Argentina recalls 1833 Malvinas ‘dislodgement’ and demands bilateral dialogue
Argentina ratified Tuesday its ‘imprescriptible” sovereignty rights over the Malvinas, South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands and adjoining maritime spaces and blasted the UK for not abiding by UN resolutions calling for bilateral talks.
According to a release from the Argentine Foreign Affairs ministry on 3 January 1833 the Islas Malvinas were occupied by British forces which “dislodged the Argentine population and authorities legitimately established in the Islands, replacing them with subjects from the occupying power”.
Argentina immediately protested the illegitimate act of force “which persists without being consented at any moment”, underlines the release.
The 179 year illegitimate British colonial occupation is aggravated by “the provocative and continued disregard for International Law expressed in the persistent reluctance to resume sovereignty negotiations as mandated by the UN Resolution 2065 and nine other resolutions that followed”.
“The illegitimacy is even more aggravated by the presence of a military base in the South Atlantic alleging false defence needs as well as the constant display of illegitimate unilateral activities in the disputes zone”.
These activities refer to the spoliation of renewable and non renewable resources in the area and the display of military exercises including launching missiles from the Malvinas Islands.
Further on the release recalls the unanimous rejection to the British military presence in the South Atlantic and unilateral activities which has been repeatedly expressed by regional organizations such as Mercosur, Unasur and the recently created Celac, plus other groups such as the association of Arab and South American countries, association of South American and African countries and the Group of 77 plus China.
Finally the Argentine government “reiterates once again on the 179 anniversary of the plunder, its standing and sincere disposition to resume the bilateral negotiation process with the UK, as is claimed by the international community, to find a peaceful and definitive solution to the sovereignty dispute and this way put an end to an anachronistic situation, incompatible with the evolution of the current post colonial world”.
Suggested Stories
-
May 23rd 2012
Following the Falklands’ ad incident Britain/Argentina at the opening hockey match in London
-
May 23rd 2012
Ambassador Castro embroiled in controversy over Falklands and “possible constitutional reform”
-
May 25th 2012
Cameron pays tribute to Falklands’ conflict dead and reaffirms Islanders right to self determination
-
May 24th 2012
Spain now tells Argentina “YPF is no more than a bump” in a long shared history
325 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history1.pdf
BTW Hector, the LE is curretly in Brazilian waters on its way to drill more holes in the seabed around the Falklands. Where is that South American solidarity we always hear about? Chuckle Chuckle.
One is “Off” and the other begins with “F”.
Not very diplomatic perhaps but then Turkey neck and her little puppy dogs deserve nothing better.
l would say that mr chuckle chuckle has gone home to Sweden for New Year's Eve celebrations.
Like the Sand People. He'll be back.
Timmerman, get lost. Go & “demand” elsewhere.
bilateral dialogue, ha ha ha. Go & talk to cristina, thats bilateral.
I wonder what CFK makes of that?
Nothing? Argentina and Brazil don't even share maritime borders.
Long Live the Falklands.
Tic tac. So many countries are claiming UK to talk. The time is coming.
If you don´t want to live in Argentina so leave because you are into it now.
BTW - The Leiv Eriksson is in the EEZ of Brazil at the moment. Where is your support from Brazil? Chuckle Chuckle!
America, Africa, Asia... even some in Europe like Spain and Portugal and some Caribean islands members of the Commonwalth are claiming the UK to negotiate... isn´t that enough?
There´s no End to the story until both parties come into an agreement.
Don´t be blind...
Perhaps:
We want to go to the ICJ . . . Oh yeah?
Little thing I wonder who was the dead body found on the Queens Sandringham estate this morning?I wonder is there any connection to Princess Dianas murder and that little coverup wouldnt do to have a Muslim screwing the Royal mother now would it???????
There is a peaceful solution. The Islanders have lived in peace since we liberated them from Argentine tyranny and don't want you crapping in their post office again.
If Brazil supports you then why are they facilitating the movement of the Leiv Eriksson to the Falkland Islands? Stop talking and do something about it if you have the balls.
That is the problem with her brand of 'socialism', you run out of other people's money to spend.
“In the 21st century it is the people invovled would have the right to say what is in their best interests. This is why you avoid taking any legal action”. There are cases in which the ICJ decided there were no rights of self determination to be considered. In fact the UN never recognized the self determination of Malvinenses... but caracterized Malvinas as a particular colonial situation.
You´re occupying argentine territory. If you didn´t want argentines around you, you should have stayed home.
Brazil supports Argentina. I thought latest times made it cleat that it´s not only about rethorical support... ilegal Malvinas flag vessels are banned (don´t exist to Latinamerica) and British battleships are banned (not welcome). Leiv Eriksson is a scientific ship.
A quick search of the ships currently docked in Montevideo shows me that the fishing vessel Jacqueline (FI flagged) is currently in port.
I thought Brazil wouldn't collaborate with oil exploration in the FI and I thought FI flagged vessels were banned from Uruguay? Not according to this evidence.
Wake up Islas, you are being ignored and there is nothing you can do about it :-)
Inherited nothing. Achieved nothing, and as far as the British Falklands are concerned - own nothing !
We are not occupying anyone's territory but our own.
After 178 ... ooops, 179 years even the johnny-cum-lately Argentina should have got used to it by now. Spain did :-)
Perhaps you would like to point these out to us. In this day and age, every case wins in right to self determination.
“we want take the dispute to the ICJ but without accepting any considerations prior 1974”
That's also a complete fabrication. If it went to the ICJ everything would be discussed. However anything prior to today would be irrelevant. What happened 200 years ago does not allow a country to stomp on peoples human rights. Self Determination will always win.
Islas has no argument and knows it.
Argentina has only two options, legal or military and it has neither the capacity or willingness to take either option.
The ships keep coming and going and the next rig gets closer every day; via Brazil!
The International Court of Justice shall immediately send the proceedings of the Committee on decolonization conflict the United Nations, which is the most appropriate body for interpreting and understanding the concepts of colonization and imperialism, its historical contexts and social processes, and has already extensively studied and reviewed and compared the arguments of both Argentina and the UK finally failed and it is a sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination. Just note that in the Malvinas Question General Assembly of the United Nations included this doctrine - the principle of territorial integrity taking into account the interests and NOT the wishes of the population of the islands - in its resolution 2065 (XX ) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21) , 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute by resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom).
In addition, every year, the Committee of the United Nations decolonization finds a resolution applying the criteria of Resolution 2065 of 1965 and it clearly states that sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination
The International Court of Justice is based on their judgments of the Decolonization Committee of the UN. Remember that the international court of justice and decolonization committee United Nations is supranational. Both have a lot of international prestige and complement each other.
Just read this turncoats profile on Wiki: what a shyster! He's had more changes of mind than Old Turkey Neck herself.
No wonder he's shot to the 'top' in Argentina's despotic government.
He will be just the person to go and lie and bleat and cry for Argentina if ever they get the courage up to go to the ICJ over the Falklands (there are no Malvinas). Gold plated prat or what?
The Falklands are about to become as wealthy as the Emirates with all the oil recently being found there. Once it amasses this large quantity of wealth, it can then stop being a “ Non-Self-Governing Territory” and become a sovereign and independent nation within the Commonwealth. It would be great to have a developed Commonwealth nation in South America, I bet you would see Brazilian, Uruguayan, Colombian, and Chilean governments rushing down there to sign free-trade agreements.
Argentina is afraid of a popular referendum. A UN sanctioned vote on autonomy would end this debate once and for all. Self-determination is a human right, the UN Charter of Human Rights supports this. Only dictatorships seem to think it's ok to colonize a sovereign and free people and bully them into war.
Legal or military. They are the only two options you have as our position is clear. Your move, and thanks to Brazil for supporting the FI drilling and to Uruguay for not implementing the ban on FI Flaged vessels :-) funny how your supporters can treat you with such contempt.
@Witless
Nothing? Argentina and Brazil don't even share maritime borders.
What am amazing observation by the big forge TIT himself.
Did you know that ships can MOVE nowadays. Even Argentine ships.
They can CROSS the Maritime boundary of Brazil.
Still you managed to type a sentence no matter how boring...
Be careful of your arthritis. type some more and keep your finger moving!!!
This has nothing to do with the Falklands really. It's just a drum CFK likes to beat to keep her daft nationalist subjects voting for her. It's a con - but it's being perpetrated on Argentines not Falklanders.
The specificity of the Malvinas question is that the United Kingdom occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the original population and did not allow their return, thus violating the territorial integrity of Argentina. Is ruled out then the possibility of applying the principle of self determination, as its exercise by the Islanders would cause the “breach of national unity and territorial integrity” of Argentina. In this regard it should be noted that resolution 1514 (XV) “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples” in the sixth paragraph states that “Any attempt aimed at partial or total disruption of national unity and territorial integrity a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. ”In the Malvinas Question General Assembly of the United Nations included this doctrine - the principle of territorial integrity taking into account the interests and NOT the wishes of the people of the islands - in its resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12) , 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom) ”to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee to review the situation, to find a peaceful solution to the problem, taking due account of the provisions and objectives of the UN Charter and Resolution 1514 (XV), and the interests of the people of the Falkland Islands. No desire. Since 2004 the Argentine government to the Malvinas Islands Question to appear on the permanent agenda and in the Bureau of the General Assembly.
@7 Prat-Hunter. Have you considered that the Falklands existed and were British long before your Argentine cesspit existed?
@14 P*** OFF! Got the picture, knucklehead?
@15 Quite right! Argentina should grow up.
@17 Don't be blind. There will be no negotiations. Britain doesn't abandon its people to fascist, totalitarian, racist, undemocratic, brain-washing, criminal tosspots.
@19 Dozy git. 1982. Uti possidetis. Got it now, lamebrain?
@21 Oh, f*** off, you illiterate animal. For your information, the body found at Sandringham has turned out to be some sort of Argentine. Shot through the space between her ears for....being Argentine. Good riddance.
@22 You have a real problem being intelligible, don't you? But on a specific point, have you noticed that you psychotics lie a lot? How can you tell whether an Argentine is lying? Its lips are moving. I use the pronoun advisedly. On the available evidence, the majority of Argentines are gay, queer homosexuals. Lots and lots of transexuals. Are you transexual, Marvin?
@25 Here's a tip. Keep it up and become part of a minority. Live argies.
@30 Here's a thought, dog's breath. Every year C24 gets nowhere. UN General Assembly resolutions are non-binding. Let's put it in terms you can understand. Argentina - “The man down at the newspaper kiosk said we were right! So I paid him for the newspaper I'd been reading for 20 minutes.” I accept that part of this analogy is ludicrous. The idea that argies can read, understand and reject government propaganda is beyond belief. Actually, the idea that argies can read is pushing it. Let's see, genocidal rebels against an imperialist colonialist regime who have become wannabe imperialist colonialists. In your psychotic dreams. Shall we give you some reasons why your “country” is a joke? Kirchner, Timerman, Arguello. AND YOU. You dozy, unintelligent, uneducated dipstick.
The idea that the FI are an integral part of your territory is a myth made up by Argentines and used to help you to further your colonial ambitions towards us. It has no basis in fact, history or geography.
You can keep repeating it til you're blue in the face. It won't make it true.
Our wishes and our interests are the same thing. Until you accept that you will just carry on making yourselves look like the intransigent neo- colonial dinosaurs that you are.
Time to put up or shut up.
Sure, b/c everyone is looking after signing deals with a powerful market of...3,000 people.
What will it be then? Not more more powerless words and bans that are not implemented, surely.
1806 ... English attack on to invade La Plata
1807 ... English expelled from this region again
1811/15 ... Spaniards withdrawn from region
1831 ... English uses US warship to destroy the islands
1833 ... English invade the islands to revenge of 1806/07
I refer you to my previous answer.
This site is in ENGLISH. If you don't like it then move (slowly. don't put you hip out or anything).
My Spanish serves me well enough for you information. You sure have a strange fixation on my ability to speak Spanish based on a typo. You clearly have issues.
The same fixation about Gays. You can't stop talking about them and bring it up in your retort to me. Perhaps your verbal violence towards me is a way of disguising your true feelings towards Homosexuals. Would you like me to send you a picture. You can look at it in private and work out you arthritis (although only in one arm).
1700 .... 1785 : GOLDEN AGE
1785 .... 1820 : FALLING DOWN
1820 .... 1900 : RECESSION
1900 .... 1940 : LIGHT TOSS
1940 .... today : LOWERING DOWN
Also, you *can* write paragraphs in other languages if your post includes at least some sentences in English.
See this: Lyin' é claramente é uma bicha mentirosa numa campanha contra o país que supostamente o acolheu.
what is your proposing which company to buy it's shares /or/
what few from London Stock Exchange ....??
Max Petroleum..... ?
Xcite Energy .....?
Borders & Southern Petroleum .....?
Melrose Resources ....?
Circle Oil .... ?
OK you win. you saw through my veil and pulled my thesis out of nowhere.
He loves it when i talk like that!
I'll tell you what. when you can prove your not a stumbling old fool clinging to chatboards for company i'll prove it ok?
WOW.....I am impressed. I can see how that makes you popular.
Do you speak to women? I mean..like....ever?
your comments have accordance with Twitter/Facebook not with here.!
You can't agrue with an idiot. You will only lose.
I'll stop now.
@55
i'll be waiting for your worthy proposings ....!!
sorry everyone!!
if there are any mates to discuss UK history(in brief) i wwant to
remind one of my original thesis which is ..
1900 ... 1940 : LIGHT RECOVERY PROCESS
i insist on that if there was no World War II ,the UK would be better today...............!!
i don't think so he was a gay .....!!
I think your right. The UK spent everything to defend not only it's empire but also Europe. Had the UK not done so I think the UK would still be more or less intact. Perhaps even as a closer union.
they made many prediction mistakes especially on Barborossa Military Action where have many Russian strategical tactics and USA's swift power from beyond Atlantic /Pasific....!
this is beyond strategic matters. The core conflicts occured in Europe. That the UK, along with France, Germany, and the Soviet Union, suffered from its effects, and more than would an outside player such as the US, was to be expected. Now, it's ridiculous to say that the country should've just stayed away from the conflict in order to save its forces. The UK was an important factor in the balance of power in Europe, and had it just ignored the war, then it wouldn't be unlikely that, say, the Soviet Union would have emerged as hegemon in most of Europe - under such a scenario, the UK's very safety would've been jeopardized. I don't really believe the UK had the option to ignore that war, and in engaging in it, it was expected that it would've been damaged badly. In this scenario - a prolonged, bloody war between the main powers - a new world hegemon always emerges, and such a hegemon is usually the great power that was least affected by that war. In this case, the US.
if Australia/New Zealand were not explored in lucky,
the UK would be worse today........!!
and most of them were Europeans, so please tell me if as we all know there was no Argentine or Argentine people at that time then how the hell did we kick argis of the Falklands when there was none to kick off in the first place. As for Argentina having the support of Uruguay Chile and Paraguay well as Sun Tzu said keep your friends close and your Enemies closer, so maybe it's time to watch your back.
the Great Britain has already been an island not related with/inside
of Europe....as an external country for Europe in always..
it's having tools Middle East to make balancing powers since the start
of 20 th century...but it is trapped while Second World War process years
for example that they lost in Middle East.../Pasific.....afterthat.
today ,it seems that not possible to getting involve in EU...
as we see that they don't have any important stations at America Continent..i think they are very jealous on America Continent interests.
have some appetite/energy to capture somethings....will they succeed it
let's wait and see....i think it is very very very hard to hold a position between China/USA/EU/Russia... they(English) play the lonely man in the world....
At least before WW2, the UK did have interests in mainland Europe, and many European countries - for example, Portugal - were well within British sphere of influence. And even if British had nothing to do in Europe, that doesn't mean that the emergence of a hegemon over that region - specially one such as the Soviet Union - wouldn't have raised security issues for the British. Just see the role the GB played in ending Napoleon's rule over the mainland.
And British Bulldog a rare specimen if there ever was one.what would you like to talk about pal.Your sentences are never really long enough to find out what you wajt to talk about.Please use the dictionary it helps.
Thanks to the Kirchners Argentina economy is doing well,
high economic growth rate, improved manufacturing sectors,increased exports,
lower unemployment and better trade relations with its neighbours, thats
a lot better than the former president of Argentina, But hey England is well
renowned for staling natural resources from countries and supporting despots
fot their own benefit and greed your a joke.
If you are FI inclined and want a safer play then RKH.
VOG (gas focused in Cameroon and new licenses in Russia) should have upside in 2012 as they are cash generators as of now. I used to hold Afren and made a great profit before they lost a huge amount of the mkt cap. Listed on the main market and making money but things in Nigeria can turn so some risk, but a very ambitious company.
here is a report from UK
date : November 2009
report owner : MI6
adress : Government
[..... UK is broken...school system deterriorating...the Economy is in shambler...collapsing..homelessness and poverty rates are expanding ... - -- yet we're nation building Iraq- Afghanistan sending economically distressed young people over 3-- 10 thousands as an annual cost of a few millions Pound........]
the brief history of UK lack the last period of British history that began in 2008
2008 - today - APOCALYPSE
where weak UK after the economic crisis, the insulation from its European partners and the scarcity of resources, the union begins to suffer. It just mention the minds of Scotland for independence or the extreme poverty that grows in Northern Ireland, the lack of sovereignty in overseas territories as a principle of weakness in the union.
But so many who suffer from amnesia,
It does not matter who agrees with you, it’s the wider implications that count,
The after effects, the ripple effect,
Great Britain will defend the Falklands, as long as they wish to remain British, and there is nothing you or the world can do about it, unless you wish a conflict,
The British government at this moment in time, is the only country that is stopping this from escalating into a violent conflicts,
By sitting back and doing nothing, while just listening to the children play sabre rattles, is probably the best way to deal with it, until or unless Argentina either gets brave and takes her chances, or you find another friend who is willing to back you up militarily , then we have to except that you are of no danger, we both know nothing is impossible, but who will be the foolish one,
,, as said before sooner or later, CFK will make one mistake to often,
When that day will come, we may never know, until it happens, but you are still running out of time,
After 2015/6 it will never happen, you just cant understand the British can you,, why we will stand up to the world, over a few rock, and you children still have no clue,
But if you were British, then you would fully understand ,
And that is the difference, [you aren’t]
As long as they wish to be British, we will defend them [out numbered][out gunned] or not,
[ Forgetit87 ]
Thank you for defending British interest, it is always the wider implications and after effects that count, and we had no choice, whereas the Americans could afford to wait,
.
I've just googled the excerpt you quoted...and it doesn't come from a British report nor does it address the UK's situation. It was from an op-ed at the NYT on the US.
RKH = Rockhopper Exploration
Per share price : 2.5 £
Market Value : 639.5 millions £
Net Income : -- 4.8 millons £ (negative)
Turnover : ...not determined...
----------------------------------------
AFREN :
per share price : 1.6 £
Market value : 1.580 millions £
net income : 29.3 millions £
Turnover : 207 millions £
the likely fragmentation of UK are expected and no surprise.....!!
your @79 comment is very emotional not European style ...!!
This is not about being weak or strong militarily. There isn't even a single thought about war, this is about making it difficult for those who live in the islands. Can't you understand this for once in your life?
1831 ... English uses US warship to destroy the islands
On the contrary, in 1823 the US State Department began the Monroe Doctrine, which stayed in place for the next 100 years. You can read more about it here:
www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=23
The British were really at a low ebb of influence over the Americans after the War of 1812. Perhaps our Argentine friends are unaware of it, but the British navy had been “pressing” (really kidnapping) American sailors into serving the British military. There were other naval matters in dispute regarding merchant trade shipments, slave boats, and illegal seizures of goods, suspected Irish rebels and ships. This resulted in a war, where the British burned down the White House. The war ended in a stalemate treaty, but 19 years later (1831) the Americans were still angry with the British.
The Special Relationship began in the 20th century.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwFKXUoo5sI
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA73POY0qok
www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=JqcHcuAMdfg
What is supporting RKH is a world class discovery and they own 100% of their licence. This is very rare these days just look at the North Sea and parts of Africa.
Afren is a different play. I am not in Afren at the moment (so missed out on a 20% gain today) but they were revenue positive in 2010 and they are producing. This is a future dividend payer with trading potential (as evidenced by today).
Ok ....!!
there were no interested with Monroe Doctrine
BECOUSE
English claims these islands are their own rights
not any internal affair intervention in their thought.
if the Monroe Doctrine was worked US would back
Argentina against UK......!!
Not Sweden this year, my dear Squatterette………….
Enjoying the Ligurian sun in the company of Mr. A……. M….. O.B.E.
Clearing Seghezzo’s stock of Imperial 76 & 82 Speysides whilst talking Malvinas (and Suez....)
Astounding how knowledgeable, pleasant and well informed those old FCO’s chaps can be…....... :-)
@30: Raul, you have nonsensically posted the same comment more than 10 times. You are of course completely mistaken. UN Charter Article 73 and the Falkland Islanders right to self-determination prevails over any other agreement and the UN Decolonization Committee's remit is to report on Great Britain's implementation of resolution 1514(XV) for the Falkland Islanders to the UN General Assembly, no more, no less.
The UN International Court of Evidence shall base it's judgement on the merits or lack thereof of the Argentine claim and require evidence to meet the legal standard of the burden of proof, not the perverse Argentine nationalist political standard of the benefit of assumption.
As an aside to that, the British shall stand by the Falkland Islanders whatever the threat. I do not think the Brazilian Executive is impressed by Argentines who threaten that Brazil would intervene military on behalf of Argentine in the event of illegal Argentine aggression contrary to the UN Treaty. Brazil shall do no such thing because illegal intervention contrary to the UN Treaty shall never be in Brazil's national interest and as a member of the UN Security Council Brazil shall be obligated to uphold the UN Treaty.
If Argentines think the British fear the Brazilians because of Argentine misplaced threats then Argentines are sorely mistaken. Brazil and Great Britain enjoy good mutual relations, share common values and political aspirations, provide privileged access to advanced defense technology and most favored nation trading status
The dispute with Great Britain is entirely Argentina's affair, Brazil simply offers its friendly help and encouragement for equitable resolution
As a part of commonwelth countries you have many places to live better than Malvinas, and more opportunities without any conflict with any country. Come on! Are u clever?
In my case, i investigated, and i'll always do it, because i wont never buy none government official propaganda, like some of you do unfortunately.
It's true that not all the population was expelled, in the same way that it's not true the fact that our claim was continuous, but the u. k. didn't have any right to force our authorities to leave the islands, beside in the statements by the councellours from the l. a, before the u. n, most them omit that in 1968, and in 1980 the british governments tried to persuade the islanders, in order to achieve that they accept to negotiate a solution for the sovereign dispute, and omit also that in 1985 the international comunity voted twice by a lanslide against the british proposal of including references about self determination for this cause, in my survey i have much more information about it, i can send it to any one.
Anyway the debate for the malvinas-falkland cause can be reduced nor to the events of 1833, nor to the phrases, the malvinas are argentine, or the falklands are british and there is nothing to discuss, many things happeend since 1833, and we must understand that if none of the two countries proposes to take the question to the i. c. j it's due to both aren't sure that they can win the case, that's why the best that we can do, is to respect once and for all the resolutions, and resume the negotiations, like the u. n signalizes, beyond the hate that some of you feel for our government, we all must be more inteligent, and not buy the pathetic and partial propaganda that some times the politicians from both sides parrot.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism_in_Great_Britain
Britain: Stop lying now ! ! ! . I´m not Argentinian but It´s clear the Malvinas Islands is only a little example of lot of territories stolen by UK.
You haven't got a clue have you?
The UK and the Falklands are not the same thing.
We are British citizens but we are not the 'UK'.
We study our own history, which is not the same as UK history.
And if I wanted to earn the money that my qualifications and experience could command in another place, I wouldn't be living here that's for sure.
We live here because it's our home and we love it. That's why you haven't got a chance.
You said “As you part of anglican culture it is so difficult to understand for you. You live in Malvinas just to earn money and just a land that it is not easy to have in UK. You don´t study the antropology of the land, the cultures of South America and why S.America is so socialist, etc.” The answer to your question is: You're wrong. Europe invented Socialism, it knows how Socialim works, and what it is.
We are British citizens but we are not the 'UK'.
We study our own history, which is not the same as UK history.
It is so interesting .... the great limitation of your culture. but, in another bloog I gonna to explain.
Yes, 104, it is your feeling, just this, but we are 45.000.000 persons with same feeling of Malvinas. is it your real home?, SOUTH AMERICA? Come on! You don´t have any right, Falklands/Malvinas is a territory in despute.
err... sorry but I think you built your house in my backyard, that's usurpation.
Anyway, our problems are not the kelpers, you are Argentines want to or not because you were born on our soil, and we will respect your property when we administer the islands, our problem is who's handled as puppets for their own convenience, you do not realize. When the Falkland Islands are governed by Argentina, you will have a better quality of life to which Her Majesty currently has an interest in giving you.
I am not responsible for your 'dispute'. It's your choice and you must do as you see fit.
I'm not impressed by your '45 million people can't be wrong' argument. Minorities have been persecuted by stronger majorities throughout history, but that doesn't make it right
108 BJK
I said I didn't have much money, not that I had a poor quality of life. That, like the rest of your post, is pure fantasy.
106 Argentina has many different kind of socialist parties (many), it is no the same of UK. For this reason, we could talk about kind of differences. However, this kind of social and politicals feelings are so different from UK (you have 2 parties labours or conservators). When read about UK, I discovered that the Queen is an exactly fascist meaning. You compose (in your mind or as a subliminal menssage) the feeling thru of the religion, but it continues being a fascist characteristics. If you study the fascist meaning and w.a.s.p. social characteristics, u will probably find that I told u.
Everything you want, but your house is built on our territory. And basically if you were born here, you're from Argentina, if you want to accept it. But if you do not accept it should go, if you want to be British, your true home is thousands of miles closer to your majesty and his gay son. Go Home.
An atheist raised a Catholic and a woman, apart from that you're entirely correct.
** brit
your @79 comment is very emotional not European style ...!!
of course , as always .
As for the rest,
No point in talking to brick walls, complete waste,
If you think they are your, then go and get them
Either
1. Fight for them
2. 2, go to the ICJ
3. One or the other,
4. [or]
5. The third rule, [twins]
Deny everything refuse to go anywhere,
But persuade every one, its all their fault, and then just talk them to death,
And if they get fed up,
Talk even more, until you get more supports,
We think you have and ore choosing the third rule,
This is what you have been doing,
Were doing, and still are doing,
So keep up the talking boys
Because no one is listening, or will, be listening, until you go home, grow up, and come back as adults, and treat others with the same respect, as you would expect to be treated .
.
then peace would rain in S/A
...................................
118 Kipling /comparison is when you compare roman right and angloxason right.
or a roman road, to an argentine road, a bit like the truth really. ahm
hehe, finally you got it that you cannot argue with yourself here by typing bs. It's stupid, but oh wait, you're a moron.
Brits are so ugly, they can't face reality by looking into the mirror and face their own ugly problems. Must listen podcast, UK's debts worst in G20 with no Gold, if their is a crisis in 2012, it will be the sterling, not the dollar and Euro.
www.kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2011/12/31_Jim_Rickards.html
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR_ishXaA6s
106
I f you study the socialism, u don´t have one socialism .....(many things to know) today, you have an example in Norway thru socialism (pure) and a diferent if u compare with Vietnam that is socialist too.
Another thing, .... . If I study the meaning of Fascism I discover that CFK is a fascist. Why not? As a Thatcher or Golda Meir. Why not as well?
you are so Argentines as we are , beacuse you Were born in our land.
We want a constructive relationship with you, we want to join us, we are waiting you with open arms. Do not be fooled by the UK they only thing they want is to take advantage of you, they use you as puppets and you do not realize. If you join to form an unite nation, you can develop.
Think of your children, what future can have on a remote island with a monarchy that wants to use politically, and make money, in an atmosphere of political instability and fear of being constantly invaded.
You can not grow well in peace ever, that is not quality of life.
Please reflect.
think about your future and your children
Join us
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-13780144
“Brits fear 2012 will be another bleak year”
“Consumers are bracing themselves for another arduous year in 2012”
www.londonstockexchange.com/news/personal-finance/newsbespoke-budgeting/154-brits-fear-2012-will-be-another-bleak-year.htm
“UK manufacturers have worst quarter since 2009 recession”
www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jan/03/uk-manufacturers-worst-quarter-2009-recession
“Argentina ratified Tuesday its ‘imprescriptible” sovereignty rights over the Malvinas, South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands and adjoining maritime spaces and blasted the UK for not abiding by UN”
The truth can´t be hide for ever. You need to know that Malvinas Islands are a part of Argentina and all the islanders will be friendly received in this country, you have the same rights as the rest of Argentinian people.
The Latin rite became obsolete with the second Vatican Council, which was before I was born.
Catholicism has persisted in England since before the reformation en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_England_and_Wales
.... although my ancestors came from Ireland, which has been Catholic since the 7th Century.
Oh dear, another Kippers stereotype bites the dust.
Why is your country classified as a “Flawed Democracy”.
Thanks to Brazil for allowing the latest oil rig to utilize their services and thanks to Uruguay for continuing to allow FI flagged vessels into their ports and allowing the Royal Navy's HMS Protector to dock as well.
Argentina is easily ignored due to it's insignificance.
What's next ??
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIX0ZDqDljA
fellow Argentines(gasp,choke etc)!!(oh! the honour!!).
Well chaps, we don't want to be Argentines & we're not moving.
This is NOT part of Argentina & yes, we ARE keeping the OIL! Yummy!
So you've realised that threats don't work, so you're turning on the smarmy charm. Just a bit late l would say.
@132 Kipling,
There are many catholics in the UK & not just from immigrants either.
The Duke of Norfolk's family, l believe have always been catholic.
@127johnfarrel,
We're not being fooled by England & the Falklands are NOT part of Argentina.
@123BJK,
Thank you for your kind offer, but we do not want to join you.
Cero-idiot, you are the ones living on stolen land.
@97Axel,
Hello Axel, you again. The answer is still, NO NEGOTIATIONS ♥
I see sr Think is back, like a bad penny, l knew he would turn up sooner or later♥ :)
That will do for now, Greetings all.
That's OK, it seems that you can just 'nationalise it back' with little or no compensation (just like a 'revolution') whenever your people run out of food or raw materials or space for people to live - or just when you feel like it, like before a presidential election.
Democratic dictatorships are wonderful things.
Long Live the Falklands.
The millions of British Roman Catholics who turned out to see Pope JP2 in 1981 and Pope Benedict in 2010 would not agree with you.
You're an idiot and a troll. Not even a very good troll.
Are you seriously telling me I don't know whether I'm a Roman Catholic or an Anglican? Give it up- you're making yourself look foolish.
Also how did the Argentine communicate there immediately protested as until 1861 there was not any country known as Argentina?
According to a release from the Argentine Foreign Affairs ministry on 3 January 1833 the Falkland Islands were occupied by British forces which “dislodged the Argentine population and authorities legitimately established in the Islands, replacing them with subjects from the occupying power”.
Argentina immediately protested the illegitimate act of force
now that's the past out of the way, I would like to thank the Argentine government for all the help they are giving the Falklands, new and better air links new deep-water port making us much less dependent on link's to SA, the list go's on, so please keep up the good work and watch us grow and prosper.
So Happy New Year to you and may all you wish for others come back to you 10 fold.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRwXrcz-F9M
www.visionmaritima.com.uy/vision-maritima/index.php/actualidad/2181-uruguay-oficializo-veto-a-la-flota-de-malvinas-para-sus-puertos
the jacqueline boat in Montevideo:
search in google : un barco de las islas malvinas descansa en Montevideo. cronista.com
(the jacqueline boat was there before it was taken this resolution)
barcos gallegos no pueden zarpar por falta de gasoil. la voz de galicia.es
the argentinian decree of 2010 is one thing we apply to argentinian ports and waters
this resolution dates of 29-12-11 and is of mercosur
anyway they can enter to montevideo ports using other flag
enjoy
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKIkzGGAG9s
Raul - stop repeating yourself. If you want to argue that the islanders have no right to self-determination, then it would have to argue this in the International Court of Justice. No other forum can give an opinion on this.
Time to put up or shut up.
I never shut up, or fails to comment on the Argentine rights over the Malvinas. As I said before the International Court of Justice would never go against the decolonization committee of the UN. This committee, as it does every year in their decisions, ruled that a sovereignty dispute. It is not self-determination.
The First Transitory Provision of the Constitution of 1994 states: ”The Nation Argentina ratifies its legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich and the corresponding maritime and island spaces, being an integral part of the country. The recovery of these territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life for its inhabitants and according to the principles of international law, constitute a permanent and unwavering goal of the Argentine people.
i´m not an idiot and you don´t look so smart. besides i don´t live in any stolen land. You have no sense of reality.
138 Kelper San...
Antonio “Gaucho” Rivero, Juan Brassido, José María Luna, Manuel González, Luciano Flores, Felipe Zalazar, Marcos Latorre and Manuel Godoy is good enough for you or you need more names?
Malvinas are Argentine, but no usurper will ever face the truth.
“Well, I’m beginning to get a little disillusioned”
You should.
Get used to it :-))
now as there was no Argentine in 1833 what time line are they from?
I can see Spanish and Italian's Implanted people but they were not Argentine, just people Implanted by Spain now you must no you own history better than me and you know as I do it was not till 1861 that the Argentine came to exist, there for no Argentine's not what was the first thing you started doing after getting independent's? you started killing of the Indigenous population, and you don't live in a stolen land try telling that to the natives that were there first,
May 25th, we said good bye to Spain
July 9th, 1816, Declaration of Independence
1825 our Independence was recognized by England
and finally in 1864 , Spain recognized our Independence as well. Hope it helps :-)
I've seen those names before. Weren't they still around in August 1833 to murder Matthew Brisbane? (Despite having been 'expelled' by the British already).
They weren't 'Argentine', but I actually can't be bothered to find out where they came from. I don't think it makes a scrap of difference where they came from.
You missed out the women, one of whom is probably an ancestor of my next door neighbour (despite having been 'expelled' by the British).
145 Raul
We know what your constitution says. That's why we have nothing to talk about. Bye bye.
KELPER SAN: Read my comment 97, i can send you all the information that you need.
XBARILOX: I read many of your comments, and i dont use to answer them, as you can see, your level of debate is so low and ignorant that it doesn't worth to give you an asnwer, but this time i decided to answer your comment, because i want you to know that unfortunatelly you have the partial and ignorant knowledge about my country which is tipical of the empires, i suggest you to search better sources, and leave behind the prejudgements that you have against argentina, in case that you want to give a serious answer.
On the other hand, we have never been friends with the u. k., we were just one more british colony during planty of years, and that was due the loans that some governments got from the u. k., the british handled our economy during more than 100 years, and only when peron took the power, he could finish with the economic dependence, i am not peronist, but i can't ignore this fact.
I don't follow you. Do you think Spain was going to recognize our Independence right away? Are you serious?
Since when is the official independence day the day a defeated colonial master recognizes independence? Interesting how Britards on this forum manage to maintaion their uppity attitude when for the most part their contribution to discussion doesn't go beyond empty pretension and distortions.
yes, it does. We won the war of Independence way before 1860.
You're a silly boy, aren't you? The whole of South America was “taken” and occupied by Spaniards, Italians and Portuguese from the other side of the world. You are just descendants of those that stole the continent. Nobody gave it to you, you just “took” it. So nothing any South American says needs to be believed. You are only people living on stolen land. So who cares what you think? Your ancestors were thieves and you still are. Of course you're an idiot. You're an argie. It's like night follows day. You're an argie so you're an idiot. I know the next bit is going to be difficult for you, so I'll take it slowly. It doesn't matter when you “declare” your independence. What does matter is when the country that owns the land recognises that independence. In your case you were sitting on Spanish land. Until Spain recognised your independence, it was still Spanish land. It's a bit like “declaring” that you're a doctor. You don't get to practice until the governing body looks at your qualifications and agrees that you are a doctor. You can't “inherit” land in the way that you suggest. It's not legal. It has to be specifically ceded to you. Got the bit of paper ceding the Falklands to you, have you? It would need to be signed both by Spain and Britain. In human affairs, there are four methods of acquiring sovereignty. Cession, conquest, occupation and prescription. We've established you haven't got the first. You can't have the second because there was no-one there to conquer. Occupation might be a possibility except there mustn't be objections from other states. And the same applies to prescription. So you had no rights to the any of Argentina until you were recognised by Spain. And you would never have rights to the Falkland Islands until Britain agreed to cede them to you. That's the law. Also get used to another legal principle. 'Uti possidetis'. At the end of a conflict, territory belongs to the combatant in possession.
My point exactly !
This is good news actually. We could just declare independence from Argentina and that would be the end of it.
Since then, the adjective 'Argentina' was limited to residents of the Argentina Confederation, later called Argentina.
The constitution promulgated on December 24, 1826 was called the Constitution of the República Argentina. Here is the writing of our independence: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Argentina._Acta_de_Independencia_%28Provincias_Unidas_en_Sud-América%29.jpg
I've already gave you some names of people that were a citizen of the Argentine in 1833 that was living in Malvinas
Now that we all know that Malvinas were settled before 1833, the people living there were argentinian, and Argentina exist before that date. Can someone explain me why is it ok that the british took the island?
It is OK because the garrison were squatters and shouldn't have been here in the first place.
It's OK because the settlers didn't have to leave, and their way of life and interests were respected ;-)
England doesn't have a God-given right to expand their country's borders invading a third of the planet anymore, so little by little are being sent back home to their small island in Europe where they belong. British people like yourself are welcomed to follow James Peck example or to return to London with your new colonial Governor Nigel Haywood and friends.
Despite being in peaceful relations with the Confederation of Argentina, on 3 January next year the British evacuated the garrison of 26 soldiers and Argentina established a military garrison. The CIVILIAN argentinien population was expelled. Since then, the islands have been under British rule.
The real story is not the fairy tale that sold you, and the British have no real rights, they simply usurped
No, the civilian population was not expelled. There is census evidence, eye- witness accounts and gravestones in Stanley cemetary which all prove it.
You have been taught to believe a lie, sorry.
Even if all your ideas were true, how would it help? What's your solution?
Live and learn - falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history1.pdf
But be warned, Malvinistas - the ruth will hurt !
Is that so? When I visited London I only heard the name Allah :-)
Who in the hell is Ruth?
1) As a middle school teacher you should, at least, be able to spell ”puerile”.
2) Mr. Millet's comment (175) may be reductionistic ...…. but nonetheless, basically true.
3) As even 13-14 year-olds know, “Britishnes” is very firmly based on the ”Family Values” of Henry VIII.
You've got your knickers in a knot if think Mr Millet's version is basically true.
Henry the VIII (you got that right, not Henry XIII as Millet said)did not break from Rome because he couldn't divorce Anne Boleyn, but because he couldn't divorce Catherine of Aragon.
The gutless pope did not want to upset Spain, then the most powerful nation in Europe.
And as for your nasty little crack at #3, well we'll just ignore that.
@176 Cero,
The Falklands were not “usurped” from anyone.
Despite all the lies you believe in, they have NEVER belonged to Argentina, although you tried to steal them twice(and were ejected like the trespassers you are, both times).
Talking about stolen land, when will you give back to Paraguay the land that Argentina stole in 1871?
When will you give back to the native peoples the land that you Argentines stole from them, after killing a lot of them, of course.
Cero, you live on STOLEN land. Don't you think?
The Falklanders are partly descended from the civilian population supposedly “expelled”.
You have no case.
@170Marcos,
And you my dear squatter are welcome to return to Europe after you have handed over to the native people the land that your ancestors stole from them. Take sr Think with you. He is presently squatting up in the cold Andes, so it should be no problem for him to adapt to life in a cold Scandinavian forrest.
But be warned, Malvinistas - the ruth will hurt !” (Lord Ton, #173)
the isolde can be quite painful, too.
The answer is quite simple for anyone who doesn't have a pint of lard for a brain. There are four internationally-recognised methods of acquiring sovereignty over a territory. Argentina (or more properly the United Provinces of South America achieved none of them. By contrast, Britain complied with at least two and, arguably, three. Is that clearer now?
When I prooved you the opposite, then some of you sayd that those people were no argentinian.
When I proved you even with names an other things that they were, you said that Argentina was not called Argentina.
Then shared a link to the declaration of our independence, another to a map of 1816 where the Falklands were included as Argentine territory and another to our constitution dating from 1822 under the name of the constitution of the Republic of Argentina ...
Some of you already admitted that malvinas were usurped, but this is ok.
So now again your arguments change since previous arguments do not serve you.
Each new response from you confirms my belief that the islanders never face the truth. no seguiré gastando pólvora en chimangos.
Don´t worry, dejalos que se pisan solos, when they don´t have más sevita, because, c stán kgandu de hambre....
Read my comment 97 please, and give me your answers, i can send you all the information to refute your so partial knowledge. or unless read the comment, it will help you.
You do not have a monopoly on 'truth'.
Nobody is disputing what happened in the past. There were some people here in 1833 who left because the British insisted. Other people stayed here and became British Falkland Islanders. That's all you can say for sure. They are the verifiable facts.
The rest is your interpretation, or mine. Whether you can call those people Argentinian, whether they should have been here at all, the word 'usurped', it's all just opinion.
As for your map from 1816, that isn't 'truth' or evidence, or anything of the kind. I've seen maps with half the world coloured red to denote British territory. I don't hear anyone calling that the 'truth'.
I have been entirely consistent in my views of what you call the 'truth'. I don't believe any sane or reasonable person or body is going to ruin my life and the lives of every other Falkland Islander on the basis of something that can't be proven about something that happened in 1833.
187 axel arg
That goes for you too. There is nothing you can possibly say to me about the events of 1833 that will make me change my mind about whether or not we should be subjugated by Argentina against our will. I'm not going to argue about it because I don't care. It doesn't make any difference. What part of that are you planning to refute? It's my view and I'm entitled to it. You can't refute it.
What you need is a practical solution. A way to subdue an unwilling population. I keep asking you for one, and you don't ever answer.
When I prooved you the opposite, then some of you sayd that those people were no argentinian.
Cero, you have proved absolutely nothing.
es.scribd.com/doc/14887706/Falkland-Islands-Population-Evolution
Even if Spain had established sovereignty over the Falklands, this sovereignty never passed to Argentina.
There was no inheritance from Spain. In fact it is legally impossible for Argentina to have inherited the Falklands from Spain. Spain did not begin to relinquish any of ifs territories in the Americas until 1836
es.scribd.com/doc/34394898/Establishment-of-Diplomatic-Relations
and when it recognised Argentina in 1859 it did not cede the Falklands to Argentina, as it no longer was in the position to do so. A state cannot cede territory it does not possess, and Spain was not in possession of the Falklands
Argentina achieved its independence by unilateral secession, not by inheritance from Spain and in the case of unilateral secession sovereignty over territory is achieved by establishing effective control over that territory. Argentina never established effective control over the Falklands
es.scribd.com/doc/34399357/Extracts-from-Crawford
Not really, Isolde is a lovely kitten afraid to wet her paws in the cold Argentinean waters(Surf Bay).
Ruth must be Redhoyt's Thai masseuse.
They cry for what they cant have, for the fact remains that we may very well be overseeing the demise of a great country, down to the lower Escalon’s of society,
Brazil is the main man, the west looks to brazil,
Very soon Argentina will start to breed contempt for Brazil, probably start accusing brazil of stealing argie land,
Brazil it is then,
Argentina, [who]
.
Long Live Scotland -- Long Live Republic
Long live the republic of delusion
I kid you not. The map showing all the red bits belonging to Britain does exist. It used to hang in every schoolroom in the Empire.
However, putting something on a map does not make it true or right. Britain did not own half the world.
Neither does the fact that you can produce a map from 1816 showing the Falklands as part of Argentina make it either true or right.
I've tried to explain that very simply for you, but I think you are struggling to understand what I am saying. A combination of the language barrier and your innate prejudices. Either that or you're just a bit dim.
If you persist in using perjorative and racist language ('these people') then we have nothing more to say to each other.
Argentina argues that they inherited the Falklands from Spain in 1816, so they had sovereignty in 1833 when the UK took over and that the UK expelled the population. Now, Argentina has said this many times, and people like you repeat it often. But, Argentina, though it has stated it many times, in 179 years has not presented a single shred of evidence to prove that it inherited the Falklands from Spain or that the population was expelled. So I challenge you, Cero, to do something that no Argentine government has ever done. To prove that Argentina inherited the Falklands from Spain and that the population was expelled. It must be proof, not someone many years saying that it happened. The proof must contemporary documentation such as a treaty between Spain and Argentina before 1833 or the accounts of those expelled or other eyewitnesses, not unsubstantiated assertions by people who were never there when the events happened.
Argentina argumenta que heredó a las Falklands de España en 1816, así que tenía soberanía en 1833, cuando el Reino Unido tomó posesión y que el Reino Unido expulsó a su población. Ahora, Argentina ha dicho esto muchas veces, y personas como tú lo repiten a menudo. Sin embargo, Argentina, a pesar de que lo ha dicho muchas veces, en 179 años no ha presentado ni una pizca de evidencia que demuestre que heredó a las Falklands de España o que la población fue expulsada. Así que te reto a ti, Cero, a que hagas algo que ningún gobierno argentino jamás haya hecho nunca. Probar que Argentina heredó a las Falklands de España y que la población fue expulsada. Tienen que ser pruebas, no alguien muchos años después diciendo que sucedió. La prueba debe documentación de la época, tales como un tratado entre España y Argentina antes de 1833 o los relatos de los expulsados u otros testigos oculares, no afirmaciones infundadas por personas que nunca estuvieron allí cuando ocurrieron los hechos.
But twas not until adulthood, did English scramble through,
Just a thought .
.
as spain invade our territory, when we made the revolution and fought for independence and sent them back to spain and killed many too (remember we were mixed people, criollos, 6.000.000 of mixed people - natives and spaniards mixes- and only thousands of spaniards) we inherited all the territory they stole (it was not of them, it was of the natives remember)and that they invaded illegally and subjugated its people by the use of force. the territory came back to its real owners.
by the way, we know perfectly well what it is a colony, a revolution, independence. southamerica doesnt need you to tell us what it is. we were protagonists of that. and facts talk for themselves. we couldnt ask spaniards for permission to get independence, you see, they with the use of much force, wouldnt give it to us. we had to fight. and all SAM did the same.
southamerica is for south americans. not intruders.
The Falklands never had indigenous Amerindian inhabitants; they were never Amerindian territory. Unlike the continent, the Falklands were never under the sovereignty of any Amerindian tribe before the arrival of Europeans, so how Spain conquered South America is irrelevant to the Falklands.
Nobody says you needed to ask for permision to get independence, but if you do it unilaterally, by force, then you have not achieved that independence via an inheritance. The notion of an inheritance in this case is totally absurd. Argentina can no more inherit from Spain territory it has taken without Spain's consent than you can inherit from your father land, or anything else, you take from him without his consent. In short, Argentina did achieve sovereignty over its territory, but it was not through an inheritance from Spain
And you are extremely naive if you believe that the land was returned to indigenous Amerindians on independence
Las Falklands nunca tuvieron habitantes indígenas amerindios, nunca fueron territorio indígena. A diferencia del continente, las Falklands nunca estuvieron bajo la soberanía de ningún tribu indígena antes de la llegada de los europeos, así que como España conquistó América del Sur es irrelevante para las Falklands.
Nadie dice que era necesario pedir permiso por obtener la independencia, pero si lo haces de manera unilateral, por la fuerza, entonces no has logrado esa independencia a través de un herencia. La noción de una herencia en este caso es totalmente absurda. Argentina ni más puede heredar España de territorio que ha tomado sin el consentimiento de España que tú puedes heredar de tu padre terreno, o cualquier otra cosa, que has tomado de él sin su consentimiento. En resumen, la Argentina logró la soberanía sobre su territorio, pero no fue mediante una herencia de España
Y eres extremadamente ingenua si crees que el territorio fue devuelta a los indígenas amerindios con la independencia
southamerica is for south americans. not intruders.
Malen
There was no war of independence in the Falklands, and if the Falklands are in South America then Falkland Islanders are as South American as you are.
No hubo guerra de independencia in las Falklands, y si las Falklands están en Sudamérica, entonces los Falklanders son tan sudamericanos como tú
Mr David
Perhaps you can explain to us(no excuses)why the English invaded one third of the planet(like Malvinas) or invaded Iraq based on a big lie, not to mention the miliions who suffered as a consequence of all this criminal actions.
They are illegitimate distractions from the real debate of the history and diplomacy of the dispute. Frankly, name calling, whether making fun of British, Argentines, Catholics, Protestants or another creed diminishes the credibility of the accuser. It is difficult to take anyone seriously if he is willing to write such low words.
Let us return the debate to the facts, and see what can be done. From the British perspective, I can see that 30 years is not so far in the past. They have recent memories of the war and invasion. They see appalling government corruption in Argentina (come on Argentines, you've all complained to me about it when I visited!). They see a population that partied in 1982 when the invasion started, and denied for many years how badly they were defeated. They see a government that has been very slow indeed to prosecute Dirty War military figures for murdering 30,000 people in a horrible manner. They see an economy with 29% inflation (which outstrips its rate of growth), little means of establishing credit due to lack of IMF repayment, and riots and strikes every week in Buenos Aires.
I do understand their reluctance to join up with Argentina. They might be more willing to join up with a more stable country like Chile.
Perhaps you can explain why Spain did the same thing, without which you would never have been born.
No Axel, l am not going to read your drivel again. l will merely reiterate,
1) Argentina has no “legitimate rights” in the Falklands.
2) Argentina has NEVER owned this land & NEVER will.
3) We will not talk or “negotiate” our sovereignty with you or anyone else.
So, Axel, the answer is NO, and l don't want to talk to you again either.
@193 Alexx,
long live Scotland.
Yes, Alex, you've said that many times. l agree, long live Scotland♥♥♥♥
@197,198 & 201Cero, Kipling & malen,
You three are a fine pair if l ever saw one!♥
Nothing intelligent or constructive to say.
@205 Millet,
l don't know what history book you are reading, but Henry VIII did not murder his first wife, Catherine. He would not be silly enough for that. lt would have brought immediate war with Spain(Catherine was Spanish) & Spain the most powerful nation in Europe at that time.
He did however murder his second wife, Anne Boleyn & some others.
@206 Marcos,
What has any of your post got to do with the Falklands?
Even if the UK invaded two thirds of the planet, that does not change our situation one little piece.
Argentina has absolutely no rights in the Falklands at all. And never will have.
QED.
@199 dab14763,
Thank you for your correct interpretations.
The Argentines are just so indoctrinated that l think it will take several generations to become normal again.
Unfortunately for them, they may well be part of Brazil by then.♥
Mr David
I am not alive thanks to Spain nor I need to explain their actions, I am Argentinean not Spaniard, ask them.
You are English so I ask you the same question again:
Please explain to us(no excuses)why the English invaded one third of the planet(like Malvinas) or invaded Iraq based on a big lie, not to mention the miliions who suffered as a consequence of all this criminal actions.
2)Davidab are you suggesting that getting independence by force is not legal, but it is legal being invaded, subjugated stolen by force?? Are you suggesting that people of this territory instead of fighting for independnece should have continue being subjugated and waited till the colonizators wanted?? hmmmmm
3) yes the land was returned to amerindians and all the mixed people that happenned between them and colonizators. these criools, mestizos, mulatos, also were subjugated by spaniards. and the amerindians with the mixed people fought together to get freedom.
our liberator san martín helped peruvians to get freedom from spaniards, the only way to recover their land, not being subjugated.
4) the isles are a british overseas territory, their head of state is a british queen, the population british and their wishes are to be british.
the isles were populated by argentina in 1833. had a legal authority.
5) dont need you to make translation, i can read and understand english. your translator of english to spanish is not good, doesnt make sense the sentences.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10637526
30,000 missing in Argentina
Nuns thrown from a great height
Argentina illegally invades innocent islands,
What you do
We can do better
You are so desperate that you spend all day looking up British past,
For your proper gander
You lost, live with it .
Argentina demise is argentines governments fault
No one else’s, while your eyes are focused on British interest,
Your own interest is going down hill.
Ok guys, it really doesn't worth to debate with you, keep on buying your own british propaganda if it makes you happy, in my case i prefer to investigate because i wont buy nobodys's propaganda, this is evident that you never understood anything, no one wants to subdue your people, we are talking just about negotiations, like the u. n signalizes, however, if you prefer to victimize your self, it's lamentable, but it's your problem, i recognize the mistakes that my country surelly commited in the last years, but if you have capacity to critic your own behaviour that shows how miopic you are.
A piece of Argentine History for you ! Jan 5, 1975
LA PRESIDENTE DE LA NACIÓN ARGENTINA
En Acuerdo General de Ministros:
DECRETA:
Art. 1º El Comando General del Ejército procederá a ejecutar las operaciones militares que sean necesarias a efectos de neutralizar y/o aniquilar el accionar de los elementos subversivos que actúan en la Provincia de Tucumán.
Art. 2º El Ministerio del Interior pondrá a disposición y bajo control operacional del Comando General del Ejército los efectivos y medios de la Policía Federal que sean requeridos a través del Ministerio de Defensa para su empleo en las operaciones a que se hace referencia en el Art. 1º.
Art. 3º El Ministerio del Interior requerirá al PE de la Provincia de Tucumán, que proporcione y coloque bajo control operacional al personal y los medios policiales que le sean solicitados por el Ministerio de Defensa (Comando General del Ejército), para su empleo en las operaciones precitadas.
Art. 4º El Ministerio de Defensa adoptará las medidas pertinentes a efectos de que los Comandos Generales de la Armada y Fuerza Aérea presten, a requerimiento del Comando General del Ejército, el apoyo necesario de empleo de medios para las operaciones.
Art. 5º El Ministerio de Bienestar Social desarrollará en coordinación con el Ministerio de Defensa las operaciones de acción cívica que sean necesarias sobre la población afectada por las operaciones militares.
Art. 6º La Secretaría de Prensa y Difusión de la Presidencia de la Nación a indicación del Ministerio de Defensa (Comando General del Ejército) ejecutará las operaciones de acción psicológica concurrentes que le sean requeridas.
Firman la señora Presidente y los ministros Benítez, Rocamora, Savino, Ivanissevich, López Rega, Gómez Morales, Vignes y Otero.
Viva la Patria carajo !!
What 'British propaganda'?
Seriously, tell me what it is and I'll tell you if it makes any difference to me or not.
I'm only interested in who gets hurt and who benefits by any given outcome.
Any of the outcomes that Argentina proposes hurt me and mine and benefit nobody.
I already told you I don't care what was done to some long dead Argentine soldiers 200 years ago.
If there was a native population clamouring for independence or liberation, it would be different.
But there isn't. There is only your national pride, and that isn't worth the hair on one Falkland Islander's head.
'My own behaviour' is utterly blameless. What the British did to further their aims 200 years ago is not my fault or my concern.
05 DE ENERO 1975
Debido a la gravísima situación que imperaba en el país y especialmente en la provincia de Tucumán, lugar en que el ERP quería conformar una zona liberada para formar un estado independiente que fuera reconocido por las Naciones Unidas como estado beligerante, el Gobierno Nacional instruyó a las FF.AA para que iniciasen los estudios y el planeamiento para operar militarmente a fin de neutralizar y/o aniquilar al terrorismo subversivo en Tucumán.
El 05 de enero de 1975, parte de la provincia de Córdoba con destino Tucumán, un avión Twin Otter perteneciente al Comando de Aviación del Ejército, el cual estaba afectado al servicio del IIIer Cuerpo de Ejercito para realizar un reconocimiento de la zona selvática en la provincia de Tucumán, mientras realizaba estudios preliminares para la iniciación del Operativo Independencia.
Una de las tareas esenciales de todo planeamiento son los reconocimientos del terreno donde se va a operar. Durante la ejecución de éstos es derribado por un grupo de terroristas (ERP22) un avión en proximidades de Tafí del Valle en el paraje denominado La Angostura, perdiendo la vida trece integrantes del Ejército Argentino; entre ellos el Comandante del IIIer Cuerpo de Ejército Grl. Br. Enrique Eugenio Salgado, el Comandante de la Vta. Brigada de Infantería Grl. Br. Ricardo Agustín Muñoz, Cnl. Eduardo Wilfredo Cano, Tcnl. Oscar Rubén Bevione, Tcnl. Pompilio Schilardi, Tcnl. Pedro Santiago Petrecca, My. Roberto Dante David Biscardi, My. Pedro Antonio Zelaya, My. Héctor Abel Sánchez, My. Aldo Emilio Pepa, Cap. Roberto Carlos Aguilera, Tte. 1ro. Carlos Eduardo Correa, Sarg. 1ro. Aldo Ramón Linares.
El atentado se produjo el domingo 05 de enero de 1975 cuando el avión Twwin Otter AE259 del Ejercito Argentino es derribado con ametralladoras antiaéreas de origen ruso, el cual dio en la cola del avión, este se precipita a tierra y se incendio calcinándose los treces ocupantes.
A mediodía del domingo y con
Long Live Scotland -- Long Live Republic
So a Twin Otter was shot down using Russian equipment and a bunch of Argentina's 'Generalissimos' got fried.
Al I have to say is 'Regular or crispy?'
What a stupid phrase!!!!!!! you make me laugh..... jijijijij
MALVINAS ARGENTINAS!!!!!! Put on your knees and change your flag you have not any port in south america where to go.
The text was too long?? :-)
PS: I owe you the rest
MONTY: The history is always submited to omitions, not only argentina omits information respecting the historic aspects of this conflict, if you dont care about what happened 179 years ego, that's your problem, i wont ignore that the actual scenario, is the result of what happened in 1833.
You only victimize your self, and dont do any critic for your behaviour, if the u. n signalizes that both nations must resume the negotiations, in order to find a peaceful solution for this conflict, that must be respected, beyond the hate that surelly you feel for us or for our government, you must understand once and for all, that you wont never be only under argentine sovereignty, because that's not what the u. n signalizes for this dispute, it's not imposible to find a fair solution for you and for us, there experiences about shared administrations in diferent places, i know what i am saying because i investigate, i dont parrot nobody's propaganda, however, it's your side the one that rejects the negotiations, realise once and for all that if none of the two nations proposes to take the cause to the court, it's because none of them is sure that it can win the case, that's why the best that we can do, is to resume the negotiations, i will always respect the wishes of independence of your people, but as long as the u. n continues calling both parts to resume the negotiations, that will have to be respected, beyond our wishes.
ARTILLERO: I know perfectly about the operativo independencia, and about what the guerrilla did, anyway, you should know why the guerilla started, you are telling just one part of the history, anyway, nothing justifies nor what triple did, nor what the dictatorship did, the guerrilleros should have been judged and sentenced, instead of being kidnapped, tortured, and killed, beside, not all te disapeared were guerrilleros, many of them were also students, or workers who claimed for rights, i have a lot more to say.
The UN general assembly resolutions you so often refer to merely “asks” both nations to negotiate, are utterly without legal basis or imperative, and are so vague they can equally be used to demand argentina stops bullying the islanders, as it is not in the islander’s interests to be subjugated by a third world joke of a nation. These resolutions are also unable to override the basic UN charter which promises self determination for all peoples.
And you once again show a deeply deluded view of your own importance if you think Britain or the British people care enough about Argentina to hate it. You are at best an occasional joke to those few who know or care about the Falklands due to your own delusions, obsessions and hypocrisy on the issue. Beyond this you are startlingly irrelevant.
And despite your delusions, you will never have even shared sovereignty of the islands. argentina has proven itself untrustworthy, unreliable, and most of all unworthy of playing any part in the islands. It has done all it can to destroy the islander’s lives through the military occupation (and the planned ethnic cleansing which would have occurred afterwards), economic blockade attempts and by your increasingly shrill demands that the islanders be considered sub human.
Britain has tried on two occasions to drag argentina to court on the issue, and both times argentina refused in favour of bullying the islanders. Now we know full well of how little we can trust argentina or rely on it to act as a civilised nation so we no longer bother. If argentina had any legal case the onus is on argentina to take it to court.
argentina has long failed to achieve anything beyond humiliation and failure with regards to the islands. Maybe its time for you to end your bloated national ego and self righteous delusions, and start acting like a civilised nation for a change
Why? because of what Axel said? I don't think so , that's his opinion and I respect it.
Ustedes , los del “Modelo” , me la chupan !! :-))
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RWPne7Qre8
but this video is awesome:
youtu.be/zHylc2_tQSg
and long live long livers and northern britain,
long live the highlands, long live long live long live
this child badly needs to grow up.
you are absolutely right !!
Long Live Scotland -- Long Live Republic
You ask H.J.Lear ?
Presumably,was my known one of the famous names from 1819 events.
What was the 1819 events?
A sample disastrous English experience in from 1819 when the cavaliers were mobilisied to disperse protestors demanding parliamentary reform in London ...result was 11 deaths,600 injured.
these argies will be telling us the truth next .lol
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/06/jamaica-republic-prime-minister
Long Live Scotland -- Long Live Republic
Historically, this ”inheritance” territorial, usurped by the Spanish crown, which, in turn, then was usurped by France and then, without anyone knowing, usurped the crown England filibuster.
That was returned to the Spanish Crown, between Spanish and Creole.
That was again usurped by the Crown in England filibuster deceptive tricks ...
That when the going gets burned, dropped everything and went left to kill their own children (United States).
That after many years, returned to usurp not abandon the islands for more”
This is the history of the usurped islands
Queridos argentinos, las cosas que hay que soportar de quienes nos han robado nuestras tierras y se justifican, aún en estos tiempos, alegando la legalidad de la retrógrada y criminal colonización
On this day signed a treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation with Great Britain which recognized the independence of Argentina, and yet, years later usurp the Malvinas.
With this treaty, also begins a new “dependency” to be free from Spanish rule in 1816, from this date (1825) and until now, Argentina is subject to the British Empire.
Vernet got down to business: contracts made in North America and Europe to bring families and acquire vessels. In the pampas of Buenos Aires, gauchos were caring for livestock. But to keep foreign vessels exploiting the territory of the Republic, Vernet asked to be appointed political and military commander, and he sent a warship with weapons necessary to enforce the orders.
”When the glorious Revolution of May May 25, 1810, these provinces were separated from the domination of the mother country, Spain, Spain had a material possession in Malvinas and other islands all around them to Cape Horn, even what is known as Tierra del Fuego; be justified and documented that possession by the right of first occupant, by the consent of the first maritime portencias Europe, and the adjacency of these islands to the continent that was the Viceroyalty of Buenos Aires, whose government depended therefore having entered the government of Argentina in the succession of all rights over all provinces had the old mother country, Spain, and enjoyed their viceroys, having continued to exert acts of sovereignty and dominion in these islands, ports and coasts, even though those circumstances have so far not give that part of the territory of Argentina, the care and attention that its importance demands, but still necessary not to delay longer to measures to shield the rights of Argentina, becoming at the same time enjoy the benefits that can give the products of those islands, and ensuring the protection due to its population, the government Argentina, on my behalf, agreed and decreed:
Art 1: Malvinas and adjacent to Cape Horn in the Atlantic Ocean, will be governed by a political and military commander, appointed immediately by the government of Argentina.
Art 2: The residence of the political and military commander will be in the Isle of Solitude, and shall establish a battery under our pavilion.
Art 3: The political and military commander will be observed by the population of the islands, the laws of Argentina, and care in its costs of enforcement of fishing regulations on amphibians.
Section 4: Communicate and published.
-Signed: Martin Rodriguez - (Governor) - SM Rail - (Secretary) - 06.10.1829 .-
The international community and international law could not tolerate aggression against another people and their rights and land. Without the hearts and minds of the Falkland islanders the Argentines are stuffed. Kirchiner knows this, she's just playing a game her her child like electorate, she knows their just red eyed dogs on her leash, she just needs to keep them foaming at the mouth over something other than herself.
This year, Vernet captures three American schooners: Breakwater, Harriet and Superior, they carried on Puerto Salvador, northeast of Soledad.
The Harriet went to Buenos Aires in November, carrying Vernet and his family.Faced with complaints from the United States, our country continued its stanceof not returning the boat. On November 30, above the corvette Lexington, commanded by Silas Duncan Malvinas pass intended “to protect citizens and commerce of the United States.” Days later, Duncan was accused of piracyand armed robbery against Vernet, trying to judge it in the United States.
On 28 December, the cruiser arrived at Soledad Lexington, destroyingweapons, looting rooms and hunting wild cattle. After arresting the settlers, Duncan held prisoner six Argentines and English merchant Brisbane. Dayslater said from Florida: “I must tell you that I will deliver or release the existingprisoners aboard the Lexington, giving the government of Buenos Aires an assurance that they have acted under his authority.”
While in the East Malvina, Duncan, commander of the Lexington declared the Malvinas “free of any government.”
The six Argentines arrested were sent to America for trial.
On 14 February the government sent a proclamation to the people, in which it was stated that the commander of the warship had invaded Lexington, amid the most profound peace, our nascent colony.
There are several diplomatic wrangling between the U.S. and Argentina, where he tried to explain who had the right over the archipelago.
On another thread l said that l thought that Kipling was an idiot.
l still do think that, but l think Cero is even stupider, if thats at all possible.
ls this the level of malvinista intelligence? lf so then we have nothing to fear.
José María Pinedo, commander of the corvette Sarandí, tries to prevent this act of aggression, but is outnumbered.The Pirates (British) were three times the number Argentine and the British Pinedo accompanying refused to fight against their flag. Thus they were only 14 soldiers and 10 other unarmed civilians. For this reason, Pinedo had no choice but to surrender.
Pinedo was sanctioned by the Supreme Council of War and Navy.According to Art. 41 Naval Code, any war commander must defend the flag of any superiority it was attacked, with the most value and will never surrender to superior forces without covering of glory in his gallant resistance ...
Beyond the decision to Pinedo, the British on this day 172 years ago but we have seized a small but beloved part of our country.
On day 15, the ship arrives in Buenos Aires Sarandí. That same day the government made a protest to the British charge d'affaires, who deny the facts.
A circular of January 23, informed the “American Republics”, the attack by England. The note was a large silence from the countries of the continent and the Annual Register, 1833, congratulated the United States to remain silent, to complaints of “weak”.
On April 24, the Argentine representative in London, Don Manuel Moreno, filed a complaint with the British Crown, which reiterated the June 17, in an extensive and documented memory of protest.
That same year, a tragic event occurred on the islands, where two gauchos, including Rivero, along with two Indians start a bloody massacre.
Read and learn Cherio -
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1823-1832/
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1833-1849/
In 1982 the Argies out numbed the British by 100 to 1 the British stud their ground and made a fight of it but vastly outnumbered surrender was the only option,
Later British reinforcements arrived thou still outnumbered but this time by only 4 to 1 they set about retaking the Islands, this time the Argentine conscripts stud their ground, well they did till their officers droop their guts and their guns and ran like the clappers.
Indeed all wrong. The Clio was a Brig-Sloop, the Sarandi an armed schooner. A Brig-Sloop was the smallest ship in the RN. And a Brig-Sloop carried 8 Royal Marines.
more lies they tell, less the truth matters,
more agression they show, less chance they have,
more they open the mouth-more they put the foot in it,
more they try to steal, less they have
more they talk,
more we ignore ?
Argentina, the land of more ==or less .
In 1820 is produced the posetion public and solemn. Period that lasted thirteen years, until the English usurpation. Until 03/01/1833, Argentina enjoyed their rights over their territory, although vessels from the United States and Britain, had long been exploiting national territory illegally
The UK can not talk with Argentina because he knows that our country have right, and the reason.
Liverpool club good
Big Ben good
Benny Hill hahahaha very good
Pippa Middleton my love, beautiful
british lies, oh no, very, very wrong.
po ne t la pi la
turn to double dutch and hope for the best
alas above proves the point,
Wow, that's quite an imagination you've got there. Not even your own government is claiming continuous and permanent possession of the FI since 1817 (or sporadic presence since 1811). Your own government seems to think it all started with Jewett in 1820. Maybe you should put a dossier of evidence together and send it to them, as I'm sure they would appreciate it. Then maybe you could show us.
Sorry for you, but it's just too bad.
It doesn't sorprise the ignorant knowledge that you have about my country, it's actually the usuall partial view which is the tipical of the empires.
I have always recognized the mistakes of my country, i have said it in all my comments, per haps my country committed mistakes when it recalled the agreements that it signed in the past with the u. k., however none of you never did any critic for your behaviour, it seems it soposes that you do everything right, please. However, it's your side the one that rejects the negotiations, using the dictatorship, in order to continue with status quo, what you call just recomendations, must be respected, if you are so miopic and ignorant to not to realise that actually if none of the two countries proposes to take the case to the court, because they aren't sure that they can win the case, that's your problem, you should know also that in 1885 my country suggested to take the case to the arbitration, and the u. k. rejected that posibility, and in 1947 the u. k. suggested to take the question of the dependencies (south georgia and sandwich) to the court, bat it didn't do the same with the conflict of the islands, i have so much information about this in my survey, i can send it to you if you want. In the same way that the islanders deffend the right to self determination, we deffend our territorial integrity, that's why it's necesary a fair solution, the hard decitions that our government took, are the result of the rejection of the islanders and the u. k. to resume the negotiations, you can't ignore that, if only victimize your self, and dont do any critic for you posture, it's lamentable, that shows how miopic you are, like many politicians, finally, if my country is a joke or whatever, that's our problem, all the countries have positive and negative aspects, dont be so hipocrite.
I know it's been done before, but the negociations might go something like this:
Argentina: Hey, UK, give us the Islands!
UK: Well, we can ask the inhabitants, but i don't think they are going to be interested.
Falkland Islanders: No, thanks. We're the only people who ever lived here and we are very happy with the way things are. Please go away.
Argentina: Waaaaaah! Waaaaaah! Hey, United Nations, they won't give us the islands.
United Nations: Well, Argentina, they have got a point, you know. Also, haven't you ever heard of self-determination? It's enshrined in our charter. You should know that.
Argentina: What about our territorial integrity?!
United Nations: Are you taking the piss?!
Argentina: Oh, bugger. Where's that military when you want it. Let's get the rest of South America to lend us some of theirs.
Rest of South America: Don't be stupid! They'll kick our arses! Anyway, you didn't seriously think we were actually going to support you, did you! We just wanted to keep your lunatic of a president off our backs.
the man in the mask strikes again.
El artículo sexto establecía que (...) quedaba acordado respecto de las costas orientales y occidentales de Sudamérica y de las islas adyacentes, que los respectivos súbditos no formarán en el futuro ningún establecimiento en las partes de la costa situada al sur de las partes de la misma costa y de las islas adyacentes ya ocupadas por España; queda entendido que los mencionados súbditos respectivos retendrán la libertad de desembarcar en las costas e islas que allí se encuentren con propósitos vinculados a sus pesquerías y erección de refugios y otras estructuras temporarias que sirvan a esos objetivos (...)
es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convenciones_de_Nutka
1825: Gran Bretaña reconoce la independencia de las Provincias Unidas del Río de la Plata, y no hace objeción alguna sobre el tema Malvinas, en el Tratado de amistad, navegación y comercio firmado entre ambos países
did you understand all that what Mr Roberts said? gooooooooooooood.
Try again, later.
As Forrest Gump once said “Stupid is as stupid does”.
What it actually says is:
Article VI provided that neither party would form new establishments on any of the islands adjacent to the east and west coasts of South America then occupied by Spain. Both retained the right to land and erect temporary structures on the coasts and islands for fishery-related purposes.
The relevant word being “adjacent”, in English now, as then, the use of the word adjacent here specificaly excludes the Falklands from this agreement.
As in no way can the Falklands be considered to be “adjacent” to South America, when using English.
And you're a poor unfortunate man surely has lived on the charity of all Argentines, because you used our education (all education is subsidized even private) have used ublish services (which are also subsidized), some of your parents has taken retirement (which is a solidarity system), and deny all this by having the same issue that the islanders want to be British in the South American world-
If your father or your mother ever have Odido addressed in a public hospital, that would have paid Idiot Argentines, who are ungrateful.
Please try your therapy that you can do it in a British office, lest they also have to pay your identity crisis, if you define yourself too gay married in another country, lest they also enjoy a subsidy in your sexual condition -
Imbecil
Only, lately their own shit is coming right into their face,
You wont ever get the Falklands, you have not even the right to lick their boots,
Long live the British, and to hell with Argentina, and its brain washed bloggers who support her .
Crackpot: Beyond the stupid ironies that you typed in your comment, i will tell you something that you can't ignore, and it goes also for everyone.
If the right to self determination is applicable or not to this cause, that only can be assured by a judgment of the i. c. j, you already know why i think that none of the two nations proposes to give that step.
However, all the resolutions say that the negotiations must be resumed under the respect for resolution 1514, the principles of the charter of the u. n., and the interests of the population, none resolution asks the u. k. to transfer the sovereignty to argentina, in the same way that none of them affirm neather that the sovereignty issue must be discussed only if the islanders wish it, you can't ignore that the main problem is the sovereignty, and it must be discussed, and find a fair solution for the all the parts.
It's true that resolution 1514 and the charter of the u. n. affirm that all the people have right to self determination, but both dont let any colonial situation to break the territorial integrity of any country, i suggest you to read resolution 2353 which reffers the gibraltar question, and you'll see what's the relevancy of territorial integrity for the u. n. On the other hand, i think that sometimes the resolutions are very generic, and they can be open to diferent interpretations, that's why i have always argued that the only on solution for this conflict, is to take the case to the court.
I made an exhaustive investigation about the historic and legal aspects of this conflict, which took me more than one year, because i dont parrot any propaganda, like some you do sometimes, i can send it to anyone.
You’re a one man proper gander machine isn’t you.
But time and time again you start with talk, and end up with demands,
To talk
The very first thing you must do, is remover the biggest obstacle, that’s sitting in your constitution,
Then you can start being nice to the people,
Stop blockading them
Stop abusing them
Stop telling abhorrent lies abt them
Stop acting like a bloody dictator
This is as you stupid Argies keep telling us, the 21st century
No true democracy today,
Illegally blockades or abuses or lies abt the item they supposedly claim,
How do you expect the islanders to trust you, when you act like bloody 3rd world animals,
Got it .
.
You make some interesting points, but I would like to make a few counterpoints:
1) Territorial integrity has has NEVER been mentioned in any resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands.
2) No resolutions say that negociations MUST proceed. They are only recommendations/invitations.
3) The UK's sovereignty over Gibraltar is not questioned by Spain; they only question the extent of that sovereignty and have a desire for it to be returned to Spain.
4) Territorial integrity is certainly a more significant issue in the case of Gibraltar, although it is debatable whether the UK's sovereignty over Gibraltar really intereferes with Spains territorial integrity (it's not an enclave, after all). The issue of territorial integrity with regards to the Falkland Islands is non-existent (they are too far away).
5) Gibraltar would probably be independent now (thus ending any potential impact of a colonial situation on territorial integrity) if it were not for the clause in the Treaty of Utrecht stating that Spain has first option if the UK ever reliquishes sovereignty. Unfortunately, that is why the situation in Gibralatr will never change either, as 97% of the population (who have been there for 300 years) want to stay associated with the UK.
6) The issue of territorial integrity has NEVER allowed one country to take over sovereignty of a territory from another, as far as I'm aware.
I agree that the ICJ is the only way to go. It is very doubtful if Argentina could ever win such a case. It would be very easy to establish that the Islanders are indeed “a people” and thus have the right to self-determination and the whole territorial integrity argument would be dismissed very quickly.
The UN decolonisation process for the Falkland Islands is unaffected as are the rights of the Falkland Islanders.
Indeed. I think that people often forget that the resolutions relate to “The Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples”. The key words there are GRANTING OF INDEPENDENCE. Their job is not make recommendations regarding any transfer of sovereignty (other than from the administering country to the territory itself).
Argentina is the successor state of Spain.
All this he knows his country, so he refuses to negotiate.
Incorrect Malvinense. Argentina gained independence by force. Spain did not grant independence to Argentina. Argentina is not a successor to Spain in any legal sense and did not derive any rights from Spain.
Anyway, however Argentina became independent still does not change the fact that Argentina was not a signatory to Nootka, so could not benefit from Nootka in any way.
And although he does not like, Argentina is a successor state to Spain. And also in the legal sense.
In the treaty of Nootka, Great Britain with his own hand, recognized that the islands does not belonged to him.
More tests needed, Roberts?.
You are wrong & JARoberts is right.
l know its not what you have been taught.
But you were taught lies. lts not your fault, but they are still lies.
Argentina has NEVER owned these lslands & does not do so now.
l know that you want these lslands but they are not yours. They are ours & we are not giving them to you or anyone else.
Are you not content with the size of Argentina, that you want our land too? Have you ever asked yourself why your government will not go to the ICJ? Why not, if they feel so strongly about them? What do they fear?
That the ICJ will rule against them, then they will have no rallying call for the masses?
And why does you country claim South Georgia & other British Antarctic territories? We were there first & no Argentines have ever lived there.
Don't give me that baloney that they are on your continental shelf.
So is Chile. Are you going to claim Chile too?
Sorry mate, Argentina has never, does not & never will own the Falkland lslands.♥
Oh, and Malvinense, the USA is not a successor to the UK any more than Argentina is to Spain. If Spain had granted Argentina independence by treaty that would be different, but the facts are against you. Argentina did not inherit any rights or title whatsoever from Spain. Spain did not even recognise Argentina until 1859, when Britain had been in control of the Falklands for more than 20 years. What's more, Nootka recognised Spanish title of the Falklands with certain British rights. Spain made no objection to Britain taking the Falklands in 1833 on a permanent basis. Argentina was never a signatory to Nootka. The only way Argentina could have benefitted from Nootka would have been with Spanish and British agreement, and many years after Nootka was signed. That never happened. Get used to it. You cannot benefit from a contract to which you were not a party. Simple.
[yes perhaps the argies should be ]
[
stolen land
yes, the land argentina wishes to steal of the rightfull owners .
return the stolen land, people from another continent!!!
How do you translate that into Quechua or Guarani?
Which were languages used in that part of the world when the British first arrived in the South Alantic, and when the British first settled the Falklands.
quechua and guaraní still exist with more than 1 millon speaker each ... la maldita colonización killed a lot of native, but thanks god still exist.
I won´t repeat the history. You don´t seem to understand.
Malvinas argentinas!!!!! salgan ladrones
What was the language of the Mohawk, Huron, Powhatan, Shawnee, Iroquois ? when the red coat came to North America?
And what the about Selknap?
@298
It wasn't the Red Coats who went to Patagonia after the British arrived in the unhabited South Atlantic
In other places (too many to mention) yes, but that is not the case in this instance.
The British did not steal anything, in this instance.
And when you sent the peninsulari back to spain, did they take your genetic code with them. Or did you simply change your name from spanish to argentinian (or UP).
Also these 2 million people, what do you say to them, when they say to you:
return the stolen land, people from another continent!!!
What about mention of the blue/grey coats at the same time, [French I belive]
And the language of the apache Comanche and all the other American Indians, when the blue coats //or was it long knives , or perhaps you know them as Americans ,
And of course thousands and thousands of Europeans,
Not always the brits you know ..
.
what say you?
Alba gu bra! :-))
Sorry mate,
On the other blogg, I replied, but it was meant for this blogg and not the other one, in a reply to you,
That’s the third time tonight I have placed the wrong reply to the wrong blogg, and as you know I cant reply until some else does, sorry old chap .
[The Falklands, like a duck in basket ]
.
We have plenty of courage and guts. We resisted you in 1982 and we aren't going to cave in to your bullying and intimidation now.
We aren't in favour of colonisation, and that includes being colonised by you. We may well be independent one day, but it will be when we decide and not you.
'You are not a person with values?' I hope you aren't talking to me.
As explained by Hermes, the UK did not lead the Court accepted the cases prior to 1974.
Spain recognizes the Independence of Argentina retroactively to the time when the events occurred.
Spain did not protest the islands, because upon the sovereignty of a new nation: Argentina.
What kind of law can have the UK when the Spanish ruled the island for years?
What kind of law can have the UK when he was absent from the islands for over 60 years?
What kind of law can have the UK when in 1765 arrived secretly in violation of the following treaties?:
England could not claim anything in 1765, under the treaties of Munster 1648, Article VI, XIII.
Treaty of Peace, Alliance and Commerce. Madrid 1667 Article I.
Treaty of 1670. Signed by the Earl of Sandwich.
Treaty of Utrecht 1713. Article VII, XIV
Treaty of Seville 1732
Treaty of Aachen (Aquisgrán) 1748
Treaty of Madrid 1758.
Peace Treaty Article II 1763
England defied all these agreements in 1765.
Ah Roberts, Indeed, in 1765 the islands were already occupied.
With regard to Nootka, British rights were fishing and building huts. Only TEMPORARY.
And on islands DO NOT OCCUPIED by Spain.
The Malvinas Islands at the time were OCCUPIED by Spain.
How can they have rights, when you have said they have no rights?
None of the treaties you mention above had Argentina as a party, so Argentina cannot benefit from them.
Finally, you obviously do not understand re the UKs declaration before the ICJ. It simply means that the UK will automatically accept the ICJs jurisdiction for all cases where the dispute arises after 1974. For other cases the UK will decide on a case by case basis. Argentina decides for ALL cases on a case by case basis and does not accept the ICJs jurisdiction automatically under any circumstances.
You have no rights here.
Your country has NEVER owned the Falklands.
Your country is a thief,
are you going to give back, the land that your country stole from Paraguay?
No? porque? because you are thieves & you want to“theft”our country too.
So sorry for you mate. better luck, next country that you try to steal land from.
Ladrones.
Argentina DID own TFI briefly -1982.
We have another bit of case law :
since Ecuador ruled that Chevron must be responsible for issues related to a previous company with which it took over, we can test the proposition that the countries that took over from Spain must be responsible not only for their own actions in their own time, but also those of the Spanish from which they took over.
Human rights, recompense and compensations. The Ecuador case shows that this will be measured in billions and billions of dollars. Australia is addressing this; as should North American countries.
Not quite the case Geoff, Isolde was correct that Argentina never owned the FI:
Possess = actual holding or occupancy, either with or without rights of ownership (the FI & the UK did not give ownership to the Argies!)
Owner = legal right to possession of a thing.
The Argies possessed the islands briefly in 1982, they did NOT own them at any time (they had no permission of ownership [with ot without consideration] so at best under UK Law they would have had a bare licence which by implication means they should have 'looked after the possession').
Also, I am not at all sure why you are quoting the Ecuador case when discussing the FI, which at origin would be UK law.
Surely the Chevron case involves human rights, recompense and compensations against Chevron, not between countries?
I think Cero is talking about me. Struck a nerve there Melchard what.
I have another question for you Cero (you haven't answered any so far, but here goes). How is that a country like argentina, which as you say, had to struggle for is democratic rights and freedoms, still finds it so easy to deny those same rights to another people.
@308 Malvinense 1833
What kind of law can have the UK when the Spanish ruled the island for years?
What kind of law can have the UK when he was absent from the islands for over 60 years?
The British have ruled the Island for 179 years, argentina has been absent from the Islands for 179 years. But Argentina still claims them.
For Christ’s sake, you will be claiming bloody Germany next,
And besides if you reward all thieves who try to steal your property,
Then you might as well pay them a wage whilst you’re at it,
Argentina will not get them, and you bloggers can whistle in the wind,
But if you think you can take away freedom to supplement your greed,
Then how long after , would Chile and the rest, be on your list,
After all was they not a colony of Spain also,
I dont have a deep knowledge about the gibraltar question, i know so little about it, anyway i suggest you to read that resolution, because the most important for me, is expressed in one of the paragraphs, which reffers the relevancy of territorial integrity for the purposes of the charter of the u. n.
On the other hand, you should know that in two oportunities, in 1985, the u. k. tries to include references about self determination for this cause, and the international comunity voted by a landslide against that proposal, the malvinas-falkland cause is still considered like a special colonial situation.
Beside, i wouldn't be so sure like you, respecting a soposed rejection by the court regarding our claim, let me tell you that in 1885, our country suggested to take the question to the arbitration, and the u. k. rejected that posibility, and in 1947, it suggested argentina to take the question of the dependencies (south georgia and sandwich), to the court, anyway you all know very well what i think about the lack of proposal by the two nations respecting the fact of taking the case to the court.
Like i said before, all the resolutions affirm that the negotiations must be resumed under the respect for resolution 1514, and the charter of the u. n., you can't ignore that resolution 1514 has fundaments about territorial integrity, beside you can't be so mipopic and ignore also that the main conflict is for the sovereignty, and it must be discussed, it's true that resolutions are recomendations, but if the countries dont respect them, ¿then what's the purpose of the decolonization committee?.
I suggest you re-read the resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands, because territorial integrity is not mentioned anywhere in any of them (but is specifically mentioned in those relating to Gibraltar). You have to ask yourself why that is.
Gibraltar is irrelevant - it's a completely different situation. Firstly, Gibraltar was once part of Spain (in contrast, Argentina never had any credible administration in the Falkland Islands). Secondly, Spain does not question that the UK has sovereignty over Gibraltar (the Treaty of Utrecht ceded Gibraltar to the UK in perpetuity), although they do question the extent of that sovereignty). Spain only has a claim over Gibraltar if the UK decides to give up its sovereignty (the Treaty stipulates that Spain has first refusal). So, Gibraltar is stuck in a catch 22 situation - they don't want to be part of Spain (97% in the last referdum voted against it) and they cannot become independent (unless Spain refuses sovereignty). Thus, the most likely outcome is that Gibraltar will remain a BOT for the foreseeable future. This is the main parallel with the FI - the only unlikely outcome is transfer of sovereignty to another country.
Simply not true,
Britain has no need or reason to go to claim what is already hers,
Thus the Oman is on Argentina to prove other wise,
As a matter of fact, it may well be in argentines interest, if she thinks she has a right to them, after all she has spent the last decades telling the world, that they are theirs, yet strangely, avoids the ICJ like the plague,
If you think it is your then take it to court, and stop trying to avoid the question with irrelevant questions of your own,
.
310 Isolde.
Our rights were usurped in 1833, return them. If you want we can continue talking about Malvinas, for the rest, inform yourself and then we can make a blog to talk.
313. Puhol. because their rights are founded on usurpation. you denied our rights when usurped the islands. your other question I've already answer it. read 306. If I miss something, tell me or not, I don't care.
Malvinense, I agree with you. The problem is that an invader population will NEVER admit the truth. then, of course, there is nothing that suits them to talk.
Your rights in Argentina today are based on usurpation in the past, much of it after you claim the British usurped the Falklands.
The difference is your version of events in the south atlantic is very strongly rejected by the British. I am not aware of any strong disagrement about what happened in Argentina.
It is not the British who do not admit the truth here. I am sure if you look for yourself you will find it, whether you will ever admit it is the question.
1)We own the lslands & are in possession of them.
2)You say they are yours but we know that they are not.
3)You want these lslands &
4)We are not going to give them to you.
5)So there is no use you talking as we won't be taking.
6)You have three choices:-
a)try to convince us to join you,don't like yr chances!
b)take us to court,ICJ.
c)war.
Your decision, Cero.
so you take 200 more years to realize. we have patience. good luck
CRACKPOT: I know that maybe gibraltar is irrelevant for this case, but if i suggest you to read that resolution, is due to in one of it's paragraphes, is expressed the thought u. n, regarding the relevancy of the principle of territorial integrity, beyond the fact that the gibratar cause is irrelevant for the malvinas-falkalnd case.
On the other hand i recommend you to read my investigation, where you'll be able to know what rights argentina and the u. k. had in 1833, when it forced our autorities to leave the archipelago, it's not argentine propaganda, i made an exhaustive analaysis of the historic and legal aspects of the arguments of both sides, i can send it to you if you want.
You can' t ignore that resolution 1514 has fundaments about territorial integrity, in article 6, beside, that resolution is always invoked for this cause.
BRITON: For the first time i agree on most you say, we all know that neather side will go to the court, because both aren't sure that they can win the case, but you should remember also that in 1885 my country suggested to take the question to the arbitration, and the u. k. rejected that posibility, beside when in 1947, the u. k. suggested to take the question of the dependencies to the court, it didn't include the mavinas-falkland cause. So, if they aren't going to take the case to the court, what both should do, is to resume the negotiations, like the u. n, and most international comunity signalize.
Quite right.......BUT, territorial integrity is NOT mentioned in any of the resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands......ERGO, it is relevannt to Gibraltar, but not to the Falkland Islands.....QED.
So, yes, I guess I agree that the case of Gibraltar is relevant to this discussion, because it shows that UN resolutions do not shy away from mentioning territorial integrity IF they think it might be relevant. Not mentioned in relation to the FI, though, is it!
I personally don't think that territorial integrity has much weight in the case of Gibraltar, either, in as much as any territory on a country's borders affects its territorial integrity. I personally don't think that it outweighs the self-determination of a population that has been there for over 300 years (the Spanish only controlled Gibraltar for 250 years after they ousted the Moors who had been there for 750 years!). That's just my personal opinion, though.
p.s. I will happily read your investigation (I review a lot of scientific articles as part of my job). I assume that you have published it somewhere on the internet. If not, why not?
@323 - Dito
Axl - I would love to read something sensible from the Argentinian side.
I have been wondering if there is anything more to it than invasions by the British before the country even existed.
Is it on the net?
The 21st century dictates that self determination is paramount,
The fact is and will always remain,,
As long as the people choose to be British, then that is that, until they change their mind,
And Argentina must , sooner or later respect that fact .
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!