View Full Version : Falkland Islands
I was surprised to hear today that Argentinian communications with the Falkland Isles are still being suppressed/hampered even up to the point that it makes it hard for Argentinian family members to get a direct flight to Port Stanley to visit graves of Argentinian soldiers.
Do you think that we should open up more with Argentina to help those berieved family members to visit the Falkland Islands?
I voted yes they should be given the chance to visit the graves of their loved ones. After all they was just doing as they were told.
This auld sweat says yes. The war was a long time ago and Argentina was a very different country ruled by a misguided and failing Junta. We did take care to bury the Argentinian dead with honour. We did more for these poor souls in death than their political masters did for them in life.
Bad Manners
28-Mar-09, 08:51
I say yes let them visit the war graves on the island.
At the time of the conflict many many of the Argintine forces did not want to be there I know I saw it first hand. The conflict has been over for many years but a lot of us have daily reminders of it, let the families that lost loved ones on both sides mourn their dead and pay tribute.
I voted yes they should be given the chance to visit the graves of their loved ones. After all they was just doing as they were told.
i did as u did and u are right.
Rainmaker2
28-Mar-09, 11:06
I've been down in the Falklands twice, the second time was when the Argentine relatives were allowed back to the isands to visit the cemetery. What I can say is that there is still a lot of powerful feelings towards the Argentinians and its going to something major for those feelings to change. The war wasn't that long ago and you can still see the scars that it left on the Islands. Put it this way you can drive from Stanley in any direction and somewhere you'll see DANGER - MINEFIELD.
Gene Hunt
28-Mar-09, 12:01
I've been down in the Falklands twice, the second time was when the Argentine relatives were allowed back to the isands to visit the cemetery. What I can say is that there is still a lot of powerful feelings towards the Argentinians and its going to something major for those feelings to change. The war wasn't that long ago and you can still see the scars that it left on the Islands. Put it this way you can drive from Stanley in any direction and somewhere you'll see DANGER - MINEFIELD.
Been down there as well with the TA, did you get your photo taken with the whalebones outside the church ??, everyone was doing that when I was there !! .. how did you find the "bennies" ?? .. or are they calling them "stills" these days .. ;), did you get your red Minefield Plaque from the EOD boys in Stanley, they must have made a fortune out of them. And do you remember the daily performances of "Dances with Seagulls" ??
The Chilean airline LanChile used to fly into RAF Mount Pleasant twice weekly using 737's, the strip at Stanley cant take anything bigger than small prop planes really. There were some issues with Argentinans taking video and pictures of the base and aircraft which didnt go down well, I believe that led to the flights stopping for a while although they were resumed later.
There were also some issues with Argentinans getting a bit militant in Stanley, some seemed to refuse to see the Islanders point of view that they want to remain British. I saw a scuffle with a few Argentinans who had laid their flag at the war memorial to the British dead, that did not go down well. Most were really nice folks though, very pleasant and good company and they stayed at a B+B called "Malvinas", now there was a canny Falklands buisnessman. There was a well known sign in one of the shop windows that said "Argentinians .. You will be welcome on our Islands when you recognise our right to self determination", the Islanders had a hard time under occupation lets not forget. That said of course relatives should be able to visit war graves, the Argentinan cemetry was beautifully kept when I visited by both visiting realtives and the Islanders that stayed at San Carlos.
I dont think anyone is deliberately trying to stop the Argentinans visiting, Argentina has a habit of making issues over the Islands on a regular basis, and with Brown in South America they will do again no doubt.
Welcomefamily
28-Mar-09, 12:08
Yes they should be allowed.
DeHaviLand
28-Mar-09, 12:33
Well, I'm voting no. But if the Argentinian Government gives up its claim to the islands, I may change my mind.
Gene Hunt
28-Mar-09, 12:37
LanChile still fly direct to RAF Mount Pleasant, Falkland Islands every Saturday of the Month .. http://www.falklands.info/factfile/flan.html
So I don't see how the Argentinans are being restricted from visiting the Islands.
Direct Flights to Port Stanley would be another matter, even the RAF trooping flights are escorted in and out of the 200 mile exclusion zone by full armed Tornado F3's. Permission would have to be got beforehand.
believe families should be able to visit the graves.
I also believe at the least sign of aggression by Argentina militia or misbehaviour/disrespect by visiting families this facility should be suspended.
The easiest solution is to allow the Falkland Islanders themselves decide when and how often the visits take place and under what conditions - they are the people living with the situation and know how the visitors behave and quite often are aware of the political situation in Argentina - so if they wish they can call a halt to any 'war grave visiting' at any time.
Gene Hunt
28-Mar-09, 13:13
I was surprised to hear today that Argentinian communications with the Falkland Isles are still being suppressed/hampered even up to the point that it makes it hard for Argentinian family members to get a direct flight to Port Stanley to visit graves of Argentinian soldiers.
Do you think that we should open up more with Argentina to help those berieved family members to visit the Falkland Islands?
A bit of research shows the Argentine Goverment THEMSELVES have banned charter flights to the Falklands from using their airspace, this has been in place since 2004. Hence the LanChile charter flights leaving from Chile to avoid the problem. It seems that the Argentine Goverment is depriving their own people to try to score political points.
Foreign Office press release from 2004 confirming the self imposed Argentine ban .. http://www.falklands.info/factfile/flightspress.html
And an interesting article from 2008 on the issue from the Falkland Island's point of view .. http://www.falklands.gov.fk/media/statement-1-may-2008.php
The only choice for Argentinian relatives at the moment is the LanChile flight or to go by Sea, down purely to their own Goverments stubborness.
Non Story as "We" are not to blame.
A bit of research shows the Argentine Goverment THEMSELVES have banned charter flights to the Falklands from using their airspace, this has been in place since 2004. Hence the LanChile charter flights leaving from Chile to avoid the problem. It seems that the Argentine Goverment is depriving their own people to try to score political points.
Foreign Office press release from 2004 confirming the self imposed Argentine ban .. http://www.falklands.info/factfile/flightspress.html
And an interesting article from 2008 on the issue from the Falkland Island's point of view .. http://www.falklands.gov.fk/media/statement-1-may-2008.php
The only choice for Argentinian relatives at the moment is the LanChile flight or to go by Sea, down purely to their own Goverments stubborness.
Non Story as "We" are not to blame.
That is not the tone that AOL are taking on access to the Falkland Islands by Argentinian visitors.
Mr Brown said there were "ongoing discussions" about whether flights from the island should be allowed to use Argentinian territory and whether the families of war dead from Argentina should be allowed to visit cemeteries.
Gene Hunt
28-Mar-09, 16:30
That is not the tone that AOL are taking on access to the Falkland Islands by Argentinian visitors.
Maybe AOL should look into things. Just asked a TA colleague who was there for two weeks last October/November and he said there were plenty of Argentinians wandering about. Most arrive by Sea these days he said, tourism is apparently big buisness down there.
Families of the War Dead do visit so I don't know where they got the info that they don't. It is true that Argentinians cant fly to the Falkland's to visit the graves direct form Argentina, but that is their own Goverment's choice to score political points. Argentinians can fly to the Islands with LanChile or by Sea. After they land they just go where they please, I met some at the Argentinian Cemetry and on a couple of battlefield tours when I was there as well as in Stanley. One of the local FIGAS pilots said they flew a lot of them about to places like Pebble Island and such that are more remote. To be honest I was bit shocked at the number of Argentinians that were there, and how much they could drink !!,
Then again it suits the Argentinian Goverment to portray the opposite when our PM is due for talks. The current President pledged to get the Falklands back during her election, from what I have read she thinks we are weaker in a militairy sense now and less able and willing to use Force. But thats what they thought before wasnt it ??
Being the daughter of a serviceman who served in the falklands and then returned to clear away said mines,and got injured in doing so i will not vote on this.
But i will say we are not aswell as equipped as we were when the Falklands took place the first time, but we certainly have the peace of mind to go in if needed..
piratelassie
30-Mar-09, 00:06
Question--Who did the Falkland Islands belong to originally ?
The only settlers there have been British and the people living their are their decedents. Prior to that there were no indigenous people living there and the Islands were never settled by the Argentines.
The British link with the Falklands goes back as far as 1692, which is prior to Argentina ever being thought of as a Country. The name Falkland’s Lands were given to the Islands in 1708 by Captain Woode Rogers who was British.
The first settlers, in 1764, were French. They left after a dispute between France and Spain who claimed a right to ownership as a result of a Papal Bull of 1493 dividing South America along a north south line giving lands to the west of the line to Portugal and those to the east to Spain. The French, for some political reasons or other, gave in to Spain’s demands that they had no right to be there and left.
Between then and 1811 there were a hotchpotch of comings and goings including settlement by American sealers and Spaniards. At that period what was to become Argentina was actually administered as a part of Peru.
Argentina was given independe3nce by Spain in 1816 and decided to claim the Falklands in1820. Between 1823 and 1832 there is a confused period including settlement by a Frenchman being given permission by Argentina, which he took to the British Consul for him to authorise. (I guess he was too intelligent to get himself involved between the two counterclaims) The Frenchman was delayed from going to the Falklands by a Brazilian blockade of Argentinian ports but he eventually got there but the expedition failed.
He was nothing if not persistent and got permission from Argentine to try again and found a Colony this time. Off he went along with some Dutch, some Germans and last, but not least, a British sea captain as deputy. Craft fellow that he was, off he went, with his Argentine permission, to the British Consul to get the nod from him. He also suggested that if the British were to return to the Falklands he would dearly love their protection. (This guy’s not daft, is he?) He also advised a British captain of the same thing and both sent messages to London concerning his comments.
The American sealers began raiding again so the Frenchman asked for Ar4genine to send a ship to see them off. Argentine either couldn’t or wouldn’t but told the Frenchman he was nor Governor. (In other words, over to you Mr Frenchman, it’s your problem) The Frenchman is still informing the British Consul what’s going on and he informs London.
An American ship turns up to allegedly sort out the sealers but instead destroy one of the settlements and create general mayhem before going away. The Argentines send their own Governor but after he arrives he is killed by mutineers so an Argentine Captain takes his place.
Then the cavalry arrived, sorry, wrong film. The Royal Navy returned to the island to see of the sealers and to advise the Argentines they were trespassing. The Argentines were politely requested to remove their flag but politely refused. As a result, their flag was taken down and handed to them, the British Flag was raised and the Argentinians were sent home. Shortly after that Charles Darwin arrived on the Beagle but that is a completely different argument which has it’s own thread somewhere.
And the rest, as they say, is history until the last 30 years which you will probably know about.
Contrary to common belief, the nearest Country to the Falklands in not Argentina but Chile and that was previously part of the Portuguese Colonies.
As a result of all the above I would say that, apart from the fact that all the people there are now of British descent and wish to remain British, if the Argentine wish to claim history is on their side I would say that Peru has an equal claim as have Chile, Spain, Portugal and not forgetting the Dutch and Germans who also had settlers there for a time.
What can I say, perhaps it’s best left as it is to save problems.
Well, you did ask!
Oh, and just to clarify, not a bit of that or National pride, despite what they say, has a darned thing to do with why the Argentines suddenly decided they had a desperate National need to have the Falklands but that is a completely different story but an examination of Antarctica might solve that riddle.
In answer to the poll, undoubtedly yes. To my mind all War Graves and cemeteries are "Neutral Territory" whoever is buried there, what ever their Nationality, which ever war it was and wherever those places may be.
The only thing I would add to that would be that all people visiting such places should treat them with respect and remember that they are not places which give people an excuse to extend previous disputes.
Aaldtimer
30-Mar-09, 03:01
The real reason Britain maintains it's claim to the Falklnds has to do with claiming mineral rights in Antartica.
Any country with territory near has claims on the coastline of Antartica.
Nothing to do with "Save the Bennies!"
Gene Hunt
30-Mar-09, 13:02
The real reason Britain maintains it's claim to the Falklnds has to do with claiming mineral rights in Antartica.
Any country with territory near has claims on the coastline of Antartica.
Nothing to do with "Save the Bennies!"
Falklanders are now referred to as "Stills" I am told .. ;)
Legend has it that a Brigadier heard a soldier call a local a Bennie and asked why, turns out they all used to wear wool beanie hats just like Bennie in Crossroads, hence the nickname. A letter went out saying that this was to stop as it was disrespectful. A while later the same Brigadier heard another soldier call a local a "Still", on asking why he was told it was because "they are still Bennies"
Argentina has more interest in the Fishing Rights and the assets on the Islands than possible Minerals in Antartica, they always have. But for the less cynical amongst us the Falklanders want to remain British and as long as that is their opinion we have to defend it. To do otherwise is to betray those killed and injured in defending that right.
The Falklanders have full British citizenship so I guess we have to defend them militarily now.:confused
We wouldn't let say Norway invade the norse enclave of NE Caithness without them feeling full retribution, would we?:Razz:evil
Gene Hunt
30-Mar-09, 16:40
The Falklanders have full British citizenship so I guess we have to defend them militarily now.:confused
We wouldn't let say Norway invade the norse enclave of NE Caithness without them feeling full retribution, would we?:Razz:evil
Tosh .. Tosh .. Tosh.
The first point on the thread you raised regarding the Argentinians being hampered in visiting the Islands was not true, unless it was by their own Goverment. A little research would have shown that. The Falklanders dont have "full British Citizenship", they are British from the moment they are born. If you went into the Globe and Laurel and claimed otherwise they would throw you out the doorway head first, without opening the door first. They are painfully aware that 255 men died and more were wounded and permanently injured to give them that right.
You might not like it and suggesting cryptically that we are in the wrong is just a bit lame. It's fairly obvious that you are not keen on the Islands being defended or even being British it seems. I dont know why you are worried though, the "We" that would fight and defend them is hardly likely to require you.
oldmarine
30-Mar-09, 20:44
I worked with the British in support by means of Satellite Communications during their taking back the Falklands. I provided intelligence communications as a part of my job while working with the US Army Communications Command and the Intel Command. I voted yes to the question.
Whitewater
30-Mar-09, 22:33
I voted yes. I won't add anything to this post, 'Jaws' has given all the information needed.
Tosh .. Tosh .. Tosh.
The first point on the thread you raised regarding the Argentinians being hampered in visiting the Islands was not true, unless it was by their own Goverment. A little research would have shown that. The Falklanders dont have "full British Citizenship", they are British from the moment they are born. If you went into the Globe and Laurel and claimed otherwise they would throw you out the doorway head first, without opening the door first. They are painfully aware that 255 men died and more were wounded and permanently injured to give them that right.
You might not like it and suggesting cryptically that we are in the wrong is just a bit lame. It's fairly obvious that you are not keen on the Islands being defended or even being British it seems. I dont know why you are worried though, the "We" that would fight and defend them is hardly likely to require you.
A little more research should have revealed that the Falklanders were GIVEN full British citizenship in 1983 when all other residents in other dependencies were not. This act was later superseded in 2002 by another act.
I'd like you to know that you have completely jumped to the wrong conclusion about me cryptically hinting that we were in the wrong to defend those islands and I want you to take that accusation right back and the belittlement that the 'We' would not include me.
Those people who know me best would have just laughed at your post for insinuating the opposite to my own feelings on this subject.
piratelassie
31-Mar-09, 22:01
Thanks for the info., JAWS, i did ask...
I dont want to hijack Rhegheads thread, but a similar problem is happening nearer to home in Gibraltar.
Britain won Gibraltar from the Spanish in 1704, and under the terms of Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht, Britain was accepted as the rightful occupants of Gibraltar..........Now the Spanish want it back, they have not gone as far as attacking the Rock.
What are your opinions on the British having control of Gibraltar, or should the Spanish get it back?
I have Gibraltarian friends, who are of Spanish decent, and they dont want to lose their British nationality. And as a seaman I have had many good runs ashore there, I would like it to stay British.
sorry Rheg.
sorry Rheg.
Nae bother mate.
I think Gib and Falkland should stay as British. America is jealous of the UK, not because of a power struggle (they will beat us hands down), they are jealous because of how we can project our seapower to fellow British citizens, not because we can but because they want to be British. Britishness means a lot to those in far off British countries. We stand for fairness, fairplay and equality. The sad thing is that those who live on our doorstep would sacrifice it all for nothing by bringing up pointless and petty past incidences.
Nae bother mate.
I think Gib and Falkland should stay as British. America is jealous of the UK, not because of a power struggle (they will beat us hands down), they are jealous because of how we can project our seapower to fellow British citizens, not because we can but because they want to be British. Britishness means a lot to those in far off British countries. We stand for fairness, fairplay and equality. The sad thing is that those who live on our doorstep would sacrifice it all for nothing by bringing up pointless and petty past incidences.Galtieri under-estimated the battle hardened British. He thought we would never go to war with Argentina. Let that be a warning to the Spanish.
Galtieri under-estimated the battle hardened British. He thought we would never go to war with Argentina. Let that be a warning to the Spanish.
exactly :) Never under-estimate the the British!!:Razz
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8373942.stm
If I remember correctly I think the appalling conditions that the Argentine conscripts were living under was mentioned by our media as soon as the conflict was over. There was obviously no reports of the ill treatment handed out to them by their own officers but that doesn't surprise me because they were obviously not going to act in such a manner in front of our troops and give them a massive propaganda coup.
The reason the families of the Argentine dead have trouble getting to the Falklands is purely on the hands of their own government who, in 2003, banned chartered aircraft travelling to the Falklands from using Argentinian air space. Seeing it is the Argentinians who are effectively the ones causing their own people's problems visiting the War Graves I would think there is little we, or the Islanders can do about it.
The understandable ban on Argentinian passport holders travelling to the Islands, imposed by the Islanders after the invasion of 1982, was lifted by them long ago.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.