Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould Britain attempt to grab land in Antarctica?
Results so far:
| Yes | 28% | 63 votes | Total: 229 votes | |
| No | 72% | 166 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesLet me get this straight. There is this very big continent at the bottom of the world. Nobody lives there. It is very cold and very inhospitable. There is barely any life there at all except for a bunch of birds that can't fly. In fact, for decades, nobody has really cared at all about this vast continent except for a bunch of scientists living on the government dole. And now, a bunch of liberals, environmentalists, and socialists are complaining that somebody actually wants to go down there and do something with the land? Pathetic!
I say that if Britain wants to invest the money in order to tap into the resources there and claim some extra land in the process, then first come first served! Let the country with the vision to move forward and help alleviate the worlds energy and resource crisis have the first profits. By helping itself, Britain can help everyone.
In America, we have a similar situation. We have this vast area of cold and inhospitable land where very few animals or people thrive, but where we have tons of oil. However, a bunch of liberals refuse to let us use it. Well, the liberals won't allow us to get oil off the coast of California or Florida, they won't let us go into the Gulf of Mexico, and they've said no to ANWR. Okay, so I understand not touching our own oil (actually no I don't, but whatever) but give me a break! Antarctica is now off limits?
I applaud Britain. I say tally-ho. And let's follow them in the chase to track down those resources which can help all the peoples of the world. With wisdom and planning, we won't destroy the ecological paradise that exists there. Our technology is so advanced today we need not worry about doing any significant harm. So again, Britain, lead the way and I hope America follows and snatches some of it's own land before less liberal nations grab it all up first.
Learn more about this author, Jason Austin.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Just because the UK used to be a country with a big empire and lots of land all over the world, doesn't mean it has to "grab" Antarctica!
The UK is having trouble retaining its present boundaries as a whole unit: Scotland clearly wants to separate from the rest of the UK; Wales would like to do the same having been a conquered land for many centuries; and Northern Ireland is being pressured into joining with Ireland so making Ireland itself a bigger country, and less of a problem for Great Britain.
Antarctica, at present, does not belong to anyone. This was due to the land being permanently ice and snow bound, making it impossible for people to survive their without external provisions. For many years this has been the last neutral land in the world, until the treaty that had been forged between many of the major world nations came to an end. Since then Antarctica is "up for grabs".
If nations didn't want the land before why should any of them be so eager to own it now? Because of the oil which can be found in the seabed around the landmass we call Antarctica! As oil becomes scarcer, businesses and nations are looking for additional resources to keep the status quo. Without further resources the developed world will run out of oil very quickly, hence the desire to own land not previously belonging to anyone.
Personally, I find this whole issue to be very tasteless in the extreme and certainly showing Mankind at its worst! By now, if we are as clever and progressed technologically as we publicly claim to be then we should have found alternative ways of satisfying the world's needs. But that isn't working out in the way expected because of "greed"! Mankind as a species is extremely greedy. So much so it will destroy everything rather than do without. A very childish view but one which appears to dominate human society today.
This greed is behind Britain's attempt to grab Antarctica. But it isn't the only country trying to do this. Argentina, for example, is also trying to do the same. Both nations say they "own", the present named, Falkland Islands. Now it becomes clear why Argentina invaded those islands, and why the UK defended them, in 1982! Although Argentina was forced to leave the islands after that mini-war it has never ceased saying publicly that they "own" the islands.
To my mind, it would be better if the Falkland Islands and its inhabitants were allowed independence, and then they could be the ones who benefit from the mad rush for oil in the surrounding lands. Britain has been giving up its empirical lands for decades now so it wouldn't do any harm to allow this independence. But it won't happen. The politicians are as greedy as ever, and once the UK becomes even more integrated into the EU, you can bet it will be the EU which will say it controls the oil and Antarctica!
Time will prove me right or wrong, but which nation do you think will finally "own" Antarctica?
Learn more about this author, Carol Noble.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Politics in the UK
- Should Britain adopt fixed Parliamentary terms?
- Does Great Britain have a solid plan in place to protect the country against terrorist threats?
- Has Tony Blair left new British Prime Minister Gordon Brown with a better or a worse UK to rule than when Blair started?
- Should Britain change its rules of succession so that Roman Catholics and non first-born sons can become the head monarch?
- Has the British Royal Family become irrelevant?
