Falkland Islands

[Corcaigh]

I think a decent compromise would be to keep the Falklands under British administration, but let Argentina have rights pertaining to oil & gas extraction in the south Atlantic, with a small token payment to the Falklands public administration of course.

 

Why compromise? I don't see what's wrong with the current policy of letting the Islanders decide their own fate.

 

 

And what I propose chimes in exactly with that. keep the Falklands British, but let the Argentinians have the oil and gas. Everyone wins.

[Ads]

The Botoxed ones late husband tore up a shared resource agreement in 2007. What do you think this endless bleating is about? Nothing more than slight of hand to mask stupidity.

[Chindie]

The Falklands will forever be a fantastic source of misdirection for any Argentine premier with trouble at home.

[Mantis]

 

I think a decent compromise would be to keep the Falklands under British administration, but let Argentina have rights pertaining to oil & gas extraction in the south Atlantic, with a small token payment to the Falklands public administration of course.

 

Why compromise? I don't see what's wrong with the current policy of letting the Islanders decide their own fate.

 

 

And what I propose chimes in exactly with that. keep the Falklands British, but let the Argentinians have the oil and gas. Everyone wins.

Whose waters is the oil and gas in?

[blandy]

colhint, on 18 Mar 2013 - 09:21, said:

but it is home. These are British Citizens. I don't think you can pick and choose who you defend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depopulation_of_Diego_Garcia

Quote

The Depopulation of Chagossians from the Chagos Archipelago pertains to the expulsion of the indigenous inhabitants of the island of Diego Garcia and the other islands of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) by the United Kingdom, beginning in 1968 and concluding on 27 April 1973 with the evacuation of Peros Banhos atoll.[1] These people, known at the time as the Ilois; are today known as Chagos Islanders or Chagossians.

Some Chagossians and human rights advocates have claimed that the Chagossian right of occupation was violated by the British Foreign Office as a result of the 1966 agreement[2] between the British and American governments to provide an unpopulated island for a U.S. military base, and that additional compensation[3] and a right of return[4] be provided.

Legal action to claim compensation and the right of abode in the Chagos began in April 1973 when 280 islanders, represented by a Mauritian attorney, petitioned the government of Mauritius to distribute the £650,000 compensation provided in 1972 by the British government for distribution by the Mauritian government (it was not distributed until 1977).[5] In October 1974, after receiving no assistance from the Mauritian Government, a Mr. Saminaden and Mr. Michel Vincatassin presented the British High Commissioner to Mauritius with a petition detailing the lack of support the islanders had received from the Mauritian government, noting that 40 islanders had died since arriving on Mauritius, and asking for the UK Government to work on their behalf with the Mauritian Government, or to return the Ilois to the Chagos.[6]

From this initial petitioning grew a series of presentations and lawsuits culminating in the 27 March 1982 agreement among the British Government, the Mauritian Government, and the Islanders (numbering 1,419 adults and 160 minors),[7] which was intended to settle all islander claims for the sum of £4 millions in cash from the British Government and £1 million in land from the Mauritius Government.[8]

Beginning in 1983, a new series of compensation claims were made against the British Government by an Ilois group called the Chagos Refugee Group, located on Mauritius. The founders and officers formed the core of inhabitants who, beginning in 1999, brought three lawsuits to British Courts - in 1999,[9] 2002,[10] and 2006[4] - and one to an American Court in 2001,[11] all requesting additional compensation and the right of abode in the Chagos. The U.S. case and two of these three British cases were defeated on appeal, the other was not appealed[9] by the British Government.

In 2005, these same litigants filed a brief with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which was brought before that court in 2008 following the final defeat of the final British lawsuit before the House of Lords, and that case remains in litigation as of August 2010.

The British government has consistently denied any illegalities in the expulsion. Even so, various officials (including the Foreign Minister) have apologised to the Chagossians for long-ago wrongdoing,[12] while still disputing that the deportees have a right to be repatriated at this time. On April 1, 2010, the British Cabinet announced the creation of the world’s largest Marine Protected Area (MPA) which consists of most of the Chagos Archipelago, homeland of the Chagossians.[13] The MPA will prohibit extractive industry of all kinds, including commercial fishing and oil and gas exploration. Some Chagossians have claimed that this MPA was created to prevent the islanders from returning to the islands.[14][15][16] The UK Government claims that the restrictions of the MPA will be modified pending the decision of the ECHR.[17]

On December 1, 2010, a leaked US Embassy London diplomatic cable [18] exposed British and US communications in creating the marine nature reserve. The cable relays exchanges between US Political Counselor Richard Mills and British Director of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Colin Roberts, in which Roberts "asserted that establishing a marine park would, in effect, put paid to resettlement claims of the archipelago’s former residents." Richard Mills concludes:

(more on the link). Double standards. Pefidious Albion.

[colhint]

you are Will Hunting, I claim my £5

[maqroll]

I'd not heard of any of that, Blandy. Pretty brazen modern day imperialism...depressing stuff.

[Awol]

Double standards. Pefidious Albion.

So doing the wrong thing in one place invalidates doing the right thing elsewhere?

Meh.

Pretty brazen modern day imperialism...depressing stuff.

Don't feel too bad about it, it's the USAF's main base in the Indian Ocean - with barely a tea swilling Brit in sight.

[villaajax]

 

 

I think a decent compromise would be to keep the Falklands under British administration, but let Argentina have rights pertaining to oil & gas extraction in the south Atlantic, with a small token payment to the Falklands public administration of course.

 

Why compromise? I don't see what's wrong with the current policy of letting the Islanders decide their own fate.

 

 

And what I propose chimes in exactly with that. keep the Falklands British, but let the Argentinians have the oil and gas. Everyone wins.

Whose waters is the oil and gas in?

 

British, so why give up our oil to a bully like Argentina? To Hell with them.

[bickster]

Awol, on 19 Mar 2013 - 19:35, said:

blandy, on 19 Mar 2013 - 19:04, said:

Pretty brazen modern day imperialism...depressing stuff.

Don't feel too bad about it, it's the USAF's main base in the Indian Ocean - with barely a tea swilling Brit in sight.

The 40-50 Marines / RN stationed there may disagree ;-)

Special rendition airport numero uno

[chrisp65]

ref to the Diego Garcia reference above:

 

return of the island to the natives was a written part of the 1980's Labour manifesto, they got into power and did a Cleggesque turnaround

[tonyh29]

ref to the Diego Garcia reference above:

return of the island to the natives was a written part of the 1980's Labour manifesto, they got into power and did a Cleggesque turnaround

Surely not

Didn't we purchase DG from Mauritius ? Least they won't be petitioning the Pope anytime soon

[bickster]

ref to the Diego Garcia reference above:

return of the island to the natives was a written part of the 1980's Labour manifesto, they got into power and did a Cleggesque turnaround

Surely not

Didn't we purchase DG from Mauritius ? Least they won't be petitioning the Pope anytime soon

They still want it back though

[Anthony]

My mate used to be training officer for the marines on DG. Jammy bastard.

 

Anyway, back on topic...Re the Falklands one needs to start looking forward, not back. If you look backwards you can find justification for pretty much any territorial dispute. Shall we talk about Northern Ireland? Or Ulster? Or Ireland? How about Brittany? Or Spain's claim to the Netherlands? Or the Scots (tribe, not country) claim to Ireland? Or Alex **** Salmond and his ego trip to independence? Perhaps we should talk about Israel? Or Palestine? No, how about North Africans' and Arabs' claim to Spain? What needs to happen is the politicians getting off their high horses, dialling down the ego and working out what's best for the people involved.

[bickster]

What needs to happen is the politicians getting off their high horses, dialling down the ego and working out what's best for the people involved.

You've been on the sherry, when did politi….

[villaajax]

Why don't we just settle this the old fashioned way, war!

[chrisp65]

ref to the Diego Garcia reference above:

return of the island to the natives was a written part of the 1980's Labour manifesto, they got into power and did a Cleggesque turnaround

Surely not

Didn't we purchase DG from Mauritius ? Least they won't be petitioning the Pope anytime soon

 

 

oh yeah, I know it's hard to believe Tony, but even Labour lack any true fibre beyond a desire to be in power.

 

I took my copy of the manifesto back to TUC House and loudly demanded my money back as it wasn't what it claimed to be.

 

(a very old school TUC type told me I might like to **** right off)

[Awol]

Why don't we just settle this the old fashioned way, war!

The Argie navy is so knackered it would be akin to beating up a small blind child, in a wheelchair. I'm not kidding either, things are so bad that their flagship the ARA Santísima Trinidad sank at it's moorings in January through want of maintenance.

 

[Jimzk5]

Didn't it sink cus they couldnt repair it, because the british wouldnt sell them the spair parts they needed

[Awol]

Didn't it sink cus they couldnt repair it, because the british wouldnt sell them the spair parts they needed

Don't think so, it had been out of service since 2004 and was being used for spare parts. Maybe some bright spark borrowed the plug?