Some may say that warfare and welfare practically go hand in hand. Here's to hoping those men and women that have already done service are treated with dignity and respect. Stories of military vets ending up either homeless or living in cars is disgraceful. May you all get the support necessary to live a decent life.

Another1,

"Some may say that warfare and welfare practically go hand in hand."

Ask Louis XIV about that. His incessant wars bankrupted France and helped lead to the French Revolution.

Brits may have no carriers, but they still have subs with nuke-tipped missiles. Argentine must be aware of that. If they take out Prince William, why the Brits should hesitate to take out Buenos Aires?

Anonymous,

The Argentine's also know there's a snowball's chance in hell the the Nuke-tipped missles would be used.

If Argentine intentionally murder the Monarch-in-waiting, all bets are off. Sometimes Brits killed their own royals, but never allowed it to foreigners.

When push comes to shove, god forbid that it would actually get there, don't forget that the UK's allies have several carriers to assist in the island's defense. We in the US kinda owe them one for assisting in Iraq when no one else would.

There have never been Argentinians living on the Falklands,The British claimed it in the era when Spain Portugal Holland and others were involved in South America.The people there are British..If Argentina ruled an island far from its shores that was formerly uninhabited.Would they give it up? obvioulsy not.The Argentines continually get bees in their bonnets and then follow them to obsessives end.Their is a lot of talent and other things in this country.but governing with any sanity is not one of them!!

When the Argentines get a bee in their bonnet they carry it to absurd and sometimes deadly results.The Argentines have no claim to the islands.It was never part of their country..And the people there are British and want to remain so,The Argentines tried to agressively take it over during the dictatorship and were severely beaten by England,.Justifiably so.. as England was defending its territory!!

You might want to do some research into history. It was the French that founded the Islas Malvinas with Spain acquiring it from them. The Brits abandoned them in the 1770s. Argentina's claim comes from when Agentina (River Plata) gained it's independence from Spain. And to see this statement:

Prime Minister David Cameron subsequently accused Argentina of "colonialism" in its claim to the Falklands

is just a frilling joke. The UK should never use the term "colonialism" against anyone. For they are the biggest proprietors of it.

Probably about time that the U.S. let Hawaii be independent, huh?

julie - well said

Probably about time that the U.S. let Hawaii be independent, huh?

Seeing that my [step] Dad is Hawaiian, sure if they want it. The Kingdom of Hawai'i was overthrown by US businessmen in 1892. In the words of Braveheart "Kūʻokoʻa" :-)

Don, you claim that Argentines"use the Falklands to take the attention away from their at home problems and failed policies." Quite the opposite is true, in fact: Prime Minister Cameron is pulling all these hysterics to draw away from his government's failed policies and consequent deepening of the economic crisis in the U.K.

As anyone even slightly acquainted with the issue can tell you, the current British government position has lost support across Latin America, in the U.N., in China, and even in the U.S.; it goes without saying that every Argentine administration since democracy was restored in 1983 (seven years after a U.S.-backed coup brought in the very dictatorship that launched the 1982 invasion), has pursued only diplomatic means to recover the islands.

The Galtieri dictatorship and the Cameron government share certain parallels: Galtieri's was an illegal regime which ordered the invasion to distract from a (largely self-induced) financial and economic crisis, quiet calls for new elections, and retain power; Cameron's is a minority government, not elected as such but rather in power due to a largely unexplained deal with a third party, and is resorting to childish provocation to distract from a (largely self-induced) financial and economic crisis, quiet calls for new elections, and retain power. Get it?

Make no mistake: I've always believed the Argentines would be better served by negotiating maritime and (potential) oil royalties with the U.K., and ultimately dropping their territorial claim over the archipelago. The issue still carries water among a majority of the Argentine electorate, and like in many other countries, of course, politics often trumps common sense. Events in 1833 and current international support aside, that's why the claim still stands.

Let's be clear on this much, however: politics and domestic problems are rattling sabers in the Cameron government. Not in Argentina.

All the best.

Benny,

I'm assuming you either don't watch the British news or read the British papers or are British and just don't like the Coalition Government.

Cameron has mentioned this issue a couple of times in the House Of Commons and the story barely makes story 4 or 5 on the TV news (on the rare occasions it's mentioned) and barely a couple of column inches in the daily papers. This really isn't huge news here - not least of all because we're used to these sporadic postures from the Argentinians.

As for Cameron's 'failed policies and consequent deepening of the economic crisis in the UK'. What failed policies? He's been in the job for approx. 18 months which is hardly enough time to have failed policies (unless that policy is to invade Moscow or declare an end to the Tide coming in - neither of which he's done). And as for the deepening economic crisis in the UK.... well, it's not good but at the moment it's stable (compared to Europe), our budget deficit is less than half that of the US, our Gross National Debt is considerably less than that of the US (would have been even less if America's collapsing unregulated financial sector hadn't sucked our banks in with it like some sort of financial black hole), our unemployment rate is lower, we still have a triple A credit rating from all three agencies, manufacturing is picking up as are exports, etc. and we're one of the few countries that are forecast to being getting our Gross National Debt down within the next few years - rather than living off other people's money.

I think you may have been mixing the UK up with countries in Europe.

So, I'm curious, how is something a rattling of sabres to distract from failed policies if you barely let anybody notice you're doing rattling anything?

I see conspiracy theorists are alive and well in the never ending search for drama or frabricated waffle. The reality is simple, its not rocket science. We are where we are after 180 years. The people in the Falklands at present dont want to be part of Argentina, they want to remain British. What is anyone supposed to do, put them in irons and transport them away from the islands?? That sort of nonsense thankfully stopped by the end of the 19th Century.

The invasion happened when the Argentinian Authorities were in trouble with a lot of unrest and opposition, they played the Malvinas card and failed. They will not do it again, World reaction would be swift and uncompromising if they tried it again. The only reason this has surfaced now is because the 30th anniversary is up, so surprise surprise Argentinian p[oliticians are using it as a political card - its politics nothing more - and the Media need some column inches for the great unwashed. The sillyness will all die down again after the anniversary and the wafflers have nothing left to contrive until the next anniversary 40th?? Who knows ...... frankly who cares ..... its just empty sabre rattling by Argentinian politicians with less substance behind it that before the invasion. All fodder for the gulible and drama queens wanting to show profound theories (!) - what a hoot.

Meanwhile back in the real world of reality and common sense, hell will feeze over before those on the Falklands agree to be Argentinian, even more so since the invasion - the latter was a real dumb 101 stupid move by Argentina, yey, "lets pursuade them we have their interests at heart by invading" - dumbas**s - kinda seals opposition to the Argentinians in the Falklands for a couple of generations rofl :)

Zydor. Last I heard the British almost thought about pulling out during the war when they lost that one large ship. And don't forget the U.S. was helping the British with Intelligence otherwise who knows what might've happened. Britain is on its way down and so I expect that sooner or later the property will end up in Argentina's hands. And it doesn't matter what the people of the Islands want. What matters is who has the greater right to the Island. If those on the Island don't like it well they could always move back to merry old.

now theres something? the Americans helped with intelligence?????????????????????????

Joecal,

The last you heard was 'innacurate'.

The US did, under a lot of pressure from the UK, supply intelligence but that was all they supplied as they were strong supporters of Galtieri's military dictatorship: Galtieri was warmly received by Reagan only a year before the Falklands War - something which is generally thought to have emboldened him in his invasion the following April (he thought the US would back him). The US described Galtieri as 'the Majestic General'. The US approved of military dictators like Galtieri, Pinochet, etc. in South America as they displaced legitimately elected (albeit) leftist governments. Frequently the US provided CIA 'advisors' in the coups and the founding of the military dictatorships.

How can you lecture me on my history when you don't have a full grasp of your own?

Ironically, it was Argentina's defeat in the Falklands War which led to the fall of Galtieri, the restoration of proper democracy (something which surely America approves of!) and ultimately the election of the current Kirchner administration which is now rattling sabres!

As for Britain being on its way down.... on what do you base this assertion. Our unemployment rates, gross national debt and budget deficit are all far lower than that of the US - while the United States is currently continuing to live off other people's money (mainly Chinese). If they call in their debts I really hope you've learnt Mandarin!

The real problem is its distance from England makes it difficult for it to defend sufficiently.

Read Adm. Sandy Woodward's story of the War, "100 Days". You'll get a real understanding of the logistics of an 8000 mile supply line. Without an aircraft carrier they could not keep and maintain the Falklands if the Argentines were to recapture the airfield, even if the "Iron Lady" were still the Prime Minister.

Major USMC retired

The hard part would be taking the Airfield in the first place, disable is more a possibility and could be achieve using special forces.

Even then they would need to fly in thousands of men to take the British 3,000 strong military force we have base their.

That would either require a large air force, which the Argentinians do not have, and could not possible count on every British Air defence site being taken out using only special forces, or the use of naval vessels or civilian vessels eg cruise liners to be taken over for military use and transfer force to the Island that way, still they would have hell of a mission getting past our marines

Even then it doubtful that Britain does not continually keep a sub down there or two which could intercept and sink them, There is also a permanent British war ship base down their would have to be neutralise. An their currently due to be three warships base around the island for the rest of the year, along with a survey vessel as well.

It would require months to organise all of this and Argentina would require complete secrecy, Britain may have took its eyes of the Falklands in the 80s but I am pretty certain Britain got many eyes and ears monitoring Argentina military movements. As well as keeping a close eye on what they are acquiring on the international markets weapon wise.

Not to Mention Argentinas "special" forces could not fill up a short bus.

I get it, you hate the British monarchy so the English speaking British citizens of the Falklands shoud be forced to become Argentinians? Should we not deal with the current facts on the ground today, not some South American desire to control land far off their coast? R Kapoor? Would it be that your "home country" was under British rule at some point and you are projecting your hate through your statements?

Don nailed it on the head. "Forced" is your keyword here.

Rkapoor.....get a grip. The Falklands have been British for at least the last 150 years or so. Why should they get out and allow Argentina to force citizenship upon them?

As for Prince William, he is being assigned to the Falklands just like any other member of the RAF can be. He's serving in the military instead of living in the lap of luxury.

Scotland voluntarily signed an Act of Union with England in 1707, and most citizens of Northern Ireland want to remain British since the formation of the Republic of Ireland in 1922. I also imagine that you've neither been to England or a third world country, if that is how you categorize England.

An unscientific survey of English people that I know shows that they would LOVE an independent Ireland and Scotland. Unfortunately they are not the ones that get to vote on it...

England is a bunch of crooks

Scotland is in the process right now of leaving the United Kingdom. Ironically more English are in support of this than there are Scots.

England's colonial exploits are a matter of record. Northern Ireland is an interesting case. The way it was worked was not a national referendum, but a county by county vote. The six counties which comprise Northern Ireland are loaded with British colonial descendants, and the vote was set up to allow them to stay with the motherland. Ireland, India, Pakistan, et al. are all living with the results of colonial rule by Britain.

So you can spare us the nonsense about how everyone joined up voluntarily. That said, some of you are way overboard in the tone of your remarks.

Yeah India is suffering so badly, with huge rail network built with British knowledge and expertise and money.

Pakistan cause its own problems not British rule before it was partition.

To all Americans who support independence of various territories and dependancies from the UK (such as the Falklands, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, etc.) without actually knowing the facts about what the residents themselves think or what the consequences might be....

What have the following got in common? Can you name their head of state? Do their residents get to vote for their head of state? Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, etc.

The Falkland Islanders don't want to change status from being a British Overseas Dependancy which is a far cry from the views of some the residents of the above named 'countries'.

Ligeti. I seriously doubt this is going to happened but if the Argentinian leader gets a hair up her ass about retaking the islands, we in the USA will help them recover the islands. I am positive that the Argentinian leaders are well aware of this. I am also sure our government wont have a problem giving Argentina a polite ear full of the consequences of any action taken against the Falklands.

Not if the US doesn't supply intell to them this time. Both Argentina and UK are our allies but there's this old document called the Monroe Doctrine. It's time the sun sets on the empire.

Yea, okay, America's going to let its so called "Best Friend" whom the American public overwhelmingly supports, lose in a war to a country most Americans don't even know the capital of, because of an ancient document nobody really knows the particulars of. BTW the Monroe doctrine states that further colonization would be seen as an act of agression, not 180 year old colonization.

What a good idea! SELF DETERMINATION.

The problem with that, is that the current residents were immigrants from Britain. It's kind of like saying here in the US we should hold a "referendum vote of the" country residents to see if we should give back everything to the Native Americans.

Guess how that vote will go?

Not one to check out history before jumping in with a stupid comment. No we can't let the penguins and other seabirds vote, just the humans that have been living there for generations.

Julie, you DO know that the British settlers have been there continiously since 1840? The current residents were born there, their parents were born there, their grand parents were born there, their great, great grandparents were born there.. to how many generations does that make to go back to 1840.

Julie I realise from your comments that you hate English people so I take you comments with a pinch of salt. If you read any history on the Falkland Islands you will realise the island was uninhabited when settlers first arrived. So it's *nothing* like the founding of the US where as you say there was a native population and yes I think maybe it is time to ask the Native American's if they want their country back. Argentina is itself an ex colony of Spain.

The issue is what should we do about this today, my view is that we should cut some deal splitting the revenue from oil and fishing and let the Falkland Islanders live where they have lived for hundreds of years. As for it being defence able it probably isn't as of today but if we lost it through war we can always come back in ten years time.

Tim - You forgot the "natives" that were in what is now Argentina and elsewhere when the Spanish arrived. Review your history, the Spanish were among the cruelest invaders in history. Perhaps those of Spanish origin should be the ones to leave!

Darthdon does have point. The Spanish single-handedly, either directly or indirectly, destroyed two separate civilizations; the Myans and Aztecs were evicerated by the Spanish.

Don't forget the Incas, david.

Oh yea, good point, thanks. That makes three.

We didn't bail the Brits out last time. We were ready to if they needed help but they didn't.

They helped us in Afghanistan as well.

Bull@!$%#! Ronald Reagan helped his friend Margaret a lot. He should have kept his (our) nose out of it.

RP-TX: Reagan did help with Sat intell, naval resupply at sea, latest AIM-9 missiles for the Harriers, and aerial tanker support for the bombing mission on the islands. An we will be there for Great Britian again if we have too.

Bull@!$%#! Ronald Reagan helped his friend Margaret a lot. He should have kept his (our) nose out of it.

Why is it kinda rude to send a member of the British armed forces to a British territory. The Argentinian President is mucking things up at home and needs a diversion. Gulf of Tonkin anyone??