Jump to content

Should we defend the Falklands?


observer

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

es we should defend the place with every ship we've got (ahhh Gordon cut spending on them didn't he?)

 

with every soldier we have (ahhh... Gordon cut the spending on them too so what we have are locked into fighting a pointless was against a bunch of armed poppy farmers in Afghanistan)

 

and with every plane and helicopter we've got (don't even go there!)

 

In short, we are buggered because we haven't got enough military equipment to fight off the population of the Isle of Man at the moment! Drag the troops out of Afghanistan and lets go invade Argentina instead.... just think of all that free beef!

 

Mind you, we could always go and sink another of their ships!!

 

Before the first Falkland War Baz, Maggie was going to scrap our Aircraft carriers and 4 frigates, as we didn't need them anymore. You forget that the Tories cut public spending more than Labour, Just think how small our navy would be if they had been in power, and if they get in are they going to spend more on defence than Labour :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'll both be cutting after May, whoever wins the election, as part of our austerity penance, the Tories perhaps a little more quickly than Labour. There is already a "Defence Review" underway, which will decide just what we require to face the threats of the 21st century and at the same time live (spend) within our means. One suggestion could be: don't waste money and men in a futile and thankless war in Afghanistan, and perhaps evaluate future missions (like the ancient Carthaginians) on a cost and return basis. :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The treaty of Utrecht recognised Spanish sovereignty and this led to 40 years of Spanish occupation of the islands, which was reasserted in 1823 by Buenos Aires after its independence from Spain. Ten years later the islands were seized by force by Britain

 

At the time of the Falklands crisis Maggie was about to discuss sovereignty with the Argentinians. This was as a result of a document presented to the UN and the British at the time clearly laying out the claims of Argentina.

 

This document was so sensitive that the government prevented it's release and only recently has it been made available to the public via the National Archives.

 

If Argentina had not invaded at the time, and it is clear that lack of response to the initial sabre rattling encouraged them to do so, then discussions over the Falklands would have happened years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I couldn't really care less about the Falklands, other than the fact that, if they do have oil, it could knock a few quid off the price of my petrol. BUT; hasn't the principle now been established by HMG, that in such cases - we ask the indigenous inhabitants, by whom they wish to be governed - a principle that seems to have been applied to-date to the Falklands, Gibraltar, Bahamas and Ulster. :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obs I know what the people of the Islands would say, The UK put the people their they are bound to be pro UK.

 

Just a small point on the War, We could have given every Islander at the time one million pound each if they had moved, We would have saved money :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a small point on the War, We could have given every Islander at the time one million pound each if they had moved, We would have saved money :wink:

 

What a daft thing to say Sgt.... we could say that aboput many things like; if we gave every Welsh speaker ?100,000 not to have us waste mikllions on translating stuff and printing everything in an ancient language that evevn now is a miniscule minority language, we would have been better off.

 

Just throwing money at something doesn't make it right. The Argies invaded our territory and they got a kicking. It is enough that we let Ossie Ardles stay here and we still eat their Corned Beef (well I don't cos its awful stuff!) Personally I would have gone with the nuke option but there you go...... they got off lightly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it was Maggie who started the oil wars all along!

 

Instead of turning the British Forces into nothing other than theiving pirates can they not for a change act with some honour?

 

I don't see why any of our or the Argentinian forces should die for the price of oil or to protect the lifestyles of a few Falklanders.

 

So I would suggest that the Faulklanders be given full independence of the islands but that the profits of the oil be used firstly to generously compensate the families of those lost or injured in the last Faulkland war. The remainder to be shared between Britain and Argentinia 50/50 in recompence for the costs / trouble of the war.

 

Nothing can ever compensate for those whose lives have already been lost or destroyed, whats the point of more bloodshed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think your missing the sordid reality, as exemplified in the George Cloony film "Syriana"; the powerfull forces of the military-industrial complex wish to retain control of our essential resources (in this case oil) and will use Presidents and Armies to secure their profits. :shock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...