Falkland's sovereignty 'not up for discussion' Britain warns after new Argentinian president vows to 'get them back'
Falkland's sovereignty 'not up for discussion' Britain warns after new Argentinian president vows to 'get them back'
If there's a hill the UK is prepared to die on this is it, 99.9 percent of Falkland Islanders voted to remain part of the UK in a UN observed open election subsequent to the UK retaining control of the islands. Argentina has never maintained any form of civilian population there in nearly 150 years, they want the oil and fishing rights.
Edit in 2013 another vote was held, 99.8 percent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Falkland_Islands_sovereignty_referendum?wprov=sfla1
Interestingly, those islands are on argentinean sea. There're international laws that would say they are argentinean land... Even if they were occupied since maybe even before the two English invasions on Buenos Aires, a few centuries ago.
… That’s not how it works.
You don’t suddenly own every piece of land X nautical miles out from your coast since 1982.
actually, I think you'll find, Argentina falls within BRITISH seas, extending outward from the shores of the Falklands.
Territorial waters extend to a maximum of 12 nautical miles off the shore. States can claim a contiguous zone to up to 24 nautical miles, in which they can exercise some control to protect their territory and customs.
The exclusive economic zone (EEZ), in which a state controls all economic resources, extends to 200 nautical miles off the shore. These are not territorial waters.
All of the above have exceptions where the territorial waters and EEZs of two states would overlap.
The Falklands are 260 nautical miles off the Argentinean coast. So even if those 'international laws' you're so vaguely citing existed, they would not apply here.
5 billion barrels of oil and access to Antarctican minerals says try it and find out. UK has a spiffy new aircraft carrier the Tories would love to send to divert attention from their abject failure to govern
Maggie 2.0, they would love it, the situation is eerily similar, disgraced failing Tory government waving the flag of empire.
Both cut spending to military spending to the point there was questions about the ability of the military to act.
And the asylum escapee that Argentina just elected might actually pick this fight because he doesn't know how to govern.
Picking a fight isn't the same as winning a fight.
So if Argentina gains votes at the current rate, 0.1 percent per thirty years they will hold a majority in 6000 years.
Argentinas new president is one hell of a idiot.
Try it and find out.
He has said he wants a diplomatic solution similar to the one that Britain reached with China over Hong Kong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handover_of_Hong_Kong
During talks with Thatcher, China planned to seize Hong Kong if the negotiations set off unrest in the colony. Thatcher later said that Deng told her bluntly that China could easily take Hong Kong by force, stating that "I could walk in and take the whole lot this afternoon", to which she replied that "there is nothing I could do to stop you, but the eyes of the world would now know what China is like".[37]
The military situation of Argentina and China aren't exactly the same.
This is biased af
