99 percent of Falklanders approve British rule in 92 percent turnout. Argentina: Meh!

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
33,046
27,404
Kansas
#1
While the assumption is that whoever is doing PR for Argentina's President Kirchner (who, as with the military junta before her, is actively exploiting nationalist sentiment over the Falklands in a desperate attempt to distract her people from far more pressing matters at home) is a loyal follower, I still suspect that this isn't their best day.

Either way, they look positively ridiculous in the wake of a poll that I'm pretty sure was successful beyond David Cameron's wildest dreams at proving, definitively, that regardless of the various interpretations for the islands' history floating around out there... it's what the people who live there now want that is important.

Manipulating the question of sovereignty with a binding referendum... pfft.
 
Likes: bajisima
Feb 2011
7,636
1,108
#2
While the assumption is that whoever is doing PR for Argentina's President Kirchner (who, as with the military junta before her, is actively exploiting nationalist sentiment over the Falklands in a desperate attempt to distract her people from far more pressing matters at home) is a loyal follower, I still suspect that this isn't their best day.
Using war to distract the people from at-home real politic is kinda like America and Republicans, isn't it?
 

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
33,046
27,404
Kansas
#3
Using war to distract the people from at-home real politic is kinda like America and Republicans, isn't it?
If you're referring to Iraq, I'll say you're partly right. On the one hand, we know now that the war was unnecessary as the objectives on which is was predicated were falsely-founded. Whether that was done deliberately, and by whom, will probably never be known with absolute certainty. However, the objectives themselves were mostly sound, had they indeed been justified by the situation.

Conversely, the Falklands issue is a complete red herring, and Kirchner has full knowledge of this fact. There is no modern history of Argentine possession of the islands, the population that lives there has been there for centuries and nearly everyone who is there now was born there to someone else who was born there. The islands themselves have no real strategic or major economic value -- though there are potential fossil fuel exploits to be had in the surrounding waters.

The people of Argentina are culturally distinct, other than a small minority of ethnic Argentines who live on the islands (and, by all measures, they largely voted for sustained British sovereignty), from the population of the Falklands. They speak a different language, they live in completely separate communities especially since Argentina's unprovoked aggression.

In terms of policy and rational governance, there is, bottom line, one reason and one reason only for Argentina to give a tinker's damn about the Falklands: Stability of the current regime which can always count on quelling a little bit of inconvenient unrest by whacking Britain over the head on the world stage for daring to defend the free will of just about every soul on those rocks.
 
Last edited:
Likes: bajisima
Jun 2006
100,729
11,026
Vancouver
#4
I had some Argentinian students - young people - and man oh man.

In their view it is the greatest injustice ever suffered by any peoples anywhere in the recorded history of time. There is literally no end to the resentment and writhing anger they felt about the issue.

I mean you take a South Korean and North Korean out and they'll probably get dunk, bow to each other and go their separate ways. More sad than anything.

I think my Arg students would have murdered the first Brit they came across if they thought for a second they'd get away with it.
 

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
33,046
27,404
Kansas
#5
I had some Argentinian students - young people - and man oh man.

In their view it is the greatest injustice ever suffered by any peoples anywhere in the recorded history of time. There is literally no end to the resentment and writhing anger they felt about the issue.

I mean you take a South Korean and North Korean out and they'll probably get dunk, bow to each other and go their separate ways. More sad than anything.

I think my Arg students would have murdered the first Brit they came across if they thought for a second they'd get away with it.
Yes, the sinking of the General Belgrano, as I'm aware, is their Pearl Harbor... Plus, it is remembered with much prideful outrage every year.

North Korea might be something comparable, but I know exactly what you are relating there as well. It is sad, and despite all the public hostility, they both know it is. These guys?

They're literally taught from a young age to believe that the Falklands belong to Argentina and that the UK committed an international travesty of the highest order by taking the islands back.

It would really be like Americans expressing hatred for Canada because of all the times you beat back our invasions.

Again, all because having that whipping boy in your pocket has been very convenient for Kirchner and her predecessors.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
7,636
1,108
#6
Yes, the sinking of the General Belgrano, as I'm aware, is their Pearl Harbor... Plus, it is remembered with much prideful outrage every year.


Never mind that it was in company with destroyers, at war, and within striking distance of Brit assets, and the destroyers were left alive to rescue General Belgrano's ship's company.
 

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
33,046
27,404
Kansas
#7
Never mind that it was in company with destroyers, at war, and within striking distance of Brit assets, and the destroyers were left alive to rescue General Belgrano's ship's company.
If you believe Argentina's side of the story, the Belgrano was on the outer edge of the "exclusion" zone, and was steaming away... in the full knowledge that British subs were in the area and that just about every Argentine naval asset was all but useless against nuclear-powered attack boats. However, the exclusion zone was a special provision taken by the Brits to keep the war contained to the islands.

They would not have been violating any laws of war by attacking military-flagged targets outside the zone, or, for that matter, targets in Mainland Argentina -- such an action would just have permitted Argentina to call on its neighbors for aid against an invader and make the political status of things more troublesome for the Brits.

None of these details matter to the average Argentine soul today, though. The Belgrano might as well have been a tugboat packed to the gills with starving infants when she was sunk, the way they treat the whole affair.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
7,636
1,108
#8
If you believe Argentina's side of the story, the Belgrano was on the outer edge of the "exclusion" zone, and was steaming away... in the full knowledge that British subs were in the area and that just about every Argentine naval asset was all but useless against nuclear-powered attack boats. However, the exclusion zone was a special provision taken by the Brits to keep the war contained to the islands.

They would not have been violating any laws of war by attacking military-flagged targets outside the zone, or, for that matter, targets in Mainland Argentina -- such an action would just have permitted Argentina to call on its neighbors for aid against an invader and make the political status of things more troublesome for the Brits.

None of these details matter to the average Argentine soul today, though. The Belgrano might as well have been a tugboat packed to the gills with starving infants when she was sunk, the way they treat the whole affair.
I have always understood that General Belgrano was outside the 200 mile radius when torpedoed, and I consider that fact totally irrelevant. So is the course the ships were steering. Nothing in sea warfare says that when you are zig zagging I can shoot at you on the zig but not on the zag. To be at war, at sea, against a sea power known to have submarines, and not taking any ASW precautions (which I understand was the case) is so negligent as to hold the Argentine officer corps open to laughter and professional contempt.
 
Nov 2007
2,013
1,211
Prague, Czech Republic
#9
I don't think it's fair to represent this as 99% in favour of remaining a British Overseas Territory. 1,513 voted in favour, 3 voted against, and one, presumably, made of a mess of the form so their vote was discounted. That's 99.74% or, rounding to the nearest whole number, 100%.

As for Argentines murdering the first Brit they can get their hands on, as a Brit I've found they're generally quite pleasant people as long as you avoid the Falklands and the 'Hand of God' incident.
 

Similar Discussions