71–80 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.io
"After being questioned as a result of the interview, the British Government denied receiving any funds from the sale of .io domain names" So according to the linked article, no: .io names give nothing to Britain.
Don't kid yourself that this is about the islander's claims. They are being used as human shields. Diego Garcia is a very strategic location. It will always be controlled by one of the great powers. Who would benefit most if the US were to leave? Who has the most to gain? Countries like China and Iran.
Just because it would possibly help other powers, doesn't exclude the idea that the native islanders can legitimately want their homes back
Without unanimity in the security council, there doesn't tend to be much action they can take. Even with the SC, the track record of reaching resolutions isn't great.
In principle, it makes sense for there to be a formalized "community of nations" to express a decision. But, in terms of having a practical role that leads to resolving these kinds of issues... would it be better if they now aimed for a reperations/compromise solution?
I can't see british sovereignty or US occupancy changing. Is the right thing now to leave chagosians with a recognized moral right, with no hope of exercising it in practice or to go for compromise?
Just curious what people think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is staggering to hear arguments justifying occupied land that has absolutely no connection to the uk. It shows how poorly the west still understands the evil of colonialism. Regardless of the ancestry of the people living in any territory, they deserve to have sovereignty over their lives.
Err, we did actually pay for it. And what connection do the "natives" have, they weren't native to it. They'd lived there less than 200 years and were French speakers. It's not an indigenous population. It's more complicated than you claim. I'm pretty strongly anti-colonial, but this ain't that and it takes the piss to frame it like it is.
In this case we're talking what 4-5 generations, depending on how you count it, that sounds fairly native to me.
The UK acted poorly here and the pressure that this vote applies to them is good, as if anyone has a right to the islands it's the people who lived there for hundreds of years.
Don't kid yourself that this is about the islander's claims. They are being used as human shields. Diego Garcia is a very strategic location. It will always be controlled by one of the great powers. Who would benefit most if the US were to leave? Who has the most to gain? Countries like China and Iran.
What do people here think about thee role of the UN here? Without unanimity in the security council, there doesn't tend to be much action they can take. Even with the SC, the track record of reaching resolutions isn't great. In principle, it makes sense for there to be a formalized "community of nations" to express a decision. But, in terms of having a practical role that leads to resolving these kinds of issues... w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would perhaps be a bit hypocritical of Spain given their own enclaves like Melilla and Ceuta in Morocco - both of which are claimed by Morocco?
There are subtle differences. Gibraltar was Spanish before The Utrech Treaty, that even included some expiration date IIRC. Ceuta and Melilla were Spanish towns before Morocco even existed. Not that it will matter in the long run...
“the full and entire propriety of the town and castle of Gibraltar, together with the port, fortifications, and forts thereunto belonging ... for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, USA should give Alaska and Hawaii to the local people
Well, principally yes. Or, at least, the US could acknowledge the massive genocide that European settlers have committed in the past, rather than glorifying the "good ol' days" of expansion and slaughtering people and their cattle, and give the indigenous people some real recompensation for the atrocities that have been done to their ancestors.
Does this mean that people can return to those islands? Certainly seems unlikely they would close the military base unless they were forced to so do by some military or substantial economic action. This type of thing is what makes me worried about the long term sustainability of US security. The paradigm is not really rule of law when it comes right down to it, it's might makes right. This is an inherently insecure p…
What do people here think about thee role of the UN here? Without unanimity in the security council, there doesn't tend to be much action they can take. Even with the SC, the track record of reaching resolutions isn't great. In principle, it makes sense for there to be a formalized "community of nations" to express a decision. But, in terms of having a practical role that leads to resolving these kinds of issues... w…
It's not quite reached League of Nations irrelevancy, but it isn't far off.