David Cameron: Britain Will Never Surrender The Falkland Islands

[ephone]

You must be kidding or simply paranoid.

Cuba has its own original people living there. How the hell it could be yours???

About those uninhabited rocks dutch found them? Are you joking?

The blood-sucking colonists killed a lot of aboriginals and then said there was no people ever living there.

I guess the current great u.s.a. was just one step from claiming that north america was virgin territory without anyone ever living there before the so-called protestants coming over???

As for Malvinas, wow, another good one. Tens of thousands miles away, the u.k. found that uninhabited rocks and moved there, while just a couple hundred miles away from Argentina coast, for thousand years, the stupid argentina sailors/fishermen never found this "uninhabited" rocks and never considered it such a good place for fishing stops???

As for your crap last point, take a vote. Well, if taking a vote will decide whether China will reclaim HongKong, I bet HongKong is still not back to China's territory yet. The great Deng Xiaoping told margaret thatcher directly, I do not give a fxxk what you wanted to do, by the time 7/1/1997, we will reclaim HongKong, one way or the other.

So you know what happened next, thatcher tripped when she went down people's hall of China, and China reclaimed HongKong as scheduled.

Argentina just need develop itself faster and becomes stronger. You will reclaim Malvinas sooner or later.

This is maddening. How many times are we going to revisit the Falklands on PDF?

The facts are simple. The Falklands were totally uninhabited rocks in the ocean until GB began colonization. Ever since man set sail, finder's keepers on uninhabited islands. Just because they are physically close to Argentina means jack. Geographic proximity is NOT a key to ownership.

The island of Cuba is MUCH closer to the USA than the Falklands are to Argentina. So are numerous Caribbean Islands. Should they be ours? Aruba, Curacao, and Bonaire are Dutch islands very close to Venezuela. They too were uninhabited rocks when the Dutch found them. Yet Venezuela, for some odd reason, thinks they should own them. Why?

By what measure should Argentina have the Falklands?

- The British colonized first
- The People are descendants of British settlers
- The people WANT to remain part of Great Britain

This last point trumps everything else. Take a vote. Find out what the people want.

 

[ephone]

You must be kidding or simply paranoid.

Cuba has its own original people living there. How the hell it could be yours???

About those uninhabited rocks dutch found them? Are you joking?

The blood-sucking colonists killed a lot of aboriginals and then said there was no people ever living there.

I guess the current great u.s.a. was just one step from claiming that north america was virgin territory without anyone ever living there before the so-called protestants coming over???

As for Malvinas, wow, another good one. Tens of thousands miles away, the u.k. found that uninhabited rocks and moved there, while just a couple hundred miles away from Argentina coast, for thousand years, the stupid argentina sailors/fishermen never found this "uninhabited" rocks and never considered it such a good place for fishing stops???

As for your crap last point, take a vote. Well, if taking a vote will decide whether China will reclaim HongKong, I bet HongKong is still not back to China's territory yet. The great Deng Xiaoping told margaret thatcher directly, I do not give a fxxk what you wanted to do, by the time 7/1/1997, we will reclaim HongKong, one way or the other.

So you know what happened next, thatcher tripped when she went down people's hall of China, and China reclaimed HongKong as scheduled.

Argentina just need develop itself faster and becomes stronger. You will reclaim Malvinas sooner or later.

This is maddening. How many times are we going to revisit the Falklands on PDF?

The facts are simple. The Falklands were totally uninhabited rocks in the ocean until GB began colonization. Ever since man set sail, finder's keepers on uninhabited islands. Just because they are physically close to Argentina means jack. Geographic proximity is NOT a key to ownership.

The island of Cuba is MUCH closer to the USA than the Falklands are to Argentina. So are numerous Caribbean Islands. Should they be ours? Aruba, Curacao, and Bonaire are Dutch islands very close to Venezuela. They too were uninhabited rocks when the Dutch found them. Yet Venezuela, for some odd reason, thinks they should own them. Why?

By what measure should Argentina have the Falklands?

- The British colonized first
- The People are descendants of British settlers
- The people WANT to remain part of Great Britain

This last point trumps everything else. Take a vote. Find out what the people want.

 

[ephone]

You must be kidding or simply paranoid.

Cuba has its own original people living there. How the hell it could be yours???

About those uninhabited rocks dutch found them? Are you joking?

The blood-sucking colonists killed a lot of aboriginals and then said there was no people ever living there.

I guess the current great u.s.a. was just one step from claiming that north america was virgin territory without anyone ever living there before the so-called protestants coming over???

As for Malvinas, wow, another good one. Tens of thousands miles away, the u.k. found that uninhabited rocks and moved there, while just a couple hundred miles away from Argentina coast, for thousand years, the stupid argentina sailors/fishermen never found this "uninhabited" rocks and never considered it such a good place for fishing stops???

As for your crap last point, take a vote. Well, if taking a vote will decide whether China will reclaim HongKong, I bet HongKong is still not back to China's territory yet. The great Deng Xiaoping told margaret thatcher directly, I do not give a fxxk what you wanted to do, by the time 7/1/1997, we will reclaim HongKong, one way or the other.

So you know what happened next, thatcher tripped when she went down people's hall of China, making a fool of herself, and China reclaimed HongKong as scheduled.

BTW, if taking a vote, a lot of places in the world would have voted themselves out of their current motherlands; Those places would have included China, India, U.S., Japan, France, Spain, U.K., Italy.... the list goes on and on.

Argentina just need develop itself faster and becomes stronger. You will reclaim Malvinas sooner or later.

This is maddening. How many times are we going to revisit the Falklands on PDF?

The facts are simple. The Falklands were totally uninhabited rocks in the ocean until GB began colonization. Ever since man set sail, finder's keepers on uninhabited islands. Just because they are physically close to Argentina means jack. Geographic proximity is NOT a key to ownership.

The island of Cuba is MUCH closer to the USA than the Falklands are to Argentina. So are numerous Caribbean Islands. Should they be ours? Aruba, Curacao, and Bonaire are Dutch islands very close to Venezuela. They too were uninhabited rocks when the Dutch found them. Yet Venezuela, for some odd reason, thinks they should own them. Why?

By what measure should Argentina have the Falklands?

- The British colonized first
- The People are descendants of British settlers
- The people WANT to remain part of Great Britain

This last point trumps everything else. Take a vote. Find out what the people want.

 

[scrumpy]

As for Malvinas, wow, another good one. Tens of thousands miles away, the u.k. found that uninhabited rocks and moved there, while just a couple hundred miles away from Argentina coast, for thousand years, the stupid argentina sailors/fishermen never found this "uninhabited" rocks and never considered it such a good place for fishing stops???

The islands are over 300 miles away from the Argentinian coast line. The British inhabited the islands way before Argentina existed. Various parts of the islands were first discovered by the British and the French. Spain had a small colony on it for a short duration of time and this is what the Argentinian claim is based on. The islands were never Argentinian.

The population is overwhelmingly want to stay British. They have been there for well over 200 years now. Any talk of supporting Argentina taking over the islands and displacing the settled population is talk supporting colonialism.

All this is sabre rattling for the Argentinian politicians to distract their populations from their actual domestic problems.

 

[darkinsky]

This is maddening. How many times are we going to revisit the Falklands on PDF?

The facts are simple. The Falklands were totally uninhabited rocks in the ocean until GB began colonization. Ever since man set sail, finder's keepers on uninhabited islands. Just because they are physically close to Argentina means jack. Geographic proximity is NOT a key to ownership.

The island of Cuba is MUCH closer to the USA than the Falklands are to Argentina. So are numerous Caribbean Islands. Should they be ours? Aruba, Curacao, and Bonaire are Dutch islands very close to Venezuela. They too were uninhabited rocks when the Dutch found them. Yet Venezuela, for some odd reason, thinks they should own them. Why?

By what measure should Argentina have the Falklands?

- The British colonized first
- The People are descendants of British settlers
- The people WANT to remain part of Great Britain

This last point trumps everything else. Take a vote. Find out what the people want.

that stands true for USA too

California and new mexico were spanish colonies, inhabited by spanish why anglo americans have occupied it?

 

[fd24]

The islands are over 300 miles away from the Argentinian coast line. The British inhabited the islands way before Argentina existed. Various parts of the islands were first discovered by the British and the French. Spain had a small colony on it for a short duration of time and this is what the Argentinian claim is based on. The islands were never Argentinian.

The population is overwhelmingly want to stay British. They have been there for well over 200 years now. Any talk of supporting Argentina taking over the islands and displacing the settled population is talk supporting colonialism.

All this is sabre rattling for the Argentinian politicians to distract their populations from their actual domestic problems.

Lets enlighten you with the law...


The Falklands/Malvinas were terra nullius when the French colonised the islands in the 18th century. They were then sold to Spain, a transfer of sovereignty which Britain recognised. However, upon decolonisation and under the principle of uti possidetis, sovereignty should have been transferred to Argentina, which declared independence in 1816. In 1833, Britain expelled the islands' inhabitants. Argentina's Foreign Minister Don Manuel Moreno was told by Prime Minister Palmerston that Argentina "could not reasonably have anticipated that the British Government would permit any other state to exercise a right as derived from Spain which Great Britain had denied to Spain itself."

Writing in the Yale Law Journal, W Michael Reisman affirmed that "Upon acquiring independence, a former colony", i.e. Argentina, "ordinarily inherits all the territory of that colony. This principle, enshrined in Latin America and, a century later, in Africa, would certainly appear to apply to the Falklands [Malvinas]." For Britons, the legal status of the islands is an open-and-shut case: Britain has no legal right to the islands. This has been reiterated at the General Assembly.

General Assembly Resolution 2065 (XX), adopted on 16 December 1965, "Consider[ed] ... the cherished aim of bringing to an end everywhere colonialism in all its forms, one of which covers the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)." The Resolution left it to Argentina and Britain to negotiate the issue using bilateral diplomacy. Britain violated this aspect of the Resolution. As a result, in December 1973, General Assembly Resolution 3160 (XXVIII) "Express[ed] its gratitude for the continuous efforts made by the Government of Argentina ... to facilitate the process of decolonization and to promote the well-being of the population of the island." The Resolution also "Urge[d] the Governments of Argentina [and the UK] ...to put an end to the colonial situation."

 

[Harry Potter]

I support UK.
Go UK Go.
Long live the queen.

 

[shivansps]

If UK wanted to ask someone if they want to be UK, Argentinian or Independent, maybe they should invent a time machine and go back to 1834 and ask the people there, the same ones that where hunted for months as "rebels". Or maybe go and ask scotland people.

The people on Malvinas as today, are brit citizens that first, should never be there, and second has been brain washed, and the only reason for then to be on the islands is for be used as human shields to protect the tactical position and resources tha are behind exploted illegally by UK, UK just use them as human puppets.
Well, the entire Brit population is brain washed, to any one to think that the islands belong to them... if that true them half of the world belong to them. Ive already explained the history.

BTW, dont forget that Argentina is currentlly extra-OTAN ally, like Pakistan, and as souch we recibe generous military offers by US every year, we just turn them down. In a conflict im not so sure if the US can align so freely with UK over a bunch of islands, and REMEMBER that Obama supports Argentina over the islands issue.

But im dont even know what is this fuss all about, the Brits sees a A4 sheet and start to cry, we not going to invade. BUT, dont get me wrong, if UK keep stealing Argentina ground by expanding the exclusion zone and keeps rejecting to talk, this its going to change, and by that time you can bet that UK is not going to face a divided military force where the airforce fight his own war, the navy fights his own war and army fights his own war whiout cooperating with each other, or facing untrained and unequiped conscripts on the ground, much less a navy with a total of 5 anti-ship missiles that we where by no means in a position to use (thats what UK intel sayed).
We not going to act first so UK can "play victim", but remember that stealing territory is a act of war.

BTW, about nuclear weapons, Argentina signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the Article X, allows us to resign the treaty and develop nuclear weapons if we feel threatened, UK many times brigned nuclear weapons in our range, and thats a violation of the NPT treaty, so at this point, by UK fault, we are in a position to resign the NPT and develop nuclear weapons as self defence.

 

[ephone]

queen my axx.

I support UK.
Go UK Go.
Long live the queen.

Just grow stronger and you will get Malvinas back.

Think about it, both incidents happened during the 80s. Argentina failed and China reclaimed Hong Kong.

If China was as weak as Argentina, there will be no way China got Hong Kong back.

Forget those BS craps from those colonists. Forget those two hundred years stay or vote for in Argentina or U.K. craps...

Since by those standards, China would never get back Hong Kong.

Just develop yourself and you will get your islands back.

If UK wanted to ask someone if they want to be UK, Argentinian or Independent, maybe they should invent a time machine and go back to 1834 and ask the people there, the same ones that where hunted for months as "rebels". Or maybe go and ask scotland people.

The people on Malvinas as today, are brit citizens that first, should never be there, and second has been brain washed, and the only reason for then to be on the islands is for be used as human shields to protect the tactical position and resources tha are behind exploted illegally by UK, UK just use them as human puppets.
Well, the entire Brit population is brain washed, to any one to think that the islands belong to them... if that true them half of the world belong to them. Ive already explained the history.

BTW, dont forget that Argentina is currentlly extra-OTAN ally, like Pakistan, and as souch we recibe generous military offers by US every year, we just turn them down. In a conflict im not so sure if the US can align so freely with UK over a bunch of islands, and REMEMBER that Obama supports Argentina over the islands issue.

But im dont even know what is this fuss all about, the Brits sees a A4 sheet and start to cry, we not going to invade. BUT, dont get me wrong, if UK keep stealing Argentina ground by expanding the exclusion zone and keeps rejecting to talk, this its going to change, and by that time you can bet that UK is not going to face a divided military force where the airforce fight his own war, the navy fights his own war and army fights his own war whiout cooperating with each other, or facing untrained and unequiped conscripts on the ground, much less a navy with a total of 5 anti-ship missiles that we where by no means in a position to use (thats what UK intel sayed).
We not going to act first so UK can "play victim", but remember that stealing territory is a act of war.

BTW, about nuclear weapons, Argentina signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the Article X, allows us to resign the treaty and develop nuclear weapons if we feel threatened, UK many times brigned nuclear weapons in our range, and thats a violation of the NPT treaty, so at this point, by UK fault, we are in a position to resign the NPT and develop nuclear weapons as self defence.

 

[Chogy]

We've been down the "colonial reversion" road before, and it's a mess that will never be solved. In centuries past, land ownership changed by conquest. With few exceptions, there were aboriginal people living in a desirable tract of land.

If the world decides tomorrow that all land won by conquest must be returned to the original inhabitants, that would mean Australia and the entire Western hemisphere would have to be evacuated of anybody not of aboriginal blood. In Europe and most everywhere else, borders would be redrawn and billions of people moved.

Is this going to happen? Obviously not.

Given that we cannot "reset" the globe, do we instead go back a certain amount of time, and fix everything after a certain date? Do we declare "All land conquests since 1850 must be reverted to the state before 1850"? If so, how do we pick a date?

The Falklands became British in the early 1800's and have remained that way since. If we "reset" the Falklands to 1825 or thereabouts, why shouldn't we reset every land grab that took place on or after that date?

The best answer, the only one that makes sense, is to allow the people living there now to choose. And they have, and it's a choice to remain part of GB.

 

[Tshering22]

We've been down the "colonial reversion" road before, and it's a mess that will never be solved. In centuries past, land ownership changed by conquest. With few exceptions, there were aboriginal people living in a desirable tract of land.

If the world decides tomorrow that all land won by conquest must be returned to the original inhabitants, that would mean Australia and the entire Western hemisphere would have to be evacuated of anybody not of aboriginal blood. In Europe and most everywhere else, borders would be redrawn and billions of people moved.

Is this going to happen? Obviously not.

Given that we cannot "reset" the globe, do we instead go back a certain amount of time, and fix everything after a certain date? Do we declare "All land conquests since 1850 must be reverted to the state before 1850"? If so, how do we pick a date?

The Falklands became British in the early 1800's and have remained that way since. If we "reset" the Falklands to 1825 or thereabouts, why shouldn't we reset every land grab that took place on or after that date?

The best answer, the only one that makes sense, is to allow the people living there now to choose. And they have, and it's a choice to remain part of GB.

Though I am neutral party here, I'd say that would you justify any other country's invasion to another country without your government not intervening?

I am not sure whether Malvinas were empty or not, but trust me; colonial era folks had a lot of talent in inventing nonsensical claims that were in those days made "world standard" which ultimately turned out to be false. You'd know it mate; you also won your freedom against them once remember?

 

[Capt P.H Young]

queen my axx.

Just grow stronger and you will get Malvinas back.

Think about it, both incidents happened during the 80s. Argentina failed and China reclaimed Hong Kong.

If China was as weak as Argentina, there will be no way China got Hong Kong back.

Forget those BS craps from those colonists. Forget those two hundred years stay or vote for in Argentina or U.K. craps...

Since by those standards, China would never get back Hong Kong.

Just develop yourself and you will get your islands back.

Hong Kong was on a 99 year lease. At the end of the lease, it was handed back. Absolutely no comparison with the Falklands. The Falklands were empty, nobody ever lived there permanently before the 18th Century. However what is now Argentina was not empty. The Spaniards and others who occupied that land killed MILLIONS of the original inhabitants in taking it over and even today in Argentina those few remaining native tribes are discriminated against. Instead of using your anti British/colonialist feelings in this thread here is an idea.. why don't you google both arguments about the Falklands, do some serious research, and for the moment forget everything about other historical subjetcs and concentrate on this, with no predjudice against us Brits. And as for colonialism.. the Argentines wish to colonise our Islands so how is that any different? Because at the moment you do not have a clue about the situation.

 

[ephone]

It does not matter. I suppose you also know the u.k. grabbed hongkong through the infamous opium wars. About the so-called lease,

if China were weak, you think any other country would give a damn what China thinks??? You think China can get Hongkong back? China would be lucky to keep herself together!

About Malvinas, the Argentinian fishermen use Malvinas throughout their lives and generations. Living there or not, it is not u.k.'s matter. There are a lot of countries that have islands that nobody live on there even today including China, u.k., u.s., mexico, indonesia and etc... You can use that as an excuse to steal the land from others??? There are still hundreds of islands in China shore that was unoccupied without people living there, except fishermen use them now and then. Why don't you send your fleet trying to claim them now???

BTW, your island??? when does u.k. become a south american country???

Well, in today's world, justice will be served in the end. Let's see how many ships u.k. have to give to the bottom of sea to give the Malvinas back to Argentina.

Hong Kong was on a 99 year lease. At the end of the lease, it was handed back. Absolutely no comparison with the Falklands. The Falklands were empty, nobody ever lived there permanently before the 18th Century. However what is now Argentina was not empty. The Spaniards and others who occupied that land killed MILLIONS of the original inhabitants in taking it over and even today in Argentina those few remaining native tribes are discriminated against. Instead of using your anti British/colonialist feelings in this thread here is an idea.. why don't you google both arguments about the Falklands, do some serious research, and for the moment forget everything about other historical subjetcs and concentrate on this, with no predjudice against us Brits. And as for colonialism.. the Argentines wish to colonise our Islands so how is that any different? Because at the moment you do not have a clue about the situation.

 

[Capt P.H Young]

It does not matter. I suppose you also know the u.k. grabbed hongkong through the infamous opium wars. About the so-called lease,

if China were weak, you think any other country would give a damn what China thinks??? You think China can get Hongkong back? China would be lucky to keep herself together!

About Malvinas, the Argentinian fishermen use Malvinas throughout their lives and generations. Living there or not, it is not u.k.'s matter. There are a lot of countries that have islands that nobody live on there even today including China, u.k., u.s., mexico, indonesia and etc... You can use that as an excuse to steal the land from others??? There are still hundreds of islands in China shore that was unoccupied without people living there, except fishermen use them now and then. Why don't you send your fleet trying to claim them now???

BTW, your island??? when does u.k. become a south american country???

Well, in today's world, justice will be served in the end. Let's see how many ships u.k. have to give to the bottom of sea to give the Malvinas back to Argentina.

Firstly you have not replied with one coherent answer. Nothing to do with opium wars or China we are talking about the FALKLANDS here, MALVINAS is a fantasy land somewhere next to Narnia and Never never land, And its not OUR Islands it belongs to the people who live there, who you seem to think can be kicked out to make way for land grabbing Argentinians. And how can we 'give back' the Islands to Argentina WHO NEVER EVER OWNED THEM EXCEPT IN THEIR HEADS. You still not have answered any questions, you have still not read anything about it but you have the mindless 'My enemies enemy is my Friend' crap in your head. And what is this nonsense about uk becoming a South American country?? Really you show your self to be totally uninformed. As for ships at the bottom of the sea we lost a few in 82 BUT STILL PREVAILED . If they try it again they will get their asses kicked again FALKLANDS ARE BRITISH AND WILL BE FOREVER

 

[ephone]

My answer is quite coherent enough if you can read through the logic and facts there with an elementary level of English reading.

"MALVINAS is a fantasy land somewhere next to Narnia and Never never land" to u.k., but it is NOT such to Argentina people. Argentina people, mainly its fishermen, use that island all the time generations after generations.

As for people who live there now, those are people u.k. get them there. Don't pretend that those are from nowhere. They do not belong there. That claiming Malvinas belongs to those people who currently live there is as insane as that saying: during WWII, nazis went after jewish people, killing all of them, taking all the treasures belonging to jewish people and claiming those belong to whoever currently have them right now.

What does exactly "owning" mean to you??? Putting a flag there??? Whoever currently have it no matter how she/he acquired it??? Are you saying that Argentina fishermen are so dumb that they could not find and use the island by their shore while the u.k. is just so smart to find that island at first from tens of thousand miles away??? Unoccupied??? There are still hundreds of islands at China shore that are still without people living there, and without a Chinese flag there. Why don't you try to grab those as well???

I bet india is also found by you at first as well as so many lands, islands in Africa and other continents as well, right??? Well, now u.k. has to give back almost all of them. Malvinas is just the few remaining relics resulting from the old colonist era. The days that u.k. desperate holding of its few colonist "assets" is numbered.

Your mentioning 82 is just demonstrating that what u.k. would have exactly done if China were weak 30 years ago. thatcher would have dispached another fleet to China's shore, just like what happened in 1840, the first opium war, when asked by China for the return of hongkong.

The reality is that thatcher have tried many tricks not returning hongkong to China until Deng threatened her that if she did not return hongkong, China will take it. I still remember the desperate thatcher falled from the stairs when leaving the people's hall after the meeting.

Well, let's see how long u.k. can hold on the last few pieces from colonist era. BTW, we Chinese still remember all those treasures looted from China, now residing in british museums. We will get our treasures back as well. Don't believe me???

Well, let's see.

Firstly you have not replied with one coherent answer. Nothing to do with opium wars or China we are talking about the FALKLANDS here, MALVINAS is a fantasy land somewhere next to Narnia and Never never land, And its not OUR Islands it belongs to the people who live there, who you seem to think can be kicked out to make way for land grabbing Argentinians. And how can we 'give back' the Islands to Argentina WHO NEVER EVER OWNED THEM EXCEPT IN THEIR HEADS. You still not have answered any questions, you have still not read anything about it but you have the mindless 'My enemies enemy is my Friend' crap in your head. And what is this nonsense about uk becoming a South American country?? Really you show your self to be totally uninformed. As for ships at the bottom of the sea we lost a few in 82 BUT STILL PREVAILED . If they try it again they will get their asses kicked again FALKLANDS ARE BRITISH AND WILL BE FOREVER