World Cup 2026

[Baile Brigín 2]

Yes and if every country claimed the country next to it because it was only 300 miles from its country then there would be conflicts left right and center

And what about countries claiming territory as far away as 7,000 miles away? Could that lead to conflict too?

Yes and if every country claimed the country next to it because it was only 300 miles from its country then there would be conflicts left right and center

And what about countries claiming territory as far away as 7,000 miles away? Could that lead to conflict too?

All countries have a right to self governance, its no more Argentinean than it is British no matter the distance between them.. Let them sort out their own issues and carry out a referendum that way there is no conflicts

I've no doubt the Argentineans feel that this is their own land as it was Spain's before that so after gaining independence they feel they own it from that point.. But its a bit rich? Considering no one from Argentina lived there? 

 

A full throated defence of British imperialism on a GAA board  by a guy from Belfast.

[Snapchap]

We are in Britain's geographical hinterland.

Think about what you're saying man.

The point being that, according to the logic some here, we're also in Argentina's.

[gallsman]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

[Baile Brigín 2]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

Or it's about nationalists from the 6c defending British colonial endeavours

[JollyGreenGiant]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

100%. I think people actually have little material knowledge about the Falklands War, or who was fighting it on the Argentine side.

[JollyGreenGiant]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

Or it's about nationalists from the 6c defending British colonial endeavours

Are you neutral on the Falklands War?

[Armagh18]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

100%. I think people actually have little material knowledge about the Falklands War, or who was fighting it on the Argentine side.

I know the calibre of mongrel that was fighting for the Brits in the 80's, we seen plenty of them here. I'd support the devil himself over those bastards.

[Snapchap]

JollyGreenGiant/Falklands, we're all blessed to have you both here to illuminate the great unwashed, uneducated savages.

Personally though, I was just challenging Milltown's suggestion that it's the countries that claim sovereignty over islands on their immediate doorstep who cause more world conflict than the countries that claim territories thousands of miles away from their shores.

[Snapchap]

Anyway, who's winning the final?

[JollyGreenGiant]

JollyGreenGiant/Falklands, we're all blessed to have you both here to illuminate the great unwashed, uneducated savages.

Personally though, I was just challenging Milltown's suggestion that it's the countries that claim sovereignty over islands on their immediate doorstep who cause more world conflict than the countries that claim territories thousands of miles away from their shores.

But it opened up other lines of conversation. We know England has been a conflict maker for centuries. But specific, I have found the reanimation of Argentina nationalism around the Falklands - in close proximity to the game) to be distasteful, and entirely forgetful of what Argentina was at the time, and why it invaded.

[Look-Up!]

Where to start on last night. It's the hope that kills they say and England will be crushed today. They've led a pretty charmed tournament up to this but in 20 minutes flat all their chickens not only came home to roost, but completely lay the boot into them when they were prone on the floor.

They are a counter attacking team. That is their strength, that is their player profile. They don't produce orchestra conductors for the middle and they don't have 5 Maldinis or the like in defense. They went 1 nil up, perfect, but then turned the screw on themselves instead.

Proof of the pudding is always in the eating and hard to feel sorry for Tuchel with the shit coming his way. Made some pretty big statements with his squad selection that haven't stood the test. You always need a little something different in tournaments so what the hell was the point in bringing Mainoo if he had no intention of playing him, EVER! Henderson on the bench with a broken arm. Palmer and Foden at home. The Greek tragedy writes itself. Trent too could have offered something a bit different at some stage. He's a brave man staying in the job because he will be despised in that squad. The phone calls for the next round up of the troops will be funny. Even big Harry will be thinking he would have cut out that cross and the desperate tactic of giving it to Pickford to pump up the field 70 yards was tailor made for him. It's so f*****g hilarious I almost feel sorry for the twats in their ranks. And Bellingham with all his Billy big bollix digs at the manager and ex players that this team doesn't choke!!!! Only thing missing was for Pickford to trip on his laces and face plant the ball into the back of his own net.

[JollyGreenGiant]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

100%. I think people actually have little material knowledge about the Falklands War, or who was fighting it on the Argentine side.

I know the calibre of mongrel that was fighting for the Brits in the 80's, we seen plenty of them here. I'd support the devil himself over those bastards.

Fair enough. The Argentina military junta at the time was doing something very similar to its own people at time.

[Snapchap]

But specific, I have found the reanimation of Argentina nationalism around the Falklands - in close proximity to the game) to be distasteful, and entirely forgetful of what Argentina was at the time, and why it invaded.

Given Britain's past, and it's War Crimes in that specific conflict, I find it odd that it's only the Agentinian nationalism around the islands/the war ahead of the game that you found distateful, but each to their own.

[Milltown Row2]

The rationale behind the Argentine invasion of the Falklands should give anybody pause for applauding it. A right wing military junta led by human rights abusers invaded for political and nationalist interests. They assumed nobody would oppose them (they didn't like people opposing them - as evidenced by the disappearance of thousands of opponents during the Dirty Wa).

It's not about territorial claims or rights, historic, perceived, inferred or otherwise.

It's about people looking any excuse to cheer against England. Very easy for people to look at things through the lens of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" without actually considering the nature of that "friend" or looking at the legitimacy of their cause.

Or it's about nationalists from the 6c defending British colonial endeavours

Yes and if every country claimed the country next to it because it was only 300 miles from its country then there would be conflicts left right and center

And what about countries claiming territory as far away as 7,000 miles away? Could that lead to conflict too?

Yes and if every country claimed the country next to it because it was only 300 miles from its country then there would be conflicts left right and center

And what about countries claiming territory as far away as 7,000 miles away? Could that lead to conflict too?

All countries have a right to self governance, its no more Argentinean than it is British no matter the distance between them.. Let them sort out their own issues and carry out a referendum that way there is no conflicts

I've no doubt the Argentineans feel that this is their own land as it was Spain's before that so after gaining independence they feel they own it from that point.. But its a bit rich? Considering no one from Argentina lived there? 

 

A full throated defence of British imperialism on a GAA board  by a guy from Belfast.

Some mental gymnastics to have a dig..

Its simple enough and I already made it easy enough for dumb people to understand.. No country should have a claim on any country that's not theirs.. So in my post where have I defended British imperialism?

Take your time to point it out...

[JollyGreenGiant]

But specific, I have found the reanimation of Argentina nationalism around the Falklands - in close proximity to the game) to be distasteful, and entirely forgetful of what Argentina was at the time, and why it invaded.

Given Britain's past, and it's War Crimes in that specific conflict, I find it odd that it's only the Agentinian nationalism around the islands/the war ahead of the game that you found distateful, but each to their own.

Where have I said I don't find British Nationalism and jingoism distasteful (or even hateful). I'll tell you that I do. But that doesn't mean I have to applaud Argentina for its invasion, or support (softly or otherwise) the invasion.