Falklands War - the real reason for 1000 dead

peacenik | 04.02.2010 00:47 | Ecology | World

28 years after the Falklands War the real reason for the war is emerging: OIL

Mainstream news reports show that oil companies are flocking into the Falkland Islands 28 years after 1000 Argentinian and British soldiers were killed in war there.

For example:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-03/u-k-says-no-doubt-on-falklands-after-argentina-row-update2-.html

One of the companies involved is Desire Petroleum PLC. The founder of this company, Colin Phipps, boasted of being in the "war room" with Margaret Thatcher during the Falklands War.

When Colin Phipps died in January 2009 his son, Stephen Phipps, took over as chairman.

More background info here:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/2009/12/03/swansea-raised-oil-man-colin-phipps-predicted-falklands-bonanza-91466-25310294/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/4528103/Colin-Phipps.html

peacenik

Comments

Hide the following 11 comments

Bullshit

04.02.2010 00:54

You could say something like that about anything

Bullshit

Wouldn't surprise me

04.02.2010 08:14

But the main reason was always the megalomanic Thatcher's desire to hang onto power at all costs. Why isn't that bastard dead yet?

Oh, and bullshit - nice analysis there :/

Concerned of Halton Moor

news

04.02.2010 10:00

And in more topical, up to date news....

The crusades.....missing records in King Johns own hand.......it was always about the oil rights.

28 years later!!!!!

we will also gloss over the whole " the entire population of the Falklands wanted to stay British" I know that being taken over by a dictatorial facist reigme makes for great stuff to whinge about but the history of the whole thing eventually resulted in the fall of a nasty facist government in latin america.

Or is this a bad thing I get confused on here

anon

Wasn't it always know that Argentina invaded for the natural resources?

04.02.2010 10:42

I thought it was always known that the reason Argentina invaded the Falklands was for its natural resources?

I hate the military and the UK government as much as anyone, but we have to remember that Argentina did start this one, unlike the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Well, you could argue that Iraq invaded Kuwait before the first Iraq war, but it wasn't invading UK territory.

Let's not get into an us versus them thing, the UK and Argentinian govts are both scum, and it's us the ordinary people who always suffer for what they do.

anon

How does it feel to be the mother of a thousand dead?

04.02.2010 14:16

"How does it feel to be the mother of a thousand dead?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1642768
(Lyrics by Crass from 1982)

The song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIDdvnHQrjk

cr@ss

Falklands is in South America

04.02.2010 15:00

Wasn't maintaining a poorly defended British colony in another hemisphere, just an exocet's throw from the South American mainland, asking for trouble? Recent relations and movements between the territories indicate a more realistic appraisal of where the Falklands
economic interests need to be concentrated.

The Generals embarked on a war of re-occupation, daring the British to respond, hoping to solidify support for their vicious and militaristic regime and divert attention from domestic crisis. So the inevitable: the deaths of many British and Argentine soldiers, and three Falklands civilians.

Of course, the British could have handed the Falklands over to the Yanks in the 1950’s and
forced the inhabitants to settle elsewhere like they did with Diego Garcia.

Malvin

Can any one of you Nationalist Pigs

04.02.2010 15:29

even begin to explain in what way an island off the coast of Argentina can be seen as UK territory. It should belong to the UK as much as India or indeed any of the old Empire which suffered (and continues to) at the hands of UK barbarity.

@T

05.02.2010 00:40

as long as you mean ALL nationalist pigs, Argentinian as well as British.

Mano de Dios

That goes without saying

05.02.2010 09:25

Nationalism is a social plague which affects all countries and not just one. What is probably most annoying is the underlying Nationalism of certain 'let wing' elements, who attempt to justify the Falklands war as a necessity in defending the sovereignty of Britain. The Malvides were yet another forceful acquisition by the British Empire and can no more be considered British territory than Australia, India, or Zimbabwe. Of course Britain never really gave up control of most of the commonwealth territories but that is a different story.

if my memory serves me right ......

05.02.2010 16:00

...... there was a story in the independant on exactly this subject.
It was published about 6 months BEFORE the falklands fiasco.

And then there were/are the persistent rumours that south georgia was in fact invaded by the SBS in disguise to kickstart the conflict.

anon

beyond OT's and nationalisms

20.12.2011 18:56

think about these issues:

*over-fishing in falkladns surrounding waters
*massive penguin deaths of penguins in the islands and healthy ones in near patagonia
*permanent military threat over people in the whole region (both argentines and islanders)
*nuclear weapons sunk and severe leak danger
*minefields
*permanent refusal of Briths govts. to solve this problem in accordance to UN rules.
*media "de-information" maneuvres from MercoPress (web) and Penguin News (the ONLY and weekly newspaper, if you don't know that).
*a few falklanders in neighbour argentina living normal lives (i know one of them). no discrimination cases known.

think!

riverplatewriter