FabSwingers.com forum: Falklands

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Sooo...the Argies are stepping up their dirty tricks campaign....they've imposed new controls on shipping to the Falklands that sail through Argentine waters.

Apparently they're not happy about oil drilling that's set to commence in Falkland territorial waters.

The Empire is not what it used to be and Britain's influence on the world has a fraction of the importance it had 100-150 years ago.

Is it about time we handed sovereignty back to Argentina, or is it right we continue to hold onto this barren wasteland of an outpost?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *etillanteWoman
over a year ago

No way, what about all those brave lads who died fighting for the Falklands.

If we gave up it would be like giving up on our brave guys who fought there

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Sooo...the Argies are stepping up their dirty tricks campaign....they've imposed new controls on shipping to the Falklands that sail through Argentine waters.

Apparently they're not happy about oil drilling that's set to commence in Falkland territorial waters.

The Empire is not what it used to be and Britain's influence on the world has a fraction of the importance it had 100-150 years ago.

Is it about time we handed sovereignty back to Argentina, or is it right we continue to hold onto this barren wasteland of an outpost?

Stu, I resepct you enormously and I'm always entertained by your posts, so I'm assuming you are simply asking the question here rather than holding this viewpoint as your opinion on the matter.

The Falklands are ours, the Falkland Islanders are as British as you and I and our soldiers fought and died to keep the islands British. If oil has been discovered underneath the Falklands then that's even more reason to keep them British. The revenue to the United Kingdom is very much needed and the islanders themselves will benefit enormously from it too.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Does beg the question how long British Governments have known about the oil deposits that lye in Falkland waters?

Did Britain know of the possibility way back in 1982, if so was this the real reason behind the war?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Stu I think the Falklanders themselves wish to remain British.... altho Mr Gridiron would be able to tell you more, his family are buried there xxxx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I am ex-Navy and yes the Falklands scars still run deep with me.

As for oil.....................

My father served on the islands back in the 50's when South Georgia was a major Whaling station. Back then the UK defended those islands for the oil deposits that we knew existed back then.

Why the hell do you think majority of wars start.....GREED, POWER.

see USA, British Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire and the list goes on........................

As for the islanders..... yes they are fiercely Brits

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ustyWoman
over a year ago

inverclyde

my now ex hubby was involved in the falklands war and gulf war 1..... he was involved in the refueling of the aircraft who were dropping the bombs and all other aircraft flying... lost a few good friends in both and i admire anyone who is in the forces.... but now i think its time to bring our guys hoem as we have lost so many over the last few yrs and it still sadens me to see the bodies coming back to wiltshire as it its someones son, hubby or a childs father

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

yup.....just throwing the question out there for discussion...is my serious posting week this week

...always good to get peoples opinions.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Maybe the Argies knew about the oil too and thats why they wanted the Falklands "back"...

....and maybe thats why they are been awkward now! Wonder if it will lead to something more, knowing that the UK forces are stretched at the moment in Afghan and Iraq etc

Steve

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *erekduvallCouple
over a year ago

swansea

Possibility of oil in the region, Argentina know we are involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, so, our resoces are stretched.I think the fact there may be megabucks there rather than a group of Islands is the Argentinian aim,

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"I am ex-Navy and yes the Falklands scars still run deep with me.

As for oil.....................

My father served on the islands back in the 50's when South Georgia was a major Whaling station. Back then the UK defended those islands for the oil deposits that we knew existed back then.

Why the hell do you think majority of wars start.....GREED, POWER.

see USA, British Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire and the list goes on........................

As for the islanders..... yes they are fiercely Brits "

Hi friend, I was there too (RM MAWTC) and I feel your pain, but I am proud to have done my duty as I am sure you are too.

The thing we must remember is that the Falklands was caused by Thatcher! She was warned that the Argi’s would invade if she scrapped HMS Endurance months before the Argi’s took South Georgia, she still scrapped the Endurance and then refused to reinforce the Falklands Garrison. She effectively laid out a welcome mat for them, and then sent us to get them back and win an election for her!

I remember just exactly how close we came to loosing, now the latest load of corrupt politicians have reduced the armed forces to a point that we need to use TA to cover our regular combat duties, the Argi’s can walk in there at any time and we don’t have the troops to take them back! And I bet this load of incompetent fools have not sent any extra troops to reinforce the Falklands Garrison!

So why are you surprised that the Argi’s are starting to project their power again, all that’s neded now are some scrap dealers or maybe a trawler or 2.

GGGGgggggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Not 100% sure of my history, but I believe the British Navy "seized" the Falklands from Argentina in or about 1833...this is despite having previously signed up to the Nootka Sound Convention in 1790 in which Britain formally renounced any rights to Sovereignty in South America or the surrounding islands.....

In 1965 there was a UN Resolution calling for discussions on the Islands future.

In 1966 there was a failed raid by Argentine Commandos.

In 1967 the then Labour Government began talks with Argentina, stating they were prepared to surrender sovereignty if the islanders way of life could be guaranteed.

In 1968 Britain, began secret negotiations to hand sovereignty of the islands to Argentina, but backed out at the last minute.

Sovereignty of the Islands has been an issue since the 16th Century.

The decision to scrap Endurance was only a small part in a big play. It is to be remembered that Galtieri came to power in a military coup in 1981 and was determined to make an issue out of sovereignty anyway.

Talks were entered into between Argentina and the US in an attempt to diffuse the situation. The Argentines walked out and issued a total rejection of the talks.

It was here that Thatcher urged preparations for a contingency plan against any Argentine hostilities.

As we all know, things escalated in 1982 when a party of "metal workers" landed on the Islands. Endurance was still in service at this point and was sent to remove them, although that order was later rescinded.

8 days after the landing of the metal workers, an Argentine invasion force set sail from Buenos Aries.

A short time after this, when it was apparent that any talks to avert an escalation was futile, Britain dispatched a Task Force.

To blame The British decision to retire Endurance as the reason for the conflict is, in my own opinion, quite ludicrous. Endurance was still in service when the Islands were invaded.

Galtieri was determined to impose his authority in the region, and an invasion of the Islands in order to re take them was inevitable. This can be evidenced by the Argentians recalcitrance throughout 1981 and early 1982 in refusing to discuss sovereignty or it's transfer from British hands.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

It was not the scrapping of the ship (that happened in 91 I think) but the announcement that it was being scrapped that gave the green light to the Argi's.

Now having yomped and fought across E Falkland and had the Islanders risk their lives to help me and my mates on patrol, I would ask you as you hand them to the Argi’s, have you been there? Have you met the people? And why are you denying the facts as admitted to by cabinet office after the release of US DOD papers under the US freedom of information act (20 year DOD rule I think) in the early 2000’s.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is not one single inhabitant of the Falkland Islands that does not want to remain part of Britain and the British Empire.

The Islands have long been important as a naval base for British exploration of Antartica.

The Islands have long been important as a British Naval Base, during the 2nd World War many of our warships protecting Britain were re-fuelled and repaired there (google the battle to sink the Graf Spee german pocket battleship)

As part owner of the Islands I don't see what right anyone here has to tell me I should give my property to Argentina, perhaps we should appease them and give them one of the Scottish Islands, many of them are unihabited and even those that do have a population could be given away since the views of the population don't really matter do they. I am sure Iceland would love some Scottish Islands.

There is no doubt that there are resources in the Antartic region, at this time the cost of retrieving them outweighs the benefits, but who knows what the future will bring, I doubt the government of the day fought for a resource that would not benefit the party at the time but whatever the reasons for the War there, it was a just war fought cleanly by both sides who both thought they were in the right, if any government should be accused of fighting for the wrong reasons perhaps you should look at General Galtieri who invaded the islands to make his party look good when Argentina was in dire political straits.

footnote:

I own 1 square metre of the Falkland Islands as do thousands of other British Servicemen who were offered the purchase after serving in the conflict there.

Another reason for holding on to the Islands would be to set a precedence, Malta is claimed by Spain, Gibralter is under claim, many Scottish Islands are also under claim from Iceland, France would like Jersey back.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

sorry but to me the islands are very very important , to be honest when you look at the charts of the waters it makes no difference what the argies do , can sail round chile and end up the same point , their wwaters only extend 200 miles , and as international law is at the moment we can drill it . lot of rubbish and propoganda form them they arent going to do jack about it .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

now the latest load of corrupt politicians have reduced the armed forces to a point that we need to use TA to cover our regular combat duties, the Argi’s can walk in there at any time and we don’t have the troops to take them back! And I bet this load of incompetent fools have not sent any extra troops to reinforce the Falklands Garrison!

That is a very cruel inditement of the Territorial Army, member of which are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan on a far too regular basis.

The days when you and I served as regular soldiers and held the TA in contempt passed long ago and they now serve in an active role (and do it brilliantly) all over the world.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm from the home town of Sgt Ian McKay VC and I think I speak for all when I say I am immensely proud of the actions of all our forces in the Falklands.

The islanders wish to remain British and we should respect those wishes.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

"It was not the scrapping of the ship (that happened in 91 I think) but the announcement that it was being scrapped that gave the green light to the Argi's.

Have already said earlier in thread that I am just throwing the question open for discussion. I certainly don't Advocate giving up sovereignty of any land under British control unless and until the people living there request it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

That is a very cruel inditement of the Territorial Army, member of which are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan on a far too regular basis.

The days when you and I served as regular soldiers and held the TA in contempt passed long ago and they now serve in an active role (and do it brilliantly) all over the world."

I apologise to any TA who may have taken offence, and I will say now that the vast majority of TA that I trained were much more dedicated than most regulars. In fact they were in the TA because they could not afford to be regulars but still wished to serve.

However the fact is that they were not and are not regulars (not that that makes much difference now). When we were in we trained all the time, when we were posted to NI we did NI training before going and even those of us who seemed to spend all our time in the crap had plenty of RnR. Now the lads are going strait from Lympstone to frontline duties!

That is wrong! Puppies being parachuted into frontline fighting units, TA (who are meant to be our emergency backup) having to cover because our regular forces cant cope having to cover for regulars, and all the time being told that we need to reduce the size of our armed forces! Its wrong!

I don’t know about you but I used to buy, beg, borrow and steal “Readers Digests” and stuff them in my combats to give me some protection from the bottles in NI, and most of the kit I used was bought by me, because our stuff was crap! 30 years on the equipment is still the same crap only difference is that now our forces are so stretched that the training and support is also becoming crap.

I have nothing but admiration for those who stand up for the colours today, but I would not sign on today and I totally understand why so many say “fuck that for a game of soldiers” as soon as they can.

It’s the corrupt politicians who line their own pockets while stripping our boys and girls of the numbers and equipment they need that I am ranting at.

To any of you going into danger, keep your heads down, keep safe and be lucky.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Agree no Government paid worker should be asked to go into a danger zone without the best equipment available, but they always will.

Firemen, Policemen, Coast Guards and the likes are still in the same boat (hopefully not a boat paid for by the government as it will be substandard)

The 1st and 2nd World Wars were won by the territorial army and most wars before that, The majority of the regular soldiers died at Dunkirk and with the rest of the BEF, thier replacements were lightly trained conscripts as has always been the way.

Perhaps in the Crimea, India, Agincourt and some other campaigns we fielded a fully trained (professional) army to the end but rarely. They don't do a bad job when you think about it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

did I mention 60,000 regulars dead before breakfast at the Somme ? replaced by lightly trained conscripts

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

[Removed by poster at 17/02/10 16:00:27]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

I still say we are not at war, as in WW1 WW2 so the TA should not be required. Maybe we should be asking why Iraq need 82 infantry bats to secure its borders (MOD estimate) but we only need 38 to be a world policeman?

Seems to me we are in a worse position now than we were in 1939!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Off thread so sorry but its all part of the same thing.

Did you know that our fantastic government have just put search and rescue out to private tender?

Seems its cheaper to have a private company make money out of our coastal search and rescue service than have our naval and air force pilots do the job.

Of course as our maritime search and rescue is used by the Navy and RAF as training for military combat search and rescue one must ask where our military pilots going to operational training after the sell off and will health and safety allow long range foul weather helicopter rescues when the job is being done by a private company for profit?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ara_and_MJCouple
over a year ago

rochdale

The RAF has already stationed a detachment of Eurofighter Typhoons on the islands, they are now the most advanced aircraft in the Southern Hemisphere. In fact, the RAF has gone through 3 generations of fighter aircraft whilst the Argentine Air Force is still scraping around for replacement kit for the aircraft they fielded in '82. Their Air Force is even less effective than '82 and their Naval capability is similarly defunct. I will lay a pound to a penny that one of our Nuclear Hunter-Killer class submarines is either on station in the South Atlantic or heading there as i type.

The Argentines are not about to invade - they really haven't the capability - these are simply the opening postures of a trade 'war'. Any oil drilled from around the islands will need the Argentine ports and waters to operate in & Buenos Aries is simply positioning itself for a share of the financial action.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's all crap how can you own land anyway. So someone settled there years ago! Big deal it should be the current inhabitants voting on what they want not everyone else.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The possibility of there being 60 "Billion Barrels of Oil under the south atlantic is the reason..

The fact we had a war with the argentine is a very said affair....lots of brave & courageous servicemen on both sides died for the "possible oil deposits"....

note.... Iraq.... Afghanistan.... where next....

1 thing for certain.... it won`t be Zimbabwe... millions dying n starving.... but NO OIL...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Some might think that oil is important.

If Saddam Hussein had achieved his goal he would have won the Iran/Iraq war and controlled the Iranian Oil fields, he would have annexed Kuwait and owned thier oil fields, we recieved a great deal of assistance from Saudia Arabia because he was next on the list followed by the rest of the middle east oil countries.

With control of such quantities of oil, the pricing structure would be within his control, your children would not be at school due to a lack of heating oil, you would not be at work unless you can walk there and providing they have oil to run the heating and equipment in the factory/office/shop etc

This country cannot survive without affordable oil, it is quite important that we don't allow a dictator to controll most of it.

It is a shame that the government didn't give us the credit to understand this and admit that we do fight wars for oil in the 21st Century, we used to fight them for better reasons like the King of France upsetting the King of England.

Don't underestimate the importance of the oil we fight for.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"Some might think that oil is important.

This country cannot survive without affordable oil, it is quite important that we don't allow a dictator to controll most of it.

Don't underestimate the importance of the oil we fight for."

Couldn't agree more, I know the peace lovers in the UK like to march against war but they would be the first to complain if there were no groceries in the shops, no heating Oil for schools and hospitals etc.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

dont get me wrong, peace is a wonderfull thing

Well worth fighting for

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Some might think that oil is important.

This country cannot survive without affordable oil, it is quite important that we don't allow a dictator to controll most of it.

Don't underestimate the importance of the oil we fight for."
What about opec ?? cutting oil production to force the price up ,,,,,

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

so what are you saying ? we shouldn't fight to safeguard supplies because the price will be high anyway ? isn't that a whole different issue to firstly fighting to maintain the negotiated flow of oil, at least with Opec there are pressures that can be brought into the equation by joint governments working together, not so with Dictators, but that is going off the topic of the Falklands.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

A couple of points, firstly, JednShasha you are absolutely correct in assertion that freedom is worth fighting for, in fact I would say it’s worth dieing for. What is more I would willingly lay down my life (and it is very dear to me) to defend that freedom, and every ones right to express their views and beliefs no matter how much I may disagree with them.

Shame that our leaders are removing those freedoms in the name of political correctness! As for your comments about oil, again I have to agree with your conclusion that oil is our lifeblood. This is something else we can blame Thatcher for! I believe it was Anerurin Bevan said: This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organising genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time.

This is Thatcher legacy! Firstly in 1983 she gave away our fishing grounds and sentenced our fishing industry to a long slow and painful death, then in 84/85 she then destroyed our coal mining industry, and capped the mines in such a way to put the coal seams beyond future use!

GGGRRrrrrrrrr……..

My second point is in answer to Sara and MJ, I will say right from the start I have never been too keen on either the RAF or Navy, this is because every time I came into direct contact with them they were taking me to uncomfortable places, and when I was travelling RAF (normally out of Lyneham) it was into deep shit, so they were not my best friends! However are you sure that there are eurofighters in the Falklands? Or are they like the first squadron that was formed at the BAE systems outside Blackburn, you know the one that flew the planes that had not been tested or built, but were put on RAF strength to cover up part of the building overrun! Or are they like the troops that are now on home (non active) postings but have been “detached” to Afghanistan! As I have said I don’t know but…..

nearly back on topic!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We lost lives defending the falklands.

I myself lost loved ones in this conflict.

And yes, we have to defend every last one living there regardless of the bloody oil.

We owe those who lost their lives to up hold the meaning of the word... "FREEDOM"

and what it means

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"so what are you saying ? we shouldn't fight to safeguard supplies because the price will be high anyway ? isn't that a whole different issue to firstly fighting to maintain the negotiated flow of oil, at least with Opec there are pressures that can be brought into the equation by joint governments working together, not so with Dictators, but that is going off the topic of the Falklands."

No gas or oil = no electricity = no internet!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *etitesaraTV/TS
over a year ago

rochdale

"A couple of points, firstly, JednShasha you are absolutely correct in assertion that freedom is worth fighting for, in fact I would say it’s worth dieing for. What is more I would willingly lay down my life (and it is very dear to me) to defend that freedom, and every ones right to express their views and beliefs no matter how much I may disagree with them.

GGGRRrrrrrrrr……..

nearly back on topic!

Well, the Argentines are kicking up a stink about the deployment of the Typhoons so they at least believe they are actually there!

The Argentine military do not have the capability to undertake another adventure to the islands, just posturing by a Govt frantically trying to divert attention away from internal problems - it worked for Maggie didn't it?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *zMaleMan
over a year ago

penzance

The antarctic shares it's mineral rights with the reat of the world BUT those with an adjacent coastline get a larger slice of the pie FACT. Thats the only reason we went to war in 1982.

I mean no disrespect for the guys that fell out there, cos I was one of them.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *zMaleMan
over a year ago

penzance

Well I didn't fall cos I'm here D'oh but you know what I mean

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Sooo...the Argies are stepping up their dirty tricks campaign....they've imposed new controls on shipping to the Falklands that sail through Argentine waters.

Apparently they're not happy about oil drilling that's set to commence in Falkland territorial waters.

The Empire is not what it used to be and Britain's influence on the world has a fraction of the importance it had 100-150 years ago.

Is it about time we handed sovereignty back to Argentina, or is it right we continue to hold onto this barren wasteland of an outpost?

Stu m8 , i'm sorry but i have to totally disagree with you on this one , the Faklands were inhabited by BRITTISH people long before Argentina even existed, and the people who now live there are proud to consider them selves BRITTISH, AND WISH TO REMAIN SO!!!.

Stu i consider you a friend , and you are intitled to your oppinion, but i must ask you to cosider the posible effect your calling the Falklands a "barren wasteland of an outpost" could have on those with a connection to them , as you are well aware MY MOTHER is buried in Stanley grave yard.!!!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

as stu has said multiple times this thread is for the purpose of discusion NOT his own opinion....

as for me, the iselanders want to remain Brits so no matter our opinions thats the way it has to stay!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Falkland Oil & Gas....

Been keeping an eye on my shares value the past few weeks

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *zMaleMan
over a year ago

penzance

What the fuck are the Argies doing of the coast of Scotland anyway????????? this was my 1st question when they invaded the Falklands in '82 D'oh OK I need to resit my Geography O level. But soon found out where they were a month later as my ship was sailing around them

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

I'd just like to clarify....again.....

I posted this just to throw open the question, and also during course of thread I have stated that I am not in favour of Britain giving up sovereignty of any territory without the consent of the inhabitants.

This time of history is a vivid one for me, hard to believe for some, but yes, I was born, alive, kicking and well into my teens. I also had family fighting in the Falklands at the time.

I believe the forums are here so that questions can be thrown open for discussion, and I shall continue to post in here. But, I apologise for any offence caused.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

Sell it! Sell the Falklands! If Argentina wants it so bad… sell it!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

"Sell it! Sell the Falklands! If Argentina wants it so bad… sell it!"

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

I’m being serious. With the prospect of oil its value will be extremely high.

This country has a huge financial deficit.

All sorts of conditions can be negotiated into the sale regarding the islanders and the oil.

It’s a peaceful solution and nothing new… the US bought loads of it’s States.

If Argentina can come up with a suitable bid…. Sell it!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

I’ve reconsidered. Don’t sell it… lease it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

now you're talking sense

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *zMaleMan
over a year ago

penzance

"We lost lives defending the falklands.

I myself lost loved ones in this conflict.

And yes, we have to defend every last one living there regardless of the bloody oil.

We owe those who lost their lives to up hold the meaning of the word... "FREEDOM"

I agree wholeheartedly............ BUT couldn't the self same thing be said for the guys that gave their lives in the Second world war. Sry off the original topic I know

and what it means "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

At the moment it is sovereign land and we are obliged to defend it. The people vote and claim to be British. No doubt the expense to the revenue is high and it costs far more than the taxes bring in. Yes oil is partly a concern, at present it helps us lay claim to the oil fields in that area. Is that a bad thing fro the UK though? Personally I think not.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"At the moment it is sovereign land and we are obliged to defend it. The people vote and claim to be British. No doubt the expense to the revenue is high and it costs far more than the taxes bring in. Yes oil is partly a concern, at present it helps us lay claim to the oil fields in that area. Is that a bad thing fro the UK though? Personally I think not."

That's cool let's all say bye bye to the Falklands and our Naval Base that has been so important to us in the past.

But hang on, if we are going to do it as a cost cutting enterprise, who wants Malta (the Italians can fight the Sicilians for it) who wants Jersey (the French) Oi Norway we have a bunch of Islands off the Scottish coast you can have, yippee the Spannish can at last have Gibralter, The Greeks will know doubt fight the Turkish for the SBA of Cyprus.

Wow that's all going save a whole pot of money.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

just to let folk kow i have been in contac with the origional poster of this thread, haveing now realised that it was not meant the way it reads.

And now offers him the open hand of friendship .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *zMaleMan
over a year ago

penzance

It is so sad to say but all the guys we have lost in the Falklands, Iraq and Afganistan have all laid down their lives not for freedom but for OIL. We knew about oil in the Falklands back in 82, The Iraq wars were nothing to do with regime change or WMD's as was claimed, but to secure the oil fields and Afganistan is nothing to do with terrorism or drugs, again it is OIL. We are fighting there to secure Afganistan so we can lay a pipeline from our Balkan allies, across Afganistan to the North Sea.

What is the price of OIL?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

What is the price of OIL?"

I'm trying very hard to resist posting the obvious answer to that.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread