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. uat2d

    uat2d ಠ_ಠ

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,727
    Location:
    Final Frontier Listening: House
    Isn't it "irrelevant" with an "a"?
     
  2. Takhisis

    Takhisis Would-be overnight hero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    33,207
    Location:
    up yours!
    I've already corrected him but he insists on doing things the English way, i.e. wrong. ؟
     
  3. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    Simple, it hasn't done so.
     
  4. Flying Pig

    Flying Pig Utrinque Paratus Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    Oh, I'm not saying that they're the only place that it can be done, but they're a very good training area - not to mention that they provide incredibly realistic training for what is probably the UK's most likely future conflict: the guys down there are doing their live-firing training on the same hills that would be battlefields if the Argentines invaded!

    I was joking; the Royal Engineers spend a lot of their time clearing them up, even now.

    'Because it is there' is a great maxim for mountain climbing, but a very bad one for the management of international relations
     
  5. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    I was meaning to say that I don't believe the UK actually has increased its military presence in the region, Dauntless replacing Montrose and all.
     
  6. Traitorfish

    Traitorfish The Tighnahulish Kid

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    28,525
    Location:
    Scotland
    Not really the point. If the Union is to be understood as anything more than English microimperialism, then the other indigenous tongues of the Isles need to be recognised as, at least on some level, its equal. The greater usage of English certainly allows it to play a role as first among equals- I'm not suggesting that ever scrap of government information be available in Cornish on demand- but it falls short of any legitimate hegemony. (I would go so far as to say that the same is true within England- that regional dialects such as Northumbric demand more respect than they receive.)
     
  7. ParkCungHee

    ParkCungHee Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    12,921
    Why would we want to do that?
     
  8. Traitorfish

    Traitorfish The Tighnahulish Kid

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    28,525
    Location:
    Scotland
    Presumably why the sort of equality I describe is wishful thinking at best. :undecide:
     
  9. ParkCungHee

    ParkCungHee Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    12,921
    Maybe it's time Scotland tried a century's worth of poorly planned and thought out rebellions, each stupider than the last.
     
  10. Traitorfish

    Traitorfish The Tighnahulish Kid

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    28,525
    Location:
    Scotland
    I'll call some of my fellow effete intellectuals, see if any of them fancy dying bloodily for no particular reason.
     
  11. bathsheba666

    bathsheba666 Fast 'n Bulbous

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    10,005
    Location:
    London
    Or wrongly :D
     
  12. Takhisis

    Takhisis Would-be overnight hero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    33,207
    Location:
    up yours!
    My, my, I'd have thought the next place UK troops were to be deployed was somewhere in the Near East from recent history.

    And, besides, why does everyone keep expecting Argentina to invade while also stating it's impossible?
    Yeah, that's sick. I'm sure it'd be a great gesture if Argentina could offer some deal: helping remove mines in exchange for being allowed to identify the remains of their dead.
    Code:
     ___
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-
    O RLY?
    What do you think all that hooligan stuff has really been? We've been training them on the InterCity for a reason.
    Go for the unemployed ones first. You'll solve unemployment and start an independence war.
    The English way is wrong, therefore, my statement stands :crazyeye:.
     
  13. Flying Pig

    Flying Pig Utrinque Paratus Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    It's impossible that they'll win. It's not impossible that they'll be stupid enough to try.

    There's another thread on this, but I'm convinced that, even if there is American involvement in that part of the world (very unlikely), the British will not intervene.
     
  14. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    Do you believe the UK is militarising the situation?
     
  15. ParkCungHee

    ParkCungHee Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    12,921
    Oh good god! You don't want to go starting a war with the English, that never ends well!
    You just keep having stupider rebellions, and eventually the English will act even stupider in response.
     
  16. Takhisis

    Takhisis Would-be overnight hero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    33,207
    Location:
    up yours!
    But it's still stupid to incense them by all this manouvering.
    Wasn't there some presence in Lybia last year?
    Don't you?
    But we get rid of the effete intellectuals and adance in our secret plan to crown Kan' Sharuminar as kig of Scotland!
     
  17. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    No, there is nothing to suggest this at all.
     
  18. Flying Pig

    Flying Pig Utrinque Paratus Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    15,651
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    The point is that whether they invade the Falklands or not has nothing to do with a genuine casus belli. If they do, it'll be because of 'push' reasons from home, not because of the actual strategic situation. Therefore all we can do is prepare, in case they do invade - we're not actually changing the odds of an invasion by doing so.

    Libya is very much not the Middle East, and the nature of the operation was totally different to anything we'd see in Iran - we deliberately didn't put a single boot on the ground.
     
  19. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    I hope this clears the issue up for some people.

    The principal arguments put forward by the Argentinians are untrue. The truth of the matter is that:

    (1) The 17th and 18th-century treaties between Britain and Spain did not prohibit British possession of the Falklands.

    (2) The Argentinians have quoted the 1771 Anglo-Spanish agreement incorrectly. The agreement as finally signed preserves the claims of both Spain and Britain, not Spain alone. There was no secret promise by Britain to evacuate the Falklands after the restitution of Port Egmont.

    (3) The Argentinians have incorrectly described the history of the 1820s in the Falklands. David Jewett did claim the Falklands then for Argentina, but he had not been sent there. He did not attempt to apply fishing regulations, or Argentine laws, or tell any foreign ships to leave. His claim was not announced formally in Argentina or even mentioned in his report. Argentina has also incorrectly described the activities of Pablo Areguati in the Falklands in 1824. Areguati was never given any official rank, nor did he attempt to enforce Argentine law or fishing regulations. It was all he could do to survive himself, and his expedition collapsed after a few weeks. Britain did object promptly when Louis Vernet was given an official title in 1829. The assumption that Argentina did establish itself adequately in the islands in the early 1820s is based, as we have shown, on a profound distortion of history.

    (4) Argentina’s claim that the 1825 Treaty of Friendship and Navigation with Britain supports its claim to the Falklands is incorrect. There was no one from Argentina in the Falklands at that time, and the Treaty does not describe Argentine territory at all.

    (5) The Argentine claim that Britain expelled an Argentine population from the Falklands in 1833 is false; the settlement continued, and most of its inhabitants were from Buenos Aires.

    (6) Argentina did not inherit a unitary claim to the Falklands from Spain, and its claim is further weakened by the lack of foreign recognition in the 19th century and by Louis Vernet’s preference for British sovereignty.

    (7) Argentina dropped its claim to the Falklands by ratifying the Convention of Settlement in 1850. The failure to mention that this ended Argentina’s claim to the Falklands is a gross distortion of history, as are the statements by Argentine historians that the British Foreign Secretary accepted in 1849 that the matter was “pending” or “postponed” – the reverse is true. After 1850 Argentina dropped all protests to Britain over the Falklands, and did not mention the Falklands to Britain for 34 years. The dropping of the Argentine claim was confirmed by Argentine leaders in their Messages to Congress in the 1860s, and the Falklands were not mentioned in any Message to Congress for 91 years until 1941.

    (8) The Argentine claim was artificially revived in 1884, by non-diplomatic means – the “Affair of the Map” – but after failing to change Britain’s position Argentina dropped the matter again for several decades.

    (9) The Argentinians have never had a valid claim to South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. These islands were only claimed by Argentina after the Second World War, after decades of acquiescence and after acknowledgement of Britain’s sovereignty there.

    (10) The Argentine argument that Islanders have no right to self-determination is absurd. They have the same rights as any other immigrant population of the New World.

    We conclude that there is no case for Argentine sovereignty over the Falklands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. All these islands are rightfully British.

    The Falklands dispute was ended over 150 years ago with Argentina’s agreement I believe.
     
  20. GinandTonic

    GinandTonic Saphire w/ Schweps + Lime

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Messages:
    7,759
    Argentine Olympic advert riles Falklands

    Classy.
     

Share This Page