MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, October 17th 2017 - 16:54 UTC

Falkland/Malvinas Islands: Forensic field work to identify remains of Argentine soldiers comes to an end

Monday, August 7th 2017 - 16:03 UTC
Full article 51 comments

During seven weeks of intense work, which began on 20 June, a team of 14 specialists – from Argentina, Australia, Chile, Mexico, Spain and the United Kingdom – exhumed, analysed, sampled and documented the remains of each of the unidentified soldiers. The work was carried out in a high-tech temporary mortuary built on-site for the purposes of the operation. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Malvinense 1833

    God bless Argentina.
    God bless the brave Argentine soldiers.

    Aug 07th, 2017 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse -10
  • Roger Lorton

    Argentina should be ashamed

    Aug 08th, 2017 - 04:45 am - Link - Report abuse +8
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    “God bless the brave Argentine soldiers” que fueron sacados de las Islas Falklands con los rabos entre las piernas!

    Aug 08th, 2017 - 05:33 am - Link - Report abuse +4
  • teaberry2

    Malvinense 1833 why would god bless an invader.......don't think so......they were not brave at all.........

    Aug 08th, 2017 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse +8
  • darragh

    Malvinense

    When is Argentina going to apologise to:-

    a) The Falkland Islanders for the death of 3 islanders, damage caused, stress caused, the treating and regard for the Falkland Islanders as untermenschen and the dumping of land mines etc etc.

    b) The UK and the individual families for the lives lost, the equipment lost and the financial costs etc. etc.

    c) The Argentine families who lost kith and kin

    All for this idiotic political stunt which you somehow try to rationalise by making reference to things that may or may not have happened 200 years ago.

    Aug 08th, 2017 - 11:23 am - Link - Report abuse +9
  • Pete Bog

    @Malvinense 1833

    “God bless the brave Argentine soldiers.”

    And the brave Brits from England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Southern Ireland, Fiji, Nepal, China, the Falkland Islands and from other origins who served in 1982 with the British Task Force, to end Argentine Imperialism in the Falkland Islands. And Malvinense 1833, the non British participants in the 1982 task force did not refuse to serve against Argentina, unlike Pinedo's British Sarandi crew in 1833, who refused to fight Onslow's men.

    Aug 08th, 2017 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +5
  • Don Alberto

    Poor, poor Malvinense 1833 diverts us with his wish. “God bless the brave Argentine soldier” floowed by a typo s.

    Tell us, Malvinense 1833, do you know his name?

    Aug 08th, 2017 - 09:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • gordo1

    Don Alberto

    And “floowed”?

    Aug 09th, 2017 - 06:14 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Don Alberto

    “floowed” - sorry about the typo: 'oo' insted of 'll' in 'followed'

    Aug 09th, 2017 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Malvinense 1833

    The journalistic note is about the Argentine cemetery. On another occasion I said that the British soldiers were brave. I feel very sorry for the lost lives of the 3 islanders as well as all the soldiers.
    I look forward to seeing and talking to John Fowler sometime.
    The death of the islanders occurred by computer error of a British ship.
    If Argentina is guilty of war, so too is the United Kingdom, because since 1833 it refused to find a solution and always delayed the search for a solution.

    Aug 09th, 2017 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • DemonTree

    @Malvinense
    You couldn't really expect the UK to hand its citizens over to the tender mercies of the Argentine Junta? Delaying in the circumstances seems perfectly reasonable.

    The UK really was negotiating - as Argentina wanted - before 1982, only since the war has our government refused to even talk about sovereignty.

    Aug 09th, 2017 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    You need to examine your conscience, you vile little man!

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 06:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Gordo, that seems very OTT. What has he said that's so bad? Just because he disagrees with us does not make him vile.

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 08:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stoker

    The only Court with jurisdiction to determine sovereignty disputes is the UNICJ in den Haag, Netherlands. The UK has been requesting Argentina takes it's “claim” before the UNICJ for over SEVENTY YEARS but Argentina refuse to do so. In that period Argentina has taken several other disputes before the UNICJ. We all remember the Argentina v Uruguay “paper mill” case - which Argentina lost 1 - 14.
    I wonder why Argentina refuses to seek a peaceful solution to the dispute and take their case before the UNICJ?*

    *Don't worry.....I know why ;-D

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • gordo1

    Demon Tree

    Thank you for your comment! So you are now one of the Mercopress monitors, are you?

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 11:25 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    No Gordo, I'm expressing my opinion, just like you are. I don't see anything particularly vile in what Malvinense has said, so I disagreed with you.

    If you can't point out what he said that was so bad, perhaps you should reconsider throwing insults in future?

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    Malvinense

    I'm still waiting to hear when Argentina is going to apologise for the 1982 war which it started.

    There can be no blame attached to the UK whatsoever.

    As for the deaths of the 3 islanders; what mealy mouthed nonsense to say that it was caused by a “by computer error of a British ship”. The only reason there was a British warship firing on the Falkland Islands at all was because of Argentina's grandiose imperialistic designs so you cannot shift the blame onto some 'computer'.

    Be honest with the rest of the world if not with yourself. The Falklands War was caused by Argentina and Argentina alone and you cannot abrogate that by trying to shift the blame onto the UK by reference to something that may or may not have happened nearly 200 years ago.

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 12:53 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Malvinense 1833

    @ Mr. Demon Tree: The United Kingdom always refused to enter into talks with Argentina after the usurpation of 1833. Proof of this are the constant diplomatic notes between the two countries.
    The attitude of the United Kingdom changed after the historic UN Resolution 2065 of 1965. Negotiations were initiated but always delaying the fundamental question: sovereignty.
    The Military Junta, committed aberrations not only to abandon the diplomatic channel and the military occupation of the islands, but also with the own Argentineans.
    Now, Argentina is a democratic country and I think that all the parties involved deserve a just, peaceful and definitive solution to this conflict.
    Regards.

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @Malvinense
    The UK started negotiating with Argentina in 1965. As I understand it the UK government was asking for an agreement where Argentina got sovereignty but then leased the islands back to the UK for 25 or 50 years, and hoped to get the Islanders to agree to this. The government in Argentina wanted a shorter period, and did not want a referendum, and the two sides could not agree. IMO the UK government WAS delaying, because there was no chance the Falklanders would agree to a handover at that time and they hoped to change their minds.

    And the crimes committed by the Military Junta against their own people are exactly what I was referring to. What country would willingly hand their citizens over to a murderous dictatorship?

    I think most people would like a just, peaceful, and definitive solution, but I can't see it happening anytime soon. None of the parties involved are willing to compromise at all.

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Clyde15

    Malv.

    As I have said repeatedly, The Argentine govt. will only accept the handing over of the Falklands along with it's sovereignty. What is there to discuss ?

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 03:29 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    What constant diplomatic notes Malvinense 1833? Mostly silence from BA between 1834 and 1965.

    As for a 'solution” - the matter is already settled. Has been since 1989.

    Aug 10th, 2017 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Malvinense 1833

    @Mr. Demon Tree: The solution is long term, and there are many formulas to evaluate: The purchase of the islands by Argentina or the purchase of the islands by the United Kingdom.
    Shared Sovereignty, or apply a system similar to that of the Aland Islands.
    Failing to reach an agreement submit the case to an arbitration or to the International Court of Justice.
    A definitive solution is possible.
    @ Clyde15 I am sure that the Argentine Government can accept the shared sovereignty.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 10:47 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • darragh

    Malvinense

    But nowhere do you mention the rights of the Falkland Islanders themselves.

    They have made it quite clear that they want to retain the status quo. It's called self-determination. I know that you and Argentina find the idea of self-determination repugnant but you are just going to have to get used to it

    When is Argentina going to apologise for 1982???????????.

    By your lack of response to my continuing to ask you this question you make it clear that you do not think there is anything to apologise for which says an awful lot about you.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 10:58 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Malvinense 1833

    @Roger Lorton: British newspapers report that on July 27th, 1849, during a session at the House of Commons, Mr Baillie asked Lord Palmerston a question regarding the status of the Falklands/Malvinas issue between the Government of Buenos Aires and the British Government. The reply attributed to Lord Palmerston is that “it would be most unadvisable to revive a correspondence which had ceased by the acquiescence of both parties” or “consent of one party and the maintenance of the other”. This publication generated a note of protest on July 31st, 1849 from the Argentine representative, where he states that:
    “(...) the silence of this Office should not be taken at any time as confirmation of the wrongful assertion attributed to H.E. in the event it effectively occurred, I allow myself to remind to H.E. that the Government of Buenos Aires and the Argentine Confederation, has never consented the dispossession of its sovereignty over the Malvinas islands made by the English Government in 1833 (...) and, if, at any time to these days, the correspondence has not been as active, is due to the exhaustion of the discussion and to the status of the relations since the intervention; but H.E. the Viscount Palmerston, in his highest consideration, cannot misinterpret the interval of correspondence with an acknowledgement or acceptance whether tacit or express that has by no means been given by the Argentine Government to the acts in this regard by HM’s Government.”
    You omit to mention the British silence between 1774 and 1829. You can not apply the supposed Argentine silence to your favor because justice operates first in the British silence.
    Go read and learn.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Clyde15

    M1833

    “YOU” are sure that the Argentine government would accept joint sovereignty BUT would the Falkland Islanders ? The UK govt. has made the wishes of the Falklanders a priority.

    With this in view your suggestion is a non-starter. Nothing about sovereignty to discuss.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    So - nothing between 1834 and 1842. Silence from 1842 until 1949. Silence from 1850 until 1888. Silence from 1889 till 1945. Silence from 1945 until 1960.

    Maybe you need to look up the meaning of the word 'constant Malvinense 1833 :-)

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Malvinense 1833

    @ Roger Lorton: What you say is false, but even if it were true, justice is first applied against the UK by the silence between 1774 and 1829.
    @ Clyde 15: I am not sure that Falkland Islanders want joint sovereignty, if they do not wish to do so they should ask London to enter into negotiations with Argentina to bring the case to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice for a final settlement.
    It is possible to exchange ideas and dialogue between countries as we do here.
    I can not believe that a people as advanced culturally, economically and in human rights as the British, can not enter into negotiations and a dialogue with Argentina.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 12:53 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • Roger Lorton

    What silence between 1774 and 1829? Acts of sovereignty in 1775, 1789, 1790, 1801, 1802 and 1814. And those are just the ones that I've found so far :-)

    Go do some research. Kohen & Ridrigues have not.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 12:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Malvinense 1833

    @Roger Lorton Can you explain it in a debate in the islands? What are you waiting for?

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 01:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @Malvinense
    You sound very reasonable, but I'm not convinced the general public in Argentina would agree to those suggestions. I am sure the Islanders would not agree to shared sovereignty or a system like the Aland Islands.

    I'm not opposed to negotiation as long as the British government made clear that any changes would have to be approved by referendum, but it would be very hard to get the Islanders to agree to any changes even if there would be benefits to them.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    Malvinense

    I'm still waiting for you to answer my previous questions about when Argentina is going to apologise for 1982.

    Constantly ignoring my question makes it clear as I said previously that you don't think there is anything to apologise for.

    The UK has stated time and time again that it will enter into negotiations with Argentina but only at the request of the Falkland Islanders. The only reason you and Argentina cannot accept that is because you believe that the Falkland Islanders have no rights.

    Therefore we have another question for you to ignore and that is will Argentina enter into negotiations with the only people that matter on this subject and that is the Falkland Islanders themselves.

    Your continually ignoring of the Falkland Islanders does your argument no favours as you clearly do not consider them to be of any account. On that basis how can you possibly expect them to have anything whatsoever to do with Argentina.

    I don’t care who did or didn’t discover the Falkland Islands
    I don’t care who did or didn’t make the first attempts at settling the Falkland Islands
    I don’t care whether the British did or didn’t accept Spanish sovereignty
    I don’t care whether Argentina did or didn’t inherit sovereignty from Spain
    I don’t care who was or wasn’t expelled from the Falkland Islands in 1833
    I don’t care that Rivera was a murdering piece of scum
    I don’t care about Vernet.
    I don’t care about diplomatic notes between Argentina and the UK in the 19th century
    I don’t care what Palmerston did or didn’t say
    I don’t care about the lies told by Ruda at the UN
    I don’t care about the C24 and its drivel.

    It is all irrelevant

    The only thing that matters is the reality of the Falkland Islanders right to self-determination.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 01:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Roger Lorton

    Debate Malvinense 1833? Of course. But I don't debate with frauds. I expose them.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 02:43 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • gordo1

    Demon Tree

    He totally omitted to include the brave and committed members of the Royal Marines who were the first to defend the islands and then also omitted all members of the British armed forces who undertook the removal of the Argentine invaders.

    They, too, deserve God's blessings!

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Clyde15

    M1833

    You don't seem to have grasped the fundamental principles here by saying that you are not sure that the Falkland islanders want joint sovereignty. Have you not been reading the posts for the last 5 years or more ?

    The last thing that the Islanders want is ANY interference from ARGENTINA in their affairs and certainly not a foothold in their country.

    This discussion is like a magic round-a-bout. It keeps covering the same proposals time and time again ad nauseum.

    Why does Argentina want a group of islands about 300 miles from their shore. As far as I can see, no one would want to live there. The culture is totally alien to your way of life.

    I keep reading a total load of crap about “we yearn for it as we are incomplete without it.”
    Your schoolkids are brainwashed into singing the Malvinas march and hearing legends about heroic gauchos fighting a battle for the Patria and being brutally ejected from this,their
    beloved home, after being there about 6 weeks.

    If you REALLY want discussions, talk to the Islanders.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Malvinense 1833

    @ darragh: The fact that the present-day inhabitants of the Falklands/Malvinas do not constitute a separate people holder of the right of self-determination does not mean they do not enjoy other rights. They are of course entitled to human rights, both individually and collectively. Argentina has committed itself in its Constitution to respect the inhabitants’ way of life. Quite simply, sixteen hundred and fifty British citizens do not have the right to decide a dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom which involves more than three million square kilometres of land and sea, a surface bigger than continental Argentina and twice as big as the United Kingdom.
    Many territorial disputes exist throughout the world, many of them involving inhabited territories. Some have been brought before the International Court of Justice. The Court has decided the sovereignty of these territories on the basis of the titles invoked by the parties, and not their inhabitants’ nationality or wishes. In the El Salvador/Honduras case, between 10.000 and 30.000 Salvadorean citizens found themselves on the Honduran side of the boundary laid down by the judgment. In the case of Cameroon v. Nigeria, more than 100.000 Nigerians inhabit a territory which the Court recognized as belonging to Cameroon. The Court did the same in its judgment in the Burkina Faso/Niger case. In all these situations, the Court reminded the parties of their obligation to respect the rights of the inhabitants of the territory in dispute, but never subjected its decision to the will of the inhabitants. Other examples may be given. At the end of World War I, France asserted that it was not required to hold a referendum in Alsace-Lorraine, since from 1871 – the year the territory was transferred to Germany – thousands of French residents had preferred to leave the territory rather than live under German sovereignty, while thousands of Germans had settled in the territory.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • darragh

    Very nice but totally irrelevant.

    Your first sentence 'The fact that the present-day inhabitants of the Falklands/Malvinas do not constitute a separate people holder of the right of self-determination' is of course ridiculous. The Sec Gen of the UN Ban-Ki-Moon said “The world’s 16 remaining territories that still do not govern themselves must have complete freedom in deciding their future status” or are you claiming that you know better than him.

    That aside you have still failed to answer my 2 questions:-

    a) when Argentina is going to apologise for 1982?

    I have asked this question god knows how many times and you never answer it and I can only assume it is because you believe that there is nothing to apologise for. That in itself demonstrates your real feelings as to the rights of the Falkland Islanders i.e. that they don't have any.

    b) will Argentina enter into negotiations with the only people that matter on this subject and that is the Falkland Islanders themselves?

    Again the simple answer is no as you stated that the Falkland Islanders are not a separate people it's that you just don't have the courage to stand up and say that Argentina will not negotiate with untermenschen

    If you want to take it to the ICJ then I suggest you do so not that it matters as Argentina will ignore any ruling the ICJ makes that it does not agree with - see Beagle Channel Dispute.

    By the way you had better check up on the latest census for the current number of inhabitants of the Falkland Islanders. That's the problem with doing cut and paste jobs like yours above as the originals are often out of date.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 03:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • The Voice

    Malvinonsense how does it feel.....

    ...to be an absolute and unrequited naive plonker?

    If 1982 proved anything there is no way that Argentina will ever get their thieving hands on the Falkland Islands. Its inhabitants who have been there 7 generations don't want Argentine culture or the chaotic political mess that goes with it.

    Shut up and leave them in peace.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Roger Lorton

    The Falkland Islanders were recognised as a 'people' by the United Nations in 1952; and by the Decolonization Committee in 1982.

    Try to do better Malvinense 1833 - you slavish following of Kohen & Rodders is making you look ignorant again.

    :-)

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Malvinense 1833

    @ darragh: And I ask you: When the UK is going to apologize for the invasion of 1806?
    When the UK is going to apologize for the 1807 invasion?
    When the UK is going to apologize for the invasion of 1833?
    When the UK is going to apologize for the invasion of 1845?
    When the UK is going to apologize for the usurpation of the territory of a friendly country?
    The Argentine Government will establish negotiations with the islanders through the Foreign Minister Boris Johnson who is its representative in these subjects.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • darragh

    Malvinense

    So unwilling to answer my questions you resort to the usual method trying to distract and change the subject.

    If you want to know when the UK is going to apologise for something ask the UK or any of the British posters on here. I don't know or care.

    I repeat, the UK has stated time and time again that it will enter into negotiations with Argentina but only at the request of the Falkland Islanders. The only reason you and Argentina cannot accept that is because you believe that the Falkland Islanders have no rights.

    When is Argentina going to stop treating the Falkland Islanders as untermenschun?

    So when are you going to answer my questions??

    Clearly you do not have the courage of your convictions because if you had you would be honest and say that you don't believe Argentina has anything to apologise for.

    You would be honest and say that Argentina will not negotiate with the Falkland islanders nor enter any negotiations where they are present.

    You would be honest and admit that you and Argentina believe that the Falkland Islanders have no rights other than to be absorbed into the Argentine South Atlantic Empire.

    But of course honesty is the last thing we can expect.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Malvinense 1833

    @ darragh: Sorry but the empire has not been just Argentine, the empire through history has been another does not you think?
    And of course the islanders have rights, nobody has said no.
    The islanders have the key to unlock the conflict but do not want to do so. Why do not you ask London to negotiate with Argentina? A definite solution of the conflict will be beneficial for all and one less problem for future generations.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 10:44 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • Roger Lorton

    Argentina did not exist in 1807.
    There was no 'invasion' in 1833, just the ejection of trespassers.
    We apologized in 1850.
    We usurped nothing from Argentina. Spain did not complain.
    The Argentine Government will do nothing in relation to the islands without the will of the Islanders.
    Only the islanders can decide. Not Boris Johnson and certainly not Argentina.

    There is nothing to talk about on the issue of sovereignty. The matter is settled.

    Aug 11th, 2017 - 11:31 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    So you allege British invasions in 1806 and 1807? More of your vile lies and nonsense!

    The truth is the British invasions of the River Plate were a series of unsuccessful British attempts to seize control of areas in the Spanish colonial Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata that were located around the Río de la Plata in South America and Uruguay. The invasions took place between 1806 and 1807, AS PART OF THE Napoleonic Wars, when Spain was an ally of Napoleonic France. NOTHING TO DO WITH ARGENTINA!

    Aug 12th, 2017 - 06:17 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Clyde15

    M1833

    I notice the use of the pejorative term“squatters” is continually used in relation to the Falkland Islanders -especially by think.

    I looked up the legal meaning of the term and came across some information pertaining to ARGENTINE LAW.

    Argentina copied most of it's laws from the USA, including ADVERSE POSSESSION.

    If one can prove residence for 10 years, in which you inhabited the territory and cared for it, you can claim a legal right to such property in Argentina.

    So, the islands were settled , by your admission from 1833 to 1982 when Argentina invaded.

    This means, under Argentine law, that the islanders have complied with the conditions and the territory belongs to them..

    So, either way they hold the rights to the Falkland islands and Argentina does not.

    Aug 12th, 2017 - 08:32 am - Link - Report abuse +3
  • darragh

    Malvinense

    And still you refuse to answer my questions.

    When is Argentina going to apologise for 1982?

    Will Argentina enter into negotiations with the Falkland Islanders directly or as a third party?.

    You just prevaricate and try to change the subject

    Clearly you do not have the courage of your convictions and will not state openly what you obviously believe i.e. that the Falkland Islanders have no rights other than to be included in the Argentine South Atlantic Empire.

    Why not be honest and admit it.

    You state that “of course the islanders have rights, nobody has said no”. Except what you actually mean are those ‘rights’ specified in the Argentine constitution, to quote yourself “Argentina has committed itself in its Constitution to respect the inhabitants’ way of life”, which is nowhere near the same thing as the right to self-determination.

    Why not be honest and admit it.

    You state “A definite solution of the conflict will be beneficial for all and one less problem for future generations”

    As far as I can see there is no conflict to solve except in the minds of Argentine imperialists like yourself. The Falkland Islands belong to the Falkland Islanders. They have the right to determine their own future and what political alliances they wish to make. It is nothing whatsoever to do with Argentina.

    Yet you desperately try to justify your unjustifiable actions by reference to ancient history.

    Why not be honest and admit it.

    Aug 12th, 2017 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse +3
  • HughJuanCoeurs

    Boohoo... Argentina is the victim... Sob, sniffle... Nasty British kicked us up the @rse when we invaded their territory... We are always the victim... of aggression and foreign intervention... Hang on... we were the aggressors and the agents of foreign intervention...Boohoo! We have been thwarted in our plans thus we are the victims of foreign colonial aggression... sniffle, sniffle. Why does no one take us seriously?

    Aug 12th, 2017 - 11:46 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Our man in Havana

    our man in havana

    None of this would have been needed if the conscripts had been issued with dog tags. I hope the Argies are billed for their failure.

    Aug 14th, 2017 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Kipper

    England will return the Malvinas within 25 years.

    Aug 15th, 2017 - 02:28 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • gordo1

    I see HEPATITIS has married a fish!

    Aug 15th, 2017 - 05:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    Gord01

    Don't know where he/she/it got 'kipper' from but he/she/it obviously doesn't realise that a kipper is a smoked herring.

    Only problem with them is that they keep repeating after you've eaten them..

    Hmmm seems appropriate to a certain extent

    Aug 15th, 2017 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Pete Bog

    @darragh

    “he/she/it obviously doesn't realise that a kipper is a smoked herring”

    As the 25 year fantasy is a red herring, a popular Argentine practise to divert from real news in their country.

    Aug 15th, 2017 - 02:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +1

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