Cameron pays tribute to Falklands’ conflict dead and reaffirms Islanders right to self determination
UK Prime Minister David Cameron has paid his own personal tribute to the 255 soldiers, sailors and airmen who gave their lives to liberate the Falkland Islands. Making his first visit to the national Armed Forces Memorial as Prime Minister, Cameron also reaffirmed his commitment to defend the Falkland Islanders' right to self-determination.
Taking time out from his official engagements to travel to the National Memorial Arboretum in Alrewas, Staffordshire, PM Cameron on Friday laid a wreath at the memorial to honor those killed during the South Atlantic campaign.
During his low-key visit to the Portland Stone memorial, the Prime Minister was shown the newly-engraved names of the 59 service personnel killed during 2011 and was also given a tour of the nearby Falklands Memorial.
Taking place on the 30th anniversary of the sinking of HMS Coventry and the attack on the Atlantic Conveyor, PM Cameron's visit came five days after a service to officially dedicate the Falklands Memorial.
Speaking at the arboretum, PM Cameron told British Forces News: “I wish I could have been here at the weekend when the commemoration was opened but I was at the NATO summit in America. I wanted to come as soon as I could because I think the National Memorial Arboretum is an excellent place to remember those who fell in various conflicts.
”Obviously on the 30th anniversary of the successful liberation of the Falklands it's right to remember the 255 people who gave their lives so that the people of the Falkland Islands could live in peace and in freedom.
“That's why I am here and I think it's a beautiful monument that's been established - and I'm sure many, many people will want to come here and see it.”
Asked what reassurances he could give to the people of the Falklands given the recent comments of the Argentine president, PM Cameron added: “They have this guarantee - that as long as the people of the Falkland Islands want to continue with their current status as a British Overseas Territory, then they will be able to do so.
”We will back them, we will support them, we will defend them. We have the Falkland Islands properly defended for a very simple reason - we believe in self-determination, the right of people in the Falkland Islands to determine their future. I think it's important on this, the 30th anniversary, to reaffirm that and to tell people in the Falkland Islands they have our backing, they have our support”
Suggested Stories
-
May 16th 2013
Falklands’ war: Defense releases stats on deaths of military personnel
-
May 13th 2013
Falklands: MPs blast Spanish MEP for comments on the Islands sovereignty
-
May 13th 2013
Malvinas' globe in UK stores triggers strong reactions from Falklands’ veterans
-
May 17th 2013
Pope Francis condemned the global ‘cult of money’ and the ‘new idols’
188 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.
But... If anyone accuses someone of something and the accused doesn't defend themselves vigorously, others will think they are guilty! This has happened with the FI.
sorry, sooner or later our Malvinas will be recovered. bye, bye.
:-)
Out of interest, what is your legal claim on the south Georgia etc?
You RG's keep harping on about the Falklands, so for arguements sake lets say the UK give them back but keep the rest! What is your arguement that you also have soverienty over them???
Anyway keep harping on ....and on.....and on...... yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwnnnnn! Actually you RG's are really bloody boring!!
AHAAHAHAH Who cares,uk is FINISHED!
Just get out from uk while you still can.
cameron is a corrupt prick!
Pure mafia!
willy.
See the following list of territories. They don't have native populations. Some never had them as they were uninhabited when discovered by Europeans. They all are or were on the UN's decolonisation list, with rights to self-determination.
Currently on the UN decolonisation list 10 out of 16 do not have indigenous populations:
Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Montserrat, Pitcairn Islands, Saint Helena (inc Tristan da Cunha), Turks and Caicos Islands, and US Virgin Islands.
Formerly on the UN decolonisation list 13 out of 35 do not have indigenous populations:
Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Cabo Verde, Cocos Islands, Guadaloupe, Jamaica, Martinique, Mauritius, Réunion, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, and Seychelles
'And dont tell me there were no habitants when britain usurped our islands in 1833.'
There was a civilian population of 33, they were encouraged to stay and most did. Only the military garrison was expelled. And Argentina had not established any sovereignty over the Falklands when the UK took over.
Good to be especially on guard now as we don't know which way CFK's régime will tack on this - and possibly do something out of the ordinary in order for them to think they're cock of the walk.
Got to save this passage to trot out later when anybody doubts the stand that needs to be taken:
“They have this guarantee - that as long as the people of the Falkland Islands want to continue with their current status as a British Overseas Territory, then they will be able to do so. We will back them, we will support them, we will defend them. We have the Falkland Islands properly defended for a very simple reason - we believe in self-determination, the right of people in the Falkland Islands to determine their future. I think it's important on this, the 30th anniversary, to reaffirm that and to tell people in the Falkland Islands they have our backing, they have our support”
3 Dick
So according to you, the majority of the people living in what is currently known as Argentina have no right to be there either. Would you care to explain how it is different for those people? Please enlighten me.
Take your time because we're not going anywhere and there's not a thing you, CFK or the 1980s Argentine military can do about it.
“cameron is a corrupt prick!”
I totally agree that he is a corrupt prick, but at least he hasn't followed your example and become a retarded prick.
Thank you. You struck a blow for the Falklands, and for all of democratic South America. We shall not forget.
You describe the Argentine position perfectly, thank you
Kelpers are British. Self Determination does not apply for british people. Only for native population.
>>>>you don't see the irony of this statement versus every other country in the Americas, and that it is directly opposite to what the Decolonisation committee says.
And dont tell me there were no habitants when britain usurped our islands in 1833.
>>>>>Don't tell you this because you don't want to hear the truth, in 1833 there was the private Vernet settlement, all but four remained, and an Argentine garrison that arrived in November 1832, murdered their captain in front of his family, and were told to leave 3 months later.
“sorry, sooner or later our Malvinas will be recovered. bye, bye.”
No they won't, unless the islanders (the inhabitants with full rights to self-determination) wish them to be..
I love how the pieces of the jigsaw are coming together as the Argentine government makes mistake after balls-up and the international community moves away from CFKC's government.
What makes Argentinean native to Argentina?
Why do they want the islands anyway? least UK have 3000 reasons
And how and why do they have a claim on the south sandwich islands?
Because the Argie tossers would make a claim on Rockall if they thought it would distract attention from the perilous state of their economy for another few weeks.
Not to mention nothing is going to change, the UK has all of the aces in having the only valid claim, economic/political and military strength.
And if that wasn't enough the Argentine government is making non-nonsensical claims and accusations that are obviously lies that everyone is simply ignoring whilst trying to deflect attention from its rather obviously economic meltdown.
Sometimes you've just got to let the dreamers (willy) dream.
@7 AHAAHAHAH. UK is so finished argies are shitting bricks because of (a) ONE SAR crewman; (b) ONE destroyer. (Note: argies don't have any destroyers); (c) ONE nuclear-powered submarine (Note: argies don't have any). CFK is a thieving slag. Pure gangsta moll with wide-open mouth, legs and butt.
It is worth noting that 255 real MEN had to die in 1982. Real human beings. Fortunately, they and their colleagues were able to kill 649 slugs. Regrettably, they only wounded 1,068 more. Even after 30 years the British Army are still investigating to find out which soldiers didn't do their job properly. As any gardener knows, no slug should be allowed to survive.
I always think of them as Italians who speak Spanish - with thick Italian accent - hence the cowardice streak that runs so deep in the Argie psyche, but not in the rest of South America.
They could be reading that after the Argentinian's cowardly attack on a defenseless population, they were beaten and sent home with their tails between their legs.
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. Therefore, the possibility is to apply the principle of self-determination, as its exercise by the inhabitants of the islands would cause the “disruption 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 of 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. No self-determination. Reaffirms resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom) ”to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee on the Situation with regard to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, to find a peaceful solution to the problem, with due regard to the provisions and objectives of the United Nations Charter and Resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands. Since 2004 Argentina got the Malvinas question is in the permanent agenda of General Assembly Bureau.
Yes, the principle of self-determination does apply and no matter how often you repeat that same drivel it wont change the fact that self-determination trumps all other considerations.
Great Britain did not expel the original population in 1883 !!!!!
In 1833 Great Britain did not expel the original population / settlers.
I assume you know that what you have written is factually incorrect in about 20 places. As it is impossible to be THAT wrong by accident, one can only assume that either you spout that crap because you know that there is no better argument, or you are on the wind up.
The Falklands were not taken by force (unlike Argentina)
no original population was expelled (or subjected to genocide in the case of Arg)
Therefore no population was forbidden to return
Argentinas territorial integrity was not disrupted-Patagonia wasn't even Arg then
Resolution 2065 says precisely the opposite of your claim, I.e. That the islanders wishes should be taken into account.
The discussions requested took place, however Argentina disrupted them by being unwilling to accept anything other than sovereignty and then an illegal invasion costing nearly 1000 lives.
The decolonisation committee assumes that the territories wish for independence, there is (or seems not to be) any provision for territories which wish to maintain the status quo.
NOWHERE in any UN documentation is there “support” for Argentine sovereignty, just the recognItion of a dispute.
One line from the UN charter proves his entire random selection of defunct resolutions is nonsense.
Raul has saved that statement he's obviously copied from someone else and posts it every few weeks or so as truth.
So for those replying to him, I wouldn't bother, neither does he understand what he is copying and pasting nor does he realise its fictitious.
Responding to this has been done to death in many different threads over the past year.
Also the UN represents every country in the world so just because one of its many self interested departments says -oohh Britain is bad, give back Las Malvinas to Argentina!- doesnt mean the whole UN actually gives a shit about Argentina's Peronist inspired obsession.
These are very simple concepts.
And a single Argentinean twit called CFK standing at the wall with a toffee hammer ,
Enough said lol.
are you not .
You're right, because there is no such place as the Malvinas Islands, but it does to the Falkland Islands because the Secretary General of the United Nations said it does to all Dependent Territories examined by the De-Colonisation Committee, in February this year. That's 2012, not 1965.
@28 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.
If you mean the Falkland Islands which exist, rather than the Malvinas which is a fairy tale, the local population were not expelled. The military, including the murderers ( some later tried and executed by the BA authorities, not the British), were expelled. 4 of the local population chose to leave, but they were not forced to, they were given a choice.
The British could not invade Islands which were already British.
The rest of the civilian population in 1833, some of which came from what is now (but was not in 1833), Argentina and Uraguay were allowed to stay. The fact that they chose to stay under British rule must tell you that they didn't want to return to South America, itself significant. I understand, though someone correct me if I am wrong, that in 1833 there was no such country as Argentina or Uraguay but an area know as the United Provinces of the River Plate, and as this region did not extend at that time down to Patagonia (that was inhabited by natives which were later butchered), then territorial integrity could not be broken, as the British had a prior claim to the Islands from 1765. (This is over 60 years before 1833).
Add to this an almost religiously fervent indoctrination of the Peronist Malvinista historical rewrite hammered into every child and you have the recipe for perpetual conflict. You could at least acknowledge that there are other points of view, you don't have to agree with them.
I think that the UK is taking the right approach. Let the Malvinistas pout and booty and tantrum all they want to. Let them speculate and postulate and demand but generally ignore them. Every now and then just remind the FI that we have it covered, the FI have our support, the Malvinistas can strut all they want. The FI is not the UKs to give to anybody and they are certainly not Argentina's to take. The FI belongs to the Falkland Islanders so, Malvinistas, please address your queries to the FIG not the UKG as being ignored often offends.
Nobody in the UK is obsessed about this; just quietly confident of our position and determined never to appease the bully. We tried to appease once but never again, the cost was counted in millions of lives.
One day the FI will be an independent nation. They are self governing already. All they need right now is an adequate defence against a known aggressor and belligerent neighbour.
My understanding is that the first rule of defence is not offence but deterrence. If a potential enemy understands that we will not be dictated to with regards to the Falkland Islands or any of our overseas territories and that we will fight tooth and nail for every inch then Argentina's potential as a de facto enemy is diminished. Sometimes being hard nosed saves lives. Appeasement is NOT an option. It is too dangerous.
Uruguay got its independance 1828, and according to my maths teacher, that's 5 years before 1833.
Stop altering history so it fits your “facts”...
Monkeymagic,
Yes there is. Not all territories were removed from the list by becoming independent. Resolution 2625 lists 4 ways in which a territory can be decolonised.
www.un-documents.net/a25r2625.htm
1-The establishment of a sovereign and independent State, 2-the free association or 3-integration with an independent State or 4-the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people constitute modes of implementing the right of self-determination by that people.
Many territories decolonised by applying one of the provisions in 2 to 4. for example several French territories integrated into France.
The 4th one applies to the Falklands and to the other British OTs.
” They have the right of self-determination in Britain!!”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRgRh6qjSs8
falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/05/27/falklanders-a-resilient-people/
Pathetic is your answer. We are not stupid and naive. It is not copy and paste. The truth is unique and does not change with time. Demonstrated historical facts and is completely true. The specificity of the Malvinas issue is that the United Kingdom occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the indigenous population is Argentina and not allow their return, thus violating the territorial integrity of Argentina.
I have no fault that you want to distort history.
33 Monkeymagic
You have to study the real history, not British. Contrastela with impartial historians and give a surprise. Carefully read the resolution 2065, clearly states that the conflict is sovereignty, not of self-determination. You decolonization committee of United Nations, every year, issued a resolution on the parties to resolve the conflict, that is sovereignty, not of self-determination. The decolonization committee of the 16 cases of colonialism, 10 cases relate to the UK (including Gibraltar and the Falklands). The facts speak for themselves.
39 Pete Bog
I understand that if someone correct me if I'm wrong, that in 1833 there was no country like Argentina or Uraguay but an area known as the United Provinces of Río de la Plata
These confused. You must study the historical context and social processes. The conflict extends from the period of the viceroyalty and the declaration of independence.
Argentina also suffered four invasions English: 1806-1807-1833 and 1845 (The Battle of Vuelta de Obligado). That is the context of the conflict. English colonialism and imperialism. Is the criterion for judging the sovereignty of the Falklands conflict, decolonization committee united nations. Just read some of your resolutions to notice.
Regarding the new article: “They have this guarantee - that as long as the people of the Falkland Islands want to continue with their current status as a British Overseas Territory, then they will be able to do so.“
If I were an islander, I'd feel a lot more comfortable if Cameron had said ”The islanders have the right to choose their status.” The way he says it, it sounds like tough luck they want to be anything other than a BOT.
I couldn't agree with you more.
That said, I don't think they care about your well presented and thought through post, they are more interested in batter eachother with personal offences...
Many of us have entered these discussion foólishly thinking that we were neutrals, only the recieve the abusement of one of the sides. So spare your time and pick a side, and join the pie casting...
The Islanders do have the right to choose their own status as enshirned in the UN charter and constantly reaffirm by the British government, and they want to remain a British Overseas Territory.
If they wanted to become an independent nation, Britain would not stand in their way. If fact the only country ignoring the rights of the Falkland Islanders are the Argentinians, who say they have no rights, and certainly no right to choose to live their lives as they wish to. The way the situation stands is that if the Islanders declared independence and the British withdrew their protection, then the Argentines would immediately invade, and oppress them removing their independence. And since the Islanders are not stupid they know this,
Currently the Islanders have the best of both worlds. They are completely autonomous in everything (except foreign policy and defence), can live their lives in freedom and the knowledge that Britian will defend them from Argentine aggression.
The Argentines want to turn back the clock to the mythical '1833', to try and make their claim valid. But we are no longer in the 19C, and you can't apply 21c laws retrospectively. Besides, even if we did 'turn back the clock' the Argentine claim would be invalid since their illegal penal colony invaded the sovereign territory of another country.
The difference between the British and Argentines politicians is that our politicians don't need to scream and foam at the mouth to get their point across. All the hysterionics coming out of Argentina lately has been for domestic consumption, to divert the publics attention away from the dire state of the economy. That economy is teetering ever closer to spilling into the abyss. But there are none so blind as those who will not see.
In the 2nd half of your post, you talk about something you think you know. On the 1st, about something you don't know...
I suggest that you “carefully read UN resolution 2065”
”1. Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the
Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial
Countries and Peoples with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the problem, bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter of the United
Nations and of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the
population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas);”
Note the following:1) Bearing in mind the interests of the population
2) taking into account resolution 1514
So let's look at 1514
Conscious of the need for the creation of conditions of stability and well-being and peaceful and friendly relations based on respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples, and of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,
So there you are, your “beloved 2065” that recognises a sovereignty dispute...recommends three things...
1) dialogue to resolve the dispute, which the UK has entered into on multiple occasions, and the Argentines have at best stormed out of and at worst started a war during,
2) take into account the wishes of population, which the British always do and the Argentines never do
3) take into account previous resolutions which absolutely spell out the right to self determination of all people's.
As for the history you wish to rewrite...doesn't matter, you believe your version (wrong) if you wish. But lying about UN resolutions is easy to disprove.
your government will fail using there present approach. and they will fail badly. they are putting any hope of realistic peaceful solution short medium and in to the long term. they lie to you every day. they fill you hearts with false dreams. i feel sorry for you
I am a Falkland Islander. Our choice to remain a BOT is a simple one. We would be risking the loss of our homes, community and way of life if we became independent in light of current hostilty from Argentina.
A BOT works for us, in fact I never give it a second thought. Any suggestion that we are 'hostage' to Britain, or not permitted to make our own decisions, is nonsense.
You are not permitted to take any decisions when it comes to foreign politics and defence. Furthermore, all visitors to the islands are to pass through a British militarised zone in form of Mount Pleasant. Every person wanting to move to the “Falklands” has to have an employment in order to be accepted, that's before even going there. Not to mention the blood dependancy.
You are controlled by the brits, like it or not
Our opinion is sought in matters of foreign policy but as as we CHOOSE to be a BOT, we accept that the final decision rests with Britain. What business is this of yours?
Yes, all overseas visitors land at Mount Pleasant airport, which is contained within a military facility. The airport fulfills its function - people fly in, people fly out. I have no problem with this and am surprised you even mention it.
Employment is an issue for you? You protest that if you want to live here you have to get a job? I would ask what your preferred scenario would be, but I fear it would have something to do with you idling your days away at public expense.
I thought we had established that your concerns for our gene pool are unfounded and simply a product of your fevered imagination.
en.mercopress.com/2012/02/23/argentine-group-insists-with-falklands-self-determination-and-sharing-natural-resources
Seems Britain has a tad more support than you...
You might be right it's not my problem, but don't expect the world to believe your self-determination farce...
58
Post me proofs of what you say. Not many nations, except your own commonwealth minions supports your cause. And don't throw the Lissabon treaty on me, most EU countries didn't even get the choice to vote it through, and those who did, voted NO :)
Argentina's claim is not an international issue. It barely makes the British press, never mind the rest of the world. This is because the issue is clear cut and there is nothing to excite interest on the world stage. The only time anyone does notice is when well educated but poorly informed members of the Argentine government insist on making fools of themselves in public. Let's face it, even your neighbours are only paying lip service to Argentina's crazy stunts. Do you believe they really care?
I don't remember saying anything about the Lisbon Treaty. I personally am against the EU, but that doesn't change the fact that the EU supports Britain in this instance. The Commonwealth countries are not Britain's 'minions', they are Britain's allies. India for example is in the commonwealth, and they have recently shown interest in oil exploration in the Falklands, in violation of Argentina's rants. If you frequently read Mercopress then you will already know this. They support us, yet you are a very foolish man (or woman?) indeed if you claim that they are Britain's minions. You don't seem to quite grasp the idea that the British Empire no longer exists. The commonwealth countries support us because they are our friends, the same reason that SA supports you.
Actually Guzz, all 27 EU countries although arguably 26 with Spain support the UK position as does the commonwealth so the UK has a lot of support.
Although the difference between the UK and Argentina is, the UK government doesn't consider it a problem and as such doesn't run around to anyone that will listen begging support.
As for SA support, that is nothing more than lip service. If you are claiming it is anything more then SA as a continent would actually do something.
The truth of it is nearly all SA countries seek UK investment and technology where it is available and the UK has good relations with nearly all SA countries so some token words about the Falkland's really don't matter at all.
India had interests in Malvinas oil yes. Why did they not follow it through?
Fact is, India has no official stance on the islands (Falklands/Malvinas)
The EU's only mentioning of the Falklands is in the Lissabon treaty. Furthermore, Spain and Italy have already hinted whom they support.
Xect
Nice to see you again, although, as always, I have to disagree :)
Pardon me, see above.
If we are measuring support in numbers of countries through treaties and words, as ever the UK wins.
Well there's 27 EU states and 53 commonwealth countries so again its a non-contest. Not to mention the 27 EU states are the most powerful group of countries in the world.
Although its all rather academic since the UK doesn't officially seek support like Argentina does because quite frankly it doesn't need any support since Argentina has no valid claim and the UK has all of the power.
www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=510765&Itemid=1
UN Decolonization Committee press release:
www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/gacol3232.doc.htm
UN Decolonization Committee having members like Russia, with its Kaliningrad exclave and Kurile Islands seems rather a conflict of interest, as well as the absence of any French Overseas territory except New Caledonia. Hypocrisy abounds...
Only thing I've seen regarding any support to the British claim, is the Lisbon treaty. Please educate me in the opinion of the Commonwealth COUNTRIES. With facts, please (which means links, not your personal convictions)
The support of Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc for the UK claim is well documented, you can google it as well as anyone can. Singapore government is a % owner of RKH exploration, so clearly they have no concerns either.
But generally it is a stupid debate because 90% of the worlds countries don't care and never voice an opinion either way. Like it or otherwise, this indirectly supports the status quo as nothing will change unless a major global player is prepared to materially support the Argentine claim.
If you limit that to countries who's support for Argentina would “concern” the UK, it would be China, Russia and Brazil or stretching the bounds of likelihood France, Germany, Canada, USA, Japan.
So, what have Brazil, China and Russia ever MATERIALLY done to support Argentina? trade embargoes against the UK? Diplomatic pressure? military support in 1982? NOTHING ZIP, SQUAT, NADA....not a thing!
Yet when push came to shove in 1982, which way did the neutral US fall? Oh yes, alongside the British. Even the garlic-swilling surrender monkeys the French, gave assistance when requested.
Your “friends” did nothing, are doing nothing, will do nothing. Should we need them, ours have, are, and will be there when we need them.
Problem with you is that, as long as children aren't getting shot at, you define it as “doing nothing”...
Clearly in my above post where I said trade embargoes and diplomatic pressure, you read “children being killed”
Not content with lying about the Falklands, you now lie about what other people write.
Ho hum.
Material trade embargoes? Material diplomatic pressure?
Don't be silly... We all know what you mean, yourself included
When you refer to historical sources and documents of Louis Vernett Charles Darwin Research by Argentine and Latin American historians clearly stated that the Argentines were expelled. Just look at the Royal Academy of History of Spain and universities and career history in Argentine and Latin America (Uruguay, Chile, Brazil, Venezuela, etc..), With legal support expressed in his research that the arguments are true Argentine and is fully legitimate claim. I recommend you read “British Policy in the Rio de la plata” by Fermin Chavez., Or “Open Veins of Latin America” by Eduardo Galeano.
Read and research the stories that are not Anglo-Saxon and will take a surprise. The story written by the victims of English colonialism and imperialism are true. And they are documented.
Note that the Nobel prizes for peace led by Perez Esquivel expressed support for the Argentine claims. In addition the Committee on Decolonization United Nations, in its annual resolutions clearly stated that this is a sovereignty dispute. Autedeterminacion not. Remember that 16 cases of colonialism in the world, 10 are caused by England (Malvinas, Gibraltar, etc.).
Other multilateral organizations such as OAS, CELAC, UNASUR, MERCOSUR expressed clearly in favor of Argentina calling for dialogue to Great Britain to abandon its colonialism and imperialism in the 21st century.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Face1354@hotmail.com
You do puddle on about all this solid official support from S.American Countries etc.
Do please advise me then - if it is indeed such official support- why to their relevant export departments use the name “Islas Falklands- or - Falkland Is.” on all relevant paperwork?
Raul,
How can there be dialogue between Britain and Argentina to end what you describe as “colonialism and imperialism”.
When Argentina would refuse to recognise or accept Independence for the Islands( this would of course mean british withdrawl from here which is what surely you want)? R
Regarding 1833 - would you like me to get you the list of names of all those settlers that remained - the names of those who subsequently intermarried with settlers from UK and whose bloodlines still run here- and the name and date of death of the last of those who stayed and is now buried in Stanley cemetery?
In return could you list the names of some of the Indigenous Patagonian and Pampas peoples who were slaughtered because they did not want to give up what had been their homelands for centuries ever since mankind started when the European Imperial Colonialists arrived in Argentina?
Because the only ones that are hung up on names are you, las Islas Malvinas in Spanish are the Falkland Islands in English... They also put London, and not Londres, on all paperwork to that city...
Not just the explorers, but the logistics companies, the rig companies, the second and third tier suppliers, the finance companies etc etc.
But they haven't....why is that?
Just an example of the Nothing, Nada, squat...a simple action that would show their “support”. Why don't they do it?
Because it might cost a few dollars....
Why don't they start some tit for tat trade issues with the UK, if their horror at 21st century colonialism is so great?
Because it's quite simple...they don't give a crap.
Raul
Of the sixteen cases of colonialism you describe, why is theist much shorter than in 1950? why has Britain happily seen independence in many of it's former colonies, and has excellent current relationships with most of them, through the Commonwealth. Why do the 16 remain?
See if you can figure it out?
Because the people who live there want the status quo...simple as that. If any of the territories voted for independence they could have it tomorrow. Australia and New Zealand are further away from the UK than the Falklands yet, the original British settlers have their independence, just as the Spanish and Italians do in Argentina.
The things that stops the same independence for the Falkland Islanders, the same right to self determination as those in Australia, new Zealand, Argentina, Canada, etc....are the Argentine bullying, and that fact they are happy to be an overseas territory.
Guzz thinks the whole world supports Argentina but cannot come up with a single economic,diplomatic or trade sanction to support his claim
Raul thinks the UN supports Argentina but cannot find a single resolution that supports his claim, and indeed quotes ones that support the “wishes of the islanders”
Quite a pair....!
Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay closed their ports for vessels carrying the flag of the Falklands as late as December last year :)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16280613
I said material...something that makes a difference...like the trade embargoes I mentioned, or proper diplomatic escalation....
MATERIAL..not symbolic...come on Guzz, your embarrassing yourself now...this huge global support amounts to the banning of flag nobody uses, and allowing the same ships to enter with a red ensign..
Show me legal action, show me refusal to do business, show me something that actually means something, that might actually change the status quo...you can't.
I beg to differ, you said “not a single sanction”
The ban is much more than symbolic, it means the islanders have to dock under their true identity, as brits :)
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4691471
That was “symbolic” as well :)
You talk a lot of rubbish.
Any counter argument is results in ”Post me proofs (links, not your personal convictions)“.
Some of your personal convictions:
”Problem with you is that, as long as children aren't getting shot at, you define it as “doing nothing”...“
”No need to pay them back, they filled their pockets already, not fulfilling their obligations. Hence, all is settled“
”Don't grab facts out of thin air because “you were there”, I know quite a few Argentinians who also “were there”, and they all disagreed on the fascist juntas invasion. Proove your facts, or stop spreading lies“
”Half of the population on the islands are military and you bloody keep the islanders blood dependant from a nation 12000 kilometres from there. You guys make the nazis proud...“
”Yoda
You are obsessed by this multiple identity thing. Try taking the right pills next time and don't project your schizophrenia on us..“
”You obviously think that if you repeat your lies again and again, they will finally end up being true... Got news for you, since the internet, it doesn't work like that anymore. Nowadays, you need to proove your facts.“
”Stop licking our butts, ynsere, it's clean enough and we got loads of yanquis and brits in line with eager tongues..“
A selection of the rubbish you post.
If people disagree with you - they are always wrong - usually you say ”stop spreading lies”.
You complain when people speculate as to you being a Uruguayan, yet you question other people's origin, by asking childish questions they have to answer. (how is your sail training going - have you achieved competent crew yet?)
You have an insane hatred of the English and also the the US.
Your posts often provide links to to articles that are often biased or dubious at the best.
How is the dredging of the Plate river canals ?
www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2012/05/15/Uruguay-export-link-at-risk-from-Argentina/UPI-50011337116212/
Only time I see you posting anything rational, it's only because you copy pasted my posts...
My sources are ALWAYS english newspapers or governmental sites, for the sole reason that you always miscredit anything that doesn't come from your mouths...
I don't speculate about ynsere's origin, fact is, I'm quite sure she's not of Uruguayan origin, which doesn't mean she can be Uruguayan...
I don't hate English people, I only dislike a few in these threads, as I told briton, don't blame Britain for your flaws :)
The islanders having to dock as British (which is what they are and proud to be), how is this anything other than symbolic. Has it cost Brazil, Uruguay, the Islanders or the UK a single dollar in lost trade, revenue or hassle? No.
In fact Uruguay is actively pursuing greater trade with the Islanders.
I listed a few of the examples of trade and economic sanctions open to the big countries, but none of the have done 0.0001% of them, and none of them include the murdering of children as per your previous drivel.
Like I said. Argentina have no real support, because anyone who looks closely can see they have no claim. The “dispute” rather than any kind of justice is used by some to further their trade or political aspirations (I.e China want a tit for tat with respect to Taiwan), but nobody has ever actually “done” anything to support Argentina.
The fact your “best” examples are so pathetic, kind of highlights my point.
The murdering of children was when you aided big brother on your illegal odyssey to the mid east...
I believe mercopress is one of your approved sources
en.mercopress.com/2012/03/30/uruguay-against-any-falklands-blockade-supports-trade-with-the-islands
You see, lots of noise, talk, symbolic support of Argentina. The words...
The actions however, the trade, the material things....say something different.
I would be much more worried if it were the other way round.
p.S.
Paraguay banning ships...LOL...funny as hell that symbolism
Did you actually read your source?
“Supporting any form of blockade would be a violation of the Malvinas inhabitants’ human rights and the same we say with Cuba, we repeat in this case” said Almagro.
Being against a blockade is not entirely the same as to “actively pursuade greater trade with the islanders” :)
Still it was Uruguay's idea to close the ports
And Paraguay has access to the Atlantic, I don't see what's funny about that...
A typical non response.
Your only (non)questions in whole that post was how my studying was going, and some pointless drivel about Rio de la Plata...
Told you Leiard, you set the standards and the tone, I merely respond to it...
Why would you send a trade delegation to the islands if you were not actively pursuing trade? For a vacation?
Poor Guzz. In a dispute that has lasted decades he is unable to come up with a single solitary action by any country other than Argentina that is anything other than symbolic, whilst simultaneously the same countries are actually “doing” the opposite.
Poor, poor Guzz...even Uruguay...
Poor, poor Guzz is getting richer, while rich, rich Monkeymagic is getting poorer... Quite ironic, don't you think? :)
It was only in the 1950's that Peron started to fill Argentine minds with propaganda and a twisted view of history that the 'Malvinas is ours' cry materialised.
Treaty: A treaty is an express agreement within international law either by sovereign states or international organisation. Treaties can be compared to cotracts and a party to either that fails to lice up to their obligations can be held liable under interbational law.
*The treaty signed by Argentina and Great Britain in 1850 is called: 'Convention between Great Britain and the Argentine Confederation, for the Settlement of Existing Differences and the Re-Establishment of Friendship.”
The Falkland Islands legally belong to Great Britain. End...
I'm amazed the same population you are talking about voted a Tupamaro for Presdident... Or maybe it was those non-Uruguayans...
GDP per capita in the UK is more than twice what it is in Uruaguay. With a much larger population, that is quite a difference.
Interesting many of the oppressed colonies have some of the highest GDP per ca it's in the world.
Falklands, Bermuda, Gibraltar, Cayman Islands,...all right near the top of the list.
Wait for 2016....FIs will sail past Lichenstein and Qatar at the top.
Might be, now check your debt per capita
When you are done, take your GDP per capita, and subtract the debt per capita.
Do the same with Uruguay's GDP and debt per capita.
Realize you are living on borrowed money :)
Indeed, I am living on borrowed money. I have a mortgage.
I didn't realise that I had to subtract the whole amount due on my mortgage from my annual income to give my net value (which is in effect what your calculation would do)
I thought, that what I had to do was take the amount serviceable on the mortgage within the given year from the annual income to get whether it was affordable or not.
I see that your understanding of economics is as poor as your understanding of FI politics.
If you wanted to do what you are suggesting you would have to get the total asset worth of a country (not the GDP) and subtract the total debt.
Jeez....you are a thickie aren't you.
Pay your debts :)
@41 Yep, Uruguay got its independence in 1828. Fostered by the United Kingdom. Did you miss mentioning that?
@43 Sh*te for brains. No more need be said.
@45 Bigger sh*te for brains. No legal place such as “argentina” until late 19th century. No legal government. No constitution. Just gangsters. Not changed, has it?
@61 So. 13 -v- 2. No problem. What are your 13 “countries” going to do with the fried faces, eyeballs, arms, legs and melting bodies? Dream on, loser!
@64 I remember Spain taking a position. It wasn't that they couldn't support argieland. Don't recall the Eyeties taking a stance. Too busy shagging 20-year old prostitutes.
@76 So glad that you've finally given up and descended into your proper level of stupidity. “Malvinas” is a bastardisation of “La Malouines”. A French word referring to the French of St Malo. And this equates to “Falkland Islands”, how? Dripweed!
@93 Poor Guzzle. Desperately trying to play both ends against the middle. Bottom line. Sooner or later, argieland is going to step over a line. People who matter (Falkland Islands and Britain) are going to demand the argieland is placed in a position where it cannot do the same again. Uruguay may have to disappear if it is not on the right “side”. Your choice, asshole.
We suggest you don’t hold the middle bit with your fingers,
You are likely to get burnt.
.
I got only one word for you: Myotonic :)
In truth, there are no penguins in the Falklands, people are just seeing Conqueror chasing sheep with his pants down his knees, creating that pace that makes people confuse him for a penguin :)
Think about it...
UN resolution 2065 states clearly that the FI could become an independent nation if they so choose. An independent nation is the permanent solution the UN wants.
www.falklands.info/history/resolution2065.html
So tell me a instance when the Falkland Islanders would choose to become part of Argentina instead of becoming an independent nation?
I can't think of one. They are already 95% independent and are self-sufficient and self-governing. They only rely on the UK for defence.
So the future of the FI is pretty clear, BOT for the time being, then an independent nation at some point in the future.
Honoria
I know the FI are happy as a BOT but Britain would still protect an independent FI, we would keep the military base and troops. I don't think our countries relationship would change much at all.
The big change is Argentina would shut up; they would no longer have a sovereignty claim. After a few years they will forget about you and annoy someone else.
Of course London is Londres in Spanish and UK is Reinido Unido -BUT
-Uruguay is the same in both languages as there is NO TRANSLATION.
Argentina and Chile are just 2 other examples where there is NO TRANSLATION.
Islas Malvinas - in English becomes Malvinas Islands - there is NO TRANSLATION for Malvinas!!
Falkland Islands in English becomes Islas Falklands - because there is NO TRANSLATION for Falklands!!!
When you are defeated you do come up with them!!
But at least you reply - more than Raul does when he is in the wrong and knows it!
With that logic, you are claiming Germany... It's Deutchland...
And the whole world would be claiming Finland, it's Soumi...
Case closed :)
I don't understand. When Darwin visited the islands, he went hunting wild cattle with gauchos. Were these British gauchos? If the population was expelled, why did a ship hired by Vernet return to the islands, then leave for Buenos Aires with a cargo of produce? Who was hunting the cattle if the inhabitants had been expelled? Since the “Clio” left no British settlers on the islands, who was there?
I'm trying to restrict this particular little discussion to whether not any expulsion took place. You are trying to convince me that the Argentine cause overall is just. Perhaps it is, but nowhere have I found evidence to back up the expulsion claim. I can't ignore Vernet's and Darwin's accounts, so please explain to me how you interpret them as evidence the population was expelled.
Don't be like you say Raul is and answer now, ARE you claiming Deutchland for calling it Germany? Are we all claiming Suomi for calling it Finland(ia)?
Mayhap you believe the translation for Suomi is indeed Finland :)
Neither name has a transaltion in the other language - they are totally Different!
Ask the Germans - they call us the Islen Falkland!!
So sorry but - when Chilean and Uruguyan Govt Departments call us the Islas Falkland - that is because that is our correct name in Spanish!
That is why the UN - in English - and several other internation bodies - in English - use the title Falklands/Mavinas.
Malvinas is Argentina,s name - it is NOT a translation into Spanish of the English name.
Islas Malvinas is just as little a translation for Falkland Islands as Germany is for Deutschland. It's the Spanish name for the islands, just as Germany is the English name for Deutschland... Check what the Spaniards call the islands...
Could be that for most of Hispanofonia, one would say “Malvinas” but Falkland Islanders of Chilean origin appear to prefer “Islas Falklands”.
Reference:
“Olvídenlo, la gente de Falklands quiere ser británica”
“Estas son las islas Falklands, yo no vivo en Puerto Argentino, se llama Port Stanley, ya está todo definido y decidido”:
www.a24.com/politica/Olvidenlo-la-gente-de-Falklands-quiere-ser-britanica-20120305-920049.html
BUT their relevant Govt depts, when they fill in standard INTERNATIONAL MULTILIGUAL forms - they use the name Falklands - and of course say Islas instead of Islands because that is indeed the spanish translation.
That some Chilean chooses to call the islands Falklands in Spanish doesn't change the Spanish name for them. Would be like a French guy telling a Spaniard that he from now on calls Deutchland for Germany instead of Alemania (me being diplomatic).
112
No SA nationofficial calls the islands for Falklands, except when they are talking English (which doesn't happen that often). Proove me wrong.
It has naught to do with claims, it has something to do with language, if you are speaking Spanish, you call the islands by their name, Islas Malvinas. If you are speaking English, you also call them by their name, Falkland Islands.
You don't call Germany Germany in Spanish, as well as you don't call it Alemania in English. Still both terms are correct.
I understand it tricky to grasp, but as with everything, it makes sense when you do...
Those folks have no idea who the importer this end is- they never meet. But they fill in the forms in SPANISH where they are describing the goods- yes they write all that in SPANISH - and then use the words Islas Falklands.
I very much doubt that those officials speak English anyway - no need for them to, they deal with Exports - not Imports where they would indeed be coming across documents from English speaking countries.
I tell you what it means, it means he got it all wrong and is mixing two languages, like calling the UK Reino United, or United Reino....
Reference:
Council Decision of 27 November 2001 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Community (“Overseas Association Decision”), ANNEX I A LIST OF THE COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES (OCTs) REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1:
eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX%3A32001D0822%3AEN%3ANOT
Having in mind that “you” are so sensitive about the naming, it does make sense that anyone that sends anything to the islands, in whatever language, writes the name of the islands in English. Elsewhise they risk being discarted before the rest of the document even is read to its end...
Especially if its about exports, loosing money for someones obsession for names is quite... dramatic...
Annd that is why the Spanish name for the islands isn't Islas Malvinas?
Nobody is discussing the origin of the name, it is STILL Islas Malvinas in Spanish, Falkland Islands in English...
How do they effect, you,
Do they interfere with you in any way what so ever,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
And as an exception, if you feel all brutish military should remain in the UK,
Does this then not make you a hypercrit, as Argentina has argentine military aboard, [does she not]
The fact is, you lot are just anti British full stop,
After all, we British have at least 4 foreign armies within 300 miles of the UK, and we are not offended.
The fact that I dislike you(r ideas) doesn't mean I dislike Britain as a whole. Again, don't blame Britain for your flaws.
I dislike every military, including the Uruguayan, and I don't want them near me at all. Especially invasive warmonkeys such as your own...
If you do things in order, then you have 3 militaries to get rid off, before you even get to the Atlantic waters,,, let alone the Falklands,
So anti British ,,is this not .
Pure and simple,
.
Your military is a joke, who are more of a danger to the people they're supposed to protect, than anyone else. That's why you're afraid of them.
The British military are there to protect British people and British territory from people, such as yourself. British people are not afraid of our military, as our military have honour and follow the rule of law.
The only invasive warmonkeys (as you put it) in South America are the Argentines. The Falkland Islands are 300miles away from the sub-continent of South America, and the forces there are purely defensive.
So, Guzz, my 'brave' friend. The only people who should worry you are the Argentinians, because if a war does happen, they'll be the ones to start it. The British, conversely, will be the ones to finish it, probably for good this time so we don't end up in the same situation 30yrs from now.
You are
1872 km
Or
1163 miles
From the Falklands,
And you are in fact closer to
Brazil , argentina , Chile , Bolivia , Peru , and Paraguay
So it has to be purly anti British, despite you denials ,
As we are more than a THOUSAND miles away from you,
We are no danger to your country, and never have been,
am i not truthfull.
I'm a human being, Latin American and Uruguayan, in that order.
I have far to many friends in Britain to allow myself to be anti British.
Britain is a wonderful country, full of stunning achievement throughout history. Just take a look at the railways, the tube and the canal systems throughout the country. Marvelous piece of engineering, truly.
Furthermore, they have contributed like few in areas such as physics and mathematics, to name some.
You might want to take credit for all of the above mentioned, but fact is, your generation have had nothing to do with any of it, and nowadays you (read government, not people) have failed to bring much but misery to the world. Time changes and the tables turns, but never ever blaim your flaws on Britain as a whole.
Long live the Falklands and long live Uruguay, both free of Argentine interference and threats.
Do you have ANY opinoins other than that I would be someone else than I am?
Your own President supports the Argentinian claim, should you be Uruguayan. Is it really that far off to think that most of the Uruguayans agree with him, and not with you? We elected him, you, we have to swallow...
Why Britain has been blessed independence in many former colonies, and has excellent existing relationships with most of them, through the Commonwealth. Why still the 16?
I asked the countries that became independent from the UK? Cost them horrors and mass genocide made by Great Britain. Just look at the massacres made on five continents to notice. Watch the movie Ghandi to see genocide English. They have eyes and not see, have ears and do not want to hear. Unfortunately 500 years of history in Britain is the inventor of colonialism and imperialism. Automatically shown in the decolonization committee of the UN. Of 16 cases of colonialism that is trying the commission. 10 cases for the UK including the Falklands and Gibraltar among others ... Do not say anything about it? Becomes clear who the colonialist and imperialist ...
On balance. England in the course of its history, only 500 years, has committed genocide in the five continents of the world and is currently making humanitarian bombing civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
It has nothing to envy to Nazi Germany and has far surpassed. Along with the U.S. are the shame of the world and Europe in crisis.
Raul believes that the UN supports Argentina, but can not find a single resolution that supports your claim, and cites the fact that support the ”wishes of the islanders'
Why lie so much?
Read the 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. No self-determination.
In addition, every year, the Committee finds UN decolonization resolution using the criteria of Resolution 2065 of 1965, clearly states that the sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination
You obviously don't understand the way the UN works.
None of these resolutions backed Argentina. They just suggested talks between Britain and Argentina. These talks were underway, when in 1982 Argentina, ignoring all UN resolutions, invaded. That invasion INVALIDATED all previous UN resolutions.
Not only that, Argentina ignored 2 UN resolutions asking them to remove their military from the islands. So that shows just how much Argentina respects UN resolutions.
So no, none of those resolutions apply anymore as Argentina crapped all over them. And if Argentina really wants to talk, they have to talk to the Falkland Island Government, not the British government.
But Argentina won't do that will they? Because then you'd have to admit to the world that the people of the Falklands exist.
That said, I still think you're a paid troll (or perhaps a “ni-ni”, but not being Uruguayan you wouldn't undertsand).
Can you please read my post @101 and respond with your views. As I am interested in the Argentinian perspective on this matter.
Thanks in advance for your reply.
Every member of the 16 'overseas territories' wants to remain British. Simple.
In 1850 Great Britain and Argentina signed a legally binding agreement 'For the settlement of existing differences and the re-establishment of friendship.'
Argentina therefore has no legal claims to the Falkland Islands. It was only in the 1950s that Peron twisted historical facts and started crying 'the Malvinas are Argentinian' that the current 'problems' have existed.
Argentinian politicians would do better to concentrate on their economy and the welfare of their people rather than using the 'Malvinas' excuse to side-track their people.
You are without doubt, a CFK follower to the grave, and very anti British,
All rubbish,
If you had your way, Great Britain would be blamed for everything, from the last ice age, to invading the Falklands and holding 3,000 innocent people hostage,
You are the total myth writer,
You and guss, make it totally anti British,
Full stop
.
For the British, has Britain ever said it will support the islanders' right to self-determination of they choose to be something other than a BOT? Seems to me there's always a little caveat in their statements of support.
has Britain ever said it will support the islanders' right to self-determination of they choose to be something other than a BOT?
you should be aware of this by now,
the British government fully supports the Falkland islanders to self determination,
1, if they with the remain
2, if they with to be independent,
3, if they wish to be Argentinean,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Its as simple and factual as that,
At this moment in time, the Falklanders have chosen to remain British,
In the future, they have indicated, that they would / may like independence,
But they have mad it perfectly clear to the rest of the world,
That they have no wish to be Argentinean,
Does that answer your question?
.
A democratic government, that killed its own people... Check our history, in 1968, your democratic government sent the police on its own people, where Liber Arce was shot and killed. The 1st (but surely not the last) civilian victim of the “democratic” government.
Liber Arce, his name didn't help your cause, did it?
Don't throw the Uruguayan media at me, it's not like they ever were on Frente Amplios side, much less Kirchners. You as well as me knows that this isn't about borders, it's merely ideological. It's not pro-Argentina, it's pro-socialism.
And your named newspapers never had any good relation to socialism. Try Brecha or late Mate Amargo for that...
Ni-ni... What, “ni uno, ni otro”? ;)
Try this, I think you are a mix of an animal and a boardgame... Lobo ludo :)
www.facebook.com/pages/Keep-the-Falklands-British/123151384435619?sk=wall&filter=3
You belong to el Partido Rosado. I don't understand why you are so upset with our government. You are very much included in the dialogue and no one is rejecting your ideas as bloc politics. You need to understand though, that you are not in power any more and the majority of this country does not think like you. We are not paid to think like we think, the truth is more that you think like you think in order to get paid...
180 years in charge and look where you brought the country, results of your politics climaxing in 2002.
You have no credibility whatsoever in our nation, you have filled your own pockets for almost 2 centuries, and now you point fingers at us and tell us we do this or that for money.
We are not like you, we don't live to collect paper
You are not Uruguayan. Stop pretending. Somebody's given you an order to project the image that ordinary Uruguayans support Argentine foreign policy.
We do not! Long live the Falklands.
This UK PM feel the loss of 255 soldiers and insists in maintaining diplomatic relations with Argentina? For what?...
@126 Guzz (#)
Take a look at the best light rail in the world....made in Japan and China...
Each member of 'overseas territories of the 16 wants to remain British. Simple.
With all the respect you deserve, with that answer, you are demonstrating that function completely ignores and the Resolutions of the Committee on Decolonization United Nations is precisely to eliminate colonialism and imperialism English and other colonial powers. In the specific case of the Falklands, please consider 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 as resolution 2065 (XX) and self-determination ..
In addition, every year, the Committee finds UN decolonization resolution using the criteria of Resolution 2065 of 1965, clearly states that the sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination
In 1850 Britain and Argentina signed a legally binding agreement ......
Argentina never give up the sovereignty of the Falklands. Read the book “British Policy in the Rio de la Plata” by Manuel Galvez. There clearly documents the context and alcanses of that agreement. Learn all sources Argentinas.
It was not until the 1950 Peron twisting historical facts and began to mourn “the Malvinas are Argentine” that the current 'problems' have been.
Do not get me wrong, I say not with evil intent, with all respect to you, your answer is again proving that you do not know in depth the conflict of sovereignty of the Falkland Islands and a total lack of Peronism. The claim of sovereignty of Malvinas transcends and is prior to Peron.
British politicians would do well to focus on its economy, since so bad as Greece. Spain and Italy, can not escape the crisis in Europe. You would do well to focus on world peace and not use the excuse of maintaining self-determination of peoples and kill civilians with humanitarian bombings as it was in Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Thank you very much
This conflict is not resolved with resentment and revanchism. Resolved to peace and dialogue Why so hateful? Why do you hate both CFK?.
Claims expressed as 99.99% of all political parties and religious beliefs in Argentina and Latin America
Remind the Nobel Peace prize, amnesty International UK, U.S. Luther King or Perez Esquivel of Argentina in their struggle for human rights against military dictatorship and the demands of dialogue in the Falklands conflict. “There are no roads to peace, peace is the way.”
John Lennon phrases that apply to British aggression in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
“Give peace a chance to” ..... “I can not believe I condecoren. I thought it was necessary to drive tanks and win wars. ”....“ If we take the power, would have the task of cleaning the bourgeoisie and keeping people in a revolutionary state of mind. ”
Lennon returned his medal Member of the Order of the British Empire in September 1969, through a letter addressed to his own Queen of England and sent to St. James Palace in London. The musician took this decision by the UK involvement in the Biafran war of secession, by the British Government's support to the U.S. invasion of Vietnam and the censorship of his song 'Cold Turkey', because references to including drugs.
”Your Majesty, I am returning my MBE (acronym for which knows the logo) as a protest against Britain's involvement in the Nigeria-Biafra issue, against our support for the U.S. in Vietnam and against falling 'Cold Turkey' on the music charts. With love, John Lennon, ”reads the letter he wrote the music to the queen, as reported by 'Music News' collected by otr / press. Now, the Medal of the Order of the British Empire, could end up in a museum as fans demand musician.
If John is really a true revolutionary of peace and nonviolence.
The answer for 135 is in the former British: 146 raul2
136 Steve_L
Sorry for the delay in reply.
Regarding your question that the Argentines were expelled in 1833 and Britain occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the original population and not allow its return, it is totally true.
There are numerous published literature that supports these facts. I recommend others to read “Life of Juan Manuel de Rosas” written by Manuel Galvez. You
I recommend the following link and find the answer.
www.cuestionmalvinas.gob.ar/modules.php?name=Paginas&op=_posicion_argentina
Face1354@hotmail.com
thank you very much
You frankly like in cuckoo land,
It will never happen,
What might happen?
Is argentina will be destroyed by her very own corrupt leaders, and CFK will certainly see to that .
You want / demand everything that is not yours .
And you are quiet happy and willing to see the free world go to conflict, to get your own way,
To you, democracy is just a hypocrite word for do gooders and fools.
You have learned nothing, but nothing since 1982,
also removing squatters is legal to unless u conciser 33 people on an island a blossoming colony?
lmao
They know, we know, the whole bloody world knows all agreements before 1850, were superseded after the agreement of 1850,
,
But they refuse to except this, and insist on the 1833 year ??
apparently this give them a claim, ,
CFK .
She makes her own rules and her own agreements,
Signed by herself, and that’s the end of it,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Meanwhile in real world, they actually have more of a claim to Spain, than anything else ??
I say: “The Argentines were not expelled because Darwin's and Vernet's records say this...”
You reply: “They were expelled because my government and my historians tell me that they were.”
I gave you evidence to show that there were people in the islands AFTER the “Clio” supposedly expelled them. You give me no evidence, you just repeat your government's position, that they were expelled and were not allowed to return.
I will look for an opportunity to read Manuel Galvez's book, but until that time, can you supply any evidence, either quotes from the book or from your memory, that support your statements?
Actually, the evidence that Louis Vernet's settlement was not expelled, that only the military garrison (including the wives and children of the soldiers) were expelled by Captain Onslow is stronger than you state. In addition to Darwin's and Vernet's records, the log book of the ARA Sarandi also confirms that only two couples (four adults and zero children) from Vernet's settlement chose to leave and that all the other settlers stayed.
All of the secondary sources (including Manuel Galvez) which claim that settlers were evicted seem to point, directly or indirectly, back to Manuel Moreno's 1833 exaggerated protest to the British government. Whether Moreno accidentally misinterpreted an ambiguous report or deliberately lied is immaterial and we have no evidence either way. Galvez may have innocently believed that Moreno's exaggerated protest was a reliable source. It is certain though that Moreno's claim that civilian settlers were evicted was false.
For example, Gregoria Parry and Antonina Roxa Carmelia were among Vernet's settlers who continued to live in the Falklands for decades, one of them into the 1870s.
Really? Did onslow asked them if they wanted the Argentine flag,or keep the language?
No Argentine settlers were allowed to buy land......
Why uk declined to go to a court of Justice to settle the issue when invited by Argentina in 1884 and at least 5 times after?
Why UN got 10 res,declaring a colonial issue in MAlvinas? Why 30 C-24 says otherwise every year?Why UNASUR,Mercosur and 6 Nobel laureated says uk has to negotiate?
Really the brits in this forum are mentally RETARD!
Parry and Carmelia were not asked either by Captain Pinedo (when Argentine military forces first landed in the Falklands in October 1832) or by Captain Onslow (when British military forces returned in January 1833) which flag they preferred. Vernet, a French national born in what is now Germany, had operated his settlement with permission from both Argentina and Britain, though he repeatedly indicated a preference for British sovereignty. Starting in 1833, Parry, Carmelia, and all other settlers were free to speak any language of their choosing. The British did not impose English on the settlers.
As for why Argentina has any political support for their claims, anti-colonialism plays very well politically, and for good reason. To the extent that the Constitution of the Falkland Islands fall short of complete self-government (which it still does, despite progress), Argentina will be able to get political play from their anti-colonialist argument. As I've written here before, colonialist arrangements are indefensible in the 21st century. If the Falkland Islanders want off the UN C24's list of non self-governing territories, they need to adopt a Constitution which strikes the remaining vestigial colonialist arrangements and limits the appointed Governor, in law, to the areas of defense and foreign affairs over which he exercises anything more than ceremonial duties, in practice. In other words, the current Constitution of the Falkland Islands grants powers to the appointed Governor that no 21st century Governor would ever exercise. Only when those powers have been officially transferred from the London-appointed Governor to the Falklands-elected Legislative Assembly and Falklands-elected Executive Council can the UN C24 take the Falkland Islands off the list of non self-governing territories. Until that happens, Argentina has a political case, but still no case in international law.
....“obsessed”....with... Hey you, stop right there. The UK is “obsessed” with Argentina negatively criticizing my country for the last 100 years. The biggest mistake former president Carlos Menen did is to re-establish the diplomatic relations with the UK. He did bankrupt Argentina like Bush bankrupted the US. As I previously stated, my 2 countries, the US and Argentina are trying to improve the most difficult economic times. The US vets are found disable suffering mental illness like you said the conscript soldiers are found in Argentina. The US the nost “powerful” and “best country in the world” can not assist the veterans on the street begging for food. The US vets are found relieving themselves on the bus stops, parks, public buildings. No one cares. The US is unable to provide immediate medical assistance because of the lack of revenues. Same situation in my Argentina. We all know that if the economy is WEAK, revenues FALLS.... Here in the US several economists have announced another recession after the next presidential elections.
Some viewers stated that “sniffed dogs” are found in most Argentina public places..that is not knew.... police with K-9 are to protect all citizens from possible unknown atacks, same in the US. Every one in the US is searched for weapons, explosives, or any other type of suspicious material or illegal activities.
Talking about “obsession” why the UK did not make a musical about Imelda Marcos 5,000 pairs of shoes and her criminal husband...instead of demostrating the UK “obsession” about Eva Peron life?.... I am waiting for your answer.....
You see, that is for feeble mind... you Ynsere Think your imagination
The “UK” did not make any musical on the life of Eva Peron. It was made by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice. There is no state direction in the UK as to what composers and writers must produce. Maybe there is in Argentina but I have no knowledge of this either way.
Anyway, it produced a few good songs, was popular world wide, so what was the harm. I don't think it denigrated the country of Argentina.
Yes, you'll find security dogs in most countries, but come on, sniffer dogs used to detect dollars????!!!!!
www.buenosairesherald.com/article/87733/speciallytrained-dogs-deployed-at-bordercrossings-to-sniff-out-dollars
It is an “obsession” for Eva Peron life... To damage her reputation they portray her as a corrupt person which is untrue.. Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice had the choice to make a musical about other women such as Imelda Marcos, Soraya....or.... still waiting ....about Diana Spencer...neurotic love affair with his muslim lover... that could bring millons $$$...
The UK is “obsessed” with Argentina's goverment and Eva Peron life....That is fact, like it or not...
Can you support YOUR fact? I believe most britons are NOT obsessed with the Argentina (nothing against the people) it's just that we are hearing more and more about your govenment in the international news with their odd policies. Including their obsession with dollars.
Like most Argentines you greatly over-estimate the global importance of your former country. The UK is not in the least “obsessed” about Argentina, in fact were it not for the Falklands issue which so obsesses your deranged politicians - or the occasional soccer match - it would hardly ever make the news. It is a forgotten country and will remain so because nobody in their right mind can take it seriously. For that matter, you seem somewhat deranged yourself - why did you go off on a tangent and blather on about military veterans, a pop opera, and sniffer dogs, none of which I mentioned? As Clyde (No161) said, in no way was “dont cry for me” intended to denigrate Argentina or Eva Peron - in fact it elevated both, IMO unjustifiably. Argentines are obsessed with the Malvinas because successive governments have mass indoctrinated the sheeple with the big lie “Las Malvinas son Argentinas”. Hence all the tacky half-broken monuments that litter the country. What does Argentina intend to do with the Falklands if or when they get it? Please focus on the issue.
I gave evidence that there were people on the islands after the “Clio” allegedly expelled. You give me any evidence, that just repeat the position of his government, who were expelled and not allowed to return.
Dear Steve_L:
I repeat:
With all the respect you deserve, unfortunately, I will not do your work for you. Read the Argentine arguments please. I give the following evidence: Read the following books.
- Jose Maria Rosa (1968) History of revisionism. Editorial Merlin. Buenos Aires.
- Rosa, Jose Maria. The gaucho Antonio Rivero (The rebel Malvinas).
- Pigna, Philip. “The Gaucho Rivero.” Retrieved on February 29, 2012.
Importantly, the rebellion of the “Gaucho” Rivero. Is further evidence that the Argentines were expelled in 1833.
Reread the following link:
www.cuestionmalvinas.gob.ar/modules.php?name=Paginas&op=_posicion_argentina
Thank you very much.
Antonio Rivero was not a rebel. He was a criminal who murdered five people. His account is completely unreliable. Trying to glorify his murders as a rebellion in order to try to give credibility to his lies is pathetic.
When in fact, this was superseded by the treaty of 1850,
And certainly, not only reinforced in 1982, but that very special year,
Invalidated any and all future claims for ever, is this not much better .
She lost, and she has no rights whatsoever over the Falklands .
.
“...I will not do your work for you”. I've already done my work. I gave evidence to support my statement. You have not done your work. You made a statement at post 28 without giving any evidence to support it. If, for some reason, you do not believe my evidence, then tell me so. I'm just asking for a good reason to believe that the Argentines were expelled and not allowed to return. I re-read your link. It's quite a big website with lots of pages and statements but provides no evidence that the population was expelled. Unless I missed something...
OK, don't even worry about producing evidence, just answer these questions: Who were the gauchos who “rebelled” if the inhabitants were expelled? Who took hid on an islands for months to avoid the gauchos, if the inhabitants were expelled? Who was Antonina Roxa and how did she come to own land if the inhabitants were expelled?
I think you have swallowed the untruths your government has created. There are other aspects of the sovereignty dispute where I agree more with the Argentine version than the British, but I won't believe something that is told to me when there is very good evidence to show it is wrong.
As I stated already, the UK has no obsession about Eva Peron or Argentina.
If I asked the average person , who was Eva Peron, I would get a blank look and the reply - never heard of her, or even, what is an Eva Peron ?
Maybe you should write to Mr. Webber and complain about his musical and the way he has treated the “Sainted ” Eva. Better still, come to the UK and find out for yourself.
As for Argentina, I think that the British public don't care one way or another about the country. It only comes up in the news when the Falklands are mentioned and only because of the belligerent attitude of the Argentine government. Most teenagers here could not tell you where Argentina is and were ignorant of the facts of the Falkland's war.
From your postings, it would appear that you are the one with an obsession about the relevance of your ( former ? ) country to the UK.
I agree that most people outside of South America have no idea who Eva Peron was. Most of those who have some idea probably think she was a fictional character portrayed by Madonna.
No-one alive knows what happen 180 years ago, but Darwin's account is a true record of what he saw while he was their, experts agree on that.
Have you ever considered that the Argentine version of events is incorrect?
Also you still haven't answered my question in post @101
No Argentine has yet. I'm guessing you are avoiding it.
Yes, eventual full independence with Britain continuing to provide defense looks like the most likely outcome in the long-term future unless Argentina decides to be friendly to the Falkland Islanders and demonstrates reliable and consistent friendship long enough for a future generation of Falkland Islanders to want to become Argentine.
I don't sense the Falkland Islanders racing toward independence, but I'm prepared to reevaluate my assessment based on what I see and hear there during my Liberation Week visit. In the end, what the Falkland Islanders decide is the only thing that matters.
You don't have any rights to negatively criticize my country. Mind you own lettrine...
Argentina is a peaceful and one of the best country in the world with economical health care services, just as an example. The country is big with fertil land and minerals. The fisheries sells fish and sea food at reasonable prices. The argentine women like the venezuelan women are the most beautiful women in the world!..
The fact is, the musical about Eva Peron was made and still is seeing in North and South American theaters is because she still is the most admired woman in the world...
@168 Briton aka british bulldog aka garlik yogurt= ASSHOLE
Skare Yensere Think is your imagination...stop rocking the boat...
@170 Clyde Cloudy Mind
I repeat, growing in Chubut Patagonia I never did understand what the UK stands for....My country does not need anything from such.....
I repeat what Cameron is waiting to break diplomatic relations with my country Argentina? I keep asking the same questions and still no viewer dares to answer my question?.....
'The argentine women like the venezuelan women are the most beautiful women in the world!..'
In your opinion? where's your facts.
'Argentina is a peaceful and one of the best country in the world'!
Peaceful? 30 years ago they illegally invaded a smaller nation.. Even today Argentina bully and harasses the innocent civilians of that nation.
Eva Peron -- is the most admired woman in the world...
No Sussie this isn't true, barely anyone outside Argentina have heard of her.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moron
sorry little child,
i cant understand rubbish,
try again in 20 years time,
now of to bed child, you have school in the morning .
I realise that you are not a native English speaker and I could only write something simple in Spanish, but part of your post is incomprehensible.
“Mind you own lettrine” means nothing. The word - if it is one-does not occur in English. As to having a “cloudy mind” it could well be true as at 70 one's faculties do slow down but in the context of this discussion, I think not.
Without meaning to patronise you, if you grew up in Patagonia, it is hardly the center of the universe and your contacts with the UK would be practically nil and as such, you would have very little knowledge of what the UK is like or what their people think .
My knowledge of Argentina is limited. I know a bit of its Geography and History. I have met some Argentinians in the UK and I liked them as people but did not discuss their politics or their view of the Falklands as I thought that it would have been discourteous to guests in my country.
As to the Argentine needing nothing from the UK, this may well be true. From where did you get the musical Evita ? Written and composed by two English men.
Does Britain need anything from Argentina, I don't really know. The only items I can see in the shops are wines. Anything else is well hidden.
As to our PM waiting to break of diplomatic relations with your country, although I bear the same surname as him, so far he has not taken me into his confidence on this point. Come to think of it, he doesn't ask my opinion on anything his government does. I presume it is different in your country.
CFK and Mr. Timmerman will keep an open line to you and inform you of all the decisions they are going to make before they announce it to the Argentinian public and the world.
As to Argentinian/Venezuelan women being the most attractive in the world, this is entirely a subjective opinion. Ask the populations of China and India and see if they agree. There are beautiful women in every country of the world.
“You don't have any rights to negatively criticize my country.”
But I do, its called “freedom of speech” my darling - something perhaps you dont seem to have had much experience with. Negative criticism? On the contrary, if what I said makes just one Argentinian (you) wake up to reality, then I believe it was positive criticism.
If you believe the things you said - Argentine women the most beautiful in the world, Evita Peron the most admired woman - then you really are deluded if not demented like su presidenta. The only thing Argentina has given the world is the Tango - a highly exagerrated strutting dance - very approprate for a highly exagerrated strutting people. As for Evita, the beginning of Argentina's terminal decline from what was (between the wars) briefly a 1st world country can be timed precisely from Peron's accession and Evita's “championing of the poor”, ie, handing out dollops of freebies to get the mass vote. Does this not sound familiar with CFK's strategy?
Argentina is now suffering a 25-30% inflation rate whilst CFK's government pretends it to be under 10%. Just like the other pretension about the Falklands belonging to Argentina when they never did.
She is but a child, who has had a bad upbringing, and blames every body else
She does nowt but insults, and thing this make her look big,
Her insults impress no one, but her delusions,
And as long as she acts like a child, she will be treated like a child,
Respect is earned, it is not given by insults or threats.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Give her time, and she will realise that acting childish is only letting laugh at her,
And she will grow up, and settle down,
And get on with real conversation, like the rest of us,
We British do not hold grudges,
An interesting observation,
Is it not.
.
So who gives you the right to talk about the argentine goverment?...
The Pinguin started insulting the argentine leader, las suecas, los chilotes and uruguayans have degrade my argentine president...and now so feel offended.....Leave my Argentina alone...you dam old freak...
I assumed that “Mind you own lettrine” probably meant “mind your own latrine” but of course I cannot be sure.
@179 Briton(#)
So who gives you the right to talk about the argentine goverment?.
[The same right, as you have to condemn my government]
Also your governments claim to British territory]
..
The Pinguin started insulting the argentine leader,
What is a pinguin] no English [again]
las suecas, los chilotes and uruguayans have degrade my argentine president.
[No idea who they are or what they are ..]
..and now so feel offended.
[And we all feel offended, for your countries illegal invasion of an innocent unarmed undefended peaceful innocent islanders ]
To who,,, that makes your government DIRECTLY guilty, of the deaths of over 700 argentine and British and Falklanders lives,]
Does this answer, your question.
....Leave my Argentina alone...you dam old freak...
No, you leave the British Falklands alone]
And again you cant open you mouth without insults coming out,
For an immigrant that hides the America, then condemns all those that either support or defends you,
Who then are you,
Besides being a very rude little girl
.
Peaceful? 30 years ago they illegally invaded a smaller nation.. Even today Argentina bully and harasses the innocent civilians of that nation
nAtion steve? Which one?The one that The UN,C-24,Mercosur,Unasur say there is a dispute,which Brazil recognizes has an Argentine sovereign territory?
What a bunch of losers and LIARS the brits in this forum(90% of them)!
Mercosur did not permit me to respond your questions. But, I tell you again: I am not interested on your UK...... it takes my attention that Cameron INSISTS in maintaining diplomatic relations with my Argentina.
I already had respond to your attention I am not interested in you, your UK, citizens and islands.
So, please comply with my request not to respond my comments,..
You have the choice to ignore my comments rather than to show your continue desire to degrade me as a human being.
There are many other interesting things to see here in Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Phoenix. So mind your own business.
DEGRADE YOU
stupid child
all of your bloggs have insulted me and my fellow britons, and we have done nothing,
just like CFK you insult and then claim to be the victim.
dont then reply to us, or post on here, unless you expect a comment back
[do you understand]
so please, dont go their,
either be polit, or stop acting the child
GOODBYE
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!