MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Poll shows 61% UK support for defending the Falklands; young voters not so sure
As the 30th anniversary of the beginning of the South Atlantic conflict approaches, a new poll conducted in the UK by the newspaper The Guardian has shown that British people are largely determined to defend the islands. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesNo one gives two fucks what the poll says.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 10:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Of course The British first ,do need to know where are these frigid islands on the map.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 10:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0well if you guys dont know, then no one does, besides you argies seem to have the brit polls all sewn up, do you not.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 10:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0as long as we islanders stick together,
CFK can whistle in the wind .
I remember a poll made many years ago which resulted for the question of “” where is the FI “”
Mar 20th, 2012 - 10:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0answers are ...37% ( I don' t know).......12%(in South Atlantic).....18%(in Pasific).......23%( North Atlantic)... 10%( near Ireland)
61% from Guardian’s inept, insecure self-centred negative parasitic windbag readers, so just think what the percentage would be for the positive people that matter.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 10:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“49% of voters aged from 18 to 24 say they support the possibility of a handover”
That’s because our youth hasn’t been brainwashed like their Argentinian counterparts, but that would definitely become much lower, if there was a real threat and not just Argentinian flatulence.
61% is really high, when you consider what the statement means... Britain should protect Falkland Islands 'AT ALL COSTS', the voters would have had thoughts running through their minds like... even if we lose a hundred thousand troops and have to Nuke an invading countries capital!
Mar 20th, 2012 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the question would have read 'Should Britain defend the Falklands Islands from an illegal invasion?' I'm sure it would have been 80/90%.
Another scathing article on The Botox Queen. she has now been sussed.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/03/20/the-president-in-black/
This is how Cristina Kirchner of Argentina and her cronies get votes:
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyPC0SD0PGw
Come on, guys. Let's be honest. Not as many British people (especially the young) KNOW about the Falkland Islands and the issues involved there. Why? Because the school and news systems don't work like Argentina's, who scream “MALVINAS” every hour of the day. If Britain was fully informed of all the facts, (as they would be in another war), the support would be closer to 94%
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You only have to read how the Guardianista worded the poll, to realise they were aiming for a totally different answer. Yet even their readers didn't vote the way the poll was worded for them to vote.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Shock horror.
4 MistyThink
100% of the people I know, not only know where the Falklands are but also don't want a fascist Argentine junta in control of them.
Oh yes people know about CFK and her tricks. They also know how ugly she is, we recently had a darts contest at my local pub, using her picture and an Argentine flag. It was VERY popular :)
the black widow hits back .lol.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentine's just nippet's, nothing but a good slap in the face will calm them down.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@9 Good point, for Argentinian school children it almost seems like 'Malvinas' is a subject like History or Science. At my school I was never taught about Falklands war, just WW1/2, Spanish Armarda, Napoleonic wars, English civil war etc.
Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think the Argentinians on these forums know no different, to the constant obsessing over the Falklands. On the news, on TV, in politics 24/7 a nation obsessed by them, its not normal for a country to do this and not healthy. CFK has more to say about the 'Malvinas' than she does about Argentina's economy, which says a lot about both.
Stefan where are you from? just wondered...
It is well established that the wording of the questions, the order in which they are asked and the number and form of alternative answers offered can influence results of polls. For instance, the public is more likely to indicate support for a person who is described by the operator as one of the “leading candidates”. This support itself overrides subtle bias for one candidate, as does lumping some candidates in an “other” category or vice versa. Thus comparisons between polls often boil down to the wording of the question. On some issues, question wording can result in quite pronounced differences between surveys. This can also, however, be a result of legitimately conflicted feelings or evolving attitudes, rather than a poorly constructed survey.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 03:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0A common technique to control for this bias is to rotate the order in which questions are asked. Many pollsters also split-sample. This involves having two different versions of a question, with each version presented to half the respondents.
The most effective controls, used by attitude researchers, are:
asking enough questions to allow all aspects of an issue to be covered and to control effects due to the form of the question (such as positive or negative wording), the adequacy of the number being established quantitatively with psychometric measures such as reliability coefficients, and
analyzing the results with psychometric techniques which synthesize the answers into a few reliable scores and detect ineffective questions.
These controls are not widely used in the polling industry.
So in a nut, polls are frequently used and can provide fairly accurate results, however unless implimented correctly they can actually be of little worth!
(14) brit abroad
Mar 21st, 2012 - 03:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“So in a nut, polls are frequently used and can provide fairly accurate results, however unless implimented correctly they can actually be of little worth”
I say:
Couldn't agree any more.......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll
So in my opinion, many people both sides of the fence are putting to much weight on this poll and others conducted before. these polls are not detailed enough!
Mar 21st, 2012 - 04:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0So can we talk about something else, or just start hurling insults around instead? Its much more fun!
Who'll start the abuse? Come you bunch of worthless malvinists........Where are ya???
Comment removed by the editor.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 04:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Legionarseolio
Mar 21st, 2012 - 05:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0What drivel!
Ok,for arguements sake i will take another stance and side with the RG's that we stole the falklands from, the then small country who hadnt even reached patagonia in their expansion (colonialism) in S america.
So ok what if you got the falklands back, what is you legal claim on the South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands????????????? because you definately got no where near them back in 1800's.
bet i get no clear answers!
@17 Legionario, while I understand that you would obviously prefer to communicate in your own language, you cannot do so on Mercopress. If you take a look at the comment guidelines just up the page, you will notice that all comments must be in English. Since you have found your way to think webpage, I am going to assume that you speak it. Please remember for next time.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina's Precious: [speaking the words engraved on the Ring] Malvinas Argentinas, Malvinas Argentinas, Malvinas Argentinas, Malvinas Argentina
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0[the light darkens and the air rumbles]
Elrond: Never before has any one dared utter the words of that tongue here in Falklands.
Gandalf: I do not ask for pardon, Master Elrond, for the Black Speech of Spain may yet be heard in every corner of the South Atlantic.
“It is well established that the wording of the questions, the order in which they are asked and the number and form of alternative answers...” bla bla bla
Mar 21st, 2012 - 10:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0If a similar poll was carried out in Argentina and questions such as
1) Where are the Malvinas located? 99% right answer
2)Who are the rightful owners of Malvinas? 80-90% would answer Argentina (mabye higher)
compare to the percentages posted by the Guardian. I would have expected much higher than 61% TBH
The fact is that Britain will eventually have to negotiate with Argentina, hopefully with some honest government and not the Kirchner gang
Mar 21st, 2012 - 10:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0For those who can read Spanish I would suggest that you read Vargas Llosa's SI, LLORO POR TI ARGENTINA (Yes I cry for you Argentina. This will give you some insight into the Argentine psyche.
The UK is cash strapped. It is even thinking of privatising its roads to the Chinese. It cannot afford to maintain its garrison on the islands in perpetuity.
Cina is the next superpower - empires come and go.
very good analysis Ozgood....
Mar 21st, 2012 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0BTW, Vargas Llosa's piece is plagued by errors. seriously, plagued by errors.
Just of the top of my head:
he claims that there was no poverty when he first visted Argenitna. WRONG! There has always been poverty in Argenitna, ALWAYS
@22 Ozgood
Mar 21st, 2012 - 11:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The UK is cash strapped. It is even thinking of privatising its roads to the Chinese. It cannot afford to maintain its garrison on the islands in perpetuity”
You clearly don’t understand the British at all, we will for ever support our military, it’s in our DNA, and it is not threat to the government like it is in Argentina. Also your low intelligence you seem to misinterpret everything you read, e.g. only privatising NEW roads, that’s if it is ever agreed.
Yes, we do at first try to negotiate, but if that doesn't work and it didn’t with you, we have learnt that Argentina can NEVER be trusted.
So whereas the Falklands will be more than self-sufficient with all that oil, you are going to be for ever powerless and reduced to having to suspend reality in order to imagine that in the distance future your pre-programmed mind can be satisfied, but you will just die waiting, you sad loser.
@18 brit abroad,
Mar 21st, 2012 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0l have asked that exact same question a few times here.
l have had one RG admit that they had no claim,
Sr Think's excuse was “because we want them”.
That was uncharacteristicly honest of him!
(actually one of the few truths that l've caught him out on!).
But the vast majority of malvinistas just ignore you.
They have no answer so they just hope you'll go away.
The real reason, l think why they want them, is because they are the gateway to Antarctica & because they think that we are weak & they can just take them.
@22 Ozgood
Mar 21st, 2012 - 02:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Totally disagree, there are only two possible future outcomes for the Falklands.
1) The Falklands Islands remain a British Overseas Territory
2) The Falklands Islands become an independent country
Someone please tell a circumstance under which the FI population would rather be ruled by Argentina than be independent, I can't think one???
Think about it...
The UN believe in self determination.
Argentina is trying to colonize islands that have a happy successful population, its wrong, the UN know that. It won't happen.
Ozgood where are you from?
61 percent isn't very high, and as the older ones die off, and younger generation comes in, lookin more like FI/IM will be handed over eventually
Mar 21st, 2012 - 03:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0LOL, brits now furious, mad mohammeds, come shine my USA boots, you UK peasants, lol gdp ppp per capita not even in top 20 anymore rofl
@Steve
Mar 21st, 2012 - 03:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are probably right.
I have family in Argentina, I know people there, I have learned Spanish at university level and believe that I have a reasonable command of the language - I am certainly not an expert.
There are some types who would not mind the return of the military. They really made a mess of the country, but they feel that there was discipline, a low crime rate a.
Most are warm people who really want to get on with their lives and are concerned with their day to day survival.
When I was in Brazil some years ago - during the hyper inflation era, I spoke to an ex paratrooper who told me he preferred life under the military because there was order and discipline.
The problem is a multifaceted one and there is no easy solution
Incidentally I could not care less if Redcaoat call me stupid, perhaps I am.
There is a legal tenet AUDI ALTEREM PARTEM - listen to the other side
@28 Ozgood, thanks for your reply, glad you've seen the light.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So I'm guessing you are Australian?
What general views do your friends / family and country have on the Falklands situation?
9 Stefan (#)
Mar 21st, 2012 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mar 20th, 2012 - 11:19 pm
Report abuse
Come on, guys. Let's be honest. Not as many British people (especially the young) KNOW about the Falkland Islands and the issues involved there. Why? Because the school and news systems don't work like Argentina's, who scream “MALVINAS” every hour of the day. If Britain was fully informed of all the facts, (as they would be in another war), the support would be closer to 94%”
**thats because british schoolchidren are only taught how to be celebrity dancers and chefs**....haha
30
Mar 21st, 2012 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah and celebrity racing drivers, footballers, rugby players, thespians, Olympians, poets, inventors, pilots, authors, film makers, scientists, doctors and.....soldiers.
Meanwhile Argentina produces stupid, macho, hairy, mouthy, supercilious chumps who for some reason want to deny their African Moor Roots.
Dear bloggers, with all respect to the islanders & I don't want to be mean, but do you seriously think that the UK cares about 1300 persons living in those Islands (as to get to 3000 we have to count all the military effectives)? Guess what? They care about the oil that is under that soil, this is what they are interested in, don't be blind or better, be blind, money colours it all...Argentina claim those islands much before knowing that there was petrol there & if you visit the continent, you will see that everybody love those islands & of course the people...you seem to have very bad memory, you forgot about the time when many sick islanders were carried to Comodoro Rivadavia for treatment and also many of you were born there, about the oil supply that YPF was doing when you were forgotten by your British broderhood? when the only air link that you had were the LADE airplanes? I wish you all the luck, but a humble advice don't spit on the sky, you guys will have to be sitting soon to discuss with Argentina...cause is on your side the illegality of actions & you know it, please stop with the disgusting Brits propaganda as they don't really give a shit about you.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The Guardian states that the poll, conducted along with public opinion researcher ICM, included interviews across all social classes, regions and nations.”
Mar 21st, 2012 - 06:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Anybody else read that? Please note “all...............nations.” So, finally giving the lie to argieland's claims, 61% of THE WORLD believes that Britain should defend the Falklands for as long as the Islanders wish it. Doesn't that make all “proper” people feel good? Argies are not included amongst “proper” people. Now what about more information on who voted who weren't British. Argies have form for getting on to British newspaper polls and voting in favour of their illegal, invalid and nonsensical “claim”.
The best thing to remember is that argies don't understand what TRUTH is. They have just managed to evolve to the level of “pleasure = good, no pleasure = bad”. This is considerably lower than the level of evolution achieved by chimps. Mentation is not involved. It is quite possible that beings that act on this level are actually incapable of mentation. They may be able to imitate humans. But that doesn't mean that they are “human”. “Think” about it. A computer may be able to operate at a thousand or ten thousand times the speed of the human brain. Does that make it “human”? Can it get out of the armchair and put the kettle on for a cup of tea? Can it go out into the garden and mow the lawn? Can it drive the car down to the supermarket and do the shopping? Such are argies. Brainwiped, programmed automatons.
Would you “negotiate” with a computer? Of course not. You would switch it off. If it wouldn't work properly after several attempts, you'd throw it away! And so the obvious solution to the argie problem becomes clear!
Malvin70 is a good example of a poor automaton with equally poor programming. Just read its comment closely. Could that be human? Look at just one sentence and understand what is behind it. “when the only air link that you had were the LADE airplanes?” Intended airborne invasion?
@32 Malvin70 / any Argentinian
Mar 21st, 2012 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Answer this ...
Tell me a circumstance under which the FI population would rather be ruled by Argentina than be independent, I can't think one???
The UN believe in self determination.
Argentina is trying to colonize islands that have a happy successful population, its wrong, the UN know that. It won't happen....
I want the FI to get every penny of the oil and gas money, to build new towns, hospitals a university and develop their islands.
Yes we do care about the FI as they are our cousins and if Argentina or anyone else invaded the FI, I would sign up to the armed forces to remove them as would many thousands more in the UK.
And you forget Britain's claim to the islands was also before any oil was found, and certainly was before your claim, your country didn't exist at that time.
@29 Steve 32 UK
Mar 21st, 2012 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I am South African - Ozgood was taken from Mad Magazine - Remember Roger Kaputnik, Alfred E Neuman etc
I have all sorts of friends and acquaintances from those who thought the military was correct. You can go to a local museum and in the centre of a hall they have a glass panel with photos - each picture has a caption below the image stating INTERVENTOR MILITAR - you canguess what this means
These were people sent by the junta to the towns to see that the local authorities carried out the policies of the ruling junta
The person's rank (usually military) Brigadier, Coronel etc
@32 Malvin70
Mar 21st, 2012 - 07:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“do you seriously think that the UK cares about 1300 persons living in those Islands (as to get to 3000 we have to count all the military effectives)”
Probably because you are a self-centred Argentinian, you can’t conceive that the British do care about their own people, and you only appear to guess, imagine or just have propaganda for information, because there are over 3000 Islanders and over 1000 troops on the Falklands.
“if you visit the continent, you will see that everybody love those islands & of course the people...you seem to have very bad memory, you forgot about the time when many sick islanders were carried to Comodoro Rivadavia for treatment”
The Islanders have a very good memory and remember all about Argentina’s invasion and the scum Argentinian that came with it, so will never forget and getting hospital treatment in Argentina was in exchange for having military bases on the islands, which was well and truly abused, never again.
“you guys will have to be sitting soon to discuss with Argentina...cause is on your side the illegality of actions & you know it, please stop with the disgusting Brits propaganda as they don't really give a shit about you”
The only reason you think Argentina’s claim is valid is because you were subjected to indoctrination as a child, so understand this, there will be no sitting down with Argentina, your claim is false and the British cared sufficiently enough to lose 255 soldiers and sailors returning the islands to their rightful owners, before any knowledge of oil.
So the only thing that is shit, is you.
To Conqueror & Steve32: you guys react as farmers, well you probably have even sex with sheeps and complaint about chimps? I don't think that you need to get aggressive when you hear the TRUTH, Steve you really are from UK I can see it dude, as you want to steal from others and colonyze as you have done it so well, a nice example of this behaviour is the British Museum. Conqueror you are blind and don't want to see facts as they are, your vision of the international poll makes me laugh, same as when I read that Cameron said that he had the US unconditional support & the next day, the US had to publish another story, guys you Brits are masters in adultering the history, Argies know about that because we learnt from you, we speak Spanish but we also have a lot of Brits inheritance in our land, even if we like it or not.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@37 Malvin70
Mar 21st, 2012 - 07:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I answered your questions with honesty and facts. So you accuse me of having sex with sheep!
Please answer my only question...
How would the Falkland Islanders be better off under Argentinian rule, instead of being an independent nation?
@37 Malvin70
Mar 21st, 2012 - 07:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You wouldn't know the truth if hit you in the face, we are not subjected to propaganda, you are, you demented idiot.
Read @36 carefully and if you can't take it in, or except it, that's proof you are brainwashed
37 - how can we alter history we have a free press and a democratic government. Argentina in turn has a pretend democracy where the president has voted herself in for another term and controls the media. A previous military junta that murdered its own people. A country that lies about inflation (the IMF has closed down their offices in BA) and defaults on IMF loans and hey the US want their loan back as well. Your economy is spiralling out of control and the falklands is a smoke screen for a failing country. So lets hope it doesn't implode. With regarding stealing from other countries the whole south american land mass was stolen from native american tribes by the Portuguese and Spanish the native ethnically cleansed, or did you think the aztec ruined cities where a theme park.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 07:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@37 Blah, blah blah. All you do is flap your gums. Come and try to take the islands. Let god choose who has right on their side. Because you can waffle on until the cows come home, the only way you'll get the islands is force.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Dear Steve, you cdn have sex with me instead afterall chimps are better than sheeps :) makes love and not war...but coming back to serious matter...and to be honest with you, FI as of now can't be independent is too small and can't be considered as country, even if they go for self determination still they need support, the word rule sounds a bit sour, anyway there is much to talk about between parties here, let's see what the outcome could be and I agree with you that maybe is not the best solution that the FI be part of Argentina or UK, but let's have the chance to discuss it. Sleep well Steve, God bless FI, Argentina & UK, let's find peace, there are opportunities only. Give peace a chance :)
Mar 21st, 2012 - 08:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@42 Malvin70
Mar 21st, 2012 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We gave peace a chance, but obviously you don't know the meaning of the word and can't be trusted.
So get back to worring about Argentina’s real problems, like you could be starving soon as your resent catastrophic drought, that destroyed your genetically modified soya bean crop, virtually your only means of revenue these days. Your current inflation of 26% set to increase, your shambolic public transport that has just doubled its fares and the price of utilities (electricity water etc.) going to rise four-fold, your rubbish isn’t getting collected, you already have squalid ghettoes and insanitary shanty towns, which are set to get very much worse, your roads are falling the pieces and building keep falling into all the holes in Buenos Aries, etc. etc.
And there is and never will be a reason to negotiate.
You guys should send this gorilla to Coventry,
Mar 21st, 2012 - 08:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The only way to stop these foul mouthed children, is to ignore them,
In two days they will commit suicide in the toilet where they belonged .
.
42 Malvin70
Mar 21st, 2012 - 08:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0'Dear Steve, you can have sex with me instead'
Is that an offer? maybe if you look like CFK in her younger days?
Glad you have seen another side of the argument, its not as clear as the Argentine media make out.
Also I know of no reason why the FI could not be an independent nation, it would be the END all sovereignty claims. Although the FI would be the smallest nation on earth in population.
Time for a baby boom FI ...
@Malvin70
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And what do you get when a brit have sex with a sheep?
A little Mohamaabe-e-eh
@45 Not quite true Steve, were the FI to be independent, then it would be second smallest, as its population is nearly four times that of the Vatican City, which is also a sovereign state.
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvin70- at least you try and get basic sums and facts right!
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Our population is 3000 EXCLUDING all military and their civilian support personnel who live on the military base.
When “push” comes to “shove” as they say - or “when the chips are down” (as in 1982) you would see that we are entitled to the principle of selfdetermination and that most nations will indeed back it - and the UN itself has to under its constitution.
Recently Arg has been doing a lot of shouting loudly of false historical and legal information over the Islands history - in the silence of no UK response, this shouting has naturally led to other national Govts thinking - well “it is all we hear - so it must Be true!”
More recently UK has ralised the danger of this and has upped its own diplomatic offensive to get the TRUE historical facts out - as a result you are already seeing cracks in your support from some regions,
silence from others and absolutley NO realistic and Practical support from even your close neighbours!
Ship Flag is easily sorted and trade etc continies as normal, and CFK makes do with the verbal support only!
Lan and Pinera refused to cut the Lan flight.
CFK ups the publicity offensive internationally with vehement speeches and all sorts of threats:
All the world media flock to the Islands(not B.A.!) and we have now got worldwide media coverage of the Falklands that would have cost us £ millions otherwise!
We actually need to than CFK for achieving it!
@46 DanyBerger
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0'A little Mohamaabe-e-eh?'
please explain, I don't get it?
@37 Thick bitch!
Mar 21st, 2012 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@42 I've no doubt you've had sex with plenty of chimps. Is Helber one of yours? Let's face it, we all know that you are all QUEER. No faffing around with all these PC terms. You are QUEER. Unnatural. Deviant. What does “discuss” mean? Please see Article 1 of the Temporary Provisions of the argie constitution. But if you want to go further, you will need to buy or steal a brain and a mind. You will need to go abroad for this. Brains and minds don't exist in argieland. See whether you can understand these minor matters. The Falklands are not argentine. They have never been argentine. They never will be argentine. Those concepts are myth. Argie government myth. Argie government “Con the peasants” myths. Useful for when your country is going down the tubes. How's your 25%+ inflation? That your government says is only around 9%. That lie alone should tell you something. Are you looking for a pay rise this year? Pay attention to the percentage increase the unions ask for? That's your inflation rate. The amount your government is willing to see paid to disguise reality.
You want peace? You can have peace. Back off. Accept that what is OURS is OURS, not YOURS. That Britain is responsible for the Falkland Islands and takes that responsibility seriously. Our responsibility is to the Falkland Islanders. To ensure that they can build their own society and economy free from rapacious neighbours. Britain takes NOTHING from the Falkland Islands. Britain GIVES.
If imperialist colonialist argieland had any honesty, it would admit that Britain is aiding the Falkland Islanders more than argieland could afford. It would be glad of that. It would be grateful that a real nation would take that responsibility.
Perhaps you could try to evolve into a proper human being. Thought of that? As matters stand, argies and argieland are a 15th century disease. That needs to be stamped out. Do you think you could join the REAL 21st century?
Give peace a chance..... check been at a state of peace since end of June 14 1982. unless the government of Argentina are planing to declare war again?
Mar 21st, 2012 - 10:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is how Cristina Kirchner of Argentina and her cronies get votes:
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 12:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyPC0SD0PGw
via Lord Ton :
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 12:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Republic of Argentina has enshrined within its own Constitution that the only acceptable future is full Argentine sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. The Republic of Argentina does not seek genuine dialogue but simply wishes to discuss the terms for a transfer of sovereignty. But neither the United Kingdom nor the Republic of Argentina can negotiate away the principle and right of self-determination for the Falkland Islands people. We should like to remind the Republic of Argentina of their international legal obligations to respect the principle and right of self-determination for all peoples, as respectively set out under the United Nations Charter (Article 1.2), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (common Article 1).
http://falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/britains-official-response-to-argentinas-accusations-at-the-un/
Is there any need for this gutter language on the part of some posters/bloggers or whatever one might call them?
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 02:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0One realises that the topic is a heated one and emotions are starting to flare up. There is a lot more to this than meets the eye and both sides are presenting compelling arguments.
So let's listen to them without resorting to barack room language!
Questions RGs dont like to answer or can not:
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 02:46 am - Link - Report abuse 01) Where is the 2 billion that was meant to spent on the airline
2) Ok,for arguements sake side with the RG's that UK stole the falklands from, the then small country who hadnt even reached patagonia in their expansion (colonialism) in S america. So what is you legal claim on the South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands?????????????
I am sure there are more
@54 Ozgood
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 11:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0“There is a lot more to this than meets the eye and both sides are presenting compelling arguments”
No there isn't, you can liken it to someone going into a bank that they haven't an account with and demand money because they live 300 miles away. But if for some reason you think this is a compelling arguement then you need your head testing.
What the islanders want is the ONLY compelling arguement and they want to remain British, end of arguement.
@Redcoat
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ozgood says that your argument/analogy is fallacious.
Whether you like it or not there is another side to this story which probably will eventually be resolved in the International Court of Justice.
Your pseudonym obviously gives you away as MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG. Great Britain allowed Czechoslovakia to be given away to a monstrous tyrant. MacMillan “shipped” the Cossacks back to the USSR after the end of WW2. The whites and moderate blacks in Zimbabwe are now under a despotic black dictatorship.
Baroness Thatcher and Lord Carrington rewarded Mugabe with a knighthood probably knowing that his North Korean trained 5th brigade murdered 20000 Matabele in the early 1980s
The colonial past of Great Britain among other things would not be regarded as one without a blemish. A bit of introspection is called for here.
Argentina was run by a thoroughly nasty and evil junta from 1976 to 1983. Now CFK is probably trying to deflect attention from the economic woes of Argentina.
So look into a mirror before you jump to conclusions.
Amnesty - Argentina's 10% Amerindian population subject to racist violence, discrimination and imprisonment in THEIR OWN LAND - http://laht.com/article.asp?articleid=355829&categoryid=14093
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Czechoslovakia - Non Brits/Never Brits.
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cossacks - Non Brits/Never Brits.
Rhodesians/Zimbabweans - Some Brits but Brits that declared UDI. Mugabe was elected democratically in free and fair election. Brit responsibility ended.
Have to say that's a rather disappointingly short list from The Empires Centuries in the Sun. And all irrelevant to the actual point you were trying to make.
The Falkland Islanders are Brits and want to remain Brits so as redcoat says “end of argument”.
Be Serious
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 03:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are only choosing the facts you like
There was much skuldugery in the 1980 elections. The illiterates were told that their votes were not secret etc.. Mugabe was reasonable until he lost the 2000 elections. He has a lot to answer for! We are overlooking the slaughter of the Matabeles!
Re:
Czechoslovakia - Non Brits/Never Brits.- This was a democratic republic
Cossacks - Non Brits/Never Brits. They were handed over to Stalin to be slaughtered or die in his gulags
None of you will see that there is more than one side to this matter!
Argentina's elections look a bit dodgy with votes being bought left right and centre. Should Spain intervene?
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 04:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The distinction that you don't seem to appreciate is that the Falkland Islanders are British kith and kin and want to remain with the Mother Country.
Dredge up history if you like, to show where British Governments have made either difficult decisions or unpalatable choices but what does that gain you?
The people of the world had voted on the UN. Why dont you respect that. Las Islas Malvinas are argentine. And the UN calls England to talk.
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you talk the problem will be solved. Why dont you want to talk. Because you like war because it gives you money. Change your mind.
@ 57 ....@ 59 ....@ 60
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 06:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For all I know Mugabe is not his original name ?
Any idea you have about it ? ( UK sources can say it..!)
Before defending islands internationally recognized disputed territory Question: UK, has a historical element that guarantees that were once owners of the islands? known to be NO, have nothing. They had 179 years to show any Argentine government that they claimed the islands.
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 07:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They had the opportunity to accept the invitations of Argentine governments to resolve the dispute by means of arbitration internaionales but they feared and rejected.
Since the first research paper in 1910 the British never encontron experts in their archives a historical element to endorse what they say, until recently continued to doubt his version.
They had 47 years to end the Argentine claim to the United Nations.
To have had the opportunity to meet as established in the United Nations to resolve the dispute each party soon, there may agree to submit the case to the ICJ or international arbitration, but fears and rejects UK.
So Cameron says that something can not prove? From lip service is easy, but by historical figures endorse assertions have nothing.
We know that UK is loose papers.
You brag about the truth,
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But if it’s the truth you want,
Read
http://www.phoenixthinktank.org/2012/02/question-of-the-falkland-islands-uk-response/
Rather than listen to propergander,
The British government response and the truth ..
.
#64 BS, Britain suggested the ICJ in 1981 over the Falklands dispute. Argentina chose to invade to seize the islands before the 150th Anniversary of the British return.
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the Argentine claim is so strong, why do you feel compelled to lie about historic facts?
Not to mention, Argentina refused to accept ICJ arbitration in 1947, 1948 and 1955 over the FI Dependencies, despite the fact that in 1955 one of the judges was Argentine.
Nor did Argentina mention the Falklands once at the League of Nations.
As regards this poll.
What question did they ask?
Any survey is vulnerable to “Confirmation Bias” if the question is faulty. For instance did they simply ask if the UK should negotiate with Argentina over the Falklands or did they mention that Argentina seeks to dictate the outcome. I rather imagine the result would be different if they knew that Argentina has no intention of negotiating. The suggestion of talks is superficially attractive if you are unaware of the issues.
@57 Ozgood
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 08:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Ozgood says that your argument/analogy is fallacious”
Of course it isn’t fallacious, Argentina doesn’t own the islands, never has and yet they want them.
“Whether you like it or not there is another side to this story which probably will eventually be resolved in the International Court of Justice”
NOW that IS fallacious, in fact you have made that up, the UN would look at such claims, but Argentina’s has no claim, because it contravenes UN principles.
“Your pseudonym obviously gives you away as MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG”
What else would I expect but a prejudice opinion from you, no it represents those defenders, who had to fight off the many unsuccessful invasions of Britain.
“Great Britain allowed Czechoslovakia to be given away to a monstrous tyrant. MacMillan “shipped” the Cossacks back to the USSR after the end of WW2. The whites and moderate blacks in Zimbabwe are now under a despotic black dictatorship”
A selection of narrow-minded, anti-British half-truths misleading accusations, that SO gives you away, as the BIGOT you are.
“Now CFK is probably trying to deflect attention from the economic woes of Argentina”
There is no probably about it, but at least you can acknowledge it.
“So look into a mirror before you jump to conclusions”
I don’t normally jump to conclusions, but the Argentinian here, having been indoctrinated as a child are boringly predicable.
65 briton (#)
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 10:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This note does not prove anything, is the same as does Cameron from UK, say some lip service, but they have a historical element to endorse the claims. They had 179 years to break the Argentine claim and what happened? NOTHING.
If I am sure my arguments, I go and once I meet with the country calling me and humiliate islands with my archive. But none of that has encouraged UK to do in these 179 years. They have NOTHING.
The two versions of the Falklands and is well known, were studied by experts and we know that never did well in UK. And if you say otherwise why they can not break the Argentine claim? Why is not more than all those experts who have never given reason to UK?
# 66 JustinKuntz
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 10:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Britain never submitted the case to the ICJ Malvinas.
Who is lying when he says that Britain was they who discovered the islands, which were the first litter the ground in 1765 and others. We know it is true, the islands were discovered over 70 years before the first Englishman to reach the islands, there are maps and maps to prove it, nor the British were the first to settle in the islands, he won the French labor in 1764, and so on. The first historically known colony in the islands is the French and the first flag that flew over the islands was not the Union Jack, was France's Louis Antoine de Bougainville of
Historical evidence has demolished the original arguments in Britain.
If we talk about the English invasion of Malvinas in 1833, and have expelled a single inhabitant in the islands, our country was exercising sovereignty since 1820 and all the captains of ships, mainly British ships which came into port in the islands knew.
Of course that our country rejected the ICJ arbitration on South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands and Graham Land Coats and other Antarctic territories. With this move, Britain sought to establish the sovereignty of the Malvinas, and the “dependent” as two separate issues, with no interaction with each other and therefore totally wrong and tendentious. This is not a fanciful assertion, but based on English law itself and the evolution thereof, which began to be applied in the first instance only in Stanley, finally applying it, in modern times, the same territory of the South Pole .
This case was filed in 1955 and the complainant was acting English Fitzmaurice.
They have the opportunity to accept a session that has offered the governments of Argentina for years to resolve the dispute and to agree between both parties to go to the ICJ or go to international arbitration. Why Britain rejects that opportunity if they say that their arguments are strong? So far we have not seen that.
Regards
68 Legionario
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is entirely up to you what you believe,
I would rather believe in the British version,
If CFK thinks otherwise then take it to the ICJ, you cant keep coming up with excuses,
ICJ or nothing .
.
70briton (#)
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 11:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The British version made water everywhere and rarely sends any UK expert to international forums to put forward its arguments about Malvinas still have not humiliated Argentina Foreign Ministry, have spent 47 years and NOTHING from you. When they were humiliatingly lost the vote, 10 Resolutions. Failed to get to the islands is the only recognized as British, indeed, Argentina got to call the islands the Malvinas and are internationally recognized disputed territory.
They do not have the guts to say in front of the Argentine foreign ministers are to the ICJ, only encourage British forums. The excuse that the British have fled to Argentina from which they were invited to go to international arbitration to resolve the dispute and UK refused.
#69
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 11:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I never said they did. Again I pointed out the UK suggested the ICJ in 1981.
And it was Argentina that refused to go to the ICJ in 1947,1948 and 1955 over the FI dependencies. Before we have the usual crap about the ICJ being “biased” against Argentina, there was a sitting Argentine judge in 1955.
And you ignored the League of Nations, to instead waffle on about some historical crap.
The Vespucci letters are forgeries, there was no discovery in 1520 but discovery of itself is not grounds for a sovereignty claim - if it were can we have Port Desire back please.
And the settlement wasn't expelled in 1833, thats a lie.
The only people afraid to take it to the ICJ are Argentine.
We think you may be slightly confused,
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 11:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The islands are British, the islanders have been their for over 150 years,
And they have rights, and have freely voted to remain British,
Argentina has had nothing to do with the Falklands,
They have never owned the Falklands,
And have no legitimate claim, and you know this .
.
Map of Les isles ou des Geantz Samson, the Malvinas, made in about 1520 and reproduced by the French cartographer André Thevet. (National Academy of Geography).
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 11:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.malvinense.com.ar/foro/viewtopic.php?t=2468
@ see 72,
Mar 22nd, 2012 - 11:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0or go to
http://www.falklands.info/index.html
this may help
# 72 JustinKuntz
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 01:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0And I answered some of your comments.
Now if you say that the inhabitants were expelled in 1833, then explain, how is it that people inhabited Port Louis, became a ghost town after the English invasion and usurpasión.
I do not tell me, take heart to tell the Chancellor Héctor Timerman who is afraid to go to the ICJ.
Argentina knows that is not afraid of anything, and invited Britain to resolve the dispute through international arbitration and refused.
The fear is that Britain has never encouraged to include the Falklands with the rest of the disputed territories in the ICJ, if they wanted to humiliate Argentina, were entitled, but .....
In international forums, facing the international community, the British never dared, and dare to tell our foreign ministers go to the ICJ, or see you at the ICJ. Only British forums are encouraged.
# 73 briton
That that Argentina has had nothing to do with Falklands hurts. The Falkland Islands have always relied on the government of Buenos Aires since Spain took them and put its first governor Felipe Ruiz Puente in 1767, and from there went twenty governors, some of them were born in Buenos Aires, or were Creoles.
Until 1811 with the last governor Pablo Guillen, the islands were depending on the government of Buenos Aires.
And where is Buenos Aires? in Argentina, and why in 1820 the Argentine government took possession of the islands? because they depended on the government of Buenos Aires. And how the Argentine government hubicó Falklands Port Louis in 1820? because he had knowledge of what was in them.
And I speak from Spain because we are obviously the heirs of the dominions of Spain from Independence. And because much of the Argentines in 1816 were Spanish and Creole descendants of Spanish.
Those who have no legitimate right is Great Britain, 2012 to date we can prove anything. They grab a handful of islanders descended from Scottish and irlandeces always took them to occupy foreign territory.
@76Malvinero,
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 07:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Do you realise that you are telling lies?
Or do you really just don't know?
You amaze me that you can lie & not feel guilty.
Argentina has NEVER owned these lslands.
Argentina does NOT now own these lslands.
Argentina will NEVER own these lslands.
Only the trespassing garrison was expelled & rightly so.
You “inherited” NOTHING from Spain. Spain did not recognise you until 1863.
ln short, you have no rights & no case.
They are OUR lslands(despite all the lies that you were taught at school),
We are NOT going to give them to you & there will be NO NEGOTIATIONS on Sovereignty.
Get used to it.
To be fair you did own them briefly in 1982.
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0The ironic thing if you hand'nt invaded you might have got them through negotiations that's NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN NOW.
Threaten us and we just dig our heels in we might not talk a good fight but as a country we excel at war last time we were not fighting someone was 1968 and that was the first break in 200 odd years. If all else fails we will fight ourselves.
Taking on south America over the islands would be insane but we've fought the afghans 4 times even the Russians ony tried it once.
So rationaliality is not our strong point.
@69 & 76 Malvinero
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 11:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Reading both your rants of writer’s diarrhoea, in which you recite the same old indoctrination rhetoric of false history and proclaim how hurt you are, just proves how brainwashed you have been.
Britain is not frightened to go to the UN, but why should they; Argentina has no plausible claim so why pander to their constitution and I have no doubt that whatever evidence is presented they, like you would claim it proves nothing, they just want the islands. We are also confident that all countries that matter know Argentina is only motivated by greed, not by facts or civilised behaviour.
But what is clear though is you have become a manipulated automaton.
Amnesty - Argentina's native population subject to racist violence, discrimination and imprisonment http://laht.com/article.asp?articleid=355829&categoryid=14093
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 11:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0I suggest the readers look at on the edition of today. It's very enlightening.
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 02:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Populism in Latinamerica has moved from the dictatorships of past decades to the so called “delegative” democracies such as those of Venezuela and Argentina, according to a group of Latam intellectuals meeting in Peru in an international seminar, “Latin America: opportunities and challenges”.
this is my cousin Adolfo in London making fun of your stupido english army
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 03:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDPK1kPWj1E
72 JustinKuntz (#)
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 03:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0One of the UK's strengths has always been the discovery of the islands. And what happened?, Historical evidence demolished that argument. Now do not give importance. Ha!
77 lsolde (#),
79 Redcoat (#)
If you are so sure of the British case, then why the British never more expert than you have done with the Argentine claim?. They have not even managed to humiliate their arguments to the Argentine Foreign Ministers in international forums.
They had 179 years to show any Argentine government claimed the islands were an historical element to endorse the claims.
it's the British army and your cousin got a kick up the backside.
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Rather than being “disappeared” .
which is the traditional south American military response usually followed by surrender when faced with a proper militarily.
What's the difference between toast and Argentinians.
You can make soldiers out of toast.
76 Malvinero
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 083 Legionario
Again both wrong, I think you will find that the British government has informed the argentine government of its own claim,
And the argentine government is aware of this, and it is also aware that every time Argentina gets into trouble, it brings up the Falklands as an excuse and diversion,
You cannot keep inferring 1833, this is a no no, it has been superseded,
And to be fair, in this day and age, with all the loony decisions being made, and the human rights brigade, and if CFK and her loyal bloggers believe you have the support of the whole world,
then today, is the very time for CFK to take its case to the ICJ, don’t keep on saying we should,/ we have no reason to, and it is you lot that want them, the CFK government could stand up in the UN and say , Argentina believes the islands are hers by right, and we are going to the ICJ , and demand the British government do the same, and prepare to defend her claim .
[And then take us to the ICJ ]And end this once and for all,
But you wont, the CFK and the argentine government knows that the lies would be exposed and Argentina would humiliate herself, and be embarrassed in front of the whole world, and her allies would desert her like the plague,
So be fair, [you don’t need our permission]
if you think, you own the islands, then end this farce and take the British to the ICJ or forget the whole thing and admit you are abusing and intimidating an innocent country, and this makes Argentina a disgrace and anti democratic, in a free and civilised world.
Just my opinion, [just an opinion]
@83 Legionario
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 06:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“If you are so sure of the British case, then why the British never more expert than you have done with the Argentine claim”
Britain has proved their case beyond doubt, but they think it's like arguing with an indoctrinated imbecile
“ They have not even managed to humiliate their arguments to the Argentine Foreign Ministers in international forums”
Only an indoctrinated imbecile would think Britain could be humiliated over its rightful sovereignty, on the other hand an indoctrinated imbecile has no reasoning to humiliate.
@82 Filippo
Your cousin is as childish as you
Haaaaaaa
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 08:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0British gentlemen what happens, they are loose papers?
85 briton (#),
86 Redcoat (#),
Evolution of the British case from 1833:
http://www.terragno.org.ar/pdfs/Proyecto%20Nacionalidad%20Malvinas.pdf
I think very clearly says the international community when called upon both sides to resolve the dispute promptly. UK has the opportunity to meet with Argentina and agree to submit the case to the ICJ. Why refuses UK? Why not agree to meet with Argentina to resolve the dispute? UK has a good chance, perhaps not in doubt say no?, Then? or does not have a historical element to endorse the claims.
The reasons given by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland not to reinstate the Falkland Islands to Argentina have changed over time, as historical evidence demolished the original arguments: first sighting, the first landing, the first settlement , adverse possession.
Yawn
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 09:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#74 Produces a map.
Where are the Falkland Islands?
51°42′S 57°51′W
Did you check that map? You might notice one tiny little problem....ie they're completely in the wrong place.
Britain did not negotiate in good faith with Argentina to find a solution to Argentina's invented problem. Britain was even prepared to transfer sovereignty to Argentina, not because of any doubts about sovereignty but because the islands were difficult to defend and had little value for the UK - provided this met with the consent of the islanders. They even tried to persuade the islanders to consider transfer to Argentina but Argentina being Argentina managed to fuck that up royally.
And Argentina then invaded. I note you frequently claim this didn't have the support of the people but I can remember the crowds in the Plaza de Mayo lauding Galtieri. A 1000 young men died for that foolish venture and I also note Argentina still has not expressed one word of regret. No, they turn the invasion anniversary into a national holiday.
As to the rest, no Britain's argument has not changed, the world has moved on. In the 21st Century, self-determination is a human right conferred by the UN on all peoples. Your morally bankrupt claim that the people of the Falkland Islanders don't deserve basic human rights merely shows the colonial nature of your claim; you would impose an alien culture upon them against their wishes.
As regards the ICJ, Britain did make precisely such a suggestion in 1981 and again in 1982 as a means of settling the dispute once and for all; you invaded. Again it was Argentina that refused to go to the ICJ over the FI dependencies.
If your claim is so strong, why do you feel compelled to lie to embellish it. You claim that Vernet's settlement was expelled in 1833, its a lie, a foolish lie, easily disproved.
No doubt, you'll respond in the classic childish manner repeating the same crap after your arguments are rebutted.
Here endeth the lesson.
Applicability of “” self determination “” for a population made up of the same colonizing force that seized is tricky.....
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 09:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think the British population transplanted with the animus to establish a colony....
@88,
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Very good, Justin.
@89,
McClick, you think all sorts of things. Mostly wrong.
88 JustinKuntz
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0sadly mate they are not interested in the truth,
they are to indocrinated, to see they are the agressers,
still as long as the union jack flies,
they will just have to cling on to their leaders apron strings .
@ 90 Isolde
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0UN Committe of Decolonization ( 2006) says according to to the Britain revealing of census data on these islands that just 40 % of the population has lived on the islands more than 10 years....and only 42 % of the population was born on the islands..more than 57 % of the inhabitants over the age of [10] have been implanted...
@87 Legionario
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why do you keep reciting the same old drivel, you do know your brain is stuck in a continuous loop don't you, Oh of course not. Yawn
@89 McClick
Don’t make me laugh you can’t think and those animals you mension were transplanted to Argentina and you are still one.
A video of you in your natural habitat:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTBAjfgHLyk&feature=relmfu
92
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Prove it,
or skiddadle
@ 94
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't be lazy,
You can investigate it in UN reports.
but your argentine version are always much better,
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 10:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0we have to have something to laugh about
do we not,
the islands are british, and will remain british long after CFK has gone
@ 96
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Only convenient cheer !
That a population that has doubled in the last 30 years has a substantial number of immigrants is not surprising. That some are 9-10 generations in the islands is an inconvenient fact you seek to obscure with such statistics.
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 11:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Implanted? Immigration of their own free will, some are even Argentine.
Could you please tell me why Argentina speaks Spanish rather than Mapuche or Tehuelche? Ah that'd be because you're descended from Spanish colonials who displaced the native population...whilst logic and consistency isn't your strong point, for hypocrisy and hubris you take the gold medal.
@ 98 J.K
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 11:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...immigration of their own free will...! to where ?
to these Frigid Islands ?......are you kidding ?
Using which language is very different point .
Frigid Islands
Mar 23rd, 2012 - 11:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0if they are so.
then why do you want them
100 briton
Mar 24th, 2012 - 01:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0few Argentines are interested, it is our government, our media and our education system that drums into us every day these islands must be ours, we must avenge the honor of our soldiers. It is all mad! Honor of our soldiers? In 1982 they were killing our own people. Insane!
98 justin
Mar 24th, 2012 - 03:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0that's not the worst. Spanish is spoken, but the spanish colony doesn't exist any more. The worst thing is that part of our territory is still colony (British) and people living there speaks English. the SOTB don't want to leva
@101Benito
Mar 24th, 2012 - 03:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0You are correct Benito - nice post
@102 Cero
Mar 24th, 2012 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0“but the spanish colony doesn't exist any more”
Yes it does, in all but name, but it’s now run by insurgents.
“The worst thing is that part of our territory is still colony (British) and people living there speaks English. the SOTB don't want to leva”
The difference is, not even the Spanish colonists want to live under the Spanish rule, whereas the islanders still want to be live as British, which should tell everything on the subject.
@101 Benito
Based on what we get here, you seem to be too intelligent to be an Argentinian.
TWIMC
Mar 24th, 2012 - 01:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mr.Benito is as Argentinean as Mr. Filippo…..
Both members of that rare breed....: The “Non Spanish Speaking “ Argentineans.
Anyhow, dear British turnips…….
Enjoy your dialog and solidarity with British trolls.
It surely makes you feel like good pirates.
Chuckle chuckle®
This whole discourse has run its course. Let's wait for the anniversary and see what happens.
Mar 24th, 2012 - 03:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@105 Think
Mar 24th, 2012 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Enjoy your dialog and solidarity with British trolls”
Can't bear to think that intelligent Argentinians do exist then, but of course you don't them too close or your stupidity is becomes even more apparent.
@105 Think,
Mar 24th, 2012 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thinkus Horrobilus, the cut & paste expert.
104 redcoat
Mar 25th, 2012 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There are two options: you eat consume too many drugs, which don't not think seriously. or you are from another planet and have no idea.
@109 Cero
Mar 25th, 2012 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well I don't take any drugs and am definitely on this planet, so there must be another option, you write childish drivel, but are too indoctrinated to recognise it.
93 Redcoat (#),
Mar 26th, 2012 - 05:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0JustinKuntz,
Boston College International and Comparative Law Review
Sovereignty and Decolonization of the Malvinas
(Falkland) Islands
http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1518&context=iclr
Regards
@111 Legionario
Mar 26th, 2012 - 06:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't know you Justin, but I couldn't get the link to open.
But I don't expect much from Boston, having been there they are anti-everything except maybe themselves.
88 JustinKuntz (#)
Mar 27th, 2012 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A French scholar discovered in the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris, precisely in 1982 - the plane of the Malvinas Islands as much as the year 1520, in the Département des Manuscrits in 15.452 French manuscript, more than seventy years before Davis and Hawkins, and fifty-seven years with priority to imaginative discovery of Drake. “The map of the year 1520 is due to Captain Andres de San Martin, a member of the Spanish expedition of Ferdinand Magellan, found the original in the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris, under the classification of '15.542 French Manuscript.”
“The question of the Malvinas issue is pending.” With this phrase, now strong, Paul Groussac closed his work published in French in 1910: Les Iles Malouines.
@113 Legionario
Mar 27th, 2012 - 06:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I've seen some of those early French maps from 1499 onwards and for example they show non-existent islands mid North Atlantic e.g. Sept Citea and S. Anna, either because of bad navigation, delirium or that they just make them up.
# 88 JustinKuntz
Mar 27th, 2012 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 01)_ You may notice that the map has a strong resemblance to the Falkland Islands. A French expert found the map in Paris and dating back to 1520 when a Spanish expedition discovered it.
2)_ The first secret document research on the validity of a title from the Crown over the Malvinas Islands was conducted by an official of the British Foreign Office in 1910 and was produced under the labels of “SECRET” and “CONFIDENTIAL”. Its internal reference number is 9755 and is on file 881/9755 of the Ministry. Starting from the first research paper from 1910, no British professional who researched, studied, analyzed the historical records on Falklands in UK have found a historical element that guarantees that the Falklands once belonged to UK and until recently still had British professionals who were doubting his release.
In 1940, the Foreign Office produced a document titled ”Proposed offer by Her Majesty's Government to reunite Falkland (Malvinas) Islands with Argentina and Acceptance of lease”. This document states the British intentions to accept a lease of the Islands. On December 22, 1970 was excluded from the public consultation until 1991. (Commons Hansard V. 52, n. 22, 21 and 23 January 1984.)
In 1968, the document in full recognition of Argentina's sovereignty over the territory and their return to our country, had been developed in full consultation bilateral governmental missing only the signatures of both Foreign Ministers when it was marred by a clique of pressure inside the chamber common, protecting economic interests in the Islands.
Argentina did not invade anything, recovered in 1982 which took away with no UK law in 1833. The Falklands conflict was not born in 1982, the conflict was coming from years before, the British government came to take for fools Argentine governments and aggression of the British in South Georgia was the straw that broke the glass of water.
When our country after inependizarse of Spain, took possession of the F
#115. Yawn.
Mar 27th, 2012 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Q. What are the co-ordinates on the map you claim is the Falklands, though they could be pretty much anything?
A. Nowhere near where the islands are situated.
Proves precisely sweet fuck all, though the desperation with which you strive to ignore basic facts is really amusing.
#111.
An Argentine scholar, reprising Argentina's flawed claims based on a distorted view of history, trying to obfuscate Argentina's refusal to submit to the ICJ with waffle proves sweet fuck all as well.
For example he repeats the claim that with the Treaty of Friendship Britain recognised transfer of possession from Spain. Except they didn't, both the US and the UK in recognising the independence of Argentina did not recognise the territory it claimed but did not possess.
JustinKuntz
Mar 27th, 2012 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In this paper an Argentine diplomat, expressly referred to British official documents. Maybe someone can disprove the existence of these documents .... (I am publicly on record here that the documents that are mentioned are properly identified with their corresponding data file and record in UK):
http://www.mrecic.gov.ar/portal/seree/malvinas/docs/04-Juan_Archibaldo_Lanus.pdf
An internal document “very confidential” from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom, December 8, 1927, recognizes ”that for more than a century Argentina has claimed that the Malvinas Islands (Malvinas) are Argentine territory ...“ . Later he says that ”Argentina also has claims on the South Orkney and South Georgia.“
In Exhibit ”A” of this memorandum, after appropriate the history of the islands and its occupation by force, mentioned the efforts and protests from the Argentine Government, 1832, 1833, 1841, 1842, 1884, 1887, 1888, and so on.
By 1927 the British were concerned about the possibility that the Argentine government raised the issue of conflict of sovereignty to the Pan American Union, which was nevertheless a troubling prospect for them. It would be a presentation to the Inter-American Conference to be held in Havana. On the other hand, Ambassador Howard had confirmed that the State Department in Washington was aware of the issue.
110 Redcoat
Mar 27th, 2012 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0certainly, this is the kind of answers that deserves your primitive reflections. You don´t deserves further effort. regards
#117
Mar 27th, 2012 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I simply note, that you completely failed to address the simple point that the map you claimed proved Argentina's claims has the islands in the wrong ocean.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so inventive.
Justinkuntz
Mar 27th, 2012 - 11:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That can be expected of you, if it is one of the few British stubborn of the who did not want to admit that British professionals, Argentine, Spanish, French and other countries who investigated the British version never gave them reason to Great Britain.
So far only misleading and fanciful arguments have been what have tested you with a luck for other adverse. We have not seen quite a SERIOUS British argument that lead to believe that they have a superior right except the strength and self-determination not recognized legally.
For years which come to demonstrate that they have nothing
Traducción:
Hasta el momento con los únicos argumentos engañosos y fantasiosos han sido lo que han probado ustedes con una suerte por demás adversa. No hemos visto absolutamente un argumento británico SERIO que conlleven a creer que tienen un derecho superior salvo la fuerza y una autodeterminación no reconocida jurídicamente.
Desde hace años que vienen demostrando que No tienen nada.
JustinKuntz and Redcoat
Mar 28th, 2012 - 12:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Since the early 16th century and for most of it, only navigators at the service of Spain travelled the maritime routes along the South American coast, advancing southwards in their search for an inter-oceanic passage. In this process, the Malvinas Islands were discovered by members of Magellan’s expedition in the year 1520. From then on they were recorded on European maps under a variety of names and remained as part of the spaces under effective control of the Spanish authorities.
During the 17th century, the Malvinas Islands were sighted by navigators from other nations who had ventured into Spanish domains at the risk of provoking reactions and protests from Spain whenever it received news of such expeditions. But the whole southern region of the Americas, with its coasts, seas and islands, was indisputably preserved under Spanish sovereignty through the different treaties signed in that period, such as the “American “ Treaty of 1670 between Spain and England.
The Peace of Utrecht, signed in 1713, assured the integrity of Spain’s possessions in South America and confirmed its exclusive right to sail in the waters of the South Atlantic. As a signatory of the Utrecht agreements, and of later 18th century treaties ratifying it, England accepted these clauses. However, towards the middle of that century, the Malvinas Islands provoked the interest of Great Britain and France, which were seeking to establish a strategically located settlement opposite the Magellan Strait.
In 1749, Spain received news of a British project to settle in the Malvinas Islands, and strongly protested to the Government of the United Kingdom, which as a consequence, gave up on it.
When in 1764 France established Port Louis on Soledad Island, Spain objected and won the recognition of its right to the islands from France. The French Government ordered the evacuation and handover of the settlement to the Spanish authorities. The handover was made in 1767 and, from then on
“misleading and fanciful arguments”
Mar 28th, 2012 - 10:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinero, I have given you the location of the Falklands Islands, the map you show is clearly for a different location. This is misleading and fanciful, pointing it out is not.
The only nations ever to have resorted to the use of force in the islands is A) Spain in 1770 and B) Argentina in 1982.
Oh and I note again you didn't address the point, that the map you claim as proof has the islands in the wrong location.
#121
The Treaty of Utrecht did not preclude Britain from installing a settlement in the South Atlantic, nor did it make the South Atlantic exclusively Spanish.
The decision not to pursue Lord Anson's expedition in 1749 had nothing to do with Utrecht, the reply to the Spanish claims makes that plain.
@118 Cero
Mar 28th, 2012 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0That’s because you can’t win and as the indoctrinated can’t often recognise what’s happened to them, I'm not surprised.
@121 Alexander
Apart from what you write cannot be verified, in 1771 the Spanish recognised in Britain’s right to the islands.
@122 JustinKuntz
I admire your patience in answering these single-minded obsessive androids, it’s like a scene from the night of the zombies.
Justin Kunzt
Mar 28th, 2012 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is abundant reference information provided by serious authors, professionals and providers to say ”“Les isles de Sansón ou des Geants” correspond to the islas Malvinas. Que no lo quiera reconocer un británico como Justin Kuntz y que no lo conoce nadie no es relevante.
http://www.terragno.org.ar/pdfs/Proyecto%20Nacionalidad%20Malvinas.pdf
http://www.terragno.org.ar/pdfs/Proyecto%20Nacionalidad%20Malvinas.pdf
Who are entitled to the islands is the people of this land who fought for freedom shedding their blood and no to a European power has always been aggressive and had nothing to do in South America. In 1833, there were inhabitants on the islands from Argentina and the use of force used them in Britain.
At the first British settlers began to implement from 1842 and not before. After the English invaders Port Louis became a ghost town. Britain used force against our ancestors in 1806, 1807, 1833, 1845, etc.
The Treaty of Utrecht 1713 is ratified in 1670 which were signed between Britain and Spain. In other words, the King of England would retain the lands of North America to islands and ports until then owned, or more than that NO, and the subjects of Great Britain will not commercialize, or navigate the area that the King of Spain had from the Caribbean to the South Seas.
123 Redcoat (#)
There are official British documents with reference numbers as No. 9755, which says the opposite and that is on file 881/9755 of the Ministry.
Androids and zombies is you British want to justify the unjustifiable and versean innocent people and ignorant.
“London known since 1910 that has no right over the Falklands”
http://www.terragno.org.ar/pdfs/Proyecto%20Nacionalidad%20Malvinas.pdf
@124 Legionario
Mar 28th, 2012 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why do you keep providing links to articles in Spanish and expect us to believe they prove anything, when I provide links to sites that prove the islands are British you and your countrymen write that they prove nothing.
“official British documents with reference numbers as No. 9755, which says the opposite and that is on file 881/9755 of the Ministry”
And you expected us to think this means anything?
“innocent people”
Argentina is far from innocent; you are obsessed with gaining territory and cannot accept the wishes of the Islanders, constantly harassing them with bogus history you take as gospel.
125 Redcoat (#)
Mar 29th, 2012 - 12:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0HAAAAA!
You, the British argue with what suits them, what they do not want do not publish. It is known, defend the lies of the British government.
What have you tried so far? NOTHING, HAVE NOT SEEN NOTHING SERIOUS BY YOU FOR MANY YEARS.
The links in Spanish that I left, make dimension to British documents with reference numbers do not give them reason to UK, British professionals themselves have documented.
No matter that you or your partners believe it, but you can not allow you to lie to people.
The islands are usurped by UK since 1833, have no historical element to endorse the claims.
Example:
The first secret document research on the validity of a title from the Crown over the Malvinas Islands was conducted by an official of the British Foreign Office in 1910 and was produced under the labels of “SECRET” and “CONFIDENTIAL”. Its internal reference number is 9755 and is on file 881/9755 of the Ministry. The British official, Gaston de Bernhardt, explains:
”About an hour before the meeting of Parliament on January 22, 1771, a statement signed by the Spanish ambassador following orders for the restitution of the Malvinas Islands to His Majesty, but the important condition on which this statement was obtained was not mentioned in the declaration. That condition was - that British forces should evacuate the Malvinas Islands as soon as was convenient and after they had been put in possession of the Port and Fort Egmont -, and the British Ministry agreed, in token of his sincerity, to keep the promise they should be disarmed first (England was preparing for war against Spain).
These facts are confirmed by the Comte de Guines (the intermediary between Spain and Great Britain) in its brief and British historians Belsham, Miller, Coote, Wade Hughes, who have described these transactions on your BOUT “The Stories of England” .
So far there is a renowned British have exceeded those professionals.
The real British history begins from 1910 and which gives
#124
Mar 29th, 2012 - 08:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Again you fail to address a fairly fundamental point, the map you showed has the “Falklands” in completely the wrong place. Then you obfuscate the fact you refuse to address this by wanking about those “who fought for freedom shedding their blood ”. Really, well they must be turning in their graves about what their ancestors are up to, denying basic freedoms to a people that have been there more than 175 years.
#126 Bullshit. There are no documents whatsoever in any archive containing a secret promise that the British would evacuate the islands. The Spanish delegation proposed a face saving measure, whereby BOTH nations would abandon the islands after restoring the British to Port Egmont. The British refused to argee and the Spanish delegation capitulated. No one has ever produced any evidence to the contrary.
Telling and retelling the same lie won't make it the truth.
@127JustinKuntz,
Mar 29th, 2012 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0They think it will though.
They will believe anything that supports their ridiculous claims.
@124 & 126Legionario
Mar 29th, 2012 - 01:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I again wasted my time checking out your fanciful claims, yes there are records that suggest the Spanish did sight islands in the vicinity of the Falklands, but from what is recorded they were almost certainly the Jason islands, north west of the Falklands but no claim was made for them and the French obviously had no clear idea of what the whole Falklands archipelago was in like in 1760 as their map shown in link below proves:
http://www.asiapacificms.com/articles/argentine_sovereignty/falklands_map_mid.jpg
Your obsession is quite ludicrous.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!