Stupid World

**FJRider** · 30th July 2021, 09:24

Originally Posted by Viking01

Is China (PRC) deemed to be in breach of an international ruling regarding several of the Spratly Islands ? Yes. I don't dispute it.

Wars have been started over such issues of claimed ownership of islands. Do people still remember the Falklands war.

**mashman** · 30th July 2021, 10:30

Originally Posted by FJRider

Wars have been started over such issues of claimed ownership of islands. Do people still remember the Falklands war.

"Oi, get your filthy hands off my desert!"
"What 'e say?"

Brezhnev took Afghanistan.
Begin took Beirut.
Galtieri took the Union Jack.
And Maggie, over lunch one day,
Took a cruiser with all hands.
Apparently, to make him give it back

Pink Floyd.

**pritch** · 30th July 2021, 17:08

Originally Posted by FJRider

Wars have been started over such issues of claimed ownership of islands. Do people still remember the Falklands war.

True. The Spratleys have the potential to be a serious problem. China is furthest away of any of the countries claiming them but they have dumped loads of fill to convert a rock into an island base. I was saddened to see reports their base is actally sinking.

**FJRider** · 30th July 2021, 17:42

Originally Posted by pritch

True. The Spratleys have the potential to be a serious problem. China is furthest away of any of the countries claiming them but they have dumped loads of fill to convert a rock into an island base. I was saddened to see reports their base is actally sinking.

And England is furthest away from the Malvina's as a claimant to the islands. Your point is ... ??

**Viking01** · 30th July 2021, 20:14

Possibly another instance that is worthwhile examining is the forcible removal of the natives from the Chago Islands in the Indian Ocean by Harold Wilson's UK government starting in the late 1960's.

They were forcibly repatriated to Mauritius and the Seychelles Island, so that the island could then be handed over to the USA for use as an air base (and possibly more recently for extraordinary rendition purposes).

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-54598084
https://prruk.org/no-one-is-above-th...to-be-kidding/
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...-labour-party/

**Berries** · 30th July 2021, 22:33

Harold Wilson is in the past. Lots of things in the past were terrible, and the UK was behind quite a bit of it. Can't change history though.

This is today - Oh look, it's the Chinese again says the BBC.

**Viking01** · 31st July 2021, 13:24

Originally Posted by Berries

Harold Wilson is in the past. Lots of things in the past were terrible, and the UK was behind quite a bit of it. Can't change history though.

This is today - Oh look, it's the Chinese again says the BBC.

Afternoon,

Thanks for the reply. Though I'm not quite sure what message(s) that I should take from your first line.

Is it:

1. That because a crime is in the past, they should just ignore it (and just get on with life). Well, those of them fortunate enough to survive.

[ I'm sure that the inhabitants of Vietnam (Agent Orange and minefields) plus Yugoslavia and Iraq (depleted uranium) - who are still living with the consequences of those actions - will bear that in mind. Not to mention Libya and Syria, which has suffered major bombing damage, loss of civilian lives, as well as facing a large future reconstruction bill. ]

or:

2. There is a time limit on crimes being prosecuted, and if that time limit has now been exceeded, well, it's now deemed too late to be prosecuted.

or :

3. There are some selected western countries (or western politicians) that are just "too important to be prosecuted", so they automatically get a "free pass, do not get prosecuted" card from the ICJ.

[In which case, I'm sure that GWH Bush and Tony Blair will heave a large sigh of relief. As well might a number of other past European leaders, such as Sarkozy.]

or :

4. There are some countries currently "out of political favour" with the West - because of their economic system or the fact their administrations just will not obey orders from the West, so they deserve whatever comes their way.

And let's not overlook the fact that some western countries (like the US) are willing to bear political grudges long term and apply all manner of sanctions (as well as continue to try and invoke regime change).

[You'd have thought that North Korea, Cuba, Iran and Venezuela would have succumbed by now.]

BBC

Good to see that the BBC is continuing to provide global coverage. While not today, something from the past month thereabouts:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-57623110

Suspect that the BBC might have been distracted this past month covering Euro 2020 and the lead-up to the Olympics.

**pritch** · 31st July 2021, 16:57

Originally Posted by FJRider

And England is furthest away from the Malvina's as a claimant to the islands. Your point is ... ??

That is not a direct comparison. Apples and peaches. There were British people living on the Falklands/Malvinas and had been there some time.

If I understand the situation, there were no civilians on any of the Spratleys, various militaries had put boots on some rocks. China travelled much further and built an Island. That their Island appears to be sinking is just a bonus.

**FJRider** · 31st July 2021, 19:36

Originally Posted by pritch

That is not a direct comparison. Apples and peaches. There were British people living on the Falklands/Malvinas and had been there some time.

If I understand the situation, there were no civilians on any of the Spratleys, various militaries had put boots on some rocks. China travelled much further and built an Island. That their Island appears to be sinking is just a bonus.

It is just as a direct comparison as yours was ...

Actually (and it seems you do not understand the situation) ... the French were the first to have boots on the ground there. France established a colony on the islands in 1764. The British "Discovered" it a year or so later ... and the Ships Captain (not realizing it was already claimed) ... claimed it for the King/Queen (I can't recall which was on the throne at the time). The French actually later sold the Islands to a Spanish owned area that is now known as Argentina.

The British later did have a Colony on their "Discovered" islands. But ... in early 1770 a Spanish commander arrived from Buenos Aires with five ships and 1,400 soldiers forcing the British to leave Port Egmont (as it was known then) ... and Britain and Spain then almost went to war over the islands. But the British government (in it's infinite wisdom) decided that it should withdraw its presence from there (as well as many other overseas settlements) in 1774. And so they did ... Lock stock and citizen.

Later ... when the significance of having an outpost (with military presence) at the entrance/exit from Cape Horn ... the British citizens returned.

You may recall after the Falklands was ... British Government declared it would continue to defend (with military force if required) British citizens ... wherever they may be ... (Not British Territory ... after this particular (Military) fracas.

Argentina then adopted a new Constitution which declared the Falkland Islands by (their) law ... as an Argentine province.

The British then declared (By act of Parliament) that it was British Territory.

**pritch** · 1st August 2021, 00:31

Originally Posted by FJRider

It is just as a direct comparison as yours was ...

Actually (and it seems you do not understand the situation) ... the French were the first to have boots on the ground there. France established a colony on the islands in 1764. The British "Discovered" it a year or so later ... and the Ships Captain (not realizing it was already claimed) ... claimed it for the King/Queen (I can't recall which was on the throne at the time). The French actually later sold the Islands to a Spanish owned area that is now known as Argentina.

The British later did have a Colony on their "Discovered" islands. But ... in early 1770 a Spanish commander arrived from Buenos Aires with five ships and 1,400 soldiers forcing the British to leave Port Egmont (as it was known then) ... and Britain and Spain then almost went to war over the islands. But the British government (in it's infinite wisdom) decided that it should withdraw its presence from there (as well as many other overseas settlements) in 1774. And so they did ... Lock stock and citizen.

Later ... when the significance of having an outpost (with military presence) at the entrance/exit from Cape Horn ... the British citizens returned.

You may recall after the Falklands was ... British Government declared it would continue to defend (with military force if required) British citizens ... wherever they may be ... (Not British Territory ... after this particular (Military) fracas.

Argentina then adopted a new Constitution which declared the Falkland Islands by (their) law ... as an Argentine province.

The British then declared (By act of Parliament) that it was British Territory.

Fuck that was confusing. We’re talking about the Spratleys.

**Berries** · 1st August 2021, 09:25

Originally Posted by Viking01

Thanks for the reply. Though I'm not quite sure what message(s) that I should take from your first line.

That the past is done and dusted and the books have been written.

**Viking01** · 1st August 2021, 11:16

Originally Posted by Berries

That the past is done and dusted and the books have been written.

I'd beg to disagree. History is always being rewritten, especially as new information (previously hidden) comes to light. Only a few would dare to say "Mission Accomplished".

**R650R** · 2nd August 2021, 15:02

Originally Posted by Viking01

I'd beg to disagree. History is always being rewritten, especially as new information (previously hidden) comes to light. Only a few would dare to say "Mission Accomplished".

History is always being misrepresented is prob more correct. We have to remember that books were the ‘ultimate’ fact checkers. Given physical demands and costs and how ultimately important publishers reputations were I’d say 99% would be accurate truthful material.
And then we have the ever popular modern day “ book burnings” where libraries run out of space for old books...