ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 25th November 2019, 11:39 AM   #1
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Falkland Islands and the right to self-determination

Mod Info The first 125 or so posts have been split from the UK General Election thread. I've moved the posts so that the discussion about colonialism and when a population becomes indigenous can be continued without the spectre of rule 11.

(Suggestions for a better title will be welcomed)
Posted By:Agatha





I wonder if he's ever been to the Falklands? I have, and that is a monstrous suggestion. Regardless of how we got here, the present situation is that there is a community there of English-speaking people of British background who have been there for four or five generations or more. It is their home. They are not Argentinian. Their society and culture and way of life are not Argentinian. He might as well propose to give joint soveregnty of New Zealand to Papua New Guinea.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Agatha; 29th November 2019 at 04:31 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2019, 02:28 PM   #2
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Falkland Islands and the right to self-determination

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Well then the Argentinians can just ship in some Spanish speaking Argentinians and 4 or 5 generations later everything will be fine and it will be Argentinian.

Really didn't think you would be an apologist for colonialism.

It's only land. There are no Argentinians there now, whatever the conflicting stories of the past. They'd do well as an independent country actually except they couldn't defend themselves against Argentina so if they did achieve independence it would be lucky to last a week.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Agatha; 29th November 2019 at 04:31 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2019, 02:54 PM   #3
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,994
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It's only land. There are no Argentinians there now, whatever the conflicting stories of the past. They'd do well as an independent country actually except they couldn't defend themselves against Argentina so if they did achieve independence it would be lucky to last a week.
They're self governing anyway.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2019, 03:26 PM   #4
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
They're self governing anyway.

I know. Everything but currency, defence and foreign affairs. They get no money from Westminster but they get to keep everything they produce. Scots who know me may understand that I was green with envy to some extent. They have what Scotland was promised in 2014, pretty much the same as what the Faroe Isles have from Denmark.

The difference is that the Faroes expect to become independent at some point (although they're in no hurry because Denmark doesn't interfere and in particular doesn't bleed them dry and then tell them they're too poor to live without handouts), and this is possible because there's no obvious shark circling waiting to swallow them up. The Falklands can't really aspire to that (although I got the impression quite a few people wished they could) because they can't afford the military hardware to fight off Argentina and probably don't have enough people to do that either. They're absolutely dependant on Britain for that function.

The main concern that I could see was healthcare. They've only just managed to buy a breast screening unit. They don't have access to the high-tech medicine most of us take for granted. If someone is seriously ill and needs a big all-singing-all-dancing hospital they are flown to Santiago in a fast military jet which I think costs about £50,000 a pop.

The Falklands, today, are a chunk of real estate which happens to be closer to Argentina than to anywhere else, but the people who live there are no more Argentinian than the New Zealanders are Papua New Guineans or whatever the term is. There is no local "indigenous " population either trying to co-exist with their immigrant oppressors, or languishing on the shore near Buenos Aires pining to return. The Australian Aborigines and the New Zealand Mauri have a better case for having their lands returned to them. At least they're actually there and actually exist. Or maybe the Spanish should give Argentina back to the Mapuche and the rest.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 25th November 2019 at 03:34 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 10:58 AM   #5
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,835
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Well then the Argentinians can just ship in some Spanish speaking Argentinians and 4 or 5 generations later everything will be fine and it will be Argentinian.

Really didn't think you would be an apologist for colonialism.
I don't get it. Argentina's claim to it is... its a chain of islands out in the Atlantic and we are the closest nation, so it should be ours?? There were no native inhabitants when the first Europeans arrive. There was briefly a Spanish garrison and fishing port there, then English before Argentina even became independent. The first people to really call the island home were English settlers in the late 19th century. Hell, if the claim is first people there, then it should go to France.
lobosrul5 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 11:03 AM   #6
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,524
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I wonder if he's ever been to the Falklands? I have, and that is a monstrous suggestion. Regardless of how we got here, the present situation is that there is a community there of English-speaking people of British background who have been there for four or five generations or more. It is their home. They are not Argentinian. Their society and culture and way of life are not Argentinian. He might as well propose to give joint soveregnty of New Zealand to Papua New Guinea.
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It's only land. There are no Argentinians there now, whatever the conflicting stories of the past. They'd do well as an independent country actually except they couldn't defend themselves against Argentina so if they did achieve independence it would be lucky to last a week.
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
I don't get it. Argentina's claim to it is... its a chain of islands out in the Atlantic and we are the closest nation, so it should be ours?? There were no native inhabitants when the first Europeans arrive. There was briefly a Spanish garrison and fishing port there, then English before Argentina even became independent. The first people to really call the island home were English settlers in the late 19th century. Hell, if the claim is first people there, then it should go to France.
Exactly. But as the Falkland islanders are one of the few people whose ancestors didn't displace anyone else - they should have the right to chose.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 11:45 AM   #7
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
And they did choose. Twice. Three people voted to join Argentina. And these three people were not the remnants of the cruelly dispossessed indigenous population either. Because there is no such population.

Colonisation happened. There are very few places that didn't have an indigenous population that was over-run and enslaved and wiped out and so on. Argentina certainly had that! The Falklands and the Cape Verde Islands are the only ones I know about off the top of my head (probably because I visited both archipelagos earlier this year).

I totally don't see why the people who managed to make a self-supporting community on the Falkland Islands should be forced to give up their land for Argentinian settlers (themselves colonists from Spain) who are no more native to the islands than they are. Ship in a bunch of Spanish-speaking Argentinians to displace the English-speaking population (who sound like Kiwis to me actually) on what grounds exactly? Because Argentina is the nearest land mass? On that basis England gets Ireland. Oh wait.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 11:55 AM   #8
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,524
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
And they did choose. Twice. Three people voted to join Argentina. And these three people were not the remnants of the cruelly dispossessed indigenous population either. Because there is no such population.

Colonisation happened. There are very few places that didn't have an indigenous population that was over-run and enslaved and wiped out and so on. Argentina certainly had that! The Falklands and the Cape Verde Islands are the only ones I know about off the top of my head (probably because I visited both archipelagos earlier this year).

I totally don't see why the people who managed to make a self-supporting community on the Falkland Islands should be forced to give up their land for Argentinian settlers (themselves colonists from Spain) who are no more native to the islands than they are. Ship in a bunch of Spanish-speaking Argentinians to displace the English-speaking population (who sound like Kiwis to me actually) on what grounds exactly? Because Argentina is the nearest land mass? On that basis England gets Ireland. Oh wait.
Yup, which is why Corbyn's reflexive pro non-West response is sometimes way out of line. I remembered the vote, and that it was overwhelming, but not the numbers.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 12:18 PM   #9
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Yup, which is why Corbyn's reflexive pro non-West response is sometimes way out of line. I remembered the vote, and that it was overwhelming, but not the numbers.

I didn't know the detailed background before I actually visited the place. I'm personally disinclined to support the actions of the British Empire and the various colonial adventures that absolutely destroyed so many countries and cultures. I am a very strong supporter of the Chagos Islanders. My instinctive reaction to the Falklands was essentially "the Brits are at it again", as the Irish say.

However, I visited. It's a bit like visiting rural New Zealand I think, certainly as far as the sheep and the accents are concerned. It was nice to be able to open my purse and spend normal money rather than wonder whether this place takes Euros or maybe US dollars? (And they didn't bat an eyelid at Scottish notes, which was just as well.) There are a few people who are rabid Union Jack wavers, but this is not most people. The people I spoke to told about how proud they were to be self-sufficient, but at the same time how grateful they were that Britain was prepared to defend the islands militarily. Of course they wouldn't need that defence if Argentina wasn't circling like a shark.

They've been there for at least four generations. It's their home. They farm the land and they work to improve their infrastructure. They're developing their tourist trade. Many of them have never been anywhere else.

Since then I have discussed the issue with an Argentinian acquaintance and while it's obvious Argentinians feel strongly about it their actual claim seems to be entirely based on "the islands are nearer to us than to anywhere else" and "we had a small military garrison there a couple of hundred years or so". It's not compelling.

It may be that the current population was put there as a "plantation" to secure that area of the south Atlantic for the British Empire, but that was a long time ago. Now, it's just another place that has a population of European-origin settlers who have made it their home (not unlike Argentina itself), and very unusually they haven't displaced anyone else to do that.

It's possible that interests as regards control of local resources might arise to cause conflict in the future. If a lot of oil was found near the islands, that could get interesting. But at the moment it's just people, on a fairly small bit of real estate, that Argentina which has plenty of real estate of its own wants to put its name on for reasons that seem no more than nationalistic pride.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 12:54 PM   #10
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 22,787
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I didn't know the detailed background before I actually visited the place. I'm personally disinclined to support the actions of the British Empire and the various colonial adventures that absolutely destroyed so many countries and cultures. I am a very strong supporter of the Chagos Islanders. My instinctive reaction to the Falklands was essentially "the Brits are at it again", as the Irish say.

However, I visited. It's a bit like visiting rural New Zealand I think, certainly as far as the sheep and the accents are concerned. It was nice to be able to open my purse and spend normal money rather than wonder whether this place takes Euros or maybe US dollars? (And they didn't bat an eyelid at Scottish notes, which was just as well.) There are a few people who are rabid Union Jack wavers, but this is not most people. The people I spoke to told about how proud they were to be self-sufficient, but at the same time how grateful they were that Britain was prepared to defend the islands militarily. Of course they wouldn't need that defence if Argentina wasn't circling like a shark.

They've been there for at least four generations. It's their home. They farm the land and they work to improve their infrastructure. They're developing their tourist trade. Many of them have never been anywhere else.

Since then I have discussed the issue with an Argentinian acquaintance and while it's obvious Argentinians feel strongly about it their actual claim seems to be entirely based on "the islands are nearer to us than to anywhere else" and "we had a small military garrison there a couple of hundred years or so". It's not compelling.

It may be that the current population was put there as a "plantation" to secure that area of the south Atlantic for the British Empire, but that was a long time ago. Now, it's just another place that has a population of European-origin settlers who have made it their home (not unlike Argentina itself), and very unusually they haven't displaced anyone else to do that.

It's possible that interests as regards control of local resources might arise to cause conflict in the future. If a lot of oil was found near the islands, that could get interesting. But at the moment it's just people, on a fairly small bit of real estate, that Argentina which has plenty of real estate of its own wants to put its name on for reasons that seem no more than nationalistic pride.
It wasn't worth the life of a single Matelot.
Captain_Swoop is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 01:02 PM   #11
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,438
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
And they did choose. Twice. Three people voted to join Argentina. And these three people were not the remnants of the cruelly dispossessed indigenous population either. Because there is no such population.

Colonisation happened. There are very few places that didn't have an indigenous population that was over-run and enslaved and wiped out and so on. Argentina certainly had that! The Falklands and the Cape Verde Islands are the only ones I know about off the top of my head (probably because I visited both archipelagos earlier this year).

I totally don't see why the people who managed to make a self-supporting community on the Falkland Islands should be forced to give up their land for Argentinian settlers (themselves colonists from Spain) who are no more native to the islands than they are. Ship in a bunch of Spanish-speaking Argentinians to displace the English-speaking population (who sound like Kiwis to me actually) on what grounds exactly? Because Argentina is the nearest land mass? On that basis England gets Ireland. Oh wait.
I work with an Argentinian. His attitude was that the war was just an attempt to distract from domestic issues, most Argentinians did not know much about the islands and certainly did not feel any great desire for them to be Argentinian and if anything, they were worried about the potential cost to Argentina of having them, especially if they had managed to win the war and now needed to defend the islands.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 01:08 PM   #12
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 88,420
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
I don't get it. Argentina's claim to it is... its a chain of islands out in the Atlantic and we are the closest nation, so it should be ours?? There were no native inhabitants when the first Europeans arrive. There was briefly a Spanish garrison and fishing port there, then English before Argentina even became independent. The first people to really call the island home were English settlers in the late 19th century. Hell, if the claim is first people there, then it should go to France.
It's not the main Falkland islands that are the jewel it's South Georgia and its location compared to the Antarctic.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 01:13 PM   #13
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,835
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
It's not the main Falkland islands that are the jewel it's South Georgia and its location compared to the Antarctic.
Thats as may be, but Argentina has no legitimate claim at all on South Georgia that I can glean from wikipedia. Its also easily over 1000 miles from Argentina, not exactly in territorial waters

ETA: it does appear they occupied it, and gave it back during the Falklands War without a shot being fired. Something I did not know.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 26th November 2019 at 01:15 PM.
lobosrul5 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 01:45 PM   #14
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
I work with an Argentinian. His attitude was that the war was just an attempt to distract from domestic issues, most Argentinians did not know much about the islands and certainly did not feel any great desire for them to be Argentinian and if anything, they were worried about the potential cost to Argentina of having them, especially if they had managed to win the war and now needed to defend the islands.

I find that very plausible, although I know some people do feel strongly about it - it's a matter of honour, a point of principle, that sort of thing. More likely among Argentinians living in Argentina I suspect. My friend Angel lives near Buenos Aires.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 02:07 PM   #15
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
I don't get it. Argentina's claim to it is... its a chain of islands out in the Atlantic and we are the closest nation, so it should be ours?? There were no native inhabitants when the first Europeans arrive. There was briefly a Spanish garrison and fishing port there, then English before Argentina even became independent. The first people to really call the island home were English settlers in the late 19th century. Hell, if the claim is first people there, then it should go to France.
You don't get what?

That importing your people to a location and then claiming legitimacy of your ownership because those people are 'us' is colonial BS?

I'm not saying anything about the strength of Argentina's or anyone else's claims. I'm merely pointing out that the colonial shizzle don't fly with me.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 02:16 PM   #16
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,835
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
You don't get what?

That importing your people to a location and then claiming legitimacy of your ownership because those people are 'us' is colonial BS?

I'm not saying anything about the strength of Argentina's or anyone else's claims. I'm merely pointing out that the colonial shizzle don't fly with me.
You said before :"Well then the Argentinians can just ship in some Spanish speaking Argentinians and 4 or 5 generations later everything will be fine and it will be Argentinian.".

THAT would actually be colonialism, by either forcing a settled population out, exterminating them, or exerting control over an unwilling population. No one lived on the Falklands when the British first settled it.

What would the alternative be? No population ever expands to empty territory. When should that have ended precisely??
lobosrul5 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 02:45 PM   #17
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,574
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
You don't get what?

That importing your people to a location and then claiming legitimacy of your ownership because those people are 'us' is colonial BS?

I'm not saying anything about the strength of Argentina's or anyone else's claims. I'm merely pointing out that the colonial shizzle don't fly with me.
The indigenous population, the only group to ever have a community there (births, deaths, families), are the Brits. That makes them the first peoples and the Argentinians the colonial imperialists trying to plant a flag on someone else's homeland.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 03:35 PM   #18
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
The indigenous population, the only group to ever have a community there (births, deaths, families), are the Brits. That makes them the first peoples and the Argentinians the colonial imperialists trying to plant a flag on someone else's homeland.

Whatever the colonial reasons for Britain sponsoring an emigrant colony on the Falklands after 1840, that is the truth in today's terms. The Falkland Islanders are Falkland Islanders. I can't actually confirm whether they even have right of abode in Britain - I know they didn't in 1982, but it's possible that has changed. Nevertheless they don't pay taxes to Britain, they don't send representatives to Westminster and they don't receive any money from the British treasury. They have their own government and their own economy.

The islands did not have a permanent self-sustaining population before then, only military garrisons, a prison, and some itinerant seasonal cattlemen trying to exploit the wild cattle on the islands. All inhabited islands got their populations from somewhere else originally. I cannot for the life of me imagine why anyone who isn't an Argentinian colonialist would want to evict them and supplant them with another population who have no roots on the islands and have never lifted a finger to farm there.

That would be "importing your people to a location and then claiming legitimacy of your ownership because those people are 'us'", indeed.


ETA: Amusing fact. Apparently since Argentina claims ownership of the Falklands, and anyone born on Argentinian soil is an Argentine national whether they like it or not, the Falkland islanders are technically Argentine nationals and the islands are indeed inhabiited by a native Argentinian population. I admire the ingenuity!
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 26th November 2019 at 03:38 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 04:02 PM   #19
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 22,787
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
You don't get what?

That importing your people to a location and then claiming legitimacy of your ownership because those people are 'us' is colonial BS?

I'm not saying anything about the strength of Argentina's or anyone else's claims. I'm merely pointing out that the colonial shizzle don't fly with me.
Exactly this, I watched people die for that **** hole.
Captain_Swoop is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 04:53 PM   #20
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,574
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Exactly this, I watched people die for that **** hole.
Oh gosh, saving a British protectorate from a brutal military dictatorship , such futility.

Oh wait, actually probably the best uses of our military.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 05:54 PM   #21
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Oh gosh, saving a British protectorate from a brutal military dictatorship , such futility.

Oh wait, actually probably the best uses of our military.

I don't know whether Maggie set that going because she wanted the game points to win the 1987 election, or because she (+/- the government as a whole) was so convinced of the islands' strategic importance that they were determined to keep them out of Argentine hands, or simply because the inhabitants were under British protectorate and saving them was the right thing to do.

But having been there and seen how it is and spoken to some of the people there and listened to their account of their lives and how they manage and how they love the place, the last one was the right thing to do. If the military isn't going to protect a civilian population they're responsible for from a foreign invasion, they might as well pack up and go back to civvy street. What do they think they're trained and paid for?
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 06:02 PM   #22
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,994
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I don't know whether Maggie set that going because she wanted the game points to win the 1987 election, or because she (+/- the government as a whole) was so convinced of the islands' strategic importance that they were determined to keep them out of Argentine hands, or simply because the inhabitants were under British protectorate and saving them was the right thing to do.

But having been there and seen how it is and spoken to some of the people there and listened to their account of their lives and how they manage and how they love the place, the last one was the right thing to do. If the military isn't going to protect a civilian population they're responsible for from a foreign invasion, they might as well pack up and go back to civvy street. What do they think they're trained and paid for?
This.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 06:16 PM   #23
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
There was a lot of territorial chest-beating going on at the time, and I knew very little about the issues. But I do remember one thing. I was in Shrewsbury the week it all blew up, on a work-related placement. I was in the same small hotel as another guy who was also doing a placement in the same lab, and we chatted in the lounge in the evenings. I remember him saying, when news of the Argentine invasion came through, that the government would never abandon the Falklands because of the people living there.

I think I only really understood how right he was 37 years later when I got there myself and saw the place and met the people. And spent some time in the museum in Port Stanley.

And to think I avoided the lectures about the Falklands war on the ship on the way there from Montevideo, because the whole thing made me feel so uncomfortable and I thought in some way I couldn't quite articulate that there was some colonial aggression involved. Well yes there was, I imagine, when the islands were first colonised. But I almost believe that war was fought for the people, and even if that wasn't the whole story, it was worth doing for that reason only.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 06:29 PM   #24
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,574
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
If the military isn't going to protect a civilian population they're responsible for from a foreign invasion, they might as well pack up and go back to civvy street. What do they think they're trained and paid for?
Agreed
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 06:47 PM   #25
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 22,787
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Oh gosh, saving a British protectorate from a brutal military dictatorship , such futility.

Oh wait, actually probably the best uses of our military.
You are welcome to go next time.
Captain_Swoop is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2019, 06:50 PM   #26
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,574
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
You are welcome to go next time.

To quote Rolfe:

“If the military isn't going to protect a civilian population they're responsible for from a foreign invasion, they might as well pack up and go back to civvy street. What do they think they're trained and paid for?”
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 12:32 AM   #27
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,524
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
You don't get what?

That importing your people to a location and then claiming legitimacy of your ownership because those people are 'us' is colonial BS?

I'm not saying anything about the strength of Argentina's or anyone else's claims. I'm merely pointing out that the colonial shizzle don't fly with me.
I have absolutely nothing against colonisation of actually virgin territory with no previous inhabitants especially if it happened 4 generations ago.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:18 AM   #28
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
You said before :"Well then the Argentinians can just ship in some Spanish speaking Argentinians and 4 or 5 generations later everything will be fine and it will be Argentinian.".

THAT would actually be colonialism, by either forcing a settled population out, exterminating them, or exerting control over an unwilling population. No one lived on the Falklands when the British first settled it.

What would the alternative be? No population ever expands to empty territory. When should that have ended precisely??
Ah ok, sorry that comment was slightly sarcastic. It was just supposed to be highlighting the silliness of the logic that if you ship a bunch of people in to a place then X number of years later you can claim rightful ownership because the people there speak your language and share your culture. Of course they do! You put them there!
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:20 AM   #29
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
The indigenous population, the only group to ever have a community there (births, deaths, families), are the Brits. That makes them the first peoples and the Argentinians the colonial imperialists trying to plant a flag on someone else's homeland.
The Brits are not indigenous to the Falklands. FFS. I've seen some nonsense in my time but this post is right up there
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:26 AM   #30
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
I have absolutely nothing against colonisation of actually virgin territory with no previous inhabitants especially if it happened 4 generations ago.
Fair enough. I do, though.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:28 AM   #31
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,727
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
The Brits are not indigenous to the Falklands. FFS. I've seen some nonsense in my time but this post is right up there
How do you think people first arrived on the islands? Which people do you think that was?

Who do you think were the first people to live on the islands and where did you get that information?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:45 AM   #32
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,950
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
It was just supposed to be highlighting the silliness of the logic that if you ship a bunch of people in to a place then X number of years later you can claim rightful ownership because the people there speak your language and share your culture. Of course they do! You put them there!
So how would you suggest ownership of uninhabited land should be determined?

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:50 AM   #33
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,727
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
So how would you suggest ownership of uninhabited land should be determined?

Dave

Following his line of logic, nobody is indigenous.

If arriving on an uninhabited island and inhabiting it doesn't make you indigenous, nothing does.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 04:54 AM   #34
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,273
It's particularly bizarre since he apparently wants to evict the existing population to give the land to the Argentinians. Who themselves are Spanish people who colonised the land where they now live by cruelly oppressing and exploiting the indigenous populations who were there when they arrived.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 05:07 AM   #35
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
How do you think people first arrived on the islands? Which people do you think that was?

Who do you think were the first people to live on the islands and where did you get that information?
Indigenous means originating or naturally occurring. British people neither originated nor occurred naturally on the Falkland Islands.

Various peoples have established various colonies on the Falklands throughout its history. The UK one being the one that stuck. None of them are or were indigenous.

You can make arguments for maintaining the colony there but trying to co-opt the concept of indigenous peoples to apply to Falkland Islanders is both laughable and slightly offensive. Especially when done so by flag-waving jingoistic right-wing loons.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 05:11 AM   #36
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
So how would you suggest ownership of uninhabited land should be determined?

Dave
That's a very good question.

1. Do they need to be owned at all? Couldn't we just leave them as they are?

2. If you really need to determine ownership, then I think 'nearest populated territory' is a pretty good starting point though there may be exceptions made where it makes sense.

3. I don't think whoever claims it and is militarily strong enough to defend it is a very good starting point.

Claiming the Falklands is part of the UK and, even sillier, part of the European Union is a nonsense.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 05:13 AM   #37
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It's particularly bizarre since he apparently wants to evict the existing population to give the land to the Argentinians. Who themselves are Spanish people who colonised the land where they now live by cruelly oppressing and exploiting the indigenous populations who were there when they arrived.
Just for the record, I only said to put Argentinians there to expose the ludicrousness of your logic that because the Falklanders speak English and are culturally British that makes the Falklands British. You aren't the only one to have missed that point though so fair enough.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 05:16 AM   #38
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,727
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Just for the record, I only said to put Argentinians there to expose the ludicrousness of your logic that because the Falklanders speak English and are culturally British that makes the Falklands British. You aren't the only one to have missed that point though so fair enough.

I think we're all missing your point.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 05:22 AM   #39
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Following his line of logic, nobody is indigenous.

If arriving on an uninhabited island and inhabiting it doesn't make you indigenous, nothing does.
Not when you are shipped in with the sole purpose of colonising the damn place!

People had been fighting over the islands for bloody ages before any of these 'indigenous' people had ever even seen or heard of them.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2019, 05:25 AM   #40
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I think we're all missing your point.
Then I will make it clearer for you.

1. Claiming that the Falkland Islands are British because the people who colonised it want to be British is a nonsense.

2. The people on the islands are in no way 'indigenous' and it's a joke to even try to claim they are.

If you want to dispute these points go ahead but neither of these are in any way dependent on the strength of Argentina's or anyone else's claims to the islands nor on whether the islands were inhabited or not prior.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"

Last edited by Archie Gemmill Goal; 27th November 2019 at 05:26 AM.
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:49 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.