egafd.com

As mentioned on earlier threads on this topic, Hawaii is roughly 2500 miles from the U.S. mainland. Any qualms about Hawaii being part of the USA? Alaska is far nearer Russia than any other U.S. state. Okay with that?

Yes I am. It's a good job really because I rule the world you know?

As far as I'm aware though no one-else wants Hawaii and Russia doesn't want Alaska back. I think they have enough Arctic wastelands of their own. Plus I think Obama has said if they have Alaska back they have to take Sarah Palin as part of the deal.

I'm sure if they were to hold a similar referendum in Northern Ireland many towns, villages and districts would declare themselves Irish.

You OK with that?

The people of the Falklands have sent a clear message to the planet. We are British, proud of it and politely sod off if you think you can take us by force. Cue Rule Britannia and warm scones with butter. Hoorah!!

You still think the Falklands to become Argentinian after the Falkland islanders voted 98.8% in favour of staying a British overseas territory?

Now you've dropped the 'because it's closer to Argentina' argument and raised the 'the Argentinians should have it because they want it back' argument. They never had it to begin with, apart from a couple of months in '82.
There are movements in Hawaii that wish for independence, as there are in Alaska.
There are also certain Russian MPs that would like to see Alaska back as part of Russia. Clearly all of these movements are in the minority and will probably never get their respective wishes.

Let's move onto N.Ireland then, as you bring it up.
Yes I am okay with that hypothetical referendum result you dreamt up. As the people involved (just like the Falkland islanders) would have determined their future.
Unfortunately, a real life poll result from the end of January this year, disagrees with you somewhat.



I admit that opinion polls aren't an exact science but they're a tad better than just guessing.

"Now you've dropped the 'because it's closer to Argentina' argument"

I can't remember ever having a "because it's closer to Argentina' argument" or in fact dropping it.

My argument is that if these 2,000 sheep shagging in-breeds want to be British they should go and live in Hounslow or Peckham rather than expecting me to fund the protection of their current lifestyle.

Apparently three of the approximately 1500 who voted said they did not want to remain British. I wonder what their reasoning for that was, and whether anyone will ever discover who they were.

"Of 1,517 votes cast in the two-day referendum, just three votes were against the referendum. There was a turnout of more than 90% from 1,672 British citizens eligible to vote in a population of about 2,900. "

Why didn't the other 1,228 get a vote I wonder?

They can't all be kids, unless the Falkland islands breed like rabbits.

The inter-breeding on the Falklands must be worse than Norfolk, at lease they have a few Eastern Europeans to dilute the gene-pool in Norfolk!

What they going to do to the three who voted "No" if they find them? Send them to camp X-Ray T Guantanamo Bay I suppose.

Apart from this of course, in which you clearly make the point that the Argies can lay claim to them, because of their proximity to them.
--------------------------------------
planeterotica wrote:

> Argentina became a Republic in 1853 and as the Falklands were British long before that date how can the argies lay a claim to them...

Have a look at a map.
---------------------------------------

They wouldn't cost us a penny if we didn't have to protect them from Argentina.
So if you wish to get your hard earned tax pennies back, see Kirchner and her cronies. They're the problem, not the islanders.

The Falklands have got a GDP per capita, pretty much the same as us, maybe slightly better now, with the oil/gas etc. No unemployment, no debt, no economic aid required, just military support as mentioned.
At this rate, the way things are going in this country, they may end up supporting us financially.

Like it or not, they wish to remain under Britain's protection.
Maybe some day, when Argentina sees sense, the Typhoons, submarines, etc, can stop patrolling the Falkland skies and waters and come and keep Hounslow and Peckham safe from invaders.

"...when Argentina sees sense"

Don't expect that anytime in the near future.

There are roughly 400+ kids on the islands. The other 800 or so will be migrant/temporary/seasonal workers.

The numbers of foreign fishing boats etc, will fluctuate with the fishing seasons. The sheep shearers will also, probably, only come to the islands for a couple of months a year.

It's used as a base for a lot of the antarctic survey teams.
There'll be a lot of non-eligible people who are involved in the oil/gas surveys. The list goes on.

Any referendum launched here could only dream of a 90+% turnout. It'd be lucky to get 50-60%.

I imagine that nothing will happen to them and that their reasons are probably quite well known down there. They may just wish for complete independence.

When governments/councils change here, we don't go around lynching anyone who voted against the tide, or ship them off to strongholds of that particular party.

It somehow makes slightly better for me, that it wasn't 100%. That at least shows credibility to any outsiders, that it was fair vote.

You're probably right Max, re. Argentina not changing their minds in the near future. I would say though, that the UN, along with certain countries, will have to recognise this vote as self determination. Which in itself, will help 'persuade' Argentina to think again.