Saturday, February 9th 2013 - 00:07 UTC

“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.

MLA Sawle: hectic but productive week in London

“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.

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.

1 José Malvinero (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:42 am Report abuse
“Hello, hello, here we are okupas, especially me, Sawle, of England, hiuju!”
2 Raven (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:48 am Report abuse
Hello, hello, Mr Jose Malvinero. The implanted occupier of stolen amerindian land in mainland South America.
3 Escoses Doido (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:56 am
Comment removed by the editor.
4 nigelpwsmith (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:59 am Report abuse
Timerman tries to deny that they exist, but the British & foreign press know who they are and so does Ban Ki-moon.

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.

5 Justthefacts (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:01 am Report abuse
As an independent (Australian) observer (who has visited the islands and Argentina), my judgement of the week just gone is a clear diplomatic win for Hague and the FI Govt Representatives- all 3 presented themselves as professional, calm, reasonable and looking for sensible dialogue- Timmerman's petulant behaviour by comparison could only set Argentina's cause backwards. The 'Falkland islanders don't exist' and 'The FI's will be ours in 20 years' statements in particular seemed calculated to offend and confront, and could not achieve anything other than to harden attitudes against Argentina. By contrast, the sharp focus of the British and FI Govt on the rights of the islanders as real genuine people, and the way every aspect of the arguement was steered towards this point, was skilled diplomacy in action.

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.
6 Gustbury (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:29 am Report abuse
Islanders don't exist,they are Britanics so for us you don't exist!!the dialogue must to be BILATERAL ,without pets!!!!!!
7 nigelpwsmith (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:43 am Report abuse

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.
8 Gustbury (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:53 am Report abuse
That comment can be expected from other subject of slavery and disgusting liar British monarchy!!Malvinas Argentina siempre!!
9 Marcos Alejandro (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:10 am Report abuse
“Falkland Islanders do not exist. They are British citizens living in the Islands”

This Englishman Dick..Sawle is a perfect example of that.
10 Boovis (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:37 am Report abuse
Argentina does not exist! Only Mediterraneans in a stolen land! Please tell me the difference...
11 Marcos Alejandro (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:46 am Report abuse
Friday 8 February 2013

“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.”
12 redpoll (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:52 am Report abuse
@9 And the Falkland Islander ,Alec Betts, mayor of some small town in Cordoba is a perfect example of that. He is a British citizen living in .......?
13 Marcos Alejandro (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:59 am Report abuse
12 redpoll
He is not claiming Argentinean territory for his country of origin.
14 redpoll (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:19 am Report abuse
So what is Alec Betts country of origin pray?
15 Marcos Alejandro (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:25 am Report abuse
You tell me Inglés.
16 dixie rebel (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 04:19 am Report abuse
Islanders, just tell the RGs that you don't want a 25% inflation rate in the Falklands. If you ever want to have something to do with the RGs, is to raise the standard of living of the islanders not to lower it. Now you see , how good it is that the Falklands are British?
17 Liberato (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 05:54 am Report abuse
Justthefact, nigelpwsmith: The self-determination card, is the last excuse the british have to mantain their colonization of the islands. Do you think they have not tried, sovereignty right?, prescription?. Have you ever studied the history of the dispute?. Do you think they used the self-determination card since the beggining of the dispute?. They have nothing left, no new excuses. they cant use the sovereignty rights card again becouse it failed to them.

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?.
18 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:24 am Report abuse
The Falkland islands (must) do nothing, they do not have to it's their islands.
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.
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.
19 Terence Hill (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:49 am Report abuse
17 Liberato

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
20 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:06 am Report abuse
The operative word, being, “conquest” which I would argue is not applicable in these circumstances.
21 Gordo1 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:09 am Report abuse
The malvinistas are totally brainwashed from infancy through official indoctrination which teaches a history of the Falkland Islands consisting of myths, fairy stories, misreporting of historical events and conveniently ignoring actual events such as the Arana Southern Treaty, ratified in 1850, which clearly and unequivocally states that there were no matters of contention between Argentina and Britain. Had the matter of sovereignty of the Falklands/Malvinas been so important article 7 of the treaty would not have been included.
22 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:24 am Report abuse
This could easily be sorted out if the Argentines agreed to take this to the ICJ. Their intransigence to do so, would seem to me to indicate that they are not confident in the success of their claim. They have after all resorted to and frequently threatened to use the courts in their other disputes.
23 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:26 am Report abuse

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?
24 Terence Hill (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:32 am Report abuse
20 reality check

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.
25 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:37 am Report abuse
There are numerous nationalities living on the islands, including Argentines. There are even Argentines on here refering to themselves by the nationalities they now have, have'nt you read sussie, if you have'nt, your the only one! You even have immigrants in your country.

So your point is?
26 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:58 am Report abuse
(25) ......Point being that....:

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?
27 Terence Hill (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:00 am Report abuse
22 reality check

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


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.”

Volume 107 Winter 1985

Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Washington, D.C.
28 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:06 am Report abuse
What? And nobody travels thousands of miles to become citizens of your country? And bring their skills with them. None of them serving in your governments service? None of them working for the benefit of your country?

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?
29 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:14 am Report abuse

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.
30 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:22 am Report abuse
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.
31 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:28 am Report abuse

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
32 Islander1 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:38 am Report abuse
Think- and WHERE did 30 million plus Argentines originally come from?

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?
33 HansNiesund (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:39 am Report abuse

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?
34 Redrow (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:44 am Report abuse
In the 2 months that I have been reading Mercopress I have noticed that not one single Argentine contributor has ever addressed the fact that all of the arguments they use against the islanders apply equally to themselves, or even more so given that the native Amerindians existed on the mainland but not on the Falklands. I realise this point is made repeatedly on virtually every thread by the pro-Islanders but even Think refuses to ever answer or respond to this. Genuine question to Think and the others but how do you deal with this dichotomy in your own heads? Does this not give you any doubts at all?
35 Joe Bloggs (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:00 am Report abuse
34 Redrow

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”
36 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:02 am Report abuse
@7 nigelpwsmith
'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...
37 Redrow (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:32 am Report abuse

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?
38 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:35 am Report abuse
(36) Steve-33-uk
I have, repeatedly expressed that my personal & favourite solution would be one resembling the Åland Islands model.....:

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.

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.
39 ChrisR (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:40 am Report abuse
36 Steve-33-uk

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.
40 Orbit (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:47 am Report abuse
@31 talk us through Timerman's Ukrainian heritage then Think... Was it many generations ago, or was it his Dad that was born there? Yes, I think it was. Now compare that to Jan Cheek and her long lineage of ancestors from the Islands. And Timerman is saying as an 'Argentine' that he has more claim to the Falkland Islands than Jan does? Extraordinary.
41 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 11:14 am Report abuse
Think - if ever their was an oxymoron...

Who cares what you Think, Think. You are irrelevant. Stick to discussing the price of corned beef.
42 Redrow (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 11:15 am Report abuse
@38 Think

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?
43 ElaineB (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 11:37 am Report abuse
I thought I would share this comment from an Argentine I read in an Argentine newspaper. It is the comment of one person but rather underlines some of the attitude we see here from some Argentine contributors. I'll post the translation as this is an English language board:

“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.
44 Bombadier Spoon (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 11:59 am Report abuse
Just ignore think. Any points he raises are laughable and distracting, he has no clear understanding of history or law and his only purpose on this site is ti get a reaction out of people or genuinely try and piss them off. Ignore him for the child he is and discuss things in a adult way with other like minded people.
45 malicious bloke (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:19 pm Report abuse
@38, sounds great. Argentina gets all it's ridiculous territorial demands met in return for a promise they won't subjugate the islanders and force an alien culture and language on them.

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
46 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:21 pm Report abuse
'According kelpers, “the Malvinas issue not resolved this Argentine government”'

'The unexplained failure of foreign policy on the islands'

'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.'

'The Falkland / Malvinas: village or town?'
47 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:52 pm Report abuse
Well it seems tinmans dad was in immigrant from Ukraine what says you STINK
48 Pete Bog (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:54 pm Report abuse
“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.
49 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:59 pm Report abuse
(42) Redrow
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...........
50 Conqueror (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:13 pm Report abuse
@6 Argies exist. There are bacteria everywhere!
@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!
51 malicious bloke (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:28 pm Report abuse
@49, ”A) Britain attacked us in 1806, 1807 and again in 1845-50.”

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.
52 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:45 pm Report abuse
Every single one of them sacked or imprisoned. Ah! the price of failure!
53 andy65 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:00 pm Report abuse
@26 Think, You keep talking about THE ISLANDERS stealing your natural resourses I say Argentines need to challenge there beloved lady leader Crissy Kirchner and her obese son Maximo, these two are the people stealing from Argentines,why don't you ask Kirchner why her wealth as grown so much while in power-oh I forgot Kirchner does not do question and answer sessions with her people.
54 DanyBerger (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:02 pm Report abuse
British are liars and thief...
They have been stealing from all over the world and is part of their DNA.
55 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:05 pm Report abuse
Dick. As anyone seen Alicie.

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!
56 surfer (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:08 pm Report abuse
#49......Point being that....:

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?

57 yankeeboy (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:41 pm Report abuse
Funny, I see Think posting right along with all the UK folks when most of us on this side of the Atlantic are sleeping.

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?
58 Terence Hill (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:58 pm Report abuse
54 DanyBerger

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.
59 Vestige (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:25 pm Report abuse
'Falkland House'.
I bet they got the deed through 'squatters rights'.
60 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:38 pm Report abuse
Possession 9|10ths of the law.
61 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:43 pm Report abuse
@59 don't matter how they got it the point is they HAVE it you don't. LOSERS
62 Redrow (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:43 pm Report abuse
@49 Think

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.
63 Gordo1 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:45 pm Report abuse
@ 49 Think ”A) Britain attacked us in 1806, 1807 and again in 1845-50.”

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.
64 Musky (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 04:33 pm Report abuse
@63 Gordo1
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.
65 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 04:41 pm Report abuse
@62 that's because STINK alias GUZZ lives in Scandinavia, another troll who hasn't been in rgenweener for years
66 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 04:49 pm Report abuse
(62) Redrow

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?
67 andy65 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 05:05 pm Report abuse
@66 Think I hope you are sending money back to Argentina to help feed your fellow countrymen especially those surviving on less than $7 per day.
Would you like to share with us all why you abandoned your homeland?????
68 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 05:08 pm Report abuse

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.
69 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 05:28 pm Report abuse
Think - an oxymoron! With the emphasis on moron!

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?
70 toooldtodieyoung (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 05:59 pm Report abuse
65 slattzzz

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


2/ who isn't a complete retard.
71 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 06:04 pm Report abuse
@66 thank you for letting us know your scandinavian (we all knew anyway Guzz) so WTF has anything got to do with you dickhead, was your dog imported from rgenweener or something. If I remember rightly as your alias GUZZ you were an engineer on a ship running out of Montivideo and then suddenly a student which basically means you are an arsehole with no credence at all and a liar and are in no position to comment on anything to do with the Falkland Islands (there are no Malvinas), grow a pair of bollocks and post under the same name, Sussie makes you look stupid (just).
72 Conqueror (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 06:20 pm Report abuse
@54 Course we are. Remember what Napoleon said? “L'Angleterre est une nation de boutiquiers.” That translates, from the French, as “England is a nation of shopkeepers.” Ever come across a shopkeeper that wasn't a liar and a thief? But WE're GOOD at it! WE know when to talk, when to trade and when to FIGHT. And we're good at fighting as well. Unlike you lot. 11,313 of your “troops” surrendered. Remember? Don't feel bad. When we come back, you too can have “trade”. What does it cost to get you to bend over, slagheap? A peso?
@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!
73 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 06:54 pm Report abuse
@38 Think
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 ?
74 Redrow (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 06:59 pm Report abuse
Ah Scandinavia. Thanks for the Nobel Peace Prize! When is Argentina getting one? Actually don't answer that, I think I know...
75 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 06:59 pm Report abuse
@73 probably not as 1. he lives in scandenavia and 2. He hasn't a clue what's happening in the South atlantic
76 Nostrolldamus the 10th (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:06 pm Report abuse

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).
77 HansNiesund (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:26 pm Report abuse
And still you haven't grasped that what happened in the early 19th century isn't the be all and end all of everything.
78 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:31 pm Report abuse
Hahaha, pathetic reputation at fighting! The real reason you invaded was because you thought we would not fight, you would not have come within a hundred miles of the place if you knew you were going to have to fight a real military.
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?”
79 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:39 pm Report abuse
@76 I tell you what shit for brains try it now if we weren't ready in 82 then we are now with 82,000 battle hardened troops from Afghan and Iraq who would eat you lot for breakfast and then go for a fight, you are a clueless twat, tell you what lets just bring it on and see what happens I think you know though, but afterwards you might just STFU
80 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:56 pm Report abuse
It must be so sad to feel the need to make up your own history.
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.
81 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:16 pm Report abuse
@80 doesn't matter they will change it tomorrow, it will be we invaded rgenweener in 1982 and they won.
82 green_hat (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:33 pm Report abuse
islands or no islands
Argentina is anti-british!
83 Think (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:51 pm Report abuse
(74) Redrow

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…
84 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:55 pm Report abuse
Oh dear, sussie that is really unkind, I am so upset, your good opinion means a lot to us you know. How are we ever going to cope with that, they do not like us. Silly moo, she has us confused with someone who gives a f•••k what they think of us.
85 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:57 pm Report abuse
@83 you got one in 82 as well “white flag prize” Stink just fook off back to rgenweener and support your country properly instead of all your pish on here
86 green_hat (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:00 pm Report abuse
87 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:03 pm Report abuse
@86 Oh sussie give it up you numpty. Go and collect your dole check and sponge some more money off the US citizens
88 green_hat (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:08 pm Report abuse
i don't reside in the USA.
I am argentinian!
89 toooldtodieyoung (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:13 pm Report abuse
76 Tito The Clown Troll

“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?

90 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:17 pm Report abuse
@88 Sussie aka Pro arg, d45, green hat, yoli99, geeagain and the rest of the shite you come out with. Make your mind up last time you lived in the USA now you don't, what should we believe except you are an oxygen thief and a crackhead with a multiple personality disorder who sponges off the US. Good luck being rgenweenian by the way
91 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:22 pm Report abuse
Aye and the whole world saw how they celebrated it too. Didn't get to seem them slinking back, defeated, under the cover of darkness though.

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.
92 Redrow (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:28 pm Report abuse
@84 Think

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?
93 Gordo1 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:42 pm Report abuse

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?
94 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:54 pm Report abuse
@93 it lives in the US
95 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:06 pm Report abuse
It can change it's name, but it can not change the way it posts.
96 slattzzz (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 10:14 pm Report abuse
@95 correct mate. Well only 4 weeks dole cheques till the Vote and rgenweener gets told to fook off big style, sussie will be in a stupor till then and time will ................FLY.....................BY
97 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 11:29 pm Report abuse
@Think - re92 Redrow - re73 my post
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?
98 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 11:44 pm Report abuse
@94 Slattzzz

“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.
99 Nostrolldamus the 10th (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 02:06 am Report abuse

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.
100 DanyBerger (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 02:14 am Report abuse
@Troy Tempest

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?
101 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 03:35 am Report abuse

Wasn't addressing you, but here we go...

“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.

“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!
102 Nostrolldamus the 10th (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 03:50 am Report abuse
You got conned, not surprising.

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.
103 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 03:55 am Report abuse


Then it must have been “Argentine”!

Silly Troll :-D
104 DanyBerger (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 04:18 am Report abuse
@ Troy Tempest

“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.”


Do you have a flag?
105 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 04:22 am Report abuse


lost interest, now.
106 lsolde (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 07:03 am Report abuse
@38 Think,
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
107 HansNiesund (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:12 am Report abuse

Only if you're not aware of anything else that has happened since the early 19th century. You do get the news there, right?
108 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:35 am Report abuse
'William Hague: we'll stand up to Argentine bullies over Falklands - William Hague has accused Argentina of “bullying and threatening” behaviour and vowed never to give away control of the islands.
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....'

'Colonialism has its moments - Comparing the Falklands with the Israeli Occupied Territories was a step too far. Plus: unconventional spirits, and becoming an adjective'
109 Malvinero1 (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:50 am Report abuse
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?
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?
110 reality check (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 10:16 am Report abuse
@100 Nosey

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
111 Redrow (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 10:26 am Report abuse
@109 Malv01

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?
112 golfcronie (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 11:14 am Report abuse
The following is a fact that cannot be distbuted
113 Musky (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 11:40 am Report abuse
@111 redrow
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
114 Redrow (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 12:07 pm Report abuse
@113 Musky.

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.
115 reality check (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 01:23 pm Report abuse
Independence and if desired, membership of the Commonwealth is certainly in the future for the islands, if that is what they choose. That is after all what this is all about, the right to self determination.
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.
116 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 01:38 pm Report abuse
More drivel from the RG realm of fantasy...

“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....'
117 reality check (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 01:52 pm Report abuse
Man I loved this bit.

“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.
118 Gordo1 (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 02:05 pm Report abuse
William Hague is so succinct!

Great statement!
119 nigelpwsmith (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 03:31 pm Report abuse
Yet another masterstroke in diplomacy. Hague gets the message out that the Falkland Islanders will stand up to bullies and Britain will stand with them.

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.

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.
120 Shed-time (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 04:39 pm Report abuse

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.
121 yankeeboy (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 05:04 pm Report abuse
When your enemy is committing suicide let them do it.
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.
122 honoria (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 05:21 pm Report abuse
If the RGs really wanted the Falklands they would already be here. The Islands were wide open for immigration for 200 years. RGs could have bought farms, started businesses, got jobs, raised their families, swamped our British culture with their own brand of Hispano-fascism. But they didn't want to.

So, dear RGs, where were you? Of course, it is too late now. We like things as they are.
123 reality check (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 05:28 pm Report abuse
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.
124 Conqueror (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 06:20 pm Report abuse
@76 Which version of history are you using? The argie version or the truth? In 1806 and 1807 Britain attacked a Spanish colony. Not unreasonable since Britain was at war with Spain. Nothing to do with you lot. And in 1826 all we seem to have done is to mediate the end of a war and arrange the independence and freedom of Uruguay. Self-determination, right? And what was wrong with 1845? You started it by impeding trade. Britain was only supporting France. So we started by defeating and seizing your “navy”. Bit of a regular occurrence, eh? After that, it seems the only troops landed were Italian. Chap called Garibaldi. So why aren't you whingeing about the French and Italians?
@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!
125 bob_99 (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 06:31 pm Report abuse
islands or no islands
Argentina is anti-british
126 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 06:36 pm Report abuse

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.
127 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 07:56 pm Report abuse

“Which version of history are you using? The argie version or the truth?”

LOL , good one Conq.!!
128 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 08:25 pm Report abuse

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.
129 Shed-time (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 08:56 pm Report abuse
@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.

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.
130 slatz (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:08 pm Report abuse
@121 yankee nobody aka troy tender testicles tempest
whatever happens in Argentina is none of your business!
131 reality check (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:20 pm Report abuse
Sussie Alert, take cover!!!!!!!!!!!!
132 slatz (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:34 pm Report abuse
@103 troy tender testicles
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.
133 redpoll (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:47 pm Report abuse
Conks Glad you brought up Garibaldi as it illustrates how much the nascent independent South American nations owe to foriegners, particularly Brits helped the revolutionary armed services in thier struggle for independence
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
134 toooldtodieyoung (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:59 pm Report abuse
128 Monkeymagic

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
135 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 10:17 pm Report abuse

”@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.
136 nigelpwsmith (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 10:27 pm Report abuse
@128 and 129

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:

or this:

or this:

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.
137 Shed-time (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 12:31 am Report abuse
@136 I'd agree, if, and only if it didn't involve stepping away from the current policy of 'mature diplomacy' and slipping into adopting the same kind of megaphone diplomacy that is a central part of herding the unthinking argentinian.

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.
138 jon and johnie (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 12:39 am Report abuse
islands or no islands
Argentina is anti-british!
Afuera de mi pais ingleses ODIOSOS!
139 Shed-time (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 12:41 am Report abuse
@138 Argentina is anti-success
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?
140 jon and johnie (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 12:49 am Report abuse

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!
141 Shed-time (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 12:57 am Report abuse
@140 No one worries about Argentina, they chose to be like this when they ascribed to Peronism-Hitlerism which delivers them endless years of FAIL. We're just here to diagnose from a forensic standpoint. As one would be interested in abnormal psychology, looking at what makes some people have a dysfunctionality, it's also interesting to look at Argentina and it's cycles of nonsense.

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?
142 jon and johnie (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 01:09 am Report abuse
Argentina economy is for argentinians to worry...not the UK!


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
He should break diplomatic relations wiht the SA country
the sooner the better
143 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 01:29 am Report abuse
@142 Shed-time

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.

144 jon and johnie (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 01:43 am Report abuse
@143 troy tender testicles tempest

the UK wants diplomatic relations with Argentina because the UK
LOVES Argentina!
145 andrea rodriguez (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 03:07 am Report abuse
poor troy tempest!
146 Leiard (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 03:54 am Report abuse

poor sussie Nostrolldamus Retard the 1st
147 Malvinero1 (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 04:03 am Report abuse
The following is a fact that cannot be distbuted
THis only WILL STREGHTEN Argentina's position..Poor deluded imperialist..FINISHED,economically and morally.Stupidity everywhere..
148 Gordo1 (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 08:38 am Report abuse
It is absolute nonsense for the UK to consider breaking diplomatic relations with Argentina. This would be an act that would change nothing.

The vast majority of argentinos have more serious matters to worry them, not least being the disappearance of democracy in their beautiful country.
149 lsolde (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 09:48 am Report abuse
@147 Malvinero1,
Enough of your shennanigans, Malvi.
Go to your room, right now.
When your father comes home, he will give you a sound thrashing.
150 Simon68 (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 02:33 pm Report abuse
122 honoria (#)
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.
151 GFace (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 02:43 pm Report abuse
@147. So the referendum will strengthen your position. Sorry dude, 1000x0 is still 0. Or as Bill Cosby (when he was still funny) said of cocaine... “...It enhances your personality... But what if you're an @$$h0£€?”
152 green_68 (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 08:43 pm Report abuse
@150 Simon68Zhivago aka ISOLDE!
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!
153 golfcronie (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 11:36 pm Report abuse
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
154 Captain P0ppy (#) Feb 12th, 2013 - 12:16 am Report abuse
fancy pancy limeys, easy going to get your sorrow arses out of US-soil back in day

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!


Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!