UK REJECTS ARGENTINA'S FALKLANDS CLAIM

chronicle.gi ^ | January 19 2010 | chronicle.gi

[Berlin_Freeper]

The Government has firmly rejected Argentina's recent claims to the Falkland Islands, MPs were told today.

In a written statement, Junior Foreign Office Minister Chris Bryant said the UK had "no doubt" about its sovereignty over the Falklands, South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding seas, as well as the British Antarctic Territory.

The Foreign Office delivered a "note verbale" to the Argentine charge d'affaires in London outlining the UK's rejection.

Mr Bryant said: "The UK firmly rejects the enactment and promulgation, on December 9 2009, of Argentine Law 26.552 and thus the additional paragraph in Article 1 of Argentine Law 23.775 insofar as it purports to include within a province of Argentina areas which comprise the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the British Antarctic Territory."

Shadow Foreign Minister David Lidington said: "We fully support the Government in rejecting any Argentinean law that purports to include the Falkland Islands and other British overseas territories.

"They are sovereign to the United Kingdom and we condemn attempts by any foreign governments to assert otherwise."

[fieldmarshaldj]

I hope the Argentines don’t rehash that mess all over again.

[gr8eman]

Round 2....DING!!!

[Berlin_Freeper]

I love this diplomatic crap...

>The Foreign Office delivered a “note verbale”

A “note verbale” Oou Oou Oou!

[HiTech RedNeck]

Looks like they are bound and determined to get their nose bloodied a second time. Maybe they are hoping Bummer will lean on the UK.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Oh, yeah, Zero will be a big help. That jug-eared moron can’t even land the Olympics or keep Ted Kennedy’s seat in the Democrat column.

[Centurion2000]

bump

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

There won’t be no round two because:

1) Margaret Thatcher is not Prime Minister and 2) the Royal Navy is only a weak shadow of its former self.

The Argentinians sense the Brit weakness and will win.

[Reaganez]

In the early 80’s the Argentine military was highly politicized. Promotion was based on family connections and proven ideological committement to the current regime.

The Argentine military of today is much more professional.

Not to Western standards but enough to win a war off its shore against a country fighting half way around it.

Would the British public be willing to pour blood and treasure there ?

I doubt it. Argentines are quite manic about a few rocks in the South Atantic.

[beaversmom]

[Paleo Conservative]

Would the British public be willing to pour blood and treasure there ?

There's lots of treasure there.

http://www.le.ac.uk/geology/art/gl209/lecture4/lecture4.html

[B-Chan]

REUNITE GONDWANALAND

[Dixie Yooper]

Every time there is a major World recession, Argentina has to try and pull off the same land grab. They would stand of better chance of taking over Chili since navel skills would not be necessary.

[spetznaz]

Looks like they are bound and determined to get their nose bloodied a second time. Maybe they are hoping Bummer will lean on the UK

Sadly this would be the best time for the Argentinians to muck about. For one, I think that the leadership today is nowhere as strong as that under the Iron Lady. Secondly, while the weapons may be more lethal pound for pound (and obviously more technologically evolved), they simply do not have the logistics, the numbers or the efficacy of going halfway around the world as they once did. The UK has seriously cannibalized their military, and all the Argentines need to ensure is that the mistakes they made last time (some logistical errors, as well as some weapons being duds ...e.g. all those weapons that hit but failed to explode) are not present this time round.

The UK would not be able to do what they did then. For comparison purposes, France still could (both in terms of ability, and more importantly will). Great ....I mean Gelded Britain ...has truly lost its cajones!

[GonzoGOP]

"Sadly this would be the best time for the Argentinians to muck about"

Buy a couple of Gotland class boats from the Swedish Navy. Or if they won't sell them to you buy a bunch of Kilo class boats from the Russians. No way the Brits would be able to park a carrier task force down there the way they did last time if there were AIP boats in the pool. And going up against the Kilos without land based air cover would be no picnic either.

[the scotsman]

Nonsense.

The Falklands garrison is armed up to the eyeballs, and numbers a much larger number than 1982.

The Argies would never get on the beach, let alone win. They’d be slaughtered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Falkland_Islands

[Ben Ficklin]

No, it is about UNCLOS, Law of the Sea, and who controls what part of the shelf and how far the shelf extends. Who gets the royalties. In this particular case there are claims and counter claims between UK, Argentina and Chile.

Given similar situations in the Arctic and the South China Sea, the US will be in there trying to limit the claims made by all three nations, preferring these areas be international waters under control of the UN.

[Red Steel]

The Argies are not going to do anything. After the little war, the Brits beefed up the Falkland island defenses.

http://wapedia.mobi/en/RAF_Mount_Pleasant

[castlegreyskull]

The UK is an awfully patriotic country, I can’t see them just allowing them to give this away without a fight if this were to be invaded again.

[plain talk]

The UK would have been wise to negotiate a settlement with Argentina and sell it to them. Over the long term the UK won’t prevail there. Perhaps they already tried that and Argentina wouldn’t deal