Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to Wikipedia, 6.5% of the people of the Falkland Islands are Chilean. However, is this a recent influx or have they been around for a while? What I am curious to know, now that the Falklands is once again in the news, is are the Chileans going to change the demographics of the Falkland Islands any time soon? I could understand the possibility if Chilean families are larger than the Falklander famailies, especially when the population is just above 3,000 inhabitants. But is this really happening on the Falklands, changing demographics or is it statstically insignifant. What would the politicial ramifications be if the demographics change? I know that the British-descendant Falklanders want nothing to do with Argentina and are quite happy being a UK territory, especially after the events of 1982. However, could demographic change ever affect the islands politically? I know that Chileans, I am sure would never want to become Argentines, but could there be another political status if the demographics change? Discuss.
Britons only make up 27% of the population of Gibraltar, but the great majority of the population remains attached to the UK. But don't forget that people's hearts are often where their pocketbooks are. The people of Gibraltar are happy because they live in a reduced tax zone and the military pumps a lot of money in, but if the military left and the taxes ever climbed above the rate of Spanish taxes, things could change fast.
The same is true of the Falklands, which is on artificial life support due to military presence. With Brazil becoming one of the major world powers of the 21st century, and Argentina, Uruguay and Chile developing alongside, being part of South America is probably going to look a lot more attractive in the next 20 or 30 years, especially if the UK continues its decline.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,497,727 times
Reputation: 12187
Britain has understood for a long time that the best way to colonize is to fill a land with its 'White Trash' and wipe out the natives. (google United States and Australia )
Britain has understood for a long time that the best way to colonize is to fill a land with its 'White Trash' and wipe out the natives. (google United States and Australia )
Well they didn't have to worry about that with the Falklands cause no one was there when it was originally settled.
KEROUAC - You are forgetting that the 27% of the population that is from the UK counts only those born in the UK proper. The vast majority of the population is "Falklander." These Falklanders are the descendants of settlers from the British isles...culturally very connected to the UK even more than the Gibraltarese. Hence, their heritage connects them strongly to the UK.
Anyway, my hunch is that the growth of Brazil and Chile as economic powers will not necessarily make it more attractive to join Argentina. (Unlike Brazil and Chile, Argentina has been in decline for a very long time, also Falklanders certainly did not see the Argentines as liberators in 1982). Possibly joining Chile is a possibility if the Chilean come to dominate the islands...but I am not sure if this is actually happening.
I follow the happenings down in the Falklands from time to time and did a big research project in college for it, determining who has the rights to the Falklands(the british).
Chile doesn't have that much influence on the Falklands.
Compared to 1982 the islands are well defended with 4 Eurofighter Typhoons which would make mincemeat of the raggedy Argentine air force and naval air arm. Plus there are around a 1000 troops there in total and a better trained group of local territorials(national guard).
I know or have known quite a few younger Argentinians and at least the sentiments expressed to me the Malvinas is not a big issue to them. I don't see much Argentina gains by doing a redux of 1982.
Argentina: Give us the Malvinas or we go to the UN.
Britain: No.
Argentina: Give us the Malvinas or we go to Latin American Countries.
Britain: No.
Argentina: Give us the Malvinas or we blockade shipping.
Britain: No.
Argentina: Give us the Malvinas or we threaten military action.
Britian: No.
Argentina: Pleeeeaaaase.
Britain: No.
LOL!
Argentina's air force was getting obsolete by 1982 and pretty much they have the same exact planes today, except they are obviously really obsolete now. They'd be barking up the wrong tree as the Eurofighter Typhoons would blast them to smithereens and if they wanted to Britain could get a squadron of them down there for back up in less than 48 hours.
I don't think the political will exists in Argentina to have another war over this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
