Posted on 02/18/2010 8:41:31 AM PST by MHalblaub
The Times has reported that Argentina “is taking control over all shipping between its coast and the Falkand Islands, effectively awarding itself the power to blockade the disputed territory.”
As The Times notes,
“According to a decree issued by President Kirchner, all ships sailing through the waters claimed by Argentina must hold a permit. The measure looks set to deepen a row over conflicting claims to oil beds lying inside the Falklands’ territorial waters… Today’s decree amounts to an Argentinian move to control all traffic from South America towards the islands, including an oil rig due to arrive today and start drilling next year.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
ping! I knew it was more than the sheep!
They gotta get there first; the UK Navy might have problems delivering them.
And even hard cases like the SAS and SBS like to have air cover.
Never happen. Britain will let it go without a fight this time. Nobody in that government is as steadfast as Thatcher was.
The Falklands has a formidable garrison now. Last time they had about 12 guys.
Does it matter ? It’s British Territory. Of course they’ll defend it.
Or do you suggest we not resist when someone tries to invade your home, or steal your property, or assault your person ??
I’m surprised people are having such a poke at the UK, given they’ve been extremely active in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Their contribution there hasn’t exactly been meek by any stretch. If they haven’t the balls then how do we explain their presence in those two countries? Just sayin’.
This could be resolved peacefully if Argentina did the right thing, namely offering to pay for land that (IMO) has been UK sovereign territory for centuries.
But no. Argentina would rather steal it.
Let’s just see how that works out.
The UK was primed to surrender the Malvinas in the 1970s. The discovery of oil off the coast changed that.
Hahahaaa do they open a neighborhood req center and the evil british are trying to close it down to make way for Condos. Only to be saved by the argentine army coming and dancing to stop the madness... Oh crap how do I remember that. OH I need to clear my brain of all 80s movies...
Naturally... since I have a stop there on my cruise in April.
9/11 happened during my last cruise. Perhaps I should avoid cruises.
Here we go again, time to break out the pop corn. The question is does Britain still have it in them to “get er done” again. Too bad Margret Thatcher is no longer at 10 Downing Street because the userper holding the office now is a whimp.
I’d advise the captain to cruise right past the Falklands....
I'm hoping they do... and perhaps substitute a quick visit to Antartica instead.
Is it Brit territory? That seems to be a question served up every few years.
Do We resist home invaders and thieves? Well, yes, if it is our home. I'm sure the Falklanders will put up a 30 second fight before they are subdued, but should the Brits spend blood and treasure to rescue 100 people at the other end of the world? I'm just sayin, this fight seems to never go away and nothing is decided. Do they have oil, gold, any other treasure to defend, or is it just another one of their forgotten places that have been given up since the disintegration of the empire? They've had trouble keeping Ireland and Scotland for eons, why would they take on Argentina for the Falklands? I would think they would have fought harder to keep the more valuable parts of their empire like India, but they ended up giving them up. How would you like the job of the soldier sent down there, and his legs are blown off, or even worse, and by the stroke of a pen, the scrap of worthless land is given up, because the "economy" is bad? This isn't like a home invader if it's not your home.
As an example, we won Germany and Japan in WWII, but gave them back their liberty. Why? .........Because we would still be fighting trying to keep them had we not. Japan wants us off the island as it is now. Fighting out of principle is fine, but sometimes you need to examine the cost.
I think you will find that after 1982 an awful lot of British people are aware of the Falkland Islands.
After 1982 a lot has changed, both in the Falklands themselves, and the way the British people perceive them. It is a matter of honour. No British Government would survive if they attempted to hand over the islands to Argentina. Not after 1982.
This is all springing up again because the Argentinian government needs a little pre-election boost in the polls. Plus there will soon be oil exploration there and many are optimistic about the results.
“Two debt ridden, third rate countries with tiny/third rate militaries are going to duke it out...”
Ask the brave American forces fighting alongside the British in Afghanistan if they consider the British to be “third rate”.
The armed forces of the SAS, SBS, Paras, Royal Marines, Gurkhas, the RAF, The Royal Navy etc ‘third rate’?...
Third rate nation?. We are not what we were, but were hardly third rate.
As for debt ridden, taken a look at your economy over the last few years?. Financially youre China’s bitch.
He’ll take on Argentina if he’s got any interest in remaining in office. The British public will not tolerate the loss of the Falklands islands, not after all the blood spilled in 1982
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.