Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Falkland Islands: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Tell Argentina to STFU

1151618202124

Posts

  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

  • CasualCasual flap flap flap wiggle wiggle wiggle Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    He's a goose. You're feeding him. Literally everyone else in the thread already knows you're right except bagginses, and as you've pointed out he's too dense/obstinate/Anglophobic to be talked round with any combination of words in the English language.

    Just like an Anglo to insist on only using English. It shouldn't even be called English. It should be American as there are more native speakers here. Calling it English just helps keep Elizabeth's Imperial Jackboot on former colonies' throats.

    Of course, of course. Any combination of words in the Anglo-American-Canadian-Australian-New Zealander-Irish-(fuck, am I missing anyone out?)-ish language. How culturally insensitive of me.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    He's a goose. You're feeding him. Literally everyone else in the thread already knows you're right except bagginses, and as you've pointed out he's too dense/obstinate/Anglophobic to be talked round with any combination of words in the English language.

    Just like an Anglo to insist on only using English. It shouldn't even be called English. It should be American as there are more native speakers here. Calling it English just helps keep Elizabeth's Imperial Jackboot on former colonies' throats.

    The language is called English because it was created in England. America's numbers don't mean shit.

  • CasualCasual flap flap flap wiggle wiggle wiggle Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    He's a goose. You're feeding him. Literally everyone else in the thread already knows you're right except bagginses, and as you've pointed out he's too dense/obstinate/Anglophobic to be talked round with any combination of words in the English language.

    Just like an Anglo to insist on only using English. It shouldn't even be called English. It should be American as there are more native speakers here. Calling it English just helps keep Elizabeth's Imperial Jackboot on former colonies' throats.

    The language is called English because it was created in England. America's numbers don't mean shit.

    I think your sarcasm detector is on the blink there.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
  • Redcoat-13Redcoat-13 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Scotland aren't leaving the Union. The logistics of such a thing would be massive, and lets be honest, the SNP aren't up to the task if any recent interviews is anything to go by.

    Take Currency. The SNP have said they're going to keep the Pound. Lets think about that for a second and how much that does not make sense.

    Redcoat-13 on
    2193478FpRzm.png
  • ComahawkComahawk Registered User regular
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Scotland aren't leaving the Union. The logistics of such a thing would be massive, and lets be honest, the SNP aren't up to the task if any recent interviews is anything to go by.

    Take Currency. The SNP have said they're going to keep the Pound. Lets think about that for a second and how much that does not make sense.

    You realize that countries don't necessarily need to have their own currency, right?

    Like right now, Iceland is looking at adopting the Canadian dollar due to their economic issues.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Do you have any points relevant to this discussion at all or are you just here to threadshit?

    poshniallo on
    I figure I could take a bear.
  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    Comahawk wrote: »
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Scotland aren't leaving the Union. The logistics of such a thing would be massive, and lets be honest, the SNP aren't up to the task if any recent interviews is anything to go by.

    Take Currency. The SNP have said they're going to keep the Pound. Lets think about that for a second and how much that does not make sense.

    You realize that countries don't necessarily need to have their own currency, right?

    Like right now, Iceland is looking at adopting the Canadian dollar due to their economic issues.

    I'm actually with Redcoat. There's no way any country is going to look at the Eurozone and think "yes, I want that." Not even Ron Paul is that insane.

  • Redcoat-13Redcoat-13 Registered User regular
    Comahawk wrote: »
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Scotland aren't leaving the Union. The logistics of such a thing would be massive, and lets be honest, the SNP aren't up to the task if any recent interviews is anything to go by.

    Take Currency. The SNP have said they're going to keep the Pound. Lets think about that for a second and how much that does not make sense.

    You realize that countries don't necessarily need to have their own currency, right?

    Like right now, Iceland is looking at adopting the Canadian dollar due to their economic issues.

    Iceland looking at adopting the Canadian dollar is a different process to Scotland gaining independence but keeping the Pound? Maybe?

    I find it very odd that a country that is wanting independence from England, is going to potentially have its currency controlled by the bank of England. There's the issue of a country's credit rating and economy; I can't see how a Scottish pound could maintain the same value as an English pound.

    2193478FpRzm.png
  • GaryOGaryO Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Comahawk wrote: »
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Scotland aren't leaving the Union. The logistics of such a thing would be massive, and lets be honest, the SNP aren't up to the task if any recent interviews is anything to go by.

    Take Currency. The SNP have said they're going to keep the Pound. Lets think about that for a second and how much that does not make sense.

    You realize that countries don't necessarily need to have their own currency, right?

    Like right now, Iceland is looking at adopting the Canadian dollar due to their economic issues.

    Iceland looking at adopting the Canadian dollar is a different process to Scotland gaining independence but keeping the Pound? Maybe?

    I find it very odd that a country that is wanting independence from England, is going to potentially have its currency controlled by the bank of England. There's the issue of a country's credit rating and economy; I can't see how a Scottish pound could maintain the same value as an English pound.

    but there's already scottish pounds? same value as an english pound with the added confusion of seeing whoever you give it to look at it with a look of utter bewilderment.

    GaryO on
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    GaryO wrote: »
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Comahawk wrote: »
    Redcoat-13 wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    lu tze wrote: »
    Bagginses wrote: »
    Yes, but the fact that you keep bringing it up unprovoked makes one worry. It's like the proper response to exchange "You know, this is my first time flying and I'm kind of edgy" "shut up, there's no bomb, how dare you suggest there's a bomb:" "Wait, WHAT? There's a bomb, isn't there?"
    You're the one who brought it up, all my posts on the matter are in direct response to your smug ignorant bullshit...

    You're going to have to show me where I said anything besides the fact that the Union Jack won't be accurate when Scotland leaves the Union.

    Scotland aren't leaving the Union. The logistics of such a thing would be massive, and lets be honest, the SNP aren't up to the task if any recent interviews is anything to go by.

    Take Currency. The SNP have said they're going to keep the Pound. Lets think about that for a second and how much that does not make sense.

    You realize that countries don't necessarily need to have their own currency, right?

    Like right now, Iceland is looking at adopting the Canadian dollar due to their economic issues.

    Iceland looking at adopting the Canadian dollar is a different process to Scotland gaining independence but keeping the Pound? Maybe?

    I find it very odd that a country that is wanting independence from England, is going to potentially have its currency controlled by the bank of England. There's the issue of a country's credit rating and economy; I can't see how a Scottish pound could maintain the same value as an English pound.

    but there's already scottish pounds? same value as an english pound with the added confusion of seeing whoever you give it to look at it with a look of utter bewilderment.

    Wrong. They're both Great British Pounds. Some are printed BoE, som BoS, but they're the same currency. It's like the US state quarters sort of but now that I've typed that out not really.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • MovitzMovitz Registered User regular
    More like the Euro then? It's the same currency but they have different pictures on the back side with some national emblem or whatever on them based on where they were printed (coined?).

    steam_sig.png
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    Should we ask the mods to rename this the thread to "Scottish Independence: How I Learned to Love Alex Salmond"?

  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    Movitz wrote:
    More like the Euro then? It's the same currency but they have different pictures on the back side with some national emblem or whatever on them based on where they were printed (coined?).

    Technically Scottish bank notes are not legal tender anywhere in Britian (Scotland included), but, equally as technically, English Bank notes above £5 in value are not legal tender in Scotland either.

    I have a thoughful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/
    I made a game, it has penguins in it. WANG gets you money off.
    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
  • Anarchy Rules!Anarchy Rules! Registered User regular
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Sigh. This is just getting sad.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • psyck0psyck0 Registered User regular
    I wish they WOULDN'T drill, all the same. Not looking forward to the environmental damage.

    Big Man in training.
    steam_sig.png
  • CasualCasual flap flap flap wiggle wiggle wiggle Registered User regular
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

  • CasualCasual flap flap flap wiggle wiggle wiggle Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    For as long as they think it might get them something.

    It's not like it really costs them anything much, and they might get some concessions out of it so why not? And of course there are the domestic politics involved ( see also US sanctions vs Cuba)

  • adytumadytum Registered User regular
  • 815165815165 Registered User regular
    tumtum i love you

  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    That 200-mile long slant drill will truly be the 8th wonder of the world :/

  • Anarchy Rules!Anarchy Rules! Registered User regular
    It's vaguely reassuring when Argentina starts being dicks to everyone and not just us:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17739204

  • rayofashrayofash Registered User regular
    It's vaguely reassuring when Argentina starts being dicks to everyone and not just us:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17739204

    Is it really being a dick when they just want control over their own resources?

  • adytumadytum Registered User regular
  • fshavlakfshavlak Registered User regular
    adytum wrote: »
    Solution:
    Spoiler:

    Steerable drilling is pretty standard these days. Wells will often be much farther horizontally from the drilling rig than they are vertically. You hear stories about drilling heads that lose pose (lose track of where they are), and come up out of the ground miles from the rig operating them.

  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    rayofash wrote: »
    It's vaguely reassuring when Argentina starts being dicks to everyone and not just us:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17739204

    Is it really being a dick when they just want control over their own resources?

    Must. Not. Bite....

  • rayofashrayofash Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    rayofash wrote: »
    It's vaguely reassuring when Argentina starts being dicks to everyone and not just us:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17739204

    Is it really being a dick when they just want control over their own resources?

    Must. Not. Bite....

    I'm talking about nationalizing YPF, not fighting over the Falkland island.

  • psyck0psyck0 Registered User regular
    If the old military government signed whatever deal that was, I have much less problem with them nationalising it. If one of the newer, "democratically elected" (except for the fraud that I am sure occurred) governments made the deal and now this one is breaking it, that is not so good but still somewhat understandable.

    Big Man in training.
    steam_sig.png
  • LolkenLolken Registered User, __BANNED USERS, Dumbasses
    psyck0 wrote: »
    If the old military government signed whatever deal that was, I have much less problem with them nationalising it. If one of the newer, "democratically elected" (except for the fraud that I am sure occurred) governments made the deal and now this one is breaking it, that is not so good but still somewhat understandable.

    It was Menem.

    "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton.

    "Money tends to corrupt, and lots of money corrupts lotsely" - Me.
  • healragahealraga Registered User
    edited April 2012
    Casual wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    I dont think they actually want (or at least expect) to gain sovereignty over the Islands. They would have to deal both with an unwilling local populace, and with an extremely pissed off England. I think this whole shebang (both the renewed interest in the Falklands and the recent nationalization of YPF) are designed to stir up Argentinan support for Kirchner and to help her blame her country's social and economic ills on foreign enemies (pretty standard rethoric: I'm the good one! I want to take back our land and our resources from those imperialist!)

    healraga on
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    healraga wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    I dont think they actually want (or at least expect) to gain sovereignty over the Islands. They would have to deal both with an unwilling local populace, and with an extremely pissed off England. I think this whole shebang (both the renewed interest in the Falklands and the recent nationalization of YPF) are designed to stir up Argentinan support for Kirchner and to help her blame her country's social and economic ills on foreign enemies (I'm the good one! I want to take back our land and our resources from those imperialist!)

    That and they want a share in the oil revenue.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • healragahealraga Registered User
    edited April 2012
    healraga wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    I dont think they actually want (or at least expect) to gain sovereignty over the Islands. They would have to deal both with an unwilling local populace, and with an extremely pissed off England. I think this whole shebang (both the renewed interest in the Falklands and the recent nationalization of YPF) are designed to stir up Argentinan support for Kirchner and to help her blame her country's social and economic ills on foreign enemies (I'm the good one! I want to take back our land and our resources from those imperialist!)

    That and they want a share in the oil revenue.

    Pretty much. They, as every other government in the world, love money in all the ways they can get them. If they can implement something which will give them BOTH popular support, and increased revenue then it isnt that much of a surprise that they will try it. Sure, it will destroy investor confidence in the short term, but if they are able to resist the initial shockwaves then maybe in the long term it will prove benefical for them.

    Or it can also horribly backfire and become a cesspool of corruption and nepotism, but we will have to see.

    healraga on
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    healraga wrote: »
    healraga wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    I dont think they actually want (or at least expect) to gain sovereignty over the Islands. They would have to deal both with an unwilling local populace, and with an extremely pissed off England. I think this whole shebang (both the renewed interest in the Falklands and the recent nationalization of YPF) are designed to stir up Argentinan support for Kirchner and to help her blame her country's social and economic ills on foreign enemies (I'm the good one! I want to take back our land and our resources from those imperialist!)

    That and they want a share in the oil revenue.

    Pretty much. They, as every other government in the world, love money in all the ways they can get them. If they can implement something which will give them BOTH popular support, and increased revenue then it isnt that much of a surprise that they will try it. Sure, it will destroy investor confidence in the short term, but if they are able to resist the initial shockwaves then maybe in the long term it will prove benefical for them.

    Or it can also horribly backfire and become a cesspool of corruption and nepotism, but we will have to see.

    Well, there's not much to see since the UK isn't going to give them shit (rightly so) on the Falkland. With the YPF thing, eh probably won't help in the long run or short run. Silly Kirchner.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • healragahealraga Registered User
    healraga wrote: »
    healraga wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    I dont think they actually want (or at least expect) to gain sovereignty over the Islands. They would have to deal both with an unwilling local populace, and with an extremely pissed off England. I think this whole shebang (both the renewed interest in the Falklands and the recent nationalization of YPF) are designed to stir up Argentinan support for Kirchner and to help her blame her country's social and economic ills on foreign enemies (I'm the good one! I want to take back our land and our resources from those imperialist!)

    That and they want a share in the oil revenue.

    Pretty much. They, as every other government in the world, love money in all the ways they can get them. If they can implement something which will give them BOTH popular support, and increased revenue then it isnt that much of a surprise that they will try it. Sure, it will destroy investor confidence in the short term, but if they are able to resist the initial shockwaves then maybe in the long term it will prove benefical for them.

    Or it can also horribly backfire and become a cesspool of corruption and nepotism, but we will have to see.

    Well, there's not much to see since the UK isn't going to give them shit (rightly so) on the Falkland. With the YPF thing, eh probably won't help in the long run or short run. Silly Kirchner.

    Yeah I wasnt talking about the Falklands, its a given that the UK isnt going to budge and I doubt the current leadership of Argentina is eager to start a war.

    But yeah, silly Kirchner

  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    rayofash wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    rayofash wrote: »
    It's vaguely reassuring when Argentina starts being dicks to everyone and not just us:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17739204

    Is it really being a dick when they just want control over their own resources?

    Must. Not. Bite....

    I'm talking about nationalizing YPF, not fighting over the Falkland island.


    Ah. Good job I didn't bite then.

  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    healraga wrote: »
    healraga wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Casual wrote: »
    They can get fucked. No international court will take it seriously.

    Argentina has repeatedly refused offers to have international courts rule on the issue, probably because they're well aware of the inevitable result.

    Everything that comes from their direction is just noise at this point. How long are they going to play this game before they realize no amount of foot stomping and arm swinging will get them what they want?

    I dont think they actually want (or at least expect) to gain sovereignty over the Islands. They would have to deal both with an unwilling local populace, and with an extremely pissed off England. I think this whole shebang (both the renewed interest in the Falklands and the recent nationalization of YPF) are designed to stir up Argentinan support for Kirchner and to help her blame her country's social and economic ills on foreign enemies (I'm the good one! I want to take back our land and our resources from those imperialist!)

    That and they want a share in the oil revenue.

    Pretty much. They, as every other government in the world, love money in all the ways they can get them. If they can implement something which will give them BOTH popular support, and increased revenue then it isnt that much of a surprise that they will try it. Sure, it will destroy investor confidence in the short term, but if they are able to resist the initial shockwaves then maybe in the long term it will prove benefical for them.

    Or it can also horribly backfire and become a cesspool of corruption and nepotism, but we will have to see.

    Well, there's not much to see since the UK isn't going to give them shit (rightly so) on the Falkland. With the YPF thing, eh probably won't help in the long run or short run. Silly Kirchner.


    Not really. As long as the situation remains as it is she can handwave away any domestic issues with "But La Malvinas! See the filthy English bogeymen! Ignore your problems and hate
    them!"

Sign In or Register to comment.