Falkland Islands

[1duck]

Christ mate you talk some shit, Argentina has never had a valid claim, They invaded last time and lost, maybe you and few of your 5th column buddies can go and help out with the next "democratic" election they have in Argentina.

Which bit of argentina being closer to the falklands is shit exactly?

Irrelevant twaddle.

Argentina itself does not make a claim on this basis.

And if it were international law and taken to it's only logical conclusion, that would mean every nation has to transfer sovereignty to its bigger neighbour. That would make the whole world Russian.

No infact it makes the claim on the fact that britain STOLE the islands in 1833

So why bring up the proximity argument?

Tomorrow if the chinese stick a flag in some outlying uninhabited islands and populate them, will you be claiming those islands are british?

I really don't understand your point here. Please explain, because it reads like irrelevant gibberish.

The British were the first to claim the uninhabited islands in 1690 and have never renounced that claim. That was over 100 years before Argentina was formed.

WE and international lawyers can talk it round all we like, but like anything, possession is 9/10ths of the law. The Falklands have been settled almost as long as Argentina has been in existence and they are not going anywhere. I've spent a year in the Falklands, never met one who wanted be Argentinian.

And frankly it's nothing to do with you, me, Britain, or Argentina. Let's see how their self-determination vote goes, maybe you will respect their democratic decision.

And for those people criticising former and current governments for doing something 'popular'... sorry to burst your bubbles, but the reason it is popular was that most people know it is RIGHT and JUST. To do otherwise would be weakness and people do not tolerate that in their leaders.

^ not even going to bother responding to that, I can't honestly tell if you are joking or not.

 

[red_riviera]

Not joking

Your arguments are weak

 

[1duck]

Not joking

Your arguments are weak

^ keep it up, you're cracking me up.

 

[red_riviera]

Not joking

Your arguments are weak

^ keep it up, you're cracking me up.

No, there's no fun having a battle of wits with an unarmed man

 

[highlandsflyer]

And frankly it's nothing to do with you, me, Britain, or Argentina. Let's see how their self-determination vote goes, maybe you will respect their democratic decision.

It has plenty to do with those who are expected to give up their lives to go and defend their 'right' to self determination, as well as their families, friends and nation.

 

[t-stoff]

I think you all should read what "self-determination" really means

Resolution 1514 :

http://wpik.org/Src/unga1514.html

additional reading

http://www.guidetoaction.org/parker/selfdet.html

http://www.c100tibet.org/Self-Determination_UN.html

 

[highlandsflyer]

Why don't you read about it and summarise it for us?

 

[t-stoff]

LOL, it can be done, but Portugal won and beer is now flowing in a way that is not compatible with posting ;x

 

[highlandsflyer]

LOL, it can be done, but Portugal won and beer is now flowing in a way that is not compatible with posting ;x

That was a tidy game. Glad to see them through.

The self determination thing is a double edged sword, and the concept can be applied in several ways.

I don't think it is an automatic human right to belong to a greater whole. Definitely not to choose one greater whole over another.

If we were to enshrine that as a human right, any group in any country could opt to belong to any other rather than their historical.

Gets very complex.

 

[dyna-ti]

And frankly it's nothing to do with you, me, Britain, or Argentina. Let's see how their self-determination vote goes, maybe you will respect their democratic decision.

It has plenty to do with those who are expected to give up their lives to go and defend their 'right' to self determination, as well as their families, friends and nation.

Or expect their country to keep them safe