MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Timerman: “Malvinas” strategy is working, not even English newspapers support Cameron
Foreign Minister Héctor Timerman assured that Argentina’s strategy on the Malvinas Islands sovereignty claim “is working” and added that “the only way for England to get out of this mess is through direct negotiations with Argentina.” Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesTimidman really is clueless.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 12:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0The only thing the UK needs to do is sit back and competely ignore him and his cronies. The ONLY thing that has happened so far is that SA countries have banned entry to ships flying the FI flag. All of his so-called allies have categorically stated that they will not support any economic blockade or prevent those same vessels entering with another flag. Argentina has achieved absolutely nothing. They're just looking more and more pathetic to outside observers and they don't seem to realise it. If this is a strategy that is working, I would hate to see one that isn't working.
And get it right Timidman - it's the “UK” or “Britain”, not England, you ignorant tit.
The port of Montevideo has received the visit of a ship with UK flag this month. It was a militar vessel with soldiers keeping figth guns during their wards. Uruguayan goverment tried to minimize it`s presence. People realised presidet Mujica was showing two faces, one for uruguayan and argentinians and other for UK
Jan 20th, 2012 - 12:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ 1 crackpot
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, Mr.Timmerman is correct when he refers to the dipute being between Argentina and England as neither Scotland or Wales support England in this issue.
So far as this allegation of there being an invasion by 'Mock Fisherman' is concerned well, it is pure nonsense. I suspect the idea was dreamed up by one of the numerous Public Relations and Advertising consultants that the 'British' government pays an estimated £17 billion per year to run most of their administration.
I find it difficult to accept seriously your accusations that Argentina is not a democracy when so much of the 'British' government is run by outside - unelected - consultants and advisers.
And Islanders be warned - the british government is looking seriously at the potential of grabbing some of that oil revenue to help them pay their rapidly increasing contributions to the euro bail-out fund.
Ah crackpot you cant admit Sr.Timerman is tge first to educate you after all my poor uneducated efforts.Everyone knows all over the World the UK as you try so hard to legitimize it is merely the puny effort of a little island to glorify itself like the USSR.Nobody beleives it not even you but nostalgia is sometimes comforting for the bewildered.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina is not a democracy ,,,,
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0more egoistic rubish,
you wont stop untill blood is spilt,
thats the be,all and end,all
blame us for your own incompetence,
to you guys, democracy is being alloud on here .
@3 dental floss
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Neither Scotland nor Wales nor England are involved individually in the foreign affairs of the United Kingdom, so what you're saying is total BS. Please try to educate yourself about how the United Kingdom works if you want to add any useful comment.
I have never said that Argentina isn't a democracy (although I certainly believe that it's not a very good one). It has been classified as a “flawed democracy” in the latest Democracy Index.
@4 Ogara:
No nostalgia from the UK. Just acceptance of the current realty - one that involves real people determining their own future and allegiances in spite of bully-boy tactics from their big neighbour. No legitimisation is necessary - the people have spoken. End of story. It is Argentina that has nostalgia for the brief period that it tried unsuccessfully to introduce some form of control over the Falkland Islands over 150 years ago and very nearly managed to establish its first overseas territory.
It seems that the UK's “puny effort” as you put it is more than Argentina can cope with. Argentina really needs to up its game if it wants to compete with the big boys.
Timidman is just a complete fool. Nobody outside or Argentina takes him seriously. Perhaps the only person who is a greater fool is Arguello
briton:Argentina is not a democracy ,,,,
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0more egoistic rubish,
you wont stop untill blood is spilt,
thats the be,all and end,all
What an IMBECILE you are!!
Oh my God,the deluded brits...
uk IS FINISHED>>>>Nothing you can write will change reality......
@ 6 crackpot
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Again my friend I can only refer you to what your own newspapers and military experts say :
” General Sir Peter Whiteley, a former commandant general of the Royal Marines, said: ‘If the Argentines decided to invade again we could never consider trying to take them (the Falklands) back because of our lack of naval resources.’
And Surgeon Rear Admiral Ralph Curr, the Royal Navy’s former medical director-general, added: ‘There’s no way we could defend the Falklands or re-engage the Argentines if it all happened again.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2088904/Argentinas-acting-president-angrily-tells-Cameron-to-school-stop-ignorant-Falklands.html#ixzz1jxTnwQm0
You suckers do like grasping at straws !
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Times was an opinion piece and the Guardian is ... well the Guardian.
Tell you what though, if Argentina hasn't gained an inch by the end of this year, then you'll know the truth - that you're stuffed!!
@8 Are you sure that these two retired chappies are telling the truth? Maybe they are speaking with forked tongues
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0You suckers do like grasping at straws !
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Times was an opinion piece and the Guardian is ... well the Guardian.
Either way lordtrash,uk is FINISHED!! Payback time for uk...Just follows JIm Rogers advise and RUN AWAY from uk....
“Major-General Julian Thompson, who commanded Britain’s victorious ground assault in 1982, gave a recent talk during which he set out a convincing scenario in which the Argentines capture or destroy the Mount Pleasant air strip, thereby denying Britain the ability to send reinforcements. With no aircraft carrier available until 2025, the prospects of staging a repeat of the naval task force that liberated the islands in 1982 are zero. ”
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9025236/Complacency-over-theFalklands-could-cost-Britain-dear.html
CrackKpot.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina strategy is to have full support of the bloc MERCOSUR, UNASUR, CALCEC , and now Central America, After that Argentina to go the next steps,
not flags brits, no ships, aircraft, submarines, to stock up at ports or airports, no more commercial flights from Punta Arenas to the Malvinas Islands, this is coming soon! This call is more serious than colonialism, Understood! ok!
@8&12 dental floss
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am actually very happy that the miltary are highlighting these worst case scanarios with what are essentially hypothetical war games. Naturally, they just want more funding for the armed forces and scaremongering is the best way to get it. Saying that, it's all immaterial, because Argentina wouldn't be able to invade the islands successfully in the first place. They are far too weak materially and are also too weak-willed.
@13 Kiwis arse (no offence to any NZs out there)
“After that Argentina to go the next steps, not flags brits, ....”
Oh, please do Argentina. I would really love to see that. It would be total diplomatic suicide if they tried to enforce that. If you think they'll do that, then you are a fool. Saying that, maybe they are just foolish enough to try it. At the moment, Argentina have nothing - just a ban on the FI flag (oooooooh!).
“Navy's £5bn Harrier jet replacement 'unable to land on aircraft carriers'
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Royal Navy's multi-billion pound fighter plane programme is under threat amid claims that its new all-purpose jets cannot land on aircraft carriers”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9016442/Navys-5bn-Harrier-jet-replacement-unable-to-land-on-aircraft-carriers.html
All the world (except some British) know that the Malvinas Islands were stolen by UK. This country temporaly manages the Islands only because it won the war. However, it´s important to remind that a country can win a war without valid arguments to steal the territories. Therefore, a war can be won only with an important military force, it is not necessary to have the reason in the discussion. It´s very clear that this Islands are Argentinian. All the world knows that the military force of Argentina is smaller that the one of UK, however all the world know that Argentina has valid arguments to make its claims. All the world is requesting to UK (since time ago) to begin the negotiations with Argentina. In spite of that, it is important to avoid forgetting that UK always was the better example of colonialism around the world. Only reading a little of history can help to realize of it.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0All the world know the truth - http://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history3.pdf
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0They look at Argentina, raise their eyes to heaven ... and tell you what you want to hear.
But nothing changes.
Does it :-)
@15 dental floss:
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just a few teething problems, I assure you.
@16 johnfarrel:
”All the world (except some British).....”
You conveniently neglect the EU, most of the Commonwealth and many other countries (including the USA, in spite of what you probably think) who couldn't give a shit about Argentina's ludicrous claims.
“This country temporaly manages the Islands...”
I'd hardly call 179 years temporary.
“it is important to avoid forgetting that UK always was the better example of colonialism around the world....”
True. Britain was indeed very good at it. Argentina, on the other hand, was very crap at it, but not for lack of trying. Their pathetic attempts in the 1820s/30s were a complete disaster. They are so embarrassed by that total failure that they are trying to do it again 180 years later.
CrapPot
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0I say that it is just the beginning, I did not offend any kiwis, mate!!everyone wants to get out of the brits.
resent again ..! not forget: you? by force! us? for the reason ...!
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Meaningless - :-)
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/argentinas-meaningless-ban/
@ 18 Crackpot (#)
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0“”“”““it is important to avoid forgetting that UK always was the better example of colonialism around the world....””“””
That is like saying a slave owner is a humanitarian because he doesnt beat his slaves.
Very funny though crackpot - and I shall remember that lol.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/dcunited/hooligans-invade-hospital-delivery-room-in-argentina-trying-to-avenge-dead-gang-member/2012/01/19/gIQARoyfBQ_story.html
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0This is all you need to know about the Argentinians...violent uneducated miscreants... the whole lot of them
Meaningless - :-)
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/argentinas-meaningless-ban/
Who cares? IF Argentina's strategy is not working,and uk is SOOO powerful why do you care???/
May be uk is a lot weaker than you think......
@ 23 yankeeboy
Jan 20th, 2012 - 04:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0“London is now worse then Harlem USA for street crime”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-111162/Now-mugging-worse-London-Harlem.html
The above comments demonstrate that british generally doesn´t like to hear the truth and they only repeat the wrong story provided by the UK government who only wants to impose its lies. But don´t worry the truth can´t be hidden for ever, and clearly it is prevailing over the lies of UK.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 04:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0The truth is indeed out there - but Argentina is avoiding it.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 04:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0@22 dreyfoss
Jan 20th, 2012 - 04:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Everything needs to be considered in the context of what was acceptable at the time. If you live in an era in which slavely is the accepted norm, then absolutely yes, the man who doesn't beat his slaves is a humanitarian.
Colonialism used to be acceptable, but now it isn't. The UK has adapted to this by allowing all of its former colonies to express their self determination (with perhaps the odd exception, which is another debate altogether). In the case of the Falkland Islands, it is Argentina that is trying to impede that process of decolonisation by denying that the Islanders have any right to self-determination. So, in effect, Argentina is perpetuating the whole idea of colonialism. To top it all, Argentina wants to take the very colonialism that the UK has been trying to bring to an end and rebrand it to suit their needs. Argentina needs to act like a 21st century nation and not a 19th century one.
LOGICAL FALLACIES THAT NEED BE TRUE IN ORDER FOR BRITISH SOVEREIGNTY TO BE LEGITIMATE.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 05:01 am - Link - Report abuse 01. A British plaque left behind during a withdrawal secures a reservation of title, while a Spanish one does not.
2. Upon return to a territory whereupon such British plaque is left behind, British property which prior to withdrawal was specifically delineated and defined by treaty stipulation suddenly swells to encompass the whole of the territory instead (for no particular reason), while the plaque of any other competing jurisdictional authority loses the territory to which it reserves sovereignty in favor of said (unilateral) British annexation.
3. The recognition of former colonial possessions into newly independent nations, and the territory that comprised them, shall have an effective date of recognition in an entirely arbitrary manner. Argentina's independence, for example, is to be regarded as effective as of Spain's recognition with territory under its military control at that time, while the United States shall be regarded as a fully independent nation as of the date of declaration over the entirety of territories so declared, regardless of actual military control over declared territories at the time of declaration.
4. When Britain acquires a territory, whether it be through legitimate or illegitimate means, such territorial possession automatically becomes legitimate (magically?) if it continues uninterrupted over a certain (entirely arbitrary) period of time.
5. If a British-controlled territory is a colony, and such territory decides to call itself some other fancy name, and Britain will not recognize said territory as a country in and of itself even after the name change, said territory ceases to be a colony and becomes whatever arbitrary adjective has been decided upon instead (even though nothing about it has really changed).
6. (and most importantly) if the British win a war, Mr. Cameron, remind the vanquished at every opportunity that MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.
@ 29 hermes1967
Jan 20th, 2012 - 05:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say that: ”6. (and most importantly) if the British win a war, Mr. Cameron, remind the vanquished at every opportunity that MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.”
If what you say is true then why does britain persistently condemn israel for refusing to surrender land IT CONQUERED in response to four wars of aggression waged against from 1947 ?
@Hermes1967
Jan 20th, 2012 - 08:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Points 1-6 all irrelevant post UN Charter.
For territories where a settled population exists, the only thing which counts is self determination. For unpopulated territory obviously things are very different and it revolves around discovery and control.
Anyway British sovereignty in the Falkland Islands has been limited by UN Resolutions, the UK does not have full title.
The dispute with Argentina does not affect Falkland Islander rights, which are spelled out clearly in every relevant UN resolution. Any resolution to the dispute MUST take the Falkland Islander's rights into account and nowhere does the UN find that the Falklands are rightfully Argentine territory.
The result for the Falklands of the UN mandated decolonisation process is not necessarily a transfer of sovereignty to Argentina. In fact, that is one of four options open to the Falkland Islanders - it is their decision, not the UK's and not Argentina's. It's high time Argentina started respecting the UN Charter it ratified and the obligations placed on it and every country which has ratified it, and especially with respect to the Falkland Islands.
Lol The TIMES so one persons opinion piece means that all the media and newspapers are against cameron does it? I think not, the fact Twitman is now crasping at one mans opinion piece in the the TIMES (a minority paper along with... cough... the Gaurdian) is a much more clearer sign of a desperate man. Lets see now, have any of their efforts actually had an effect on the falklands or the ordinary man, woman or child in the UK? Nope everything is still the same and runningly smoothly. In fact the majority of the UK population do not even know that argentina is sabra rattling again as its hardly ever reported in the press, thats how insignificant the press see argentina as.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0In other words the main stream newspapers, like the The Sun, The Mirror, or my brothers fravorite, The Daily Sport (his wife hates it), all know argentina is insignificant, and poses no real threat to the islands or the UK. What is funny though is seeing the argentines on here claiming this to be some kind of moral victory, when the rest of the world are laughing at twitman and anyone that takes him or argentina seriously. Even your neighbouring countries are against argentina and its attempts to bloackade the falklands. The fact they had to make statements to the effect that they will not support a blockade is nothing short of evidence that argentina had tried to get her neighbours to take part in a full on blockade.
I'm amused, an Argentine spouting on about logical fallacies.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 09:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0“1. A British plaque left behind during a withdrawal secures a reservation of title, while a Spanish one does not.”
Really, so if you assert the Spanish plaque grants title, then so does the British one. Ergo you recognise the British title. Since Spain did not relinquish its claim over the Falklands till 1863, nor recognise Argentine independence till 1859, this also excludes any Argentine claim.
No doubt you'll claim Spain title passed to Argentina, claiming Utis Possidetis Juris, well neither Spain or the UK recognise that principle, which was a treaty between South American states at the Conference of Lima in 1848; a treaty which Argentina didn't recognise.
Aside from the fact that Utis Possidetis Juris of 1810 would confer a claim on Uruguay not Argentina.
Logical fallacy indeed.
2. Is just incorrect, both Spain and the UK claimed the entire archipelago, the treaty of 1771 was a mutual agreement to allow both to develop their respective settlements. A fudge that did not delineate territory.
3. Recognition of independence was totally arbitrary in the 19th Century. Neither the US or the UK in recognising Argentina acknowledged its right to all the territory it claimed at the time.
4 & 6 are simply nonsense.
Point 5 is nonsense. Britain has not created a fancy name or anything, in recognising the self-determination rights of the inhabitants of former overseas territories it is facilitating their right to form a Government of their own choosing and is continuously modernising its relationship. Since the 1960s its policy has been to grant independence on request and to confer the maximum amount of self-government possible. In the case of the Falklands ALL the UK does it provide foreign representation and defence security.
You would do better to stop viewing the situation through the lense of narrow nationalism, prejudice and bigotry.
Timmerman forgot to say the internet commentators who are desperately supporter of collapsing UK .....
Jan 20th, 2012 - 10:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0@29Hermes1967,
Jan 20th, 2012 - 11:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0Welcome back, Alejandro. Still churning out the fabrications, rubbish & lies l see.
No need for further coment,
Justin & J.A.Roberts have successfully countered all that you've spouted.
QED.
Welcome back, Alejandro. Still churning out the fabrications, rubbish & lies l see.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 11:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0No need for further coment,
Justin & J.A.Roberts have successfully countered all that you've spouted.
QED.
You are soo dumb isolde...
All the UK and the Falklands need to do is just sit back and watch a Frustrated argentina running around and not achieving any REAL results!!!
Jan 20th, 2012 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Falklanders will decide there own Futures!!!
Long Live the Falklands.
Down with argentine Colonialism!
What exactly is the matter with Herr Timerman? Although indisputably Jewish, his name is equally indisputably German. Were his parents nazi collaborators? Are concentration and death camps all he really knows about?
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The thing is, Gauleiter Timerman, that British newspapers print articles in order to sell newspapers. Unlike Argentine newspapers that are printed for government purposes. You remember that newspaper that your “government” (snigger) keeps trying to suppress. Very murky...your dealings with the press, Herr Timerman.
@16 & 26 “All the world....” That's you then, isn't it? Let's see you give a step by step explanation of why the Falklands belongs to argie scumbags. I'll help you by telling you where to start. 1690. So come on, let's hear it. By the way, you mentioned “the truth”. Why did you do that? You wouldn't recognise the truth if it got up and smashed you in the face.
@36 It is not courteous to address a lady in such a way. Still, who would expect courtesy from a lying, cheating, cowardly, underhand argie scumbag?
“You are soo dumb isolde...”
Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not nearly as dumb as you Malvinero...
You are soo dumb isolde
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Praise indeed Malvin praise indeed
Haywood made his statements in an interview published in British newspaper ‘The Times’ today
http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/90451/malvinas-governor-considers-ship-bans-an-enormous-error
@30 Not sure, maybe for the same reason that Britain - while condemning Israel - keeps selling them weapons!
Jan 20th, 2012 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/18/britain-selling-military-equipment-israel)
#31 - “Points 1-6 all irrelevant post UN Charter.” Thanks, that was my point #7 but I ran out of space :-) I agree that there is a degree of self-determination but it does not extend to include the changing of history, for in order to lawfully remain British the islands must legitimately have been British in the first place. Hence points 1-5. Self-determination applies to actions of islanders in regards to the legitimate jurisdiction, this dispute is about the latter and not the former.
#33 Justin you were doing so great on my first point! Should have stopped writing after your first sentence and gone to the third point, which answers everything you wrote after. You are wrong about 1771, the treaty clearly delineates and limits both party's properties, whereas they may each have claimed the whole archipelago prior to the treaty, this bilateral action grants specific limited territorial rights to both. As far as recognition of independence, I'm referring to the present time and the argument you made in response to my first point regarding effective date of Argentine independence. The inherent arbitrariness of such a modern-day point of view lies in that for Argentina you place obstacles which the UK doesn't in regards to other former colonial nations' independence (i.e. not until a former colonial power recognizes it/must have military control/etc). Clearly you're stalling for time so you can say Argentine independence wasn't “effective” until after 1833. 4&5 complete nonsense? I AGREE! And yet Britain still claims acquisitive proscription (4) and Andrew Rosindell MP asked Cameron for exactly that reminder (6). As for point 5, you'll have to do better than semantics - British law won't even allow the FIG to speak for itself. That's a colony in my book.
@35 - sure.
In this particular instance of argentine government retardation, there is something for both British and argentine bloggers to celebrate.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0over the past few years, argentine bloggers and net denizens have tried numerous ways and methods to justify their attempts to subjugate thousands of innocents, and also to say how they are somehow “winning”. each and every attempt has failed miserably both due to the retorts from British net denizens, and basic realities playing out in the news.
However, now something has changed.
over the past few months, the argentine government and it's minions have shown such stunning incompetence, idiocy, hypocrisy and self righteousness, that they can be labeled with utter certainty, to be less intelligent and knowledgeable about the issue than the average argentine or British commenter here on mercopress.
for example, in the past it was seen only as a blatant troll, or at least deeply mentally impaired individual that would state that argentina was going to personally liberate Scotland and wales by the example they set.
as of a few weeks ago, the argentine government has officially adopted this position.
similarly the attempt to say that a single opinion article from one of Britain's newspaper's somehow is “crushing” to Britain's cause, is something so batshit inane, even the Malvinense have given up spewing it.... yet now hector “melted frog face” timmerman has stated on record that this is the case
seriously, argentine netizens should be proud of themselves, as they have officially shown themselves to be less hilariously insane and ignorant of the issue than their overlords.
Argentinian press is stupid. Put whatever channel of TV and you´ll see that. To discuss on facts, analysed for the people of the Mercosur countries, is the method to understand how bad is the opinion about Argentinian government. It´s false to think that they are support for neighbour people
Jan 20th, 2012 - 03:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm Argentinean. I think we would not be having this discussion unless oil was not found in the Islands. I think both our governments don't give a s--- about anything else but the oil that has been found there. Don't be fooled by our governments, this can only end in a war that normal people do not want, or do you want one ?. Imagine yourself going to war and giving your life for nothing but economic interests ? This sadly already happened recently. Governments need the public support of their nations in order to declare a war, DO NOT GIVE THEM THAT, DON'T BE FOOLED.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think is time to leave nationalisms on the side, I believe people in the islands have the right to decide where to belong. Unfortunately, this would not solve the oil issue.
Probably the best solution to all this, would be that Falklanders declare their own independence ?
@44 The UK will not benefit from the oil. Only the FIG will so our interest is protecting them; that's all.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 04:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina, on the other hand, wants the oil revenue because they are running out of money fast.
TWIMC
Jan 20th, 2012 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0New title for this article....:
Think: “Malvinas” strategy is working, not even English newspapers support Cameron”
Argentina's economy is projected to grow by 5% in 2012, I hardly think that constitutes running out of money.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0On the other hand....http://www.debtbombshell.com/
The only retardation I see is that of Briton and Islanders desperately attempting to (unsuccessfully) portray themselves to the world as innocent victims of Argentina.
South America clearly sees the illegitimacy of their territorial usurpation that went far beyond the borders of their last internationally recognized legitimate possession on the islands, namely, Egmont, which in 1833 magically became the whole archipelago.
South America clearly sees their continued desire for economic expansion by exploiting natural resources that clearly do not belong to them.
South America clearly sees their inherent hubris and self-righteousness in their refusal to enter negotiations like a civilized nation would, and its bellicose posture in militarizing the region.
And, most importantly, South America has now taken stock of its own vast natural resources and naturally concluded that if British neo-imperialist aggression can be openly employed against Argentina, it can likewise be used against any other Mercosur nation.
Thus, South America has taken clear and decisive action, which contrary to numerous reports includes all vessels presently known to operate under the illegitimate FI flag, or having been known to operate under such flag in the past.
Rest assured, this WILL be enforced.
As for Timerman and Bouloudo, their greatest mistake is to have been “surprised” by PM Cameron's comments about Argentina's actions being “colonialist”. Any student of the Malvinas dispute should know very well that the British regularly employ historical falsehoods and role reversal tactics in order to justify their criminal actions. If anything, Cameron's comments should have been expected and characterized as more of the same British sovereignty nonsense, which is EXACTLY what it is.
Herr Von Timmerman is at it again. Minister of Propaganda or better known as Lord Haw Haw of Argentina.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He was obviously trained by the Nazi war ciminals that found Argentina so welcoming in 1945.
Thus, South America has taken clear and decisive action, which contrary to numerous reports includes all vessels presently known to operate under the illegitimate FI flag, or having been known to operate under such flag in the past.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 07:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Rest assured, this WILL be enforced
Are you SURE?
En este contexto, la Cancillería uruguaya en su afán de hacerse agradable a los ojos argentinos, y a pesar del destrato otorgado por aquel gobierno a nuestro país, anuncia, en tono solemne y rimbombante, que Uruguay no dejará ingresar a sus puertos a los buques con bandera de Malvinas.
Uruguay se compra un conflicto gratuito con Gran Bretaña y España (afectados por los eventuales efectos de la medida anunciada) para luego “recular en chancletas” aceptando lo que era obvio, es decir que los buques comerciales con destino a Malvinas seguirán ingresando sin problemas a nuestros puertos.
http://www.uypress.net/uc_23996_1.html
Malvinero
Jan 20th, 2012 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvino where is my albino
Your intelligence is second to none,
With you thinking hat on,
And advice up your rass
What comes from your mouth is grass,
How will these bloggs, ever cope again when you all go home,
No more Argies, no more ahhhhhhgs, and thinks thinking goes back to a lonely
Thinking statue, all alone on ones plinth, surrounded my malvinos,
Your thinking rages are becoming legendary,
All in your head of course, but legendary all the same .
.
#41 More logical fallacies I see.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 07:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The treaty of 1771 does not delineate territory.
http://www.falklands.info/history/1771agree.html
And no I don't place obstacles, you simply conveniently ignore that A) Argentina didn't subscribe to the Conference of Lima and didn't accept Utis Possidetis Juris B) UPJ would confer a claim upon Uruguay.
As far as Argentine independence goes, the date is irrelevant. Argentina gained independence through war. A well established principle in International Law in such a case, where the parent state did not consent limits territory to that obtained by conquest. Argentina may entertain pretensions to an inheritance from Spain but thats all they are. No state recognised Argentine rights to territory it claimed but did not possess.
Oh and the Argentine Government that claimed the Falklands, well its successor declared all of its declarations null and void. Just another oen of those inconvenient facts you simply ignore.
But again, moot anyway, seeing as in 1850 Argentina signed a treaty settling its differences with the UK.
http://www.falklands.inf
Another one of those inconvenient truths you simply ignore. Which in reality puts your rant about “neo-colonialism” into perspective. The only neo-colonialist ambitions in the South Atlantic are Argentine. The sympathetic platitudes mouthed by your neighbours don't become concrete acti0n.
And for all the Argentine pontifications about its strong man policy becoming effective, well supposedly the last time that happened the Falklands would become Argentine by 2000.
Which merely illustrates Argentine claims are impotent nonsensical rhetoric.
Seems quite specific to me - the treaty specifically defines and identifies British property to be restored:
Jan 20th, 2012 - 09:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“his Catholick Majesty shall give orders, in consequence, to one of his Officers to deliver up to the Officer authorised by his Britannick Majesty, the port and fort of Port Egmont”
The document lists no other British possessions and constitutes the last, clearly defined, uncontested and internationally recognised British territorial possession on the islands, later abandoned.
How, upon returning in 1833, such a limited territorial possession inexplicably grows to encompass the entire archipelago, is beyond rational explanation. That is, of course, with the exception of illegitimate usurpation, for even if at the time Britain did not recognize the sovereignty of the United Provinces, it would still be bound to recognize the reservation of sovereignty made by the Spanish plaque.
The obvious conclusion, and simplest one is of course that a British plaque holds a reservation of sovereignty whereas a Spanish one does not - which, given the hubris and self-righteousness inherent to those who would today style themselves victims of 'Argentine aggression', is to be expected and dismissed as the hogwash it clearly is.
And yet again I fail to see where the islands are mentioned in the 1850 text. Justin of course would have the world believe Rosas signed this text as a random act of kindness out of the goodness of his heart, altogether ignoring the British military incursions nearby. Devoid of historical context, ignorant of two previous British attempts to invade Buenos Aires, Justin presents this as evidence of settlement of the Malvinas dispute when in fact its singular purpose was to secure a British promise that it would not attack Buenos Aires once again.
Not to mention the fact that Rosas was an illegal dictator, and as with all illegal dictators, their acts are devoid of any force of law - the very same reason why the 1982 war was inherently illegal.
Surely if Argentina is claiming inheritance from Spain,
Jan 20th, 2012 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But the islands were in fact, had by a Frenchman, [is that right]
Then surly under the same rules if inheritance,
Great Britain could claim victor’s right to all possessions and or spoils, of the defeated enemy,
This would include all French and Spanish colonies, would it not,
[Probably wrong, but just a thought ]
.
@50
Jan 20th, 2012 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Have you not fought this battle by the hills
on th'Emerald Isle, not very long before,
and with great bloodshed too by Scottish locks
with bloody sword in far off days of lore?
Now crushed to dust under the weight of its own hubris
what fate befell your great empire but the same as all,
witness a whisper and a shadow of its former self -
a just dessert for bloody conquest fueled by undue gall.
You press your claws unto these stolen islands justly ours,
and then pretend with but self-righteousness as cause
saying to friend and foe alike “Argie Colonialists!”
to exploit riches under far-off seas not yours.
“Remind them, Mr. Cameron, they lost the war!” cries Rosindell
for 'might makes right' forever is the mark of brutes;
heed not the world's unending calls for peaceful dialogue,
let unabashed greed again now bear its fuits.
Yet for my part in this game I'll only play my hand,
the knowledge of the truth triumphant, ever durable,
and with resolve unwaivering to all the world announce it thusly:
RECUPERATION OF MALVINAS ISLANDS IS INEVITABLE.
@54
Jan 20th, 2012 - 10:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It will NEVER happen but keep on Dreaming of those Fantasy Islands called malvanus as that will be as close as you will ever come to having them!!!
Long Live the Falklands.
Down with argentine Colonialism.
Many dreams come true - especially when it comes to British territories mired in illegitimacy. Just you wait.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 10:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And while you're waiting, here's a haiku:
Mercosur 's with us.
Britain's broke.
Seems you guys are fucked!
@38,39 & 40,
Jan 20th, 2012 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks for your support, boys.
Malvinero1 doesn't faze me much.
l don't think that he/she/it is very intelligent.
Comes accross as the village idiot.
@54 Hermes1967,
lf it is inevitable as you say, then why are you bothering with your charade?
Why don't you just sit back & wait for it to happen?
You know, deep down inside that Argentina will NEVER get their grubby little mits on the Falklands.
Are you hoping that the Brazilians will do your fighting for you, if you suck up to them?
More likely they will just take over your country. lts a lot bigger prize than us.
Or perhaps you are hoping that the Chinese navy will come steaming over the horizon?
Well they might, but probably to take over their latest soy farm(whats left of Argentina when the Brazilians have taken their cut).
You're a prolific writer, Hermes, but its all fiction.
Why don't you channel all that energy into lifting your country up?
lt badly needs it♥.
Why am I here? To represent and answer british and islander propaganda. The only thing I know deep down inside is that I'll live to see the union jack being lowered from government house for the last time. No grubby little mits here, though we do make some of the best leather gloves in the world. Are you hoping the french will do your fighting AND your sailing for you? Brazil's been kind enough to let our pilots train on their aircraft carriers. Most likely they'll keep in mind their vast amounts of oil in the atlantic and deal with you islanders as rudely as you continually deal with us.
Jan 20th, 2012 - 10:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, I am a prolific writer - and perhaps I will channel that energy into lifting up Argentina. Then again, be careful what you wish for - God help you if I ever come to power.
54
Jan 20th, 2012 - 10:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You have no claim but a dream made in hell
Ruin the peace and bring destruction
Then turn to the world, you scream and yell
That you are the victim and cannot they tell
That poor Argentina the wannabe empire builder
Who is prevented in her goal by the bad British
The usurpers to argentine expansion built on lies
For if we can convince you then the world will fall like skittles in the night
For if the British will not give, then Argentina will take
It is ours all ours for our greed knows no bounds
For we will dispose of the islanders without a sound
For we will beg the world that we are the victims
And play on their sympathy
For they will never see the evil that Argentina has
For we will lie and deceit our way to victory
And be dammed the good of democracy and decency
As long as Argentina gets rich and well
The rest of the world can go to hell .,
Not brill, but it will do
For those who read it, will know it is true,
.Hermes
once again you try to defend lies with lies,
argentina is wrong and you know it,
this will end the only way it can end,
and will be replace by a new type of plastic.
Yes, I am a prolific writer - and perhaps I will channel that energy into lifting up Argentina. Then again, be careful what you wish for - God help you if I ever come to power
Jan 20th, 2012 - 11:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Medication time Napoleon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9MjWBInGZ0
@60 Medication? Interesting dormitory scene - thank you but I've already had mine:
Jan 20th, 2012 - 11:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_1yn-2PkvA
Its effects are long lasting and can even be carried back to one's motherland!
@59
Our proper roles reversed, the dark made light
looming destruction warned by whom destruction's helped
crying 'socourr us from the condor circling night'
when they themselves its sharpest fangs saw fiercely felled.
They say we'd wish have empire; they project!
'Tis only their own greed they see in all.
Like thieves who say they're victims, yet their theft's
like candy from a baby: only keep the status quo.
So if they won't restore their thefts, then let them fear,
for all they truly offer is disdain,
for foul disposing, taking, dialogue would veer,
instead their greed shall turn back to bite them once again.
And so ignoring facts, distorting roles,
the thief now claims being victim to our “crime”
What evil can those evil see but in themselves
when they just act as cruelly as in their prime?
For history's quite clear, and Cameron knows
'tis Britain who has gotten rich and well
redrawing maps with bloodied sword and horse
telling the world to clearly go to hell.
Now Mercosur has spoken: THIS WON'T DO
and barred their wicked fleet from entering port
no more shall trade an exploitative crew,
their fantasies and fallacies grow cold.
And so it goes and so it always has
when people wrongfully, shamefully choose to steal
presenting sword instead, yet nations free demand
FOR ARGENTINA'S SOVEREIGNTY IS REAL.
Hermes, Dahling, that film is as stupid as you are.
Jan 21st, 2012 - 06:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0And God help you lot IF,I ever came to power. l will not go into the gory details.
Talk is cheap.
Action speaks louder than words.
So, my dear, just what does your silly country intend to do about it?
l have stated this before, but for the great unwashed l will say again.
You only have three options that l can see:-
1) Make Argentina so attractive that we would WANT to join you.
(you have an uphill battle there, can't really see it happening)
2) Take the case to the ICJ.
(your case is so weak, & you know it, so don't think you will do that)
3) War.
(this is the option that l believe you will take in the future).
Your country's decision, Hermes.
Talking, threatening & compaining will get you no-where.
Well?
@62 Isolde
Jan 21st, 2012 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0I hope you aren't right about war.
I hope there is a Trafalger nearby, or even HMS Astute - The ARA's ships are'nt terribly good ASW platforms. I'd like to see them laughing about HMS Astute going aground while it's pumping spearfish torpedoes into their fleet and tomahawk missiles into bases on the mainland.
I bet their admiralty knows it, and I hope they remember what we did to Argentinian Naval vessels when we saw them last time. I think Nelsons phrase “Engage the enemy more closely” sums it up.
All I can say is that if it comes to war, if this Timmerman fellow is the best they have to offer in terms of leadership, then things may not go as well as Argentina would like.
The press over here DOES NOT support Argentina. The vast majority of it is hostile to those people.
If you want to cheer yourself up, or the others down there, if you read the comments attached to any on line article, particularly any that suggest neogotiation with the enemy, you'll see that the overwhelming majority of us Up North support you, and hold Argentina's actions in utter contempt.
Blood is thicker than 1000s of miles of Ocean water.
We won't let them win.
This is not a matter of you letting or not letting something happen. THIS IS AN ISSUE OF WHAT'S RIGHT AND WHAT'S WRONG, AND CONTINUING TO DO THE WRONG THING WILL HAVE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOU BOTH. And, I suspect, for us too, and for Mercosur, but what's happening now is happening because the fact is that you will get the shit end of the stick in the long run.
Jan 21st, 2012 - 06:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Isolde makes three very good points above and I agree with him, yet not in his interpretation of them.
My money is on point #1 but in a timeframe of about 50 to 75 years, and not necessarily from Argentina improving but rather within a framework of Europe, and the whole of Britain, going into great decline. By which I'm referring to widespread economic depression, an unsustainable domestic budget crisis, increasing civil unrest, etc. Then you add the effects of global climate change, the looming shortages in British food production, declination from peak oil in the latter part of the 21st century sparking an energy crisis from which the UK will not be spared. That alone would make Argentina a much more viable long-term solution for prosperity in the FI. I also suspect, after negotiations begin, that the deal will be sweetened by guarantees of continued self-government and the protection of islanders' language, customs, and way of life in general. Yes, all things being equal, I agree this is far-fetched....but all things are not equal.
As far as option 2, were this to come to ICJ I have no doubt that Argentina has a much stronger case, which would be a slam-dunk in our favor. Britons and islanders think self-determination will act as an impenetrable wall to protect them there; they often make the mistake of thinking such a case would be about the islands' political future while in reality it would only concern the islands' political PAST.
Option 3, war, is a non-starter without argentine air superiority. Defense policy & funds for us is no longer a priority, I can't see this as viable at all.
My money is on point #1:
Jan 21st, 2012 - 07:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Then you shouldn't bet, Ever. If what you stated was to happen and the UK went totally tits-up. The islanders would just go for independence.
There would be nothing Argentina could do about this. Nothing.
“were this to come to ICJ I have no doubt that Argentina has a much stronger case, ”
Again, you shouldn't bet. How much actual research have you done on the history of the islands? Argentina has a very weak case when it comes down to what they can actually prove and the rubbish they talk about in the media. It's light years apart.
“”Britons and islanders think self-determination will act as an impenetrable wall to protect them there;“
It would, completely. For the ICJ to hand the islanders over to Argentina they would be forcibly handing a population of civilians into subjugation. This would be unprecedented. It's simply never going to happen.
”they often make the mistake of thinking such a case would be about the islands' political future while in reality it would only concern the islands' political PAST.”
You are the one making the mistake here. The UN human right laws are the backbone of the UN, it's highest laws. Self Determination is one of those human rights whether or not you want to believe it, they are.
The past would of course be discussed, and Argentina barely has a case at that if you actually look into the history of the islands.
There is no way in this real world that what may or may not have happened 200 years ago will ever(read: ever) overrule the human rights of people living in this day and age. It would just never happen.
And i it would be truly comical to see Argentina's case over the other islands it claims.
@Hermes1967
Jan 21st, 2012 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A lot of what you are saying is guesswork about the future. You would need 50-75 years of apologising and being generally nice to the Falklanders to get them to even think about joining Argentina.
It would take that long for them to forget the invasion and the subsequent years of vile harrassment and infantile bully boy tactics.
@Hermes1967
Jan 21st, 2012 - 09:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0to be honest with you,
it will get Argentina nowhere,
We thinks you will agree that sooner or later, the inevitable will happen,[what ever that happening happens to be,]
Argentina will try, every trick in the book [short of war] to get them, so moving down a bit, and look forward,
In or by 2015 at the earliest or by 2016 max, the royal navy will have its carrier,
It will have all [6] type 45s,
Four of the astute, [the type 26 will not even be made yet]
So this honestly gives Argentina about 3-4 at most to either gat a [check][or mate]
I don’t play chess so interpret that, ,
The point is, time is on our side [peacefully]
And not argentines,
Argentina must obtain concessions or forget it, once the British military gets back into full swing, then the sovereignty issue will disappear like a ghost,
Argentina must pull out all the stops, even bribing perhaps the Americans to send the 6th fleet, even just to sit between you,
But one things for certain,
If by 2015 the issue is not in argentines favour, then it never will be,
Right or wrong, Argentina is in fact running out of time, despite all the rhetoric, we all know, great Britain will never start the conflict, the move is CFKs
Am I right or am I wrong, time will tell,
But without conflict,, ,,she really is running out of time .
isolde:Malvinero1 doesn't faze me much.
Jan 22nd, 2012 - 12:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0l don't think that he/she/it is very intelligent.
Comes accross as the village idiot.
AHAHAHHAHAH!
But I manage to make you write the effort..
Other thant that you and robert pinocchio are the dumbest of the lot!
Now I can sleep in peace.I did manage to bug a brit subject!
Mission Accomplished!!
lf it makes you feel better, Malvinero1.
Jan 22nd, 2012 - 09:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0You just make yourself a good strong cup of coffee & gloat over the tremendous victory that you've just had.
Does it give you a warm fuzzy feeling?
Then you'd better go & lie down for a bit.
When faced with the truth they either ignore it,
Jan 22nd, 2012 - 03:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Or throw back insults,
A nation that will not accept the truth,
Is a nation not worth talking to.
.
BTW you do realise that Hermes1967 is one Alejandro Argerich, graduate of the School of Americas and currently on vacation in Buenos Aires.
Jan 22nd, 2012 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Usuahia, malvina´s capital: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Gobernaci%C3%B3n_Provincia_de_Tierra_del_Fuego_Ant%C3%A1rtida_e_Isla_del_Atl%C3%A1ntico_Sur.jpg
Jan 22nd, 2012 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It seems they never stop trying to con people,
Jan 22nd, 2012 - 10:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@71 JustinKuntz,
Jan 23rd, 2012 - 06:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, l worked out that they were one & the same also.
l have even called him Alejandro & he didn't refute it.
He is also “Malvinas Argentinas”(what a stupid name!).
He has a distinctive style, but why bother to use 3 names?
Hermes1967,
Jan 23rd, 2012 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0'And yet again I fail to see where the islands are mentioned in the 1850 text. '
The agreement describe a 'perfect friendship” between Argentina and Britain. There is clearly something about 'perfect' you don't understand. It cannot be in spite of a territorial dispute.
The agreement describe a 'perfect friendship” between Argentina and Britain. There is clearly something about 'perfect' you don't understand. It cannot be in spite of a territorial dispute.
Jan 26th, 2012 - 03:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0Also signed by corrupt uk in 1825...Treaty of commerce and Frienship.....
Just do you know how to swim,brits??/ Well learn it,because uk is sinking....
NoOO BDY give a damn about uk......
Ask the French during Malvinas war......They were extremely happy any time the Argentines sunk a brits ship.....Stupid,corrupt country..
@ Malvinero1,
Jan 26th, 2012 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor Malvin, so full of hatred for all things, British.
Whats the matter, Malvin, have you got “small man syndrome”?
Are you so small that all the girls laugh at you?
Nevermind, have a mug of coffee, today is another day.
lf the UK is going to sink as you say, then we may as well all move to Argentina. Well you said it was a paradise, no?
We can have, then plenty of perfect friendships, eh Malvin & you will have plenty of new people to hate! btw- you can be helped, you know.♥
@ Malvinero1,
Jan 26th, 2012 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor Malvin, so full of hatred for all things, British.
Whats the matter, Malvin, have you got “small man syndrome”?
Are you so small that all the girls laugh at you?
Nooo isolde,I like truth and justice....And frankly I am more upset to the brits writting here than uk itself......
Tell me isolde: Are you a female, rigth?
No I wonder because sometime I write fast and beign in the technical field I do not have the patiente to write in a more “diplomatic” way.
However I must admit that you seem a nice girl....May be sometime in the future we can have a more productive relationship..
Regards
29 Hermes1967 (#)
Jan 26th, 2012 - 03:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Interesting that you bring up the concept of uninterrupted ownership. This is called prescription under English law. It effectively says that, if you have had uninterrupted ownership for a period of 25 years then, by right of prescription, you are deemed to have always owned the land in question (from time immemorial or since 1189). This concept has been adopted by UN when looking at the right to self determination and they have put the time frame as being 9 generations. The Islanders can trace back 9 generations living there and, as such, are protected by this UN treaty. By the way, you are a signatory to this treaty. Ultimately this is about the rights of the Islanders who live there. This is a humanitarian issue and I can't believe that you are demanding either (i) that all the islanders leave and move to another country (thus making them refugees and also against the Treaty you've signed up to) or (ii) that Argentina is given control over the Islands and the Islanders (against the Islanders wishes and also against the anti-colonialism treaty that your government has signed up to)? Can you clarify which of these it is and which treaty you will be unilaterally breaking?
@79 Welsh Wizard,
Jan 26th, 2012 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't expect a coherent or reasonable answer, WW.
They have no rights & they know it.♥
@79 Welsh Wizard
Jan 26th, 2012 - 10:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well said.
They don't get that the falklanders have the right to freedom of self determination, just the same as they do, it gets in the way of their dreams of conquest.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!