Very amusing, before 1985 they had elected councillors but were governed from London. Post-1985 they became self-governing.
Take the outrage that a islander might feel reading my last post and multiplice that for ten thousands when an Argentine hear (like I ve hear from Mrs Tatcher mouth) that the war bring democracy to Argentina. :roll:
Mmm, if the Argentine forces had won the Falklands War, how long would Galtieri and the rest of that bunch of murdering thugs been in power? The wave of patriotic fervour that swept Argentina meant that any dissent was instantly crushed, even the Asociación Madres de Plaza de Mayo was suppressed and threatened.
Its a fact of life, losing the war meant the military Government was finished and democracy returned to Argentina. Thatcher is actually right but the truth hurts sometimes.
Its also a fact of life that the Falkland Islands were more democratic than Argentina was at the time. So your claim on the moral high ground is distinctly dubious.
Oh, I dont dispute that losing the war undermine (even more) the credibility of the Military Giverment, but the democracy thing is mentioned like it was born in 1983, when in fact, was more than a century earlier.
Its a fact of life, losing the war meant the military Government was finished and democracy returned to Argentina. Thatcher is actually right but the truth hurts sometimes.
Hmmm, not sure they stay a year and a half more in power. If the effect of the war was so damaging as Mrs Tatcher said , they probably wont last more than 2 months.
The truth hurt and that is a fact, the britons have demonstrate this very well in the “War crimes in Malvinas” topic.
“War Crimes in the Malvinas”, was conclusively shown to be complete and utter bollocks, no matter how you try and spin it.
UK looks to make Antarctica claim
Claims can be made for up to 350 miles off existing territories
The UK is looking to claim sovereignty over a large area of the remote seabed off Antarctica.
The claim for an area around British Antarctica is one of a number being prepared by the Foreign Office, a spokeswoman said. Even if granted, those rights would not allow Britain to contravene the treaty that prohibits oil and gas tapping under the seabed. The spokeswoman labelled the move “a safeguard for the future”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7048237.stm
Another link:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKN1841963420071018
Panzerknacker, the only way anyone could describe the political system of the Argentine government as “democratic” whilst the Junta were in power is if they were mainlining crack.
It was a dictatorship. end of. You spoke out, you got throw out… of a herc over tha Atlantic.
As for the environmental issues of the islands. Animals die out regularly, becaue they don’t adapt quick enough, sometimes man (of any nationality) will speed it along.
Currently the Falklands and the Brit Forces on the islands undertake large amounts of work to sustain the wildlife. THE FI are not overfished, they rely on the fisheries for money, to overfish them is to kill the goose with the golden eggs.
Penguins are not endangered on the Falklands, there are loads.
I notice your topic on the destruction of wildlife on the Falklands didn’t include the similar destruction of wildlife and the native indians of south america by Argetnina?
Give the war crimes up, they didn’t happen live with it. You lost to a fair fight by a better nations.
Who ISN’T making a claim on Antarctica or the Arctic these days?
The Canadian Armed Forces have just bolstered their spending and base construction in the north order to counter the claims being made by other nations including, but not limited too, Russia…
Who ISN’T making a claim on Antarctica or the Arctic these days?
Dunno, I just heard about the recent british claim, this is the pizza portion claimed by Argentina, chile and uk.
1000y I will be extremely grateful if you can quoting me saying that the military goverment between 1976-83 was a democratic one, if you cant is because you like to say the obvious.
In regard of the crime topic, Is a mistake from my part to name it in this thread, if the people is interested will read that and drawn his own ideas.
An by the way, the only penguin that worries me is this one.
My mistake Panzerknacker, you simpley point out democracy had been in your country before '83. Rather than being born in '83 by Thatchers defeat of your junta around the Falklands.
My mistake.
What the heck have claims over Antarctica got to do with the Falklands?
Britain has a claim to parts of Antarctica as a result of having South Atlantic possessions. That’s why. Some Antarctic Treaty or other…
And Russia? Seems to me everyone who want it has claims to Antarctica.
I dont see how having the Falklands gives the UK any claims over any other nation. I mean we dont claim the Arctic do we?
What heck ?
heck do.
It is related because is one other thing that could cause conflict in modern times, that will be the “aftermatch”, this is a quote of the second link above.
The claim could spark disputes with both Chile and Argentina, both of which view large chunks of Antarctica as their own. Some areas of the continent are disputed by all three countries
.
Easy way of solving this, no one should own it.
Let the UN control it. There are no natives to it, so no one owns it…
The UN? Deary me… I can just see it now, the “Antarctica for food” scandal;)
Agree with you there.
I’m sorry, but let one of the most corrupt international organisations on the planet control it when there are probably huge deposits of minerals on it? I can see it now, mineral exploitation rights being given to whoever gives the right people a big enough backhander.
I’m inclined to agree.
You only have to look at, among other examples, how China and Taiwan buy UN votes in the Pacific; how Japan does the same with whaling votes; and now Venezuala is moving into the Pacific.
Don’t know about the Arctic, but the Antarctic Treaty is a better proposition at the moment, because it’s harder to buy votes. http://www.antarcticconnection.com/antarctic/treaty/index.shtml
Its actually a non-story though as expected Argentina has gone off on one.
The reason for the claim is that there is a deadline for territorial claims following Britains ratification of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. If we do nothing we lose the future right to make a claim. If the claim is disputed, its parked until the dispute is resolved, though remaining extant as if the claim were made.
Also part of the reason for making the claim is that it enables Britain to police fishing in its Antarctic zone, enabling Britain to fulfill its commitments.
It doesn’t allow for mineral or oil extraction, since they are banned by subsequent treaties. It also doesn’t threaten the Antarctic treaty, or extend the Falkland Islands economic zone into Argentine waters as claimed by certain parts of the Argentine media.