Mumsnet Talk

I don't understand what our claim on the islands is. From what I have read our argument for retaining the islands is that most of the islanders are of British heritage, well they would be wouldn't they considering the islands are so remote.

We gave Hong Kong back so what's the difference with the Falklands?

David Cameron accused Argentina of colonialism, from where I'm sitting it looks as if Britain are guilty of that, holding onto islands for no legitimate reason, guilty of provocation by sending Prince William and a warship out to the area.

Have I missed the point? Why do you think
we should retain the islands?

I don't know how we got it in the first place but it's difficult as the islanders want to stay British. If they didn't want this then it would be very different.

Back to whom? There never was an indigenous population. The only claim Argentina has is relative proximity. This is surely outweighed by the wishes of the population.

Yes, you've missed the point.

It's not a case of giving it back to Argentina, we could, however, give them back to Spain - as Spain 'owned' Argentina and the Falklands at the same time, but Argentina never 'owned' the Falklands so they'd be getting them for the first time if we handed them over.

The people who live there don't want to be part of Argentina, the Islands are actually rather a long way from Argentina, there's an argument for the Islands to have total independence, but noone's asking for that.

Hong Kong is different, we never 'owned' that, we leased it, there was always an agreement we'd hand it back after a set length of time.

Give it back to who exactly??? Who has claim to it?

Besides as someone who has resided at The Falklands I think I can say the Islanders themselves may be a bit pissed off to be sold down the river as they are and see themselves as British and wish to remain so.

Aren't there oil fields there?

Thanks. So our claim to the islands is valid because there never was an indigenous population?

Were there any other British outposts that did not have an indigenous population that have been handed over?

There is a huge difference between the Falklands and Hong Kong, as we had the latter only on a fixed term lease.

Sorry - that's most of the area of Hong Kong on fixed term lease. The bits in perpetuity that need not have been handed back were too small and lacked the infrastructure to be viable as a separate entity.

I think there is oil.

i do think it's weird though, like taiwan owning the isle of wight

OP, you may want to have a read of the history Wiki

Frankly who 'owned' the islands is as clear as mud. From what I can see, no one country can easily say it's theirs.

If we are holding onto the islands for 'no legitimate reason' then you could easily argue that the US should give up Alaska & Hawaii for the same reason.

The UK have had continuous sovereignty since 1833. That's long enough in my mind to say it's a legitimate claim. Especially since many countries that are around today weren't back then.

that'd go down like a lead balloon in stanley. i'll lend you my copy of '74 days'.

give it back to who?

the only people there are british. admittedly there's still argentinian graffiti on a few walls from last time, but that's like me popping over to <insert other country> writing my name on the wall and claiming it's british and the residents should leave.

nice beaches. the ones that don't still have minefields on, anyway.

they've been talking about oil for e ver. they have at least started looking now. it's all tied up with south georgia, and tbh makes not a lot of sense to me, except for the wishes of the residents.

no, I like them, they have post boxes and british folk. I might want to live there one day, YABU etc

oh and it is a bit odd, but TBH I think we should have more British outposts, like Gibralter, BVI and Jersey etc. They are cute and we could all live there without learning a new language. I vote for Madeira being the next teeny tiny colonial outpost. We should invade without delay. Their economy is crap at the mo, so they would prob be glad of it.

at "They are cute"

Can we bagsey Sardinia or Corsica next?

Maderia has quite a lot of rain doesn't it?

I would prefer Zanzibar or Australia.

But if you think Britain's claim is shaky (based on historical precedent and the inhabitents wishes), what would Argentina's claim be based on?
They have never "owned" the Falklands.
Why would Argentina have any claim?

"Why would Argentina have a claim"

I read something about Spain handing over their empire to Argentina in the early part of the 19th century and Spain governing the Falklands at the time of the handover. Well that seems to be Argentina's claim anyway.

I don't really fancy the Falkland Islands they look a bit dull, I bet nothing opens on a Sunday.

Argentina on the other hand looks amazing. I would like to visit one day and it would be nice to have given them something before my visit. I don't like hostile countries, they were burning union jacks when I was in Malaysia, I felt a bit scared.

guilty of provocation? sorry, i totally missed that on first reading.

you do know how many british troops sit there drinking themselves to death year round as 'protection', don't you? with raf and infantry and all manner of paraphernalia to deter randoms?

will is being sent there as it's relatively safe (despite the recent sabre rattling) - the most danger he'll be in is dying of boredom. it's like the brecon beacons out of season. presumably he's going in his capacity as a s&r pilot? he might get a good few fishermen rescues in when the trawlers go down. and i bet he gets a south georgia trip.

unless you lot in the uk are getting media coverage we aren't...

Falklands are twice as far from Argentina as The Bahamas is from the USA. Should the US be able to claim The Bahamas?

How about Anguilla - also in the Caribbean, and with the same 'overseas territory' status as the Falklands.

Perhaps we should give Jersey and Guernsey to France? Jersey is 25 times closer to France than the Falklands are to Argentina, and indeed much closer to France than the UK.

>David Cameron accused Argentina of colonialism

Spot on. wanting to ride roughshod over the inhabitants of a place just so you can exploit its resources. What else could it be classified as?

I heard years ago that Denis Thatcher owned land/potential oil rights there.If true then Maggie might have had an ulterior motive for making certain suggestions.

I audited the landing strip built on the falklands after the war to land wide bodies jets on it.

Just saying.

Sorry to be din, but can someone explain the Hong Kong lease thing to me?