LoL firefly, you are like the energizer bunny of this forum, you just like to keep 'em going on for ever don’t you 
Well, on that basis since the Falklands population identifies itself pretty much as 100% British, 0% Argentinian, are you arguing that Britain should have sovereignty? That is an identical arguament to the one you are using with Argentina…
Not sure how much influence he actually had - when it came down to it, the US was never going to support Argentina over the UK, and by all accounts the US military were being as helpful as they could get away with right from the word Go.
As for who it is, Walter Cronkite? Can’t find any references to the quote though on google so can’t confirm
Edit: formatting
Spanish fishermen claim to have sighted them in 1522 (Disputed)
Dutch cofficially sighted them on charts etc in 1600 (undisputed)
Italian sheep on rafts towed by penguins landed in 1601 (disputed)
Brits landed there first 1690 (undisputed) BISCUIT TEA AND HOME (stfu)
The French created the first settlement at Port Louis East falkland 1764(pronounced lewis now - undisputed)
Brits settled west Falkland 1765 (undisputed)
The Spanish “buy” Port Louis in 1765, in 1770 they ask the Brits to move out, the British garrison declined the inviation, the Spanish return with a superior force and the British forces leave
In 1771 the British threatened Spain with war, and returned unhindered.
1774 Britain withdraws for economic reasons
Spain remains in control of the islands until 1811 when they too leave due to being unable to maintain their South American colonies
THE ISLANDS ARE EMPTY AGAIN WITH THE SPANISH WALKING AWAY FROM THEM.
1828 The Argentine Government only 12 years old declares the Islands Argentine and sends settlers - The very first Argentine settlers.
1831 an American warship destroys the Argentine settlement in the Islands
1833 The British invade 5 years after the first Argentine settlement was created and deport the Argentine, without firing a single shot.
1855 1,800 British Settlers reside in the Island.
and have been there ever since!
In short mister Schatzer and Irish Duck. -
[b]
90 years after a dutchman marked it on a chart for the first time the Brits stuck a Flag in it.
1764 French settled the East, 1765 Brits settled the West.
Basically :
the Brits have had settlers there for 182 years not sequentially.
The Spanish had settlers there for 41 years
The French has a settlement there for 3 years (though were the first settlement)
and the Argentine had settlers on the land for 5 years. Granted they claimed them earlier (claim lasted seven years - but men on the gound is the way to posess an Island not sticking pins in maps)
[/b]
I’m not sure if this has been asked before:
Since Argentinians don’t live there now… and indeed barely ever have in the past, why do they even CARE if they have the Falkland Islands as part of Argentina or not?
Good old macho hispanic pride, why else?
Oh goodness no! the Falkland Island supply of hair grease and tight white short sleeved Tshirts that we have been hiding has come to the attention of the world. It will now only take weeks until they plunder our shores looking for underpowered mopeds to complete their macho look.
Sorry, but i think you are wrong here.
The islands were discovered by Gomes.
It´s prove by a map of 1523, which shows the islands.
No more discussions about that, please, there is nothing to say, peolpe who don´t believe should go to the museum and see the map. That´s all, no mystery.
I have the map in a book, if i´ve time i will show you to see.
When you talked about 1811, you are missing a part of the history, let´s me explain that better:
In 1811 Spain, who was the owner of the islands, left them, because from that time to 1833 pass it to Argentina, why? becasue in 1810, is produced the Mayo Revolution and a Junta took the control of the territories.
In 1811 Buenos Aires sent a ship to the islands, and in 1817 the “25 de Mayo” navy went to the islands to protect them too.
Spain went away from the islands, but Argentina took care of them.
England went away en 1774, and that confirm that UK recognized the domain of Malvinas to Spain.
Then you say:
"1828 The Argentine Government only 12 years old declares the Islands Argentine and sends settlers - The very first Argentine settlers. "
That´s not true, if Argentina sent a ship en 1811, 1817, and in 1820 took public possesion of the islands and established a colony.
While people where living in peace a crazy ship of USA went and destroyed all whithout sense.
And in 1833 England invade Argentina´s 22 years after took care of them.
“without firing a single shot.” Because Argentina didn´t have more than 10 soldiers with patetics guns.
UK took Malvinas using the force, becasue UK knew that the sovereignty was argentine.
So then if they established and have a population of 1.800 thousands, who cares?
The law say that are argentines.
We can´t talk here about self determination, because first it´s impossible and then because are from Argentina.
Islanders depends of UK, in a lot of aspects…
military security (it cost millions of pounds per year) , manufactures, infraestructures…
The islanders have only tourists and a bit of oil.
This year, fish go down, they ´ve lost a lot of money with liscenses…
Regards,
Patrick.
Would the Islanders be better off under the Argentine economy?. This forms the crux of the situation today. You can go on endlessly about how the UK gained possession of the Islands but that is ancient history.
The only view that counts is that of the Islanders as they have been there for a considerable ammount of time and they have no wish to become Argentine. The Argentine economy would not be able to subbsidise them to the extent that the UK can.
As I mentioned in a previous post Argentina missed the boat in during WW2 but also did so again in 1982.
Had the Argentine Military understood the significance of the loss of the Atlantic Conveyor and it’s cargo of Chinook’s, which left British Forces without Air Mobility, instead of claiming to have hit an Aircraft carrier, they may have been able to hold the Islands against a smaller Force with limited resources and line of supply problems.
With the benifit of hindsight the failure of the Argentine forces to carry the day has as much to do with lack of use of even the lowest grade intel and subsequent logistical support than the temmerity of the British soldier. The prime examples being that the BBC had announced the attack on Goose Green before 2 Para had their boots on the start line and that British forces where tabbing/ walking ( or for the benifit of any Booties, yomping) accross the Island towards Port Stanley.
The obvious course of action would have been to beef up on Arttillary and switch air attacks away from the bridge head’s to advancing forces.
Had the Argentine Navy hit the task force enroute rather than sit out the conflict in mainland ports the retaking of the Islands could’ve been prevented.
Having read a number of Argentine web sites regarding the 1982 conflict, they seem to be based on the information pumped out by the govenment at the time. The Argentine population believed that they where winning the conflict right up to the day the Menedez signed the surrender.
Had anyone bothered to accept news reports from the BBC or American ( USA ) news resources the reality of the situation would have been clear the war was not going well and all the whining since should be directed against the muppets that planned the opperation.
1982 has meant that Argentina’s chance of gaining the Islands by either political negotiation or by force of Arms is unlikley in the forseeable future, not only would Argentina not have UN support but given their current economy could not afford them if the UK withdrew. The Malvinas exist in the Argentine psyche as a tool of distraction for succesive administrations to use to distract the general population from the fagility of the Argentine economy.
Irishduck’s attitude seems to be that nicking a country from natives is OK, but nicking a few islands from a few settlers is terrible & we should give it back.
There’s a terrible double-standard here - all the arguments you’ve applied as to why the UK should give the FI back to Argentina apply equally (or even more forcefully) as to why Argentina should give its country back to the natives and FOAHP.
We can´t talk here about self determination, because first it´s impossible and then because are from Argentina.
No, not impossible - you ask the people whether they want to be part of Britain or Argentina. This has been done, and the result was that they wanted to remain British.
The islanders are also not from Argentina - this appears to be a myth put about in Argentina that the islanders are Argentine and speak Spanish, are kept on the islands forciby and are oppressed by the British (someone said this somewhere else in the forum - he’d travelled around Argentina and was surprised as to what they believed about the islanders) - not true, they’re British, speak English, and can leave whenever they want. They also voted to remain British, so how can you say that they’re Argentinian? They also settled from Britain, not Argentina, so how are they Argentinian?
I have not mentioned Gomes because gomez was merely the first to draw the islands onto a map.
My timeline starts after gomez dreww the map at the time that the first man landed on the islands, The British.
Your hisotrical claims are flawed in that you surmise they are Argenitne due to the presence of an Argentine garrison. If the Garrison was displaced by a superior British force then tough shit, it happens, You cannot defend an island inadequatly then ask for them back to try and defend them again, in fact you did try to take them back and defend them again and yet again you were displaced.
The time to claim the islands was when they were unoccupied at that time you needed to put settlers in but you didnt you placed a garrison there to defend an outpost that is noit the same as establishing a cmmunity.
Irish duck why do you give anyway, You are called Patrick, Youre not Argentinian! or are you - becasue your family lives in Argentina? The Falkland islanders are Falkland Islanders because that is where their families live. They are not under the control of Britian they are merely of British descent and hterfore we have duty to protect their way of life from Pancho Villa and his merry men that would otherwise cripple their economy and divert the mineral wealth of the oil and Squid rich islands to suppor the failing argentine economy when it could otherwise enrich hte islands.
We do not tax the islands - or impose upon their community, would the Argentine be as gracious? the only opportunity you had to parlez and discuss a peaceful hadnover was squandered by your government.
The British Government fought to defend the islanders, not the islands.
mate,im afraid that what you call “macho look” is all you think from everything who comes from spain.
we are not mexicans,we have modern cities and infrastructure (buenos aires is one of the best cities in the world,i think the best after hong kong).
im afraid you don´t generalize well as i don´t think that the americans and ex british colonies look like island monkeys like you,and talking about grease,your people are large amounts of grease,i never saw so fat guys,and people of my age in your country have an ugly smell you told me bluffcove :lol: ,you need to have a bath at least once a day (oh!,wait!,you don´t have enough water :lol: ,and i use more than 100 liters on a day :twisted: ).
and your women are ugly as shit.and we have more territory!.
I stop talking like you and start the serious:
If you worry so much about the islanders,why don´t you send them back to the homeland?,i believe they will live better and not be considered citizens of 2nd kelpers or bennies.
I don´t see important those things you add,like asking if patrick is or not argentinian or what is him (i believe he is irish).
oh,btw,northern ireland is from ireland,belfast is irish,gibraltar español!,and you can´t see that your country has territories in all the world because of the condition of “empire”,you will fall and before usa.
I don´t wonder if you will finish talking french or beginning a german colony.
all i want is my fucking islands back to argentina!.
the islands aren´t british,you just send some guys there to occupy land,and your occupation forces!.
YES,IM A MOD,and???,im still argentinian and proud,so,wtf if i reply like you?.
I will leave again this and do what im for here: WORLD WAR 2.
ladies and gentleman.Im out of here (btw,if you reply my message and ask me here for something,you will never receive and answer).
the islands aren´t british,you just send some guys there to occupy land,and your occupation forces!.
Then Argentina does not belong to the Argentinians (they were some guys sent there to occupy it, and occupying forces), so I want Argentina given back to the natives!
If you cannot see that this is exactly the same thing, then there is no point in argueing with you when your logic is warped by blind prejudice.
If you want to send the Islanders back to the UK, then you and your family should FOAHP back to Germany, just to be logically consistent, eh?
This topic is about the history of the islands, not other thing, like self-determination, where i came from, etc…
that you can ask (if you want) in an other topic not here.
Up to now you have seen that the islands are not british.
Spain discovered the islands, and then Argentina took care of them -all legitime-.
Then in 1833 England took the control using the force.
So now you know, the Malvinas Islands are argentines, nothing to say, and you can´t say me other thing, so you are asking me where i came from, and posting photos who hasnt´any sense with the aim of this topic.
Regards,
Patrick
Patrick,
Spain took control of Argentina by force, so by your argument it belongs to the natives!
So as you can see, Argentina belongs to the Natives, and the whites who took it by force should give it back to them.
If this is not true for Argentina, then it is equally not true for the Falklands.
And now, 5 generations on, it is ALL about self-determination, or did Argentina not sign the UN charter?
Sorry you are claiming that his is about hte history of the islands.
Britain had a settlement there - settlers not a garrison, before the Argentine nation was formed, and before the Spanish settled there.
Argentina shook off its colonial shackles nad became an independent state consequently Spain left the south American continent. Sixteen years after the Spanish settlers pulled out of the Islands and returned to Spain, the Argentine Nation put troops in. Troops are not settlers they have no “Land-rights” Britian had already held a settlement there. The French had he;ld a settlement there. The Spanish briefly had a settlement there but the Argentine turned up after all of these!
We were there prior to the Argentine, we were there before the Argentine nation was born. Our history in those Islands preceds yours.
“Spain took control of Argentina by force”
What???
The natives didn´t fight with spanish they lived together you are not undertanding this is a different thing.
Spain helped natives, they taught them lot of things, it wasn´t an invassion was a colonization, two different words.
Argentina born in 1806 - 1816, Spain lost the territories, because people got free of them.
In 1833 UK invade a total legitime colony of Argentina.
So people who are leaving today in Malvinas are usurpating an argentine territory.
And if you are talking about United Nations let´s me explain you that in 1983, after Argentina lost the war, the UN ordered to UK to give back the islands to Argentine, to start talking about the poblem of sovereignty, so if today th islands are under the control of UK is because they are one of the more powerful nations of the world and do what they want without consecuence.
So don´t talk about UN because you will going to sink in the mud.
Regards.
so wise patrick,im afraid you know more than everybody here about this.
cheers
Erwin
All the UN did was call on the UK & Argentina to resolve the dispute, they didn’t tell the UK to give the territory to Argentina! Just to “resolve the dispute”.
But, in reality, whatever happened in the early 19th century is irrelevant to the people who live there today.
It seems that the Argentinians don’t give a damn about the people who live on the islands - they just want to take the mineral & fishing wealth away from them.
When did the Spanish settle the Islands?
When did the British settle the Islands?
When was the Argentine Nation formed?
What is wrong with using military power to force people off desired areas of land? The Argentine were forced out after how many years?
The Falkland Islanders were attacked after five generations of peaceful existence?
Glass-house prepare for incoming stones!
Now Furcough
Unfortunately untrue ID. (The bit about the UN, not the conflict result.)
Not sure what you mean by sinking into the mud ID.