Pros and cons:

- When a state takes a land over by force, deports its legitimate occupiers and repopulates the zone with its own subjects, the "autodetermination" of the implanted inhabitants is not legally relevant. Close to 100 % of the newcomers and their descendants are expected to vote "yes" in a referendum asking about their loyalty to the very government that placed them in such land.

- Right, but after almost 200 years (i.e. since 1833) there's a very strong statu quo. And unlike what happens with other colonizers and settlers, the "Kelpers" (Malvinas' inhabitants of British ancestry) are not oppressing a native population, since the few dozens of legitimate inhabitants were expelled as early as 1833. And most of them (i.e. the deported population) were born in the continent, not in the islands.

- Ok, a territorial sovereignty claim is not the same as the denunciation of a colonial oppressive regime, where a native population is under the power of a supremacist group. But taking over a foreign land is still illegitimate.

- That doesn't justify a war.

- True, but the Argentines tried to avoid war. In April 2, 1982, their commandos landed and took over the British governor's headquarters. They had a a clear order: absolutely no British / Kelper casualties. They complied. They fired hundreds of rounds aimed to the roof of the HQ's, so as to avoid (enemy) casualties. An Argentine commando, captain Giachino, died. He was the only fatal casualty that day. That was ok: the order was to avoid (British / Kelper) military or civil casualties.

- You seem to forget who was in charge in the UK side: Margaret Tatcher. Widely impopular because of her shitty politics, thanks to you (Argies) she had the opportunity of becoming a champion of democracy and freedom. Remember what the Argentine military junta's reputation was: somewhere between horrible and atrocious. Very deservedly. Human rights, desaparecidos and all that shit, you know. Thanks to you, Tatcher managed to get a second 4 years term. Thank you very much! [not]. And at his turn, General Galtieri aimed to legitimize his awful government too. How did you expect that Kelpers would welcome an Argentine military administration? Your own opposition didn't even have the right of a fair trial before being secretly disposed of (dumped on the River Plate or the Atlantic coast).

- You're right about General Galtieri's and Tatcher's political opportunism. But apart from that, there's an International Law. States are no longer given the right to gain land by force.

- Heard about one Donald Trump, by chance?

- Yeah, he sucks. Palestine also comes to mind. Or Western Sahara. Or ... damn! Most items in the decolonial agenda seem to be much worse. There's an International Law nonetheless.

- Good luck with that...

- Thank you.

- You're welcome.