the falklands

[eFestivals]

God you are one hell of a boring person...

Do you have no fucking morals at all ? Any real ideals ? I know you like to pretend you do but you clearly fucking don't.

The people of Britain want the islands to stay British ... The people of the island want to stay British...

The UN should be standing up for that for a start. But we saw how fucking useless the UN was over Iraq etc.

In principle, I support the idea of self determination.

But principles won't defend those islanders from an Argentinian attack in the future. That defence - a hopeless defence - will be done by the lives of children, perhaps mine and yours.

And those children have rights too. More people died in the last war than lived on the islands. Those soldiers have a right to life no less than the islanders.

The UN was spot on about Iraq. It was the UK and USA that wasn't.

I dispute we can't defend the islands. We are doing right now If we wanted we could level Argentina in a matter of seconds. And that is without talking about the future capabilities coming in the defence pipe line.

PMSL. Those future capabilities are lesser than we have now.

If the argies invaded tomorrow there's fuck all we could do - except send you and your daughter with a gun to see if your actions match your words, or if you're spouting just meaningless hot air.

Would you sacrifice your daughter for those islanders 'rights'? Or does practicality kick in instead?

[Stash]

Ever heard of Oil / Fuel / Energy Security ?

[eFestivals]

But we did... Or did you forget that one ?

We did. Unlike you, I'm old enough to remember, old enough to have fought at the time. Some of my friends did - I know some stuff that can't be repeated about what happened too. You wouldn't believe it.

I also remember what's happened since. Like the fact that our armed services are now only 20% of the size that they were then.

[Alcatraz]

Have you seen the film Deliverance? or The Hills Have Eyes? They're like that

[t8yman]

The people of Britain want the islands to stay British

[t8yman]

So we should devolve decisions to an elite panel of you, Neil and Zippy from Rainbow ?

Deary me...

[eFestivals]

Unlike you I don't need to make up stories about friends down the pub having nuclear secrets...

that friend is posting on here, laughing at you about that and an awful lot more, as it happens. But never mind.

You are not the only one out there with Friends in the forces... both past and present...

Whooppy do. It's only of relevance if you know the story, about how the Falklands was far less of the glorious victory you want to think of it as being. And you clearly don't.

Of far more relevance to now is whether you would wish to sacrifice those friends, and your daughter - many hundreds of them - in defence of a few hundred sheep farmers, but where that defence proves impossible, meaning that all of those lives are wasted in defence of your jingoism.

Would you think that was worth your daughter's life? Or would you rather she lives to a ripe old age than dies in a pointless and unwinnable war?

Or to make it winnable, are you happy to give up your house extension and your second car and your second and third holidays - not just for now, but for all your life and all your daughter's life - in support of your jingoism? Would tens of millions of inhabitants of the UK living a life far less prosperous and joyful life be a fair exchange for keeping those handful of hill farmers on a hill on the other side of the world?

Do bear in mind that you're not happy to support those in the UK in need thru no fault of their own when you give your answer, won't you?

[eFestivals]

a large part of the population including Barry Fish do believe whatever Murdoch told them to believe.

corrected for you.

[eFestivals]

You don't need "size" to defend those islands...

You can do it with ground defence and submarine defence.... In fact its probably easier today to defend the islands than it was back then.

This concept of us having to ship a task force half way around the way, well, has set sail...

Fuck it, drop a nuke on the fuckers and have done (not a serious suggestion)

And this is why you are not the Chief of the Defence Staff.

According to the heads of the UKs armed forces, we couldn't defend the islands today, or any time in the future with the military plans we currently have in place. We could cause a bit of disruption to their attack - that is all.

We certainly couldn't retake the islands if they were captured by a force as poorly armed and trained as the argies were in 1982. And they're better armed and trained today.

So when does practicality kick in with you? Do you think the argies will drop their claim to the islands?

We are doing our damnest to get out of St Helena, because we can't afford it - and yet they cost a morsel of the Falklands, and have a much bigger population. Why should they be abandoned without comment from you, but not a much smaller population in the Falklands?

The only differences between those two places is jingoism and oil.

So your concern is not really about the people. If it was you'd have already started about St Helena. Or have I missed the thread you started about that?

[eFestivals]

You are back to boring me now...

Oh sorry, I hadn't realised that you calling for your daughter to be shipped off to war to die a pointless death was so boring for.

You could alleviate that boredom by strangling her yourself today. Just a thought.

[eFestivals]

I know nothing of St Helena and god knows why I need to know about that to feel people should be able to self-determine their futures..

they're being allowed to self-determine. They're being told "get on with it, we're out of here".

What you're missing is that self determination is a two way thing. They have a right to say what they want, but they do not have a right to force a 3rd party - the UK - to do what they want. Just because we have governed there does not mean that we are obliged to continue to govern there.

The same applies with the Falklands. Sooner or later - and it'll be later, much later, because of the jingoism that's stoked up because of the war 30 years ago - the UK will choose to self-determine that we no longer wish to support the Falklands. Which, with our current policies, drops them in the shit.

We could instead choose to pursue a policy with recognises the inevitable, and by doing so doesn't drop them in the shit.

[eFestivals]

Which one ?

all of them, from the moment they hang up their badges.

Until they hang up their badges they toe the party line. They know where their pay cheque comes from.

[eFestivals]

Is it really worthy of laughing ?

You keep doing that... Regarding people being killed as well... Its at best childish and at worse c**tish...

I'm laughing at you, not them. A smarter person would have realised.

So will you be happy to see yourself and your daughter stand up for those islanders, and die for them? Or is it just other people and other people's children that you want to see die in support of your 'principles'?

[eFestivals]

Oh right... So you had no point other than a lie ? FFS

where's the lie?

Go and see for yourself what the ex-heads of services have said about the possibility of defending the Falklands is now.

It was a not an easy thing back then. It's not possible with the far smaller size of our military now.

Edited April 2, 2012 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Yes but you didn't say ex... Did you... You lied about the heads of our military having an opinion they clearly have never expressed.

FFS. Care to show me any serving general publicly saying "we will lose this war"?

One always loses, but that one never says. Have you never considered why?

[eFestivals]

Its besides the point though... You said something that very clearly isn't true...

this thread is littered with untruths by you, with you wishing to make a point using only your ignorance. Hong Kong people wanted to be Chinese, yeah? ... we got the falklands back before, we can do it now? ..... with our future capabilities?

At least mine has a basis in facts and truth, which is more than you've managed.

You also said that Argies military is better trained and better resourced than it was in the 1980s... Which is also false.... Its terribly trained and resourced...

it was terribly trained and resouced then too you fool. Their best ship was a yank ship that wasn't fit for WW2, and they had a purely conscript army.

They have a volunteer army now, and a democracy rather than a dictator. You under-estimate how much difference that makes.

[eFestivals]

there were just over 200 of them at the time of the war (214 if I remember rightly).

correction ..... I guess those numbers came from a poor memory of the number of soldiers that died in the war.

The current population is stated in Wiki as 3,140.

[philipsteak]

I cant understand why the islanders would want to live there anyway. It looks a proper shit place to live. Like Craggy Island Vs the Wickerman. I can only imagine that every person who lives there is a massive weirdo and everyone has a picture of the queen on the mantle piece

[eFestivals]

All you have given me is your dogma and lies. Oh and your hate for anything remotely British

How is it a hatred of anything remotely British for me to not want to see British lives lost trying to defend the undefendable?

How is it a hatred of anything remotely British for me to want the islanders to have the most viable future that is possible for them?

How is it a hatred of anything remotely British for me to not want our taxes wasted on jingoism, and instead to see them spent on Britain?

It will not do those islanders any long-term favours to pursue an imperialist agenda to placate the minds of little Englanders like yourself. It is not anti-British to see the bigger picture, while it does British interests no good to bury your head in the sand.

Self determination gets to mean that Britain can self-determine to leave its governance of those islands - and sooner or later that will happen, no matter what the islanders want for themselves.

The military costs of our current policy is unsustainable. The purpose of that military mission is unsustainable. That is only going to mean one outcome.

All I am doing is recognising that outcome, and believing that the islanders interests are best served by the recognition of that inevitable outcome.

If, for example, a treaty was signed today that handed the islands to Argentina in 100 years time, and every islander was given the right to full British citizenship, then no islander is abandoned, and no islander alive today or their offspring has to go thru the change of country that will inevitably happen.

Every child will grow up knowing what will eventually happen, and they have 100 years to mentally and culturally prepared themselves for the huge change of a different flag flying from the island. They can build proper cultural links with Argentina without hostility, and end up being with the better economic power too.

How are ideas like these a bad thing, and anti-British? Sure, they're different to the small minded jingoism that dominates this country on this issue (and so many others ), but they are more in British and British people's interests than that buried head in the sand jingoism.

[eFestivals]

You have repeatedly demonstrated a hatred for the concept of a nation... The idea of a group of people working together for themselves... You want us to throw down the borders and for our nation to be the planet etc...

and you think we're not in our powerful position because we've raped the world, because....?

But that's got fuck all to do with anything about this. This is purely a practical consideration, that saves lives, anguish, and tax money.

Its recurring dogma from you...

It stops the concept of "Britain" from being so... You would have it referred to as land only...

As opposed to the view of the Falkland Islanders by the British before 1982, when the Falkland Islanders were not British? That held negations with the Argies for handing the islands over in the 1960s? And which told the Argies that if they invaded we'd do nothing - so putting those islanders' lives at risk thru the pre-planned response of a counter-invasion?

There's a lot that's wrong about Britain, and not all of it is my doing.

You hate this country... You hate its people (largely)... You hate its government... Don't make out you give a shit when you clearly don't...

PMSL

I love this country, which is why I choose to live here. I hate stupid people wherever I see them; I just happen to see more British stupidity cos I live here. I hate shite govts wherever I see them. Etc, etc, etc.

I also hate to see people die because playing politics is more desirable than pragmatics. It saves the eventual outcome by nothing but always tends to cost lives.

Thats up to you... But its a bit annoying for you to suddenly put on the "Britain" hat... Its laughable...

Do you really think that by default the jingoistic view is always the patriotic one?

Awwwww, sweeeeeet.

Edited April 2, 2012 by eFestivals

[lost]

Neil, I'll remind you of your views the next time the israel / palistine conflict comes up. One side is indefensible, We waste a huge amount of money and lives on peace keepers and it would be much cheaper to bow to israeli might and find the palestinians somewhere else to live.

[lost]

I had this in the back of mind as well... No doubt Neil has some clever (but not really) way of changing his stance...

[eFestivals]

Neil, I'll remind you of your views the next time the israel / palistine conflict comes up. One side is indefensible, We waste a huge amount of money and lives on peace keepers and it would be much cheaper to bow to israeli might and find the palestinians somewhere else to live.

except, to be consistent with my views, you've got that completely arse about face. .... a consistent implementation of my views would see the Israeli's finding somewhere else to live.

But consistent doesn't really work there anyway, because for consistency the situations would have to be consistent, and they're not.

No one is trying to steal land with the Falklands or displace people, it's simply about which country should be sovereign. At the end of the day that has zero effect on the residents of the Falklands, the only change is the flag that flies.

You can't even say that it changes how the islands are governed, because they are as-good-as independent from the UK and would be under the Argies (at least, on the basis of handover talks that have happened in the past). They weren't even British citizens until after the Falklands war.

[eFestivals]

... but to suggest its based on who has the strongest army is quite frankly bizarre?!

and yet that's exactly the current stance of the Brits, even tho they've not got the strongest army in that location any more (or if you want to disagree with that, they certainly won't forever).

[eFestivals]

I had this in the back of mind as well... No doubt Neil has some clever (but not really) way of changing his stance...

I don't have to change my stance. You have to change your ability to think properly, so that you can think properly.

Your line of "they're British and must stay British" was not the British view until 1982 - after they'd been invaded. It is a view that is based in jingoism and nothing else; a line that followed a war for election, not a war for liberation ('liberation' was merely a side consequence).

But true liberation can only happen for the repressed. Who was repressed? Not the Falkland islanders under that brief Argie rule.

OK, so they don't much like the ideas of being ruled by the Argies. I don't much like the idea of being ruled by tories. In both cases it's the whole of the UK that gets to decide, not me personally or a bunch of islanders personally.

And sooner or later, the UK will decide that the UK does not wish to rule the Falklands, and those islanders will have to come to terms with that. It'll be easier for them to come to terms with via a long-agreed transition with alternative options offered to them of UK residence - which is more than the people of Hong Kong were given (unless they happened to be loaded ).