Who was right?
>>18576080both countries have strong legal arguments but the fact that the population wants to remain under the british crown trumps all
>who has the best claim to the landBritain, obviously. It was uninhabited, kekked>but-the above combined with the fact the population want to stay with Britain makes it a closed issue. There is no debate, no dispute, Argentina (or anyone else) trying to take them is a hostile invasion. If they want to try that, go for it.The entire """argument""" about the Falklands supposedly being """""contested territory""""" is based on Argentina malding about not getting them from Spain in the early 19th Century. It is perhaps the weakest argument for contested territory on earth.
>>18576080I remember watching an interview with an Argie veteran and he said they stormed the islands expecting to be welcomed by fellow Argentinians celebrating their liberation, but instead they were greeted by scared and timid white Brits. So of course, las malvinas son inglesas
>>18576080The BritsBoth they and the Argies left the Falklands for a prolonged period of time, thereby more or less relinquishing their claims to the island.However, ultimately, the Brits returned to settle the islands properly when it was uninhabited by both>>18576116>It is perhaps the weakest argument for contested territory on earth.I mean, Israel claiming the area because they got booted from Palestine 2000 years ago isn't much stronger
>>18576184Israel's is still stronger, as there was at least some historical (however ancient) precedent and Jewish people living there. Falkland islands population was non-existent until Britain colonised it.
>>18576184>I mean, Israel claiming the area because they got booted from Palestine 2000 years ago isn't much strongerAnd it's still stronger as there were actual jews on the ground in the past. That can't be said about Argentinians
1764: Port Louis founded (French)1765: Port Egmont founded1766: Port Louis passed to Spain1770: Port Egmont captured by Spain1771: Port Egmont returned1774: Port Egmont abandoned1808: Spanish-American wars of independence begin1811: Spanish garrison leaves, civilians visit periodically for fishing and cattle1816: United Provinces of the Río de la Plata formed and lays claim1831: UPRP collapses1832: Argentine Confederation lays claim1832: AC garrison mutinies and they lose control1833: Britain lays claim1840: Falklands becomes crown colony with the first permanent settlers1861: AC collapses
>>18576080they're literally British islands with Brits living on them raising sheep and cod fishing or whatever same as they do back homethe Argentines have no settlement and never did on the Falklandsmost people without examination assume that the territorial dispute involves some sort of clash of cultures but thats not the casethere are no Argentine institutions or citizens on the Falklands, there never have beenthe whole thing is ridiculous>>18576130i wouldn't doubt soldiers and the people were told straight up fabrications about beleaguered Argentine farmers waiting to be liberated and all that, just to get there and ya..
>>18576334>the Argentines have no settlement and never did on the FalklandsI guess you're being hyperbolic because that simply untrue.
>>18576358Antarctica technically has civilian settlements today.
>>18576080Argentineans destroy their own credibility with their continuous "we came from the boats" nonsense. Bitch how you gonna cry about colonialism while bragging about being colonists? Not to mention having big ole monuments to Julio Argentino Roca, the CONQUEROR of Patagonia, in Buenos Aires.
The Argentinian claim to the islands is the most retarded nationalist argument of any nation I've seen yet>señooor you are colonizers, we are closer to the islands>yes the reason why we're so close to them is because we colonized our way to them but never mind>it's ancient Argentinian land even though Brits settled it before Argentina was even a thing >señoooooor
>>18576080Argentina because they're closer to the islands and that's what matters
>>18576080Argentina has a better reason to want the islands than England does, they possess no strategic value to England but represent an eternal humiliation to the Argies. Imagine the humiliation to the English if Argentina controlled the Isle of Man!This question of who they "rightfully" belong to is really just a placeholder to a separate question, the question of how national borders are drawn. National boundaries have and always will be drawn through the exertion of political and military strength, nothing else. Because England is a stronger country than Argentina, they're perfectly free to keep them humiliated over this rocky island chain which is really of no value to the English themselves.But how long will England's naval power last? America has gutted all vestiges of their former empire and without it, England will find itself increasingly bankrupt and politically unstable in attempting to support its overpopulated motherland. Can a world-spanning naval fleet be sustained in these circumstances? Would the British be willing to risk another war over strategically useless islands, or will they one day meekly give them up, just as they meekly gave up the rest of their Empire without a fight? Will America come to England's defense, when so far America has betrayed England at every turn and repeatedly kicked them to the curb?>>18576098Actually, that fact is entirely irrelevant in geopolitics. You will find that, in history, it is rarely the will of the people that matters.
>>18576957>Argentina has a better reason to want the islands than England doesretarded statement>they possess no strategic value to EnglandAbsolutely moronic and uninformed. go and read about the continental shelf and the role of the Falklands as a south Atlantic outpost>Would the British be willing to risk another war over strategically useless islands, or will they one day meekly give them up, just as they meekly gave up the rest of their Empire without a fight?you're a fucking prick>Imagine the humiliation to the English if Argentina controlled the Isle of Man! why would that be a "humiliation"? It would all depend on the context something you demonstrated you lack an understanding of in your badly written argument. Argentina didn't even exist when the British colonised the Falklands. Fuck off back to your third world hovel you cunt.
>>18576965I accept your concession.
>>18576080I sympathize more with Argentina because they're openly immoral in their desire to seize territory, much like the British themselves were when they were once a great nation
distance from england to the isle of man>30 milesdistance from argentina to the falklands>400 miles
>>18576967you just got absolutely btfo and made no counter argument. only an absolute tool wouldn't recognise the strategic value of an outpost in the south Atlantic that can provide supplies to the Antarctic. goodbye idiot
>>18576098This is the same argument the Germans used for Danzig. Face it, the will of the people has never mattered, ever.The Falklands belong to England because America and the UN recognize it as such. But with Trump's recent betrayal of the British that may not be the case forever
>>18577012The Germans were right about Danzig and sincerely could've gotten it back peacefully if they had been willing to play the long game. The 20 years between WWI and WWII is nothing, a literal blink of an eye. The German political establishment could've easily gotten Danzig back after a few decades of agitation, something Poland also knew, which is why Gdnyia was built to begin with.
I just see no fucking basis to Argie claims>residents are entirely British, not even traces of Argentinians>even if we imagine that there is morally some ”you’re morally allowed to reconquer territory taken from you” clause, in this case it has expired generations ago>it’s an island in middle of fucking ocean with very little strategic value, so you can’t really even appeal to some realpolitikfag ”actually, taking them is the only rational option for Argentinian national security and you would be naive to say otherwise” pedantry
>>18577012>Trump's recent betrayal of the BritishTrump betrayed the UK government, which is an enemy of the British.
>>18577012If it's just bongs vs argentina I still give it to the bongs. Both are degenerate states but Argentina is far more so.
