Should we be talking to Argentina about the Falklands?

[Nibble]

PTSD is a big problem and WILL be a big problem for years to come but it is an issue that is slowly being dealt with throughout the Services!

It was not many years ago that we did not understand what PTSD was! Sadly we are having to learn faster and faster these days!

Quite, some efforts are being made, more from NHS and private counsillors though.

 

[goldstone]

Thanks .I don't have contact with my Dad, I do however know that it is highly likely his alcoholism was likely down to PTSD. Coincidentally enough I am currently researching and speaking to people who have treated ex-service men with PTSD and one ex service man himself for a job I am doing and after seeing what has happened to some of these men I would advocate a subtle but firm NO on the Argie situation, carefuly engineered to avoid conflict.

Unfortunately we have 2 generations of service men returning from the middle East over the next few years. A timebomb of drug addiction, homelessness, broken families and mental illness that the M.O.D will sweep firmly under the carpet.

You are making a very strong case for an immediate end to unnecessary military adventures. And into that category I put the Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Was what we achieved in the Falklands (retaining sovereignity over a bunch of rocks 8000 miles away) really worth a single British life, or the after effects on those that survived? I think not.

 

[danish seagull]

Brief conversation, f*** off.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I can see this turning into a governmental "hot potato", much as the fabled "Referendum On Europe" has turned out to be, i.e. every government talks, delays and then passes the problem over to the opposition when they get in, ready to criticise them for being weak if they cave in to the Argies.

Bottom line - I don't think we should hand the islands back but am willing to reconsider if we sign Becchio from Leeds in the window.

 

[Nibble]

You are making a very strong case for an immediate end to unnecessary military adventures. And into that category I put the Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Was what we achieved in the Falklands (retaining sovereignity over a bunch of rocks 8000 miles away) really worth a single British life, or the after effects on those that survived? I think not.

Quite. Many people wrongly credit Thatcher with advocating War in the Falklands. In fact she didn't believe it was worth the cost to British troops stating "who cares about a dirty rock a thousand miles away". And then let herself down by caving in to cabinet pressure who collectively pursuaded her to attack as it was what Britain wanted and she would look feeble if she didn't and would lose the next election. So she had the right intentions at first but caved, sacrificing troops for her own political gain. So anyone that regards Thatcher as a strong woman over the Falklands is way off the mark and it illustrates the fact that politicians will sacfrifice the sanity and lives of their men and women for another 5 years in office. This needs to end.

 

[beorhthelm]

... let herself down by caving in to cabinet pressure who collectively pursuaded her to attack as it was what Britain wanted and she would look feeble if she didn't and would lose the next election. So she had the right intentions at first but caved, sacrificing troops for her own political gain.

interesting take on the virtues of cabinet government.

 

[Silk]

You are making a very strong case for an immediate end to unnecessary military adventures. And into that category I put the Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Was what we achieved in the Falklands (retaining sovereignity over a bunch of rocks 8000 miles away) really worth a single British life, or the after effects on those that survived? I think not.

How near does a place have to be in order for it to be worth it? What if Spain invaded Gibraltar, for example?

 

[Dave the OAP]

or france invade the channel islands?

 

[Don Quixote]

What's wrong with her? Loads of problems in her country, unemployment and debt and all she can talk about is some islands with nothing on them but Penguins. She is trying to distract the people from the real problems of the country.

 

[Bognor Bystander]

No - in my opinion.

 

[somerset]

The views and feelings of the islanders should be paramount. Incidentally, the FIG meets most of the running costs of the military presence on the Islands so there is little if any cost to the poor UK tax payer..

There is a Company size 'territorial' unit maintained by the FIG, about a hundred light Infantry, trained by bootnecks, the cost to the FIG is about £400k per year. Standard garrison costs for the British troops based there are entirely at the tax payers expense. Having said that, I think the government is talking to the Argies in a way, it is saying all things are possible as long as the Islanders themselves ( just over 3000), have the final say in what their future aspirations are, hence the poll in March.

 

[somerset]

What's wrong with her? Loads of problems in her country, unemployment and debt and all she can talk about is some islands with nothing on them but Penguins. She is trying to distract the people from the real problems of the country.

Of course she is, the same as the General in '82.

 

[Triggaaar]

We cannot continue to bear the costs of maintaining our military presence on a bunch of rocks 8000 miles away in the South Atlantic, so we may as well start talking to the Argies and agreeing a workable solution.

I agree. This is what we should say: "We're withdrawing our military presence from the Falklands. If you go near it, we're going to bomb the f*** out of Argentina. Good day."

 

[somerset]

I think they (the Argies) should tone it down a bit, but yes we probably should talk to them. And that is nothing to do with their 'right' to the Falklands as they don't have one, it just makes economic and political sense. And military too as there's no way we could mount an operation similar to the last one to recapture the islands, and given the distance and logistical problems we couldn't hold them indefinitely either.

One could argue that perhaps a bit of old-fashioned imperial politics is what's needed; in the 'old days' it was quite common for governments to horse-trade territory after a war. Some sort of joint sovereignty and joint mineral rights deal may be the way forward.

If you had done a bit of research before putting down your two-penneth worth, you will have known that we were talking to the Argies on several fronts regarding shared mineral and oil exploration, shared logistical and economic deals regarding the Islands other resources including tourism,..... but twice the Argies kicked them into touch saying they wouldnt dicuss it until the UK handed over control of the Islands. Then came the war in '82 and nothing much other than south american rhetoric since.

 

[kjgood]

Absolutely not!

 

[somerset]

Also, dont get stuck in that British colonial bit either,.. there is barely a 1st world country that doesnt have islands and territories scattered across the globe, and not all of them what you would call the former western colonial powers either.

 

[goldstone]

How near does a place have to be in order for it to be worth it? What if Spain invaded Gibraltar, for example?

Same thing. Let them have it. For what reason do we need sovereignty over a rock on the southern tip of Spain. Ridiculous. Not worth losing any British military lives over.

 

[somerset]

Same thing. Let them have it. For what reason do we need sovereignty over a rock on the southern tip of Spain. Ridiculous. Not worth losing any British military lives over.

A bit churlish of the Spanish to be bleating about Gib when they themselves maintain territory across in North Africa, Ceuta and Melilla to name but two, plus a plethera of Islands off the coast of Morocco and Tunisia.

 

[kjgood]

Same thing. Let them have it. For what reason do we need sovereignty over a rock on the southern tip of Spain. Ridiculous. Not worth losing any British military lives over.

You seem to fail to understand, the Islanders are British Passport Holders and wish to be British, that is the reason.

 

[goldstone]

You seem to fail to understand, the Islanders are British Passport Holders and wish to be British, that is the reason.

Hard luck .... we're pulling in our horns.