Falkland Islanders Vote To Remain British

[Trembly]

As opposed to the UK conjuring up Ireland, Israel, Kenya, India, Syria ( I wonder how many can grasp the irony ) thatcher, Joey Barton, Mad Cow et al

Anyone? On the vagaries and wanton British interpretation on Democracy and Self Determination?

Thought so..................

What are you on about?

Ireland? The RoI is an independent, sovereign state and Northern Ireland is part of the UK because the majority of the people living there want it to be part of the UK.

As for the other countries you list; yes, they all used to be, at one time or another, part of what was the British Empire, but the empire is long gone and all those countries are independent and have been for many years.

So kindly explain your point, as it's gone right over my head.

I have altered this nested quote, but I have responded to the the previous quotes, so I believe that to be OK.

To Scott, I don't believe I am Brit Bashing, just exposing the vagaries within the lauded British belief in democracy and self determination.

7by7, you ask me to explain myself, I am not sure I can in a manner that you will understand, without the new ball fizzing over your head, like a Dennis Lillee bouncer that nicks a lofted bat to the joy of the awaiting slip fielders, but like the patient sort of guy I am, I will try.

British Democracy and the will of free determination is only granted in general terms under their own licence. ROI as you state is a sovereign state, but was it given up freely?

The other countries I state, of course they were part of the British Empire, but were they given up freely? Syria, for instance, was encouraged to rise against their Ottoman occupiers in the first world war with the bait to have their own country, the British Government forgot to to tell them that they had already promised the country to the French, who exacted a heavy carnage against the under strength indigenous tribes afterword.

Israel, did the British leave a democratic state willingly, or did Begin's Stern Gang have a hand within it? Need I go on regarding Kenya et al?

These countries wanted self determination, but they had to fight for it, or have it deceived from them, not democratically given to them.

Democracy, it is system best learned cold, and Trust in God, but keep your powder dry.

I don't recall anyone in this thread claiming that the concept of Self-Determination is licensed solely to the British . . .

[Mossfinn]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

[transam]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

Yep, and a point is that the UK has kept it's eye on it's stuff, to do it's stuff, which is different to other countries who just waffle with no backbone.

[Mossfinn]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

Yep, and a point is that the UK has kept it's eye on it's stuff, to do it's stuff, which is different to other countries who just waffle with no backbone.

To do its stuff? Quite eloquently put, not quite sure what you mean though. To occupy countries forcibly who wanted self determination perhaps.

Good stuff, but I would rather be neutral thanks

[transam]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

Yep, and a point is that the UK has kept it's eye on it's stuff, to do it's stuff, which is different to other countries who just waffle with no backbone.

To do its stuff? Quite eloquently put, not quite sure what you mean though. To occupy countries forcibly who wanted self determination perhaps.

Good stuff, but I would rather be neutral thanks

Your Swiss eh.

[Mossfinn]

Oh dear..................

[metisdead]

Off topic posts have been removed. The subject of returning Hong Kong to the British is not the topic here.

[Thaddeus]

How do you get 14 Argentinians in a Mini Metro?

Tell them it belongs to someone else, has a valid tax disk, a working stereo and a full tank of gas.

[Trembly]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

After all the justification milked from the phrase 'self-determination', I don't think that Her Majesty's Government would be able to deny it to the islanders if they really pushed for it - not without a wincing dose of knavery anyway.

The thing is, the islanders are probably a bit too naive to play the absolute blinder of hand that they've been dealt.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Trembly

[MAJIC]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

Yep, and a point is that the UK has kept it's eye on it's stuff, to do it's stuff, which is different to other countries who just waffle with no backbone.

To do its stuff? Quite eloquently put, not quite sure what you mean though. To occupy countries forcibly who wanted self determination perhaps.

Good stuff, but I would rather be neutral thanks

We are talking about the Falklands! which was not forcibly taken. And quite obviously the Falklanders are more than happy to align themselves with the UK and already have the power to make their own decisions.And it also looks like they will never desire to be governed by Argentina,and frankly what Country would?

[7by7]

Mossfinn, I now see your point; other than an opportunity for some Brit bashing, you seem to be saying that because the UK has a chequered past, and I will be the first to admit to that, and is a former colonial power that the residents of the Falklands should be forced to submit to Argentinian rule!

Surely not.

Your mentioning Britain's nuclear submarines being used by Callaghan to 'scare off' the Argentinians is somewhat ironic considering the furore kicked up by the trendy lefties when one of those same submarines sunk the Belgrano!

Edited March 16, 2013 by 7by7

[Mossfinn]

You are quite correct Trembly, but it is about the right of self determination of the Falklands, which is a British Dependency.

I just gave an alternative view of the right of self determination, or not and the consequences of not such peaceful means.

Yep, and a point is that the UK has kept it's eye on it's stuff, to do it's stuff, which is different to other countries who just waffle with no backbone.

To do its stuff? Quite eloquently put, not quite sure what you mean though. To occupy countries forcibly who wanted self determination perhaps.

Good stuff, but I would rather be neutral thanks

We are talking about the Falklands! which was not forcibly taken. And quite obviously the Falklanders are more than happy to align themselves with the UK and already have the power to make their own decisions.And it also looks like they will never desire to be governed by Argentina,and frankly what Country would?

Couldn't agree more with your statement Majic.

[Mossfinn]

Mossfinn, I now see your point; other than an opportunity for some Brit bashing, you seem to be saying that because the UK has a chequered past, and I will be the first to admit to that, and is a former colonial power that the residents of the Falklands should be forced to submit to Argentinian rule!

Surely not.

Your mentioning Britain's nuclear submarines being used by Callaghan to 'scare off' the Argentinians is somewhat ironic considering the furore kicked up by the trendy lefties when one of those same submarines sunk the Belgrano!

You do not see my point, read my posts and try again. I have said consistently that I agree with self determination, how does that work in with forcing the Falklanders to Argentine rule!!

Oh, and I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

[Mossfinn]

M

Your mentioning Britain's nuclear submarines being used by Callaghan to 'scare off' the Argentinians is somewhat ironic considering the furore kicked up by the trendy lefties when one of those same submarines sunk the Belgrano!

Where's the irony? Callaghan used mind games, by stating submarines were in the area, hence no invasion.

The Conqueror sank a second world war cruiser outside of a British declared exclusion zone and sailing away from it!! If I was the Commander in charge, so would I have done.

[Jingthing]

,,,

And it also looks like they will never desire to be governed by Argentina,and frankly what Country would?

The Vatican?

[7by7]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

[Jingthing]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

Uh huh. Not the first one to break off though, eh?

[transam]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

Uh huh. Not the first one to break off though, eh?

Explain.

[Trembly]

M

Your mentioning Britain's nuclear submarines being used by Callaghan to 'scare off' the Argentinians is somewhat ironic considering the furore kicked up by the trendy lefties when one of those same submarines sunk the Belgrano!

Where's the irony? Callaghan used mind games, by stating submarines were in the area, hence no invasion.

The Conqueror sank a second world war cruiser outside of a British declared exclusion zone and sailing away from it!! If I was the Commander in charge, so would I have done.

The declaration of an exclusion zone was more for the benefit of non-combatant shipping. Hostile shipping, especially the heavily armed flagship of the enemy fleet, can expect no quarter in or out of the exclusion zone; war had, after all, been declared.

The direction that the enemy vessel is pointing in is also quite irrelevant. The people who made a fuss about that may as well have made a fuss about all the aircraft that were shot down from behind during the first and second world wars.

The level of cognitive dissonance it must have taken to not understand this is quite staggering.

Edited March 17, 2013 by Trembly

[khunken]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

That is pure <deleted>. The US, Ireland, India, Pakistan, Burma all required uprisings of one sort or another to gain independence. Plus the mess left in Ireland, Cyprus, Malaya (Malaysia & Singapore), India, Pakistan are still not sorted out (OK Malaya is sorted).

I love the 99.8% figure in the referendum. Only 0.01% from the 99.9% so dearly loved by one-party states, which is what the Falklands/Malvinas is.

[smokie36]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

That is pure <deleted>. The US, Ireland, India, Pakistan, Burma all required uprisings of one sort or another to gain independence. Plus the mess left in Ireland, Cyprus, Malaya (Malaysia & Singapore), India, Pakistan are still not sorted out (OK Malaya is sorted).

I love the 99.8% figure in the referendum. Only 0.01% from the 99.9% so dearly loved by one-party states, which is what the Falklands/Malvinas is.

Talk of a one party state made me laugh. Do you realise how many people live there?

You could set up a government in a room at the back of the pub!

Methinks the Falklanders are not so stupid.

Edited March 17, 2013 by smokie36

[transam]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

That is pure <deleted>. The US, Ireland, India, Pakistan, Burma all required uprisings of one sort or another to gain independence. Plus the mess left in Ireland, Cyprus, Malaya (Malaysia & Singapore), India, Pakistan are still not sorted out (OK Malaya is sorted).

I love the 99.8% figure in the referendum. Only 0.01% from the 99.9% so dearly loved by one-party states, which is what the Falklands/Malvinas is.

Pray tell why India is not sorted ? They have been on their own for a loooooooooooooooooong time. So what are your thoughts or problems. May l worn you l have something up my sleeve.

[smokie36]

An exocet missile?

[Scott]

Let's stick to the topic of the Falklands, which seem to wish to stay a part of Britain.

[justathought]

They are all of British stock so what could you expect? A colonial outpost settled by British ,people who wish to remain British. Is anyone surprised?

[7by7]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

That is pure <deleted>. The US, Ireland, India, Pakistan, Burma all required uprisings of one sort or another to gain independence. Plus the mess left in Ireland, Cyprus, Malaya (Malaysia & Singapore), India, Pakistan are still not sorted out (OK Malaya is sorted).

I take note of Scotts comment above, so will only say that you, too, should learn some history.

A dictionary so you can look up the meaning of the word 'majority' may help, as well!

Edited March 17, 2013 by 7by7

[khunken]

I agree with Jingthing that the Falklands with eventually become the Malvinas - it'll just take time.

To answer Transam about India there is the rather messy unsorted problem in Kashmir.

[7by7]

I agree with Jingthing that the Falklands with eventually become the Malvinas - it'll just take time.

To answer Transam about India there is the rather messy unsorted problem in Kashmir.

So you, too, are anti democracy?

[transam]

I agree with Jingthing that the Falklands with eventually become the Malvinas - it'll just take time.

To answer Transam about India there is the rather messy unsorted problem in Kashmir.

Most of the UK's outposts were given an insight how to become free and integrate, some have gone the route of corruption and wealth for a few others they have tried to do something.

Edited March 17, 2013 by transam

[khunken]

I agree with Jingthing that the Falklands with eventually become the Malvinas - it'll just take time.

To answer Transam about India there is the rather messy unsorted problem in Kashmir.

So you, too, are anti democracy?

No but I don't regard the referendum in the Falklands/Malvinas as democratic - more of a farcial exercise in political one-upmanship.