UN court ruled falkland islands belong to the Argies Watch

KimKallstrom
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#61
Report 2 years ago
#61
I love how some of you lot pretend to be all about what the people want, with your transparent and sanctimonious BS, but you never fail to betray your true feelings. There is pretty much nobody who proposes giving back the Falklands to Argentina - even though everyone on the island would hate that and it's never been Argentinian - who isn't actually motivated by hatred towards Britain. Obviously I include people like Corbyn in that. On this basis, you can all go suck it and cry more when the will of the people is fulfilled and the island continue to have nothing to do with Argentina
2
quote
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#62
Report 2 years ago
#62
(Original post by The_Opinion)
You are forgetting how much of a traitor Corbyn is, he has no loyalty to this country.
I wouldn't necessarily put it past the Falklands, whether it be as violently, as in likely through more diplomatic means, do want Anguilla did

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
quote
reply
41b
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#63
Report 2 years ago
#63
It's always funny hearing leftists, feminists and other supposed egalitarians defend the UK's possession of the Falklands. The only reason the UK cares is because massive oil reserves lie nearby, and considering the UK already had the North Sea oil windfall, leftists should, for equality's sake, be happy to see the Falklands given to Argentina?

More seriously, finder's keepers. And if not, winners keepers. So unless Argentina wants to start another war... stfu
0
quote
reply
999tigger
  • Very Important Poster
Badges: 19
#64
Report 2 years ago
#64
(Original post by 41b)
It's always funny hearing leftists, feminists and other supposed egalitarians defend the UK's possession of the Falklands. The only reason the UK cares is because massive oil reserves lie nearby, and considering the UK already had the North Sea oil windfall, leftists should, for equality's sake, be happy to see the Falklands given to Argentina?

More seriously, finder's keepers. And if not, winners keepers. So unless Argentina wants to start another war... stfu
Disagree. i think we'd defend them without the oil. Its not what motivated them to go and reclaim them.
quote
reply
41b
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#65
Report 2 years ago
#65
(Original post by Farm_Ecology)
The proposed expansion includes the islands, it doesnt come up in the picture though.
Countries have the right to exploit economically areas that are within 200 miles of their coast or the continental shelf, whichever is closer (iirc, correct me if I'm wrong).

The dispute is not over the islands but the huge oil reserves that lie in Falkandic/British waters.
0
quote
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#66
Report 2 years ago
#66
(Original post by The_Opinion)
You are forgetting how much of a traitor Corbyn is, he has no loyalty to this country.
Can someone explain to me why Corbyn is aupposed to be a traitor, as far as I can see it's because he prefers to negotiate with people we disagree with rather than blow them up. Why does this make him a traitor?
0
quote
reply
Farm_Ecology
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#67
Report 2 years ago
#67
(Original post by Drewski)
It doesn't. The ruling clearly states the territorial waters of the Falklands are outside the parameters of their decision.
(Original post by 41b)
Countries have the right to exploit economically areas that are within 200 miles of their coast or the continental shelf, whichever is closer (iirc, correct me if I'm wrong).The dispute is not over the islands but the huge oil reserves that lie in Falkandic/British waters.
You're right, I think I misunderstood the article.

(Original post by scrotgrot)
Can someone explain to me why Corbyn is aupposed to be a traitor, as far as I can see it's because he prefers to negotiate with people we disagree with rather than blow them up. Why does this make him a traitor?
It's an attempt to silence opposition by using insane slurs on a persons character. Like when people call Farage a racist.
0
quote
reply
41b
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#68
Report 2 years ago
#68
(Original post by scrotgrot)
Can someone explain to me why Corbyn is aupposed to be a traitor, as far as I can see it's because he prefers to negotiate with people we disagree with rather than blow them up. Why does this make him a traitor?
Britain is the Royal state. There are subjects of the Queen, not citizens of the state. Corbyn refused to sing the national anthem.

IMO if one doesn't and one is also a leftist, one should be stripped of British citizenship (or rather, subjecthood).
0
quote
reply
41b
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#69
Report 2 years ago
#69
(Original post by 999tigger)
Disagree. i think we'd defend them without the oil. Its not what motivated them to go and reclaim them.
Britain in 1982 was a much more proud, nationalist and strong country. Perhaps in 1982 they cared about territorial integrity, their People etc but today if Argentina successfully attacked and was in the same relative position compared to Britain as it was in 1982, do you think a wimp like Cameron would defend it, if there was no oil?
0
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#70
Report 2 years ago
#70
(Original post by scrotgrot)
Can someone explain to me why Corbyn is aupposed to be a traitor, as far as I can see it's because he prefers to negotiate with people we disagree with rather than blow them up. Why does this make him a traitor?
In this particular situation its because he plans to negotiate a power sharing agreement that is not wanted by the residents - he'll actively work against their self determined wish to remain independent.

Completely aside from any other political view he may hold, he's essentially saying the views of the British people he could represent don't matter to him. It's pretty hard to spin that as a positive.
0
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#71
Report 2 years ago
#71
(Original post by 41b)
Britain in 1982 was a much more proud, nationalist and strong country. Perhaps in 1982 they cared about territorial integrity, their People etc but today if Argentina successfully attacked and was in the same relative position compared to Britain as it was in 1982, do you think a wimp like Cameron would defend it, if there was no oil?
Yes. That's why they maintain - at great cost - a defensive garrison that could repel anything that Argentina was capable of throwing at it.

Arguably, Britain in '82 was much weaker. Our forces were poor, we'd just retired our last proper aircraft carriers, we'd started looking (under the table and very unofficially) at how to get rid of them.
0
quote
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#72
Report 2 years ago
#72
(Original post by Drewski)
In this particular situation its because he plans to negotiate a power sharing agreement that is not wanted by the residents - he'll actively work against their self determined wish to remain independent.

Completely aside from any other political view he may hold, he's essentially saying the views of the British people he could represent don't matter to him. It's pretty hard to spin that as a positive.
Yeah but it isn't traitorous. Cameron doesn't represent me that well. Off with his head!

Also states ignore self detemination all the time. I doubt if I held a vote of the citizens of bollington and we voted for independence, to secede from the UK and we made our own commune, erected barricades...."The Poeple's Republic of Bollington" I don't think that would go down well with the British state.

Falklanders wanting to remain as part of the UK is good enough reason for it to remain as far as I'm concerned but I doubt we would just give them away if it was the other way round.
0
quote
reply
Pupillageman20
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#73
Report 2 years ago
#73
To be fair, the Falkland Islands are a lot closer to Argentina than the UK... In fact, the Falkland Islands are across an entire ocean from us, whereas mere miles from the Argentines. Any objective geographical reading would put the FI with Argentina, not the UK.

I am happy to see the arguments on the other side, though.
0
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#74
Report 2 years ago
#74
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Yeah but it isn't traitorous.
It could be argued it is.
"traitor - a person who betrays someone or something"

If Corbyn was to have his way could it be argued he was betraying the islanders? Very possibly.
0
quote
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#75
Report 2 years ago
#75
(Original post by Pupillageman20)
To be fair, the Falkland Islands are a lot closer to Argentina than the UK... In fact, the Falkland Islands are across an entire ocean from us, whereas in view from the coast for the Argentines.

These are the last vestiges of colonialism, we have no reason to feel such an immense amount of attachment. The Latin Americans have been through enough (They are human beings too).
Try telling that to the Islanders

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
quote
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#76
Report 2 years ago
#76
(Original post by Drewski)
It could be argued it is.
"traitor - a person who betrays someone or something"

If Corbyn was to have his way could it be argued he was betraying the islanders? Very possibly.
"No top down reorganisation of the NHS" :eek:

Also you ignored the rest of my post. You can argue states fundamentally are hostile to the idea of self determination. I can't just claim and make my plot fo land my own intendant country without running into the force of the state I live under. The state has bigger sticks and more people to wield them than I do.

Again. I doubt the British state would respect the Falklanders if they said they wanted to be apart of Argentina and let them brake away. It;s more the current set up is a happy coincidence.
0
quote
reply
Pupillageman20
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#77
Report 2 years ago
#77
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Try telling that to the Islanders

Posted from TSR Mobile
I do not feel strongly about this. I am happy to hear reasons for both sides. I just think some objectivity is required in this debate. A lot of the rhetoric is based on nationalism.
0
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#78
Report 2 years ago
#78
(Original post by Pupillageman20)
To be fair, the Falkland Islands are a lot closer to Argentina than the UK... In fact, the Falkland Islands are across an entire ocean from us, whereas in view from the coast for the Argentines.
No they're not. They're over 200 miles from the Argentine coast.

And proximity means nothing at all, it's entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

(Original post by Pupillageman20)
These are the last vestiges of colonialism, we have no reason to feel such an immense amount of attachment. The Latin Americans have been through enough (They are human beings too).
Yes, like a failed invasion...

If anything it's the Argentineans who have no right to any attachment seeing as their country only came into existence after the claiming of the Falklands.
0
quote
reply
Pupillageman20
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#79
Report 2 years ago
#79
(Original post by Drewski)
No they're not. They're over 200 miles from the Argentine coast.

And proximity means nothing at all, it's entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
My comment was figurative. And proximity is entirely relevant to territoriality.

I see your point, though.
0
quote
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#80
Report 2 years ago
#80
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
"No top down reorganisation of the NHS" :eek:

Also you ignored the rest of my post. You can argue states fundamentally are hostile to the idea of self determination. I can't just claim and make my plot fo land my own intendant country without running into the force of the state I live under.

Again. I doubt the British state would respect the Falklanders if they said they wanted to be apart of Argentina and let them brake away. It;s more the current set up is a happy coincidence.
The rest wasn't relevant to the point. You said it's not traitorous, I gave a definition under which it could be described as exactly that.

But the notion of going against the state is irrelevant in this case as the state against whom we're arguing didn't exist when the islands were claimed and inhabited.

If the islanders ever decided that the only thing I could envisage changing is that we'd withdraw defence and leave them to their own devices; there would be no arrangement to hand them over to someone else.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (282)
27.35%
No (749)
72.65%

Watched Threads

View All