Cameron: Britain would fight another war with Argentina to keep the Falkland Islands

reply to post by CJCrawley


Looks like you don't know what cut to the chase means, as you followed it up with a long ramble;

Heres an example of cutting to the chase.

The inhabitants of the Falklands have their livelihoods invested in the place, it is their home and for most of them has been their and their ancestors home for approaching 200 years and they do not want to be ruled by a country that has never previously ruled them, except for a brief and illegal takeover 30 years ago, and is over 300 miles away from them.

Now, to continue;

Following the irrelevant blah blah blah with which you avoided most of my questions to you, you said;

No - best leave all that tub-thumping, lager-lout xenophobia to the dumbass Brits.

Just how wrong can you be?

Only Argentina is doing any tub thumping (about taking possession of the Falklands) and displaying xenophobia.

The Falklanders just want to be left alone, the UK has merely promised to defend their rights to choose their own path IF required to do so. You cannot possibly have failed to see that point.

And if people disagree with you they're 'knuckledraggers', are they?

Oh, PLEASE do explain how you take that inference from the words I wrote. Or did you take it personally because you yourself cannot handle the fact that Britain is built upon immigration and always has been?

Yes I was wrong to say Celts, their arrival on these isles was far too recent for me to use them as an example, I was merely trying to point out that humanity didn't spontaneously ping into existence here and since the first arrivals came, that process has never stopped.

Now, can you address any of the previously made points or not?

Specifically, I would like to see you justify how an artificially created nation state has a 'natural entitlement' to something 300 miles off its coast? That should be fun.

Oh, and please again, do explain why you feel proximity matters specifically in relation to the Falklands but not so much anywhere else.

Why are you against the islanders having self determination? Whatever you might feel the reason is we are backing them, why don't YOU want them to choose?

Originally posted by CJCrawley

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by CJCrawley

 

Your logic seems flawed, the Falklands are hundreds of miles from Argentina but belong to them by right due to proximity?

They are much, much closer to Argentina than any other country (and a # of a lot closer than Britain).

Check out a map.

That has no relevance. Sorry if you disagree, but the Falklands is not within any territorial boundaries of Argentina so it makes no difference at all. I think you are either willfully ignoring this or just don't understand.

reply to post by CJCrawley


It doesn't matter if there is a sovereignty issue between Canada and Alaska, YOU said it was all about proximity, therefore Alaska is being forcibly occupied by the USA..

And as you have been saying, it doesn't matter a damn what the Alaskans want, they are joined onto Canada so Canada should own them. Why should Alaskans be given the right to self-determination, sure it's all about proximity

If they don't like it let them move back to the continental United States.

Originally posted by CJCrawley
At the end of the day it's about proximity.

Get the USA to hand back Hawaii then?

Get the USA to release the United States Virgin Islands that are located in the Caribbean. LOL!

I've seen so much ignorance on this thread it shocks me.

There are people who agree with uprooting families by force and moving them to another country just because some other country owned the islands hundreds of years ago.

Its about democracy, the PEOPLE vote to stay British, it is their HUMAN RIGHTS not to be forced from their homes.

The members from the US are beating their chests in support of Argentina.. Yeah because you guys don't go in guns blazing any time their is a little trouble in the world, or when it suits your causes.

I thought you guys were all for the democratic will of people kind of thing, isn't that what 1776 was all about?

Originally posted by godofme
I've seen so much ignorance on this thread it shocks me.

There are people who agree with uprooting families by force and moving them to another country just because some other country owned the islands hundreds of years ago.

But this is the thing, they didn't even own them before. Sad, very sad. Anybody that advokates Argentina owning the Islands does not support a free and democratic society. FACT.

Originally posted by michael1983l
Sad, very sad.

I agree.
I am also surprised by the amount of US members disagreeing with a UK position advocating support for Falkland islanders in the event of an Argentinian attack - they must have other undisclosed hidden sentiments inspiring their unjustifiable position - jealousy and inferiority issues perhaps?

Originally posted by ObservingYou
Do you really think we were over there to fight for a minority of people who claim to be British?

I can promise you, most us Brits do not consider those people far away across the sea as British - far from it.

Deeper politics are involved, as always.

I'm posting from mobile at the moment, so I'll try and exspand later from laptop.

What a load of drivel, how can you say most Brits don't consider the people far away across the seas as british? I can assure you it's the opposite, most people are patriotic towards Britain and her over seas territories. Even if fellow Brits didn't consider them as Brits, they ARE still British.

And yes, there is oil at stakes which is prolly why Cameron put a new shiny boat down there.

Originally posted by CJCrawley
reply to post by waynos

 

Cut to the chase.

The British were NOT the first settlers on the islands - the FRENCH were.

They call it Isles Malouines (from which the Spanish 'Malvinas'), because the first settlers were from the Breton port of St Malo.

Three nations have competing claims of discovery - Spain, Portugal, and Britain.

The Argentinians were amongst the earliest settlers, but they started to lay claims to the islands in the early 19th century after their independence from Spain; there was a large Spanish settlement there which Argentina then took over.

They reasoned, quite naturally, that, as it was the closest country, Argentina was best placed to administer the islands and provide vital services; which of course is undeniably true.

The French are strangely quiet about it though; come to that, so are the Spanish and Portuguese.

Maybe that is because these people appreciate the absurdity of getting all fired up about a small group of cold islands in the middle of bloody nowhere.

No - best leave all that tub-thumping, lager-lout xenophobia to the dumbass Brits.


"That is an irrelevant strawman argument with nothing to do with the subject. Britain has ALWAYS been built upon immigration since the first Celts moved in to an uninhabited island thousands of years ago. Just because the knuckle draggers cant handle it doesn't make it wrong."

FYI: Britain was not 'uninhabited' when the Celts came.

And if people disagree with you they're 'knuckledraggers', are they?

I see.

Wow....just wow;...

May I ask what country you are from?

Originally posted by godofme

Originally posted by CJCrawley
At the end of the day it's about proximity.

Get the USA to hand back Hawaii then?

Get the USA to release the United States Virgin Islands that are located in the Caribbean. LOL!

I'd love to oblige, really I would.

But I don't have any influence over American foreign policy.

Erm, not being American and everything...

Originally posted by Krono

Originally posted by CJCrawley
reply to post by waynos

 

Wow....just wow;...

May I ask what country you are from?

Yes, of course you can ask.

In fact, you just did.

Mr Hollywood Sean Penn opens his mouth and some Americans are like wow Mr Penn your totally right the Falklands should be the Argentinians land !

Aye Mr Penn forgot where the United states were created on native American lands as did alot of other Americans.

How is it that Argentines speak Spanish again ? oh yeh because the Spanish invaded the south Americas and created a colony.

please refer to the letter I posted from a friend of a friend a few pages back which clearly outlines the history of the Islands!

Originally posted by CJCrawley
At the end of the day it's about proximity.

The FI are much closer to Argentina than any other country, so own them by natural right.

Natural right , there is no such thing as natural ownership of territory ,this entire planet belongs to Us All not to a any given government claiming territory.

of course playing by the silly rules our governments do use in territorial claims, by your logic loads of land is owned by the wrong countries the British empire should be handing back loads of land as should the US as should many other national governments !

Taking it to the next level we earthlings own the moon , so its ours by natural right , and if any martians want it then they are up for a fight , oh wait what about the lunarians who were born on the moon , dont they own it by natural right ?

Originally posted by CJCrawley

Originally posted by Krono

Originally posted by CJCrawley
reply to post by waynos

 

Wow....just wow;...

May I ask what country you are from?

Yes, of course you can ask.

In fact, you just did.

Fair point. Now, can you answer my question please?

Originally posted by Krono
Fair point. Now, can you answer my question please?

Does it really matter mate? The guys argument is flawed in any case so probably best just dismissed with some pity as the ill-informed assertion it really is.

reply to post by Krono


He is a fellow Brit I think.
EDIT he is a Brit check his other posts, he calls the police "The old bill"

Originally posted by grainofsand

Originally posted by Krono
Fair point. Now, can you answer my question please?

Does it really matter mate? The guys argument is flawed in any case so probably best just dismissed with some pity as the ill-informed assertion it really is.

Hmm, I suppose, shame he doesn't come up with a good arguement.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by Krono

 

He is a fellow Brit I think.

That is surprising, I had a hunch he was from across the pond.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by Krono

 

He is a fellow Brit I think.
EDIT he is a Brit check his other posts, he calls the police "The old bill"

edit on 10-1-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

Buy that man a drink.

Originally posted by CJCrawley

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by Krono

 

He is a fellow Brit I think.
EDIT he is a Brit check his other posts, he calls the police "The old bill"

edit on 10-1-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

Buy that man a drink.

I just read your post where you said "not being american and all", boy do I feel foolish.