You’re right that Gibraltar had been Spanish. My bad. My point was primarily (not entirely) about “who’s living there now, and how do they vote, plebiscite-wise?”
And it may be true that it would be a good economic idea for the UK to investigate selling (in effect) some of its far-flung, tiny, non-wealth-producing dependencies.
But Argentina’s notion that “It’s just ours, because, um, it’s sorta close to us, and because Shut Up,” is nonsense.
“My point was primarily (not entirely) about “who’s living there now, and how do they vote, plebiscite-wise?”
Another very poor example. As per, China invading Tibet. Relocating its citizens throughout China and moving Chineese in to Tibet. Destroy the culture but hey, they now have the vote.
And though the Chi-coms claim Tibet to historically being part of China, that too is B.S.
Plebescites are irrelevant in these situations because those sent to occupy the land are naturally going to support the colonizer/occupier. Britain flooded the north of Ireland with Protestants to give them a majority, and I don’t care what those transplants want in terms of government. At this point they only hold their “majority” by lumping all non-Catholics (including Hindus, Muslims, etc.) into one bloc.
Western Sahara alledged the same against Morocco when Spain withdrew; Morocco sent settlers in to support Moroccan rule, and the matter still hasn’t been resolved (Spain left around 1975). The “consent of the transplant” is irrelevant, maybe not legally, but certainly morally.
I believe (don't have the source handy) that significant oil reserves have been found in the Falklands. They may well end up earning their keep. Another reason, of course, for Argentina to really, really want them.