It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: I love the irony of his statement: "colonialist, ludicrous and archaic."

Yeah fuck democracy and self-determination - islands should belong to whom I believe they should belong. Moron.
Well, he does have a point actually. The matter isn't as clear-cut as the UK government (and press) wants people to believe. Democracy and self-determination are great principles, but does it really work as a justification when the British forced the Argentinians out of the islands earlier? If a couple of British citizens build houses on Burhou (an uninhabited Channel island that nobody's interested in) and then self-determinedly decide they want to be part of Iran, would the British government oblige? The weren't particularly fond of Sealand ...

To me, it seems that the saber-rattling in the British press is having its desired effect on the population. Which is a bit sad imho, but probably foreseeable. And it's also the same effect that the Argentinian saber-rattling has on _their_ populace. Given that situation, Penn's call for a diplomatic solution might not be as moronic as you think.
Post edited February 14, 2012 by Psyringe
avatar
Psyringe: but does it really work as a justification when the British forced the Argentinians out of the islands earlier?
The thing is the UK never ceded it's claim so theoretically that (tiny) argentine settlement (in the 1830's) was technically an invasion... the current settlements have been in place since what 1833? The islanders consider themselves British, English is the national language and the religion is the church of England... Hell there were no Argentines on the islands until the 90's (apart from during the war) when Argentinia used a political dispute to force the Falklands to allow them access >.<
avatar
Lone3wolf: I know I've said America mustn't go isolationist, and remain active in world affairs, but this is the total proof that they should just STFU and go away
You're going to group an entire country's opinion together with this man's? ಠ_ಠ If I did the same thing with Britain, there would be outrage here. :p
If only they've listened to Cary Grant more.
Also, who reads the Daily Mail?
Post edited February 14, 2012 by Arteveld
avatar
Psyringe: snip
I don't read British press - my views are my own, based on my own 'research' into the conflict.
avatar
Arteveld: If only they've listened to Cary Grant more.
Also, who reads the Daily Mail?
As an alternative comic to the Murdoch-controlled press, it's a good laugh :P
The rabidity of the comments even more so

ROFL
avatar
Psyringe: but does it really work as a justification when the British forced the Argentinians out of the islands earlier?
avatar
wodmarach: The thing is the UK never ceded it's claim so theoretically that (tiny) argentine settlement (in the 1830's) was technically an invasion...
Yep, but then we're really arguing on the basis of colonialist claims, which constitutes its own can of worms.

Anyway, I do agree that the UK's claim to the islands is stronger than Argentina's. But I also think that Argentina's claims are good enough to respect them as a valid opinion, even though I find the British claims more convincing.

Basically, the ownership of the islands has been disputed for as long as they exist, partly due to the fact that several nations wanted to grab them, but none could actually create a working settlement, yet no nation wanted to forego its claims. The islands' history is an odd loop of settlers coming, going, and leaving plaques stating that although they couldn't make the settlement work, their nation of course still claims the land as theirs. It would actually make good comedy material if that needless conflict hadn't cost so many lives.
avatar
Lone3wolf: As an alternative comic to the Murdoch-controlled press, it's a good laugh :P
The rabidity of the comments even more so

ROFL
Oh, the "it's so dumb it's funny" market. I thought it's one of those serious-yet-dead-wrong ones. I guess it's like the polish Onet then.
There's a whole lot that I don't agree on with Mr Penn, but I will give him credit: he has certainly put his money and his time where his mouth is when it comes to his humanitarian beliefs. I don't feel his status as a middle-heavyweight in Hollywood detracts from his credibility; it's what he says and does that matter, and he has done more than most. Does this give him special insight into this particular matter? Not on the face of it though his public celebrity may give him insider access that we don't have, as evidenced by his meetings with various leaders.
avatar
Lone3wolf: As an alternative comic to the Murdoch-controlled press, it's a good laugh :P
The rabidity of the comments even more so

ROFL
avatar
Arteveld: Oh, the "it's so dumb it's funny" market. I thought it's one of those serious-yet-dead-wrong ones. I guess it's like the polish Onet then.
Dumb's not the word :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFfWykH05Gw