Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Do You Think The UK Will Ever Return The Malvinas  
User currently offlineLuisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3557 times:

I was reading the history of the Malvinas (Falklands) war. From what I read in the book the UK stoled this land back in the 18something's. This land had always belonged to Spain and later to Argentina but was Stolen one day. Argentina Is the one that has developed infrastructure and trade in the Islands and the one that is the rightfull owner in my point of view. Why does the UK still cling to a land with no strategic or commercial value, instead of returning it to the rightfull owners. Even the Pope supported Argentina in the war, visiting Buenos Aires in what was probably one of the hardest moments in Argentine history.

The same is true with the UK's occupation of Gibraltar, it is a worthless rock supported entirely by economic trade with Spain.

I think it is sick that the UK is still clinging to some outdated "British Empire" nonsense and in a time where the UK is a more "Socially Aware" society it could look above natinalistic pride and see the truth on these issues.

77 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5426 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3547 times:

The same is true with the UK's occupation of Gibraltar, it is a worthless rock supported entirely by economic trade with Spain.

If you think Gibraltar is just a "worthless rock" you know less about military strategy and geopolitics than you pretend to. Gibraltar represents a critical choke point. He who controls Gibraltar controls who gets into and out of the Mediterranean via the Atlantic. To address your asinine question, the Argentina's "infrastructure" and "trade" was for one purpose - to make the islands a penal colony. Besides, why should land be turned over to the Argentines when the residents of the Falklands wish to maintain their British citizenship? I could understand it if the residents of the Falklands were launching some insurgency to try to join Argentina, but they overwhelmingly have stated their desire to remain part of Britain and, according to Article 73 of the UN Charter, that desire must be respected.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1370 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3543 times:

The history of the Falklands isn't that clear-cut, and like many territories of European powers, the islands were handed back and forth many times. The Wikipedia has a handy open-source and relatively unbiased history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War

The Falklands are two main and many smaller islands in the South Atlantic Ocean east of Argentina. Ownership of the group had long been disputed. The Falklands were first discovered probably in the 1520s by the Spanish. The first British claim dates from 1592. In 1690 they were finally named after the Treasurer of the Navy, Viscount Falkland. France established a settlement on East Falkland and claimed the islands 5 April 1764, which the Spanish offered to buy, as they were concerned about disrupting the balance of power in the region. In 1765 the British established a settlement on Saunders Island, and in 1767 France transferred its settlement to Spain. In 1770 the Spanish capture the British settlement, but in 1771 it is handed back. In 1774 and 1806-11 respectively, the British and Spanish leave the islands, each maintaining a claim over them. It is in this general period that the confusion lies.

Argentina gained independence from Spain in 1816 and moved to occupy the Falklands (Islas Malvinas) in 1820, but that settlement did not endure and the Argentinian claim similarly fell into abeyance. Finally, in 1833 the islands were settled by the British. Argentina nevertheless continued to argue that the 'Malvinas' were Argentine territory.


More important than their history is the fact that the islands' inhabitants consider themselves British citizens and have no desire to be annexed by Argentina. Disputed territories like the Falklands, Kashmir, Northern Ireland, Gibraltar, even Taiwan, should (and in theory, under the UN charter, do) have the right of self-determination. It would save the world a lot of trouble and suffering if regional powers would let the people be heard and then respect their decision.

--B2707SST



Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16367 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3542 times:

The bottom line is that the Falklands are British Isles. The only people who have ever lived there for any period of time are British. There has never been a native population.

Perhaps Argentina should focus on improving its own moribund economy before it looks longingly at the Falklands.

Why does the UK still cling to a land with no strategic or commercial value,

By the same argument, why does Argentina want to gain a " land with no strategic or commercial value"?

More important than their history is the fact that the islands' inhabitants consider themselves British citizens and have no desire to be annexed by Argentina.

Exactly. This is the key point. Although Argentina's shameful recent history of dictatorship would perhaps suggest that Argentines are not great respectors of democratic will.





Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineArcano From Chile, joined Mar 2004, 2411 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

The argument that Malvinas people want to remain British is biased: of course they do! they are Brisith people! But this is only because UK has setted its population there.

I give you an example. At the end of the Pacific War (Chile against Peru-Bolivia, 1879), the former Peruvian cities of Arica and Tacna were controlled by Chile. There was an agreement with Peru that stated the following: Chile would manage both cities for 10 years. After that, there would be a poll in both cities and the habitants will decide if they wanted to be Chilean or Peruvian.
What happened? a few years before the poll, Chile moved Chilean citizens to both cities to gain more votes. Peru did the same... then, Peru and Chile realized that poll was biased, since the result would be linked to the capacity of each government to carry more people there. So? a new agreement: the border will pass between Tacna and Arica. This is how Tacna is Peruvian and Arica is Chilean now.

So, to stay that Malvinas should remain Brisith because the habitants want to is biased, since Argentina has no chance to put Argentine people there and let them decide, and UK moved it's people to the south Atlantic for answering that question: we want to remain British.

Argentina has been banned to many things related to the Falklands, actually, Chile has more trade and links with the island than Argentina. Remember LAN is allowed to land there on a weekly base.

Anyway, Luisca, I think your opinion is biased. All stories have 2 versions. "Stolen" is a harsh word and we don't know exactly what happened. Many territiories at the times were abandoned and many borders were moved. It would be like Chile claiming that Argentina stole the Patagonia: it's FALSE, because we abandoned Patagonia and Argentina wisely took advantage of that. It was our fault, if "fault" was the right term for that. Argentina stole nothing. So, wait to hear the other version before state things.

Regards,

Arcano


in order: 721,146,732,763,722,343,733,320,772,319,752,321,88,83,744,332,100,738, 333, 318, 77W, 78, 773 and 380
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

So, to stay that Malvinas should remain Brisith because the habitants want to is biased, since Argentina has no chance to put Argentine people there and let them decide,

Argentina did have a chance. They settled, looked around, saw diddly/squat, and quickly abandoned the Falklands. The English settled on islands already abandoned by Argentina. Several nations made claims on the islands, but ONLY the English are bullheaded enough to stay in such a God-forsaken place, and only the English have actually done something with their claim other than simply planting a flag and leaving.

Charles


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3510 times:

The only wishes that should be considered in a cases such as the Falklands and Gibraltar are the wishes of the inhabitants. These are cases where no indigenous population was displaced, and so the self-determination of the citizens is paramount.

Gibraltar was handed over to Britain by Spain in 1704, by Treaty agreement. End of story. The treaty still stands, Spain doesn't have a legal leg to stand on. Other territories ceded by Spain to Britain in the same treaty (eg. Menorca) have been returned as a result of subsequent treaties, but Gibralter has not. Spain can call it a military occupation if they like, but Gibraltar is a representative democracy, and the recent referendum endorsed the residents' overwhelming wish to remain British. Besides, Spain still holds territory taken from Morocco (Ceuta and Melilla) so are hardly in a position to point fingers.

The Falkland Islanders have also indicated their wish to remain British - there are no Argentines living in the islands, because the original Argentine settlement, and before that the French settlement (for whom incidentally the islands are named in Spanish - the original French settlers came from St Malo, the islands were named after them Les Malouines, which became Las Malvinas in Spanish), were abandoned.


User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24964 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3504 times:

Hey, Cfalk, British not English, British  Big grin


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineVirgin744 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 919 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3493 times:

don't you mean Falkland's Islands?

User currently offlineZak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3487 times:

i have also wondered when the u.s.a will return panama the territory it keeps occupied to this day


10=2
User currently offlineBanco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3485 times:

There's one fundamental difference between Gibraltar and the Falklands. The Gibraltarians are not ethnic British people, they are Spanish. However, they have overwhelmingly expressed their desire to remain part of the UK. Perhaps the question should be why it is that these people don't want to be part of Spain? Oh, yes and the Spanish are horribly hypocritical on this question with their North African enclaves in Ceuta and Melilla. At least the British respect the will of the people.

In the case of the Falkland Islands, the ONLY reason they are still British is because the population there wish it to be. Think about it, the islands are 8,000 miles away, require a military garrison to defend them, and don't actually contribute much to the British economy. Do you really think the UK is hanging on to them for the sake of empire?

The UK government was exploring the idea of sovereignty transfer throughout the 1970's. There was hesitancy because of Argentina's lack of democracy at the time, and the concept of a leaseback was mooted. It was Argentina who comprehensively destroyed the idea of any sovereignty transfer through the idiotic invasion in 1982. Naturally, the islanders are now implacably hostile to the idea of Argentine government.

If Argentina really wants the islands back, then they have to demonstrate to the islanders that it is in their interests. Argentina is now a democracy (thanks to the British victory in 1982 ironically), and they need to win hearts and minds. It can be done, but it'll take time. The morning after the Falkland Islanders decide it's in their interests to be part of Argentina, you can rest assured that Britain will be gone.

Pretty simple really.



She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3460 times:

Zak - the Panama Canal zone has already been returned to Panama, I believe. The lease ran out.

User currently offlineRyanb741 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 3221 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3459 times:

The UK will never return the Malvinas because there is no such place as the Malvinas. As for the Falkland islands, forget it. It's as British as roast beef and yorkshire pudding.


I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24964 posts, RR: 56
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3451 times:

"It's as British as roast beef and yorkshire pudding."
Nice statement there  Big grin Of course you need gravy on your Yorkshire puddings  Wink/being sarcastic



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3449 times:

Re: "It's as British as roast beef and yorkshire pudding."

Shouldn't that read "It's as British as Chicken Tikka Marsala" ?


User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3433 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Finders keepers.

The debate over the Falklands islands is a non-issue, no Argentines have ever
inhabited the island so the Argentines have no legit claim to it. The Falklanders want to remain 100% British, and as long as they want to remain Brit, the islands are not up for negotiation. Same rules apply for Gibraltar.



In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineIakobos From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 3316 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3424 times:

There is something called the International Court of Justice.
Any country (who is a signatory) who has territorial claims can bring the case to the Court.
A case was settled recently between Nigeria and Cameroun, whereby borders were adjusted (mostly in favour of Cameroun).

I bet that Spain and Argentina do not even contemplate the prospect of sending lawyers to The Hague...eqd


User currently offlineOly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6843 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3400 times:

Will the spanish and portugese speaking peoples leave south america and return the land to the indigenous populations? Will spain and the catholic church return all the gold and other stuff they liberated from the locals? How far back in history do we go? Who should the US of A be returned to? What about Canada? Australia? New Zealand? Should the middle east be redrawn on tribal grounds, not countries invented after WW1? What about Africa?

How about Diego Garcia being handed back instead of being a US aircraft carrier in the Indian Ocean?

Incidentally, the falklands have rich fishing grounds that bring in lots of money.

Andy




wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5426 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

i have also wondered when the u.s.a will return panama the territory it keeps occupied to this day

Zak - don't mean to interrupt your typically anti-US sentiments with actual facts, but the canal, as well as all canal-related lands (yes, this includes the Panama Canal Zone), buildings, and infrastructure were given to Panama on December 31, 1999 under the conditions of the Torrijos-Carter Treaty. You're about 5 years behind the times on this one.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineLuisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3377 times:

ZAK i have also wondered when the u.s.a will return panama the territory it keeps occupied to this day

http://www.pancanal.com
http://www.pancanal.com/eng/ctransition/index.html

30 Panamanian high school students died in 1964 by the hands of US troops in protest, this event utlimetly lead to the Torrijos carter treaty. Every year on January 9 we honor the martirs. This was the turning point in the strugle to reclaim the Canal. The initial treaty stated that the US would have it perpetually.

Make some research next time you make such a statement. All lands that the US once occupied were returned on December 31st, 1999. Jimmy Carter and Madeleine Albright came down to the Handover, along with the King of Spain and several other leaders as witnesess.

Incidentally, where I study the (school of aviation of my university) is in the former School of Howard AFB.


User currently offlinePdpsol From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1120 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

Never underestimate the power of a some random rocks in the South Atlantic populated by sheep, penguins and (few) humans to generate crazy rantings.

Luisca, you live in Panama (although you appear to be obsessed with the W/Kerry election as well as opposing gay marriage for some bizarre reason). Why do you give a rat's a&* about the Falklands/Malvinas? These islands could not be further away from your tropical surroundings.

Who cares, other than desperate Argentine and UK (mostly Argentine) politicians wishing to rouse nationalist sentiments among their constituents?

The Falklands War of 1982 was started as a reckless gamble by frantic Argentine generals terrified of losing whatever shred of popular support they had. Argentina was heading for economic calamity resulting from irresponsible governance and was slowly learning of the dreadful crimes committed by the military. The war was a sideshow meant to distract and motivate; unfortunately, the human cost (to both sides) was devastating and completely unecessary.

Argentina does not need another round of blind nationalism. Unfortunately, Argentina's currrent president, Kirchner, appears obsessed with the 'evil IMF' and 'rapacious capitalists' and incapable of truly addressing the problems facing the Republic.

Those islands will become Argentine when its inhabitants will them to be so.

The islands are completely benign to Argentina's strategic interests and, if anything, can present an opportunity to strengthen the Republic's political, commercial and cultural ties with the UK; strong ties both nations enjoyed to great success throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries.


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 21, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3354 times:

The Falklands are vital to the UK's defenses, much like the Golan Heights.

Bottom line is, all the world's borders are where they are because people killed other people to put them there.




Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3343 times:

Re: The Falklands are vital to the UK's defenses.

Errr... yeah. Always important to have military resources stationed 13000 miles away on a barren, penguin-infested rock in the opposite hemisphere - you never know where those pesky Russians might land  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Back on topic - it is thought that there might be oil reserves in the continental shelf off the Falklands - if significant reserves are found, this could alter the position a bit.


User currently offlineBanco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 23, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3334 times:

As far as oil reserves are concerned, the UK government forestalled the issue by concluding a revenue sharing deal with the Argentine government some years back. The last thing either side want is an argument over oil rights colouring the picture.


She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
User currently offlineWiLdmanVzla From Mexico, joined Sep 2000, 616 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3313 times:

Of course the Malvinas must keep their condition as a british colony!!!!!!!!...

Why?

Simple, as a second class power, the british must need something to believe they're an important world power, even in their reality as an "non discussing ally" (slave, in other words) of the U.S.A. .

By the way, the malvinas are 100% argentinian for sure!!!!!!!, but be sure those islands will be a british colony forever and ever... what a shame, a fault of argentinians (remember that stupid war).

*******


25 Garnetpalmetto : the malvinas are 100% argentinian for sure!!!!!!!, International law states otherwise.
26 Banco : Simple, as a second class power, the british must need something to believe they're an important world power, even in their reality as an "non discuss
27 Post contains images Gman94 : Of course the Malvinas must keep their condition as a british colony!!!!!!!!... Why? Simple, as a second class power, the british must need something
28 Derico : Notice how no argentine has answered this thread (till now). I don't care about the falklands. And a surprising number of Argentines don't either. IMO
29 North County : So the British are our slaves? I see a new mini series: Roots 3, The up-tight House Slaves. Scene from the series: Maser Thomas to Maser Richard; "Doe
30 Post contains images Derico : So, I see no one is so willing to throw a rock from their glass house now...
31 Saintsman : Derico, Serious question. You said that a surprising number of Argentines have no interest in the Islands. Was that true in 1982 and if not what has c
32 GDB : You forgot to mention all the Nazi war criminals who hid out in S.America, including Argentina. Scots and Welsh are free to vote for self determinatio
33 Post contains images Derico : Yes, a surprising number of people don't care about the islands. As for 1982, I was too young to tell you much, but when a country goes to war people
34 Lurch : Hi people besides fishing grounds the FALKLAND ISLANDS have vast resources of OIL and natural Gas deposits that are only just being tapped so they wil
35 GDB : I'm sure that Canadian members could tell you more about Quebec. As for rallying behind the flag, you clearly did not see the mass UK demonstrations a
36 Post contains images Derico : I can't believe what I'm reading. Either I'm really way smarter than everyone here, or I'm being taken for a fool. "You forgot to mention all the Nazi
37 Derico : This discussion is going in circles... To compare the invasion of a sovereign country (Iraq), by a democratic government in the internet and cable TV
38 MYT332 : some hate Argenitna Yea well, you nearly killed my dad. Oh and in respone to the thread title. Nah.
39 Derico : I nearly killed your dad... I'm not going to argue the fact I believe your statement is injurous and totally without merit, simply for the reason that
40 Renton_WA : I agree with Derico 100%. No Argentine has replied to this because a lot of us don't care. Back then even though I was young I do recall a lot of peop
41 Arsenal@LHR : Dude you're making an ass out of yourselves, GDB posted some good stuff to which you felt you needed to reply word by word. Read the title of the thre
42 MYT332 : Derico, nah he was in the army at the time. I have a right to my opinion anyway but erm dont cry for me Argentina, the truth is i couldn't care less a
43 Derico : Renton, But of course since we are Argentine, how could we possibly know how was the war really perceived? By the replies here, I'm begginning to thin
44 Derico : It would be the end of the story if people gave a simple answer and did not embellish them with additional unnecesary (or false) comentaries on Argent
45 GDB : The point I was making (which for all your bluster, you cannot answer), was that over a million people marched in London against the Iraq war, nothing
46 Renton_WA : Logical fantasy displayed by the Argentine contributors to this thread, won't change that? There is no fantasy in what I said GBD and for you to make
47 Derico : Yeah, I bluster and am patriotic or so they say here. You have all been neutral and impassionate, on the other hand... :wink: :wink: The point I was m
48 Derico : There's a joke that goes something like this... - The Bolivians hate Argentina because it grabbed Jujuy. - The Brazilians hate Argentina because it gr
49 GKirk : "Simple, as a second class power, the british must need something to believe they're an important world power, even in their reality as an "non discus
50 Pdpsol : GDB, I do not believe ANYONE here, Argentine or British, is arguing in favor of Argentina's horrific military government. As I mentioned in an earlier
51 Donder10 : the Quebecois Because they voted against secession in the not too distant past(just).
52 Derico : PdPsol, I've been here for four years (albeit on and off), and have critizised Argentina so many times, as you know. Way back in 2000 I had a huge arg
53 Arcano : Derico: You were doing well till reply 48, which I'm not willing to take. Chile never denied San Martin aid, and never thinks of that much, I bet very
54 Alpha 1 : That should be up to the citizens of the Falkland Islands-not the British nor the Argentine government. If the people who live there want to remain pa
55 Derico : Arcano, it was a 'stereotype' joke, which means that it is 99% innuendo and maybe 1% fact, not meant very to be taken literally. Maybe it's out of con
56 Paulc : Having been to Argentina in 1996, our guide was quite open about the conflict and considered it to be a political war to gain popular support for the
57 L-188 : I simply put the Falklands up into the same catagory I put the Golan Heights and the West Banks. The Argintinians lost the way.....therefor the land.
58 Banco : It was the General Belgrano, L-188. The captain believes that HMS Conqueror's actions were perfectly appropriate. Incidentally, you might be intereste
59 L-188 : Hmm, your right, Learn something new every day, I always thought it was a former Dutch ship. And who names a ship after a land general? Ships should b
60 Post contains images Banco : Well, both the US and Royal Navies have a Winston Churchill in their fleets, don't they? OK, a slight cheat as he was a former First Sea Lord, but his
61 Post contains images PU151 : As far as I'm concerned there should be a Churchill in the fleet of every democratic country on earth... Sorry for the off-topic, but what kind of boa
62 L-188 : Well if the role of the First Sea Lord in the movie, "Sink the Bismark" is a good reference, then yes, you are being difficult.
63 Scotty : Nope. No Churchill currently in the RN fleet and the USN has a Winston S. Churchill
64 Post contains images Banco : PU151, I couldn't find anything on the Royal Navy website, so maybe I'm wrong. Or maybe a future ship is being named Churchill. Certainly I vaguely re
65 Paulc : Banco, the STA (Sail Training Association) had a schooner called 'Sir Winston Churchill' so that is possibly what you were thinking of. The US Navy sh
66 Banco : Ah. Found some info. HMS Churchill was a nuclear powered submarine, decommissioned around twelve years ago. Apologies for the mixup.
67 Luisca : Luisca, you live in Panama (although you appear to be obsessed with the W/Kerry election as well as opposing gay marriage for some bizarre reason). Wh
68 Zak : interesting, i guess i stand corrected. i was still under the impression that panama was still under control of the usa due to the channel being a str
69 Luisca : zak Actually, untill about 5 months ago panama had seriuos differences with the USA, due to the US's stand that they did not want to clean some shooti
70 Derico : Regarding the 'support' for the war, my argument was more that there were many opposed to the war, as well as a lot of support. There was a lot of gen
71 Derico : A final point: It has been said many times that the junta actually did not expect a reaction from the UK. I find that hard to believe, at least some i
72 Delayedagain : the important fact has been stated already - that the right to self-determination is paramount and looked at in isolation cannot be contested. However
73 GDB : That's one of the mad things about the whole episode, considering that despite being a former Spanish colony, Argentina had close links to the UK, the
74 Banco : A final point: It has been said many times that the junta actually did not expect a reaction from the UK. I find that hard to believe, at least some i
75 GDB : I would not say that the Falklands are more vunerable now, unlike 1982, there is a full length airfield there, with protection. The UK forces were muc
76 Pdpsol : Thankfully, the Argentina of 2004 bears no resemblance to the nation it was 22 years ago in 1982. Argentina will never rely on its military again to r
77 MD11Engineer : I´ve heard that after the war the Argentinian Junta refused the repatriation of Argentinian POWs because they were afraid of several thousand very an
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Do You Think The UK Will Adapt The Euro? posted Thu Jun 6 2002 19:47:23 by PH-BFA
Who Do You Think The New Mods Will Be? posted Tue Nov 15 2005 04:10:41 by Greasespot
When Do You Think The War Will Start posted Mon Mar 10 2003 09:08:38 by Bruce
Enron: Do You Think That Jury Will Say, "Guilty"? posted Thu May 18 2006 23:11:38 by AerospaceFan
Do You Think Thierry Henry Will Go To Italy? posted Tue Nov 29 2005 19:22:41 by 9VSPO
Who Do You Think Will Make The Super Bowl posted Mon Dec 30 2002 00:42:59 by I LOVE EWR
Who Do You Think Will Be The Next Mets Manager? posted Sat Oct 5 2002 22:32:48 by Dragon-wings
Do You Think China's Entry To The WTO Will Affect posted Sun Jun 23 2002 01:30:49 by Donder10
Who Do You Think Will Light The Olympic Fire? posted Wed Feb 6 2002 17:02:59 by B737-700
Who Do You Think Will Win The Yugo Elections? posted Sat Sep 23 2000 04:06:53 by JAT