Does Argentina have a good legal case in the Falklands?

Edric Streona

Ad Honorem
Feb 2016
4,462
Japan
Bottom line... if Argentina had any legal standing she could take legal action. She doesn’t and won’t... because her case is so weak.
 

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,641
San Antonio, Tx
OK now I can understand to you. Why earlies settlement and not discovery? Who discovered? British said British.. and Spanish said Spanish... if we are talking about settlement... so French were the first one. But I think it not issue about settlement (Spaniards were the first to settlement in Vancouver... Should I say isla de Quadras?, Nea Bay (Washington) and Alaska... And what?

The issue (and I agree with you) is Britain have right to be in Malvinas (Falklands) because they conquered the Island in 1833 and in 1982 retaking again...and when Argentina (not in next centuries) have the military power to crush British in Falklands.. they will have the right to do it... why no?

Regards.
Why do you keep cal;ling them the “Malvinas”? Have any of the inhabitants for the past 180 years ever called them the “Malvinas”? No? Then cut it out.
 
Last edited:

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,641
San Antonio, Tx
You are arguing that might makes right. The OP specified legal rights. For the past 75 years or so, since the UN was chartered, international law has attached less weight to historical and other arguments than to self determination. Law, diplomacy, politics, etc all exist to peacefully resolve conflict. If one is willing to forego peaceful solutions and resolve conflict violently then one should not care about legal arguments. That's why Argentina invaded the Falklands in 1982 - law and diplomacy weren't getting them anything.
I suspect that the reason for the Falkland invasion by Argentina is that the military junta was looking for a big “hot button” distraction in order for it to hold on to power. Galtieri was a pompous ass who was merely saving his own skin.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,879
Portugal
Why do you keep cal;ling them the “Malvinas”? Have any of the inhabitants for the past 180 years ever called them the “Malvinas”? No? Then cut it out.
The name of the islands is "Malvinas" in several languages and in several countries.
 

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
35,217
T'Republic of Yorkshire
I suspect that the reason for the Falkland invasion by Argentina is that the military junta was looking for a big “hot button” distraction in order for it to hold on to power. Galtieri was a pompous ass who was merely saving his own skin.
It worked too, only it worked for Margaret Thatcher.
 

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,641
San Antonio, Tx
Well Tulius.. nobody knows who discovered Malvinas... if British or Spanish...till Magallanes- El Cano expeditiion was said they saw Malvinas. Spanish maps from 1529 onwards they describe a set of islands Eastern... as you know Mapa de Ribero (Ribero´s map 1529)... So.. when you say British discovered Malvinas.. it is because you want to believe... if I say Spaniards discovered Malvinas... you have not evidences on contrary, have you?

By other side... if Archipielago was discovered by Spaniards or by British lack of importance. Britain is there because invaded the Islands in 1833... that is the only reason... as Argentina lack of rights because they don´t defend the island so good and they were in a war in 1982 not ready for...
Argentina is not ready for taking Malvinas.. so it is non-sense this issue... When Argentina have an excellent navy and a decent army... Malvinas will be argentine... maybe in 22nd or 23rd Century.. not sooner...

inhabitants care nothing, dear Tulius... care nothing in HONG KONG in 1997 and cared nothing in CUBA, 1898 and care nothing in any place....

regards
Yeah, sure. By the way, please stop calling them the “Malvinas” because the folks who own these islands call them the Falklands.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
6,643
Spain
Why do you keep cal;ling them the “Malvinas”? Have any of the inhabitants for the past 180 years ever called them the “Malvinas”? No? Then cut it out.
Are you going to say to me how to name a place? .I will never tell you how you must to name things, but I will never accept that you (or anyone) tell me how to call things ... remember, I don´t accept totalitarism. And the totalitarism begun... manipulating or using names....Malvinas as Falklands are both HISTORICAL names... both words are right.

So, as both words are historical... I use Malvinas... because Spaniards were in the islands... and the Islands belonged to the Empire in 19th Century... under Charles IV and Ferdinand VII.. both Sovereigns in Malvinas..... and you can be sure (and I can prove) any settlers (sent by British only 140 years ago) were in Malvinas when Spaniards took the Islands and added to the Crown..

List of the Spanish governors in Malvinas.


Can you see this OFFICIAL RECORD.. sent by the Governor to Montevideo and from Montevideo to Madrid through Cadis?



You can read...Soledad de Malvinas... March 17th, 1802... yes you can see.. It is not written... LONELINESS OF FALKLANDS... can you read again? yes... Soledad de Malvinas.

Can you say to me how many British settlers were in Malvinas when the islands belonged to the Crown? Not even one! as in Texas.