It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Falklands referendum: Voters choose to remain UK territory

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 01:25 PM

Originally posted by GrandStrategy
the people living in the Falklands seem unusually keen to remain with Britain.

The people of the Falklands ARE British. They are British citizens. How did you expect them to vote?

posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 01:29 PM
It is interesting to note that the only part of South America which was not subject t to violent colonialism was the Falklands, as it was uninhabited. Argentina was formed from the gore of oppressive colonialism which was still going on just over a hundred years ago with the Patagonian genocide. Just remember that fact when Argentinean officials rant on about British colonialism.

- Number of natives killed in colonising the Falklands = 0
- Number of natives killed in colonising Argentina = who cares, pass the rifle!

The historical record involves all sorts of interesting treaties and understandings between France, Britain and Spain, all of which has asserted sovereignty at some point. The British move in the 1830s was a peaceful reassertion of a continuous sovereign claim and not some violent act as some people like to portray. Subsequent agreements and Argentinean acquiescence demonstrate Argentinean acceptance of British sovereignty.

The Argentineans only really started to resurrect their claims in the dark days of WW2 when it looked like the British would fail and the Nazi sympathetic-Argentineans saw opportunities to profit. I point this out to highlight that Argentina has not been consistent in their claims for the Falklands and those lapses are telling.

Since the 1940s, the policy of successive Argentinean governments (dictatorships and democratic) has been to forge one single nationalistic goal, which is why so many Argentineans are so keen to “reclaim” the Islands. In this period the creep of lies and misinformation has nurtured an atmosphere which has manifested itself in one war and now just bubbles over in a kind of unpleasant racism and bullying.

No wonder the residents of the Islands want to be anything other than Argentinean. If Argentina really wanted the Islands (plus everything else the British have in the South Atlantic which they claim) then they need to start showing that they can be pleasant neighbours.


edit on 12/3/2013 by paraphi because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 01:33 PM

Originally posted by GrandStrategy
99% said they want to stay? Weird.

On a vote about whether grass is green I wouldn't expect 99% agreement

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, just that the people living in the Falklands seem unusually keen to remain with Britain.

Not really. If they become independent and the UK military leaves they know they will be invaded by Argentina again promptly. While the UN does nothing and South America cheers.

The choice is to remain within the UK or vote for the near certainty of invasion by a hostile neighbour with a history of instability, repression and gross economic incompetence.

Its not unusual at all.

posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 03:24 PM
reply to post by Annunak1

You do realise that the Argentine people colonised and displaced the native peoples ? So by your own logic, those of Spanish decent should give Argentina back to the indigenous people ?

posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 09:09 PM
reply to post by Annunak1

Yeah sure kick all the Aussies out of Australia too !

I've had the pleasure of living/serving on the Falkland Islands and let me assure you they want to remain British.

Looks like they have better gun laws than anywhere now lol.

The Spanish have more claim to the Falklands that anyone. ( excluding the British )
edit on 12-3-2013 by FawnyKate because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 01:52 AM
I think the bottom line is islands inhabited for near on 200 years through countless generations has the right to determine who they want to be ruled by, if anyone. They have spoken, the Argentinian government can waste more of its tax payers money jet setting around the world trying to convince everyone of their argument and trying to make out that the argument is rational hence the support, rather than governments supporting Argentina are mainly due to anti-British sentiment or back door deals, it is what it is. Time for Argentina's government to get on with sorting out their country and may be win back the 60% that are now apparently against the current government due to the state of the economy and corruption, let the British government get back to fleecing the tax payer because I can't expect any less and let the islanders live in peace, not fear, now and for future generations.

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 02:24 AM

Originally posted by glen200376
reply to post by Annunak1

You do realise that the people were their long before the war?
Why the hell would the winner of a war hand the islands back to the facist invaders who lost?
The islands have never belonged to Agentina and never will whether you like it or not.
Argentina have more need to sort out their economy with their nice 25% inflation.

Are you sure you're from Scotland ?

I think that someone was already living on the Falklands when the English first "discovered it", don't you ? Or are you claiming that the English have spawned on the Falklands since ancient times ?

edit on 13-3-2013 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 02:52 AM
Argentina is a country that can't even govern itself, why do they deserve to govern the Falklands, against the wishes of it's inhabitants?

I have an idea, let's have Argentina be ruled by the Falkland natives. I'll bet their hyper-inflation and dicey banking system would be fixed shortly.

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 02:57 AM
reply to post by SevenThunders

wow...a brilliant argument.

Let's then take away all countries with unstable economies from their people and give them to the British or the Germans.

Bravo !!!!

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 03:22 AM
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

I think you should read the first page. It has already been discussed that the Falklands never had any indiginous people. It has only ever been colonised by europeans...

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 04:40 AM
reply to post by Wide-Eyes

I realize that...but first inhabitants of the Island were not British...

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 06:10 AM

Originally posted by Annunak1
reply to post by glen200376

It all started with colonization. They don't belong there. Why don't they find a volcano to live on.
Same as with the rich white folks in South Africa living in their nice mansions and luxury while the native people live in poverty. Just because a country has been colonized in the past don't give people the right to live there and act like they are better.

You haven't been to South Africa in a while, have you?

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 07:39 AM
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

They were French.

I'd be happier seeing the Islands handed over the France than the foaming at the mouth psychopaths which Argentina calls its government.

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 08:09 AM

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by glen200376
reply to post by GrandStrategy

Maybe because they are British?
Three people voted no.

It's still an unusually high percentage, to have 99.8% of people agree on any political issue. Hints at a society that's wholly indoctrinated if you ask me.

Still, it's nice to see the British government FINALLY care about self-determination and democracy. Shame they didn't give the inhabitants of Diego Garcia the same courtesy... democracy and self-determination for all (who will overwhelmingly vote in our favour

edit on 12-3-2013 by GrandStrategy because: (no reason given)

Actually it's not. It depends on the issue. In scotland in 1994 we had a vote on whether we would like the water to remain in public hands or be privatised as they were in England, the result :

97% voted NO to privatisation.

There are some issues that go way beyond politics. What do you think would happen if you held a vote in the US for remaining independant or returned to UK rule.......

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 08:16 AM

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by Wide-Eyes

I realize that...but first inhabitants of the Island were not British...

This argument becomes absurd. Look all but 4 of Vernet's colony remained on the island, civilians were not kicked off of the island only soldiers. The French did indeed base a port on the island but they got paid off to leave, but again this was near on 200 years ago, can people not understand this? Where do we draw the line? If Argentina, a country that did not even exist back when the Falklands was first claimed by the British, has a claim to these islands, then every country around the world can look back 200 years and put a claim in for land that may not even have ever belonged to them, but that is simply close to their borders or may have had some common factor in history. Do you see how this will never end in Argentina's favour? It cannot, because there is no claim there! I think people's distaste of Britain being this colonial powerhouse 200 years ago has warped their minds, without realising that they are condoning Argentina's colonial like bullying and threats. The French and the Spanish would have a greater claim, but neither see it as an issue, because for those countries the issue was settled all those years ago!

As I said, everyone should let it be now, let the islanders live freely in peace rather than live in fear that an invasion could happen at any moment or that they will be sold off to Argentina and be forced out. There is no freedom in that for people who have been on the island for many many generations spanning near on 200 years and if there is no freedom in living under the bullying tactics of an aggressive Argentine government, how can anyone here have any opinion other than to be against Argentina's ongoing fascist rhetoric? You're either for freedom, or you're not, it really is that simple.
edit on 13-3-2013 by SecretFace because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 08:21 AM

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by Wide-Eyes

I realize that...but first inhabitants of the Island were not British...

Splitting hairs now aren't we. The first people walking on the Islands were french. But to say at that second they were inhabited by the French would be ludicrous. Inhabited implies living there surely ? If we are talking about the first colonies (ie people living there in a self sustaining manner) then it would be the British.

They are called history books. You should have read they are full of magical information!

One thing is for certain there was no such country as Argentina at the time the french, british and spanish were arguing over the islands. The "future" argentinians were busy slaughtering native indians in an area of south america around the river plate in order to occupy it........

I think Japan should be returned to the Chinese after all it's an island off their coast, isn't it....oh the logic!

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 08:59 AM
reply to post by Annunak1

You mean like Jacob Zuma living in his 300 Million S.A. Rand mansion? You know nothing about South Africa so shut it! The poor blacks that were poor blacks during the white aparthed regime (Which I never supported) are still, over a decade later, poor blacks!

Good on the British! This is exactly the result I was hoping for! Go Falklands! British forever!

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 09:01 AM
reply to post by Annunak1

And another thing. It was YOUR forefathers that created apartheid rule in South Africa! Where do you think the Afrikaans language spoken in S.A. came from? DUTCH!
edit on 13/3/13 by wiser3 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 09:10 AM
I can't help but see a GIANT elephant in the room....... Aren't Argentinians Spanish
So in accusing Brittons of being squatters on the Islands are they not also Squatters of South America

Furthermore the Islands in Chronological Order of discovery and settlement is as follows:
1. Penguins and seaguls
2. Dutch (discovery)
3. French & British (Temporary)
4. British & Spanish(only temporary, a launching pad for a greater land theft).
5. British Colonised permanently (being the second longest colonitsts of the Islands, only second to penguins and Seaguls).
So looking at the details on my small list who deserves to live there

Further details: 1600 the Islands were rediscovered(being already known to exist by South American Indians) by the dutch then named Sebald Islands but were not colonised.
90 years later Captain John Strong accidentally sailed into the islands but still not colonised. They continued to explore the Islands and the Channel between was named the Falkland Channel after Anthony Cary Viscount of Falkland, and subsequently the Islands where given their name.

1764 commander Louis Antoine de Bougainville built the first settlement on Berkeley Sound, In 1765 British captain John Byron claimed Saunders Island on West Falkland, he named the harbour Port Egmont and established a settlement 1766. Byron claimed the island group for King George III but didn't know the french had already claimed parts of the Islands. Spain took the French colony in 1767, and placed an administrator there.

1770, Spain attacked Port Egmont and drove off the British. War was narrowly avoided by a treaty and the British got back the Port Egmont settlement.

Long story short.... 1829 Buenos Aires and Britain allowed a settlement on the Islands but under Brittish Protection...yada, yada Buenos Aires tried to make it a prison colony but failed due to a mutiny, then in 1833 the Brittish ordered the Buenos Aires Garrison to go home and made the Islands into a Naval Outpost but in 1840 the British permanently colonised the Islands.

So if your going by discovery it's the Dutch.....If your going by Colonised time its the British. If your going by locality it belongs to the Penguins and Seaguls

I have a suggestion which is completely and utterly fair...
Argentinians GO HOME to Spain.

Following that event then the Brittish Islanders might return to their own shores.

p.s just to add... 1517 or so population.... When it was quoted there was more than 2000 or more. Would you allow a Britton to vote in the US presidential elections just because he worked there for a month? A Visitor or Long Stay Visitor... DOES NOT a voter make. Sounds like a play from the Russia V Georgia playbook.
edit on 13-3-2013 by DreamerOracle because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 11:44 AM
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

Where did you get the idea that I was claiming that Brits had spawned on the islands since ancient times?
FYI the war was just over thirty years ago.
Finally,yes I am from Scotland.Contary to popular belief we don't all lap up der furher Salmond if that's what you are getting at.
edit on 13/3/2013 by glen200376 because: typo

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in