MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, September 27th 2021 - 22:34 UTC

 

 

Falklands’ capital Stanley expands: 34 new housing plots for residents

Thursday, July 7th 2011 - 17:26 UTC
Full article 19 comments

The Falkland Islands Government has announced support for a new phase of work, which should help to alleviate the housing shortage in Stanley. Lack of home ownership, especially for those on lower incomes has been a problem in the capital for many years. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • briton

    The falklands grows bigger
    and
    Argentina can only look in awe

    Jul 07th, 2011 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ManRod

    how much does a house cost in average?

    Jul 08th, 2011 - 11:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Raul

    Leave the hatred and resentment of Argentina. Resentment is astray. We have more reasons UD. suffered three invasions British and we remain committed to dialogue and peace.

    They are applying one of the three basic policies of Peronism: Social justice. Congratulations on this great step.

    Jul 08th, 2011 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinero1

    he falklands grows bigger
    and
    Argentina can only look in awe
    Do not worry,we can reoccupy them after.After all,still Argentina has a strong legal case,over Malvinas...
    Plus the mandate of the UN 2065!
    No self-determination applicable to Malvina's....

    Jul 08th, 2011 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    manrod, probably £100-150,000 perhaps, more if its real posh and plenty of land, less if its mall and old and tatty.
    Malvinero - please show me the UN Charter or formal bibding UN statement(not just an advisory committee like c24) from a formal entity where it states that Selfdetermination is not applicable to the Islands?
    Even if there was- so what? What legal meaning does it have over the ICJ which is the world only International Legal Jurisdiction body in cases like ours?

    Jul 08th, 2011 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    After all,still Argentina has a strong legal case,over Malvinas...
    Plus the mandate of the UN 2065!

    If you truly belive this, then why has not argentina gone to the [ ICJ ]
    NEXT

    Jul 08th, 2011 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Redhoyt

    SiEster Who Is Now Marvin - you have no case at all and 2065 carries no weight. Haven't you noticed ?

    Self determination is what the islander's already have. They are employing it. Haven't you noticed that either?

    Jul 09th, 2011 - 12:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rhaurie-Craughwell

    guffawl...please Malvinarse...please please please tell us which section of 2065 says that self-determination is not applicable :)

    From my reading it doesn't say anything about self-determination not being applicable...buts says decolonisation must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of 1514 and 1541....

    And you know what that means, 3 options....

    1. Independence (through an act of self-determination)
    2. Free association with another state (through an act of self-determination)
    3. Integration with another states (through an act of self-determination)

    I see no option which states that the Falklands must be integrated into the Argentine state without an act of self-determination......

    Mightily strange how the Falklands along with Gibraltar are the only two countries on earth who are not allowed self-determination, are the subject of sovereignty claims....

    Says something about the claimants really..

    Jul 10th, 2011 - 08:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    4 Malvinero1
    but of course if argentina is always in the right,
    and never lies, and is sitting on the malvinas islands,
    then you should have nothing more to say,
    you have the malvinas,,and we have the british falklands,
    so whats the problem ???

    Jul 10th, 2011 - 10:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rob the argentine

    Self determination is what the islander's deserve, and be sure you will get it pretty soon. I also hope to see Falkland and Argentina working together for the good of both of them. Anything else, coming from brits or argies, is just nonsense.

    Jul 11th, 2011 - 02:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinero1

    Self determination is what the islander's deserve, and be sure you will get it pretty soon. I also hope to see Falkland and Argentina working together for the good of both of them. Anything else, coming from brits or argies, is just nonsense.
    Sure,but they have a legal problem...There is the UN resolution 2065,they cannot get selfdetermination,without Argentina's consent......
    uk talking about self determination...after the Chagosian were forcible expelled.....
    What a LIARS the Brits....

    Jul 11th, 2011 - 12:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rhaurie-Craughwell

    11....Malvinarse....

    Go on then, tell us which section says they aren't allowed self-determination and can only do so at Argentina's consent :)...

    I see you're also talking about Diego Garcia again like a manic parrot, is that the only argument Malvinists have? When your own defunct and flawed thinking is exposed.....play the Diego Garcia card!

    But wait a second.....what exactly do you imply with Diego Garcia, that:

    1. You support self-determination and thus were appalled at Diego Garcia.....So why do you want to do the same thing to the islanders?
    2. You don't support self-determination of the Falklanders, so why do you complain about Diego Garcia not being extended the same privileged...
    3. You can't think of a better argument, so use Diego Garcia with little thought process merely as an insult to rouse the British lion....

    I'm going for number 3....

    You clearly have no idea what your talking about....

    Jul 11th, 2011 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    to be truthfull
    they dont know what they want,

    Jul 11th, 2011 - 11:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinero1

    Go on then, tell us which section says they aren't allowed self-determination and can only do so at Argentina's consent :)...
    Sure.guys...
    International Law 101:Here have some lesson,Titans of history and Law:
    Section (6) of UN Resolution 1514 states:

    Any attempt aimed at the total or partial disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

    Argentina claims on this basis the restoration of its territorial integrity.

    Furthermore, according to a study on the right to self-determination for the UN Commission on human rights (U.N. doc. E/ CN.4/Sub2/204 paras 267-279), Aureliu Cristescu describes the following as 'elements of a definition' of a 'people' that can exercise this right:
    The relevant elements are that the term 'people' denotes a social entity possessing a clear identity and its own characteristics, and that it implies a relationship with a territory, even if the people in question has been wrongfully expelled from it and artificially replaced by another population (Quoted from ICJ 1982, p. 32).
    This interpretation would clearly favour Argentina's case.
    The strongest elements in the British case seem to be its long occupation of the islands and the clear desire of the population to remain under British sovereignty.14 Legally, however, it appears that Argentina has a very strong case. Unfortunately there are sufficient uncertainties in the legal arguments for Argentina's case (just as there are in the British case) that it is not possible to arrive at a definite conclusion.
    http://www.malvinasonline.com.ar/index.php/derecho-internacional/articulos/57-the-british-resort-to-force.html
    By the way,it break my heart,reading the Malvinense,edward,crying
    Imploring the Special Committee not to adopt the resolution as presented, Roger Edwards, an elected official of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands, and one of several petitioners to ta

    Jul 12th, 2011 - 01:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rhaurie-Craughwell

    Ask a Malvinist one simple question and you get an essay.....which doesn't answer the question XD......

    All you've done is re-hash the Argentine argument...from an Argentine website I highly doubt the credibility of any website which markets itself as Malvinas online and yet dedicates 3/4 of its content to the Falklands war, and is marked by its complete absence of reference to the people of the islands, their history, their culture, their opinions?!?!?

    Now please please please please....tell us which bit of 2065 tells us that only Argentina can allow self-determination of the islanders, or even that self-determination is inapplicable :)

    I see calls for a negotiated solution, but I do not see:

    1. Calls saying self-determination is inapplicable (only Argentina is saying that)
    2. That Argentina's territorial integrity takes precedence (only Argentina is saying that)
    3. Calls saying that the Islands must be handed over to Argentina (only Argentina is saying that)

    Have you read 1541.....I believe you haven't...here you go: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/15/ares15.htm

    I highly recommend that you read principle IX, “Integration with another state” (the option that Argentina wants-glorious integration with the eternal parrot-tree) section b.
    -“Integration should be the result of the freely expressed wishes of the territories inhabitants acting with full knowledge of the change of their status and their wishes having been expressed through a full democratic process”.

    - I note with glee it also states territories inhabitants, not people smirk smirk, a bit of a downer for Argentina....no wonder your poor excuse for titans of international law always miss out resolution 1541 :)

    Jul 12th, 2011 - 07:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinero1

    No the Argentina site,is citing correctly,professor Blooth
    http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/24/1/5.abstract
    http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/24/1/5.abstract
    The principle of decolonization was established by the General Assembly of the United Nations in resolution 1514 (XV) of 1960 (gibnet.com). Since then the principle has been further developed as an aspect of the principle of freedom from colonization. Both Britain and Argentina appeal this principle in a conflicting manner. Britain maintains that the principle of de-colonization does not apply to the Falkland Islands, that it is not a colonial situation and that the Falklanders do indeed have the rights to self- determination. UN Resolutions 2065 (XX) and 3160 (XXVIII), however, specifically declared the “aim of bringing to an end everywhere colonialism in all its forms, one of which is the case of the Falkland Islands” (UN.org).
    http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/24/1/5.abstract
    http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/24/1/5.abstract
    Blooth,is a professor at Leeds.
    By the way,is the case is soo good for the Malvinenses,why they cry at the UN decolonization, that no body listen to them?
    The votes are overhelming in favour of Argentina.
    Every year,every UN resolution,favors Argentina's case more and more.
    By the way,Malvinas,represents a loosing money operation for uk.
    Part of your tax sterlings goes to pay for them.
    See you next year at the C24.
    46 years debating at the UN....every year in favor of Argentina.
    Please take,justin,redhoyt,Salt& pepper and help them wining at the UN....
    So far you are loosing..

    Jul 12th, 2011 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rhaurie-Craughwell

    Malvinarse you dodge the question yet again :)

    - All you've provided so far is a journal about the Falklands war, from a website which dedicates that majority of its content to the Falklands war...nice one :)

    Now are you going to tell me which bit of resolution 2065 states:

    1. Saying self-determination is inapplicable (only Argentina is saying that)
    2. That Argentina's territorial integrity takes precedence (only Argentina is saying that)
    3. Calls saying that the Islands must be handed over to Argentina (only Argentina is saying that)

    I can't :)

    “By the way,is the case is soo good for the Malvinenses,why they cry at the UN”
    - I thought that the Islanders aren't recognised by Argentina, and that this was a bilateral dispute.....so what is a 3rd party doing arguing its case at the UN....ooops :)

    “The votes are overhelming in favour of Argentina”
    -really? I must have missed the vote which stated that the UK must hand over the islands smirk smirk :)

    Every year,every UN resolution,favors Argentina's case more and more.

    - There has been no UN resolution on the islands since 1988, so don't know how you came to that conclusion, and even then it didn't exactly favour you :)

    “By the way,Malvinas,represents a loosing money operation for uk”

    -Falklands are self-sufficient financially, socially, politically we provide defence that is, and frankly preventing British citizens from having their democratic rights to self-determination trampled on by Argentina is money well spent, and anyway....you've just proven that they aren't a colony....we lose money defending them, aren't colonies meant to be profit making enterprises for the motherland?

    “So far you are loosing”

    -Really?.....so by losing you mean not having Argentina gain sovereignty? In my country we call that winning......

    180 years, we've won a war, suspended negotiations, and haven't handed over the islands....Argentina is impotent, all you can do is whine and delude yourselves your getting somewhere :)

    Jul 12th, 2011 - 05:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LegionNi

    As I understand it Argentina basis it's claim on territorial intergrity. Question therefore is has Argentina every proven that the Falkland islands were ever an integral part of the territory? Seems to me they need to prove this to the international community first.

    Argentina also argues that the Falkland Islanders have no right to self determination because they are an implanted population. Yet their claim to territorial integrity is based on Vernets settlement on the islands, which was in itself an implanted population, who by their own argument would have no right to self determination.

    The Argentines built themselves a country by an act of self determination when at the time some of the lands that no make up Argentina where an integral part of Spanish territory.

    Argentina also claims to have inherited the Falklands from Spain. Who decides this? Who decides the borders? From what I understand the countries that we now recognise in South America spent much of their earlier years fighting amonst themselves to establish their borders let alone who inherited what from Spain. Inheritance would also imply consent from Spain which they did not give.

    Hell the country that is now Argentina spent much of it's early years fighting with itself, with the federalist who wished to rule from Bueno Aires and those who didn't. They couldn't even agree on their own borders at the time so how can they prove what they were to anyone else?

    Jul 15th, 2011 - 08:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ManRod

    “manrod, probably £100-150,000 perhaps, more if its real posh and plenty of land, less if its mall and old and tatty.”

    Quite a proud price for a house, so far away from any metropolis.

    Jul 15th, 2011 - 11:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0

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