MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Brazil Defence minister wants the South Atlantic as a peace zone shared with Africa
Brazil’s new Defence minister Celso Amorim said he plans closer links with Unasur (Union of South American Nations) and Africa to ensure the South Atlantic turns into a peace zone free of weapons of mass destruction. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWants to own the south Atlantic? No chance!
Aug 09th, 2011 - 01:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0still waiting the article about “” UK in burning by riots “” !
Aug 09th, 2011 - 01:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wants to own the south Atlantic? No chance!
Aug 09th, 2011 - 04:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0no chance what? They already own it. What can or will the UK or the US do? Nothing. We both know that.
Little things called UNCLOS and international waters. Remember them?
Aug 09th, 2011 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Last time I checked no-one owns the whole South Atlantic. Each state and territory owns and administers it's own location and assets. Sound like the area is already a peace zone as there appears to be no significant militarization in the area and therefore no threat of military conflict.
Aug 09th, 2011 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0www.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Atlantic_Peace_and_Cooperation_Zone
Aug 09th, 2011 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0South america and Africa have signed for peace in south atlantic
High seas, national waters and EEZs:
Aug 09th, 2011 - 07:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0WMDs include submarines, surface vessels and aircraft with nuclear weapons on station and in transit, and the flight configurations of IBMs.
They *may* include chemical, biological and radioactive material in storage or in transit, though these would have to be configured as deliverable weapons to be considered as WMDs - otherwise transport of eg. Gyphosate agricultural pesticides might be caught up in Amorim's proposed 'ban'.
I get the feeling that Amorim is really warning the USA, Russia, China etc, to keep their subs out of the South Atlantic.
He would like to exercise the Brasilian military might towards this end, but only in concert with the rest of the South American nations and the African nations.
How he would do this in practice is as unclear as it is unlikely.
So, what is this statement other than embarassingly toothless militaristic rhetoric?
More of the same from this strange man whose history of embarassingly toothless rhetoric extends way back into his responsibility for foreign affairs.
Amorim, the politician who (to quote) seems blissfully unaware that politics is the art of the possible.
Geoff, you should know your place. How laughable is it that you're trying to tell Mr. Amorim how to do his job, how international relations are supposed to work. At least when it comes to Amorim's field, you're but a pretentious zé ninguém. I hope no one's impressed by the arbitrary assertions that you throw around with such confidence - for there is nothing to them but attitude. You get enraged whenever BR (or ARG, for that matter) acts without 'due reverence' towards the Western world (and specially your country), and to vent your frustration, you do this 'connaisseur' act. Drop the act, Geoff.
Aug 09th, 2011 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0[] - 7
Aug 09th, 2011 - 08:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0is tis true ? # comment 203 !
http://en.mercopress/com/2011/03/31/argentina-promotes-world-wide-malvinas-discussion-under-the-logo-of-it-takes-two-to-tango
you can find this article from the archive if the link can't work !
#8,
Aug 09th, 2011 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0can you explain exactly what it is in my #7 that you find erroneous?
Read it carefully, and have a go.
you cannot dictate peace in the south atlantic, unless their is a problem,
Aug 09th, 2011 - 11:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and even then if you include south africa, then you would have to include all nations that either have an interest,
or all nations that use the south atlantic,
and that may incude over a 100,
and how would you inforce this PEACE] thing,
stop and search,
are you suggesting that you wish to turn the south atlantic into a demiliterised zone,, are we at war or did i miss something,
brazil i think may be just a bit to big for its boot to assume,
the south atlantic is free and open to all nations, and that is the way it should be .
i was not aware their was weapons of mass destruction in the atlantic,
i find it very normal using rethoric dialogue agreements to build peace
Aug 10th, 2011 - 12:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0thats a very real way and it seems it functions in the region
Hi Malen,
Aug 10th, 2011 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0rhetorical dialogue and rhetorical monologue give 'a warm feeling inside' to those that engage in it (eg. Hugo Chavez), but, as they say in the UK, 'it doesn't butter any parsnips'.
you build peace your way we already know how you do it
Aug 10th, 2011 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0www.montrealgazette.com/news/NATO+bombing+raises/5210157/story.html
we on our way... dont need your lessons of butter any parsnips. thank you. i pass.
Malen#14
Aug 10th, 2011 - 01:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Which way is your way?
The military way? (Right?)
The revolutionary way? (Left?)
The way of colonial occupation and erradication/genocide?
With respect,
'your way' has killed such a massive proportion of both the indigenous populations and colonialists,
I think there are as many lessons needing to be learned in the Southern Hemisphere/New World as in the Northern Hemisphere/Old World.
Rhetoric, on its own, does not kill people, but it is a normal precursor to the actual killings:
The Nuremberg rallies were exercises in rhetoric and served their purpose of 'priming' the German populations that they were threatened by both 'the enemy without' and the Jews within.
CFK's TFI rhetoric follows this classic model and, as such, can be seen as a precursor to, and with the potential to be the initiator of, actual conflict.
off subject Geoff
Aug 10th, 2011 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0we are talking of peace in 2011
not colonialism 200 years ago...in that case you have colonized many other countries with much more deaths i believe
i will never support any killing not even of my country in the 70s or 82
this region is in peace the way we build peace is the way we choose it thats why we are independant
we are not in war with other regions or with our neighbours
drop your act geoff you are boring defendiendo lo indefendible de tu país
saying what you say of CK corre por tu cuenta y es una absoluta muestra de tu falta de respeto por otras formas de pensar y actuar por no decir una boludez
los resultados están a la vista
OK Malen,
Aug 10th, 2011 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0rhetoric is timeless; what it can do is also timeless.
Used to whip up xenophobic hysteria, it is a powerful weapon of war.
Used to promote peace, it is useful;
but the message must be credible - hence my original comment.
@ 16 jajaja falta de respeto! andá a lavarte la cageta malem
Aug 10th, 2011 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0CFK is a dirty arsewipe b*tch and a dirty zillionaire who f*cks everyone and has no respect for the lives of the poor she says she loves sooooooo much!
Xbox, are you voting for Cristina this year? jajajaja!!
Aug 10th, 2011 - 07:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0nuremberg???xenophbic hysteria??? you dont have ARGUMENTS geoff thats why you are derrapando malllllllll
Aug 10th, 2011 - 09:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0igual que barilo.......always were poors in this country im not a kid like you
im not voting cristina by the way
Geoff, this might be of interest for you:
Aug 11th, 2011 - 12:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.rodrigovianna.com.br/palavra-minha/globo-vai-partir-pra-cima-de-amorim-isso-prova-que-dilma-escolheu-bem.html
Oh, as for you question on where did you say anything wrong - Geoff, assertions can be wrong, and thus refuted. Insults cannot - they cannot no matter how base they're. As such I can't point to anything erronous in your post. I can only expose your pretentiousness in thinking you can lecture Mr. Amorim, a great diplomat and a good negotiator - something you'd recognize if you were not so immersed in this ultra-ideologized view of yours - about the nature of the international system and the viability of his projects. You trying to point Amorim how to get his job done, is like a fly trying to teach a lion to hunt.
Aug 11th, 2011 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Hi, Forgetit #22,
Aug 11th, 2011 - 10:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'm glad you found all my arguments irrefutible.
You will note that my comments were addressed to Mercopress posters; Mr. Amorim, that great and venerable world-statesman, would surely never stoop so low as to read a mere blog comment.
We flys must stick together, there may be lions around.
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/11/uk-riots-dictatorships-syria-reaction
Aug 11th, 2011 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/08/11/Libya.war/
@20 Malen, you are smart so you cannot tell that the riots in London and the Syria situation are the same thing, correct? is just a question
Aug 11th, 2011 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Gadaffi has a great sense of humour, doesn't he?
Aug 11th, 2011 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I'm glad you found all my arguments irrefutible.”
Aug 11th, 2011 - 09:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You too have a great sense of humour, Geoff.
As I said before, I didn't refute anything because, as often, you didn't make any argument, you just ranted in your faux connaissuer manner.
artillero
Aug 11th, 2011 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0not the same but after all not so different!!!
violence with or witthout NATO mandate, in my opinion is always violence.
i think Britain, Usa, France etc should sort out its own problems (violent also problems) rather than interfere and destroying and killing in others countries. They not pacificate these regions, on the contrary they feed this violence, they divide and confrontate people of poor countries for their own business. In my opinnion should leave people alone, what they are doing is not better (and less knowing they sold them arms).
i think Britain, Usa, France etc should sort out its own problems
Aug 12th, 2011 - 10:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0perhaps you may be right,
should great britain withdraw from afgan and lybia, to deal with its own problems,to deal with and including the falklands problem perhaps,
sending 10,000 plus troops and over 20 planes and 13 ships to argentina to deal with our problem,
perhaps your fellow bloggers would dasagree with you, and prefer the british and amarcans stay put, at this time,
perhaps not, who knows .
make war in between yourselves
Aug 13th, 2011 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0other people wants peace
Memorandum on Libya handed to British Consul General in Cape Town by SACP and allies
mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/sacp120811.html
google
Malen #30,
Aug 14th, 2011 - 11:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0you have peace. The Southern oceans are a haven of peace.
What's your problem?
UK has nothing to do in SA and SA
Aug 14th, 2011 - 05:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malen #32,
Aug 14th, 2011 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Clue: 'Protectorate” pro·tec·tor·ate /prəˈtɛktərət/ noun
plural pro·tec·tor·ates: a small country that is protected by a larger one.
i think reading the memorandum that other people think of you in terms of in-va-sion and im-pe-ria-lism to small countries
Aug 14th, 2011 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and that you are a little reiterative in these matters
look that we are in 21st century now....... what need you have
buy the oil
Malen #34,
Aug 14th, 2011 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I doubt Brasil - or me - are seen as big into invasions etc.
and as for oil - we have plenty now the pre-salt reservoirs are coming to the surface.
I agree with you that I am a bit repetitive, but really only on the matter of Brasil & corruption - but new corruptions surface all around me, day by day, year by year, and show no sign of stopping. Hence the repetition.
when i say you (UK) are a bit repetitive in these matters of invading, i am refering to the UK
Aug 14th, 2011 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0think of you - UK - in terms od invasion or imperialism to small poor or complicated countries like libya nowadays
UK should buy the oil
Brasil corruption?? nothing to do with this
Malen
Aug 15th, 2011 - 09:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0You will be aware by now that I am no apologist for England, the UK, the EU, for Europe, for the Northern Hemisphere, for the South Atlantic, for Brasi (my home), for South America, or for the world. Quite the reverse, I am vociferous where I see fault and inadequacy and where better human choices could make things so much better for the people.
Re. 'UK should buy the oil':
world oil is bought and sold like any other commodity, where it exists within a country or an EEZ the licences control its extraction and the state takes directly - and through taxation (typically 60%) - and profits go to (or should be for) 'the people'.
It used to be Brent Crude Spot that set the benchmark price (I don't know about today), but please don't think that we - you, me, the man in the street, our governments - just *take* oil; it is all paid for, right down the line, and traded to make profit.
It is my hope that the profits from Brasilian oil extraction will reach the people; my fear is that a large proportion of it will stick to the corrupt hands of the already rich.
Brasilian resources is a problem of brasilian people.
Aug 15th, 2011 - 01:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0NATO countires invade only poor complicated small countries that have oil. This wars are unwinnable, and makes NATO powerful militar countries to stay for 8, 15 years in this poor countries stealing their resources.
This is the new way of colonialism, imperialism, that now is supported by international community and a strong mass media that wants to make us believe you are the saviors of the world.
Why instead of helping rebels of Libya, you dont help to become strong African Union so african problems can be resolved by african people?
no, you invade, stay and steal. With violence, so you are not better but worst or worse.
I once bought your(central countries) speech, now no.
Its my opinnion. Many think this way too.
Thank you for your reply.
Aug 15th, 2011 - 05:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your comments have been noted.
TWIMC
Aug 15th, 2011 - 11:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UK government has nothing to do with oil exploration. If oil is ever exploited in the FI, it will be sold on the open market and the UK will have to buy it if it wants some. The profits go to the companies that take the risks, and the tax revenues go to FIG.
(40) Monty96…
Aug 16th, 2011 - 02:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
”The UK government has nothing to do with oil exploration…….”
I say:
Suuuuuure……….., besides their military intervention that allows their companies to make the exploration, exploitation and profits…..............
Like in Iraq:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/31/bp-stranglehold-iraq-oilfield-contract
Or Lybia:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/31/bp-stranglehold-iraq-oilfield-contract
Morever; the British government and the FIG(leaf) are two sides of the very same coin.
Stop being such a brainwashed half-Brit and try using the good part of your brain (the Chilean) for a change……
Lybia, Libia, Lybya, Libya . . . who cares?
Aug 16th, 2011 - 07:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Only pedants, zoologists and crabs.
Lybia (common names include boxer crabs, boxing crabs and pom-pom crabs) is a genus of small crabs, including Lybia tesselata and Lybia edmondsoni. ...
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!