Hong kong was leased from china for 100 years in 1897 hence being returned in 1997 as the lease was up. So a totally different situation. Lets just hope that whatever happens on the falklands no lives are lost, after all it's not football.

I meant our military forces. We still flying the same old Mirages with almost no upgrades (actually just a few of them can fly), for example.

We used to have a good relationship before the war. The military junta fucked up everything, and the politicians that came later are just retards. Look, if none catastrophe, we will be neighbors for many centuries, so there is time to resolve the issue or change our minds in the process. I hope we can quickly get rid of these politicians and move on.

EDIT: Is there any confirmation of this history from a UK irrefutable source? http://en.mercopress.com/2006/04/10/fco-1974-proposal-to-share-falklands-with-argentina . I read it a while ago, over this side, is known as the time we were closer to recover the islands, but to be honest, I never heard of such a proposal from the mouth of a british source.

For an interesting viewpoint, with sources from both the islanders, British combatants, Argentinian combatants, diplomats and civilians/journalists from both sides, read ' Forgotten Voices of the Falklands' by Hugh McManners.

Sheds some light and some interesting facts about the conflict.

"Re : Falklands or Malvinas?
(02. 15. 2012 14:02 PST)

Avatar
Sindher

Argentina DID offer the Falklanders several things and they said no. As for our "dismantled" military, what exactly is missing? We have the worlds best destroyers and submarines. We have an Airstrip on the Falklands, an airbridge connecting the UK to Falklands via Ascension Island.

We also have a faithful ally in Chile.




Argentina has never owned the Falklands."

I don't know why the "quote" function will not work here. Clicking on "quote", it says "you can only edit your own article".

Well, to Sindher: you my dear aren't interested in "some of [our] opinions". What you are doing here is simply baiting the Argentinians.

Para SIndher: Las islas Malvinas son y seran argentinas siempre!.,., jamas permitire que un pais como UK imponga su patetica cultura y forma de vivir., lo unico que saben es "HACER GUERRAS" pero asi les fue ayudando a los Estados Unidos "LOS MISMO INGLESES TRANTAN A LOS GURKAS (MALVINENSES si asi se les dice) COMO INGLESES DE 2 segunda CLASE" ., no dejan de ser USURPADORES!., por que eso es lo que son., intentan imponer a traver de la fuerza.,., Una vez Mahatma Gandi dijo "EL USO DE LA VIOLENCIA ES EL ULTIMO RECURSO DEL INCOMPETENTE" sean razonables ., no les da verguenza que ocupen otras tierras que esta a una distancia abismal de inglaterra???¿¿¿ .
Que ironia no?¿ hoy en dia Inglaterra tiene miedo., ya que su economia apesta al igual que su politica.,
y para ellos lamentablemente Argentina tiene hoy en dia mejor ejercito y economia que Inglaterra, por eso su miedo a perderlas, no dejan de ser una nacion rompe culturas , poco les queda las islas ya volveran a su patria que es argentina!!!.
Y sean afortunados que no matamos al pricipe willian , que sino no tendrian heredero al trono., sean considerados ingleses que poco les queda.....

Ha y dudo que digan verdaderamente como tienen las islas ., claro para ustedes el mundo es el subersivo pero inglaterra no se puso a pensar que ellos son los agresivos??¿¿ jajajajaaja les falta mucho a los ingleses mucha pasta!

To SIndher: The Malvinas are Argentine and always will be!.,., Never allow a country like UK pathetic impose its culture and way of life., All we know is "TO WAR" but so they were helping the United U.S. "tHE SAME tO ENGLISH TRANTAN Gurkhas (Malvinas if so they say) ENGLISH aS A KIND oF 2 second." not cease to be squatters!., because that is what they are., trying to impose force traver .,., Mahatma Gandhi once said "THE USE oF VIOLENCE iS THE LAST RESORT oF INCOMPETENT" reasonable., not ashamed to occupy other lands is at a distance abysmal England?? ¿¿¿.
That irony not? Today England is afraid., As its economy stinks like his politics.,
and unfortunately for them today Argentina has army and economy better than England, so his fear of losing them, they are still a nation broken cultures, some have left the islands and will return to their homeland which is Argentina!.
And be lucky to Pricipe willian not kill, but would have no heir to the throne., Are considered English that little is left .....

He and I doubt that really say as of the islands., Clear to you the world is not subversive but England began to think that they are aggressive? Jajajajaaja ¿have a long way to the English a lot of money!

Argentina has never owned the Falklands. I like your comment, "Argentina has army and economy better than England".

This is our military budgets.
United Kingdom 57,424,000,000
Argentina 3,179,000,000

To say that we could do nothing is hilarious. Here's a brief run down of what would happen.

1. Task force sails south, SSN's arrive in advance inserting Special forces on to the Falklands and into Argentina. The SSN's cut off all shipping to the islands by sea. No re-supply and no warships would survive when faced with British SSN's hunting them.
SSN's armed with Tomahawk land attack missiles will disable the airports and airbases at Mount Pleasant (Falklands) and the Argentine air bases in the south, limiting Argentine air forces to using bases further north and further inland. Special Forces provide support in this mission and also RN Frigates provide support for the SSN's in sea denial.

2. With Argentine re-supply is now limited to air transport only until the Type 45 Destroyers arrive to take control of Air Defence. When these arrive on station this will end. No Argentine transport aircraft or fighter jets have the ability to successfully engage and destroy a Type 45. Type 45 covers an area of 400 square miles.

3. After successfully disabling Argentine air bases, successfully defending access from the sea, and successfully defending the airspace over the islands and utilising the helicopter AWACS for early warning where needed the RN is now in a position to secure a beach head and land ground forces.
The UK therefor will be fighting whatever size force the Argentine have landed on the islands.

4. RN ships, submarines, apache gunships and special forces begin to assail and bombard the Argentine forces on the islands whilst recconnaisance will pinpoint a suitable landing area for ground forces.

5. Amphibious assault begins

6. Superior armed, trained and motivated British troops gradually inflict defeat upon defeat on the Argentines until the inevitable surrender.

To URRS

I think you've lost your mind. A military solution to this problem would be a catastrophe for Argentina for the following reasons:

1) In 1982, Argentina's planes and pilots in quality and quanity were on a par with UK. Also, although UK only had 2 small CVs, Argentina's planes had to fly a long distance to reach. With Argentina's smaller military and with the UK having an airbase ON the islands, the UK is at a huge advantage.

2) In 1982, technology wasn't half of what it is today. In the US, professional military officers all know that massed seaborne ground invasions are a thing of the past. An attack with massed infantry forces would invite a barrage of devestating tomahawk missiles on the beachhead. Which leads more importantly to #3

) In 1982, Argentina had a navy capable of doing some damage. They had poor Phoenix and some WWII destroyers, along with a Collususs carrier. The ships were really old, but the UK didn't have much to match those 6" and 5" guns if they got into range. The army and air force fought really well, but the navy didn't do a dam thing after the troops landed. The subs never attacked, the carrier didn't leave port and the DDs failed to protect the one capital ship they had. Looking at the balance of power:

Argentina 4 destroyers, 9 corvetters, 2 landing ships 3 subs

UK 19 frigate/destroyers, 24 patrol ships, 4 landing ships, 11 subs

This would be a blood bath. There is no more cold war to hold the UK back. The 11 subs alone could handle the whole Argentinian fleet. Between air and sea power, no ground forces would make it alive across the water to the islands to fight. Lets not forget that in 1982, they only landed due to the element of surprise. I'd say that Argentina is SO mad at the deployment of a few minor ships because any chance of success would completely be dependent on the RAF and RN to be asleep.

/topic for reference of the falklands/ Malvinas.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17045169

Nearly three decades after the Falklands War, tensions between the UK and Argentina have resurfaced. The UK insists the Falkland Islands are rightfully the UK's. The Argentine government maintains the islands, which it calls Las Malvinas, belong to it. But what are the details of each side's legal, historical and geographical claims for ownership?

1º Sindher, creo que si bien tiene el derecho a escribir en este foro, también tiene la obligación de respetar el lenguaje del mismo -español-, por lo tanto apréndalo o use el traductor google.

2º Es estúpido usar la teoría de la autodeterminación, cuando la población de las islas no es autóctona sino descendiente de los británicos que la invadieron o directamente ingleses que se han mudado allí. Con el mismo razonamiento, si mandamos 100000 argentinos a la Isla de Man podríamos reclamarla como territorio propio, ya que seríamos mayoría.

3º El caso Malvinas es considerado por los organismos internacionales un tema de Colonialismo, así que cualquier otra consideración sobre el tema está fuera de lugar.

4º Mi pregunta para ud. Sindher, considera a esta altura del siglo XXI al colonialismo como algo defendible?

5º Por haber vivido esa guerra no puedo menos que considerar una provocación este hilo desde el momento que usa la palabra Falkland en un foro Argentino.

Don't let Sindher's provocations get to you.

Don't you see that he is just trolling (successfully, it appears)???