Awol Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) 75 Million is a pittance to spend on 1000 people? I look forward to your comments about welfare reforms using the same logicThat 75 million is the cost of D e f e n c e. It is not spent on the Islanders themselves. The UK does not subsidise the Falklands Government, it simply provides for defence and foreign policy.Incidentally they also have full employment so probably have little need for welfare anyway. So AWOL are you now accepting that oil is the major force as to why Gvmts are interested in the Falklands?No, but I've laid out the reasons why so often and so clearly that you simply cannot have missed them. Therefore this must be a wind up and I'll just leave it there, particularly as you refuse to answer any questions yourself. Edited March 17, 2013 by Awol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/falklands-offer-to-split-oil-profits-1913021.htmlAccording to this from 2012 link:Under licences signed by the oil companies, all proceeds from the oil will flow to the Falkland Islands Government, Short and the Foreign Office both told Reuters.What goes north after that over and above the costs of local defence spending seems less certain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 75 Million is a pittance to spend on 1000 people? I look forward to your comments about welfare reforms using the same logic That 75 million is the cost of D e f e n c e. It is not spent on the Islanders themselves. The UK does not subsidise the Falklands Government, it simply provides for defence and foreign policy. Incidentally they also have full employment so probably have little need for welfare anyway. >So AWOL are you now accepting that oil is the major force as to why Gvmts are interested in the Falklands? No, but I've laid out the reasons why so often and so clearly that you simply cannot have missed them. Therefore this must be a wind up and I'll just leave it there, particularly as you refuse to answer any questions yourself. :-) - so defence spending is not an expense - I have heard everything now. I suppose the cuts in the defence budget down to the austerity measures are meaningless. The Millions spent are not for the sake of the 1000 or so islanders it's actually to defend them penguins !!! And even though you know that Oil is the key to all of this you wont admit it, blimey you should get back to the UK asap a career in the Gvmt is open and waiting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/falklands-offer-to-split-oil-profits-1913021.html According to this from 2012 link: >>Under licences signed by the oil companies, all proceeds from the oil will flow to the Falkland Islands Government, Short and the Foreign Office both told Reuters. What goes north after that over and above the costs of local defence spending seems less certain. Amazing !!! - even the article is titled - " Britain set for Falklands Islands oil windfall" How you claim that the UK is not a beneficiary of oil revenue is now totally beyond me The opening bit of the article states "Britain will share in a Falkland Islands windfall when oil starts flowing there later this decade and, with taxes and royalties estimated at up to $167 billion (105.7 billion pounds), the potential prize could inflame mounting tensions with Argentina over sovereignty." and to top it all " When oil starts flowing, and in whatever quantity, the Falkland Islands will contribute to the cost of its defence, which is currently paid for entirely by Britain, local assembly member Gavin Short told Reuters in a telephone interview. "We have always said once we have found out what we have got and it started flowing, then it would be our intention to make contributions (to Britain)," Short said on Thursday." And you still don't accept that Oil is the key to all of this? Edited March 17, 2013 by drat01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 17, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 17, 2013 Oil / mineral rights were on the agenda in 82 too. They may not have been the primary reason for what happened but it was always there lurking in the background, it was mentioned often by the press at the time. The government of the day may not have said it but most people understood there was a potential mineral rights bonanza in the future 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 So we spend £75m a year on defending the Falklands, oil or no oil, yet people think this is an issue? Plus you know what, there being oil there is a good thing is it not? I've no doubt we'd have defended the place from the Junta regardless, but maybe the Junta wouldn't have been as interested had there not been any oil. Swings and roundabouts I suppose, but the right choice was made anyway. I'm not sure how that is even arguable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 We probably spend a lot more than 75 million and at a time where all we hear is about cutbacks to vital services that affect terminally ill, elderly, the vulnerable on society you feel that this is not an issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Do you not think that Argentina posturing for a fight makes the Falkand Islanders some of the most vulnerable in society Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 :-) scraping the barrel now . At least admit that the many many millions being spent is to protect potential oil revenues and then things can be judged accordingly. I look forward to your similar comments when we discuss the impacts of gvmt cuts at home and their impact on groups such as terminally ill elderly etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 but it is home. These are British Citizens. I don't think you can pick and choose who you defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 but it is home. These are British Citizens. I don't think you can pick and choose who you defend.Ladies and gents, we have a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 As the many articles have shown there are a lot of oil companies now in the process of setting up the extraction of the oil reserves. 30 years after the conflict that's one heck of a long term Masterplan Thatch and the oil companies put together after a foreign force illegally invaded an Island that was happily being handed over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 75 Million is a pittance to spend on 1000 people? I look forward to your comments about welfare reforms using the same logic That 75 million is the cost of D e f e n c e. It is not spent on the Islanders themselves. The UK does not subsidise the Falklands Government, it simply provides for defence and foreign policy. Incidentally they also have full employment so probably have little need for welfare anyway. >So AWOL are you now accepting that oil is the major force as to why Gvmts are interested in the Falklands? No, but I've laid out the reasons why so often and so clearly that you simply cannot have missed them. Therefore this must be a wind up and I'll just leave it there, particularly as you refuse to answer any questions yourself. :-) - so defence spending is not an expense - I have heard everything now. I suppose the cuts in the defence budget down to the austerity measures are meaningless. The Millions spent are not for the sake of the 1000 or so islanders it's actually to defend them penguins !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 We probably spend a lot more than 75 million and at a time where all we hear is about cutbacks to vital services that affect terminally ill, elderly, the vulnerable on society you feel that this is not an issue? If there's billions of pounds worth of oil there then it sounds like a worthy investment to me.but it is home. These are British Citizens. I don't think you can pick and choose who you defend. Most importantly, this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 These are British Citizens. I don't think you can pick and choose who you defend. Isn't 'picking and choosing' just what we've always done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 (edited) and now Kirchner has asked the pope to help good luck with that one Edited March 18, 2013 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 The Pope should just keep to fictional matters like god. Can't we just try to ignore Kirchner and hope she goes away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 The Pope should just keep to fictional matters like god. Can't we just try to ignore Kirchner and hope she goes away? How do you know God is fictional? Just curious, since it's pretty silly to try to claim to know that God does or doesn't exist. But yeah, she just doesn't know when to quit. I don't really see what effect it will have even if he does back her up. Catholicism really isn't that big here at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 (edited) I think the falklands should become part of Argentina and leave the UK. Just think how much better the weather would be being a south American nation. Edited March 18, 2013 by Jimzk5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 18, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 18, 2013 Just curious, since it's pretty silly to try to claim to know that God does or doesn't exist.There' a different topic entirely for such discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts