ron

"they belong to nature and wildlife" is the stupidest take ever. The homo sapiens evolved in Africa and migrated everywhere else from there so technically all of the American, European, Oceanic, Asian and Antarctic continents "belong to nature and wildlife", especially Antarctica, as it's been colonized pretty recently. The human being migrates. It's what we do.

However I think a couple of things are overlooked whenever foreigners debate on the sovereignty of the islands, being:

1. That the British had abandoned all their settlements in 1774, and did not protest at the fact that Spain had ridden the islands of all British symbology, effectively surrendering their lands.

2. That the British had once before recognized the Argentinian country in its entire expanse, which included the islands.

3. That the military occupation of 1833 was a breach of peace negotiations that violently displaced the Argentinian settlements. You can't just kick out everyone there and then cry "right of self determination" in front of the UN. Well you can but it's a bit hypocritical.

4. That the malvinas war is not something the argentinian people ever consented to in the first place. That the U.S. backed military dictatorship that ruled our country between 1976 and 1983 would force over ten thousand untrained civilians who were barely of age to fight the war regardless of their personal will. That if their families were to denounce this publicly in any way they risked persecution, kidnapping, torture and murder at the hands of the military.

There is a deep sentimental value to the war that everyone who ever ragebaits in regards to the sovereignty of the islands ignores. There was an ideological genocide going on. The only thing you could ever do for your country with the support of the undemocratic government was stick it to the British. For many people this was a beacon of hope. For many, this is the only way to rationalize the loss of their loved ones.

It's not precisely a claim to sovereignty, but I think it gives a valuable perspective anyways. That trained and consenting British soldiers were fighting young men with hopes and dreams and a whole life ahead of them who hadn't even chosen to be there.

That the British, even if reportedly pitied the situation the Argentine soldiers found themselves in, had no interest in liberating them from this regime or giving them some sort of out, ultimately legitimizing the undemocratic government by continuing to perpetuate this war.

5. That the sinking of the A.R.A. General Belgrano constitutes a war crime that the British failed to take accountability for. That if anything the Argentinian people deserve reparations of some sort at least for this incident.

which. ignoring the obvious, is just factually wrong, it was the spaniards who arrived first, then it became part of argentina after independence. the british tried to invade it but spain always got them. back

"BUT THE REFERENDUM!!" yeah, who would have thought that moving your people there to make them most of the population would make the result like that. no different than New Caledonia voting to become part of France, when the indigenous Kanaks are a minority in their own land and 80% of the population are French settlers.

like. is everyone ok.