6 ms·

> How about returning the islands they stole, instead? Obvious troll is obvious but for the sake of facts: a) The Islands were uninhabited when the British se

> How about returning the islands they stole, instead? Obvious troll is obvious but for the sake of facts: a) The Islands were uninhabited when the British settled there. b) Argentina didn't even exist as an independent country when the British claimed the Falklands. > It's not like they're anywhere close to London, are they? It's not like Argentina is anywhere close to Madrid, but there seems to be a lot of people of Spanish descent living there.

mrleinad 9y ago
Ok, for the sake of facts, and I'm not quoting Wikipedia. - Spain named several governors for those islands from 1774 to 1810. Sovereignity was clearly stated by Spain over those islands. - During that time, those islands depended of Buenos Aires government. - If Spain owned Argentina plus the Malvinas, then once Argentina got its independence from Spain, the Malvinas were included as part of that independence. - 1820, frigate La Heroína sailed to Malvinas to take possesion of it - 1825, Great Britain admitted Argentina's independence from Spain, but didn't claim the islands. - 1828, Buenos Aires government granted Port Soledad to Luis Vernet, for building up a colony. For this purpose, he shipped 100 inhabitants to the islands. - 1829, Vernet was named as governor of the islands - 1833, Great Britain took the Malvinas, and expelled the inhabitants from the islands. Not to mention other facts like geology, and that the UN approved the new map for Argentina, which expands the continental shelf all around the islands.[1][2] So, care to tell me how can Argentina OWN all the argentinean sea shelf AROUND the islands, BUT the islands? [1] http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/OP/OP14UPDT.HTM http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/OP/OP14UPDT.HTM [2] http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/IMAGES/ARG-CNSH.JPG http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/IMAGES/ARG-CNSH.J...
- quirkafleeg 9y ago
  > 1825, Great Britain admitted Argentina's independence from Spain, but didn't claim the islands. They claimed the Falkland Islands before Argentina even existed as an independent country, as I said in my post. They didn't have to make a new claim every time they recognized a new country.
  - mrleinad 9y ago
    No, they did not claim it before that year.
  - mrleinad 9y ago
    Also, you didn't address the continental shelf bit of evidence.
    - quirkafleeg 9y ago
      "Evidence" of what? A line drawn by Argentina around territory they want to take over? I'm going to assume you're kidding. a) anyone can claim any territory they like; that doesn't automatically make the claim legitimate or credible b) claiming a territory is academic unless you can actually enforce your claim c) Britain claimed the Falklands (decades) before "Argentina" even existed in any form as an independent country d) if a "British" claim and presence on islands with no native population is illegitimate, what does that make a "Spanish" claim and presence on land taken from the native population that is now called "Argentina"? Maybe the people of the Falklands are going home when the people of Argentina do. > No, they did not claim it before that year. https://www.google.com/search?q=1765+falklands+claim https://www.google.com/search?q=1765+falklands+claim https://www.google.com/search?q=argentine+independence https://www.google.com/search?q=argentine+independence Even after so-called "Argentine independence" - half a century after Britain claimed the Falklands - "Argentina" didn't exist even remotely like the country we know today. In fact even by 1865 - 100 YEARS after the British claimed the Falklands, and 15 years after "Argentina" relinquished claims in the treaty of Arana Southern - this is what "Argentina" looked like: http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~210675~5003722:North-America--South-America- http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~21... So who do the British owe the Falklands to again? Buenos Aires? United Provinces of the River Plate? Argentine Confederation? Chile? Uruguay? Araucania and Patagonia? Spain? Tell me again the one about returning stolen land.
      - mrleinad 9y ago
        Oh, so your argument is that the country changed. Big deal. Again: Spain asserted sovereignity over those islands as part of the colony way before that. The "line drawn by Argentina" is the territory accepted by the UN. That little organization where all the countries are represented. I understand from what you say that you favor the rule of the strongest instead of the actual law and common sense, but it's something real and concrete: the Argentinean sea surrounds the islands, and it's been proved to be a part of the country. The UK has absolutely NOTHING to do there, as their country is on the other hemisphere. I'll reply to the rest of the "arguments" as you so call them, about the "claims" they did. I need to retrieve some information from the library first, so I can give you some proper references, instead of Google, as you did. Maybe that way you can learn something.

mrleinad 9y ago

Ok, for the sake of facts, and I'm not quoting Wikipedia. - Spain named several governors for those islands from 1774 to 1810. Sovereignity was clearly stated by Spain over those islands. - During that time, those islands depended of Buenos Aires government. - If Spain owned Argentina plus the Malvinas, then once Argentina got its independence from Spain, the Malvinas were included as part of that independence. - 1820, frigate La Heroína sailed to Malvinas to take possesion of it - 1825, Great Britain admitted Argentina's independence from Spain, but didn't claim the islands. - 1828, Buenos Aires government granted Port Soledad to Luis Vernet, for building up a colony. For this purpose, he shipped 100 inhabitants to the islands. - 1829, Vernet was named as governor of the islands - 1833, Great Britain took the Malvinas, and expelled the inhabitants from the islands. Not to mention other facts like geology, and that the UN approved the new map for Argentina, which expands the continental shelf all around the islands.[1][2] So, care to tell me how can Argentina OWN all the argentinean sea shelf AROUND the islands, BUT the islands? [1] http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/OP/OP14UPDT.HTM http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/OP/OP14UPDT.HTM [2] http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/IMAGES/ARG-CNSH.JPG http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/IMAGES/ARG-CNSH.J...

quirkafleeg 9y ago
> 1825, Great Britain admitted Argentina's independence from Spain, but didn't claim the islands. They claimed the Falkland Islands before Argentina even existed as an independent country, as I said in my post. They didn't have to make a new claim every time they recognized a new country.
- mrleinad 9y ago
  No, they did not claim it before that year.
- mrleinad 9y ago
  Also, you didn't address the continental shelf bit of evidence.
  - quirkafleeg 9y ago
    "Evidence" of what? A line drawn by Argentina around territory they want to take over? I'm going to assume you're kidding. a) anyone can claim any territory they like; that doesn't automatically make the claim legitimate or credible b) claiming a territory is academic unless you can actually enforce your claim c) Britain claimed the Falklands (decades) before "Argentina" even existed in any form as an independent country d) if a "British" claim and presence on islands with no native population is illegitimate, what does that make a "Spanish" claim and presence on land taken from the native population that is now called "Argentina"? Maybe the people of the Falklands are going home when the people of Argentina do. > No, they did not claim it before that year. https://www.google.com/search?q=1765+falklands+claim https://www.google.com/search?q=1765+falklands+claim https://www.google.com/search?q=argentine+independence https://www.google.com/search?q=argentine+independence Even after so-called "Argentine independence" - half a century after Britain claimed the Falklands - "Argentina" didn't exist even remotely like the country we know today. In fact even by 1865 - 100 YEARS after the British claimed the Falklands, and 15 years after "Argentina" relinquished claims in the treaty of Arana Southern - this is what "Argentina" looked like: http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~210675~5003722:North-America--South-America- http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~21... So who do the British owe the Falklands to again? Buenos Aires? United Provinces of the River Plate? Argentine Confederation? Chile? Uruguay? Araucania and Patagonia? Spain? Tell me again the one about returning stolen land.
    - mrleinad 9y ago
      Oh, so your argument is that the country changed. Big deal. Again: Spain asserted sovereignity over those islands as part of the colony way before that. The "line drawn by Argentina" is the territory accepted by the UN. That little organization where all the countries are represented. I understand from what you say that you favor the rule of the strongest instead of the actual law and common sense, but it's something real and concrete: the Argentinean sea surrounds the islands, and it's been proved to be a part of the country. The UK has absolutely NOTHING to do there, as their country is on the other hemisphere. I'll reply to the rest of the "arguments" as you so call them, about the "claims" they did. I need to retrieve some information from the library first, so I can give you some proper references, instead of Google, as you did. Maybe that way you can learn something.