They were Spanish before Argentina’s independence (hence the Argentine claim); a British ship stopped there and planted a flag (hence the British claim).
That the people there want is irrelevant, because then the newcomer simply inundates it with settlers to claim they are answering a majority’s needs/desires. Happened in the north of Ireland, in Gibraltar, Morocco is doing it in Western Sahara, etc.
You’re an idiot. How far back in time do you want to reverse history?
That’s a pack of lies. A British colony at Egmont existed before Spain ever enteredt thee picture. The French established a small private colony despite previous Portuguese, English, and Dutch claims of discovery. The British shortly afterwards established their own colony while being unaware the private French colony had been established nearby a few years previously. The French sold whatever rights they did or did not possess to the Spanish. The Spanish claimed the islands by right of conquest when they drove the British colonists out of the Falklands, but this nearly led to war. Spain settled the dispute and allowed the British coony to be reestablished. The Spanish recognition of the British colony thereby negated later claims of an exclusive sovereignty in the Falklands. Spain withdrew its colony and Britain withdrew its colony again, while retaining their respective claims to sovereignty over the Falklands. A predecessor government, the United Provinces of the Platte, attempted to pirate away the prior claims of Britain and Spain, but they never succeeded in stablishing a legitimate government in the Falklands, and no Argentine goverment ever established any settlement or colony in the Falklands. Instead, the Falklands were under the control of pirates from the evacuation of the British and French-Spanish colonies until the reestablishment of the British settlements. The only nations to have ever established settlements in competing claims for sovereignty were France, Britain, and Spain. Argentina never inherited any Spanish claims, because the Spanish cclaim was lost after Argentina had already come into existence and would have been in conflict with the prior exercise of sovereignty by Spain. Spain subsequently recognized British sovereignty in the Falklands, so Argentina has no lawful basis to claim a right already abandoned or settled by treaty by Spain.
Argentina has no rightful claim to the Falklands by any theory of inheritance or possession. Furthermore, Argentina is in violation of the Charter of the United Nations waging a war of aggression upon Britain. If Argentina makes any further war upon the Falklands, its government should be treated like that of NAZI Germany.
There’s one distinction, about which there’s no argument, between the Falklands and all the other examples you cite. It is that there was no indigenous population before the first modern settlements.
The ‘native’ Irish who were supposedly displaced by the English/British colonisation of Ireland were nothing of the sort.
They were simply the descendants of the Celts/Gaels who invaded ancient Ireland and subjugated and destroyed the existing civilisation, ‘the Beaker People’. Who themselves were from Europe, but who had drifted to and had lived in Ireland for centuries in peace. The Celts/Gaels were just as brutal as any other invading horde in ancient times.
So all the Irish who bleat about British occupation of Ireland are hypocrites. If we are to return Ireland to its rightful ‘native’ people, then EVERYONE should exit that island immediately. Because today’s ‘native’ Irish are just the descendants of brutal subjugators and invaders.