Santiago Declaration with no explicit reference to the Falklands’ dispute
The final document of the EU/CELAC summit in Chile which gathered representatives from 61 countries made a strong commitment to promote trade and investment between the two blocks as well as combat protectionism, but there was no explicit mention to the Falklands’ dispute with Argentina.
EU and CELAC leaders approved the document in which they reaffirm their support to resolving “controversies through peaceful means”, as enshrined in the UN charter.
Point 5 of the Santiago declaration states that “we reaffirm our commitment with all the purposes and principles established in the UN Charter.
We reaffirm our decision to support all those efforts to defend the sovereign equality of all States, respect its territorial integrity and political independence”.
The final statement differs from that presented by CELAC members who openly support Argentine claims over the Falklands and called “to overcome the existence of colonialist practices in the continent” which affect Argentina.
They also expressed “concern with the growing militarization and introduction of nuclear weapons to the South Atlantic”.
However none of this was collected in the Santiago Declaration.
But Santiago summit leaders pledged “to abstain in their international relations, from threats or the use of force in any form incompatible with the purposes and principles of the UN, to support resolutions on controversies through peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of Justice and International Law”.
In another chapter the declaration underlines the importance of the 61 countries (33 from Latam and the Caribbean and 28 from EU) to work together to promote investments in the framework of sustainable development.
Besides the declaration a plan of action for 2013/2015 was approved in a 14 page document with 48 points.
“We reaffirm our commitment to adopt policies that promote trade and investments between CELAC and EU countries, convinced that this will contribute to guarantee sustainable development and the creation of jobs, particularly juvenile employment in both regions”.
These policies must be based in “cooperation and complementarity, solidarity and social inclusion with environment responsibility”.
Furthermore the declaration makes explicit mention to avoid protectionism in all its forms.
There was also reference to making “a priority social development, health, education and the promotion of sustained and inclusive economic growth, ensuring an inclusive, fair and equal society since these are essential to achieve sustainable development”.
Other articles mention protection of the most vulnerable groups including indigenous peoples and their communities, promoting higher education, corporate know-how, scientific research and innovation, and strengthening dialogue on joint efforts referred to migration both ways.
.
Suggested Stories
-
May 23rd 2013
Falkland Islands wish for normal neighborly relations with all South American neighbors
-
May 22nd 2013
Falklands and other BOT should be given a seat in the Commons, says MEP Farage
-
May 21st 2013
Falkland Islands: it’s a three-side debate; Argentina must recognize Islanders right to decide their future
-
May 20th 2013
Falkland Islands: Argentina blasts UK’s ‘double standard’ on self determination right
80 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.
Could we be seeing a subtle shift in policy towards the Falkland Islanders and away from Argentina, especially with the referendum on the horizon?
Argentina, has of course, isolated herself with her insane protectionist policies which her neighbours have finally had enough of.
As always with CFK it's always a case of too little too late.
'Has she gone yet?' 'yep' - mutterings of 'thank fuck for that' from the back of the room - 'OK put that crap she brought with her through the shredder and print a few more copies of this one'
“Malvinas son Argentinas! Britishers pirates dogs we area owns you are ass! Britishers puke dogs. This ares official. All the world knows! So there!”
And in the BA news there really was an official and specific declaration etc etc etc. Then another tour company gets staved in by the local police, there is a riot outside the British embassy and KFC tells Uruguay it will be next.
Just another day in Malvyworld.
Never to see the light of day until the next jamboree.
LOLs
Well actually they don't mean ALL of the principles of the UN charter as all (even the one on political integrity when it is analysed correctly) support the Falkland Islanders transition to a status of their choosing, thereby disqualifying the Argentine position.
These idiots do not get it in South America.
The whole point of de-colonialisation was to allow countries who did not want to be ruled by an Imperial power to become independent, or choose their allegiance with someone else. If the country administered by another country wishes to keep that status, it's called self-determination.
It's really hard for them to grasp this simple principle.
Ouch! Can't wait for the “official” Argentine position to “clarify” this. Sucks to be a Malvinas troll right now.
uk.reuters.com/article/2013/01/28/borderspetroleum-falklands-idUKL5N0AX21S20130128
'Bolivia in Chile claimed the right of their country to a sovereign coastline on the Pacific - The historic tension between Bolivia and Chile returned to emerge in the last hours, after three Bolivian soldiers were detained in Chilean territory border and President Evo Morales accused Santiago of “colonialism”.
www.politicatandil.com/noticias/Internacionales/72658:4/Bolivia-reclamo-en-Chile-el-derecho-de-su-pais-a-una-costa-soberana-en-el-Pacifico.html
'Chile supported the Argentine claim on the sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands dispute - President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner met with his counterpart of Chile, Sebastián Piñera, where stated their intention “to deepen” ties and unity with Argentina “in Antarctica”, as had the own mandatory.'
www.diarioc.com.ar/politica/Chile_respaldo_el_reclamo_argentino_en_torno_a_la_disputa_de_soberania/190469
“Special member state territories and the European Union”:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_member_state_territories_and_the_European_Union
.
What ever happens at the next CELAC meeting will not change the Santiago Declaration !!!
“We will not lose sovereignty over any part of our territory,” stressed in statements to the public network TVN Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs, Alfredo Moreno...'
www.el-carabobeno.com/portada/articulo/50943/chile-responde-a-evo-morales-que-no-hay-pases-que-regalen-su-territorio
'The question of the Malvinas/Falklands and colonialism in the 21st century'
ilreferendum.it/2013/01/28/la-questione-delle-malvinasfalkland-e-il-colonialismo-nel-xxi-secolo/
The Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly approved a document Malvinas.
www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/subnotas/212661-62147-2013-01-26.html
The Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly adopted a document recommending the heads of state of the EU CELAC and foster “dialogue for a peaceful, just and lasting solution” to the sovereignty dispute over the Falkland Islands, as proclaimed by various UN resolutions. “The Assembly discussed the” Malvinas issue 'in different organs and promotes dialogue for a solution, “says the message of parliamentarians, approved yesterday by all participants of the meeting of the Political Affairs Committee, British Deputy least Nicole ”Nikki“ Sinclaire, who left the room at the time of the discussion. The initiative was sponsored by Senator Daniel Filmus. In proposing to the assembly is recalled that the case of Malvinas ”to United Nations is not a question of law for the determination of the occupants of Malvinas“, referring to the referendum driven from London but ”the people of the Falklands are result of a colonial occupation. “
www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-212721-2013-01-27.html
.... Respect for the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands, but the UK, as a member of the EU, blocked any explicit mention in point five of the document is a clear nod to Argentina's position. There, the 61 signatory countries reaffirmed their commitment ”to all the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations“ and the ”decision to support all efforts to uphold the sovereign equality of all States, respect their territorial integrity and independence policy “in addition to” refrain in international relations from the threat or use of force “,” support the resolution of disputes by peaceful means and in accordance with the principles of justice and international law. ”
Face1354@hotmail.com
Have you bunch got an alternative dictionary where the meaning of words is the diametric opposite to what everyone except the argies think it is?
That is the only way I can make sense of your pathetic drivel.
You're pathetic and pitiful. You have not read the links.
Read and study a little UN Resolutions and Decolonization Committee of the United Nations.
UK does not comply with international law. Do not want to comply with UN Resolution 2065 of 1965, ratified by subsequent resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37/9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39/6) , 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40) 1,987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute. No self. It is a territory to colonize.
Undoubtedly you have to study the true story. Play other bells speaking Argentine rights.
Links on Argentine Rights on Malvinas:
www.encuentro.gov.ar/sitios/encuentro/Programas/detallePrograma?rec_id=103988&capitulo_id=103991
www.cuestionmalvinas.gob.ar/
www.embajadaabierta.com/?p=660
www.cancilleria.gov.ar/portal/seree/malvinas/docs/03-Jorge_Arguello.pdf
www.malvinasalta.com.ar/index.php/fundamentos-historicos-y-juridicos.html
www.malvinense.com.ar/derechos.html
www.malvinense.com.ar/smalvi/0109/1072.html
www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-211180-2013-01-04.html
www.malvinas-1982.es.tl/Argumentos-Argentinos.htm
Always keep in mind the Constitution Argentina:
“La Nacion Argentina ratifies its legitimate and sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and insular areas, being part of the national territory. Recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty , respecting the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the principles of international law are a permanent and unwavering goal of the Argentine people. ”
CONSTITUTION ARGENTINA, Prime transitional provision
Please explain to me how Argentinas sovereignty argument for South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands is legitimate?
Jan 28th, 2013 - 04:07 pm
Well it isn't but neither is their claim over the Falkland Islands or the British Antarctic Teritory. It won't shut them up either way though will it?
Raul also: Let's also pretend that the UK conquered the Falklands and that is justification for it's transfer to Argentina. What does this mean for all that territory that Argentina stole off the natives? What about the territory conquered from Paraguay?
There is no reference to the Falkland Islands in the declaration.
static.pulso.cl/20130127/1694199.pdf
thanks agent999
I wonder if that is a tongue in cheek dig at CFK and her supporters, who as we know, would quite happily not deal with the rest of the world. Ironic that they keep coming on here to tell us about this protectionist and isolationist viewpoint.
I gave you the courtesy of reading - in depth
www.malvinas-1982.es.tl/Argumentos-Argentinos.htm
A piece of bullshit propaganda.
To quote “ sailors on the Belgrano ”massacred“. This term cannot be used in reference to a fully functioning warship intent on attacking and destroying the British Task Force.
It could be more readily applied to the sinking of a virtually unarmed merchant vessel -Atlantic Conveyor - by a long range missile.
May 1 5 harriers destroyed. Totally untrue.
May 2 ”Spanish“ submarine Conqueror sinks Belgrano ??????????
May 30 HMS Invincible damaged by Argentinian air attack -
your proof of this is ??????
June 8 HMS Plymouth ”sunk“. As she sailed back to the UK and was scrapped just recently it seems rather unlikely she was sunk.
May 25 3 Harriers lost. No losses reported on this day
The rest of your”links“ are of the same ”high standard ”
Argentina's claims are legitimate. Their arguments are similar to the Malvinas by its historical and legal context.
I recommend the following links:
South Georgia and the irrefutable evidence:
www.irizar.org/819puglisi-georgias.pdf
Also read the following link on the foundations of sovereignty of the islands (San Pedro) Georgia and South Sandwich.
www.aposmalvinas.com.ar/geog003.htm
www.cescem.org.ar/malvinas/historia/pag19.html
www.aposmalvinas.com.ar/geog004.htm
www.cuestionmalvinas.gob.ar/
For more information send mail:
face1354@hotmail.com
25 agent999
27 cornishair
Please do not be naive. Read your own link in section five. Obviously between lines is clearly stated that it is not to antagonize Malvinas summit, as clearly expressed Page12 daily.
.... We reaffirm our commitment to all the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. We reaffirm our decision to support all efforts to uphold the sovereign equality of all States, respect their territorial integrity and political independence, to refrain in our international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with ... purposes and principles of the United Nations to support the resolution of disputes by peaceful means and in accordance with the principles of justice and international law.
Malvinas is obviously!
“Read between the lines”
You and page12 can imagine all you like but that it is not in the declaration.
somebody tell them it doesnt.
Raul - you DO know that that includes the right to self-determination... dont you?
i.e. it SUPPORTS the Falkland Islanders
numpti
So it seems I was not the only one 'not to read the links' aka see it for what it is, BULLSHIT.
And all the UN resolutions, which are not binding of course, BEFORE 1982 are defunct, gone, worthless, etc because you argie bastards invaded the Falklands (there are STILL no Malvinas you culo).
So piss off with your lies.
There, do you understand that?
'12. Britain did not seize South Georgia and the
South Sandwich Islands by force from Argentina.
In his speech in 1964, José María Ruda asserted that
Britain had “wrested” South Georgia and the South Sandwich
Islands from Argentina. That is false; they never were
Argentinian. They lie east of the line laid down by Spain and
Portugal in the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) to divide New
World territory between them. By Argentina’s own argument
that would make them Portuguese, not Spanish.
Captain James Cook claimed South Georgia for Britain in
1775 and was also the first to sight the South Sandwich
Islands. Britain’s claims to them and other Antarctic and subAntarctic territories were consolidated in Letters Patent in
1908 and 1917 – without any protest from Argentina, whose
attention was drawn to these documents. Argentina expressed
no interest in those territories until 1927, when it made a
claim to South Georgia and the South Orkneys to the Postal
Conference in Berne. Argentina first mentioned a claim to all
the Falkland Islands Dependencies in 1937, when it reserved
its rights to them following an incidental remark by a British
representative to a whaling conference going on at the time.
That incidental reservation was not followed by any formal
diplomatic claim. Such a claim only began to be firmly
pressed by President Perón from 1946 onwards. Britain
countered this with several invitations to Argentina to take its
claim to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The
Hague. In 1955, Britain tried to take the case unilaterally to
the ICJ, but Argentina refused all such offers.'
www.falklandshistory.org/false-falklands-history.pdf
That first link giving ''proof'' of Malvinist claims, mentions Davidoff a lot but curiously no mention of Alberto Astiz. www.yendor.com/vanished/junta.html
Your links are getting as far fetched as Pirats.
In response to this Argie failure:
Cristina blamed it on Timmerman and pretended to be sick, holed up in her house.
and
Maximo drove a local donut shop out of business during all u can eat deal.
“2.To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;”
You'll find it at www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml
Don't say that the Falkland Islanders aren't “people” or we'll have to send you some missiles.
@30 Reported for abuse again. Argie references? An argie couldn't tell the truth if its life depended on it. Note that. YOUR life probably depends on it. But still you lie! Tell us “Raul”, is “Raul” a pseudonym for Maximo? Or are you contacting us from your kindergarten? Time and again, you have been told that UNGA resolutions are NON-BINDING. Do you have the trouble with the concept? Are you just stupid? Ignorant? Uneducated? Brain-dead? Happy to continue reporting you for abusing both FACTS and people's intelligence. Are you one of those brainless, nazi turds that thinks that repeating things enough times will make them true? Then YOU're on our hitlist. Can't have turds in the human gene pool. Seems YOU're to brainless to “discuss”. Just enough synapses to post what you're told to post. A typical brainless, cowardly argie. Your future is short. Your lack of brain ensures your demise. I think we can ignore you from now on. Apart from reporting your abuses. I wouldn't give you more than 5 years.
A: Let's say that the Falklands are a colony, what does the UN are the possible outcomes to end the existence of colonies?
Read the decolonization resolutions committee and UN resolution 2065.
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 the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. ”
In the Malvinas Question General Assembly of the United Nations included this doctrine - the principle of territorial integrity by referring to the interests and NOT the wishes of the population of the islands - in its resolution 2065 (XX), 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37/9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39/6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41 / 40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the UK) ”to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the application of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, in order to find a peaceful solution to the problem, with due regard to the provisions and objectives of the UN Charter and Resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the people of the Falkland Islands. ”
The word equals sovereignty interests. No self-determination. The Argentines were expelled in 1833.
Regarding your second question, you have a total ignorance of Latin American history. Read the following link:
www.revisionistas.com.ar/?p=7344
Remember that Argentina suffered four British invasions (1806-1807-1833-1845). UK in its 500 years of existence committed genocide and racism in the five continents.
President Raul Castro, whose island nation is still languishing under a crippling 50-year-old US trade embargo, formally took over the chairmanship of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) from summit host Chile.
The development, hailed by Argentine President Cristina Kirchner as a sign of the “changing times,” marks Cuba's full regional reintegration and represents a major diplomatic coup for Castro.
“We are building the ideal of a diverse Latin American and Caribbean region united in a common space of political independence and sovereignty over our enormous natural resources to advance toward sustainable development, regional integration,” the 81-year-old Cuban leader said in his address.
Set up in Caracas in December 2011 at the behest of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, CELAC groups all nations from across the Americas except the United States and Canada...
au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/world/15961810/cuba-assumes-latam-group-presidency-in-diplomatic-coup/
'Vice Chancellor reported that Britain wants to “control the South Atlantic” and “access to Antarctica” from Malvinas - Argentine Deputy Foreign Minister Eduardo Zuaín said today during the first Summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), that Britain intends to ”monitor (Ocean ) South Atlantic “and” access to Antarctica “from the Falkland Islands, whose sovereignty is in dispute with Argentina.
During his address to the presidents of CELAC, Deputy Foreign Minister said ”Malvinas is one of the most militarized territories the world ”and that attitude analyzed by Britain has nothing to do with the protection of the inhabitants of the islands.
The Argentine Deputy Foreign Minister discussed th
Raul
On five continents you said, go on, list the countries on five continents, where the UK deliberately murdered the populations intending to make them extinct.
CFK can take her theiving hands and soddy offy.
Two things...
The UN cannot rule on border disputes preceding 1945. They can invite the parties to have a “nice cozy chat” but no more than that. The 1982 invasion basically killed (non-binding) resolution 2065
The UN charter is based on self determination - pure and simple. However you try and twist it that is where we are. The Falkland Islanders are a people, they are the only voice that matters and they will make that voice heard loud and clear on March 9th.
The expulsion of an illegal MILITARY Argentine garrison in 1833 makes no difference to where we are today. In any case Argentina signed the Southern-Arana Treaty in 1850. This means that they either truly settled their differences with the UK (or were f***wits at negotiation).
If you are trying to imply that the Falkland Islanders do not have the right to self determination you wrong...
Self-determination overrides Territorial Integrity, fact! Argentina tried to change this but failed.
Please take a look at the following documentation from the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization)
'By the terms of the amended resolution, the Assembly would further reaffirm that, in the process of decolonization, there was no alternative to the principle of self-determination, which was also a fundamental human right. '
www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/gaspd406.doc.htm
Also backed up by...
UN Resolution 2065 (XX) of 16 December 1965, calls on Argentina and Britain to seek a peaceful solution to the Falklands issue within the framework of UN Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960. Section 2 of Resolution 1514 is clear: “all peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”.
Backed up further by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon when asked about the Falklands and colonialism...
'prevailing impression is that “people living under certain conditions should have a certain level of capacities so that they can decide their own future”, be it independence or some kind of government in their territories.'
So Raul I have a question for you if the Falkland Islands status was to change...
Why would the Falkland Islanders choose to be ruled by Argentina, instead of becoming an independent nation?
Thanks in advance for your reply.
exept CFK wont let them have any rights,
and thus she will never ever get them.
@41 Raul: You have a total ignorance of Latin American history, you say Argentina suffered British invasions in 1806 and 1807. I think everyone on here can see the flaw in that claim.
Is not this hypocritical and two faced,
They agree here by peaceful means,
And yet CELAC on its own totally disagrees with this as in the way it is treating the Falklands.
.
Apologies with the link before, but this one is a classic, it actually made me laugh.
'UK accuses Argentina of militarizing Malvinas to exploit resources - Argentina today accused the CELAC summit in the UK to convert the Falkland Islands in one of the territories “most militarized in the world” for the sole purpose of exploiting the natural resources that are in the archipelago.
“We believe that militarization is only done to ensure the exploitation of natural resources and hydrocarbons,” complained Eduardo Zuaín Argentine Deputy Foreign Minister, in his speech at the plenary session of the Summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), in Santiago.
The British government pursues “military control of the South Atlantic”, issue “wild” fishing licenses and access to Antarctica, said the deputy minister, who replaced President Cristina Fernandez, who only attended the first day of this summit.
Zuaín thanked the support received from Argentina claim partners CELAC and said the Argentine Executive Latin America wants a “free of colonialism”.
Deputy Foreign Minister reiterated that the Argentine government wants to resolve the dispute over the sovereignty of the Malvinas “by the path of peace and negotiation” with the United Kingdom.
Argentina claims sovereignty over the islands which the British call Falklands since January 1833, when they were annexed by the United Kingdom.
Argentina's claim is based on a territorial right, considering that the islands are an extension of the continental shelf Argentina.
Argentina also claims the islands of Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, which are east of the Falklands under British sovereignty...'
www.elconfidencial.com/ultima-hora-en-vivo/2013/01/argentina-acusa-reino-unido-militarizar-malvinas-20130128-88059.html
The Falkland Islands are a British Overseas Territory. The Falkland Islanders have the right to self determination under the UN Charter. The Falkland Islands have got absolutely nothing to do with Argentina.
www.falklandshistory.org/
>I recommend the following links: South Georgia and the irrefutable evidence:
> www.irizar.org/819puglisi-georgias.pdf
The “irrefutable evidence” is a picture on a stamp of two sealing ships foundered in Grytviken harbour. The ships have blue and white stripes painted on their funnel.
If I were Obelix, I'd be changing my trousers.
He's definitely had a breakdown.
Seriously, Raul is just going to paste the almost exact same thing he did last time and completely ignore all of the facts you(and many have on many, many occasions) have displayed.
For a while i honestly thought he was a bot or macro. Because his text on every post is prretty much copy pasted from one story to the next.
He is an actual idiot.
“in the process of decolonization, there was no alternative to the principle of self-determination, which was also a fundamental human right.”
You can show him this all day long, and he just won't accept it. Even though it's from the UN.
I especially love how he personally quotes from:
“Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”
And then goes on to tell us how the islanders aren't entitled to independence. THE CLUE IS IN THE TITLE, Raul.
“ referring to the interests and NOT the wishes of the population of the island”
Been asking for such a long time as to what he means on this. Please, Please, Oh please Raul will you tell us?
I believe there's terminology for when one acts in someones interests while it being against there wishes. I believe they called it Slavery.
he is totaly lost in here.
You are a liar. These sick. He never gave me the courtesy of reading. Never mention that link. If you read my opinions really, I was never in favor of war and revanchism. I am in favor of peace and dialogue against any colonialism and imperialism in the 21st century.
38 Raven
What happens to you? Are you nervous? What link are you talking about? Link has been confused. You are a pirate. Perhaps you are protecting Astiz genocidal? Their conversations are typical of a racist and colonialist.
You are a true racist and colonialist pirate.
Steve-33-48 and 54 Steve uk-33-uk
@ 42
Apologies to the link before, but this is a classic, it really made me laugh.
Pathetic and sad. Thought in answering but I see that you keep laughing and making fun of those who think differently from you. Not worth it.
God help you.
Hangar-time 58
No article is biased. You find your own. No I have not read the fault links. They reinforce the historical and legal arguments Argentines.
Definitely judge without knowing the reality.
60 Zethee
You're the idiot. Insult what you do not know. As always denying the evidence and blaming others for your own inability to contemplate reality. No copy. If you repeat the same concept with the same arguments is that you have not been able to prove otherwise. The truth is one. It does not change with time. Conflict is sovereign. Not self-determination.
64 British
You'd be surprised the number of British islanders Mails sent to me sharing my views. All is not lost. Amid the thorns, roses are very beautiful.
Face1354@hotmail.com
I meant you no disrespect, I can tell you are passionate and have done research. I was laughing at the article I linked, the wild fishing licences bit.
Anyway, can you please read my post @48 and answer the question, I would be interested to know your thoughts.
Also if you could tell us whether you think independence would be a fair solution?
a gardiners dream.
as long as a thorn dont get you.
“29 Clyde15
You are a liar. These sick. He never gave me the courtesy of reading. Never mention that link. ”
Your English above is somewhat incomprehensible.
I did read the piece of crap you gave as a link and quoted DIRECTLY FROM IT !!!!!
So you are calling me a liar for doing this?
Was HMS Plymouth sunk ?
The Belgrano sunk by a Spanish submarine ? etc
The damage to the Invincible is another Argentinian myth.
I checked the Harrier losses with UK military records - your link, wrong again !
So, if anyone disagrees with you, they are liars.
Look at the link AGAIN and point out where I am lying !!
We are expected to take as Gospel, biased unsubstantiated reports from Argentinian sources ?
I have replied to another of your postings about the militarisation of the Falklands and AGAIN your links do not mention the FALKANDS but talks about the USA and NATO which have nothing to do with the Falklands.
Please do not post any more links which have nothing worth adding to your topics - I object to wasting my time reading nonsense!
I appreciate your courtesy and your attention.
With the respect you deserve and give the end of an appropriate response sent you my E-Mail to hereby send me your e-mail so we can talk with enough space.
E-Mail: face1354@hotmail.com
thank you very much
I see you mention Capt Alfredo Astiz, the blonde Angel of Death from the Escuela Mecanica. The brits treated him as a PoW when they should really have given him his own medicine, a one way trip in a helicopter. This shows the difference in attitudes between UK and Argentina.
give it another few years and another Argentine myth about the gallant defender of Isla San Jorge will be created just like Gaucho Rivero
Bloody murderers the pair of them
This again is lifted straight from
www.malvinas-1982.es.tl/Argumentos-Argentinos.htm
”So far no one has spoken about the content of the minutes of secret, but surely one of the main points are the large losses of life suffered by the United Kingdom during the Falklands Gesta. Not forgetting also, the loss of large numbers of moving vehicles, both air and sea. official British figures are 255 and 777 fallen wounded. Taking into account the very fact that the attacker is always lower than the defender, that figure is totally absurd and deceitful, more ground as Malvinas. Below is a daily casualties suffered by Britain since its arrival to Georgia on 23 April to 14 June 1982, when the islands are usurped again (red detailing the casualties for each day of combat): References: - Red represents the total fallen in the day. - Every time you see a “+”, it is because the estimated death toll is higher than real. - By the way, has placed several times an estimated number, which is probably more of a percentage, about that many people have perished in each day attack.”
TOTAL AIRCRAFT LOSSES: 154 Total aircraft (Harriers, Sea Harriers ) deployed in the Falklands: 77, of which 46 were disabled. Total helicopters deployed in the South Atlantic: 171, of which 108 were damaged. CONCLUSION: FALLEN TOTAL: 1090 TOTAL VESSEL DAMAGED OR LOST: 31 TOTAL AIRCRAFT LOSSES: 154 Great Britain never declared the true number of casualties of his troops and the loss of numerous weapons. Was lower than Argentina and is demonstrated by the great damage that far exceeds that Argentina received. If today the islands are a British possession is with the help that Britain received from the United States, and other members NATO.
This is what passes from “truth” in Argentina.
Do you really think that the UK public would not notice the missing troops or aircraft when the figures are easily available,
That is why I dismissed your links as fanciful rubbish !
20 items Rereading Raul again I realize now that I sent to 19 CrisR these links. Not you.
Anyway is the link I was referring to the diplomatic and historical arguments of the conflict and had to hear other bells.
UK ... does not conform to international law. Do not want to comply with Resolution 2065 of 1965, ratified by subsequent resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37/9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39/6), 1985 ( 40/21), 1986 (41/40) 1,987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute. No self. It is a territory to colonize. Certainly, one must study the true story. Other bells Play speaking Argentine rights .......
In 72 Clyde15 you telling me this war matters which speaks cited page.
This page was interested only historical and legal arguments. Not acts of war. If Argentina sank a ship or not or if England had more dead than Argentina or not. Or if the exocet worked well or not.
You rush into something I'm not arguing.
Obviously you will realize that not everything that says the page is up for debate. Neither this completely and wait accordingly. It is not my responsibility. I'm not creative author of that link.
Reiterate this concept. We were debating historical and legal arguments. No details of the 1982 conflict.
We were debating with 19 CrisR. Not with you. Got it?
71 redpoll
Argentina is committed to peace. England by violence.
You are totally wrong. Argentina public never consider him a hero Alfredo Aztiz, since it is a real genocidal murderer one of the founders of the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo. Never a genocidal Alfredo Aztiz can be hero in Argentina. You can be a hero in Britain. In Argentina ever.
You have a total ignorance of the gaucho Rivero. It's totally different. There is a myth since returning from England died fighting against British invasion in the fourth round in 1845 when he ruled forced Rosas. Remember the four British invasion of Argentina 1806-1807.1833-1845.
I understood that this was an open forum.
If you wish it to be specific to one person, please indicate it thus........” this is for the attention of (fill in name ) ONLY. NO OTHER REPLIES WILL BE ACCEPTED !
I am sorry but your English above does not make much sense. If you are using a Google translator then I suggest that you may try another one.
In my defence you called me a liar for “not ”reading your links. I read them all and I consider them Argentinian propaganda.
The one link from which I quoted was
www.malvinas-1982.es.tl/Argumentos-Argentinos.htm
This was supplied by YOU as some form of evidence.
It took me at least an hour to wade through it and my feelings about it I stated at #72.
If you did not wish it to be read, why did you post this link? It was so full of “lies” that it was a travesty of what happened in the 1982 conflict. If this was an example of your “true facts”, why should I believe any other link you quote.
“We were debating with 19 CrisR. Not with you. Got it?”
OK Raul, any future posts from you I will treat them with the contempt they deserve and ignore them !!!!
Calm down and leave the hate and resentment towards everything that is Argentine!
Do not take this the wrong way but, why you are so arrogant, prejudiced and hasty?
Leave the hatred and rancor. I have no guilt that you insult everyone who does not think like you.
It took at least an hour to walk through it and my feelings about what I said in # 72.
I appreciate your attention and I apologize to you if you call liar. At first glance I thought that I had not sent that link. Anyway not to my liking.
I do not advocate violence and wars. Bet to dialogue and peace.
Anyway the rest of the links, if carefully analyzed, say many truths, even if you do not want to accept. Conflict is sovereign. No self-determination.
May God help and leave the hatred and rancor.
E-Mail: face1354@hotmail.com
What you Argentines cannot understand as you are so arrogant, is that when people do not agree with you and can reference information that disagrees with yours, you resort to being 'the victim'.
Just to set the record straight. What is not relayed on these posts are the many great Argentines who have no hatred against the Falkland Islanders, but when you keep stating an unproven comment like no self-determination, this is clearly stupid as the UNs principles are based on the UN Charter. You have still provided no evidence that there is an exceptiion to self-determination in the case of the Falkland Islanders.
The UN charter applies to everybody on the planet, not just the countries that Argentina selects.
Even Ban KI Moon has stated that the British are not breaking UN resolutions over the Falkland Islands.
You cannot expect those of us who defend the islanders to be defeated by arguments that can easily be taken apart by reference to history, the context of that history of the time, and the UN charter.
“We demand the immediate handover of the French colonies of St Peirre and Miquelon to Canadian sovriegnty on the grounds of proximity to our country”
Well if the Argies can justify thier claim to the FI why shouldnt we give it a go too? We do even speak French you know
Ludicrious aint it?
@ 75
What Argentines can not understand how you're so arrogant, is that when people disagree with you and you can refer to information that does not match yours, to resort to “the victim”.
Argentina suffered four British invasions. 1806-1807-1833-1845. Is not that enough?
You have not provided evidence that there is an exception to self-determination in the case of the Falkland Islanders.
Please 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. Also read the resolutions of the Decolonization Committee of the United Nations especially the June 14, 2012.
“The chairman of the United Nations Decolonization ............. described the announcement of a UK referendum on the Falkland Islands as a” political stunt “, insisting that the islanders can not appeal to the right to self-determination according to them, because in the Malvinas case ”is not a principle of territorial integrity“ of Argentina, which is above other considerations and the UK is the ”occupying force“ since 1833 ” .
Even Ban Ki Moon, said that the British are not violating UN resolutions over the Falkland Islands.
It is totally wrong. Ban Ki Moon committee is supporting the UN decolonization. The committee considers UN decolonization to the Falkland Islands as a colony. Of the 16 cases of colonialism in the world, 10 are for the UK they are: Anguilla, Bermuda, Gibraltar, the Malvinas-Falkland Islands, Cayman Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands, Monserrat Island, Pitcairn Island and St. Helena Island.
Just look at any web page concerning the decolonization committee of United Nations refers to are a colony.
es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comit% C3% C3% B3n A9_de_Descolonizaci%
Give up mate. Raul is like a broken record. Because he is articulate it is easy to assume he is also intelligent. He has clearly disproven this time and time again.
His theory:
Argentina and UK have issues because of British invasions nearly 200 years ago..... seems France can move on and work with Germany but for Argentina being a victim is a badge of pride.
Every resolution either explicitly refers to or is subordinate to the UN Charter. The self determination clause is ALWAYS conveniently ignored.
Also I couldn't find any reference to the referendum by the C24 Committee.
www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/gacol3238.doc.htm
daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N12/412/79/PDF/N1241279.pdf?OpenElement
However as Pazmiño is Ecuadorian its not surprising that he has stared these things anyway. It is just unprofessional in that he voiced them as an Ecuadorian and not as the C24 Chair. They are not in the documents released by the C24.
But honestly what does it matter what the C24 think. They have shown themselves to be self perpetuating propaganda machine with no desire to do themselves out of a job. Tokelau twice declined to “decolonise” and their reward for this snub was to be ignored. And no one has ever show how Pitcairn Island could remain anything but what it is.
Here's to the next 180 years with the Islands still not Argentinean. And there's nothing Argentina or the C24 can do but bluster.
It's interesting what Papua New Guinea’s delegate said about the Special Committee last June 14th. It ”must be retooled in order to better achieve its goals. If not, it ran the risk of being marginalised within the United Nations family. Situations should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, which could only be accomplished with the active participation of all stakeholders, and the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) was no exception.”
I think he is wrong. I think the C24 is already marginalised.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!