Malvinas Spat ( United Kindgom beating war drums )

[jp]

Aha. You admit they weren't the first. The first were the French, who handed the rights on the islands to Spain.

This isn't clear cut. Britain's claim dates back to 1690.

 

[ssr]

If you guys can t find an agreement, give it to the French. After all, they were the first europeans to start a settlement there, they gave the malvinas name (Saint Malo, Malouines, Malvinas) and economicly it makes sense. England is has oil (Brent) already, Argentina has oil (Mendoza) as well, France doesnt.

Let s be fair

I think it's time for the US to come in and save the day. Again. Must we solve all the world's problems?

The Monroe Doctrine gives us ownership of the entire Western Hemisphere anyway and we have tremendous cars that require an awful lot of gasoline so, enough already, it's time for us to end this squabbling by claiming the islands ourselves. The residents of the Falkvina Islands will get finally get the Starbucks they've so longed for and 15-year-old Argentine girls will no longer cost their families so much because trips to the new DisneyWorld Falkvina will be much cheaper than going all the way to Orlando. Problem solved, everyone's happy.

Besides, we can't have the British wasting troops needed in Iraq and Afghanistan on some conflict with Argentina. The islands will be perfectly well defended by the massive military base we'll build there to train the next generation of Latin American leaders so those British troops can head home for a week or so of well-deserved R&R before shipping off to the Middle East.

See, not all that complicated. There's really no problem that can't be solved with a bit of American ingenuity and leadership. And you're welcome.

 

[esllou]

my idea was for gordon brown to make a big announcement on tv saying "we've decided to give up sovereignty of the falklands (cue kirchner squeals)....and we're giving them to Slovakia."

 

[Moonwitch]

Apparently it isn´t even really a UK issue now, as the Lisbon Treaty made the Antarctic and Falkland territories under the control of the EU. Take it to Brussels Kircher x

 

[ElQueso]

Dude, you obviously don't actually read anything that I write. I know they're long posts, but I don't write in sound bytes.

Some families were there too...you know, without women there couldn't have been a "first person born on the islands". She happened to be Argentine.

I have said that the British pleaded with people to stay on the islands when they threw the ARGENTINE SOLDIERS off the island - NOT the Argentine settlers, nor the French, nor the Swedeish, nor the US. aCtually, only 5 settlers left the island with the Soldiers.

I have said many times there were ARGENTINOS on the islands at that point. YOU said the British threw everyone off, and that is patently not true.

In addition to the Argentinos that stayed, there were also British, American, Swedish, French. IN FACT, as I have stated many times, that settlement was founded by a FRENCHMAN (notice, NOT ARGENTINO) who asked the Argentine government for help and an official appointment, but was refused, and who then later asked the British government to come to the islands and reclaim their settlement.

Those Argentinos, by the way, were absorbed into the culture of the islands - again, it was multi-national for years. That Argentine woman you mention was one of those whose family was there for 9 generations - but she and her family became British subjects - more than 170 years ago!!!! Like all the others. There was no Argentine presence, as a government, ever, on those islands.

BTW - the Argentine government never mentions the Frenchman I've referred to, Luis Vernet, because they considered him to be anti-Argentine after his letters to the British were made public. Although he is attributed in places (including the article you linked to) as being an Argentine governor, he was never given any rights by the Argentine government and the Argentine government never supported him.

Again, because there were some Argentinos living there with a bunch of other foreigners, where is Argentina's claim in all this? None of them had ANYTHING to do with the government of Argentina and the soldiers who were shown off the island were hired by the FRENCHMAN, not sent there as emmissaries from the government in Buenos Aires who obviously didn't want the islands.

Aha. You admit they weren't the first. The first were the French, who handed the rights on the islands to Spain.

I have repeated SO MANY TIMES that the Frensh were the first on the islands, and that the second were the British. The Spanish were there because the French didn't want the islands and had some previous agreements with the Spanish. That means the British were there before the Spanish, but the French were there before all. Unless you want to go back and count the British ship that landed there in 1590...

The Spanish also had a treaty with the British to allow use of the islands (actually all islands in the South Atlantic), and Spain NEVER rejected any British claims on those islands after Spain threw the British off in 1770, and then let them come back after nearly causing a war.

You could start asking the many expats reading this forum

Why don't you ask me? I live here - have for three and a half years.

What I can guarantee you, 100%, is that if I did not have a salary that came from business outside Argentina, I would NEVER consider living here. Read the forums yourself and see how many people have made the same comment

The others, who would live here (and would still be living here in a few years) living on local salaries - yeah, there are things for all sort of people, even in Argentina.

But don't ask me - ask the vast majority of expats who live here, who are not 1) retired and have their own income 2) don't make their money from work outside the country and 3) come from developed countries (not other South American countries, or Africa, or many parts of Asia, etc, where conditions are much better here than there) what the PERCENTAGE of people that would live here if their situation was different related to money.

You might get a higher percentage saying that they would live here than the Falklands Islanders, I bet - but those people did not live through an invasion of their land by Argentina either.

 

[malbec]

British ship that landed there in 1590...

As I wrote above, the Spanish landed before.

The Spanish also had a treaty with the British to allow use of the islands (actually all islands in the South Atlantic), and Spain NEVER rejected any British claims on those islands after Spain threw the British off in 1770, and then let them come back after nearly causing a war.

The Spanish got the ownership of the islands from the French. The fact the Spanish never rejected the British (which I really don't believe) doesn't mean the Spanish HANDED OVER the islands!

The kelpers who you say want to be British were introduced after getting rid of the Argentine settler, who lived MANY years before the british invasion of 1833.

 

[Liam3494]

I think this debate is going to reach a resolution (I mean the debate on this forum) at about the same time that hell freezes over (with or without global warning!).... We do seem to see the same messages being repeated, so I shall depart having said my two cents worth, comparing in some ways the situation in N I with that here.

We will never reach agreement, and sadly, with Christina's winging, the Islanders winging, the British Govt seeing the Cash Crop of Oil, and Chavez backing Christina (Duh!), nor will anyone else!

 

[Gringoboy]

It's not Britain beating the war drums at all. We all know how Cristina would love to milk this for all it's worth.

 

[ElQueso]

As I wrote above, the Spanish landed before.

The Spanish got the ownership of the islands from the French. The fact the Spanish never rejected the British (which I really don't believe) doesn't mean the Spanish HANDED OVER the islands!

The kelpers who you say want to be British were introduced after getting rid of the Argentine settler, who lived MANY years before the british invasion of 1833.

I have to apologize - I mixed dates up a bit about a Spanish expedition that did indeed spend some time in the Falklands in 1540 - a couple of months. Their expedition was to the Straights of Magellan, though, and they did not stay in the Falklands long - nor did they claim the islands for Spain. They were creating a settlement in the Straights, which later failed, and very few Spanish ships sailed as far south as the Falkland Islands until the mid-19th century. In fact, until the mid-1800s, Spain relied on British, Portuguese and Dutch maps for information on the region.

So? How does that strengthen Argentina's claim? Because Spain saw them, walked around on them, before the British, but didn't put a settlement on there, nor claim them for Spain, nor even map them before the British?

You say the Spanish got "ownership" of the islands from the French, even though we are talking about the French being on one island (East Falkland), and the British being on another (Saunders Island) - remember there are hundreds of islands. You also completely do not mention, nor reply to any mention I make, of the treaty between the British and Spanish that granted the British the right to be in those waters and upon the shores of those islands anyway. It's called the Nootka Sound Convention (and there are earlier ones - the Treaties of Madrid), and was signed related to problems between Spain and Britain in Alaska but extended to all parts of the world between the two nations.

So okay, Britain leaves the Falklands in 1776, Spain leaves the Falklands in 1811, less than 40 years later. Both keep a plaque on the islands reserving the right of sovereignity. Vernet puts a small colony on the island with no support fo the Argentine government. Vernet repeatedly asks the british to return. Only Britain returned - in 1833, 22 years after Spain abandoned them.

You say that Argentines lived on the island MANY years before the British "invasion." Really? How many years? Who settled it?

The only successful settlement BEFORE the British "invasion" was Vernet's, which was to slaughter cattle and sell their meat and hide. That settlement was started in 1826 - 7 years before the British returned to claim their islands. But Vernet was not under Argentina government auspices and indeed, wrote many letters to Britain asking for them to return to the islands and re-establish their claim.

In 1829 Argentina tried to claim that the islands were theirs. It was called the "Comandancia Político y Militar de las Malvinas." It was made by General Juan Lavalle who had seized power from the rightful governor of Buenos Aires Manuel Dorrego (killing him in the process).

Funny enough, Juan Manuel Ortiz de Rosa regained power lawfully and when he did so, he ordered every decree of Lavalle null and void, including the "Comandancia Político y Militar de las Malvinas."

ALSO, the British government protested the "Comandancia Político y Militar de las Malvinas" decree to begin with because they still had their claim on the islands (remember - so did Spain) and they didn't intend to give it up.

BTW - I mixed up another statement, that the Argentine soldiers were hired by Vernet. In reality, Rosas sent the troops - 26. Many of the soldiers were military prisoners sent to the island with guards.

In fact, some of the prisoner soldiers ended up mutineeing and murdered the commander (in front of his young wife) and some of the civilian population there and ran for the hills and hid - it was the British ship in 1833 that restored order, brought the runaway murders in, and took them and the remaining soldiers, with 4 civilians who also wanted to leave, off the island.

BTW - the 4 civilians that left (leaving 29 of the 33):

Joaquín Acuña and his wife Juana​

Mateo González and his wife Marica

The muderers/mutineers were shot February 8, 1833 in Buenos Aires by the Argentine government.

 

[mendozanow]