Argentina wants to own the Falklands Islands, this much is well known.
Recently their government has decided to release an advert promoting their hopes for the London 2012 Olympics.
You might be wondering how these two things are going to link up.
If you dont know this story already, I bet now your mind is turning trying to figure out how they connect. You've probably got ideas forming but they all seem pretty ridiculous.
Let's see if they are more ridiculous than the truth.

Argentina put out an Olympic advert that shows one of their athletes training on the Falklands islands (the adverts calling them the Malvinas, the Argentine word for them.)
He works out on the steps of a WW1 war memorial to British dead and seemingly collapses are doing one press up (Dunno why they made it look that way...)
In the end the message comes up saying-
"To compete on English soil, we train on Argentine soil"

Here is a link, if it doesnt work you can easily youtube it and see the advert for yourself.

Soooo yeah.

What could be more in keeping with the Olympic spirit than using them as an excuse to push a political message while insulting the host nation.
Argentine Government = CLASSY!

I still can't get my head round the issues of the Falklands.
I know I am bias, being English, but hard as I try I cant understand the Argentine claim.

They haven't owned the islands for close 200 years.
They were not the first nation to claim ownership of the islands.
They are not hte last to claim ownership.
They have not owned them the longest.
And most damning of all, everyone on the Island doesn't want to be part of Argentina.


The only claims seem to be "we owned it at one time" (by which logic wouldn't Argentina need to give its land back to the original native kingdoms that lived there?) and "it's nearer to them than England" (by which logic if someone owns a holiday home near my house I am allowed to take it over, because it is nearer to my home then theirs.)
Is there another argument, beyond this vague assertions of the British Colonialism?
Can anyone tell me one? I don't get it.

The most telling part of this advert is not what it shows, but what it leaves out.
Where are the people? Where are the islanders?
Much like Argentine foriegn policy, the advert likes to pretend there is no one living on the Island expressing an opinion that the Argentine government does not want to hear.
I think everyone has the right to self determination and to force people to join your nation against their will by invading them because you want their land, is...last time I check... colonialism.
How do you say Irony in Spanish?

"ironía"

By that logic the US needs to give at least 13 states back to the English. Who in turn must give them back to the native Americans.

I think this falls under "I want it, therefore it is mine".

Everyone has to give everything back to everyone else...RIGHT NOW!

They wanted it before, so they invaded and got kicked in the teeth by a British task force (fun fact: neither side declared war on the other) and were forced to surrender.

But right now the British military isn't what it used to be even 30 years ago, and Argentina knows this. The government knows that there could be massive oil reserves in the waters around the islands, they also like to appeal to the emotions and national pride of the people, and have made it clear that they don't care if they burn every last bridge they have with Europe.

I really hope that all of their shit disturbing backfires.

The Argentine Military is also not what it was 30 years ago. A conflict would easily end with Britain curb stomping them into dust.

Canouvea is right, Argentina's military has barely improved in 30 years technologically.
Britain's military may have suffered many cuts etc but its still pretty up to date in terms of weapons, and we had the advantage over them 30 years ago.
The idea of Argentina attacking it pretty unthinkable.
Britain has some planes, anti air craft missiles etc in place on the island which would be enough to fight off out dated Argentine forces.

Also, Argentina is not a military dictatorship anymore (the military rule collapsed after they lost the war and now they have democracy...you're welcome, Argentina!) and democracies cannot declare war as flippantly as dictatorships can.

So I don't think we will see more than these kind of impotent gestures like the charming Olympic add.

Seriously though, if anyone knows any good reason why Argentina should get those islands, I am genuinely interested to know what they are.

challenge accepted!

1. Argentina has been going through a difficult time in its life. they've been lashing out as a defense mechanism. by giving them the Falklands it will show that we care, and that they are not alone. they'll feel better about themselves, and we'll all be friends! Peace will break out like the bubonic plague in medieval Europe!

2. its what Jesus would want.

3. Falklands? More like Fail-lands! Britain would be cooler without them!

4. The people living in the Falklands don't know what they're missing. You know what's awesome? Corruption, and Pandering! Argentina has both! That's why they should want to be with Argentina!

5. Argentina worked really hard on that Olympic ad. They should have something to show for it. Why not the Falklands?

6. Generosity is one of the elements of harmony.

Tiberius reason one there is surprisingly close to the truth.
Argentina is suffering in the economic down turn and its largely incompetent leaders are suffering in opinion poles.
The Falklands is a good, patriotic cause to rally the people behind and distract them from the problems at home.
The British serve as a useful target from national anger that useless politicians would otherwise suffer.

I just wondered if anyone had any reasons that argentina might actually admit to?

The Melvinas rightly belong to Argentina, and the British colonialists have no right to lay claim to what is rightly (and obviously) Argentine soil; the Melvinas are, and always have been Argentine, and the British claims to the islands are false and criminal.

That's their argument, and it's the only argument that you're likely to get out of them. The only other thing that I've heard from people in Argentina regarding the Falklands was from a group of Argentine intellectuals who said outright that Argentina has no realistic claim to the islands, and that the government is using the issue as a way to rally public opinion behind them. Essentially what you are saying Hark.

I'm curious as to what value the land has that's worth military action. Are sheep that scarce in Argentina?

Or maybe Argentina just wants to get all their mines back.

We've found oil near to them recently....

Really?

...

TO WAR!! THE USA OBVIOUSLY HAS THE MOST LEGITIMATE CLAIM TO THE FALKLANDS ISLANDS. WE ARE THE LARGEST CONSUMER OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, SO ANY OIL AND THE LAND ABOVE IT BELONGS TO US!

Whoops, sorry.

So why did they go to war in the eighties (I'm assuming prior to the discovery of oil) for the land?

Their economy was in trouble and there was widespread discontent with the military dictatorship at the time, so the men in charge decided to capitalize on the patriotic feelings that most Argentines had about the Falklands and invade, drawing attention away from their failing economy and bolstering support for the dictatorship (that sounds familiar).

They planned to blockade supplies to the Falklands, then try to negotiate with the British at the UN, and failing that they would invade (that sounds familiar too), and they pretty much banked on the British not doing something about it because they figured that they wouldn't care, nor would they have the capability to stop them.


The last time was about distracting people from economic woes and political turmoil, now it's about oil.

We may be wrong of course, considering how trustworthy their government is.