• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    On a differrent note: What would anybody want of the Falkland Islands? I mean, it is a lousy island with 3000 inhabitants and half a million sheep, and they live of fishing, wool, and day tourism from cruise ships.

    On the one hand, maintaining a military presence equivalent to more than half the number of native inhabitants costs the British a shitload of money. On the other hand, starting another bloody war with the UK in the middle of an economic catastrophe over a piece of rock with sheep does not make any sense for Argentina, either.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      On a differrent note: What would anybody want of the Falkland Islands?

      Oil in the nearby ocean ownership is the reason why.

      Its the way international treaties work as far as claiming ownership of resources in the ocean.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nationalist Kvetch entirely, those are Brits on the island, not just British citizens, full on ethnically British Islanders who’ve lived there almost since anyone knew the islands were there to begin with.

      When polled they overwhelmingly voted in favor of remaining with the UK

      Falklands are as British as black pudding and the royal corgis. Argentina just keeps pressing the claim because it makes a good nationalist distraction whenever right wing nutcases inevitably prove to be completely incompetent.

      Also, any attempt to link it with some overarching notion of decolonization is complete bunk, the islands were uninhabited before they were discovered it’s only colonialism if you think the very concept of an exclave is colonialist because that’s in effect what they are, a very far removed exclave.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        those are Brits on the island, not just British citizens, full on ethnically British Islanders

        Why are you mentioning this? Does that mean they’re worth saving more than a citizen who isn’t “ethnically British”?

        What is that anyway? The UK is a collection of countries: England, Scotland, etc. Is there a hierarchy of British ethnicities in your mind? You implied that there is some separation between certain groups, so you must have thought about it. Right?

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          They were very very clearly mentioning it to show that Argentina has no legitimate claim or argument using any traditional reasoning. You had to work very hard to purposefully misinterpret that statement. Pathetically so.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was pointing out that they aren’t an indigenous people under British colonial rule, they are themselves Brits who identify solidly with Britain.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On a differrent note: What would anybody want of the Falkland Islands? I mean, it is a lousy island with 3000 inhabitants and half a million sheep

      So it’s a Scotland in the southern hemisphere.