Perhaps you should concentrate on improving your research techniques and analytical skills? (QED)

Translation:

"Even though I came on this thread claiming I am knowledgeable about the Falkland Islands and calling most of the posters "numnuts" (sic), I refuse to provide this information since I really don't know very much about it at all."

(DNFTT)

Please refer to my original post - as with many of the opinions on this thread they are based on incorrect or illogical assumptions.

I have suggested that others should do more analytical research into the subject. I am not proffering my opinions or knowledge on the subject as it seems to me there is neither enough space or "fertile ground".

PS - if you wish to include yourself in the "numnut" category, that is up to you - I have not specified any individual in particular nor do I intend to.

Perhaps the lack of"fertile ground" needs some manure spread over it. You might be the perfect candidate to do just that.

And now I am out of here.

I find these last few posts extremely odd. I always thought one of the purposes of a forum was to share information. I posted a link to the BBC website which purported to give a summary of the Falklands situation (including the history), and added the 'knowledge' which I thought I had.

I'm always ready to be proved wrong (it happens quite often!), but if posters are going to say, in effect, "You're not worth the trouble", what is a forum for?

I find these last few posts extremely odd. I always thought one of the purposes of a forum was to share information. I posted a link to the BBC website which purported to give a summary of the Falklands situation (including the history), and added the 'knowledge' which I thought I had.

I'm always ready to be proved wrong (it happens quite often!), but if posters are going to say, in effect, "You're not worth the trouble", what is a forum for?

It's a chance to show off how childish we are

I appreciate it when people provide interesting links to stuff I'd have never found, or post interesting opinions. I never knew that most people preferentially went in anti-clockwise circles, and, to be honest, I remain slightly sceptical

BTW my family have been connected to the islands since long before Thatcher's war

It wasn't 'Thatcher's war' it was Galtieri's war!

If the Argentines hadn't invaded then Thatcher's government would not have sent a task force and there would have been no war.

Or are you seriously thinking that a secret phone call went something like:

"Hello Leopoldo. Margaret here. Look. I'm seriously down in the opinion polls and an election's coming soon. Do me a favour and invade the Falklands so I can send a task force to liberate them and so get my popularity back up. There's a nice chap."

Inflammatory post removed

Whilst we're drifting aimlessly off-topic, with nothing constructive to say on the Flaklands, can you think of any other wars that have been started over severed body parts?

SC

I'd mis-heard, and it turns out it was war of the Roses...

Cowslip...do you by any chance believe in the hand of God?

It's a lot of garbage, I've already pointed out that British ownership of The Falklands pre-dates The Alamo, anyone with a brain can see that Mexico has a far more compelling case to request the return of Texas, than the Argentinians have on The Falklands.

We're getting twisted in the wind with smart ass trolling. I don't know what nationality cowslip is, but if he was to carry his argument to it's logical conclusion, we should all revert back to the land ownership situations as they stood in 1833.

Who seriously thinks that's going to happen? and if cowslip is a colonial boy then he should declare his country so we can ridicule him.

Over to you cowslip.

It's a lot of garbage, I've already pointed out that British ownership of The Falklands pre-dates The Alamo, anyone with a brain can see that Mexico has a far more compelling case to request the return of Texas, than the Argentinians have on The Falklands.

We're getting twisted in the wind with smart ass trolling. I don't know what nationality cowslip is, but if he was to carry his argument to it's logical conclusion, we should all revert back to the land ownership situations as they stood in 1833.

Who seriously thinks that's going to happen? and if cowslip is a colonial boy then he should declare his country so we can ridicule him.

Over to you cowslip.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick there. Cowslip hasn't contributed anything to the discussion, other than to say he knows all about it; no-one has taken a contrary position to that; and several of us have pointed out that the Flaklands have been British since before KerryK was young, and therefore by grandfather rights etc let i rest where it falls. To be honest *, the last significant contribution to this thread, was this remarkably prescient observation

Anyway, entertaining though this is, the Warrington Catalans game is coming on deleayed telecast, so I'm off to the laughingly-misnamed-in-this-instance Live Rugby League thread

SC

* In my remarkably arrogant and self-important opinion

It's a lot of garbage, I've already pointed out that British ownership of The Falklands pre-dates The Alamo, anyone with a brain can see that Mexico has a far more compelling case to request the return of Texas, than the Argentinians have on The Falklands.

We're getting twisted in the wind with smart ass trolling. I don't know what nationality cowslip is, but if he was to carry his argument to it's logical conclusion, we should all revert back to the land ownership situations as they stood in 1833.

Who seriously thinks that's going to happen? and if cowslip is a colonial boy then he should declare his country so we can ridicule him.

Over to you cowslip.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick there. Cowslip hasn't contributed anything to the discussion, other than to say he knows all about it; no-one has taken a contrary position to that; and several of us have pointed out that the Flaklands have been British since before KerryK was young, and therefore by grandfather rights etc let i rest where it falls. To be honest *, the last significant contribution to this thread, was this remarkably prescient observation

Anyway, entertaining though this is, the Warrington Catalans game is coming on deleayed telecast, so I'm off to the laughingly-misnamed-in-this-instance Live Rugby League thread

SC

* In my remarkably arrogant and self-important opinion

I concur......I think.

So what's all the fuss about then?

So where I come from influences the history and arguments for and against the issues surrounding th Falklands?.....soreignty being only one of course.

It really sums up the paucity of the arguments and opinions voiced here.

Which of course is what I have been pointing out all along.

So where I come from influences the history and arguments for and against the issues surrounding th Falklands?.....soreignty being only one of course.

It really sums up the paucity of the arguments and opinions voiced here.

Which of course is what I have been pointing out all along.

<yawn> Yes of course it does. Meanwhile you offer nothing constructive to the discussion whatsoever.

So where I come from influences the history and arguments for and against the issues surrounding th Falklands?.....soreignty being only one of course.

It really sums up the paucity of the arguments and opinions voiced here.

Which of course is what I have been pointing out all along.

Well, on the bright side, Warrington beat the Catalans 15-6, which really sums up the extent to which you have contributed to the discussion.

SC

I simply cannot understand the attitude of those who think that the Falklands should be handed over to Argentina regardless of the feelings of the people who actually live there.

The people who live there now consider themselves to be British and want to remain so. Those who would force them to be otherwise or leave their homes cannot care anything for democratic freedoms and the right to self determination.

So where I come from influences the history and arguments for and against the issues surrounding th Falklands?.....soreignty being only one of course.

It really sums up the paucity of the arguments and opinions voiced here.

Which of course is what I have been pointing out all along.

<yawn> Yes of course it does. Meanwhile you offer nothing constructive to the discussion whatsoever.

Despite his Home Counties moniker, the man is clearly an Argentinian.

So where I come from influences the history and arguments for and against the issues surrounding th Falklands?.....soreignty being only one of course.

It really sums up the paucity of the arguments and opinions voiced here.

Which of course is what I have been pointing out all along.

<yawn> Yes of course it does. Meanwhile you offer nothing constructive to the discussion whatsoever.

Despite his Home Counties moniker, the man is clearly an Argentinian.

Perhaps he is just a Man City fan....or has Welsh cattle farming relatives.

The reality of life in Port Stanley is lots of boredom and crappy weather punctuated by the occasional military or scientific boat passing through...when the place must take on the feel of Bodmin in summer...well almost.

This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues....I doubt there are many Argentinians looking to settle there....and if they want to I would be happy to see residency visas granted.

Perhaps he is just a Man City fan....

Pardon !!

Perhaps he is just a Man City fan....

Pardon !!

No offence intended.

"This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues" - a fine example of the blinkered views being expressed here. It seems some posters are unable to see anything in terms of more than one viewpoint or issue.

Perhaps he is just a Man City fan....

Pardon !!

No offence intended.

I don't come in here very often lately smokes, don't know what drew me in. Bladdy weird that.

"This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues" - a fine example of the blinkered views being expressed here. It seems some posters are unable to see anything in terms of more than one viewpoint or issue.

It was a great game, by the way. Not high scoring, but tremendous defence from both sides. I'm optimistic for the Challenge Cup tie next weekend against Huddersfield

SC

"This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues" - a fine example of the blinkered views being expressed here. It seems some posters are unable to see anything in terms of more than one viewpoint or issue.

So what, in your view, is it about?

You have yet to say.

Do you believe in the fundamental democratic right of self determination?

If you do, then you must agree with successive British governments' (of all political persuasions) position that the islands will stay British until and unless the inhabitants decide otherwise.

"This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues" - a fine example of the blinkered views being expressed here. It seems some posters are unable to see anything in terms of more than one viewpoint or issue.

Your view of me is one dimensional at best. Please try harder in both your posting and understanding of my open approach to others views.

I'm waiting for you to teach me something...really I am.

I notice you never commented on the rest of my post....did you not comprehend what I was referring to?

"This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues" - a fine example of the blinkered views being expressed here. It seems some posters are unable to see anything in terms of more than one viewpoint or issue.

Penguins?

"This political battle is exclusively about oil revenues" - a fine example of the blinkered views being expressed here. It seems some posters are unable to see anything in terms of more than one viewpoint or issue.

Penguins?

Now there's a man that knows his biscuits

It was a nice bit of business dropping off the odd sheep farmer and his flock there, though I doubt it was known at the time that oil deposits were in the locality. In years to come the Falklands also gives the UK a claim to part of Antarctica. Incidentally Rockall was also a nice acquisition.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2011/jan/01/john-vidal-rockall

Rockall is a stormy crag 240 miles off the Orkneys, and the last land grab of the British empire. John Vidal tells of his personal attachment to it – and why it could be worth £100bn

The only oil that was in the minds of the original settlers came from the blubber of whales.

The only oil that was in the minds of the original settlers came from the blubber of whales.

Looking forward to the Six Nations already?

SC

I don't want anyone else to die over this but I think the Malvinas should be Argentinian. I have heard the British argument and witnessed British emotion about it, and also heard from the Argentinian side. I can't get past the geography of the thing. Does the US always have to side with the UK on every issue? I thought you US let the Americas down on this one.

Of course it didn't help my sympathies during the actual war that Thatcher was almost as fascistic as the Argie-pargie dictators she was fighting.

Don't the people who live there have a say in this?

An English-speaking population who have only minor trade ties to Argentina - they are surely entitled to choose either complete independence from either party, or to live under benevolent control of their own chosen protector.

That would never be the Argies.

Agreed. I adore Argentina and have found her people wonderful, inviting and friendly. Buenos Aires is on our to live in hit list for the future. I have to make one slightly succinct point about occupancy and the Argentineans. What language do they speak? Are they not invading colonists in the same way we were? I think that it is silly that this argument still persists, but oil does do that. Point above is correct. We hand back the Falklands and the US hands back Hawaii. Simple really.

I don't want anyone else to die over this but I think the Malvinas should be Argentinian. I have heard the British argument and witnessed British emotion about it, and also heard from the Argentinian side. I can't get past the geography of the thing. Does the US always have to side with the UK on every issue? I thought you US let the Americas down on this one.

Of course it didn't help my sympathies during the actual war that Thatcher was almost as fascistic as the Argie-pargie dictators she was fighting.

Don't the people who live there have a say in this?

An English-speaking population who have only minor trade ties to Argentina - they are surely entitled to choose either complete independence from either party, or to live under benevolent control of their own chosen protector.

That would never be the Argies.

Agreed. I adore Argentina and have found her people wonderful, inviting and friendly. Buenos Aires is on our to live in hit list for the future. I have to make one slightly succinct point about occupancy and the Argentineans. What language do they speak? Are they not invading colonists in the same way we were? I think that it is silly that this argument still persists, but oil does do that. Point above is correct. We hand back the Falklands and the US hands back Hawaii. Simple really.

This is an interesting concept. To whom does the US hand back Hawaii?

When they were accepted into the US they were The Republic of Hawaii and prior to that they were the Kingdom of Hawaii.

Maybe if we could find a direct descendant of Captain Cook.we could go with that?

Not really so simple after all.