MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Britain’s stance on the Falklands a “mistake”; UN resolutions must be complied
Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner said that Britain’s stance of declaring sovereignty over the Falklands/Malvinas sovereignty “non-negotiable” is a “mistake” dictated by “unilateral practices” that have created insecurity in the world. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesIf you think the stance of the UK is a “mistake” and is not compliant with international law then take the matter to the ICJ. Nope CFK will raise at every other forum except the ones that require a deep analysis of her argument. Dimwit!
May 18th, 2010 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Thankfully after the Argentine prsidential election(2011??) this will all quieten down!
don't worry, soon or later the che idiots will worry about something bigger since the Republic of Che idiots risk of defaulting is growing every day (it's just behind socialist venezuela....Laugh..
May 19th, 2010 - 01:20 am - Link - Report abuse +1http://www.businessinsider.com/the-15-countries-at-the-greatest-risk-of-default-2010-2#argentinas-cds-spread-10025-bps-14
I wonder if she is beginning to overplay her hand. The rest of the world is going to get bored of this soon - especially if it disrupts other business.
May 19th, 2010 - 05:47 am - Link - Report abuse +1Cristina ..! Cristina..!
May 19th, 2010 - 07:31 am - Link - Report abuse +1you don't know these simple tactics ...
they distract themself on their ruined Economy..
”We have no doubt about our sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. There cannot be negotiation on sovereignty unless and until the Falklands Islanders so wish,”
May 19th, 2010 - 07:57 am - Link - Report abuse +1This seems to be a brick wall that Argentina has some masochistic fascination with :-)
Ivo. Takes one to know one. Argentina and especially CFK are always using the Falkland Islands to divert attention away from internal problems. You previous dictatorship did the same thing and it came back to bite them in a big way. Although CFK is not as stupid to play a military card (hasen't got the infrastructure to do so anyway), not dealing with domestic issues will ultimatly take it's toll.
May 19th, 2010 - 08:00 am - Link - Report abuse +1Get your own house in order. We intend to pay our debt not default on it!
Argentina has no claim to the Falkands, South Georgia etc. NONE! The people of the Falklands have repeatedly stated as to how they wish to express their UN enshrined rights to self determination. Therefore there is nothing to discuss.
May 19th, 2010 - 08:47 am - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina's claim is no better than if a person, who squated in your house for several months and then was lawfully removed, tried to lay claim to said house many years later.
The distance from the UK is also of no importance with regard to title or the islanders rights to self determination. France has territory off the coast of Canada - no problems. Indeed France has territory on the South American mainland - again no problems.
As has been stated - Argentina is so unsure of its own claim that it will never go to a court such as the ICJ. It comes up with excuses as to why it will not but they are just that, excuses that show up to the world just how silly and unfounded their spurious claim is. Instead they try to play the victim card at events such as the one above - arena's that have no real legal value with regard to this issue but allow Argentina to mouth off. If only the poor indigenous people she stole lands off in her Conquest of the Desert could have had such opportunitities to speak out.
Argentina is trying to introduce colonialism into the 21st Century by her actions over the Falklands. Her imperial ambitions are shown for what they are. Her expansionist policies are no different to that she undertook in the 1870's.
We should understand the “real” world.
May 19th, 2010 - 08:54 am - Link - Report abuse +1After its 1982 sneak attack, Argentina says and does nothing that reaches the level of international news until the 90s when it sensibly enters into agreements on joint exploitation of appropriate South Atlantic resources.
In 2003, whilst campaigning for the Argentine presidency, “Kickback” Kirchner raises the question of Falkland Islands sovereignty in order to get the support of the mob. It was 2003 when Argentina took their claim to the UN, tried to avoid direct discussions with the Falkland Islanders and ran away when the Falkland Islands delegate entered the room.
Recently, the Kirchners have drummed up South American and Caribbean support (in words), although articles elsewhere in Mercopress and elsewhere generally indicate many of those countries scrabbling for relationships with the EU that they would have to give up if they upset EU member states.
The Americans started by declaring themselves neutral, and have subsequently referred to its “close friend and ally” and the “unbreakable alliance”.
No-one else has said anything!! Of course, Russia and China are plunging in on the basis of selling off surplus, no-longer-required, out-of-date military equipment, nuclear power (from Russia?) and otherwise making as much money as possible whilst its still available (just!).
So yes, Cristina is now coming over as a whinger. But I do think that when her current 14% support has disappeared and she is replaced, any agreements with the Falkland Islands/UK should be conditional upon the removal of appropriate articles from the Argentine constitution and a public international statement that Argentina has no claims to the Falkland Islands. It would demonstrate the same sort of long-overdue intelligence now being demonstrated by Spain in declining to support Argentine claims and, tacitly, acknowledging Gibraltar territorial waters.
UN !!?? aaaaaaaaaaaaa
May 19th, 2010 - 09:08 am - Link - Report abuse -1tomorrow ..20/5/.. East Timor's Independent Day from Indonesia ..
Cristina implies the role of UN atEast Timor's independence process..
That would be another erudite Argentine comment, would it?
May 19th, 2010 - 09:16 am - Link - Report abuse +1The real mistake is Argentina ignoring the Falkland Islanders' right to self determination - and self determination does not mean: ”Yes, you can keep your passports but we want the Islands (and all their resources)”.
May 19th, 2010 - 09:35 am - Link - Report abuse +1Self determinations means the Islanders decide what passports THEY want to hold and the Islanders decide what happens to THEIR islands.
gdr wrote “what a coincidence !!!! the Brits invaded -Samoa Islands- in1830's..at Pasific ..and after their “ stalking horse ” New Zealand !!.......”
May 19th, 2010 - 09:52 am - Link - Report abuse +1And Spain invaded South America from the late 1400's onwards. Argentina invaded Patagonia from the 1870's. Your point is?
You know, I think I see a possible trend. Cristina is President of Argentina (for the time being) and Nestor is Secretary General of UNASUR. They have admitted plans for the next 10-15 years. How long before South America becomes Kirchnerland?
May 19th, 2010 - 10:00 am - Link - Report abuse +1GDR wrote “Patagonia was not invaded...it got combined for Republic !”
May 19th, 2010 - 10:07 am - Link - Report abuse +1LOL Oh my aching sides!!!! Stop it gdr - I cannot take such laughter at this time of day!! Of course it was invaded in the CONQUEST of the Dersert. An INVASION that is considered by many as genocidal.
Did she actually say “Please” ? Is that pretty please negotiate I'm being nice or pretty please negotiate out of urgency so I have a legacy before I'm ejected from office in 10 months time?
May 19th, 2010 - 10:40 am - Link - Report abuse +1GDR unless I'm mistaken Conquest implies invasion, I've never heard of Roca's “combination of the desert” even your compatriot Jorge in one of his rare attacks of common sense admits that Roca's actions and others after him in Patagonia was the culmination of what the Conquistadors started 200 years earlier.....
Either your in denial or history was never your top subject?
Comment removed by the editor.
May 19th, 2010 - 10:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0gdr wrote “#17---- the readers would learn lie and faulty things ,
May 19th, 2010 - 10:48 am - Link - Report abuse +1if they look at Encylopedia Brittanica and similar ones...!!”
Oh dear! Everybody writes so many lies about poor old Argentina! Rubbish. You are in denial.
gdr wrote “but at the Argentine's Republican Process there were no any frictions !”
LOL Stop it with the humour, please! No frictions indeed. That is your funniest comment yet, bravo!
GDR, You might want to read your history books, Samoa was a german colony and New Zealand had just signed the treaty of Waitangi which guaranteed peace and equal status of the indigenous with white settlers and was well on teh way to independence....
May 19th, 2010 - 10:49 am - Link - Report abuse +1Rhaurie-Craughwell wrote “You might want to read your history books”
May 19th, 2010 - 10:58 am - Link - Report abuse +1Sadly..I think that it is the reading of Argentine history books that has got him into the state he is in;-)
He Islanders are the only argument that has UK
May 19th, 2010 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse -1Use the islanders and islanders are left to use.
horacioyanes wrote “ He Islanders are the only argument that has UK
May 19th, 2010 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse +1Use the islanders and islanders are left to use.”
Not at all. There are many arguments that show up the Argentine claim as spurious and without value and they have been used many times to do just that. Argentina has NO claim of any value over the islands - NONE at all. That is also shown to be the case by the fact that Argentina will not take it to the ICJ.
The reason why the UN enshrined rights to self determination of the islanders is now used is because that issue pushes away anything that either Argentina or the UK may wish. Even if the UK wanted to give Argentina the islands the UK, relinquishing its rightful title over the islands, would not be able to do so because of the UN enshrined rights of the islanders. If they wanted the title of the islands transfered to Argentina then the UK would have to do it. It isn't a case of using that as an excuse. It is a case of not being able to over ride it what ever the wishes of Argentina or the UK. Why is that so hard to understand?
Horacioyanes - on the contary, the British have the historical argument and indeed the legal one........... in other words, all the valid ones!
May 19th, 2010 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse +1Today as before, the Argentine government maintains its protest regarding the illegal occupation of the Falkland Islands, not abandon, or give up its rights to those territories, until there is justice. Since the considered part of the domain of Argentina, founded on the priority of discovery in the priority of occupation, possession and exercised initiated in the recognition of tacit and explicit and the acquisition of such securities by treaty belonging to Spain.
May 19th, 2010 - 11:46 am - Link - Report abuse -1horacioyanes wrote “Today as before, the Argentine government maintains its protest regarding the illegal occupation of the Falkland Islands, not abandon, or give up its rights to those territories, until there is justice. Since the considered part of the domain of Argentina, founded on the priority of discovery in the priority of occupation, possession and exercised initiated in the recognition of tacit and explicit and the acquisition of such securities by treaty belonging to Spain.”
May 19th, 2010 - 11:57 am - Link - Report abuse +1Except that the UK isn't illegally occupying the Falkland Islands and Argentina has never had legal title to them. They did not 'inherit' them from Spain. The fairy tale that is part of the Argentine constitution is just that - a fairy tale. No basis in truth...just words!
But again - that doesn't matter anyway as neither the UK nor Argentina can ignore the UN enshrined rights to self determination of the islanders. Why is Argentina trying to impose colonialism upon the islanders by ignoring their UN enshrined rights?
You talk of justice yet Argentina would never allow it to be put to the ICJ.
You talk of Justice yet Argentina is set upon ignoring the UN enshrined rights to self determination of the islanders.
You talk of justice yet Argentina is trying to bring a new era of colonialism in the 21st C
You talk of justice yet Argentina is set upon an imperialistic path.
You talk of justice yet Argentina has no legal argument that it dare actually put to the test.
27 horacioyanes “Today as before, the Argentine government maintains its protest regarding the illegal occupation of the Falkland Islands, not abandon, or give up its rights to those territories, until there is justice. Since the considered part of the domain of Argentina, founded on the priority of discovery in the priority of occupation, possession and exercised initiated in the recognition of tacit and explicit and the acquisition of such securities by treaty belonging to Spain.”
May 19th, 2010 - 12:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +1CORRECTION
Today as before Argentina has CLAIMED the UK's occupation of the Falkland Islands to be illegal BUT has supplied no evidence to back that claim up.
Argentina has again not supplied evidence that the UK's occupation of the islands has been declared illegal by any international body or court.
It has not supplied this evidence because the UK's occupation and sovereignty of the islands is not illegal, and in fact it has been recognised in the Lisbon Treaty as a UK overseas territory. Meaning all of the EU member states including Spain have recognised the UK's sovereignty of the islands.
How many countries have recognised Argentine Sovereignty over the Falkland islands in international treaties?
I believe the answer is a big fat zero.
This group of British settlers, may not sustain for long this lie, against a nation of 54 million people with strong feelings toward the islands.
May 19th, 2010 - 01:09 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Just because a “nation of 54 million” believe somehting to be true doesn't make it so.
May 19th, 2010 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +1If you belive it so much then take the appropriate legal recourse and refer the matter to the ICJ. I don't expect a rational response because every time the ICJ get mentioned the Argetnine posters on this forum stick their fingers in their ears and pretend not to listen.
The drilling continues and CFK and her supporters can do nothing about it.
CIJ:
May 19th, 2010 - 01:40 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Hisashi Owada Japón
Peter Tomka Eslovaquia
Shi Jiuyong China
Abdul G. Koroma Sierra Leona
Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh Jordania
Thomas Buergenthal Estados Unidos
Bruno Simma Alemania
Ronny Abraham Francia
Sir Kenneth Keith Nueva Zelanda
Bernardo Sepúlveda Amor México
Mohamed Bennouna Marruecos
Leonid Skotnikov Rusia
Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade Brasil
Abdulqawi Yusuf Somalia
Sir Christopher John Greenwood Reino Unido
mmmmm we are not idiots.
Did Argentina obey UN resolution 502 when it was passed - or did they just ignore it?
May 19th, 2010 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Ah yes Senor Yanes, the invocation of massive majority vs Minority, I guess that when nationalistic Facist fervor swept Germany the will of the majority that Jews where sub human scum was entirely justified, dam Jews just couldn't sustain their argument and lie that they were all human!
May 19th, 2010 - 02:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1But let us look at from the point of proportion obviously comparing the opinion of 40 million (yes that is your current population stats not 54 million) against 3,500 is somewhat unfair, their only a small country, so latest opinion polls and the 1996 inspired referendum in the islands showed 98% against Argentine rule/Imperialism, now let us look at the latest Argentine polls which showed a drop over the last 20 years of nearly 28% to currently 72% supporting Argentine sovereignty/Imperialism over the islands in Argentina, and it's dropping every year, having peaked during the height of the fighting in 1982, it seems that Nationalism is not the powerful motivating factor it once was now that free choice and wealth have been added to the equation.....
As for settlers I'm no expert but the current ethnic composition of Argentina and that language you speak didn't suddenly fall out of the sky did it?
Horacio,
May 19th, 2010 - 02:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Please remind me, is “Yanes” a native american surname? Or is it a Spanish “settler” surname?
Comment removed by the editor.
May 19th, 2010 - 03:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Rhaurie.
May 19th, 2010 - 03:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -1What are your sources indicating their Stats?
Roberts.
My surname is of Spanish origin. But my blood descendants Comechingones and Pampa. Result of the union of Spanish with Aborigines.
Horacio, so why do you have a problem with the Falkland Islanders being settlers? Especially since your own ancestry includes settlers.
May 19th, 2010 - 03:58 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I have nothing against the islanders, they can live there perfectly under sovereignty Argentina. They could keep everything they have now and would have many benefits; but his atipatia and contempt for the Argentine people reveals his racism. They are anti-Latino. But they forget that live on Argentine territory and 14,000 kilometers of Great Britain.
May 19th, 2010 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1No they don't live on Argentine territory Horacio. That is complete nonsense. They are Falkland Islanders and they live in the Falkland Islands. They have a right to self determination enshrined in international law. They are not anti-Latino. On the contrary, they have excellent relations with Chile, Brazil and Uruguay. They simply want to be allowed to choose their own destiny. Can you not understand that?
May 19th, 2010 - 04:34 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Well Senor Yanes, unless you have a subsrciption with JSTOR you will just have to take my word for it, just like in absense of yourself providing a family tree or picture of yourself that you can claim that your indigenous heritage (if indeed you have any?) willingly allowed themselves to mix with the Spanish invaders.
May 19th, 2010 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The articles title name in question is:
“The Dynamics of Argentine and Spanish Nationalism since the fall of the Junta's” by Dr C. M. Brescain professor of History-Ibero Latin American Studies, Universidad Complutense de Madrid.....
found in the Iberian Latin American Journal, 2009, edition 4 issue 85.
Perhaps if you wait two years then it will be allowed into the public domain?
horacioyanes wrote “My surname is of Spanish origin. But my blood descendants Comechingones and Pampa. Result of the union of Spanish with Aborigines.”
May 19th, 2010 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +1That union was one sided and forced upon the Aborigines.
Oh and how I laughed when I read La Princesa de Plastica's words in Madrid. She is proud to be the “granddaughter of Spaniards”, and she is proud that Argentina is a country which welcomed immigrants.
May 19th, 2010 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse +1http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=1266315
So people going of their own free will to Argentina is called “immigration” but people going of their own free will to the Falklands is “implantation”. And that is from a 2nd generation Argentine talking about Falkland islanders who have been there for 8, 9 and even 10 generations...
The relationship with Chile, Brazil and Uruguay is strategic. How much will it last?
May 19th, 2010 - 05:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Latin America is in an integration project and the islanders cambio.Y have much to lose if they keep their position.
Strategic or not, the fact is the Falklands have had excellent relations, particularly with Uruguay and Chile, for many decades and there is absolutely no reason why this should not continue. Your assertion that they are anti-Latino simply does not hold any water.
May 19th, 2010 - 05:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@Christopher UK
May 19th, 2010 - 05:28 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Why is that so hard to understand” because is simply a lie.
UK never respects anything else than his own selfish interest. Where was the self-determination of the Diego Garcia Islanders?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depopulation_of_Diego_Garcia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depopulation_of_Diego_Garcia
Where was the right of self-determinations of the Palestinian?
And for the Indians and Irish?
The only way to get rid of the British crown is with a big missile made in Russia in the middle of Westminster or Windsor Castle the world safer.
You will be grateful to us for giving you the freedom you deserve.
I like this for the job.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depopulation_of_Diego_Garcia
NicoDin,
May 19th, 2010 - 05:33 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I'm a bit confused. Are you saying the UK should also do to the Falkland Islanders what it did to the Chagossians?
Palestine? What does that have to do with the Falklands or the UK for that matter?
What about India and the Irish? India has been independent since 1948 (that's 62 years) and the counties in Ireland who chose to have been independent since 1922 (88 years). What is your point?
Aborigins and Torres Strait Islanders have -self determination-rights !!??
May 19th, 2010 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse -1here is the some Brits massacres in Australia on aborigins :
1830 ... [Fremantle( West Australia) massacre] ; by Brits Comm.Irwin...
1833-34...[Convincing Ground massacre] ; in Victoria,on whale hunters..
1838 .....[Waterloo Creek massacre]; ..on women and children....
1928 ... [Coniston massacre ];.... revenge of Frederick Brooks..
by William Murray.......
How about this massacre Ivo:
May 19th, 2010 - 05:47 pm - Link - Report abuse +1http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masacre_de_Napalp%C3%AD
George !!! you are still Encylopedia Kid ? exceed yourself please !!!
May 19th, 2010 - 06:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Comment removed by the editor.
May 19th, 2010 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is the only one thing that many of you can say, just a current of insuts and that's all, i understand that it's very complicated to be objetive when we are talking about a cause that covers our feelings, in fact no one is totally objetive, but some people are more inteligent or humble and respect the diferent opinions, beside this kind of people dont adjudge for their selves to be the owners of the truth.
May 19th, 2010 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Accepted or not, my country still has rights to claim for the islands, if our claim is spurious and weak, i wonder why minister brown didn't argue to our president that the u.k. wont discuss about the sovereign dispute with argentina because it's claim prescribed many years ago, like many of you like to hold all the time, it's simple, because the adquisitive prescription is not valid for the public international right, the fact that our claim wasen't continuos was a terrible mistake, but my country never recognized the legitimity of the british ocupation.
The u.k. only argues about the right to self determination, i have no doubt that the islanders have right to remain as british citizens, but some day they will have to understand that we have right to claim for territorial integrity too, my government can't keep on ignoring the islanders, and your side will have to sit and discuss about a solution that satisfys the wishes and the interests of both parts.
The fact that you can declare your independence wont affect our claim, anyway if you could not declare it during all these years of economic prosperity, i dont think you can do it in the future as long as the sovereign dispute exists.
AXEL HERRERA REYES.
@J.A. Roberts
May 20th, 2010 - 05:51 am - Link - Report abuse -1“Are you saying the UK should also do to the Falkland Islanders what it did to the Chagossians?”
1- I never said something like that Mr. Roberts else I am showing you how expendables are you like them.
In fact you were near to follow the same destiny in 1962/64 but the Pomies politicians changed their mind.
In 1966 the British unofficially told the Argentines that they had no economic interest in the islands at all and that they were largely self sufficient. Although this may have been the case at the time, this position soon changed. By 1975 the British Government established a working committee under, Lord Shackleton, to investigate the economic potential of the islands. The report concluded the islands had enormous fishing potential, as well as potentially significant oil and natural gas reserves. The oil crisis of 1973 and a recent (1973-75) geological survey in the region had suggested the significant potential for the development of local oil and gas fields. Thus, economically the British Government could not allow the islands to pass out of the British sphere of influence. The Argentines were also aware of the economic potential of the islands as the geological survey was not secret, this led to suspicion in Buenos Ares that the “British were after the islands oil” The importance of the discovery of oil in the region can not be overstated as a reason for increasing tensions in the region. It would have been politically unsound to say the least for the British to cede control of significant new reserves to a foreign power so soon after a global oil crisis. To the Argentineans, the potential exploitation of a major new oil field just a few miles off their coastline, by a foreign power, was unacceptable.
http://www.ukessays.com/essays/military/falklands-war.php
2- Director of the “Reducción de Napalpí Enrique Lynch” AKA Henry Lynch origin “Lynch family of Galway of the Tribes of Galway, of Anglo-Irish origin”
@thorson
Arg: 3 UK : 1 :)
Axel - The British do not accept that your country has any right at all to claim the islands. That is why we will not discuss sovereignty with Argentina. And we don'y need to put any argument to your President as that would be 'discussing' sovereignty!
May 20th, 2010 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse +1Prescription is not an issue.
The British government now argue the islanders right to self-determination because they consider the historical argument won. The British government also believes that the proposals that come out of C-24 are flawed. As it happens none of those proposals now have ny chance of becoming UN Resolutions so the C-24 is also irrelevant.
Argentina has no territorial integrity as it has never owned the islands.
Our side will NOT have to sit ......... there is nobody and nothing other than the islanders who could make it do so!
As far as the British are concerned there is nothing to discuss and if the islanders wish their independence, then the British government will assist them is achieving such.
End of argument really.
Hoytred one thing i slightly disagree with is that the government argue the peoples right to self determination not because they consider the historical argument won, But because the historical argument is OBSOLETE.
May 20th, 2010 - 06:29 am - Link - Report abuse +1The world has moved on since the age of sail. Well, everyone except Argentina.
Axel,
May 20th, 2010 - 08:29 am - Link - Report abuse +1Self determination is the only relevant thing now. This has been clearly spelled out by the UN. It is international law.
All the history is very interesting to debate, but like zethe says, it is obsolete. It is no longer relevant to the situation.
@ Hoytred & zethe
May 20th, 2010 - 08:37 am - Link - Report abuse -1Well some Islanders seem to be very smart like Alexander Betts (Born in Falklands/Malvinas) who has a complete point of view from you guys. A light in the darkness and confusion made all these time by the UK’s Govt.
He understood the lies from the evil British Empire and he was looking for the real truth.
Unfortunately he had to pay a very high price to be intellectual honest with himself.
He lost all is properties in the Islands and also the right to keep his daughter with him.
I guess the only self-determination you’ve got in the Island until now is to say, “Yes Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, we belong to you”.
Wake up fellows and be careful to don’t end like Bolivia with Spain.
The worst think that happen to them was to discover silver they ended like slaves and ruined.
Oh that's interesting Nico. The opinion of a single Falkland Islander now outweighs that of all the rest of the the Falkland Islanders (just because it co-incidentally chimes with the unsustainable Argentine take on things)...
May 20th, 2010 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse +1HOITRED, J. A. ROBERT, AND OTHERS.
May 20th, 2010 - 02:19 pm - Link - Report abuse -1As long as you keep on suffering of cheap nationalism , like many of my compatriots, our situation wont never change, i never liked to underestimate any one, because i am not a haughty, but after all these monthes that i take debating with you, i must recognize that with that fucking mentality that you have, it's imposible to debate about absolutly nothing, you adjudge for your selves to be the owners of the truth, and that's all.
It's reall notable the way you distort the history and the reality to your convenience, anyway you can keep on saying all the crap that you want, i will continue with my survey, talking to expert people on the issue, and i'll keep on respecting the wish of the islanders, criticising the posture of our government, and defending our territorial integrity, maybe some day you can understand that the solution must benefit both parts, or maybe you wont, who knows.
Accepted it or not, as long as you prefer to be a propserous viceroalty, even your great grandchildren will have to live with our claim, sorry guys. AXEL HERRERA REYES.
That's really interesting Axel, so support for British compliance with international law is “cheap nationalism”. What is “cheap nationalism” anyway Axel? It's a fairly meaningless concept.
May 20th, 2010 - 03:02 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The historical argument does not favour Argentina in the slightest and is obsolete anyway, and on top of that, in the United Nations age the Falkland Islanders have done nothing more than exercise their international rights.
The British government has repeatedly said that it would happily walk away from the Falklands if that is what the Falkland Islanders wish. So much for “cheap nationalism” - whatever that might be.
I see you have not yet addressed the inconsistency in your position regarding the Viceroyalty, the Falklands and Argentine “patrimony”. Your “territorial integrity” argument might hold water, but first you have to prove that BsAs/UP/Arg inherited the islands from Spain. I look forward to seeing how you square that circle.
Good luck with your survey. Just a little tip though - nobody would consider the Argentine “Cancilleria” an independent source of information any more than the FCO in London. You are best off sourcing your material from as many sources as possible, and best of all from original documents - or a very least plausible copies of these documents. The AGN in BsAs and the PRO in London are good places to start.
By the way, there will be a massive benefit for Argentina if it dropped the claim. Normalisation of relations with the UK, normalisation of relations with the FI and the resulting co-operation. As nearest neighbour it is logical for the Falklands to trade with Argentina, but until Argentina drops the unsustainable claim and aggressive posture the FI will simply take their business to Chile, Uruguay and Brazil. If Argentina chooses not to, then I'm afraid you are correct. The Falkland Islanders will have to continue as they have done for decades, without normal relations with Argentina. They have done this successfully for decades...
axel, the world has moved on mate, i don't see how you guys don't get it.
May 20th, 2010 - 03:36 pm - Link - Report abuse +1This is the age of the UN, people have a right to live how they choose.
let's say for example, the united kingdom gave the Falklands to you. This would be against the will of the residents. The security council(Uk, france, US, russia, china) would be obligated to send a task force to kick you back out.
You might not like it, but this is just how the way the world works now days.
Residents don't have more rights than Argentina, pirates!!!!!
May 20th, 2010 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse -1I really doubt you could get much from Uruguay, Chile or Brazil. Their companies have interests in Argentina and they know that doing business in Malvinas without permission from our government is ilegal and could lose their business here. Sorry guys!!! The day you have a rope on your neck will come one day and you will have to change your behaviour.
“they know that doing business in Malvinas without permission from our government is ilegal ”
May 20th, 2010 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Err.... no it isn't - why on earth would you think it was illegal?
Jihad Jorge Nostradamus is back. Try dealing with the reality not with your dreams about the future. Hope and dreams is all you appear to have Jorge. Nothing certain or material.
May 20th, 2010 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You do however have about 10 days to buy some shares in Rockhopper and make enough profit to make at least some of your dreams a reality!
Jorgebobo, the Argentine Congress does not make law in Chile, Uruguay and Brazil...
May 20th, 2010 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Who is this Alexander Betts that his views/comments should have any relevance? Web searches locate one such individual. Regrettably, he's not much of a source. Data indicates that he was on the Falkland Islands at the time of Argentina's sneak attack. But what was his nationality? Again, data indicates that he held a passport that stated “Born in Falkland Islands”. No Argentine government of the time would have issued such a document. But there are clues. In an article, he refers to arriving home in Cordoba after Britain re-established its sovereignty. So that makes him one of two things. A traitor or a spy, or perhaps both. Had to get out to avoid the normal penalties - being shot or being hanged. I see that Cordoba is far from both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Probably very wise.
May 20th, 2010 - 05:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Nicotine the straw shop has run out of stock, I see you have resurrected that unfortunate tale of Alexander Betts to try and prove an albeit weak point.
May 20th, 2010 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse +1It is a sad tragic tale rather than one of any “light in the darkness” he was an unfortunately very bitter man who fell on hard times when the islands economy collapsed and he saw Argentina as the only means to salvage it.
He openly aided the Argentine forces and rather mockingly and openly celebrated the invasion, when his own two brothers were suffering dreadful hardship opposing it.
Let us be firm about what rights he “lost” and why. He was not forced to flee because of his views, he had talked about them openly and occasionally getting the harsh look, many people knew his views, it’s because of what he did in 1982 that he forfeited them, he was not forced to flee because of his views, he left voluntarily with the Argentine forces after the surrender, and abandoned his daughter, aeging mother and three grandchild, in the 27 years since he left he could have visited her anytime, but he hasn't I guess he has alot of demons with him to this day, and struggles with varying degrees of self loathing which caused him to turn on people who were once his neighbours and friends a somewhat cowardly act to leave those who depended on you all for want of a political cause, it nearly tore their family apart in the islands.
I might add he was also dropped from Argentina's poster campaign 3 years ago after he stated that the only fair way to resolve the dispute was to take it to the ICJ.......I would choose your poster boys carefully Nicotine
But obviously we are going to use people and opinions we are going to discard to suit our own opinions. But I would prefer if we kept away from using very public tragic family breakdowns.
Jorge che idiot...a nation like Brazil doesn't give a hood about your Falk Lands nonsense nor the che idiots in your lousy government. They simply buy your land and the Kirchner's are accepting their money, for them self. Laugh...argies are so stupid to get in that Falk Lands hype..
May 20th, 2010 - 09:06 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Horacio##39
May 20th, 2010 - 10:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You are absolutely right!!. The Falklanders live 14.000 km away from Great Britain.
Now a very interesting question ... How far away do you live from your ancestors land (Spain/Italy etc.) ?
Would a qualified guess be 14.000 km approximately or ..?
Time for reflections/speculations...eh????
@J.A. Roberts
May 21st, 2010 - 08:42 am - Link - Report abuse -11- This is a lie Mr. Roberts try to write the letter just to know the truth Britain will never respect your self-determination if goes against her own interests $$$$$$.
2- If 1 Islander counts for nothing to you what represent the almost 1% of the population (excluding foreigners British troops).
Why so (according with your logic of course) will count 1000 Falklanders/Argentineans over 40 millions plus 2 Falklanders continental Argentineans that just only represent 0.0025%?
If your logic is that quantity matters more than anything, the opinion of 1000 is close to nothing in today’s world.
Your so in a country like Argentina will not count the opinion of the Jewish for example (They are less of the 1% population) or the Irish/Argies or Aborigines.
Come one Mr. Roberts rethink what you say else how can you convince the world that 1000 people can have self-determination to split part of Argentina territory.
3- “Arg inherited the islands from Spain”
That was already proven in history for that reason UK rises up the hilarious S-D stuff.
4- “massive benefit for Argentina... Normalisation of relations with the UK”
In fact UK will benefit more if they drop they illegal occupation by force.
You will benefit more by gaining access to Mercosur and all agreements made by the block. You will gain access to Argentina’s infrastructure to process you oil (If you find any of course).
@Rhaurie-Craughwell
“in the 27 years since he left he could have visited her anytime”
Mr. Agent0060 said “traitor or a spy”
May be he is afraid to be killed like happen with Dr. Mike Bingham.
2 cases 2% of the actual population.
You don't want to talk about families tragedies OK fine.
The Juntas Galtieri, Videl, etc also were families tragedies they kill 30.000 people here.
Well, I won’t say any more to don’t bash his family in the Island.
And you know that I can do that very easily.
So Keep that in mind when you make your point against Argentina and her families Tragedy
Alexander Betts website:
May 21st, 2010 - 08:52 am - Link - Report abuse +1http://elmalvinense.iespana.es/elmalvinense/autor.htm
Not to be confused with this Alexander Betts who happens to be an Oxford educated expert on migration and international governance:
http://elmalvinense.iespana.es/elmalvinense/autor.htm
I get the impression the two are often confused in Falklands debates.
Nico,
May 21st, 2010 - 09:16 am - Link - Report abuse +1I think British actions since 1982 show that they do take the Islanders SD seriously.
It's your “logic” is a bit faulty. The Falkland Islanders have expressed their wish as a group via a democratic process. The opinion of one man does not represent that of all the Falkland Islanders. Perhaps you should look up the word “democracy” in the dictionary Nico. I know you don't have much experience of it in Argentina Nico, but that is what it is.
Oh and if you think the opinion of 40M Argentinas is relevant, you are sadly mistaken. The only people who can decided what happens to the Falkland Islands is the Falkland Islanders. As for “splitting” Argentine territory, that simply shows how brainwashed you are. The Falklands have never been part of Argentina.
Argentina did not inherit anything from Spain. Anyone who says that just looks a bit ridiculous. BsAs/UP and therefore Argentina took independence in a unilateral act and by force. So please get over this myth that Argentina somehow “inherited” the Falkland Islands.
71 Nicodin “3- “Arg inherited the islands from Spain”
May 21st, 2010 - 10:52 am - Link - Report abuse +1That was already proven in history for that reason UK rises up the hilarious S-D stuff.”
Proven? When?
Britain never recognised Spanish sovereignty of the islands. Spain never held uncontested sovereignty of the islands so Argentina couldn't inherit it anyway.
The only country who could dispute sovereignty of the Falklands is Spain. Shame they recognised British sovereignty in the Lisbon Treaty.
Given this, and the fact that at the time you had a garrison on the Falklands Spain still saw you as nothing more than Rebels against there rule, please explain how you inherited anything?
@ J.A. Roberts & LegionNi
May 21st, 2010 - 11:51 am - Link - Report abuse -1JAMES DOUGLAS LEWIS, born on the Malvinas expressed disappointment that little progress had been achieved. and his grandfather had traveled to the mainland. Like other settlers from the Malvinas, he had integrated without difficulty and become a mayor.
Recalling that the Malvinas question introduced by the United Kingdom itself, he said that had led the Special Committee to adopt a resolution as recently as 2006, which stated that the dispute over the Territory was about sovereignty, and that it could only be resolved through negotiations.
That text determined that the principle of self-determination, applicable in the case of most Territories to be decolonized, was not applicable in the Malvinas case, which involved a Territory dismembered by force after the expulsion of the original Argentine population. Having been prevented from returning, it had been replaced by a population of British people.
In the Malvinas case, the international community had ordered the end of colonialism through negotiation between the parties. The United Kingdom had ignored that international mandate, but Argentina was willing to find a mechanism whereby both parties might reach agreement.
He said he had struggled to find interests that would unite the two parties, such as fishery conservation, tourism, livestock farming operations and exploitation of any hydrocarbons that might be present in the area, but the lack of dialogue had hampered progress. The United Kingdom, through its unilateral fishing agreements and exploration and exploitation of oil, had done nothing to maintain the spirit of cooperation set out resolution 41/11 of 1986, zone of peace and cooperation. Argentina’s rights, arising from discovery and possession before 1833, had been repeatedly recognized at the United Nations and, as such, the UK should seriously address the issue.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/gacol3162.doc.htm
Can you guys extend the 2000 chrs
see you later
75 Nicodin
May 21st, 2010 - 01:04 pm - Link - Report abuse +1In the link you provide your minister for foreign affairs Mr Jorge Enrique Taiana states:
“”all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory…” Those general principles had been applied to the Malvinas question 42 years ago in resolution 2065 (XX), which explicitly ruled out the principle of self-determination as a way to settle the dispute.”
Resolution 2065 states no such thing. No where does it rule out self determination. It says that the dispute is to be resolved bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the UN Charter and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands. How is this excluding self determination.
His argument like yours has no bases in fact.
Also
The UN has NOT recognised any Argentine rights in the Falklands nor has it recongised any UK rights in the Falklands. All it has recongised is that Argentina disputes UK sovereignty.
What the UN has most certainly recognised in the UN charter is the right to self determination.
Also
You have not yet answered the questions put to you in 74 above. You claim that Argentinas inheritence of the islands has already been proven. Please provide evidence of how and when this was proven. Until you can then your claim is just like that of your minister for foreign affairs, it has no bases in fact.
The great thing i love about their claims are that they say they have proof, yet every time we say well then, take it to the ICJ, we get a reply of “we dont have to” - There aint any other way you're going to get them, well...there's not any way.
May 21st, 2010 - 02:36 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@LegionNi
May 21st, 2010 - 02:40 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“UN Charter and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands”
“Interest is not equal to self-determination” many nations in their constitution have a “the interest of the people” as a paramount but that doesn’t that they can choose to be part of any foreigner power.
Any British or Argentinean has also the right of self-determination to do things but none can determinate to be part of France or US.
You start from the wrong side, first you are not a nation in the sense of legality this is not the middle age where a tribe call themselves the nation of the Francos for example.
To be a nation and S-D you have to be recognized as that so some question for your application form to become a nation.
1- The name of the nation? Falkland can be? Right
2- Have you got any written constitution?
3- Who is the head of estate of your future nation? (Queen Elizabeth II not valid she is the head of UK) Else you are not and independent nation with self-determination UK would be the nation.
Well you have to do a lot of things very expensive to be represented in the world imagine that some nations 1000 time bigger that you found difficult to represent themselves in the world.
Forget it you are condemned to be under the boots of Britain as an overseas territory or became and independent estate like ours provinces (states) within Argentina.
Pro be part of a largest nation, freedom, federal assistance, Access to infrastructure to process your oil, cheap flight to the continental Argentina, access to Mercosur, freedom to fish whatever you want with in Argentina’s maritime zone, ports, Representatives in Argentina parliament low house and upper house,
Co participation of federal founds (any province receives found from the central govt. for education, health, etc).
Think about it
Erm Nico, you just copied and pasted the submission of a single petitioner to the C24. Completely meaningless.
May 21st, 2010 - 02:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Anyway, it's generally accepted - even by Argentina - that only UN General Assembly and UN Security Council resolutions constitute a source of international law, particularly Security Council resolutions. What the C24 says or recommends is completely irrelevant unless its recommendations are adopted by the Security Council or General Assembly. Perhaps you'd like to try again.
Also, I'm fascinated to know how you are going to bend logic and reason to explain how Argentina somehow “inherited” any territory from Spain.
@NicoDin
May 21st, 2010 - 02:46 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Who's this next prat you've dug up? James Douglas Lewis? Can't find any trace of him. Is he a figment? Sentence construction suggests a Falklands-born Argentine who had no trouble integrating into Argentina.
@71 NicoDin.
I'll retract “traitor or spy”. Please replace that with “traitor, spy and coward”.
2- Have you got any written constitution?
May 21st, 2010 - 02:48 pm - Link - Report abuse +13- Who is the head of estate of your future nation? (Queen Elizabeth II not valid she is the head of UK) Else you are not and independent nation with self-determination UK would be the nation.
The united kingdom has no written constitution, this is not a requirement of becoming a nation.
Also, queen Elizabeth is the monarch if around 14 totally independent nations including Australia and Canada, when you get it through your thick skull, that it's just a TITLE. The commonwealth treasures it's history.
Nico dear, I think you'll find that every single UN Resolution (and I mean General Assembly or Security Council resolutions, not committee resolutions) regarding the Falkland Islands or non self governing territories all make reference to GA Resolution 1514 (XV) of 1960 which clearly spells out in an unambiguous manner the Falkland Islanders' right to self determination.
May 21st, 2010 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +178 NicoDin (#)
May 21st, 2010 - 03:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +1May 21st, 2010 - 02:40 pm
Under the “boot of Britain” there is ZERO poverty in the Falkland Islands. What federal assistance do they need or want from a nation with numerous shanty towns? They are perfectly capable of looking after themselves and it is quite clear that it is Argentina that wants Falklands natural resources.
They experienced Argentine “freedom” in 1982. I get the impression they didn't like it much.
Argentina - Possibly not a failed nation - yet!
May 21st, 2010 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina - A failed democracy. The Kirchner dictatorship.
Argentina - Freedom of expression - as dictated by Argentine dictators.
Argentina - Knowledge - as dictated by Argentine dictators.
Argentina - Education - as dictated by Argentine dictators.
Inside the next 10 years, Argentina will progress further into its state of being an embarrassment to South America (except for Venezuela, that is progressing toward being the South American version of North Korea - a rogue state). Argentina will never succeed in its colonialist, imperialist ambitions. It could grow up. It could say, “Back in the 19th century, we believed that we should have sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. But this is the 21st century. As a democratic nation, we accept the right of the Falkland Islanders to self-determination and territorial sovereignty.” This is generally known as national maturity. Can Argentina do this? The next comments will tell.
@J.A. Roberts
May 21st, 2010 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1OK look think for an instance that you have convinced me ok.
So I say the Malvinas are not part of Argentina else the Falkland belongs to the Islanders.
Freedom from the bloody Argies and if you give some Quids I we represent you to the UN.
What do you think will that change?
Should I answer? Nothing mate, nothing at all because the issue is not against you is against UK.
And the case of Argentina is very, very, very strong to be dismissed by a “Self-determination” declaration.
The best thing that happen to you was our invasion that put the attention of UK over you else you would be like in the middle age.
If I would be you I will think to make a good deal with Argentina, and here my generous and free advice.
1- Make that our govt. accepts your inclusion as an independent province (estate) like the rest.
2- That they will put in writing under an international body lake UN that any govt. or future govt. will not change any aspect of you way of life. Like language, culture, education, etc. and that all islanders will keep their right as it is now over their assets (properties, land etc), and the right to keep your British citizenship and Argentinean together (nothing of this would be necessary) as this is guarantee in Argentina.
That’s it you will be able to make your own laws, to drive you car as usual, to do everything that can made any other province in Argentina. Get founds from the govt. and legal representation within Argentina congress.
What would be your problem?
Are you more developed than Tierra del fuego? No.
Do you think that UK will be there forever if there are not commercial oil or fishery?
Tierra del Fuego just from January to February received $75 millions.
You will live a year with that would be 75.000 a head.
Last offer mate...
A joint Argentinian/UK citizenship could have been a solution, but the citizens of the islands unilaterally would refuse this. They want nothing to do with you.
May 21st, 2010 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0From their perspective, United Kingdom has protected them and continues to spend about 100 million a year doing so, where as Argentina invaded them, and tried to force them into submission, these memories are still fresh in their minds, not to mention you refuse to do business with them, you alienate them. The British army is still dismantling the scores of mines places there during the war.
For these reasons you can't really blame them for not wanting to be Argentinian.
The Falkland Islands. Remove claim to sovereignty in Argentine constitution. Accept status of Falkland Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands as British Overseas Territories. Accept any change of status to be determined SOLELY by Falkland Islanders.
May 21st, 2010 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +164 Idlehand, 66 J.A. Roberts, you bunch of ignorants, international companies in argentine terretory must respect our legislation. Every company operating in Argentina must ask permission to operate in Malvinas, if they don't they face justice. You know nothing about our legislation, retards!!!!
May 21st, 2010 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Nicholas, don't smoke near the beach!!! LOL
Nico,
May 21st, 2010 - 04:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina does not have a “very, very” strong case. If you did, the islands would be yours by now. In fact the Argentine case is fatally flawed in many respects. No-body takes it seriously. The only thing the UN calls for is for a resolution of the dispute - Argentina's dispute - and not a transfer of sovereignty. The UN has never said sovereignty should be transferred nor has it ever said the Islands are Argentine.
You are correct. The 82 invasion did put the focus on the Islanders. The Islanders had been saying all through the 60s and 70s that they did not want the islands to be transferred to Argentina. The FCO had been trying its best to do exactly this. Now that is totally impossible. The UK was forced by your invasion to stick to its obligations to the Islanders and respect their democratic wishes.
Why is any deal with Argentina good? If the Falklands became a province then their taxes would go to BsAs. Now their taxes go to Stanley. How could that possibly be a “good” deal? Why on earth would the Falkland islanders want representation in the Argentine congress when they have perfectly good representation in their own Legislative Assembly. Why do the Falklands need to be more developed than TDF? Surely it's up to the Falkland islanders to decide how developed they want to become? Anyway, the only reason TDF is so developed is because it gets development aid from BsAs.
The UK will honour its commitment and international obligations to the Falklands for as long as the islanders want this, so your idea that the UK will be gone if there is no oil or fishery is nonsense. The UK has no access to income from the fisheries now, and will have no access to income from the oil either (if there is any) so your assertion makes no sense.
Ok. jorge! is the voice of Argentina. This makes Argentina unacceptable as a member of the international community. Imperialist, colonialist, ignorant, rabid, nationalist Argentina must accept control of their territory and activities by the UN Security Council. Argentina cannot be trusted.
May 21st, 2010 - 04:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +188 jorge! (#)
May 21st, 2010 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse +1May 21st, 2010 - 04:38 pm
All you could do in those circumstances is refuse to allow a company that operates in the falklands from operating in Argentina. You can't charge them with any crime. Argentina needs all the economic activity it can get so it would only be shooting itself in the foot. It would also likely be in breach of other trade agreements that have already been reached as well as WTO policies.
@88 jorge! Here's a bit of straightforward Falkland Islands/British justice. Be at the forefront of the next Argentine attempted invasion. I will be only too happy to put a bullet through your ---I was going to say brain, but you don't have one ---- head.
May 21st, 2010 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Do you get the picture? No matter what you say, you and your crap country are not wanted in the Falkland Islands. You can get real or commit national suicide. Don't really care. Second option is probably best. Surrounding South American nations would take over your territory in short order. Five years. Argentina - who?
@J.A. Roberts
May 21st, 2010 - 06:28 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Not mate you are complete wrong becuse you don’t understan our federal system at all and perhaps you take the crap that Clarin and La Nacion Groups used to bash the govt. and the right win.
Argentina has national taxes and estates taxes (province) fixed by any independent Estate.
1-The national taxes are IVA 21% (VAT in UK) and now is close to this % and will increase in the future.
2- Income tax. Maximun 35 % for big corps and companies and has a mono-tribute for small business that for a fixed amount that included retirement national pension and coverage for health service scheme “Obra social”. Your business has to have a turnover less that the maximum I don’t remember now I think U$s 100.000 at year.
3- The province of the south under the parallel (No remember Now) are exempted of some taxes.
The province producer of oil retain a royalty (regalia) for themselves that the companies have to pay in compensation for the extraction of the not renewable resource.
So if your local govt. (Falkland Governor and parliamentary house) don’t want to put any tax is not the federal business you will be tax free except from the VAT & Income tax maximum 35% that will return later according with your contribution and your needs.
The national taxes like VAT & Income tax goes to a basket and the central govt. will redistribute this money to all provinces. The less rich receive more so Buenos Aires always receive less because has the largest GDP in Argentina U$S 220bn. in proportion.
Argentina is a copy paste of US federal system we are a Federal Republic.
Last, the UK will sell you for a good deal mate, if you find oil there your life will be ruined believe me.
You will end like Bolivia exploited kicked out and looking for a job in Tierra del Fuego.
That is the British way mate they preferred to save International Bankers that they citizens in UK what make you think that you are more so special to them? Oil, Fish, and a foot in Southern Atlantic
AKA money
I am originally from a town in the UK called Poole. On the other side of the harbour from the town is the largest onshore oil field in Western Europe. It is so well hidden that I have never seen it and I'd guess most people in the area don't even know that it's there. I don't recall it disrupting my life in any way so I think the residents of the Falklands will be fine. Especially as it is their oil and their choice should the reservoirs become viable.
May 21st, 2010 - 06:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@Idlehands
May 21st, 2010 - 07:47 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Yes sure mate like the Deepwater Horizon Incident in the Gulf of Mexico due to the negligence of BP they even noted that either until now.
They were operating inadequate equipment with leaks and security issues like valves that never worked.
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/
How will you repair the damage to the ecosystem?
You don’t know how things work in UK? Cheap labour force, Cheap equipment, Cheap, cheap but high, high profits but is something goes wrong a cheap insurance covers the mess if not goes to bankruptcy first in the meantime.
I fell more safe now.
Thanks
www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=44036
May 21st, 2010 - 08:08 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Thanks for that long-winded explanation of how taxes in Argentina work Nico, but the bottom line is today tax revenues in the Falkland Islands are collected and spent by the elected representatives of the Falkland Islanders on their behalf.
May 21st, 2010 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1What you are proposing is that the Falkland Islanders surrender part of their tax revenue to Buenos Aires and let BsAs decide how that money is spent.
And you think that is a “good” deal for the Falkland Islanders? Most people would be questioning your sanity...
@J.A. Roberts
May 22nd, 2010 - 08:45 am - Link - Report abuse -1I will answer with this to don’t enter in a long my system your system tax, etc.
Tierra del Fuego:
GDP: U$s 3.2bn (2009)
Exports: U$s 250 m
Export destination: Chile (46%), Brazil (26%), USA (15%) and China (8%). Rest of the world (8%).
GDP per capita Official Exchange rate: U$s 25,993 (Nominal)
GDP per capita PPP: U$s 46,787 (Purchasing Power Parity)
I hope you recognize that they are far more developed than you guys, in infrastructure, Industries, etc.
The economic data available of the Islands are very unreliable the only thing I could get is that you have a deficit of more than 5m Pound ( U$s 7.2) in your budget.
And a GDP of U$s 105M really this is your GDP? I can believe it you are a little business.
And you really think that your U$s 61,05M of tax revenues would go to Buenos Aires?
Are you laughing on me?
The UK is helping you or ruining you?
And you are questioning my sanity? Do you really think that UK is a great deal for the Islanders?
I doctor here please.
See you.
Nico,
May 22nd, 2010 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse +1Who cares what TDFs GDP is. It's of absolutely no relevance. The Falkland Islanders might not want to have as much development - has that not occurred to you? It is up to them to decide how much development they want and the state of play in TDF or Santa Cruz or Chubut or wherever is totally irrelevant.
Of course I question your sanity. You have said that if the Falklands were part of Argentina that would be a good deal. How would that be a good deal? You even say yourself that the Falklands “tax free except from the VAT & Income tax”. Then you say “the central govt. will redistribute this money to all provinces”. So, as I said, you are effectively asking the Falkland islanders to surrender a portion of their tax income to BsAs for BsAs to decide how it is spent. That does NOT sound like a good deal to me.
And anyway, the only reason TDF is as developed as it is, is because federal taxes are distributed to TDF “according to its needs”. The Falklands, who pay their own way a the moment (except for defence) could end up subsidising TDF. That is NOT a good deal for the Falkland Islands.
@ J.A. Roberts
May 22nd, 2010 - 10:13 am - Link - Report abuse -1Mr. Roberts, your nationalism is quite amazing.
If you would have a country like Argentina surely will lunch and attack against US, Russia, and China over night. By thinking that you are the world superpower.
Your tax revenue 61m is like a drop in the ocean compared with Argentina.
You are poor mate you cannot subsidize even yourself, you cannot afford to finance a road with that much, less a pipe for oil, and less any oil production, even a factory ca you run with this little money.
Ok may be you don’t want to grow as you said, if that is your explanation.
Regards,
Actually Nico,
May 22nd, 2010 - 10:38 am - Link - Report abuse +1I'm sorry, but the fact is the Falkland Islands are now totally self sufficient financially, apart from defence - and if it was not for Argentina's aggressive attitude there would be no need for that defence expenditure. So your assertion that they can't even subsidise themselves is complete nonsense.
The size of the Falkland Island economy is completely irrelevant. There are many, many countries with smaller tax revenues than Argentina. So what?
You have completely failed to demonstrate how the Falklands becoming another Argentine province would be a “good deal”. In fact, it would be a massively bad deal for the Falkland Islanders. They would surrender tax revenue to BsAs and control over their own affairs. How could that possibly be a “good” deal? Anyway, it is the Islanders choice at the end of the day, that is their international right. Argentina has offered the Falkland Islanders nothing but threats in the past so what makes you think Argentina is going to be make a positive difference?
My nationalism? Just for standing up for the Falkland Islanders right to self determination? I don't think you know what the word “nationalism” means. And when did I ever suggest that the UK was a superpower? Attacks? Russia? China? Overnight? What are you trying to say? Please, Nico, stick to the topic...
91 Idlehands (#) May 21st, 2010 - 05:00 pm
May 22nd, 2010 - 02:37 pm - Link - Report abuse -1You don't know the decrees working at the moment. Every company operating in Argentina, especially those involving oil and fisheries are not allowed to make business in Malvinas without permission from the government. If they do, then they can be charged!!!
The upshot of this is that there is none argentine company operating in Malvinas.
We are not shooting in our foot, companies have never put pressure on us and preffer to keep their business here.
92 agent0060 (#) May 21st, 2010 - 05:13 pm
- There wasn't anyinvasion from Argentina and never will be, since we cannot invade our own terretory.
Your threats are a good laugh!!! You don't need to wait for a war to meet me. You can come to Comodoro Rivadavia and try to do what you are dreaming, lol. It would be a strong pleasure to kick a british ass!!!
I couldn't care less wether or not islanders want us!!! Can you understand that, little man??? I don't care!!!!!
Please stop talking about our neighbours, you know nothing about them.
Keep dreaming with your “self-determination”, that is not for you, it is for people oppressed by colonialism, and most important, it is for PEOPLE!!!!
That's quite amusing Jorgebobo. Your decrees are obviously working very well, but only for Argentine companies. Barclays, BP and others continue to operate in Argentina and also in the Falkland Islands and there does not seem to be any appetite for enforcement when it comes to them.
May 22nd, 2010 - 02:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Talk about shooting yourselves in the foot.
J. A. ROBERT. ZETHE. AGENT060.
May 22nd, 2010 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse -1JASON AND ZETHE, i allready told you about the precariousness of the rights of my country during 19 centenary, i am not going to repeat then, read then again.
If the u.k. gained controll on the islands, that was because it usurped then in 1833, that's why it could improve it's tittle over the malvinas.
About the chancery, if i go there, that's because there is abundant information about our cause,, but it's not the only one source from where i get information, in fact i will have an interview with an expert in international right form the u.b.a (university from buenos aires).
Cheap nationalism is bassicly when some one bases hes arguments in the ignorance , and it does not recognize that he maybe could be wrong.
I have allwyas recognized the mistakes of my country, i talk to expert people on this issue, but all of you underestimate my arguments, and adjudge for your selves to be the owners of the truth, that's why many of you suffer of haughtyness and cheap nationalism.
About our relations with u.k., they are allready normalized, we have a productive and mature relation with it, it was recognized even by minister brown.
About the right to self detemination, of course the world move on, but that right is not the only one important aspect, like it or not there are many others aspects that must be taken into account.
Beside if my country dropped it's claim in 1850, it was never invoked by the u.k. during the negotiations, if our claim was false, the u.k. could have prouved it perfectly, and it had nothing to negotiate with arg.
The islands could have been finally decolonized and the conflict was over, on the other hand, maybe the islanders can declare their independence, but it wont impide that my country keeps on claimg for the malvinas, anyway you allready know what i think about it.
AGENT060, keep on repeating all the crap that you heard from the media, you have no idea about the true reality of my country idiot ignorant.
Axel,
May 22nd, 2010 - 03:24 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The UK could not have usurped anything from Argentina. Usurp means taking possession of something without legal claim. The title of the islands was not clear at the time, they were certainly not Argentine. Britain had a strong claim, she exercised her claim and gained control.
Thank you for your own personal interpretation of what “cheap nationalism” means. It's just that, your own opinion. You may think my arguments are based in ignorance, but that again is your own opinion. I try my best to back up my arguments with reason and facts. It's a bit rich for you to say I engage in cheap nationalism when you still have not clearly, unambiguously, stated if you think the Falklands were inherited from Spain or not.
I'd hardly call relations between the UK and Argentina as normalised, when at every forum Argentina brings up the Falklands, continues to behave childishly, walking out of conferences where Falkland Islanders are represented etc. That is hardly “normal” behaviour.
I think you will find that under international law, the only “aspect” in the process of decolonisation is self determination. There are not “many other aspects”. There is no other consideration other than self determination.
Were you at the negotiations between the UK and the UP in 1849? To you have a record of what was discussed? I don't think so. We only have the convention and Argentina's subsequent behaviour to go on. Argentina clearly signalled that it's claim to the Falklands had been dropped by no longer including the claim in messages to congress. There is not really any other way of looking at it.
104 axel arg: I'll say again, all Argentina's claims are IRRELEVANT. It would not matter if Spain decided to come out tell us that you are right, and the Falklands were yours.
May 22nd, 2010 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The world has moved on. The right to self determination is the most powerful defining factor. This is just how the world works now.
@zethe
May 23rd, 2010 - 05:25 am - Link - Report abuse -1NO in this case
If Argentina' proves that this is part of its territory like the Islas Martin Garcia for example the self-determination stuff should be dropped by UK.
The Island are over Argentina maritime platform “territory integrity”
And don't start with cases in Europe because here doesn't count this is America. That is the reason why UK doesn't want to sit with Argentina to resolve the problem. And if UN give the right to Argentina about the issue then any military operation to get them back would be complete legally. That is the way the world works now.
The UK does not wish to sit with Argentina to resolve the problem because THER IS NO PROBLEM!
May 23rd, 2010 - 07:46 am - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina has NO territorial integrity cliam because the islands have NEVER been part of Argentina!
The islands are over their own piece of continental shelf and not over any part of Argentina's.
The UN doesn't give a stuff which is why there are no new UN Resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands! C-24 merely proposes Resolutions which have never been adopted.
There is NO DOUBT - THE ISLANDS ARE BRITISH because the islanders wish it so...... Argentina is irrelevant!
Sorry Nico,
May 23rd, 2010 - 09:22 am - Link - Report abuse +1The “continental shelf” argument is meaningless. It is not the basis for a claim. The rest of the world (except for Hugo Chavez) would laugh at you if that is what your claim was based on.
Territorial integrity has nothing to do with how near or far the islands are from Argentina, but rather depends entirely on if the Islands were once Argentine territory - which they were not. So the “territorial integrity” argument fails also.
The only problem to resolve is your problem. Your unjustified and ultimately unsustainable claim is what you Argentines as a nation have to solve. You have to get it into your collective head that self determination is what operates here and finally realise that the only way to solve your problem is to drop the claim.
108 NicoDin if Argentina believe's that then you should pull out of the United nations.
May 23rd, 2010 - 11:11 am - Link - Report abuse +1You clearly don't have the same rational views as the rest of the modern world.
@J.A. Roberts
May 24th, 2010 - 05:13 am - Link - Report abuse -1“the only way to solve your problem is to drop the claim”
We will never do that and will go stronger and stronger our claim.
You would have to get use to my friend.
regards,
Hmm, I think the facts show otherwise Nico. Your unsustainable claim is becoming increasingly irrelevant. Stronger my foot!
May 24th, 2010 - 08:55 am - Link - Report abuse +1@NicoDin, Jorge and every Argentine who comment on Mercropress.
May 24th, 2010 - 12:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I was born in the Falkland Islands. I was raised in the Falklands. I still live and work in the Falklands. The United Nations, an organisation which the majority of countries in the world are members of (including Argentina), has listed basic human rights, which every member pescribes to. One of the human rights, is self-detemination, which allows people to choose their own economic, cultural, political and social future. The people of the Falkland Islands have exercised this right, as has many other countries in the world. I am fed up of Argentines commenting on here, lying about the validitity of their claim over my country. This is my country, not yours. I live here, I work here, I will raise my family here, my future is here, not yours, and for deluded Argentines to tell me what is right for me and my country, when they most likely have never stepped foot in the Falkland Islands is insulting and for them believe the nonsense that is indoctrinated to them through their childhood via their 'education' is laughable. People like me, my parents, my friends, my neighbours my co-workers, these people will decide the future of the Falkland Islands, not some misinformed, miseducated, arrogant and ignorant Argentines. You have no right to determine my future or my country's, you do not have the right, so stop making up lies. Get over it, get on with your lives, because you are embarrassing yourself. The UN gives the people of the Falkland Islands the right to choose their future, as it does with the Argentine people's future. That is it, thats final, you cannot argue with that. You will never win, because there is basic human rights here. You will never colonise the Falkland Islands.
Argentina swallow your pride, you have lost and will continue to lose.
115 M_of_FI :
May 24th, 2010 - 01:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Spot on mate, couldn't agree more. We here in the UK will do all we can to support you guys out there.
it's just hot air to be honest, there isn't much they can do about it.
J. A. ROBERT. ZETHE. HOITRED. M_OF_FI.
May 24th, 2010 - 03:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -1JASON, it's really notable how you keep on understanding just what you want, my arguments are not ambiguous, i allready told you about the fact that my country didn't inherite anything from spain, our rights and britain's were precaurious, i recognize then, on the other hand we had started to excercise our rights on the islands, but we could not inprove our rights there, because we were despoilled by the u.k., that's why it could improve it's tittle on the malvinas, and i recognize too that there are no doubts about the british sovereignty in the islands.
Beside you still didn't answer my question, if my country dropped it's claim in 1850, why the u.k. never invoked that fact during the negotiations with arg., you dont understand yet that the true purpose of that treaty didn't have anything to do with the malvinas's cause.
I allready told you about what the u.k. could have done in 1965, if it considered that our claim was false, i am not going to repeat it, read my comments again.
ZETHE AND HOITRED: accept it or not, the u.k. is violating our territorial integrity, the islands were argentine, unless for a few monthes, but we were despoilled for the u.k., that's why we could not inprove our rights on the islands, read the comment that i left for jason and after get your conclutions.
I really think that the wish of the islanders must be respected, they are not responsable for what happened in 1833, but some day they will have to understand that we have right to claim for our territorial integrity, and the final solution to the conflict must be fair for both parts, like it or not, i have no doubts, THE MALVINAS ARE NOT ONLY BRITISH, THEY ARGENTINE TOO.
M_OF_FI: what else could be waited from and ignorant like you, keep on suffering of haughtyness and cheap nationalism, and the status quo will remain for years, this is evident that you too understand just what you want, negotiating does not mean submition.
AXEL HERRERA REYES.
Axel
May 24th, 2010 - 03:23 pm - Link - Report abuse +1One question I would like to understand is why are Argentines so passionate about their ownership of the Islands. Why do you want them so much? I know oil may have changed the equation a bit but it's been diputed from long before that. It seems crazy to covet something that isn't really worth that much using arguments relating to events from 200 years ago.
118 axel arg
May 24th, 2010 - 03:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You say the UK is violating your territorial integrity. How?
The only way the UK could be doing that is if the Falkland Islands were ever a recognised sovereign part of Argentina and they never were.
Vernets settlement was a private venture which he funded himself. He also asked for Britains permission as he knew we claimed the islands.
When Argentina appointed him Governor thereby trying to establish a sense of legitimacy to some kind of Argentine svereignty the British government made an official protest, stressing that Argentina had no right to appoint a governor to British sovereign territory. When Argentina ignored British protest, Britain expelled your garrison as we had every right to do.
As Argentina never held sovereignty of the islands then there is no territorial issue.
Other than Vernets settlement what grounds are there for territorial integrity? Please explain.
Axel, My answer to your question re 1850 is at #105, last paragraph.
May 24th, 2010 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I never said your arguments were ambiguous. I said they were contradictory (contradictorio). That's a different thing. Even above you make contradictory statements:
1. “my country didn't inherite anything from spain”
2. “we had started to excercise our rights on the islands”
What rights? If you did not inherit from Spain, then what rights? How did you acquire these rights you mention?
3. “the u.k. is violating our territorial integrity, the islands were argentine/we have right to claim for our territorial integrity”
4. “my country didn't inherite anything from spain”
If you did not inherit anything from Spain then the islands were never Argentine, so Britain could not have violated your territory and nor does territorial integrity apply.
5. “i recognize too that there are no doubts about the british sovereignty in the islands”
6. “THE MALVINAS ARE NOT ONLY BRITISH, THEY ARGENTINE TOO”
No need to explain. The contradiction is obvious.
7. “I really think that the wish of the islanders must be respected”
8. “M_OF_FI: what else could be waited from and ignorant like you, keep on suffering of haughtyness and cheap nationalism, and the status quo will remain for years, this is evident that you too understand just what you want, negotiating does not mean submition”
Oh, so that's how you “respect” the wishes of the Falkland Islanders. You lower the Falkland Islander's democratically expressed wishes to “cheap nationalism” and “haughtyness”.
John Stong in 1690 landed and named the sound and eventually the entire island group after Viscount Falklands.
May 24th, 2010 - 04:46 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Prior to John Strong's landed there are no recorded landings by any other nations. So britian where the first to claim the islands and the first land on the islands, all this before Argentina even existed as a country, therefore Argentina's historical claim is nonsense. As you can not claim sovereignty over a nation or territory, whos sovereignty has alreacy been claimed, that existed years before your own nation existed, and the Falkland Islands are a nation
1776: The British finally depart the islands but leave behind a plaque re-asserting British dominion - 10 years before Governor Juan Crisostomo Martinez did the same asserting spanish dominion, when he was recalled to spain.
In 1823, the United Provinces granted land on East Falkland to Luis Vernet, who first travelled to the islands the following year. That first expedition failed almost as soon as it landed, and a second attempt, in 1826, sanctioned by the British (but delayed until winter by a Brazilian blockade), also failed after arrival in the islands. In 1828, the United Provinces government granted Vernet all of East Falkland, including all its resources, with exemption from taxation if a colony could be established within three years. He took settlers, some of them British, and before leaving once again sought permission first from the British Consulate in Buenos Aires. After receiving consent, Vernet agreed to provide regular reports to the British consul and expressed the desire for British protection for his settlement should they decide to re-establish their presence in the islands.[1] Note How Vernet recognised British sovereinty by Expressing his desire for British protection of the settlement and British permission to establish a settlement on britains behalf, as his expedition was sanctioned by the British
@M_of_FI
May 24th, 2010 - 04:54 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Are you talking about your self perhaps?
Your country where?
You are 14.000 km away from your country this is Argentina, sorry this is reality.
You are quite wrong but keep trying, indoctrination is very hard to get rid of, specially the British one.
Regards,
@zethe
“Spot on mate, couldn't agree more. We here in the UK will do all we can to support you guys out there.”
You cannot support yourself and you want to support others.
You are quite funny really.
@ Idlehands
May be coz is our perhaps?, or may be UK is violating all international laws as always have done?, may be we are fed up of UK arrogance? A lot of may be and this is going to increase with the UK’s stupidity to unimaginable levels, wait and see.
Regards,
@J.A. Roberts
“How did you acquire these rights you mention?”
And can you explain how UK acquired her rights?
“As Argentina never held sovereignty of the islands then there is no territorial issue.”
So if we kick your way off for 200 years you will not make any further claim?
Why you didn’t say that before? I’m calling the troops right now, ring, rign commandos we have an appointment in Puerto Argentino 5 o’clock get ready.
Regards,
@axel arg
Are you drunk or a M5 undercover?
Brits don’t understand you and me either what are you trying to say?
Even the Brits feel sorry for you mate.
Please make your arguments pretending to defend the British position may be that way you get things right this time.
Chau.
@Nico Dixon
May 24th, 2010 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Grow up! M_of_FI (FI standing for Falkland islands) lives in the Falkland islands. His country is the Falkland Islands, Not the UK. The Falkland islands are self Governing protectorate of the UK. The Uk has sovereingty over the islands because the islanders wish to remain British Citizens (self determination), hence why Britain has not given up its sovereignty of the Islands and never will.
Your historical claims go back to the late 1820's, ours go back to the 1690, so your historical claims are full of rubbish. Your countries disregard for the rights of the islanders is disgraceful and your should be ashamed, how would you like it if spain claimed sovereignty of Argentina and paid no attention to what you wanted? Oh am sorry, they already did that 400 years ago didn't they! Now you want to do the same to those living in the falklands.
Tell you what Nico, the only way you will get the falkland islands back will be through war, and i can tell you now you will never win a war against us, and everyone here in the UK will willing take up arms to help defend our fellow Brits in the falklands.
@NicoDin
May 24th, 2010 - 05:24 pm - Link - Report abuse +1What reality do you refer to? The Falklands being Argentine, that's an Argentine fantasy. Reality is when it is actually real NicoDin, not something you wish for.
This is real; I was born in the Falklands and live there, therefore I get a say in how the country is governed. Not you. That is reality. NicoDin, did you vote in the Falkland General Election last year? No you didnt, but I did. That is reality. The British flag is flown in the Falklands, is the Argentine flag any where in the Falkland? No, that is reality. I bet you have never been here, never met or spoken to a Falklander, but you believe you know what is right for country you have never been to. You know nothing about reality.
Is it indoctrination to believe in human rights? Self-Determination is indoctrination? Is the UN brainwashing the world? That is what you allude to NicoDin, what does that say about you and your country? Especially when your country keeps (falsely) bragging about how it obeys the UN (the indoctrinators) and the resolutions it passed decades ago. You are making it too easy NicoDin.
@Teaboy2
May 24th, 2010 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“The Uk has sovereingty over the islands because the islanders wish to remain British Citizens..”
So go to Britain 14.000 north have you ever see a map?
“hence why Britain has not given up its sovereignty of the Islands and never will.”
Well my friend this depends of Argentina too the “never will” depend much of what we will..
Nothing is eternal and you know how many people say I will never and then have to say I will.
“1820's, ours go back to the 1690, so your historical claims are full of rubbish. Your countries disregard for the rights of the islanders is disgraceful and your should be ashamed, how would you like it if spain claimed sovereignty of Argentina”
Oh they can in fact Yugoslavia was a country and later was divided in several parts, Germany is another case and now are together again, things change.
But the case is that Spain is not claiming and Argentina yes so UK has to sit with Argentina in UN and start talks to roll back the mess done by them and respect the international laws. Colonialism is not acceptable any more in the world.
“Tell you what Nico, the only way you will get the falkland islands back will be through war, and i can tell you now you will never win a war against us, and everyone here in the UK will willing take up arms to help defend our fellow Brits in the falklands.”
And what would be the problem. Do you thing that we are afraid to go into a war against UK?
We have done several times and we won 3 times and you 1 you should be afraid to loose this time because will plunge your nation to the dipper hole you have ever seen. Are you aware of that?
Do you understand what is your situation my friend, your country will collapse economically and socially you are just in the edge you need just a little push. That’s all.
Best regards and don’t dream a lot could be dangerous, very dangerous.
@nicodin
May 24th, 2010 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“So go to Britain 14.000 north have you ever see a map?”
Maybe we should tell the argentine citizens living in Britain to do the same, but then citizenship. But then what about those with dual citizenship? Just becuase you have citizenship of a nation, doesn't mean you are required to live there. The falkland islanders choose to be British citizens but choose to also remain in their country of the Falklands islands!
“Well my friend this depends of Argentina too”
Incorrect it depends and always has depended on the Falkland islanders right to self determination, a human right in which every person living has a right too. No nation or other person may denie another of such right. Doing so is a violation of UN Charter. So no i does not depend on Argentina at all, it never has and never will depend on what Argentina wants. Stop living a dream!
“Oh they can in fact Yugoslavia was a country and later was divided in several parts, Germany is another case and now are together again, things change.
But the case is that Spain is not claiming and Argentina yes so UK has to sit with Argentina in UN and start talks to roll back the mess done by them and respect the international laws. Colonialism is not acceptable any more in the world.”
Yugoslavia and Germany are completely different cases, with different circumstances, i suggest you read your history books on them, as i can tell you now neither are relevant to the Falkland Islands sovereingty. Your point about spain is Nonsense, as Spain under the lisbon Treaty recognizes British sovereinty of the Falkland Islands, so Spain in this matter is irrelevant also.
“We have done several times and we won 3 times and you 1”
whens theirs only either been 1 war between us i find what your saying is nothing but nonsense. All previous wars were against spain and French forces. By the way if it wasnt for British investment and support in the early 19th century, you would not have any Railroads or Ports We built your country
@NicoDin
May 24th, 2010 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“So go to Britain 14.000 north have you ever see a map?”, you keep showing your complete lack of understanding of the people of the Falkland Islands. You keep claiming you know what is good for the Falklands and its people, but you are very misguided. We have the rights over this land NicoDim, sorry I mean NicoDin, not you and not even the UK. And for you to tell us to go back to the UK shows that you are very ignorant. I am a 7th generation Falkland Islander, I doubt you are even 3rd generation Argentine, and you are telling people to leave their country. I love your attitude and your arrogance. It amuses me. No NicoDim, I wont leave my country because of some poorly educated and brainwashed Argentine says so based on lies and a fantasy.
And I also love seeing how powerful Argentines believe Argentina is. Oh yes, I bet Britain are terrified of a country full of corruption, poverty and naivity. A country that is in constant economic crisis, that keeps plunging itself deeper and deeper into a hole, while its leaders steal to make themselves rich, while the people who elected them, struggle.
Reality is not your strong point NicoDin.
#128 ... where are you from ?
May 24th, 2010 - 07:36 pm - Link - Report abuse -1you are not from Malvinas(Falkland)...
@IVO
May 24th, 2010 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse +1And who are you to say M_of_FI, is not from the falkland islands? Do you have any evidence to prove he/she is not from the Falkland Islands? No you dont! And as a result you have no right to make up such claims without any prove to back it up. But then Argentina have a habit of making up false claims, just look at their historical claim for sovereignty and claims the British removed the Islands indigenous population, when, in fact, the islands were uninhabited and never had an indigenous population. Your government knows they have no chance of winning any claim to sovereignty, which is why they will not goto the ICJ, all the plastic princess is after is the oil, as its funny how when the first well was found to contain non commerically viable oil that your countries claim for sovereignty went suspiciously quiet, and now that the secound well has discovered Viable oil, shes shooting her mouth of again.
“You cannot support yourself and you want to support others.”
May 24th, 2010 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I think Britain has proven that she can, will and has the ability to support the Falklands islands.
You're not afraid to go to war with us? You'd just be wasting lives, you have no means to even reach the islands anymore.
I'm not getting where this new found sense of power is coming from Nico, your armed forces are quite frankly an embarrassment.
You had a very good chance in 1982, the UK was caught with it's pants down, And you messed it up. those islands have full air and naval support now.
Your landing craft would not even reach the islands.
Yes NicoDin, take your sorry 3rd generation Italian/Spanish arse back to Genoa...
May 24th, 2010 - 11:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Axel - “ ... ZETHE AND HOITRED: accept it or not, the u.k. is violating our territorial integrity, the islands were argentine, unless for a few monthes, but we were despoilled for the u.k., that's why we could not inprove our rights on the islands, ....”
May 25th, 2010 - 01:54 am - Link - Report abuse +1When were the islands Argentine Axel? For 2 months in 1832? And in the face of an existing British claim and regular diplomatic objections to Argentina's actions. No chance. The crux of the historical argument for you seems to be that Argentina obtained a legitimate claim in 1832 which the British 'usurped' in January 1833. Utter rubbish!
Argentina cannot claim territorial integrity because she NEVER had sovereignty..... not once! Vernett had British permission to settle, the occupation by an Argentine garrision for 2 months did not and was therefore illegal. It was properly dealt with by British forces.
Nicodin you are right, one should never say ”never' .... but not in your lifetime old son, and your are more likely to see independent islands than Argentine islands. Yes, armed force is your only option .... now go for it. Wind and water, that's all you and your forces consist of!
@M_of_FI
May 25th, 2010 - 06:39 am - Link - Report abuse -11- “This is real; I was born in the Falklands and live there, therefore I get a say in how the country is governed”
What country do you mean, UK? This is fantasy Falklands is not a country is a territory in dispute between Argentina and UK and currently occupied by UK illegally by force.
2-” did you vote in the Falkland General Election last year? No you didnt”
Well I either don’t vote for Tierra del Fuego general election of Santa Fe, or Cordoba but they are part of Argentina what that means?
But for your surprise my friend I can vote for UK elections if I would be there and? I never thought that UK has to be part of Argentina for that. Your argument is just silly don’t you know that?
3-“ That is reality. The British flag is flown in the Falklands”
The German flag also is flown in many little villages in part of Argentina but that doesn’t mean that their territory is part of Germany http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Immigrantqueen2005.JPG what is your point here?
4- “but you believe you know what is right for country you have never been to. You know nothing about reality “ Where are your embassies in the world (countries have, name them please.
Show me where says that exist a country called Falkland or Malvinas, please.
This is your reality so how long you are going to live in total denial?
Come on wakeup from your British fantasy.
5- “Is it indoctrination to believe in human rights?” no indoctrination what you have received all your life thinking that you have a nation called Falkland that you are part of UK and or you will come an independent country splitting Argentina territory.
This will never happen and for your own good start to understand that ASAP.
@ Teaboy2
1- you already do that if they are not EU nationals so I really doubt you can send 1 back.
“their country ...” none country in the world is known with that name have you ever see a map?
2- we fought as the coward Spanish left us alone. Spanish doesnt count here
regards
NicoDin wrote “Colonialism is not acceptable any more in the world.”
May 25th, 2010 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse +1I have to agree with you on that one NicoDin. Now that we are in agreement, and I dare say many posting here agree with us, will you join us in petitioning Argentina to STOP trying to introduce colonialism upon the peaceful people of the Falklands?
It's not colonialism when it is Argentina that wants something from somebody else. It's then inalienable rights.
May 25th, 2010 - 09:34 am - Link - Report abuse +1“Spanish doesnt count here”
May 25th, 2010 - 09:40 am - Link - Report abuse +1Yet the Spanish are your only claim to the islands, of and a 4 year garrison? Ridiculous.
Can't you see how outdated your nations views are? You would impose your government upon another group of people, by force if necessary just to settle a claim that happened hundreds of years ago? You just seem so behind the rest of the world, i pity your nation.
@nicodin
May 25th, 2010 - 09:43 am - Link - Report abuse +1LMAO, seriously the war against the spanish was before argentina existed, oh and we actually won that war, it was the napoleonic war, where we were fighting the french and the spanish, we also along with the french blockaded your country forcing ROSA to withdraw from uraguay, the 3 wars you are referring to were, infact nothing but battles, that were all part of the same war. A war that was eventually won at waterloo by the british.
The Falkland Islands are a country any over sea territory of any nation is a country. Hence why it has its own name. Oh and yes its only in Argentine maps that its not called the falklands, aswell as in a few other latin american maps. but in all the other maps around the world that i have seen, they were called the falklands, and have been since 1690.
Seriously you need to learn a correct version of your own history and a correct understanding of what constitutes a country, before posting your views, that are nothing short of the believe that human beings living on the falklands have know right to exist as a self governing nation, its a shame spain didnt take the same stance about argentina and crush your country like a bug while it had the chance. Your country, thanks to princess plastic's public speeches in international politics, is the laughing stock of the political world right now. Everyone knows that your only interested in the oil that belongs to the Falkland islanders. Hell the UK will not see a penny of the profit, the falkland islanders will only use some of the money from any oil to help pay for their defense.
End of the day, the falkland islanders do not what the islands to be part of argentina, they expressed that clearly as an act of self determination, by wishing to remain british. they have been british since before your country even existed (which was 1816 when argentina came into existence) we landed on them and names the islands in 1690.
Bring on the war, you will get an even bigger kicking then before
#138 ... where are you from? ...you are not Brits !
May 25th, 2010 - 09:51 am - Link - Report abuse -1@IVO
May 25th, 2010 - 09:58 am - Link - Report abuse +1Oh yes i am a Brit, i am born and bred in Yorkshire in the north east of England.
So again what gives you the right to publicly claim we are not Brits or falkland islanders, when you have no prove to back up such a claim?
its like me saying someones not an argentine dispite them previously making clear they are!
@nicodin
Just to let you and others known, the falkland islands have their own constitution. The Falkland Islands Constitution Order 2008 No. 2846, they have their own laws and their own government, just like any other country.
115 M_of_FI, You don't have a falklands country, stop talking crap!!! You live in Argentina, recognize it or not.
May 27th, 2010 - 12:18 am - Link - Report abuse -1I don't care what you think or want regarding the islands, I neither care what your family think, what your friends think, what your children think or what your grand-children think! You live in our land and one day you will have to accept it.
You are not a 7th falklands islander but a 7th british squatter!!!!!!!!!!
You are just that, apart from an amusing ignorant!!!!
Now that's a bit of a coincidence jorgy boy because the British don't much care what you or your family think either!
May 27th, 2010 - 06:42 am - Link - Report abuse +1The islanders live in their own land, and you will be the one doing the accepting because nothing will change jorgy boy ..... nothing!
But hey ... it's no problem :-)
Jorge i compliment you on your passion for your country, however the falklands do not and never did belong to Argentina. Spain do not recognise Argentinas sovereignty of the islands eithers! So what does that say to you? Because Spain actually recognise the Islands as being British territory, and as such they recognise the Falklands islanders rights to self determination and as a country. So what solid ground of evidence or historical facts do you have to back up any claim that the islands belong to Argentina? Please tell us, because so far everything you and others have said to back up your claim, has been incorrect or misinterpretated (as a result of your closed minds and denial of the truth), both historically and factually!
May 27th, 2010 - 07:58 am - Link - Report abuse +1J. A. ROBERT. HOITRED.
May 27th, 2010 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Jason, i explained to you 6, 7, 8, 9 times the reasons why me country had right to ocupate the islands in 1833, this is the last time i do it.
The islands were submitted to the jurisdiction of the viceroalty like all the rest of our territory, anyway the fact that my country didn't inherite anything from spain, made that our rights were precarious, because our independence was declared unilaterally,we had started to ocupate the malvinas with our small garrison, but we were despoilled by the british, and that's why we could not improve our rights, the u.k. could improve then, because it ocupates pacefully the islands since 1833. On the other hand we have right to claim for our territorial integrity, because the u.k. is violating it since 1833, the islands were argentine unless for a few monthes, but we were despoilled by the u.k.
Besdide you still didnt' answer my question, if my country dropped it's claim in 1850, why the u.k. never invoked it in any of the negotiations with arg.?, in fact in the last days, in any of the declarations of minister brown, and councellor norma edwards they mention a word about it, they only argue about the right to self determination, find a reliable answer please.
I allready told you why i think that many of you suffer of haughtyness and cheap nationalism like many fo compatriots too, read my comments again, an dont victimize your compatriots in that pathetic way that you like to use.
HOITRED: I f moron vernet asked the british to stablish a settlement in the islands, that was because surelly it was more convenient for hes interests that the islands were under british gov. but he had no need to do it, the u.k. didn't controll anything after 1774, remember that one territory is not controlled by sporadic settlements, it's only controlled by authoritys, the u.k., is violating our territorial integrity like it or not, the malvinas are not only british, they are argentine too, i have no doubt about it.
axel arg: A lovely and absolutely irrelevant post from you again.
May 27th, 2010 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +1We only talk about self determination because that is all that matters in this day and age. Colonial treaties and claims are an outdated process, This is the age of the UN. Self determination is a principle human right, as a member of the United Nations your nation has signed the charter of the UN.
The Falklands islands are neither British or Argentine property in reality, The people there own those lands and they decide what they want. If they didn't want to be an British oversea territory, they wouldn't.
It's really as simple as that.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!