Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   Pilot's Lounge (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=205)
-   -   1982 Falklands (Malvinas) War: a view from across the pond (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=30601)

Osprey 03-21-2012 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomcatViP (Post 401055)
Well if really tht's what they wanted they wld hve only to wait the day Thyphies are grded. Tht won't be too long for sure... Why do you think the island is still "blistering" with expensive to maintain Rapier missiles;)

More over Britain's leaders shld be aware tht if 30 years ago the Argentinian leaders did not really hve their people behind them and only a few allies, nowaday, it wld be quite different.

Analysing the spirit across the Sth Am peninsula, I am on the verge of thinking tht some countries like Br or even Cl wld now join the Argentinian ranks if the storyboard is to be replayed.

Tomcat, do you seriously believe that the islands are more vulnerable than they were 30 years ago? When the now relatively free Argentine media start broadcasting the bodies coming home they would fold like any other modern country.

I don't think much of your common sense if I'm honest, first the whole 100 octane mumbo jumbo, and now you think that a bit of Argentine rhetoric is enough to make us go wobbly at the knees. We aren't French you know....

baronWastelan 03-21-2012 05:25 PM

Quote:

In the 80s it was about having a strategic position (like Gibraltar)
The Brits were thinking ahead to the days of no aircraft carriers. :)

Osprey 03-21-2012 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II (Post 401340)
In the 80s it was about having a strategic position (like Gibraltar), nowadays the interests are mutating into economics one, especially after they found out more oil than what they found in the North Sea, and probably even more..

I'm pretty sure that it was known that there was a very high chance of finding oil in the region even in 1982. It just wasn't worth extracting it, until now.

And Stern, according to your logic the Canadians should get Alaska, or should they? I wonder if your stance would've been different if the Russians hadn't sold it off to the USA - I don't hear you pleading for sovereignty there, and it was handed over much later than the UK had people living in the Falklands.

fruitbat 03-21-2012 05:44 PM

Stern that page you linked was from an Argentine Government webpage.

No doubt that there's no slant on that lol.

Still waiting for an answer to my question.

Kupsised 03-21-2012 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by klem (Post 401187)
An interesting read which IMHO seems determined to ignore the UN resolution on de-colonisation or bend it to its own ends. That's not meant to be inflamatory, its just my take on that I read on that website.

The entire question of Argentinian ownership of the Falklands is based on the initial Spanish siezure of the Islands during their colonisation of that part of the world and Argentina's succession of Spanish rights. The 1960 UN Resolution 1514 (XV) “Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples” was intended to remove such colonisation in favour of the interests and wishes of the peoples living in those colonies. Britain has (had already) followed that principle in the de-colonisation of its 'Empire'.

Argentina, still claiming 'ownership' as Spain's successor, does not seem inclined to follow that principle arguing that it contravenes the protections of the UN resolution which states “any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations”.

However it is hard to argue that the Islands form part of " the territorial integrity " of Argentina when they are beyond the territorial waters of the Argentinian coast, i.e. they are not a contiguous part of the Argentinian mainland. (Territorial Water is a belt of coastal waters extending at most 12 nautical miles (22 km; 14 mi) from the baseline, usually the mean low-water mark, of a coastal state.) The Islands therefore always formed, at best, a colony of Argentina or Britain. Also, with virtually no Argentinian presence on the island and an overwhelming presence of people preferring to be regarded as 'British' or at least linked to Britain rather than Argentina, it can't be argued that "national unity" with or of Argentina is disrupted.

It still comes down to the choice of the people living there.

Well said. That's basically the same thing I was saying earlier in this thread, except I think you worded it much better :P

Jaws2002 03-21-2012 06:03 PM

There's a snowball chance in hell for another atempt to take the islands by force.
Argentina was in it's best military shape when they tried last time and the island had almost zero defences.
Now things are a lot different. Trying to invade now would create a lot of casualties and the defenses on the island would most likely be able to hold the invasion, until help arives.

Very different picture. I doubt the Argentinians are willing to take the kind of losses they would suffer.

Hood 03-21-2012 06:20 PM

This is all very interesting, but what about what the Islanders say?

http://www.falklands.gov.fk/

What a lovely website.

Hood

gheoss 03-21-2012 06:29 PM

To my point of view, the Malvinas are Argentine territory, you cant go to someones backyard and claim it to yourself because theres no one living there.

And the argentinian soldiers who died and survived the conflic, has the balls of the size of the moon, they were young kids with no combat training, scared and suffering from hypothermia, they fought like hell, they had F.A.L that didnt work, bad munition, no food (the high ranks were stealing all the food, money and items that the soldiers families were sending to them)...poor kids, when they saw the British suited with thermal, night vision, and all that technology..it was a big shock, but they still fought as heroes.

Same as the FAA, to me, the best pilots in the world (argentina STILL has the same jets, A4E Skyhawks, Mirage III, Super Etendart, Pucarás and Pampa)..

They used the jets as attack boats, fliying right above the sea crests..they had to wipe the cabin because of the water..

Big Respect for the Argentinians who fought with honor, they are the real heroes of that horrible and mistaken war.

TomcatViP 03-21-2012 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osprey (Post 401357)
Tomcat, do you seriously believe that the islands are more vulnerable than they were 30 years ago? When the now relatively free Argentine media start broadcasting the bodies coming home they would fold like any other modern country.

I don't think much of your common sense if I'm honest, first the whole 100 octane mumbo jumbo, and now you think that a bit of Argentine rhetoric is enough to make us go wobbly at the knees. We aren't French you know....

You are thinking in term of win and loss forgetting that in a modern war, all side hve alrdy lost !

I don't think that this thread was about that kind of rhetoric Osprey. I don't think either the one you mentioned deserve such also.

There might be a time when you'll understand.

Baco 03-21-2012 07:30 PM

Regarding what the Ilanders want. The British did not stop one secod to ponder on what the people allready living there wnated whnen they kicked them out...

The principle of self determination is exclusive for indigenous population, NOT, tranplanted colonial population. No Islander grategrandfather was born on the islands, period. Every one of them comes from a british subjec familly. So the principle of self determination of the people does not aplly to them. It was Argentinian territory with a flag and a governor.. we do not claim to inherit it from spain, we claim it was populated and ruled by Argentina when the british took it by force. Putting it plainlly: If I steal yopur car, does it make it mine if my kid rides on it for long enough time? Or is it still your car?

Same thing here. The onlly reason the islands still are a British ocupied territory is illigal use of force. The whole world sees that, hell even the US abstained, instead of voting aggainst the UN resolutions..... Even the british people say it (acording to the latest polls)....

The war was a desperate atempt used by a drunk to remian in power... and gave the perfect opportunituy to a power drunk lady to stay in power, and oh yes the good ole British Navy a chance to get a little more budget... Still it was our right to claim what is rightfully ours. This is the same case of the owner of a house being sued by the burgler for getting hit in the head with a bat, INISDE the house, of course and with the families DVD in his hands.......

Regarding the combatants, Well both sides displayed honnor and courage and served their countries like true heroes... allways the military pays for the incompetence of their governments... Both sides fighting for what they belive in. My respect for them. British and Argentinians.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.