[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

Again Stern, I ask the question for the third time. how many years is OK.

I'm sorry, but in my opinion it's a question that bears no meaning. two thirds of the islanders are British or of British descent, and these people are there because of the illegal actions taken by their ancestors 200 years before, right? Well it's unfortunate, but in my view that doesn't make them natives, and I think there's a bit of confusion about this point.

200 years in your book isn't OK, but 500 hundred is OK.

Where the line, 201, 301, 401, i'm curious of your rational.

Of course i expect you to duck for a third time.

Can't answer, I'm not surprised.

I haven't said that, you are saying it. It's a big of a generalisation me thinks. What point are you exactly trying to make?
I think we're confusing the concept of "native" with "indigenous". British "Falklanders" are not indigenous, hence the "right of self determination" doesn't apply, technically they're still squatting on a contested piece of land.

..uh and what's with the troll tone? Calm down fella..

Oh, and there's nothing wrong with posting what you did, but if you expect all and sundry to believe intrinsically what you posted without examination then you are a fool, Just as if I'd of posted a doctored 'British' history, then i would be a fool.

sorry, I should have explained why I posted that (although I believe I did it afterwards): it's to show that as much as some of us here are convinced that there's no question about British sovereignty (but haven't produced much support or evidence to that), there is another side of the story, which of course is the Argentinian one, who claims otherwise.

As to the question in hand, its nothing to do with me or any of you unless you live there. Only the people who live there, opinions count. I couldn't give a rats ass if they wanted to go solo, but that's my opinion.

Of course if its not up to them, as a few in this thread have delightfully had a bash, i ask them,

Do we advocate ethnic cleansing these days.......

The whole point is that I don't think people who live there are in the position of taking an unbiased decision because of their interests. This is a matter above generational opinions, it's something that needs to be determined by the two contending countries and possibly the UN, the voice of the people living there should bear little or no weight to the decision, because it can be perceived as biased and be linked to personal interests.

As for the ethnic cleansing, I have no idea what you are trying to say, but it sounds a bit OTT.

and to add,

I have friends from the first time around, i don't want anymore to have to go through that.

It's unfortunate, and I agree, people shouldn't die for such things. Still, I'm not happy to hear that the UK uses £61+ million a year to keep its military presence in the Falklands, it's ludicrous to say the least in such dire times.