Falkland Islands: Tensions Rising

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

If you are actually interested in the facts you can of course follow the links they provided to the national archive and pay to read them.

I looked at the Wikipedia articles and various other news items. It all seems pretty consistent with the history of the islands, since I am not the one whose arguments reference the documents within the archive I am not really concerned with paying to read them. I would presume these facts are in the public domain since we're talking about a history of the Islands.

BTW Where did I get my dates wrong? You said this a few posts back and I am wondered which part you were referring too.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Damien

I looked at the Wikipedia articles and various other news items. It all seems pretty consistent with the history of the islands, since I am not the one whose arguments reference the documents within the archive I am not really concerned with paying to read them. I would presume these facts are in the public domain since we're talking about a history of the Islands.

The Cabinet papers are much, much more indepth than the other articles referencing the history of the islands - regrettably they are not available in the public domain without payment. They do, however, highlight the successive cabinet concerns as to the legitimacy of the British claim of ownership - so much so that they lead up to the offer of a lease back option with Argentina which was being explored by the Tory Government of the day.

Originally Posted by Damien

BTW Where did I get my dates wrong? You said this a few posts back and I am wondered which part you were referring too.

On the matter of the UN self determination and decolonization protocols.

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

The Cabinet papers are much, much more indepth than the other articles referencing the history of the islands - regrettably they are not available in the public domain without payment. They do, however, highlight the successive cabinet concerns as to the legitimacy of the British claim of ownership - so much so that they lead up to the offer of a lease back option with Argentina which was being explored by the Tory Government of the day.

The primary reason they were previously so willing to distance British claims for the Falklands was because we had a 'managed decline' policy towards the Islands anyway. Argentina might even have that lease back arrangement now had they not tried to take it by force. I mean we offered that they take the dispute to the International Court of Justice in the 1940's and 1950's. Which they declined. The fact we were willing to go there speaks more about how the Government then perceived the strength of our case.

On the matter of the UN self determination and decolonization protocols.

I didn't mean to suggest the right to self-determination came after the resolution, I meant the right to self-determination will be more important that the resolution. Supersedes was the wrong word. This point is redundant anyway since the decolonization protocols act only to enforce the right for self-determination in colonised areas.

[DocDutch]

There is only 1 reason the argies want the falklands and that is the recent find of oil and has resources to kick start their own economy.

If they are that adamant to object to the UN about a military presence by the UK which is classed as more of a training and sar post they will have it thrown back in their face.

Another thing don't think its classed as a colony but a British protecturate like the us have in the pacific namely the Marshall islands, guam and midway.

They all have their own governments but as far as i know don't vote for national elections

They'll forget about this soon enough, it will flare up again, they will whine again. Until there is a fundamental shift in the influences at play nothing will change. They won't get anywhere with the UN, they won't attack the Islands and we won't budge so we're gridlocked.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

They'll forget about this soon enough, it will flare up again, they will whine again. Until there is a fundamental shift in the influences at play nothing will change. They won't get anywhere with the UN, they won't attack the Islands and we won't budge so we're gridlocked.

Bit like this thread....

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Osem

Bit like this thread....

Quite.

Just watched the UN Press conference on Falklands tension in New York just now, with the Argentine Foreign Minister explaining his complaint to the UN, he has basically made an accusation that the UK is holding Nuclear Weapons in the South Altantic. That it has too much power in the South Atlantic when it's Capital is 14,000 miles away. That the UK is in clear Breach of a 1965 UN Resolution.

UK Ambassador to the UN to address conference shortly.

[DocDutch]

oh bit like tennis

[Hom3r]

I just realised the title of this thread is wrong.

He's not visiting, he's there as a part of his tour of duty.

Brief Summary of the UN Press conference tonight:-

Originally Posted by Sky News

Argentina's foreign minister has spoken at the United Nations to officially protest Britain's "militarisation" of the seas around the disputed Falkland Islands.
Hector Timerman attacked the UK, saying that the Falklands represent "the last refuge of a declining empire".

He went on to say the UK "seems to see the South Atlantic in the same light as it sees the Persian Gulf and Iran".

Mr Timerman also said he was a "firm believer" that problems should be resolved peacefully between countries and even quoted Beatles singer John Lennon, saying "let's give peace a chance".

He summed up saying: "The UK is using the unjustified defence of self-determination as cover for establishing a powerful military presence that serves the UK's interests."

Originally Posted by Sky News

The UK's ambassador to the UN Mark Lyall-Grant responded, saying that Argentina's charges were "manifestly absurd".
"Nothing in the UK's defence posture has changed in recent months or years. The only thing that has changed is the politics of Argentina," he said.
As a final warning to the South American country, he said: "We are not ratcheting anything up, but be assured we are responsible for the defence and security of the people of the Falkland Islands, and we will defend those people if necessary."

http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16167094

[DocDutch]

LOL... the Argies foreign minister is accusing the Royal Navy of having a Vanguard class ballistic missile sub in the area now I'm sure that those subs wouldnt be there but the Astute or otherwise the trafalgar class at least

[adzii_nufc]

I'm getting the feeling She's not half as a cocky now that Nuclear Armed Vehicles have supposedly been put into action. She must have thought we'd just sit and back and let them rant on.

[danielf]

One wonders if the Argentinians are reading Alan's Twitter feed.

[Osem]

How utterly surprising and outrageous of the UK to send more military assets to the Falklands and deliberately upset those utterly benevolent Argentinians. I mean it's not as though the Islands been been persistently threatened, provoked or invaded by Argentina in the fairly recent past is it?...