MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Malvinas: Argentina working for more than “a gesture of support” from Unasur
Argentina is working with Unasur (Union of South American Nations) so that in the future the South American forum offers more than “a gesture of support” to Argentina’s claim over the Falkland/Malvinas Islands and helps bring the United Kingdom to the sovereignty negotiations table, said Argentine ambassador before United Nations, Jorge Argüello. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThe Argentine civilized manners that british subjects will never understand, this is why Argentina should stop wasting their time and work on a nuclear defence program like Israel did, and there is nothing UN can or will do about it.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 08:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0Civilized manners generally don't include landing about 12,000 troops on your neighbours without their express permission.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 09:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'd be more interested to know if anyone from the C-24 is actually going to bother to visit Stanley, I believe that there is an open invitation for them to visit.
Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0@Rufus
Aug 27th, 2010 - 10:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well sometimes civilized societies have to use the force to deal with some criminals and usurpers that seize other people territory.
Everyone has an army to defend themselves from invaders and colonialist nations like UK.
Everyone has an Army except Argentina. CFK has de-funded the military the budget so barely covers salaries much less maintenance, fuel or new equipment.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 11:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0“And the followers of the Anti-Christ” (that's South America) “shall be cast into the lake of fire.”
Aug 27th, 2010 - 11:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0“As ye sow, so shall ye reap.”
Argentina is corrupt internally, and is turning into a dictatorship, just like Venezuala has; everything they do is bent, or a lie, to make short-term advantage, nothing you agree with them is honoured, paper treaties are worthless, and if you let them have something then they come creeping back for more and more.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 12:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They are a bunch of slimy barstewards out to line their own greasy pockets and nothing else, they won't work for it, they just want to persuade others that they should join together and give it to them, at no risk to Argentina.
We have a line drawn in the South Atlantic, if any body wants to cross it they should expect a good kicking, because we're willing to take you all on if we need to.
THIMC
Aug 27th, 2010 - 01:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Malvinas: Argentina working for more than a gesture of support from Unasur”
In plain English, it means to apply the Argentinean “Denial of Service to Malvinas related Business” to other regional ports in the region.
Should not be so difficult.....
Brazil and Uruguay are quite positive about the idea.....
Let's wait and see how it goes........
Shall we?
What service exactly, have they been denied?
Aug 27th, 2010 - 01:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Denial of service doesn't work when you can't deny someones services. Even if you could totally deny them every form of trade we can simply resupply them by air, we are more than happy to foot the bill.
Lets say for arguments sake, you did manage to totally blockade the islands, and the people could get food, water, ect and they had to relocate, You still wouldn't get the islands.
So Latinos that massacred the native populations of south america are entitled to their land and nationhood and yet the Falklands population that displaced nobody are land thieves and pirates with no rights.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 01:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You can see the logic
How far up your own fundamental orifice can you put your head ?
Aug 27th, 2010 - 01:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A Unasur blockade of the Falklands, even if it can be achieved which I doubt, will cause some inconvenience but will not fundamentally affect the economy or the political position. It will not bring Argentina any closer to its objective of talks on sovereignty.
The only way to convince Falkland Islanders to have anything to do with Argentina is through several decades of friendly neighbourly co-operation. Di Tella could see that, even if some of his methods were a little bizarre. Garcia del Solar and his henchmen and followers cannot see it because they come from the archetypical Argentine mentality that all you need to do to get what you want is to bully.
Sorry guys, we are 400 miles and several million light years away. Bully and blockade all you like, and you will just look foolish.
I have to completely agree with stillakelper
Aug 27th, 2010 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The more Argentina continue to implement the policy of isolate and alienate the Falklands from South America the less likely Argentina has in achieveing their objective. Britain is clear on its stance, the people of the Falklands choose their future, and Argentina's current strategy is to deny these people their human rights and force an economic blockade upon them. It doesnt really endear Argentina to the people of the Falklands. The more you continue with this strategy the closer you push the people of the Falklands to Britain, and also you put off an entirely new generation of “Benny's” to Argentina.
My plea to Argentina is to continue with this policy. It only strengthens our resolve and highlights the immaturity of Argentina's “Democracy” and their twisted and blinded logic.
Like I said before actions speak louder that words and it appears that once again I am correct. Argentina has realized that verbal support is worthless. Considering Brazil were happy to receive the taxes for the docking of the tug and the Ocean Guardian earlier this year I doubt very much that they will turn away such future opportunities. After all with the sick economies of Portugal & Brazil their key to increased EU trade will be Germany and the UK.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 03:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0These descisions will be based around the $ and not poxy And toothless Argentine nationalism.
CFK's Government isn't really interested in the Falklands. They have always used this matter to distract the Argentine people's attention from internal corruption and economical disaster, as all the other Governments have done in the past.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentines: start working seriously and you'll see the benefits. Leave the people in the Falklands alone.
Sorry guys, I know you are getting very upset about the situation, but you need to understand that after 177 years of illegal occupation of Malvinas by London sooner or later that will end.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 06:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2010/07/21/Falklanders-feel-Argentina-sea-blockade/UPI-56401279741550/
Malvinas Argentinas y Sudamericanas.
@Marco
Aug 27th, 2010 - 06:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina, by using twisted logic and creating incorrect historical events, claims that there is an illegal occupation of the Falkland Islands. The fact that people like Marco believe that the Falklands is still a colony only highlights the cronic lack of Argentine understanding of the Falklands and there highly dubious beliefs of the Falklands. To claim that the British still control the islands, is laughable and completely ignores the Falkland Islands Government, who Argentina claims doesnt exist. You can claim anything as illegal when you ignore the hard facts. And until Argentina recognise the facts of this situation, the more they will continue to fail in their persuit.
And I notice now that the Argentines on here have included the “y Sudamericanas”, puts a little wry smile on my face.
@15 Margo. Not upset, boooored! But try sticking your little noses inside the EEZ, by air or sea. See what happens!!
Aug 27th, 2010 - 07:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(11) stillakelper and (12) M_of_FI
Aug 27th, 2010 - 08:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First of all... No blockade exists... That's just a “word” you use to play victims in front of the word.......
We are just implementing a “Denial of Services”
Second... You both seem to be under the false impression that we actualy care about the opinion the settlers have about us!
We know it perfectly and we don't care anymore...............
For pragmatic reasons Argentina will always take in consideration the best interests of the settlers and is prepaired to pay them proper compensations, offer them generous terms etc etc... .... but their well known opinion is totally irrelevant for us....
it is always very hard to talk to brain dead people, or brainwashed children, remember poll pot, but sadly Argentina will never get the Falklands by military action, even with all the south American countries together , you would still lose, [the trouble is, THEY know it, but you, yet, don’t], as for c24, the British will cast them off as ungrateful corrupt and selfish, the argies can talk forever and get help from mars if need be, but without the agree ment of the Falklands people you can forget it, and as long as the argentine government and brain washed idiots like Marco and thinker, think the islanders are not worthy to lick there boots, you will never, ever get your grubby filthy hands on the Falklands, so you lot can cry as much as you want, and the rest of south Americas can cry for Argentino. but the fact will always remain, and go down in all the history books [forever] Argentina was all mouth, and no trousers, always carry a white flag in there back pocket for emergencies, cowards in 1982-2010 and still use skulduggery behind there backs, can never be trusted, and the only truly honest argentine people those that care, are either subjugated or in prison, long live FREEDOM and down with argentine dictatorship, ????
Aug 27th, 2010 - 09:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think, Ok Denial us Services-Blockade - we are splitting hairs - its the same thing and we both know it.But please clarify what services you have so far denied?
Aug 27th, 2010 - 09:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You have not DENIED us access through the Straits - obviously no British or Islands operated ship will ask for your“papers” and sign the papers, there is no reason why any other ship cannot apply for such a permit and come here - You have inconvienienced us abit - that is all.
Your Govt through your Unions was prepared to get the Montevideo dockers to strike and black all HamBurg Sud cargo ships ( because some link into the Islands ) - there was never any problem with the Govt in Montevideo - just your good old union bullyboy threats - simple solution - the ship concerned moved a mere one day,s steaming up the coast!
Uruguyan products are still on sale here! as they are from several other S American nations. Chile as well - just comes a different route.
So - results so far:
Damage to the Islands and Islanders - virtually zero-just increased our“piss-off-Argentina feeling”
Damage to innocent Chileans in southern Chile - YES - several lost their jobs.
Some victory for Argentina?
May I remind you - If K asks other S American Govts for “tangible support” - those S American Govts will have to look at the plus-minus balances:
Do they want to piss off Britain AND the EEC - possibly millions of dollars worth to be lost?
What is in their financial benefit? THAT my friend is what counts in this imperfect world we share.
Example - when Lan moved into Arg and started LanArgentina - BA asked Lan to refer only to us as malvinas in any flight schedules here etc. Lan said Ok we will use both names(as they do, one in Spanish and the other in the English broadcast inflight) - because we are friends with Britain as well in business Oh and who was head man in Lan then? - a clue his name beginins with a P.
Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Listen guys. Feel free to discuss with Think; he has at least the ability to formulate an argument although I and others hold opposing views.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Simply ignore Marco & Gassy. Like Jihad Jorge and gdr before them, their comments and logic are a prime example of why inbreeding is dangerous.
Marco claims there is an illegal occupation yet he fails to point out the law in question. Funnily enough his government also have not managed to do this or take this accusation to the ICJ! Looks like being a legal numpty is enough to get a place in the Argentine government.
Oh, and Bank of America/Merrill Lynch have updrages RKH to a Buy with a short term target price of 650p. Looks like Sam Moody had it right when he said that the Argentine position was a minor annoyance.
Get that flow test underway guys!
marco you have been relagated to the lower ranks,
Aug 27th, 2010 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0chaves welcomes you.
goodbuy, think, you are at least normal, and can understand the truth, even if you do not agrre with it, you DO understand the truth,
the falklands are british, and argentina is argentina savvy ??
Argentina is acting like the typical schoolyard bully... without their chums to back them bullies are always just piss and wind....
Aug 27th, 2010 - 10:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina is trying to convince itself that is can have a bearing on the Islands. Kind of like a nation with an inferiority complex! Like i and others have suggested it will be the $ that will determine the outcome and Argentina will not be able to buy the friendship it wants.
Aug 27th, 2010 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”The international community is coming to grips with the “colonial coup d’ état” perpetuated by the United Kingdom in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI), one of six British-administered colonies in the Atlantic/ Caribbean”
Aug 28th, 2010 - 12:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2009/08/re-colonising-colony.html
“It's a coup d'etat” cries the government that has been found to have been systematically corrupt. Now who would have thought that.
Aug 28th, 2010 - 02:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0It seems the population are rather more happy about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_and_Caicos_Islands
(22) Beef
Aug 28th, 2010 - 04:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“Bank of America/Merrill Lynch have updrages RKH to a Buy with a short term target price of 650p.”
Seems to be that even the “Scientology Style ” optimist Rockhopper investors from iii are having problems in believing this “story”
http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail/?display=discussion&code=cotn%3ARKH.L&threshold=0&pageno=1&it=le&thread=6823587
What was the word you “stock people” use for such a story?.......Ramper?
I prefer to get my information from the free press and not the iii rumor mill
Aug 28th, 2010 - 06:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1306848/MARKET-REPORT-GEOFF-FOSTER-Cable--Wireless-lifted-bid-talk.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Pan down and you will find the short paragraph about RKH.
So marco if you say that the UK is re-colonising the Turks and Caico's islands by suspending their constitution and law making powers and given the territory has an identical constitutional set up and relationship with the UK, doesn't that contradict your almost religious fanatical assertion that the Falklands are a colony because they have a governor??????
Aug 28th, 2010 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0(29) Beef
Aug 28th, 2010 - 01:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Some pearls from the original article left out in the British Press synopsis......:
“Politically charged but technically manageable:
”Whilst the sovereignty dispute between the UK/Argentina over the islands still brings uncertainty, we believe that the field could technically be developed.....“
”Given the political situation of the Islands, the number of potential partners is limited and probably excludes most companies already operating in Latin America.....“
”Based on what we believe are conservative assumptions, a 50% chance of success... and applying a 12% discount for potentially higher political risk, we value the project at 343p......“
Well.......Looks that the ”Minor Annoyance“ of Argentina's position is beginning to figure in the ”Rich and Powerfull North“ analysis.......
Our goal is, as so many times said before...... to make the above mentioned: ” Discount for Potentially Higher Political Risk “ grow to the point of unrentability.....
What that point is?
We don't know!..... The ”almighty” market will show us....
Until then we will continue to apply the necessary pressure.....
Have a nice weekend......
Shell and Hess have been there before think. Considering the price of oil held up in the recession then during the years of recovery the price of oil will simply rise and rise. When push comes to shove policy will be determined by the financial rewards.
Aug 28th, 2010 - 04:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps BP, perhaps Shell, perhaps Hesperhaps the Chinese or Korean (South) state companies, perhaps India (they are afer Gulfsands and I banked a good 42% on that one over a couple of months).
Any of the above will render the Argentine position impotent. Perhaps Argentina could join in and then you may see the benefits in terms of jobs for the poor of Argentina.
Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 28th, 2010 - 04:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If. ..... When....Considering...... It will......When push comes...... Will be......perhaps, perhaps, perhaps..................
Aug 28th, 2010 - 04:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A lot of suppositions.....but no meat.
The Malvinas are a “Special Case” as declared by the UN.....
This applies for the oil industry too......
The South- Atlantic is not Equatorial Guinea where a son of a British Prime Minister can buy a pair of helicopters, hire some white assasins and try to become Emperor ......
.
But you are right in one thing.
Money is Might.......
But this time is us that want to make the “real money”
That's the whole idea of developing!
Twinky. Why do keep quoting the UN as if it were important?
Aug 28th, 2010 - 05:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Did Argentina pay any attention to UN Security Council Resolution 502?
United Nations? Veto.
Aug 28th, 2010 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“According to a draft resolution that the Special Committee approved by consensus, a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom was the only way to end the special and particular colonial situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas”
Aug 28th, 2010 - 07:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Draft resolution that was not voted upon, unless a resolution is voted upon and that vote is in favour, it isn't a UN Resolution is it? If it were then it would have a number officially given to it by the UN.
Aug 28th, 2010 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Padding out a Committee with no teeth what-so-ever with your buddies and then deciding to use a means other than a vote to approve a draft means you've created more toilet paper, and more importantly, baseless political spin for Argentina to feed its population.
You'd have to be a complete moron to think any draft is a valid legal document.
as long as you guys moan abt the un or other south American committees, then you will be talking for ever, none of them have teeth, even you don’t have teeth, there are very few countries or organisations on the planet that can for Britain to do anything, you can count them on one finger on one hand, so you are just wasting your bad breath, go home argies and play with you action men and dolls, and let brazil do the talking for south America , they will do a deal with the yanks to deal with Argentina, ????????????
Aug 28th, 2010 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Margo.
Aug 29th, 2010 - 09:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0How nice of you to bring up the irrelevant UN Decolonisation Committee. I say irrelevant because (a) it is “packed” with representatives from South America and (b) because Argentina pays no attention to the UN unless it suits. As witness its reaction to UN Security Council Resolution 502.
But bringing it up does permit a certain insight:
”He (Timerman) recalled the forcible expulsion of the Territory’s Argentine population by the United Kingdom in 1833, and efforts to prevent their return, emphasizing that the current population had not been subjected to a colonial Power and therefore could not possess the right to self-determination.“
This clearly demonstrates the incompetence and stupidity of Argentina's Foreign Minister. He begins by stating Argentina's version of history - events that did not happen - and then goes on to say that the inhabitants of the Falkland Islands ”had not been subjected to a colonial Power” thus disproving the claim that the Falkland Islands are a colony.
Is it any wonder that the Security Council does not adopt any of your daft draft resolutions when you send morons like Timerman to represent you?
Isn't this boring! Same old crap from Marco, same old optimism from Think.
Aug 29th, 2010 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Decolonisation Committee is discredited on this issue and is being ignored by the majority of the UN. I can however understand Argentina's frustration with her neighbours. All that rhetoric, so little action. But then, that's what politics is all about.
No change. The islands are British .... get used to it.
The committee is here to help nations who want to become independant become independant, you can't force it upon people who don't want it.
Aug 29th, 2010 - 01:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Aug 29th, 2010 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”The representative of Chile introduced the draft resolution “Question of the Falklands Islands (Malvinas)” (document A/AC.109/2010/L.15), saying it reflected the main elements of the doctrine formulated by the United Nations over the years with regard to that question. The text acknowledged the special and particular colonial situation, which differed from others due to the existence of a sovereignty dispute between the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom.
He said the text also specified that the only way to end that dispute was a negotiated settlement, expressing regret that, despite the time spent and numerous resolutions adopted to date, direct diplomatic negotiations had not begun. Expressing support for Argentina’s sovereignty rights over the islands, he said that, for Latin America, the issue must be resolved definitively. That sentiment had been expressed in the December 2009 meeting of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) and at the February 2010 Latin America and Caribbean Unity Summit.”
Thank you Chile
Malvinas Argentinas y Sudamericanas.
Marco, no need for me to waste more time trying to educate you of the reality of all the meaningless zaro value UN committee drafts etc - they are of no effect at all - just hot air - thats why others support you there - because it looks good - but means bugger all! Arg. is like the ever whining nagging old mother-in-law, day in-day out - whining.Eventually the relatives(Argentine neighbours) just get fed up with it - so they say OK we will back you and vote for you here and there if that will make you shut-up and not whine so much.
Aug 29th, 2010 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For reality please see my post 20 above.
Margo. Double stupid aren't you?
Aug 29th, 2010 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you'd read (40) and had any intelligence, you might have seen how stupid Timerman, Argentina and you look.
But now I agree with another poster. Time to ignore margo, avergassy, gorge and the like. No conversations, debates or responses to the brain-dead zombies!
(44) Islander
Aug 29th, 2010 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“ Argentina is like the ever whining nagging old mother-in-law, day in-day out - whining.”
That was quite a bad choice as an example :-)
Statistics say that those old harpies have a +60% chance of wining in the end......
I had three and the score stands 3-0.............. to them... (thanks god:-)
#2 the illegal occupation of Islas Malvinas, Argentina is not a civiliazed, I heard USA used a nuclear bomb to protect USA, I believe Argentina has to do the same because UN doesn't do a thing, if not look at what UN allowed UK and USA to do in Afghanistan, Iraq and soon Iran, or else just look at Gaza and Lebanon, I hope Argentina starts working on a nuclear defence program to avoid the further invation of Argentina.
Aug 29th, 2010 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Go ahead and waste your money on them lol, Personally i think the UK should scrap them and use the money for the other three forces, useless vanity weapon.
Aug 29th, 2010 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think, sorry I had not heard of that statistic! Only had the one and she was a sweetie ! OK maybe bad choice of example then. However, time and economics and money will determine this one .
Aug 29th, 2010 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Gassy, Iraq was questionable yes- but Afghanisatan I am pretty sure was UN backed.
“The Falklands can no longer remain as Britain's expensive nuisance
Aug 30th, 2010 - 04:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Distant colonies are an anachronism. Britain will have to negotiate with Argentina because the world will insist on it”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/25/falklands-britains-expensive-nuisance
(49) Islander1
Aug 30th, 2010 - 06:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0That proves it!................
You have to go to the end of the world to find a “sweetie” mother-in-law :-)
Back to reality....
1) Denial of Services....... Just started in Feb. 2010.... Still a “Beta Version”....90% oriented against the oil industry....The restant 10% is oriented against the fishing and tourism industry.....The expensive letucces are just a “collateral bonus”.
2) About some innocent Chileans in Punta Arenas losing their jobs....... Too bad..... But....... We have about 500.000 Chileans citizens in Argentina making a living and remiting a lot of money back to Chile.
3) Nobody is “pissing” the EEC, they dont care about Malvinas...
Even the “pissed” United Kingdom can do nothing.
Business is conducted between private firms.
Those firms will be presented with some new “businnes terms” : The South-American market or the Malvinas.
Not many seconds for an Economy Director to figure where the best profit is.....
If Malvinas can offer the best deal.... well,... then they will choose you :-)
No rocket science here.
It is quite amusing to see how the Argentines on here believe they know more about the Falklands, than the Falkland Islanders themselves, specifically referring to the effectiveness of the “Denial of Services” and whether the Falklands is a colony or not. I bet Think, Marco, Avargas and all the other Argentines have never stepped foot on the Falklands and seen the country and its administration for themselves. And until they do, they will continue to believe the propaganda that is fed to them by their Government and their own image in their minds of the Falklands.
Aug 30th, 2010 - 03:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have never been to Argentina, so my image of Argentina is one of masses on homeless people, crumbling buildings and a President getting fatter and wealthier. I am sure the Argentines in here will tell me that I am wrong. But I will adopt their attitude, My perception of another country is completely right, and I will ignore all facts that contradict my belief. Also, because your leader is only a 3rd generation Argentine, descended from Spain, your country must still be a Spanish colony.
M_of_Fi,
Aug 30th, 2010 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0not bad your messagge.
I would assume something like you believing in “Let´s keep ourselves isolated from the nasty neighbourhood” and in ´Somebody who ignores can easily hate and despise´
Say, would just reflect the statistic majority´s mind writing here.
Perhaps I´m wrong assuming that. It would be nice being wrong.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/25/falklands-britains-expensive-nuisance
Aug 30th, 2010 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“That war is unlikely to be repeated. But this cannot allow us to ignore its causes. Distant colonies are a post-imperial anachronism. Britain will have to negotiate with Argentina because the world, either at the UN or at The Hague, will insist on it. The government and media can bury their heads in the sand, but that will not make the Falklands dispute go away or atone for the dead of the silliest of wars a quarter century ago”
you're so screwed! And you know that, If I were you (son of generations of pirates and thiefs) I would swim 'till GB (motherland) no doubt about it.
Aug 30th, 2010 - 05:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Better think right, and co-operate being part of Argentina's population, if not you're free to go GB your real home.
Me and another 40.000.000 as self-determined citizens wants to put an end to colony in our lands.
Bottomline, whose self-determination is more valid? a 500 km or a 12.000 km one? one who has the right of sovereignty by heritage or one who occupied the lands by force? you tell me...
Still more of the same .... the islanders opinions are being ignored by the Argentines, even though the islanders are the one's who count. Argentina can get stuffed, it knows nothing and has no hope of getting hold of the Falkland Islands. Denial of services will not work. If there's enough oil then it'll get extracted with or without Argentina. If there's no oil, then the status quo resumes. And Argentina gains ........ nothing!
Aug 30th, 2010 - 06:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hey ho ... no change :-)
(56) Hoyt
Aug 30th, 2010 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not quite so..... If Oil “really” flows, we get a pretty complicated situation I prefer to wait before commenting on that ( too many variables).....
If it doesn't.... well.... Rockhopper and mates can quite easily end being as beneficial for Argentina's position as Dictator Galtieri was for the British....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKegAqMyFe0
Aug 30th, 2010 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If oil is there the islanders will be very wealthy and could possibly go independant if they wished it. If not, it wont make any different think, we've been happy to front the bill up untill now and will always be happy to.
Aug 30th, 2010 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0so when is Argentina going to hand back the land it stole from others, before it condemns the British, as for giving them back, they are with the rightful owners, but even if you look at it from the argies point of view, the Falklands does not necessarily have to go back to Argentina, it could go to Chile, south Africa, brazil, anybody except Argentina,
Aug 30th, 2010 - 08:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0so i say to you who do not learn, the Falklands are British as long as they wish to be, and when they wish not, they will be independent, but NEVER Argentinean, who in hells name would want to be ruled by a nation that has no respect for human life, who hate and dismiss the islanders whom they brag about, Argentina should count themselves lucky the Brazilian or Americans allow them a breathing space, they are ignorant evil and selfish, down with Argentina, up with democracy .and freedom.
“That war is unlikely to be repeated. But this cannot allow us to ignore its causes. Distant colonies are a post-imperial anachronism. Britain will have to negotiate with Argentina because the world, either at the UN or at The Hague, will insist on it. The government and media can bury their heads in the sand, but that will not make the Falklands dispute go away or atone for the dead of the silliest of wars a quarter century ago”
Aug 30th, 2010 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0amazing how cooperative you are when you want some thing, before the violence starts again,
Aug 30th, 2010 - 09:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0unless your friends are willing to send military aid, put a line of ships across the south Atlantic, line your troops up , unless your mates are willing to fight,,, ,then you will never get the Falklands,, only with the peaceful consent of the islanders. and Marco THEY DONT WANT YOU.
is that clearer for you,
Clear enough! Malvinas Argentinas y Sudamericanas.
Aug 30th, 2010 - 09:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentinas y Sudamericanas VOT IST THIS THIS
Aug 30th, 2010 - 09:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Can I just point something out?
Aug 31st, 2010 - 01:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0What we Argentines feel for the Kelpers is indifference, we DO NOT seek their support nor do we validate their claims because we know that their “Self-determination” is nothing more than a tactic used by the UK to assert its claim on the islands, it's very simple, a five year old can see through it. You can be as derogatory as you want, but you need to understand this wether you like it or not because that's how we feel. That being said, we don't wish the Kelpers any harm either. The blockade is in place as a countermeasure against the UK's activities in the south atlantic, specifically speaking the oil exploration.
Another thing you need to understand is that this is no longer an issue isolated to the islands, the size of the exclusion zone imposed by the UK is RIDICULOUS, you're claiming not just the islands but a HUGE chunk of the Argentine continental shelf. So when you talk about the islanders the first thing we think is: WHAT??? In the grand scheme of things the islanders wishes are completely irrelevant.
I don't blame the Kelpers for taking England's side, they ARE English, but everything England's ever done they've only ever done for themselves, for their own benefit and their own pride. The UK is “protecting the Kelpers”? Really? Why, because we would otherwise go over there and kill them or something? The UK is protecting their assents, their claim on LAND. If you were to look for England on a map without a magnifying glass, you would simply give up and THAT'S what this is all about, not the Kelpers.
Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 02:58 am - Link - Report abuse 066, Marco, I'm sure that Fernando_A doesn't need someone like you to add anything to his arguments, which, whilst I disagree with them, are at least a particular point of view, and are not the 100th+ time that he has posted the same bloody thing, over and over and over and over again, on and on endlessly, boringly, tiresomely. Whoever taught you how to cut-and-paste should be dealt with unmercifully!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Comment removed by the editor.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Marco, I have never opened or clicked on anything that you have ever posted. And to prove my point, you've gone and done it again! Idiot!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0I meant to say -assets-, not -assents-
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0If we can't be factual and mature about this I really don't see the point, that goes for everyone.
Think-51. Actually she came from the top end of the world bless her!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Denial of services to OilOperators? What are they please - dont think they have noticed any?
EEC does not care a b- about Falklands? How come K got a bit of a dusty answer when she looked to verbal support from Spain even.
EEC recognizes and lists us a British overseas Territory with its own elected Govt.
I agree though - at the end of the day it will be the mighy $ that sways most in S America. Western Europe still has basic principles at the bottom though - within the last 10-15 years they have even gone to war in support of them.
We will see - if(still a big if) there is a commercial exploitable find - we move into a different ball game altogether.neither of us will have much say!
If none - well all the fuss will simmer down and we will just carry on quietly as we were. Very nice as it would be to have, we actually can manage financially not to badly without oil.
To Fernando_A
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nice to see a new Argentinean poster in here with a fresh point of view....
But..........Wait a second...
I'ts not fresh..... Is identical to mine....Give it back you Argie thief!
(Just joking... )
It's not a realistic point of view though Think. It's vague hope in the face of reason. The reason? Well we haven't let you (or indeed the spanish before you) have the islands since 1765 ,,,, so why on earth you keep hoping to get hold of the islands is a mystery. It's that brick wall again Think .... how's your head?
Aug 31st, 2010 - 05:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando - fortunately we think about as much of Argentina's views as she thinks of the islanders. Which is why it's so easy to just stonewall you.
As for 'self determination', well it's more than just a 'tactic' it's the final nail in Argentina's coffin.
The Falkland Islands are British ..... get used to it!
(73) Hoyt
Aug 31st, 2010 - 06:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0In many of your posts you call me an “optimist”, a “dreamer”, a “hoper” and many other positive things.
Thanks a lot............ But..............
I must admit that, since 1982 to the beginning of 2010 I have been exactly the opposite.
Then came the inflexion point in mid-February 2010 where Great Britain boldly played their cards in the South-Atlantic and totally changed the Status Quo in our favor.
Since then, I have been more than positively surprised by the momentum this relative little issue has aquired in our Region.
The situation is steadily getting more “real”...... day by day......
Quite happy about that :-)
Think: sorry I just found this site ツ
Aug 31st, 2010 - 06:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0(a veces lo mejor es lo mas simple, ignorar)
(76) Fernando_A
Aug 31st, 2010 - 06:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0Absolutely right...... 90% of the posters in here are better ignored :-)
This said... Mercopres is a quite good (if biased) compiler of usefull information about the South Atlantic.
The use of t“Kelpers” by Argentines is hugely offensive, it is considered a racist pejorative. Please stop it now, otherwise I hope that the Mercopress editor will act on the policy of removing racim.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 09:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Another Argentine, equally obsessed with islands 300 miles of their coast, claiming to speak for the Falklanders. You claim, yet agaim, that Britain is using the Falklander's self-determination as an excuse.
WRONG
The FCO would have happily given the islands to Argentina, if for no other reason than to shut up your incessant whining about the Falklands. As far as the FCO was concerned the islands had no strategic or economic value and in their wholly cynical calculation dumping the islands on Argentina was worth improving relations with Argentina. Nothing to do with sovereignty; the islands were never Argentine.
What stopped the FCO plans in its tracks were the islanders, who organised a Parliamentary lobby and stymied their plans. Still the FCO persisted in trying to woo the islanders into accepting a transfer to Argentina. It signed the Communications Agreement with Argentina that made the islands dependent on Argentina, cutting off the traditional links to Uruguay and Chile. It did everything it could to persuade them they'd be better off with Argentina.
It didn't work and that it didn't work is largely down to Argentina itself.
a) When the FCO persuaded Falklanders to visit BA to discuss the matter in the '70s, they received such a hostile welcome they left early.
B) Argentina was ruled by a Military Dictatorship that dealt with disssent by throwing people drugged out of the back of planes after rape and torture.
C) Argentina invaded and turned the place upside down.
D) Argentine continues to pursue a policy of aggression and confrontation with the islanders at every opportunity.
The oil money goes to the islands, the islands govern themselve and issued the licenses. It has nothing to do with Britain, other than we will defend them against Argentina.
KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS.... KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS
Aug 31st, 2010 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS.... KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelpers
Curiously the Wikpedia definition of KELPER has been constantly edited by “ a man with a mission” in an “edit war” with other more normal users :-)
Guess who?........... Right................ The lovely Justin Kunz.....
His “personal opinion” about the peyorative use of the word has been contested many times even by the author of the Article.
“Kelper” is a nice nickname.... As “Argie” is.................
KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS.... KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS
KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS.... KELPERS.... KELPERS... .KELPERS
Think, you wind-up merchant, you!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 02:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0However, Justin, I'm not too sure that you're right about Kelper being a derogatory term, at least I don't believe that the vast majority of Islanders consider it to be derogatory now, if they ever did.
There are a chain of stores in the Islands called “Kelper Stores”. In my youth, I used to play football for the Kelper Store Celtics. The bi-annual golfing Falklands Cup (the equivalent of the Ryder Cup in the Falklands!) is competed for between the President's team (made up of any resident not born in the Islands) and the Kelpers team. This is a relatively new competition and, thus, I would have to infer, the term or description Kelper is not considered offensive, at least not today and not in the golfing community.
There may be some (outside the golfing community) who consider it to be offensive and, if so, then I apologise!
On most other things (if not all other things), Justin, I agree with what you have to say about the Falklands “dispute”.
Way to go!!!..... Aussie!!!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:-))))
Ha! I just knew that you'd be cock-a-hoop, Think! I winced over every key I pressed, thinking about your reaction! ;-)
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0However, if the term “Kelper” is used in a derogatory sense, it's still derogatory, even if the offendee is not aware of the insult. Happily, the Islanders will do what they've always done with the Argentine: ignore it!
Justin, you get offended by the term kelper but is ok for you to make fun of the Welsh.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Remember that exchange with your friends?
15 JustinKuntz (#)
Aug 18th, 2010 - 12:02 pm
Welsh?
My I mention Rourke's Drift....and “Stop chucking, those bloody spears, at me”.
Chorus of Men of Harlech anyone?
What must have most value, the self determination of people that was born there and is living there or the self determination of people that was born outside there and have never been there ???? (and I think never will be)
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That's the ultimate question must be answered.....
And I consider the Island as part of the LA but as independet country when Argentina stop the agression as the illegal blockade throug the Magellan Strait and their entrance/exit to international waters....
You're quite right, Sergio. The reason why the Argentinians say that the Islanders are not relevant is because they know that the right to self-determination trumps every twisted historical argument that they can come up with. So, the Argentinians say that the Islanders are implanted and, therefore, have no right to self-determination (which is not correct anyway!), conveniently forgetting that 99% of the populations of every Latin American country are as equally “implanted” in their countries as the Islanders are in the Falkland Islands. No one in their right mind would say that these “implanted” populations do not have the right to self-determination in this day and age...except for the Argentinians in the case of the Falklands. What we can deduce from this is that these particular Argentinains are not in their right minds!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sergio, may I suggest to get your Land Rover parts in mainland Argentina?
Aug 31st, 2010 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you Mr Piñera and Chile for your support.
Malvinas Argentinas
@Fernando_A. Your comments at (65) and (70).
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Let's see whether your claim to “be factual and mature about this I really don't see the point, that goes for everyone.”
The claim of the Falkland Islanders to their right of self-determination is not a device of the UK. Their right to self-determination is enshrined in the UN Charter that Argentina signed and ratified. Real Falkland Islanders, not Argentine “plants”, regularly go to the UN to state their case even though the UN Decolonisation Committee is “packed” with Argentina's cronies.
Another thing you need to understand is that Britain, representing the Falkland Islanders, has claimed an area consonant with international law. In attempting to interfere with the economic welfare and development for the benefit of its inhabitants, Argentina is in breach of a UN resolution. In the grand scheme of things, the Islanders wishes are paramount.
Looking over the whole scenario, Argentina has NO historical or current claim to the Islands especially when Argentina persists in twisting and falsifying the facts.
As Justin has made some attempt to point out to you, there was a time when the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office would have happily handed the Islands to Argentina because the FCO has always been more interested in keeping other countries happy than its own.
Fortunately, for them, the Islanders were able to make their case to the Government, Parliament and the British people. They wished, and still wish, to remain British citizens living on their British territory. And until the Islanders change their mind, that is the way things will stay.
As I said Kelpers is considered offensive when used by Argentines, something that is difficult to find what wikipedia considers a reliable source to prove. For example http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2283129011&topic=8208 notes that its considered a derogatory term. For example the article on Wikipedia was edited by Bennytec, a Falklander to explain it better:
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2283129011&topic=8208
Another of the reasons for not editing wikipedia is that its all too easy to censor, something that Chuckarg33 or Wombat6000 (actually the same person) would know as they did everything they could to expunge any reference to its offensive use.
That the islanders use the term is not the issue, Black Americans address each other in a manner that would be considered highly offensive when used by anyone else. That wikipedia feels the need for the racist nature of its use is another reason why I don't edit there much any more.
I politely asked you not to use what many consider an offensive term
,typically Think uses it with abandon with a huge measure of personal abuse thrown in. Used in such a boorish manner, when clearly aware of its offensive nature, well that says everything about your attitude towards the Falklanders.
PominOz I appreciate your comments but you're in fact incorrect, its use by Argentines is nearly always derogatory and to imply a 2nd class citizen. Thats why its use in the islands has declined, shame really.
But yes, if Think and his ilk wish to use racist terminology when there is a very ready alternative says it all really. We can pretty much ignore them as a irrelevant racist fuckwits.
Oh and Marco., pleeeasee, not even a nice try, definitely no cigar. U must try harder.
Justin, I appreciate and understand what you're saying and I did try to address this in my post at 81. You're right, if a term is used in a derogatory sense, it is derogatory whether or not it is taken as an abusive term by the person or persons it is directed at.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What I was trying to say earlier is that I don't believe that the vast majority of Falklanders find the term offensive these days, regardless of who is using the term. If Think is using it in a racist manner, well, then, that's his problem. I believe that the vast majority of Islanders would merely shrug their shoulders and ignore him, as they do all of the ridiculousness that is spouted by the deluded “Malvinas” brigade!
(81) PomInOz
Aug 31st, 2010 - 05:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0KELPERS.....KELPERS......:Using this word as “derogatory” has never crossed my mind......Not even after J.K. supraliminal message ...... Spanish is a lenguage quite rich in insults... we don't need to create more.
RACISM!.... RACISM?....:
First of all,...... “British” is not a “Race”...........
We Argentineans can agree, disagree, be mad at them, hate them or even wish those Britsh squatters dead..... but racism? C'mon................. Not even a trace........
When will the british illegal alien occupying Islas Malvinas Argentinas will go away, does Argentina have to build a nuclear defence program to be listen to like Israel did ?? or do we have to bomb the island and go to war and get rid of all the people in Malvinas to have a say on our land ??
Aug 31st, 2010 - 05:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0one of this days we will wake up with a big surprise, one of the two convewntional war or a nuclear explotion in our islas Malvinas nuclear war head test site.
@ Think
Aug 31st, 2010 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don’t agree with the definition of wiki mate.
Kelpers means
Keep Exacts Lies Pygmy Expat Rock Squatter (from Oxford University)
@Islander1
“Do they want to piss off Britain AND the EEC - possibly millions of dollars worth to be lost?”
“even you don’t have teeth, there are very few countries or organisations on the planet that can for Britain to do anything” wow! This is a statement. Isn’t it?
Argentina perhaps?
“the islanders opinions are being ignored by the Argentines, even though the islanders are the one's who count” Wow! again such an arrogance from some penguins Brits wannabe.
Who cares about Britain? In fact we want to get rid of her, interest is the main keyword here and even US don’t want to piss off us. Do you note that?
And by the way I don’t see the Germans, French, Italian, Irish or Spanish being piss off if we trash Britain. In fact they will laugh and louder and don’t mention the Russian and Icelanders.
Britain has more enemies than George W. Bush visiting Muslim Ramadan day. Haha
British liars always giving to themselves more importance than they really have lets say nothing.
@ briton
“unless your mates are willing to fight”
We are and you?
If you loose a one way ticket to UK will be waiting for you this time belongings and properties will be retained as war compensation.
: ) fair is fair mate
“enshrined” that's a nice word, isn't it? goes well with “royalty” and “kingdom”. I'm not an expert on UN resolution but I seriously doubt we would sign ANYTHING that would validate your claims.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Kelpers? don't be so sensitive, we're called “Argies” and we don't fly off the handle. Besides, that's what they are Kelpers.
Actually Argentina does have a nuclear program. Argentina is hoping to upgrade its submarines to nuclear by 2015 with the use of the CAREM reactor, locally produced by INVAP technology institute. The CAREM reactor would be installed in the existing TR-1700 class submarines, the first reactor will be installed in a new TR-1700 sub being assembled at the Argentine Naval Industrial Complex CINAR.
Hey Justin the Kelper,even Harrier told you to get your facts right!
Aug 31st, 2010 - 07:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 018 harrier61 (#)
Aug 18th, 2010 - 06:19 pm
Rufus. Don't get me wrong. I agree with what you say. It's just that some of us, usually including Justin who has made just a minor mistake on this occasion, like to get facts right!
Ever noticed me using the term “Argie”? No.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 07:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ever noticed that I have reproached British editors for using abusive terms? Yep.
Last time I looked the British were definitely a race and denying an identity is of itself a form of racism. Hating someone simply for being British is racism. Wishing someone dead simply for being British or British descent is racism.
And yes PominOz I do just shrug at the fools yelling insults.
You know who the Kelpers remind me of? The Amish, I saw them once on a trip to Philadelphia, PA, they seem quite nice. God I hope I'm not insulting the Amish.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As we might have expected Fernando_A is no more mature than the other Argentine psychotics and their cronies.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I assume A stands for “Ass” and you can attribute any meaning to that you like!
Justin kelper
Aug 31st, 2010 - 08:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I could care less abot the term argie. If the term kelper is ok to be used beteween islanders shouldn't be an offensive term if anybody else uses it. After all is a term created by the british in your mainland, I believe, that used to treat the islanders as a second class citizens.
Stop playing the non sense race card, take a look at your english history and present also.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3636385/The-Scots-destroyed-the-Union-so-vote-SNP.html
Fernando_A, you do not directly insult the Falklanders and you dont use the same repetitive nonsense as Marco et al uses. However, what you do have in common with Marco et al, is that you still lack knowledge on the Falklands. Self-determination is not something the UK uses, it is something the Falklanders use themselves so that we are not forcibly occupied by an unwanted aggressor. Also, Britain has no input in the governance of the Falklands, with exception of the military, that is there as a deterent of Argentine aggression. It would not be there if Argentina had no claim and did not invade the islands. The Falkland Islands Government governs the Falkland Islands, and the elected assembly men/women make the decisions. The Governor only contributes in Foreign Affairs. But in the end the power is with the Falklands people, as we vote. This is fact, this is how we govern ourselves. You can twist this as much as you want to fit your illogical arguements, but that is your problem, you are just wrong. Also, the Minerals Department issued the hydrocarbon licences. The Britain has zero imput in the whole process. This again, is fact. If you believe otherwise. You are misguided.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 08:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0M_of_FI: lies, whatever helps you sleep at night.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 08:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Marco: the link you posted raises an interesting point. The whole world knows Scotland and Ireland hate the British, there is no such thing as the “United Kingdom”.
“There are no more Scots than there are Yorkshire people. So why Scots should seek ”equality with England“ is a mystery. They're a tiny, heavily subsidised, minority - living off my taxes.”
I think “tiny” is the keyword here. Why else would you travel 8,000 miles to the ASS-END of the world to steal land?
“The UK is an anomoly that needs to be modernised. There are 4 distinct nations each wanting more and more to go their own way. The concept of Britishness only really exists now as a romantic notion or a convenience should your job rest on it. It's time that the people of the UK be asked if they want to continue as a Union.”
No wonder you're so bent on holding onto Malvinas, without your imperial bullshit of a “kingdom” you're doomed.
You're a parasite and nobody likes you.
Born a Kelper-proud to be a Kelper - and I will die a Kelper in my homeland - not for some time yet though! Nope - doesn,t insult me a bit, the name has been around for generations I think.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You can call us Bennies if you like - the british Forces did for a while after 1982- never bothered us either - saw plenty of vehicles getting around with “Bennywagon” wrtitten on them! It fussed the military HQ who tried to ban it - so the soldiers called us “stills” (still a benny) - we just called them “whenies” - always saying “when I was in Germany/Ireland/HongKong ”etc! It was really a bit of a laugh.
99Fernando - get your fact correct before you make an ass of yourself-the majority of N.ireland WANT to saty part of the UK - thats what all the troubles were about! Think you will find that the majority of Welsh do as well, and so far the majority of Scots. Probably what you cannot understand is that if you ask a Scot his nationality - he will say Scottish, same as an Englishman will say English(mostly) - but all are British each place has its own strong cultural identity and are fiercely proud of it, all part of the rivalry and respect that keeps the UK what it is - a great nation. Same in the fordes-Paras and Marines will fight each other every Sat night outside the pub if they can- in a war situation they will readily die for each other though. You have a lot to learn,
@JustinKuntz
Aug 31st, 2010 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0British a race, hahaha this is rally funny.
What the hell are teaching in UK’s schools?
I hope you don’t think Argentineans are a race too? Do you?
British is a nationality not a race.
Race is something related to biological and genetic homogeneous structure shared in individual groups.
A Siberian Husky born in Britain would be still a Siberian Husky (to what to race concerns). You can mix him but genetically his genes will be traceable in its dependence.
Now extrapolate the same concept to your “British race” if I take genetic samples of 10 British I will get 11 different races genes. Haha
British always had a psychological identity problem (The Islander Mentality Syndrome) may be due to a respond for the multiples invasions suffered in history by the Spanish/Romans/Norman/ Danish, etc and now being culturally washed by Pakistani, Indian, Chinese, Polish, Portuguese, etc
As a result they have to invent new stories about the origin to have a sense of unity like the are a race, Anglo-Saxon, Basque, Vikings, etc.
What in reality they are Latin Celts that speak a funny language close to French and Spanish.
What that gives me a new title for a book...
“Britain the nation that still is looking for her father an mother in continental Europe.”
Well there we go. scratch the surface and out pours the most vicious spiteful bile. Allegedly the Falkland Islanders can expect Argentina to respect them, as demonstrated here that is utter crap, the hate is so indoctrinated that they just can't help themselves.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 09:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“CIVILISED MANNERS”, you have no idea what that means.
@JustinKuntz
Aug 31st, 2010 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is nothing to “scratch the surface” the time of “CIVILISED MANNERS” had gone now we don’t want nothing we the Kelpers or Britain else to live to where they belong.
Your are clearly a threat to Argentina security and the whole region and the rest of South American countries think the same.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7038490.ece
I don't hate the Kelpers, I don't need to insult them either, don't need to talk to them even. In this conflict they're not part of the equation, they're an English community on Malvinas, nothing more, nothing less.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 10:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In fact, we should respect them and understand that they're stuck in the middle. They're families and they're doing what they think it's best for them.
That being said, sooner or later you will have to adhere to the laws of Argentina, whether you're willing to adjust or not will decide your future on the islands. I suspect that you will, no choice.
Respect them but don't want to talk to them, they have no choice and have to submit to the will of a hostile neighbour who would happily throw them out. A hsotile neighbour that teaches its children that the people of the Falkland Islands are untermenschen, not worthy of any consideration.
Aug 31st, 2010 - 11:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is what you teach your children and it is truly evil. I used to think the Falklands problem could be solved by dialogue. Now I realise it can't be, the roots of hate are planted so deep.
Next time the FIG goes to the UN it should take along some of these examples of Argentine “respect”.
Argentina will continue to become less and less relevant, you'll continue to bleat on about the Falklands and the rest of the world will get bored with it. The irony will of course you'll blame everyone else but yourselves.
Justin, What happened with the kelper name that you hate so much?
Aug 31st, 2010 - 11:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Did you read Islander at #100 “ Born a Kelper-proud to be a Kelper ”
And who on earth cares about the “FIG”. Tasty fruit though.
It's not what we (ARG/UK) feel, what we like or don't like, it's what will happen that matters here.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 12:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0I saw a comment above criticizing Chavez. You don't like Chavez? So what? “He's this, He's that..” blah blah blah, what impact do our words have?
Facts:
_Argentina is rebuilding its armed forces after decades of neglect, this starts with an initial purchase of 12 Mirage 2000 from Spain and 2 Amphibious Assault ships from France, the L9012 SIROCO and L9011 FOUDRE. New treaties with Russia have been signed to supply Argentina with armament, the first purchase was two Mi-171E transport helicopters.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4592392
_Venezuela's support is both public and unconditional, with an air force comprised mostly of Sukhoi Su-27/Su-30 fighters and Mi-17/Mi-28 helicopters.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4592392
_Brazil's support is a given, it is both our interest and duty to protect our industries which are closely aligned. Brazil's defense capability is indisputable. And don't forget Brazil and Argentina's nuclear program, this type of alliances are key to our independence on foreing supply, we know this very, I assure you this supersedes any economic factors you can possibly think of.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4592392
_Chile would probably remain neutral, however our relations with them have greatly improved. Currently, Chile, Brazil and Argentina are collaborating on the production of new OPVs (Offshore Patrol Vessels). Argentina has an agreement to use the Danubio IV PZM design as the basis for five new OPVs of its own, these ships will be used to patrol the Exclusive Economic Zones of all three countries. Chilean warships are regular participants with Argentina, Brazil, France and the US in naval exercises such as the UNITAS and Rim of the Pacific. Chile, also gets most of their natural gas supply from Argentina.
_United States's involvement is questionable, I have no clue, but somehow I
Fernando, still out of date! Chile no longer gets most of its natural gas from Argentina - they did - and Arg stuffed them time and time again- they wont trust you again for a basic commodity for a long time. They have a new big plant on the coast(built largely by a UK company) that received gas from several contries by sea. I think you will find that the Royal Navy also participates in exercises with the Brazilian Navy, The Chilean Navy etc at times as well- its all about building trust and confidence and working together -= nothing new at all. Likewise building ships/planes etc jointly - S America is only just starting to co-operate - Europe and the US have been doing it for ages.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 01:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Veezuela,s support? - ever heard the expression “out of the frying pan into the fire”!
Oh in 104 you called me English? No way Jose - I am an Islander first and foremost - and then British - but NOT English - they are people who live in England. I have 170 years of family generations born in these islands-MY Country. How many have you in YOUR Country.
Continued from 107
Sep 01st, 2010 - 01:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0...doubt they would chose to alienate themselves from most of the countries on its own continent by interfering in the event of a conflict. If they didn't interfere in 1982 (“technically”) they're sure as hell not going to do it now.
The big picture here is the UNASUR, Union of South American Nations. The president of UNASUR happens to be Nestor Kirchner, however it was Brazil's president Luiz Lula da Silva who took the initiative to push for a unified military force coordinated by UNASUR.
In the event of a conflict, which.. really I don't see any other way, the UK wouldn't last two days, and that's probably optimistic.
So I ask you again. What does it matter what we think? What exactly are we trying to accomplish here? We're never going to agree on anything, this can only be resolved by war.
I don't think Argentina expects the UK to leave Malvinas, it is simply our responsibility to maintain a constant sovereignty claim, not just on our islands but on our oceans which are being stolen as well. It is also our way of saying “We asked you nicely” to leave, as I'm sure there are other diplomatic factors I'm not aware of. But in the end we know a war is inevitable, there will be an incident, a spark big enough and it will stat.
Nothing that we say here will make any difference, nothing. It's facts that matter, not feelings, words, likes or dislikes.
Fernando, you're leaving in cloud-cuckoo land! Your military and that of the comedian Chavez are tiny compared to the UK's miltary. There is no way that any other Latin American country would support Argentina with men or materiel.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 05:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0The US would support the UK, as she did last time, offering all sorts of equipment and the use of an aircraft carrier. The UK did take the US up on its offer of brand-new, top-secret air-to-ground missiles, which were used on Argentine aircraft. For the US not to support the UK would almost certainly bring about the end of NATO, so that one's a no-brainer.
You are right about one thing, the UK will not leave the Islands because of anything that Argentina does, but only if the Falklanders want them to.
You may be so blind as to want war to recover the Islands. However, no matter what your leaders may say in public, they know very well that any war with the UK would end badly for them again.
And please stop mentioning UNASUR, whoever they are. You're having a laugh!
Sadly Fernando is flying high in those “macho clouds of war”........ (but you are not trailing sooo far behind)
Sep 01st, 2010 - 05:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0And..............just for you:
UNASUR....UNASUR....UNASUR....UNASUR....UNASUR....UNASUR
Quite a lot of potential in this “Social Club” ...........
108 Islander1: Your country? What does your passport say on the cover?
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0By definition, a passport is a document that certifies the identity and nationality of its holder.
110 PomInOz: Time will tell
Who...who...who...who...who...who...?!
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0If you listened more to the “Didgeridoo News” along your dream track you would know..... you Abbo.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0:-)
Whether or not you believe you are being funny, that is racist, Think.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Think, where are you from?
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0@Islander1
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0It is funny how you twist your parameters to measure your history compared to Argentina.
You “say 170 years of family generation” and then “my Country”.
1- You are not a country else an illegal settlement on disputed territory clamed by Argentina.
2- “170 years family generation”, well in Argentina there are families with 470 years of history down here.
3- “Likewise building ships/planes etc jointly - S America is only just starting to co-operate - Europe and the US have been doing it for ages”
4-
Let me remind you that 60 years ago European were killing each other in Europe and the EU its not so stable and solid as you like to believe. And US cooperation as you said, was more related to rebuild its own economy than to help Europeans. Now US is more interested on what is going in Asia than in Europe.
4- “I am an Islander first and foremost - and then British - but NOT English”
English and British to political and economical concerns is the same thing England interests always had played the leader role in the Union as they rule UK.
Lets see the numbers:
Scotland GDP USD 140bn (a little higher than the capital of Argentina GDP and far less than the great Buenos Aires). Scot Population 5,194,000 (2 millions more than CABA)
Wales GDP USD 85bn (far little than the Argentinean capital) Welsh Population 2,999,300 (less than the capital of Argentina)
England GDP USD 2.2 trillions. English Population 52 millions.
And to be British means to be English as the name come from Britain (Britannia in Latin) the province and territory dominated by the Roman Empire, now known as England.
Scotland was called Caledonia and Wales was called Cambria. And the whole region was called Albion.
Do this tell you something?
If I would be you (claiming not to be English) I would think twice before consider myself British.
(115) PomInOz
Sep 01st, 2010 - 07:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0The last word is extemly racist.... Yes... Very much so.. No discussion about that.... No doubts.....Not supposed to be used ever... But used a lot...
I know I know....
I “used” it for three reasons:
1) My sick sense of humor................
2) Because I'm pretty sure ther is no risk of any Aboriginal gene in your “double spiral” ergo: no personal offense...................
3) To perspectivize the debate we had before about the very doubtfull and discutible derogatory value of the word “Kelper”. (personally I like the social and historical implications of that nick).
Thanks for your human reaction.
Fernando_A
Born in Belgrano (es un pais)
I used it as a reminder of the “Kelper” derogatory value”debate
No entiendo que quisiste decir, sos de Belgrano, BsAs, Argentina. Argentina es tu país. Obviamente no vivís en Argentina porque nadie en Argentina habla Inglés como vos, ni como yo.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 07:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0(119)Fernando_A
Sep 01st, 2010 - 08:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'll keep writing English because the editor can be quite strict about that :-)
“Belgrano es un Pais” was a slogan of the 60's i think.... And I loved my barrio.....
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:b1kzB3qbuGwJ:www.mibelgrano.com.ar/tanto.htm+%22Belgrano+es+un+pais%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk
Later I became Patagonian.
About languages:
Parafraseando a Borges: Pues si,..... Me manejo con fluidez e ignorancia en diversas lenguas.........
By the way......Many Anglo- Argentineans speak better English than some of the British posters in here :-)
Nicodin - “English and British to political and economical concerns is the same thing England interests always had played the leader role in the Union as they rule UK.”
Sep 01st, 2010 - 08:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0In the past that might, on occasion, held some truth but that certainly isn't the case now.
In fact with the devolved governments in Scotland and Wales, England finds itself facing the complete opposite of what you state.
England does not have its own Parliament, like Scotland, or it's own assembly, like Wales, it only has the UK parliament. So while English MP's can't vote within the Scottish parliament or the Welsh assembly, involving purely Sottish and Welsh issues, there are no such restrictions on Scottish and Welsh MP's voting on purely English issue within the UK parliament.
This means it is possible for legislation to be passed affecting only England where the majority of English MP's have voted against it but it gets passed due to the votes of Scottish and or Welsh MP's.
This set up certainly doesn't suggest England as the political leaders of the union to me.
Also the two Prime Ministers before David Cameron were both Scottish. Oh and little bit of historical fact the Union itself was created by a Scottsih King when he inherited the English throne.
@ Fernando_A
Sep 01st, 2010 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Let me guess you are in Ireland perhaps? Or learned English in Ireland?
2 cents am I right? Do I?
@ LegionNi
I know Scotland and Wales have some sense of independence in a formal way.
In Cymru you can see telly like BBC news in Welsh language, the signs are in Welsh and so on.
But England elite had always ran the military, economy and political arena in UK.
I know also that the 2 former PMs were Scottish Tony Blair (from Edinburg) and Brown from (from Glasgow) but this has not changed the reality and dominance of England in the Union.
I think if the next PM would be from Pakistan the agenda will not change absolutely nothing, as the powers behind are always the same.
122 Nicodin.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Do you have any idea how silly your last post was?
You state:
“But England elite had always ran the military, economy and political arena in UK.”
But then go on to state:
”I know also that the 2 former PMs were Scottish Tony Blair (from Edinburg) and Brown from (from Glasgow)
So you claim that the English elite have always run the union, and yet admit you know that the last two prime ministers were Scottish. So as the PM's controlled the political arena of the union along with the military and economy, it has actually been a Scottish elite that has governed the union for over a decade.
Gordon Brown was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and set the budget for the UK. How is that the Engish elite controlling the economy of the union?
You contradict yourself in your own statements.
Then again the fact that the union has been run by Scots for over a decade doesn't fit with you Anglophobia.
@Fernando_A
Sep 01st, 2010 - 12:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Claiming what I said is lies, is a perfect example of the Argentine arrogance and their complete disregard for everyone apart from themselves. I find it very amusing to hear all these Argentine threats... for example “one day you will have to adhere to Argentine law”. What a load of rubbish. How are you going to make us? You going to colonise us? How? By force? Love to see you try it AGAIN. I will join the FIDF to fight against your consripts. Fernando, keep dreaming. I can see the desperation in your words. Argentines have been saying the same things for decades “one day... blah blah blah” and nothing has happened. And my home will continue to be British, because people like me decide this country's future.
“That is why to many English people ”Britishness” means nothing other than a series of (often quite glorious) historical facts. “Britain”, to me, is now simply a geographical entity.”
Sep 01st, 2010 - 03:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3636385/The-Scots-destroyed-the-Union-so-vote-SNP.html
Malvinas Argentinas
Well, it seems that F_A is just another psychotic Argentine hate fanatic without the brain of an amoeba. Same category as twinky, gassy, margo, nico-the dim and gorge.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 03:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando, Yes - my passport says British - that is the United Kigdom - no mention of England at all! It says that because I am British.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nico - what an arse you are! You have made it clear that you are originally an IMPLANT as well - just what you accuse us as being!!! Other have correctly ridiculed the rest of your post. All different parts of great britain- or the United Kingdom - have been called(and still are) all sorts of different names over the last 2000years - sorry yes their history goies back a wee bit further than yours.
120 Think: No Spanish huh? Funny how posters here like to play the “racist” card on just about anything but we're not allowed to write in Spanish. Frankly I couldn't care less, and I get it, most posters here are not educated enough to be bilingual.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 05:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0M_of_FI, Conqueror, Islander1:
Your passport says UNITED KINGDOM but you keep referring to the islands as “my country”, and you're calling ME psychotic?? You're English, British, whatever who cares..?
I wonder, is there a colony of penguins on South Georgias and Sandwich claiming self-determination too? The penguins I can understand, because.. well they're penguins, what do they know?
Tell you what you guys should do, send me passport photos and I'll make you all a passport that reads MAGICAL KINGDOM OF THE FALKLANDS and you can hold it while you pick berries off the wallpaper.
Don't forget to take your pills.
We support Argentina in building a nuclear defence program to rid the nation from occupation and military sige and threat from Islas Malvinas Argentina, we do not want Islads Malvinas to become our Palestine, this is why we must follow Israel foot steps and build a nuclear defence program to protect our land from occupation, UK will try to bully Argentina into submition but we must be firm and arm ourselves to bully the bully, the fakland holding firm with her british slaves have their days numbered in Islas Malvinas.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/darwin_clifton.pdf
www.en.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFalkland_Islands_Company&h=19ee2
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_East_India_Company
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Indian_Ocean_Territory
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Opium_War
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Island
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_Federation_of_Great_Britain_and_Ireland
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uqair_Protocol_of_1922
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
www.falklandislands.com/images/view/464/489/259
www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/A_HRC_WG6_1_GBR_1_E.pdf
www.ttparliament.org/hansards/hh19990604.pdf
GO HOME PIRAT.
Bags of spare time in the asylum!
Sep 01st, 2010 - 07:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The British are stuck in 1982, still selling their worthless propaganda of “superiority” to these poor saps, a war Argentina was very close to winning, had it not been for the intervention of Chile, the US and our own bad timing. We learned, we advanced and the UK is not likely to benefit from the same set of circumstances that took place in 1982.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 07:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinas belong to Argentina
Georgias Del Sur belong to Argentina
Sandwich Del Sur belong to Argentina
“we advanced”
Sep 01st, 2010 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No, you stagnated.
“UK is not likely to benefit from the same set of circumstances that took place in 1982”
No, it would be a completely new set of circumstances which would all be in the UK's favor.
The UK still has naval superiority.
The typhoons would dominate the skys, tomahawks would make mince meat of your military runways, Denying you any air support.
The base there now has thousands of troops with heavy equipment, available reinforcements within 24 hours.
You had your chance, you missed it.
[yawning]
Sep 01st, 2010 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry, what were you saying? Typhoons will dominate the skies or something? Four typhoons, I'm terrified.
@LegionNi
Sep 01st, 2010 - 09:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you so naive or are having an indoctrination problem?
The fact that Gordo or Blair was the PM doesn’t mean that they were really governing the country.
UK is governed for the same rotten English elite and interest in the dark from the middle age, so doesn’t matter if the PM is English Scottish, Welsh of Pakistani the agenda will be the same.
All follow the same agenda to make happy their masters.
The day you understand that may be you start see the reality
@Zethee
I like the confidence you have, haha this will help you to survive the collapse of UKI in the next years.
Should I remind you Iraq and Afghanistan again?
133 Fernando_A:
Sep 01st, 2010 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yawn all you like, The last war should have taught you that capability is superior to numbers, especially in air combat. Aside from the american f22, there is no better fighter jet than the eurofighter.
Four typhoons would easily destroy the 40 odd second generation, 50 year old jets you have. It would also only take 24 hours to bring in more jets if needed, you have no advantage.
“Should I remind you Iraq and Afghanistan again?”
You could, then i could remind you of my responces to the last conversation we had about it two weeks ago, and we would just be going around in circles like idiots.
Well, we agree on thing then, these conversations do go round in circles, it's like a scratched LP record that won't stop. We're never in full possession of the facts either, neither one of us.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 10:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the UK's government wishes to underestimate Argentina, that's their prerogative.
As for the inhabitants on the islands posting here, I tried to understand them and I tried to respect them but all I got from them was garbage, so there is no point.
I'm not willing to generalize and assume that all Kelpers, (or whatever) are like these people here, bitter, backwards and stuck in their dilutions of grandeur.
Fernando
Sep 01st, 2010 - 10:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UK does not underestimate Argentina. We know you're s**t.
You did nothing except spout the same dreary, psychotic, bitter, backward delusions that Argentines always come out with. The sooner you recognise that your poverty-stricken subsidised, thieving country is crap, the sooner you might be able to make it better.
The Malvinas Islands constitute one of the last remnants of British colonialism, part of a history of economic piracy stained with the blood of millions who suffered as a consequence. The sooner this history is brought to a close the better.
Sep 01st, 2010 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinas Argentinas
136 Fernando_A:
Sep 01st, 2010 - 11:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I was not referring to you when i said going round in circles, i have not spoke to you before. We don't underestimate you, we know your capabilities. We also know the capabilities of our jets, they have out preformed every jet in the world they have flew against, even picking up an f22 on radar when it was supposedly impossible.
Fernando, you can hardly blame the responce you get when your fellow country men are constantly going on about nuking them.
Fernando- you fail to understand as you are blinkered - We are 3000people and our-MY- Country is under threat from a large and agressive neighbour - logically we need to belong to a larger nation at the end of the day to protect our human rights to live in our own choice of Govt - that is why we are still British - and part of the Overseas Territories.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 01:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0That does not stop us being first and foremost - Islanders or Kelpers if you prefer.
get rid of the aggression from the neighbour - then no need for us to have a British presence in the South Atlantic to defend us. End of problem then for all those Argentines who see the problem as a British/Old European force next door to S America.
as for yours and others silly remarks about military prowess - Britain was caught napping in 1982 - they are never caught twice! When did Britain last loose a war - they may have lost the odd battle or two over the centuries but the last war lost was in USA 1n 1776.
You scorn the Typhoons - they carry 8 missiles each and can start taking out your elderly airforce from such a distance that they wont even appear on the Arg plane,s radar. As others have said - UK now monitors your miltary movements from afar - any sign of the wrong move s- and there could be 16-20 Typhoons here in 24 hours. And you never know-- where a cruise missile launching nuclear submarine is . Crazy talk from some on your side.
I can only speak for myself, as some of the islanders make the rest look bad, some Argentines make all of us look bad.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 02:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando_A: I can just about follow how Argentina justifies its claim to the Falkland Islands (although I do not agree with it and, when you strip away the twisting of history, there is no historical claim whatsoever), but how do you justify the Argentine claim to South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the other sub-Antarctic territories? I had understood that even your best minds were left scratching their heads on this issue. So, go on, let's see if you can put your rhetoric into some proper form of words.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 03:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinas/Falklands, South Georgias and South Sandwich are viewed as a chain of islands by both Argentina and the UK. I'm sure there is a whole ENCYCLOPEDIA of reasons why both countries claim them. While the UK's claim is based solely on historical reasons, Argentina's claim is based on both historical and geographical reasons. And lets cut the crap, ALL these islands are in close proximity to Argentina, the UK is 8000 miles away and we're fed up with your colonial imperial bullshit, we don't want you in control of ANYTHING in the South Atlantic.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 04:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Quit playing stupid we all know this is how it is.
As for the previous remarks of “intimidation” about the Eurofighter, which I'm sure is an excellent aircraft. When you fight Argentina nothing is certain, we've proven that much.
Err, you fail! Both your historical and geographical claims are utter rubbish.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 05:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0The historical claim is relatively recent - 1927 onwards - after having been given (at Argentina's request) details of British claims in 1908. There was no protest from Argentina.
Geographically, the islands are not in close proximity to Argentina: the islands are, in fact, so far from Argentina that, if you followed this ridiculous line of reasoning, pretty much the whole of South America should belong to Argentina!
And who is Argentina to say that it doesn't want another country in control of anything in the South Atlantic, regardless of whether it is Britain, Chile, Brazil or anyone else?
And, incidentally, Britain does not see the Falklands and the other sub-Antarctic islands as a chain. They are administered separately and independently. So, yet again, another Argentine without a clue, spouting the lying propoganda from their Government.
No, I said we don't want the UK in control of anything in the South Atlantic. And, the closest country to these islands, is Argentina. Who is the UK to claim a chain of islands 8,000 miles away?
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 05:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ok, so who is Argentina (or any country for that matter) to say that Britain can't control anything in the South Atlantic? You ask how it is that Britain can claim territory over 8,000 miles away. Well, the real question, in terms of international law, is why can't it? The answer is, it can, it did and just because Argentina doesn't like it doesn't mean that the British claims are not valid.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 05:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just because the islands are closer to Argentina than any other country does not mean that they should belong to Argentina. There are many examples around the world of territory being owned by a country many thousands of miles from that country. True, many of them are British territories, but that is merely a result of the historical exploration of the British. There are quite a few other territories on mainland South America owned by other European countries that might (and I say might) fall under the concept of territorial integrity (if such a thing exists in international law) and you don't hear the countries bordering them crying into their milk. The Falklands and the other islands certainly do not fall under the disputed concept of territorial integrity.
Every aspect of the Argentine claim is faulty. It knows this, hence why it has never and will not submit to the ICJ's jurisdiction on the matter.
Well, there you go, you've got nothing to worry about, go argue with someone else.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 07:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0If only your Government could accept the facts then everyone could get along nicely together and there'd be no need to argue the toss. Either way, there is nothing to worry about from Argentina on this matter.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 09:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0But there we have the typical Argentine psychotic's reaction. Out-thought, out-debated, out-argued, outclassed, they don't want to play anymore. Kiddies throwing their rattles out of their prams.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Not to mention out-manoeuvered and out-fought!
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0134 Nicodin - “Are you so naive or are having an indoctrination problem?
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0The fact that Gordo or Blair was the PM doesn’t mean that they were really governing the country.
UK is governed for the same rotten English elite and interest in the dark from the middle age, so doesn’t matter if the PM is English Scottish, Welsh of Pakistani the agenda will be the same.
All follow the same agenda to make happy their masters.
The day you understand that may be you start see the reality ”
Oh so according to you the Prime Minister of the UK does not actually govern the UK, it is actually governed by some dark and mysterious Enlgish elite who remain hidden away somewhere in the shadows planning world domination. Would these mysterious people be the legendary Illuminati?
Either you have been watching to many episodes of the X Files or your a major Dan Brown fan.
You accuse others of being naive and indoctrinated, yet continue to spout completely unfounded, completely baseless anglophobic rubbish.
Please oh wise sage, illumate us with your wisdom and provide us the evidence of these shadowy figures.
Oh but I forget, your Argentine, you don't have to provide proof of your claims, you just repeat it over and over again until people think it's the truth.
The really scary thing is, you probably believe what you are saying.
151 LegionNi:
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0the funny part about his post is that there is a rumor about an elite group who have superior controll over the UK and it's intrests, but they aren't english, they're scottish.
The “Scottish Raj”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_mafia
Fernando, admit it. your wanting Britain out of the South Atlantic is a smokescreen - if Britain did withdraw and granted us Independence - Argentina would simply invade by force as soon as planes and ships could get here. Now that would very simply be good old fashioned COLONIALISM of the worst sort - gone from the rest of the world a century or two ago!
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 01:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just the establishment, don´t look for deeper conspiracies.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps we have read too many novels describing detailed how it works despite the formal government. In case of being true, who who knows will denie, the rest doesn´t realize.
In Malvinas War, it was pointed the strange opportunity of its ocurrence, before the Royal Navy could have their surface ships and carriers scrapped, and before the Argentine Navy have received all the already purchased Super Etendards with Exocets.
Galtieri´s enormous mistake or something else, having been the argentine government an historically influenceable and infiltrated government (by MI5), specially his Navy?
@Fernando_A
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 02:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You said..“we're fed up with your colonial imperial bullshit, we don't want you in control of ANYTHING in the South Atlantic”
You are still not understanding the basics here. We are not a colony, for the Falklands to be a colony, Britain would completely control the territory, however in the Falklands, we govern ourselves. We have our own administration and democracy, therefore, I will say it again, we govern ourselves. And usually colonies are maintained against the will of the populaiton. If Argentina were to take control of the Falklands, the Falklands would become a colony, as there is an occupying, aggressive, force, that dictates their will on the population. This is not happening in the Falklands, this is a fact. And until you recognise this, your arguement is severely flawed. You will dismiss what I have said, because you believe you have superior knowledge over the Falklands when compared to someone who lives there (me), which again is a severely flawed arguement. I live here, I see what happens here with my own eyes. All of your knowledge is developed from what you government tells you and what is taught to you in “school” (both being the same thing). Come to the Falklands and see what happens here with your own eyes.
M_of_FI
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But what about the Falklanders? One would not wish them to suffer a similar fate to that of the Chagossians; and the fact that Britain upholds the 'principle of democratic self-determination' for the inhabitants of its small remaining colonies only when that accords with the UK's economic and strategic interests does not by itself prove that the claim of the people living on the Falklands / Malvinas islands should be given no moral or political credence. But what is that claim? They do not assert that they wish to be an independent nation- what they want is to be British subjects. Following from this, they have no special right which would trump a British decision on what to do with the land on which they live, and the natural resources which surround it- any more than do the people who live in the way of a proposed railway line, airport or power station. Their democratic position is that they, like any other group of a few thousand- or many more- UK citizens, have to accept the decisions of the elected British government.
Ha, Marco. You really should put comments that you have taken from someone else in inverted commas or at least credit the author that you stole them from!
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 04:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We have been through this before though. In theory, the Falklanders, by wishing to remain British, are at the whim of the British Government. However, in theory, the British Government will not do anything that is incompatible with the Islanders' wishes. In practice, if the British Government did try to do something that the Islanders very seriosuly did not want to happen, the Islands could and would declare independence from Britain. The principle of self-determination applies so as to allow them to remain British for so long as they want and also allows them to assert their independence whenever they want.
From the other remarks made by the author of the comments that you are trying to pass off as your own, it is clear that he/she is not aware of the degree of self-governance that the Islanders have. The author misses the significance of the Islands being an Overseas Territory of the UK and not part of the UK proper. It is a very different thing.
@157 Pom. In support of your words, the British Government is committed to following the wishes of the Falkland Islanders. I believe Argentina has been told this by successive British Governments since 1982. Ain't gonna change!
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 05:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@Marco,
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0PomInOz and Conqueror have responded well to Marco's 'comments'. Also, the Falkland Islands Constitition came into affect last year. The UN principle of Self-Determination, is heavily included into the document, and, in my understanding, as this includes Britain, Britain agreed to the people of the Falklands right to self-determination and signed it. Britain is now bound to the Falkland Islands Constitition, specifically tothe right of self-determination. And Britain, unlike other nations (hint hint) tend not to break agreements. This empowers the people of the Falklands Islands to choose their future.
The UK supports you and plays along with your dreams because they happen to work in their favor, if they didn't, they would abandon you and Argentina would simply move in. 153 Islander1 describes this scenario as an “invasion” to support his claims, we would simply take control of what we believe to be rightfully ours. And there would be no conflict, unless you plan to throw harpoons or molotov bombs at us or something, eventually we would all adapt and things would blow over.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You all know damn well Argentina did not harm any of the islanders in 1982, quit being so dramatic.
Please explain the UK interests involved when we kicked Argentina out of the Falkland Islands in 1982. Please explain the UK interests involved when we allocated the Falkland Islands a development budget. Please explain the UK interests involved when we built a new military base and provided adequate defence forces.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 07:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And don't mention oil, gas or any other resources. The British Government didn't “know” about it then and don't “know” about it now. If the British Government had “known” it would have been quite practicable to reserve all resources to itself. It didn't do that and so any benefit of resources found will go to the Falkland Islanders, who do not pay any taxes to Britain.
As for not harming Islanders? How would you count locking up hundreds in a single building, leaving them to survive on bar snacks and meanwhile filling their homes, their beds, their furniture with human excrement?
Uh, you're crazy and I can make stuff up all day long if I wanted to
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 07:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Please explain the UK interests involved when we kicked Argentina out of the Falkland Islands in 1982” Did you read what you wrote? Who is “we”?
You guys really need to get some air, eat some fruit or something.. you've lost it completely.
Fernando_A, you really are showing you dont know much in your comments. My father was dragged from him home at gunpoint and locked up numerous times for no reason. His home was broken into many times during the war by your nation's consricpts. Fernando, you are the one who has lost it. The people who were born and live in the Falklands are the ones who control the islands. We have more stake in the islands, than you. For you to say you have more ownership of a place you have never been to is laughable. You are basically saying you have more right to a place than me. I am sitting in Stanley as we type this. I was born here, educated here and will live here until the day I die. You probably never have stepped foot on these islands, and clearly know nothing about these islands, and you state you more rights over these islands than me. And the thing is, you cannot see how absurd you are. I am washing my hands of MercoPress. I thought, as many others have, that the Argentine people might be rational, and may understand how an islander feels. But they couldnt care less, they are so twisted and fed full of so many lies, to the point, where you so blindly believe you have more rights over these islands than me, A Falklander, Benny or Kelper (whatever you want to call us), and cant see absurd it is.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the sovereignty of Hong Kong can be returned to China without any undue controversy at the end of a lengthy period of leaseback, surely the sovereignty of a tiny group of islands in the South Atlantic, occupied by just a few thousand people, can be placed under a similar leaseback arrangement made.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 08:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the events you're describing did in fact take place, they are deplorable, I can only imagine this unfortunate behavior was the result of poor training and I do not condone it.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 09:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As far as the detention of civilians, you're right, I wasn't there and I don't know the reasons. But if I had to guess I'd say it was done to prevent civilians from running around playing Rambo, that'd be a pretty quick way to get yourself killed and then have something even more terrible to complain about.
And if you wish to point out deplorable incidents how about I put things into perspective for you? The sinking of the ARA Belgrano, a ship on a heading north-west towards Argentina, well outside the exclusion zone. There were no British ships between the Belgrano and Argentina, this ship didn't even fire a single round and 323 people lost their lives. Yes it was war and they knew the risks, but this was done solely to tip the scale and for that f--ing whore of a president Margaret Thatcher to win the elections.
Overall I'd say Argentina behaved far more honorably than the UK did.
164 Marco: The difference is that the people of hong kong didn't mind becoming Chinese citizens. The people of the falklands do not want anything to do with you.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You can bang on about the Belgrano as much as you like, YOU started a war and your ship got sunk, we lost plenty of ships and don't moan about it.
An exclusion zone is not a perimeter in which fighting can only happen, war's don't have boundries. An exclusion zone is to let other nations know that, within that area any sea vessel or aircraft from any country entering the zone may have been fired upon without further warning, it is a simple process to stop the accidental sinking or shooting of other nations assets.
If you don't want your troops killed, don't go to war. It's simple really.
Captain Hector Bonzo even said it was fair game, the ship was sailing away, only to return the next day, and had orders to fire upon british ships.
And, you know what? even if your three warships were not planning on getting involved, sailing along the edge of a warzone when you are in the middle of a war with a nother nation wasn't the smartest thing to do.
Argentina never complained about the sinking of the Belgrano and I'm not moaning, I'm simply putting things into perspective. It is regrettable that most of our elite forces had to be stationed at the border with Chile to prevent an invasion from their side, things would have unfolded very differently. We wouldn't even be talking.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Also “the British government had informed Argentina on April 23rd, that Argentine ships and aircraft outside the Exclusion Zone could be attacked if they posed a threat to the British task force, and senior figures in the Argentine Navy have made clear that they understood this message; for example, Argentine Rear-Admiral Allara who commanded the Belgrano’s task group said “After that message of 23 April, the entire South Atlantic was an operational theatre for both sides.”
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“In 1994, the Argentine government conceded that the sinking of the Belgrano was ”a legal act of war“”
It was NOT a war crime.
However, the way your troops treated the islanders was awfull. Like M_of_FI said. Other residents had Argentine troops steal and defecate in there homes.
Ok you're on a loop, let me know when you're done so I don't have to repeat myself over and over.
Sep 02nd, 2010 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando/Marco belgano issue is old hat,well accepted by ALL Arg Naval Commanders that it was a fair target as steaming in a holding pattern waiting for wind to get up so your carrier could launch bombers so Belgrano could attack from south in the aftermath in a pincer movement.Naval Fact accepted by your hogh command - get used to it!
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 12:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Mrs Thatcher was not a president - she was an elected Primeminister- if she ordered the Belgrano sunk to help win an election in 1983 then explain to me WHY prior to April 1982 was here Govt actively trying to encourage islander to do a deal and accept Argentina! Lucky for us your drunk old generalissimo lost his marbles and invaded - THAT changed Thatcher,s position and the position of the UK public.
Fernando- you still have no idea about COLoNIALISM - it is the taking of a territory from ITS inhabitants and forcing your will and Govt on them against their wishes. = 100% Argentina, ambitions with the Islands - and sorry - it aint gonna happen.
Then shut up already.. god you people are so weird
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 02:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando_A, if you make stupid, ignorant comments, complaining about the sinking of the Belgrano or showing that you know nothing about the behaviour of some of your armed forces during the occupation in 1982, then you can expect to be bombarded by people teling you what an idiot you are. Before you start shooting your mouth off, it is always best to have at least a little bit of an idea about the subject you are trying to discuss.
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 03:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0I understand some abuse probably occurred in Malvinas by Argentine forces and they regrettable. Lets also remember that not a single islander was hurt, killed or raped by the same forces. The three ladies that unfortunately died was because of indiscrimate bombardment from HMS Avenger.
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 03:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0And let's not forget Lt. N . Taylor, Sea Harrier pilot, his body was recovered by Argentines troops and given a full military funeral by the
same personal.
Interesting article
http://www.ppu.org.uk/falklands/falklands3.html
Marco, excellent note.
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 06:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ironically, the most deplorable acts carried out by Argentina were directed towards the Argentine troops.
I remember April of 1982, I was in first grade. Our teacher told us we should buy chocolates, put them into boxes and bring them to school, she said all the boxes would be sent to the troops on the islands. I remember how happy I was to do this, ecstatic is the word. I remember writing a message on the box.. something like “so you won't be cold”. The next day at school there were thousands of boxes, all with messages on them. The boxes never got to them.
I wish the soldiers today could at least read the messages on the boxes.
“Ok you're on a loop, let me know when you're done so I don't have to repeat myself over and over.”
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 09:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0I like to prove my point when you come out with a total load of rubbish.
“It is regrettable that most of our elite forces had to be stationed at the border with Chile to prevent an invasion from their side, things would have unfolded very differently. We wouldn't even be talking.”
Thats just such a silly notion. By the time british troops had landed on the islands the war was won. We had air and naval superiority. Your men had no supplies coming in and our men are just better trained, the basic british soldier has the longest training period in the world.
I don't know how good you think your “Elite” troops are but ours are generally considered the best in the world. And i certanly don't know how you seem to think they would have beaten us without air naval or artilery support, with no food or ammunition.
Yeah ok, thank you expert, go step on a mine make yourself useful
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't need to be an expert to realise that your forces were and are, inferior.
Sep 03rd, 2010 - 09:49 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!