Was the Falkland War British aggression or was it justifiable?

[Wright]

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.

But Spain is the heir to the Spanish empire. Anyway Spain used to own large chunks of present day US and Canada, but lost these in wars with the Americans, French, British. Thats how it was back then, you lost the war, you ceded the territory.

 

[888jamie888]

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.

Go back to Spain first eh?

 

[UKBengali]

LOL at Argentine accusing the UK of being colonialists

They are a mix of Spanish and Italians so let them give the land back to indigenous Indians first.

 

[jhungary]

From what I see, why the Falklands is full of British in the first place?

Regardless of who said who claim it first, you cannot come back and tell the British People "Thank you for developing our inhabitant island and make farmland here and there, now bugger off"

British is not a caretaker for Argentina, if you want the Brits to bugger off and leave all the hard work they did in generations, you send them money and pay them, not sending tanks and warship.

I have read somewhere the Brits was actually willing to return the Las Malvinas to the Argentinian. But the moment you send tanks, APC and warship, you effectively lose the island forever. Now British blood have been shed, you cannot remove the British Settlement in Falklands anymore.

 

[upriver]

One writer quoted as saying it was like two bald men fighting over a comb. It was a distraction to keep British people distracted from Thatcher's personal scandals.

 

[El Gaucho]

Most of Argentina wasn't even populated, even today its still unhabited. Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, all used to have millions of natives in their lands. All of Argentina's natives were hardly 100.000, mostly living on the borderlands of present day Bolivia and Chile, due to better technollogy given by Inca influence. The Pampas were a massive dessert, a monstrously large ocean of land with hardly any animals or tres, and sat-water rivers. It could only become the farmland it is today thanks to modern technollogy. What is more important; Argentina did not expell its natives, they still live here, and some, like the Mapuche, who came to Argentina from Chile because of a better treatment, sometimes have more rights than the actual population, as the government protects "opressed" minorities. The Mapuche again claim an enormous amount of the Patagonia, and nearly non of it belongs to them historically, as they came here displacing the previous natives. Therefore, saying Argentina should give back its land to the natives is a very ignorant thing to do.

Argentina is not just a mix of Spanish and Italians, but a mix of all of Europe, parts of the Middle east (4 million arabic descendants) and Asian; as well as Latin American.

Indians is enough; saying indigenous Indians is redundant. As well as a British person pretending not to have one of the largest (and still operating today) past of colonialism.

 

[iajj]

this residents' plebiscitary **** is getting on my nerves: a bunch of burglars rob someone and then hold a democratic vote to divide the loot among themselves and that makes the crime legitimate? if UK lacks the legitimate original title, no amount of democracy can remedy the crime.

 

[El Gaucho]

From what I see, why the Falklands is full of British in the first place?

Regardless of who said who claim it first, you cannot come back and tell the British People "Thank you for developing our inhabitant island and make farmland here and there, now bugger off"

British is not a caretaker for Argentina, if you want the Brits to bugger off and leave all the hard work they did in generations, you send them money and pay them, not sending tanks and warship.

I have read somewhere the Brits was actually willing to return the Las Malvinas to the Argentinian. But the moment you send tanks, APC and warship, you effectively lose the island forever. Now British blood have been shed, you cannot remove the British Settlement in Falklands anymore.

It's full of British because the Argentine settlers were removed.

That would be factible, but the Falklands are unhabited by 3000 people of which 1000 are soldiers. The Infrastructure given by the British is laughable. What's more, there's no farmalnds in the Falklands, not even tres grow there. Its scenery is Mongolian.

All the hard work they did in generations was that of corrupting history.

Yes, they were willing, but after the war, when nationalists began to care about them, you just can't get rid of them and hand them back to the hated enemy, can you? It doesn't matter if it actually belongs to them. Doesnt sound very progressive.

 

[El Gaucho]

this residents' plebiscitary **** is getting on my nerves: a bunch of burglars rob someone and then hold a democratic vote to divide the loot among themselves and that makes the crime legitimate? if UK lacks the legitimate original title, no amount of democracy can remedy the crime.

They don't need justification when they have force. That's why today, in their decline, they wish to get a legitimate claim by whatever means posibble, as they can't resolve to force anymore.

 

[jhungary]

It's full of British because the Argentine settlers were removed.

That would be factible, but the Falklands are unhabited by 3000 people of which 1000 are soldiers. The Infrastructure given by the British is laughable. What's more, there's no farmalnds in the Falklands, not even tres grow there. Its scenery is Mongolian.

All the hard work they did in generations was that of corrupting history.

Yes, they were willing, but after the war, when nationalists began to care about them, you just can't get rid of them and hand them back to the hated enemy, can you? It doesn't matter if it actually belongs to them. Doesnt sound very progressive.

IN fact, if memories serve me right, Falklands is the number one cattle production to the UK in the last decade.......

 

[El Gaucho]

So cattle is farmed? I didnt know cows could be planted and harvested. And of course, with modern technollogy, even the saudí arabian desert can be farmed. The Falklands however, naturally did not have trees and were used as a shelter for fishermen, not as a primary goods producer.

Nonetheless, that is beside the point. The truth is that Argentina is not claiming the islands because we want to oportunisticly steal the British infrastructure, however minimal it is. Infact, we've been claiming them for almost 200 years, when they were nothing more than a bunch of sea rocks, not far from what they are today.

 

[El Gaucho]

Again, the issue is being absolutely distracting from the important. The Falklands have a minimal amount of food production, as, according to its own government, 4 farms equal 25% of the arable land. If you wish to say that is infrastructure,do so. But don't claim Argentina only wants the islands to steal THAT. Or oil. Not only is Argentina a major world producer of both but also most of our own potential is underdeveloped. And besides, the issue dates back to 1820, when the islands had absolutely nothing, and were owned by Spain. What are we stealing there exactly?

 

[Capt P.H Young]

That's not a good analogy. The population of the Falklands is not the indigenous population. The Argentinians who lived in the Falklands during the 1800's (after Argentina got independence from the Spanish) were forcibly removed and expelled to the mainland by the British navy, and English/Welsh settlers were brought in.

If you get rid of all the dissidents, and then ask for the opinion of those who remain, it's not a meaningful referendum.

RUBBISH!

Here is the absolute truth not the lies started by Peron when he thought we may lose against the Germans in the 1940's..
“ .. In 1832 an Argentine military garrison was sent to the Falkland Islands in an attempt to impose Argentine sovereignty over British sovereign territory. The United Kingdom immediately protested and later expelled the Argentine military garrison, on 3 January 1833. The civilian population, who had previously sought and received British permission to reside on the Islands, was encouraged to remain. The majority voluntarily chose to do so. The United Kingdom has never implanted any civilian population; all civilians have voluntarily migrated to, or been born in, the Falkland Islands. Civilian migrants voluntarily settled on the Islands from a large number of countries, as they did throughout the whole Americas region, including Argentina, during the nineteenth century. Many of today’s Islanders can trace their roots on the Falklands back eight or nine generations. The Republic of Argentina’s claim to the Islands, which it bases on the principle of disruption to its territorial integrity, is without foundation, as the Islands have never legitimately been administered by, or formed part of, the sovereign territory of the Republic of Argentina.”

 

[Capt P.H Young]

Argentine claims are justifiable more than england imo. Argentines own that island, but got removed by the british.

Falkland should be given back to argentina, but since the island is populated by the english for like more than 100 years, i dont think they should be removed from the island, as they have a sense of belonging there.

 

[bidonv]

By:www.express.co.uk
British Army poised to take on 'weak' Argentina 'within HOURS' of Falklands invasion

HUNDREDS of British troops could be deployed to the Falklands in a matter of "hours" if Argentina threatened to attack the islands, according to a former UK defence secretary.
Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who served as Defence Secretary and Foreign Secretary during the 1990s, gave an analysis of Argentina's pitiful military prowess as he said the Falklands were better defended now than at any point since the Falklands War, which ended more than three decades ago.

He insisted islanders had little to fear from a belligerent Buenos Aires administration because Argentina's military capability was now a "shadow of what it was in the 1980s".

He told Express.co.uk: "The Falklands today are hugely easier to protect. Argentina from a military point of view is far weaker and at any time of increased tensions the Falklands can be reinforced in hours not in weeks by air delivery of troops and equipment and anything else that might be required."
Analysts estimate up to 1,000 British troops could be sent to the remote South Atlantic islands within days using an "air-bridge" with Ascension Island, where the RAF has a base, which allows planes to refuel mid-way through the 20-hour flight.

Key to defending the Falklands is RAF Mount Pleasant, which was expanded during the 1980s following the conflict with Argentina.

The longer runway enabled larger jets to make the transatlantic journey, meaning more troops could be deployed at shorter notice.
The strenghened air deterrent on the islands also relieved pressure on rotating Royal Navy aircraft carriers stationed nearby in the aftermath of the 1982 conflict.

Last December's election of Mauricio Macri heralded a thaw in relations between the UK and Argentina after years of threats and aggressive rhetoric by Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.

But Buenos Aires has been celebrating a recent UN commission decision to expand Argentine maritime territory by a third, to include waters surrounding the Falkland Islands.

Experts believe the UK has little to fear from the current administration or Argetina's severely diminished armed forces.
Leading academics on Argentine affairs agree the country lacks the military muscle to pose a serious threat to the islands today.

One regional expert, speaking to Express.co.uk, dismissed Argentine claims of sovereignty over the South Atlantic islands as "bluster" that would "never be followed up by any military action".

Mark Jones, a political scientist at the US-based Baker Institute, said Argentina's navy consisted of between 10 and 15 seaworthy ships, which were often deployed on exercise for just two weeks a year.
He recalled instances where local fishing firms had donated money to the coastguard so that they could buy fuel to go out on patrol, while the air force's ageing fleet of Soviet-era Mirage jets were only able to fly during daylight hours and in good weather as their radar systems were now defunct.

And he said many of its land vehicles were so dilapidated that they had to be towed onto the battlefield during military drills.

Professor Klaus Dodds, a geopolitical security expert on the South Atlantic, agreed that Argentina currently posed no military threat.

But the Royal Holloway academic added there were signs that Buenos Aires planned to modernise Argentine forces.
He told Express.co.uk: "They are trying to chip away at the Falklands.

"They know the military route is out of the question, but they hope there will come a time when the British government and British public support turns and says we no longer want to spend millions of pounds keeping up our military air base.

"They are in it for the long game."

Instead, Argentine authorities were attempting to harm trade on the islands by making "deliberate attempts to make life difficult for the Falklands in commercial terms", threatening legal action against firms that do business with the islands.
Related articles

Tourist vessels have also been harassed and attempts at developing the island's vital fishing industry, which is largely dependant on the migratory patterns of squid and contributes as much as 60 per cent of GDP, were being hampered.

Despite instability in the Middle East, defence of the Falklands remained priority number "two or three" for the MoD, Prof Dodds added.

He said: "There are around 1,000 British personnel on the airbase at any one time and usually four Typhoon jets.

"If the men were ready to go, within a couple of days you could boost that presence with a thousand troops down there."

Tory MP Andrew Rosindell, who has long campaigned on the importance of protecting the remote British overseas territory, told Express.co.uk: "Given recent rhetoric from Argentina, it is vital that we maintain a round-the-clock defence to ensure the protection of the Falkland Islanders."..........................See more

http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/78/590x/secondary/rifkind-514115.jpg