Milei says Argentina has no right to the Islas Malvinas

[Quilombo]

Maybe I'm dumb, but I've never understood why Argentina simply doesn't bribe the islanders, it's a tactic that has worked throughout human history - you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar after all.

Last week, instead of spending 1.6 Billion on keeping the dollar cheap, the government could have given each islander $461,228.02 to vote to be in confederation with Argentina. Make the islands both an SEZ and special territory of Argentina with English as the official language and it's own migration controls and the problem solves itself.

You give me half a million dollars I'll vote anyway you want me to.

 

[Redpossum]

Fancy expanding your view or are we supposed to be in awe and guess at your sweeping generalisations?

Specifically Anglo and to a more interesting extent "US meddling"? Or the wider issues for all of South America?

 

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

Maybe I'm dumb, but I've never understood why Argentina simply doesn't bribe the islanders, it's a tactic that has worked throughout human history - you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar after all.

Last week, instead of spending 1.6 Billion on keeping the dollar cheap, the government could have given each islander $461,228.02 to vote to be in confederation with Argentina. Make the islands both an SEZ and special territory of Argentina with English as the official language and it's own migration controls and the problem solves itself.

You give me half a million dollars I'll vote anyway you want me to.

If the silly fuckers had never invaded in the first place there‘s a very good chance they’d be in Argentine hands.

 

[Jimbob]

View attachment 10286

What does any of this have to do with the UK and the Falklands?

 

[Jimbob]

If the silly fuckers had never invaded in the first place there‘s a very good chance they’d be in Argentine hands.

This is the crux of it.

 

[billyarboles]

I was under the impression that back in '82 Galtieri was suffering from declining popularity in Argentina, and like many heads of state before him (and several after) he decided that an invasion of a foreign controlled territory would distract the population, redirect their anger, and solve his popularity problems.

What I don't entirely understand is why Argentines cling so tightly to this event. The main reason I don't understand is because I don't want to ask and stick my tongue on the third rail. In addition to his intended distraction with it's waste of military and other national resources it would seem that Galtieri had no problem using Argentine soldiers as pawns and sending them off to die in battles they couldn't possibly win. Is it simply a case of Argentines supporting their fellow Argentines who served as opposed to Galtieri's failed domestic and military policies? Even simpler, is it just national pride for anything Argentina does/did? Since I don't ever bring it up or offer and opinion I can't say, but it doesn't strike me as 'support the troops but oppose the war' like you heard from many in the US after the (second) Iraq invasion. Another analogy would be the Vietnam War. Americans wanted to put that behind them ASAP and if there's any prevailing 'good' feelings about the war it's for the veterans who were predominantly drafted to serve in the folly, not the war itself.

Not having a dog in the fight I don't really care who controls the islands or how the islanders prefer to identify themselves. I am more interested in who the islanders would like to be aligned with. Generally speaking, I'm anti-Imperialist but also all for self-determination. I'm more interested in understanding why I never hear Argentines mention Galtieri's attempt to reverse his declining popularity and his use of Argentine soldiers as disposable chattel. I'll never raise that question outside of this forum and I'm 100% open to being told I'm completely wrong or ignorant of certain majorly relevant circumstances.

 

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

I was under the impression that back in '82 Galtieri was suffering from declining popularity in Argentina, and like many heads of state before him (and several after) he decided that an invasion of a foreign controlled territory would distract the population, redirect their anger, and solve his popularity problems.

What I don't entirely understand is why Argentines cling so tightly to this event. The main reason I don't understand is because I don't want to ask and stick my tongue on the third rail. In addition to his intended distraction with it's waste of military and other national resources it would seem that Galtieri had no problem using Argentine soldiers as pawns and sending them off to die in battles they couldn't possibly win. Is it simply a case of Argentines supporting their fellow Argentines who served as opposed to Galtieri's failed domestic and military policies? Even simpler, is it just national pride for anything Argentina does/did? Since I don't ever bring it up or offer and opinion I can't say, but it doesn't strike me as 'support the troops but oppose the war' like you heard from many in the US after the (second) Iraq invasion. Another analogy would be the Vietnam War. Americans wanted to put that behind them ASAP and if there's any prevailing 'good' feelings about the war it's for the veterans who were predominantly drafted to serve in the folly, not the war itself.

Not having a dog in the fight I don't really care who controls the islands or how the islanders prefer to identify themselves. I am more interested in who the islanders would like to be aligned with. Generally speaking, I'm anti-Imperialist but also all for self-determination. I'm more interested in understanding why I never hear Argentines mention Galtieri's attempt to reverse his declining popularity and his use of Argentine soldiers as disposable chattel. I'll never raise that question outside of this forum and I'm 100% open to being told I'm completely wrong or ignorant of certain majorly relevant circumstances.

Mostly because they say they have the original rights to the islands and it was Britain who kicked them off back in 18 whenever.

Britain are still the colonial power exerting their influence on the free people of Argentina etc etc etc.

So regardless of the Falklands war - Las Malvinas son Argentinas.

 

[Vossos]

Mostly because they say they have the original rights to the islands and it was Britain who kicked them off back in 18 whenever.

Britain are still the colonial power exerting their influence on the free people of Argentina etc etc etc.

So regardless of the Falklands war - Las Malvinas son Argentinas.

The exterior boogeyman is an omnipresent political strategy. I mean that’s the whole reason we’re out of the EU by extrapolation of “bendy bananas” nonsense