h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Besides many elements that I can understand while this commemoration
There are two things still bugging my mind.

Was the occupation of this Island enough reason to start a real war?..
Not that soon.
It was more a theatrical personal "statement" by Margaret Thatcher, translated in war.

The second problem for me.

Almost at the end of this war, an Argentine submarine had turned and was on its way to Argentine.
Still it got a torpedo by the others and 200 men died, while an enemy on the run should never be shot at, according to Geneva conventions.

Today, besides all British soldiers I also commemorate the Argentines.


Alfredo, Amsterdam

I think the idea was to get the Argentinian dictatorship's soldiers, remember General Galtieri & Co and all those missing Argentinian civilians of the 'wrong' political stripe, out of the islands before they turned them also into part of their police state. You have to remember that those islands were basically only occupied by Scottish and Welsh sheep farmers.
The Argentinians had only a dubious claim to them based on the idea of them being on the end of the continental shelf. By that mode of thinking I think they could equally belong to Chile.

Thanks for your comment.

It was and is clear to me, why the dictator of Argentine did what he did. Trying to become popular in his country.

Al though it's more relevant if the Falklands would belong to Argentine, their way of occupying it with cynical motives is clearly not a mature way of behaving in the world community of states.


I just got a comment at another site which I would like to post.

Quote; "My cousin was an officer on a British warship in the Falklands War. He helped to rescue burning bodies from the Sir Galahad.

The commemorations here yesterday were commemorations of ALL who died in the Falklands War - both British and Argentineans."


Well, if it indeed was for ALL, then that would be very "mature" by GB to do so.

The same reasoning that says that because an island is on a continental shelf it must belong to the country with the longest piece of adjacent coastline would mean that Sri Lanka must belong to India or that Trinidad and Tobago must belong to Venezuela. Clearly the Argentinian argument doesn't hold water - if you'll pardon the pun!

Zeitgeist says that memorial services should be for soldiers on both sides. That's something of an open question.

Nearness (?) is one of the relevant factors, and I am talking about it from my own point of view, despite thinking and acting of dictators who try to stay in power, even by occupying adventures.

I don't think the Falklands are a colony, for there are only british peoples living there.

Any argument pro either contra isn't bullet prove.

And what services concerned; I do like to appreciate the intention of the organizers of the commemmoration for all deaths and wounded.
To me it's more than Zeitgeist.

Europe knows sometimes it's history of colonies, slaveries, continental wars, two world wars and a haulocaust.

There's still a shadow of Europe at the globe.

It's interesting to look at the atlas for that region and try and figure out who should own what - for instance, who should South Georgia or the South Sandwich Islands belong to? Those small islands like Montagu, Saunders, Leskov, Zavodovski, Candlemas and Viskoi might be only rocks in the sea but if there's oil or mineral wealth found nearby they will suddenly become important.

Isn't there an Argentinian shadow over Tierra del Fuego? I think only one or two Fuegians survived that bit of ethnic cleansing, but I'm not sure. I believe that today the race is extinct.

Well, that makes it all - by reason - more complicated