Was the Falkland War British aggression or was it justifiable?

[J.griffin]

I thought that it was the US navy that expelled the argentine settlers and that France Spain and Britain had all claimed the island before there before Argentina colonised it...

 

[J.griffin]

Argentina only held the Islands for about 10-15 years

 

[Carlos 'Cypher' Renato]

Being a "neighboor" of Falklands i can see pretty well that Argentina don't have any rights on the Falklands. The ones who first colonized the island where brits and french. After everyone abandoned the island the argies tried to settle down there. But the only thing they made there was a jail. 20 years later the british sent the HMS Clio to retake the island sending ALL non british people away. The island was british ever since.
In 1981 (one year before the war) the falklanders voted to continue being part of UK. There are a lot of another arguments that prove that the british are the rightfully owners of the islands but i don't have time to post them now.
Argentina may be near Falklands but don't have any right on theirs.

Las Malvinas NO san Argentinas!

 

[ARSENAL6]

You should probably change the title to Argentinian agression or justifiable seeing it was Argentina that invaded.

Simple thing is the majority of the population want to be part of Britian.

To put it in perspective if the majority of Kashmir voted to be part of Pakistan and India invaded would it be agression on the part of Pakistan to try and kick india out?

How does one becaome an agressor when he/she reclaimming the things that were stolen.
Its like saying that a robber robbing a shop has no connection to him/her is claiming things that is rightfully his/her own.

Vassnti stick to the day job, these topics obvioulsy tooo much for you brain can handle period.

 

[888jamie888]

How does one becaome an agressor when he/she reclaimming the things that were stolen.
Its like saying that a robber robbing a shop has no connection to him/her is claiming things that is rightfully his/her own.

Vassnti stick to the day job, these topics obvioulsy tooo much for you brain can handle period.

Time has had it's effect, the islands are overwhelmingly British. The people want to remain so.
If we try to reverse past actions, why not go back further? Why stop at the Falklands? Heck let's reverse all the changes in land ownership in the past 1000 years?
Where do you draw the line? Why don't the Argies go back to Spain?

 

[El Gaucho]

Time has had it's effect, the islands are overwhelmingly British. The people want to remain so.
If we try to reverse past actions, why not go back further? Why stop at the Falklands? Heck let's reverse all the changes in land ownership in the past 1000 years?
Where do you draw the line? Why don't the Argies go back to Spain?

It was not 1000 years in the past, it was some 180 since they were stolen. And taking into account that the Argentine population was removed and that Argentina still has the most (actually the only) legitimate claim, why would time be a relevant factor? They didnt become a British majority due to natural growth, and they didnt swap to British rule by democratic or peaceful experience, as well as obviously not everyone agrees to that change. It is necesary that historical facts are exposed cleanly and fully, if a desition has to be taken.

 

[ejaz007]

Argentina only held the Islands for about 10-15 years

If they held the Islands for 10-15 years than that is good enough to claim the land.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

The truth is the people of falklands want to be british and therefore perfectly justifiable.If it was aregntine people kept under british military control against their will it would have been aggression.But wasn't that.There were very few if any troops on the island when argentina occupied them.Shows the islands were not held by britain through coercion but popular consent.

 

[Slayer786]

It is all economics my dear fellows. It has nothing to do with love of the land or the people. There is an estimated 60 billion barrels worth of oil under the seabed near the islands and both countries know of the value. Right now UK is in possession of the islands so it will be benefiting. But Argentina is angry that it wont get anything. So hence the tension.

 

[ejaz007]

The truth is the people of falklands want to be british and therefore perfectly justifiable.If it was aregntine people kept under british military control against their will it would have been aggression.But wasn't that.There were very few if any troops on the island when argentina occupied them.Shows the islands were not held by britain through coercion but popular consent.

The truth also is that settlers living there were brought there by the British in the first place. They were British citizen when they arrived there and are not locals. That is why they always voted for remaining British.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

The truth also is that settlers living there were brought there by the British in the first place. They were British citizen when they arrived there and are not locals. That is why they always voted for remaining British.

Were there any locals in the first place in that remote place?

 

[ejaz007]

Were there any locals in the first place in that remote place?

The Island mostly remained uninhabited. However in early 19th century Spanish had some population on the island. After blockade by the British perhaps in early 19th century Spanish withdrew and then came the British.

 

[Wright]

The Island mostly remained uninhabited. However in early 19th century Spanish had some population on the island. After blockade by the British perhaps in early 19th century Spanish withdrew and then came the British.

So they belong to Spain more than Argentina.

 

[ejaz007]

So they belong to Spain more than Argentina.

Argentina herself was a Spanish colony.

So if we go by that logic then any Ex Spanish territory close to Argentina should be part of Argentina.

 

[Gold1010]

Here is a great post from another website.

"When they were first discovered by a Dutchman in 1600 there was nothing there but seabirds. No people, no cultural heritage for anyone to trample over. Just a windy bunch of rocks.

Ninety years later a British sailor was blown off course and sailed through a bit of water he named Falkland Sound, and 74 years after that the French turned up to form a colony.

WAIT! I hear you cry. The French colonised the Falklands?

Why yes, and 18th century email being what it was the British turned up two years later and built a settlement on another one of the islands and claimed the whole lot for the Crown, unaware the Frenchies were already in residence.

The French sold out to the Spaniards a year after that, who put the colony - containing French people - under control of a governor in Buenos Aires.

Three years later the Spanish picked a fight with the Brits, kicked them out and after a peace treaty let us back in. In 1774 the Brits, overstretched by the Americans kicking off, withdrew and left a plaque behind asserting their claim. Thirty two years later the Spaniards departed too, leaving another plaque, and in 1811 the last settlers threw in the towel.

We were back to empty, windy rocks known only to whalers and sealing ships, and two memorial plaques.

In 1820 an American pirate called David Jewett took shelter there, and finding the place deserted promptly claimed the islands for a union of South American provinces which later became Argentina.

You lot didn't realise this for a year, but still didn't settle the islands. Instead a German who pretended to be French called Luis Vernet came along, asked the Argentines and the Brits politely if they minded, and founded a little colony of his own.

It took him a few goes, but eventually he established a settlement, you named him governor and gave him the right to kill all the seals. This quite hacked off the Brits, who wanted some seals for themselves, but Vernet placated us by asking for our military protection.

It all got a bit hairy in 1831, when Vernet found some American seal ships, arrested their crews and sparked an international incident. The Americans sent a warship, blew up the settlement, and hot-headedly sent the most senior settlers to the mainland for trial for piracy.

The Argentines sent a new governor to establish a penal settlement, but he was killed in a mutiny the day he arrived. The Brits, quite reasonably, decided the whole thing was a dog's breakfast.

And now we get to the bit you're unhappy about Argentina, the invasion and forced expulsion.

The Brits arrived two months after this mutiny, and wrote to the chap in charge of the small Argentine garrison. The letter said:
"I have to direct you that I have received directions from His Excellency and Commander-in-Chief of His Britannic Majesty's ships and vessels of war, South America station, in the name of His Britannic Majesty, to exercise the rights of sovereignty over these Islands.

It is my intention to hoist to-morrow the national flag of Great Britain on shore when I request you will be pleased to haul down your flag on shore and withdraw your force, taking all stores belonging to your Government."

Now, there are many ways people can be oppressed, forced, compelled and abused - just ask Sean Penn - but a polite note is not one of them. The Argentine in charge thought briefly about resisting, but he didn't have many soldiers and besides, most of them were British mercenaries who refused to fight. So on January 3, 1833 you left, Argentina, with wounded pride and your nose in the air.

You had never settled the islands. Never established a colony of your own. Never guarded it with a garrison of your own soldiers. They had never, ever, been yours.

And now to the matter of that expulsion. The log of an Argentine ship present at the time records the settlers were encouraged to stay, and those that left did so of their own free will and generally because they were fed up with living on some boring, windy rocks.

Eleven people left - four Argentines, three 'foreigners', one prisoner, a Brit and two Americans.

Twenty-two people remained - 12 Argentinians, four Uruguay Indians, two Brits, two Germans, a Frenchman and a Jamaican.

As the imposition of colonial power on an indigenous population goes, that takes some beating. And for the sake of clarity I should point out that a human melting pot like that makes the place about as British as you can be.

A few months later HMS Beagle, taking Charles Darwin to the Galapagos for a long think, popped in and found the settlement half-ruined and the residents lawless. There were several murders, some looting, and in 1834 the exasperated British sent Lieutenant Henry Smith to run the place.

The islands have been ours ever since, and is now home to almost 3,000 people descended from settlers who came from Britain, France, Scandinavia, Gibraltar, St Helena and Chile.