Falklands (Americans View)

Yes, there is recoverable oil, but the price per barrel will need to reach about $150 US. And it will require pumping hot air or water into the pockets to make the oil liquid enough to retrieve.

As for the indigenous people owning Argentina and no European settlers, I also agree. Unfortunately, unlike in North America, almost all of the indigenous people were eliminated by Europeans, especially during the few times Britain showed up and shot everything in sight that didn't have white skin. Portugal was just as bad. In the parts of South America where the indigenous people continue to exist as intact cultures (Paraguay, Bolivia, Chile, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela and many parts of Brazil), the Spanish "conquerors" had a reason for keeping the indigenous folks around: conversion to christianity and then slavery. Once conquered and converted, then it was OK to kill them if they escaped enslavement.

The British didn't have this same motivation. About the only indigenous language still spoken is quechua and various dialects of it in the northern provinces. When friends have come to visit us when we're down here in The Squeeze's home town (Buenos Aires) they always remark, "I'm amazed at all of the white people down here! I thought everyone would be brown like in Mexico!"

There are still small Teutonic-like communities in Patagonia where German is more common than Spanish. In fact in the Province of Chubut there are several communities that look just like Wales and the locals still speak Welch -- in addition to Spanish. Trelew, which is, I believe, a Welch word is the name of the largest city in the Province and is very proud of its copy of St David's Cathedral in Pembrokeshire. There are many hotels and restaurants that serve high tea. Most of the homey architecture is 100% Welch. It's so odd to have a grandmotherly Welch woman serve you tea and cakes while speaking the thick Argentine Spanish accent. I asked one of these ladies one day why she didn't speak to us in Welch/Welsh and she answered "Porque castellano es más facíl."

Yeah, I'm all for reparation and restoration of indigenous people. But look how much trouble Evo Morales is still having not because of political policies, but simply because he's the first indigenous Bolivian to be president. The 10% of Bolivians who regard themselves as "white" are doing all they can to not cooperate with his administration and tear him down. After all, they ARE white. Racism is alive and well between indigenous tribes, too, throughout South and Central America.

• If you think that you're so smart, you just may be a work of art! -- Burma Shave
• Some people are like a Slinky; they aren't good for anything, but they make you smile when you push them down the stairs.
  
• Isn't life beautiful? Isn't life gay? Isn't life the perfect way to spend the time of day? (hurl!)
  

The UN has a resolution that relates to the Falklands - this is where the law stands. The resolution is not implemented because Argentina refuses to co-operate, which is a fate all too common for UN resolutions. Notwithstanding we have a legal decision. It is tidy in law.

Ecomomics are less tidy. Prior to the Falklands War the Falkland Islands were simply a drain on resources for the UK. The war was expensive (I'm making just the economic calculation). The peace has been even more expensive. The UK has had very substantial costs. Exploration for oil is so far another cost. But suddenly there is a possibility that it may all change. If commercial oil is found there can be little doubt that the UK would pop the champagne cork. Drilling rights could be sold very quickly (and the money might be big enough to transform the UK's finances). The asset would boost the UK's credit worthiness making us that bit safer from potential bond market catastrophe.

The UK is not terribly bothered about what Brazil thinks. We export more to little Ireland than Brazil, Russia, India and China combined. Already the primary air supply route to the Falklands is from Chile (not Argentina) while the UK-Ascension-Falkland route is in frequent use (I think it is weekly). If Argentina and Brazil behave they are obvious locations for refineries and obvious markets for the oil. If they don't the refining can be done on the Falklands, supplies come from Chile and even South Africa. The only real threat they have is invasion. And the UK has just concluded a 50 year defence alliance with France, a nation which like the UK has vulnerable islands all over the world.

But midlifebear, what is the rationale for Argentina's claim? You gave some nice background info and a good overview of the socio-economic relationship between the UK and Argentina, but is there some alternate reason Argentina still claims the islands other than the legacy of the defunct junta? If the oil isn't recoverable and you already have better sheep, why bother?

Argentina is a country whose phenotype is probably whiter than the UK!

The last time I looked, the average Falkland Islander created $10,000 more wealth than an Argentinian.

Argentina didn't give a toss about the Falklands in 1933, & were delighted with British help...

Roca

I think it would be nice if the Argentines paid for the clearance of the 20,000 landmines that are still a risk to people, sheep & penguins alike!

As far as I'm aware NOT ONE country hasn't been pillaged, raped, & resettled. Big deal.

However, not one baby was ever born during the illegal early 19th century Argentine Falklands prison settlement.

There have been thousands born since.

Freedom for Greenland?

Bluntly, the reason Argentina claims the Malvinas is mostly symbolic and comes from the failed foreign policies foisted upon powerless Argentines who suffered from under military juntas and their relations with the UK and the USA. But no one down here is in a big huff and protesting against either country. The old wound does, however, make the news in the UK and USA about once a year. Down here it's just business a usual. There have not been any giant rampaging "manifestaciones" in the streets in Buenos Aires about retaking the Malvinas.

But there is a general anti-Anglophile sentiment shared among the citizens of the MERCOSUR countries (South America's version of a Southern Common Market). They believe, and there seems to be some truth to it, that as long as the UK and USA stay away from messing with the internal affairs of these countries the better off everyone will be. The Kirchners secured cordial, but distant relations with the USA when Nestor took office.

When George W. showed up basically uninvited to a world conference on Southern Hemisphere issues, President Kirchner insisted that the US President. would be accorded no more security than any other head of state in attendance. So, while the other heads of state were housed in the luxury of 5 star hotels in Mar del Plata and wined and dined by the Kirchners, George W. slept on and stayed close to Air Force One. "Fuera Bush" signs were everywhere and protestors enjoyed chanting the same in the streets of Buenos Aires, Córdoba, and Mar del Plata. He was a symbol of his father's ill-fated relations with Argentina. George W. barely stayed 24 hours in Argentina and flew directly back to the USA. Nestor's widow who is the current president, Cristina Kirchner, was invited along with other leaders (most notably Lula de Silva who just finished 8 years as president of Brazil) to meet Mr. and Mrs Obama. She showed up as a solid member of the MERCOSUR contingency and relations with the USA are a bit more cordial than before. It's worth mentioning that Obama is regarded as a major improvement in the USA and he is very popular among all South Americans, with the exception of Hugo Chavez. And even Chavez no longer sabre rattles as much as he did when Bush was President. And Chavez's "close" South American allies basically regard him as a tragic blow hard. But he is their blow hard who will be dealt with by them, the allied South American countries. The USA can ignore Chavez and South America will deal with him if and when necessary.

But one of the things Argentines have difficulty understanding is how the USA could have supported the military juntas for so long rather than pay attention to the crass human rights violations that took place during the military regimes. It wasn't a big secret that the Argentine military had illegally wrested control of a democracy that usually worked until the Juan Peron's second wife was pushed into the role of president in the 70s. It was the USA that pleaded with Argentina at the end of WWII to spread as much foreign aid as possible to war torn Europe. Read up on Eva Peron's "great" world tour where countries were thrilled she showed up with bucket loads of cash, but many wouldn't shake her hand. Those glory days when Argentina had one of the world's treasuries with the deepest pockets are long gone. And it was basically the act of trying to be a good world neighbor to help rebuild Europe that was the beginning of the end of Argentina's prosperity.

As with most South American countries, the emerging democracies had to compete and were easily corrupted by world banks and world corporate money -- just like the USA is held hostage by corporate interests today.

But the Malvinas suddenly became a symbol of foreign countries and foreign financial interests having more influence over the sovereignty and fate of Argentina than the Argentines, themselves. So, again with the Malvinas it's really a symbolic attachment. As some UK posters probably know the Malvinas were at one time offered (for a price) to Argentina and Argentina didn't bite. It appeared no one wanted the craggy rocks. And that's exactly what they are, windy craggy rocks without much topsoil. But a great place if you like UK-style welfare and sheep.

As I mentioned, the majority of Argentines didn't want to go to war for something they saw less important than rebuilding the country's democracy. And prior to the military juntas' stupidity of sending off poorly prepared and under supplied soldiers to do something that no one except the military wanted, the residents of the Malvinas historically came to Argentina, especially Buenos Aires, for health care and a bit of X-mas shopping. Those days are long gone.

Jason has stated that there is oil in and around the Malvinas. He's not been too keen on mentioning that to date the quality of that petroleum is incredibly expensive to get at as well as not a very good grade. It's more like hardened tar mixed with pebbles rather than something that can bubble up as the sweet crude oil did so magnificently 50 miles off shore in the Gulf of Mexico. But there are some very strict limitations on the available oil fields in the South Atlantic. BP, which is one of the major players looking for more crude oil down here, has at least one hand tied behind its back because of the pristine fisheries that exist and UN laws reigning in oil production and/or anything -- especially over fishing -- that will affect the environment. Still, oil companies are hoping to find something, eventually, that will not cost $150 a barrel to get to market. And there has been a great deal of drilling going on.

[Just an aside: within the USA, especially in the Four Corners area, there are plenty of oil fields of this same type of gravel oil. It is better than oil shale, but not by much. The US petroleum companies have yet to exploit these similar resources. And they don't even have to drill very deep. If you ever take a water raft trip down the San Juan River you'll be surprised at the constant smell of raw crude the permeates the desert air of the canyons as you flot along. And a slightly better grade of the stuff can be sniffed and even touched in down town Los Angeles at the corner of Wilshire and LaBrea. Just thought I'd mention that.]

The best oil fields that have yet to be pillaged are those just off of Argentina's southern coast within Argentina's waters and there is lots of interest in the northern Provinces of Jujuy and Formosa. It's also worth noting that if, in fact, global warming continues and the world's ocean levels rise, there will most likely not be a collection of craggy, windy rocks called anything. The Malvinas are barely above sea level. An island fort 200 kilometers off of Argentina's coast east of the entrance of the Rio del Plata is has already turned into a slushy brine swamp just within the last 10 years. the fort, which still belongs to Argentina, is just too wet to maintain. The Argentine government is more interested in fixing pot holes and keeping the system of auto pistas working smoothly. The Malvinas may suffer the same fate as that slushy old fort.

As for Europe, the UK and the USA being important allies for the MERCOSUR countries, it's important to realize they joined up to show that the UK, USA, and Europe are not that important. Spain is still a huge trading partner. China buys all of the soy beans farmers in Argentina and Uruguay can produce. And Brazil is doing just fine at the moment as the only country in the world that will be running on almost 100% bio fuels for its energy needs. The Peugots, Renaults, Citroens, Fords, and Chevrolets built locally in nearby provinces can all run on 100% alcohol. Brazil is quite happy to do business with the UK and USA, but there are plenty of other trading partners in the world with stable currencies ready and waiting to become trade partners.

In Argentina, it's just the management of corporate and union corruption that needs to be choreographed so there is always enough newsprint, fuel for automobiles, beef, chicken, fish, milk and cereal for Argentines to remain well fed and continue to improve their lot. All of the public transit systems are privately owned. And during Menem's reign as a womanizing fool, someone thought it would be a good idea to sell off the City of Buenos Aires' public water utility to private French interests. It wasn't such a good idea. They are working on coming up with a viable means of buying it back.

And it's worth noting that like the UK, when there is a union strike or a major problem with picketing (most recently, the workers of the trains leaving Congresso train station destroyed the place and cut the electrical lines stranding tens of thousands of people) no bullets are fired. No one is shot for being loud and dissident. The police and army just push and herd the loud angry masses into pockets of dissent and contain them. Back in the 1980s the military government would have simply slaughtered everyone with automatic weapons while the USA and UK looked on and said "Tsk, tsk.". Everyone down here complains of the work stoppages, strikes, and mass protests, but no one complains that anyone should be killed for exercising their right to public assembly and free speech.

I'm sure it's no surprise to anyone that the USA and the UK have never had a problem telling Central and South Americans how to live and who should be their leaders. It's a flaming miracle that a democratic Chile made it out from under the thumb of Pinochet. Allende, the legal democratically elected president who was overthrown by a combination of US "advisors" and opposition leaders wasn't any better or worse than Pinochet. But even in Chile (which is definitely not a great ally of Argentina) the sentiment toward the USA, UK and Europe is "keep your hands off." Although most agree, including Chile, that Chile is in the back pocket of the USA's foreign policy machine. Argentina, not so much.

Despite my own dislike of monarchs, wether they be benign or malignant, the ring tone on my mobile phones is the recording of Spain's King Juan Carlos yelling at Hugo Chavez several years ago during a Hispano World Conference "¡¿Por qué no te calles?!" Chavez continued to rave on about socialist brotherhood or some nonsense and kept interrupting Spain's Zapatero, not letting him finish a sentence. Unlike some other country's HRHs I could mention, Juan Carlos was ready and willing to throw a direct punch at Chavez. And Chavez did shut up. Gotta admire that. Anyway, my mobile ring tone always attracts knowing grins and chuckles when my phone goes off in my pants pocket.

• If you think that you're so smart, you just may be a work of art! -- Burma Shave
• Some people are like a Slinky; they aren't good for anything, but they make you smile when you push them down the stairs.
  
• Isn't life beautiful? Isn't life gay? Isn't life the perfect way to spend the time of day? (hurl!)
  

Juan Carlos got a lot of respect for that remark. He said what had been on everyone else's mind for a long time, (and got away with it because he's the f***ing king of Spain). Argentina does substantially more trade with MERCOSUR than the US, but there is still about 9.7bn in total imports and exports, making the US their 3rd largest trade partner, behind China and Brazil, so I wouldn't send the ambassador packing quite yet. For some reason, perhaps because of the roles played by Bolivar, O'Higgins et. al., South American militaries have always viewed themselves as custodians of the state, ready to safeguard it and pick up the pieces when corrupt or weak civilian governments fail.

Photos (3)

Midlife> You have a great depth of information regarding one side of the story and I would not question it, as you confirmed many of my suspicions about the root of the matter in the first place. However, I totally disagree with your attitude that people in the US are so much less intelligent than others and they believe what they are told (that is my analysis of your statements and prose). In sum it is that attitude which you present damages some of your stock with me.

Ultimately my friend I agree to disagree and make no bones about the fact going back to the original posters question of how Americans felt.

This US version of a North American feels like this: Argentina lost the moral high ground in 1982 when they used force to "liberate" the Falklands. Any hope the Argentine government had of negotiating or winning the hearts and minds of the British people on the island were lost. The US has as much right to defend it's allies as any other nation. If your nation exercises a military option then it should expect a reciprocal response. As an American tax payer I expect my government to back its allies, otherwise our credibility sucks worse than it already does. Especially allies that didn't just lend lip service to the Global War on Terror post 911, but actually acted upon it. Blood is thicker than water, and the UK has been shedding it with the US since the Boxer Rebellion.

Argentina at the end of the day has to live with the fact the, the nations leadership made poor decisions (much like your friend GW Bush did for us) and you should probably just let sleeping dogs lay. Who knows, seventy five years from now the islands will probably be a protectorate or have a commonwealth relationship with Argentina anyway after Argentina recovers from all of its hardships and the UK feels a level of comfort with the government.

I doubt the US ambassador does much. His name rarely, if ever makes the papers. But it's amusing you should bring him up. The US Embassy which is within half a mile of my piso is an ominous two-storey steel and black glass curtain architecture modernist construction with more antennae than a flying saucer convention. I've had to use their notary services a couple of times. But you're never allowed into the hallowed secret black steel and glass building. Predictably, you line up and go through several layers of security only to take a number and sit in what looks like every damn department of motor vehicles office in the USA. It's bland, celieatex ceilings with recessed florescent lighting, and rows of orange and green molded fiber glass chairs.

But just walking around the Recoleta neighborhood you can visit the UK Embassy (classy and old), take a tour of Italy's Embassy, and drop in on the fun folks of Leichtenstein (sp?). There was a time when Argentines were trying to revive the Parisienne architecture of the belle epoch --- up until the early 1940s. But it's all poured cement. God forbid there should ever be an earthquake in this city. Millions will die.

• If you think that you're so smart, you just may be a work of art! -- Burma Shave
• Some people are like a Slinky; they aren't good for anything, but they make you smile when you push them down the stairs.
  
• Isn't life beautiful? Isn't life gay? Isn't life the perfect way to spend the time of day? (hurl!)
  

Photos (4)

So is Arizona and Texas- and Florida. But that's besides the point. States like Mississippi and Alabama are kept afloat through federal largesse, mainly from states like- yes- California, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, etc. Blue states- liberal states. Last time I checked, for every $1.00 that California sends to the federal government, it gets something in the range of $0.75-$0.80. FOr every dollar, it gets 75 or 80 cents back. Want to cut the budget? Let's start by cutting the amount of pork states like Alabama and West Virginia get back.

I'm not a size queen- but I do like their boyfriends

LOL.

LOLOL.

Oh, the fate of the Falklands? Sorry. Just can't get worked up about the fate of 3000 sheep farmers today.

Anyway, except for Lady Margaret's excursion, I thought Brittania gave up on her dreams of empire long ago.

Now if you're going to exhume her boyfriend Ronny, I might buy a ticket.

Hello from Argentina, that is in America, so we too are Americans.
Sorry for my english.

The UN policy is to end with the colonies in the world.
"The Falklanders are 100% British" of course man, if they are occupying the territory! With that argument, we can send 3500 people in a boat to the islands, make and election and easy resolved! That's not about 1982, but british occupation in 1833. Before that the first settlement was a French one, that after give that to Spain. In the middle, british come and gone, after agreements with Spain, and after the spanish themself leave too. Then Argentina goes and take sovereignty. And here we go again to 1833 when british occupied military the islands, claiming an inexisting sovereignty for them (and kicking out argentinians).


The geographic element (important for the decolonization UN policy) adds to the historical. Your comparison with Alaska is tricky, since USA get that not just by an election from alaskans, or i am wrong? The same (and worst) about New Mexico, Texas, etc. If Canada had had people in Alaska and the U.S. had kicked out then, that would be a good comparison.

Well, certainly it matter to the British, didn't they?
More from the geographic element: the island are in the argentinian maritime platform. Imagine if we go to a Canadian island uninhabited (they have a lot of islands) and claim argentinian sovereignty, it's obviously ridiculous!
For "all sides" oil matters. Remembers all that about invading Irak for weapons they never found? Oil, oil, oil...
Also, matters the strategic position in the world for future conflicts.

1982 war nothing have to do with any discution about the claims for sovereignty, it's hard to understand? and yes, they "displacing anybody" in the XIX century. The recent plebiscites are ridiculous, is like we make one in Buenos Aires to get under british kingdom! they are british occupants, is obvios what they will vote!
Of course it were a despotic government in 1982, but that is also funny to say, like if Thatcher had not been despotic in his own way, in many ways! But, i repeat, 1982 war nothing have to do with any discution about the claims for sovereignty, 1982 war nothing have to do with any discution about the claims for sovereignty, 1982 war nothing have to do with any discution about the claims for sovereignty


I agree with some and and disagree with oter things you said, however they are about things that have nothing to with Malvinas subject, but i just wanna tell you that the 2010 census gives a 40 million population.

LMAO what some people thinks...

Dear sixinch: I get where you're coming from. I really do. However, the USA had Argentina convinced we were its ally for decades. It was our non action that came as a surprise to the military government running things down here in 1982.

I would suggest you do some reading regarding Henry Kissinger's advice, in 1976, given to Argentina's military regime. The USA heavily subsidized Argentina's military dictatorships with lots of US Dollars. Kissinger encouraged the military to get the "dirty war" over and done with ASAP so the US House and Senate would continue to support the junta. This escalated two things: 1.the continued assassinations of labor leaders, any anti-junta activist, journalists, students, etc., and 2. the belief by the last junta that one back scratched the other and that surely in 1982 the USA would back it's fight for the Malvinas, because the military government had been a valuable ally helping its great friend, the USA, displace Daniel Ortega as "the evil socialist/communist" leader in Honduras. Today, thanks to Reagan, Oliver North who was pardoned by Reagan for crimes against the Honduran government that included arms and drug smuggling while he served in the US Military, is considered a great patriot and 'Mericuhn hero with his own conservative anti-Obama radio talk show. Of course, Ollie North was getting his marching orders from Reagan under the advice of the US Military. And he's considered a great 'Mericuhn hero 'cause that's what 'Mericuhns have been told, not because they know any better.

Last I checked, Daniel Ortega ran for President of Honduras a few years ago and is still the sitting president. Things have may changed since I last paid much attention. I've been avoiding Honduras because they have a serious problem with Denque fever. Sorry, but I have little faith in the general understanding of my fellow countrymen regarding world politics.

I was reading this morning a bit about the collapse of the Argentine economy in 2001. Paul Krugman, in today's NY Times, blames the collapse on Argentina pegging the Peso to the US Dollar and taking huge loans from the IMF in the early 1990s. He completely overlooks the fact that then President Menem (he was originally a Muslim, but converted to Catholicism to ensure political popularity and winning the presidency) used the Argentine Treasury as his personal checking account. Menem is fondly remembered for big gestures, such as handing over the cash to build the largest mosque in South America. And it really is beautiful, situated between Jumbo (a wildly popular shopping and grocery store experience) and the US Embassy. But when he left office, the Treasury, which had once been able to back every Peso with a US Dollar, didn't have enough Dollars to back the Peso. Most of Menem's minions are still living quite well in the Province of Buenos Aires and Spain. Menem lived, for a time, in Paraguay after he stepped down from the Presidency. There was no extradition policy at that time between Paraguay and Argentina. However, Menem and his minions could have done the right thing and put economic austerity measures in place to stabilize the economy rather than open their arms and willingly be drowned in IMF money which they abused with conscientious malfeasance. Krugman seems to have missed that part in his understanding of the Argentine economy and it's eventual collapse in 2001 -- a time when 9/11 was certainly a shocking event to Argentines, but not as shocking as having their entire middle class wiped out overnight. Argentina is not harboring Al Qaeda terrorists in the milongas of San Telmo, Barrio Norte, Recoleta or Palermo.

Menem lives somewhere in a northern province enjoying his old age and a multimillion income from off shore banking accounts (actually, Uruguay, the best kept secret for those wanting to launder and hide money from any government).

And dear Jason: You'll love this. Krugman makes arguments for four economic scenarios regarding the future of the Eurozone and he calls one of them "Doing an Argentina."

• If you think that you're so smart, you just may be a work of art! -- Burma Shave
• Some people are like a Slinky; they aren't good for anything, but they make you smile when you push them down the stairs.
  
• Isn't life beautiful? Isn't life gay? Isn't life the perfect way to spend the time of day? (hurl!)
  

In the words of the dead late night TV host Johnny Carson, "I did not know that!" Sorry for the mixup. Last I paid any attention or heard about a census was last year and I was given to understand it would take place in 2011. But you're quite right about the best way to settle the Malvinas issue: simply send 3,500 porteños on vacation to the islands. Have them apply for residency, put them up in tents, and force a coup by referendum vote. Sadly, it can't be that simple, but I like the idea.

As for anyone wanting to disagree with me, Marcelo has the floor. After all, I'm only down here to support my legal husband as he cares for his mother and extended family. I'd prefer to be back home in Santa Margarida outside of Barcelona. And my knowledge of Argentine politics doesn't come from reading Wikipedia. It comes from sitting at the corner cafe each morning, reading Clarín (I'm addicted to Nelly), and listening to the local bronca regarding lovely Buenos Aires. And Buenos Aires really is quite lovely in many ways -- unless you live in Once. (That last bit was meant as a gentle joke. If you've been to the barrio/neighborhood you understand.)

• If you think that you're so smart, you just may be a work of art! -- Burma Shave
• Some people are like a Slinky; they aren't good for anything, but they make you smile when you push them down the stairs.
  
• Isn't life beautiful? Isn't life gay? Isn't life the perfect way to spend the time of day? (hurl!)
  

Photos (3)

Going back to my original quote or my first post to this string, part of the problem I identified was the failed US Foreign policy through the 70's (while I did not identify Argentina, I noted the problems with Nicaragua and Iran). We were notorious for backing the dictator of the week. IMO if anything our lack of not backing the UK probably gave Argentinians the tacit green light. We were still terrified of another Vietnam and thought that confronting the Soviets through proxies was the way to go. Argentina and the UK going to blows didn't fit the intelligence, dogma or doctrinal flavor of the week. I believe it caught the US with trousers around ankles.

I am very much familiar with the operations, doings, undoings, deeds and misdeeds in Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Panama, from first hand experience.

I can assure you that the US are not the only ones with dirty hands in that part of the world. No; we don't always guess right.

Daniel Ortega was the Sandinista President of Nicaragua, not Honduras. We (the US) ran Contras out of Honduras in an effort to overthrow him. Ultimately he collapsed on his own and was re-elected later (post Reagan) in 2007. There are issues with the Honduran government now, but I am not fully aware of the particulars as I have not operated there in some time.

North was an overambitious dick at best, that did and still does greatly exaggerate his role in history. He is an embarrassment to the military.

The UN position is set out in a series of resolutions:
Falkland Islands Information Portal - History - UN Resolutions

They boil down to the people of the Falklands have the absolute right to decide on their future.

The most simple status quo solution is that the Falklands have a measure of independence with foreign policy and defence handled by the UK. Also possible is that the Falklands may seek integration within a UK county (as for example the Isles of Scilly are part of the County of Cornwall) and therefore be an integral, non-colonial part of the UK, part of a UK electoral constituency. (In many ways this would be the best solution as colonial status is increasingly problematic. It would also send a clear message to any aggressor that the UK regards the Falklands as an integral part). Just about unthinkable is that the Falklands would vote to joint Argentina.

If Argentina disagrees with the outcome of the UN deliberations then Argentina must resolve that through the UN. Right now we have an unresolved conflict because Argentina is not willing to abide by the result of a referendum held on the Falklands. In international law it is Argentina that is not in compliance.

Oil extraction is not commercial at the moment. This is the big uncertainty - it is possible that a commercial deposit will be discovered soon. The legal position is that the oil belongs to the Falklanders, which in the context of their determination to remain British means that the UK would benefit.