Quote:
Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II
That's the whole argument around secular state.
On one side what the British settlers did is not fair, on the other, they've been there for quite some time more or less undisturbed and they feel entitled to it because of the time spent there.. that's why I don't think it would be fair to give the Falklands/Malvinas either to Argentina or the UK, but turning them into an independent state.
What I would like to say to my "native" British friends here and in real life is that we don't have any personal beef with you about this issue, it's that to the non-British public opinion, especially the one of countries with no big colonial heritage, the British claims on the Falkland islands are far-fetched and anachronistic, and if anything they just seem to be a cover for other economic interests, I hope you can understand that.
|
For sure. It's impossible not to be struck by the sheer ridiculousness of the situation where a country has claim on (or finds itself stuck with?) some islands on the other side of the world because some of its citizens set up home there a few hundred years back.
(not convinced by the economic reasoning - I suspect that if Argentina hadn't launched the invasion 30 years ago the islands would probably have been quietly disposed of by Britain by now - populations have been sold out easily in the past when it proved more convenient and cheap.)