MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Why the Falkland Islands are British
By Graham Pascoe - On April 24 it was reported in the Guardian and the Telegraph in London that President Trump has asked the Pentagon to “review Britain’s claim to the Falkland Islands”, as a possible “punishment” for Britain’s unwillingness to support his war on Iran. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWell said Graham!
May 05th, 2026 - 10:22 am - Link - Report abuse +290 years of silence from Buenos Aires until an unpopular government made up a fantasy to distract the Argentine people, repeated by an evil murdering military Junta, and the fanatics believe every bit of BS that they are fed.
May 05th, 2026 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse +3hahahahah the great liar:
May 05th, 2026 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Rosas 1849 address to the Legislature is of key importance, having been made a month after the signature of the Arana-Southern Treaty. The address relates in detail the negotiations that resulted in the signature of the agreement.
“The Government pays serious attention to the pending claims of the Republic before Great Britain for the unjustifiable retention of the Malvinas Islands (...) The government fully approved the well-founded complaint and protest of the Argentine minister against the inaccurate assertions of HM’s minister of foreign affairs and expressed that, through that protest it supported, as it should have and as it had to verify in any case, the proper rights of the Argentine Confederation in the Malvinas Islands, against the renewed disregard of HM’s Minister of foreign affairs, who made the unfounded supposition that the correspondence had ceased by reason of acquiescence on the part of the Confederation or of both parties, according to the different versions that appeared in the newspapers (...) the Government ordered its Minister that when discussing this, he always uphold the same principles and base himself on the same facts that resulted from the correspondence followed on this topic, and transmitted other orders for upholding the unquestionable rights of the Confederation in the Malvinas islands.
Evidence That Argentina Dropped its Claim to the Falklands After 1850: https://www.academia.edu/165761012/Evidence_That_Argentina_Dropped_its_Claim_to_the_Falklands_After_1850
May 05th, 2026 - 02:02 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Rosas, huh? You mean the monster that established a dictatorship backed by state terrorism?
May 05th, 2026 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not to mention the repressive Mazorca, an armed parapolice that killed thousands of citizens to establish a cult of personality? Yeah, great choice of “source.” BWAHAHAHA!
Poor liar, he asks why the islands are British and couldn't give a single reason, not one! He gets lost in words explaining the incident in an Argentine town on Argentine territory, which in no way supports the false British claim.
May 05th, 2026 - 03:49 pm - Link - Report abuse -2You know, Graham? The islands were never British, and no lie can hide that truth.
The only liar on this thread is you and your idiotic fantasy, their is not one shred of evidence that supports Argentinas claim and you know that, in 1982 Haig offered the chance for Galtieri to take it to court to settle it, he refused, he knew dam well you had no case, you are an embarrassment to this site, and an embarrassment to your family and an embarrassment to your country, seek medical help asap and a family intervention. and then all the white implanted stock in Argentina should leave and leave it too the few natives that are left after the genocide you committed.
May 05th, 2026 - 04:06 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Genocide? Another british moralist? Britons who have exterminated entire populations around the world, Foster, please, don't make me laugh...
May 05th, 2026 - 04:19 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Malvi, what the F,,,ck is wrong with you, you have put your case forward 100s of times, it holds no water, it is been debunked so many times but you continue with this ridiculous nonsense. it achieves nothing other than to make you look like a burk. you only see what you want to see, so many false statements you have posted, so many distortions some of which are so ridiculous a 10 year old can see through it, ignoring historically recorded facts, claiming things for Spain that they themselves have never claimed, oh and who did Britain exterminate ? Spain .Portugal. Netherlands, Belgium, France, Germany, Rome, Ottoman Empire, Russian Empire. Chinese Empire. Mongol Empire. Japanese Empire etc all conquered and did bad things, as did you, how many natives are left ? how many black people are left ? Everyone is laughing at you, wake up and grow up, it doesnt matter what you think or believe, its irrelevant,
May 05th, 2026 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Malvi, the Spanish killed many millions in the Americas alone. Did you grow up speaking Spanish? Why not do the honorable thing? It could save the rest of us the time wasted reading your veritable fount of prevarication. Just a thought...
May 05th, 2026 - 04:58 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Malvinense 1833
May 05th, 2026 - 06:35 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Come back when you can find one, just one piece of international law that Argentina can put before an international court that supports her Falklands claim.
Malv
May 05th, 2026 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Your rebuttal of Mr Pascoe’s article is, less than convincing, to say the least.
And your reply’s, in particular ‘exterminated entire populations’, oh like the ‘Conquest of the Desert’, perchance?
And then, however you try and spin the history story prior, the:
‘“Perfect friendship” naturally ruled out the existence of any dispute between the two countries.’
Is the Coup de Grace.
Pugol, Graham is a great liar. You can have differences, but continuing to insist on the same thing when it has been proven with solid evidence that he is wrong makes me lose respect for him.
May 06th, 2026 - 11:53 am - Link - Report abuse -3Henry Wheaton:
”The effect of a treaty of peace is to put an end to the war and to abolish the subject of it. It is an agreement to waive all discussion concerning the respective rights and claims of the parties and to bury in oblivion the original causes of the war.”
“If an abstract right be in question between the parties, on which the treaty of peace is silent, it follows, that all previous complaints and injury, arising under such claim are thrown into oblivion, by the amnesty necessarily implied, if not expressed; but the claim itself is not thereby settled either one way or the other. In the absence of express renunciation or recognition it remains open for future discussion.
“The treaty of peace does not extinguish claims founded upon debts contracted or injuries inflicted previously to the war, and unconnected with its causes, unless there be an express stipulation to that effect.”
Is the Coup de Grace.
Regards.
Fortunately., Malvi, as ,my last post indicates, it is you who are the greatest liar, and your continuing attempts to draw away from that fact merely underlines the despicable quality of your emissions. Once, again here's a little ditty for you...
May 06th, 2026 - 03:23 pm - Link - Report abuse +1https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgFrs5wxcw0
imoyaro
May 06th, 2026 - 03:35 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Besides saying that Rosas was a dictator and sending songs, you haven't contributed anything; you haven't been able to refute anything I wrote about the Malvinas. You should keep quiet; just a thought
Actually I have, I recognize that you are posting lies, and am giving you the response you deserve I will continue to mock your assertion that what you are posting is true. Your print proves nothing other than the fact that you are capable of lying continuously. Not only that, you represent a country that has been run by dictators more than once, (Where are Peron's hands?) and Peronism has morphed into a “left wing” form of kleptocracy which will no doubt return to power. Suffice it to say your argument about laws has not washed in the courts. That leaves you as an individual who should at best be mocked, and you certainly provide the material. But as you seemingly wish to be taken in a more serious vein, I shall refer to you as “Malevolence.” I do hope that helps. ;)
May 06th, 2026 - 04:06 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Every single oner of your pathetic claims had been destroyed over the last 10 years, just had a look through pages from 8 years a go, your claim of inheritance is BS, no international law says that, the islands where not Spanish in the first place, and you where just a rebel break away region, nothing more, military power and only military power dictated what did and did not happen ,you claim the islands have never been British, that is the most absurd lie of all your lies. Spanish historical records refute that, you claim Britain occupied the islands clandestinely, yet both France say different both new they where British. you claimed Britain accepted Spanish and Portuguese authority over all South Atlantic, so far from the truth its laughable, you claim the Pope divided up South America, zero authority to do that and no other country followed it, you claimed Argentina protested every year after your illegal garrison was removed, not true they where leaving anyway as the business venture had collapsed as where the civilians from various countries, most where persuaded to stay, only 2 Uruguayans and 2 Brazilians left plus the wives and kids of the military who where desperate to leave, and their are much much more fabricated and distorted nonsense you have posted, it is fanatics like you that cause problems, lets just suppose 10% of what you claim is true, Britain and Argentina sit down to negotiate. what happens then ?,they collapse in seconds as Argentina demands the UK says eff off, end of talks but the Falklanders continue to live grow and prosper, any clown who believes Argentine media, Kohen-Rodriguez etc is nieve and conned,. your case is so full of holes that water streams out of it. what a pathetic poster you have turned on to, but you will be back in 10 mins with yet more excrement, its you that needs to get educated and counselling. and keep quiet.
May 06th, 2026 - 04:24 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Hmm. The Pope, Vernet, illegal garrison, two Uruguayans, two Brazilians, desperate to leave, collapsed business, just like Graham, lots of words but...
May 06th, 2026 - 05:10 pm - Link - Report abuse -3They still can't tell me how this supports the British argument, and what's worse, they can't tell me how the islands are British.
Hell of an argument, Malevolence. Looks like you were all over the place.. A pity the courts haven't taken your case seriously. Bummer, hey? ;)
May 06th, 2026 - 05:31 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Argentine fanatical tunnel visioned lunatic, the big difference everything can be confirmed with valid historical documents , if you bothered to get off your lazy ass and did some genuine research not the false propaganda created by loser Peron, and the make believe of K-R. how are the islands British ?. claimed in 1594, long before Spain tried to play games, reasserted the claim in 1690, and then again let the world know in 1745 that the islands where indeed British, nobody disputed this until silly political games started with the European powers, Britain continued to claim the islands, even when the military garrison left British business was sill conducted on the islands and ships regularly visited the island, where was Argentina when all this was happening ? you did not exist. over 150 years of settlement, just what evidence supports your claim ? inheritance ? lol. a Argie town ? most of the business people where not from the UP, Malevolence and excrement sums you up. time your wife divorced you as you dont live in reality and waste so many hours on your false drivel and a story that would not stand up in court, thats why Argentina refused Haigs invitation to take the case to court, something you continually brush over, just like you brush over what your country did in what is southern Argentina now. pathetic is an understatement, if i was a lawyer i would love to go against you in court it would be so fun, as many have said its time you grew up and woke up, but no more brown stuff will appear on your next post,
May 06th, 2026 - 06:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Malv
May 06th, 2026 - 10:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Humm, If I may suggest, take care to read legal English carefully, it means what it says and says exactly what it means, if it does not say it, it does not mean it.
Hence, ‘The treaty of peace does not extinguish claims founded upon debts contracted or injuries inflicted’.
The Malvinas is neither.
It is a territorial dispute, where:
Henry Wheaton's Elements of International Law, asserted (in text virtually unchanged through successive editions for 80 years):[68]
The treaty of peace leaves everything in the state in which it found it – according to the principle of uti possidetis – unless there be some express stipulation to the contrary. The existing state of possession is maintained, except so far as altered by the terms of the treaty. If nothing be said about the conquered country or places, they remain with the conqueror, and his title cannot afterwards be called in question. During the continuance of the war, the conqueror in possession has only a usufructuary right, and the latent title of the former sovereign continues, until the treaty of peace, by its silent operation, or express provisions, extinguishes his title for ever.
What you are quoting is not actually relevant to the issue, when you read it carefully and take the time to work out exactly it is saying.
Saludos
@Pug. most things he quotes are neither relevant or factual. the fact that after years and years of his so called evidence being exposed as false, he continues to repeat them. that is hardly normal behaviour , but sheer desperation to keep the Malvinas myth alive,
May 07th, 2026 - 10:37 am - Link - Report abuse +2Mr. Foster:
May 07th, 2026 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse -3....how are the islands British ?. claimed in 1594, long before Spain tried to play games, reasserted the claim in 1690...
Pascoe and Pepper recognise that the Malvinas were not discovered by English sailors.
they recognise that many decades before, Iberian sailors sighted the islands, with Spanish sailors spending months in the Malvinas, and that the islands already appeared on a variety of maps.
Pascoe, Graham and Pepper, Peter, pag. 5.
....and then again let the world know in 1745 that the islands where indeed British...
1749 Admiral Anson
Ricardo Wall, who immediately protested:
...if the purpose of the trip was to establish settlements in the islands, that would be construed as a hostile act towards Spain, but if the purpose was to satisfy their curiosity, as much news as they wanted could be provided, without the need to incur such expenses merely out of curiosity...
Benjamin Keen:
...As establishing a colony in either of the two islands is not the intention and Her Majesty’s corvettes will not go ashore, they will not even get close to the Spanish coast, the King cannot understand that this plan can provoke resentment on Madrid’s part...
Ambassador Keen informed Bedford that the Spanish minister had told him:
he adverted to the inutility of pretending to a further examination of them and affirmed they had been long since first discovered and inhabited by the Spaniards; who called them the Islands de Leones from the number of sea lions on their coasts and that in the office books there were ample descriptions of the dimensions, properties, etc. If we did not intend to make any establishment there, what service could this knowledge be to us? We had no possessions in that part of the world, and consequently could want no passages or places to refresh in.
Who is the liar, Mr. Foster? Have the British brainwashed you, imoyaro?
Para muestra basta un botón, las islas jamás fueron británicas, son territorio argentino ocupado.
No, Malevolence, you have ! ;)
May 07th, 2026 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“..how are the islands British ?”
May 07th, 2026 - 04:04 pm - Link - Report abuse +2“Applying the rules concerning the mode of extinctive prescription to GB r
Regardless of the conclusion reached above, however, the establishment of the world courts changed the situation so that diplomatic protests were no longer sufficient to keep Argentina's claim to sovereignty alive. ”
Major James Francis Gravelle
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; Washington, D.C., Winter 1985
”On 17 June 1833 the first major protest by Argentina referred to the succession to Spanish rights as the basis of its claim. Spain's rights to the Falklands were, in turn, based upon the prior occupation by and purchase from France and by the abandonment of possession by Britain. Palmerston's response on 8 January 1834 was to refer to the communications that had taken place in 1770-1 as demonstrating no intention on the part of Britain of relinquishing its claim, and included the often quoted statement that “the Government of the United Provinces could not reasonably have anticipated that the British Government would permit any other State to exercise a right as derived from Spain, which Great Britain had denied to Spain itself”
P.35 Sovereignty and the Falkland Islands Crisis D.W. Greig
“A State which has ceased to exercise any authority over a territory cannot, by purely verbal protestations, indefinitely maintain its title against another which for a sufficiently long time has effectively exercised the powers and fulfilled the duties of sovereignty in it.''(Theory and Reality in International Law, de Visscher, 1957, p201).
I personally think that having Patagonia revert to Chile should be the real aim here. Oh well...
May 07th, 2026 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Once again Argentinian fanatic you are posting irrelevant and pointless drivel. absolutely nothing is taught to the British about the Falklands unlike you idiots that indoctrinate kids in school just like Hitler and chairman Mao did. what ever an admiral did or didnt say is irrelevant, its what the British government said that mattered. what we do is research properly and question our governments and call them out when they lie, the Spanish may have discovered the islands first, no one knows for certain but they where not the first to claim them. Britain was, as said before in those days it was military might that decided who owned what, not Spain or Rome to decide, so yes you continue to lie, where was Argentina when all this was going on ? answer ? . thats right you did not exist,. Britain has never ever accepted Spanish sovereignty over the Falklands and indeed eventually the Spanish agreed the islands where British, now like said before go on the facebook site you was told about and see the Argentine drawn maps that do not include the Falklands as their land. have you called out your people who claimed the Invincible was sank 6 times, have you questioned them about the claim the only one Argentine soldier died in the illegal invasion. or call out your soldiers who put guns to the heads of children. or put artillery at the side of the school. or painted hospital signs on buildings that where not hospitals, why not apolgise for that, so yes your country is indeed full of lies. propaganda and false hoods that people like you are so sucked in you could not see the truth if it bit you on the back side. i spoke to an Argentinian guy at a sporting event last year and he said quite clearly he is sick to death of people like you who perpetuate this rubbish, the islands have never been Argentinian, your claim is weaker than a tea bag with no tea in it, one Argie even claimed Vernet was evicted lol.
May 07th, 2026 - 05:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Malv
May 07th, 2026 - 11:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +2You quote 1594, 1690, 1754, 1749, and no mention of 1771 I notice. However, Argentina didn’t exist until what 1816, long after the issue was settled.
The only relevant date in Argentinian history about the Malvinas is 1850.
Malvi, even if your claims about Spain having recognised sovereignty over the Falklands is true which it is not by the way, what has that got to do with Argentina, and dont bother to come out with the bollocks of being a successor state as it laughable, grow up wake up and move on from this garbage,
May 08th, 2026 - 09:18 am - Link - Report abuse +1@Pugol
May 08th, 2026 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse -21771 is very simple. Prince Masserano declared in the name of His Catholic Majesty that the commitment to restore Fort and Port Egmont (to save English honor) should in no way affect Spain's prior right of sovereignty.
English honor was saved, and in exchange, the English withdrew, and the Spanish remained in possession of the islands. That was the agreement, and what ultimately happened; they cannot deny that historical fact.
From then until Palmerston's note, which they mention above, there were no claims.
@Jack London
Indeed, Argentina is the successor state to a Spanish province that was formerly called the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata.
It makes me laugh when they say that Argentina didn't exist. Of course it existed, not as the modern Argentina we know now, but it existed.
Buenos Aires existed, and you know what, Jack? It was a Spanish city.
Port Soledad in the islands was a Spanish settlement.
In this note, Graham mentions the possibility of independence for the islands. Do you know what that would mean? The islands would be the successor state to the United Kingdom. I hope I've been clear enough.
Regards.
Argentina did not exist, it wasnt even a name, just a rebel state that broke away from Spain called the United Provinces. no inheritance of any other territories that spoke Spanish, French, Dutch. Portuguese or English, did the US inherit Canada, Bermuda etc. did Argentina inherit Cuba Uruguay etc, did Jamaica inherit the Bahamas or Barbados, did Mexico inherit Columbia no. you inherited nothing you live in a dream world alternate facts , of course their was a Spanish settlement on the islands, which Britain did not recognise as valid, another lie, the English did not with draw, why you keep repeating this lie beggars belief, a stronger Spanish force removed the British, no agreement that gave British sovereignty up at all. Britain responded with the threat of war and and suddenly they backed down. Britain returned and an uneasy peace was observed, when the Spanish left they accepted the islands as British, yet more lies and distortions from Argie propaganda, still you havent answered the question about stealing southern Argentina or admitting your government lied through their teeth about the Invincible sinking or the death rate in the illegal invasion, or the evil behaviour of troops threatening children. and still havent answered why Argentina remained silent for 90 years, dont lie about that either, or why they have never took the case to court,
May 08th, 2026 - 12:24 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“1771 is very simple.” It sure is when your deliberate omission is revealed
May 08th, 2026 - 12:34 pm - Link - Report abuse +1”The Argentine 2007 pamphlets say (English p. 1, Spanish p. 4) that the agreement contained:... a Declaration by which Spain restored Port Egmont to the British in order to save the honour of the King of England, making express reservation of its [Spanish] sovereignty over the whole of the Malvinas Islands, and also of an Acceptance of this Declaration in which Great Britain remained silent as to the Spanish reservation of rights. A reservation of Spanish rights had originally been proposed in December 1770 during the negotiations, stating that the agreement “cannot prejudice the anterior rights of the king of Spain to those islands”, but at British insistence this was removed from the final text of the Anglo-Spanish agreement. The agreement as actually signed in London on 22 January 1771 merely stated:... that the engagement of his said Catholick Majesty [the king of Spain], to restore to his Britannick Majesty the possession of the port and fort called Egmont, cannot nor ought in any wise to affect the question of the prior right of sovereignty of the Malouine islands, otherwise called Falkland's Islands.
In other words, the question of the prior right of sovereignty was left as it had been before the dispute both countries' rights were left untouched, Britain's as well as Spain's.
Getting it right: the real history of the Falklands/Malvinas by Graham Pascoe and Peter Pepper
Moreover, Argentina is claim is excluded by the Peace and Friendship Treaty of Utrecht between Spain and Great Britain
ARTICLE VIII
“...it is hereby further agreed and concluded, that neither the Catholic King, nor any of his heirs and successors whatsoever, shall sell, yield, pawn, transfer, or by any means, or under any name, alienate from them and the crown of Spain, to the French, or to any other nations whatever, any lands, dominions, or territories, or any part thereof, belonging to Spain in America.”
@Terence
May 08th, 2026 - 01:10 pm - Link - Report abuse -1I honestly don't know if the British have been brainwashed or if it's simply ignorance or lack of knowledge.
...In other words, the question of the prior right of sovereignty was left as it had been before the dispute both countries' rights were left untouched, Britain's as well as Spain's.
Getting it right: the real history of the Falklands/Malvinas by Graham Pascoe and Peter Pepper...
Thomas Pownall´s statement in the British Parliament, on March 5th, 1771:
whatever may be the present ostensible form of the convention, mark well the end: It will end on our part either in the actual cession of the island or in a gradual direliction of it. Without some such idea as this; namely that as soon as reparation is made to our honour for the violent and hostile manner in which we were driven off that island, and as soon as we were put in a situation to evacuate it of our own motion, its tacitly understood we are to cede it. Without some such idea as this; the whole of the negotiation is inexplicable and unintelligible. But taking this line, as going to a matter mutually understood, the whole is plain, definite and but of one construction.
I suppose he had a bit more knowledge than Pascoe and Pepper, don't you think?
Regards.
“...reparation is made to our honour...”
May 08th, 2026 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +1There you have a very real problem. “Your” country has a long record of murdering not merely the indigenous but generation after generation of your own “Europeanoid” citizens. You have turned your country into a bloodbath every chance you get, and I suspect we will be seeing more headlines like this in the future...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_detention_center_(Argentina)
What honor?
Yet more long winded waffle from the Argie fanatic, Spain is not Argentina, Argentina has zero evidence to support its claim and the Argentine government knows that, they have always known it, whatever papers where signed and no matter how it is interpreted is meaningless. no British government has ever relinquished sovereignty and never accepted Spanish sovereignty either. the simple fact us British history predates Argentine history for over 100+ years. no lies can change that, what is important is the here and now, all the matters is the will of the islanders and it is their decision on what they want their home to be, it is enshrined in the UN (NO SPECIAL CASE, ARGENTINE PROTEST REJECTED) every white and black person on the American continent is implanted stock, especially the country that is 97% white and almost wiped out the natives. just a silly little Argentine man desperately clinging to scraps of information that make no difference to the true history, the here and now and the future of the Falklands,
May 08th, 2026 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“ honestly don't know ...”
May 08th, 2026 - 08:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +1'The British Foreign Secretary at the time, Lord Palmerston, ... ... On 27 July 1849, in reply to a question in the House of Commons, he said:
“... a claim had been made many years ago, on the part of Buenos Ayres, to the Falkland Islands, and had been resisted by the British Government. Great Britain had always disputed and denied the claim of Spain to the Falkland Islands, and she was not therefore willing to yield to Buenos Ayres what had been refused to Spain.” “The withdrawal of His Majesty's forces from these islands, in the year 1774, cannot be considered as invalidating His Majesty's just rights. That measure took place in pursuance of a system of retrenchment, adopted at that time by His Britannic Majesty's Government. But the marks and signals of possession and property were left upon the islands. When the Governor took his departure, the British flag remained flying, and all those formalities were observed which indicated the rights of ownership, as well as an intention to resume the occupation of that territory, at a more convenient season.”
Getting it right: the real history of the Falklands/Malvinas by Graham Pascoe and Peter Pepper
Malv
May 08th, 2026 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The evidence simply does not support your ‘version’ of 1771, not least a reading of the actual treaty.
But your missing, or avoiding, the point, as usual, which is 1771 was long before 1816.
You are arguing events long before Argentina ever existed.
Argentina is not Spain, Spain is not France, but the British claim predates all of them.
All this before you even get to the rights of the inhabitants, who Malv, by any measure, have at least as much right to be there as you have to be in Argentina, if not more.
And who said Thomas Pownall was right?
Saludos
The British claim is based on:
May 09th, 2026 - 05:42 am - Link - Report abuse +1Effective possession of the western islands since 1771.
Effective possession of the Spanish island of Soledad since 1833.
Continuous, open, and peaceful possession.
Uscapion. Acquisitive prescription.
Argie claims are based upon? An unrecognised claim of inheritance.
British claims cannot be beaten unless Argentina can prove that inheritance. So far, Argentina has not attempted to do so. Not in any forum that could decide the matter.
It would seem that the matter is settled.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!