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.
Let it be decided over a game of football, played at a neutral venue. It would be a Great Britain team to play against Argentina rather than just England. Said team would therefore include Gareth Bale.
In all seriousness, it's up to the islanders to determine their fate. I have nothing against Argentina, but I can't help but feel that Kirchner is just doing this for political gain and knows full well that any kind of repeat of the 1982 invasion will not work.
The Falkland Islands are British, the people living on the islands are British and probably THE most important thing of all, they want to remain British, therefore they have as much right as the people living in Kent to being defended by the British Crown, there is not going to be another war, the islands are now too infamous to be forgotten about and if the Argentinians were to try anything stupid (which they wont) then the British will once again react just as they would if somebody tried to 'invade' Norfolk, but its all irrelevant because nothing will change in the short term no matter how much the Argentinian government whines on about it, nothing to see here - end of story.
I believe that what is REALLY behind this question are not the islands per se...
I believe the real reason for dispute are the "territorial waters" of the islands.
In my opinion, the islands may keep being British territory IF a fair agreement is reached with Argentina regarding the "territorial waters" of the islands and the economic exploration of those waters (including oil).
Because the islands per se have nothing of value...
Why the if though? It's been arbitrated several times that the UK has de facto and de jure control of the islands and the islanders who have been lived there for generations upon generations would vote British in any vote of self-determination (which is probably as fair as it could get). The islands before the ancestors of current Falkland Islanders was uninhabited so there's no legacy of extirpation or population replacement. The Falklands are a fair distance away from Argentina and there are already in place conventions in place for how territorial waters are determined (conventions which already greatly benefit Argentina). This all seems pretty cut and dried.
If anything, this sounds like another foolish boogeyman hunt so a ruling government could focus national attention on a riveting non-issue that gets absolutely nothing accomplished. This is not a unique ploy/tactic at all and the sad thing is it actually works.
The Islands are Argentine? Yes.
Were usurpated by British empire? Yes.
Who do you think should have control over ? In 2013, the British. The past was full of violations on the part of England, but is the past. Now is ridiculous to change the realitiy of a land populated by Britishers essentially.
I think maybe the best option is the one that Malaman pointed.
The Islands are Argentine? Yes.
Were usurpated by British empire? Yes.
Who do you think should have control over ? In 2013, the British. The past was full of violations on the part of England, but is the past. Now is ridiculous to change the realitiy of a land populated by Britishers essentially.
I think maybe the best option is the one that Malaman pointed.
The Islanders, of course, have the right to self-government. Argentina's posturing aside, demanding that a group of people hundreds of miles away from your mainland acquiesce to your rule because of an ancient claim is ridiculous.
Argentina will get the exact response Japan would get if Japan demanded Hawaii be handed over to them.
FTR: the whole reason I left out a "let the islanders decide" option is because they already have. I'm just curious hearing peoples' perspectives on it, considering that we have a swath of people from all over the world.
its a pity argentina feel the need to obssess over this issue , ive been to argentina , i think the country has much going for it , with a growing demand for the likes of commoditys worldwide , argentina is in a strong possition to gain or at least should be
argentina doesnt cover itself in glory by bringing this issue up all the time , they were foolish to go to war against the fourth strongest army in the world in 1982
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.
