The Falkland Islands

The corrupt Argentine president, Kirchner, says that Britain should 'give back' the Falklands and that we are flying in the face of UN Resolutions and are being 'colonial'. I suppose if Argentina owned them, that wouldn't be colonial? Even though the population wants to maintain their relationship with Britain, not a lot of them, not a majority but almost every single one of them, it seems that the over riding UN principle of self determination should be ignored.

Argentina claims that they once owned the islands and Britain took them. History has a habit of doing these things. We want to stop that kind of aggression, but Kirchner it seems wants to continue it. There is a reason of course, that she speaks Spanish rather than Aymara or Quechua. I suppose she could always get rid of the indigenous population once she 'gets back' the islands. That wouldn't be 'colonial'.

Kirchner should stick to conning people in domestic issues, like dodgy land deals from which she gets rich, rather than try the same limp techniques on the wider world. You can fool some of the people, dear.

I suppose, if some batty left ideologue at the UN decided it was anti-colonial to forcibly seize a territory from a government its people desire and hand it over to another power, we could follow up the logic ourselves. The Falklands are some 400 miles from Argentina, but Ireland, an island we used to 'own' is much closer. So perhaps, under 'Kirchner's law' we should take back the whole of Ireland? Maybe the terrorists McGuinness and Adams could move to Argentina - I think their skills are more appreciated there.

The Falklands

Argentina is a country that is perpetually ruled by grubbing types, either military or political. The present President is a vain, yet quite unattractive woman called Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who became wealthy through corrupt land deals. She rails these days, not against herself, her corruption and the appalling mess she is making of a country already in a bad way.

No, she diverts attention away from her to the Falkland Islands and British colonialism, which is oppressing  the people of the Islands. This her people believe because they are taught it at school, but like global warming, that doesn't make it true. Naturally if the islands were a colony of Argentina she wouldn't have a problem with colonialism.

Some people think her timing cynical, to reopen the wounds of the 1982 war, but this is coincidence. Her timing is based on the fact that oil has been found around the islands and her greed knows no bounds or reason. Her country could be looking for oil in its own regions, but that would require effort; so much better to take other people's possessions and the fruit of their labour.

And, as she well knows the Islanders speak English and wish to retain their links with the UK, not Argentina. So another of her planks is pulled away because if she invaded these foreign shores again, it would be Argentina, once again acting in the role of oppressor.

In 1982 there was genuine surprise among many conscripts in the Argentine forces, to find the local population hostile to them and decidedly British. This was not what they had been told to expect. It may well make sense for the Islands to be part of Argentina, it being the closest mainland. But not when it is run by corrupt nutters, so the choice of the Islanders, in the circumstances is both logical and right.

In fact, the Falklanders could offer to take over Argentina, thus not only making the coveted link, but also providing some people who are not power crazed crackpots, to restore the country to prosperity.

Falklands Defence

I read in the Mail that the MoD have drawn up plans to defend the Falklands in case the nutter running Argentina has to distract the Argentine people from a) her running of the country and b) just where her money came from. From what we gather the MoD squeezes only momentary fractions of its time into the job we expect them to do, spending most time on sick days, bonus schemes, holiday, research holidays, supplier visit holidays and meetings about meetings (to swap holiday destinations), pausing only to sign off procurement of something they saw in an Eagle comic or a brochure that looked nice/had a free holiday attached.

I can only imagine a plan drawn up by the excessively large number of people not doing very much in Whitehall would go something like this. Firstly it would involve ordering equipment which could then be used to defend the Islands, like aircraft carriers. They may not be ready for 20 years, but considering whether that might be relevant doesn't fall within the parameters of the project plan.

Then order some planes that don't exist, to fly from the carriers that aren't built yet. Ships would be dispatched, but they would be supply ships, which due to the haste necessary to meet an imminent threat, they didn't actually load with anything. Ships with guns and missiles on them being be on a good will visit to Switzerland.

Extra troops would be loaded into aircraft to be flown to the airstrip built on the Falklands for the purpose, but the planes would circle endlessly searching for the runway amongst the Orkney Islands, which the MoD believe is where the Falklands are. Keen to show they are now a thinking part of austerity Britain the MoD would load older ammunition to use that up first; 7.62mm instead of the 5.56mm now used by the standard rifle.

This might suggest that the MoD are gormless and useless, but the reality is somewhat worse.

Actors - A Special Breed

It would be nice to think that people who memorise someone else's words, could realise that the fame attached to this activity is about their entertainment value not their wisdom. Now we have Sean Penn popping up to spout off, in passing about something he doesn't comprehend, (comprehension is something these artistes seem to struggle with, they don't have the time you see).

Sean Penn, who has some trouble maintaining personal relationships and keeping his anger managed, has decided to inform us that we should 'hand back' the Falklands to Argentina. The basis appears to be that Britain is a colonial power. It is hard to know where to start with such a dimwit. Firstly, Britain was a colonial power and isn't now. Second, by wishing to forcefully takeover the islands he accepts violence should pay (he would wouldn't he!) and then, once achieved, does that not make Argentina a colonial power? Even worse surely, as every one that lives on the Falklands wishes to retain their British connection.

Just because Penn has a liking for violent and corrupt regimes, doesn't mean it is a common view, much less a valid one. Can you imagine someone with such stunted thinking actually holding a position of power (er yeah - Cuba and Venezuela for instance), let alone being allowed to be a parent? The furore here over a comedic remark by Jeremy Clarkson pales against the dribblings of people like Penn, who believes in the leaders who actually do take people out and shoot them in front of their families.

But then Penn belongs to a special class of idiot; he isn't just left leaning, he is a rich, actor who wishes a hell on other people of his making that he wouldn't be subjected to himself. The poverty and destitution Dickens railed against was one of carelessness, Penn constructively wishes to inflict harm and pain. Part of his character it seems.

Colonialism

There seems to be some misunderstanding about colonialism floating around the world these days. I blame the Lefties who have been talking tripe (do they ever do anything else?) about it for decades. Colonialism is when one country takes over another, often by force and without regard to the wishes of the people currently living in the country. Which brings me on to this letter, a reply from the UN to the Argentine President, Cristina Kirchner.

Dear President Kirchner,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding a number of issues currently pertaining to the South Atlantic region. Firstly, I would like to congratulate you on selecting the UN as the body best able to assist you in your international dispute with the United Kingdom.

Looking back at our records I see this has cropped up before, in 1982, when the UN helpfully, I think, passed Resolution 502, which also addresses your current claim that the region has been militarised, as the Resolution called for the invading Argentine forces to withdraw from the Islands and for both sides to refrain from using force. Naturally, the UN is very much on your side because of our childish and poorly thought out policies on 'colonialism'.

Argentina was created in 1816 by throwing off the yoke of the Spainish colonial power, becoming an independent country and claiming the Falklands Islands as a colony. Which is obviously fine as any land 400+ miles away is bound to belong to that country. After having a spat with the Americans the Spanish/Argentines were thrown off the Islands and the British snuck up, in 1833 and claimed the Islands (again) for Britain and it has stayed that way ever since.

Naturally, the UN supports the idea of self determination and as the Islands have almost never had any Argentines living there, the population is and wishes to remain British. It is hard therefore, to substantiate your claim that it is provocative of the Islands to have amongst them a member of their own Royal Family. I have, for instance never received a complaint from Ireland when a British Prince visits Wales.

I fear I may have to further disappoint you, by finding that the sending of a warship to the region is not in effect 'militarisation' but, sadly what often happens when a local power starts making threats. Overall then, it seems plain to us at the UN that Argentina is threatening military action, which we cannot condone, in order to obtain a colony in the name of repudiating colonialism. Maybe if your thinking was a tad clearer, you would not be in the mess in Argentina that requires the distraction of a foreign military adventure. Which I'm sure also has no connection with the recent drilling in the area of the Islands.

My military aide also suggests that I urge caution on your part as he says, you should remember that your Air Force, whilst having had a noble tradition is mainly held together with string and sealing wax these days, that your Navy returned to port and stayed there the first time a ship was attacked and your Army saw its officers run away whenever possible and treated the ordinary soldiers with contempt. Soldiers who were massively surprised on arrival not to find themselves in the role of liberators, having been taught at school that the people are forced to remain 'British', but instead as invaders and as such, were detested.

I gather that this didn't upset them too much as no-one wanted to stay on the wind blown place and that it reminded them of the part of Argentina no-one lives in.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to deal with others like you in Syria and elsewhere.