Argentina opens up second front in Falklands Kerfuffle

[MrJonno]

The Germans took the channel islands. That's a different animal altogether.

We choose to not even try and defend it knowing the Germans were coming, not sure that is different to giving it to them. We also told the inhabitants not to resist (as it was pointless)

India was British, but India wasn't empty when the Brits got there. The Brits conquered it, made a colony of it, and exploited its people and resources for the benefit of the British Crown and country

How do any countries form?, one group or the other takes other it kills ,expels or enslaves (they may already be living there) , or at least subjugates any other groups present . This continues until another group does the same. Basically nation creation = genocide

[Coito ergo sum]

The Germans took the channel islands. That's a different animal altogether.

We choose to not even try and defend it knowing the Germans were coming, not sure that is different to giving it to them. We also told the inhabitants not to resist (as it was pointless)

Because the Germans were the most powerful military in human history. You chose not to defend it because you knew you'd be pulverized. That was tactics in a larger war, and is not in any way a factor here.

India was British, but India wasn't empty when the Brits got there. The Brits conquered it, made a colony of it, and exploited its people and resources for the benefit of the British Crown and country

How do any countries form?, one group or the other takes other it kills ,expels or enslaves (they may already be living) , or at least subjugates any other groups present . This continues until another group does the same. Basically nation creation = genocide

Be that as it may, it is irrelevant to the present case. In the present case of the Falklands, they were empty when the Euros got there and no country had claimed it. Argentina did not exist. The Brit claim goes back to before Argentina even existed.

So, the question is not whether Argentina can assert dominance by conquest by pushing the Brits out and saying "we own it now, come and get us out if you dare." The question is whether Argentina has a legal claim to the islands. it doesn't.

Nation creating was indeed the way you describe up to a certain point in the first half of the 20th century. With the advent of the League of Nations and its successor, the United Nations, and soon to be the United Federation of Planets, there is an international law regarding these matters and it is no longer "legal" to conquer lands that have people on them.

[MrJonno]

The Falkland Islands are British I'm just doing my best not to sound patriotic about it, if we keep the inhabitants happy and have good relations with Argentina that should be our aim

[Coito ergo sum]

The Falkland Islands are British I'm just doing my best not to sound patriotic about it, if we keep the inhabitants happy and have good relations with Argentina that should be our aim

Yes, but if Argentina won't be happy unless the Falklands are turned over, there is an impasse. At some point, they're going to need a boot in their ass again to remind them that they need to shut their pie holes and stick to slicing up tasty Bife de Chorizo.

[MrJonno]

The Falkland Islands are British I'm just doing my best not to sound patriotic about it, if we keep the inhabitants happy and have good relations with Argentina that should be our aim

Yes, but if Argentina won't be happy unless the Falklands are turned over, there is an impasse. At some point, they're going to need a boot in their ass again to remind them that they need to shut their pie holes and stick to slicing up tasty Bife de Chorizo.

If the Argentinians want to fight a propaganda war its a lot better than a real one

[Coito ergo sum]

The Falkland Islands are British I'm just doing my best not to sound patriotic about it, if we keep the inhabitants happy and have good relations with Argentina that should be our aim

Yes, but if Argentina won't be happy unless the Falklands are turned over, there is an impasse. At some point, they're going to need a boot in their ass again to remind them that they need to shut their pie holes and stick to slicing up tasty Bife de Chorizo.

If the Argentinians want to fight a propaganda war its a lot better than a real one

Sure, and like the last time, the Brits won't fire until fired upon, or until the Argentinians start landing troops on the island (or attempting to).

Remember, in the 1980s, the Argies started it. The Brits aren't going to start bombing Buenos Aires.

[MrJonno]

The Spanish have been moaning about Gibraltar for a long time, even during WW2 with a fascist Spanish neighbour we manage to avoid conflict. Nothing wrong with a bit of permanent moaning if it means no war

[Coito ergo sum]

The Spanish have been moaning about Gibraltar for a long time, even during WW2 with a fascist Spanish neighbour we manage to avoid conflict. Nothing wrong with a bit of permanent moaning if it means no war

I'm not calling for the Brits to initiate war. The only ones threatening war are the Argentinians. The only ones who started a war about the Falklands have been the Argentinians.

[Cormac]

The Spanish have been moaning about Gibraltar for a long time, even during WW2 with a fascist Spanish neighbour we manage to avoid conflict. Nothing wrong with a bit of permanent moaning if it means no war

I'm not calling for the Brits to initiate war. The only ones threatening war are the Argentinians. The only ones who started a war about the Falklands have been the Argentinians.

Exactly.

All though it might be prudent to send a contingent of Royal Marines and SAS down to do some training, along with a submarine and a couple of surface boats on manouevres...

[Jason]

Given that the original settlers of the islands were British, and Britain has always had sovereignty over the islands, and that there were no indigenous people, and that the current inhabitants overwhelmingly wish to remain British, Argentina simply has no case.

Geography? England isn't even on the same continental shelf.

This is not in any way a logical reason.

So if, say, North Korea settled one of those largish rocks near your Island you'd be cool with it?

[Coito ergo sum]

Given that the original settlers of the islands were British, and Britain has always had sovereignty over the islands, and that there were no indigenous people, and that the current inhabitants overwhelmingly wish to remain British, Argentina simply has no case.

Geography? England isn't even on the same continental shelf.

This is not in any way a logical reason.

So if, say, North Korea settled one of those largish rocks near your Island you'd be cool with it?

If it was a rock which was not already part of a country, yes. If it was a rock which is already within the country, then no.

If this strategy works for Argentina, I think the US should claim Bermuda. After all, it's far from London, but close to Washington.

[Cormac]

Given that the original settlers of the islands were British, and Britain has always had sovereignty over the islands, and that there were no indigenous people, and that the current inhabitants overwhelmingly wish to remain British, Argentina simply has no case.

Geography? England isn't even on pppppppolpkmmn same continental shelf.

This is not in any way a logical reason.

So if, say, North Korea settled one of those largish rocks near your Island you'd be cool with it?

Let us recap.

Britain claimed an UNPOPULATED, UNCLAIMED island. This is a gold standard territorial claim.

Argentina's claim is that the island is just off their shore, and it has oil, and, well, they want it, regardless of what the people who live there want.

If North Korea turned up on our shores, they would be violating the territorial integrity of an existing country. This would be an overt act of war.

[Jason]

So you claim all rocks around your Island thus extending your borders beyond any outcropping? Clever.

[Coito ergo sum]

So you claim all rocks around your Island thus extending your borders beyond any outcropping? Clever.

I think countries claim what they claim, and there is a thing set forth in international law called "territorial waters" which by international convention means that any rocky bits inside those territorial waters are owned by the country whose territory those waters surround.

[Jason]

I'm aware of that Coito. That was sort of the point.