21–30 of 59 posts
Ha, well played BBC! You mean the state broadcaster for the UK managed to avoid mentioning the Falklands in an article about disputed barren islands. I'm truly shocked!
Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall
On a visit to South Korea, I was astonished to watch a national weather report on televsion. It showed the weather in Seoul, in Busan, in a few other major cities, and on Dokdo! (Dokdo is this tiny island mentioned in the article, disputed by Japan, with two people living on it.) In this case, the status of the island is largely a proxy for remaining Korean bitterness over WWII, towards the Japanese who (at least in…
1. This reminds me of the territorial dispute right now between Canada and the US, http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-tiny-islands-where-ca... Let's go to war! 2. There is no dispute over Dokdo, it's Korean territory plain and simple. But if Japan really wants it, they should just take it or else just shut the fuck up about it and stop bringing it up every year.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/position.ht...
But it is not so actively disputed by Japan. Meanwhile, South Korea flies a large flag there, and the two permanent residents can choose between cellular telephone service providers, as more than one company has built towers there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall
> "More people have landed on the moon than have landed on Rockall." Charming place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody ever fought over Rockall.
As an uninhabitable island with rival territorial claims from Denmark and Ireland mainly because the fishing rights are potentially worth something, it's a better comparison point than an island group which has been continuously occupied for nearly 200 years...
On a visit to South Korea, I was astonished to watch a national weather report on televsion. It showed the weather in Seoul, in Busan, in a few other major cities, and on Dokdo! (Dokdo is this tiny island mentioned in the article, disputed by Japan, with two people living on it.) In this case, the status of the island is largely a proxy for remaining Korean bitterness over WWII, towards the Japanese who (at least in…
Here in the U.S. I've even seen local Korean owned businesses with posters up in the window "Dokdo is Korean territory!" and other such slogans. It may seem absolutely insignificant to Americans and people from other large countries, but to South Koreans, surrounded by large powerful neighbors, in the middle of immensely crowded territorial waters, it has a not insignificant economic rationale.
Another example i the island Kataja, which didn't even exist when the border between Sweden and Finland was drawn, but now sits on the border.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A4rket https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kataja
Better they expend their border-dispute resources over these barren islands than the inhabited ones.
In a way, isn't that just it? They're still 'fighting' over them because they're actually not that important? If they were important, the fight would be over much more quickly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody ever fought over Rockall.
As an uninhabitable island with rival territorial claims from Denmark and Ireland mainly because the fishing rights are potentially worth something, it's a better comparison point than an island group which has been continuously occupied for nearly 200 years...
The distinction between islets and islands is the basis of what China is up to with the artificial islands it is constructing. UNCLOS is a really interesting thing to get stuck into if you are a legally inclined geek.
Ha, well played BBC! You mean the state broadcaster for the UK managed to avoid mentioning the Falklands in an article about disputed barren islands. I'm truly shocked!
Falklands has 3000 or so people, a small town, lots of sheep and is not really disputed except when Argentina feels like distracting attention from whatever shitshow is going on at home. Even their historical claim is dubious as hell.
