Argentina demands UK nuke apology - Page 4

Master Zen · December 10, 2003, 03:53

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell

Britain reoccupied it before Argentina did. On top of that, Argentina attempted to reclaim it and Argentina failed. As a prominent mod here would say, "Case closed".

umm, nope, Britain left the falklands in 1774, this was not done by war nor by pressure, they just left. Spain took over and when it lost control of its south american colonies, Argentina settled it. Then came the US incident which destroyed the Argentinian settlement and after that the Brits came in and re-settled it, AFTER Argentina did.

Now I know what some of you might say: what's the difference between Spain's takeover and Britain's second takeover? Simple, in the first case the Brits left voluntarily, in the second case, the Argentinians were kicked out.

Imran Siddiqui · December 10, 2003, 03:55

Quote:

Because the Argentines CAN'T settle it.

Take ANY piece of land in the world, kick out its native inhabitants, now bring your own settlers and settle it for the next 100 years, now ask those settlers if they want to join up with the old native country, gee, what do you think the answer will be?

So what's your beef? It's 'unfair'? Boohoo... and let's return ALL land to its natives and live in city states.

Master Zen · December 10, 2003, 03:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

So what's your beef? It's 'unfair'? Boohoo... and let's return ALL land to its natives and live in city states.

If you would care to understand my posts, all I'm pointing out is that Argentina does have a legitimate claim on that island and its not just silly propaganda that they teach their kids and print on their maps.

Imran Siddiqui · December 10, 2003, 04:00

Quote:

all I'm pointing out is that Argentina does have a legitimate claim on that island and its not just silly propaganda that they teach their kids and print on their maps.

Actually they don't and yes, it is. The British are there, their settlers have been there and they won a war over it. Argentina has no claim over the islands whatsoever, except to themselves. No one recognizes any legitimate claim by Argentina to those islands.

So I do understand your posts, they just happen to be wrong

.

Master Zen · December 10, 2003, 05:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

So I do understand your posts, they just happen to be wrong

.

I'm glad that makes you feel better.

Sikander · December 10, 2003, 07:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
I demand that all the citizens of the US give me at least $10, for all of them have pointed a LETHAL object in my direction at least once in their lifetimes.

Evil Americans.

Hey I didn't do it on purpose, its just that my penis is curved.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 07:29

Imran, Latin America (even Chile) and Spain support our claim at the UN

Sikander · December 10, 2003, 07:40

Quote:

Originally posted by JCG

Because they are basically Brit-descendants who wouldn't want it any other way.

"Nice" strategy though...kick out the people who are actually geographically close to the place, settle it with your own people, who will evidently never want to change things, and then bingo! the land's yours forever (or at least a very long time) even if your nation's thousands of miles from the place.

It's a nice strategy if you are bent on wasting a lot of money.

TheStinger · December 10, 2003, 07:43

Look there ours and you not having them back.

And whlie we're at it Spain can't have Gibraltar back either.

Gangerolf · December 10, 2003, 07:45

What would the Argentinians have done if they won the war? Would they kick out the Falklanders? Did they have a plan at all?

Winston · December 10, 2003, 07:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Gangerolf
What would the Argentinians have done if they won the war?

They would have turned it into a gigantic heliport for sheep.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 07:54

The "plan" was to land a symbolic force no more than a few soldiers to force UK to negotiate the islands status, not to go to war, they weren´t expecting UK to really care about it IMHO. Nobody knows what would have happenend if we had won (

), I think nothing probably.

TheStinger · December 10, 2003, 07:57

They would have put all there political opponents on there, it would be a new way to dissappear people.

BeBro · December 10, 2003, 08:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Unspeakable Horror
The "plan" was to land a symbolic force no more than a few soldiers to force UK to negotiate the islands status, not to go to war, they weren´t expecting UK to really care about it IMHO. Nobody knows what would have happenend if we had won (

), I think nothing probably.

I don´t know what you call a "symbolic force", but one aircraft carrier, one heavy cruiser, three destroyers, three frigates, two landing ships, several smaller ships and a landing force of ca. 5000 troops (April 2 1982 at Port Stanley) is a bit much symbolism IMO.

Saras · December 10, 2003, 09:18

The paras and royal marine commandos wholesomly whopped their arses though.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 09:25

Those are the reinforcements that arrived later.

Here´s a better and possibly more accurate description of the landing force.
http://www.naval-history.net/F15invasion.htm

Bereta_Eder · December 10, 2003, 09:29

Juntas are known to do stupid and not calculated things.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 09:37

I agree

.

BeBro · December 10, 2003, 09:49

Quote:

[SIZE=1] Originally posted by Unspeakable Horror
Those are the reinforcements that arrived later.

Not exactly, they all belonged to the forces that took part in the initial phase. Your link only refers to the forces directly participating in the landing. But the naval forces I mentioned were part of the task force(s) that secured the entire action from the beginning (only after the sinking of the Belgrano - early may - most bigger Arg. warships did not participate anymore).

Edit: Your site mentions the complete task forces on another page
http://www.naval-history.net/F17argforces.htm, althought not exactly those I mentioned above, but the point is that it was quite a strong force altogether.

You are probably correct that the full personal strenght at the Islands wasn´t reached on April2, but soon in the following days, so it doesn´t seem that only a symbolic action was planned.

Saras · December 10, 2003, 09:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Unspeakable Horror
Those are the reinforcements that arrived later.

Here´s a better and possibly more accurate description of the landing force.
http://www.naval-history.net/F15invasion.htm

Was actually browsing that site for a while.

Of course the reinforcements kicked their arse. The brits would be crazy to keep garrisons all over the world. The luxury of being a seaborne power is being able to go across the globe to deliver some whoppass.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 10:02

Bepro: Yes you are right, I stand corrected then.

Cruddy · December 10, 2003, 11:02

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
Juntas are known to do stupid and not calculated things.

To be honest, given the hostile climate down there, I'm surprised anyone wants to live there... but some do.

How's about this - we give back the Falklands to the Argentines, if Argentina is given back to the natives who were there before the Spanish arrived?

Of course it will be a little bit crowded, but hey, I'm sure you'll soon get used mud, snow, ice and sheep.

Winston · December 10, 2003, 11:04

What about the penguins, won't somebody please think of the penguins.

VetLegion · December 10, 2003, 15:17

Britain looks like it barely won that war. Did it affect her military strategies afterwards? How?

Imran Siddiqui · December 10, 2003, 15:36

Quote:

Imran, Latin America (even Chile) and Spain support our claim at the UN

But then you lost the war... so enough of that

.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 16:28

Nope, they are still supporting it

.

Imran Siddiqui · December 10, 2003, 16:29

Which matters not

.

Unspeakable Horror · December 10, 2003, 16:31

Time will tell...

Master Zen · December 10, 2003, 16:59

Quote:

Originally posted by TheStinger
Look there ours and you not having them back.

And whlie we're at it Spain can't have Gibraltar back either.

I'm glad two little worthless pieces of crappy land mentally and emotionally compensate your people for losing 20 million square kilometers of colonies during the last half century

mrmitchell · December 10, 2003, 17:46

Quote:

I'm glad two little worthless pieces of crappy land mentally and emotionally compensate your people for losing 20 million square kilometers of colonies during the last half century

On the other hand, the Argentinians are so awful that they went to war over two little worhtless peices of crappy land, and still whine about it to this day