Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Falkland Islanders to hold referendum over sovereignty

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Donegeal View Post
    Fine. Whatever. Both have claims. Both can stick it up their asses. Anybody know how the actual vote went?
    Curious about whether it was 98% or 99% in favour of staying British?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
      Drake is just trolling as usual. Right or wrong isn't as important as how many people get upset.
      I'm fighting against ignorance. If some ***** get offended along the way, that's just a bonus.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tupac Shakur View Post
        Yes, quite unworthy, given that generically claiming the entire earth, known or unknown, occupied or unocuppied, and dividing it between two parties has precisely zero weight in admiralty law, which preceded intenational law.

        Not only that, but whatever claim the Argies thought they might have had was extinguished in 1850, by the Arana-Southern Treaty, a fact which the Argies seemed to be well aware of until a little hiccup in 1888, and then didn't raise again, how convenient, until 1941, then promptly forgot.
        When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

        Comment


        • Captain John Strong stopping by briefly in 1690 is just as irrelevant in establishing a strong claim under international law as the Treaty of Tordesillas was. The first legit claim to the Falklands didn't materialize until the French actually settled the place in 1764.

          Comment


          • Not under admiralty law as applied at the time, which is what counts. The common rule was touch and claim, not establish permanent settlement and claim. Modern international law is a lot different, but sorting out a long history of competing claims requires each to be judged in the context of the law which applied at the time.

            That's all just the bottom layer of the cake. The icing was the relingquishment of claims by the Argies in 1850. Just because they have seller's remorse because their dumbass strongman of the day couldn't negotiate doesn't mean they get do-overs a century and a half after they screwed the pooch.
            When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

            Comment


            • what the fack bull**** are you gusy talking about now
              still with the argentina?

              ENOUGH WITH THE ARGENTINE ALREADY

              god damn i want some arginetine titties in my facve now
              To us, it is the BEAST.

              Comment


              • Not under admiralty law as applied at the time, which is what counts. The common rule was touch and claim, not establish permanent settlement and claim. Modern international law is a lot different, but sorting out a long history of competing claims requires each to be judged in the context of the law which applied at the time.
                It's amazing the lengths you're going to in order to avoid admitting the obvious fact that the British stole the Malvinas from the Argentinians in 1833...

                Anyway, the obvious counter to this is that the word of GOD was what counted at the time of the Treaty of Tordesillas, thus making the Spanish claim (which predates the British claim by 196 years) completely valid when judged in the context of the law which applied at the time.

                Comment


                • GO COMB YOUR BEARD
                  To us, it is the BEAST.

                  Comment


                  • You can't steal what's already yours by right and what the thief concedes is yours after you take it back. You trying to impress some hot Argentine mariquita?
                    When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat View Post
                      You can't steal what's already yours by right and what the thief concedes is yours after you take it back. You trying to impress some hot Argentine mariquita?
                      I hate undereducated know-it-alls like yourself. You're a cruder version of Molly Bloom.

                      Comment


                      • And you're a non-zealot version of Ben.
                        When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."

                        Comment


                        • i never ****ed an argenina margerita or whatever before
                          i had jewish, white, black, guatelmela, italian, serbian, bosnian, german, korean, japanese, chinese, filipino, lebanes, southern girl, eghyptan, mexian

                          what else?

                          hmm no canadians tho
                          never met a hot puerto rican... probalyt the unglist latinas
                          cuban seems intersting

                          i really wanna brazil
                          they are nice women
                          To us, it is the BEAST.

                          Comment


                          • MtG, I'm not sure you understand the dynamic Drake is going with here. There are two factors at play: 1) Drake hates the UK, and 2) he's indirectly trolling everyone who believes that the Palestinians should be allowed to kick out the Jews, because the Jews "stole their land".
                            If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                            ){ :|:& };:

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
                              Who cares? The kelpers want to be British.
                              Actually their opinion doesn't really matter, it is an open secret that Britain was going to give the Falklands away and compensate the inhabitants. They have done it over and over for centuries, Norfolk island, Cocos, Pitcairn, Lord Howe, need I go on?

                              But the Argie generals got impatient, wanted a domestic win to shore up their rule, tried to speed things up with their invasion and ended up setting back the Argentine cause by maybe another century. In the meantime the Law of Sea convention has come in and given the Falklands an EEZ, making it much more valuable economically. The economic arguments that were driving Britain toward a settlement -the cost of administration - no longer exist.

                              In Anglo eyes this is typical Latin incompetence. Good one General Galtieri!
                              Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..

                              Look, I just don't anymore, okay?

                              Comment


                              • Pitcairn has like 50 people on it. Probably fewer actually. Who would want it? Does it belong to like, New Zealand now or something?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X