The Fawklands is all gonna kick off again....

[skipper734]

There was a lucky American Warship that the Japs failed to sink at Pearl Harbour. It sailed away and was later sold.
In the next war it Popped up in, it was sunk.
Your starter for ten! Name that warship.

 

[Race]

belgrano?

 

[skipper734]

10 points. You couldn't make it up.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Is it just me that can see the point of view of Argentina? The current residents presumably do see it as being British as they are British. Should we have been there at all?

 

[Trufflehound]

wasnt the bismarch sunk on its 1st voyage?

Possibly. But at least it was huge.

 

[sten_super]

Is it just me that can see the point of view of Argentina? The current residents presumably do see it as being British as they are British. Should we have been there at all?

Why do Argentina have any claim to an island, just because it is close to them geographically? Perhaps we should lay claim to France on the same basis...

I would have a lot more sympathy if the Islanders wanted to be Argentinian. But they don't, they want to be British. Given that, there is no context or reason for any change in sovereignty to take place.

 

[Trufflehound]

Perhaps we should lay claim to France on the same basis...

I think you'll find we did exactly that, many times over the past 1000 years... And vice versa.

 

[Pot noodles for everyone]

I went to the doctors the other day. He said I've got Hermes. "surely you mean Herpes" I told him. "No" he replied "you're a carrier".




Oh yes. Still got it kids.

 

[sten_super]

I think you'll find we did exactly that, many times over the past 1000 years... And vice versa.

There's a difference between invading (which is not necessarily backed by a belief of ownership, more of desire) and saying 'We morally should have ownership of this island, based on geographical location' though, isn't there? The justification of ownership is a fairly new thing (previously it was 'my army's bigger than yours, back off') in international terms.