It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lysergic
So why does the UK need the Falkland islands any how?
Clinging to those old imperialistic nostalgia?
I don't know much about the conflict other than UK beat them, Argentina fired a ?harpoon? missile and messed up a ship?
UK Alien Buff
Lysergic
you don't know anything do you?
we lost hundreads of people and quite a few ships.
i beleive you are calass B....rd to say messed up a ship
Originally posted by Lysergic
So why does the UK need the Falkland islands any how?
Clinging to those old imperialistic nostalgia?
I don't know much about the conflict other than UK beat them, Argentina fired a ?harpoon? missile and messed up a ship?
Originally posted by Jimmy1880
Lysergic, The UK holds the Falkland Islands becuase there are Huge Oil reserves in the vicinity. I apologise for my countrymans response
No imperialistic feelings at all, When the UK claimed the Falklands as a British territory the Islands were uninhabited.
The falklands Today is a permanent military base, there is no such thing as a native Falklander, (apart from shed loads of penguins )
Argentina to keep most of its elite troops on the mainland, distant from the Falklands theatre. In addition, Argentine military planners had trusted that the United States would remain neutral in the conflict, but, following unsuccessful mediation attempts, the United States offered full support to Great Britain, allowing its NATO ally to use its air-to-air missiles, communications equipment, aviation fuel, and other military stockpiles on British-held Ascension Island, as well as cooperating with military intelligence.
Originally posted by Kolmo
The "Falkland citizens" are in fact 3/4 of the army and the rest are probably their families who were placed there around 1983 after the war.
I find it funny that Britain mentions that aslong as the Falkland citizens wish to remain British there will be no negotiations.. those people were placed there after the war WTF! doesn't make sense
If I was Nestor now, I would retake the islands.. (we have support from all S.America) no need for the British to be so arrogant.. specially when they hardly won a war were Argentina was under dictatorship and were the war was only a distraction from it's internal problems.
One last thing, Paki/Blackie/Argie is diminutive and is racist so dont say it.
Originally posted by Kolmo
If I was Nestor now, I would retake the islands.. (we have support from all S.America) no need for the British to be so arrogant.. specially when they hardly won a war were Argentina was under dictatorship and were the war was only a distraction from it's internal problems.
One last thing, Paki/Blackie/Argie is diminutive and is racist so dont say it.
Originally posted by avro
Originally posted by Lysergic
So why does the UK need the Falkland islands any how?
Clinging to those old imperialistic nostalgia?
I don't know much about the conflict other than UK beat them, Argentina fired a ?harpoon? missile and messed up a ship?
shouldn't you at the very least do a google search before posting about a war you say you know little about btw it was exocet missiles (french) that were fired
Originally posted by UK Alien Buff
then don't post on here!
Originally posted by UK Alien Buff
then don't post on here!
Originally posted by Kolmo
Firstly to everyone who says "we gave em a frashing of er life".. if it had not been for the Americans and Chile, the islands would currently be Argentine.
Originally posted by Kolmo
Not to mention it's neighbore country Chile giving full support to the British army as well as providing airfields for their planes.
Secondly, Im sure most of you have no idea were the islands are even located.. they are right next to Argentina, and around half the world away from Britain.
Originally posted by Kolmo
The islands were first captured by France, and then given to Spain who handed them over to Argentina, thats a fact! Britain illegally stole them, and the United Nations doesn't care.
The first European explorer widely credited with sighting the islands is Sebald de Weert, a Dutch sailor, in 1600. Although several English and Spanish historians maintain their own explorers discovered the islands earlier, some older maps, particularly Dutch ones, used the name "Sebald Islands", after de Weert. However, the islands appear on numerous Spanish and other maps beginning in the 1520s[citation needed].
In January 1690, English sailor John Strong, captain of the Welfare, was heading for Puerto Deseado (in Argentina), but driven off course by contrary winds, he reached the Sebald Islands instead and landed at Bold Cove. He sailed between the two principal islands and called the passage "Falkland Channel" (now Falkland Sound), after Anthony Cary, 5th Viscount Falkland (1659-1694), who as Commissioner of the Admiralty had financed the expedition and who later became First Lord of the Admiralty. From this body of water the island group later took its collective English name.
The first settlement on the Falkland Islands, called Port Saint Louis, was founded by the French navigator and military commander Louis Antoine de Bougainville in 1764 on Berkeley Sound, in present-day Port Louis, East Falkland.
Unaware of the French presence, in January 1765, English captain John Byron explored and claimed Saunders Island, at the western end of the group, where he named the harbour of Port Egmont, and sailed near other islands, which he also claimed for King George III of Great Britain. A British settlement was built at Port Egmont in 1766. Also in 1766, Spain acquired the French colony, and after assuming effective control in 1767, placed the islands under a governor subordinate to Buenos Aires. Spain attacked Port Egmont, ending the British presence there in 1770, but Britain returned in 1771 and remained until 1774. Upon her withdrawal in 1774 Britain left behind a plaque asserting her claims, and in 1790, Britain officially ceded control of the islands to Spain, and renounced any and all colonial ambitions in South America, and its adjacent islands, as part of the Nootka Convention. In addition, the Nootka Convention provided for equal British, Spanish, and US rights to fish the surrounding waters of, as well as land on and erect temporary buildings to aid in such fishing operations, in any territory south of parts already occupied by Spain - the Falkland Islands being one of them since 1770 [2]. From then on Spain ruled the islands unchallenged under the name "Islas Malvinas", maintaining a settlement ruled from Buenos Aires under the control of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata until 1811. On leaving in 1811, Spain, too, left behind a plaque asserting her claims.
Originally posted by Kolmo
The "Falkland citizens" are in fact 3/4 of the army and the rest are probably their families who were placed there around 1983 after the war.
Originally posted by Kolmo
I find it funny that Britain mentions that aslong as the Falkland citizens wish to remain British there will be no negotiations.. those people were placed there after the war WTF! doesn't make sense
Originally posted by Kolmo
If I was Nestor now, I would retake the islands.. (we have support from all S.America) no need for the British to be so arrogant.. specially when they hardly won a war were Argentina was under dictatorship and were the war was only a distraction from it's internal problems.
Originally posted by Kolmo
One last thing, Paki/Blackie/Argie is diminutive and is racist so dont say it.
Originally posted by
TO stumason:
Of course the US would help UK, whatever Bush does, Tony does, vice versa.. look at the impression the world has on these 2 countries, going to yet another war would be incredibly bad for their reputation, specially as they are in Iraq now.
I know many countries would not be content with this.
The reason we lost many planes was because you had the harrier, logical.