Who should own the Falklands?

[Flying Pig]

Curious, but how have Labour's numbers fared since this started?

Pretty nicely. With the inherent bias of our electoral system towards them (there are fewer people in the city constituencies but more labour voters, so if labour can secure the support of 50% of the people they may well end up with 60% of the seats.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

As far as I can make out, the Argentine argument is 'the Falklands are near to us, and we owned them once in our history. The people there hate our guts, but we have a right because of this to rule them irrespective of their wishes'.

Sounds a lot like the British claim to Normandy to me

And Northern Ireland.

Not so, sir.

No?

As far as I can make out, the Argentine argument is 'the Falklands are near to us,

As is Northern Ireland.

and we owned them once in our history.

'Owned' / 'Conquered' sameo, sameo.

The people there hate our guts,

They'd be crazy not to.

but we have a right because of this to rule them irrespective of their wishes'.

I see your quote "66% express long term preference of the maintenance of Northern Ireland's membership of the United Kingdom", but i don't see an explanation of what the maintenance of Northern Ireland's membership of the United Kingdom is preferred to. Preferred to a devolved Northern Ireland or rule from Dublin? I imagine, given the way politics in Northern Ireland is going, entirely independent rule from Stormount would be preferred to rule from Westminster.

Sounds a lot like the British claim to Normandy to me

It's a flippant comment agreed, but to my mind the situation in Northern Ireland bears at least a resemblance to the Falklands. Ireland just happens to have better Terrorists than Argentina.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Curious, but how have Labour's numbers fared since this started?

A good point. Nothing like a War we can win to distract us all from a recession; just as Thatcher did last time out and I believe Major did in Iraq too.

It's the Wars we start in the boom years we struggle with.

 

[Flying Pig]

It's a flippant comment agreed, but to my mind the situation in Northern Ireland bears at least a resemblance to the Falklands. Ireland just happens to have better Terrorists than Argentina.

As someone who's been to both with a flag on his arm, I can say that they're completely different. In Ulster, during the heyday of problems there and still in some places today, Tommy Atkins (and especially paratroopers) couldn't go into a pub for fear of being attacked by the locals. In the Falklands, shortly after the end of the war, a few tired, stinking and generally alcohol-deprived paratroopers and one tired but teetotal one walked into the Globe and got drinks on the house. That's the difference between the two.

I see your quote "66% express long term preference of the maintenance of Northern Ireland's membership of the United Kingdom", but i don't see an explanation of what the maintenance of Northern Ireland's membership of the United Kingdom is preferred to. Preferred to a devolved Northern Ireland or rule from Dublin? I imagine, given the way politics in Northern Ireland is going, entirely independent rule from Stormount would be preferred to rule from Westminster.

Preferable to anything other than Union Jacks and God Save the Queen.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

As someone who's been to both with a flag on his arm, I can say that they're completely different. In Ulster, during the heyday of problems there and still in some places today, Tommy Atkins (and especially paratroopers) couldn't go into a pub for fear of being attacked by the locals. In the Falklands, shortly after the end of the war, a few tired, stinking and generally alcohol-deprived paratroopers and one tired but teetotal one walked into the Globe and got drinks on the house. That's the difference between the two.

You said it was "a lot like Normandy". I believe it's "a lot like" Northern Ireland save for the fact that those who live there don't want to be part of Argentina. Likewise, our claim to Gibraltar is highly spurious but we keep it because the people there want us there.

My point is that the views of the people who reside there is the only difference. As such, the pre-history being discussed is meaningless. Whether we saw it first or stole it off some French Fisherman lost at sea, all that matters is those people want to remain British and so we are justified in ensuring that is the case.

Preferable to anything other than Union Jacks and God Save the Queen.

I disagree. Purely anecdotally, and following the evidence in Wales and Scotland, I believe that most people in Northern Ireland would allow freedom from London if freedom from Dublin was assured.

 

[Flying Pig]

Therefore, the situation in Ulster and the Falklands is nothing like the same, surely? When there was trouble in Ulster the British had to keep the people down, when there was trouble in the Falklands the people were embarrasingly helpful!

I disagree. Purely anecdotally, and following the evidence in Wales and Scotland, I believe that most people in Northern Ireland would allow freedom from London if freedom from Dublin was assured.

Very few people in either country really want independance. 66% of people even in Ulster say that British soverignty is preferable to anything else

 

[GinandTonic]

PoL, splendid to have you back and all that.

Should people not have the right to self determination? What alternative do you propose? Just to piss and moan from the sidelines or do you have a better alternative?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Very few people in either country really want independance. 66% of people even in Ulster say that British soverignty is preferable to anything else

I wouldn't characterize 1/3rd of the population of Northern Ireland as "very few", especially considering that there are regions where the vast majority of the people who live there want their independence.

But I tend to agree with you about the Falklands. But considering that almost all of them have British ancestry, it isn't much of a surprise which country they would prefer to be a part.

 

[Takhisis]

...Mmm yes. I like where this is going! TR was able to negotiate an end to the Russo-Japanese War... doesn't seem Obama'll be able to diffuse a second Falklands War.

..Though really. What makes the Argentines assume this'll go any different if war was to break out? That they will have Venezuela was an ally?

Oh god, mighty Venezuela's gonna stomp the Brits!

...Would be a pretty good test of just how crazy Chavez is though, if a war did break out. Would he REALLY go all Hitler-esque and actually force his country into a war he can't even win?

I've already stated this many times: Argentina does NOT have the military capability of invading the Falklands. This is a smokescreen to cover the theft by the president of +$6 billion's worth of the Central bank's reserves through an unconstitutional decree.

 

[Flying Pig]

I wouldn't characterize 1/3rd of the population of Northern Ireland as "very few", especially considering that there are regions where the vast majority of the people who live there want their independence.

But I tend to agree with you about the Falklands. But considering that almost all of them have British ancestry, it isn't much of a surprise which country they would prefer to be a part.

My hunch (although its little more than that) is that there's a big difference between people who will wave the flag and demand independance in a survey and people who will actually vote for it.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

The Stormont parliament is a joke, divided into two diametrically opposed factions based on ethnic grounds. The nationalists and unionists are completely incapable of agreement on any meaningful issue. The only reason that Northern Ireland has any government and laws at all is because of Westmnister stepping in to force the two factions together and to run the country during the very long intervals in which the Stormont representatives refuse to speak to each other or even turn up to work.

Stormont is an exercise in PR, it is not a viable administration. Independence for Northern Ireland is an idea that is absurd beyond imagining. No-one wants it. About 45% of the population might want union with the Republic but absolutely nobody wants Ulster independence.

And it is important to remember that just because 45% want union with the South eventually that doesn't mean that they would actually push for it now. Changing the status quo in such a dramatic way without near-universal consensus is just a one-way ticket to hell and nationalists know that.


Also, the Falklands and Gibraltar are black-and-white open-and-shut cases of one side being copletely right and the other being completely wrong of the sort which are quite uncommon in the world today. I'm astonished that this thread has lasted as long as it has.

What is there left to say when essentially the entire population of an area makes its will clear?

 

[Flying Pig]

Up the Queen and God Save the British Army! Or...

 

[say1988]

Nah. The Royal Navy will get the job done. If they are ready no infantry will be needed this time, though if necessary the Royal marines will get the job done

 

[CoffeeMug]

Wow. I can't remember how many times i have witnessed this kind of discussion on many forums, its quite funny to look it here on civfanatics. Maybe the reason is because the core of the game is based on real life.

Okay here it is my two cents: no offense intended by the way.

As far as i understand, Falkland islands were uninhabited when they were discovered by european explorers. But it seems the english got there first commanded by John Davis on Thomas Cavendish's expedition to the New World. [http://www.polarconservation.org/education/explorers/john-davis].

However the french settled there first in the mid 18th century (Port St.Louis) which was later claimed for the british by John Byron although he did claimed Saunders Island (Port Egmont) which technically one of the islands belonging to Falklands. [http://www.falklands.info/history/history2.html]

The islands were subsequently acquired from France by the Spanish (presuming the french colony based there) while Spain attacked Port Egmont ending british presense there in the 1770s.

I believe that the result of such diplomatic standoff between britain and spain led to a british victory as they restored their base at Port Egmont.

Events happened after that time, including American revolutionary war, and the economic pressure associated with it forced the british to withdraw from many ovearseas settlements, but formally the UK never renounced their claims in the island as well as Spain.

From a diplomatic and strategic/military standpoint Spain never achieved full control of the islands thus the famous uti possidetis principle claimed by Argentine (related with possesions from Spain during their colonial and viceroyalty ages) to be a falacy.

On this case, we can't talk about terra nullius neither as both the english, french and spanish were in the island and all of them claimed their rights over the land.

So my full support goes to britain based on history records.

Whatsoever i am not an expert on the field. Just a freelance writer.
Cheers

 

[bhsup]

I'm going with a much simpler "possession is 9/10th of the law" and "the people there WANT to stay British". Not too concerned with historical realities one way or the other.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Aye.

If the Argentines truly want the islands, they can have them...

...Provided they can pry them from Britannia's cold, dead hands, anyway. Good luck with that, chicos!

I certainly hope a British South America comes out of all this...

The partitions of Argentina!

 

[Shrinking_12]

I think UK should have them (Even if I wish Argentina Should) because:

1.-Islanders are more British than Argentinean
2.-Argentina can´t offer what UK can for Islanders
3.-Can't go further, UK its more *everything" (But I can't say its better, Argentina have its good things!)

 

[Quackers]

USA have betrayed UK on this issue. I hope USA elects a good leader next time so we can have good relationship once again.

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

Couldn't we just give them the Isle of Man in exchange?

 

[Takhisis]

Aye.

If the Argentines truly want the islands, they can have them...

...Provided they can pry them from Britannia's cold, dead hands, anyway. Good luck with that, chicos!

I certainly hope a British South America comes out of all this...

The partitions of Argentina!

I'll keep Buenos Aires to myself and trade it for a few estates in convenient locations.

I think UK should have them (Even if I wish Argentina Should) because:

1.-Islanders are more British than Argentinean
2.-Argentina can´t offer what UK can for Islanders
3.-Can't go further, UK its more *everything" (But I can't say its better, Argentina have its good things!)

Argentina has good things? Besides the landscape, beautiful women and good cooking it has +40% poverty, rampant inflation (around 30% yearly, it's a pain in the arse living here), and a good degree of social violence... not to mention hooliganism, drug smuggling and gun proliferation. Football stadiums have huge fences of barbed wire and even moats to keep rival hooligan firms from each other's throats or from killing players. The dead 'vote', i.e., they're not erased from polling stations and their 'votes' are recorded by corrupt officials in their favour, the presidential couple has horribly multiplied its assets while in office by buying state-owned land and the selling it at ten times cost... what's the advantage to joining this banana republic of a dump? The Kirchners have even said they won't obey Congress or the Supreme Court (in theory, both are peers/superior to the Executive) because those powers of the state are 'golpistas' (coup-mongerers) to them... reallly...

USA have betrayed UK on this issue. I hope USA elects a good leader next time so we can have good relationship once again.

Why? The territory doesn't belong to anyone, and the USA will make sure that Britain doesn't get harmed. The only way Argentina could pull this off is by somehow making Lula do something. Which he won't. obama will do it quietly, but the Falklands won't become Argentine territory during his tenure.

Couldn't we just give them the Isle of Man in exchange?

Hmmm... Now there's a thought. Aye aye sir!!