The Belgrano

[elmarko]

Sovereignty isn't derived from where you come from

Or really from who lives there. It only derives from the peoples acceptance of those who rule over it. Clearly the Falklands (and Gibraltar) are pretty happy under the crown and don't seem to care about location or the historic ethnicity of those who live there.

Can only support the continuation of the best situation for the ordinary people opposed to the mad claims of states and stuff

Obviously,

But the point is that the Falkland islands never belonged to anybody - it was uninhabited until the Dutch built a fishing post (iirc) - the Argentinians have no claim apart from "it's closer to them on a map than us", which is meaningless.

I do fully agree with the sentiment though, the Falklands should stay with whoever the people who live there want to be part of.

My problem is based on the fact that Argentine never belonged to them to begin with anyway - it's the hypocrisy which bugs me.

 

[Participant]

+1/...i dont get why people would get upset over some so small really lol. If they want to name their league after a sunken ship, which belonged them then no big deal.

I doubt that many people actually give two hoots what they call their football league. 'Cheeky' is probably about as far as even the most vocal person would go.

 

[Firestar_3x]

The point is distance from each respective claimant means nothing, it's not in Argentinas territorial waters, if the people on the island wish to remain under british rule then we should listen to them.

I think the only reason Argentina is draging this up is because the country is in such a mess they need something to talk about.

On a side note i wonder if the Belgrano would still be in use today?

 

[a1ex2001]

Renaming the league would be a nice gesture to the memories of the dead if it wern't for the fact it's a blatant piece of political posturing! The sailors serving on the Belgrano deserve a lot of respect it certainly takes more courage than I have to put to see in a war zone in a defunct second world war destroyer to face the best a modern Navy had to offer.

The modern day situation is totally different to that of the 80's Argentinas military strength both Naval and Airforce is much less threatening and our strength on the islands is massively increased The firepower we have available on the islands and our ability to reinforce them by air in a matter of hours. Provided the runway remained serviceable for 48hrs Argentina would stand no chance of regaining the islands.

I also suspect we would fight a very different campaign last time we didn't attack the Argentine mainland in anyway in a repeat I would expect to see Argentine Airforce and Naval bases being destroyed by submarine launched Tomahawks.

 

[Diesel]

It gives a whole new meaning to fans at matches chanting "Going down! Going down! Going down!"

 

[Nitefly]

But it isn't close. The Isle of Wight is less than a mile off the English coast.

For a country that's over ten times the land mass of the UK, it's close enough for them to care.

I'm pretty sure there's been a trade blockade from most S. American countries to the Falklands that has been established over the last few months, which is worrying.

 

[spudbynight]

For a country that's over ten times the land mass of the UK, it's close enough for them to care.

I'm pretty sure there's been a trade blockade from most S. American countries to the Falklands that has been established over the last few months, which is worrying.

Close enough to care? Maybe

Close enough to have any legitimate territorial claim? Not that I can see.

 

[culvers]

We no longer have carriers. How are we going to get there?

It's more than a coincidence that the Argies are making noises now.

subs launching cruise missiles = welcome to the middle ages argentina

 

[Firestar_3x]

Whilst sticking a missile into the mainland would make them think twice i can't help but think it would be a huge mistake.

 

[Diesel]

We no longer have carriers. How are we going to get there?

It's more than a coincidence that the Argies are making noises now.

We already have Typhoons at RAF Mount Pleasant.

 

[Nitefly]

Close enough to care? Maybe

Close enough to have any legitimate territorial claim? Not that I can see.

I really don't see how Britain have any more of a territorial claim (in the sense that they should own the falklands) other than 'oh look I've placed my flag here thus it's mine forever, tough', which is an equally rubbish reason, even if that is the basis most international ownership. I think the Britain should continue to own it, but I'm not really convinced that they should own it in the sense that it has always correctly belonged to Britain.

As for who owns it, to the Argentines, they do own it. It's not even a question. On all of their maps, it's theirs. It's a national symbol, it always has been considered by them to be theirs, long before the war. They simply cannot comprehend why the British think it's theres. When I went to Argentina for 2 months last year, you could tell that they care about it far, far more than the British do - it's not even an anti-British thing.

So for me it's between a meaningful and passionate symbol for one country and a convinient military base for another country half the world away.

*shrug*

I don't think I'm really against British owership, I'm merely surprised at how 'I was here first' is seen by so many to be a totally conclusive argument.

 

[The Funktopus]

The British often forget the context of the Falklands war from the Argentine perspective. It was attacked last time under a ruthless dictatorship at the end of the 'dirty war' in attempt to gain political support from the people. The support of the people wasn't entirely there and there were muted protests against it - keep in mind at this time it was illegal to travel round in Argentina in more than a group of three persons. It was dreadful.

Given the horrible repression the Argentinian people suffered under the Junta, including the widespread use of torture and the 'disappearances' in their struggle to restore democracy, you'd like to think they'd have more respect for the democratic rights of others. In this case, the Falkland Islanders right to self-determination. (IIRC, 'troublemakers' who spoke out too vocally against the Junta were flown out over the sea in an Argentine Air Force aircraft, then thrown out to their deaths)

It kind of irks me that on one hand, the Argentinian government squarks about being democratic, but then on the other seemingly wants to run rough shod over the wishes of the Islanders and "restore" islands to their governance that they haven't ruled for nearly two centuries. In a way, I think the worst thing that could happen to the Argentinians would be to gain possession of the islands, as where else would they externalize their own problems then?

 

[spudbynight]

I really don't see how Britain have any more of a territorial claim (in the sense that they should own the falklands) other than 'oh look I've placed my flag here thus it's mine forever, tough', which is an equally rubbish reason, even if that is the basis most international ownership.

I think the Britain should continue to own it, but I'm not really convinced that they should own it in the sense that it has always correctly belonged to Britain.

As for who owns it, to the Argentines, they do own it. It's not even a question. On all of their maps, it's theirs. It's a national symbol, it always has been considered by them to be theirs, long before the war. They simply cannot comprehend why the British think it's theres. When I went to Argentina for 2 months last year, you could tell that they care about it far, far more than the British do - it's not even an anti-British thing.

So for me it's between a meaningful and passionate symbol for one country and a convinient military base for another country half the world away.

*shrug*

We don't stake a claim on it based in geographical proximity. We lay a claim on it based on self-determination.

The colonial era is over and the UK has granted independence to every colony that has requested it. The Falklands want to remain British.

If the Falklands were to become Argentine then they would become an Argentine colony.

 

[a1ex2001]

Whilst sticking a missile into the mainland would make them think twice i can't help but think it would be a huge mistake.

I think against legitimate military targets like the costal airbases they would have to use to give their ageing airforce the range to make the Falklands it would be legitimate and wouldn't raise to many eyebrows in the rest of the world. If we started dropping them on targets be they military or not in Buenos Aires we would soon loose any international support which would be a very bad thing.

I also like the idea that someone thinks we have enough Tomahawks to reduce Argentina to the stoneage, we seriously don't but we do have enough to cripple their essential forward airbases.

 

[Nitefly]

We don't stake a claim on it based in geographical proximity. We lay a claim on it based on self-determination.

The colonial era is over and the UK has granted independence to every colony that has requested it. The Falklands want to remain British.

If the Falklands were to become Argentine then they would become an Argentine colony.

I agree with this entirely, see my edit:

I don't think I'm really against British owership, I'm merely surprised at how 'I was here first' is seen by so many to be a totally conclusive argument.

 

[Diesel]

I think against legitimate military targets like the costal airbases they would have to use to give their ageing airforce the range to make the Falklands it would be legitimate and wouldn't raise to many eyebrows in the rest of the world. If we started dropping them on targets be they military or not in Buenos Aires we would soon loose any international support which would be a very bad thing.

I also like the idea that someone thinks we have enough Tomahawks to reduce Argentina to the stoneage, we seriously don't but we do have enough to cripple their essential forward airbases.

I like the idea of one, minus warhead, landing on the front porch of the Presidential Palace. Perhaps with a trollface painted on it.

 

[ubersonic]

Just reading the history of the islands and I'm a bit puzzled as to how Argentina actually thinks it has any claim to their ownership at all - except that they are geographically quite close.

That's about it, when we discovered the Falklands they were uninhabited islands in the middle of nowhere and Argentina didn't even exist.

 

[Firestar_3x]

At the end of the day it's all rather comical, If they want to spice things up we should start marketing a series of posters and t-shirts, i'm picturing the Belgrano sinking into the water with the words failship above.

 

[matt_fsr]

I like the idea of one, minus warhead, landing on the front porch of the Presidential Palace. Perhaps with a trollface painted on it.

"U mad, bro?"

First politician to suggest this, wins my vote for life!

 

[a1ex2001]

At the end of the day it's all rather comical, If they want to spice things up we should start marketing a series of posters and t-shirts, i'm picturing the Belgrano sinking into the water with the words failship above.

You do realise over 300 men lost there lives when she was sunk? Even as a joke your comments are pretty disgusting.