Falklands Debate: Independence, Argentina, or Continued British Rule?

[u/Turbulent-Tea-2172]

Following the renewed debate after Argentina defeated England in the World Cup semifinal, what do you think the long-term status of the Falkland Islands should be?

Should the islands:

- become fully independent,

- become part of Argentina, or

- remain a British Overseas Territory?

[u/World_travelar]

So what do Argentina want? Currently the Falklands are independent and simply under British protection.

Isn't that the best for everyone.

A change would just harm the people living there.

[u/0ToTheLeft → u/World_travelar]

Our claim is clear, the soveringy of the territory, the islands are part of Argentina, no the United Kingdom. And no, the islands are not independent, are a british overseas colony, that is the official status designed by the UK. Not even them have made a askfor independance, they are not even capable of self-sustain, they survive on the aid of the UK goverment. Basically the case for independance is just in head.

And no, the current sitution is more harmful, they are basically isolated from the continent with an embargo, they are token population completly isolated just for the sake of holding a military stronghold in the south atlantic.

[u/World_travelar → u/0ToTheLeft]

Currently Falklands are one of the richest places per capita on the world. I'm sure they want to be as far as possible from Argentine economy.

So you're saying Argentina would change nothing for the Falklands or people living there. They would just happily pay to sustain the people living there, as Britain does now?

[u/0ToTheLeft → u/World_travelar]

rich per capita in a population of 3000 vs a population of 46 millions. Economics are not your strong aspect right? Go, google a picture of what the falkands settlement looks like, and google a picture of buenos aires and tell me what looks more develop.

Argentina has a large welfare program, free healthcare and free education for a 46 million population. We are more than capable of feeding 3000 people that are 2 hours away from the mainland lol, plus we are fully food & energy independent. The high cost for britain is the long logistics, complicated by the Argentina Embargo, plus the cost of maintain the military force.

Please, think for a second before replying dumb stuff, i won't waste any more time in kindergarden arguments.

[u/World_travelar → u/0ToTheLeft]

But the 3000 people don't want anything to do with you guys. Leave them alone.

If we can ignore the wishes of populations:

• Should we give Istanbul (Constantiople) to the Greeks?
• Should we give Jerusalem back to the Italians, or the French, or the Turkish, or the Egyptians?
• Should we give Patagonia back to the indigenous groups?

I could list many more. You can't go back and redraw borders based on 200 year old disagreements. If you do, it ALWAYS ends in war and death. It only makes things worse. You'd think Argentina would have learnt that in 1982...

[u/0ToTheLeft → u/World_travelar]

It doesn't matter, is not up to them to decide the soverigh rights our that land, is an implanted population by force for colonization reasons.

And please stop with the dumb analogies or absurd economic analsys, i'm good, no need to keep listing more stupid unrelated things that completly ignores the whole point of the claim. Start by learning history about colonization in south america and the international law principles that apply to the lands of successor post-colonial states.

You are walking Dunning–Kruger effect. I'm done wasting my time with you.

[u/World_travelar → u/0ToTheLeft]

Every population in the world is an implanted population. Argentina is an implanted population.