Gilbraltar |
![]() |
| log in |
Message boards : Politics : Gilbraltar
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
As we didn't have enough irritation with the antics of the Argentinians over the Falklands, now we have the Spanish getting skittish again over Gibraltar. Bearing in mind that they are just about to follow Greece in defaulting on debts, and being slung out of the Euro, you would think that they might have better things to do with their time. | |
| ID: 1236453 · | |
|
Chris, perhaps Greece and Spain are going for a combination deal -- Greece to revisit WW II reparations from Germany to pay off its debts and Spain to demand what it will call back rent on Gilbralter. | |
| ID: 1236480 · | |
Chris, perhaps Greece and Spain are going for a combination deal -- Greece to revisit WW II reparations from Germany to pay off its debts and Spain to demand what it will call back rent on Gilbralter. Or Spain is following the example of Argentina in creating a nationalistic diversion to distract from it's own internal woes. A good question is... Could we retake Gibraltar if it were to be invaded? Could we defend it in the first place? Regards, Martin ____________ Mandriva Linux A user friendly OS! See new freedom Mageia2 The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3) | |
| ID: 1236511 · | |
|
Or agree with Spain regarding self-determination -- not sure what the Basques and Catalans would do as independent countries though. | |
| ID: 1236518 · | |
|
I posted the history of Gibraltar some time ago but basically, an Anglo-Dutch force captured Gibraltar from Spain in 1704 during the War of the Spanish Succession. The territory was subsequently ceded to Britain "in perpetuity" under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. If you look at the political history of it all there was much goings one between France and Spain and other countries at the time. A good question is... Could we retake Gibraltar if it were to be invaded? That situation would never arise Martin, no way would Spain ever consider starting to trundle military vehicles over the border, it just wouldn't happen. They would be knee deep in SAS before they had a chance to switch their engines off. Both sides are committed to a political solution, which at the moment remains an impasse. | |
| ID: 1236530 · | |
|
Chris, it seems the most 'English' places are pretty far from England. I've never been to Gilbralter - but I have been to two very 'English' places -- Victoria, BC and Christchurch, NZ. They both seemed more 'English' than the various places I have been to in the UK. I mean I know London has long been far less than 'English' -- but heck, even places like Oxford, Cambridge, Bath and Canterbury seemed less English than Victoria or Christchurch -- though I will give them (and London) credit for offering excellent cider in pubs (something I really like). | |
| ID: 1236532 · | |
|
Hiyah Barry, | |
| ID: 1236535 · | |
|
Chris, I don't do warm beer, but I thrive on cold cider. | |
| ID: 1236559 · | |
they would never have had to create an empire. It originated with the overseas colonies and trading posts established by England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. At its height, it was the largest empire in history and, for over a century, was the foremost global power. By 1922 the British Empire held sway over about 458 million people, one-fifth of the world's population at the time, and covered more than 33,700,000 km² (13,012,000 sq mi), almost a quarter of the Earth's total land area. As a result, its political, linguistic and cultural legacy is widespread. Its peak was between 1800 and 1900, the Victorian era, even the Romans didn't compete with that. And yes, I think a British influence did bring a good environment to the world. These days now that we have taken a back seat so to speak, the world has gone to pot. BUT, we ain't letting go of Gibraltar or the Falklands, they are non negotiable. And if any little tinpot 3rd world country wants to say different, then they are going to get a rude awakening, both politically and militarily. | |
| ID: 1236686 · | |
|
Chris, I'm certainly a fan of Churchill in his time and place. I also agree that the Falklands and Gilbraltar are not decisions up to external parties. | |
| ID: 1236714 · | |
|
Barry, you are right about Churchill, and also you could add in Thatcher as well. They were both charismatic leaders, but of their era as you suggest. Churchill certainly played a big part in helping us to win WWII, and we wouldn't have got the Falklands back if it hadn't been for Maggie. | |
| ID: 1236742 · | |
|
Chris, Franco ruled before WW II, and Mussolini would have as well if he had managed to keep out of WW II. Heck, Churchill *liked* Mussolini until he attacked France in June 1940. | |
| ID: 1236744 · | |
|
Spain snubs Queen | |
| ID: 1238273 · | |
|
Falklands........ | |
| ID: 1238339 · | |
|
Your take on the film is about the same as the critics here Mark. Great character play by Streep but too much emphasis on the dementia angle. It was meant to be more of a documentary than an entertaining film. | |
| ID: 1238457 · | |
|
Chris, well after all, the producer and director might have been playing to the current government. If they presented the full range of Thatcherdom instead of her current mental state, they probably would have had to include some of the less favorable aspects of her policy and behaviour while in power. Instead they were able to gloss those over. | |
| ID: 1238575 · | |
|
You would be about right Barry. A lot of people think she deserved better. | |
| ID: 1238629 · | |
Message boards : Politics : Gilbraltar
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |