[drieddust]

She and her family is responsible for a lot of atrocities around the world. Yet a lot of people here are eulogizing as if she was a saint who taught art of living to the people.

To me this is a demonstration of power of conditioning and media management.

[oceanplexian]

My family is Argentine. The Queen’s son personally boarded a war ship to travel 7000km away to kill Argentines because they dared assert sovereignty against another country in a completely separate hemisphere of the Earth. The idea that the days of empire building are behind us is false.

[simonh]

Argentina itself is a creation of Spanish Imperialism, and British control of the islands dates to that same era, before Argentina became a nation. I don't see how either one can be claimed to be more or less creations of Imperialism than the other.

The fact is the British foreign office had been trying to find ways to offload the islands on Argentina for ages. The British government felt they were an expensive nuisance that were an obstacle to better relations in the region. The Galtieri regime only invaded because they needed a boost in popularity. Negotiation is one thing, but military occupation quite another.

There is (or could have been) a legitimate discussion to be had about the history of control of the islands. Sure. But those who resort to pre-emptive military force, when facing no threat to themselves, have no business complaining when the resulting conflict goes against them. Suez is a good example of us learning that lesson the hard way.

[rcarr]

My understanding was that the Falklands voted to remain in the UK and the UK fought to defend that democratic wish. If this is wrong please inform me so I can update my knowledge. If it's correct though, I don't see how fighting to defend a democratic mandate is a bad thing? Aren't we all cheering on Ukraine for exactly this right now?

[oceanplexian]

Yes, all of the British voted to remain. None of the Argentine, or other South Americans were legally allowed to cast a ballot. I guess that's the UK's idea of a democracy.

[msla]

The people who weren't living on the Falklands didn't get a vote, true.

[rcarr]

Surely the only people who should have got a vote in this matter are the people living on the island? If you’re going to let everyone vote on everything then the entire world would end up being owned by China because it’s got the most people.

[msla]

> Surely the only people who should have got a vote in this matter are the people living on the island? If you’re going to let everyone vote on everything then the entire world would end up being owned by China because it’s got the most people.

That's my point, yes.

[rcarr]

I wasn't aware of this, so there were Argentinians and others who were permanently living on the island who weren't allowed to vote? Surely this is not the case today? I would definitely have to read more from all sides to get a better picture of the entire event from all perspectives.

[msla]

An Argentine dictatorship was trying to build its empire by conquering a bunch of people who voted to remain British.

That they can paint that as British Imperialism blows my mind.

[simonh]

Can you describe what they did, personally, that makes them responsible for atrocities? Yes I know she was head of state, but she had no significant executive or legislative power. I don't see how she's responsible in a practical sense for such things any more than any British citizen.

[dmonitor]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-roy...

[brigandish]

Posting bare links is rarely helpful.

> In one instance the Queen completely vetoed the Military Actions Against Iraq Bill in 1999, a private member's bill that sought to transfer the power to authorise military strikes against Iraq from the monarch to parliament.

A wise move indeed, if Blair's record is to be taken into account.