http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-38490305
>A new year's message by Argentina's social development ministry has caused uproar after it excluded the disputed Falkland Islands from the country's map.
>Former combatants and social media users said the message was offensive to those who died in the 1982 war.
>The ministry has apologised, saying it was a mistake by the design team.
>The islands are a British territory in the Atlantic claimed by Argentina, where they are known as the Malvinas.
>President Mauricio Macri, who took office in December 2015, promised a "new kind of relationship" with the UK, a step seen as aimed at boosting Argentina's flagging economy.
>Since then, the countries have agreed to work toward removing measures restricting the oil and gas industry, shipping and fishing around the islands. But the issue of sovereignty has not been discussed.
>Saul Perez, who fought in the war, expressed his "uneasiness," and told C5N news channel "it was not a mistake."
>He said the omission was part of a campaign by Mr Macri's government to "place a priority on bilateral trade" over the sovereignty claim.
>Alicia Castro, who served as Argentina's ambassador to the UK under former President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, called the absence of the islands "inadmissible."
>"I'm upset to see this mutilated map. Usually the British do this, I haven't seen any government doing it," she told Argentina's Radio 10, according to La Nacion newspaper (in Spanish).
>Some users on social media accused the government of betraying the claim to sovereignty.
...
This Country, my country... is going down, President Macri fucked all up
>>96518
yeh he did
and he is most likely going to lose his seat due to his monumentous intentional fuck up
>>96518
"Have you already given away the Malvinas?"
muuy mall bldo.
Right in the butthurt.
>>96518
Ironically if your country wasn't so corrupt there would be more economic ties between Falklands and Argentina and after a few generations they might decide to join voluntarily.
Ignorant outsider here. Aren't these islands worthless for human habitation anyway?
I could understand fighting about mineral & oil drilling rights offshore, or even fishing rights, but I never understood why Argentina and the UK would fight over a shitsplat of an island like that one which can't support more than 1000 people and maybe some sheep if they're lucky anyway.
>>96610
>I could understand fighting about mineral & oil drilling rights offshore, or even fishing rights
It's literally all about that, human habitation is a secondary concern (and even then it's mostly for the human element in propaganda). The idea here is that by controlling the islands you gain control of the immediate nautical vicinity, which in turn gives you priority in offshore activities. It's the same reason that the Chinese are building artificial islands: by owning the land, you get higher claim over the water (though the Chinese case is highly irregular because of the artificial nature of the land).