Amazon.com Widgets

Should Argentina abandon their claim to the Falklands?

Asked by: TN05
  • Yes they should

    They have not proved any argument that the island's can rightfully be claimed by Argentina in any way, shape or form.
    They have had 100 years to go to the ICJ but have refused knowing they have no valid claim and are afraid of losing.
    Time to end their colonial ambitions over the South Atlantic.

  • Yes they should

    They have not proved any argument that the island's can rightfully be claimed by Argentina in any way, shape or form.
    They have had 100 years to go to the ICJ but have refused knowing they have no valid claim and are afraid of losing.
    Time to end their colonial ambitions over the South Atlantic.

  • Yes they should

    They have not proved any argument that the island's can rightfully be claimed by Argentina in any way, shape or form.
    They have had 100 years to go to the ICJ but have refused knowing they have no valid claim and are afraid of losing.
    Time to end their colonial ambitions over the South Atlantic.

  • Argentina has no historic, legal or moral claim. It is time to move on!

    Argentina has not one legal claim, not one historical claim and not one moral claim. This is a claim of blatant colonialism. The only argument Argentina has is "Because they are closer" - and that's just pathetic. There was no inheritance from Spain, there is no law of succession and never has been.

  • Proximity doesn't constitute ownership

    Argentina has an at best iffy claim to the Falklands (Maldinas), other than the claim that the Spanish gave them the islands in 1816 and that they were usurped in 1833 (That in itself is disputed and they also dropped the claim for more than 50 years, which has serious implications in international law). However, the British have laid claim to the Island since the 1670's and had possesion of it a couple of times with the island changing hands between the Spanish and French. Argentina has been using this claim as a ploy to distract the people and ignite nationalistic feelings, especially in bad times. They even dropped the claim for a half century and as soon as trouble hit, they again claimed they were the oppressed people deprived of their god given right. The fact that the Falklands is very prosperous is another reason that the vultures are interested and they completely disregard the interests of the people on the island.
    "I don't see how our country can impose on a group of 3,000 people, whose ancestors arrived there 180 years ago, a government, a sovereignty and a citizenship they do not want," said Fernando Iglesias, a former opposition legislator and one of the men behind Malvinas: An Alternative Viewpoint, a paper penned by the group. The paper argues against Argentina's long-standing position that Falklanders are a transplanted population from Britain with no rights over the islands."
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/feb/22/argentinian-intellectuals-question-falklands

  • Yes, they should

    Every country in he world deserves to have its sovereignty if they so want it. Being an American, I see clearly how my country lords over much of the world. If the people of the Falklands vote to kick the Argentineans out, I think that is what should take place.

  • Yes, Argentina should abandon their claim for the people.

    Argentina does not have the military capacity to attack the British Island, and it is not good for the people who live there. There are several thousand people there, and if there were a change in governance, it could negatively impact all of them. It isn't worth the danger to so many lives.

  • Respect the Islanders' wishes

    The Falkland Islanders clearly do not want to be governed by Argentina, which is not surprising given how bad Argentina doing. A significant factor may also be the fact that Argentina illegally invaded the Falklands, resulting in the deaths of three islanders. Argentina's only claim towards them is that they are closer to Argentina than Britain, which is about as silly as saying Cuba should control Puerto Rico because they are closer to Cuba, or that Alaska should be controlled by Canada or Russia because they are closer than the mainland US.

    Posted by: TN05
  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.