Falklands -Your views?

Question

Just write what you think (no threats please!)

Answer 1

Nice Penguins.

Answer 2

There are far too many things to consider to give a full answer on this forum...I think Margaret Thatcher did the right thing in sending the task force to regain the islands, which after all were British sovereign territory...however before the invasion Britain gave out many signals indicating that they were not interested in maintaining the Falklands...HMS Endurance was due to be scrapped as were a number of other Naval vessels which were eventually used by the task force...so in some respects we got our just desserts.
If the Argentinians had not invaded but had used some other Diplomatic measures, there is a chance that they could have gained ultimate control of the Islands over a long period of time. However the Junta in Argentina were unpopular and they found the Invasion would be a way to increase their popularity....It is ironic that their failure resulted in the collapse of the Junta, whereas Mrs. Thatcher won the next election on the back of the success. We were very fortunate to win that conflict....and came awfully close to losing. Had it not been for the training and toughness of our armed forces, we may well have done.
Like all conflicts it makes you wonder if it was all worthwhile looking back on it, and the sad loss of young lives.

Edit.
I have to take issue with Callum A when he says 'we stole it off them in the first place' I'm afraid he needs to read some History....and to call it a useless piece of rock is not only geographically inaccurate, but offensive to the brave soldiers and seamen who died there. It is not a useless piece of rock, it is and was the home of British subjects...the same could be said of the Isle of Wight...We waste far more money on other things...

Further edit..
Here Here Catherine...

Answer 3

My brother emigrated there a couple of years ago to marry a local woman, and they have just left us after a two week visit to the UK.

My sisiter-in-law worked for the Falklands radio station during the conflict and was thrown off the islands by the militia for refusing to broadcast Argentinian propoganda. She now works in the government there so I think I can answer this one.

The islanders consider them to be 'more british than the british', most still take afternnon tea and are fiercly royalist and thatcherist. They spend many hours each month looking after both the British and Argentinian war memorials on the island and are welcoming to veterans of both nationalities. The islanders are still very grateful for the efforts of the forces and saddened by the loss of life suffered during the conflict on their behalf.

Since the war, the economy has blossomed and the falklanders are self-sufficient finantially as a result of the sale of fishing licences in their waters. So those people on here who claim our involvement in the islands is a waste of money need to do some research. The econony there is so good, that their equivalent of our Community Charge is only £24 per year! They are British citizens and deserve our continued protection.

Answer 4

It should be up to the people who live on the Falklands and as far as I know they wish to remain British.

Although Argentena may claim it as theirs the original Argentine colony was only established in 1828 following the abandonment of the previous Spanish and British colonies in the Falklands in 1811 and 1776 respectively [ref #1].
The British have controlled the Falklands since 1833 [ref #2]

I personally believe that you cannot just go and try and reverse history and say that because a territory was invaded and captured it should not revert to the people who held it previously. If you followed that logic Argentina itself should be given back to the Inca's (actually they invaded Argentina so the people before the Inca's).

So let the people of the Falkland's decide.

In term's of the value of the land - it permits the UK to claim large tracts of Antartica - that's the economic reason. However since 1959, claims on Antarctica have been suspended and the continent is considered politically neutral. Its status is regulated by the 1959 Antarctic Treaty and other related agreements, collectively called the Antarctic Treaty System. For the purposes of the Treaty System, Antarctica is defined as all land and ice shelves south of 60°S. The treaty was signed by twelve countries, including the Soviet Union (and later Russia), the United Kingdom, Argentina and the United States. It set aside Antarctica as a scientific preserve, established freedom of scientific investigation, environmental protection, and banned military activity on that continent. [ref#4]

Answer 5

This war was fought for several reasons:

a. The UK government were embarassed that they had not heeded the warning signs from Argentina.

b. Conservatives way down in opinion polls.

c. Easy to send someone else to die.

d. Tub-thumping.

I would be curious to know if this war which was claimed to be standing on the principle of sovereignty would have been considered if the opponent had been well-armed, well-trained and well-lead. Would we have gone toe to toe with the US for this principle?

Notwithstanding the above the expedition was a monumental feat of arms and showed that the UK military are (or rather were) not to be trifled with. Couldn't do it now of course; no Navy, pitiably poorly equipped RAF and everyone leavingthe Army as fast as possible. Aren't governments sh!te when it comes to the military? Take the glory and give back nothing.

Incidentally I was in the FI for 4 months back then. Civvy now.
It wasn't worth it.

Answer 6

Cold, wet, a bit like the peak district only with penguins.

Moreover, there are BRITISH SUBJECTS over there who deserve our protection.

Nobody complained back in '82 when we had a "bit of a tiff" with the neighbours, so why now? If we argue as to the worth of the islands then what was the point of it all then? Were my comrades who are buried there killed for no reason?

As a Falklands veteran I have to say that They are British and should remain so.

Answer 7

ITS BRITISH, not argy, the people are British,(end off) thatcher only did one good thing ,when she was at no 10,the boys she sent did the job,the best solders in the world, (the red and green kill in machine) the rest of her time at no 10 was shame full to the country ,just ask eney of the boys that came back requiring medical treatment ,one year on,thanks for the job well done boys (now go away )and gives the same look,as she wood scraping dog crap off shoe

Answer 8

Falklands, oooh. it does ring a bell. it reminds me of a great leader, MARGARETT THATCHER, who fought for the sovereignty of our nation. We strongly need someone of that like today as our prime minister, cause i got a feeling that we are not as strong as we were. Britain has always been a LEADER and must stay a leader, the # 1 option in the world. I love our country.

Answer 9

A tortured landscape created by magma displacement, a harsh wind blown environment only a Scott or Irishman could find comfort in mingled with some ale and plenty of fine women. Me thinks.

Answer 10

Is a false argument to say Argentina belong to Incas because sovernight problems are betwen estates . And as you know they appear in history so much late .
Moreover , accord my knowledge , Incas was in Peru and not in Argentina.
Whit respect to treaty England may be signed the Antarctic treaty but doesn't signet the international treaty about borders sea convention and in the present you have break a very important treaty invading Irak.
Whith respect to the war i think you should read the following book : `` From the front line ¨ by Robacio . A Malvinas hero.
United Nations was done or create for England and winners of the world war II to maintenace of the peace around the world .
England never wanted to talk with Argentinians about soberanight as resolution 2065 order to them and England doesnt vote against these resolution .
Resolution 502 was a bluf because England voted to go Malvinas and is a justice principe in all world you cannot be judge and part in a question where your interest involving.
However resolution dont authorized use of the force without force to Argentinians to leave the Islands.
In 1975 Brithis were alerted about a posible attack by Military Junta and sended 5 ships there .
War in 1982 dont start in Malvinas without in Georgias Islands with Davidoff expeditons to whale factorys .
There was a confused chapter with a flag in the middle.
So much fast a new with a flag suppose planted with argentinans was known in England. There is a doubt accord Argentinian sources because Davidoff said the flag was there when he arrive there.
Septhember 11 :
Well , i think we have not equal brainer to animal reign . We have done rules . The maens need rules to order maintenace .
I am sure you dont up to a thank to go at your job.
Why do you use yours thanks acroos iraqui street to go to your military job?
United estates want to force and pursue to latin americans countrys to use his army to fight against drugs.
do you use your army to fight or combat drugs?
Why have we do it?
Equalitaian principles are factor to international laws and international laws are rules to live in peace .
You are not right and etic criticism to argentina a cause international debits. Do you remeber your debit after world war II? Why do you can dont pay?
Why do you send and pay prees to do a comercial break over yours financial interest as radio 10 , joaquin morales sola, bernardo neustadt, etc?
If you reason dont say to you about respect the rulen not only inside your country without out your country then you and your science is very near to delinquency.
I think you should say you want not return malvinas , but to say lies with your press and winikepedia and put estupids arguments is a maner of to say it.

Answer 11

Islands - Off Argentina coastline approx 800 miles - OURS not theirs - other than that - a load of rocks in the sea to be honest from what I can tell -