Falklands is an expensive White Elephant however, it's entirely symbolic. 60+ million pounds per year to protect a symbol of the glory days of the Empire.
Yeah, let Argentina have at it, then use that 60 million quid for something actually in the UK. People will forget about Falklands within an election or two, but the money saved is forever.
Falklands is a symbol but does it have so much value that's it's worth the money? Brits don't get some daily boost by remembering the Falklands, they only remember about it when it's in the papers.
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/falkland-islands-cost-2012-2?r=US&IR=T
61 million pounds, with an annual increase of about 3 million pounds.
And when you count that as per-Falklander then it's about 25000 pound per person. You could hand that to Argentina, then offer all Falklanders an ongoing cash payment if they want to relocate, and still save money. After all they'll be spending that money in the UK.
I disagree; the Falklands are not a symbol of the glory days of Empire, whatever that is. The Empire's been dead for a long time, not a lot of people remember it, thus to maintain a symbol of something dead would not make sense - but you must be mistaken in believing that this most obscure of Atlantic islands is a symbol of the prestige of Empire.
What these islands symbolize is simple: They symbolize the Falkland Islands.
You talk of the Falkland Islands as if they are as you say, a white elephant, as if they were a statue in Trafalgar square or a social media campaign. I stress that they are not.
They are a self-sufficient country under the protection of the United Kingdom, who under international law have the right to exist and govern themselves. In all areas they stand by their own feet, under the protection of the United Kingdom. So by what right then can any merchant come along and tell a people they will be sold, their lands sold, their country sold to a foreign invader against their will? For some rather obvious reasons, I doubt that would go down any well in the United Kingdom. Britons do not live in a world where might makes right, where everything has a price and everything can be sold.
But of course, might does not make right, but it does make. Should we then be planning for war with Argentina, if we are expected to surrender without a fight? Is the drastic cost of these islands such a white elephant that our armed forces are to crumble and die? That would be a compelling argument, if it were true.
The issue therein is that the cost of defending the islands is 0.034% of our defence budget.
And you would say we should surrender our country and countrymen over pennies that poor? Dare I say, Argentina should better learn international law.
Is May becoming unpopular? or is this like... Trump where he was "unpopular"
Wouldn't say May was ever popular, so much as people had confidence in her because all of her opposition imploded. All in all I wish the Tories were less retarded and hypocritical in ways. Difficult election all around, personally I had to pick between choosing an MP who is spectacularly competent but would provide a strong voice against Brexit, which obviously I would rather not see occur. My alternative then would be to choose a middlingly competent MP from labour who would provide a weak voice against Brexit, or else vote for the Conservative MP who doesn't even live in my area and reeks of "doing this for the money".
It's not the most enjoyable of situations to be true, which is what I'm getting at in that a great deal of May's support can probably be attributed to her being an inoffensive and competent statesman. A situation is comparable to Hillary Clinton versus Bernie Sanders, wherein their respective parties chose the candidate who had the most experience running the security apparatus of the state - which while a positive, came with the baggage of running the security of the state, especially in such a time as mass surveillance and data retention has erked the public. I imagine upon any possible victory, her popularity stands to decrease further - especially given current attitudes towards cutting public spending in social services to redirect towards investment, which will cause significant angst in the years to come as people die from terrorism, obesity and hospital waiting lines. On the bright side, it does at least demonstrate long term commitment towards further developing a high-tech economy in emulation of Japan or the USA, which is a positive. Just "ignore the dying people" will no doubt be the party slogan 2020
*EDIT
wtf someone got the old thread banned and killed :<
Author
Topic: UK Snap Election Thread - Darth May (Read 42374 times)