414
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by Zaelaa@lemmy.zip to c/pics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 98 points 4 days ago
[-] stark@sopuli.xyz 19 points 3 days ago

Also this:

Argentina invaded the island killed 3 Falklanders and then got their ass whooped. And to this day Argentines think they are the victims.

[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

The victims of this conflict are the casualties of a completely pointless war, on either side. Neither side fought for legitimate reasons and both used it to drum up nationalism.

[-] stark@sopuli.xyz 14 points 3 days ago

How is defending against an invasion not legitimate?

[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

It's only legitimate out of context. The two countries were trying to negotiate a transfer before the war broke out. Argentina was ruled by a military Junta and used the invasion to bolster its internal politics. Thatcher did the same thing by using overwhelming force over a territory that Britain was trying to get rid of. An Argentine cruiser was sunk outside of the exclusion zone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_ARA_General_Belgrano

Afterwards Britain fortified the island to feed its military industrial complex and drum up more support for its decaying empire. Everything about this war was totally pointless except from a domestic political standpoint.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/07/british-sovereignty-falklands-absurd-imperial-hangover-argentina

[-] stark@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

So what should have been the right move then when Argentina invaded the islands? Should Thatcher just have abandoned the people on the Falklands and let them fend for themselves?

[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

No, those 907 people absolutely had to die so that Britain could keep its frozen rock halfway around the world.

[-] stark@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I doubt the regime that threw dissidents out of helicopters would have just let the British Falklanders live peacefully among the Argentines.

[-] bigpEE@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

It's legitimate in context. I'm not addressing all your points, but the exclusion zone was never "this is the only place we'll be fighting"

[-] axx@slrpnk.net 12 points 4 days ago

Helpful, but is there more context here?

Such as who are there people currently living there and therefore voting in this referendum?

[-] PennyRoyal@sh.itjust.works 69 points 4 days ago

The descendants of the only people to live on the islands since pre-history. Literally the only people whose opinions count, including the uk population and government. It doesn’t matter what the Argentinians or the British think really, same as Greenland - the people who live there want to be a part of the uk

[-] axx@slrpnk.net 12 points 4 days ago

Sure, I entirely agree on principle. But that's my question, who are these people? According to Wikipedia, there are no such people:

Although Fuegians from Patagonia may have visited the Falkland Islands in prehistoric times, the islands were uninhabited when Europeans first explored them.

So I suppose I have my answer overall. The people living there are broadly the descendents of the French, Spanich and English who settled there in the late 18th century. The French ceded the settlement to Spain a year after they started, so even just scratching the surface of the situation it looks like it's been a mess for 250 years.

But in any case, the people living there, now, clearly want to remain a UK territory.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 days ago

The modern population of the island are the natives, kinda like how Icelands population is completely native to the island. Not to say people didn't fuck around on the island occasionally but there's basically no evidence of prehistoric settlement of the Falklands.

[-] Theoriginalthon@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Greenland wants to be part of the UK 🤔

[-] PennyRoyal@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago

Nah, I meant that the population of Greenland want to remain under the administration that they’re currently under

[-] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 50 points 4 days ago

People who has always live there?

The Maldives has never had Spanish/Argentinian population.

Argentina only claims it based on physical proximity, not on the will of its population.

Malvinas not Maldives (they're half a world apart), and there have been briefly Spanish/Argentinian populations on the islands between 1774 and 1820 but none since then. The majority of whom were one of a) a military garrison b) convicts c) guards of convicts. Very small numbers of non military settlers during that period

So broadly yes, everyone who has been there since the early 1800s is aligned with the UK

[-] axx@slrpnk.net 6 points 4 days ago

Thanks, this was helpful and also prompted me to look more into it.

this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2026
414 points (100.0% liked)

pics

29170 readers
262 users here now

Rules:

1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer

2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.

3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.

4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.

5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.

Photo of the Week Rule(s):

1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.

2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.

Weeks 2023

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS