Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why was it important to keep the Falklands? Watch

    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Demonstrably wrong. From a Chinese statement to the UN in 1972.
    "The questions of Hong Kong and Macau belong to the category of questions resulting from the series of unequal treaties which the imperialists imposed on China. Hong Kong and Macau are part of Chinese territory occupied by the British and Portuguese authorities. The settlement of the questions of Hong Kong and Macau is entirely within China's sovereign right and do not at all fall under the ordinary category of colonial territories. Consequently they should not be included in the list of colonial territories covered by the declaration on the granting of independence to colonial territories and people. With regard to the questions of Hong Kong and Macau, the Chinese government has consistently held that they should be settled in an appropriate way when conditions are ripe."
    In other words, "well take them back how and when we want to".

    Hardly the position of a government not interested in regaining control without the UK's permission.
    I am not sure it is as hostile as that given the PRC had only just gained China's UN seat. I think it means, we will talk bilaterally (USA butt out) at a time of our choosing and from a position of strength.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am not sure it is as hostile as that given the PRC had only just gained China's UN seat. I think it means, we will talk bilaterally (USA butt out) at a time of our choosing and from a position of strength.
    Same thing.
    China never intended going to war because they knew that the UK would concede to pretty much any terms. What alternative did they have?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Irrelevant, as China had HK removed from the UN list of colonies eligible for self-determination. From the early 1970s, HK was always going to go back to China. The only questions were when and how.
    How does that contradict anything I said? I even said even with a referendum it would've gone to China.

    There was no referendum because there was no point confirming the negotiation and because the UK didn't have democracy in Hong Kong (and the people didn't ask for it).

    You can list a million reasons why it went the way it went but the fact remains that it's a British territory that was given away without a referendum.

    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am not sure it is as hostile as that given the PRC had only just gained China's UN seat. I think it means, we will talk bilaterally (USA butt out) at a time of our choosing and from a position of strength.
    And the claim was that it was stolen from China, not that it was on lease.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    How does that contradict anything I said? I even said even with a referendum it would've gone to China.

    There was no referendum because there was no point confirming the negotiation and because the UK didn't have democracy in Hong Kong (and the people didn't ask for it).

    You can list a million reasons why it went the way it went but the fact remains that it's a British territory that was given away without a referendum.
    I can also list a million reasons why I am the same as Usain Bolt, but I don't think anyone is going to back me in a race.

    The Falklands and HK are, despite some similarlities, two completely different cases, so why you are making such a big issue about HK in a discussion about the Falklands escapes me.:dontknow:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    I can also list a million reasons why I am the same as Usain Bolt, but I don't think anyone is going to back me in a race.

    The Falklands and HK are, despite some similarlities, two completely different cases, so why you are making such a big issue about HK in a discussion about the Falklands escapes me.:dontknow:
    Someone asked for an example of a British territory that was given away without a referendum. The million reasons comment was about how irrelevant and off-topic you have been - I didn't want to list those million reasons, but you tried.

    I gave them one.

    Why you are making such a big issue about an example that was entirely accurate and keep going on about irrelevant arguments that I didn't make escapes me. :dontknow:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Thatcher's unpopularity ratings were through the roof.

    Argentina sent its military into the Falklands.

    Thatcher knew it was an easy war for the UK military to win - she also knew that a successful war would boost general good feeling and her popularity, and would unite much of the British people behind her.

    So she sent the British army to defend the Falklands.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeapingLucy)
    Thatcher's unpopularity ratings were through the roof.

    Argentina sent its military into the Falklands.

    Thatcher knew it was an easy war for the UK military to win - she also knew that a successful war would boost general good feeling and her popularity, and would unite much of the British people behind her.

    So she sent the British army to defend the Falklands.
    It certainly was not an easy war to win. Nothing like it had ever been attempted before. The war was fought 4,000 miles from the nearest British base. Although raids had been mounted at a similar distance from friendly bases (e.g. Pearl Harbor) no fleet had been maintained at sea in hostile waters at that distance from support in order to mount an invasion.

    But I am afraid you do not seem to know a lot about this as you think the Falklands were defended. The Falklands were lost and recaptured.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Someone asked for an example of a British territory that was given away without a referendum. The million reasons comment was about how irrelevant and off-topic you have been - I didn't want to list those million reasons, but you tried.

    I gave them one.

    Why you are making such a big issue about an example that was entirely accurate and keep going on about irrelevant arguments that I didn't make escapes me. :dontknow:
    If you think that the Falklands and Hong Kong are comparable examples of British colonies/territories, then that is entirely up to you.
    However, the facts suggest otherwise.

    As JP Moynahan said - "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts".
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    If you think that the Falklands and Hong Kong are comparable examples of British colonies/territories, then that is entirely up to you.
    However, the facts suggest otherwise.

    As JP Moynahan said - "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts".
    Did someone ask for an example of a British territory that was given away? Yes.

    Was Hong Kong a British that was given away? Yes.

    Who's the one who's keeping going on about this? You.

    You just keep putting words in my mouth because you have no arguments against me. Someone asked for an example, I gave them one. Then people started arguing over technicalities, I went technical and pointed out how they were wrong, then I was accused of being hung up on the technicalities.

    If you want to point out the differences, that's fine. But not only does it not mean I was wrong (I didn't say the situations were the same or different, or do you disagree with the fact that Hong Kong was a British territory that was given away?), the way it's been presented also suggested a misunderstanding of the situation.

    If you really want to talk about the different circunstances, fine. HongKong was given at not because of the treaty, that's just an excuse. It's because Argentina is not China, militarily and economically speaking.

    This is not even about opinions - your perception of what's happening is incredibly twisted. You assumed what my opinions are, what my intentions were, and you kept going on about it even though I abandoned the thread before you even came in.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.