)

Sean Penn's moral compass is so far off he will probably never be able to see what is true and what is untrue.


----------



## Ken Morgan (Feb 16, 2012)

Falklands are British. Period.


----------



## David43515 (Feb 16, 2012)

From what I understood during the last war (I was in high school...wow) The folks who actually live there consider themselves British subjects. That pretty much settles the issue for me.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 17, 2012)

Before the the last Falklands war the government here were seriously considering telling the Islandrs that they were going to be independent which as far as the Islanders were concerned wasn't what they wanted. the Islanders themselves want to be and regard themselves as British, they want to stay with us. As for Prince William going to the Falklands, his squadron does deployments there as a matter of course, he wouldn't refuse to go as he's part of a team, he worked last Christmas because it was his turn to, it's how he is, determined not to pull rank on his colleagues. His job is as a Search and Rescue pilot who will go to the rescue of anyone who needs help, that includes Argentinians. 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ol-Falklands-hero-Simon-Weston-hits-back.html

I imagine this is what has got the Argentinians agitated.

_"Drilling within the 200 mile territory surrounding the Falklands could yieldb tax windfalls of £111bn from oil and gas exploration, a major report claimed today.
_
_Several companies have been prospecting for oil within the exclusion zone set up during the 1980s Falklands War.
_
_UK-listed companies are involved in exploring four major prospects this year, with the biggest, Loligo, potentially holding more than 4.7bn barrels of oil.
_
_The riches available are put in perspective when it is considered that Catcher, the biggest discovery in the North Sea, is thought to hold only around 300m barrels."
_
_According to a new report by oil and gas analysts Edison Investment Research, if all four prospects were drilled the potential tax funds would net close to $180bn.
_
_Ian McLelland, who co-wrote the report, said: 'With current tax and fishing incomes in the region of $40m , the islands look set to be transformed by the oil industry.'
_
_'The proverbial spanner in the works that remains is the ongoing political dispute between Britain and Argentina regarding sovereignty of the Falklands."


_My other half was in the last war as was his brother.


----------



## Jenna (Feb 17, 2012)

The argument that Penn and others are using centres around the usual colonialism rhetoric.  I think Argentina itself, being an historical product of colonialism has a skewed sense of righteousness in this case.

There is some oil http://www.fogl.com/fogl/en/Operations/2012drilling_programme though I do not believe this is the real reason for the interest.  I think rather this is a wholly political debate between the southern-American nations who are politically fused now against the UK over the Falklands and the beleaguered coalition government we have here.  

I would think though that a war in the South Atlantic would not bring the kudos to Cameron et al. that it brought to Maggie Thatcher.  I think also that the damage to trade from the emergent economies of South America would be poor political management by the government here.

Also, the Fernandez government are not the fascists that ran Argentina under Galtieri.  Politically things have changed there also.

We are told here that the people of the Falklands seek to remain self-governing British.  Yet Argentina have their own poster boys who say otherwise 



  Without a referendum nobody can know absolutely and all we have is our own prejudice.

All I hope is that fairness to the residents of the Falklands prevails regardless of what the UK / Southern American conglomerate political and commercial dictates demand.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 17, 2012)

As there are no Argentinians who live in the Falklands and all the residents there hold British passports I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't want to remain British. When I was last down there the Islanders were strongly if not fanatically of the opinion they wanted to remain British. Islanders died too when the Argentinians invaded, islanders too have fought, served and died in the British forces during the world wars.
I doubt Cameron is looking for any kudos tbh, our servicemen died defending those Islanders for which the Islanders are very grateful and they do not foget those who made that sacrifice for them, to habd the Falklands over to the argentinians would be a betrayal of the Islanders and those who died.
The other thing to remember is that there is a large Garrison now in the Falklands so an attempted invasion would be very difficult and costly for the Argentinians.
The only fair thing here is that we keep faith with the Islanders and those who died for them.


----------



## granfire (Feb 17, 2012)

Ah, yes, politics on the backs of the little people, just because...


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 17, 2012)

The Falklands are British not because the UK governments say so, not because the UN says so, not because we beat the Argentinians and kicked them out *but because the inhabitants of those islands say so. *


----------



## Ken Morgan (Feb 17, 2012)

As a Canadian, I think Greenland, Alaska and Saint Pierre and Miquelon should belong to Canada, screw what the people who live there think.....


----------



## granfire (Feb 17, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> The Falklands are British not because the UK governments say so, not because the UN says so, not because we beat the Argentinians and kicked them out *but because the inhabitants of those islands say so. *



Easy, Lady, I am on your side!


----------



## granfire (Feb 17, 2012)

Ken Morgan said:


> As a Canadian, I think Greenland, Alaska and Saint Pierre and Miquelon should belong to Canada, screw what the people who live there think.....



I can see Alaska....but Greenland?!


----------



## Empty Hands (Feb 17, 2012)

Ken Morgan said:


> As a Canadian, I think Greenland, *Alaska* and Saint Pierre and Miquelon should belong to Canada, screw what the people who live there think.....



We bought it fair and square!  Wait, that would mean that Sarah Palin would be a Canadian.  Hmmmm, there may be something to this idea....


----------



## Carol (Feb 17, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> The Falklands are British not because the UK governments say so, not because the UN says so, not because we beat the Argentinians and kicked them out *but because the inhabitants of those islands say so. *




*YES.  *They did not choose to be Las Islas Malvinas.     They are very British. They maintain elements of British culture, are English speaking people with English-sounding names....and would rather everyone butt out and leave them to raise their fine sheep.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 17, 2012)

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



> The *Falkland Islands* (English pronunciation: /&#712;f&#594;lkl&#601;nd/ or English pronunciation: /&#712;f&#596;&#720;lkl&#601;nd/; Spanish: _Islas Malvinas_) are an archipelago in the South Atlantic Ocean, located over 250 nautical miles (460 km; 290 mi) East of the coast of mainland South America. The archipelago comprises East Falkland, West Falkland, and 776 lesser islands. Stanley, the capital and only city, is on East Falkland. The islands are a self-governing British Overseas Territory, with the United Kingdom responsible for its defence and foreign affairs.
> Controversy exists over the Falklands' original discovery and subsequent colonisation by Europeans.[SUP][6][/SUP] At various times there have been French, British, Spanish, and Argentine settlements. Britain re-established its rule in 1833, yet the islands continue to be claimed by Argentina. In 1982, following Argentina's invasion of the islands, the two-month-long undeclared Falklands War  between both countries resulted in the withdrawal of Argentine forces.  Despite its defeat, Argentina still pursues its claim; however, UK  policy supports the islanders' self-determination to remain British citizens.
> The population, estimated at 3,140, primarily consists of Falkland Islanders, the majority of British descent. Other ethnicities include French, Gibraltarian, and Scandinavian. Immigration from the United Kingdom, Saint Helena, and Chile has reversed a former population decline. The predominant and official language is English. Under the British Nationality Act of 1983, Falkland Islanders are British citizens.
> Both major islands have mountain ranges, both reaching to around 700  metres (2,300 ft). The islands are home to large bird populations,  although many no longer breed on the main islands due to introduced  species. Major economic activities include fishing, tourism,  and sheep farming (used for high-quality wool exports). Oil  exploration, licensed by the Falkland Islands Government, remains  controversial as a result of maritime disputes with Argentina.



Points I see are that Britain has a legit claim to the islands, the islanders -want- to be British citizens, and have maintained that desire consistently for generations.

Seems a non-issue to me.


----------



## granfire (Feb 17, 2012)

Empty Hands said:


> We bought it fair and square!  Wait, that would mean that Sarah Palin would be a Canadian.  Hmmmm, there may be something to this idea....



LOL, stop that!
:lfao:


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 18, 2012)

Greenlanders want independance, they are getting there but it's taking time. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...hat-would-it-mean-for-its-people-1036735.html


----------



## K-man (Feb 18, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Greenlanders want independance, they are getting there but it's taking time. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...hat-would-it-mean-for-its-people-1036735.html


Mmmm. This article says Greenland is the world's biggest island.  Last time I looked that title was Australia's. Maybe we look smaller because we're further away!


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 18, 2012)

If the Greenlanders get complete independance the Americans will probably have to move their base away from there, I know the Greenlanders were extremely unhappy about the 'extraordinary rendition' flights stopping there not to mention being evicted from their lands and the 'lost bombs'.
Perhaps Mr. Penn would like to take up their case?
http://thewe.cc/weplanet/news/inuit_battle_to_shut_us_air_base.htm


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 18, 2012)

K-man said:


> Mmmm. This article says Greenland is the world's biggest island. Last time I looked that title was Australia's. Maybe we look smaller because we're further away!




From Wiki answers.
Australia 7686850 sq km.
Greenland 2166086 sq km.


----------



## Ken Morgan (Feb 18, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> From Wiki answers.
> Australia 7686850 sq km.
> Greenland 2166086 sq km.



That's another 2166086 to Canada, thank you very much....


----------



## billc (Jun 1, 2012)

Obama never misses a chance to disrespect our friends in Britain...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/06/01/Obama-Betrays-Britain-Over-Falklands



> Obama, in his usual duplicitous way, reportedly told British Prime Minister David Cameron in March that the United States would refrain from publicly calling for negotiations between the British and Argentina over the matter. But now the State Department is getting involved; Acting Under Secretary for Press Affairs Mike Hammer said:
> &#8220;Our policy is unchanged. We believe that this is a bilateral issue that needs to be worked out directly between Argentina and the United Kingdom. That&#8217;s what we are encouraging both sides to do &#8230; we are encouraging Argentina and the UK to work this out peacefully, to work it out through negotiations.&#8221;
> This echoed Hillary Clinton&#8217;s remarks in March 2010, when she was in Argentina:
> &#8220;We want very much to encourage both countries to sit down. Now, we cannot make either one do so, but we think it is the right way to proceed. So we will be saying this publicly, as I have been, and we will continue to encourage exactly the kind of discussion across the table that needs to take place.&#8221;
> ...



From the article linked in the story...

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/n...-knifes-britain-yet-again-over-the-falklands/



> Barack Obama recently declared himself to be &#8220;neutral&#8221; on the Falklands, which is bad enough. But he is more than just &#8220;neutral&#8221;. His administration is actively siding with Argentina&#8217;s calls for a negotiated settlement. This is a position that Britain views as completely unacceptable, and with good reason. Over 95 percent of the inhabitants of the Falklands are British, and wish to remain under the protection of the British Crown. They have no desire to live under the boot of Argentina, and it is a clear-cut case of self-determination. The idea that the British should sit down with the Argentines to negotiate the future of the Falkland Islands is simply preposterous.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 1, 2012)

I have said it a few times before but it bears repeating - whoever it is that is giving President Obama advise on foreign policy and diplomatic relations is doing an excellent job of frittering away America's political 'capital' in the Great Game.

Do any of our Trans-Atlantic cousins know off-hand what US interests are served by America giving tacit support to the Argentine government in this matter (which is what calling for negotiations amounts to)?


----------



## Scott T (Jun 1, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> I have said it a few times before but it bears repeating - whoever it is that is giving President Obama advise on foreign policy and diplomatic relations is doing an excellent job of frittering away America's political 'capital' in the Great Game.
> 
> Do any of our Trans-Atlantic cousins know off-hand what US interests are served by America giving tacit support to the Argentine government in this matter (which is what calling for negotiations amounts to)?


An end to all European influence in the western Hemisphere?

Maybe he'll support Canada's (non-existent) claim to St. Pierre and Miquelon over France next. :uhyeah:


----------

