• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

I find this really interesting. For all the complaints about Khan he speaks really well here and is promoting cross faith goodwill, then you read the replies.

Situation where you literally can't win

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Unfortunately unfurling a banner at a football match doesn't make the Malvinas 'yours'....gonna take a bit more than that.

Might get a bit of a cheer in that moment but you go back home and reality sets in.

Given the complex history and emotive nature of the subject, I think they have a right to think as the do, given the complexities of British history I can't in good faith be a critic of that. BUT it shouldn't manifest itself at a WC
 
Given the complex history and emotive nature of the subject, I think they have a right to think as the do, given the complexities of British history I can't in good faith be a critic of that. BUT it shouldn't manifest itself at a WC
I'd bet those players have little knowledge of the complex history.
Just the passed down Us v Them rhetoric
 
I'd bet those players have little knowledge of the complex history.
Just the passed down Us v Them rhetoric

Of course, like many Brits who are critics. But thats part of what makes it complex IMO, these are hugely emotive subjects harvested in hugely emotive people and its part of their history. And in fairness its alot closer to home for them than it is for us
 
Of course, like many Brits who are critics. But thats part of what makes it complex IMO, these are hugely emotive subjects harvested in hugely emotive people and its part of their history. And in fairness its alot closer to home for them than it is for us
I think the French and the Spanish have had their moments of rule there. I'm not sure if Argentina ever have?
It's 300miles from them...why do they think it's important to them?.
There's hundreds of islands 'owned' by various countries around the world that just chug along as they are.

I'm surprised the French have never wanted the channel islands back tbh🤣

Tbh I'd happily, in principle (not considering the logistics), give the Falklands back to whoever....all these things ever stink of is dingdong swinging if I'm honest.
 
I think the French and the Spanish have had their moments of rule there. I'm not sure if Argentina ever have?
It's 300miles from them...why do they think it's important to them?.

There's hundreds of islands 'owned' by various countries around the world that just chug along as they are.

I'm surprised the French have never wanted the channel islands back tbh🤣

Tbh I'd happily, in principle (not considering the logistics), give the Falklands back to whoever....all these things ever stink of is dingdong swinging if I'm honest.

I know from talking to a client who is based in BA that its taught about from a young age, its in the curricular, national symbolism and is a source of public discourse. So like I say, its complex, I think its fairly understandable why people who grew up with it as part of their history feel like they do IMO. Like I say, I can't in good faith say I don't, especially given our own historical complexities and what people here say about all number of different moments in history and conflicts.

Given they gained independence from Spain in the 1800s they should have likely gained the Falklands as part of that, us laying claim to it because some oik landed on the shores in the 1600s and the island being 8000 miles away seems more irrational TBH
 
I did nothing more than read the Wikipedia entry about the Falklands / Malvinas sovereignty dispute and a 19 year old Guardian article yesterday but based on that it seems to me that there is enough in both arguments to conclude that there is no obviously 'right' answer. I don't know how the issue could be resolved except by negotiation or perhaps an agreement to some kind of binding independent arbitration. I don't see either happening any time soon.


 
I wonder when the COBRA meeting is today?
Obviously being held ensure the full force of the law is brought against the Moroccan rioters from last night
I mean we keep getting told there isn't two tiered policing in this country so surely those who broke the law last night and attacked people and caused masses of damage around Edgeware Road will be getting arrested and fast tracked into court like others have

We need calls for another one

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
I think the French and the Spanish have had their moments of rule there. I'm not sure if Argentina ever have?
It's 300miles from them...why do they think it's important to them?.
There's hundreds of islands 'owned' by various countries around the world that just chug along as they are.

I'm surprised the French have never wanted the channel islands back tbh🤣

Tbh I'd happily, in principle (not considering the logistics), give the Falklands back to whoever....all these things ever stink of is dingdong swinging if I'm honest.

Oil

It was first discovered there in the late 70s. It had never occurred to them to be interested in the islands before then, when it was just home to about 12 sheep farmers and seal fishermen. But their ongoing economic crisis means it will always be desirable to them, until fossil fuel phase out is complete anyway
 
Oil

It was first discovered there in the late 70s. It had never occurred to them to be interested in the islands before then, when it was just home to about 12 sheep farmers and seal fishermen. But their ongoing economic crisis means it will always be desirable to them, until fossil fuel phase out is complete anyway
I thought there might be an oil element as I vaguely remember it being mentioned over the years.
 
Oil

It was first discovered there in the late 70s. It had never occurred to them to be interested in the islands before then, when it was just home to about 12 sheep farmers and seal fishermen. But their ongoing economic crisis means it will always be desirable to them, until fossil fuel phase out is complete anyway

They always had interest, it was on all official maps from around the 1800s

They pushed for it post WW2 and all number of bodies were involved in trying to find resolution
 
Back