RF wrote:Britain no longer has the military or naval strength to refight the Falklands campaign of 1982 - no carriers for a start.
The strategy is to keep the islands from being invaded - using the bare minimum of military forces on the islands.
The problem are politicians who no longer believe in Britain being a genuine independent country, who would rather use billions of pounds of taxpayers money to bankroll the European Union and bail out the Euro, rather than spend on the military. This CONservative coalition government has cut British military spending even more rigourously than the previous Labour government would have done.
If the Falklands were American, with US civilians there - the Argentinians wouldn't dare make a peep, not even with Obama as president.
Vic Dale wrote:Now forgive me for being a cynical old bugger, but doesn't withdrawing the fleet at that time look a bit suspect? A bit of an opportunity? A come-on for Galtieri? As far as Thatcher's political future was concerned she now secure and I can recall watching her at the time and thinking, "She knows she's got it made and she is cock-a-hoop - though playing it down for all she is worth."
I don't personally accuse Margaret Thatcher being a schemer, she never had the brains for that, but someone knew full well what to do and it only cost 258 British lives, 700 wounded, 2 destroyers, 2 frigates, and 2 auxiliary vessels sunk. That moved saved Thatcher,
If the Falkland islanders did want to join Argentina and voted for it in a referendum you can be pretty sure that Argentina and the United Nations would be the first to recognise that referendum and congratulate the islanders on their ''wise'' decision.
Benjamin wrote:In the case of colonial territories the principle of territorial integrity prevails over the right to self-determination.
Benjamin wrote: Imagine if a group of people from say Ireland had established an Irish colony on the eastern coast of England and then claimed a right under the principle of self-determination to have the land they are occupying declared a part of Ireland. Can you imagine the threat to world peace and stability that would ensue if such action were legal?
That's the logic behind the legal criteria that limits the right to self-determination and why as a matter of common sense and international law, a coloniser can't legally disrupt the territorial integrity of another State by implanting its own population unto the territory it is colonizing.
But a colonizing power would never allow a referendum to take place if it knew it would go against its wishes in the first place. These referendums are really just a tool used by the colonizing power to legitimate their position over the country whose territorial integrity is being threatened.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests