Keesje, you clearly have your own agenda here and your partiality is clear to see. Regarding the preposterous press release that you posted, any independent observer who takes that at face value and see the Uk as the aggressor here would have to be very naive indeed.
Some of the more ludicrous points:
'Britain militarised the S Atlantic.' Until 1982 the extent of British military in FI was a small handful of Royal Marines. There are surely greater numbers of more heavily armed soldiers standing guard outside various government buildings in The Hague or Buenos Aires. The military presence was only increased after a war initiated by.... Argentina. So who militarised the S Atlantic?
'Argentina's peaceful claim on the islands'. Peaceful? They came guns blazing last time, and would again if they thought they stood a chance.
'Britain's colonial aggression.' Argentina's 'colonial' argument is so tangled up in hypocrisy that it cannot be taken seriously. No indigenous people existed let alone were displaced. Argentina didn't exist when we successfully settled the islands. Argentina could only have had control of the islands through colonialism. Argentina only exists through colonialism. Perhaps they should lead by example and pack up back to Spain and Italy, leaving Argentina to the native S Americans.
UN, International law, blah, blah, blah. They conveniently ignore the UN right of self determination. There will be no conflict or bloodshed if this right is respected by Argentina. There are no people with a greater claim on the islands than the UK and the islanders, the only successful non-transient settlers of the otherwise uninhabited islands. The Argentine claim is based solely on proximity, which is basically irrelevant. By this principal they should invade Chile.
Cristina would do well to focus on problems within her actual, not imagined, borders.
Last edited by Torque Tonight; 7th Jan 2013 at 12:16.