MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Argentina to demand a review of the South Atlantic fisheries agreement
President Cristina Fernandez announced that Argentina will request the review of the South Atlantic fisheries agreement, because the UK and the Falklands are not abiding by the ‘protocols’ signed in the early nineties. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesOoh look. Another KFC 'gambit'.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 05:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Can someone just tell her to shut-up and sit down?
Mar 07th, 2012 - 05:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Seriously, they're so spineless it makes you want to laugh. Better just stop listening to them and get on with what's important.
“Operation Condor” is a clear example of state sponsored international terrorism. It's not something that any civilised country is going to promote as being a good thing, however, we're not talking about a civilised country now are we.
It's just like North Korea v2.0 but with more whinging.
Operation 90 was conducted by ten soldiers from the Argentine Army under then Colonel Leal. Since the Antarctic Treaty prohibits any military activity in Antarctica to date Operation 90 remains as the only documented military land maneuver on Antarctic territory.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 05:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So they have been defying the rest of the world since 1965 and the cowardly pratt who led it was “the first president of the Military Centre for Democracy.”
What a crap-hopper he must be and typical of his type in Argentina.
Despicable man.
AND CFK: WTF is she on? ”Argentina complains that since 2006 the Falklands government awards 25 year fishing licences, instead of the one year version, “which ultimately has helped the companies catching in Malvinas and Argentine waters”.
Well of course it helps companies with fishing licences catch fish you stupid cow.
Anyway, if any of the companies so licenced are breaking ARGENTINA laws then use your fabled navy to stop them. BUT, be warned, none of the crap that these plonkers have been doing last year by stopping vessels illegally or you might just have a Type 45 up your arse.
So supporting hijackers and breaking international law?
Mar 07th, 2012 - 06:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nice people.
Is she lauding the hijackers hoping to encourage private initiatives that land unnanounced on the Falklands on the anniversary? I seem to recall some groups were planning such antics
Mar 07th, 2012 - 06:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Another 'demand' from Fernandez, one might easily conclude that she's actually quite 'demanding'
Mar 07th, 2012 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How amusing! She's getting increasingly desperate and pathetic to the point the international community is laughing at her.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UK actually doesn't need to do anything since she and her underlings are comprehensively discrediting Argentina. I can almost hear the laughing from Whitehall.
@3,4 So they ignored UNSCR 502 becoming a delinquent to the UN. Then they ignored all the Antarctic Treaties becoming delinquent to those. Now they're delinquent to everything they signed up to in Mercosur, which is effectively dead. Then they're sponsoring internation terrorism and hijackers. To top it off, they're bullying a much smaller territory, just because they feel like it.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So can someone tell me why the international community isn't beating them with a long sh!tty stick?
I am absolutely gobsmacked (suppose I shouldn't be) - of course we are not complying with the joint agreement on fisheries science that we had with them. The Argentines under the Kirchner regimen threw an almighty wobbly and tore the agreement up and walked away from it. I believe some of their scientists were actually quite appalled at their governments action but were “lent on” so its a bit hard to have joint cooperation on anything when only one side is sitting at the table. Dear lord they are either becoming more desperate hence the even wilder distortion of the truth - or Mrs K has finally lost touch with reality.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 06:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0CFKC is barking mad.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Madwoman of the Casa Rosada becomes madder by the day.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I've got it down as paranoid schizophrenia with a touch of megalomania.
Celebrating an act of terrosim, For all we know this could be a rally cry to the young in preparation for a possible invasion by sea or by air,
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0which brings me to a few questions,
how would The falklands deal with an Argentine commercial plane full of protestors or possibly worse once they have landed for instance lets say they hijack the plane or not and take over airstrip after all if coming from argentina it could be anyone, your not going to know until they have landed?
or any sea vessel non combative raid a beach on mass how is one destroyer going to stop that, have we the right to blow non-combative vessels with possible troops on clean out of the water?
either scenario is possible as similar has happened before,and if the plan goes wrong the argentine government can deny knowledge?
Where do we stand, have we preparations, i would like to think we have.
When dealing with Argentina theres no such thing as Paranoia only common sense.
stupid woman, for heaven's sake!!!! I AM SO BLOODY SICK AND TIRED of her meaningless announcements based on distorted realities!! Every single day the same story for us here in argieland...what a nerve, she is not complying with the agreements and promises her government makes within Argentina. If what she claimes miraculously happened to be true (don't believe a word she says myself), I would be rejoicing at the thought that she would be getting a taste of her own medicine. She is definitely coming across as a pityful nutter to the whole world, this woman needs a shrink urgently!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Kind of sums up CFK completely with that one word “DEMANDS”
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The reason is because that so-called“military” operation was not any military operation whatsoever. It is a flagrant lie, or a crass mendacity, or an inverecund editorialization by Mercopress. They should be really ashamed of faning the flames.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Most operations in Antarctica are performed by military personel of all nations. So how is it that the actions of the British, or Australian, or Chilean, or American, or Russian, or Brazilian militaries are not military, but the Argentine actions are, is beyond chutzpah and arrant gull.
Quite honestly, pathetic try there.
argentina pulled out the fishies agreement? why would she “Demand” more talks, stupid ugly woman :p
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0TWIMC
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A couple of weeks ago I asked, on these very pages, when was Great Britain going to take a poll and ask its citizens about their true opinions regarding the Malvinas Islands……..
Then the “famous” Telegraph poll came along and I, single handed, rigged it by voting....: YES (please), Return the Malvinas Islands to Argentina (if you would be so kind)…………
Well……. Sems to be that today we have the first serious poll of a loooong succession to come….:
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/44427/britons-want-diplomacy-if-falkland-islands-tension-continues/
And the results are pretty darn interesting…………:
1) In the online survey of a representative sample of 2,011 British adults, more than half of respondents (56%) believe the Government should engage in diplomatic negotiations with Argentina to seek a solution that would please both sides.
2) A majority of respondents (51%) do not think the current tension in the Falkland Islands will lead to a new war.
3) One-in-four Britons (26%) think the Government should use any means necessary, including military force, to continue with the planned oil exploration.
PS:
Please take into account that we, Argentineans, haven’t even started our diplomatic ”Charm Offensive” in the beautiful Great United Kingdom of Britain…..
Chuckle chuckle®
She's hilarious, and she's clearly insane. She honestly thinks she can 'demand' to get HMG to sit down and negotiate on something that her husband's government walked away from. They left HMG sat there, going 'urm.. ' and now they're painting the picture that they're somehow offended...
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0... and then she's highlighting her support for terrorism, in public. Hahahah, lordy lord.
Faggotry faggotry everywhere, but not a truth to see.
17 you can't please argentina (like any child) you want negotiations, but you can only really negotiate with the falkland islanders. and they don't like you lot.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0God knows why?
After reading the article, it seems CFK is going to be out of luck. Primarily because there is no such thing as the “Malvinas Islands zone”. Her next difficulty is going to be who she talks with. Given the reaction of the British government to her “suggestion” that the LAN flight be replaced with three argie flights, I would reckon that the British government will say “Fishing licences are issued by the Falkland Islands government. You will need to discuss it with them!” Unfortunately, CFK doesn't recognise the FIG.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So that's flights and fisheries she going to fail on. Because she has no-one to talk to.
Isn't there a thing called “painting yourself into a corner”? As googer62 says, the argies tore up the agreement and walked away. As we say here in the UK, “Tough titty!”
I still stick with my view that we have to get the Argentines backed into a corner so that they are forced to take military action and then we should reduce their military on the mainland to zero and leave them vulnerable to some old score settling by chile, Paraguay, Uruguay etc.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm assuming the tactic here is to get the chileans to cancel the flight and in return she will open the imports up again - then renage on the deal when the chileans do close the flights.
Pretty transparent tactic.
The woman is no more than a terrorist. Very, very sinister woman.
The deranged fool hasn't got the right to demand anything from the UK Government.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just wantede to advise all British, Falkland Island and friendly posters that I am requesting the “Think” troll be banned for “trolling”, repetitive posts of the same comment on different articles, posting irrelevant “comments” and so forth. Let's see what MercoPress does.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 024 Sounds like necessary housekeeping to me.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@21 agree on all parts especially military action, i dont think it would take much after The UN meeting goes tits up in june or even before that for her to act, she has built up tensions too much to walk away and survive politically something is going to happen, wether it be on her own doorstep or Falklands.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 08:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@25
Mar 07th, 2012 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0when you surround yourself with sycophants and terrorize your own country you then turn attention to the outside world which The botox Queen is doing. Unfortunately the UK doesnt play by these corrupt rules and eventually she will be brought down.
she will get so obsessed with her own personality and cult through the likes of La Cámpora that she will have to do something.
Unfortunately we play games when it gets nasty with cruise missiles etc. as she will no doubt find out sometime soon.
The regime in Argentina is a filthy one with endemic corruption and rent a crowds instructed to invade forums such as these to pollute the internet with their foul rants. what a nasty, vile, horrible set of thugs the Argentines have become.
@23 Troller's gonna troll.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 08:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ALL The fact is if everyone just ignored her, like they're doing now, she will eventually go away. Her latest nonsense is no different to the UK demanding the Norwegians to sit down and renegotiate their fishing rights in Norwegian territory to give UK some of it. The Norwegians would quite rightly say 'fork awf' and ignore it.
She's just a sandwich short of a picnic and showing interest in what she says isn't helping anyone. Even soon to be president Fat-Nestor keeps quiet doing his hitler youth thing.
For those of you who only click on “Falkland Islands” on this site, have a look under “Argentina”. There is a story there about KFC's upcoming meeting with the Chilean President. The LAN flight is on the agenda.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0usual hysteric comments again....
Mar 07th, 2012 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0bravo CFK...keep on eating fish contains iodine useful for your thyroid..!
CFK still trying to give the impression that she has some or other control or influence over events.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Truth is she is down to her last card, LAN flights. Whatever she may say, there is nothing more she can do, short of military manovers.
She's being schooled on diplomacy by the UK government which to be fair has a thousand times more experience of these matters on a world stage.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 09:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The only people that are going to lose from all of this is Argentinian people that suffers more humiliating defeats at the hands of far more capable opposition.
As CFK said herself 'I'm tried of being humiliated' - My advice would be to stop trying to cause trouble and lying then to take attention from your own economy.
I know this is about fishing but isn't it possible that a wholesale review of the arrangements for all aspects of cooperation in the South Atlantic would be a good thing? Hydrocarbon exploration and extraction would also have to be on the table. Now that is serious money compared to fishing rights and the air link to Chile. Reviewing that agreement on the one hand might go some way to addressing the Argentinian concern that it going to go ahead without it if something isn't done by them (and I don't mean military force). On the other it might de-risk the investment needed to successfully extract the oil. A review doesn't seem a bad idea to me if the modalities can be agreed quickly and without preconditions that prejudice the interests and well understood wishes of the islanders.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@32
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That's just not going to happen. The British tactic seems to be one of silence to eventually frustrate her into shutting up, making a complete fool of herself or overstepping the mark so that we are bound to take decisive action.
I'm sure that we have a plan of action and it will be put into place when the time suits. Remember that our diplomats wont have been silent behind the scenes but of course we dont know whats been said because we dont go mouthing off like a wanker to all and sundry.
planes lands at mpa after being escorted in by a typhoon to be met by the resident infantry company and some RAF policemen.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0if its military anything other than coming out of the plane hands up you get filled full of holes. civillian plane well thats not even remotely practical as an assault plane.
I'm sure the MOD has lans for the anniversry
@34
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Remember as well that if it kicks off again, which I definitely think it will because the RG's are so fucking dense, any Argentine military heading towards the FI will be able to observe Cruise missiles heading in the opposite direction. Hopefully they will decimate their armed forces on the mainland and one might also land on the President's desk.
I think it will be a far different story this time around. I think they will be hit and hit massively on the mainland at least that's what I'm hoping for.
@32 I'm not really understanding what we're supposed to be reviewing here. You don't determine your whole domestic policy, or the domestic policy of any of your territories or protectorates simply because some mad lady wants you to. It's got to be based upon benefits-driven cases. The Argentinians had the opportunity to drive cooperation during the last review, and they decided to opt out. Now they want the UK to have another review and give them some scraps from the table. Well, it doesn't work like that. 26 year long licenses have been sold, and they'll have to wait until the majority of these are ready to expire and the FIG revisits it's fisheries policy going forwards.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Besides, everything you said dismisses the fact that the Argentinians only want to discuss sovereignty. The benefits of entering into a negotiation or discussion with Argentina knowing this, are minimal. It's in their constitution that sovereignty is not negotiable, so any review as you suggest would involve them trying to impose their will over the FIG based upon this stance. Not only this, they are likely to walk out of any discussions that aren't about sovereignty and they are likely to renege on anything they sign up to anyways. So it's futile.
The only strategy to manage the Argentinians going forwards is ignoring them. And to be fair, it is a strategy that works very effectively.
@36 A most effectively made riposte by you and @33 too. I feel absolved from commenting on the visit to Chile. The dogs have been walked so the troll and I had better be off to our room for the night. Thanks for bringing us closer together.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@34 & @35 I dont know the routine on greeting visitors or who greets them on the falklands, what my concern is that argentines as we all know ignore rules, what is stopping an unsuspecting plane leaving Argentina with 200 heavily armed argentine special services & co disembarking and taking over the airstrip with hostages, long enough for reinforcements to land? its very possible if you are not expecting it, look at 1982 who expected that the only difference they used ships then? is their any real answer too this?
Mar 07th, 2012 - 10:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0my fear is we will be caught with our pants down again by some cheap shot,and left pissing in the wind.
Its argentina they will try every single trick in the book as they see “no shame in cheating,its a cunning way of tricking your opponent to get the upper hand”- maradonna never a truer word.
@38
Mar 07th, 2012 - 11:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We Brits seem to play an interesting game. We always suspect that our opponents will be too good for us and that our army, navy and air force will be too busy to look at things like Radar screens as they will be either pissed or playing cards.
I think I'm fairly safe in assuming that any plane, boat or penguin that comes near the FI, about 200 miles out will be spotted and contacted and if we dont get the right response they will be shot down.
If the Argentines are able to land hundreds of troops including special forces on the island, take hostages, land reinforcements, take over the island, plant an Argentine flag on the island and then ethnically cleanse the islands before we know about it then I'd suggest we are wasting £59b defence budget per annum and have a pretty hapless and hopeless military command. It will also suggest to me that Argentina have one of the best military's in the world full of capable and invisible people with hardware to match.
We were told that it was a close run thing that we able to take the islands back in 1982 because their conscripts were well dug in and held the high ground. You now seem to be suggesting that being dug in on the islands for 30 years, having Typhoons down there plus a cruise missile capability as well as 1,200 Marines counts for nothing.
We're a strange lot!
The budget is actually closer to 65bn.
Mar 07th, 2012 - 11:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And the Type 45 is able detect aircraft at about 400 miles and can hit a golf ball sized target at over 150 miles. So essentially it can sit and monitor the Argentine mainland and if any Aircraft are off track, classify them and where appropriate engage them, you really wouldn't want to be a pilot against one of these.
Heck these things can even shoot down satellites if they want too.
But yeah I can totally see a commercial aircraft bypassing the islands defences and a Type 45.
17 Think....why do obsess with everyone else's opinion regarding the Falklands except the very people who live there...the people who make the Falklands their home. The people who make the Falklands what they are with a self-sustaining economy and government.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0And in the end it is the people who live in the Falklands that matter. No matter how much you try and deny our human rights or our right to exist, we will always deny your country's imperialist ambitions.
From wiki:
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Daring class are often considered the most powerful air-defence warships in the world.[26] The ship's capabilities centre on the SAMPSON Multi Function Radar which can detect hundreds of targets out to a distance of 400 km (250 mi) and the Sea Viper missile system. In addition Daring's S1850M 3D air surveillance radar is capable of detecting 1,000 targets up to 400 km (250 mi). It is also capable of detecting outer atmosphere objects such as ballistic missiles.
The Daring class are often considered the most powerful air-defence warships in the world.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0[ah but ah]
Can it outwit an argentine rowing boat, with stealthy paddles, [mmm] I doubt it .
Ah but ah, can our sat alights detect a CFK plastic floating stealthily in the water, mmm [I doubt it]
Ah but,, CFK does not need the Falklands any more, as she now controls it all in her head, mmm
And besides, if the asylum thinks she is clever, and the loony bin thinks she is a plastically geniuses, then we stand no chance against her,
And as she is supported by her metrical scientific bloggers who have more answers that an encyclopaedias what chance have we,
[Thank fcuk we can laugh at this, because if it was true, then we would all be indoctrinated wouldn’t we not,
Lololol
Argentina,,, ,,have a laugh on us, instead of your selves for a change lol.
[justa joka, donta crya ]
.
@43
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0LOL. PMSL.
thanks
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0I wish we could just ignore her. She is a turkey necked Vulture and completely insane. Reminds me of Galtieri's saber rattling. The country tanks, so you try to inflict your misery onto the Falklands. What an ignorant cow!
Mar 08th, 2012 - 01:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Darned interesting Think - but hardly surprising. After all, we are a reasonable people, and don't have any conclusions enshrined in our (non-existent) Constitution.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 05:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0We've talked already, without success.
But then, most of the poll's respondents wouldn't be aware of that would they?
Darned interesting! lol
A review of the agreement Argentina repudiated and walked away from? If this were comedy you couldn't write this stuff as no one would believe that the Kirchner regime would be that stupid.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 08:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0PMSL
@46 I think the point is, with a normal or modern navy vessel just hanging around Falklands Territorial waters, we can simply just ignore her.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 09:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0What we probably can't ignore is Fatty Nestor Jr's Hitler Youth, who probably have swimming to Malvina's practice every day.
We must be prepared,
Mar 08th, 2012 - 11:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0They will try again.
l feel it in my bones.
“Ooh look. Another KFC 'gambit'.”
Mar 08th, 2012 - 11:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Furry-Fat-Feck (#1)
If it is a gambit, it is a juvenile pawn's gambit.
Or perhaps a juvenile prawn's gambit, or a squid's gambit.
No, - and seriously - Argentina lost credibility in the area of fisheries when it withdrew from the South Atlantic fisheries joint fish stocks monitoring and research programmes, refused to share data, and reduced the ability of the world to monitor and conserve stocks.
They are definitely untrustworthy in this matter.
I think we may all be missing something here.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0What if she is 'piling on the pressure' in order to get the MoD to send a small reinforcement to the existing garrison just prior to the jamboree to mark the start of the war (as these demented people mark the start, not the end) 'just in case'. This would be reasonable given the Argie history.
'The Bitch' would then shout 'militatisation' and stir up further 'support' among the LatAms.
Hard to see what else she has up her sleeve given the fact she has emasculated the Argie military.
Obviously, MercoPress is wrong in qualifying Leal's South Pole operation as militarty. It was performed by military staff, but was not at all a military operation.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0@53 Well, considering it's objectively agreed to be the only military operation that has taken place in Antarctica, that would make you wrong. It was just another attempt by Argentinians to colonise something. You just don't like the fact the Argentinians don't actually abide by treaties they make with the UN or the Antarctic Treaty. You really don't like the fact Argentinian expansionism is so obvious.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your comments are riddled with social acceptance bias.
53 Marcelo Kohen
Mar 08th, 2012 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Does the REAL Prof. Marcelo Kohen know you are using his name for the drivel you put on here?
@55 I've asked whosoeveritis several times if Prof. Marcelo Kohen is aware that his character is being ruined through the incessantly low grade and seemingly uneducated comments of this person claiming to be him. So far, I've had no response.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 01:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm relatively sure it's not.
@ 53 you're so fake, like your fake name and like your comments :p
Mar 08th, 2012 - 04:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Totally unrelated (but this happens a lot on this site doesn't it)
Mar 08th, 2012 - 05:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Didn't a retired British soldier once say that he would of died of old age not in combat if he had held the dug in Argentine defensive positions in the Falklands war.
Type 45 has not even deployed yet!!! thought it was meant to protect the conquistador prince who must be back home soon!!! RG's ramped this up as a aggressive act Or maybe it was just a straight swap of the Islands guardship you decide!!
@38 Do not be concerned. Consider 1982. The Falklands had no British military base. It had no military radars. It had no air defence equipment. It had no combat aircraft. It had no on-station warships. It had no ground troops beyond 80 Royal Marines and the Falkland Islands Defence Force.
Mar 08th, 2012 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It now has a military base. The only place where an aircraft carrying 200 argie special forces could land. Military radars are in place. Air defences are in place. Four Typhoon multirole aircraft are so far beyond ANY South American capabilities that it might be termed the Great South Atlantic Turkey Shoot. And even more so when HMS Dauntless arrives on-station. There are now three warships, not counting any submarine that might be in the area. There are now at least six times as many ground troops as there were in '82.
Scenario: Unexpected and unauthorised commercial aircraft approaching from north, west or south. Warned off. Continues on-course. Typhoons take off to intercept. Crew warned off. Continues on-course. Typhoon shoots out one engine. Only a military or terrorist group would continue under these circumstances. Shoot down? Alternatively, call in HMS Dauntless to shoot down. OR: Military vessels detected entering EEZ. Despatch Typhoons. Leaving Dauntless to cover possible two-prong attack. Typhoons warn military vessels to reverse course. Vessels continue. Typhoons destroy bridge of each military vessel using Maverick and HARM missiles and guns. If necessary, Dauntless closes to use gunfire at the rate of 28 rounds per minute. Unlikely scenario: argieland uses troop-carrying submarine. They only have 3 submarines in service. All diesel-electric and therefore highly detectable by current standards. Possibility of landing a credible combat force? Not good. One thing the Falklands needs is a squadron of Apache gunships!
poor CFK she is finnished, without the aaahhhfrom malvino
Mar 08th, 2012 - 07:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“ .... if its military anything other than coming out of the plane hands up you get filled full of holes.” Martin Woodhead (#34)
Mar 08th, 2012 - 11:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Always struck me as odd - holes are the absence of filling.
“Argentina to demand a review Argentina --- will request the review”
Mar 09th, 2012 - 04:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why make comments on the article, when whomever wrote the article cannot tell the difference between “demand” and “request”?
@59.“ OR: Military vessels detected entering EEZ. Despatch Typhoons”
Mar 09th, 2012 - 04:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thats means that argentine military vessels can not enter Falkland Islands EEZ. So we can also prohibit any military UK vessels enter argentine 200m EEZ ?
@61 of course you know it's oxymoron, and used for emphasis.
Mar 09th, 2012 - 07:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0like a full hole, sweet vinegar, a sincere argentinian, an argentinian dating a female of the appropriate age, a virtuous argentinian, a non-mafia argentinian, et cetera.
@64 GY,
Mar 09th, 2012 - 09:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0l'll bet theres some cracker stories in Argentine church confessionals!
What a pity the Priests are sworn to silence!
@65 I think you assume that your typical Argie considers 'the wrong kind of love' to be a sin; they seem to consider it perfectly normal. Seemingly, so do catholic priests.
Mar 09th, 2012 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Jack Sprat could eat no fat.
His wife could eat no lean.
And so between them both, you see,
They licked the platter clean.”
I cannot think of a more poetic description of Argentinian society. I'm pretty sure they run out of holy water and the crucifixes all melt, however.
@66GY,
Mar 09th, 2012 - 11:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0Got a joke for you,
The Priest is sitting in the confessional when he hears an obviously drunken man lurching & crashing down the aisle until the fellow slams inside the box & sits down with a thud.
After a few minutes silence & some groaning & grunting the priest says “may l help you, my son?”
The drunk replies “sure you can, mate. You got any paper on your side!”
@67 LOL. I like it. Luckily the priest has that glory hole hatch to pass the paper through, otherwise it could have got quite unpleasant with all the beads and hail-marying.
Mar 09th, 2012 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0@63 Only if you want to die, wholesale. You choose!
Mar 09th, 2012 - 08:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So why your goberment protest when we prohibit your military vessel enter in our EEZ ?
Mar 09th, 2012 - 11:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0but who will inforce this [prohibit]
Mar 09th, 2012 - 11:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you still not ansewer me. Why we can not cross your EEZ but you said you have all the rigths to croos our EEZ ? I'm sorry my English is not very good. But please some British could answer this question.
Mar 10th, 2012 - 03:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's ok, taky, the restrictions of the EEZs do not apply to rights of transit.
Mar 10th, 2012 - 08:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0I know, but Conqueror said that argentine military vessel are not allawed to enter Falklands EEZ!!!! How do they know if is for transit ? going to Argentine Antartic bases.
Mar 11th, 2012 - 05:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0@74 taky
Mar 11th, 2012 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ How do they know if is for transit ? going to Argentine Antartic bases.”
You don't need to enter Falkland waters, as you are not friendly and cannot to trusted, it’s as simple as that
@17 Think
“And the results are pretty darn interesting”
No they aren't, you clearly don't understand the British, they aren't interested in something like this, unless they is a clear THREAT, we simply don't respond to hot air.
The only people that would respond to such a survey are the unrealistic bleeding heart types, who stupidly imagines Argentinians are rational people.
Redcoat you are wrong if you see a map, going from Buenos Aires or Bahia Blanca is shorter to cross Falkland EEZ.
Mar 11th, 2012 - 01:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The fair thing is that if we can not use your EEZ for transit you can not use our EEZ for transit.
@76 taky
Mar 11th, 2012 - 03:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm not wrong, sure it's shorter, but they don't have to travel in Falkland waters, Argentina is behaving in an awkward way and may well stop the Royal Navy entering their waters, but the British have no reason to trust you.
Argentina should build a nuclear submarine and send it to patroll the sea around Islas Malvinas Argentina if british illegal aliens can have a sub why not Argentine citizens, or are we going to let Argentina become like Libya ?? People here need to remember that what UK really wants is resources, no matter what part of history we live in, or what part of the world you live the strategy is always the same, exploit the resources and destroy the local economy, from opium to tea and all the way to oil the UK has manage to bring slaves get them to fight among themselves and use them to theft the local resources. I have a resounding message from the masses to britain, boycott UK !
Mar 11th, 2012 - 11:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0bla bla .
Mar 12th, 2012 - 12:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0@78Pirat-Hunter,
Mar 12th, 2012 - 09:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0You will make an ideal slave, after we've taken all your resources of course.
Kneel slave.
Another “demand” from the RG's. Breathtaking arrogance.
Mar 12th, 2012 - 09:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0All this talk about crossing an EEZ!
Mar 12th, 2012 - 10:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0If Argentinian vessels want to get their 'research sites' on Antarctica the coastal TdF route allows access to ports all the way down the continental coastline. The Scotia archipelago and South Georgia are British Territories and fisheries incursions would be dissuaded, not least because of the Marine Protection Zones. The standard restrictions on exploiting below the 60 degreeS latitude apply.
Is there a problem?
@78 Pirat-Hunter
Mar 12th, 2012 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Argentina should build a nuclear submarine”
Yes and the attempted construction of which would make Chernobyl and Fukushima look like minor accidents.
“People here need to remember that what UK really wants is resources, no matter”
What the UK wants is trade, what you spout is just parroting what corrupt leaders come out with, in order to distract their own people so they can rip off and wreak their own economies.
“from opium to tea and all the way to oil”
We have plenty of oil, but you don’t know much about history do you, opium was the ONLY thing the Chinese would buy and British tea was better and cheaper than that offered by smugglers, threating to put the latter out of business.
“the UK has manage to bring slaves get them to fight among themselves”
That’s a clever trick if it was true, whereas the Spanish worked them to death.
“I have a resounding message from the masses to britain, boycott UK”
Get out of Canada you PARASITE !
I still don't understant how international innocence transit apply for the british minds. They can transit their vessel (even military ones) inside our EEZ. But we are not permitted to transit theirs. I don't get it. You stil don't answer me. I thought that the that law applied the same for everybody....
Mar 12th, 2012 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You're right, taky, you don't understand.
Mar 12th, 2012 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There are legal a juristictional differences between an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and Territorial Waters, etc. (3, or typically 12, miles). There is some wartime anomaly called a Total Exclusion Zone (which warns non-involved nations that they are in a free-fire zone, but does not limit combat losses to within the Zone).
Transit of vessels of parties 'in dispute' may be restricted because of the dispute, either in the region of the 'conflict' or further afield, as a third party agreement. This may be, and usually is, contrary to peacetime maritime laws.
Transit across an EEZ is normally no problem, but fishing or drilling contravenes.
Consider, taky, an Argentinian naval force transiting TFI EEZ or Territorial Water.
In itself, no problem; but consider if this were an invasion force - would TFI be wise to allow free transit?
Previous experience of duplicity demands circumspection.
Russian missiles in Cuba, and Russian submarines in Norwegian fjiords, present other examples where maritime law takes second place to military (defence) necessity.
@84 taky
Mar 12th, 2012 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“You stil don't answer me”
See 85 or more simply:
We haven't offensively attacked you since 1807, whereas Argentina attacked recently and hasn’t given up its ridiculous claim to the Falklands and British South Atlantic processions.
So why can’t you understand, we still have no reason to trust Argentina.
Well in my point of view and a fair thing is that your vessel should not be allowed in argentine EEZ. Equal conditions is a fair thing.
Mar 12th, 2012 - 06:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@87 taky
Mar 12th, 2012 - 08:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“your vessel should not be allowed in argentine EEZ.”
That's your discretion
Argentina do not have any military capacity to any kind of invasion today. Our army is ulmost inexistent at the moment. Your concern is riduculous.
Mar 12th, 2012 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If we cannot cross your EEZ you should not cross ours. Reciprocity should be a norm. Your warlike argument only serves your propaganda.
Reciprocity should be apply to this question.
Is a shame that many in my country desagree with CFK policies and even agree with you of leaving the islander in peace and respect the self determination of them. But aggresive comments like yours make many of us change our minds.
Is obvious that you still missing the times that Britain dominate the world. You still consider yourself superior than the rest of the world.
You pretend that freedom should be respected only for you while you didn't respect the freedom of the people you dominate.
Your logic of “I can do whatever I want but you cannot” only apply for the past and over Empires. Today is unacceptable.
.Well put it this way, if Argentina had not invaded in the first place, then we would not be here to day, would we not,
Mar 12th, 2012 - 09:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If Argentina stopped Slagging of the islanders and threatening and abusing them, we would not be here today, would we not,
and if Argentina stopped effectively trying to blockade them, telling abhorrent lies and ratching up the anti, every chance she gets, we would not be here today, would we,
And if Argentina removed her silly claim, and removed the offending article in her constitution, we would not be here today, would we,
And, ,,,if you don’t like the brits retaliating and replying to argentine bloggers who support her false claims, we would not be here now, would we not,
And finally, phew,
You don’t like the insult, or what you consider insults, and the brits always blaming Argentina for every thing,,,, well Argentina did do the things above , did Argentina not, the facts are,
Argentina started all this, and Argentina can finishes this,, so rather than moan on here about us, why not tell CFK to change her attitude against an innocent little unarmed island, who only wants to live in peace, the very same peace, that Argentina keep banging on about, a shame then CFK did not practise what she preaches,,
Justa thought
.
@89 taky
Mar 12th, 2012 - 10:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who the hell are you replying to?
How can you interpret “That's your discretion” into:
“Your warlike argument only serves your propaganda and
”Is obvious that you still missing the times that Britain dominate the world“
It seems your carefully concealed hostility has spilt out.
.
”Is a shame that many in my country desagree with CFK policies and even agree with you of leaving the islander in peace and respect the self determination of them”
No it isn't Read @90 briton's post which I indorse
I'm sorry my english es not very good. I didn't meant that is a shame that many in my country desagree with CFK policies. I want it to say that many in my country (like myself ) desagree with CFK policies specially about FI. I agree about the rights of the islanders about self determination. What I don't like is the way you talk about Britain as the good and the rest the bad guys. I have read british school text of 60' of history and not even mention the atrocities the British Empire commit in the past history. Only glorifing yourself.
Mar 12th, 2012 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0People like Conqueror make me doubt about my believe about the rights of the islanders about their rights of self determination. His arrogance, racial prejudice against evrything that is Hispanic, his attitude about the world only remaind me about those British that build the Empire over the lives of millons of dead around the world.
I don't want to have any contact with people like him. And if one day the argentines realiese that is better to have the Falkland Islanders as friends and neighbors isnted of harras them I will be very happy to that.
But if the people of the islands are like Conqueror that want to drop nuclear bombs and talk about that everything Hispanic with so much hate, I will not want to have anything to do with them.
But after reading so much in this blog I find out, with a few exeption, that all of you are fanatic of the old British Empire that brought so much pain to millons in this world.
Talking with a chilean laidy that work for a couple of years in the Falklands she said that she went there to work because they pay good money, but also realise that she will never be confortable living permanently in those islands becuase the islanders, that were polite to her, treat her with some kind of racial prejudice and keep distance from her because she was indian phisical looks. They always treat her like a guess worker and she realise that she will never be welcome to reside permanently in the community. Is a shame
92 taky
Mar 12th, 2012 - 11:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You take your self to seriously at times, what Conqueror says, can be taken with a pinch of salt, he is no worse or better than some argie bloggers on here that insult and abuse, some even want to nuke Britain and all our families, so please, you should not take things to seriously,
We have all be insulted at some time, you need to separate fact from fiction,
You mention the empire in the 60s, [was that right] well this is the 21st century, and it is today you need to concentrate on,
The Falkland islanders are the same as any people, all they want is to live in peace and be left alone,
All the British want is peace and to be left alone, sadly its Argentina CFK and others that are ratching all this up, it has nothing to do with the past, or the empire , its today, and its argentine [no one else] that is causing all this upset, you have no claim, you never did have, they have been British and on the islands long before Argentina existed, so surely even by your own education, that if the islanders must be kicked out, then Argentinean must also be kicked out, if the islanders are not entitled to freedom, or self determination, then Argentina must also suffer the same,
The cure to all this is simple
Argentina CFK to renounce her claim, remove the offending article from your constitution, and publicly state that the islanders are British, and that Argentina will leave them alone, and to live in peace without hindrance or threat,, is that to much to ask, simple isn’t it,
And we can all go home and live in peace .
.
I agree with you that the islanders have the rights of self determination.
Mar 13th, 2012 - 12:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0What I don't agree with you is that those islands were always British.
That is not true France, Spain had at moment as much rights to those islands too. Keep saying that only Britain always have the righfull sovereignty of those island is not going to make it true. Denied the past is not good for any one. Don't do what you always criticez to the argentines.
You alway said that the Falklands never had any historical conection with Argentina.
Spain rights of those islands were put on Buenos Aires. We have royal edictos that said that. You said that because we got independence from Spain we lost those rights and that is not true. We can discuss about that.
But saying that is not historical connection between Argentina and the islands is complete false.
Spain was not illigaly in those islands nor France. What makes your claim better than theirs ? You didn't discover them. There are maps showing those islands long before your pretensions of discovery.
You don't want to us to distort historical facts. But you do it constantly.
You are convince about your version of history. That France first, Spain after and Argentina a lot later were mere intruders of those land that always belong to you. And that is a lie.
Don't distort history for your convenience if you don't want us to do the same.
But I agree that today should be more important self determination of all human kinds that historical rights. That is why I agree with the islanders. I like to study history specially wroten by French, British, American and Spanish.
I do not like how you potrait your Empire in your books as the good, fair and honest people, when the true was completly different.
You shoul read Diaries of British that invade Buenos Aires and you will find out how racist prejudice run in your Empire. How you looked us when you invade Buenos Aires. You were not good, not fair and not honest people. Belive me. Sorry for my english
taky,
Mar 13th, 2012 - 10:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0lf you agree that the lslanders should have self-determination, then what is all the fuss about?
The lslanders have said that they don't want to be part of Argentina.
So you agree that the lslanders & the Falklands are seperate from & never will be part of Argentina.
Problem over, now:-
1) just drop your claims.
2) remove the offending clause from your constitution.
3) stop teaching your schoolchildren lies about the Falklands.
4) stop the blockade.
& we can all be friends again.
@94 taky
Mar 13th, 2012 - 11:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0“You keep saying that only Britain always have the righfull sovereignty
We say it on good grounds:
1764 French have first settlement on East Falkland
1765 British settle on Saunders Island and formally claimed all Falkland Islands as British
1766 French think they are naming Port Egmont but have in fact named Keppel Sound
1767 Spain claim Falklands in their sphere of influence and FORCE the French to withdraw
1770 Spanish also EXPEL British from the Falklands
1771 Spanish AGREE that the expulsion of British was illegal and the British return
1774 British troops in Falklands are redeployed to the North America colonies
1776 French FORCED to sell to Spanish for £25,000
1776 British withdraw temporarily form islands but leave PLAGUE of OWNERSHIP there.
“I do not like how you potrait your Empire in your books as the good, fair and honest people, when the true was completly different.”
Those empires less successful than the British e.g. France, Spain, now only see what they want to see and overlay what THEY DID in their empires, onto the British. But Britain’s empire was more successful, because it was based on the OPPOSITE of what you accuse it of, i.e. co-operation and mutual benefit.
“You should read Diaries of British that invade Buenos Aires and you will find out how racist prejudice run in your Empire”
Spain and France tried to invade Britain without provocation and they were JUST as racist. Those British that invaded Buenos Aires, did it off the cuff and got heavily defeated and you still want to hold a grudge, MORE evidence of your brainwashing.
Racialism is generally just mistrust, if you feel someone may betray you, somewhere down the road you keep them at arm’s length, My experience ‘s have shown me that many who appear friendly can suddenly show deep racial resentment, something quite different from members of your own ethic group..
Redcoat
Mar 13th, 2012 - 01:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So in your opinion teaching to childrens that Spain had soverignity rigths over the Falklands is a lie. For you France, Spain as Argentina were trasspasers in British lands. Well is a lot of documentation that is against that. You have your version of the Falklands history France, Spain and Argentina have their own. All of them back it with a lot of documentation that prove it. Spain hold the islands for many decades before leaving, also like you becouse latin american revolt, and leave a plaque asserting Spanish soverignity of those islands. Just because you said so that does not makit true. The argument are valid for all.
And you are wrong 1807 invasion of Buenos Aires was planned with 12.000 troops. Buenos Aires did not have Spanish troops to defend themself the all population that were 90 % criollos for many generations (like the falkland islanders) defend their land with evreything even with stones. You have no respect for them, enter the city killing everything that move. Officer Peck was a racist prick calling his men to kill this “animals”. Your intention over Buenos Aires was not attacking Spain, it was conquered and dominate the local population against their will. That is why after you surrender the people of Buenos Aires want it to kill you all. Thank to Liniers that contain the population you could leave the River Plate safetly.
Spain did not came to help us like Britain did when argentina invade the Falkland in '82. That is why two years later we made our first expresion of independence from Spain.
That is why we celebrate the day we got free from you. We were a colony of Spain in 1807 as the Falkland was a colony of Britain in 1982. You celebrate your liberation from argentine invaders and we celebrate ours from you.
The diference it was that we didn't consider the islanders dogs but you consider us less than humans even colling us dogs.
If you succeded in 1807 probably you will kill all the population and bring whites like in Australia.
@97 taky
Mar 13th, 2012 - 09:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“You have your version of the Falklands history France, Spain and Argentina have their own”
No, France, Britain and even Spain (signed Spainish documents) have one version of history and Argentina has another.
“And you are wrong 1807 invasion of Buenos Aires was planned with 12.000 troops”
You are wrong again, those troops were on their way to South Africa but were told of the poor conditions in Buenos Aires and thinking it was a push over changed their plans.
“Officer Peck was a racist prick calling his men to kill this “animals”
This is the type of propaganda you are subjected to, it poisons your minds to control you, but what gets us is how ready you are to believe it.
”If you succeded in 1807 probably you will kill all the population and bring whites like in Australia”
More evidence of how poisoned your mind is , the truth is after that failed invasion, the British and Argentina became friends until Peron.
Redcoat
Mar 14th, 2012 - 04:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0You are completly wrong. The invasion that came from Cape Town was in 1806. You took Buenos Aires with almust no resistence, for mor than a month, because the criollos thought that you after kick out the Spanish you will give indepence to this lands. But after a while Beresford made it very clear that the British intention were to put this lands under the British Empire. That is when, with the help of Montevideo help we kick your arses and Beresford surrender. They were take it prisioners inside the country.
The second invasion was prepared by the British government and put Whitelocke as the commander of the expedition. The british goal was to take the all River Plate basin. 14.000 men well armed invade first Montevideo killing a cuorter of the population that defend the city. They surrender and for two days you loot the city.
And from there with 12000 men they try to invade Buenos Aires. This time we didn't have any help from Montevideo. The defence of the freedom of the people of Buenos Aires was in hands of themselfs.
The all town prepare for the invasion, men, women, children, slaves, indians, everybody fought togather against a common enemy.
Your troops enter the town killing evrything that moves. Your troops didn't have any mercy for nobody house by house evrybody was executed.
But a town with 50000 souls was too much for the 12000 coward redcoats. Finally after 3 days of intensive street fight you surrender.
Liniers have to hear the complain of the population that want to kill all the british for the atrocities they commited when they enter the town.
But he agree with Whitelocke the surrender and that the British will leave all the River Plate and that his soldiers will be respected.
If you don't believe me just read the Whitelocke's court martial when he arrive to London. The british blame him for loosing the River Plate.
My mind is not poisoned, all is documented in British books and diaries of many officers that were here in 1807.
@99 taky,
Mar 14th, 2012 - 08:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0You seem to be well read on these events, taky.
l knew none of this.
lf true then you have a good reason to hate us.
l will investigate further.
Peace.
Remember that in the same is difficult for for to forgive argentina what it did in 1982 even if pass 200 years. Is difficult for us to trust you.
Mar 14th, 2012 - 03:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At the end of the Whitelocke Court Martial he said, “it is difficult to be with a population that hate us so much”.
Is true that after 1850 we ulmust forgieve you and start a good frienship,
but Peron during 1940 revive all that hateress for the british from the past.
From 1807 until 1860 we alway conmemorate when we throw you out of our land. But from 1860 to 1940 we don't even mention in schools what the british did during the invasions of 1806 and 1807. During those decades you were our friends and we were consider an informal part of the British Empire. Peron revived all that hatred we left in the past. Is true that what Peron did was disgusting. We were good friends before 1940. We drop our claims of the Falkland Islands. But he was a fascist, like Mussolini.
I don't hate you and I disagree with the mayority of argentines about you and those islands, and your rights of self determination should be respected by us. But history is history, and I don't like lies from ether side. You were not as good as you always portait of yourself and we neither.
We also did our share of atrocities in our history.
I agree with you
Peace.
@99 taky
Mar 14th, 2012 - 04:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I wrote initially from memory and was referring to the first unopposed invasion which was not authorised and was only supposed to be recognisance in case Spain launched an attack from South America, so I’m not wrong, which you ignore. But yes, there was a second planned invasion, as the British had to withdraw after becoming outnumbered in 1806. So in 1807 with Spain still allied with France and at war with Britain, this invasion firstly liberated Montevideo, then engaged the Spanish colonial army driving them back, but at first didn’t enter Buenos Aires, trying to get them to surrender, but this was rejected, so they did enter the city in two columns, 4000 men in each column from both side. But the city had been reinforced by thousands of violent well-armed mixed race militia from other areas, who set themselves up at every possible sniping advantage point in the city. Therefore the British found themselves fighting against overwhelming odds in a closed urban environment, losing 1,808 men, killed or slaughtered. So in an exchange for the release of his remaining men, Whitelocke agreed to surrender Montevideo for which he was court-marshaled. But with the Spanish colonial army then defeated, it was those that had come into the city from other areas that ransacked it, not the British.
But our version doesn’t include all the emotive embellishments yours does, and because you recall it so easily (despite what you have written @101), is proof of your mind has been poisoned.
Also this was the start of the end of Spanish control in the area, meaning they were no longer a threat to South Africa, so no more attempts were made.
@101 taky
1982 invasion is in living memory, whereas using an 1807 invasion as an arguement is the result of brainwashing, meaning no one trusts you
Redcoat you are wrong again.
Mar 14th, 2012 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you take time and read the Whitelocke court martial, a lot of testimonies of oficials and soldiers proofs of incidentes commited by the british soldiers outside of buenos aires.
Even the British goberment gave special instruction to Whitelocke before the expedition to don't make anything that could put the local population against the british. But what Whitelocke did and specially some of his officers was to commite all kinde of atrocities outside the city.
Looting some little towns outside buenos aires.
Loria was a family living was is today Plaza Congreso. They have a small house at the entrance (in those days) of buenos aires. A few british soldiers went to their house and offer to buy the horses. Mr. Loria dennied to help them and he was shot right a way, then his all family was kill. If that was not an atrocitie I don't know how to call it.
What you read in your version of the british history is brainwashing (british history books = fairy tale) .
Is very funny read british history text books.
For example during the Iberian Peninsula War. You were helping Spain against France. You read in those british books about everything but not even mention the atrocities you commited against a populations that suposse to be your alied during that campaign. Do remaind you something the name Badajoz and other towns in Spain that suffer the same fate under british attacks.
You are hypocrite. You are the one that is brainwashed, believing how good, honest, fair were the British in history.
Your version of history said that you didn't kill the native of Canada, the American Colonies, Australia, Tasmania, they just died of diseases.
And you also teach that Spain exterminate the native of the Spanish America.
But your brain cell never realize that the spanish carried the same diseases than the english so if that excuse apply to the Anglo Colonies also apply to the Spanish Colonies. Today more than 50% population in SA is mestizo or indians.
Hi taky,
Mar 14th, 2012 - 08:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have posted frequently on this site about:
human disease introductions in both directions (see http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/01/15/uk-syphilis-columbus-idUKN1443055520080115, and 'Guns, Germs and Steel' Jared Diamond);
also on genocides (see 'The Third Chimpanzee' Jared Diamond), which by definition, need conscious decisions to undertake - unlike the passive transmissions of germs to the 'unprotected'.
As I have said a number of times here, Tasmania was the only genocide - albeit a small one - undertaken by the British or by early British colonists.
We cannot be so complacent about the South American purposeful erradications in Argentina, Amazonia, etc, and - of course, more recently - to the males of Paraguay.
These were true, large-scale purposeful genocides.
@103 taky
Mar 14th, 2012 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You certainly are proving my point, you rant on as though it was yesterday, which means, it is so heavily imprinted on your mind; you can’t contain your intense hatred.
Do you actually think, anyone would stupid enough to trust a people that, is REALLY as violent and bigoted as you?
“Even the British goberment gave special instruction to Whitelocke before the expedition to don't make anything that could put the local population against the british”
That would have been a typical order given to a British commander, but he was ambushed so it became impossible and with so many British killed, they wouldn’t be in the best of humour and no doubt committed crimes, but no different from the Spanish when attacking the British in the Caribbean and Central / South America
“Your version of history said that you didn't kill the native of Canada, the American Colonies, Australia, Tasmania, they just died of diseases”
The British didn’t, Native Americans went to Canada to escape extermination after 1783 and are still there today, as are the aborigines are still in Australia.
“Today more than 50% population in SA is mestizo or Indians”
But not Argentina, where they were largely exterminated.
“For example during the Iberian Peninsula War. You were helping Spain against France. You read in those british books about everything but not even mention the atrocities you commited against a populations that suposse to be your alied during that campaign”
YES WE beat the French, because the Spanish would not properly cooperate with the British, so they constantly got beaten by them and although supposed allies, the Spanish hated the British, so no doubt made up stories, as they are good at lying.
Your mind is so poisoned and Brainwashed you seem unstable, so I doubt whether you could ever change.
Redcoat
Mar 14th, 2012 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0102 “ this invasion firstly liberated Montevideo”
Do you really think that the British liberated Montevideo in 1807 ?????
Do you really think that the people of Montevideo want it to became british subjets ?????
Is like saying that Argentina wanted to liberate falkland islanders in 1982. Is ridiculous your affirmation. Or it was a joke what you wrote ???
When sombody try to imposse a new goberment over people that don't want you in not liberation. That can apply to argentines in 1982 or to the British in 1806 and 1807.
That is what the british curricula teach in the schools, that the world wanted to be dominated by the british ????? Is outrageous !!!!!
“The British didn’t, Native Americans went to Canada to escape extermination after 1783 and are still there today, as are the aborigines are still in Australia.”
How many natives are in Canada today ? or aborigens in Australia ? You should read the Canadian or Australian Census before writen ridiculous claims like yours.
“But not Argentina, where they were largely exterminated. ”
I agree about Argentina, but my point is that in your history books you teach to your kids that Spain exterminate the natives of Spanish American and I can give you biography about this. You lie to your kids. And they grow up hateing everything that is Hispanic. You keep feeding the black legend...
“ the Spanish hated the British, so no doubt made up stories, as they are good at lying.”
You should read what Wellignton said about what his soldiers did in Badajoz. Was not an inventions of the Spanish. It really happen, you enter the city of Badajoz after beating the French and rape and kill the spanish population that was suposse to be your allied.
Who is brainwashed at schools only us ?
You are so arrogant people. I don't hate you like you said. I only like the truth. You keep throwing hatered against everything that is Hispanic in your book and you think I will not said a word about it???
You are wrong!!!!!
Your overblown sense of self importance is outrageous, I used the word ’liberate’ as a kind of joke, because Montevideo (ultimately Uruguay) broke away from Argentina.
Mar 14th, 2012 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your assertions are ridiculous,
Canadian or Australian Census don’t prove that they were, as they weren’t exterminated, see also GeoffWard2 post @104
All you do is transfer your guilt onto others, mainly the British.
Unlike Argentina we don’t lie to our kids because history is no longer taught in English schools, mainly because we see how divisive it is in Argentina and we don’t hate anyone, but we do distrust the untrustworthy.
“You should read what Wellignton said about what his soldiers did in Badajoz”
You are such a selective bigot:- At the Battle of Badajoz Wellington lost 4,800 killed and 3,500 wounded achieving the near impossible, but the French then retreated into the city and crazed British troops chased them and went wild looting and committed a wide array of atrocities which took 72 hours to completely restore order. THAT’S WAR you Pillock. Without the British, Spain would be a French colony.
“You are so arrogant people. I don't hate you like you said. I only like the truth”
What a joke, your so called (selective) truth is just a means of throwing aspersions at people you hate and despite your typical Argentinian claim of innocence; even you nearly agree you are subjected to brainwashing, with the end result of a distinctively poisoned mind.
You are waste of time.
So in your opinion for me to don't be brainwashed I have to agree with you that the British were good and the Spanish, French, German and Argentines were bad ????
Mar 15th, 2012 - 02:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0If I said so I wont be brainwashed ????
Ok you were very good people. The world want it to be dominated by you. The people that don't want it to be dominated by the British were just anti-british full of hate. You were so good boys that you don't deseve the rejection of those people.
When you invade somebody else land you respect their language, their costum and their way of living. Such a good people deseve to be welcome when you invade somebody else land.
But if was the oposite that somebody else try to invade you and make you change your language, costumes and way of life, they are bad people. How they dare to dominate the british, domination of somebody else land only is reserved for the british because they are the chosen people by God.
Thank for your advice I will burn all the History books I have and I will take your word that is sacred.
Now I know:
British = good
Spanish = bad
French = bad
German =bad
Argenine = bad
Thank you
@Redcoat,
Mar 15th, 2012 - 09:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0l think that our friend taky may be telling the truth as he perceives it.
And he may be right.
Horrible things happen in war. We all know that. Our hands are as bloody as everyone elses.
l will have to do some more investigations about all this, but l just have that feeling that taky is far more truthfull than people like Think, Marcos,malen etc, etc.
Never liked to get too involved in the Napoleonic wars as l would have had relatives on both sides!
And St Joan of Arc is my heroine!
Still don't like malvinistas, though.
Peace to all.
@108 taky
Mar 15th, 2012 - 09:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0You certainly have mood swings, no we don’t over justify our past actions, in fact we always seem to be told (by our own people) the inglorious side, as if it’s a perfect world and we should have been saints and we let the country down. But what you dig up was at a time when Britain HAD to compete with other European powers, or the opposite of what you write would be the case. Britain wouldn’t probably still exist if Spanish, French, Germany or Argentina had become dominant. We are small nation and we HAVE to trade and the only way to insure that is not to let others control us. Despite what you are led to believe, we don’t control you (your debt and corrupt leaders do that), we would prefer you to be prosperous and friendly. But until your children are no longer indoctrinated and you have changed your constitution, you cannot be trusted.
@109 lsolde
A brief history lesson: Napoleon a despotic war mugger, bad. As for St Joan of Arc, I won’t spoil your romantic image.
And for taky, since I’ve been on here, I’ve noticed that if I dig a little, their real intentions become apparent.
Isolde and Redcoat
Mar 15th, 2012 - 10:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you for your replay. I'm sorry for my English, I try to do my best to explain myself.
Believe me when I said that I agree with you completly about your rights of self determination. I got many of my co-nationals agains me. But I don't care because I'm loyal to my feith: freedom!!!
The only thing I don't like about you is when I read your history books you were always the good and the rest of the world were bad guys. You always found a way of justify a masacre or un atrocities commited over others people land. Or if you can't justify a bad act you just hide it from the public.
Do you know that Reginald Dyer (Amritsar massacre) was recived in Britain as a hero even recive a pension for life. Those kind of impunity of a murderer make me very angry. I said to myself how do that happen, so many lifes killed senseless? what happen in this man head to do something so disgusting?
Searching a little more I find out that the mayority of the society of that time agree with Darwin evolution and think that for example the indians were sub-humans and cannot be treated like whites specially whites british.
That make me more angry. But when I study Argentine history I found the same philosophy in those days.
The diference is that if I take a argentine history text book (since the restauration of democracy before we also use to dennied the wrong doings in our history) you can read all the masacres and atrocities we commited during our history. Rosas first extermination of the Indians of Buenos Aires Province.
Roca extermination of the indians of Patagonia. The unfair war against Paraguay (Brazil was more responsable for more death than us).
But when I read a english book about your history. I only read how glorious and good your Empire was, and if you mention something bad you always have a way to justified it. If that is not brainwashed I don't know how to call it.
I also agree with you that about Falkland Islands we dennied some important facts. Sorry.
@111 taky
Mar 15th, 2012 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You seem to have calmed down now, so if you want, I will attempt to explain, you may probably think I shouldn’t try and it’s indefensible, but I’ll have to leave that up to you. Firstly we are far from perfect, but we defend ourselves if threatened.
I was completely unaware of Reginald Dyer and the Amritsar massacre, but I know of other incidents of this type.
There were SO few British in India (max 50,000) it was a very fine balancing act, if there were only a few disturbances simultaneously, the whole house of cards would come tumbling down and chaos would follow. The British had agreements with Moguls to maintain order to prevent infighting, so we were really the middlemen or a glorified protection racketeer, we were excepted to control disorder, but if an incident happened that was badly handled, even criminally so, the official line taken was, as others weren’t there so they were assumed to have acted correctly, but they may well have to face an investigation behind closed doors.
If it was found to be criminal, whether or not it was made public, depends on what were the consequences of releasing the findings, if it made the situation worse it wouldn’t be.
In India, the British mainly got on well with them, but a by-product of colonialism is a rise in public support for nationalism and if it became violent, the British would ruthlessly deal with it, simply because it was the only feasible way of keeping it check.
Now the findings on Reginald Dyer, he said he was convinced that they faced an imminent threat of mutiny in Punjab on the scale of the one in 1857 where hundreds of British men women and children were murdered. So whether right of wrong he was let off.
p.s. Your English is good, my only requirement is I can understand you, and remember Britain and Argentina WERE good friends before Peron. (As were Germany and Britain before the Kaiser)
You keep defending the domination of other peoples lands by Britiain was correct ? You are so brainwashed to think that you were good. No killings, no murder ever existed, no racial discrimination, no extermination of the aborigen in Australia, no concetration camps in south africa. And if you admit something is always justifiable for a good reason. Any body can justify an extermine of people. We can justify what we did in patagonia too. As the australian colonizer we need the land for the white settlers too.
Mar 16th, 2012 - 05:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0Let me be clear YOU ARE NOT THE CHOSEN PEOPLE BY GOD
If it was wrong for the Spanish, French German or anybody else to try to dominate the world IS ALSO WRONG FOR BRITAIN TOOOOOO.
Stop defending the British Empire. It did awful things and is obvious you are been brainwasher by the defenders of the Empire.
I won't waste my time any more try to explain to you the simple thing that ALL HUMAN ARE EQUAL !!!!! and nobody has the right to dominate nobody else. Not argentina to the Falklands, and not you either to somebody else.
Stop justify the atrocities the British committe through history. The british empire was build over racial supremacy of what they consider sub-humans.
Winston Churchil once compare the Indians with dogs. He was a fervent defender of the British Empire. He was convince that the british were superior than the rest of the world.
For me a person that defend the former British Empire is equal to a racist person.
Is wrong to imposse your will over people that don't want you. Do you undersand that. It apply to argentina- falkland case too.
Is the last time I answer to you
You are a lost cause.
Isolde is the only one that understood what human equality means.
Last time : ALL HUMAN ARE EQUAL RIGHTS !!!!!!
I hope you get my massage.
Bye
Taky, etc.
Mar 16th, 2012 - 09:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0There was a time - until quite recently - that human sacrifice and eating each other was considered ok ....... a human right.
The concept of absolute equality of all humans - and all races - is VERY recent indeed. At the present point in human social evolution much of the world believes this - at least as an aspiration - and invests it in a mess of laws.
Except that - for example - membership of a particular religious belief-group seems to confer superior rights to some and lesser rights to those outside the group (and my god is certainly more right than your god ;-)
It is the 'modern' version of the Gentlemen's Club - a social device to segregate and offer advantage to the few over the many; it has always been the case (?) that mystique, coercive power and status have been constructed to give advantage.
Some believe this to be advantage in 'future lives', others simply take the advantage in the here and now.
There are presently movements afoot to extend the (bhuddist, etc) philosophies of Rights of Sentient Life to non-human primates and even to human pre-foetal entities!
No, I think that ascribing equality in all areas, at all times, to all humans, in all geographies and in all stages of development is merely the social construct of some, somewhere, at a point in time.
@GeoffWard & taky,
Mar 16th, 2012 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0l don't believe that all people are created equal.
l also classify humans into a distinct hierarchy.
But l don't classify people by race or nationality.
But by intelligence.
l have seen, geniouses(is that a word?)& gormless idiots in all races & nationalities that l have had contact with.
Also, one must not confuse intelligence with knowledge.
Some do.
Just because someone doesn't know how to do a certain thing, doesn't mean that they are stupid.
They've just never been shown.
Although a lot of people feel more relaxed in the company of their own race or nationality(that's natural), l prefer the company of people of the same interlectual level as myself irregardless of their race or nationality.
But thats just moi.
@113 taky
Mar 16th, 2012 - 11:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0Whenever you give an Argentine the benefit of the doubt these days, because their minds have been poisoned, they always let you down, treachery seems in their blood.
I wasn’t defending what happened, it was 150 years ago, so only just what happened, they were different times with different norms, but you are so brainwashed and bigoted that you go on as though it was in 1982
If a people’s intelligent is so low and they behave like dogs, some more flamboyant types will label them so, that’s not a defence, it’s just understandable.
“YOU ARE NOT THE CHOSEN PEOPLE BY GOD “
Of course not, but life favours the intelligent and you are not showing much sign of intelligence, thinking my explanation was a justification.
“ALL HUMAN ARE (have)EQUAL RIGHTS,
But clearly some will do better in life than others and although helping others is rewarding, if they abuse that help, that doesn’t mean you are obligated to continue that help.
These days it’s the Argentines with their poisoned minds that want to brutally suppression the rights of the Islanders and for you to keep researching old history to justify your hatred, shows how out of touch you are.
My suspicions about you were absolutely correct..
Bye.
@115 lsolde & @114 GeoffWard2
I have found, never to take people on face valve, you’re likely to be disappointed that way.
I don't search old history to justify my hatered. I like reading history. From all nations. I don't hate britain or british people. Is that I don't like the way they see themselves as the saivors of the world instead of a nationa that try to dominate the world against the less power ones. At the same time you critize other cultures and put them as bad just for trying to do the same you did for centuries is too hipocrety (?).
Mar 16th, 2012 - 02:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I study argentine unjustice too and I'm also very sad what my country wrong doings of our history. But at least don't dennied it like you do.
I don't like people that is proud of their historical intention of dominate other people against their will. Call it Italian, German, French, Greek or British.
The difference with you is that you are proud of that. The Germans are not proud of what they did. We are not proud of trying to wipe the indians from our lands. If you ask to any argentine about how they feel that our ancestors try to exterminate the natives, they will said that it was wrong.
But you don't even admited. Only resently in Australia and in Canada they start admiting wrong doing in their history and, for example Australia, make official apologize to the aborigens of the atrocities commited against them in the past. But some people of UK not only don't even regret it, they also defend with pride what they did.
Is like reading two diferent stories. From one side I read Irish history from their point of view, and they see you as agressor and racist. And the same story by your history books said that you were good and not even mention the atrocities you did commited during the time Ireland was dominated by you.
To whom I believe. A crime can not be hide under the carpet. Even if pass hundreds of years.
The german, the argentines, even australia admmited some wrong doings in their history how come you cannot look inside of you and admited you too
commite crimes agaisnt others. You were not as great and fair or nice as you see yourself.
@117 taky
Mar 16th, 2012 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I like reading history”
But you obviously only see what you want to see to be resentful, whereas I like history to know what has happened and why it happened.
“Is that I don't like the way they see themselves as the saivors of the world ”
It WOULD refreshing if other nations would take the lead in getting rid of dictators and tyrants that kill their own people and threaten the world, but the trouble is most countries are corrupt and are almost as bad .
“you critize other for trying to do the same you did”
So AGAIN: we HAD to compete with other European powers in colonialism, because we found our trading links were being cut off and our produce was being stolen by the likes of Spain and France. So we built up our Navy to protect our interests and low and behold, we became better at it than them. So yes of course we criticise them for AGAIN threatening us, because WE KNOW what they are like and how they couldn’t be trusted (like you)
“But people of UK don't regret it, also defend with pride what they did”
Maybe, but I haven’t got to apologise for something in Britain’s the distance past, Kevin Rudd apologised because he’s had an on-going problem of discrimination that needs resolving, but he apologised for injustices, not atrocities (that’s your bigoted mind) .
“I like reading irish history from their point of view”
Of course you do, because like you, some perpetuate their hatred, but what they don’t say is how much they benefited from the British Empire and followed it where ever it went, because they were nearly always starving and fighting each other at home.
“The german, the argentines, some wrong doings”
I’ve never heard the Germans, Japanese or Argentinians APOLGISE for what did !!!!
“You were not as great and fair or nice as you see yourself”
Again that’s your bigoted view, I think we were successful and no worse (probably better) than others, that’s why our colonies are nearly all in the Commonwealth.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!