aelf
Ashen One
It's kinda hard to say that with any certainty. For example, old people these days may still have prejudices from the time of WWII, but most young people who are not subject to extensive propaganda don't seem to have them.
The Falkland Islands
- Thread starter imperialman
- Start date
It's kinda hard to say that with any certainty. For example, old people these days may still have prejudices from the time of WWII, but most young people who are not subject to extensive propaganda don't seem to have them.
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
Both the Romance name of the islands and the English one are derived, ultimately, from Celtic. Therefore, the islands truly belong to Ireland, the only independent Celtic state! 
Skwink
FRIIIIIIIIIITZ
- Joined
- May 14, 2010
- Messages
- 5,683
From a USA#1 Stance this is really the best option.
warpus
In pork I trust
Pangur Bán;11199297 said:Both the Romance name of the islands and the English one are derived, ultimately, from Celtic. Therefore, the islands truly belong to Ireland, the only independent Celtic state!
But seeing as celts originate from Anatolia, and all humans originate from somewhere in Africa, it should obviously be given to Kenya.
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
Apparently, there are a fair few Argentinians who are still upset about the British taking the Falklands in 1831.
More importantly, so long as Argentina keeps claiming the islands - and especially if it continues to act in the childish manner we see recently - there's little chance of the islanders ever forgiving and forgetting to the extent that they are prepared to submit to Argentine rule.
Wrong. The last thing you want is for the British citizens on the island to be left twisting in the wind. They deserve to know their government will never, ever abandon them. That means never humoring in any way such talk by a foreign power against your citizens and territory.
warpus
In pork I trust
Not abandoning them is one thing, sending an American aircraft carrier to the region is another.
aelf
Ashen One
Hence my mentioning...
Winston Hughes said:
That's why I said they should bide their time.
Well, my two comments were related but distinct. The point is, I think the current status should trump what was briefly the case a couple hundred years ago.
Quackers
The Frog
aelf
Ashen One
Or maybe just give up on the whole idea?
If they revisit the idea in the future when things are in their favour does it count as giving up?
CaptainF
The Professional Poster
It seems to me that allowing the Brits to control Las Islas Malvinas is in contradiction to the Monroe Doctrine.
aelf
Ashen One
So what is the matter at hand? I'm actually not sure, beyond the notion that this thread is about Argentina's claim on the Falkland Islands.
imperialman
Admiral
The Monroe Doctrine was more to prevent further colonisation of the Western Hemisphere or interference with nations in the Americas, the Falklands as a British territory pre-dates the MD. Besides US SoS Livingston declined to invoke the Monroe Doctrine when the United Kingdom resumed its presence in the Falkland Islands in 1833, so I don't see that as being a factor.
You can easily make the argument that the British claims predate the Monroe Doctrine and hence it never applied (it was about stopping Europeans from interfering with the independent countries). Just like the British retained authority over modern Canada.
warpus
In pork I trust
Do you know what antagonizing somebody who isn't preparing for war at all is?
