Malvinas Spat ( United Kindgom beating war drums )

[gusgutier]

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.

I think there is a diffrence of interpretation on Monroe`s doctrine. what it means America in "America for the americans" ? The continent or USA? The very old semnatic problem.

 

[almagestos]

Patagonia was invaded by Argentinos - more than once. IN FACT - the British had already colonized the Falklands before the Argentinos colonized Patagonia by slaughtering all of the indigenes that were there before the Argentinos AND the Spanish. Read history a little better too - The French and the British were BOTH occupying the Falklands before Spain came.

No one disputes that Buenos Aires belongs to the Argentines.

The British also invaded the US colonies and the actual US as a country - I don't think anyone is disputing that the US is now the rightful owner, even after the British were the ones who originally threw those indigenes out.

So what does the British having invaded Buenos Aires province twice have anything to do with land that was in no way under Argentine control, in any fashion, ever? It's an argument that makes no logical sense, but has plenty of emotion - all you have to do is start with "the British invaded" and no one from Argentina is going to listen to anything else - they are already sold.

The only thing that gave Spain any supposed legal right to anything was a Papal Bull in 1493, issued by a corrupt Spanish pope, which gave the western hemisphere to the Spanish - something which the pope had absolutely no right to give anyway. Even Spain gave back Port Egmon when they threw the British off the Falklands in 1770 because they realized that having done so was against their treaties.

España descubrió América, tuvo derechos legítimos de expandirse por todo el continente y ese derecho fue heredado por los criollos y sus descendientes que conformaron las nuevas naciones... Inglaterra no tenía ningún derecho de invadir territorios de la corona española heredados por los criollos y argentinos...

Según el punto de vista inglés, las Malvinas son inglesas porque los ingleses las ocuparon antes y su presencia se mantuvo ininterrumpida desde hace cien años...

Ok, entonces podríamos decir (siguiendo el punto de vista inglés) que la Antártida es argentina porque el asentamiento más antiguo y con presencia ininterrumpida es argentino...

 

[Lucas]

Patagonia was invaded by Argentinos - more than once. IN FACT - the British had already colonized the Falklands before the Argentinos colonized Patagonia by slaughtering all of the indigenes that were there before the Argentinos AND the Spanish. Read history a little better too - The French and the British were BOTH occupying the Falklands before Spain came.

No one disputes that Buenos Aires belongs to the Argentines.

The British also invaded the US colonies and the actual US as a country - I don't think anyone is disputing that the US is now the rightful owner, even after the British were the ones who originally threw those indigenes out.

So what does the British having invaded Buenos Aires province twice have anything to do with land that was in no way under Argentine control, in any fashion, ever? It's an argument that makes no logical sense, but has plenty of emotion - all you have to do is start with "the British invaded" and no one from Argentina is going to listen to anything else - they are already sold.

The only thing that gave Spain any supposed legal right to anything was a Papal Bull in 1493, issued by a corrupt Spanish pope, which gave the western hemisphere to the Spanish - something which the pope had absolutely no right to give anyway. Even Spain gave back Port Egmon when they threw the British off the Falklands in 1770 because they realized that having done so was against their treaties.

España descubrió América, tuvo derechos legítimos de expandirse por todo el continente y ese derecho fue heredado por los criollos y sus descendientes que conformaron las nuevas naciones... Inglaterra no tenía ningún derecho de invadir territorios de la corona española heredados por los criollos y argentinos...

Según el punto de vista inglés, las Malvinas son inglesas porque los ingleses las ocuparon antes y su presencia se mantuvo ininterrumpida desde hace cien años...

Ok, entonces podríamos decir (siguiendo el punto de vista inglés) que la Antártida es argentina porque el asentamiento más antiguo y con presencia ininterrumpida es argentino...

almagestos
Spain discovered America, had legitimate rights to expand across the continent and that right was inherited by the Creoles and their descendants who formed the new nation ... England had no right to invade the territories inherited by the Spanish crown and Argentine criollos ...

According to the British viewpoint, the Falklands are British because the British occupied it before, and its presence remained unbroken for a hundred years ...

Ok, then we could say (following the English point of view) than Argentina because is the oldest settlement and continued presence in Antarctica it belongs to Argentina...

What about that...

?

 

[cabrera]

Great Britains claims on the Malvinas are tenuos to say the least and world public opinion is against them . Suprisingly they seem to be caving in with even a backlash in the United Kingdom with some commentators actively saying that they are Argentinas and they are righfully ours. This balanced link below clearly shows that Argentinas claim on the Malvinas is and has always been correct.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/25/falklands-sovereignty-argentina-britain


It's time to talk about the Falklands



Britain should stop behaving like a 19th-century colonial power and start discussing Falkland sovereignty with Argentina

• 
• • Grace Livingstone
  • guardian.co.uk, Thursday 25 February 2010 14.00 GMT
  • Article history

A union flag waves over Stanley, Falklands. Photograph: Daniel Garcia/AFP/Getty Images

"We have no doubt about our sovereignty over the Falkland Islands," said Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant this week. But official papers show that, for more than a century, the Foreign Office has had qualms about the merits of Britain's claim to the Falklands.
In 1910, a 17,000-word memo was commissioned by the Foreign Office to look at the historical dispute over sovereignty. The study highlighted many weaknesses in the British case and can be seen as our equivalent of the Pentagon Papers, the leaked study of US policy in Vietnam.
The holes in the British case shocked many officials in Whitehall. The head of the Foreign Office's American department, Gerald Spicer, wrote: "From a perusal of this memo it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the Argentine government's attitude is not altogether unjustified and that our action has been somewhat high-handed."
An assistant secretary in the same department wrote: "The only question is who did have the best claim at the time when we finally annexed the islands. I think undoubtedly the United Province of Buenos Aires." And the British ambassador in Argentina, Sir Malcolm Robertson, wrote in 1927: "I must confess that, until I received that memorandum myself a few weeks ago, I had no idea of the strength of the Argentine case nor of the weakness of ours."
The study was regarded as so explosive that the British government withdrew it from public view during the Falklands war, but it's now available in the National Archives.
No one really knows who first discovered the Falklands. Pro-Argentine academics suggest Italian-born explorer Amerigo Vespucci, discovered the islands as early as 1501; pro-British historians make the case for the English explorers John Davis (1592) and Sir Richard Hawkins (1594), while many scholars say the only conclusively documented discovery was by the Dutchman Sebald de Weert in 1600. All agree that what is now known as East Falkland was first settled by the French in 1764. The French ceded control of the island to Spain in 1767.
A year after the French landed, the British established a settlement at Port Egmont on West Falkland, but abandoned the territory in 1774. Spain maintained a presence on the Falklands until 1811. The newly independent United Provinces of the Río de la Plata (which included Argentina) believed that Spanish possessions should revert to them and in 1820 sent a ship to the abandoned Falklands. In 1829, Argentina appointed a governor. The British then sent two warships to the Falklands and struck the Argentine flag. Argentina, impoverished and divided, did not have the means to resist.
The British case, in recent times, has focused on its peaceful occupation of the islands for the last 177 years and the self-determination of the Falkland islanders. Argentina maintains that the islands were illegally annexed by Britain in 1833 and remain to this day a colony, an anachronism in the 21st century. A 1965 United Nations resolution backs, to some extent, the Argentine position by ruling that the principle of decolonisation applies to the Falklands.
This week the 32 nations of Latin America unanimously backed Argentina in the recent dispute over oil because for most developing nations it is a simple question of colonialism. Britain may not have formally colonized much of Latin America, but as the world's preeminent power in the 19th century, its bankers and merchants had a stranglehold on the new nations' economies. In 1824, George Canning wrote of Latin American independence: "Spanish America is free, and if we do not mismanage our affairs sadly, she is English."
For a colonial power in the 19th century, the Falklands offered not only fishing and whaling opportunities, but a strategic port in the Atlantic, a base from which to suppress piracy or police the trade of rival powers and a key outpost en route to the Pacific and Antarctic.
Today the territory holds a similar strategic value and has the added bonus of oil. Britain and Argentina have been aware of hydrocarbon deposits around the Falklands for decades and diplomatic spats over oil-exploration predate the 1982 Falklands war.
Is it not time for Britain to stop behaving like a 19th-century colonial power and heed the call of the United Nations to discuss the question of sovereignty with Argentina?

 

[bigbadwolf]

Surprisingly they seem to be caving in with even a backlash in the United Kingdom with some commentators actively saying that they are Argentinas and they are righfully ours. This balanced link below clearly shows that Argentinas claim on the Malvinas is and has always been correct.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/25/falklands-sovereignty-argentina-britain


It's time to talk about the Falklands




Britain should stop behaving like a 19th-century colonial power and start discussing Falkland sovereignty with Argentina

Margaret Thatcher is old and frail now and the shock of giving up the Falklands might kill her. You wouldn't want that to happen to such a dear and sweet old lady, would you?

 

[tangobob]

Margaret Thatcher is old and frail now and the shock of giving up the Falklands might kill her. You wouldn't want that to happen to such a dear and sweet old lady, would you?

OK youve won me over

 

[mendozanow]

Spanish oil firm Repsol to drill near Falkland Islands

Cannot play media.You do not have the correct version of the flash player. Download the correct version


The Ocean Guardian oil platform arrived this week

Spanish oil company Repsol is to drill for oil in an area near the Falkland Islands. It will drill about 200 miles off Argentina's coast by December, "well within Argentinean waters," a spokesman told the BBC.
The move comes as UK oil companies begin to search for oil in the Falklands, despite strong opposition from Argentina.
An oil platform started drilling in Falklands territorial waters this week.
The platform, the Ocean Guardian, has been towed 8,000 miles from the Cromarty Firth in Scotland.
Repsol said it would explore for oil in a "few" wells in the area.
The spokesman said the fields were about 150 to 200 miles west of where the Ocean Guardian is, which is under licence to UK firm Desire Petroleum.
Last year, Repsol bought the Argentine company YPF - the biggest private oil and gas company in Latin America.
Oil row
Argentina claims sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. It invaded them in 1982, before a UK taskforce seized back control in a short war that claimed the lives of 649 Argentine and 255 British service personnel.
Leaders of 32 Latin American and Caribbean countries at a summit in Mexico unanimously backed Argentina over the oil row.
Argentina has formally asked United Nations to bring the UK into talks over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.

 

[mendozanow]

So, interesting tactic by the Argies, no doubt it will be in the area within the Falklands 200 km zone. We will see how the British react if it goes ahead.

 

[esllou]

So, interesting tactic by the Argies, no doubt it will be in the area within the Falklands 200 km zone. We will see how the British react if it goes ahead.

what makes you think it's inside that zone? or is that another example in this thread of a person just "saying something"?

I'd be very surprised if the argentines were being that provocative. Drilling for oil inside someone else's EEZ is quite a serious step (all arguments about sovereignty and legitimacy aside)

 

[Futboljunkie]

Maybe I am just begin a noob but if there is oil in Brasil near Rio and near the Falklands, there should be in the Argentine waters as well