If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Tensions rise between England and Argentina over territorial disputes of the Falkland Islands. England remains firm on their control of the islands for strategic sheep purposes   (cnn.com) divider line 152
    More: Asinine, Falkland Islands, territorial dispute, Argentina, Cristina Fernandez, foreign offices, British Military, British rule, England  
•       •       •

3909 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jan 2012 at 12:22 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



152 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-26 12:25:13 PM
farm8.staticflickr.com
 
2012-01-26 12:25:24 PM
This is not a repeat from 1982?
 
2012-01-26 12:25:26 PM
The Falklands thing was a fight between two bald men over a comb.

- Jorge Luis Borges
 
2012-01-26 12:25:59 PM
It's about oil. It's always about oil.
 
2012-01-26 12:26:37 PM
Didn't this not end well for Argentina the last time they went down this road?
 
2012-01-26 12:27:29 PM

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.


This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.
 
2012-01-26 12:27:46 PM
Well, they did have a flag.
 
2012-01-26 12:28:05 PM
Argentina's claims are absurd.
 
2012-01-26 12:30:40 PM

Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?


No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.
 
2012-01-26 12:31:56 PM
I see what ewe did there, subby.
 
2012-01-26 12:32:06 PM

cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.


You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans
 
2012-01-26 12:32:09 PM
Ah, the rattling of Argentinian sabres... is it election time or has their currency devalued again?
 
2012-01-26 12:32:45 PM
24.media.tumblr.com

Repeat from 1982
 
2012-01-26 12:33:54 PM
The Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings might need a new verse and an extra wing.
 
2012-01-26 12:34:27 PM

phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans


Except the whole "currently populated by people who prefer the status quo" thing.
 
2012-01-26 12:36:18 PM

YixilTesiphon: phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans

Except the whole "currently populated by people who prefer the status quo" thing.


And the fact that the present-day Romans are scared of leaving Mamma's cooking/laundry service.
 
2012-01-26 12:38:22 PM

phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans


And Mexico owns a good portion of the US since they predate the US colonists.
 
2012-01-26 12:38:46 PM

andersoncouncil42: The Falklands thing was a fight between two bald men over a comb.

- Jorge Luis Borges


Truly he was one of the greatest authors and poets of the 20th century, and pretty high up in history.

I wish I could read Spanish; I'd like to read his work without translation.
 
2012-01-26 12:39:34 PM

Dinobot: phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans

And Mexico owns a good portion of the US since they predate the US colonists.


But the anti-Israel folks don't say we should give the Falklands to Argentina or Texas to the Mexicans, do they?

(Stirring the pot.)
 
2012-01-26 12:39:37 PM
Sorry, I know this is a serious matter, but any time someone mentions the Falkland Islands I think of this...
 
2012-01-26 12:39:42 PM

toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.


They still have a nuke or two.
 
2012-01-26 12:39:54 PM
Now two boys have been found rubbing linseed oil in the school cormorant.
 
2012-01-26 12:40:19 PM

toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.


Granted the Brits aren't at their Cold War levels, but has there been any massive build up in Argentina that one British sub full of cruise missiles couldn't take care of in about half an hour?
 
2012-01-26 12:41:28 PM

cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.


Not really... Spain had colonist in one of the islands around the same time as England. But they abandoned the colony as it sometimes happens. The English also at some point also abandoned theirs. Upon each side abandoning the islands, they basically left a "plaque" saying they'd be back to maintain their claims. Now, I don't know if this plaque thing is legal or not... but given that both England and Spain did it, I assume both nations recognize the use of plaques to hold a land claim.

Argentina's reasoning is that they inherited the Spanish claim after their war of independence. If Argentina does have a legal claim it is to part of the islands, not the whole though. But since they've been kept out since the 19th century and there's people living there now who should not be forced to submit to Argentine rule against their will, maybe they should just sue for financial compensation.
 
2012-01-26 12:41:42 PM
England should offer to sell the islands for a fair, but high price. One that includes the value of the oil, the sheep, the land, and the military losses sustained in the last war. If Argentina doesn't pay it, then I guess they don't really want the islands after all, now do they? They just want none of the other kids to have them.
 
2012-01-26 12:42:34 PM
the people of the falklands should be allowed to choose whom they want to be affiliated with.
 
2012-01-26 12:43:26 PM

YixilTesiphon: phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans

Except the whole "currently populated by people who prefer the status quo" thing.


Argentina never had a claim on the Falklands.The Falklands are not even close to Argentina.. A better analogy would be France claiming Iceland... because, you know, no good reason, they just want it.
 
2012-01-26 12:43:28 PM
Q. What do you call the sheep brought back from the Falklands by the Royal Marines?

A. War Brides.
 
2012-01-26 12:44:23 PM

toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.


Sure they do.

There's four Eurofighter Typhoons stationed at the Falklands. That's enough to wipe out the Argentinian Air Force in the morning and still be home in time for tea.

And the sub that's usually there helps.

Also, what problem is Argentina trying to distract their people from this time?
 
2012-01-26 12:44:41 PM
As a Canadian I can support Argentina in this and welcome the return of Canada's newest territories. The Northeast Territory (current Greenland), The Westerner Northwest Territory (current state of Alaska), the new additions to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador which will henceforth be known as the province of Newfoundland and Labrador and St. Pierre and Miquelon.

Also, in order to appease our southern neighbours, we'll accept the state of Michigan. You wanted rid of it anyways
 
2012-01-26 12:46:00 PM

phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans


The Celts were there before the Romans. If we're going by original settling and not native peoples, their claim would predate Italy's. The question would be who to credit with that claim, since it would be difficult to tie them to a modern nation. At least as far as I know it would. I'm not a historian.
 
2012-01-26 12:46:03 PM

jagec: England should offer to sell the islands for a fair, but high price. One that includes the value of the oil, the sheep, the land, and the military losses sustained in the last war. If Argentina doesn't pay it, then I guess they don't really want the islands after all, now do they? They just want none of the other kids to have them.


I'm sure the British government would consider that, but I'm not sure how the inhabitants of the islands, who all consider themselves British, would feel about it. The Falklands are like the Northern Ireland of South America.
 
2012-01-26 12:46:15 PM
Argies wanna die again?

static6.businessinsider.com
 
2012-01-26 12:46:31 PM

LoneDoggie: toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.

Granted the Brits aren't at their Cold War levels, but has there been any massive build up in Argentina that one British sub full of cruise missiles couldn't take care of in about half an hour?


The question is, would the UK be willing to use weapons of mass destruction to keep their claim to the Falklands? I mean, yeah, if the UK really wanted to, they could nuke Buenos Aires and solve the problem pretty quick, but I really hope they're not that crazy. Do they have the conventional forces necessary to defend the Falklands? Probably, but it's not a foregone conclusion; Argentina's military isn't something to just ignore.

Of course, this is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Neither Argentina nor the UK are going to fire a single round; this is just saber-rattling.

A more interesting question is one of Gibraltar. I've never understood how Spain and the UK can be on such good terms (especially being members together in the EU), when they refuse to acknowledge each other's full territory. It would be like Turkey joining the EU while refusing to acknowledge Cyprus's claim to the northern half of their country.
 
2012-01-26 12:46:32 PM

amishkarl: As a Canadian I can support Argentina in this and welcome the return of Canada's newest territories. The Northeast Territory (current Greenland), The Westerner Northwest Territory (current state of Alaska), the new additions to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador which will henceforth be known as the province of Newfoundland and Labrador and St. Pierre and Miquelon.

Also, in order to appease our southern neighbours, we'll accept the state of Michigan. You wanted rid of it anyways


We like you guys way too much to foist Detroit on you.
 
2012-01-26 12:47:34 PM

LargeCanine: YixilTesiphon: phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans

Except the whole "currently populated by people who prefer the status quo" thing.

Argentina never had a claim on the Falklands.The Falklands are not even close to Argentina.. A better analogy would be France claiming Iceland... because, you know, no good reason, they just want it.


That's absurd! Using that logic, American Indian migrated from Asia so the United States should be owned by the Chinese. Oh, wait...
 
2012-01-26 12:47:48 PM

amishkarl: As a Canadian I can support Argentina in this and welcome the return of Canada's newest territories. The Northeast Territory (current Greenland), The Westerner Northwest Territory (current state of Alaska), the new additions to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador which will henceforth be known as the province of Newfoundland and Labrador and St. Pierre and Miquelon.

Also, in order to appease our southern neighbours, we'll accept the state of Michigan. You wanted rid of it anyways


I've always wanted to go to St. Pierre et Miquelon, for no reason other than I can say I've been.

It's crazy expensive to get to though, which is silly. It costs more to fly there than it does to Paris or Tokyo.
 
2012-01-26 12:49:36 PM
What the Argentinians are demanding - that the Falklands be handed over irrespective of the desires of its people - "is actually far more like colonialism because these people want to remain British and the Argentinians want them to do something else."

How can anyone seriously argue against that with a straight face?

Isn't the whole point of the anti-colonial banner that Argentina hides behind that, above all, people should have the right to political self-determination?
 
2012-01-26 12:50:48 PM

toraque: No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.


Bull.

They have four Eurofighter Typhoons down there, thats all they will need to swat the Argentine Air Force out of the sky, a tanker, patrol aircraft and SAR helicopters

They have a Type 23 frigate, a patrol boat and submarines patrol down in the South Atlantic.

Against the best planes in the Argentine Air Force the Typhoons would have an easy time of it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Air_Force#Inventory
 
2012-01-26 12:52:02 PM
Argentina better watch out...or England will go out and rent a cargo ship and go down there and do something. Sheep sovereignty and what not.
 
2012-01-26 12:52:04 PM

Dinobot: phalamir: cgraves67: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: It's about oil. It's always about oil.

This, sadly. And Argentina has never had a claim to the islands. The first colonists were Brits. Argentina is full of shiat.

You realize that by that logic, Italy owns England, since the Romans predated the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans

And Mexico owns a good portion of the US since they predate the US colonists.


And Mexico should give back all its land to the Aztecs, Maya and other tribes since they predate the Spanish colonists. I guess that means Texas reverts to Apache or Caddo control. If you can still find any.
 
2012-01-26 12:52:33 PM

Lord Dimwit: LoneDoggie: toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.

Granted the Brits aren't at their Cold War levels, but has there been any massive build up in Argentina that one British sub full of cruise missiles couldn't take care of in about half an hour?

The question is, would the UK be willing to use weapons of mass destruction to keep their claim to the Falklands? I mean, yeah, if the UK really wanted to, they could nuke Buenos Aires and solve the problem pretty quick, but I really hope they're not that crazy. Do they have the conventional forces necessary to defend the Falklands? Probably, but it's not a foregone conclusion; Argentina's military isn't something to just ignore.

Of course, this is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Neither Argentina nor the UK are going to fire a single round; this is just saber-rattling.

A more interesting question is one of Gibraltar. I've never understood how Spain and the UK can be on such good terms (especially being members together in the EU), when they refuse to acknowledge each other's full territory. It would be like Turkey joining the EU while refusing to acknowledge Cyprus's claim to the northern half of their country.


The Brits have about two companies of infantry and four Typhoons on the Falklands. And zero aircraft carriers any more. If the Argies can knock a few holes in the one runway capable of launching Typhoons, there's not much the Brits can do to stop a determined invasion.
 
2012-01-26 12:54:07 PM

Lord Dimwit: I've always wanted to go to St. Pierre et Miquelon, for no reason other than I can say I've been.

It's crazy expensive to get to though, which is silly. It costs more to fly there than it does to Paris or Tokyo.


Really? I guess that'd be because there are so many more flights to major cities. Maybe look at flying to St. John's and then driving to Fortune and taking the ferry over to St Pierre. Don't know if it'd be any cheaper but you'd see the lovely Newf as well
 
2012-01-26 12:56:21 PM

Spade: toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.

Sure they do.

There's four Eurofighter Typhoons stationed at the Falklands. That's enough to wipe out the Argentinian Air Force in the morning and still be home in time for tea.

And the sub that's usually there helps.

Also, what problem is Argentina trying to distract their people from this time?



"Britain can do 'nothing' to prevent Argentina retaking Falkland Islands" according to the guy who led the task force which retook the island in 1982.
Link (new window)

Britain no longer has aircraft carriers or harriers to support any force. Four planes on the island isn't a whole lot, if shooting starts.
 
2012-01-26 12:56:24 PM

Aardvark Inc.: Ah, the rattling of Argentinian sabres... is it election time or has their currency devalued again?


The election just passed but the currency has been weakening consistently relative to the dollar. Yes, even compared to the US Dollar. Employment is good but inflation is still out of control. They probably hope that, if indeed there are any oil resources there, it would prop up their currency and domestic spending.
 
2012-01-26 12:56:40 PM

Mishno: Lord Dimwit: LoneDoggie: toraque: Robert1966: This is not a repeat from 1982?

No, it's not. This time around, the Brits don't have the military might to back up their claim.

Granted the Brits aren't at their Cold War levels, but has there been any massive build up in Argentina that one British sub full of cruise missiles couldn't take care of in about half an hour?

The question is, would the UK be willing to use weapons of mass destruction to keep their claim to the Falklands? I mean, yeah, if the UK really wanted to, they could nuke Buenos Aires and solve the problem pretty quick, but I really hope they're not that crazy. Do they have the conventional forces necessary to defend the Falklands? Probably, but it's not a foregone conclusion; Argentina's military isn't something to just ignore.

Of course, this is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Neither Argentina nor the UK are going to fire a single round; this is just saber-rattling.

A more interesting question is one of Gibraltar. I've never understood how Spain and the UK can be on such good terms (especially being members together in the EU), when they refuse to acknowledge each other's full territory. It would be like Turkey joining the EU while refusing to acknowledge Cyprus's claim to the northern half of their country.

The Brits have about two companies of infantry and four Typhoons on the Falklands. And zero aircraft carriers any more. If the Argies can knock a few holes in the one runway capable of launching Typhoons, there's not much the Brits can do to stop a determined invasion.


Right, the Argentinians could certainly take the Falklands, but keeping them is another matter. The Royal Navy could send a carrier or two (I think they have two or three currently) and retake the islands.

Of course, once the carriers left, Argentina could just take the islands again, ad infinitum. It would really boil down to who had the political will to spend the lives and resources to really hold onto the islands, and whether or not the UK decided to go nuclear (which I can't imagine they would). In the end, I think if the Argentinians really wanted the islands more than the British, the Falklands would be Las Malvinas, but that's just my armchair analysis.
 
2012-01-26 12:59:35 PM

amishkarl: Lord Dimwit: I've always wanted to go to St. Pierre et Miquelon, for no reason other than I can say I've been.

It's crazy expensive to get to though, which is silly. It costs more to fly there than it does to Paris or Tokyo.

Really? I guess that'd be because there are so many more flights to major cities. Maybe look at flying to St. John's and then driving to Fortune and taking the ferry over to St Pierre. Don't know if it'd be any cheaper but you'd see the lovely Newf as well


Yeah, I looked into that too. Flying into St. Johns is reasonably expensive (as in, with clever scheduling I could get to Paris for the same amount), and it's a bit of a drive to get to Fortune.

I would totally do it, but my wife has told me, in no uncertain terms, that if we're going to take the time, we're going somewhere like Paris or Tokyo (her two favorite cities), and I can't really argue with her.
 
2012-01-26 12:59:40 PM
yeah no one in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland EVER died defending the falklands...

it's only JUST England, not britain.. not the UK..

Just England.

must be american,

sigh, ignorant and stupid.
 
2012-01-26 01:00:25 PM
I would highly suggest Argentina acquire nuclear weapons or start a nuclear weapons program.
 
2012-01-26 01:04:01 PM

Funk Brothers: I would highly suggest Argentina acquire nuclear weapons or start a nuclear weapons program.


They had one... it was pretty far along too. I understand it wasn't as close as Brazil's though. Argentina can even build its own nuclear plants. But they abandoned the weapons program and joined the non-proliferation treaty. I think Brazilian scientist still visit and observe Argentine nuclear facilities and Argentine ones visit Brazil's as part of a deal to make sure neither side develops the bomb.
 
Displayed 50 of 152 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report