“Islanders exist: here we are”, the toast at Falkland House in London
Falkland Islands lawmaker Dick Sawle invited to toast for “the existence of the Islanders” during a reception at Falkland House in London, on Thursday evening, at the end of a hectic but productive week of contacts, interviews and intense lobbying for the Islands and the coming March referendum.
“Islanders exist: here we are” said MLA Sawle raising his glass of champagne at the event with British and foreign journalists, Foreign Office officials, a former governor and friends that were invited to Falkland House hosted by the government’s representative in London, Sukey Cameron.
The ‘existence’ toast was in reply to one of many extravagant statements from Argentine Foreign Minister Hector Timerman several days in London who said that “Falkland Islanders do not exist. They are British citizens living in the Islands”.
At the reception Ms Cameron made the presentation of the two booklets: “Our Islands, Our history” and “Our Islands, Our home” which recall the history of the Falklands, early sightings, settlers and the development of the Islands as we know them nowadays particularly after the 1982 conflict when the Argentine military invaded the Islands.
MLA Sawle and MLA Jan Check arrived on Monday to London invited by the Foreign Office hoping to hold a meeting with Foreign Secretary William Hague and Argentine Foreign minister Hector Timerman, who was also in London lobbying for Argentina’s case in the Falklands/Malvinas dispute.
The Falklands’ representatives were hopeful of a face to face meeting with Timerman to dialogue on issues of common interest (oil, fisheries, communications) and at the same time request that the government of President Cristina Fernandez ‘leaves them in peace so that they can get on with their lives”
However the meeting of the Falklands’ representatives and Foreign Secretary Hague had to get along with ‘an empty chair’ since Timerman refused any presence of Islanders since Argentina considers the Malvinas issue ‘bilateral’.
But Timerman had time to deny the existence of Falkland Islanders, argue they don’t have the right to self determination since they are an implanted population, that Argentina will not accept the result of the referendum (‘asking the British if they want to remain British’) and that Britain in this time and age remains a colonialist power intent in militarizing the South Atlantic.
Although in a much commented lapsus, Timerman anticipated to the BBC that if negotiations (with UK) continue within the next twenty years the “British Islands” would be de-colonized, (oops, sorry Malvinas Islands).
The rest was a competition for UK media coverage with ample support for the Falklands stance and a degree of disappointment from MPs belonging to the All Party Argentine/UK parliamentarian group that hosted Timerman and his delegation at Westminster, since their only purpose was to talk about Malvinas.
Timerman concluded his lobbying with a two-day ‘Argentina-fans’ group from 18 different European countries, which called for the resumption of negotiations with the UK for a peaceful solution to the Falklands’ sovereignty dispute.
Suggested Stories
-
May 23rd 2013
Falkland Islands wish for normal neighborly relations with all South American neighbors
-
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
-
May 20th 2013
Polynesia in decolonization list; Pacific islands proposal supported by 193 votes in UN General Assembly
154 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.
The Falkland Islanders are the true custodians of the Falkland Islands and I for one, am proud that they want to have British nationality.
The Falkland Islanders migrated to the islands from countries all over the world, including Argentina! They are not exclusively British and they were most definitely not 'implanted' in the Islands by the British Government.
The Falkland Islanders have had a community in the Islands since 1826 and not 1833 as Timerman suggests. You see, when Vernet went to the Falklands, he was aware that it was British sovereign territory & sought permission to be there. Vernet actively encouraged the British to exert control over the Islands, because he feared that his business would be seized by the United Provinces. Vernet's colony did not end in 1833, it continued. The Argentines would have other nations believe that all Argentines were expelled in 1833, but they know it's a lie. After all, how could Rivero be an Argentine on the Islands if they had all been expelled?!
The Falkland Islanders have developed and cultured the land to become a thriving community. Some of the people that came to the islands with Vernet, stayed on, lived and died on the Islands. Their community continues to grow as one of the most ecologically responsible countries in the world.
The Falkland Islanders produce a higher percentage of electricity from renewable wind energy than any other nation on Earth.
The Falkland Islanders manage their fish stocks to ensure that they are not depleted, unlike their neighbours.
The Falkland Islanders have no drug problems or rampant crime. People can leave their houses unlocked and even keys in their cars, safe in the knowledge that no one will take their property.
The Falkland Islanders want nothing but the best for their children & their children afterwards.
THE FALKLAND ISLANDERS EXIST.
My only criticism of the British/FIG approach is that it relies too much on the self determination principle, and makes the argument seem like (and the Argentines are already beginning to frame it this way) it is a debate over whether the long multi-generation residence of the existing population gives them some rights in spite of being illegal occupiers, when in fact the major and more important reason why the islands cannot be 'returned' to Argentina is that they have never had ownership or a legitimate claim to them in the first place. I sense that there are many Argentinians who are gradually accepting the idea that the islanders themselves cannot be ignored or discounted in the issue, but who none the less sincerely but wrongly believe that Argentina is the legitimate owner. This side of the argument needs to be addressed more strongly and the historical untruths perpetuated by the Argentinian govt confronted if there is ever to be any real progress in convincing ordinary Argentinians that Argentina should abandon its claim. But as I say, my observations as an outsider and not really for me to tell the FI's how to manage the issue.
Thank you. Interesting to have a contributor with an outside perspective of the Falkland Islands & Argentina.
I agree with you. It's my belief that the Falkland Islanders need to confront the misleading Argentine information with truth that originates from their own archives.
That's why I've suggested that the Falkland Islands should encourage the BBC or Discovery or National Geographic or the History Channel to do a documentary about the Islands explaining their history in detail. A documentary that can be produced in English and Spanish (& Portuguese) so that all South Americans can see for themselves that the Falkland Islanders have every right to be on the Islands & to have sovereignty over them.
Argentina tries to paint the story one way. That it was owned by them until an evil empire stole it, but that is simply not the case.
It's not a case of who saw them first, who landed first, who set up a community first or who raised a flag first. It's about who created a national identity. A nation is more than just a few individuals. It can be formed from the members of a single family, but to be internationally recognised, a nation is a community of people with a distinct identity, who are self-sustaining and wish to relate with all other nations.
I believe that the Falkland Islanders would be better off as an independent nation state. A new member of the United Nations with their rights and freedoms recognised and guaranteed by the UN, the UK and all other nations. I'm proud that the Falkland Islanders want to be British and continue their association with the UK as a British Overseas Territory. Australia and other commonwealth countries followed a similar path. Australia (& New Zealand) still proudly carry the Union flag in their own national flag, just as the Falkland Islanders do.
Maybe when the oil revenue starts to come in, the Islanders will be able to consider being more & be proud as a nation of Falkland Islanders.
This Englishman Dick..Sawle is a perfect example of that.
“This dispute will only be resolved be dialogue: it's time our Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary showed the maturity to face that fact”
”Argentina in 2013 is a pluralistic democracy with a peaceful, elected head of state. It is a G20 nation, the third largest economy in a very important, fast emerging continent and a core voice and founding member within all major regional and international institutions. According to the Argentinian government of 2013: “there is no prospect whatsoever that Argentina would go to war over the Malvinas Islands.”
So what is the threat posed by this nation that is so severe that it recently prompted Cameron to announce a flippant willingness to go to war at the drop of a hat? In a word, dialogue.
The Argentinian administration – backed by 40 UN resolutions calling on the two nations to negotiate the sovereignty dispute – has repeatedly asked for talks on the future sovereignty of Falklands/Malvinas. For absolute clarity (in terms of the Argentine claim) sovereignty does not mean displacement of the current inhabitants, in fact the rights of Island inhabitants are enshrined in the Argentinian constitution.
The British government happily negotiated full sovereignty with the previous Argentinian military dictatorship for many years, with all options on the table. Yet when it’s peaceful, democratic successor now asks for talks with terms in line with international law, the prospect of war is raised by Mr Cameron with the rather chilling abandon: “of course.”
www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/bulldog-camerons-talk-of-war-keeps-falklands-solution-in-the-kennel-8487461.html
He is not claiming Argentinean territory for his country of origin.
Do you think this is about if Hague have more diplomatic skills than Timmerman?. This is about reality. And reality says that the “falklands government” is the name of the british colonial administration. For the UN, there is no legitimate government in the islands, but a colony, sorry, a non self-governing territorie. Where all information regarding that colony is not requested to that “falklands government”. Instead all information requested by the UN about the islands are solicited to the administrative power. In this case the UK.
nigelpwsmith, you said:
(Argentina tries to paint the story one way. That it was owned by them until an evil empire stole it, but that is simply not the case.
It's not a case of who saw them first, who landed first, who set up a community first or who raised a flag first. It's about who created a national identity. A nation is more than just a few individuals. It can be formed from the members of a single family, but to be internationally recognised, a nation is a community of people with a distinct identity, who are self-sustaining and wish to relate with all other nations.)
So you say it is not important who saw them first, who claimed them first, who have more rights over that territorie, who is the owner of that land, but insted who have the bigger military force to mantain a population there from all this years?.
The Falkland islands (must) do nothing, they do not have to it's their islands.
MA
Strikes me that you and Bets have a lot in common, both living in someone else's country, in preference to living in your own. As for what is nationality is, why don't you ask your inglese neighbours, they might know.
Librrato
Do not be such a big hypocrit. You invaded the islands and were the direct cause of the deaths of nearly a thousand people. If there is a larger British Military presence there now, it is as a direct result of your aggression. Even your own defence minister has stated, that if it were not for that presence, you would do it again. So if your looking for a reason, try looking in the mirror.
Hello! reality
ICJ judge, Dame Rosalyn Higgins, wrote: ”Attractive an aphorism though [self-determination] is, it still has to be said that the territorial issue does come first. Until it is determined where territorial sovereignty lies, it is impossible to see if the inhabitants have a right to self- determination” (Dame Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process - International Law and How We Use It, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994)
The British jurist Rosalyn Higgins arrived at a similar conclusion when she pointed out: No tribunal could tell her [Argentina] that she has to accept British title because she has acquiesced to it But what the protests do not do is to defeat the British title, which was built up in other ways through Argentinas acquiescence.80“ There was therefore little doubt that Britain acquired title to the Falklands by extinctive prescription. In other words, it was in this mode that the strength of the British claims resided.
80. Rosalyn Higgins, ”Falklands and the Law,” Observer, 2 May 1982.
The Falkland War : Britain versus the past...Daniel K, Gibran.
It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared
in 1970 that the modem prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created 'prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law'
Akehursts Modern Introduction to International Law By Peter Malanczuk
Article says….:
“Islanders exist: here we are”….. said MLA Richard “Dick” Sawle.... (Born 1954 in Sheffield, Yorkshire, brought up in Leyland, Lancashire, educated in Liuerpul, Merseyside…..)
I say….:
MLA Richard “Dick” Sawle is an Englishman who has lived less than half his life in the Malvinas Islands…..
MLA Richard “Dick” Sawle is an Englishman that has already planned his retirement life in the South of France….
English Islanders (like MLA Richard “Dick” Sawle) exist indeed in Malvinas….
Born, raised and trained in the English Counties ….
Retiring in Provence, France….
Brainwash anybody?
I am not making a claim of conquest is applicable, but Argentina does. I am just showing that such a claim still legally confers sovereignty to the UK, and is supported by the UN General Assembly.
General theory of law and state by Hans Kelsen, 1945
...there occurs, according to international law, a territorial change, provided that the occupation, made with the intention of incorporating the occupied territory into the territory of the occupying State, assumes a permanent character, and that means that the legal order of the occupying State becomes efficacious for the territory in question... ...Taking possession through military force of the territory of another State against the latter's will is possible, however, without any military resistance on the part of the victim. Provided that a unilateral act of force performed by one State against another is not considered to be war in itself... ...annexation is not only possible in time of war, but also in time of peace. The decisive point is that annexation, that is, taking possession of another State's territory with the intention to acquire it, constitutes acquisition of this territory even without the consent of the State to which the territory previously belonged, if the possession is “firmly established.” It makes no difference whether the annexation takes place after an occupatio bellica or not.
So your point is?
1) “English Islanders” like Richard “Dick” Sawle, born, raised and trained in the English counties travel 15.000 miles south to some squatted Islands to steal the natural resources of other Nations....
2) After having squatted and stolen for some years, those “English Islanders” like Richard “Dick” Sawle retire to a sweet cottage life in the south of France.
3) No wonder that “English Islander” Richard “Dick” Sawle raises his glass of champagne.......
Brainwash anybody?
Argentina has lost the right to take the issue to the ICJ.
“claims between Argentina and Great Britain. To avoid losing her
claim by extinctive prescription, Argentina should have submitted
her claim to the League of Nations, the Permanent Court of Interna-
tional Justice or the International Court of Justice. Argentina did
not. ...For over 50 years prior to the
31
armed conflict of April 2, 1982, Argentina failed to submit the
dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims.
There is no evidence that Argentina was in any way impeded from
taking the issue of sovereignty over the Islands before these courts.
One must conclude that Argentina failed to do so through neglect.
Argentina's failure to use available world courts greatly enhances
Great Britain's claim to sovereignty through extinctive prescription.
It is reasonable to assume that Great Britain acquired definitive title
to the Islands at this time.176
However, in any case, there is little reasonable doubt that Great Britain acquired definitive title to the Islands by prescription before 1982.
The purpose of the mode of prescription supports this conclusion.
Prescription assists in maintaining minimum world order and protecting inclusive values. 177 The intent is to preserve world order even if a nation fulfills some exclusive values by committing wrongful acts. To foster the minimum world order system, the claims of a deposed country are assumed to be extinguished after a period of time. Applying the purpose of prescription to this case compels the conclusion that Argentina's claim was extinguished long before 1982. World order was disrupted by Argentina's invasion of the Islands. The disruption potentially could have been much greater if other nations had become involved.”
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Volume 107 Winter 1985
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Washington, D.C.
That what you saying?
Point aside, he is stealing nothing, it's their land not yours, they control their immigration policy, not you and I might add, you are never going to either.
What no champers at the Timerman Embassy gig?
How many Argentinians have EVER been born on the islands?
How many of the “59 souls” who left on January 1833 were born on the islands?
How many of the “59 souls” had been there more than 2 months?
How many of the “59 souls” were “islanders” and how many were implanted people who had been on the islands less than 2% of the time of Dick Sawle who you dismiss as an English implant?
Has Dick Sawle murdered anyone?
Has Dick Sawle raped anyone in front of their children?
I am thinking that these answers should get you to only one conclusion.....even the islanders today with least claim to “being an islander” have a greater claim than any Argentinian EVER.
Thanks for that makes it easier to understand the current situation. Regarding your previous, I appreciated and understood your opinion, I was just trying to open up the discussion. Apologies if I gave you a false impression.
Revided title for the above Article....:
“English Islanders exist: here we are”, the toast at Falkland House in London.
(Next toast at Dick's retirement cottage in southern France)
Chuckle chuckle
Who was living in what we call Argentina today, when those settlers first arrived from Spain?
What happened to the majority of those people who were the original indegenous inhabitants of today,s Argentina?
Hey - who has just dodged the “dollar clamp” and been swanning off to Paris and Rome on holidays and shopping?
Brainwash anyone?
What on earth is the point of endless nit-picking over the events of two, three or four hundred years ago, when both Argentina and the UK have signed up to a universal and unqualified human right that supercedes what went before?
Absolutely correct except for one minor point. Think does answer this every now and then. Obviously less often than each two months. And his answer?
“We're different because we broke off our ties with our various European homelands and became an independent country”
'I believe that the Falkland Islanders would be better off as an independent nation state.'
Spot on sir, too much talk of the past events and not enough talk of the solutions. Independence is the only sensible solution and the solution I believe many in the UN want. We all know Argentina will never accept the true historic events and will not stop accusing Britain of colonialism, stealing resource etc. Without Britain in Argentina's sovereignty claim, they simply don't have one...
The FIG should make the future goal of independence clear to all, even if independence doesn't happen for 100+ years, with everyone knowing that it will happen eventually, it will make the sovereignty debate almost irrelevant.
Think, Liberato, Gustbury, Marcos / DOD
Do you think independence is a fair solution?
Your honest thoughts please...
Ah. Thanks Joe. So if the islanders were to reassert their autonomy, for example in the form of an internationally-supervised referendum followed at some point in the future by full independence then Think would consider the matter settled then? Well that makes a little more sense to me - so why don't they ever say that then?
I have, repeatedly expressed that my personal & favourite solution would be one resembling the Åland Islands model.....:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85land_Islands
That would, of course, mean that:
1) The United Kingdom should withdraw their claim over the uninhabited South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands…
2) The United Kingdom should withdraw their claim over the so-called “British Antarctic Territory” that totally overlaps the Chilean and Argentinean claims…
3) If Great Britain “Thinks” that they, for whatever reason, need a chunk of the Antarctic; they can take back some of the fifty (50%) of the Antarctic territory that they, so generously, ceded to their Ex Crown colonies of Australia & New Zealand.
But….
Confronted wit the complete haughtiness and total negativity of the British Government and their Kelper subjects; I can not do other that support, wholeheartedly, the current hard-line policies of Argentina.
Are you for real?
Asking the biggest liar on MP, I don't Think & DoD; Marcos and Gustbury both idiots par excellence to speak the truth!
They have NO idea of the CONCEPT of truth and it would stick in their throats if they ever uttered a word that was true.
Get a grip man.
Who cares what you Think, Think. You are irrelevant. Stick to discussing the price of corned beef.
Aland only works because its neighbours can both be trusted not to invade it. Are you truly confident that all Argentine governments would be able to resist in perpetuity the desire to re-invade the Falklands were they to be demilitarised. Argentina's track record isn't great in this regard I hope you would agree.
I would certainly agree that there are special regions of the world that we need desperately to leave well alone and the Antarctic and Brazilian Rain Forests are 2 such regions. So I personally would have no problem with an exploitation / militarisation ban on Antarctica for at least a 100 years if that would help. Then it wouldn't matter who “owns” them since we all would.
In asking Britain to renounce its claim to South Georgia would you intend Argentina to take possession or would you want some kind of neutral UN protectorate? If Argentina just wanted them for exploitation purposes then how would you justify that?
“If the General San Martin had been a little more ambitious, if it had been a conqueror rather than a liberator, Chile today would be a province of Argentina, and Bolivia and Peru as well. A Uruguay Uruguay not included because it is actually a province of Argentina. Paraguay does not count because in that region there is nothing worthwhile, ah oranges are very good. We miss German mentality for submission to all our neighbors and make them ungrateful work for us, and now we pay the price for our indifference. It was obviously a historical mistake. Too late now ...... or not, who knows.”
Laughingly extreme but posted in relation to the tit-for-tat chanting by Chilean and Argentine cadets.
We all know how good Argentina is at sticking to the international agreements they've made, lol.
Your prior actions damn this idea from the start
www.clarin.com/politica/cuestion-Malvinas-resolvera-gobierno-argentino_0_862713832.html
'The unexplained failure of foreign policy on the islands'
www.clarin.com/politica/inexplicable-error-politica-exterior-islas_0_862713831.html
'Referendum on Malvinas: Uruguayan deputies will be observers
They are opposed to the government of Mujica. A group in favor of the cause Argentina yesterday rejected consultation illegal.'
www.clarin.com/politica/Referendo-Malvinas-diputados-uruguayos-observadores_0_862713830.html
'The Falkland / Malvinas: village or town?'
www.rionegro.com.ar/diario/las-falklandmalvinas-pueblo-o-poblacion-1067182-9539-nota.aspx
“Falkland Islanders do not exist. They are British citizens living in the Islands”
This Englishman Dick..Sawle is a perfect example of that.”
So every Argentine citizen currently entitled to vote was born in Argentina right?
Timerman's father was Argentinian, right?
CFK-did her grandfather come to Argentina in the 1800s?
If you cannot answer (truthfully), yes, then your comment is irrelevent.
You say…:
Ӂland only works because its neighbors can both be trusted not to invade it. Are you truly confident that all Argentine governments would be able to resist in perpetuity the desire to re-invade the Falklands were they to be demilitarized.
Argentina's track record isn't great in this regard.”
I can see by your response that you…:
1) Don’t know much about the Åland Islands…
A) The Åland Islands are a prosperous territory, inhabited by a SWEDISH AUTONOMOUS MINORITY and administered by Finland.
B) In the case of Malvinas, the Islands would be a prosperous territory inhabited by a BRITISH AUTONOMOUS MINORITY and administered by Argentina.
Why would Argentina even ”Think” about invading one of its own, most prosperous territories?
2) Don’t know much about British/Argentinean history…
A) Britain attacked us in 1806, 1807 and again in 1845-50.
Not to mention the multiple attempts of possession by the British on the Patagonian coast. (Port Desire & Ushuaia being the two best documented examples…
(Please spare me that nitpicking argument of Argentina ”not existing in its present form” at that time…. The United Kingdom has only existed in “its present form” since 1922, if memory serves me right.)
B) The 1982 ill-fated Malvinas military adventure in 1982 ended as it should…
With a coward military dictatorship thoroughly defeated.
Every single high ranking member of that dictatorship has been…:
I) Kicked out of the Armed Forces,
II) Tried by the Argentinean Justice and either died in disgrace before their sentences were passed or currently serving life sentences
III) Every single one of them.
In contraposition; the British have not even considered returning the stolen Treasury Monies from Buenos Aires and Montevideo on their, twice failed, colonial expeditions of 1806 & 1807.
Seems to me that Argentina's historical ”track record” is much better that Great Britain’s...........
@8 Sod off, bacteria. Or we'll come down and piss on you!
@9 The genocide, the murderer, the rapist, the thief, the “thing” that walks on the blood and bones of the rightful owners, speaks. Anything useful to say, slug?
@11 Very good. You learned how to copy and paste! Here's a FACT. Five paragraphs - five lies. Here's another FACT. No chance. Are you stupid? How many times do you have to be told? We'd rather wipe out “argieland”!
@15 No “answers”, slug?
@17 Would you like to “think”? Here is the answer to any point you may like to raise. Half-a-million argies are not worth one Falkland Islander. Here's a well-known FACT. When “your” invasion and occupation of '82 had failed; When 11,313 of “your” troops had surrendered, “your” government didn't want them back. THAT is what the individual argie is worth to “your” government. WE, the British, travelled 8,000 miles for the sake of around 1,500 Islanders. “Your” government couldn't be bothered to travel 400 miles for over 11,000 argies. You are just dupes. And stupid dupes at that!
@31 Do you ever THINK about the blood and bones of the rightful owners that you walk on? You are, of course, a murdering genocide. Do you ever THINK about that? How about renaming yourself THOUGHTLESS. Or, perhaps, WITLESS!
@38 I have a preferred solution for argieland. It resembles that of Bikini Island. What do you reckon?
@49 Why would Britain consider returning seized Treasury Monies taken in the course of war? Or have you forgotten that those monies were SPANISH!
Unless you want to revise the date of your independance back a few more years, in 1806 and 1807 you were still part of spain and allied with Napoleon.
So pointing out that Argentina didn't exist at the time is entirely accurate.
They have been stealing from all over the world and is part of their DNA.
Jan. No, she could not make it.
Dick. Why not?
Jan. She could'nt get a baby sitter.
Dick. I thought the baby had gone back home!
1) “Argentine founding father” like , José Francisco de San Martín, raised and trained in the Malaga, Spain travel 6000 miles south to some squatted land to steal the natural resources of other Nations and indigenous people...
2) After having squatted and stolen for some years, those “Argentines” like José Francisco de San Martín retire to a sweet cottage life in
Boulogne-sur-Mer, France.
3) No wonder that “Argentine” Francisco de San Martín raises his glass of native blood.......
Brainwash anybody?
;-)
Think, when was the last time you were in our part of the world? I would guess sometime in the 70. Is that right?
He also used the term “stone” instead of pounds recently GASP you aren't living in the UK are you? I wonder....
Does this sound familiar to anyone else:
Dr. Hannibal Lecter: First principles, Clarice: simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius, “Of each particular thing, ask: What is it in itself? What is its nature?” What does he do, this man you seek?
Clarice Starling: He kills women.
Dr. Hannibal Lecter: No, that is incidental. What is the first and principal thing he does, what needs does he serve by killing?
Clarice Starling: Anger, social acceptance, and, uh, sexual frustration …
Dr. Hannibal Lecter: No, he covets. That's his nature. And how do we begin to covet, Clarice? Do we seek out things to covet? Make an effort to answer, now.
Clarice Starling: No. We just …
Dr. Hannibal Lecter: No. We begin by coveting what we see every day. Don't you feel eyes moving over your body, Clarice? And don't your eyes seek out the things you want?
Well what ever they are they're not even in your league, from the land of liars you espouse lying and dishonesty as a virtue, by your self-proclaimed viveza criolla. So your in no position to question anybody else's integrity.
I bet they got the deed through 'squatters rights'.
.
What I was trying to point out as delicately as I could was that you are proposing a Scandinavian solution to a dispute in which Argentina is involved and thus is wishful “Think”ing at best. When Argentina invaded in 1982 the first thing they did was to put a gun in an unarmed man's back and force him to play the Argentine National Anthem over the radio. That's the sort of behaviour that gave us Brits a particular opinion of the Argentines that we have struggled to shake off.
It is interesting that you have found a way in your own mind to dissociate yourself from the actions of the Junta in 82 (i.e. which happened in your and my lifetime) and yet you quote early 19th century history at me to justify your distrust of the British. It's 2013 mate, I can't even name my Great Great Great Grandfathers let alone know whether any of them attacked BA or not. What I know is that my uncles fought the Nazis and yet today we have excellent relations with Germany. Why? Because not only did Germany rid itself of fascism but it rejected its colonial intentions as well. So it is not enough to bad mouth the Junta because of their methods, it is time for you to reject their colonial fantasies as well.
These are some of the myths and and fairy stories to which I referred above. The truth is that in 1806 and 1807 Britain was at war with Spain and Buenos Aires, at the time, was a Spanish colonial city. Thus, British troops invaded Spanish territory and were repulsed by the defenders.
In 1845/50, both Britain and France blockaded the River Plate to the detriment of both the Argentine Confederation and Uruguay due to a trade dispute. The blockade was eventually withdrawn and subsequently Britain and the Argentine Confederation signed and ratified the Arena Southern Treaty(known as the Treaty of Perfect Friendship) in which BOTH parties declared that each had no outstanding matters pending against the other(Article 7) - thus the Argentine claim for the Falklands/Malvinas OFFICIALLY disappeared.
Think's comments are another example of the truth being twisted to the advantage of Argentine - it just doesn't work.
Very correct. For 91 years Argentina upheld the treaty with not a single mention of the malvinas in any Message To Congress but in 1941 it was ressurected and argentina thus lost its integrity as a trustworthy nation.
1) You make us Scandinavians sound like some übermenschlich, peaceful entities….
Thought you Brits knew better after centuries of us burning your ugly churches, roasting your fatty women and raping your pretty sheep” (or was it inversely?)
2) I quote 1982 and early 19’th century history at you because that’s the history Argentina and Britain share.
Besides….I could easily mention thousands of examples of “Bad behavior that gave us a particular opinion about the British that most of the rest of the world is struggling to shake off.”
Just name the Country and/or the decade…..
3) I’m glad to hear that you Brits are pals again with your peaceful German cousins.
When is Britain going to learn from them?
Would you like to share with us all why you abandoned your homeland?????
Interesting you bring up the subject of rape.
Is that not the speciality of your “Argentinian” Falkland Islanders. you remember them, what your government calls the original population....but you and I know they were only on the islands for seven weeks.
none were born there, all of them there for less than 50th of the time Dick Sawle has been, but apparently 180 years later, their sovereignty claim is worth more than his.
Argentina can forget sovereignty, can forget any form of land share, can forget appearing anything other than being seen as pathetic on a global scale.
Do you not think it was odd that we welcomed Timerman to come and spew his drivel? It was because we needed a good laugh.
Aland, LOL...forget it, try NOTHING.
This discussion is about the existence or otherwise of the Falkland Islanders : They don't want to be a pariah nation under warning by the IMF, they don't want the influence of Chavez, Castro and Iran, they don't want corrupt politicians and police, they don't want 30% inflation, they don't want a fast depreciating currency, they dont want to live on $7 a day, they don't want Argentinas Mafia, they want to be able to walk out after dark without the threat of being raped mugged or murdered, they don't want a society where you have to have iron bars on your windows to keep out theives, they don't want any guns like you see as a 'must have' and they don't want Latin Alien Culture. And, in the referendum in March they will vote for what they want to retain, their association with Britain.
They do want to retain the British culture, the quiet village atmosphere of the their towns and villages, they do want their own independent government, they do want the friendship and protection of a powerful friendly nation, they do want no crime fraud or guns on the street, they do want wildlife and fisheries carefully and intelligently managed, they do want controlled tourism, they do want to retain their British heritage, the British education of their children and they also want peaceful and friendly relations with their neighbours. This last desire is constantly frustrated by the aggressive and vocal actions of Argentina who they do not like or trust.
Do you get it?
Isn't it nice to see all “La Campora” posters on this forum, yet again finishing the job started by laughing boy Timerman....?
The likes of Think, Gustbury, DanyBerger & Marcos Alejandro can all give themselves a pat on the back for totally failing.......
Yet again they fall back on that good old position of ”You British are liars and thieves....... wa, wa, wa!!!!
and all this over some people who apprently don't exist...............
Ok, now could we have some input from an Argentina who
1/ Actually lives in Argentina
and
2/ who isn't a complete retard.
@59 Are you trying to suggest that you have a “vestige” of humanity? Slug.
@66 Good-oh, Twinky. You're where we can get at you. Just like an argie. How long have you been lying for? Keep your eyes peeled, Twink. Never know when someone will walk up behind you with a combat knife. Do yuou have armoured kidneys? When will we learn? When we've wiped out all bacteria and slugs. Let's tell you how we feel. A bit amused. And a little bit annoyed. Remember what happened to the last lot of “people” that annoyed us? Mussolini and Fascist Italy? Hitler and Nazi Germany? Galtieri and some numpty argies. Sod him Hussein? Some twat called Gaddafi. But you mistake us. We have “learned” from our German “pals”. Would you like to know the lesson? It's this: If the pillocks won't give in and shut up, kill 'em. All of 'em. Being “shopkeepers”, we call it “a closing down sale”. Sale time coming for you soon, bacteria!
Thanks for your thoughts.
I don't believe its a fair solution for the islanders, they do not in any way wish to be ruled by Argentina. Argentina invaded their home and held them hostage! The question of the islanders EEZ? whether they have one or not. Hydrocarbons / Fishing rights, I'm pretty sure the current sabre rattling is because Argentina wishes to steal the Islanders oil. Regarding SGASSI, a totally separate case they wouldn't be part of any deal, as Argentina have no viable claim. Then there is the question of trust, would you trust your current Govt? be honest. Also can you give me your thoughts on independence ?
Actually part of the reason the Falklands War happened was that you British had a pathetic fighting reputation in Argentina. We thought you'd not fight. Just like in 1806, in 1807, in 1826, and in 1845 (by that I mean you did fight but were humiliated, except in 1826 where you chickened out entirely so no chance at that).
And still you haven't grasped that what happened in the early 19th century isn't the be all and end all of everything.
As for your ficticious early 19c Argentine wars, the vast majority of those doing the fighting against the British were mercenaries ant to make it
worse, they were those horrid Europeans who like so much!
As for chickens, the Brits were those running up those mountains around Stanley, it was your lot who running down. I wonder, what was the name of the vet, that won , the “Stanley Steeple Chase?”
I don't know which references he uses, but I looked it up.
1810 -1825 Argentine War of independence. Now I do not know about you,
but I read that as meaning they did not gain independence until after 1825.
1826 War with Brazil. Well he nearly got that right, both countries start with the letter B.
He is almost right about 1845. Which Was an Anglo French blockade, not war, blockade. He can have that one.
Should call themselves the Republic of Walter Mittys.
Argentina is anti-british!
AFUERA DE MI PAIS INGLESES ODIOSOS!
You say….:
”Ah Scandinavia….. Thanks for the Nobel Peace Prize!
When is Argentina getting one?
Actually don't answer that, I think I know...”
I say….:
Don’t mention it…... Nob(e)lesse oblige!
When is Argentina getting one?
Actually we got one in 1936 and one in 1980, you now know…
AFUERA DE MI PAIS INGLESES ODIOSOS!
i don't reside in the USA.
I am argentinian!
AFUERA DE MI PAIS INGLESES ODIOSOS!
“Actually part of the reason the Falklands War happened was that you British had a pathetic fighting reputation in Argentina”
Do you ever take time off from being a retard??
The whole world knows ( except you apprently ) that the Falklands war happened because the Junta were trying to cling to power and thought that they would play the “Miltary adventurism” card to unite the population behind them................
Well, we know how well that one worked don't we?
clown
Thirty years later, they are at it again, thinking they can achieve by lies and deceit what they failed to achieve by force.
Got that wrong too, only it will take longer for them to realise it this time.
But never the state - indeed the later one was won for resisting the Argentine state! Surprised you brought it up really. (Ok so I looked it up in Wikipedia - it wasn't important to know).
Anyway, delighted to hear you are enjoying our European hospitality and freedoms. While here are you thinking of joining the Swedish or Danish Chapter of the “Calling for talks we won't then attend” Group?
Leg-pulling aside what I would be interested to know though is whether you would accept Falklands independence as being an acceptable long term settlement? Clearly it wouldn't be your first choice but would you agree that it would be hard to contest?
Which part of your country is occupied by “Ingleses odiosos”? Do you really believe that British people would want to live side by side with “argentinos tufosos” like you?
Think, we just want a view point about independence from your angle...
a) Would you accept Falklands independence as an acceptable long term settlement?
Clearly it wouldn't be your first choice but...
b) Do you agree that it would be hard to contest?
“it lives in the US”
Personally, I do not believe that.
It sounds like the sort of typical thing an Argie would boast about to impress other Argies and get status.
“Sussie” seems to know nothing about the US, whatever.
Even direct questions get deflected or lies that are easily dismissed.
He used to like to use it as a dig at us, -Sussie living off welfare of the US while we pay taxes to do it and sacrifice our young people overseas, while he laughs at us.
PH try's the same thing - attempted to get our goat by saying he marries multiple Argentinians to bring them to Canada.
Duh... You (meaning the Brits) wanted control of the River Plate. Always did, especially back then. When Argentina went to war with Brazil to drive them out of Uruguay or take it over, you were hoping Brazil would win and keep the territory. They were a monarchy and we were a republic, and being the anti-democratic sponsor Britain has always been, you decided that dealing with Emperor Pedro the 2nd was better than dealing with free people.
When you realized Brazil was being destroyed in battle after battle (in spite of far larger resources, population, and navy), you brokered a truce, which lead to Uruguay's creation, which was your next best solution... to have a tiny puppet state you could bully at will.
You then tried in 1845 with the Frogs to take over the Parana... failed AGAIN.
Of course that came after the British invasions (no mercenaries), in which your army men where defeated twice not by Spanish troops, but by barely armed and trained criollo (argentine) citizens of Buenos Aires.
All that should explain part of the reason attacking the UK didn't seem like such an awful idea really.
Can you explain us since when living in UK is a symbol of status????
Do you think also that eating hamburgers and hot dogs is a synonymous of first class cuisine?
Wasn't addressing you, but here we go...
@100
“Can you explain us since when living in UK is a symbol of status????”
Isn't it obvious???
BTW, you made a silly little typo there, “US” not “UK”, but I'll let you go this time.
It's just a typo, and the same answer for either.
@100
“Do you think also that eating hamburgers and hot dogs is a synonymous of first class cuisine?”
You had best ask Sussie - he goes on and on about living in USA and has several times raved about the “local delicacies”, burritos and “tasty tacos”!!
BTW, in California last month, I ordered an “Argentine Empanada”.
While it was a bit crusty on the outside, and a little spicey inside, it was well described, as the filling was ultimately a bit light, and had little substance.
:-D bon appetit!
There is no such thing as “argentine empanadas”. There are empanadas salteñas, the most popular ones, and tucumanas. Both these fight it out for popularity in terms of being a “specialty”
And then the niche for empanadas criollas (rest of the country), and mendocinas. That's it.
Sorry for the bad news.
“Conned”???
Then it must have been “Argentine”!
LOL!!
Silly Troll :-D
“BTW, in California last month, I ordered an “Argentine Empanada”.”
That could be a serious indication of argies inhabitants in the region.
Do you think any chance to claim any territory over there?
I know that Argies have done before let me see...
“His forces occupied Monterey, California, then a Spanish colony, raising the Argentine flag there and briefly claiming a small portion of the future U.S. State of California for Argentina.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippolyte_de_Bouchard
Oops!
Do you have a flag?
yawn,
lost interest, now.
ln your dreams.
Not one mm3 of OUR earth to be given to anyone, least of all Argentina.
@49 Think,
As above, in your dreams, OR:-
If you want it, come & get it if you can.
Put your money where your mouth is.
Yes Think, you Scandinavians liked our Saxon & Celtic women so much that you had to come over every year & rape them.
ln fact, you altered our DNA that much that we went out & created an empire.
So most of the blame for any “evils” of the British Empire can be conveniently blamed on you Scandinavians :-))))))))). lol
**********************************************************
These malvinistas continually harp on about defunct UNGA Resolutions.
Their invasion in 1982 & refusal to abide by UNSC Resolution # 502 wiped the slate clean.
That being the case, any reason why we can apply to the UNGA to cancel all of these Resolutions prior to 1982?
That will whip the rug out from under them.
But then again, its fun to listen to their whining & complaining.
And being able to defeat their ridiculous arguments.
Also, l hope Cristina stays, she's the best general that we've got! ha ha
Only if you're not aware of anything else that has happened since the early 19th century. You do get the news there, right?
The Foreign Secretary dismissed the Buenos Aires Government's claim on the South Atlantic islands as a “fantasy”.
“Britain is a country which supports the right of people to determine their own future,” Mr Hague told The Sun newspaper.
“There should never be reward for bullying or threatening behaviour in international affairs - just as there never should be in our personal lives.”
The Foreign Secretary said the bullish claims to the Falklands by Christina Fernandez de Kirchener, the Argentine president, only made the islanders more determined to remain British.
Next month the Falklands will hold a referendum to decide whether the islands will stay in British hands....'
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9860387/William-Hague-well-stand-up-to-Argentine-bullies-over-Falklands.html
'Colonialism has its moments - Comparing the Falklands with the Israeli Occupied Territories was a step too far. Plus: unconventional spirits, and becoming an adjective'
www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/colonialism-has-its-moments-8488359.html
Their invasion in 1982 & refusal to abide by UNSC Resolution # 502 wiped the slate clean.
That being the case, any reason why we can apply to the UNGA to cancel all of these Resolutions prior to 1982?
AAHHAAHAH isolde...There are several resolutions after 1982,and actually they are stronger than the 2065.......Useless pirates...Really Argentina should cut any diplomatic links with the uk and kick out brit companies..What for?
So now the then UK government has gone from being at war with you in 1826, to supporting Brazil. Hardly the same as being at war with you is it? So why say it was? By your logic, your support for the Nazis in WW2 means that you were at war with the allies and you lost that one too.
You are also wrong about 1805 and 1807, Britian was at war with Spain. The citizens of BA, Europeans and Europens by descent, including English and Irish mercenaries, fought for Spain, not for you, you did not exist as Argentina.
Such a shame that you have so little national histroy to be proud of, you feel the need to create a ficticious one. Much the same as your ceation of the Malvinas Myth really
The purpose of the UN is to help resolve disputes without recourse to war. So as often as Argentina goes to the UN and complains about the Falklands, the UN will pass some kind of non-binding resolution calling for dialogue, but these should never be mistaken as indicating specific support for Argentina. If the UN dismissed countries for being time-wasting imperialists then those countries would stop going to the UN and thus resort to conflict sooner. I am unaware of any Falklands resolution that has ever suggested that a full or even partial transfer of sovereignty to Argentina is necessary. Again, and I am happy to be corrected on this point, but the only thing the UK is required to do (other than offer talks which we recently did and which your Foreign Secretary refused to attend) is to help the islanders move towards autonomy and ultimately independence. I believe something is happening in the Falklands in March that will demonstrate the progress that is being made in this regard. With the UK meeting all of its UN obligations what do you think Argentina will do next?
26 days to the FALKLANDS REFERENDUM
SELF DETERMINATION
Very well put but i would say that it is not britain's job to make the islands independent, it is our job to ensure they control their destiny. If they choose independence britain will protect them.
@112 golf cronie
And it'll be another nail in the argentine fantasy
Quite right. Yes i meant that we should make Independence available to them as an option but accept and defend whatever their freely-expressed choice may be, BOT or otherwise. That is an obligation i am delighted my country will meet.
Argentina would of course, not recognise that Independence, as no doubt would it's allies, not all, but some. It would continue with it's belligerent behaviour and frankly, at some time, would threaten invasion again.
A state that gains independence for itself, would be a poor state, if it did not take steps protect and defend that independence. Another right, enshrined in the charter of the UN.
The islands, by their very nature, will never be in a position to entirely provide that defence. It follows that a Defence Treaty would have to be in place with the UK.
Mount Pleasant could be leased back to the UK, the islands who by then, will have sufficient revenue, could pay for the provision of the neccessary military hardware, whilst the UK and the Islands, provided the personel.
Independence in itself will never guarantee freedom from Argentine, it must be
backed up by a viable defence policy.
“We have marked presence in the Falklands British public opinion and other places in Europe”
He said the head of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate, Daniel Filmus, referring to the visit to London that led Foreign Minister Hector Timerman.
The senator from the Front for Victory (FPV), who accompanied the deputy chancellor with Guillermo Carmona, in dialogue with Télam explained that “there is still work to increase the level of installation question` Malvinas' in Europe ”, but highlighted the “high level of receptivity” that showed the various countries of the region. “Where we are not present does not reach our eyes the Malvinas issue,” said the legislator to highlight the importance of the meetings that took place last week in London among whom there was a meeting with 18 European groups Pro-Dialogue Malvinas. In this context, the former education minister highlighted the magnitude and the calling of each of the meetings held, but especially the fact that the meeting have been made in the British capital, something that had never happened. During his visit to Britain, Timerman and legislators also attended a meeting with 30 British MPs in the chancellor's stance exposed Argentina to resolve the dispute over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands in the roundtable, as promoted by the United Nations in all its resolutions, something that Britain never accepted....'
www.telam.com.ar/notas/201302/7277-hemos-marcado-presencia-con-el-tema-malvinas-en-la-opinion-publica-inglesa-y-otros-espacios-de-europa.html
“The meeting was attended by prominent figures from politics and culture of different countries in Europe with Timerman signed a document in which they perform ”call on the UK government to resume talks with Argentina“.
What prominent ”Europen figures?” is he referring to? The Argentine Ex pats that no one has ever heard of.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9860387/William-Hague-well-stand-up-to-Argentine-bullies-over-Falklands.html
Great statement!
There are many nations who've been bullied by neighbours. Virtually the entire Arabian Gulf feels threatened by Iran and would rather see their demise. When it comes down to it, the Argentines are their own worst enemy, because they encourage people to hate them. Argentine politicians should be forced to read 'How to win friends and influence people' by Dale Carnegie. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People
Hague and the Islanders can show the rest of the world that we are eager to talk about anything to do with the Islands. Anything except sovereignty, because that belongs to the Islanders.
It's fairly obvious from post 17 by Liberato, that the ordinary Argentine still doesn't understand the full, true history of the Islands. They still cling to the false history taught in the schools.
It is also obvious that they have no real understanding of the legal position explored so comprehensibly by Terence Hill.
That's why I believe that it would be better to 'go on the offensive' with the facts.
Argentines have been raised on propaganda. They simply don't know the truth. They might feel that if the facts were presented by the Falkland Islanders or by Britain, then it must consist of OUR propaganda. They have no idea that the information we're showing them actually comes from both Argentine & British documents, documents which prove that the Islanders do have the right to be on the Islands and to own the sovereignty to them.
That's why I keep rabbiting on about a documentary, televised proof showing the documents and what they mean. What better way to re-educate the Argentines to the facts? If the ordinary Argentine realised that the Islanders are the true descendants of Vernet's colony & that Vernet wanted the Islands to be British, then the Argentine claim evaporates.
The issue here is that they believe themselves. They also show their strategy effectively, which is to remove key facts and befuddle others. They aren't open and honest about where these people are from, who they are or what groups they represent. Then they discuss how the UK is ignoring 'all' of the UN resolutions. It's a simple strategy which works on those who aren't very intelligent and have little access to more information to fill in the gaps (Argentines).
What else is interesting is that the 'prominent British people' includes a seemingly failed journalist and an MP sponsored by some union unawares that they are both stooges of a fascist government. However, their suggestions were a rapprochement with the islanders and lease-back.
Neither of which make any sense, because Timmershylock doesn't even admit they exist, and also it would be a curious negotiation where Argentina walked in with nothing and walked out with long-term ownership of the islands, ready to ethnic cleanse them. Not at all likely.
I can only suggest that something else was afoot in that meeting.
Soon enough a new gov't will be ruling Argentina
They have a huge mess to clean up
Their navy is nonexistent
Their Air-force is nonexistent
They have no fuel
They have no ammunition
Uncle Chavez is dead
Keep up the defenses ignore the crazies and get on with your lives the wind is at your back. Enjoy it while you can.
So, dear RGs, where were you? Of course, it is too late now. We like things as they are.
Come off it, that would have entailed enduring hardship and hard work. Much easier to steal it. Trouble is, things are not going quite to plan this time. They have come up against people who are willing to fight for what's theirs.
@99 Unfortunately for your “history”, the Eastern Province (Uruguay) had been part of the Portuguese Empire and then the Empire of Brazil since 1816. You were just trying a land grab.
@106 I don't think the '82 invasion and UNSC 502 “wiped the slate clean”. UNGA resolutions are NON-BINDING. They are no more than opinions or wishes. And right back at the beginning? Resolution 1514? The UK, along with a number of other members, abstained.
@109 What is it about the phrase “NON-BINDING” that is beyond your comprehension? All those resolutions that people like you like to quote are meaningless. As are the resolutions from all those other pitiful, pettifogging organisations that you also like to quote. Here are a few FACTS that you should get a grip on. The Falkland Islanders wish to be free. They wish to be associated with the UK. They DO NOT wish to be a province, or part of a province, of argieland. Britain supports and will defend their wishes and THEIR Islands. Argieland doesn't get a say. You can yap all you like. Makes no difference. There's NOTHING argieland can do. And, as all REAL evidence shows, argieland doesn't have the support of “the whole world”. Get used to it. Argieland lost 180 years ago!
Argentina is anti-british
AFUERA DE MI PAIS INGLESES ODIOSOS!
Agree with everything you said except “argieland lost 180 years ago”
What happened in 1833 is hardly worth even calling it an Argieland loss. 54 people (mostly non-argentine) representing the United Provinces of River Plate (not Argentina) were politely requested to vacate the islands where they'd been for just two months.
As military losses go, it's up there with Prince Harry playing Call of Duty, I.e. totally irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
Argentinas claim to the islands is weaker than piss weak, it's pathetic. In that 180 years on they are still prattling about iT! Shows how pathetic they are.
“Which version of history are you using? The argie version or the truth?”
LOL , good one Conq.!!
If Britain had gone to the Falkland Islands in 1833 and evicted a 1000-2000 strong civilian population that had been Spanish when they first arrived in 1750 and had chosen to gain independence with the rest of the UP in 1814, and by 1833 were governed by the UP from Buenos Aires.....then, and only then would the Argentines have any right to feel aggrieved, but STILL 180 years later SELF DETERMINATION would prevail.
However, as you rightly point out:
1) Spain voluntarily vacated the islands in 1811 before any independence
2) there was no civilian population between 1811 and 1826
3) Vernet was neither a representative of the UP nor UK when he arrived
4) UP attempt at establishing COLONY began in November 1832 when 50-60 militia arrived
5) Militia mutineed, murdered their captain and raped his wife in front of their children.
6) Militia removed by captain Onslow of HMS Clio in January 6th 1833, two months after arrival.
7) independent Vernet community remained under Brisbane.
8) UK continued presence ever since.
9) UN resolutions in 60-70s request peaceful dialogue to resolve Argentinas claims
10) UK attempted dialogue, but Argentina invaded at the cost of 900 lives. Argentina ignored BINDING UN resolutions.
11) UK offered deal on hydrocarbons exploration, Nestor Kirchner ripped it up.
12) UK offered discussions with FIG present Argentina refused
To follow:
13) Referendum shows Falkland Islanders wish to remain BOT
14) Falklands never have been, never will be a province of Argentina.
Dealing with people who have been heavily propaganda'ised is never going to be easy. Their minds are not just furked, they are closed and furked.
Not much we can do about it, as they're too damaged to ever learn the truth.
whatever happens in Argentina is none of your business!
pay attention ....
she said the southwest is “taco territory”
is not for the ----- CORNISH pasties ----made by Mr.Thomas from Cornwall, England!
Oh! yes, she knows where this bloody rubbish english man lives.
It was said that many British soldiers in these armies fought as units whose marching song was “Green Grow the Rushes oh” later corrupted to gringos
Look at the names still revered today Cochrane, Brown, O'Higgins (troll wail : but they were mostly Irish} Well so was Arthur Wesley, better known as the Duke of Wellington.
In Uruguay we have Patrick (Patricio)Campbell, former sergeant of the 91st regiment, one of Artigas most trusted lieutenants and founder of the Uruguayan navy
But of course our Malvinero anglophobes will never acknowlege that
Well said!! I LOVE the bit about:-
13) Referendum shows Falkland Islanders wish to remain BOT
14) Falklands never have been, never will be a province of Argentina
But I think you forgot :-
15) More childish tantrums from BA
16) More whining and shouting in the UN
17) More Argentine diplomats embarrassing themselves and their country in public.
I think that just about says it all
”@128 The crux of it all (from reading comment boards in Argentina) is that Argentines are very befuddled about the history of the islands. They've all been told that nothing happened before 1833 and don't really seem to understand that the British had a claim since a long time before.”
Hi, Shed-time
It really must be very difficult for them to have to accept that parents and other trusted figures in their lives, from childhood, are either lying or deluded, the whole time. Who wAnts to appear patriotic to their friends and family?
And really who could care less what Argentina does or thinks, but they do want others to think the worst of us so that they can have the Falklands.
They ARE deluded, all the Peronists.
I agree with you.
The Argentines would only have a legitimate claim IF (and that's a big IF) they had actually colonised the Islands before 1764 and done so with thousands of Argentine people, not Spanish. But Argentina simply did not exist then. No claim can be inferred by a legal doctrine which is not accepted by other nations. Just because the Americans became independent, did not automatically mean that the United States had the rights to own Canada or the British islands in the Caribbean.
As Shed-time points out, the Argentines have closed their minds to the truth. They've been indoctrinated, brain-washed to believe the propaganda they've been taught at school as gospel. They simply do not know that this history is false.
Worse still, the Argentines believe IN their propaganda so much, that they are willing to pervert it to fit the story as they see it, even if, the perverted version is so far from the truth to be laughable.
That's why we need to go on the offensive with a documentary series on the history of the Islands. To teach the Argentines (and all other South Americans) the true facts and then inform other nations why the Argentines have no rights to the Islands.
Some people have gone to a lot of trouble to document the facts and when you read them, you wonder why the Argentines are bothering at all - other than living up to their creed of Viveza crillo - to steal something which does not belong to them.
If I want to check something, I refer to this:
falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history13.pdf
or this:
www.falklandshistory.org/
or this:
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/
It's only when you look over the documents they've collected from so many sources, that you begin to see that the Argentine Government has been aware of the truth all along, that they knew that they had no rights to the Islands in 1833, gave them up in 1850 and lost them by failing to make a claim in the ICJ.
In most good sports, it is common to beat the opposition by getting them to play your game, you don't beat them at theirs. In this case, Timmershylock is simply going to rub everyone up the wrong way, because let's face it, he has the behavioral traits and maturity of a pubescent juvenile. Diplomats don't like it, they will tolerate it, but they don't like it.
Most diplomatic avenues prefer and respect the way that the british do things, and we don't need to go around shouting about the history of the falklands unless it is done softly and to the right sources. Your average poorball shirt wearing sun reader isn't really going to care about it.
It would be better to do what the British UN representative did, which was to provide concise bullet-points from history that reflected the clearly water-tight legal argument upon which the UK rests it's case of ownership.
People need to experience the islands. Having 3000 on a grassy knoll in the south atlantic makes it difficult to get people to actually experience it. So, that I think is the big issue about awareness.
Argentina is anti-british!
Afuera de mi pais ingleses ODIOSOS!
Argentina is anti-truth
Argentina is anti-forward
Argentina is anti-economic
Argentina is anti-morality
Argentina is anti-ethical
Argentina is anti-legal
.... shall I keep going on?
SO, why you worry so much about ARGENTINA?
DON'T you have nothing else TO DO?,,,,,,
try to find something
to play with
between your legs!
At the moment I'm interested in how not to deal with inflation and how to fail at diplomacy and this is a good forum to do this.
What brings you here? Too cold in your basement?
Argentina economy is for argentinians to worry...not the UK!
but
the UK is involved in this “circus circus situation” because the UK resumed diplomatic relations with Argentina.
Cameron said the islanders are suffering “argentine goverment
harassment”
He should break diplomatic relations wiht the SA country
the sooner the better
speaking of 'failing', did you see the PUTA TRAVESTI message of the day @141,
“He should break diplomatic relations wiht the SA country
the sooner the better”
He seems to be repeating this often now - the latest obsession he has seized upon.
:-D
the UK wants diplomatic relations with Argentina because the UK
LOVES Argentina!
poor troy tempest!
poor sussie Nostrolldamus Retard the 1st
26 days to the FALKLANDS REFERENDUM
SELF DETERMINATION
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
THis only WILL STREGHTEN Argentina's position..Poor deluded imperialist..FINISHED,economically and morally.Stupidity everywhere..
The vast majority of argentinos have more serious matters to worry them, not least being the disappearance of democracy in their beautiful country.
Enough of your shennanigans, Malvi.
Go to your room, right now.
When your father comes home, he will give you a sound thrashing.
Feb 10th, 2013 - 05:21 pm
I have said several times on these threads that we, the Argentines, have proved ourselves to be PLAI (Perfect Latin American Idiots) over the “Malvinas” issue, because, as you so rightly say, we had 20 years to go and populate the Falklands, and instead you Falklanders came and populated Patagonia, especially Santa Cruz province.
We lost our chance to claim the Islands through self determination because we didn't have the guts or the inclination to get off our lazy back-sides and go and work hard to aquire a right to the Islands.
Our “government” should forget about their obsession with the FI and get down to finding solutions to our real problems, rising street crime, inflation, unemployment, government corruption, etc.
Oh! my.....and this game continues in Merco-british crap-Press!
...“we, the Argentines, have proved ourselves to be PLAI”....
Shut up stupid Jew!'
The majority of residents in Chubut and Santa Cruz are spanish!
The UK is GUILTY for continuing diplomatic relations with Argentina!
Why would we want to sever Diplomatic Relations. We love winding you all up, it's a British trait don't you know. Just suck it up it is ok
USA should give a hand to the fine people of rgentina and wipe those keppler limeys out of there with their sheeps and land rovers!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!