Do the Argentinians actually have any proper calm to the Falklands/Malvinas?

Who did they raid?

Argentinian "colony" of 40 people because they had seized three american ships

>Also taken on board, Duncan reported, "were the whole of the (Falklands') population consisting of about forty persons, with the exception of some 'gauchos', or cowboys who were encamped in the interior."

Basically we rounded up the people on the island and declared there was no longer a goverment there

I thought the islands were british

they are, basically an argie tried to make a colony but it failed

Kys self-hating retards.

seems like bullying desu

...

Here's why people want them.

Wrong, this is why...

British Antarctic Claim is based on territorial proximity.

French map of the Falklands from 1760... no wonder they couldn't keep up with the British Empire if their cartography is this crap.

Let's try that again with pic.

Holy shit

what about you putting your claim to the Islands in your constitution?

It is literally just niggers wanting gibs

The only logic they have is "it is closer to us than Britain"

Anyone who says otherwise is making things up or believing Argentinian propaganda

...

>argentina
>niggers
Go back to /pol/ pls

It was

But Argentina was such a shitshow they couldnt do it properly

>someone unironically claiming argentina is white

...I thought this was a myth

...

Why don't you read an encyclopedia?
Most are free these days

hahahahahhahaha

This is the saddest thing ive ever seen

Are you like the only white people in argentina or are you black and just in denial?

>South American definition of white

This isn`t helping your cause

>Ours! Ours! Ours!
>[Kirchner diplomacy]

argie here, no we dont but if i say this i get lynched so yes we do

Those are Encyclopedia Britannica figures, so it's their definition of white. Argentina has no census on race, we are not obsessed with it like Americans.

Thank God, the last thing we need are your insane identity politics and affirmative action bullshit.

Who?

America belongs to the Amerindians. Go back to europe, subhuman.

Every argies i met were all fucking anal about the falklands, pathetic

Argentina has as much claim to those islands as they have to Buenos Aires itself. Both were ruled by Spain until their independence.

So take it as you want.

Don't cry because it's over, cry because it happened.

They weren't exactly lining the streets cheering at their liberation were they?

everyone always brings up how the brits living in the falklands do not care for this but meh, the creoles that were there before the brits did not care about british liberation either. People bring up how this should be resolved through referendum but again if something happened to the british govt where they could not function well and lets say forty years down the line argentina has a military for once they could probably just go in and send those people to britain.

But how would this be justified? Just because the island is close to Argentina gives the right, in the case of a British collapse, to invade somewhere you've never held and forcibly deport all the citizens, who've lived there for their whole lives in the same way that they have for 200 years? It just doesn't make sense.

>refendum in the Falklands
>tiny 2000-strong population implanted by Britain predictably vote to be part of Britain
>UK: self determination is all that matters! The people have spoken!

>referendum in Crimea
>1,274,000 Crimeans vote to become psrt of Russia
>UK: wtf we need to stop this! Territorial integrity is all that matters!

Not like any conquest of the Falklands was exactly justified. it doesn't have to be and the Brits being a bit too altruistic does lead them to being bullied around. also muh oil and clay and muh history. it was probably not justified to commit to the reconquista of spain but the spaniards did it anyways. honestly not many wars have really ever been justified, they are just full of nations or peoples competing against one another either to gain something or because of some sort of differences/disagreements

this

>implanted by Britain
I don't get what you mean by this. The people there have ancestors who came from Britain yes. Should we also ignore the wishes of the entire peoples of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the East Coast of the US etc?
>wtf we need to stop this
Britain has taken no further actions than any other UN nation, which Argentina is also a member of, so really they did nothing to stop the annexation.
Also, that anime is fucking awful.

>Just because the island is close to Argentina gives the right, in the case of a British collapse, to invade somewhere you've never held and forcibly deport all the citizens, who've lived there for their whole lives in the same way that they have for 200 years
That's what the British did with the Argentine settlers in 1833.

I don't care much for the Falklands and I think it's autistic to complain about things that happened 184 years ago, but Britain continuosly misrepresents the Argentine claim.

Argentina doesn't claim the islands based on proximity. It claims them based on history.

Britain renounced its claims in the Nootka Sound Convention with Spain, Argentina inherited the islands from Spain and settled them, putting in place the first actual government on the islands under its flag. Then the British came along in 1833, in the middle of Argentina's civil war and decided they wanted the islands again. The Argentine governor and his garrison were expelled at gunpoint.

The dispute is also much wider than the Falklands, it includes Antarctica, the South Sandwich and Georgia islands, as well as the territorial waters around it, all this territory is not inhabited and thus not subject to "self-determination".

>Do the Argentinians actually have any proper calm to the Falklands/Malvinas?

Whether or not a nation has a "claim" to a specific territory is entirely based on whether or not it is willing and able to defend that territory against rival claimants. The Falklands War proved that while Argentina was willing to fight for the islands, it was not able to defend them. Therefore, Argentina has no claim.

But they never renounced sovereignty, especially not to the new state of Argentina. The sailors had to leave many South Atlantic possessions due to economic pressures, but they maintained declaration of ownership in the form of a plaque. Furthermore the secret clause of the convention stated that the effects only remained in place so long as no other power had formed an 'establishment.' I would consider Argentina after Spanish independence to be an 'other' power.

Nobody gives a fuck except retards. I read more about the subject in the english speaking internet than in real life.

t. argie

Fair point.

Like I said, I don't like history to be misrepresented. I don't care much for the Falklands but it annoys me when people say things like "Argentina never held them" or "just because they are close doesn't mean anything" and so on.

By painting the other side as irrational or chaotic evil then the dispute will never be settled. If it was up to me I would give all Falklands claims in exchange for shared oil and fishing rights and split our overlapping claims in Antarctica on equal portions with mutual recognition of each other. (Strenghtening them against foreign powers like China or the USA)

But hey, that's just me. Most people on both sides don't care, and the few that do have ridiculous hardline positions on it.
SAD!

So it's just like the Argentinian equivalent of drumpf supporters that care about this?

Just a few hardliner rightwingers and leftists care about the Falklands.

Ironically Argentine conservatives (our "tories") have been huge angloboos both historically and at present.

Argentina and Britain were extremely close allies between 1853 (signing of the Constitution) and 1943 (Nationalist coup that brought Peron to the Ministry of Labour). Relations were very tight, more British inmigrated here than anywhere else outside the Anglosphere, it was a sort of "Honorary Dominion", economically if not politically.

The Argentine ambassador famously was the only one that refused to leave London during the Blitz, saying "As long as the Queen stays so will I".

It's very weird, how two countries that were such close allies ended up fighting a war for such a petty reason.

In terms of leaders that dramatically changed their countries trajectory for the worse, I'd put Peron only a little behind Pol Pot and Mugabe.

>Do the Argentinians actually have any proper calm
No. As an Argentine, I can say we have no proper calm, ever.

You are probably right.
Peronism is a cancer.

If this land wasn't ridiculously fertile and endowed, and the country ridiculously weathy when Peron took over, we would've collapsed already. But Argentina is so blessed by geography (and some redeemable very hard working honest people) it always manages to bounce back from Peronist fuck ups.

...

The British Crown claimed North America before the USA, therefore the United Kingdom is its rightful owner.