To not understand why some Argentinians seem to want the Falkland Islands so much?

I’m not really talking about the etymology. But how funny it is that people position Britain as the colonising entity here while fiercely referring to the territory by its Argentinian name where they speak Spanish. Which is not a language native to the Americas…

Re Ash Sarkar political area of people, I think Argentinian football having such an obvious racism problem makes a difference too.

Ironically Las Malvinas comes from the French naming the islands after their own Saint Malo Island. Islands themselves named after the Welsh explorer St Malo. So even the "alternative" name is neither Argentinian or even Spanish (from whom Argentina base their own claim). And named after a British man.

ETA: it's a Spanish derivation of the French name of course. But it's still funny that calling it Las Malvinos is supposed to be a massive burn.

The amount of people who don’t seem to realise that Argentina is itself a settler state, a nation of colonisers is baffling to me. They speak SPANISH for god’s sake!

It's a strategic base into the south Atlantic .

This is good to know. Now I remember her posts on the Piddington thread…

I think the left and right are pretty united on the Falklands? I was watching Novara media and it is noticeable how "jingoistic" (in a good way) Ash Sarkar gets on the subject of Argentinian football and the Falklands. It helps probably that the Argentinian government who started the Falklands war were extremely right wing and that subsequent Argentinian politicians who have made a big deal out of it also come from the right. So not natural allies of the UK left.

Plus the only arguments Argentina has for the Falklands tend to be ones not associated with left wing thought (proximity, might is right, we called dibs first). Whereas the argument in favour of them being British/not Argentinian involves self determination which is popular across the UK political spectrum. I have seen some Argentinian propaganda trying to pull the "Argentina as a victim of colonialism re the Falklands" but that has never gained much traction as it doesn't fit well with Argentina's own history or the way it talks about itself now.

”Malvinas”. And saying that in Spanish is funny.

The Falklands were uninhabited. Ireland was habited.

The colonists living in Argentina aren’t indigenous to it either. Send them back to Spain and Italy.

It's a fantastic detractor for all the other things gone wrong in the country that he doesn't want the voters looking too closely at.

Most Falkland Island residents did qualify for full British passports. Some didn’t, it’s true.

But that should give you fewer mixed feelings. The islanders wanted to be British but Britain wanted to deny some of them passports. Yet they still wanted fervently to remain British. The commitment of the islanders to Britain is very, very strong.

It’s not inconvenient, it’s historically and politically irrelevant.

Your second paragraph is spot on though.

I am usually the first to point out the ills caused by empires around the world. The Falklands (for that's what they're called) are not one of them. This whole thing is yet again a sorry by-product of jingoism gone sour - this time on the part of right-wing MAGA-affiliated Argentinians.

According to Geology thry are more like South Africa

What about Biology?
Give the islands to the oenguins. They at least have an actual territorial claim (unlike a country several hundred miles away)

Won't somebody think of the rocks!

Misleading in a sense that it's true, but probably inconvenient.

However that is all moot. The moment Argentina chose (because it was a choice) to try to use military force, all bets were off.

The Falkland Islanders want to stay British and it is hard to see their presence as brutal colonisation at any point in the history.

I remember the Conflict very well, deeply regret the loss of young life on both sides and it is to be hoped Milei does not repeat the mistakes of Galtieri.

It is Las Malouinas not the Falklands. Sorry. Look at the geology

Potential military base for the Southern Hemisphere.

Strategic.

Same reason as the UK and U.S want the Chagos Islands, Diego Garcia.

Britain as a country has existed since the 1700s.

I have very mixed feelings about it. Before 1982 Thatcher had declined British passports to the islanders but defended them for political aims.

They forgot they were colonisers too. Also there is a weird belief that because it’s near to them it’s theirs (which makes zero sense. There are French and British territories in thebCaribbean and nobody argues they should be part of the USA or Mexico)

It’s also to do with their independence from Spain and their belief ownership with transfer.

And Trump is an idiot with a very weird hard on for the UK.

What, in the 1830s?

Wilson’s government tried secret talks with Argentina but they leaked. Massive public and political opposition buried the idea immediately. Under Thatcher there was intermittent consideration of whether to hand over the Falklands but it never went anywhere.

So it’s completely misleading to say that “Britain” tried to “get rid” of the Falklands for much of the 70s or for much of any other period.