MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Argentina/China sign 18 agreements; discussions to solve soy-oil dispute
China and Argentina signed 18 agreements covering infrastructure, energy and railway projects on Tuesday during Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner second day official visit which included talks with her Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao and with Vice-Premier Hui Liangyu. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesI think that you forgot the part where Hu Jintao expressed China support to Argentina in the Malvinas sovereignty issue with UK.
Jul 14th, 2010 - 09:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0:)
It is fare to mention. isn’t it?
No mention of a solution to the soy oil dispute. Bother. China now buying all needed supplies from USA who have surplus. Wonder if Cristina could persuade China to let Argentina pay to send the soy oil.
Jul 14th, 2010 - 09:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Then she would have solved the dispute, exports would restart and it would only be necessary to hide the payments to China.
“I think that you forgot the part where Hu Jintao expressed China support to Argentina in the Malvinas sovereignty issue with UK.”
Jul 14th, 2010 - 09:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0That came just after Christina's expression of support for China in the Taiwan sovereignty issue with the Taiwanese ....
1 Nicodin
Jul 14th, 2010 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0”I think that you forgot the part where Hu Jintao expressed China support to Argentina in the Malvinas sovereignty issue with UK.
:)
It is fare to mention. isn’t it? ”
You can mention anything you want Nicodin. If you wish to mention that sovereignty talks between Argentina and the UK have been backed by China, a communist dictatorship, with one of the worst human rights records in the world, a country keeping Tibet subjugated at the point of a gun, thats enitely up to you.
China will not put any support in writing. It is against their policy to do so, so NO NicoDIN, it is not worth mentioning :-)
Jul 14th, 2010 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0Actions - Words
Jul 14th, 2010 - 02:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Our friends - Yours
”I think that you forgot the part where Hu Jintao expressed China support to Argentina in the Malvinas sovereignty issue with UK.
Jul 14th, 2010 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:)
It is fare to mention. isn’t it?“
”NicoDin“ I 100 % agree with you man.
And this is for ”LegionNi“, you complain about China, when UK is the country that more territories has invaded and robbed along the world, in name of their single party, oh is not, I forgot it was in name of the queen. Please we're all adults here and it was time to get honest.
To ”Frank”, of course right now Taiwan is a US colony, the son learned good from his mama (UK), they both are specialists to rob what never belonged to them. Even that is the reason why that island doesn't have status of state.
And Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
And Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Jul 14th, 2010 - 08:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sigh, no they are not,they are British
They are Argentinian, just were stolen by the British pirats. But we are gonna fix that mistake soon. ;)
Jul 14th, 2010 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
well well, so now Argentina has powerful friends, i suppose that means that now you are backed by the greatest and biggest and most powerful nation on the planet, it wont belong before you start threatening the little old British, with your powerful friend, you guys must really be chuffed now, your head must be swelling, your mighty armies are going to cross the sea, with the help of your new friend, who is going to send ships to help you, your powerful air force ,backed up by china's air force is going to kick the British out, how wonderful for you,[ now i suggest you wake up] from your stupid dreams and return to the real world, as long as china has claims on Taiwan, your army will still be crap, your navy will still hide in port, and you air force [bless them] has just run out of planes, and Argentina WILL STILL NEVER GET THE FALKLANDS]
Jul 14th, 2010 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and we live in the real world, so keep crying Argentina, china will not help you, especially now great Britain has [ the TARANIS COMBAT PLANE] NAMES AFTER THE CELTIC GOD OF THUNDER,,
long live Great Britain and all who sail with her, [just a thought]
7 Argentino - “And this is for ”LegionNi“, you complain about China, when UK is the country that more territories has invaded and robbed along the world, in name of their single party, oh is not, I forgot it was in name of the queen. Please we're all adults here and it was time to get honest.”
Jul 15th, 2010 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0I wasn't complaining about China, I was merely stating fact.
9 Argentino - ”They are Argentinian, just were stolen by the British pirats. But we are gonna fix that mistake soon. ;)”
You can't steal what already belonged to you. Vernet asked the British for permission to build his settlement on the Falklands. This is well documented. Argentina had no right to appoint a governer to the Falklands in the 1830's as sovereignty of the islands was under the British crown. Britain officially protested this act, also wel documented.
Argentina tried to steal the islands from Britain in the 1830's. In 1833 Britain performed a police action and removed the invading Argentine garrison, but allowed any of the settlers that wanted to stay to do so.
Argentina tried to steal the islands again in 1982. Again Britain enacted is sovereign rights and removed the Argentine forces.
If Argentina ever tries to steal the Falklands again the same will happen.
China has not stated suppport for Argentine sovereignty it has merely given its support to a DRAFT (please take note of DRAFT) resolution requesting that talks about sovereignty of the Falklands between the UK and Argentina should resume.
As this DRAFT resolution will never get passed the Security Council to become an actually UN Resolution, it is irrelevant.
Keep crying Argentina.
LegionNi: “I wasn't complaining about China, I was merely stating fact.”
Jul 15th, 2010 - 06:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Me too, I'm also stating the fact UK is a pirate island, they like to steal territories along the world, very far from their little home (14.000 km. to Malvinas). Is not necesary that I say it, everybody knows this is real. Also UK is a country that lacks any moral and ethical to talk about human rights, when not long ago killed unarmed civilians in Iraq, together with his son US, invading a country to steal their natural resources (the black gold).
Without mention the deaths and invasions that UK is carrying from past centuries. What a shame!
LegionNi: “You can't steal what already belonged to you...”
Wrong. The islands (Malvinas) since the beggining were a spanish colony, after Argentina declared the independence in 1816, all the old spanish colonies (Virreynato del Río de la Plata), automatically start to belong to Argentina. Five decades after the WW2, every single country in America (including your son US, who was helping UK during the war) signed the decolonization treaty in the UN, which involved the withdrawal of all European colonies in the American continent.
So I think you both should wake up of your dream, the world is changing again, Hong Kong is not british anymore and many other colonies you still have will follow the same way.
And nobody is crying here, is not me who is living in a very small and grey british island.
Ohh I almost forget it:
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
another man that farts backwards,
Jul 15th, 2010 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0we the british are so kind, we even reward terrorist, we give them compensation, human rights, so what are you complaining abt,
one day when you are looking at us in a trance, the chilians, and others will take back what you stole from them, and are still stealing,, but as argentinians are brought up to belive argentina rules the world, and is right in every aspect, the world stands no chance, , so when the chips are down, why then does argentina only cry at us , insted of trying to steal from us, and the islanders, , , you only talk big, ieven your small neighbour is taking back what you stole from her, ,,
12 Argentino. OK, so Britain admits it took the Islands from a bunch of sorry-ass colonists. What are you going to do about it? Answer. Nothing. Because that is what you are. Nothing.
Jul 15th, 2010 - 07:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0briton: “we the british are so kind, we even reward terrorist...”
Jul 15th, 2010 - 07:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For god sake man, you are really blind, your own government is terrorist, and with an old data, it was born pirate, and it always will be, it likes to invade, steal and kill, is in your DNA. All you people were born in a micro small island without any kind of resources, so you need to go abroad and steal, is like that. A fact.
harrier: “OK, so Britain admits it took the Islands from a bunch of sorry-ass colonists”
Congratulations! That's a big step, you accepted it, english pirates are a bunch of thieves. And of course I'm someone, someone who is telling you Argentina is gonna recovery its islands, but not killing people as your country loves to do.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
I'm someone, someone who is telling you Argentina is gonna recovery its islands, but not killing people as your country loves to do.
Jul 15th, 2010 - 07:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well if you dont fight for them you aint going to get them
“Congratulations! That's a big step, you accepted it, english pirates are a bunch of thieves.”
Jul 15th, 2010 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Alright, we colonised places hundreds of years ago. It was a different time.
Argentina is STILL trying to colonise the islands. You've tried by force and you don't care about the local population.
When are you going to apologise?
P.s. You are not, EVER. Going to get those islands.
Some new crazy folk about- surely we have not got to go into all the historical facts of who was a son of a b to who hundreds of years ago? of little relevance in the 21st century.
Jul 16th, 2010 - 02:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0China normally votes against democracy in the UN anyway - what is intersting though is Argentina,s public support for China over Taiwan - I imagine the odd eye has twitched a bit in in Washington - not a good move towards improving your relations there me thinks.
Zethe is so very right - we used to be a British Colony with rule over all our life and laws from Britain - no longer - we moved on some time ago and now have FULL voting and legilslative control over all our own internal affairs,taxes.laws etc - and our own offshore minerals.
HeHo - in 2010 Argentina wants to turn the clock back a century and impose good old fashioned old world style Colonialsim over us!
zethe: “Alright, we colonised places hundreds of years ago. It was a different time.”
Jul 16th, 2010 - 05:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0Wrong! UK still was stealing territories few decades ago, stealing Malvinas islands to Argentina.
zethe: “You've tried by force and you don't care about the local population.”
The local population is british, that's the big problem, too far from their country.
Come one people, what were you doing 14.000 km. far away from UK in the end of the XX century trying to keep new colonies?
Go back home, to the north, near the arctic, where you all belong and should be living.
The history is cyclical, your country soon or later is gonna fall, and then how is right and fair the islands will return to Argentina. You never say ever. ;-)
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
“Wrong! UK still was stealing territories few decades ago, stealing Malvinas islands to Argentina.”
Jul 16th, 2010 - 10:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0In the last 100 years we went from owning a quater of the world to having a few colonys. We aren't expanding. The falklands have been British for almost as long as Argentina has called herself Argentina.
“The local population is british, that's the big problem, too far from their country.”
They've lived there for longer than anyone in earths history. They have more right to live there than anyone in the world.
You have no right to tell these people where to live. They;ve been living there for 9 generations without harming anyone.
15 Argentino. I think you misunderstood me. I said Britain took the Islands from a bunch of sorry-ass colonists. I didn't say they were YOUR colonists.
Jul 16th, 2010 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0You see, if a bunch of people, from anywhere, want to sail off into the wild blue yonder, land on an island, erect buildings, plough the land and so on, they would be colonists. Doesn't make them LEGAL colonists. And if the owner, i.e. the person or body with sovereignty, then turns up and wants their land back, then that is right and proper. You cannot steal what is already yours.
Now, British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands dates back to at least 1765, a date when the word “Argentina” hadn't even been thought of. In 1833, after Britain had fought, and won, a war to save Europe, including Spain, from the French Napoleonic Empire, she returned to find a settlement and a garrison that had been planted following punitive action by the United States. It was obviously inappropriate to allow a garrison of foreign troops on British soil and they were, therefore, evicted. By contrast, the civilian settlers were told that they could stay on British territory if they wished. This would naturally include acceptance of British sovereignty and rule. The majority of the settlers chose to remain, thereby demonstrating an early preference for life on the Islands under British rule rather than life on the mainland under United Provinces rule.
No question of British theft or piracy, merely restrained legal actions by the standards of the day.
Incidentally, the term “piracy” is quite inappropriate. Piracy is a war-like act committed by private parties (not affiliated with any government) that engage in acts of robbery and/or criminal violence at sea.
harrier61: ”(...) You cannot steal what is already yours.”
Jul 16th, 2010 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The problem is that never it was yours, my friend. As never was of any other country, american territories belong to american countries, for the decolony treaty, any single european country has to leave their old colonies, in Malvina is a british colony, that's a fact. And that's the reason only a british oil company, and nobody else, is there exploting our natural resources (I mean stealing).
The Falklands were discovered in 1520 by Esteban Gómez, a crewman of the ship San Antonio, one of the ships of Magellan's expedition. as the demarcation of lands of the papal bulls, the islands belonged to Spain. However, British sailors, Holland and France reached the islands on several occasions.
In 1765, a British expedition reached the islands and called the Falkland Islands. In 1770, British occupation forces were evicted by Spain, which claimed sovereignty over the islands through diplomatic channels. When you created the Viceroyalty of the River
Plata, the Falklands were placed under the governorship of Buenos Aires. From 1774-1810, Spain successive governors appointed to the archipelago.
In 1776, when it created the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata, the Falkland Islands were included in the territory of the governorship of Buenos Aires. After 1810, the islands remained under that jurisdiction. In 1820, the frigate Argentina Heroin was sent to Falklands to take final possession of the islands. In 1825 there was a significant fact: Britain recognized the independence and Argentina claimed the islands. In 1828, the government of Buenos Aires Luis Vernet granted in concession, the
Puerto loneliness to build a colony. This led to one hundred and Indian gauchos on the pampas, skilled in animal husbandry.
harrier61: ”Piracy is a war-like act committed by private parties (not affiliated with any government) that engage in acts of robbery and/or criminal violence at sea.”
So I suggest to all the british pirates to s
@22
Jul 16th, 2010 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All very interesting argie,but they are British
@22
Jul 16th, 2010 - 03:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All very interesting but for a few small points that you omitted to mention.
(1) Esteban Gomez was the captain of the San Antonio and had deserted Magellan's expedition when he sighted something. No record of a landing, so no claim.
(2) The papal bulls that you mention have been declared void and irrelevant by the current Pope. Don't times change?
(3) British forces didn't actually leave the Islands until 1776, leaving a plaque asserting Britain's continued sovereignty.
(4) Spain left the Islands in 1811, leaving a similar plaque.
(5) The frigate Heroina was under command of an American privateer, David Jewett, who had already committed piracy by capturing the Portuguese vessel Carlota. A privateer, as the name suggests, is a private person or vessel with no legal right, even then, to claim anything.
(6) Luis Vernet's enterprise was permitted by Britain not Buenos Aires. Vernet was required to provide regular reports of his enterprise for Britain and did so. When BA designated him “civil and military commandant” Britain protested that they had no legal right to do so.
(7) In 1831, Vernet attempted to impose his seal hunting rights by capturing at least 4 American vessels. The USS Lexington was despatched to recover American property. Captain Silas Duncan took 7 persons aboard his vessel and charged them with piracy. At the same time, he took aboard the major part of Vernet's “population” “principally German citizens from Buenos Aires, ”appeared greatly rejoiced at the opportunity thus presented of removing with their families from a desolate region where the climate is always cold and cheerless and the soil extremely unproductive”.
So your claims are based on those of a deserter and 2 pirates.
When the British returned, in 1833, it was a naval task force led by a Captain of the Royal Navy. A Government force cannot commit piracy.
Basically, you have a distorted and propagandized version.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentines
Jul 16th, 2010 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0yes i have finally excepted that the Malvinas islands belong to Argentina.
BUT THE FALKLAND ISLANDS BELONG TO BRITAIN,
SO WHATS THE DIFFERNCE,
the Malvinas don’t exist,
The Malvinas were discovered in 1520 by Esteban Gómez, a crewman of the ship San Antonio, one of the ships of Magellan's expedition, as the demarcation of lands of the papal bulls, the islands belonged to Spain. However, British sailors, Holland and France reached the islands on several occasions.
Jul 16th, 2010 - 06:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In 1765, a British expedition reached the islands and called the Falkland Islands. In 1770, British occupation forces were evicted by Spain, which claimed sovereignty over the islands through diplomatic channels. When you created the Viceroyalty of Río de La Plata, the Malvinas were placed under the governorship of Buenos Aires. From 1774-1810, Spain successive governors appointed to the archipelago.
In 1776, when the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata was created, the Malvinas islands were included in the territory of the governorship of Buenos Aires. After 1810, the islands remained under that jurisdiction. In 1820, the argentine frigate, La Heroína, was sent to Falklands to take final possession of the islands. In 1825 there was a significant fact: Britain recognized the independence and Argentina claimed the islands. In 1828, the government of Buenos Aires gave to Luis Vernet, granted in concession, the Puerto Soledad to build a colony. For that, he took a hundred gauchos of the pampas, skilled in animal husbandry.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
P.S.: Called Falklands by the british pirates like “briton”.
@26. You just repeated yourself. So you are with a deserter and 2 pirates. Whilst Britain is with an authorised Government task force.
Jul 16th, 2010 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No contest!!
The Falkland Islands will remain British territory until the disposal of all threats and independence.
the democracies agree
Jul 16th, 2010 - 07:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0the dictatorships do not, that’s the difference between freedom and slavery
briton: “the democracies agree”
Jul 17th, 2010 - 08:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0UK is not a democracy, is a terrorist government who still have people stealing for the queen 14.000 km. away from your island in the north hemisphere, like in the case of Malvinas.
harrier61: “No contest!!”
I'm contesting. In 1776, when the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata was created, the Malvinas islands were included in the territory of the governorship of Buenos Aires. After the revolution in 1810 and the independence in 1816, the islands remained under that jurisdiction.
Argentina inherited the spanish rights according to the “principle uti possidetis juris”, whereby Argentina now emancipated would apply the same limits as the extinct Viceroyalty of Río de la Plata, because its historical and legal.
It's a fact, everybody around the world knows UK is a thief country, who doesn't care any international law, cause they work like pirates, invading and stealing, so also every country in the world knows for sure that:
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
“I'm contesting. In 1776, when the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata was created, the Malvinas islands were included in the territory of the governorship of Buenos Aires. After the revolution in 1810 and the independence in 1816, the islands remained under that jurisdiction.”
Jul 17th, 2010 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0In 1776, you could have claimed jurisdiction over the Moon. With the same degree of justification and legality. In fact, you can claim jurisdiction over just about anything you want. Until someone objects. In this case, the Falkland Islanders object and Britain objects.
Here's the bottom line. Back in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, things were different and you could do all sorts of things provided the world's major power didn't notice. If the world power subsequently decided to notice, you were screwed.
But times have changed. The guiding principle is now self-determination. Britain supports and will defend this because we have matured. Argentina wants to indulge in imperialistic colonialism because it hasn't matured.
Basically, Argentina is on the downward slope again. Temporarily buoyed up by trade restrictions, subsidised prices and government disinformation.
But it can't last. On a different article someone pointed out that, several years ago, China promised US$20 billion in aid. Argentina is still waiting.
Now, Argentina has lost its major soy bean oil market and, whatever these 18 agreements may be said to be worth, you can be sure that Argentina will pay. China is good at realpolitik. Argentine coolies!!
harrier61: “In 1776, you could have claimed jurisdiction over the Moon. With the same degree of justification and legality. In fact, you can claim jurisdiction over just about anything you want. Until someone objects. In this case, the Falkland Islanders object and Britain objects.
Jul 17th, 2010 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Maybe you didn't read well: Argentina inherited the spanish rights according to the “principle uti possidetis juris”, whereby Argentina now emancipated would apply the same limits as the extinct Viceroyalty of Río de la Plata, because its historical and Legal.
harrier61: ”But times have changed. The guiding principle is now self-determination. Britain supports and will defend this because we have matured.“
Don't be cynical, UK doesn't have any moral and ethical authority to talk about self-determination, when it was the main country that has violated this principle in the course of the history.
And it's funny cause now you're changing your speech, before you were saying: ”The islands are ours, so we took them“ and suddenly it became in a ”We took them, so are ours“.
The truth is the case of the islanders set up by UK, after expelling the people of Argentina, self-determination is not applicable, because they are not a national subdued group, but are subjects of the british crown implanted by the colonial power.
This right belongs only to one ethnic group over the territory of their membership, and not over illegally occupied spaces. Pointless to ask the usurper if wanna keep which was torn.
harrier61: ”Now, Argentina has lost its major soy bean oil market...”
Who said that, have you been working for the chinese government?
China is our second largest trading partner, and we will continue trading all kind of products, including the soybean oil and creating new business, I think you got the wrong information or you didn't read good.
And coming back to the topic:
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
“Don't be cynical, UK doesn't have any moral and ethical authority to talk about self-determination, when it was the main country that has violated this principle in the course of the history.”
Jul 17th, 2010 - 05:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina once again living in the past. It's history. The rest of the world has moved on and the WORLD believes in human rights.
Self determination is a human right.
“This right belongs only to one ethnic group over the territory of their membership, and not over illegally occupied spaces. Pointless to ask the usurper if wanna keep which was torn.”
There are no exception where self determination is not applicable. Human rights are not subject to laws or territory disputes.
Self determination is the freedom of the people of a given territory or national grouping to determine their own political status and how they will be governed without undue influence from any other country.
“Maybe you didn't read well: Argentina inherited the spanish rights”
Spanish law is not British law.
And just when will Argentina be handing the land back to its native people. Argentines are not native. They are colonists. Implanted by the Spanish Empire. Don't forget your heritage. Unlike most of countries that were within the British Empire, who were granted independence by the colonial power, you rebelled. So you are doubly thieves. First you stole from the natives and then you stole from the Spanish Empire. And you have the gall to quote legal principle. Your whole history is one of thievery and attempted thievery. But not this time. The Islands and the Islanders will remain British until the Islanders choose independence. And even then, I confidently expect a defence treaty.
Jul 17th, 2010 - 06:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Harrier you are right british colonyst will remain british when they arrive to britain, but this is their freedom to choose when the time comes, we can't force them to apply if they don't want to stay, as far as I knew they are as Argentine as the pinguins in Islas Malvinas, if they really wanted to be british they should apply for british citizenship, oviously the pirats rather quarrel with Argentina's territorial integrity.
Jul 17th, 2010 - 07:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0why not push for the respect of the freedom in nations closer to their kingdom, like The Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy lacross team ?http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/07/15/2008090/iroquois-nationals-stopped-by.html?storylink=mirelated
“but this is their freedom to choose when the time comes”
Jul 17th, 2010 - 09:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes. And they have chosen to stay in the land they were born and grew up in for 8 generations.
And they will forever have our support. Do not doubt this.
Couple of small points.
Jul 17th, 2010 - 10:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Falkland Islands are not a colony. They may have been at one time, but not now.
And they are already British citizens.
Argentina can keep its territorial integrity. BUT, by definition, a group of islands 300 miles away cannot be integral.
As for the Iroquois? Well, they didn't have documentation adequate for entry into the UK. They could have got themselves Canadian or U.S. passports, but declined. The Iroquois have never sought diplomatic links with or recognition by the UK. Tough. Like Britain is. And getting tougher.
put it this way
Jul 17th, 2010 - 11:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 01, if the Chileans voted to become argentine citizens, would you except them, or tell them to get lost
2, if the peoples of the disputed territory on the southern tip of Argentina, voted to become argentine, would you except them
if the people or Uruguay voted to become argentine citizens would you except them,
if the Falklands voted to become argentine citizens would you except them
answer please.
[be carefull how you answer]
harrier61: “The Islands and the Islanders will remain British until the Islanders choose independence. And even then, I confidently expect a defence treaty.”
Jul 18th, 2010 - 07:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Wrong, the islanders are british, they were put ther but a colonial force (UK) in 1982.
Argentina is a nation where its people has almost 500 hundreds years of identity living in the territory, with their our culture, traditions, and idiosyncracy, so would be foolish the comparation. There was a moment when all the american territories around the continent declared the decolonization treaty, and there is only one country don't wanna come back home (UK), only one country never respected the self-determination, and everybody knows is UK. I think you all people should read this once again.
The truth is the case of the islanders set up by UK, after expelling the people of Argentina, self-determination is not applicable, because they are not a national subdued group, but are subjects of the british crown implanted by the colonial power.
This right is applicable only to one ethnic group over the territory of their belonging, and not over illegally occupied spaces. Pointless to ask the usurper if wanna keep which was torn.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards!
Argentina is colonised! Argentina es colonizado!
Jul 18th, 2010 - 10:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina for the indigenous peoples!
Argentina para los pueblos indígenas!
Patagonia is Mapuche! La Patagonia es Mapuche!
Araucanía is Mapuche! Araucanía es Mapuche!
The Pampas are Wichi & Toba! Las Pampas son Wichi y Tobi!
Cuyo is Diaguita & Huarpe! Cuyo es Diaguita y Huarpe!
The Northeast is Guaraní! El Nordeste es Guaraní!
Freedom for the indigenous peoples! Libertad para los pueblos indígenas!
Spanish & Italian Colonists go home to Europe now!
colonos españoles e italianos van a casa a Europa ahora!
You are 14 000 km from your homes!
Usted está 14 000 km de sus hogares!
We do not want you here! No le queremos aquí!
You are not welcome! Usted no es bienvenido!
Get out Spanish thieves & pirates!
¡Fuera los ladrones y piratas español!
Regards! Saludos!
http://www.mapuche-nation.org/english/html/kingdom/intro.html
http://www.mapuche-nation.org/english/html/kingdom/intro.html
@38. Just how dippy are you? Are you seriously suggesting that post June 1982 Britain shipped 3,000 people to the Falkland Islands?
Jul 18th, 2010 - 02:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina as a nation hasn't EXISTED for “almost 500 hundreds years of identity living in the territory”. You are just making it up as you go along, like most rabid Argentines.
“This right is applicable only to one ethnic group over the territory of their belonging”. Don't try to claim Argentines to be an ethnic group. Won't wash.
(39) Domingo
Jul 18th, 2010 - 02:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you have any genuine interest in the situation of the Indigenous Peoples of Patagonia, please link to their real organizations like the following:
http://www.avkinpivkemapu.com.ar/
http://www.avkinpivkemapu.com.ar/o/
Not to a Internet page written by the descendants of a Self-proclaimed Emperor of Patagonia ( A half-crazy white French Adventurer)
http://www.avkinpivkemapu.com.ar/
That was a little bit pathetic :-(
Even for your standard.
harrier61: “Just how dippy are you? Are you seriously suggesting that post June 1982 Britain shipped 3,000 people to the Falkland Islands?”
Jul 18th, 2010 - 02:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes. UK, over and over again is affecting the determination of Argentina, by ignoring the claims of sovereignty over the islands. Argentina’s claim is the claim of a nation, not a bunch of british people that some colonial force (UK) has put recently in the islands, who always expressed their desire to remain as british.
Isn’t valid in the Malvinas the pronouncement of the population, imported into the territory by British troops after the usurped in 1833 by force and disperse the population of Argentina. Therefore, it is recognized that the Malvinas Islands are a special case, and that decolonization should be attending not the “wishes”, but the “interests” of its people.
If I had invaded and taken by the force a part of the territory of a nation like the UK, next to the main british island, and I put my own people there, that people would be illegally usurping a place that is not theirs, so would be crazy to think they could have the right to claim any self-determination. It’s crazy, cause under this approach, international law would be in favor of the invader, but not the invaded. Then each country would be empowering, to invade new territories that do not belong to them as they please. To then claim, for the same international law, that these new residents (usurpers) have right to self-determination.
It is this the way the UK has matured (as harrier61 said), in terms of international law and policy? Or is still a pirate island, which wants to continue stealing territories? I would keep with the second question.
Domingo: “Argentina is colonised! Argentina es colonizado!”
And every country of Europe , exactly UK should save the self-determination right for some of the irish living right there in the north part, what do you think about?
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
#35 that's not what I heard, We all know this illegal aliens have desided to cause problems in land their ancesters thefted from an Argentine settlements in 1833, now they say they want to stay british for that they will have to go back to britain, I agree with you that britain should support them and allow them to comeback if they wish since that is their freedom to determine if they want to go home or apply for Argentine citicenship, you can't have both, you are either in or out of Argentine, I don't see an implanted population of illegal colonist having the rights over land taken from a local settlers, can their vote be legitimate if their theft is illegal, can the world accept everyone else erradicating people and implating alliens ?? can everyone else do the same, can a group of Argentine vote to be independent and break a part of Canada ?? show us how this colonist do it and then we should emulate it all over the world. we are all waiting to see.
Jul 18th, 2010 - 03:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0mean time can you all help support The Six Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy lacross team ?
http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/07/15/2008090/iroquois-nationals-stopped-by.html?storylink=mirelated
43: The islanders have never been a part of your nation. They are a different “people” to you. And are therefore entitled to live how they see fit.
Jul 18th, 2010 - 04:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I still don't get how you guys can think that your two years of living on the island and you have rights over the people who have been living there for 200 years. It's crazy.
42 Argentino :
If you invaded somewhere in this day and age no you would not just be able to claim self determination. This isn't the case with the islanders. They've been living there for longer than anyone in earths history. Back in 1833 when we kicked you out the world was indeed a very different place, territorys were passed around, sold, traded. It was the age of colonialism.
But, the rest of the world has moved on, apart from argentina it seems. And nowpeople are given the right to choose their own government. The people living there have been so for almost as long as you guys have been independant. You have no rights over them.
zethe: “ The people living there have been so for almost as long as you guys have been independant. You have no rights over them.”
Jul 18th, 2010 - 05:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They don't have any right, cause they are usurpers in a territory don't belong to them, they are living there illegally, they were put in the islands by a colonial force (UK). So Argentina's government respect their interests and limited rights like usurpers, they can choose remain living in the Malvinas islands as argentine citizens, or return to UK, cause I can see the pirate government is very interested to defend their subjects.
And you should read this again, cause I think you didn't before:
Isn’t valid in the Malvinas the pronouncement of the population, imported into the territory by British troops after the usurped in 1833 by force and disperse the population of Argentina. Therefore, it is recognized that the Malvinas Islands are a special case, and that decolonization should be attending not the “wishes”, but the “interests” of its people.
If I had invaded and taken by the force a part of the territory of a nation like the UK, next to the main british island, and I put my own people there, that people would be illegally usurping a place that is not theirs, so would be crazy to think they could have the right to claim any self-determination. It’s crazy, cause under this approach, international law would be in favor of the invader, but not the invaded. Then each country would be empowering, to invade new territories that do not belong to them as they please. To then claim, for the same international law, that these new residents (usurpers) have right to self-determination.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
“They don't have any right, cause they are usurpers in a territory don't belong to them”
Jul 18th, 2010 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina lived there for two years. The islanders 200.
Do the math.
@Think (41): Sorry, Think. I was just mimicking Argentino's propaganda slogans to make the counter-argument, that the same logic Argentino uses to deny Falklander Islanders the right of self-determination applies equally to every modern-day Argentine; since of course Argentines live on stolen land from the indigenous people of Argentina & by the same argument have no rights, because they implanted themselves in Argentina
Jul 18th, 2010 - 10:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I find it very ironic that both Argentino & Avargas express mock concern over invasion & seizing of territory when of course this is precisely how modern Argentina's borders were created. The concern only appears to be for themselves & not the peoples Argentina has wronged. It is all the more hypocritical, when the Conquest of the “Desert” was actually carried out more than 50 years after the UK asserted its sovereignty on the Islands
By their own standards, Argentines should now be considering the return of all stolen lands, wealth & resources to the indigenous peoples of Argentina & the implanted settlers & their descendants from Europe should return to Europe
Slogans like:
Argentina for the indigenous peoples!
Argentina para los pueblos indígenas!
apply
@Think:
Actually, don't be too quick to criticise about the website I posted, it's got lots of very good content even if you consider the claim
Thanks for your links. I found them very interesting. Similarly, if you're interested in an analysis of the impact of your theft of Patagonia from the the Patagons & the Argentine Republic's destruction of their nation, people, culture & history; their forced subjugation into the Argentine state & the Argentine policy of “invisibility” of the true indigenous population read
http://alhim.revues.org/index103.html
Truly shame on Argentina!
@Argentino(42): Agreed. The people living in Northern Ireland have self-determination;if that means they choose unity with Eire, good
The UN Charter applies to us all, Resolution 1514(XV) to the Islanders
zethe: “Argentina lived there for two years. The islanders 200.”
Jul 19th, 2010 - 05:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0They are living there illegally, are usurpers in a territory which never belonged to them, No matter how many years they lived there, they took the islands by the force of a invasion, expulsing the argentine people living there before. UK stole part of the territory of Argentina, they stole a nation. That's a fact. Do the match.
Domingo: “By their own standards, Argentines should now be considering the return of all stolen lands...”
Argentina is a Nation with a lot of different ethnicities, all of them argentines citizens claming for the same right to recover their Malvinas islands, a part of the argentine territory, usurped by british pirates.
And the big problem with the people in Malvinas, is they are usurpers, they are not the original people, they are british under the UK government, they don't have their or culture and customs, they don't have own identity, they just belong to UK.
By the way, in your opinion, should break down all modern nations, including the UK., right?
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
@48 Argentino. There is no point in “discussing” anything with you. You simply mouth off the same phobic propaganda.
Jul 19th, 2010 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I now realise why such a high proportion of Argentines live in an anxiety state. They are insecure. They know that they have stolen land. They know that they have committed genocide. They hope to legitimise themselves, but recognise that it isn't working.
I'm afraid, Argentino, that if the bulk of your population is like you, the end will be self-immolation.
harrier61: “There is no point in “discussing” anything with you. You simply mouth off the same phobic propaganda”
Jul 19th, 2010 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Take it easy, nobody is doing propaganda here, I'm just spoken at length the historiacal and legal reasons of why the Malvinas belong to Argentina. The problem here, it's maybe you don't wanna recognize that the british colonial empire invade the islands and stole national argentine territories, were usurped by UK.
And don't worry, cause the only country here has committed genocide, is UK, and all it's bunch of pirates aroung the world, invading, stealing, and killing inocent people, exactly not long ago in Irak. If you don't have your own natural resources to produce what you need for living, you can buy them to the other countries, but not steal to them man, don't be a pirate please, nobody likes that any more, people in the world is not stupid as you think.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
“No matter how many years they lived there, they took the islands by the force of a invasion, expulsing the argentine people living there before. ”
Jul 19th, 2010 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Much like argentina did with the natives of Argentina? Does that make your nation illegal?
Also, by defenition a nation can not engage in piracy. The islands changed hands on many occasions in those times. People lived there before your settlement anyway including the british, Living somewhere for two years hardly gives you the rights for it forever.
Any claim you may have had 200 years ago is defaulted by the current inhabitants of 200 years and the coming of human rights and self determination.
zethe: “Also, by defenition a nation can not engage in piracy. People lived there before your settlement anyway including the british, Living somewhere for two years hardly gives you the rights for it forever.”
Jul 19th, 2010 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Again wrong, and I repeat you why:
In 1776, when the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata was created and the islands were under spanish control, the Malvinas were included in the territory of the governorship of Buenos Aires. After the revolution in 1810 and the Argentina's independence in 1816, the islands remained under that jurisdiction, so the the island pass to belong to Argentina nation. Conclusion: This is a legal fact.
After the Argentina's independence, Malvinas islands, now under argentine territory, were invaded by British troops who dipersed and forced the argentinians living there to withdraw from the islands. Conclusion: This a illegal fact.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
@50. As I said, the same phobic propaganda. There is certainly one “nation” that is as stupid as we think. A bunch of rebel colonists that calls itself Argentina.
Jul 19th, 2010 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Note that a rebel, therefore illegal, regime cannot “inherit” anything.
You have a chance here. You can prove that you don't read, won't read, can't read or that you are (politically) blind or you can note what was written at 21 amongst which was “It was obviously inappropriate to allow a garrison of foreign troops on British soil and they were, therefore, evicted. By contrast, the civilian settlers were told that they could stay on British territory if they wished. This would naturally include acceptance of British sovereignty and rule. The majority of the settlers chose to remain, thereby demonstrating an early preference for life on the Islands under British rule rather than life on the mainland under United Provinces rule.”
Go on. Prove there is something between your ears besides government propaganda and a vacuum.
mind you that Ghurkha who cut of the Taliban’s head, has been sent home to England, he may be sent to the Falklands as a deterrent to any roaming argies,
Jul 19th, 2010 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Again wrong, and I repeat you why:
Jul 19th, 2010 - 10:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“In 1776, when the viceroyalty of Río de la Plata was created and the islands were under spanish control, the Malvinas were included in the territory of the governorship of Buenos Aires. After the revolution in 1810 and the Argentina's independence in 1816, the islands remained under that jurisdiction, so the the island pass to belong to Argentina nation. Conclusion: This is a legal fact.”
A spanish legal fact? Spanish laws are not legal in the UK. At the time the nations were constantly at war with eachother.
At the time there was no such thing as international law. it's not binding.
Argentino,
Jul 20th, 2010 - 02:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0You amaze me with the bulls**t you believe - well I assume you believe it! Right from “there are only UK companies drilling for oil”? - suggest you check out the address for the head Office of BHPBIllington?
We were implanted in 1982? - my family had already been here for 6 generations by then! Then we were implanted by force in 1833 when those here before were thrown out? Both wrong - our ancestors came and stayed of their own free will, and wrong Argentiness were not thrown out in 1833 - all civilians were invited to stay - and many did - all well documented. Then you go about selfdetermination and rights of a population not applying - please tell me then WHY do Argentine troops often serve alongside british troops in Cyprus to defend the right of one people to live on an island claimed by another?
A century or two ago it was different - but if you look around todays world you will find that pretty well all conflicts(Iraq excepted and I agree that was wrong) have been about Selfdetermination and the Rights of Peoples - and guess what - they appear to be the winners.
Islander1: “Argentino, You amaze me with the bulls**t you believe - well I assume you believe it!”
Jul 20th, 2010 - 05:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Of course I believe it, cause is a fact, you people were implanted in an argentine territory that don't belong to you, and you were implanted by a colonial force like UK, you are british, not islander.
If I had invaded and taken by the force a part of the territory of a nation like the UK, next to the main british island, and I put my own people there, that people would be illegally usurping a place that is not theirs, so would be crazy to think they could have any right to claim self-determination. It’s crazy, cause under this approach, international law would be in favor of the invader, but not the invaded. Then each country would be empowering, to invade new territories that do not belong to them as they please. To then claim, that these new residents (usurpers) have right to self-determination.
harrier61: “The majority of the settlers chose to remain, thereby demonstrating an early preference for life on the Islands under British...”
Of course, cause they are british usurpers, the problem is they are living in Argentina's territory. They have two options: To live as argentine citizens, or come back to UK. Every american country inherited the rights over the old colonial territories.
zethe: “A spanish legal fact? Spanish laws are not legal in the UK. At the time the nations were constantly at war with eachother.”
Wrong. Is an argentine legal fact, cause when you invade the islands in 1833, forcing the argentine people living there to leave their home, Malvinas already was a part of Argentina's territory since 1810. Maybe you didn't read well: Argentina as a nation, inherited the spanish rights according to the “principle uti possidetis juris”, whereby Argentina now emancipated would apply the same limits as the extinct Viceroyalty of Río de la Plata, because its Historical and Legal.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
@Argentino: Your views are very rigid & do not agree with all facts. I would like to hear your comments on this:
Jul 20th, 2010 - 06:23 am - Link - Report abuse 01. Interestingly, the Spanish royalists were still occupying the Malvinas in 1810 & Argentina did not control them. In 1811, the Spanish left a permanent claim to the Islands on a plaque stating their claim, as the British did in 1774. All that time from 1774-1833 British & US Sealers & Whalers used the Islands freely, recognising no govt.
2. What's your view of the Conquest of the Desert & the annexing of Patagonia into the Argentine state by force? This was not completed until 1885; surely by your own argument's logic Argentina must return Patagonia to the original Patagons? In 1833, Argentina was not much bigger than modern day Buenos Aires province? Much of Argentina's land came by conquest after 1833. The Mapuche call this “The Last Massacre”.
3. According to the principle uti possidetis juris, in 1810 Spain retained the Malvinas. Also, it is not appropriate to apply this principle to a territory that was disputed by another state (Britain) & was not under effective control, e.g. the UK/US sealers & whalers who much outnumbered the Spanish penal colony & did as they pleased
3. Also do not forget, in international law the principle of Uti possidetis applies to 1833 & 1982, i.e. the territory & other property remains with its possessor at the end of a conflict
4. A peace treaty, the Convention of Settlement, was ratified by Argentina in 1850, which ended Argentina's claim to the Malvinas, stating that all existing differences were settled & perfect friendship existed between UK & AR. At this point AR protests in Messages to Congress ceased & were only revived by the fascist Military Junta in 1941 taking advantage of WWII
5. Britain has exercised de facto & de jur sovereignty for 177 years
6. Argentina voted for UN resolution 1514(XV) to apply to the case of the Falklands/Malvinas which guarantees the Islanders right to self-determination!
@Argentino.
Jul 20th, 2010 - 08:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Because so much useful information has been given to you, i.e. 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, I'll only mention a limited number.
42“”harrier61: “Just how dippy are you? Are you seriously suggesting that post June 1982 Britain shipped 3,000 people to the Falkland Islands?”
Yes. “
Go on then. Come up with news reports, not Argentine, that show Britain shipping 2-3,000 people to the Falklands from June 1982 onwards.
48 ”They are living there illegally, are usurpers in a territory which never belonged to them, No matter how many years they lived there, they took the islands by the force of a invasion, expulsing the argentine people living there before.“
Not true. If you had read, you would have learned that, in 1833, Britain expelled a foreign garrison from its territory. Civilians were told that they could stay if they wished, and the majority did. In fact, you quoted this back at me and twisted it to represent the settlers I spoke of as British rather than from United Provinces.
Your arguments have so many holes in them that they are indistingushable from colanders. You have also, more than once, had ”piracy” defined but are apparently incapable of departing from the propaganda drummed into you.
Domingo: “1. Interestingly, the Spanish royalists were still occupying the Malvinas in 1810 & Argentina did not control them”
Jul 20th, 2010 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Wrong, you didn't read or you don't wanna read, that's a bid difference.
From 1764-1810 the territory was under control by spanish colonial forces, even there was a fact when the british recognized the spanish possesion of the islands. From 1810 to 1833, in the islands was living argentine people, in Puerto Soledad with the respective governor, cause Malvinas already were a part of Argentina's territory. In 1833, UK invaded the islands, installing british pirates, and forcing the argentine civilians living there to leave their home. this is the key moment, after that nobody cares, you can say what you want, cause the theft and usurpation have already been committed.
Domingo: “...surely by your own argument's logic Argentina must return Patagonia to the original Patagons?”
Nobody here is putting a debate the integrity of Argentina as a nation, because by the same criterion it would have to dissolve all the UK and the U.S., and every country in the modern world. And here we are talking about one country “UK” stole, to another country “Argentina”, territories that were not of its belonging.
harrier61: “Not true. If you had read, you would have learned that, in 1833, Britain expelled a foreign garrison from its territory”
Again wrong. The british occupiers in Malvinas, can not decide on the fate of what is not theirs, in this case, the territory of the archipelago. Yes, they could, in case of full restoration of the exercise of sovereignty by Argentina and their constitution like a minority, decide on their own personal destiny, exercising the right of choice in matters such as nationality, religion, property, conditions migration .... You must appreciate the difference between right of option and right to self determination.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
argentino you are a waste of space
Jul 20th, 2010 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0About time you found a way of differentiating hallucinations from reality.
Jul 20th, 2010 - 12:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here's a clue. Everything you have written since Jul 14th, 2010 - 08:54 pm is a hallucination!
We can't help you. You need to go back to your psychiatrist, tell them what they've got you on isn't working, and ask them to triple the dose.
@Argentino:
Jul 20th, 2010 - 12:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You agree with the proposition that if territory is secured by coercion or force then this territory should be ceded to the previous claimant to correct the perceived wrong
However, you cannot expect the UK or current Islanders to agree to this logic, when it also equally applies to case of Argentina's annexation of Patagonia & other territory ripped by force from free peoples who would not choose to be subjugated, but were by Argentina
Argentina must also apply this logic to itself, to its own detriment, if it is credibly to expect others to apply it to themselves. Otherwise Argentina must agree its logic & morals are flawed and are equally not applicable to any other modern state if not applicable to the modern Argentine state. Otherwise, Argentina's position is highly hypocritical & can be justifiably ignored
I'm very happy to read what you write, Argentino, however your description of continous & effective exercise of sovereignty by Argentina on the Falklands/Malvinas between 1810-1833 & Spanish sovereignty between 1765-1811 is not accurate & the historical records show that your claims are inaccurate compared the the Argentine National State Archives of the logs of the ship Heroine, Sarandi & state correspondence of the time
The UK assertion of sovereignty of the Islands by the then legal principle of Uti posseditis is equivalent to the Argentine patriots assertion of Uti posseditis juris from Spain
Spain formally accede to the independence of the Argentine Republic until 1859, some 49 years later, because it de facto & pointless to contend the territory of Argentina would ever rejoin with Spain.
Similarly, the Falklands have been de facto British for 177 years, much longer than Patagonia has been part of Argentina, yet Argentina will not
cede Patagonia.
AR voted for self-determination to apply to the Islanders inResolution 1514(XV) & the resolution was unanimously carried 89:0 thus AR must apply self-determination to the Islanders!
Domingo. Why are you bothering? Argentino is clearly a brain-scrubbed fanatic as evidence by the fact that, no matter what anyone says to him, he just reiterates the same tripe.
Jul 20th, 2010 - 03:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You watch. He'll do it again soon!
Domingo: “You agree with the proposition that if territory is secured by coercion or force then this territory should be ceded to the previous claimant to correct the perceived wrong”
Jul 20th, 2010 - 06:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wrong. You are confusing previous claimant with previous owner, in this case Argentina as a nation, which is something completely different. When UK invade the islands in 1833, Malvinas already belonged to the argentine territory.
Domingo: “Spain formally accede to the independence of the Argentine Republic until 1859...”
This analysis is completely invalid, the revolution in 1810 was a fight against the colonial forces of Europa in this case Spain, in US's case it was against UK, until 1810 the islands were in the hands of Spain, after this year when Argentina's independence is done, Malvinas automatically became part of Argentine territory, appointing a governor and sending argentine people to live there.
The problem is UK still today, in the XXI century, wants to keep territories that are not belonging to them, is like if Spain would be so crazy to claim for some province in Argentina, or UK for some state or island in the US, the decolonization treaty already was signed, but there is a country never respected it, yes the UK. Once again you need to read this:
The british occupiers in Malvinas, can not decide on the fate of what is not theirs, in this case, the territory of the archipelago. Yes, they could, in case of full restoration of the exercise of sovereignty by Argentina and their constitution like a minority, decide on their own personal destiny, exercising the right of choice in matters such as nationality, religion, property, conditions migration .... You must appreciate the difference between right of option and right to self determination.
harrier61: “Domingo. Why are you bothering? Argentino is clearly a brain-scrubbed fanatic ”
Calm down man, you don't need to attack and disqualify people. I suggest you go to take some pills and relax yourself.
Regards.
@Argentino:
Jul 20th, 2010 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ok, but if what you say is true, I still don't understand the difference between the UK taking the Malvinas & keeping them after a very long time & Argentina taking Patagonia & keeping it after a very long time
It seems by your analysis the Patagons lost Patagonia to the stronger Argentines & the Argentines lost the Malvinas to the stronger British, but you demand the Malvinas but want to keep Patagonia too. That doesn't seem fair
Also I don't understand why Argentina also claims British Antarctica, South Georgia & the Sandwich Islands as these territories are separate to the Malvinas
With respect, I don't understand how Argentina can argue against self-determination for the Islanders when the UN General Assembly has decided that self-determination according to resolution 1514(XV) does cover the cases of the Malvinas and also that Argentina itself has voted for that resolution to apply to the Islanders. Argentina surely have to obey General Assembly Resolution 1514(XV) now?
What I also don't understand why is it ok for the Argentine Patriots to take land from the Spanish Royalists & keep that territory, when Britain simply took territory it thought it had a right to from the Spanish or Argentine Patriots & kept it. Both nations are doing the same thing, except it seems Argentina does not like this fact of life when it is not in Argentina's favour. That is not fair or reasonable of Argentina
It simply seems that Argentina lost the territory permanently in 1833, settled its loss by peace treaty in 1850 & in 1982 it foolishly started a war it could not win & then lost that war, which is also a permanent reason for Britain to keep the Malvinas under uti possidetis & UN SCR 502 & Britain now also seems to also be performing its duty according to resolution 1514(XV) for the Islanders
Since the Islanders & British have exercised de facto & de jur sovereignty for 177 years & today, nothing stops the Islanders from self-determination? AR is powerless.
“AR is powerless”
Jul 20th, 2010 - 10:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes.
you cannot speak to people that are brain washed from an early age, as i have said before these people are taught from the argentine history book,
Jul 20th, 2010 - 10:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0[the world according to Argentina] how are they to believe other wise, these poor people need to get out and see the world, as it is, and not how Argentina sees it,
Domingo: “Ok, but if what you say is true, I still don't understand the difference between the UK taking the Malvinas...”.
Jul 21st, 2010 - 07:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0Cause we are talking about a decolonization process, and UK never wanted to accept the fact they don't have any right in America. When UK stole (not took as you said, there is a big difference)the Malvinas islands in 1833, they already belonged to Argentina, when you talk about the provinces of Patagonia region, by the same criterion it would have to dissolve the UK, US, and every moden nation. And here we are talking about one country “UK” stole, to another country “Argentina”. That's what you don't wanna accept.
Domingo: “Also I don't understand why Argentina also claims British Antarctica...”
Antarctic territory doesn't belong to any country, there only exist claims for some areas by different nations, many countries have bases there, also Argentina.
Domingo: “With respect, I don't understand how Argentina can argue against self-determination for the Islanders...”
Cause you never can claim sovereigny over the sovereigny of another country, in this case Argentina. And also you can't claim for self-determination right when you are the robber, that same people who invaded a territory, adn took it by the force. Pointless to ask the usurper if wanna keep which was torn. You have to read this again: The british occupiers in Malvinas, can not decide on the fate of what is not theirs, in this case, the territory of the archipelago. They could, under the sovereignty by Argentina and their constitution like a minority, decide on their own personal destiny, exercising the right of choice in matters such as nationality, religion, property, migration conditions.... You must appreciate the difference between right of option and right to self determination.
Domingo: “What I also don't understand why is it ok for the Argentine Patriots...”
Is like if after the US independence, Spain was today still claiming for Florida state, or any other.
Regards.
69 Argentino - You say something very interesting.
Jul 21st, 2010 - 07:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Cause you never can claim sovereigny over the sovereigny of another country, in this case Argentina.”
This is very interesting. Britain claimed sovereignty of the islands in 1765 and never renounced that sovereignty. Therefore by your own argument Argentina couldn't have owned the islands as you put it, because you can't claim sovereignty of another country, which as Britain never renounced its sovereignty Argentina was clearly trying to do in 1830's.
Argentina had now right to sovereignty of the islands because sovereignty of the islands had been held by Britain since 1765.
Argentina had no right to be in the islands in the 1830's and its military was rightfully ejected.
Argentina has no rights to the falklands now.
Argentina has no rights to the South Sandwich islands or South Georgia either.
LegionNi: “This is very interesting. Britain claimed sovereignty of the islands in 1765 and never renounced that sovereignty.”
Jul 21st, 2010 - 01:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinas never were under sovereigny of UK, from 1865-1810 the islands were under control of spanish forces, even they installed governors during the period of the Virreynato del Río de la Plata, after that, with the Argentina's independence, the islands became a part of the argentine territory and its sovereigny without any doubt, this until 1833 year when were invaded and stolen by the britis pirates.
brito: “you cannot speak to people that are brain washed from an early age, as i have said before these people are taught from the argentine history book...”
My friend. The fact is that UK is a specialist for stealing territories and things that do not belong to that country, that's the pirate essence every british has inside, like his son US stealing lands to Mexico. Like father, like son.
So I was not surprised at all, to read comments of people who were raised, in a country that always had colonialist and imperialist pretensions. Now I can see and understand your skewed view of reality, that’s really a good brainwashing, then I suggest you go out, to see in the real world what the people thinks about UK, everybody knows that little island like to steal. And the big problem is that all of you just have read one story, and the worst part that's the story of the conqueror, the invader.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
71 Argentino - “Malvinas never were under sovereigny of UK”
Jul 21st, 2010 - 03:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentino now you are just completely ignoring historical fact.
LegionNi: “Argentino now you are just completely ignoring historical fact.”
Jul 21st, 2010 - 03:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And you're taking one sentence out of context. I said Malvinas never were under sovereigny of UK, cause during that period from 1765-1810 the islands were under control of spanish forces, and after the spanish possesion the island became a part of the Argentina's territory, now a independent country, so the they came under argentine sovereignty.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
73 Argentine
Jul 22nd, 2010 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Spain didn't turn up in the Falklands until 1766 after our claim of sovereignty in 1765.
At best Spain only every held disputed sovereignty of the islands. Argentina could therefore not inherit sovereignty of an already disputed territory.
Brtain NEVER renounced its sovereignty of the islands which it has claimed since 1765. Britain also NEVER recognised Spainsh sovereignty of the islands.
Those are the facts.
Wrong, those are not the real facts. Indeed UK was just by 8 years claiming for a little part of the island, UK abandoned this settlement in 1774 and gave up its sovereignty to the Kingdom of Spain by signing a treaty.
Jul 22nd, 2010 - 01:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The real facts are UK violated Argentina's sovereignty in Malvinas, invading, usurping Puerto Soledad, and taking by the force the islands in 1833, removing also by the force the argentine people living there.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
Argentino “Wrong, those are not the real facts. Indeed UK was just by 8 years claiming for a little part of the island, UK abandoned this settlement in 1774 and gave up its sovereignty to the Kingdom of Spain by signing a treaty.”
Jul 22nd, 2010 - 02:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not this same old rubbish. Britain never gave up its sovereignty of the islands. Britain NEVER signed a treaty with Spain in which it gave up it's sovereignty. After Spain removed our settlers from the island, Britain and Spain almost went to war over it and Spain was forced to back down and restore the settlement. The treaty that was signed at the time left the sovereignty dispute unresolved. Britain did not renounce its sovereignty nor did Spain renounce its claim.
When Britain left the islands in 1774 it left a plaque asserting British Sovereignty, standard practice at the time. Spain did the same when it left the islands also.
lets be honest here, you argentine lovers , secretly admire the British [and don’t deny it] , you always slag of the ones you love or care for, you guys just cant say it openly, but we will say it for you, ,
Jul 22nd, 2010 - 05:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you harbour that one day you might become British, you love us really, you cunning devils,
LegionNi: “Britain never gave up its sovereignty of the islands...”
Jul 23rd, 2010 - 10:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0You're wrong. In 1774 the british withdrew from the islands on their own, abandoning their settlement, after signing the Treaty of Nootka. With these agreements, between other issues, the UK recognized the spanish sovereignty in the South Atlantic and Pacific archipelagos next to the American continent.
Malvinas islands belong to Argentina! Las Malvinas son Argentinas!
Regards.
78 Argentino - “You're wrong. In 1774 the british withdrew from the islands on their own, abandoning their settlement, after signing the Treaty of Nootka. With these agreements, between other issues, the UK recognized the spanish sovereignty in the South Atlantic and Pacific archipelagos next to the American continent.”
Jul 23rd, 2010 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nope sorry your wrong again. Britain did not renounce sovereignty in the Nootka sound convention treaty. All Britain agreed to was not to build settlements on the islands adjacent to the coast of South America, and is is debatable if that would have included the Falklands anway. Also the treaty becomes null and void if a third party, i.e. Argentina trys to set up home on the islands.
No where in any treaty did Britain renounce sovereignty of the islands. It doesn't matter that we left in 1774 we still maintained our sovereignty claim, just as when Spain left they maintained their sovereignty claim.
The Nootka sound treaty is irrelvant anyway as Argentina gave up it's claim to the islands in 1850 when it signed the treaty friendship and settlement, which settled ALL differences between Britain and Argentina.
like i said , brain dead, no speeke englishhh
Jul 23rd, 2010 - 10:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!