Falklands War part 2?

[MotF Bane]

Exactly. There's no reason for the UK to further militarize and threaten people who want to continue peace and come to a peaceful diplomatic solution.

No, you're not getting it. There already is peace. The Argentinians are stirring up all sorts of shit, looking for blockades, embargoes, demilitarization, whatever. They're disturbing the peace.

 

[Nebor]

A country with 10% economic growth means the economy is dogshit. You only get that sort of figure when you have nothing in the first place.

Agreed. They sold 3 more burritos last year. Woopie!

 

[Nebor]

No, you're not getting it. There already is peace. The Argentinians are stirring up all sorts of shit, looking for blockades, embargoes, demilitarization, whatever. They're disturbing the peace.

And developing WMDs, I hear.

 

[MotF Bane]

That was 30 years ago. If we want to go by history, then obviously the UK is going to lose the 'who was more peaceful in history' debate when it comes to a comparison with any other country on earth.

Oh yeah, let's pull up a thousand years of history versus a nation with a total of what, three hundred years? Better to do that by percentages. Or better yet, just focus on recent history, because here's a protip: the events of 1066 are totally irrelevant to this current situation Argentina is creating.

 

[RabidMongoose]

A country with 10% economic growth means the economy is dogshit. You only get that sort of figure when you have nothing in the first place.

Or it means that it's doing well. Argentina is not some backwards poor country. It's an upper middle income country. For gods sake, it's in the G-20. LOL.

Argentina is doing very well.

 

[MotF Bane]

Because finders keepers isn't the determinative law. Colonialist British tendencies are also not something that is determinative.

Moreover, they've been in UK hands for about 150 years after the UK invaded.

Argentina should own the Malvinas. The Malvinas should not be a conquest of British colonialism.

You have yet to provide adequate cause for removing the Falklands, with British citizens, from British control and giving it to Argentina to support their own ambitions.

 

[RabidMongoose]

No, you're not getting it. There already is peace. The Argentinians are stirring up all sorts of shit, looking for blockades, embargoes, demilitarization, whatever. They're disturbing the peace.

I disagree. In my view, the UK is stirring things up by further militarizing the South Atlantic. The Argentinians are looking for peaceful solutions, the UK is more about militaristic antagonism.

 

[monovillage]

And developing WMDs, I hear.

The Argentinians are also trafficking in slaves I've heard. They're also the center of the international child pron cartel and they kill and eat small puppies, really cute puppies.

 

[Veliko]

I disagree. In my view, the UK is stirring things up by further militarizing the South Atlantic. The Argentinians are looking for peaceful solutions, the UK is more about militaristic antagonism.

What does 'militarizing the South Atlantic' actually mean?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Because finders keepers isn't the determinative law. Colonialist British tendencies are also not something that is determinative.
Moreover, they've been in UK hands for about 150 years after the UK invaded.
Argentina should own the Malvinas. The Malvinas should not be a conquest of British colonialism.

Are you seriously contending that British claims to uninhabited islands with no indigenous population are subordinate to claims later made by a nation that did not even exist at the time of the original claim?

Is your position based on anything more than your opinion that Argentine colonialism is somehow superior to British colonialism?

 

[RabidMongoose]

You are still avoiding the questions and just repeating yourself. Once again:

How does the Argentinian claim counter the fact that Britain found them before Argentina even existed? How can they be Argentinian if Argentina didn't exist at the time when they were discovered?

If the Falklands shouldn't be a conquest of British colonialism, why should they be a conquest of Argentinian colonialism?

I'm not avoiding the question. I directly answered it. The problem is that you disagree with my answer. That is fine. Or perhaps you just didn't read the post. I suggest that you re-read it.

 

[Remobz]

No, you're not getting it. There already is peace. The Argentinians are stirring up all sorts of shit, looking for blockades, embargoes, demilitarization, whatever. They're disturbing the peace.

Argentina will get its ass whipped again.

However, my hat goes off to the Argentine pilots in the war who did A LOT of damage. They were truly bad ass.

The average Argentine infantry soldier was pretty useless though.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Are you seriously contending that British claims to uninhabited islands with no indigenous population are subordinate to claims later made by a nation that did not even exist at the time of the original claim?

Is your position based on anything more than your opinion that Argentine colonialism is somehow superior to British colonialism?

I'm stating that finders keepers isn't applicable law.

 

[Veliko]

I'm not avoiding the question. I directly answered it. The problem is that you disagree with my answer. That is fine. Or perhaps you just didn't read the post. I suggest that you re-read it.

You haven't answered it at all, as has been pointed out by other posters.

Why are you so against British colonialism yet utterly enamoured with Argentinian colonialism?

 

[RabidMongoose]

Oh yeah, let's pull up a thousand years of history versus a nation with a total of what, three hundred years? Better to do that by percentages. Or better yet, just focus on recent history, because here's a protip: the events of 1066 are totally irrelevant to this current situation Argentina is creating.

You can even go by recent history, say of the last 100 years. The UK has no moral high ground when it comes to historical bloodshed. Regardless, I think that this is a line of argument that the pro-UK posters have abandoned.

 

[Veliko]

I'm stating that finders keepers isn't applicable law.

What is the applicable law that counts for Argentina?

 

[Nebor]

The Argentinians are also trafficking in slaves I've heard. They're also the center of the international child pron cartel and they kill and eat small puppies, really cute puppies.

I read that Wall Street Journal article too.

 

[Vic Vega]

So I guess the question of self governance has not occurred to you guys?

I say neither the UK or Argentina has a right to claim them. Let the people there self govern.

 

[MotF Bane]

I disagree. In my view, the UK is stirring things up by further militarizing the South Atlantic. The Argentinians are looking for peaceful solutions, the UK is more about militaristic antagonism.

The Argentinians are stirring things up with threats of blockades and air flight embargoes. Given their past aggression towards the islands, it behooves England to prepare defenses.

Here's a concept for you. Putting guns, missiles, troops and ships (other than carriers) on a small island chain you already own, with your own citizens on it, is a defensive action. Threatening to interfere with the freedom of the seas to an island that is part of another nation, attempting to isolate and sequester that island from the rest of the world, is an offensive action.

 

[CallMeJoe]

I'm stating that finders keepers isn't applicable law.

I believe the claim is more one of prior settlement and self-determination of the current population.
Your opinion seems to be that geographic proximity and your preference for Argentine colonialism to the British variety justify overruling the desires of the actual residents of the Falklands.

 

[Veliko]

So I guess the question of self governance has not occurred to you guys?

I say neither the UK or Argentina has a right to claim them. Let the people there self govern.

They don't want that.

 

[MotF Bane]

So I guess the question of self governance has not occurred to you guys?

I say neither the UK or Argentina has a right to claim them. Let the people there self govern.

1) The people have chosen to be British.
2) Argentina will invade if nobody is there to stop them. They did it once, they'll do it again.

 

[RabidMongoose]

You haven't answered it at all, as has been pointed out by other posters.

Why are you so against British colonialism yet utterly enamoured with Argentinian colonialism?

I did answer that particular question. It's just that you and certain pro-UK posters disagree with it. However, I answered the question.

I am against colonialism, but more importantly, I am not in favor of rewarding countries for colonialist behavior. As such, I don't see a legitimate claim for the UK with regard to the Malvinas.

 

[MotF Bane]

Are you seriously contending that British claims to uninhabited islands with no indigenous population are subordinate to claims later made by a nation that did not even exist at the time of the original claim?

Is your position based on anything more than your opinion that Argentine colonialism is somehow superior to British colonialism?

Excellent post.

 

[Nebor]

So I guess the question of self governance has not occurred to you guys?

I say neither the UK or Argentina has a right to claim them. Let the people there self govern.

The people do self govern. They wrote their own constitution which was ratified in 2009. They want to remain a part of the British empire.