“Malvinas for Argentina and sea for Bolivia” battle cry at next OAS assembly
Bolivian president Evo Morales announced on Monday he will request at the coming Organization of American States, OAS General Assembly to be held in Cochabamba that the issues of Malvinas Argentine sovereignty and a sea outlet for Bolivia be discussed.
“Two things, Malvinas for Argentina, and sea for Bolivia, for the debate must continue at the international community” said Morales during a meeting he held over the weekend with Argentine Vice-president Amado Boudou, some of the contents of which were released on Monday by the Bolivian government official news agency, ABI.
Next week, from June 3 to 5, OAS will be holding its annual assembly hosted by Bolivia and representatives from over thirty countries will be present, “an excellent opportunity to discuss the two issues”, anticipated President Morales.
Last week end Boudou met with Morales for a Bolivian national celebration at Cochabamba, the same city where the OAS assembly will take place, and publicly thanked La Paz for its long standing position in support of the Argentine claim over the Falklands/Malvinas, under British sovereignty.
Morales is also very much interested in addressing at the OAS summit the issue of Bolivia’s outlet to the sea, which it has been claiming for over a century and is a standing conflict with Chile.
The Bolivian leader argues that the OAS declaration approved in 1979 stating that “it is of permanent hemispheric interest to find a fair solution by which Bolivia can have sovereign and useful access to the Pacific Ocean” remains effective but undelivered.
Bolivian Foreign Affairs minister David Choquehuanca said over the weekend that the sea outlet La Paz is claiming will be one of the issues to be on the table at the general assembly. “We’re going to be there with all our strength and patriotic fervour to claim the legitimate and historic right that belongs to Bolivia”.
Morales over a year ago said he would appeal to international courts to recover the sea outlet lost at the end of the XIX century during the Pacific War in which Chile ended up with 400 kilometres of coast and 120.000 square kilometres of annexed Bolivian territory.
The announcement caused disappointment with the Chilean administration of President Sebastian Piñera that has insistently argued that there are no pending issues with Bolivia and anyway if it was the case it is “bilateral”.
Even when the 42nd general assembly motive is “Food security and sovereignty”, in previous meetings other countries have anticipated they will take advantage of such a qualified presence of representatives to address other issues of regional interest.
Suggested Stories
-
May 18th 2013
Argentina forces cancellation of all Lan flights by suspending ground services
-
May 17th 2013
Argentina’s ‘autarkic project’ worsens bilateral relations and multiplies problems
-
May 17th 2013
Argentine whitewash bill turning into ugly electoral debate
-
May 16th 2013
Falklands’ lawmakers meet Chaco human rights group following formal Argentine request
270 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.
I won't hold my breath.
The porblem with these summits from a Bolivian and Argentinain point of view it is just clapping each other on the back. Shouting from the roof tops on mutual support whist nothing is actually achieved nor done. The international community just looks on and says “well done, now you have had your rant at everyone else for your troubles shout up and leave us all alone”
It will just be the usual crap and nothing new will be spoken about.
fourfourtwo.com/blogs/fourfourtwoview/archive/2012/05/02/in-the-new-issue-england-germany-holland-spain-amp-the-metropolitan-police.aspx
Pretty sad... Brits actually think they will win this. LOL!
Have you not heard of the stereotype 'plucky brit'?
Better that than hoping to win something and then bitching and moaning about it to who won hoping to change the outcome *cough* 1982 *cough*
About the 'padeo' thing, the official age of consent for the UK is 16, whereas for Argentina (it appears anyway, i could EASILY be wrong) is 13. So what the UK would catagorise as paedophilia would be considered socially acceptable in Argentina.
Either that or the Catholics - as usual - don't think sexual relations with young children is wrong.
Where as, your police are highly corrupt, statistics are always faulty, child poverty is rampant in SA. I bet you any money, you have 12 year old children selling themselves on the street in S.A.
Have a read: www.humantrafficking.org/updates/830
Or, how about this wn.com/child_prostitution?upload_time=all_time&orderby=relevance
But we can't forget about Paul Schaefer can we. Where was he found? sect leader? lol, Don't paint others with your own bruch.
no point leaving thing to themselves
i would be surprised if south Europe, Argentina and the rest of the world didn't have a problem with them criminals. should all be found and shot if you ask me
You brits love throwing mud dressed in cricket unis but can't take the mud back. You are pathetic whingers...
Don't like what I have to say? Stop insulting my nationality or culture with lies.
You don't want to take the discussion there... First off, it's pointless to have a go at eachothers criminals, they don't make your own better. Secondly, whatever is done to other peoples children in the world, in Europe there has been a scary tendency to do the same to their own. Of course it's not the common European, but still, you don't want to take the discussion there.
I'm not going to post you links of what I'm talking about, it's bad enough as it is, and I'm sure you are fully aware of what I mean...
Doesn't that rest my case? Northern European... In Northern Europe pedophilia is a cultural trait, just like bribery is in the south. Nothing to be ashamed about, just something in the water.
Even though I am British and support the Falklands fully I feel sorry for the average Arg who has been indoctrinated and hit by so much properganda that thier vision is clouded of the real facts. The people of Argentina deserve better than her. And Boliva. Don't get into bed with the devil. Only deal with people who actually care about your cause. Not countires that only support you to serve thier end. If you take her for example. What real support has she managed for her cause? Nothing other that a warm gestures and nothing else.
An expeditionary campaign must of been more difficult back in the past where most RG's live. What about recent history????
YOU LOST jajajajajajajajaa
Everyone remembers the last result :) Islands are British and that hurts doesnt it, deep down inside. And no amout of bleating will ever help
I believed I prefaced my statement that AOC was 13 with “it appears anyway, i could EASILY be wrong”, you can hardly be suprised with me not being well versed in those laws of a country which I have no intention of ever visiting.
About the 'insulting your culture' part, i apologise if i have, but I feel compelled to say that's what the opinion of the Falkland Islanders is.
“Stop insulting my nationality or culture with lies.”
Some islanders might be British, the islands are Latin American. Some islanders, the real ones, not the imported ones, are Latin American too :)
But, as there was no native population, surely all the islanders - whatever nationality - would be considered 'imported' in your eyes because otherwise, wouldn't that smack of hypocrisy?
No, my friend. Your nationality is your infance and your memories.
With time it can grow to become your choice, but something it will never be, is a place where you impose your will...
But the UK isn't looking to impose its will on anyone? I mean, the islanders -again, of many nationalities - would prefer their British links.
If you mean MPA, that's not a particularly imposing outpost by any means. If SA policy could be influenced by MPA then that would be the fault of the politician in my opinion.
Then remove your military, we don't want them there. British citizens are welcome, British miitary is not. Don't talk about self-governance, don't use your feeble excuses that Argentina will invade, just got those military out of here, and the issue is solved.
That's the rub, you can hardly blame the UK for having a larger contingent there from what happened last time when the garrison was relaxed, this policy replicated back then could have saved around 1000 lives (can't remember the exact figure)
But also from interviews with the islanders, they say they are more secure and are comforted knowing that those forces are there to protect them, and their way of life (should the need arise)
If Argentina did the same to us (say for example, the Isle of Wight), i'd personally have no problems with an Argentina military garrison provided certain elements (like amphibious assault ships) were not there + our government had suitable 'defences' against such an outpost.
The other thing Guzz is even if what you say is right and that the islanders were put there 180 years ago. They have made the islands theres for 100s of years and concider themselves British. They developed the islands. Improved the infrastucture of the islands. They are thier islands. Would you ask every white man in Australia to leave as the island was never there's and belong to the natives? If on the basis of your arguement was implemented what would that mean to other places like that. Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, Alaska and so on?
My apologies, I should have specified MPA = Mount Pleasant Airfield. thanks for the thanks :) I don't see any value in name-calling or 'argie-bashing'.
I would like to enquire about your opinions, if you would care to share.
They are there for a reason, can't you remember what that reason is?
whats the age of consent in spain u spik 13 and who is the pedos ur 1 sick cookie
THIS, my friends, is what is meant by underdeveloped.
They are literally underdeveloped - in every way. Psychologically, Emotionally, Intellectually, Spiritually - Undeveloped.
But the source of all of this crazy talk and corruption is an undeveloped conscience, which comes from an undeveloped consciousness.
You simply can not make a claim for territory without money and might.
Unless you're sick, crazy and stupid.
military might is not everything. Ghandi ring any bells. However he did have morality on his side and the rest of india.
I think the FI should be given independance and become a country of its own right. Surely then Argentina would be in trouble for any blockades or threatening behaviour to wards the islanders as it would be its own sovierign nation. Surely some sort of legal alliance could be drawn up where the UK protects it? So not too disimilar as now but with FI having more rights instead of being seen as a British over seas territory?
Everybody wins that way, except for Argentina ofcourse.
So why do you have an issue about the British military being somewhere you've never been and will never go? How does it affect anyone in South America?
Further who in the Argentine government has ever suggested that the issue would be resolved by simply leaving the islands undefended?
vedicviews-worldnews.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/disrupting-gang-of-pedophiles.html
You just let your kids starve to death instead
At least 10 indigenous children have died from malnutrition in north-west Argentina
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12973543
there protecting the future of the Falklands and increasing stability in the whole south Atlantic Area
Argentina is a potential highly aggressive country as proven by past events
not many people or country would go against one of the most technological advanced Armed forces in the world
@tobias if your gov will not persue these people it will sway the stats, they are everywhere its just our police are better at catching them
I too think that - ultimately - the FI should become independent. But what I am against is people thinking that they should become independent while they wish to remain a British Overseas Territory =)
If they want to be independent, then fine. But if they want to stay a BOT then that's fine too. Either way, its their choice and who am I to say what they should/shouldn't do.
Besides, I'm not sure what the UN decol. committee could do to enforce this if the islanders wish the status quo to remain, I mean don't they usually deal with regions that yearn for independence rather than wanting to maintain their link?
what happened to give peace a chance??, this is her version of peace by conspiring to strip their homes and identity along with the right to self determination and forcing her will on these peaceful and valid people????
UN Resolution 1541 (Principle VI) gives 3 legitimate options for an overseas territory under it's right of self determination:
(a) Emergence as a sovereign independent State, or
(b) Free association with an independent State; or
(c) Integration with an independent State..
The Falklands have chosen Option (b) ie Overseas Territory of the UK (and EU) with local responsibility for all areas of government except foreign affairs and defence.
One other thing I don't quite understand. Is why CFK and gang have not done any dialog with the people. I mean if they were interested in the islands would it not be best to get them on board? From an Arg point of view that is. Rather than trying make the islanders lives difficult you would think she would make Argentina look more promising????
@Guzz, I understand why you may not want a foriegn military power close by however would you argue about other nations that have militaries next door to you? and also why do think the British military are there? ask yourself this... has argentina given the uk a reason to believe that the UK must protect its interests?
Indeed, all 16 states should be given a referendum and finally get themselves of the list. In order to vote you have to have been born in the territory which gets rid of any implanted population nonsense.
Vote 1/2/3 for indepence, overseas territory or align with other country.
Close the list once and for all.
But that would give the comittee nothing to do and no reason to exist. Think of all the salaries and junkets to tropical islands - they'd never want that
Excellent idea,
lf Argentina are SUUUUCH good friends with Bolivia then they should give their good friends some land & enable Bolivia to reach the sea. lol
@Guzz,
What business is it of yours that we have a British military base?
lts our land & we want it here.
Why are you so frightened of the British?
Brazil would have more troops than us right next door to you.
lf the British left, the Argentines would be here in the blink of an eye.
We are not that stupid.
lf fact l would like to see MORE troops here. Many, many more.
Nobody trusts Argentina, and this is perfectly fair, as Argentina is not a reliable country. Isolde is right. If the British removed their military, the islands would be immediately invaded.
You are right Argentina won't achieve much. I'v also highlighted that point. No body likes a cry baby constantly whining. Maybe if Argentina changed its aggressive stance and improve trade, relations and ect with islanders then the benefits for both would become evident. I think before Nester that there were discussions on joint hydrocarbon exploration/exploitattion on the cards. It could still be that way I would like to believe if it was not for the likes of CFK and such.
The truth of the matter as we all know that this will never happen. Argentina is too spiteful for that. “cut thier nose of to to spite thier face” attitude.
Thanks for the info
@50
I have no idea, the key is consistency, positive consistency. The idea that CFK thought the islanders would accept the 3 flights from BA per week is ludicrous, especially whilst Mercosur are banning Falklands shipping etc and they already have a regular + trusted air link to Chile.
The better way would be positive trade talks, not the illogical methods CFK is using which are producing few - if any - results.
Whilst I think that Argentina may have gone too far to ever 'persuade' the islanders to become Argentine, there is a far brighter future that could be had. The main stumbling block to this hope however is the amended Argentinian constitution demanding total sovereignity of the Falklands, which in itself (alongside Britains refusal to discuss sovereignty ) bars discussions from happening at all. It would be sensible to add that Britain is willing to discuss anything with Argentina except sovereignty, whilst for Argentina it is vice versa.
Also, whilst the Kirchners (sp?) appeared to be very anti-war, it'll be interesting to see the methods her successor uses in 2015. I doubt it will change, but interesting none-the-less.
Agreed - and this would resolve the Falklands and Gibraltar issues once and for all.
After all French Guiana is classed as part of France and Ceuta and Melilla are classed as part of Spain.
A non-elected military junta invaded the islands. They not only invade the islands, they also tortured and killed its own people, the same people that supported them, you expect the world to believe.
Argentina has a sovereignity claim issue with Britain. Who knows who is right, and how many really cares (the world is bored). Fact is, Britain has military in an area where no one wants them, and I would understand it if there was a real threat, but Argentina is not mobilizing for war. On the contrary, their army is kept down, for historic reasons.
Its people might agree on their claims, but no Argentinian civilian is going to invade the islands other than in words (like Conqueror killing me...)
Sort your issues with Argentina, or don't. In the meantime, remove those military from our Latin American coasts. As for USA, they should stop producing drugs in Colombia and send their troops back home as well.
www.facebook.com/pages/Keep-the-Falklands-British/123151384435619?sk=wall&filter=3
If that's the case mate, I'd argue that thievery, drug manufacturing/distribution, kidnap, extortion, distortion of truth, genocide and general douchebaggery are cultural traits of South America. Less something in the water and more something in your genes.
See, I can make ridiculous generalisations about specific populations as well mate.
@ Guzz #29
As has been oft repeated on here, the Islanders want the British to maintain their military presence as they don't trust Argentina to not try another military escapade. It doesn't matter one iota whether you personally, or even all of South America don't want the British military there. The islands are British, because the natives of the islands, the Falkland Islanders, wish to be so. All of the evidence (Not including the revised history by Argentine governments spouted since 1941) supports the British claim. If Argentina was so sure of its claim, they would've taken this issue to the ICJ and have it settled once and for all...except for the fact that they know their argument hasn't a leg to stand on, and they find the Falklands issue to convenient a distraction to get rid of.
...With that out of the way, I'll be interested to see how the end of this international meeting goes....maybe Christina will have a partner to storm out of the conference with.
No one except the brits themselves supports your invasive colonialism. Its 2012, go home. You claim to be innovative world leaders? Then lead the world out of misery, instead of dragging misery to the world.
Leave the islanders with THEIR islands.
Righto mate, first of all, I'm an Australian observer/commentator, so my country has nothing to do with this.
Second, the Falkland Islanders are home already, and they have elected to remain linked to Britain, as is their right.
Third, the only acts of 'invasive colonialism' going on here is Argentina's continued attempts to acquire the islands.
Fourth, I think you will find that many countries around the world support the current status quo regarding the Falkland Islands: That the islands are British, the Islanders wish to keep it that way, and Argentina will continue whining about this.
In 1978 there was a military junta in charge of Argentina (non-elected by definition), and also in Chile. Same in Uruguay, Brazil and Paraguay. Now, we got rid of them, and finally (after fighting several amnesty laws they prepared for themselves), we (SA) have put most of them in jail. The only ones left to deal with are the British forces in the Falklands, and the US forces in Colombia. We don't agree either with the military junta, or you warmonkeys (you know who you are), we despise you both.
I can't take you seriously, no matter if your post are written with your best intentions. Mostly because I'm still here waiting for you to come and shoot me, as you promised you would...
You are nothing but a warmonkey, and the only thing I might use your posts for, is to educate children in how not to become...
We're not complaining that Argentina has military forces. It is the actions of those forces, their harassment of Falkland Islands flagged and other vessels in international waters, the regular provocative (and unreciprocated) military incursions into Falkland Islands airspace, and he constant threats and 'demands' from the Argentine government that persuade us that it is prudent to offer protection to the Falkland Islanders and to deter further military aggression from Argentine forces. Surely you can see that this is perfectly reasonable under the circumstances, and is no threat to Argentina.
Your government whine about this to the UN. As if. Seriously, if we wanted to destroy Argentina, which we don't, we could do that from one submarine berthed in London, no need for any military presence even in the South Atlantic. But seriously relax, take a happy pill if you have to, we're not coming to get you any time soon. On the other hand we regularly hear your compatriots promising “we'll be back”. Until your government, and that portion of your population that supports them, grow up; expect to have British forces on British territory to defend it.
You can say the Falklanders choose to have British troops there, well, that's not acceptable, and that is an issue that has to be talked about.
No nation in the world should be allowed to have a foreign military aiming guns at their neighbour. And if you are not aiming guns, why the hell are you there??
Argentina has no functional army, and the people in charge are the ones that fought the very same army that invaded the islands.
Drop your excuses and go home...
It is of course a known fact that most of the Islanders are married to people they are already related to in one way or another. After 179 years this is hardly suprising.
That's an outright lie and serves no good for any issues presented in any threads.
The islanders might be blood dependant, but the blood is coming from many nations of the world, so inbreeding is not happening.
hiding his own corrupt actions.
Guzz, if your region of peace uses only words to settle disputes, then why all the efforts to cut off the Islanders from the rest of the world?
As for none of you agreeing with the Junta, that must mean all those cheering, flag waving, patriotic supporters of the 1982 invasion announcement by the Junta must have been forced at gunpoint in front of the cameras.
In fact, Latin America continues to be rife with border and territorial disputes at all levels - from countries down to provinces down to cities down to neighbourhoods and right down to the insecurity of many individual homes and lands.
Because Britain refuses to enter a dialogue.
Not at all, those ones cheering were mostly the ones profitting from the junta, plus a few deluded ones. But hey, you can't judge a country for having fascists, I'm sure Britain has quite a few as well. Doesn't make you a fascist nation, does it?
And how to tell what peoples reaction means in a military dictatorship that tortures and kills its own people... Frightened people tend not to react, and grab for anything that will get you out of that position. You should try it, then tell me how you would react...
How would you like Britain to have a dialogue with the Argentine government when the Argentine constitution effectively allows for only one possible outcome: Britain handing over the islands to Argentina.
There can be no dialogue when one side (Argentina) already has the contract finalised for the other side (Britain) to sign.
What says in the Argentinian constitution is the Argentinian stance on the matter as things are, not the outcome of that potential dialogue...
“First.- The Argentine Nation ratifies its legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over the Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur Islands and over the corresponding maritime and insular zones, as they are an integral part of the National territory. The recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respectful of the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the principles of international law, are a permanent and unrelinquished goal of the Argentine people”
That's a direct excerpt from the Argentine constitution, courtesy of pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Argentina/argen94_e.html
I'd like to draw your attention to 'permanent and unrelinquished goal'. To me that reads that the only accepted outcome is Britain handing over the islands. If Britain does establish a dialogue and doesn't agree to hand over the islands, Argentina will bitch and whine, claiming that the dialogue failed because of Britain's stubborn refusal, and demand a new dialogue to discuss the issue.
Good job it isn't up to you whether or not we put our own forces on our own territory. You might be a big cheese in the La Campora elite Mind Fuck Platoon but you certainly don't dictate to the UK how we deploy our defences on our own territory..
I don't have to explain this to you or any Argentinian but I am going to anyway.
You want us to remove our defences so that you can occupy our territory, for the third time in less than two centuries. You know we couldn't mount a task force like the one we sent in 1982 so it would be a much simpler task to hold the territory this time if only you could cajole us into leaving the islands defenceless. Then you could slaughter the natives at your leisure, as is the Argentinian way.
We both know that the UK, like Argentina, has scaled back it's armed forces. In terms of numbers since Argentina last started a war by invading our territory. The UK armed forces are a shadow of what they were even in 1982 at least in terms of numbers. Our defence strategy for the Falkland Islands is a simple one. We deter the Argentinian military. Nothing more. I am mildly gladdened that you feel threatened by a battalion of infantry, a small flight of fast jets and a couple of naval vessels. They are good but they are no freaking death star you buffoon. Still if they keep out the pikeys it's all to the good I suppose.
And I repeat, they are on our territory so don't threaten or dictate to us until you are marching up the Ross Road and even then we won't listen.
Sorry, Grizzle, your words have no credibility. As far as coming to shoot you is concerned, I have no problem with that. You stay on your bit of the planet and operate in accordance with the rules that the world has laid down. AND stay away from our territory and don't interfere with its activities, and you'll be quite safe. Well, safe from us, anyway!
As far as self-governance is concerned, although we refer to it as self-determination, it's none of your business. The British and Falkland Islands governments have agreed that the Falklands will govern itself, except for defence and foreign affairs. That's our business, not yours. Regarding your “You can say the Falklanders choose to have British troops there, well, that's not acceptable”, you don't get a say. Your “opinion” is irrelevant. As for “aiming guns”, you are just laughable. Tell us one piece of British or Falklands ordnance aimed at the south american continent. Do make sure the piece of ordnance can actually reach the south american continent!
Let us be 100% clear. The Falkland Islanders do not wish to enter into a dialogue and, therefore, neither does Britain. Argieland has a history of trying to force the Islanders to accede to the argie point of view. Note the word “force”. But dialogue, under present circumstances, is not going to happen. Britain listens to the Islanders. The Islanders are “frightened”. The active argie armed forces currently number 73,100. More than 24 times the number of Islanders. The Islanders have every right to be “frightened” bearing in mind the belligerence of the argie thieves. Didn't the argies try being “friendly” for about 10 years? Until they found it wasn't working. Then reverted to their normal belligerent, obstructive, grasping, mendacious ways.
Argies have no chance of getting their way and your specious and mendacious comments will get you exactly nowhere. Don't care. The Falkland Islands are, and will remain, free!
Argentina has no territorial disputes. All its land borders are settled with all our neighbors, and the Falklands are not a territorial dispute (this is not me saying it, this is you Brits saying it). And I agree.
Thus, there is nothing to discuss in the Falklands, and we have settled through war, expansion, annexation, arbitration, treaties, and purchases all our land borders (within 200 years).
You Europeans have had 1800 years of a head start and are still rife with disputes.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_territorial_disputes#Europe
The fact you still have disputes after 2 millenia and 2 wars that killed 80 million of you, encapsulates th definition of futility and intellectual hebetude.
Thank you Conqueror for breaking the stereotypical mold!!!
Chaco and Puna de Atacema...
books.google.co.uk/books?id=kA6TyX4oPL8C&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=bolivia+argentina+annexed&source=bl&ots=E9VC0knri0&sig=b8TR3C3LXJuTi3YznNPn608T1A8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NObET_bBOIyr8AOFrrDpCg&ved=0CFIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=bolivia%20argentina%20annexed&f=false
HYPOCRACY ANYONE? ANYONE WANT A SLICE OF ARGENTINE HYPOCRACY???
In the Paraguay article people demand we return (Chaco/Formosa)
In the Bolivia article they demand we return (northern Jujuy, Puna de Atacama)
If the topic is Chile, they demand we return (Patagonia and half of Tierra del Fuego)
When it's Uruguay and the dredging of the Rio de la Plata, that we return (Martin Garcia Island)
...and Brazil (most of Iguazu Falls), when the issue is the tourism at the Falls.
Or when it is about Santa Cruz, how we took that from British settlers from the Falklands.
Not happening. The land is ours no matter how all of you cry, hate, and fit about it. It makes so many people mad.
There are military bases all over Europe, sometimes another country 'A' will have a base in Country 'B', it’s just normal and no-one is bothered by it.
For you as a Uruguayan to be bothered by a small military base in the Falkland Islands puzzles me, it’s about 1000 miles away from you!
It’s like people in the UK being troubled by the US military base in Bulgaria, which is the same distance (1000 miles) from the England.
I don't understand why it’s a problem, maybe a cultural thing?.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian%E2%80%93American_Joint_Military_Facilities
Just because the rest of the world doesn't care, doesn't mean we argies have to think so.
There are US troops in many countries in Latin America, but they even approach Argentina and the country blows up in rage. We do not allow any foreign troops in our soil, no foreign military ships in our ports, end of story.
If the rest of the world doesn't care about other countries troops fine.
We will not tolerate US, British, European, Chinese, Chilean, Brazilian, Bolivian, or any troops in argie soil. They should be killed on sight if on our territory.
That almost happened to Bolivia last year, they tried to enter and caused a massive incident.
Besides, as i understand it Argentinians are more afraid of their own Armed Forces than they are of foreign Armed Forces. Memories of the Dirty War still run deep, don't they? Understandably so.
So, Argentina has got 1 whole country on their side with a worse equipped Army than Argentina.
Chile must be 'quaking' in their boots. Not with fear, but with laughter.
May 29th, 2012 - 04:02 pm
Well never mind eh? It's just as well you don't get to have a say in it then I suppose.
Where did I say there are British troops in argie? There aren't thankfully. What I don't get is why you all get so mad when Argentina blocks military ships from the Uk, US, Spain, and other countries from docking in our ports. We've done that for a while now. We don't allow war mongering vessels in our waters.
Much less troops in our territory. That's all. Just because the rest of the world signs agreements with each other allowing this, doens't mean we have to.
We couldn't give a flying fart whether you let our vessels in or not, that is where you do have a say, fill yer boots, your territory, your rules. So long as you leave our territory alone we should get along just fine.
Incidentally. Are you and Guzz hot bunking? Do you go on active mind fuck duties whilst your battle buddy sleeps?
British forces in the South Atlantic:
- 1 destroyer
- 1 Corvette
- 1 SR helicopter
- 1 Transport jet
- 4 fighter jets
- around 700 soldiers if you include the local Defence force
- Possibly 1 nuclear POWERED NOT ARMED submarine
No tanks, no Apaches and no artillery pieces.
Now lets examine Argentinean assets in the region:
- 105,000 personnel
- 440 artillery pieces
- 524 anti-aircraft weapons
- 610 Armoured Personnel Carriers
- 216 Infantry Fighting Vehicles
- 50 Armoured Cars
- 175 light tanks
- 236 Main Battle Tanks
- 42 Helicopters
- 62 fighter jets
- 4 Destroyers
- 3 submarines
- 9 Corvettes
- 2 Fast Attack craft
- 6 Patrol Craft
As you can see, Argentina has significant military assets at its disposal, far outstripping the British garrison on the Falkland Islands in both number of soldiers and amount of equipment. The garrison on the Falkland Islands is just large enough to keep at bay any potential Argentine attack long enough for reinforcements to arrive, but in my opinion it needs to be better equipped to provide a more suitable deterrant. The people of the Falklands do not like the fact that a country which wants their land and has invaded before has such a large military so close by, but they put up with it. Were the Argentineans to drop their claim to the Falklands and scale back their considerable military might the garrison would be scaled back too. However, until that happens, the (in my opinion) modest garrison will remain
Then why cry and whinge when Argentina does not allow foreign military ships to dock, because it is some sort of “protocol of friendship”. Friends don't send weapon-laden vessels to another country and ask to stay.
There's never been a foreign base in Argentina, and the one time a joint excercise was planned, that was bringing in Chilean, Brazilian, US and Canadian troops the country rose up in revolt. We do not allow foreign military in our soil, unless it is to be killed or to kill us.
'Cos neither of these claims have any basis in international law (or at least to countries who actually abide by treaties they signed).
Don't like a treaty you signed ages ago? Renegotiate it, don't repudiate it.
(and for the hard of thinking, that means Argentina should have renegotiated in 1941, not now)
Incestuous paedophilia is also frequent in these countries going by the rate of prosecutions for this vile crime. In view of these examples I just do not believe that in Argentina the incidence of paedophilia is low.
Given the number of people in Argentina of Italian and Spanish descent I am amazed at Tobias's claim. I have lived in Italy and Spain for long periods and, in my opinion, paedophilia is “alive and kicking” in similar numbers as it is in the northern European countries.
So, Tobias, no more Argentine bullshit!
El Salvador and Honduras have as much in common with Argentina as India does with England.
And those countries are 10 times poorer on average.
Sorry but the numbers don't like, go protest to the FBI and Interpol why they pick on the white pedoes...
(and remember, in the USA 60% of crime prosecutions are of blacks, as the police there is rampant with racism, so take that 83% figure of pedophiles being white and account for the racial bias in prosecutions.. imagine if it didn't exist how high that number would be).
You guys can say we don't keep stats, that we are corrupt, that the age of consent, that the moon is grey, that the planets didn't align right... but if there was a bad situation with pedophiles in Argentina it would get out, and people would be outraged since in this country people are avid protesters of crime.
Sorry, pedophilia is just not as culturally pervasive as in northern Europe. The statistics and the “general feel” of things make that clear.
“While nearly 70% of those serving time for violent crimes against children were white, whites accounted for 40% of those imprisoned for violent crimes against adults.”
And remember, this is a biased sample as in the USA minorities are overprosecuted and whites underprosecuted.
“The idea of Argentina invading if the British left is pure excuses, as big a truth as Saddams WMD's, and served for the same purposes.” This is a terribly weak analogy. Weapons of mass destruction were one of the very few ways in which Iraq could threaten the United States, and the evidence for their existence in the former has always been very scarce. The Lebensraum ideology is all Argentina needs in order to threaten the Falkland Islands, and the evidence for the great popularity of this idiotic meme among its citizens is overwhelming.
As I have said, northern Europeans are more prone to pedophilia and serial behavior. Notice how most mass shootings occur in USA, Canada, Britain, Holland, Germany, Norway...
Just like you people are far more in tune with corruption and bribery of southern Europeans, because it is more alien in your culture... while to Southern europeans it does not seem as rampant or as such a big deal. It's almost like a Stockholm effect in both cases. Perhaps to you all, because you live within the culture itself, you can't tell the forest for the trees.
But to outsiders, like myself, this has always been very well known. Look at the Christian sects that kill themselves, all protestants, all in “northern” countries.
Do you think the incarceration rate of Whites as child molesters, the Interpol most wanted pedophiles being 90% white, the serial killer rates being overwhelming white, the mass shootings being mainly in northern Europe/North American phenomenon, the protestant sects that kill themselves...
that is all just a fortuitous coincidence??
Come on.
Mpa aka the death star its really called that :)
Faith,hope,charity and desperation the typhoons that live there can deter argentine massivily .
How does the backing of the Argentine for Bolivia's claim to a piece of Chilean territory square with Chilean“solidarity” with the Argentine's claim for the Falklands.? Maybe someone from the Argentine would care to explain this one ?
Might makes right. You of all people should be a supporter of that rule.
May 29th, 2012 - 04:21 pm
No no no. You cry and you whinge and you stamp your feet and pout and shout and wee yourselves with over exitement......
We just laugh at you.
As a part of one of my work assignments I had to investigate and report on child abuse in Argentina and Chile. To even suggest that it not a huge problem is ridiculous in the extreme. The difference is that the Southern Cone countries cover it up and turn a blind eye. Tobias is mistaking the lack of prosecutions in Argentina with the actual occurences. It is rampant and, for the most part, the children have nowhere to report the abuse.
But we all know it has nothing to do with this article. Tobias is just spoiling for a fight with anyone about anything. Sad.
John Hughes' view, in recent LSE presentation is that British see Falkland Islands as a human rights/self-determination issue, but Argentines see it mostly as territorial integrity issue (at 17 minute mark in ipod broadcast: www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/videoAndAudio/channels/publicLecturesAndEvents/player.aspx?id=1481
Their arrogance and superiority complex makes them the butt of jokes and nobody, but nobody, has any respect for them at all. Maybe, that is why there is a higher per capita population of psychiatrists and psychologists in Argentina than any other national in the world.
The only contribution they make to the world is to produce “futbolistas”!
You need a rest, its obvious you and other argie bloggers are cracking up, with stress,
You need a holiday, and relax with all your fellow bloggers,
Before you all commit suicide,
Not that most brits would worry,
But they may well get the blame,
You guys will believe anything, a Bolivian guy in a wig, want the water,
And CFK want the fishes,
Who gets the bread thenlolol
Relax the British are here to help .
.
The Falklands have their issues, like anywhere else. Child abuse, a previously hidden phenomenon, has lately come to the fore. There are two men serving jail sentences for sex with under-age girls and one for incest. They constitute the entire prison population.
prove it, link please,
PROVE IT likn please .
Absolutely right on both counts. The only point I would quibble on is the “turn a blind eye”. I think it is more to do with poverty and lack of police resources.
@2 I’ll take you for a night out in a Chilean mining town, we’ll see who runs and hides first. If you don’t accept my invitation can I assume you are “lots of shouting, very little action”?
@4 Where is TTT when you need him?
How does an Argentine commit suicide?
- he climbs to the top of his ego and jumps off.
How do you recognize an Argentine spy?
- From the sign on her back that says, 'I'm the greatest spy in the world.'
How do you make a quick buck?
- Buy an Argentine for what he's worth and sell him for what he thinks he's worth.
I'm just filling in for Tobias. I'm sure he'll be back soon to pick where I left off. Tobi, take it away...
May 29th, 2012 - 07:32 pm
Maybe he fell asleep on stag and is now being beasted by a big hairy La Campora Sergeant Major type.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9176205/How-the-good-life-came-to-the-Kelpers.html
You've lost it. I used to respect you for your posts but obviously the pressure has built up too much for you. Interestingly you say you believe us Kelpers should be allowed to remain in the Falklands and you also hate the Argentine Government, so you are not the everyday run of the mill Argentine Mercopress poster. However your hatred for the UK and everything British is overpowering your ability to remain sensible I'm afraid.
Take a break and come back and start again. LOL.
Yes, full independence would solve the problem. It would force the UN C24 to take the Falkland Islands off their list of non self-governing territories. Argentina would lose the political support of the rest of latin america, just as Guatemala lost support when Belize became independent. There is just one problem with the idea.
The Falkland Islanders don't want to be independent, though a growing minority are comfortable with the idea. There is precedence though. Malta didn't want to be independent, but Britain forced independence on them. Singapore didn't want to be independent from Malaysia, but Malaysia forced independence on Singapore. However, the British are currently in no mood to force independence (or anything else) on the Falkland Islanders. The Falkland Islanders need to decide for themselves.
If Argentine politicians really wanted the Falkland Islands, rather than something with which to rally voters and distract them from corruption, graft, and other abuses of power, then Argentina would be nice to the Falkland Islanders, would seek warm relations, etc. rather than being the neighborhood bully.
Dear Chanchi
You are the laughing stock of Hampshire...
Look at how much of a threat I am: I'm one person taking on 20, who insult my country, attack it, make lies about it, deride our race, our ethnicity, our language, our ways, our religion, and Mercopress is completely fine with it. Shows they have no values themselves.
My replies are responded by dozens of people proving how penetrating and threatening they are perceived to be, I have impersonators pretending to be me which shows people see me as a threat, I have Mercopress now banning my posts, so they obviously see me as a threat now.
You want a monopoly on humiliation? You ain't getting it.
Good night all. Time for me to go home after a hard day's work. Mrs Bloggs does not like me “wasting your time on that damned Mercopress” at home when I should be helping out around the house, playing with the kids and helping them with their homework. She most likely has a point but it is a bit addictive isn't it. LOL!
So you approve of insulting an entire nationality as post one did? You should be demanding that reply be banned.
Yet you don't. No honor, you are coward of te internet like the rest.
@108 You seem to have a very unhealthy interest in paedophilia. (Please note I don't believe in this lazy American spelling.) One wonders what induced you to research such a subject? Now the question is: Have you differentiated between “paedophilia”, “pedohebephilia,” “hebephilia,” and “ephebophilia”?
@112 I'm afraid you do cry and you whinge and you stamp your feet and pout and shout and wee yourselves with over excitement...... But then psychotics rarely recognise their psychosis. You need to submit yourself for a diagnosis in a proper country. I doubt your own nut-doctors would recognise their own nut-jobs. By the way, there is no such thing as a “bestialist”. Try “zoophiliac”.
Talking of mud, it seems that the argie accusation of likely contamination of the Uruguay river turned out to be sewage outage from Gualeguaychú, Entre Ríos. Does that count as mud. You blocked a Uruguayan project for SEVEN years because of what you were doing. Even better, the argies protesting were the ones causing the contamination. But then, nothing is ever your fault, is it? As for your subsequent posts, you wouldn't recognise the truth if it smacked you in the face. And in respect of post one? I don't see any “nationality” mentioned. “The guilty flee when no man pursues”!
Post one insulted all the argentines who died in the Falkland's war... basically saying they are worth nothing, and their deaths were an act of cowardice. And all of you after it endorsed it. Mercopress endorses it.
I would like all of you who approved of post one here to go and say those words, “grow a spine and do something... all shout no action”, to the face of a Falkland's Veteran to their face, or to the children of a killed serviceman. Then you all wonder my reaction here today? What people devoid of any compassion, and even a modicum of fairness and pathos.
You are all spineless, lying, dishonorable, debauched, scurrilous, uncouth, mealymouthed, prevaricating, dishonest, fibbing, rebarbative people.
Bye, bye losers. And remember, tell those words of post one and two to the families of the killed.
All we get from your end is all talk and no trousers. I want to see Argentina show some courage and impose effective sanctions against us or at least commence legal action.
No need to get so angry. It is not our fault you are useless. I was hoping we would have heard about the May 2nd legal deadline for oil explorers in the FI but not a sausage :(
How is post 1 insulting?
It is a fair point. The Bolivians have been banging on about access to the sea since the 19th century. Argie governments about the Falklands. I think “put up or shut up” is the order of the day.
Regarding your self evaluation of yourself as a threat, I think the situation is more akin to when there is a ranting nutter in the room. First the good folk try to talk reason to him, then they ask to have him removed. There is no need to take offence at comment number 2, Bovis is just making a light hearted innocuous ( and erroneous) generalisation about us.
@Mcarling
Thank you for the consistently informative and high quality posts.
Are you by chance a teacher? The way you enter the forum at #130 and ignore the previous 93 post to answer the last sensible question asked, has a teacher-like quality.
102 JPhillips
“Is there some kind of “Buy One, Get One Free” deal on lost-cause territorial claims on at the moment in SA?”
Nice. LMFAO
You just made my point man! Do you see not wat you wrote???
700 killed man!! And you say said men are spineless??????
THIS is insane.
thank you for the link.
including /-
Kelpers receive random telephone calls from the mainland, abusing them in the night.
Do they feel part of South America?
“No,” says Summers
146
that bite on the leg, by that cow, must have been infected, you need a doctor, urgently,
you are sounding incohision .
We lost a lot of people in the war with Peru and Bolivia too.
I think was Beef was saying is “You (Arg + Bolivia) lost, shut up and get on with it”.
I quite agree with this.
Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. It would be very risky for the Falkland Islanders if Britain were to increase troop strength beyond a sustainable level. A reduction later would send a bad signal to would-be aggressors.
Chileans seems still very well in tune with asking Patagonia east of the Andes to be returned... So put up or shut up?
“you are sounding incohision”
I hope that was an intended joke.
Interesting. Argentines say not to be part of SA, and are arrogant.
FIs say it, and it is quaint and weal.
Skeletons are being laid today.
At a stretch it was implicit.
Absolutely yes. I would tell any compatriot to shut up on that issue. It is not official policy and there is no campaign to return Patagonia to Chile.
Chile accepted the arbitration on Laguna del Desierto (near Chalten) and since has shut up.
of course
Undoubtedly, Britain will be observing at the Cochabamba OAS General Assembly meeting and emails from commenters who wish to show solidarity for Falkland Islanders right to self-determination should email to Rachel Edis, listed as the UK Permanent Observer to the OAS, at: rachel.edis@fco.gov.uk
Reference:
Agenda item 9, “The Question of the Malvinas Islands” [sic], on page 4 of the Draft Agenda of the Forty-First Regular Session of the General Assembly AG/CP/doc.796/11: scm.oas.org/IDMS/Redirectpage.aspx?class=AG/CP/doc.&classNum=796&lang=e
Permanent Observers to OAS:
www.oas.org/en/ser/dia/perm_observers/countries.asp
Morales over a year ago said he would appeal to international courts to recover the sea outlet
listening???? if you really wanted the Falklands take it to the international courts!
Quite right.
The brooding over territorial disputes that you mention is, I think, a phase we are going through and I hope we grow out of it.
The problem is that it is a guaranteed vote winner. In Bolivia it would be political suicide to declare “let’s just forget about the sea”.
Maybe the closest UK analogy would be for a politician to say “let’s scrap the NHS”. To many outsiders looking in it would be a sensible way to cut the deficit. What’s the big deal, people pay directly for health care all over the world, but in UK this would not be a vote winner.
On the matter of access to the sea for Bolivia, law makers in Chile have proposed a corridor for Bolivian use in the past, but the Peruvians don’t like it. There is also a train that runs from La Paz to Arica. Produce on the train is exempt to duties at the border. So the Bolivians effectively have duty free access to the Pacific. This is no good for their most valuable export which requires a more clandestine route to the Pacific.
An old army boss of mine used to say that Bolivia wasn’t a proper country and we should just agree with Peru, Argentina and Brazil to divvy up Bolivia between the 4 of us. I don’t entirely subscribe to that, but you know...
@156 I knew you did.
If the UK had something “practical” to offer to Argentina, perhaps your way would work. Chile and Peru have something practical to offer to Bolivia, so you don't see such a huge blowup like with the Falklands.
But since the UK is in effect an irrelevant country for Argentina overall (compare to the 1860-1945 era when the British were important for us), then there is nothing to lose, so to speak, by keeping the Falklands issue going in the government's eye.
There's nothing practical since the UK has nothing to offer us.
All of those are arrogant nations and we want nothing to do with you or them.
If you humblde up, perhaps your continent would return to economic growth and employment.
And please, don't say the above is preposterous, you would say the same to “us”.
Like having no food in the refrigerator after a massive summer barbecue whole cow in coal pit, vs having no food in the fridge after being rescued from being lost for a week in the mountains.
You wouldn't call fools all here who want to see Argentina rive and sink to a Cimmerian chasm (98% of contributors)>
References:
Senador boliviano pide refugio en la embajada de Brasil:
www.voanoticias.com/content/bolivia-senador-roger-pinto-denuncias-gobierno-evo-morales-narcotrafico-persecusion-politica/1120926.html
Pinto: “Mi Verdad Al Pueblo de Bolivia”:
senadoconvergencia.blogspot.ca/
The Government of the Falkland Islands is far more democratic than any of the regimes from 30 years ago with which you try to equate them. I would like to see the ongoing trend of transferring power from the appointed Governor to the elected Legislative Assembly continue, but this will happen only as fast as the Falkland Islanders want.
The presence of the British military in the Falklands is manifest of the democratic desire of the Falkland Islanders to have their protection against Argentine attempts to make the Falkland Islands a colony of Argentina and, as planned in 1982, to ethnically cleanse the Falkland Islands. Remember, Argentina is the only country in the western hemisphere which executed a virtually complete genocide of the indigenous population.
If the people of Colombia want US forces out, then US forces should leave immediately, but the Falkland Islanders most definitely do not want British forces out of the Falkland Islands.
The “natives” of the language don't like being embarrased by a lesser human.
You all do want Argentina destroyed. But anyway, so why are the Falklanders begging for fishing cooperation? They want nothing to do with us... Well, they are getting their wish.
Fishes or no fishes, it doesn't affect us.
See? That's what happens when you want nothing to do with neighbors, that whether you like it or not, you have to deal with.
The Falklanders want to pick an choose in what areas they want to deal with us, and we have called their bluff. We pulled out of all agreements. “COoperation”, “COordination”, “COlaboration” ...check the prefix meaning of “co”, it means “two or in tandem”.
Or a more fitting saying “takes two to tango”.
“We want nothing to do with you”, that is not CO________. We are happy to oblige.
A year gone already ? Doesn't time fly :-)
Certainly true that there are a couple of hardcore Argie haters.
But there is plenty of lighthearted stuff:
“You might be a big cheese in the La Campora elite Mind Fuck Platoon ”
and
“Is there some kind of “Buy One, Get One Free” deal on lost-cause territorial claims on at the moment in SA?”
Come on, that's jolly enough.
@War Monkey: are you Greek Yogurt?
falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history8.pdf
You left out the method by which Argentina gained Patagonia and most of the rest of Argentina: genocide. The Argentines killed off virtually the entire indigenous population in the late 19th century.
@74 Guzz ”No nation in the world should be allowed to have a foreign military aiming guns at their neighbour. And if you are not aiming guns, why the hell are you there??“
The only things on the Falklands aimed at Argentina are early-warning radars.
@95 tobias ”There are US troops in many countries in Latin America, but they even approach Argentina and the country blows up in rage. We do not allow any foreign troops in our soil, no foreign military ships in our ports, end of story.“
@98 tobias ”Where did I say there are British troops in argie? There aren't thankfully.“
Thank you for admitting that the Falkland Islands are not Argentine territory.
@144 Condorito ”@Mcarling Thank you for the consistently informative and high quality posts.
Are you by chance a teacher? The way you enter the forum at #130 and ignore the previous 93 post to answer the last sensible question asked, has a teacher-like quality.”
You're welcome. Yes, I teach law.
I knew it!
Leiard, those jokes of yours... I think the last one is from the late 1920's, just saying... Still true, you might say? Mayhap so, then again, there is a reason they are called the brits of America...
And I must say Argentina isn't the laughing stock of SA, mayhap it's the most attacked by the SA countries, but I can assure you You guys amuse whole SA a lot more than the Argentines (you warmonkeys, that is)
Britain has outplayed its role in SA, scream all you want or need, but as long your troops are there, you are responsible for the isolation of the islands (which actually happens to be exactly what you want, isn't it?)
The pedophile discussion is out of topic, but to say SA suffers the same issue as northern Europe is an outright lie, only in Denmark there has been 4 cases this last year, and that's only counting the incest... Please stop that discussion, no one thinks whole Europe is represented by those lowlifes.
The real translation of Falklands Islands to the Spanish language is Islas Falklands.....as well is Londres for London, or Francia for France or Estados Unidos for United States......Malvinas is a kick name adopted by Argentines for a BOT called Falklands Islands.
As I'm reapeting in my post.....why Brazil and the rest of SA countries are too concern about the Falklands issue and don´t say nothing about the French Guyana which is a real colonialism issue inside SA....?? Or some other cases over the Caribbean Sea related to UK, Netherlands and France.....or, as it was reported here, over Spanish position over North Africa (Ceuta y Melilla) and Cannary Islands (very similar to FI situation respect to the mainland)...?? Is there a double standard...? Why....? And Puerto Rico.....??? Some to think about...?
Bachelet will destroy her opponents in the upcoming elections in Chile, and it won't happen that Chile will support the British claims, only in your head.
Islas Malvinas is the Spanish names for the islands, like it or not. If you don't believe me, check with the Spaniards...
Argentina is a country that invaded a British oversea territory costing over 250 British lives.
Are they sorry for this act of agression? Have they ever shown remorse or recompense to the British or the islanders?
NO!
They blame a military junta (it wasn't me!), show dishonour and disrespect at every opportunity, and continue their disrespect. Imagine Angela Merkel stood in front of a map of the Third Reich with a swastika over it, claiming the French and Polish were pirates.
Out of respect for their own war dead, if nothing else, Argentina should drop their ridiculous claim. That way Guzz can have his wish. British military can remove its defences and the Falklands can join the South American (NOT Latin American) community.
communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/rights-so-divine/2011/nov/8/argentina-child-sexual-abusers-paradise/
www.dagorret.net/argentina-child-prostitution-in-buenos-aires/
gvnet.com/childprostitution/Argentina.htm
www.enotes.com/topic/Prostitution_in_Argentina
Then we have Brazil with over 250,000 child prostitutes
www.enotes.com/topic/Prostitution_in_Brazil
It is estimated that there are 35,000 children working as prostitutes in Colombia with between 5,000 and 10,000 of them on the streets of Bogotá
www.enotes.com/topic/Prostitution_in_Colombia
In fact, tobias you live in one of the most perverted parts of the world I have ever seen. Doesn't it make you proud where you come from tobias?
Law ?..........what is it ?
Chile: Hi, CFK we support your claim for Islas Falklands.
CFK: Why thank you for showing the unity of our South American brotherhood.
Bolivia: Hi, CFK, we support your claim for Islas Falklands.
CFK: Why thank you for showing the unity of our South American brotherhood. By the way, we support you against Chile, so that you can claim some of their land to be by the seaside. South American unity against the evil world.
I'm not sure what you're asking.
If you're asking the philosophical question of “What is law?” then in the grand context of the 20th century Hart/Dworkin/Rawls debate I'm more sympathetic to Dworkin's ideas but I recognize that Hart and Rawls also made important contributions to understanding what law is.
If you're asking what sort of law I teach, my primary research interest is the application of the mathematical tools and methods from economics to research in law. For example, I've been studying game theoretic approaches to dispute resolution (both domestic litigation and international conflicts) for more than twenty years.
#191 Or maybe its because Cristina is principled and the Bolivian case is just
'we Brits have right to say “we're actually quite tight for cash at the moment and we'd rather not spend it on defending against a non-existent Argentine threat while cutting public services at home”. Surely?'
Yes, just as the Falkland Islanders have an absolute right of self-determination to decide whether or not they want to be part of a political relationship with Britain, the British have the _equally_ absolute right of self-determination to decide whether or not they want to be part of a political relationship with the Falkland Islands. The relationship can be maintained only so long as both sides are in mutual agreement.
I almost agree that, today, the military threat from Argentina is “non-existent”. Argentina's military, while quite large, is poorly equipped, poorly trained, and poorly supplied. That is why Britain is able to currently defend the Falkland Islanders with the tiny force levels that Britain now maintain in the South Atlantic. The immediate threat of another Argentine military invasion seems low, but the current political and economic aggression of Argentina against the Falkland Islanders suggests a serious long-term threat.
Today they have zero chance of getting anything, and their feeble attempt at getting Argentina to back them is simply ridiculous. Chile is amongst one of the largest investors in Argentina with some US$16 billion invested and growing, plus we source 10% of our total imports from Argentina. Very good products and very cheap. We are loyal customers and are sticking with them. In the first three months of 2012 about 650,000 Argentines visited Chile, we even take their Pesos and they can buy as many Dollars as they like here.
So in conclusion I would say that a fly shit on the wall at the Casa Rosada rates higher than Bolivia when comparing it to the Chile Argentine economic relationship.
www.rightsidenews.com/2012053016318/us/homeland-security/irans-offensive-in-americas-backyard.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
#198 I'm afraid I can't take seriously an article that still calls Latin America the USA's backyard
But what about The Mad Bitch of Argentina?
When she has a bad bout of bi-polar she is completely irrational and likely to do anything, irrespective of the consequences to either party or anything else in her way.
....so Argentines randomly telephone Falklanders in the middle of the night to hurl abuse at them!?!?
When they mention the 800lb gorilla do they mean CFK or Argentina as a whole?
en.wikisource.org/wiki/1850_Convention_of_Settlement
and guzz
anything to suit your selves,
is it not .
So, you mean international treaties should be respected by everyone, except Britain, USA and sidekicks?
You think you have veto on morals?? :)
I think when a state uses chemical weapons on its own citizens, you can disregard treaties.
I think that when a nation (USA) provides another nation (Iraq) with those same chemical weapons, they kind of lost the right to judge anyone...
1850 treaty ratified between Great Britain and Argentina settling ALL outstanding differences. Also, the Argentine settlers on the Falkland Islands WERE PURSUADED TO STAY by the British and were NOT evicted.
Read and digest...
The fact is,
It is argentina that disregards treaties not the British
This is about your actions over the Falklands,
Not the American over Iraq.
Is this not true .
If I sell you weapon I am not responsible for how you use it.
Your government chooses what treaties to respect and which ones to disregard.
With that in mind, why can't Argentina do the same? And if they do, who are you to point fingers?
Condorito
If I put a maniac in power and equip him with chemical weapon, don't you think I share the responsabilities for the outcome?
Mccarling
A crime is a crime, no such thing as a justified crime, they come with justified punishment...
you did not answer the question on the other blog,
try this one,
name the treaties that the UK goverment has totaly ignoresd,
Your proof that Britain has ignored treaties? Your biased opinion is not proof. As usual you show your racist views, with you pathetic hatred of the British.
Why do you hate the British so much? Are you jealous? Poor Guzz, too embarrassed to admit he's from Argie land, poor fake Uruguayan.
If “you” put him in power, then yes, you would bear some of the responsibility. But Saddam put himself in power. If you are suggesting that some shady American group put him there, then I think you give them far too much credit. If they had that kind of ability they would have eliminated him just as easily.
As for who made the weapons, there were weapons manufactures from many countries in Iraq making arms for Saddam, including Chileans. They set up shop in Iraq to get around export restrictions placed by their own governments. The actions of business men are not always endorsed by governments.
Iran doesn't have nukes.
Pakistan and NKorea don't have reliable delivery systems
Nobody f***s around with India because they don't give anyone reason to.
The UK had nukes in '82, that didn't stop Argentina. If Argentina had nukes today, there would still be a stand off, the stakes would just be higher.
Argentina should ditch the formal military, and simply have an aerial defense system of high tech radars, SAMS and ICBM interceptors plus some sort of weapon or system that cripples any invading task force coming from the sea.
Get your facts straight.
The USA DID NOT provide Saddams Iraq with chemical weapons. Germany, the Netherlands, Eygpt all provided precursor materials, with German and dutch companies being directly involved in building the factories for the nerve agents produced using them.
It was your friends, the chinese that supplied munitions (45000) capable of being filled with these chemical agents.
I would suggest research before accusation in future.
@tobias - go ahead and develop a weapons programme - just think about what you will have to ditch to pay for it first. You can't use them to invade the falklands either, unless you want to occupy a dead wasteland, or see Argentina hit in return.
But I guess you want Argentina defenseless, not surprised though.
I see answer 1 and 2 remain up. A humilliation of the war dead of Argentina, and no apology by all the British and non-argentines here who approve of insulting the argentine war dead with their silence or outright support for the comments. An opprobrious attack on argentines based on ethnicity and Mercopress does not take action.
Quite clear that slighting argie war dead is a completely acceptable form of expression here.
You will pay dearly for your impudence one day. Well, your children likely will.
Many countries could invade Argentina, so-called democracies who when in need of resources will surely strike in the future. As for it being a good thing, we will never know I guess. The Brits tried taking Buenos Aires and were comprehensively wretched by a civilian militia (not any Spanish armies, which had left town due to protect other more important colonies).
That however, was certainly a good thing. The worst that could have happened is for Britain to have a colony in South America proper. Thank god for the citizens of Buenos Aires stopping it.
They were let down by their leaders, from Galtieri down to second lieutenants. They were let down by Argentine politicians from the time of Perón, the people who created the “Malvinas Argentinas” fantasy.
The Argentine survivors were treated better by the British than by their leaders.
This isn't merely my opinion. Thank God I wasn't there. This is what the survivors themselves have stated.
The comment was made HERE that argies are spineless because they only “talk” and don't act on the issue of the Falklands. That I took as a reasonable conclusion to be a direct affront on those that actually gave their earthly bodies on a battlefield.
That is what has set me in high dudgeon and rightfully so. As a result I may have said many things that were wrong, but that comes with the territory of complete outrage I experienced and still do at such comments.
#217 “Condorito
If I put a maniac in power and equip him with chemical weapon, don't you think I share the responsabilities for the outcome?”
Exactly
#221 Saddam, like bin Laden actually, was a Frankenstein's monster for the west, easy to help to power in the Cold War, harder to get rid of or deal with once he had been established in place. His association with the CIA goes back a long way, to his role as a very young Ba'athist in the attempted assasination of the left wing founder of the Iraqi Republic Kasim in 1959, through the coup against Kasim in 1963 right through to his waging war against Iran for America in the 80s
Saddam was YOUR failed experiment, and as a result, hundreds of thousands civilians payed with their lifes.
I don't need sources on this one, it's a historical fact and it's there to read for everyone.
Wow! That's a stretch. I'm really having trouble seeing how that's an affront, especially a “direct” affront, on the war dead. I hope the person who wrote it didn't mean it as an affront on the war dead.
I suspect it was meant more along the lines that Argentina hasn't done much constructive to try to peacefully resolve the issues. I would give Argentina credit for the good things they did during the mid-to-late 1990s, but it's difficult since Argentina has reneged on most of it.
It seems like the attitude of the Falkland Islanders may be something like: “The Argentines didn't keep their word of 1850, they didn't keep their word of the 1990s, so how can we trust them? Better to not have anything to do with them.”
The only legal way that Argentina can ever gain sovereignty over the Falkland Islands is with the democratic consent of the Falkland Islanders. In my opinion, if Argentina would like to make progress with the Falkland Islanders, they need to stop trying to bully them and extend a hand of friendship. To start, Argentina needs to stop threatening companies doing business with the Falkland Islanders, allow flights without any conditions not imposed on other routes, allow Falklands-flagged vessels to use Argentine ports under the same conditions as other foreign vessels, comply with their obligation under the postal treaties to recognize the validity of Falkland Islands postal stamps, and stop desecrating war memorials in the Falkland Islands.
If Argentina can consistently show reliable friendship for several decades, a future generation of Falkland Islanders might forgive Argentina's past aggressions and accept Argentine sovereignty. It's a long shot, but it's the only shot on the table.
“Saddam was YOUR failed experiment” – you are throwing “YOUR” pretty wide there. I don’t remember participating in that experiment. Or does “YOUR” = the whole world less Guzz?
I don’t think, Saddam and Bin Laden were skipping down the road to Sunday prayers when they were abducted and brainwashed by the Americans.
They did what they did because they wanted to do it for whatever reasons they had. You can’t blame someone else for their actions. Or maybe we could just blame their mothers for not bringing them up right.
A crime is a crime, no such thing as a justified crime, they come with justified punishment...don’t you agree? ;)
Don't fret about it they have had a planning session with their handlers. It was found that the only time the British press took any notice of Argentina's current national tantrum was when one of their athletes, in the Falkland Islands under false pretenses scored a massive own goal by desecrating a war memorial on the islands.
With no justifiable moral arguments of their own they have been directed by their La Campora handlers to feign shock, horror and indignation at 'British and Falkland Island disrespect for Argentine war dead'. Unfortunately no disrespect has been forthcoming except from the usual suspect (you know who you are) and his posts are just too easy and obvious, even we Brits are embarrassed. So the Malvinistas have had no choice but to revert to type and cook up an excuse to act all upset. Well it worked with the British press afterall.
Don't forget. That old murdered UN resolution 2065 translates directly into Malvinistian as 'Malvinas son Argentinas'. ARA General Belgrano was a Red Cross hospital ship full of orphans on a peaceful friendship cruise when it was attacked and sunk by callous British pirates and the British are only making all this fuss to distract their population from dire economic issues in the UK.
Are you aware what a rumour is, a false accusation ,
People will believe anything nowadays,
Now then
You made a statement that Briton were insulting argentine war dead,
Please back this statement up with proof,
As accusations like this get out of hand, and before you know it, the British are being accused of insulting others war dead,
And your accusation of blogg [1] and [two] do not count,
I have read this, and it is in no way offensive to argentine war dead,
Please provide positive proof that argentine war dead were insulted ,
And please remember it takes two to tango, and no doubt, British bloggers may well counter your claims, and prove argentine bloggers have insulted British war dead .
Thank you for your cooperation.
.
So, Mrs. CFK and Mr. Evito will must await a long time to make arranges with her....our Chilean Teddy Bear-like former President
118 windy
prove it, link please,
PROVE IT likn please .”
I think you will find he is correct.... unless either the civilian couple from MPA are still banged up... a little bit of domestic violence was involved there.....or they have caught the cabbage bandit...
Back on subject... why don't they put the 'Falklands for Argentina, and sea for Bolivia' up to the vote... a single yes /no vote for the two on the one card.... I think I know how Chile would vote.... SA solidarity my left foot....
He is implying that she is overweight.
It is true that Bachelet has wide public support. I have a lot of respect for her even although I don’t support her. But she did mess up big on the 27th Feb 2010 and the facts should be laid bare. It might seem harsh that a natural disaster should ruin her career, but Chile is the most seismically active country in the world. 3 of the 10 most powerful earthquakes ever recorded, were in Chile, including the most powerful. It is therefore imperative that our leader reacts correctly under these circumstances.
Unless you have lived through one, it is hard to imagine the aftermath of a massive earthquake. Everything is out, no lights, no phone, no internet, no mobile signal, chaos and panicking people everywhere. You know many people are dead or trapped, but you don’t know where. You have no idea if you are near the epicentre (hence got the worst of it) or if the centre was hundreds of miles away and therefore the earthquake is even worse than you have just felt.
In my case I got to my car and drove away from the coast. I put the radio on and went from one static channel to the next until I picked up a station over the border in Argentina. People were calling in to give updates. One guy called in and said the US Geological survey website put the epicentre in the south of Chile and there was a tsunami warning. 15 mins after the earthquake, I knew what was going on but the emergency response executive in Santiago didn’t or were dithering.
I expected the whole of the country’s armed forces would be deployed; I expected to hear frantic activity in the skies, helicopters, transport planes, to see army vehicles hurtling past me on the road. But nothing. The army wasn’t deployed for political sensibilities and the tsunami warning wasn’t given due to (it would appear) incompetence.
A lot of people died that day because of those two mistakes and it seems both were made by Bachelet.
You are absolutely right about Ms. Bachelet. If she really is responsible for the fantastic lack of emergency reponse in Chile on 27 F 2010, then she should pay the political cost of that. More so as Chile is recognized as the best trained emergency response country in SA. Having said all that I must say that I think she actually would be the best president for Chile at this point in time. Piñera has failed as a right wing president by trying to cuddle up to the left wing Governments of SA. This was a bad mistake, he should have just done his own thing and left the rabid left to sink into it's own muddy hole.
By the way the hot pisco and lemon went down a treat, blessings.
I have been disappointed with Piñera too. As you say he has been too populist. He shouldn’t have tried to appease the left and he should have been harder on the conflicts of interest on his own side (re the issue of education) to remain credible. I heard him interviewed last week, he sounded like a defeated man.
If it wasn’t for the 27F failure I think Bachelet would be the best choice for national cohesion. But it happened and it is now a divisive issue, so maybe we need someone new.
Incidentally, although much was made about the famous miners’ rescue, the Chilean recovery from 27F was truly heroic. I doubt any country in the world could withstand such an event, either physically or economically, as well as Chile did.
Glad the pisco worked! I use it as a pre-emptive measure too.
For many, maybe too many, years I worked in emergency services, part of my training about 30 odd years ago was in Chile, so I have a real soft spot for ONEMI and I know just how hard the 27F recovery was. I would say that it was not only heroic it was nigh on impossible in the time it took. Brilliant.
But your country did care about international treaties one international treaty in particular, 'The Convention of Settlement' that the Argentine Government ratified in 1850. Because after that date in the 1870s, and 1880s the Argentine government produced maps which showed that the Falkland Islands WERE NOT PART OF ARGENTINA. The '1882 Latzina map' clearly shows this historical fact. Oh dear...
From a Brit Emergency Service member too an Argentinian Emergency Services member, Respect man, respect!
When, Guzz @ 234. when?
'France and the Reagan administration provided Saddam with chemical weapons, as well as they provided him with weapons and economic finances to war against the ayatollah.'
Er, no, the U.S.S.R. provided most of Saddam's weapons. He was financed by other Sunni muslim arabs. the reason he invaded Kuwait was because they didn't feel inclined to pay him whenthe war ended.
In fact, it's a little racist to suggest that Iraqi chemists were so stupid and primitive that they couldn't make chemical weapons like mustard gas- dating to 1917- or nerve gas- invented in WWII- without foreign assistance.
'I don't need sources on this one, it's a historical fact and it's there to read for everyone.'
If, it's a 'historical fact', it's where to be read for everyone?
Oh, they will have plenty of experience when they go around the Horn then!
Or why don't you just “claim” their whole country?
Problem solved, they then have your coast as theirs.
Well, Argentina is good at “claiming” other people's land!
If Bolivia ever got a sea port they would immediately drop their support for Argentina's claim to the FIs.
Well thats not very gentlemanly is it? Or even accurate really
“It might seem harsh that a natural disaster should ruin her career”
Not at all, if the people think she failed to deal with it properly they're entitled to be as harsh as they like on her electoral prospects. And a ban on standing would be entirely unnecessary. If on the other hand she remains (as she seems to) the overwhelming favorite of the people to win the next election, and a government of the opposite party bans her from standing, won't that look like a political prosecution???
The law must be upheld. If she is above the law wont that look like political corruption?
I've often wondered why the rest of South America put up with Argentina. I mean they have no military to speak of, they're on the verge of bankruptcy, and constantly break treaties and trade deals. They always talk of South American solidarity, then stab their neighbours in the back.
Maybe all these neighbouring countries are waiting for Argentina to become bankrupt (again), and then they can carve up what's left between them.
One thing for sure by linking the Bolivian demands to their demands for the Falklands means that both Chile and Peru, and perhaps others, will refuse to support Argentina.
But then that's what CFK wants; more Argentine public outrage directed at countries like Chile and Peru, for not being brothers and supporting their erroneous demands; instead of looking at the dire state of the Argentine economy.
This might indeed prompt Chile to back away from close support of Argentina's demand, knowing that Bolivia expects as its quid-pro-quo from Argentina to pile on Chile over the Salida Al Mar issue.
As far as I can tell, Perú is split between siding with Argentina because of the leftist tinge in both countries, versus more centrist and military elements who fear some further isolation from the UK-Europe-US cluster.
Go on, piss off the rest of South America.
lt just helps us that little bit more.
another entry for the colonization wishlist?
i.ebayimg.com/t/1824-Woodbridge-map-South-America-5-/00/%24(KGrHqIOKjQE4nEyLNROBON2I76%2Bsw~~_3.JPG
“Because Britain refuses to enter a dialogue.”
UK does not refuse to enter a dialogue. It has been going on since the mid 1940'es.
The Argentinos shout “Malvinas Argentina”, to which the UK representative answers “Sorry, but the can't be, as the Falkland Islanders want to stay British”.
“Malvinas Argentina”
“Sorry, but the can't be, as the Falkland Islanders want to stay British”.
“Malvinas Argentina”
“Sorry, but the can't be, as the Falkland Islanders want to stay British”.
- nothing for Argentina to complain about.
As long as the Argentinos refuse to respect the opinion of the inhabitants of the islands, that's the way the dialogue must continue.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!