• KevonLooney
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    It was discovered and settled by Britain, France, and Spain (in that order). But nobody lived there except some gauchos and soldiers (many of whom were British)

    Pinedo entertained plans for resisting, but finally desisted because of his obvious numerical inferiority and the want of enough nationals among his crew (approximately 80% of his forces were British mercenaries who refused to fight their countrymen).[citation needed] The British forces disembarked on 3 January and switched the flags, delivering the Argentine one to Pinedo, who left on 5 January.[3]

    Recognising Vernet’s settlement had British permission, Onslow set about ensuring the continuation of that settlement for the replenishment of passing ships. The gauchos had not been paid since Vernet’s departure and were anxious to return to the mainland. Onslow persuaded them to stay by paying them in silver for provisions and promising that in the absence of Vernet’s authority they could earn their living from the feral cattle on the islands.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reassertion_of_British_sovereignty_over_the_Falkland_Islands_(1833)

    The modern nation of Argentina didn’t exist in 1833. They were the “United Provinces of the Río de la Plata”. If you think they have a claim, then Bolivia, Brazil, and Uruguay have an equal claim. Do you believe that?

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      But nobody lived there except some gauchos and soldiers (many of whom were British)

      I mean, that’s blatantly not true.

      From the wiki article

      France was the first country to establish a permanent settlement in the Falkland Islands, with the foundation of Port-Saint-Louis on East Falkland by French explorer Louis Antoine de Bougainville in 1764.[2] The French colony consisted of a small fort and some settlements with a population of around 250.

      A pop of 250 is not “some gauchos and soldiers”. They were not even “(many of whom were British)”.

      I mean, we can go down the rabbit hole and start a population census conversation based on year-to-year, but that seems excessive for the conversation being had, and something that is really not needed.

      Its fair to say that the French had a presence there, they gave that presence to Spain, and Argentina inherited that presence from Spain (going around the long way, as the Doctor would say).

      • KevonLooney
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The gauchos are the settlers you mentioned. The soldiers were mostly British mercenaries. Did you read the article?

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          A colony of 240 people are not a few people, and are not all comprised of just gauchos or British mercenaries, they were French there as well.

          I’m going to “bow out” of further replies. I’ve been at this for coming up on 24 hours now, and am tired of everyone wanting their “pound of flesh”, and have said pretty much everything I can say. No disrespect meant to you, just thing the conversation has reached a termination point. Take care.