US Policy Shift Sparks New Row Over Falklands Sovereignty

Yagoda or whatever your name is... message me if you want to speak about Brits like that!

4 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

Yagoda or whatever your name is... message me if you want to speak about Brits like that!

Really? You dont think the British empire was murderous? Whatever happens, we have got, the Maxim gun and they have not.

What are you gonna do tough guy? When are you guys gonna free the Irish from bondage, btw. Why wont you give back the stolen goods?

On 4/24/2026 at 5:50 PM, Yagoda said:

The Falklands are a remnant of the evil colonialist now crumbled British Empire and should be returned to the Argentines.

Couldn't agree more. UK did the right thing in returning the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. So should they return the Falklands to Argentina. However, one suspects more than nationalism it is the predilection of Brits for sheep, which preponderate the Falklands, particularly ewes, which is stalling the process.

14 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

The US has been threatened by Iran for 47 years, and they have killed thousands of Americans.

Has the UK been threatened by Russia?

Yes, Britain has, numerous occasions, plus actual attacks.

Total number of Americans, native born or naturalised, who have died as a result of Iranian action, direct or indirect, is about 800.

260 in Beirut

19, Khobar Towers

~500, Iraq

Post-2011 Proxy Attacks; about 12

2026 war: 15

As for who started what in 1979, the Americans at that time have something to answer for,

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP90-01208R000100070046-6.pdf

September 8th, 1978, Black Friday. The Shah's troops shot into unarmed protestors.

SAVAK was set up and trained by the CIA, who taught them how to pull fingernails, electrocute testicles, waterboard, and various other coercive techniques. Many SAVAK members were absorbed into the Islamic Republic, complete with their acquired skill sets.

Some things are said about how Westernised Iran used to be. But the photos that are often circulated, of young women in bikinis at the beach are actually from a photo album of teenage kids of American and European diplomats who gone to the beach at the same time as 500 people were burned to death in an Iranian cinema. Iran was not a westernised nation. This account sets the scene before 1979

In 1971 he flew in 18 tons of food prepared by the French restaurant Maxims to celebrate what he called the 2,500 anniversary of his dynasty, and to celebrate himself. For days he entertained 60 kings, queens and heads of state at luxury tents in the desert at the ancient ruins of Persepolis. This waste of resources while people were hungry became a symbol of his total detachment from his people and a rallying cry for a need for major change.

Meanwhile, the Shah’s regime grew even more repressive. After 1972 those committing alleged political crimes were tried before secret military tribunals, without witnesses or defense lawyers, and with guilt determined solely based on SAVAK’s evidence.

There was no such thing as freedom of speech or association. The press was strictly censored, with the Shah decreeing that every newspaper with a circulation of less than 3,000 and periodicals with a circulation of less than 5,000 be shut down. From 1975 to 1978, political activity was restricted to participation in the Rastakhiz Party, the Shan’s party, membership in which was mandatory for everyone.

Trade unions were outlawed and workers who protested for better conditions could be imprisoned or killed. Academic freedom was  restricted and students and university teachers were subjected to surveillance by SAVAK.

https://www.hamptonthink.org/read/the-sordid-history-of-us-intervention-in-iran

Amnesty International in 1975 reported on the Shah's Iran "the Shah of Iran retains his benevolent image despite the highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture which is beyond belief".

In 1976, the NY Times reported;

https://www.nytimes.com/1976/02/29/archives/iran-accused-at-meeting-here-of-torture-and-repression-speakers.html

There are 100,000 political prisoners and there have been 300 official executions in the last three years in Iran, according to figures of Amnesty International, Le Monde, and othe. The r European newspapers, and the international Federation of Human Rights.

Now why did the incoming revolutionaries had such an animus for the United States. You must be spectacularly naive to think America contributed nothing to that view.

American companies and institutions were particularly prominant in Iran, in contracts linked to the Shah. Grumman built an entire American town in Iran, in readiness for the new production line for Iranian built F-14 Tomcats, for instance, to house American engineers. Harvard Univiersity signed a big deal with the Shah, to carry out "urbanisation" ("westernisation"). Its little wonder that many Iranian people associated the horrors of the Shah with America; just a few years early, Saigon had fallen, and stories were coming out about the activities of the CIA in South Vietnam and Cambodia.

In 1978, despite the incredible wealth that the Shah enjoyed, building up a huge and very modern miitary, the econimy was in a state of collapse, high unemployment and inflation. The dption.efence spending brought with it rampant corruption. The Shah had encouraged a cut of the Shah; its easy to forget, his line was a sort of fake Royalty, created in the early 20th Century, but he seized upon the lore of the Peacock Throne as his own. Its easy to see why one personality cult was replaced by another.

As the Ancien Regime collapsed:

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/02/25/archives/iran-wants-a-new-era-but-only-on-its-terms.html

On Wednesday, United States Ambassador William H. Sullivan paid his first visit to Iran's new Prime Minister, Mehdi Bazargan, the former opposition leader whom he studiously ignored for months while he conferred almost daily with the now‐exiled Shah.........

......We used to run this country,” an American diplomat remarked last week as he climbed onto a bus parked by the United States Embassy on his way to Teheran's airport to join other Americans leaving Iran. He glanced at the Islamic guerrillas standing guard all around the embassy complex and added, “Now we don't even run our own embassy.”

It was a succinct epitaph for the once‐ubiquitous American presence here. As recently as November, when the revolution that toppled Shah Mohammed Riza Pahlevi was approaching its climax, there were 30,000 Americans in Iran, including 8,000 military advisers in every branch of the Iranian Army and Air Force. Hundreds of American companies did business in Iran, where they realized some of their largest profits in the Middle East.

Iran will be an independent country, nonaligned, not under the influence of any superpower, and it will only have friendly relations with those superpowers that demonstrate they are ready to respect our national interest and our independence,” said Ibrahim Yazdi, Deputy Prime Minister for Revolutionary Affairs, when asked what Mr. Bazargan might have told Mr. Sullivan on Wednesday.......What we want from the United States is to respect our revolution, accept its reality, understand our mOvements, and submit to it

Iranian officials suggest that the first test of Iran's new relationship with the United States may come when they start canceling many of those contracts. What they are in fact saying is that because many of these agreements contain penalty clauses for cancellation, the only way the United States can show its good will is by not raising a fuss over the cancelled orders. “There is one thing that must be crystal dear,” Mr. Yazdi said, “we will not buy any of the armaments that the Shah committed himself to buy. They are unnecessary and we will not buy them. “

The strong feelings expressed here against these commitments reflect the Iranians' conviction that many of the arms sales were forced on them by the Nixon Administration, and particularly by former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, who, they say, sought to “use Iranian money to do America's spying.”

Yet, beneath the tough talk, there is a subtle plea for a new alliance with the United States. Hossein Bani‐Assadi, a prominent ideologue for the Islamic revolutionary movement, said Iran will still need to buy American technology, particularly in agriculture, which has fallen into disarray, and will resume oil exports to the United States “I think there is plenty of goodwill for Americans among the Iranian people,” he said. “We just need to deal with you as equals, not as an American protectorate.”

And there is the rub; a missed opportunity. The CIA did a piss poor job spotting the signs of revolution, did not put out feelers to the opposition. The incoming Reagan government did not have reliable information about the incoming regime, and took a belligerant position from the start, protecting the Shah. It was when the US gave shelter to the Shah, a wicked man, that spurred students to seize the US embassy. If the US had been more contrite, offering a hand of friendship, who knows how things would have panned out. Instead they were in the grip of an obsessive view of the Cold War (in retrospect, we know the USSR was on its last legs by the late 70s), that nearly wrecked relations with an old ally just 3 years later.

Americans managed to say sorry to North Vietnam, and mend bridges, while the Vietnamese are still very much communists. Vietanam killed 50,000 Americans over a mere 10-15 years. Where is your rage about that?

4 hours ago, Autocan said:

UK did the right thing in returning the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

They didn't.

1. The deal has been canceled

2. Mauritius never "owned" the Chagos, so it was impossible to "return" the islands to them.

4 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Really? You dont think the British empire was murderous? Whatever happens, we have got, the Maxim gun and they have not.

What are you gonna do tough guy? When are you guys gonna free the Irish from bondage, btw. Why wont you give back the stolen goods?

Well you Russians have blood stained hands as well.

A post and a reply with a derogatory slang comment toward Americans has been removed.

Starmer thought screwing everyone over his Chagos repatriation scam would be fine.

It's not.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Starmer thought screwing everyone over his Chagos repatriation scam would be fine.

It's not.

What about the Falklands? Would Trump be right to reconsider the US position on UK's sovereignty?

13 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

They were not and have never been a part of Argentina. The Argentine claim to the Falklands was never established and rests solely on the former presence of the Spanish on the island. Using the Argentine logic, the USA, Germany, French and Portuguese could make a claim too since they all had whaling/seal killing stations. It was only the British who had invested in building long term settlements and who established a legal claim in 1833. The Argentinians never had a population, nor a colony on the Falklands. The did try to establish a penal colony and it failed. Today, the local inhabitants do not want anything to do with the Falklands.

A close reading of the US position accepts the will of the Falklands people. To do otherwise, is to greenlight a Chinese invasion of Taiwan and to facilitate Chinese expansion in the South China Sea, which the USA is opposed to. The Falklands is British and this is undeniable. The financially insolvent and inept Argentinians should find another national rallying focus, like maybe an effort to end corruption?

Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. The Spanish did occupy the Falklands (Las Malvinas) from 1744 until 1811. Then the Spains troops were recalled to the mainland. They did leave behind a plaque that asserted Spanish sovereignty. Then in 1820, that nation that eventually called itself Argentin reoccupied the island under the legal theory that it had inherited that right from Spain as a successor state. Then in 1833 the. British threw them out.

Anyway, given that for almost 200 years it's been part of the UK, and that the island are about 300 miles from the closet point in Argentina, and that it's prospering and that the natives don't want to be re-united with the UK, Trump's insertion of the US into this situation, is probably based on his infatuation with Javier Milei, the current President of Argentina.

19 hours ago, candide said:

What about the Falklands? Would Trump be right to reconsider the US position on UK's sovereignty?

Given Starmers lack of support re. Iran operations and also over Chagos I think it's reasonable for him to reconsider US support re. The Falklands.

Starmer has absolutely ruined the relationship between the 2 countries and there will naturally be consequences.

37 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Given Starmers lack of support re. Iran operations and also over Chagos I think it's reasonable for him to reconsider US support re. The Falklands.

Starmer has absolutely ruined the relationship between the 2 countries and there will naturally be consequences.

I think you'll find it's Trump that has strained the relationship. Your love for the cheesy wotsit really has blinded you.

Fairly dangerous topic. I mean, should Guam's sovereignty also be questioned? How about Hawaii? Is that really US territory? Should it be? What about Puerto Rico? Even sounds Spanish. And Alaska? Historically that was Russian.

If we start digging out bits and pieces that suit us well in history, inevitably there will be other bits that pop up that start working against you, and often it's the best course of action not to dig into hornets' nest. But, when you have someone bent on revenge against anyone who ever did anything to him in position of bully in chief, anything goes. But it will have consequences where least expected.

Those who don't read tend not to learn much from history.

5 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

I think you'll find it's Trump that has strained the relationship. Your love for the cheesy wotsit really has blinded you.

It was the UK government that wants to give away Chagos. Not Trump.

You're obsessed.

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

It was the UK government that wants to give away Chagos. Not Trump.

You're obsessed.

Can't "give away ' if the occupation of Chagos is illegal according to ICJ and UN General Assembly.

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Given Starmers lack of support re. Iran operations and also over Chagos I think it's reasonable for him to reconsider US support re. The Falklands.

Starmer has absolutely ruined the relationship between the 2 countries and there will naturally be consequences.

Tacit support for a foreign power considering hostile action against us.

Traitorous behaviour.

On 4/25/2026 at 11:57 PM, Roadsternut said:

By "the City of London and European Globalists", your sort really means the Jews, right?

Loon.

I mean the Satanists masquerading as Jews...those who sit above the ordinary Jewish and Israeli people in the pyramid.

2 hours ago, uncletiger said:

I mean the Satanists masquerading as Jews...those who sit above the ordinary Jewish and Israeli people in the pyramid.

Thanks fr the confirmation of the original diagnosis. Loon.

3 hours ago, uncletiger said:

I mean the Satanists masquerading as Jews...those who sit above the ordinary Jewish and Israeli people in the pyramid.

Is the Great Pyramid or one of the ones near the Sphynx?

On 4/25/2026 at 7:43 PM, Roadsternut said:

Well you Russians have blood stained hands as well.

LOL, Im an proud non traitorous American and there arent many nations or peoples who dont have blood on their hands.

Some more than others, Europe LOL

9 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

I think you'll find it's Trump that has strained the relationship. Your love for the cheesy wotsit really has blinded you.

At least he isnt screamin his love for the terrorists of Iran

3 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Is the Great Pyramid or one of the ones near the Sphynx?

The one in Glasgow, England.

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

At least he isnt screamin his love for the terrorists of Iran

Er, ok. And who is exactly?

Argentina chumped the current POTUS into picking up their $20-40 billion (depends on the news source) debt. They know they've got themselves a sucker, now they are pushing it as far as they can. I've been anticipating them bringing up the Falklands.

When I was living there in the '00 decade the press was keeping it a current issue, the Malvinas were mentioned several times a week as a historic patriotic incident, memorial statues dedicated, readings of the names of the dead, and a few movies about it.

Loaning money to Argentina is like giving cash to your loser brother-in-law, they don't pay off and will beg for a "haircut" (debt forgiveness, that is how the term is translated down there). I doubt if DT did not understand this -- it takes one to know one, right? I think Bessent managed to convince him on this.

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Er, ok. And who is exactly?

Well you for one. But you knew that, you appeared to want to bait me into a response because you need attention.

There ya go. Make it personal now.

24 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well you for one. But you knew that, you appeared to want to bait me into a response because you need attention.

There ya go. Make it personal now.

Jeez, you are really losing it now.

1. Point out where I have said I support terrorism. One link to one post. You won't find one. So retract it or say you were lying.
2. You said "at least he isn't screamin [sic] his love for the terrorists of Iran", and I asked you who is doing that. How is that making it personal exactly? It's a simple question.

And then you say I am. And that's not making it personal, calling me a terrorist supporter?

So, please, a link to one post in my entire posting history where I express support for terrorists - from Iran or anywhere else.

I'm waiting. See if you can back up your statements or if you are just a childish name caller when someone disagrees with you.

One link buddy. Must be easy?

15 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

One link buddy. Must be easy?

Ya got to own it buddy, or do you disavow your philosophy?

Here lets make it easy

Was the US justified in taking out Iran?

15 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Ya got to own it buddy, or do you disavow your philosophy?

Here lets make it easy

Was the US justified in taking out Iran?

Sorry, you don't wriggle out of it.

It was your claim, you back it up. If you can't then just admit you're a troll and post any old trolling nonsense to get your post count up.

Point me to a post where I expressed support for terrorism, either by Iran or anyone else.

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Sorry, you don't wriggle out of it.

It was your claim, you back it up. If you can't then just admit you're a troll and post any old trolling nonsense to get your post count up.

Point me to a post where I expressed support for terrorism, either by Iran or anyone else.

Got it. You wont answer LOL.

You just did.

5 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. You wont answer LOL.

You just did.

What are you on about?

6 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

Is the Great Pyramid or one of the ones near the Sphynx?

It is the one you see depicted on US Federal Reserve notes.