0
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)
news
23563 readers
785 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
You can't simultaneously support British balkanization and think the UK should have an imperialist outpost in South America lmao. There's a reason why the Global South as a whole supports Argentina's claims to the Malvinas no matter how many times Anglos, including the ones here, cry about "the Falklanders' sovereignty." How very convenient these Falklanders aren't asking to be their own sovereign country but part of the UK where the UK has access to its oil and territorial waters. They couldn't even ask to be a Commonwealth state like Jamaica. At least Taiwanese, Uighur, and Tibetan separatists have the decency to pretend their respective republics would be an independent country and not just some US proxy state when the Falklanders couldn't even do that.
"imperialist outpost"
Literally just people living there, who are entitled to the same international legal considerations.
There people living in Taiwan. Should we protect and cherish their right to riddle their island with US bases if they want to?
I do kind of think Taiwan is basically a settled issue. There was a war 70 years ago and it resulted in this split. Yes the people there would be better off if the PRC had control of the island but no one would be better off if they started fighting back up again. It isn't a pressing issue though
China has a legal and moral claim on Taiwan but making an issue of it would just be bad for everyone involved
That's fair. I have no argument to that.
Ultimately this is why I flip flop on it. In terms of popular support though people will always side with "What do the people living there want?" and this is what makes it a mess.
I think part of the reason support for being part of Britain is so high is the implicit threat that without British protection then Argentina would take the island and they'd be shit out of luck, potentially even kicked out. Taiwanese separatists are similarly reliant on American protection and the majority of Taiwan wants to "maintain the status quo" because they know what it means if the status quo changes. Similar story there in my opinion.
With all that said, Britain losing more would be good. If the islanders can have their security and existing laws guaranteed then changing hands of the island is probably fine.
There's so many things that the UK (and Argentina) could've done if they actually cared about the people living in the Falkland Islands/Malvinas instead of using them as geopolitical pawns. Like, if we must insist that the Malvinas get labeled "Falkland Islands (UK)" on maps:
The UK could de jure or de facto cede territorial waters to Argentina.
The UK could demilitarize the island.
The UK could grant Argentina fishing and drilling rights on the islands.
The UK could offer to pay a lease for the islands.
The UK could buy the islands from Argentina.
The UK could offer a trade agreement favorable to Argentina for the islands.
The UK could have a similar arrangement like the PRC and Portugal regarding Macau where the island belongs to the UK but is administered by Argentina (or vice versa).
Nobody on the islands has to get deported to the UK and both countries can save face. But the UK had absolutely no intentions for diplomacy.
Last time the Argentinians invaded, they immediately started rounding up people to be deported.
This really hits the nail in the head: if the issue here is "sovereignty" then shouldn't they reject both Argentina AND the UK?
It's 4000 shepherds on a rock, you understand that autarky has consequences right
It's "4000 shepherds on a rock" who give the United Kingdom territory in South America, if it was "just 4000 shepherds" they would be fine without the UK's military presence in the region.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/09/liberation.htm
Right, Argentina never invaded it before and started displacing the people who live there. That definitely did not happen.