1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

The Falkland Islands

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by imperialman, Jan 18, 2012.

  1. innonimatu

    innonimatu Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,843
    Well, there is a reason why the UK never got rid of those tiny islands around the world, when it got rid of its larger colonies. And it isn't just that no guerillas are sustainable there.

    No, the dismembering of empires happens when territories not really controllable by the elites in the capital start demanding a proportional share of power there. Threatened with displacement from their position of power those elites almost always choose to cut out those imperial territories. The whole history of the dissolution of the British Empire was like that, starting with the rebellious americans, then the Dominions of South Africa, Australia and Canada which would not get representation at Westminster, and finally India and all the other African and Asian Colonies. It almost came to civil war over Ireland. And the Americans who went for gradual imperial expansion with incorporation of new territories and sharing of power did came to civil war over that sharing of power. Oh, wait, it was supposedly just about slavery, I forget...

    Anyway, my point is that the reason the Falklands remained is that those islands can even easily be granted "representation": they're so small that their weight at the capital is negligible. Likewise for the former French, Dutch, etc Empires (I'm not sure about the dutch, but the french did organize their overseas territories as one more departmént).
    And in this sense they remain imperial territories, even with representation: they're absolutely dominated from afar, because of their smallness. And they would remain imperial territories whether it the the UK or Argentina that controls them.
     
  2. Takhisis

    Takhisis Would-be overnight hero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    33,208
    Location:
    up yours!
    You certainly have a point there.

    The Falklands are in an imperial position because not even the most delusional Falklander would say they're 'equal' to the government in Britain. The troops are not local for one thing. The Falklands will always be dependent to a greater or smaller degree on the outside, they can't be hermits.
    As I said before, cooperation with Argentina I only inevitable. But both sides have to stop being so idiotic about it.

    It *did* come to a war with Ireland btw.
     
  3. Traitorfish

    Traitorfish The Tighnahulish Kid

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    28,558
    Location:
    Scotland
    That was a war to get Ireland out of the union, though, not over its constitutional position within it.
     
  4. Takhisis

    Takhisis Would-be overnight hero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    33,208
    Location:
    up yours!
    The same could be said of the U.S. war of independence.
     
  5. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    I think the islanders are happy with the constitutional arrangements as they are, they don't want to be part of Britain. Not that I'm suggesting you meant that, just thought I'd point it out.
     
  6. Traitorfish

    Traitorfish The Tighnahulish Kid

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    28,558
    Location:
    Scotland
    Yes and no. The American rebels didn't even think about independence until the war was well underway, while the First Dáil had been declared as the legislature of an independent Irish Republic before the war even began. Both cases represented a failure of the British imperial system, but in quite different ways.
     
  7. Takhisis

    Takhisis Would-be overnight hero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    33,208
    Location:
    up yours!
    They want to remain a colony, no more and no less.
    Hence my 'could be said of' instead of 'applies to'.
     
  8. bathsheba666

    bathsheba666 Fast 'n Bulbous

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    10,005
    Location:
    London
    As the US are pressing for us to talk to Argentina, are they also preparing to withdraw from Diego Garcia ?
     
  9. Mad Man

    Mad Man Your lord and master

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,716
    Location:
    Empire of Maryland
    Good, send those poor islanders back home.
     
  10. Silurian

    Silurian Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,809
    Yes the US should allow them back but it maybe already too late.
     
  11. bhsup

    bhsup Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    30,387
    Why the hell are we taking this stance? I cannot believe this. Obama starts his term by betraying Poland, and is wrapping it up by betraying our closest friggin' ally in the world??
     
  12. say1988

    say1988 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    4,659
    This isn't anything new. pretty sure Bush held the same policy. Argentina was name a major non-NATO ally by Clinton.
    It won't cost the US anything more than a bit of ing by the UK (it will not put any alliance at risk) while it puts the US in a position to gain with much of Latin America.
    Since it is still extremely unlikely anything will actually happen the US has nothing to lose.
     
  13. innonimatu

    innonimatu Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,843
    Don't worry, your allies got used to it long ago. Those eastern europeans might have been shocked, but that was because they were still naive.
     
  14. bhsup

    bhsup Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    30,387
    Then I guess the only positive is we never Czechoslovakia'd or Hungary'd any of our allies...
     
  15. uat2d

    uat2d ಠ_ಠ

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,727
    Location:
    Final Frontier Listening: House
    What are these backstabs you're talking about and could you leave some links so I can learn more about them? :)
     
  16. bhsup

    bhsup Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    30,387
  17. uat2d

    uat2d ಠ_ಠ

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,727
    Location:
    Final Frontier Listening: House
    Thanks, that was a good read, yeah, the USA still hasn't invaded any puppet state yet, but still, that's not really a good guideline. :p

    As for the missile defense system, I'm guessing he wants to show the Russians he means no harm, it's not like Poland or any of its neighbors can hurt USA's interests as much as Russia can, and since we're all EU, we'll all continue to deal with the USA's crap without even calling them out on their BS.
     
  18. Cutlass

    Cutlass The Man Who Wasn't There.

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    40,702
    Location:
    US of A
    Well, to be fair that missile defense system in Poland was a major dumbass idea in the first place. :mischief:
     
  19. Mad Man

    Mad Man Your lord and master

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,716
    Location:
    Empire of Maryland
  20. bhsup

    bhsup Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    30,387
    Guatemala invaded by Guatemalans? Not quite the same thing. Also, and more directly related, not exactly our ally.
     

Share This Page