The Falklands

[Zoe]

Depends whether you mean the side that "started" them or the side that "really started" them!

In the case of Iraq I would have thought it was the American led coalition that started the war but the argument could be made that it was Saddam that started the war by not proving beyond doubt to the world that he had disarmed.

 

[Schnellzug]

In the case of Iraq I would have thought it was the American led coalition that started the war but the argument could be made that it was Saddam that started the war by not proving beyond doubt to the world that he had disarmed.

it was Saddam's fault for not being able to prove that he didn't have something, yes. An interesting philosophical conundrum there.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

it was Saddam's fault for not being able to prove that he didn't have something, yes. An interesting philosophical conundrum there.

How can you show something that does not exist ?

 

[CarterUSM]

Pedantic I know, but war was never officially declared by us or the argies during the conflict.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Pedantic I know, but war was never officially declared by us or the argies during the conflict.

Having been in political circles at that time, I must say that the one word in your post that gives it the semblance of truth in Government is "officially". I assure you that it was managed, evaluated, planned and delivered as a war in any normal use of the word within Government administration.

I was concerned with information at the time, and noted that the 'conspiracy theories' were not only commenting on real or imagined oil and mineral reserves, but also with the strategic benefit of the Malvinos/Falklands as a stageing post for resource extraction from Antartica (which would potentially be on a grand scale) but, more bizarrely, with the vast potential for food-protein production developed from krill (which is extremely abundant in the Southern Oceans).
As with most good conspiracy theories, they're not entirely nonsense. Further, they're not entirely disproven nor of less potential value now than then.

I can't say I have a view on any of those opinions nor on how well informed they are (I'm used to policy-led-research in such matters which always provides the required evidence).

 

[kylemore]

In the case of Iraq I would have thought it was the American led coalition that started the war but the argument could be made that it was Saddam that started the war by not proving beyond doubt to the world that he had disarmed.

Errr actually he had or had it proved for him, which is why they had to resort to dodgy dossiers and bumping off the odd awkward weapons inspector!

 

[Schnellzug]

Errr actually he had or had it proved for him, which is why they had to resort to dodgy dossiers and bumping off the odd awkward weapons inspector!

This is why I don't beleive all those conspiracy theories that the Bush government was resposnible for 9/11 and so on; if they were that fiendishly cunning to organise, and then cover up, something on that scale, could they not have planted some reasonably convincing chemical weapons or something somewhere in Iraq??

 

[CarterUSM]

Having been in political circles at that time, I must say that the one word in your post that gives it the semblance of truth in Government is "officially". I assure you that it was managed, evaluated, planned and delivered as a war in any normal use of the word within Government administration.

I was concerned with information at the time, and noted that the 'conspiracy theories' were not only commenting on real or imagined oil and mineral reserves, but also with the strategic benefit of the Malvinos/Falklands as a stageing post for resource extraction from Antartica (which would potentially be on a grand scale) but, more bizarrely, with the vast potential for food-protein production developed from krill (which is extremely abundant in the Southern Oceans).
As with most good conspiracy theories, they're not entirely nonsense. Further, they're not entirely disproven nor of less potential value now than then.

I can't say I have a view on any of those opinions nor on how well informed they are (I'm used to policy-led-research in such matters which always provides the required evidence).

Sorry Dave, I meant to post "officially"....... Not to mention rolling my eyes

 

[jon0844]

This is why I don't beleive all those conspiracy theories that the Bush government was resposnible for 9/11 and so on; if they were that fiendishly cunning to organise, and then cover up, something on that scale, could they not have planted some reasonably convincing chemical weapons or something somewhere in Iraq??

I don't believe anyone could organise 9/11 better than the way it was supposedly carried out, which was perfectly feasible and - dare I say it - clever.

I am sure Wikileaks or Anonymous, or other tip offs to the media would have uncovered the truth otherwise. I really don't expect that in 50 years or whatever, we'll have classified documents that confirm it was all done by Bush.

I also doubt the conspiracy theorists around 7/7 too, claiming the bus bomb was a controlled explosion. Didn't seem like that when it happened, given I was 100-200 yards away on another bus. Yet, there are plenty of people who like to believe crazy things, while the real conspiracies are rather too boring and go unnoticed (but often do get revealed sooner or later).

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Sorry Dave, I meant to post "officially"....... Not to mention rolling my eyes

No worries!
I've just escalated your 'cynic rating' by a fair few points.

 

[kylemore]

This is why I don't beleive all those conspiracy theories that the Bush government was resposnible for 9/11 and so on;QUOTE]

Depends what you mean by "government".
Reasonably careful observation has led me to believe over the years that the people in "government" that you see, are to greater or lesser extent figureheads (GW completely - his father perhaps less so), window dressing so to speak.
I like to think that I have an open mind on 9/11 however the "conspiracy theory" which most insults my intelligence is the official one.

 

[LE Greys]

This is why I don't beleive all those conspiracy theories that the Bush government was resposnible for 9/11 and so on;

Depends what you mean by "government".
Reasonably careful observation has led me to believe over the years that the people in "government" that you see, are to greater or lesser extent figureheads (GW completely - his father perhaps less so), window dressing so to speak.
I like to think that I have an open mind on 9/11 however the "conspiracy theory" which most insults my intelligence is the official one.

The trouble with some conspiricy theories is that they suppose that there is someone in government clever and Machiiavellian enough to come up with them. For example, the problems with "Prince Philip organised the assassination of Princess Diana" are the first three words.

 

[Schnellzug]

Depends what you mean by "government".
Reasonably careful observation has led me to believe over the years that the people in "government" that you see, are to greater or lesser extent figureheads (GW completely - his father perhaps less so), window dressing so to speak.
I like to think that I have an open mind on 9/11 however the "conspiracy theory" which most insults my intelligence is the official one.

I think there's probably a lot of truth in that. I think there very much is a secret power behind the Politicians, but it's not so Secret, it's, in particular, the Entertainment industry, the Media, the Financial Sector and the Oil companies, all these are the ones that pull the strings. This was made very obvious when the Entertainment industry tried to persuade the U.S. Govt. to introduce that half-baked idea to control the internet. It's not the Government is sinister and Machiavellian, although someone certainly is.

 

[Badger]

Given our populations and that evidently Stanley is suitable for housing, why don't more people emmigrate there? There seems to be more than enough land. Stanley is the size of nearby villages here. East Falkland is 6,605 km^2; the entire West Midlands county (2.6m people) is only 902 km^2. Seems to me a gross underuse of land for such a populous nation.

 

[LE Greys]

Given our populations and that evidently Stanley is suitable for housing, why don't more people emmigrate there? There seems to be more than enough land. Stanley is the size of nearby villages here. East Falkland is 6,605 km^2; the entire West Midlands county (2.6m people) is only 902 km^2. Seems to me a gross underuse of land for such a populous nation.

I'd go, but only if I had the chance to work for the British Antarctic Survey. Not sure I'm cut out for sheep farming.

Besides, no trains (unless anyone's up for starting the Falklands Railway).

 

[Badger]

The trackbed's still there apparently. I'd imagine a population boom would be cause for a railway again.

 

[LE Greys]

The trackbed's still there apparently. I'd imagine a population boom would be cause for a railway again.

Why, so it is! Of all the places . . .

http://www.railwaysofthefarsouth.co.uk/11acamberrailway.html

 

[jon0844]

Finally! Somewhere to send the Pacers.

 

[WestCoast]

Finally! Somewhere to send the Pacers.

I suppose that's true, since Iran is no longer an option due to sanctions.

Somehow I just can't see mass emigration to the Falklands, they aren't exactly Australia...

 

[kylemore]

The trouble with some conspiricy theories is that they suppose that there is someone in government clever and Machiiavellian enough to come up with them. For example, the problems with "Prince Philip organised the assassination of Princess Diana" are the first three words.

Thats the beauty of conspiracy theories - you can pick and choose!

You're right the "Jookie Embra" looks as if he would be hard pressed to organise a visit to the dentists never mind a fiendish and nefarious assasination plot!

 

[Schnellzug]

i see that the Argentina are going to complain to the United Nations. Like the United Nations don't have anything more important to occupy their time, do they.

 

[ainsworth74]

Indeed! And their complaint doesn't even really have much in the way of merit we're not increasing the size of our deployment down there we're swapping one ship for another and Prince William is flying an S&R helicopter. Doesn't exactly sound like we're militarising the islands any more than they already are.

 

[Michael.Y]

A mate of mine once took a Falklands flag to a Wales v Argentina rugby game. I thought it was subtle, funny and powerful all in one.

I'm not usually one for imperialistic tendencies but the Falklands have been British for nearly 200 years.

Suddenly oil is found and the Argies want them back again?

:roll:

 

[Lampshade]

A mate of mine once took a Falklands flag to a Wales v Argentina rugby game. I thought it was subtle, funny and powerful all in one.

I'm not usually one for imperialistic tendencies but the Falklands have been British for nearly 200 years.

Suddenly oil is found and the Argies want them back again?

:roll:

They were never Argentina's to give back; the Dutch have more of a claim, but we don't see the Netherlands jumping up and down about them.

 

[SS4]

A mate of mine once took a Falklands flag to a Wales v Argentina rugby game. I thought it was subtle, funny and powerful all in one.

I'm not usually one for imperialistic tendencies but the Falklands have been British for nearly 200 years.

Suddenly oil is found and the Argies want them back again?

:roll:

The Argies wanted them before oil was found (it's still yet to be established if the oil is economically viable). It's only hit the news here because of tensions at home

 

[junglejames]

Finally! Somewhere to send the Pacers.

Do that and the argies will be straight over to take a ride on them!!!

I hear the reason for the initial invasion by the Argies, was because even back then, Mr Branson was talking of running Voyagers, but down in The Falklands! Needless to say, this caused the military and locals down there to turn their arms on Mr Branson Leaving the way open for the argies.

I know, worst joke of the century

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Sorry for the Daily Mail link, but apparently US actor Sean Penn has called the UK 'colonialist, ludicrous and archaic' over our refusal to hand back the Falklands to Argentina.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...fusing-hand-Falklands-Argentina.html#comments

 

[Schnellzug]

I think the picture of him embracing Hugo Chavez, the man who wants to think of himself as the new Castro but is actually more like Benito Mussolini in terms of credibility, says all that needs to be said about Mr. Penn's credibility when to comes to international politics.

 

[ainsworth74]

I wonder if he would still think like that if he actually went and spoke to the Islanders and found out just how long some of their families have lived on those islands. Then again I guess he's to busy cuddling up to Latin American dictatorships like Venezuela and Cuba (and these days Argentina isn't looking completely democratic any more) to actually want to find out the facts of the situation and the wants of the people that live there.

 

[Michael.Y]

I think the Mail are giving this such prominence is good, but sad.

It's like Rowan Atkinson appearing in the New York Post saying that Puerto Rico and Guam should be handed back to Spain.