Well, he does have a point actually. The matter isn't as clear-cut as the UK government (and press) wants people to believe. Democracy and self-determination are great principles, but does it really work as a justification when the British forced the Argentinians out of the islands earlier? If a couple of British citizens build houses on Burhou (an uninhabited Channel island that nobody's interested in) and then self-determinedly decide they want to be part of Iran, would the British government oblige? The weren't particularly fond of Sealand ...

To me, it seems that the saber-rattling in the British press is having its desired effect on the population. Which is a bit sad imho, but probably foreseeable. And it's also the same effect that the Argentinian saber-rattling has on _their_ populace. Given that situation, Penn's call for a diplomatic solution might not be as moronic as you think.

The thing is the UK never ceded it's claim so theoretically that (tiny) argentine settlement (in the 1830's) was technically an invasion... the current settlements have been in place since what 1833? The islanders consider themselves British, English is the national language and the religion is the church of England... Hell there were no Argentines on the islands until the 90's (apart from during the war) when Argentinia used a political dispute to force the Falklands to allow them access >.<

You're going to group an entire country's opinion together with this man's? ಠ_ಠ If I did the same thing with Britain, there would be outrage here. :p

If only they've listened to Cary Grant more.
Also, who reads the Daily Mail?

I don't read British press - my views are my own, based on my own 'research' into the conflict.

As an alternative comic to the Murdoch-controlled press, it's a good laugh :P
The rabidity of the comments even more so

ROFL

Yep, but then we're really arguing on the basis of colonialist claims, which constitutes its own can of worms.

Anyway, I do agree that the UK's claim to the islands is stronger than Argentina's. But I also think that Argentina's claims are good enough to respect them as a valid opinion, even though I find the British claims more convincing.

Basically, the ownership of the islands has been disputed for as long as they exist, partly due to the fact that several nations wanted to grab them, but none could actually create a working settlement, yet no nation wanted to forego its claims. The islands' history is an odd loop of settlers coming, going, and leaving plaques stating that although they couldn't make the settlement work, their nation of course still claims the land as theirs. It would actually make good comedy material if that needless conflict hadn't cost so many lives.

Oh, the "it's so dumb it's funny" market. I thought it's one of those serious-yet-dead-wrong ones. I guess it's like the polish Onet then.

There's a whole lot that I don't agree on with Mr Penn, but I will give him credit: he has certainly put his money and his time where his mouth is when it comes to his humanitarian beliefs. I don't feel his status as a middle-heavyweight in Hollywood detracts from his credibility; it's what he says and does that matter, and he has done more than most. Does this give him special insight into this particular matter? Not on the face of it though his public celebrity may give him insider access that we don't have, as evidenced by his meetings with various leaders.

Dumb's not the word :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFfWykH05Gw