MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
UK Defence Select Committee plans to visit the Falklands next month
British lawmakers will visit the Falkland Islands next month in a move that is likely to heighten tensions between Britain and Argentina over the Islands, The Times reported on Wednesday. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesI was a month out. I heard they were going down in March....never mind - I can't be right all the time.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 06:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Of course they will NOT be mentioning defence costs. Absolutely not! Would I lie?
Not surprised they are keen to visit. Given the fact that Argentina was throwing it's weight around 30 years ago and are still talking the talk now, the Defence Select Committee really have no choice but to visit!
Feb 15th, 2012 - 08:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0If they did invade (as they are mad enough to), the people of the Falkland Islands would want a end put to the matter as quickly as possible, which means Defence!
Another nail in the coffin of ....... something or other :-)
Feb 15th, 2012 - 08:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0As it is Argentine government policy to be offended by anything that happens on the islands I can't see why anyone else would care one way or the other what they think about it.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 09:37 am - Link - Report abuse 01
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Of course they will NOT be mentioning defence costs. Absolutely not! Would I lie?
Are you Argentinian?
I don't even know why defense costs are mentioned here, its not really relevant. By all accounts its usually between 150-200m which really is pocket change to the UK defense budget of 60BN.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Visit will just Prove what excellant value the UK Tax payer is getting for there money in terms of Defense of the Falklands!!!!!!!!
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Long Live the Falklands.
Cost has nothing to do with it!
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0None of their business what we do on OUR lslands.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Let's face facts, given the current status of the authoritarian nationalistic socialist dynastic regime that is ruling Argentina at this minute, you'd definitely be wanting some kind of spaceborne laser defence to keep those warmongering little sh!ts off the beaches.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0The fact is that the defence of the islands will have to be stepped up and any intelligent politician knows that, especially when the oil is being extracted and exported as the Rigs and support vessels will be at risk and any incident involving them could be ecologically and politically catastrophic.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 01:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I would not be surprised to see the deployment of a squadron of F35 vstols on the Islands and another type 45 and probably a squadron of Apaches armed with Air to Sea missiles.
You will also see more troops down there too through a new training programme.
I'm only guessing of course but it would be silly of Britain to be complacent and not see the potential for an escalation of this issue.
Sean Penn is in Uruguay today and still banging on about the Falklands. The islanders really should invite him over.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Penn & (St)ink
Feb 15th, 2012 - 02:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/02/15/penn-shoots-himself-in-the-foot/
@11
Feb 15th, 2012 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All the Falklands need is
4 x Typhoon Jets
1 x Armed Patrol Boat
600 x Infantry
That is MORE than enougth to Discourage any assault on the Falklands from Want to be an Empire building argentina!!!!!!!!!!
Long Live the Falklands.
Down with argentine Colonialism.
@14 What the Falklands needs to do is to use their oil windfalls to build serious infrastructure and diversify their economy into other types of agro-business and maybe even financial services. They need a proper port, A proper Airport for 787 Dreamliner destinations to Antarctica and South Africa. They need proper storage and processing facilities for fish to send to the Far-east. They need real educational facilities to bring in the minds. Then they can carry on being clean living and become a regional hub of the South Americas.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 02:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If they use their money wisely, it happened with Singapore, and it happened with HK.... there is no reason why the Falklands cannot be next.
and the saga continues ... :-)
Feb 15th, 2012 - 02:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 14 Papamoa
Feb 15th, 2012 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Prior to the escalation of the sovereignty issue the cost to the british taxpayer of defending the Islands was £167 million per annum. Since the deployment of the type 45 and the submarine plus the new revolving troop training programme, plus the additional costs through dimplomacy, plus the proposed increase in flights between the uk and the islands -that cost has risen to £227 million per annum.
Now do you get the idea?
The islands are presently under defended in relation to the potential escalation when that oil comes out of the ground and increasing the cost of defence of the Islands is a valuable propaganda tool for Argentina because Argentina knows that the british press will be scrutinising ever penny spent so anything Argentina can do to increase those costs is an extra little victory.
Irrespective of the rhetoric coming out of britain, britain's government knows that that this issue will be decided by two overwhelming responses:
The reaction of all the nations of South America to the sight of that oil being exported north, and the support they receive globally. Kirchner is gambling heavily on this. And the reaction of the british press, which at present is lukewarm but could easily turn into a vicious anti-Falklands campaign driven by public outrage at the sight of a handful of islanders and oil executives making vast fortunes.
I would not like to be in the shoes of David Cameron right now because as an intelligent politician he must be able to see the same scenario as myself developing and ending in at best an extremely embarassing and costly hiatus.
““If the Falkland Islands were by any chance to be retaken by Argentina, we would take it back,””
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I just wonder if he will be there the day that Argentina sends a task force, how easy is to say and how difficult is to accomplish I guess.
17. The numbers are you using are deliberately misleading. They assume that the the ship/men would be de-commissioned and not deployed somewhere else. I believe The UK does their cold-weather training in the Falklands so they would be doing it somewhere else if not there so the costs would be about the same. It is not going to be eliminated.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 015 GreekYoghurt
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There's a reason: The Falkland Islands belong to Argentina. The specificity of the Malvinas question is that the United Kingdom occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the original population and did not allow their return, thus violating the territorial integrity of Argentina. Read the resolutions committee of the United Nations decolonization which is the organization that studies the different cases of colonialism. Read the resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37/9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39/6) 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute. No Self-Determination.
Furthermore, the sovereignty claim is supported by the UN, OAS, CELAC, ALBA, MERCOSUR and other organizations worldwide. British Islanders are not accepted in Latin America for being a colonial enclave in England.
As you will see Argentina and worldwide commitment to peace and dialogue to resolve conflicts of sovereignty. UK commitment to terrorism and disarmament. Evidenced by the humanitarian bombing civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and wants to do with Iran. Argentina wants to intimidate the militarization of the islands with nuclear bombs just because of claim peacefully, through international forums, what is his for legal, historical, geographical and humanitarian.
Argentina's constitution clearly puts it: “La Nacion Argentina ratifies its legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and island spaces, being an integral part of the country. The recovery of these territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life for its inhabitants and according to the principles of international law are a permanent and unwavering goal of the Argentine people. ”
CONSTITUTION ARGENTINA, First Transitional Provision
Raul 20, In 1690, Captain John Strong first landed on the islands where there were no indeginous people. He then nameed the after Anthony Cary, 5th Viscount of Falkland. In 1764, French navigator and military commander Louis Antoine de Bougainville founded the first settlement on Berkeley Sound, in present-day Port Louis, East Falkland. In 1765, British captain John Byron explored and claimed Saunders Island on West Falkland, where he named the harbour Port Egmont and a settlement was constructed in 1766.Spain acquired the French colony in 1767 and placed it under a governor subordinate to the Buenos Aires colonial administration. In 1770, Spain attacked Port Egmont and expelled the British presence, bringing the two countries to the brink of war. War was avoided by a peace treaty and the British return to Port Egmont. In 1820, storm damage forced the privateer Heroína to take shelter in the islands. Her captain David Jewett raised the flag of the United Provinces of the River Plate and read a proclamation claiming the islands. This became public knowledge in Buenos Aires nearly a year later following the publication of the proclamation in the Salem Gazette. After several abortive attempts, Luis Vernet established a settlement in 1828 after seeking authorisation from both British and Argentine authorities.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A dispute over fishing and hunting rights resulted in a raid by the US warship USS Lexington in 1831. The log of the Lexington reports only the destruction of arms and a powder store, though in his claim against the US Government for compensation (rejected by the US Government of President Cleveland in 1885) Vernet stated that the settlement was destroyed. The Islands were declared free from all government, the seven senior members of the settlement were arrested for piracy and taken to Montevideo, where they were released without charge on the orders of Commodore Rogers.
In November 1832, Argentina sent Commander Mestivier as an interim commander to found a
@17 You're not including or discounting quite a lot of factors there. Well done.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@20 Raul: “There's a reason: The Falkland Islands belong to Argentina.”
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Then your Government needs to prove it, and it needs to do this somewhere that can make binding decisions on such matters (ie, the ICJ).
Otherwise, the status quo will prevail and no amount of bleating will change it.
Short of invading again (not a wise move), there is absolutely nothing that Argentina can do that will change the UK's stance on this matter (ie, no dialogue on sovereignty wthout the consent of the Islanders).
So, the ICJ is Argentina's ONLY option if they want to try to change the administration in the Islands, and even then the odds are that Argentina will lose, because the wishes of a 200-year old community trump everything, especially as they didn't oust any indigenous inhabitants.
In other words, it is highly likely that nothing is EVER going to change, apart from full independence for the Falkland Islands at some point. Even then, the Islands are likely to maintain a defence agreement with UK, so there will be no change in the UK military presence. So, how will Argentina deal with that, I wonder, when they can no longer use the “colonialism” card, which is starting to look a bit frayed around the edges now it's been used so often.
I would have thought that sitting on a potential $180 billion ,or $60 million per capita could take care of a few financial worries as well as Argie worries.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 03:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think 14 and 15 are spot on .17's figures are a bit suspect on the high side.
The MPs visiting are the people breathing fire down Cameron's neck for
being too soft on the Argies and cutting defence too much. They don't take prisoners.
The relationship between the UK and the Falklands changed irrevocably in 1982.Before then nobody had heard of them ;in fact most people ( my wife included ) thought they were off the top end of Scotland.
The devious ,lazy British politicos who's philosophy was 'anything for a quiet life' were trying to get rid of them as a bit of a nuisance( this included Mrs Thatcher). They had been busy giving independence to various territories around the world and thought they could do a deal with what they thought was a normal Argentina.
The only problem was that Argentina was then and is now not a normal country.It is a mixed up Latin neo fascist pseudo democracy and more and more people are realising this.
17; you have got it totally wrong regarding the British attitude to the Falklands and Argentina.They are 'taking the piss' out of Argentina and are getting more protective towards the Falklanders.
Where Argentina is getting it wrong is in thinking that the
Falklands has an exclusively Latin American destiny. The Anglosphere is
many times larger and more powerful than any combination of American states and spread out all over the world. The Falklands do not need Argentina ; especially if there is an oil bonanza.
Cameron is thought by many in the UK as being weak ; especially with the defence cuts while we are still in Afghanistan and maybe soon to get involved in Iran.He has been put on notice that if anything happens to the Falklands his 'head is on the block'.
The Plastic Lady could have had her cut of the oil money if she had not torn up the agreements . Not now !
@23 If the Argies go to the ICJ the only outcome that relies on objective facts would be, “No, Nazi-Germany you cannot annex the Sudetenland, regardless of what it says in your illegal constitution”. If they don't have this ruling, then I think a lot of countries will have good reason to get the UN renamed to 'League of Nations 2'.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 020
Feb 15th, 2012 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Falkland Islands are British. Any fool can see that.
Argentina may dispute that but so what, who cares.
Argentina knows that the british press will be scrutinising ever penny spent so anything Argentina can do to increase those costs is an extra little victory.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cost! dont talk bollox all we have to do is get the Daily Mail to say a sub is on the way and the argies shit their pants
“we need a bit of political bravery and admit we can no longer fund the islands in the south Atlantic.”
Feb 15th, 2012 - 06:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11999601
@17 £227 million per annum you say. Well I never. Less than the UK gives the EU every five days. Now watch the skies, girlie. We can blot your cesspit out within half-an-hour.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 06:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@20 You should pay attention to Bombardier. Oh, and no UNGA resolution is binding so you know where you can stuff them. Your reliance on these pronouncements is much on the level of saying “My mummy says so.”
Wake up Argentinia. Fernandez is just using the Falklands to put a smokescreen on other matters on the home front like out of control inflation, increased rates of violent crime and a dwindling reserve of dollars to pay for imports. Just like the Junta Fernandez is trying to dupe the Argentinian people.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@28 they'll be able to fund themselves soon, with all their squid and oil. Does that upset you? Makes you want to do some illegal annexing??
Feb 15th, 2012 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@28 Marcos Alejandro
Feb 15th, 2012 - 06:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Peter Preston ,aka Percy Peanut( courtesy Private Eye)who is probably the most prominent and longstanding British Malvinista .
His finest hour was when as editor of the Grauniad he committed the mortal sin in journalism of revealing sources and getting various decent journalists in the shit.
His name is mud in the profession. Not a trustworthy individual or a person to be taken seriously. Part of the same team as Chavez,Castro
AhMADinejad and Sean Penn.
@32 You missed one, BBC British Broadcasting Corporation
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 28 marcos
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes I've seen that interview before but it does confirm what I've been saying about the british media and their scepticism and willingness to question the rationale behind the government's determination to maintain the status quo. Peter Preston was after all the editor of the very influential Guardian newspaper.
Here's the follow up interview:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12001527
34 dreyfoss
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you , very interesting.
@33 & 34
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The BBC is a well known hotbed of looney lefties. If you want a real feel for British public opinion try the Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph websites.The Guardian is one of the smallest circulation British newspapers normally read by smelly, bearded,muesli eating, sandal wearing eccentrics.
@36 So you read only what you want to hear.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@37
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think the same thing applies to Malvinistas x 100. There is a greater amount of truth in the Falklands version of its history than that put about by the Argentine government.
In a way it is quite sad that what could be a rich ,prosperous, well respected country (as it was in 1900) always seems to go down the dead end of peronist self delusion with bad consequences for the people.
@ 37 marcos
Feb 15th, 2012 - 07:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As the Daily Mail has been mentioned here is what they have just published in their on-line edition. It's a huge article with lots of pics but it focuses on the American actor Sean Penn and his comments, which surprises me somewhat. Why would anybody want to listen to an idiot like Sean Penn and why publish anything he says?
I also found HMS Plymouth. This ship served in the 1982 conflict and after returning to britain was retired and was taken into the care of a preservation society who opened the ship to the public as a museum and the ship is especially interesting as I believe the document confirming the surrender of Argentine forces on South georgia Island was signed in the officers dining room.
The ship has been abandoned now and is rotting away in some old dockland near Liverpool which is amazing as there is a maritime museum across the river from the where the ship is located presently and I can't understand why the ship has not been moved into the museum in readiness for the 30th anniversary of the 1982 conflict.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2100858/Sean-Penn-attacks-Britain-second-time-days-Falklands.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2100858/Sean-Penn-attacks-Britain-second-time-days-Falklands.html
They come to see what is like to be in a land stolen 180 years ago by thieves whose blood is still today there.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@39
Feb 15th, 2012 - 08:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I agree with you totally in paragraph one but the important thing is to look at the 4290 (maybe more now) comments left by readers; maybe 90% pro Falklands or anti Argentine.
The tabloids in Britain are masters of marshalling peoples opinions and this is a classic example of getting people onside by making Sean Penn look like an idiot and reacting to his idiocy.
Whoever is running the Argentine information ( or propaganda) machine would get one mark out of a hundred for their efforts so far.
Ever since the Vietnam war the attitude of most older English speakers is to poke fun a politicians and people with inflated egos. The Argentine politicians fit both categories.
The Falklands/Malvinas issue is a godsend not only because it brings back memories of Britain's most recent finest hour with a tinpot dictatorship against Mrs Thatcher and her handbag.
The British have got many divisions and problems at the moment but this issue and Europe unifys most people. That is why Cameron's popularity ratings are rising rapidly. Throw in a Royal Prince (Princess Dianas son)and you Argies have no hope in this country or most Anglo dominated press worldwide which take their cue from the British press.
I agree with you on paragraph 2 also but the problem is Britain is short of money and could preserve any number of ships eg; this country has built well over 100 aircraft carriers in its history but not one is preserved.
One question to you ! There were 2 winners at the end of the 1982 war.
One is the Falklanders and the British, the other is the Argentine people who got rid of the junta and got a type of democracy (even if flawed).
When is Argentina going to thank Britain for rescuing them from dictatorship?
@ 41
Feb 15th, 2012 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0because I am very familiar with modern politics and the media and believe me - they are all a bunch of f******* scumbags always looking to their own ego and a cheap opportunity.
As unfortunately - you are all about to see for yourselves.
You argie bloggers can cry as much as you wish, but whatever happens on the islands are nothing to do with you, also it is nothing to do with Argentina who goes there, who flies there, or where they go, mind your own business, if we had a government with a backbone you losers would be gone by now,
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But the brits are always so polite,
Facts are facts, its nothing to do with you, so soddy of .
.
I do not think it is necessary to do anything at the moment. The Argentines are destroying their credibility daily. Nothing has changed and nothing will change.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I see the support is still there !
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The people of Mexico want Sean Penn's estate, so they should have it. Because stealing stuff from the rightful owners is the only way to combat colonialism.”
Wall Street Journal
The English economy sees ever more recession,unemployment UP, Debt UP,
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Crime gone crazy over 500 arrests in London in three days and thats only for drugs.And Walter Mittys and Mittinas tell us Argentina lacks credibility
Haha O gara you are some comedian! I genuinely laughed at your post.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Even when the UK is in recession its economy is still immeasurably better than Argentina's in fact Argentina could do with some English recession since its economy is be about 500 times healthier than Argentina's.
47. Since Argentina has become a hub for cocaine controlled by CFK minions there are not too many drug arrests. Maybe a couple now and then to show the Int'l community they are on top of it but it's just show.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have NEVER heard of a commando assault on someone's house in London suburbs but how many were there in BA last month 10-15? More? How many sucuestro express? 100?
Don't be a fool and try to say BA is safer than London there is no comparison.
Oh I agree.
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mexico is a lawless society in the same way, where the criminals have the run and the police selectively police.
I do like how CFK's increased her wealth by over 500% since her and her husband took power, I'd like to say I'm surprised but given her track record of lies, its hardly surprising.
28 Dreyfoss
Feb 15th, 2012 - 11:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't worry about any concerns individuals from the UK may have about not being able to afford the defence of the Falklands. Firstly, the UK can afford it and, secondly, as soon as the Falkland Islands Government can afford it (by about 2016/ 2017) they will repay the UK for the defence of their islands.
So don't worry, just relax and find something constructive to do.
Penn & Stink :-)
Feb 16th, 2012 - 01:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/penn-stink/
45 Lord Ton
Feb 16th, 2012 - 02:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0He didn't use force to acquire the money like you colonialists did to acquire the Malvinas. Sharp dealing perhaps but not force.
Ejecting trespassers is 'reasonable' force Morecrap !
Feb 16th, 2012 - 04:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ 52 so funny, you call them colonialists, and what are you then? lol
Feb 16th, 2012 - 05:00 am - Link - Report abuse 01) Would be if they could be colonialists?
Feb 16th, 2012 - 07:37 am - Link - Report abuse 02) Wannerbe colonialists?
3) Land thieves?
4) Malvinistas?
5) ldiots?
Good for the UK Defence Select Committee members to assess TFI' s defence needs on the spot. (So often politicians worldwide left the on the spot work to the military, and this often, historically, led to bad strategic decision-making.)
Feb 16th, 2012 - 07:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0It is, of course, the Committee's legal duty to protect a Protectorate.
This is a commitment with financial implications. The money-out side of the equation will be constantly re-balanced as the oil-money-in changes.
As the stakes become raised - oil infrastructures, Argentinan threat increases, etc - the defence needs must match the changing environment. This is simple, sensible management.
So, if Argentina reduces it's threat-level, the protection needs will match it - but only up to a point. Brasil recognises it needs a protection capability for its offshore oil infrastructures, in spite of there being no obvious or immediate threat to it's nation state and its oil industries. The UK/TFI is simply doing the same as any prudent administration; the same as any country protecting assets and supply lines.
@56 Pretty sure that there is a consistent threat level 'amber' over this whole thing, which makes me surprised that the Argies are so upset about it. It's kind of difficult to reduce the threat level from the Argentinians when they've got the theft of this land and the submission of the population to foreign rule enshrined in their constitution. An 'amber' threat is more than enough reason to reassess your defensive capabilities.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 11:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0The noise coming from Argentina is just the song of the butthurt, and we need to be better at ignoring it.
Seems a bit unfair of us Brits not to ask the RG's first of its ok for our democratically elected MP's to go to a British Protectorate and see for themselves how British tax payers money is being spent.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 12:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Whilst we're on i'm a bit upset that we havent let the RG's pick and choose which members of our military go to the Falklands; I'm mean how dare we sent Prince william, a free citizen of our country and a member of our armed forces to just go to the Falklands and not take heed of the RG's.
Disgraceful :-)
The next time CFK stands up in parliament to address us all, do we bow and curtsy to her,
Feb 16th, 2012 - 01:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We must have been asleep for the past decade, i had no idea that great Britain was now part of the growing and powerful Argentina empire .
@58 Apparently the UN has put it's foot down and the British Ministry of Defence is now due to tell Argentina where exactly in international waters each of their military submarines are and get their agreement beforehand on where the destroyers are to be sent. Apparently this will remove the 'deterant' function of the subs, but it's really more important that we do what the peaceful Argentinians want.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 01:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If Argentina says that the Falklands Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands are part of Tierra Del Fuego, does that mean that legally Teirra Del Fuego now belongs to Britain? Ive seen some photos and it looks quite nice. Its separated from the Argentine mainland and is approx 1000 miles from Buenos Ares but only about 250 miles from Port Stanley. If there is another War we should seize it. The Argentine military would have to go back to Argentina but the people could stay, they could even continue stabbing bulls and shagging llamas for say another 50 years but after that they would have to evolve into becoming British. Instead of going to war to claim what could be rightfully ours perhaps we should get the UN to mediate. I'm sure we could get Tom Hanks to agree.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@61 The UN Decolonisation Committee have just phoned to tell me that they're prepared to have an emergency session to discuss your idea of greedily decolonising Tierra del Fuego. In return you have to agree that Venezuela can decolonise half of the caribbean, and sean penn's moustache.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 03:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 61 - My dear fellow - shagging Llamas and stabbing Bulls are much more fun than shagging sheep and sucking fish ala the Falklanders.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 062 Its a nice piece of real estate, I say we should have it.
Feb 16th, 2012 - 06:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 063 You've obviously been about a bit. Tell me, is there a four legged animal that doesn't get slightly nervous when you enter its enclosure?
21 Bombadier Spoon
Feb 16th, 2012 - 08:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Unfortunately, their arguments are false, as the committee of the UN decolonization ruling in favor of Argentina and against England.
The Committee on Decolonization United Nations, which is the most appropriate body for interpreting and understanding the concepts of colonialism and imperialism, such as Gibraltar, Falklands, Belize and other similar cases, their historical contexts and social processes, and already has extensively studied and reviewed and compared the arguments of both Argentine and the United Kingdom and finally failed for Argentina because his arguments are true because it is a sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination. Just note that in the Malvinas Question General Assembly of the United Nations included this doctrine - the principle of territorial integrity taking into account the interests and NOT the wishes of the population of the islands - in its resolution 2065 (XX ) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37/9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39/6), 1985 (40/21) , 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute as resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom).
In addition, every year, the Committee finds UN decolonization resolution using the criteria of Resolution 2065 of 1965, clearly states that the sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination
The International Court of Justice is based on their judgments of the committee of the UN decolonization. Remember that the international court of justice and decolonization committee of United Nations is supranational. Both have a lot of international prestige and complement each other.
@65 Was it Copypasta and Spam for lunch today? (http://images.memegenerator.net/instances/500x/9543206.jpg)
Feb 16th, 2012 - 09:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@61Be Serious,
Feb 17th, 2012 - 08:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0Great ldea, then we can give TDF to Chile as a good will gesture while we concentrate on “liberating” Sta Cruz & Chubut provinces for ourselves.
Well why not? The British were there before the Argentines.
They are Squatters on British land :-)))))
@65 Raul
Feb 17th, 2012 - 03:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't you find it interetsting that in the most recent three of those resolutions, 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25), there is no mention of any sovereignty dispute. The resolutions simply refer to settling differences, resolving pending problems and normalising relations.
It would seem that the issue of sovereignty dropped off the agenda a long time ago. Time to forget about it, move on and normalise those relations.
and stop trying to steal what is not yours,
Feb 17th, 2012 - 06:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0settle down and concentrate on your very own failing economy, just like the rest of the world .
I have posted before criticising Raul's equating of the ICJ with the C24.
Feb 17th, 2012 - 08:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The ICJ arbitrates issues of conflict between nations, it provides binding judgements that define the structure of the world we inhabit.
The C24 is little more than a joke; a country lane in a lazy land, as compared to the ICJ motorway.
Both are, however, powerless when faced with the great power nations - Tibet's situation is unable to be resolved through either of these agents of the UN.
@70 Raul just writes the same thing over and over from the same sheet of paper. He lists some UN resolutions that he's clearly not read because only one of them even mention the Falklands. He never mentions Security Council Resolution 502 which called for Argentina to leave the Falklands, and they subsequently ignored. He also never mentions any of the core facets of the Charter of the UN.
Feb 17th, 2012 - 11:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They just don't really get it.
he needs to throw all his paperwork away,
Feb 18th, 2012 - 09:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0stop taking indocrinated pills,
and start all over again with a blank sheet,
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!