Wednesday, February 20th 2013 - 05:13 UTC

Malvinas: read what the real world is saying

By Fernando Petrella (*) - The following article by an Argentine former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs was published as a column in the Buenos Aires media. The following reproduction in English is not necessarily literal but tries keep to its spirit as much as possible.

 What should really concern is the distance the US has taken from Argentina, argues Petrella

An efficient diplomacy must interpret the messages which the international system transmits and adapt them to its possibilities so that it can boost its interests in a sustainable way. Locking in and speculating politically with positions of ‘principles’ weakens those same arguments and on taking distance from reality, leads the most just causes to failure.

Documents recently declassified by the foreign Office on the Malvinas conflict are a tragic example of a diplomacy distanced from reality which, representing a military government, arrogant and blind, led two countries historically friends to war, destroying what was achieved during years of laborious negotiations to resolve the sovereignty dispute, Those negotiations anticipated a satisfactory solution for both sides which, reflecting the international reality of the moment, showed the UK more compliant  and the US willing to help diplomatically, which it did during the course of war. The US support to Argentina remained standing since the end of the conflict until now.

Leaving aside the abyssal distance, in heart and form, which separate us from those tragic experiences, currently the international system is also showing indications which if correctly read will enable us to react with fairness, with no over-acting and above all without again falling in the trap of impatience, the worst enemy of efficiency. In effect periodically the UK underlines before the UN that those territories under its administration, including the Malvinas Islands, already enjoy a degree of self government which makes it unnecessary for the UN involvement. Although these statements can be rebuked and taken isolated should not cause concern, if the March referendum in the Islands is taken together with statements form Ban Ki-moon saying that “people in certain conditions must be able to have some capacity to decide about their future”, and the recent visit by Hillary Clinton to (independent) Kosovo and her message to Serbia, plus the recent cooling of support from the US to Argentina, they constitute four powerful signals that in no way must we sidestep.

Of all those factors the one which most impacts is the referendum. However the Islanders have been expressing themselves towards gradual autonomy sustainedly since the end of the conflict. They have expressed their points of view periodically. This is the case, for example, when the UK proposed Argentina a lease-back in 1977, and the same with each of the provisional accords subscribed since the re-establishment of diplomatic relations in 1989, to the resignation of President De la Rúa. Thus there doesn’t seem to be much anew. On the other hand the terms of the referendum are ample enough and leave options open. Returning to an association climate with Argentina is not discarded. It is not the formality of the referendum that should concern but rather that again we do things wrong, and we grant the referendum and its eventual result a display and entity which suits nobody. To start with the referendum does not affect the UN resolutions still in force, we must remember that not all International Law is contained in the UN charter or in the resolutions adopted in that context.

What we need from our side (Argentina) are imaginative actions, and even transgressor ones such as retaking the active presence of Argentina in the disputed area and not elude non official contacts with the Islanders since whatever they reply could seriously affect the stability in the Southern Cone and further delay the chances of cooperation, which are needed by all sides, and unavoidable in the mid-term. Denying the presence of Islanders in the British delegation is a counterproductive back step which also means cutting eroding sovereignty from our counterpart.     

What should really concern is the distance the US has taken from us. The role of the world’s leading power was of great help for the re-establishment of relations with the UK in 1989, preserving intact the terms of the sovereignty dispute, and further on supporting Argentine involvement in the security, communications and economy of the Islands as well as establishing the seat of the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat in Buenos Aires, strengthening our role as key player in the South Atlantic and austral zones.

To imagine that the main ally of the UK in the hemisphere is not interested in the dispute would be a very serious misreading of reality. What seems urgent and necessary is to ensure that that interest has not changed and that it continues to support bilateral negotiations between the sides even when the conflict, because of its nature recognizes the existence of other ‘players’ such would be the case of the Islanders. That should be Argentina’s priority with the White House.

Clearly the international system is sending us messages and opportunities. But to take advantage of those opportunities we have to ‘refresh’ our arguments and adapt them to a globalized world, of shared responsibilities and imaginative solutions. The criteria of the sixties could be read today with a different spirit. The majority of those who will have to solve the sovereignty dispute will have been born after UN Assembly Resolution 2065 (1965). They will not have known the Cold War, or the East-West conflict or colonialism. Calling the UK ‘colonialist’ distances us from the negotiation and does not reflect the attitude of our neighbours and associates towards that country with which they have deep strategic and economic links.

United Nations has sustained and with reason that the Malvinas question is a special and particular case and thus has nothing to do with the human and economic miseries of ‘colonialism’ which with extreme flippancy we attribute to the UK. Likewise those who have knowledge of the colonial phenomenon are aware that no situation, no dispute, no matter how violent or complex, was resolved without previously ensuring guarantees, consenting privileges and designing joint projects for the future among the different actors. Thus with realism we should urgently create the conditions to resume discussions with the UK as was proposed by the President before the UN and during her last tour of Asia. Resumption of negotiations does not mean ignoring that the other side could also have some reason and that the solution must collect that circumstance. It also implies reactivating with a big country vision, the associative attitude towards the Islands without been swamped in the search of “symmetries” that will make even more difficult the approach.

Summing up, it is a matter of supporting with clear and coherent positions the conciliatory message of President Cristina Fernandez, who with unique frankness has called for dialogue with no pre-conditions. That attitude reflects a correct reading of the messages presented by the international system. Not assuming them in these moments of change and opportunities, and insist frenetically with confrontation can only lead once again to scuttle the possibility of putting on track the most important territorial conflict of our hemisphere.

(*) Petrela is a lawyer and notary from the University of Buenos Aires. He also has a degree from the International Public Policies School, John Hopkins University. He was Deputy Foreign minister with Guido Di Tella and ambassador before the UN. Currently he is a member of CARI, the Argentine Council on International Relations.
 

212 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. Comments should refer to article. Thank you.

1 Think (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 05:24 am Report abuse
TWIMC

Article says...:
“The following reproduction in English is not necessarily literal but tries keep to its spirit as much as possible”

I say...:
“...as much as possible?”
”Possible for whom?
Chuckle chuckle...
2 reality check (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 05:32 am Report abuse
No preconditions and no islanders either! That's a good one.
3 Anglotino (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 05:47 am Report abuse
It was an interesting article that made me nod my head in several places and shake it in others.

But unfortuntely it was all undone at the very end:
“Summing up, it is a matter of supporting with clear and coherent positions the conciliatory message of President Cristina Fernandez, who with unique frankness has called for dialogue with no pre-conditions.”

The VERY LAST thing that CFK has been is “conciliatory”. And to then say that she has shown “unique frankness” and “dialogue with no pre-conditions” is an outright lie.

It would seem that even Argentines who attempt to take this issue in a new direction veer off track quickly. Which reminds me of an article I read last week:
www.buenosairesherald.com/article/124164/cristina-goes-walkabout

Walkabout has a very specific meaning to Australians so it caught my eye. However it became a very interesting read, especially in conjunction with an article that says CFK's “ attitude reflects a correct reading of the messages presented by the international system”.
4 agent999 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 05:51 am Report abuse
“the conciliatory message of President Cristina Fernandez, who with unique frankness has called for dialogue with no pre-conditions.”

Feb 2013
“The Falkland Islands will be back under Argentine control within ”20 years“, the country's foreign minister Hector Timerman said.”
5 LEPRecon (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 06:53 am Report abuse
@3 Anglotino

I agree with your post. Most disappointing in the fact that he couldn't or wouldn't criticise the Argentine Governments monumental mismanagement of the whole Falklands 'issue'.

In fact, he mentions the resolutions, but has obviously never read any of them, as if he had he would've known that the rights and wishes of the Falkland Islanders must be taken into account during any negotiations.

And then when the UK agrees to talk, taking into account the Islanders wishes for representatives of their government to be present, suddenly the Argentines get upset, throw their teddy's in a corner and throw up preconditions to any 'discussions'. Of course the Argentines have always had the biggest precondition, and that's written into their constitution, about full sovereignty.

The fact that they did this, not in Argentina where the Gestapo control most of the media, but in the UK in front of the International Press, who all went away and reported how the UK were willing to talk, but Argentina wasn't.

That sent a message to every country in the world about how Argentina wasn't actually 'interested' in talking, or in the human rights of the Falkland Islanders or in following international law.

In fact, Hectors little visit to the UK, was probably the best thing he could've done to support the Islanders.

By showing the world their true face, Argentina has ensured that no country in their right minds would allow Argentina control of the Falkland Islands.

Every time Timerman opened his mouth to accuse the UK of something, it was so blatantly obvious that he was actually talking about Argentina's desires that he was projecting onto the UK.

UK only wants the oil - which actually translates as “Argentina wants the oil.”
UK is not interested in dialogue - which translates as “Argentina doesn't want to talk.”
And so on and so forth.

They must honestly believe that the international community is as gullible as their own brainwashed masses.
6 Redrow (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:03 am Report abuse
The guy was a diplomat. So he can't say the interesting (and difficult for Argentine ears) things he said and then not brown nose CDK at the end or he will be accused of treachery. When you strip away the stuff merely said to keep him from having a series of unexpected & unwarranted tax investigations, the main thrust is that Argentina faces a confluence of serious diplomatic challenges, which I don't think too many would disagree with!
7 Lord Ton (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:14 am Report abuse
The devil is in the detail ..... and the detail is unintelligible !
8 reality check (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:19 am Report abuse
How's this for a precis, “The current Argentine strategy is not working, we got it wrong again.”
9 Gordo1 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:37 am Report abuse
He seems to contradict himself several times but basically he is saying that Argentina must change tack and start to respect the views of the islanders. I think that is what all of us would desire.

However, the big question is this - if, eventually, the dilemma is concluded favourably for Argentina exactly what are their proposals for the future of the archipelago? Will thousands of argentinos “up sticks” to colonise the islands? They seem reluctant to leave their urban paradises to settle their vast and remote regions as it is - the Falkland Islands have nothing to offer them!

The malvinistas don't seem qualified to raise sheep!
10 Musky (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:51 am Report abuse
'Clear and coherent message' from KFC, come on, she's a witlesss calamity for the malvinas cause, a false cause.

The article talks of 'refreshing the arguments', well come on again, the arguments are untrue, the claims are a joke (same continental shelf, distance from each country, birds flying in/out of argentina to the islands, events of 1833).
11 MrFlagpole (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:53 am Report abuse
Who wrote the last paragraph? Seems completely out of context with the rest of the article.

Or do Argentine journalists always have to praise CFK? To avoid electrodes to the genitals.
12 nicklyne (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:03 am Report abuse
Reading between the lines, and ignoring his “diplomatic” nod to CFK, he's basically saying that it will take at least another 30 years of an intelligent strategy toward the Falklands before Argentina is even close to a deal, which given the current administration's approach is very unlikely. As he says, Argentina is its own worst enemy in dealing with this issue.
13 kelperabout (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:26 am Report abuse
For someone who has a degree he is rather unsure of his method in attempting to get his point across. It is just another attempt so close to what is now a reality to disrupt what the Islanders are about to do and that is tell the world that we DO NOT want to be involved in any Argentine sovereignty relations period. When is people like the writer Fernando Petrella ever going to realize that Argentina has done nothing to make us want to accept their culture. The only existence Argentina knows is bullying and lying to their people and the world.

The issue now is more about what the Falkland Islands people are about to develope and that is OIL. 30 years ago it was more about stabilizing Argentina’s political uprising. This is still going to be a concern for them again as Islanders start pumping oil.

Fernando Petrella suggests many things and among them starting to recognize that we are a people but it is way too late for that. He ramble on about us not being familiar with the cold war etc.etc. We are not stupid and well versed in how the world is working. What we will never do is forgive the Argentine invaders who in 1982 turned our peaceful lives upside down. Now they complain about a British force established here to ensure that those thugs do not try it on again.
Wake up there is no militarization of the zone as you put it. These soldiers are here to protect a sovereign right of a people. Argentina on the other hand put 10's of thousand of soldiers on the islands in 1982 yet that by their thinking is quite Ok. Grow up for Christ sake who are you trying to kid.
14 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:57 am Report abuse
I think for the brainwashed Argentines to finally accept that they will never get the Falklands, this kind of piece is necessary. Argentines must believe:

1) they were right to claim the islands for the last 50 years
2) Their fabricated history is the the truth
3) Something has changed which means they need to change their position
4) that change is somebdy elses fault
5) CFK is always right.

So, by claiming that the US recognizes kosovo, that Ban Ki Moon recognises self determination, and that Britain isnt behaving like a colonialist anymore, he is trying to point to changes which might allow the Argentines to change their position yet save face.

I can imagine future rhetoric, where the Argentine government professes that it was its actions that ended British colonialism in the South Atlantic and got “freedom” for the islanders....

chuckle chuckle
15 Musky (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:07 am Report abuse
@14 Monkeymagic
Interesting thought in your last paragraph. Perhaps then, the referendum is the ideal opportunity for the argentines to save face?

The article also says
”What we need from our side (Argentina) are imaginative actions, and even transgressor ones such as retaking the active presence of Argentina in the disputed area ” - does this not mean invade?

This article tries to be all things to all men (all argentines). Trying not to upset any argentines and get himself in hot water.
16 Martin Woodhead (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:17 am Report abuse
Lawyer speak possibly says trying to ignore the islanders not a bright move.
But he's a lawyer could mean anything.
17 Idlehands (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:18 am Report abuse
I can't see it ever happening simply because the Falklands will become one of the highest income per capita regions of the world. Why would they then vote to be absorbed by Argentina?

It's like the proverbial turkey voting for Christmas.

Argentines seem to have it in their head that “one day” it is inevitable. They should just give up.
18 Doveoverdover (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:28 am Report abuse
@15 No, it means licensing fishing and oil exploration in the EEZ and then enforcing it. Nothing aggressive at first, just letters to current fishing and exploration companies notifying them of Argentina's licensing regime and asking them to pay up.
19 reality check (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:29 am Report abuse
There is historical precedence for the “one day” theory.

I refer of course to thee Israelites and Jerusalem.

Which means, Argentina can look forward to sovereignty around the year
3833 and not a year before.

Just a thought.
20 Huntsman Extraordinaire (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:39 am Report abuse
This article WOULD be ok, except as the Falklanders who visited the UK the same as timmer-70s specky big fish lips-man pointed out, they have no wish to negotiate with the RGs, only to have a stern word and basically give them a ticking off.

You don't just need to recognise the people, you need to recognise the public opinion of that people; which in regards to any future long/mid or short term hand over of soverigenty seems to be a very polite and yet strong F&@K OFF!

He speaks as if Argentina still has a case. Face facts and jog on!

See you in 20 years!
21 Musky (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:56 am Report abuse
@18 Dove (whom ever)
The letters to the oil companies are like water off a ducks back, May last year CFK promised action...and nothing. The licensed fishing area is controlled by the islanders. Anybody wanting fish there can just get a licence from the falklanders. There is nothing in argentina's non-military armoury that has any kind of leverage, not even words from any potential latin american pope can bypass legitimacy and international law. Argentines will continue beat their heads against a wall for their lack of progress, ultimately no progress because their cause is false, unjust, incorrect and above all non-sensical. Concentrate on what is real and not a pipe dream.
22 toxictaxitrader2 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:56 am Report abuse
In the modern world you cant overturn the wishes of a settled population(180 years) or expel them, the Argentine ruling classes know this!
Its all a smokescreen to distract the gullible masses from the real problems!
23 Doveoverdover (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:03 am Report abuse
@21 whatever. I wonder if you wouldn't benefit from pausing to engage your brain before typing. You asked if an invasion would be the embodiment of his threat to transgress. I said there are less violent approaches that could be adopted and gave an example or two. You then rant back. Goodbye.
24 lsolde (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:13 am Report abuse
Fernando old mate,
The time for talking has long passed.
We do NOT want to be part of Argentina & you have NO RIGHTS here.
We are quite happy to swim along peacefully without you.
But thank you for your efforts, but no thanks.♥
25 txiki (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:33 am Report abuse
First step for Argentina would be to change the constitution to remove the offending statements on the Falklands. Until then, they are not going to be taken seriously.
26 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:45 am Report abuse
What a convoluted tome? If this was written in the equivalent of plain English, it could be just one or two sentences.

At least someone in the Rg FO recognises that they are going about things in totally the wrong way.

Not long now for the final nail in the Rg coffin, then we will have the scenario of the sulking child who is bound to throw some of its toys out of the pram along with empty threats and insults. Just like the trolls really.
27 bigron (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:35 am Report abuse
Today, Argentina is again a rather sad demagogy. Yesterday, Argentina was a rather sad demagogy.
It is said that total power corrupts. Political movements in Argentina have always been corrupt and attempted to dominate not just politics, but its democratic institutions and not least, ignore or modify its constitution for political gain. Sadly, these well-worn tactics are used by both the right and left, and translate to a pseudo democracy. A significant, poorly uneducated underclass embraces the demagogues since the advent of Radicalism in 1916. Thereafter a pendulum has swung from the right to left between extreme ''political movements''. It used to stop dead for military rule, when the people got sick and tired of more of the same from politicians seem able to fool most of the people all of the time. When people had enough of the military they would generally vote the same people in different colors back into the lower house, senate and government. All over again politicians and upper to middle ranking officials, and not least the judiciary would rob the state and when the state coffers were dry, rob the people again. And so the cycle went on and on. Kircherism is about to reach the dry coffer stage of this process. Holding elections does not automatically give you true democracy in a country like Argentina and anyone who thinks so is on drugs. Argentina has always been one of the most corrupt societies in the world and its social and political histories, written, re-written and corrupted by its victors make for an often confused and misled people who are easily fooled. Add to that Argentina’s chequered and unfortunate history - embracing fascism whilst the Britain and the free world fought for life; Argentina in Jack-boots again from 1976 to 1983; the invasion of the Falklands and war; - (SORRY I HAVE TO POST THIS IN TWO THREADS)
28 Idlehands (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:40 am Report abuse
Carry on
29 bigron (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:48 am Report abuse
followed by the ineptness of Radicalism and then the dirtiness and corruption that is modern Peronism; and now Peromisms current schism, Kirchnerism, that has evolved under Cristina in ways that were unimaginable – just who are these people kidding?
Cristina is again betraying the people, time will prove me right. She will lose power in 2015 and then the next government will inherit a ‘’black hole’’ and falter and the people will look back with their ‘’rose colored specs’’ and ‘’national amnesia’’ and do it all over again. I say again, time will make me right
This horrible ‘’state’’ betrays its people again and again and to my mind has no right to subject anyone else to the terrible hardships endured by my Argentine family and friends – that’s not until it sorts itself out.
Only then should Argentina start talking to the Kelpers and not Britain. This is NOT a bilateral matter. Whilst I fully understand that proximity would make the Falklands more Argentine than British, that is the only logical claim that Argentina has over the Falklands.
30 years is not long enough for the Kelpers to fall in love with Argentina, even though the British fall in love with this amazing country and its people again and again. I am one of them.
30 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 12:04 pm Report abuse
Is that Ronny Biggs - oh no he's dead!
31 bigron (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 12:07 pm Report abuse
NO, but I came across him once in a bar in Rio - what a tosser. And, a criminal. He got no less than he deserved and the same stupidity of the British public to fall in love with this anti-hero demonstrates that our peoples are not so different.
32 Redrow (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 12:49 pm Report abuse
@18 DoD

I agree with you that that appears to be what the writer is saying. But would you agree that his suggestion is unlikely to help the Argentine cause? Argentina desperately needs to gain some credibility and I don't see how selling rights to something they don't, in reality, own will help achieve that. I was trying to be fair to the guy but although he has produced a much more realistic analysis of the current situation that normal (for an Argentine official) his actual recommendations are no less counter-productive than anything else they try. Argentina simply has to bring themselves to deal with the Islanders, and thus attempting to sell the Islanders fishing rights or oil rights would be yet another beligerent act that would also make them look even more foolish internationally than they do at present. Do you agree?
33 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 12:53 pm Report abuse
Thanks Ron, its so refreshing to read an independent perspective on Argentina. Having visited the country a couple of times and the Falklands and South Georgia too its perplexing to us Britishers at the level of hate and bile displayed by the Trolls on here. I have travelled all over the world and wherever I have been the vast majority of people I met have been welcoming and lovely. I found Argentina no different on a personal level. But there seems to be a serious national flaw that prevents them from governing themselves effectively. This FO guy seems to be a bit more realistic though and seems to appreciate that the way forward is to woo the islanders, not treat them with contempt like the current Muppet government. Even then it will take a couple of generations for real trust cooperation and accord to develop
34 Condorito (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 01:13 pm Report abuse
Nice summary bigron.
35 Conqueror (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 01:37 pm Report abuse
@1 “As close as possible” for ignorant, uneducated, brainwashed, lying argies, of course.
@18 I wonder if you understand what EEZ means? In the case of the Falkland Islands, it means “Exclusive Economic Zone”. If the Islanders were to permit the cesspit to engage in “licensing fishing and oil exploration”, it would be giving in. They have no need to do that. Let the cesspit change its “constitution”, end all its illegal measures against all BOTs and admit all its lies and the Islanders may start to trust it. In a hundred years or so. And let it ask for all its war dead to be repatriated and the cesspit war cemetary to be closed.
36 Viscount Falkland (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 01:37 pm Report abuse
Waffle ,Waffle,R-Slickham and legal-speak....nothing changes and he has wasted alot of his time and more importantly mine !
37 bigron (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 01:54 pm Report abuse
I would like to see my countrymen stop the racism - we are not like that as a nation - we are proud democrats with a multi-racial culture. I would like to see the Argentines wake up and smell the coffee - for F sake stop drinking the Kool-Aid. We can agree to disagree and just get on with our lives. Kelpers - stand firm - international law no doubt will uphold your right to self-determination - precedents exist. The war of words comes from the ineptness of two governments with neither political nous nor stamina. CFK and DC are footnotes in our proud histories and we should be allies and remember they engineer this war of words for their own selfish reasons. The time is right for Argentina to court the city of London all over again and it's certainly time for Britain to get it's money on the nose when Her Royal Highness departs and is hopefully put away with the rest of her motley crew for corruption. One day, the Kelpers will need closer ties with the mainland - the Uruguayans also sick of being aligned and dependent on their wayward neighbour realises this and looks like getting-in first - stupid Argentina! The current government of Argentina has few friends and looks to make new ones that increase isolation in the real world. Tinman who ran away like a school girl during the dictatorship came back to sell his own people down the river - no surprise. His powerful extended family in the USA despise him. They are moments and time goes on - please people moderation - we are civilised peoples.
38 screenname (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 01:56 pm Report abuse
I think, while this article seems quite reasonable compared with the childlike rants we are used to from many Argentinians, at the end of the day this gentleman is of the opinion that since Argentina wants the Islands in the South Atlantic it should get the islands in the South Atlantic. The fact he is willing to be a bit more patient about it does not make a huge difference to the big picture unless the FIG have a plan to re-educate Argentina. Or the FIG could try and convert the Island population to Islam because, as he pointed out, that would tempt the US to back the FI to counter their actions in other Islamic areas. If they can back an area of Serbia to claim self determination (which I am pretty sure is against the UN charter or we would see most of Africa break up), then they should have no problem with an island population hundreds of miles away from their imperialist neighbours.
39 bigron (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 02:08 pm Report abuse
It's a poor translation because it misses many of the important nuances - MERCORUBBISH.
40 LEPRecon (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 02:16 pm Report abuse
@38 - screenname

Kosovo proved that Self-detmination of a population trumps the 'territorial' integrity arugment.

So, for instance, if the people of Texas (for some reason) decided to become an independent country, and voted for it with an overwhelming majority (as happened in Kosovo), then their Self-determination to be their own country would trump the USA's territorial integrity. The USA could only do one of two things. Let them leave, and be amicable about it. Try to force them to stay by sending in troops, and risking civil war (doesn't everyone in Texas have a gun?), and then other States objecting to the use of military intervention on 'their own' people, and also threatening and deciding to cede.

That's the quickest way to destroy your own country.

Just like Scotland having a referendum on independence. If the UK government were to refuse that referendum due to 'territorial integrity arguments, you realise that they would have already lost. Let the people decide. That is true democracy.

In the 21st century, it is getting more and more impossible to use that argument to hold land against the will of the people who live there.

Eventually this will filter through to even the Argentinians, although it hasn't yet.

Although Mr Petrella is saying more concillatory things, his actual goal is the same as all the others. To get the Falkland Islands, through hook or through crook, even if it means crushing the Islanders under foot.

What they want doesn't even enter the minds of most Argentinians, despite their 'oft' quoted UNGA resolutions, that ALL say the wishes of the Islanders have to be taken into consideration in ANY sovereignty negotiations.

Argentina should give up flogging this dead horse and look inwards to the very real problems they are facing.

Too many Argentine governments have pointed to the Falklands and told the population that only IF Argentina had control of the 'Malvinas' ALL of their problems would magically disappear.
41 Simon68 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 02:43 pm Report abuse
Hello all,

Fernando Petrella was Deputy Foreign Minister to Guido di Tella, of teddy bear fame, and it should be noticed that in this article he didn't mention once: 1833, implanted population, pirates, squatters, militarization of the South Atlantic, or any of the other malvinista key words we've come to expect from Timerman and his troupe.

We also must remember that this is written in diplo-speak, what he is really saying is that Argentine “diplomacy” has taken the wrong road and should immediately rethink its strategy.

His mention of Cristina's message and her frankness was a brilliant bit of diplomatic blackmail, indicating to the Argentine FO that the only way to get ourselves back into the real world is by being truly “diplomatic” and talking to the world movers and shakers without making any preconditions.

My personal opinion is that it is far too late WRT the Falklands question, but it could be helpfull to get us back in touch with the real world. Well done Mr. Petrella!!!!!!!
42 Raven (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 02:44 pm Report abuse
@40 LEP

I'm surprised that this worn out old magic trick still gets fallen for, it doesn't get any better no matter how many times it is deployed.

Here is a young Hector Tinman, practising his superior wit, skill and charms... www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-cR88io34o
43 redpoll (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:13 pm Report abuse
@41 Simon I thought it was quite a good article apart from the curtsey to CFK in the last paragraph. Shows that there are still afew realists who can discuss relationships with the Falklanders rationally
The Falklanders have stated time and time again that they are willing to discuss matters of common interest such as fisheries and oil exploration but on a basis of nation to nation
Bit difficult when the other party denies the very existence of the Falkland Islanders though isnt it?
44 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:18 pm Report abuse
Ron, perhaps you could translate some of the important parts better. Even in English the above text is hard to follow?
45 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:22 pm Report abuse
“The following reproduction in English is not necessarily literal but tries keep to its spirit as much as possible.”

This is why monolinguals always are losers in the new global game. This is why the Anglosphere is set for a precipitous decline (which has already started notice how the USA and UK are in all categories plunging compared to 20 years ago).

@43

No chance Argentina will ever sit down and discuss fishing or oil again.

Forget South America falklanders, and finish your airports and bridges to Europe and Africa.
46 axel arg (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:31 pm Report abuse
The article is very interesting, however, i would like to add some comments.
Respecting the u. s. a.'s support, it has alwasy been tepid, in fact it has always called both nations to sit and dialogue about this question, that was what was expressed by hillary clinton when she met c. f. k. at the government house in 2010.
Regarding including the islanders in the conversations for the sovereignty, as long as u. n. resolutions don't include the govt. from the islands as a third part, i'm not sure wether our government should include them or not. Anyway, although c. f. k's govt. decided not to include them, it wouldn't mean that their wishes will be defenetly ignored by our govt., due to c. f. k. read last year before the decolonization committe, a secret proposal treated between arg. and the u. k. which respected the wishes of the islanders of remaining under british gotv., and argentina's sovereignty rights, that proposal was based on a shared sovereignty. In my opinion that was a strong messagge for the govt. from the islands, and for the pro imperialist sepoys that we have in the mainland, who post comments in this forum, and love repeating all the time that for arg. there is just one outcome. However, at the same time that those hipocrites parrot that stupid idea, they defend the posture of the govt. from the islands, every time it's members manifest that they are disposed to discuss about different issues with arg. but not about the sovereignty, as i asked in others oportunities, isn't pretendig just one outcome too?, it's just shows the colonial hipocersy of people who have such a mediocre thought.
Respecting the words by banki moon, i recommend you to search on line the interview that he gave for tiempo argentino (leftist, and pro kircherist newspaper), which was published partially by la nación (conservative and pro imperialits), if you search it on line, you'll see that his posture was very contradictory.
47 Musky (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:38 pm Report abuse
@45 Nosebag
Engish is ubiquitous, taught in every school in every country of the world. It is the business language of the world, the communications language, the language of the computer and the web based. Taught in scandinavian schools because their neighbouring countries have very difficult languages. Taught in all chinese and indian schools. I guess Argentina probably teaches iranian or north korean.

Not talk about oil or fishing, good, your loss.
48 Shed-time (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:45 pm Report abuse
@45 Monolingual does not mean 'cannot speaking spanish'. Most people who aren't poor cannot speak spanish. They speak other useful languages.
49 Huntsman Extraordinaire (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 03:53 pm Report abuse
@45

I speak English, French, German and some Italian... Opps, sorry; I don't speak Spanish, I must therefore be a monolingual!

Dumkopft *slaps head*
50 LEPRecon (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 04:00 pm Report abuse
@46 - axel

I wouldn't count on Hilary Clinton's support. She has been dropped from the Obama admistration like a bad habit after the 'Bengharzi incident', where the US ambassador was murdered. She has been fighting for her political life, and is losing.

All of the UNGA resolutions say the wishes of the Falkland Islanders must be taken into consideration. They do not wish to discuss sovereignty, and they do not wish to be Argentinian.

Therefore the UK is respecting the wishes of the Falkland Islanders, and the UN resolutions. Isn't it about time Argentina did too?

Forget the 'secret negotiations' they were buried when the Falkland Islanders found out about them, and kabooshed them.

There were further kabooshed when Argentina decided to break off negotiations, break all UN resolutions (including a LEGALLY binding UNSC resolution - 502) by illegally invading and occupying the Falkland Islands AGAINST the wishes of the Falkland Islanders.

That brilliant move in 1982 put an end to Argentina's claim. You talked of peace, but opted for military aggression.

Nothing much has changed. You talk of peace yet act aggressively towards the people of the Falklands.

No one in their right minds would EVER trust Argentina. You say one thing then do another. You break your word over and over.

Face it, you blew any chance you had of ever gaining the Falkland Islands.

Since 1982 Argentina has done NOTHING to promote good will between yourselves and the Islanders. You have done NOTHING to prove that the people of Argentina are any different than the military junta who threatened to murder them all.

You make the same claims as they do. You refuse to acknowledge their existence, refuse to acknowledge that they are people with all the same human rights as the other 7 billion people on the planet.

In fact, your approach to the Falkland Islands and its people has been appalling, meanacing and bullying as well as farcial.

Game over, Argentina. You lost...AGAIN.
51 Condorito (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 04:00 pm Report abuse
NT 12

The US is not in decline. It is in relative decline. Very different.

“No chance Argentina will ever sit down and discuss fishing or oil again”

They most certainly will.
52 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 04:12 pm Report abuse
@41 Simon68

Your summation as an Argentinian is interesting.
I agree, it sounds like the relentless attacks on FI sovereignty have cause too much damage and widened the rift too far. It will be another 40-50 years, by the time anyone with living memory of the '82 invasion has died off, before anyone would consider close ties with Argentina. I expect any Falklanders would agree.

As to Petrella, the absence of the usual Malvinista 'talking points' is significant, and he has done all the questioning of tactics that he can get away with publicly, in Argentina.
53 Steve-33-uk (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 04:47 pm Report abuse
'UK considered allowing Argentina Falklands naval base two weeks before war - The Foreign Office considered the possibility of allowing Argentina a naval base on the Falkland Islands just two weeks before the 1982 invasion, newly declassified documents disclose.'

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9883042/UK-considered-allowing-Argentina-Falklands-naval-base-two-weeks-before-war.html
54 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 06:02 pm Report abuse
Without too many childish interventions by the trolls a sensible and interesting grown up discussion takes place. Nostril and Stink please note... Might be time to create a new grown up identity..... And pigs might fly...
55 Escoses Doido (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:05 pm Report abuse
@14 mm

To quote you; “I can imagine future rhetoric, where the Argentine government professes that it was its actions that ended British colonialism in the South Atlantic and got “freedom” for the islanders....”

I believe we will at some time in the not so distant future, hear precisely this from argentina, or at least the islanders will.

Not long now before they will be imploring the FIG to put some business argentinas way.......
56 Brit Bob (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:07 pm Report abuse
#46 Axel Arg

Ban Ki-Moon's words were probably altered just like INDEC's inflation figures and Argentina's history of the Falklands. Little wonder the country is rated in 102nd by the World's CPI Transparency organisation. Argentina and the truth doesn't sit well.
57 briton (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:22 pm Report abuse
First of,
Never trust politicians,
2nd
It seems that he is trying to turn the clock back 35 years, and then propel it forward to the present and start it all over again, [talking]
A bit like what the European union wants to do,
Re-write history after 1945,

Basically, trying to convince CFK and her government, that after failure after failure,
And still no victory, despite the war, and all that has happened since then, the intimidation , the threats , the bullying , the false accusations , the insults , to the islanders and the British government,
They false statements and lies given to the UN and any other country in the world that would listen,
Refusing ships to dock,==yet despite all this crap, and exhaustive waste of time and energy, where has it got Argentina,
No where, nothing but humiliation and embarrassment, and the world still laughs,
So now all they have to do, is conveniently expect the Falklands and the British, to forget the past,
Forget the last 35 years, and lets start talking, afresh, slowly at first, then slowly increase this,
Until you get what you want, by hook or by crook, if they can persuade the UN and the world, they have changed, become nice and respectful, caring and loving to the islanders, Britain may then be forced to negotiate,
The point is, can they do it,
And will we and the Falklanders just roll over and forget 35 years of insults,
Just so CFK can get her hands on the wealth, and claim her delayed victory,
[personally I say Soddy offy]
But its not my decision,
Lastly I finish how I started,
Never trust politicians
mmmmmm

mm
58 St.John (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:23 pm Report abuse
@41 Simon68

more or les my thoughts when I read the article.

Petrella recommends a complete change in approach.

That could e.g. be a long term (half a century?) “win hearts and minds” campaign if Argentina wants to have any hope of the Falkland Islands to get closer to Argentina, not to mention an association with that country. You don't make friends by harassing those you want to be your friends.
59 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 07:54 pm Report abuse
@47

You are so delusional like all the others here. To suggest Argnentina has more to lose economically, being 100 times larger in area and population than the Falklands is just the height of your unwarranted arrogance.

It's like saying the USA has more to lose than the Bahamas in having trading relations. You people are totally off the reservation in your assessment of both your own importance and how you belittle us.

@48

Spanish is too complicated for you. You need 40 tenses x 6 verb conjugations, whereas your brain at most can handle 10 tenses x 2 verb conjugations. So don't bother.

@51

Zero chance. You are also delusional.
60 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:04 pm Report abuse
Please do not feed the sick troll...
61 redpoll (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:11 pm Report abuse
Go away snotty and puke in the basin if it isnt clogged by your usual excresencies and vomit already
Intersesting leading article in the Buenos Aires Herald today by Carolina Barrios on Timmerman. Recommended reading
62 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:15 pm Report abuse
I'm not going anywhere you twats. The truth hurts huh.

Sucez!!
Lutscht!!
Chupen!!
Chupem!!
63 brit0n (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:19 pm Report abuse
@57
the problem is that the islanders don't have nothing to show
189 years....,,,,,,//////for what?
64 Foxtrot Indigo (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:21 pm Report abuse
@59

The arrogance you display is truly shocking. To assume you are better than someone else simply because you speak another language shows a level of narcissism I have never before witnessed.

My father speaks English, French, Spanish and Latin yet he does not think himself more intelligent or better than my mother who only speaks English and some Spanish.

What makes you think you are so superior to others?
65 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:23 pm Report abuse
@64

I am superior than all of you. Just because I am fair minded. Simple really.
66 Conqueror (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:24 pm Report abuse
@62 A wanker with no hands, aren't you? And so your “frustration”. Get your head down, wrap your legs behind it, and SUCK. You're used to that! Alternatively, spread and take that broom handle!
67 Joe Bloggs (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:27 pm Report abuse
63 Sussie

Reported
68 brit0n (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:30 pm Report abuse
@54 Captain Poppy
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuujajaja look who is talking
69 Foxtrot Indigo (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:35 pm Report abuse
@65

No you are not, the fact you think yourself superior is what makes you not. How is calling all Europeans 'retarded' fair minded? How is thinking yourself better than everyone else 'fair minded'? You are an arrogant small minded person who appears to assume that the world revolves around them, and then you throw a fit when someone calls you out on your arrogance.

People have different talents in different areas. I bet you couldn't write a symphony or create a new vaccine or plot the course of the stars over the past hundred years. Neither could I, but I am not saying that I am superior to anyone. There are people in this world far more intelligent than you even if you don't want to admit it.
70 Monty69 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:40 pm Report abuse
65 Nostrolldamus the 12th

Is this some kind of elaborate joke, a kind of very deep irony that's so sophisticated that no-0ne can understand it apart from you?
Or are you just a pillock?
71 Escoses D0ido (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:45 pm Report abuse
@67 Joe Bloggs
hey wimp
,,,,, this is captain poppy aka conqueror aka captain silver
don't you have nothing else to talk about?
72 redpoll (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:45 pm Report abuse
@63 Naughty noughty Sussie
Stealing peoples identies again. You steal your clients wallets too?
73 Joe Bloggs (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:46 pm Report abuse
71

Reported
74 The Cestrian (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 08:58 pm Report abuse
What gets me is that there is no acknowledgement that the RG's have no case. Not only that but the islanders want nothing to do with them. They just dont seem able to comprehend this.

The 1982 RG debacle set any cause they had back by 100 years.

By the time another 100 years comes the FI will be independent and secured by the UK military.
75 redpoll (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:01 pm Report abuse
Sussies business not going to well methinks from the amount of time it spends on there boards
Perhaps shes just a subtitute for a destitute prostitute? Uh ja uh Ja uh ja uh ja!!!!
Sussie stop fakeing it. Clients dont like that
76 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:04 pm Report abuse
Why feed the troll? Your indignation nourishes his sickness... He's just a little turd.

Just watching the Brits, One Direction No 1 in 63 countries currently , Britpop rules! And its all for Red Nose day, great British charity event.
77 redpoll (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:12 pm Report abuse
Sussie is too stupid to even be a troll Silver
78 briton (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:18 pm Report abuse
63
You have been reported.

64, if you can’t read properly then don’t blame us for your poor education.
68
You have been reported again.
///////////
It seems these susses and others are now resorting to ruin this site by impersonating others names,
I my self reported this last week, and recommended that you cannot keep changing your username,
If merco press does not stop this,
They will ruin this site, for there own selfishness.

.
79 ChrisR (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:19 pm Report abuse
Interesting, if poorly translated, article.

I think Simon68 has the best view of it, but as he says it is far too late to make any real difference to what has already been set in motion regarding the future of the Falklands.

Does anyone really believe this will end with the referendum? The hope must be to obtain independence with paying the UK for defence out of the oil revenue.
80 Gordo1 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:28 pm Report abuse
@ 62 Nostrolldamus the 12th

Good evening, trollísimo! I have some questions for you - exactly what are you trying to achieve here? What is the purpose of your presence here? Do you honestly believe that your immature meanderings actually represent the position and beliefs of the entire population of Argentina?

Just interested!
81 Musky (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:31 pm Report abuse
@23 Dove
You think you can indulge in oil exploration or fishing in british sovereign territory and achieve it non militarily? Would argentina allow the same activity in its waters by brits? I doubt it, your forces would be scrambled and you would rightly defend your undisputed territory.
Transgressions...will be dealt with appropriately.
As for my rant, i was calm when i typed it.
82 Zethee (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:51 pm Report abuse
Someone with that haircut is clearly in touch with the real world.
83 Conqueror (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:52 pm Report abuse
@46 Why do you bother? We all now know what argie “teachers” are. Useless incompetents who can't get a proper job! Your “comments” bear this out. Thick as two short, splintered planks! Let's give you a few responses so that you go away and leave intelligent, non-argie, people to their discussions.
WE don't care what the USA thinks or says. Just disappointed that a country that purports to be the foremost democracy can't support democracy!
Sovereignty? Not on the table. Not NOW. Not EVER. Forget it!
UN resolutions? There are NO UN resolutions that apply! Because all UNGA resolutions are NON-BINDING!
Argie government “view” on whether Islander government should be included? Irrelevant. Sovereignty cannot be “discussed” unless the Islanders agree. All other matters proper to the Islander government.
“Argie” sovereignty rights? There are NONE!
“Shared sovereignty”? Forty years ago - maybe. Now -not a chance!
C24 - irrelevant wankers!
There are two possible outcomes for the Falkland Islands. A continuing BOT or independence. Free independence. The cesspit gets no say! Possibly a few screams!
Think you can get those FACTS into the gloop you think is a brain?
There are important matters that the cesspit could discuss with the Islander government. When will the cesspit change its constitution? When will the cesspit be paying the £billions in reparations? When will the cesspit be begging for repatriation of its “war dead”? Or can the gloop just be poured down the drain? When will the cesspit be admitting its hundreds of lies? When can we start executing the 40 million argie war criminals? When will the cesspit declare itself to be a nuclear weapons test range? How many seconds should a British combat aircraft or warship give an argie intruder before the intruder is destroyed?
Want to come back when you've got some acceptable answers?
84 kelperabout (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 09:58 pm Report abuse
65 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#)

“I am superior than all of you. Just because I am fair minded. Simple really.”

Oh yes we must emphasize the word Simple because it is exactly what you are, one brick short of the load I think the saying is.
Islanders have for those 169 years managed to do what in that time Argentina has ultimately failed to do. That is live peacefully with themselves or their neighbors’.

It is true that you reap what you sow.
The seed the Islanders planted all those years ago has grown and we can now boast of our achievements while the seed the Argentines sowed were infected and more than half never really developed. Falkland Islanders are to be congratulated on their achievements and such good examples of how a people should live and develop in a country. Not once have they resorted to violence to achieve their means and that the world does acknowledge this fact. Just like the world is acknowledging our referendum. No matter what Argentine individual or groups try to do or say the referendum is happening and then the whole world will know the truth of the wishes of it's people.

The vast potential oil fields will also be developed and again there is nothing Argentina can do.
Tourism and Fishing will continue to develop and again There is nothing Argentina can do.
It is a win, win for the Islanders.
85 redpoll (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:12 pm Report abuse
@80 Juvenile self aggrandisment gordo I think
86 Steveu (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:35 pm Report abuse
@84 Kelperabout

Very eloquently put!
87 Britworker (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:41 pm Report abuse
Pre-referendum panic, the result will be another slap in the face for the long suffering Argies, this arsehole is just attempting to sugar coat it for them.
88 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 10:41 pm Report abuse
@84

Talk about thinking the world revolves around you...

Re-read your post. Even assuming all of what you said is true, what do you think the effect is on Argentina?

Imagine you are a curling ball, and as polished and pretty as you could make yourself, it makes you think that all that will give you more gravity to influence the Earth.

That's how delusional you are. Nothing Argentina can do... I'm glad, for YOU. But whatever you do there, is so infinitessimal it would have a 0.000000000000000000002% effect on Argentina's economy!

Just be humble for once.

@80

I'm not interested in your interests. Why do you feel your compatriots have full rights to insult us the way they do daily?
89 LEPRecon (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:00 pm Report abuse
@88 - Tobias

Still posting crap? Still accusing people of picking on you?

You insult people daily with your bigoted racist rants, and when people respond in kind you get upset and say 'it's not fair, you're picking on me!'

Argentina has great potential. It could be a world leader. Your problem is that successive governments use Argentina as their own personal piggy banks, and what do the people of Argentina actually do about it?

Nothing! If someone criticises Argentina's policies you leap to defend them, no matter how crazy, insane, or how much those policies will actually hurt Argentina and its people.

So the conclusion is that the problem with Argentina is people like you, Tobias. People who bury their heads in the sand and refuse to see the truth. People who fervently shout about the 'Malvina's' myth, and truly believe that if you could just somehow get your hands on the Falklands, that all your problems would magically disappear in a puff of smoke.

But in the real world everyone knows that won't happen. Argentina is headed for another major default, probably worst than 2001.

It'll be worse because the government has been robbing the international community, they've been robbing the people of Argentina. There are millions of Argentines who won't get a pension because the government stole their money. There will be a generation of Argentines who will only ever know hardship.

Maybe dreaming of the mythical islands helps distract people, but when people are hungry, cold, unemployed and in fear because of rising crime, what do they really care for a group of Islands that only exist in the imagination of Argentina?
90 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:11 pm Report abuse
And what the fulg do you want me to do about it? I've said a trillion times I don't like the pursuit of the “malvinas”, I have said it is a compulsive obsession and it makes me F sick. It really does... I hit people in the head with a plumbing pipe when they mention the subject so they know better and shut up.

That does not mean I will let people trash me up and down. I have some decency.

Part of that is calling out wild exagerations of which your post about Argentina's “situation” is part of.

There are tons of cold, unemployed Brits right now... do you think they appreciate spending billions on carriers that will likely NEVER see significant action?

That is a tpyical dead man's argument about the poor and the cold and the jobless. Name me one country that has none of them, and if such country does not exist, why are they spending billions in guns, in diplomatic lavish meetings and state dinners?

Why not wait till ALL poverty and joblessness is eliminated??
91 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:21 pm Report abuse
Trying to ask for anyone in Argentina to pay attention to the islanders is futile. Since I'm from Argentina I can neither believe the Argentine government nor the British one. Even if you're right that the Argentine government brainwashed everyone for decades (which is odd that only the British say that given such successful brainwashing is uncommon), it wouldn't matter. Argentina has a different truth of its own. All media, all history books (even the university ones I think) all almost everyone believes that Britain invaded the islands in 1833, and the only ones who contradict this are the British. What I find this odd is that everyone talks about how North Korea brainwashes it own people, but the only ones who believe Argentina is brainwashing its people are the British. Isn't this VERY convenient? I read media from the USA and many other countries in the world, but nobody said anything like this. It's also something quite hard to believe. That the Argentinian government, notorious for changing its state policy with every administration, could brainwash people for over 60 years, and make everyone buy it, even with very open access to information, is something that is hard to believe even in such a wacky place as Argentina.
92 Clyde15 (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:24 pm Report abuse
#65
“I am superior than all of you.”
Oh dear, oh dear, hyperbole in action again !
For a self proclaimed “linguist” your English grammar is faulty again.
I am superior TO (not than). This only relates to the correction of your grammar. Your comment is fatuous in the extreme.
However, no doubt it keeps your adolescent mind entertained as it appears that you have nothing better to do with your time in the earthly paradise of Mendoza.
As a self proclaimed isolationist could you answer me this point.
Aberdeen university is undertaking research on the deep ocean bed to bring organisms from the floor to their laboratories with the view of producing new strains of antibiotics.
If they are successful, am I to assume that you would have nothing to do with them because :-
A ) They were discovered by the despicable British.
B ) You refuse to have any trade or dealings with anyone outside of Argentina and you can live quite happily without products from anywhere else.
From all your previous postings, this is a common theme. Am I correct ?
93 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:33 pm Report abuse
@92

Benthic research to me is irrelevant. But I do avoid any foreign made product as much as humanly possible. I do check every single item so that no a cent of my money goes to foreigners who hate me.

I refuse to have any dealings with nations that cheat us and wish to destroy our industries. Since that covers all of you outsiders, yes, it is very difficult for me to willingly accept and foreign product (which usually are of very doubtful quality because they could care less what they export to us).

So yes I am extremely skeptical about anything made by a foreigner. The fact that you get donkey meat when you intended beef, or that you die of alfalfa in Europe, or that e-coli is ubiquitous in US ground meat (along with 'pink slime'), doesn't necessarily boost my confidence in your miraculous “self-guiding” hand of capitalism.
94 Pirat-Hunter (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:54 pm Report abuse
This guy is a retard, what Argentina needs is a nuclear defense program 100% made in Argentina. In time UK will have to spend in arms until they go broke or dance to a new tune.
Sorry people but I am an Argentine national who can read history. Does falkland holding exist in the real world or is it a country? Lol what a joke!
95 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:54 pm Report abuse
#91 I have photographs of my grandfather visiting the Falklands in 1922. It has always been British, it was never stolen from anyone. All Argentineans have been fed a myth from birth. If Argentina is so sure the Falklands are part of Argentina why doesn't your government make a case in the IJC? I will tell you, its because you don't have a case that you can win, and, the population of the Falklands don't want an Argentinean government as will be clearly demonstrated next month. Your strategy is deeply flawed. Instead of making friends with the Falklands people you attacked and occupied the islands committing all sorts of war crimes and since then you have harrased them. And even worse you are now continually insulting Britain and its people and harrasing them when they visit your country. What on earth are you playing at. Is it any wonder that there are arms on the islands and that Britons and islanders are very wary of Argentina?
96 Foxtrot Indigo (#) Feb 20th, 2013 - 11:56 pm Report abuse
@90

”Name me one country that has none of them

The Falkland Islands :-)
97 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 12:01 am Report abuse
@90nosecandy

“That does not mean I will let people trash me up and down. I have some decency.

Part of that is calling out wild exagerations of which your post about Argentina's “situation” is part of. ”

Simply put, that's not true.

Even where no controversy exists, and nobody is addressing Toby, you jump in with totally unrelated inflammatory statements and controversies of your own.

You instigate conflict and revel in the ranting and name calling.

When you lose, you pout.

End of.
98 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 12:07 am Report abuse
@97

Yes, no controversy is also the state of mind among Nabiru theorists who expect the Nephilim to return anytime.

So to you, a state of no controversy equals a state of reality and truth.

Well, one plaudit to you for that wonderful insight of Canadian whisky, I mean, wisdom.
99 Foxtrot Indigo (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 01:02 am Report abuse
The greatest achievements of the human race come out of Europe or Asia. Democracy, flight, cars, engines, medicine, archaeology, astronomy, electricity, running water, property ownership, laws, telephones, railways, computers, the internet, you name it the Europeans or Asians created it. So if you were to truly reject all 'European' creations would have to live in a mud hut in the middle of nowhere with no running water, no electricity, no plumbing, you couldn't go to hospital, use modern medicine or use a car or anything with an engine in it. I think it was even the Europeans who first tamed horses, so you couldn't use those as a transport either. You would have to rewind time to the Dark Ages. I would rather risk the odd 0.1% of horse meat in a burger than reject all the great things that have come out of Europe. But my opinion is only my opinion, I speak only for myself.
100 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:33 am Report abuse
@95 I can agree that the government is being idiotic, but being friendly with the islanders is an utter waste of time, if you really want to be British. Now, I don't care if the British keep the islands, but most people in Argentina do. In fact, the people of Argentina would never accept letting the UK keep the islands and if the UN rules in favour of the UK this could make things worse than they are now, for both of us, since the people in Argentina MIGHT overthrow the government and militarize the country. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

By the way, it doesn't look good for you that only the British say that the islands were always British in the first place. It looks very suspicious, it seems. I always thought Argentina's claim was fishy, but if we're talking about brainwashing, then I must be skeptic about both sides. I'd really like to see some investigation from a country as neutral to both sides as possible, with first-hand evidence that must be INDISPUTABLE. By first hand, I mean, the actual documents that prove either case, not transcripts of them.
101 redpoll (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:28 am Report abuse
Snotty
Benthic creatures.
Arent they the ones that feed on rotting detritus in the mud at the bottom of a stagnant pond? In which case you have described yourself to perfection.
Congratulations!
102 lsolde (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 05:40 am Report abuse
@98 Nostril,
Oh do stop it, dear nostril.
You're making me weep.
l've never heard anyone who feels so sorry for themselves as you do.
Please tell me dear nostril, that its only an act.
Designed to make us Brits either feel sorry for you or to try to make us feel guilty(about what, l couldn't begin to imagine).
Well, l'm here to tell you that your shennanigans don't wash with me.
Pull your head in mug, have a bath,get a job & stop crying & whinging, you pillock.
103 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 06:29 am Report abuse
Heh heh heh, Isolde!

Nose candy - as the Americans say, “what a horse's patoot!!”
104 Gordo1 (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 06:37 am Report abuse
@ 91 MagnusMaster

Your comments are odd to say the least. My Argentine friends admit that from an early age they are brainwashed by the educational system to believe ONLY the Argentine version of the history of the Falkland Islands. When they are presented by PROOF that that version is full of loopholes, fairy tales, lies and arrogance then they give ground.

I know many Argentines who are pro Falklanders.
105 lsolde (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:32 am Report abuse
@104 Gordo1,
The malvinista attacks will take many guises, Gordo.
Like water, if you can't flow one way, flow another, but get to the lowest point.
l don't trust any of them, which is a pity as l have no doubt there are many decent Argentines.
But how do you sift the wheat from the chaff?
As a famous American once said(at least, l think he was American),
“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”
How very true.
106 LEPRecon (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 09:18 am Report abuse
@100 - MagnusMaster

The British 1st spotted the Islands in 1690, and gave them their current name.

France was next on the scene until the Spainish stole it from them ( so maybe the French should be the ones complaining about illegal usurpation!), but a British colony was set up about a year after the French one and neither knew of the others existence.

The Spanish booted the British colony out (oh look more usurpation), but unlike the French the British took great exception to that, and gave the Spanish a damned good thrashing, which led them to apologising profusely, giving ground and paying out damages to the British (as was common practise in the 18th and 19th centuries).

Britain and Spain shared joint sovereignty with occasional colonies of one kind or another, until 1826, when a group of colonists settled on the Islands with the permission of the British. Spain still retained their own sovereignty claim.

In 1832 a bunch of soldiers from the United Provinces of the River Plate illegally settled on the Islands despite an official protest made by the British.

The UPoRP ignored that protest, so the British sent the RN to reassert British sovereignty and kick out the invading troops.

When they arrived thy found the troops had murdered their commanding officer, raped his wife, and we're running amok on the Islands endangering the colonists.

The British rounded them up and handed them over to ship that had arrived from the UP. That ship took the criminals back to the UP and left without a shot being fired.

The colony remained under British rule and protection, and their ancestors live on the Islands tidy.

Important points to note.

Britains sovereignty claim dates back to 1690, there are no earlier claims that can be found.
Spain relinquished its sovereignty claims in the 1840's acknowledging full British sovereignty.

Argentina didn't exist in 1833, and that fact alone makes all their claims invalid.
107 kelperabout (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 09:20 am Report abuse
90 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#)

“ And what the fulg do you want me to do about it? I've said a trillion times I don't like the pursuit of the “malvinas”, I have said it is a compulsive obsession and it makes me F sick. It really does... I hit people in the head with a plumbing pipe when they mention the subject so they know better and shut up. ”

So your real truths are coming out . You are a thug by your own admission.

Your other comment

“That is a tpyical dead man's argument about the poor and the cold and the jobless. Name me one country that has none of them, and if such country does not exist, why are they spending billions in guns, in diplomatic lavish meetings and state dinners?”

Someone has already commented a fact that the Falkland islands has none of them. Falkland Islanders have
No unemployment
No hunger
Not cold as you suggest because we all live in modern homes because we can afford them.
No one sleeping on the streets.
Falkland Islanders donate more money per capita to the rest of the world in donations than any other place on earth.
Falkland Islanders are always ready to help others in times of need. Yes Argentina we would help you as well if you removed your stupid threat .
How would we do that you say.
Reduce or remove the need for a strong British Military presence .
Invite you to participate in Oil developments.
Increase your wealth in the Tourist Industry because if the threat was removed Tour operators would feel safer to visit you.
In fact there is much more to gain than to loose by being a nice honest neighbor. But your problem as is with your Government is that you do not want to share anything with a Falkland islander because you refuse to accept we exist.
108 Brit Bob (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 11:21 am Report abuse
litics/International/Rhetoric-Increases-as-Falkland-Referendum-Looms.html
109 Conqueror (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 12:56 pm Report abuse
@91 Well, you sound relatively reasonable. It's unfortunate that argieland appears to have been able to destroy a video that showed the compulsory school lectures on the subject of the Falkland Islands. It used to be on YouTube, but it's gone! Why would that be? You pose some interesting questions, but let me ask one of my own. How many countries is argieland in dispute with over territory? Just one, isn't it? “Everyone” may believe that Britain “invaded” the Islands in 1833, but that's only “everyone” in argieland. Fortunately, Britain knows that it first landed there in 1690. Strange how argies never mention that. Of course, some argies insist that argieland “inherited” the Islands from Spain. But they can never point at any international law or accepted practice that permits that. Sometimes they point at a papal bull that wasn't even accepted at the time. Strange that, isn't it? Have you ever tried any research that DOESN'T include argie “sources”? Have you read this? www.falklandshistory.org/false-falklands-history.pdf
But the most persuasive argument is this: why is argieland so manic over a small group of islands with an area that represents 0.43% of the territory that no-one argues about? The answer is that argieland isn't really interested in the Islands. What it is interested in is that, in 1833, a major power told them they couldn't have something. This may have been compounded because, in 1828, Britain had blocked argieland's attempt to “acquire” the Banda Oriental (Uruguay). Also, have you read this? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viveza_criolla Any of it sound familiar? If you still find it hard to accept, note that “arguments” have raged here on the history of the Falkland Islands. And, time and again, argie bloggers simply refuse to accept the truth. Even when it doesn't come from “official” sources!
110 axel arg (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 01:34 pm Report abuse
LEPRECOM. BRIT BOB.
LEPRECOM: As i told you in another comment, you can't be more mediocre and ignorant.
You and everybody else have right to think whatever, but there is something much more important than our opinions, i mean the facts.
Accept it r not, when you get into the website of the u. n., you won't find any resolution which says: application of the right to self determination for the population from the malvinas-falkland islands, like there are for others populations who live in territories considered like non self governing territories.
Accep it or not, there is not any resolution which includes the govt. from the islands as a third part of the conflict.
Accept it or not, the case has always been consideed like a special colonial situation.
On the other hand, if you dont' understand the messagge that c. f. k. gave, when she read before the u. n. the secret proposal that included the wishes of the islanders, and argentina's sovereign rights, then it means that you don't have enough intellectual honesty in order to discuss about something so complicated like politic issues. The only thing you can do, is to cotinue posting your usuall reactionary comments, comparing the actual behaviour of our govt, with the actions of the dictatorship.
On the other hand, when i said that the u. s. a.'s support has been tepid, i mean that it has been not much different than the support that others nations gave for arg., respecting resuming the dialogue with the u. k., in order to find a solution for this conflict.
BRIT: If you think that just our politicians omit information before the u. n., or before any other int. forum, then it means that you have been perfectly indoctrinated by your so loved decadent empire.
Respecting banki moon's expressions, you don't need to believe what i say, just searh the interview on line, and get your conclusions.
111 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 01:55 pm Report abuse
#110 All that doesn't matter. If you thing Arg has a valid case take it to the International Court of Justice. Oh! But you know you haven't, how sad! Why don't you, is it that you can't afford to, or, that there is no clear cut case, or, is it because Argentina didn't exist in 1833 when the murderers and rapist were removed? Please advise a reason?
Anyway the UN won't impose Argentinean rule without the agreement of the inhabitants who can trace their history right back to 1833 will they? The islanders have the right to live in peace without fear of another 11,000 of your soldiers arriving to steal their freedom to live as they wish.

In a word, Argentina - stuffed
112 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:10 pm Report abuse
I seriously don't know why you folks even engage in discussion with 'axel foley'. He starts off sounding half reasonable and within a few words starts saying 'pirates', 'usurpers' and 'cockroaches'. As a nut-job he's well suited to teaching in Argentina.

He bots on and on about the 'secret proposal' when that was part of negotiations that they ended when they started a war. Besides, it's not very secret if we all know about it. It's as if the world doesn't change for these nut-cases, and they don't seem to understand that this proposal was taken off the table many many moons ago.

(Cue axel foley talking about some not-secret proposal)
113 Gustbury (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:17 pm Report abuse
Bennies can be Brits if they wish it.Just we want the islands!! CLARITO PAPI
114 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:20 pm Report abuse
@113 “You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” Exodus 20:17

The irony is that the next Pope might be Argentine, someone who has seemingly ascribed himself to territorial-nationalism and territorial covetousness since childhood.
115 Nostrolldamus the 12th (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:25 pm Report abuse
@107

Your arrogance knows no bounds. Further, you, as every other lemming here, falls head first into my little rhetorical traps. You people are intellectually light years behind me in debating skills.

“So your real truths are coming out . You are a thug by your own admission.”

Notice how I said this “thug” comment in a paragraph where otherwise you heard everything you as a Facklander would LIKE to hear from an argie. Yet you chose to attack me on the one little “imperfection” that I revealed. Which shows your utter contempt and complete dearth of any sense of objective fairness. You are too far gone for me to bother with you, but since you lived through a war (unless you are young as well), that is the only reason I give you islanders some slack.

I don't do the same with the racist, morally bankrupt Europeans, Brits, and North Americans on this website.

So you have no poverty, no hunger, no homeless??

So pay for the military that protects you! Why do you ask the Brits, who are by the millions going hungry, cold, and homeless right now in their own country with no end in sight to SIX years of recession, to pay for the shiny toy guns??

Ah, if you did, then you would all go hungry, cold, and homeless.

Argentina (the government) should recognize your existence, and then completely forget about the islands. Any relationship between Argentina and Falklands on economic terms would be the equivalent of a relationship between a hamster and a rhino. Your oil is yours, whatever there is there, make good use of it.
116 Gustbury (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:36 pm Report abuse
114@ no no no nothing of that!!.Just the land!!
117 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 02:48 pm Report abuse
@116 You're coveting the land of your neighbor. That makes you all condemned sinners in the eyes of the Catholic god. This includes the next pope.

@115 Suggesting you're good at debating when you're clearly not doesn't mean you spent 3 years chairing the Cambridge Union Society. I find your method of discussion like that of a child and it's quite likely that is the only reason you are tolerated on here.
118 Gordo1 (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:03 pm Report abuse
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_Commonwealth_of_Nations

This is a list of all the Commonwealth countries plus those that have been expelled plus those that have applied for membership.

Perhaps one of the malvinista trolls can kindly tell us which of these countries supports the nonsensical claim from Argentina for sovereignty of the Falklands archipelago.
119 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:13 pm Report abuse
My favourite part of their claim is that it doesn't involve acknowledging in any way a war they opportunistically started and subsequently lost.

That's my favourite part of their claim.
120 kelperabout (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:21 pm Report abuse
115 Nostrolldamus the

Problem is with you is that you reject the intelligence of another. How many people have to tell you. The only reason that British Forces is on the Falkland Islands is to protect our interests of self determination from Argentine aggression. Maybe you have forgot or was not born in 1982. We lived through destruction and the realization that the invader was about to implant their way of existence on us. Well no thank you scumbag we are never going to allow that situation to ever happen again and if it means adding thousands more soldiers to protect our rights then so be it. When the black gold runs we will not only repay all our British forces presence but will contribute far and beyond that to Britain. Oil , Gas you name it they will reap the benefits. All you can do is sit and watch.
121 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:37 pm Report abuse
@120 Doesn't that chap Alessandro Bettsisimo want to come back to the Falklands with his friends in the Junta that caused him to turncoat and yet he has found that all the people he turned his back on don't really want him there?

He does seem quite a strange person.
122 redpoll (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:54 pm Report abuse
Well I think according to Joe when he fled he left a bun in the oven?
123 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 03:54 pm Report abuse
@106 @109 You don't seem to understand that, if Argentine sources aren't trustworthy, then British ones may not be trustworthy either. Given that we are in a situation where brainwashing is involved, I have to be extra careful to believe either side. Your “Falklands history” pdf isn't trustworthy, it isn't the kind of first-hand evidence I'm looking for. Sorry if I'm not buying into your side wholesale, but given the situation we're in, I can't. Even IF I bought everything you said, I couldn't do anything to change the mind of the people in Argentina who won't believe any “British propaganda”. Nothing that comes from the mouth of a British will be believed, this is the sad truth.

Oh and of course I know what viveza criolla is, after all, this is how life in Argentina works. You need some “viveza” or you won't survive.
124 agent999 (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 04:10 pm Report abuse
@115 trollyb
We needed a good laugh today and you gave us all one with your statement
:-“You people are intellectually light years behind me in debating skills”
125 Clyde15 (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 05:04 pm Report abuse
From what I have seen on this site the pro Argentinians do not debate, they pontificate.
126 redpoll (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 05:08 pm Report abuse
Read James Nielsons editorial in the Buenos Aires Herald “Puppets on a String” Its hilarious
127 CaptainSilver (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 05:13 pm Report abuse
Young Nostril is having a right strop today. Reminds me of a little kid in a pushchair who when he asks for another ice cream gets told no, then loses it. Apart from living in some parallel universe the worrying thing was someone said he was a teacher. I wouldn't like a mentally unbalanced twat like that near my kids. Anyone know what school he is at?
128 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 05:43 pm Report abuse
@123 'trustworthiness' is purely dependent on how much you trust the source. If a source is from Argentina where they largely ignore history and create propaganda that supports territorial nationalism and La Campora, then one would typically say it's not trustworthy. However, UK sources are largely objective including things like 'there was a war in 1982 started by Argentina and lost by Argentina' making it seemingly trustworthy.

Linking the trustworthiness of Argentinian sources and UK sources is just a logical fallacy. Linking them makes you either a knob or an imbecile. You choose.

@126 Having little or no morality it makes me wonder why he wants to return to the Falklands from Argentina as some kind of ruler? He's already a mayor of some little town over there in Retardina so he wants to come back and see the family he so liked that he chose to become a traitor? Seems strange.
129 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 06:09 pm Report abuse
British sources tend to be objective in most cases, but since they have a vested interest in this conflict, I can´t fully believe them. Since we´re talking about brainwashing I don´t want to buy wholesale what the British goverment claims without really checking if it´s true, just because they´re usually trustworthy. But keep in mind that I don´t believe my government either.

Even if you´re are right, it won´t change a single thing because people in Argentina wouldn´t believe what you say anyway. If you want to expose the truth, you should make the whole world expose it, or otherwise it will be regarded as British propaganda. You are too optimistic if you believe that the truth always wins.

I´ve read the pdf, it does have some first hand sources, but I really prefer a source from a neutral country.
130 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 06:24 pm Report abuse
@129 There is no conflict. The only conflict that ever existed was when you started a war in 1982 and you subsequently lost it. The only vested interest that the UK has is in seeing the self-determination of people they rescued from the claws of your expansionism.

The argentinian vested interest is in furthering the realisation of their principle of territorial nationalism. They wanted land from Chile, they wanted land from all their neighbours, and they want land from the Falklands. It's already well known that the version of history that they teach in schools is far from what is considered to be objectively verified history. It only starts in 19833.

No one expects Argentines to believe the objectively verified truth, because that would run counter to their need for territorial expansion. Instead they will believe whatever truth-du-jour aligns with Viveza Criolla, their animalistic need to get something out of everything regardless of the morality or consequences.

Propaganda in the UK is typically of the form 'you must change your toothbrush every week and use David Beckham razor blades twice a day'. British schools are well known for not teaching what is popular, regarding our pretty savage history in full. Argentina is the opposite of this.

Anyways, worrying about what the argentines believe is a fools game.
131 cdc (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 06:42 pm
Comment removed by the editor.
132 Conqueror (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 07:14 pm Report abuse
@129 Oh, thank you. “British sources tend to be objective in most cases” The corollary being that argie sources aren't! One has to question what Britain's “vested interest in this conflict” is. Britain is spending money defending the rights and homes of an “associated” territory. Who will benefit from any gas or oil commercially exploited? The Falkland Islands! Britain has already invested in protection of the Islands for 30 YEARS! What taxes do the Falkland Islands pay to the UK? NONE. Where's the British “vested interest”? You must explain that. If you can. On the other hand, argieland's “vested interest” is easily seen. To an even greater extent than the Falkland Islands, argieland has NO valid claims to South Georgia or the South Sandwich Islands. BUT, the Falkland Islands represent the first domino in the attempt to get the lot. Leading to a potential barrier across the South Atlantic. Argieland NEEDS those island territories in an attempt to claim the British Antarctic Territory. That has, in effect, existed since 1908. Argieland is already KNOWN to be in breach of the Antarctic Treaty as it conducts military operations there. Colonialist, imperialist argieland. Fortunately, no-one is as stupid as an argie government. Who do they think DOESN'T know? Think about it. RN “survey” vessels, high altitude surveillance aircraft, satellite observation. Shame for you “Argentines”. Perhaps you'll believe us just before we “negate” any threats we believe your government poses. Pick out any army, “air” and naval bases you know of and make your home as far away as possible. And what will happen in Antarctica? “Research” stations sliding below the ice? Torpedoes and missiles being fired from under the ice? The people of Britain perceive “wild” argieland to be a growing threat on a daily basis. The obvious move is to “eliminate” the threat. Your “country” is skipping along the edge of a cliff. Don't blame us for what happens!
@131 Want to die? I'm easy!
133 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:10 pm Report abuse
@129

You will notice the wording that Argentina uses concerning 1833. “Think” points out that the words are very carefully chosen.

Argentina says that the islands were “forcibly stripped” from them in 1833. It says the land was usurped by the British in an “act of 19th century colonialism”, it says that the “argentine population was forced to leave and their return prohibited”.

All these things are “TRUE” from a certain point of view, and to quote Obi-Wan Kenobi, “many of the truths we cling to depend on a certain point of view”.

However, the next part is very important.

1) there is no evidence that the United Provinces inherited the land from Spain, the Spanish civilian population had voluntarily left the islands in 1811, and there is no evidence to suggest they were for or against Independence.

2) the British had also had a civilian settlement and sovereignty claim dating back to the early 18th century, but they too had left voluntarily.

Here is the kicker:

3) The Argentines (or more accurately) the United Provinces “population”who had the islands “usurped” or “forcibly stripped” from them on January 6th 1833 were a 50 strong group of militia and deportees who first arrived in November 1832. They had already mutineed, murdered their captain and raped his wife. They were requested to leave by Captain Onslow of the HMS Clio without a shot being fired.

So in essence the British and Argentine accounts are identical. They both agree that Spainish and British had previous settlements and they both agree that a certain number of Argentines were forced to leave in January 6th 1833.

The Argentine account simply forgets to mention how many were forced, how long they'd been there, what they were doing there, and that they were entirely seperate from the Vernet community.

When I say “forgets”, it deliberately implies (without being explicit) that there was a large, long standing, settled, civilian community that was brutally evicted by the British....
134 ynsere (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:31 pm Report abuse
Falklanders: Don't be taken in by this Argentine former diplomat's sweet-talk. It's no more truthful than their braggadocio. Petrella's article contains both.
135 Brit Bob (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:33 pm Report abuse
#110 Axel Arg

Like I said, 'the truth and Argentina don't sit too well.' Fact.
136 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:47 pm Report abuse
Continued...from 133

So Magnus Master,

It isn't an independent truth you are after. The truth is pretty indisputable.

In October 1832 the United Provinces sent the Sarandi to the Falklands to set up a penal colony. There we 50 or so people on the ship, made up the crew (UP navy and various international hired hands), family of the crew, and various deportees and criminals (presumably the first inmates of the penal colony).

They arrived in the November. There was a mutiny which led to the death of the captain, Esteban Mestevier and the rape of his wife. Order was partially restored by Pinedo the second in command.

Britain clearly saw the establishment of this penal colony as a threat (the first genuine threat) to its long held sovereignty claim, and sent the Clio to evict the Sarandi.

So the question is this:

1) do the actions as described constitute a usurption and a forcible stripping of the islands?
2) do the actions of Onslow and the Clio constitute a blatant act of 19th century colonialism?

I would argue strongly the answer is no. however, you might argue that it does but only in a very minor sense.

Given the very minor nature of this, does the previous British settlement and the subsequent British settlement of 180 years negate any wafer thin claim of unfairness?

Again you might argue “no it doesn't”. I'd disagree.

Finally, does the 1982 invasion and the subsequent death of 900 people, together with the two British settlements, together with the wafer thin sense of being hard done by in 1833 negate any Argentine claim...

If you are still arguing that it doesn't, then there will shortly be a referendum on the islands.

Perhaps, the islanders overwhelming practicing a founding right of the UN-self determination, together with the above might persuade you....if it doesn't, then I am sorry...it's just too bad.
137 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:48 pm Report abuse
@130 just because the Argentinian government is a big fat liar doesn't mean I have to trust 100% what the British say. This reminds me of when the government began pointing out all the lies the Clarin group said in decades to successfully convince people to believe the government's lies.
@132 you think Argentina is a threat to the world, you threaten Argentina all the time, yet you don't see the British vested interest? You do realise that the British have a military base there don't you? In the early 19th century the UK didn't like what Argentina and Brazil were doing. This led to the creation of Uruguay, and was also the main reason the UK was interested in the islands, which were right next to Argentina. Nowadays the islands are militarized for obvious reasons, but I suspect that the UK is also worried about other South American countries.
@133 finally someone who understands my point. I want to make sure the UK aren't “forgetting” anything before I buy your claims. Just because the UK isn't very keen on propaganda doesn't mean they don't do it.
138 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 09:09 pm Report abuse
P.s. F.A.O. Nossie

I admire your anti-British/American/European stance.

One day you may find a young lady that wants to sleep with you (granted its a long shot without a significant personality overhaul), but let's pretend for a second that it was possible that Quasimodo has a sister.

Now, poor Mrs Nossie goes to hospital to give birth to Nostril Jnr. The Labour pains kick in...would you like some gas and air Mrs Nossie? Nossie jumps up...“no dear” nasty British discovery, developed by the Germans...suck in the pain, girl.

Now, wind the clock on, and Nossie Jnr is born. Sadly, Nossie Jnr has an illness, first trip to doctor prescribes a dose of antibiotics.

Oh no, Nossie..can't have Penicillin, a nasty British discovery, come on Esmeralda, let's take Nossie Jnr home.

Without said, anti-biotics, sadly poor Nossie Jnrs condition starts to get worse. He now needs surgery. But there are so many procedures little Nossie can't have as they were developed by American, British or European physicians.....

I won't tell you how the story ends, Nossie. But it's a pity you don't study Watson and Crick, otherwise you'd realise what a congenital fucking idiot you were.

P.S.

I am sure most people would gladly forego whatever medical advances came from Iran or Argentina..

P.P.S.

Don't reply on the Internet, or use the world wide web they weren't Argie inventions either. Perhaps watch some TV instead..oh crap you can't..maybe go for a drive..no again...or call someone on the phone..shit..!!

Ok Nossie, you've got me. What fucking use has any Argentine ever been?
139 kelperabout (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 09:25 pm Report abuse
I wonder just how many Argentines can claim their ancestory back that does not include British, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, German, Chinese...... the list goes on and on . Going to be real hard for any Argentine to survive without the input of just about every country in the world.

Thre are few if any Countries left in th eworld that has not had a human impaxct on Argentina. So for the so called Argentines to say we Isanders do not exist just remember some of your lot are decendants of dare I say it Falkland islanders. Yes there are quite a few already living in Argentina and in time these few one day will multiply just as the African slaves did in North America and look what we see now a direct decendant of one of them is their presidant. Who knows one of our decendants could one day rule Argentina . Where would your critics be then. The funny part is it could actually happen.
140 Shed-time (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 09:43 pm Report abuse
@137 Trust whatsoever or whosoever you like. It matters not.
141 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 21st, 2013 - 11:44 pm Report abuse
@136 let me be clear, I don't mind if the islands are British. However, most Argentinians will never pay attention to the islanders, because they think that the islands were stolen from them, so they hence they have no say. The referendum will change nothing, or it will change things from the worse. If the UN supports the British claim as a result of the referendum, the people here in Argentina will get very angry and things might get very ugly. Until whatever lies the Argentine government said are exposed to the world just like North Korean propaganda is, there will be no solution to this issue.
142 Anglotino (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:16 am Report abuse
Why does MagnusMaster keep talking about Argentina as if Argentina has an actual impact on the world?

“If the UN supports the British claim as a result of the referendum, the people here in Argentina will get very angry and things might get very ugly.”

So do as we say or we'll crack a strop? Juvenile in the extreme. But then again after watching the protesters bang pots and fascist groups harassing businesses in Argentina it is hardly surprising.

“Until whatever lies the Argentine government said are exposed to the world just like North Korean propaganda is, there will be no solution to this issue.”

First the Argentine government has been proven wrong so many times that if they were an actual person you would say they have a low IQ.

As for a solution. What solution? No one really cares what Argentina does. Honestly if nothing changes then nothing changes. It will always been Argentina crying and gnashing their teeth. The rest of the world will continue to look on with amusement.
143 dab14763 (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:23 am Report abuse
“In the early 19th century the UK didn't like what Argentina and Brazil were doing. This led to the creation of Uruguay, and was also the main reason the UK was interested in the islands, which were right next to Argentina. ”

Magnus,

Except they weren't right next to Argentina back then as Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego were not part of Argentina in the early 19th century. And it wasn't the main reason for the UK's interest in the Falklands, if at all. Round South America was an alternative route to round Africa for British ships to get to Oceania and Asia. The Falklands are more conveniently located than the west coast of South America for a stopover port to replenish supplies, and much better if the port is in sovereign British territory rather than have to get permission from another sovereign as would have been the case with a port on the continent.
144 redp0ll (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:24 am Report abuse
Magnus
The Argentines can get thier knickers in a twist and thier ordure white hot if they want to
This is about a small nation deciding its own destiny and really has
f *** all to do with Argentina
145 Vestige (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 01:09 am Report abuse
Ah yes, on the same day I read of India asking for their Koh I Noor diamond to be returned and the Greeks asking for the “Elgin” marbles back I can go to the falklands settlers page and read of support from gibraltarian usurpers. Never the bad guys.
Off to read about N.Ireland now.
146 MagnusMaster (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 01:41 am Report abuse
@142 why do I keep talking as if Argentina had any impact in the world? It's because you're always whining when Argentina does anything. If nobody cares what Argentina does, then stop whining, and ask your media to stop pretending as Argentina is any threat.

@143 you're right that in 1833 Argentina didn't have Patagonia yet. Still, the islands were much closer to Argentina and Brazil than to the UK.
147 sammy (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 02:43 am Report abuse
They would be better off concentrating their efforts on repairing the streets,sewers,trains,subways and all the other polluting aspects of
GOOD AIR,thats a joke,aka the capital!!!fort get these islands for a few
decades and see if you can drag this piece of shite that is argentina back
to it's former glory of the early 1900's.Lets live in the here and now and a
little in the future,the past is over and done let it go.
148 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 02:58 am Report abuse
@146 Magnus

“@143 you're right that in 1833 Argentina didn't have Patagonia yet. Still, the islands were much closer to Argentina and Brazil than to the UK”

The conclusion is : The Falklands are close to neither - and neither could claim ownership by proximity.

Interestingly, they have been British for all this time, regardless.
149 HansNiesund (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 05:26 am Report abuse
@145
Well done. First time I ever heard of the Koh I Noor and the Elgin marbles being invoked in favour of Argentinas's claim to the Falklands. Cheesy attempts at guilt by association such ad thrse only show how Argentina's case really is. I do
look forward to it being trotted out at the UN to join CFKs migrating birds, the Quisling Betts, and Marcelo Vernet's great grandma's diary.

But do enjoy your reading about North Ireland, and especially the Good Friday agreement,. You will find that that conflict was resolved by application of the principle of self-determination. Particularly to be applauded was the statesmanship shown by the Republic in removing its irredentist territorial claim from its Constitution. Perhaps one day there will also be an Argentina politician with the courage of a Garrett Fotzgetald to state that the nationalist myth is not worth a single death, Maybe then some kind of solution will be found. Doesn't look like today, though.
150 Shed-time (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 08:23 am Report abuse
The fallaciousness of the logical arguments coming from the Argentines is quite mind-bending.

'Mrs Jenkins gave back a pair of shoes, so you should give back the Falklands'

I really wonder what they actually do get taught in school.
151 lsolde (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 10:36 am Report abuse
@150 Shed-time,
Our countryman, briton, once said that someone stole Mr Jones roses,
So maybe thats also a good reason to give the Falklands to them.
l don't think that they get taught too much at school, just that they should own what we have.
152 Shed-time (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:00 pm Report abuse
@151 I think they get taught how to construct curious logical fallacies and little more beyond that.
153 malen (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:14 pm Report abuse
139 can the british living in Arg continent vote in the referendum?? Those that were expelled and threaten for thinking different so came to live here and all the descendants like Gleadell, etc. Democracy its for all.
154 Clyde15 (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:21 pm Report abuse
#139
Argentinians or “Britons” living in Argentina have no more right to vote than Britons living in Britain. Neither do the British forces in the Falklands have any right to vote in the referendum.
155 malen (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 12:34 pm Report abuse
1) So for ex the malvineros living in Britain or for example in any other country can not vote????
2) In Arg there are a lot of malvineros, and Gleadell for example, descendant of one, is here Intendente of San Julián Port. He is descendants, cant vote??
If I am descendant of a spaniard grandfather I am able to vote for president in Spain.
156 Anglotino (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 01:01 pm Report abuse
And look at the trouble Spain is in!

Bad bad example.
157 Shed-time (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 01:20 pm Report abuse
@155 Yet again, another ridiculous fallacy comparing the ability to vote for real falkland islanders with the incapability of naturalised argentines to vote. Basically the same as asking if an american can vote in UK elections or can an Iraqi vote in Kuwaiti elections. If you're talking about Alessandro 'Traitor' Bettsilini, no as a traitor to his own people, he's unlikely to have been able to vote. Neither are those who claim to be family of Vernet, because they went to live elsewhere. What the hell does Spain have to do with it? The UK nor the Falklands are Spain making that yet another strawman fallacy.

The only people who can vote are the falkland islanders themselves.
158 Simon68 (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 01:58 pm Report abuse
137 MagnusMaster (#)
Feb 21st, 2013 - 08:48 pm

Just for your information, the main British military base in th South Atlantic in 1833 was located in Río de Janeiro. The real importance of the Falklands was not military, instead it was comercial, the object was for the Brits to have a staging place for rounding Cape Horn East to West, and a place to recuperate from theWest to East rounding of the Horn. It seems to me that the colonization of the Islands was more of a second thought than a primary intention.
159 malen (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 02:53 pm Report abuse
Vernet descendants would have had more than 9 generations in the isles. Even the first person born on the isles, was his daughter Malvina.
Spain its an example.
160 Doveoverdover (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 03:18 pm Report abuse
@159 You open up an intriguing prospect of generational proportional representation. Anyone on the electoral register should have their vote premium weighted by the number of generations of their family who have lived on the islands. First generation Islanders would, of course, have their vote discounted by the proportion of their lives spent on the island (sorry JB that means much less than half of a vote for you). Descendants of those who left the island would have a vote divided by the number of generations found elsewhere including in Argentina and UK (certified Malvina Vernet descendents one vote divided by nine for example).

This would have great democratic impact, increasing the tally of votes cast greatly and stopping it from looking like a UK run whitewash. Now, I only have to find the international body/bodies supervising and observing the March Referendum and get them to incorporate it into their as yet unpublished plan. Anyone have a name and address for them yet?
161 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 03:36 pm Report abuse
@159

Vernet descendents would have had 9 generations on the islands if what..?

Vernet was not even on the islands in 1833, he was under arrest by the US associated with the Lexington raid, and never returned. Nothing to do with the British.

His deputy Matthew Brisbane was of course British, so we can attempt to find some of his bloodline in Wales if you like?

Crikey, what a load of crap...
162 Islander1 (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 04:04 pm Report abuse
160- nothing secret- we are using the normal electoral roll as used every general election with new people qualifying onto it and no doubt a few who pass away or have emigrated a few years and thus are delisted.
Perfectly above board and standard democratic system. You will even find there ARE some on it and entitled to be on it, who were born in Argentina!
163 Doveoverdover (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 04:16 pm Report abuse
162 So there's no need for an international supervising and observing body then. That's disappointing because I could have sworn someone on here once said that there was going to be at least one.
164 dab14763 (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 04:29 pm Report abuse
Monkeymagic,

Vernet wasn't arrested by the Americans. He wasn't there when the raid happened. He and his family left in November 1831 aboard the Harriet, one of the seized American ships. The Lexington was in January 1832

Brisbane was Scottish
165 Shed-time (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 04:53 pm Report abuse
If past generations are being included in Malen's plan for the islands, then why not include future generations too? We could approximate who might move into the islands in the next 100 years and then apply a weighting to their estimated vote and similarly with the future generations after theirs.

This could create approximately an infinite number of votes and a tendency towards a particular outcome.

No point including the Vernets, they left.
166 malen (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 05:31 pm Report abuse
Vernet was called from BA to deliver with the problems of the Harriet. His descendance should vote.
WHat about those born on the isles but living here?????
165 Since 180 years arg cannot enter to the isles, only 25 are arg, I think this creats a tendency towards a particular outcome.
167 Think (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 05:59 pm Report abuse
(163) Mr. McDod

Not “Internationally Supervised” nor “Intermationally Recognized”....
(As you already knew.....)

”Washington will not recognise the result of next month's referendum.”
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/02/22/william-hague-john-kerry-falklands_n_2739945.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

As one of my Argentinean compatriots so rightly put it on these pages some days ago……:
“The only thing that will come out of this “Referendum” is a series of ugly post stamps.”

Ps:
Mr. Joe Bloggs:
Did you ever post that letter with those ugly stamps to Villa Pagana?
Secretary says.......: No letters from them Islands...., yet.
Chuckle chuckle
168 Clyde15 (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 06:15 pm Report abuse
I thought the referendum was to ask the current population LIVING on the Falkland islands what they wanted, not
what Argentina wanted !!!!

The voting rules for the Scottish referendum are as below:-
Under the terms of the 2010 Draft Bill, the following people would be entitled to vote in the referendum:
British citizens resident in Scotland;
Commonwealth citizens resident in Scotland;
Citizens of other European Union countries resident in Scotland;
Members of the House of Lords resident in Scotland;
Service/Crown personnel serving in the UK or overseas in the armed forces or with Her Majesty's Government who are registered to vote in Scotland.
In January 2012, Labour MSP Elaine Murray led a debate arguing that the franchise should be extended to Scots living outside Scotland. This was opposed by the Scottish Government, who argued that it would greatly increase the complexity of the referendum and cited evidence from the United Nations Human Rights Committee that a referendum based on criteria other than residence would be queried by other nations.
Note the last sentence. The Islanders have got it right.
169 ChrisR (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 06:21 pm Report abuse
@167 I don't Think aka The Turnip In Chief aka The Biggest Liar on MP

So you are posting a link purporting to advance your bigoted and untruthful (there’s a surprise) case over the Islands.

“”takes no position regarding sovereignty“ ”We will not speculate on a referendum that has not taken place. Our position remains one of neutrality.“ ”The US position has not changed. The US does not support Argentina's sovereignty claims. The US recognises the UK's administration of the Falkland Islands, but takes no position on sovereignty.”

Which part of the above formal statements of the US government says they will not recognise the referendum?

Usual bollocks from a bitter and twisted old man supported by someone from the UK who should know better, just about sums this up.
170 redpoll (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 06:52 pm Report abuse
My comment which I at least I considered important seems to have got lost in merco cyber space so I will rewrite.
I am not trying to take sides but in some cases voting systems seem to be quite crazy
As malen says because his grandfather was Spanish he, as an Argentine citizen can vote in Spanish and EU elections and as a voter can theoretically have a say in what happens in lets say Latvia or Slovenia
In the Italian parliament five seats are reserved for Italian descendants living overseas. Reducing that to absurdity our former Presidsent Sanguinetti is enfranchised to vote for a deputy in the Italian Parliament
And of course all these Spanish or Italian descendants have a right of abode in EU as they can apply for the necessary passport
As far as I can ascertain any Brit who has lived abroad for more than 15 years loses his/her right to vote in UK/EU elections
Bit crazy I think you will agree
So back to the Falklands. Are just the residents on referendum date the only ones who can vote? What about students who are away on a University course outwith the Falklands or residents who are away on a trip for business or other reasons? Is Mr Alex Betts entitled to vote?
I would welcome some informed comment on this from either side without the usual shitslinging please
171 Think (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 07:03 pm Report abuse
(170) Mr. Redpoll, the Non Spanish speaking, 100% Yorugua hasta la muerte......

As far as I'm informed, only residents, phisically present on them Islands, on referendum date are allowed to vote....

A bit restrictive I know but... that's them Islands “siege mentality”

Alex is , most definitely, NOT allowed to vote.....
172 Doveoverdover (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 07:18 pm Report abuse
so long as they are on the electoral register....
173 toooldtodieyoung (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 07:52 pm Report abuse
171 Think & 172 Doveoverdover

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha,ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!!

Ok, I give up......tell me. Which one of you is the puppet and which one of you is the the guy with his hand up your *rse?????

Did you both not know that just because one of you says something and the other repeats it, it doesn't make you twice as right, it just makes both of you look like twice the buffoons that you are.

Why so??? A very just and safe precaution to stop KFC and robots from flooding the Islands on voting day and putting an “X” against “I would like to be an Argentinian please steal my land and my home and my heritage from me”.

I would add that most of “La Campora” can just about manage the “X” but asking them to write words may be a little beyond them.
174 redpoll (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 08:12 pm Report abuse
@171 Think
A typical small minded cooment on your part but I ddnt expect anything else. The rules on these boards say that comments should be English which you break by on occasions posting in Swedish.
Yes I can discuss these matters with you in Spanish. Portuguese or even in my limited Welsh or Guarani
No doubt you, as a colonalist settler and horse whisperer, speak all the native aborigine languages down there in Chubut- or have they died out with the genocide of the native speakers by you usurping colonists?
175 lsolde (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 08:54 pm Report abuse
@165 Shed-time,
So maybe my unborn grandchildren can vote too? Oh goody.
@174 redpoll,
Love your comments. Keep the pressure on our resident snake.
176 Think (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:06 pm Report abuse
(174) redpoll

The rules on this board say that comments should be in English............. which YOU, Mr. redpoll, break occasionally posting some words in Spanish........
And that's why, Mr. redpoll, I doubt your proficiency in the Spanish language....
I have noticed several odd misspellings and wrong use of tenses....
Besides, you seem to ignore the existance of the letter “Ñ” altogether...

You can spot the difference between....:
Feliz año nuevo
and
Feliz ano nuevo ......
Don't you?

Ps:
The native languages down here in Chubut are alive an well, thank you...
As for myself, I speak some gloses og Gününa Këna learned decades ago from el viejo Rueda, the best baqueano it ever was..................
177 redpoll (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:21 pm Report abuse
I dont use tildes as I dont choose to, Think vaqueano
178 ynsere (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:25 pm Report abuse
Redpoll, don't bother with Think. He's best ignored.
179 Think (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:30 pm Report abuse
(177) redpoll

“Vaqueano” is Portuñol....

In Spanish we use “Baqueano” or “Baquiano”.....

Más sabe el Diablo por viejo que por Diablo........
180 redpoll (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:32 pm Report abuse
Ynsere
I was thinking of going down to Chubut for a nice flyfishing holiday but with his attitude, if it represents the attitude of Chubut residents, I think I'll go to Chile instead
181 Think (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:38 pm Report abuse
(180) redpoll

Chile..... Excellent choice too.
182 ChrisR (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 09:42 pm Report abuse
@176 I Don't Think aka The Turnip In Chief aka The Biggest Liar On MP

Repeating the old chestnut again culo?

You can spot the difference between....:
Feliz año nuevo
and
Feliz ano nuevo ......
Don't you?

Yes, it’s happy arsehole, you arsehole. That’s if you use archaic out of date term ‘ano’ only used in medical circles. Regular users prefer the term culo to describe you in this day and age.

What a pity you are a bitter and twisted specimen of the argie race imported as you are via the bird shit works in Chile that your family once owned, that you cannot move forward.
183 redpoll (#) Feb 22nd, 2013 - 10:56 pm Report abuse
@179 Think I am perfectly aware of the dialect spoken on the frontier, calimbao ,and really do not need linguistic instruction from you on the subject thank you
184 ynsere (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 12:08 am Report abuse
Redpoll @ 180
Good fishing in Chubut. Only snag: population is mostly usurping European squatters, Amerindians have been killed off / reduced to poverty.
185 Redrow (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 11:39 am Report abuse
@171 Ingmar Think ersson

Not sure who told you that but you should get your info from an Islander instead. I'm fairly certain there will be postal and proxy vote options for those on the electoral roll but not likely to be physically present near their voting station on the day. It sounds like a pretty standard voting system to me.

What you seem to be saying is that the vote is irrelevant plus it's also undemocratic. That's like saying “No I didn't steal your lawn-mower and anyway it was broken”. In fact the vote sounds like it will be entirely democratic as you are probably well aware. Thus it is only its relevance that remains to be seen. If Argentina had just blissfully ignored it then I would be more worried, whereas it is the hysteria that speaks the loudest.
186 Joe Bloggs (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 01:30 pm Report abuse
176 Think

If he was directing his comment at you he most likely meant to use ano.

Chuckle chuckle
187 axel arg (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 07:38 pm Report abuse
CAPTAIN SILVER. SHED-TIME.
CAPTAIN: If you dedicated your time to investigate deeply about this question, as i did, instead of making stupid comments, or repeating mediocre analysis, you would know that between 1884 and 1888, arg. suggested taking the case to the arbitration, but the proposal was rejected by the u. k.
On the other hand, in 1947 the u. k. manifested arg. that it would be disposed to take the question of the dependencies (south georgia and sadwich) to the i. c. j., but it didn't include the malvinas-falklands in the proposal. So, if you had unless one line of intellectual honesty, you would recognize that the case has strong and weak aspects for both nations.
Beside, if after 1947 none of the two nations proposed to take the case to the i. c. j. again, is because perhaps neather arg., nor the u. k. are sure of getting a positive result, if the case is taken to that institution.
SHED: I understand that for any reactionary people like you, the invasion ordered by the criminal junta that roled arg. in 1982 is your best excuse to reject the negotiations.
However, the day you have enough intellectual honesty, which is necesary to discuss about such a complicated case like this, you'll realize that if after the war, the u. n. has always continued calling both nations to resume the negotiations, it should be respected by the two parts of the conflict.
The defence that you, the u. k., and the govt. from the islands make respecting the application of the right to self determination for this case, is no more than your tipical hipocrite colonial caprice, because accept it or not, self determination has never been applied for this cause.
Many of you can continue distorting as much as you wish the posture of the u. n. respecting this cause, but like it or not, the most important are the facts, and they show everything i said in my comment 110.
188 lsolde (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 09:21 pm Report abuse
@187 Axel,
Oh Axel, you make me laugh.
You spend a lot of time & energy writing rubbish & lies.
Self-Determination is for ALL people, dear Axel.
You do NOT own these lslands & NEVER did.
And, l might add, you NEVER will own them.
We will be rich & prosperous when Argentina has broken up into smaller countries.
Also dear Axel,there will be NO NEGOTIATIONS on Sovereignty.
Thats just in case you forgot.
189 Shed-time (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 11:26 pm Report abuse
@187 Junta or no Junta, Argentina caused a war rather than negotiate and the world kept on turning. Ban Ki Moon said that no members of the security council were ignoring any resolutions. End of story.

Your investigations lead you to see that Argentina refused to take South Georgia and the South Atlantic islands to the ICJ because they know they have absolutely no claim at all... even less claim than over the falklands, which Spain never transferred the sovereignty of to you because, neither did France, neither did Uruguay. End of.

Great 'deep' investigations there, you muppet.
190 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 23rd, 2013 - 11:39 pm Report abuse
@187Axel

“However, the day you have enough intellectual honesty, which is necesary to discuss about such a complicated case like this, you'll realize that if after the war, the u. n. has always continued calling both nations to resume the negotiations, it should be respected by the two parts of the conflict.”

Speaking of 'intellectual honesty' Axel, you have phrased it “the u. n. has always continued calling both nations to resume the negotiations ”, make it sound as though since 1982, the UN has been futily banging on the door of the UK demanding that they negotiate submitting to Argentina's claims on the islands.
191 lsolde (#) Feb 24th, 2013 - 12:24 pm Report abuse
Axel is an air-headed prune.
Pointless trying to debate with him.
l think that he is mentally retarded.
192 Shed-time (#) Feb 24th, 2013 - 03:38 pm Report abuse
@191 he doesn't seem to understand that arbitration or seeking a legal ruling isn't synonymous with handing the Argentines someone else's land.

Definitely a retard.
193 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 24th, 2013 - 06:58 pm Report abuse
axel arg

The reaction of “shed-time” to the 1982 invasion is neither reactionary nor incorrect. I can recall no other occassion when a country completely distances itself from the actions of a past government in the manner Argentina tries to with the Junta.

You cannot in one breath distance yourself from the invasion and then in another commemorate it. You cannot distance yourself from a war but still support it's aims. You cannot wash the blood of 900 people from your concience yet hold the same Malvinas jajajajaja rallies in Buenos Aires.

Argentina is not sorry for the war, it doesn't apologise for the war, it uses the war dead for political point-scoring, it celebrates the war...so please don't pretend that it was all the Junta. It was and is Argentina.

Nobody including your own defence minister believes that if the Falklands were left undefended Argentina wouldn't do it again.

So, we have established:

1) Spain never had universal sovereignty
2) Spain never ceded sovereignty to the United Provinces
3) In 1814 there was noone on the islands to claim “Independence”
4) Vernet was not an official representative of the UP when he arrived on the islands in 1826-28
5) Nobody from Vernets community were forcibly evicted
6) the only representatives from the UP on the islands evicted in 1833 were fewer than 60 “vagabonds, deportees, rapists, murderers and mutineers” who had been on the islands for fewer than 60 days.

Britain has had two successful civilian populations on the islands for well in excess of 200 years.

You continue to repeat the UNs request for us to talk. We tried talking in the 70s and when you didn't get what you wanted you invaded. We tried again with Menem and again failure.

As I said previously, a precursor to any future talks should be a unilateral withdrawal of Argentina from Patagonia and the establishment of an Amerindian state with full retribution of mineral rights backdated. Otherwise 19th century usurption is clearly irrelevant.
194 Anglotino (#) Feb 24th, 2013 - 07:02 pm Report abuse
@193 Monkeymagic (loved that show as a kid)

You just wrote everything I wanted to. Axel Arg is like a broken record. He'll mainly cut and paste a standard response.
Good luck
195 JB (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 12:03 am Report abuse
what the real world is saying!!

www.infonews.com/2013/02/22/politica-62300-frica-tambien-reconoce-la-soberania-argentina-en-malvinas-islas-malvinas.php
196 Clyde15 (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 10:10 am Report abuse
#195
So what ? An Argie press release -must be true !!!!!!!
197 peaceman (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 11:15 am Report abuse
I haven't read all 196 comments, and have taken to find out more about the current situation, as Argentina's position is getting quite tiring for me.

The article in essence is sensible, although as pointed out, has flaws.

My current thinking is; in this modern world a country cannot make claims for sovereignty of a territory. Such claims fly in the face of the general themes of various UN resolutions for colonised territories to have the right to self determination.

Barring the various legalities of the UK government divesting the Falklands. If the Falklands become an independent state, everyone wins don't they? The UK would relinquish their sovereignty, so Argentina should be happy. Under the UN resolutions and charters, Argentina could not look to establish sovereignty, so they wouldn't lose face with their people in dropping that from their constitution. The Falkland Island government would then look to establish trade agreements with all nations of its choosing.
In that scenario, both the UK and Argentine governments could stand up at the UN and declare how wonderful they have both been in helping to develop a new independent state.

A naive notion? I don't think so. Ditch the history and solve the problem in a modern world way.

Discuss.
198 Shed-time (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 12:03 pm Report abuse
@197 Becoming an unrecognised independent state will not prevent the argentinians from wanting to annex you. Annexation of other people's land is an inalienable part of their constitution. Besides, just look at all the shenanigans going on in central america.
199 redpoll (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 02:01 pm Report abuse
@197 The case of independent Belize and Guatemala is a case in point of UK defending a former colony, now fully independent
200 peaceman (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 03:07 pm Report abuse
@198 how about if the new independent state gets recognised, by various countries. It is happening. Annexation does not fit with the UN charter and resolutions, as has been amply demonstrated with Kuwait, as an example.
My suggestion is that if the Falklands become independent, Argentina can take comfort that the Falklands are no longer British, and then look to themselves to align policy to the UN charter and resolutions by removing their claim to sovereignty from their constitution.

Trade wise, I could see the Falklands government falling over themselves to establish links that will be mutually beneficial. The proximity of the two countries and the lack of animosity (sovereignty claims) would be a compelling reason to get around the table. The positive outcomes are too substantial to start listing here. But as an example; tourism and fuel.

@197, thank you, I'm not naive then.
201 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 03:15 pm Report abuse
peaceman

I think you misunderstand the Argentine position.

The Argentines dont care that Britain have the islands, they care that Argentina doesnt.

An independent state, a Uruguayan state, a state under UN flag...none are acceptable...it is a province of Argtardtina or nothing.

They would only accept an alternative if they believed it was an interim to their final goal.

Britain would happily see the Falklands as an independent state, and it would be if it were not for the Argentine threat.
202 peaceman (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 03:42 pm Report abuse
Monkeymagic, thank you for that. Such an attitude would meet with condemnation from the UN, not to mention sanctions.

Once the islands are independent, there's no way the UN would allow Argentina to annex them. Argentina will have to do some serious diplomatic duty to entice the islands into their fold.

Well let's see what the UN and the international community have to say following the referendum. That will be the new start line from which the Argentine government will have to work from, not historical claims.
203 ChrisR (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 03:55 pm Report abuse
202 peaceman

“Well let's see what the UN and the international community have to say following the referendum.”

The UN are toothless and will just utter a mild rebuke at the worst of offences.

“That will be the new start line from which the Argentine government will have to work from, not historical claims.”

It should be but I strongly suspect, given they have lied and lied about the truth in the past, they are not going to let a little thing like an “illegal” referendum (for that is how AR see it) get in the way of further lies.

If you think about it how can TMBOA give up the histrionics that accompany the mythical Malvinas claims? Peronistas have too much invested in this drivel to EVER relinquish it.
204 peaceman (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 05:25 pm Report abuse
@203 ChrisR

Can't find the meaning of TMBOA? :( The referendum should be the path to starting a campaign by all interested parties to neutralising Argentina's claims to the point that nobody listens or responds. This is not a complex dispute like Israel. By comparison its pathetic.

However, I feel for the Falkland islanders living under the continued threat from Argentina that requires a military presence to deter any aggression.

You can argue that Argentina wants the spoils of any Falkland oil and gas deposits, and getting them to declare that is their real claim based on histrionics will be a long time coming. I don't even think the UK government are holding on to benefit from that potential resource, are they?

I know a comment earlier suggested that an independent Falklands could become the southern hemisphere's richest economy, if the exploration does bear fruit. So, be it.

If the Argentine government could see beyond the end of their noses, they would see that collaboration would be far more economically beneficial to them, than being continuously frozen out because of their claims.

There is most probably a case for interested individuals forming a lobby group in support of the Falkland Islands to neutralise the Argentine claims, following a successful referendum. I think people power is now required to add weight to the Falkland governments representations, rather than the UK and Argentine governments.

I wonder if veterans from both sides of the Falklands war share a common view to just let the Falkland Islands be an independent state? If that's what the people want we should work with them to silence the Argentine claims once and for all, with the government not losing face to amend the constitution and get on with exploiting the massive opportunity in the islands that could benefit their economy also.
205 axel arg (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 06:07 pm Report abuse
SHED- TIME. MONKEYMAGIC.
SHED: If you are so intelligent, and if you consider that i am a muppet, can you answer me, why did the u. k. didn't include the malvinas-falklands in the proposal of arbitration of 1947, and why did it reject the proposals of arbitration which were suggested by arg. between 1884-1888?.
You know what i think respecting why none of the two countries proposed to take the question to the i. c. j. in 1947.
Respecting banki mon's words, if you search the whole interview on line that he gave for tiempo argentino (leftist and pro kichnerist), you'll realize that his posture was very contradictory, because while it is true that he said what you expressed in your comment, he also said that the u. n. work in order to achieve that all the territories can get their independence, however, when he was asked about this question, he said he was very worried about the verbal scalation between both countries, and said also that he had the hope that both nations solve the dispute by mean a dialogue, however, he didn't include the govt. from the islands in that so called dialogue, beside, he didn't express either that self determination should be applied for this cause. So, who is being the true muppet, me or you?.
MONKEY: The historic aspects of this conflict are much more complicated than the tipical propaganda that you tiped in your comment. On the other hand, it is you, and many other people in this forum, who use hipocritically the invasion of 1982, in order to continue rejecting the negotiations, like if arg. were still a dictatorship.
Beside, arg. just honours the soldiers who gave their lives during the war, and those who survived, because it's an obligation of the state, but it doesn't celebrate galtieri's decision of invading the islands.
On the other hand, it seems that you ignore that the claims and the rights of the indigenous populations are included in our constitution, which is a true historic reparation.
206 ChrisR (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 06:52 pm Report abuse
204 peaceman

The Mad Bitch Of Argentina TMBOA! Cristina Fernandez the President.

She is severely bi-polar which used to be more accurately described as manic-depressive. One minute the patient is euphoric at some little 'win' and the other minute in a severe depression over a 'lose' situation. She shouts her head off at the smallest upset by her underlings and she has admitted that she is trying to calm down.

My solution is of course a 0.45 acp hollow point in the centre of the forehead.
207 Monkeymagic (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 07:02 pm Report abuse
Axel ARG

The history is simple. See my 6 points above. All are factually correct.
ARG doesn't just honour the soldiers it supports the cause.
Nobody gives a shit whether Argentina is a dictatorship or junta or whether it is a democracy. IT IS STILL A PARIAH STATE. It defaults on its debts, steals foreign assets, lies on an international stage to an extent Iran would blush.
As I said, quite simple. If 19th century colonialism is so abhorrent to you, please immediately vacate Patagonia, return the land to the Amerindians, give the, full historicreimbursement to the minerals/oilthat you have stolen from them, and lets say 50 years after that, when it is proven you are serious, we will take the full historical documents from both sides concerning the Falklands to the ICJ for a once and for all judgement. I believe given the 6 facts above, Argentina would be laughed out...but I want to see your seriousness in Patagonia first.

how does that sound?
208 Shed-time (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 08:17 pm Report abuse
“who use hipocritically the invasion of 1982, in order to continue rejecting the negotiations, like if arg. were still a dictatorship.”

What's hypocritical about reminding argentines that they started a popular war in 1982 and as a result turned peaceful negotiations, seemingly on good terms for them who deserve nothing, into a military conflict.

It's neither hypocritical nor irrelevant to negotiations because it shows that Argentina cannot be trusted enough to be negotiated with, even after forgetting the 1850 treaty of perfect friendship which they ignore.

Axel Foley, do you agree that nothing about the argentines is worthy of trust? Is there a treaty they haven't opportunistically ignored?
209 lsolde (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 09:15 pm Report abuse
@202 peaceman,
Why should we become independent & ask the British to leave just to please Argentina?
We, no doubt will become independent when we are good & ready, but it is none of Argentina's business.
Argentina has no rights here & no say in how we run OUR country.
They were offered a share in the oil but tore up the agreement because they couldn't get sovereignty over the Falklands.
They wanted it all!
Well now they get nothing & l'm glad.
l, for one, want NOTHING to do with a belligerent, corrupt,failed, rogue state like Argentina.
Thank you.
210 ChrisR (#) Feb 25th, 2013 - 09:30 pm Report abuse
209 lsolde

It's not like you to hold back on commenting on the argies!

LOLs
211 row82 (#) Feb 26th, 2013 - 11:42 pm Report abuse
Please support this page - Falklands Forever British - dedicated to Falkland Islands current affairs, keeping the islands free and poking fun at the lunacy of the Argentine government and their various claims and winding up their Internet trolls - www.facebook.com/Britain1592

www.facebook.com/truthfk

Please support our other page - Falkland Islands Desire The Right - dedicated to Falkland Islands current affairs - www.facebook.com/truthfk

www.facebook.com/Britain1592
212 Pete Bog (#) Feb 27th, 2013 - 09:24 am Report abuse
@205
“The historic aspects of this conflict are much more complicated than the tipical propaganda that you tiped in your comment.”

Yes Axel including the fact that the UP governor who authorised Vernet as the governor of the Falkland Islands murdered his predecessor.

That is another complication. Does the murder of his predecessor make his government illegal and therefore Vernet's appointment void?

This is the problem with Argentina's claim.

It states that the civilian population was evicted from Port Louis in1833 when the majority stayed.

One of the people that stayed on the Islands died in Stanley many years later so she could not have been evicted.

It is the fact that in 1833 more British people were ejected(most of Pinedo's men were........British) than the mainly South American population that stayed.
It is complicated as in the Spanish accepting Britsh rule over the islands in 1863 with a diplomatic visit, yet the Argentines claiming inheritance of the Spanish (c o l o n i a l) claim.

The Inheritance claim does not add up.

This is indeed complicated.

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!

Advertisement

Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!

Advertisement