• Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure that this link really helps your case

    The parts you quoted were about self-defense and stopping the fighting, not about the ownership of the islands.

    I quote it because it also talks about negotiations that should be begun when it comes to the ownership of the islands, in lieu of continuing the fighting.

    I’m already on record about stating that the fighting was wrong, though I don’t know how long anyone would expect a nation to wait for a diplomatic solution.

    This press release from the UN goes into more detail on the basic structure of what I’m arguing about: https://press.un.org/en/2021/gacol3347.doc.htm

    (I really shouldn’t bother with attempting nuanced conversation on the Internet, it never ends well.)

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        but surely you realize that Argentina shouldn’t expect (or want) to gain sovereignty over the Falklands

        No, quite the opposite actually. I believe they have more of a claim to the islands than anyone else, via Spain’s ownership of said lands that Argentina inherited when they gained their independence from Spain, as well as the proximity to Argentina, and finally to the fact that Great Britain was speaking with Argentina about turning them over, before the stupid war was started.

        Now, having said that, IANAL, so don’t know what the law would say about that. Really don’t think we’ll resolve the issue here on Lemmy.

        • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I fail to see any tangible benefits of ceding islands inhabited almost exclusively by British and French people to a former Spanish colony, but perhaps you know more than I do.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I fail to see any tangible benefits of ceding islands inhabited almost exclusively by British and French people to a former Spanish colony

            Considering the French had already ceeded/gave the islands to Spain (which Argentina then inherited from), your comment does not hold weight.

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                How so? That is a historical precedent, not a tangible benefit.

                IANAL, but based on what I’ve read, my understanding that ‘historical precedent’ is legal and can be argued for in international court of law, when it comes to these kind of issues. It is why it is mentioned so often.

                  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’m speaking of ownership via interpretation of International law, so our conversation is not compatible it seems.

                    I’m going to “bow out” of further replies. I’ve been at this for coming up on 24 hours now, and am tired of everyone wanting their “pound of flesh”, and have said pretty much everything I can say. No disrespect meant to you, just thing the conversation has reached a termination point. Take care.