News Falklands Dispute: Views from Argentina and Beyond

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ryan_m_b
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The recent tensions between Argentina and Britain over the Falkland Islands have resurfaced, particularly regarding the UK's military presence and the deployment of new naval vessels, which Argentina views as militarization. The islanders predominantly wish to remain British, complicating Argentina's claims to sovereignty, which are rooted in historical grievances. The dispute is further fueled by potential oil reserves in the surrounding waters, raising the stakes for both nations. Many outside the UK view the conflict as obscure, with little interest compared to other global issues. Ultimately, the desire for self-determination among the islanders remains a central point in the ongoing debate.
  • #31
A minor yet pathetic development
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17946838
Argentina has riled the Falkland Islands by broadcasting a political advert filmed on the territory without authorisation.

The advert features an Argentine athlete training in the Falklands ahead of the London Olympics in July.

It ends with the slogan: "To compete on English soil, we train on Argentine soil."
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Ryan_m_b said:

Yes, all pretty depressing stuff, but the key word is 'pathetic'. The issue of the Falklands is going nowhere. However, I fear there could be an unpleasant reception for Argentina from the UK public at the forthcoming Olympics. The press would love this. I only hope people will ignore it, both as the pathetic posturing it is and the predictable response from Hammond et al. But I wouldn’t put any money on it.


mheslep said:
I have the opposite opinion. Some Galloway gems:

Agreed, some foolish stuff. But he takes no nonsense off the rich and powerful in the UK, and I stand by my view that his instincts are generally right. He was absolutely brilliant on BBC’s Question Time recently.

Office_Shredder said:
The downturn in acceptance for warfare has generally been over the fact that the public is not clear on whether the military action has any defensive value. I don't think it's obvious that a direct threat to a part of the UK would engender a response like 'what and get into another Iraq?' or anything similar.

Yes, a direct military threat to the UK is one thing, and I think you’re right to say that there would be a strong public demand for action. But I can’t conceive where such a threat could realistically come from.

Elsewhere in the world, though, I’m not sure. The public response to casualties in Afghanistan suggests that politicians would have to be mad to consider hazardous interventions. Of course, politicians are quite good at whipping up the required sentiment through the media when it suits them, but I think that it will be a very long time, if ever, before the UK gets involved in another significant military venture.

As was pointed out earlier in this thread, the reduction in the capacity of the UK to defend the Falklands is greatly exceeded only by the reduction in Argentinian capacity to take them.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K