Give back the Chagos Islands and apologise

Where did say “ chucked off” ? you are obviously making things up lemon- I said
“ relocated”.

I would think you are indigenous when you do not think of another distant country as your homeland.

Relocated against your will = chucked off in my view.

You know that for a fact do you ct?

Do you know any Falkland Islanders?

I think your arguments lack any validity.

But not when you are told they are “your words” when they aren’t. By “Relocated” I meant you have a choice in the matter you don’t have to relocate unless you don’t want to go - - I didn’t mean chucked off and certainly they werent my words. If the Falklanders love Britain they shouldn’t mind going there if Britain withdrew its claim.

I didn’t say “ relocated against your will” so don’t make things up .

While you're about it, chuck off the Argentinians and send them back to Spain, also the Brazilians back to Portugal. Incomers all!!!

Who said anything about “chucking off” - talk about Chinese Whispers.

The Highlands and Islands have enough problems caused by white settlers already, the last thing needed is a mass import of immigrants from las Malvinas

Quietly hand them back
The Falklands Lily65?
Hand them back to whom?
The French? Found these uninhabited islands in 1764
The British arrived and set up a colony a year later.
Spain? Arrived 1770 from its colony of Argentina and forced the British off

After the Peninsular War the British returned to the Falklands.

None of which is relevant to the Chagos Islands, of course, but just trying to correct some of the misconceptions posted on this thread

Caledonai apologies, I thought your name was Caledonail too
I get called Jalimal on occasion

The first people to actually have sight of the Falklands were in fact the Dutch in 1600. The first landing and naming of Falkland Channel was in January 1690 by an English sailor. This channel, now Falkland Sound was named after Viscount Falkland who had financed this expedition. There is in fact no treaty to say who has a legal right to be there as pre 1690 they were uninhabited, so the only way to gain possession is by force of arms or the the will of the people who have been settled there since c1833. You can't give the Falklands back to Argentina, as they has never had them in the first place! Their claim came post independence from Spain after Spain relinquished them along with Argentina, by which time it was a well established British Colony,

Thanks, Jabberwok for that explanation.
We knew a Falkland Islander whose family had been there for generations; she had married a British msn and lived in England but always suffered from "hiraeth

I don't know why that posted - having problems with internet today!

man not msn of course!
And 'what the Welsh call hiraeth'.

It is very sad that the Chagossians are reported to have "exploded with joy" at this finding - because it is just "advisory" which I assume means those involved can simply ignore it.

Mauritius was, in effect, forced to hand over the Chagos Islands as a condition of being granted independence from the British. My understanding is that any such arrangement should have been made with the full and willing consent of the inhabitants. This clearly was not the case as they were forcibly removed.

It's absolutely disgusting and I don't see criticismof such an act as "Britain-bashing". I would imagine the vast majority of people in Britain - both then and now - had, and still have, little knowledge of this event because it received hardly any coverage.

For those who would like to see the reality of what happened, here is a link for a John Pilger Granada Television documentary "Stealing a Nation" which sets out in detail exactly what happened to the Chagossians. It is a truly appalling and distressing account. From the original black and white footage you will see the confused and unhappy faces of people forcibly herded onto a ship and transported, firstly to the Seychelles where they were "marched up a hill" and placed in a prison before being sent to Mauritius - then a quite poor country - where they were not properly housed or supported.

As a Labour supporter I am very upset that this event occurred during the term of a British Labour government. When Healey was asked to comment about his role in it, he replied that he "had no memory of this".

If you feel that too much fuss is being made about this event, I urge you to take the time to watch this documentary so that you can see the reality of what happened.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjNfXK6QpqY

it is just "advisory" which I assume means those involved can simply ignore it.
Well, I think that this is an important step, the UK has been shamed and will now act Eloethan without too much delay.

However, the Chagossians should be the ones to decide whether or not the USA military base should be shifted off there or if they want to be used as a staging post and receive the 'rent' of £20m pa.
Perhaps some back rent too as reparation?

Although it is not well-publicised, it is something that I have been aware of (although I admit not in the forefront of my mind) for many years so how Denis Healey could not remember it is beyond me.

I'm sure all governments since then have been fully aware of this too.

See also. . . youtu.be/NomdcCBEtJA

Thanks to everyone who has brought this thread back on track.

And thanks for the reasoned debate we are having, along with the extra information which is one of the best things about GN.

I grew up with these tales of The Chagossians. The islands should be given back to Mauritius, the Americans turfed out and the indigenous population allowed back. It won’t happen unfortunately, money will change hands.

Thank you Culag.