All we ever get is sequels these days.
First it Beverley Hills Cop, now this.
It's the early 80's all over again.
What is up with the UKs hard-on for these islands?
The people on the islands want to stay a part of Britain is one reason
Yeah because the British people colonized it, and maintain control through superior military force.
who lived there before them
Penguins. Pretty sure the islands were uninhabited.
Weird, I just looked on a map and the islands are nowhere near the UK.
Did not know location invalidated peoples democratic rights. But given how much closer and able to offer support Argentina is then the UK. They must be really crappy for 99.8% of the only people who have ever formed a civilian settlement to decide they want the UK instead.
But more to the point. Chile and all its islands are right next to Argentina. Dose that mean their population has no right to decide who rules they follow. Why is water 350 miles wide not enough of a border to allow citizens to make up there own mind. But land right next to it is OK. Denmark's Faroe Islands is about the same distance from the UK. While Denmark is 3x the distance. Dose that mean the UK should rule them. And fuck what the people living there think. Hell the Republic of Ireland is less then 80 miles and we used to rule them. Why do they deserve freedom to make their own choice. Or for that matter why do we now let northern island remain rather then forcing half the population to join RoI. They can have a vote anytime they express the support to do so (at least since 97).
And hell if you look as the Caribbean sea and the Golf of Mexico with a 350 mile radius to any larger nation. It becomes a complete fucking mess.
The whole idea that Argentina has any claim at all based on location is just utterly insane.
Whoa there. Awfully defensive about your past imperialism, aren't ya? What's insane is the number of people still kowtowing to the British government because they had a big navy 200 years ago.
How the hell is supporting the democratic rights of settlers supporting imperialism. An idea that is founded in feudalism.
Besides how the hell is the Falklands Islands to do with imperialism. No one lived their at all before UK settlers. UK was the first human landing France Spain and UK ran military out posts for decades. Argentina less then 1 year. Then some UK folk built a settlement. At no point in the past has any nation taken over the homes of other nations citizens. In fact the closest we have seen is Argentina trying to force its way. A nation also built by Spanish imperialism.
Your arguments are totally unfounded bullshit with less then 0 merit.
I wouldn't waste your time with this fool.
For strategic sheep purposes
This is the best summary I could come up with:
British ministers regularly cite the results of a 2013 referendum that saw close to 100% of voters on the islands, which has a population of about 3,500 people, opt to remain a UK Overseas Territory.
Read more:A pope critic and Al Capone fan - meet Argentina's new presidentFalklands War: Remembering the friends who never made it to breakfast
In an interview with daily newspaper La Nacion, Mr Milei proposed the UK hand over the Falklands to his South American country in a similar way to how Hong Kong was given over to Chinese rule in 1997.
The populist politician, a self-described anarcho-capitalist who has been compared to former US president Donald Trump, conceded that the views of those living on the islands "cannot be ignored".
Rejecting any negotiation on the future of the Falklands, Mr Shapps highlighted how Royal Navy ship HMS Forth had been sent back to "protect the islands" in the southern hemisphere.
It comes after Mr Sunak criticised the EU for its "regrettable choice of words" in July after it appeared to have endorsed the name Argentina prefers.
The original article contains 475 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
