MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
“Argentina: shame on you”; Editorial from Canada’s Globe and Mail
Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has said it is “absurd” for the British government, which has enjoyed sovereignty over the Falkland Islands for 180 years, to maintain its claim from an ocean away “when these Islands are part of our maritime platform.” Applying the logic of Ms. Kirchner, Canada should be stoking international tensions in an effort to annex Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. And perhaps Greenland. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThe only grip Chrissy has is shaky grip on her bottle of meds.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor lady.
One would “Think” that a Canadian newspaper would be better informed about current Canadian Affairs…..
Apr 14th, 2012 - 07:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Paper says:
“Applying the logic of Ms. Kirchner, Canada should be stoking international tensions in an effort to annex Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. And perhaps Greenland.”
I say:
1) Canada has through effective diplomatic actions taken virtual control over the fisheries and natural resources of the waters surrounding Saint-Pierre and Miquelon…..:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon#Maritime_boundary_case
2) Canada is constantly trespassing into Greenland’s territory….
Most current example is Hans Ø:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon#Maritime_boundary_case
As a matter of fact, this last Canadian encroaching attempt was Front Page News in Denmark as late as the day before yesterday….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon#Maritime_boundary_case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon#Maritime_boundary_case
Blame Canada!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon#Maritime_boundary_case
Globe and Mail is currently middle of the road journal.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0It is not shame to claim of Quebec self determination rights.
I don't know which is the most remarkable part of this article. How inaccurate it is or how old the news is. Fair dinkum Mercopress; get a grip.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Mr. Joe Bloggs is apparently not fully satisfied with the fair, impartial and unbiased line of reporting from his own Falkland Islands News Agency........
Apr 14th, 2012 - 09:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0He would maybe prefer a “Harsher”” line?
A la Mr.Conqueror perhaps?
A la
@3 I'm sure that Argentina fully supports Canada when it puts territorial integrity ahead of self determination.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 09:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0(6) Cmd McDod
Apr 14th, 2012 - 09:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina's position is crystal clear on both issues.......
It fully supports Canada's territorial integrity against the French pretentions in the “Saint-Pierre and Miquelon Issue”
It fully supports Kalaallit Nunaat's territorial integrity against the Canadian pretentions in the “Tartupaluk / Hans Ø Issue”
I thought the whole world supported the false arg claim??
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0It seems not...
Quite rightly said and full of logic - CFK need's to get a grip!
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0So this twisted charm offensive that is supposed to make us Falkland Islanders love Argentina .... (I am told that we shouldn't take it personally, it is not aimed at us as we have no part in the dialogue and it is just Argentina's way of expressing its frustration with the British) .... I was surprised to discover that a four year old knows what an Argie is. I am pretty sure that when I was four I didn't know what a German was and certainly 30 years after WW2 I bore Germans no animosity. Argentina has been sowing some poisonous seeds over the last 30 years with no signs of stopping and without seeming to realise that it will take at least an equivalent amount of time to undo the harm done.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Canada's Globe and Mail Editorial is a masterpiece!
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0Philippe
It fully supports Canada's territorial integrity against the French pretentions in the “Saint-Pierre and Miquelon Issue”
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why not start nearer to home
Regions and territories: French Guiana
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/country_profiles/3516572.stm
@7 Very interesting but I was referring to the issue of the French speaking minority within the otherwise English speaking Canada rather than squabbles over the colonial outposts of European powers such as Denmark and France.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0(10) Honoria
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:31 am - Link - Report abuse 01) ***”Twisted charm offensive”**** is the twisted Anglo way of putting it.
The only thing Argentina is doing is not collaborating to the comfort and well being of the British squatters in Malvinas, those spearheads of British pretensions of domination of the South Atlantic and the Antarctic.
2) You were just four in the seventies!
Well....., that explains a lot, young lassie :-)
3) Argentina has no need or intention to ”undo any imaginary harm done to any British squatter”
We have been told innumerable times by you Brits to ”Bugger Off”.
The feeling is now mutual…………
Good article. It is kind of rare that Canada is heard on the international circuit so to hear some scorn aimed at Argentina further dimishes the Argentina's misplaced junvenile claims and as William Shatner (aka Captain Kirk) is Canadian, then to have the Space Federation on our side too, makes me feel all the more legit.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0(13) Cmd McDod
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0You will have to be clearer about what you are “referring to” on any future exchanges............
I'm not a cryptologist................
Regards
El chirpy Think.
Ps: the other day, after my “chirpy” freudian slip, I suddenly remembered this Scottish hot panted chirping beauty!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSNSTerj2Kc
She surely does chirp one's day ;-)
Hmmmm.......stirred up the official spokesman, the analysis must be uncomfortably near the mark.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0This is how most independent observes see the issue. The hysterical claims to world support are a bit like Galtierei's claims to be still winning the war on the 12th June 1982.
Time to grow up.
@16 I don't want to appear chippy but my original post was clearly related to @3's “It is not shame to claim of Quebec self determination rights” It's just as well I have some “Bletchley Park” experience in the service of the Crown to draw on.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And I'm a Bay City Rollers man myself.
'Ms. Kirchner needs to get a grip.'
Apr 14th, 2012 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No, I don't think that.
I think someone else, like the 3000 Falklanders (ther are no Mailvinas) might just like to 'get a grip' round her old turkey neck and wring the crap out of her.
@14 - Think, how far back can you trace your ancestors in Argentina? Not far I'll bet.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Answer me this honestly, Think, the Falkland Islanders can trace their roots back to BEFORE 1833. Argentina didn't exist as a country at that point, it was the United Provences and Buenos Aires didn't even belong to the UP.
So how can they be squatters, when you say that Argentinians are not? The Falkland Islanders were the first to successfully colonist the Islands, and have been there for more than 180yrs. Argentina ethnically cleansed the land and stole it from the original inhabitants.
By your own logic YOU are the SQUATTERS!
A piece of advice - buy US$, as Argentina is heading towards economic collapse at an alarming rate.
(18) My bad Cmd McDod, my bad…….........................
Apr 14th, 2012 - 12:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I failed to notice that you were addressing Poster No.(3) TipsyThink and not Poster No.(2) Think ®™©♀☮
Inexcusable mistake…………. But….
How comes that you ask such complex Argentinean Foreign Policy questions to an obviously Non-Argentinean Turnip?
“Answer me this honestly, Think, the Falkland Islanders can trace their roots back to BEFORE 1833. Argentina didn't exist as a country at that point, it was the United Provences and Buenos Aires didn't even belong to the UP.”
Apr 14th, 2012 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So a change in name or borders means a change in entity? Wow, then certainly a change of flag would mean the same thing (since both are just symbols for the political entity)
That means the United States has been a country only since what, the middle 1960s when they promoted Alaska in status?? That must mean the UK didn't exist as a country until the 1970s when the Guyana broke off. That's a change in borders.
What a completely uninformed, ridiculous comment.
Argentina has existed since 1805, when it began to de facto self-govern without Spanish say. In 1810 this became official, and in 1816 it was formalized by all existing provinces at the time. The fact you are trying to debate argentine history with argentines shows the appalling levels of conceit and outright shamelesness you carry. Have some shred of honor and admit your out of your league talking about this. If you don't like this, stick to what you do know best (probably your country and the Falklands).
(18) Cmd McDod
Apr 14th, 2012 - 01:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Funny you mention X........................
The other day when you so cunningly noticed my typo assisted, mood swaying, Freudian slippery CHIPPY/CHIRPY anagram I meant to ask you if your sharp observation skills were just natural predisposition or acquired by training?
I never did ask though….........................
And yet, you readily answered my unasked question with just a minimal amount of induction from my side.
Spoofy………….isn’t it?
(20) LEPRecon
I must say that I totally agree with poster (22) Mr. Tobias about the merits of your post.
Besides, as I just wrote to my Argie-Anglo counterpart on another thread…..:
”77 Think Apr 14th, 2012
1830’s…………, Huhhhhh…..
Approximately same point in time as the Swedish branch of my Clan arrived to Perú’s coasts to shovel some bird droppings onto ships.
Thus assisting humankind into killing each other more efficiently.”
http://en.mercopress.com/2012/04/09/argentine-government-in-full-force-support-vice-president-accused-of-embezzlement
I think more countries will start posting similar articles criticizing Argentina's aggressive approach to the Falkland Islanders, now that 'the seal' has been broken.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 02:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have read a few toned down articles from both Politicians / Press questioning Argentina's approach and motives from around the world, but I think the problem is no-one wants to upset Latin America. But this isn't a Latin American battle as Argentina would try and paint, and countries / politicians shouldn't be afraid of any Latin American backlash if they speak the truth.
“.... when these Islands are part of our maritime platform.” CFK
Apr 14th, 2012 - 02:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's not just Greenland that should worry by CFK's 're-writing of international land ownerships' wrt marine platforms:
The UK might be claimed by France and the Low Countries;
Sri Lanka claimed by India;
Trinidad & Tobago by Venezuela;
Papua New Guinea by Australia;
Japan by South Korea and by Russia;
Sumatra and much of Indonesia by Malaysia;
etc.
This is not an argument that will go down well with the United Nations .....
What wasn't expressed in this article, is the sistematic rejection by the u. k and the islanders to resume the negotiations and find a peaceful solution, like what is manifested by the the u. n and most international comunity. On the other hand, it's a very mediocre tought to express that c. f. k is perhaps using this cause, instead of taking care of more important problems, this is evident that global and mail doesn't know anything about the effort that the country is doing in order to improve our situation, it has no more that the tipical partial information which is published in the media about arg., beside c. f. k was reelected a few monthes ago with the 54,11% of the votes, which became her into the most voted candidat since 1983, and she still has high levels of popularity, even the most conservative polls affirm it, so, like it or not, she doesn't need to use neather this cause nor any other, like thatcher and galtiery needed in 1982. Global and mail should know that the despite the world crisis, our economy is forecasted to expand betwen 4,5 and 6,5%.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Like i always say, if the islanders want to remain british, that's not going to change, because the u. n has never asked the u. k to return the islands to arg., beside it neather invoked self determination for this dispute, like it did for others scolonial situations, nor expressed that the sovereignty must be discussed only if the islanders wish it, but it doesn't mean that we can't find a peaceful and a fair solution for both people respecting the sovereignty issue. Anyway, like i always express too, i dont deny that maybe our government didn't act correctly regarding some issues, but at the same time, neather the u. k nor the islanders have never accepted to discuss about the sovereignty, which is the main problem, and that's not a coorect behaviour eather, global and mail should reffer about it too, instead off making such a partial analysis.
Brilliant editorial by an independent source, a Canadian newspaper. Game, set and match to the Falkland Islanders and their motherland, Britain.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 03:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0These silly Argentinian fascistas can huff and puff for long as they like but the Falkland Islands will remain the Falkland Islands for as long as the islanders want....and having cousins there, I can assure you they aren't interested in being governed by a third-rate South American nation.
Our regular Argentinian critics here can't deal with the fact that the Falklands is being used as a distraction for more serious issues like high inflation, ridiculous protectionist trade policies, high levels of corruption and poor administration, because these fools are supporters of the governing Peronist regime.
I have sensible Argentinian friends here in Australia that migrated due to the poor economy in Argentina. And why does Argentina have such an ordinary economy...for the above sad reasons.
Come on Argentina, grow up, learn from little brother Chile and knuckle down to some hard work....instead of the usual graft and corruption that you seem to excel at.
By the way, I wonder how long some of these Argentinian critics families have lived in South America...I reckon you'd find many of their families arrived in Argentina in 20th century...I doubt many, if any of them have ancestors who in Argentina back in 1833 and before. As for your education system, an Australian current affairs program, Dateline, shows how clearly your children are indoctrinated on this Falklands issue.
TWIMC
Apr 14th, 2012 - 03:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you haven’t been here yet; join the party
The article had just 4 comments when I was there this morning
We are up to 53 comments at the moment. Many of them quite disquieting for the squatters and squatterettes of Malvinas………….
Let’s show those Mounties what Malvinas is all about ;-)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/argentina-shame-on-you/article2401928/comments/
El Think
A♀of☮
I love how KFC and the Peronist nutters frame the invasion of sovereign territory as “adventurism” like it's a taboo only because it's risky - like going rock climbing or something. We'll keep this in mind next time they accuse us of militarisation.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@26 And what do you think would be a peaceful solution?
Apr 14th, 2012 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Islanders live peacefully, and have done for near to 200 years, content to be British. The only trouble disturbing the peace is the ambitions of two tyrannical leader from Argentina.
You see, there is nothing to discuss. The Falkland Islanders have expressed their wish to remain Falkland Islanders and British. They are content. The British are happy for them to remain as they are for as long as they wish and has pledged to defend them if necessary. They are content. The only problem is the avarice of Argentina who want everything. So they should learn - like a child has to - that they cannot have something they have no right to just because they want it. That would be a peaceful solution.
@27
Apr 14th, 2012 - 04:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There are more Chileans in Australia than Argentineans. That must mean they have even less work ethic and more corruption because, according to your argument, to migrate must mean this.
let Alone the fact there are 50,000 argies in Chile but half a million chileans in Argie. And they have half our population.
But lets not get reason get in our way of some good ol argie bashing. The Aussie economy is soon to implode soon as well, the property bubble there is even worse than in the USA at its height, and your economy is just as if not more dependent on raw materials. With any further deterioration of Europe, a sputter in the USA plus China finally coming down... ouch. You have far more to fall than us, because your economy is far more leveraged at the moment.
As I had suspected, Canada knows what it's talking about.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@31 - I would be MUCH more worried living in South America. Yes, the Western economies are still in trouble, but they aren't so bad we have to LIE about them. God knows in what state of ruin the Argentinian economy is in! South America, much like Asia, DEPENDS on the success of Western economies. You make a mistake if you think in this globalized age, a complete collapse of a US or EU economy won't put you in an even worse state. Grab that hammer and aluminum. You'll need to build more slums before long! haha
@ 26
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sovereignty is not at issue. The dispute is only in the minds of the Argentinian public who have let themselves be brainwashed by propoganda over many years. The UN resolution calling UK and Argentina to 'talk' is meaningless. It is what the UN does and if the Mexican's shouted loud enough over wanting to get California back into a greater Mexico then the UN would ask the USA and Mexico to 'talk and resolve the issue.' It is meaningless and done to appease the 'crying child'. The only solution is for Argentina to stop 'driviling' on and accept that there is no problem. The Falkland Islands are a long way from South America and the Islander's wish to remain 'British'. End of. All of the shouting about sovereignty by the Argentine Government is simply being done to distract the gullible away from the fact that their country is being led by a disasterous political regime.
The US and Europe have effectively collapsed, who would have thought they would have gone through so many years of recession before 2007? Yet we haven't collapsed. If your economies were growing at 4-5% like in the past, we would be swimming in prosperity.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stefan, re #31. .............. Spot on!
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Europe and the USA are now in the return side of a 10 year period of no growth. Your economies began shrinking in 2007. It's 2012. I'd call that a lost decade.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A collapse does not have to be sudden in a matter of days, say like Argentina in 2001. It can be slow, dragging, almost insidious. But if the end result is the same, it is still an economic disaster.
Japan collapsed after 1989. It just took 10 years for them to realize it.
www.the-falkland-islands-co.com/index.php?section=0
Apr 14th, 2012 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands_Holdings
The governor general in Canada and fakland island company are surely running the show for now, they might end up like Gaddafi one of this days. We all will but some of us create more enemies then others. Barrick gold is destroying my province's glaciers I believe those glaciers are a good cause to keep Canada in check and meet international agreement to protect glaciers.
BRIT BOB. ELAINE B.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's amazing how ignorant you are, you have no idea a about what you are saying and didn't understand anything of what i said. Firstly, the u. n resolutions are to be respected, beyond if they aim to a periferic nation, or to a former colonial power member of the security councill. If the islanders want to remian british, nobody can change that, but it doesn't mean that we can't find a peaceful and fair solution regarding the sovereignty which is the main problem. The comparison that you do with mexico is not only ignorant, it's stupid too, the history of this conflict is very diferent than what happened with mexico. On the other hand, if you want to criticise the policies of our politicians, get better sources of information, because this is evident that you still didn't realise how missinformed you are, i dont deny that our government has negative aspects, like all the governments around the world, but when you compare it with a regimen, that shows the mediocre and ignorant thought that you have.
Why you guys listen to the defeated envious jealously indocronoughts, I will never know,
Apr 14th, 2012 - 07:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As long as the islanders wish to remain British, and as long as the British defend them, there is nothing, ,nothing the argentine indoctrinated immortals can do about it,, but shout scream and cry .
So the next time you pass one, toss him 20pence and move smartly on .lol.
just a kindly and sympathect thought .
Some pearls from the for the Globe & Mail comment section:
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0BillMor
There are a lot of Canadians who don't buy the love Britain pathology of the GLOBE AND MAIL editor. Argentina has a far better claim to the Malvinas than England.
Imago Dei
Firstly, the author (intentionally?) misrepresents Argentina's claim over the Falkland's as based simply on geographical proximity…
Secondly, the author maliciously and erroneously claims that Argentina's president “managed to provoke a riot” outside a British embassy.
JackMacTagget
The biggest colonialist in history, Britain, shouldn't talk about “justice”. It's a slap on the face of those who REALLY know history!
Ryan.D
Shame on the Globe and Mail. You can't take somebody elses territory and then justify the legitimacy of that by colonizing it.
coolman
Any neutral person looking at the problem with any objectivity has to come to the conclusion that these islands are a part of the Argentine territory.
Complicating matter further was the policy of settling these place with non indigenous populations whose loyalty is then bought by some preferential treatment from the occupier assuring a dubious democratic excuse of holding on to these places.
Just veritas
What Canadi(a)n interests is being served in such strokes of EngliSHness?
Does England and US need more apologists for their centuries old atrocities?
All LATIN AMERICANS are united with Argentina against the other side representing exploitation, pillage, slavery, subservience etc…
Grashnak
So, having occupied an island thousands of miles from home and populated it entirely with your own citizens, you then get to claim that this is legitimate because the people you sent there are in favour of your claim? There's a brilliant piece of doublethink.
The Emperor's Paparazzi
“right of self-determination” -- what a concept for the British to be promoting.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/argentina-shame-on-you/article2401928/comments/
One should never believe what is written in newspapers,
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Unless they wish something to gossip about,
Or to argue a none truth .
That said, some papers do tell the truth,
I just cant think of one .
Re: Post number 40
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Grashnak's post is an interesting one. It could apply equally to Argentina or the Falklands. Could anyone explain how the situation of the British inhabitants of the Falklands differs from the Spanish inhabitants of Argentina?
Anyone?
lol is this the best these idiots can do?
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and wtf mercopress. don't you have some news to put up on your front page?
42
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'll tell you one difference. There were no indigenous people on the Falklands when our ancestors arrived. The land that is currently know as Argentina was heavily populated by native Americans already.
No rocket science Mr. Joe Bloggs.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is all a question of Allegiance.
Take me, for example… Proud first generation Argentinean of Scandinavian origin.
My allegiance is with Argentina, not with my Scandinavian roots.
Take you for example … Proud xxx generation Kelper/Belonger/Whenie of British origin.
Your allegiance is with the United Kingdom of Great Britain.
You want to be a Patriot…..?
Fine with me…...................... But…..
Be it in Britain, not in some stolen territory 14,000 km away from home.
What a load of nonsense. I am a Falkland Islander which makes me British as well. Different to your situation but far from wrong. If it's okay with you I'll be it where I am. If it's not okay with you I'll be it where I am. LOL!
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 043 Troneas
It's the best us idiots HAVE to come up with because we are up against vastly superior idiots. LOL!
El Think,
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you truly A Female of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament or are you really just a piece of a woman? If the latter, exactly which piece are you? Those are questions by the way - you can tell that they are by the context and the wording but the real give away is the question mark at the end of each sentence.
As for spoofing, as in pretending to be a turnip, I would just say that any opportunity to point to the unpleasant and irritating consequences of official Latin/Germanic bilingualism (e.g. as per Belgium and Canada) should never be missed. This lest anyone should ever suggest something similar down south.
And finally for tonight, as I need my sleep. My powers of observation are a fine combination of nature and nurture: a great pedigree and a British Public School education. Tomorrow morning I will, God willing, wake and remind myself that by being born a Scot I came a very close second in the lottery of life.
So, trust you will be keeping up the selective cut and paste jobs between your trips to the bathroom tonight.
RAdm McDoD, Kent, UK
You are definitely Station X material :-)
Apr 14th, 2012 - 08:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Regards
El Think
A♂of☮
Go Canada.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@30 ElaineB,
lts very hard to get any sense out of Axel.
He says that he doesn't want sovereignty, but he does.
He thinks that Argentina has “RIGHTS” in the Falklands but we all know that they do not.
He says that he is peaceful, then makes threats.
He is a hard core malvinista, who is frustrated by our blank refusal to surrender our sovereignty.
l think that he is a real fool.
@ Squatter Think,
Up to your old insults & tricks again.
Why don't you explain to us all why we are squatters & you are not?
You are squatting on the native Amerindian's land who your countrymen murdered in the 1880s.
Then stole their land.
So you are not only a squatter but also a receiver of stolen goods.
As you well know, there were no native people here when the British took over the Falklands.
Unlike you, we didn't kill anyone to get OUR land.
Later on, we had to remove some illegal, squatting Argentines who were “trying it on”.
Now these 1st generation Argentines amazingly have the ridiculous idea in their noggins that somehow, they have more right to this land than the 8th & 9th generation Falklanders.
Damned cheek. Think. even for you.
tobias is right,
you stay in “your”(stolen)land & we'll stay in OUR territory.
you continue on your downward spiral.
you'll get no sympathy from me.
Think,
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0your Comment postings in #40 are just that - just comments,
though perhaps carefully selected to sustain a point of view.
Arguably, they carry as much 'weight' as yours or mine, but probably less as they are a couple of continents away and are from 'outsiders looking in'.
Comment writers are, so frequently, disastrously under-informed, don't you think?
@lsolde and Bloggs
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Was Canada pristine land? Isn't this newspaper a thief because it exists based on a theft? Why no outrage at them? Why not the calls for Canadians to leave immediately and give all the land back to the Inuit?
51 Truth Telling Troll
Apr 14th, 2012 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm not interested in Canada. Well that's not true, I love going there to watch hockey. What I mean is I'm not interested in the history of their sovereignty. I'm interested in Falklands sovereignty; that's what this thread is all about. Your ancestors however stole the land that is currently stole Argentina from the native Americans that lived there. However my ancenstors didn't. But that aside, tell me how you have more right to be 13,000 miles from Spain then we do being 14,000 miles from the UK.
If your answer is as flawed as Think's was before don't bother.
#40 THINK: Some pearls from the other side of the Andes regarding the Globe & Mail comment section:
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There are a lot of Canadians who don't buy the love Britain pathology of the GLOBE AND MAIL editor. MOST OF THEM LIVE IN QUEBEC.
You can't take somebody else’s territory and then justify the legitimacy… LIKE YOU DID IN THE FALKLANDS WAR?
Any neutral person looking at the problem with any objectivity has to come to the conclusion that these islands are a part of the Argentine territory. THINK, YOU NEED TO STOP DRINKING THAT CHEAP JUG MENDOZA RED WINE. YOUR PERCEPTION OF REALITY IS COMPLETLY LOST.
All LATIN AMERICANS are NOT united with Argentina.
ROUGH DAY THINK? TRY A NICE MALBEC AND A GOOD SLICE OF CHEESE WITH SOME OF YOUR WONDERFUL SELECTION OF DOMESTIC HAMS.
Speaking of wines, I've been meaning to try carmenere. What winery bottles good stuff of that. I heard its a spicy varietal.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think, there are always those who take a paper article to task in any country over the Islands one way or the other. Inevitably most of them are usually ill-informed as to the arguments of BOTH parties and thus usually do not make rational statements.
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0On a diferent angle - seesm like your ancestors and mine arrived in this part of the world about same time. Can you answer me this:
Here there was no indegenous population to displace and dispose of - yet you say I am a “squatter”
In Chubut before your Spanish ancestors arrived there WAS a native indegenous population who collectively owned the land etc. They were pretty well wiped out and exterminated by the Spanish AND process continued by the Argentines afterwards.
How is it that you do not class yourself as a “squatter” ?
.Is it not, always the thief that claim ownership of others land, to who the thief stole from others in the first place,
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Example
As the islands have been British for over 150 years, no others have lived or owned the place, therefore no stealing was necessary, thus today, it remains 100% British,
But Argentina on the other hand, was a fraction of its size in the 1830s, and others were living there, and owned the land, that Argentina subsequently stoles from them,
As is why today Argentina is very big, occupying other people land that was taken from them, is this not true,
So in fact, it is thus, Argentina who then should return the land it stole /conquered from others, before it can claim doubt from others, is this not true.
So Argies, when you return to whom you stole from, then you can lecture others, until then, it may well be wise to stoom it .
..
@55
Apr 14th, 2012 - 11:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually in Chubut province it was mainly the Welsh that did the stealing.
Go invade Wales in reprisal... oh wait.
54 Truth_Telling_Troll Carmenere is sort of like a spicy Merlot with the body of a cab. Are you in the UK?
Apr 15th, 2012 - 12:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0No, no, no I'm quite close to Shiile, that's why I ask winery even if I can't get that particular one in a local wine cellmart, when I ever head that way I could make it a point to grab a bottle.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 12:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0for the pavote of joe bloggs......52
Apr 15th, 2012 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0why you have more rights to be 13,000 km of spain than we...............etc etc jajajajaajajajajaajajajajajajajajajaajajajajajajajaajajajajajajajajajajajajaajaj
why? you dont know why?
we have nothing to do with spain, we are southamericans living in southamerica.
My beautiful inspirational Queen Cristina has a firm grip on reality, and on the politics of her country. Not the vice like grip of a dictator of course, but the grip of an orator of pure genius who can hold an audience in the palm of her hand; the grip of a motherly guide leading her wards away from danger to a better place. I could go on, but I wouldn't want to be accused of being a sacharine sweet sycophant again =)
Apr 15th, 2012 - 01:15 am - Link - Report abuse 050 GeoffWard2
Apr 15th, 2012 - 04:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Following authentic Canadian* poster comment about this very article is the best answer for your questions………:
”plagiarizingmaggie
7:33 PM on April 14, 2012
Why are names never attached to these sometimes flippant and one-sided opinion pieces?
Are they ashamed? Embarrassed? Lacking in conviction or factual support? Penned simply to stir up the very non-representative posting mob, thereby producing false positive feedback?
Are the pieces farmed out to third-party opinion factories?
Inquiring minds want to know ...”
Yes, this ”Opinion Piece” is blatantly flippant, one-sided and simply penned by third-party opinion factories to stir up the non-representative posting mob………………......................................
Even so, about 40 to 50% of the Authentic Canadian* commentators see through it and express a critical and informed opinion……
Go,Go Canada
* By clicking at their names you can check the posters comments history………..
“Curiously” the most staunch and aggressive defenders of the British Squatters on Malvinas are newbie’s….
@62 So not only are you trawling through pages of comments desperately copying and pasting to reinforce your viewpoint, now you're going through all their back histories as well? I think we might actually start feeling pity for you soon lol.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 04:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0Some more pearls from the for the Globe & Mail comment section:
Apr 15th, 2012 - 05:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0caomeiguo
This much I know – international geopolitical issues are seldom clear-cut. That this editorial is so firm in its belief regarding the debate probably shows its Anglo-Saxon bias.
HDelVe
It's a real shame (THE real shame) to read editorials like this, so full of hostility, of demonized ideas against such simple countries' rights like the claim for their own territory.
laobaixing07
A very poorly and unprofessionally written editorial, with totally unnecessary side remarks about the current Argentinian president. Clearly written by an apologist for the UK, with little regard to history and geography
Frankof-the-river
If Canada sides along with Britain on this one, the country would be speaking from both sides of its mouth. Canada is already opposing a claim from France for extended seabed rights around St-Pierre and Miquelon, similar to Britain's claim around the Falklands
henry garino1112
Another biased, misleading, untruthful editorial that the globe has us used to.....the Malvinas were taken by force-piratry and have been diplomatically reclaimed since 1833
Syed Abbas
Hey G&M Editorial writer, get a grip.
The Colonialism is over. The Empire is dead
plagiarizingmaggie
Why are names never attached to these sometimes flippant and one-sided opinion pieces?
Are they ashamed? Embarrassed? Lacking in conviction or factual support? Penned simply to stir up the very non-representative posting mob, thereby producing false positive feedback
Bob1013
Not sure why Argentina should be ashamed. Brits occupied the islands 180y ago - they should be ashamed.
fringe_remnant
It's not about whether little Johnny Falkland's sons will be speaking English or Argie thirty years from now.
Its' all about money and the natural resources beneath the sea that is the background to this dispute. And until the conversation goes to that, the rest of this is pure gibberish.
And, oh yeah, ego. On both sides.
60 Malen
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Oh get real! LOL! Your pioneering ancestors didn't say to themselves one day in Spain, “hey, let's move to south America and become South Americans”. Are you really that naive? I don't think so.
Falkland Islanders might one day also become an independent nation but we all know why that is currently not an option. Don't worry though, your country's continued attempts to unsettle us are just strengthening our resolve and solidarity to make the Falkland Islands the great place they are.
By clicking at their names you can check the posters comments history………..
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Curiously” the most staunch and aggressive defenders of the British Squatters on Malvinas are newbie’s
Think, Paraplegia or salaried?
(65) Joe Bloggs
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“Oh get real! LOL! Your pioneering ancestors didn't say to themselves one day in Spain, “hey, let's move to South America and become South Americans”.”
I say:
Well...... That's E-X-A-C-T-L-Y what the many thousands of my Welsh neighbors here in Chubut did.
Escaping from English persecution, they moved to South-America and became 100% South-Americans.
Salt of the Earth, our red-haired, God-fearing Patagonian Welshies.....
Oh, the Welsh colonised what is currently called Argentina and murdered the native Americans did they? I thought it was the Spanish. Sorry, my mistake.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0(65) Joe Bloggs
Apr 15th, 2012 - 07:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
Oh get real! LOL! Your pioneering ancestors didn't say to themselves one day in Spain, “hey, let's move to South America and become South Americans”.
I say:
“Thinking” a bit more about your above comment….
Well...... That's E-X-A-C-T-L-Y what millions and millions of my Spanish, Italian, German, British, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, French, Polish, Croatian, Serbian, Danish, Swedish, Russian, Ukrainian, Armenian etc, etc, etc… compatriots did.
Escaping from war, persecution and misery in Eurasia they moved to South-America and became 100% South-Americans.
Escaping from English persecution, they moved to South-America and became 100% South-Americans
Apr 15th, 2012 - 07:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0must of felt at home then
The Trelew Massacre
http://www.argentinaindependent.com/socialissues/humanrights/trelew-massacre-35-years-on/
69 Think
Apr 15th, 2012 - 07:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Good for them. We're lucky that we came from a more privelliged background where we had more options and currently choose to remain Britsh.
Still, your ancestors arrived in what is currently known as Argentina, uninvited, and murdered many of its native inhabitants. as you suggest, desperate I guess.
(71)
Apr 15th, 2012 - 07:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“ We're lucky that we came from a more privelliged background where we had more options and currently choose to remain Britsh.”
I say:
Indeed you did.
You are British Planters...
Squatters paid and installed on stolen territory by the British Crown.
“The President of Argentina proposed that Cartagena was a good place to discuss Falklands because it was walled city just to defend against English pirates in their time,” Timerman said commenting on Cristina's speech on the Malvinas cause. GREAT PRESIDENT!
Apr 15th, 2012 - 07:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0@65 Joe Bloggs,
Apr 15th, 2012 - 08:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0malen was boasting once that she is of partly Amerindian descent.
Which l took with a grain of salt as she staunchly defends her compatriots who murdered many of her ancestors relations.
Argentina is the whitest country in South America & the word “lndio” is an insult.
Yet when it suits them, why they've all got native American blood!
Juan Stanic(good slavic name)was another one, lndians everywhere!
Sr Think cannot claim that as hes often stated that his ancestry is Swedish(oh well it changes to suit him, could be even Danish, could be anything really).!
@ Think,
Clutching at straws now Cher Think.
You still haven't answered why we are squatters & you are not.
Don't try to wriggle out of it.
Argentina didn't take over Chubut until the 1870s or 1880s.
And the land wasn't empty when they bowled into town.
What happened to the “originals” Think?
Falklanders had already been living here for nearly 40 years.
And killed no one.
lt seems your precious emigrants made a terrible mistake, Thinkus.
Fleeing “persecution” in Eurasia & coming to Argentina ensured that some of their descendants got thrown out of aircraft while still alive.
Well, Squatter Think, why do you think that you are not a squatter?
We would be all interested to know.♥
72 Think
Apr 15th, 2012 - 08:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0So let me get this right. According to the mind of Think, if a group of people go 13,000 miles to another country and force their way in, killing many of the natives, and declare themselves independent nationals of that land, that's okay. But if another group go a similar distance and settle in uninhibited land but choose to hold onto the support (are you sure your ancestors cut off all support from their mother lands overnight; I think not) of their motherland, that is entirely different.
LOL! Or is it chuckle chuckle? Keep clutching at straws.
We're in the islands and we're here to stay.
Squabbling....Squabbling...
Apr 15th, 2012 - 09:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just as a reminder, not only did they butcher the indigenous natives, they *commemorate* the slaughter on the back of the 100-peso note:
Apr 15th, 2012 - 12:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.bcra.gov.ar/bilmon/bm010600_i.asp
Why not go the whole way and have a nice engraving of nuns being flung out of planes on the back of the coins?
Woooow……………
Apr 15th, 2012 - 12:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/argentina-shame-on-you/article2401928/comments/
I count +176 comments on the above article and more than 50% of them are positive towards the Argentinean position!
And all that, in response of a tendentious article published by a conservative Anglo newspaper in an Anglo Country ruled by a British Queen :-)))
I think this article can be used as a “Case Study” about how NOT to adress an intelligent and quite unbiased population as the Canadian.
I’m happy to see that the American Public Relations Company, hired by the FIG(leaf) to help them ”get the message across” is doing such a lousy job….
I hope they are as expensive as they are bad………
Chuckle chuckle©
Now he's caluculating percentages. Bless him.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 12:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@74
Apr 15th, 2012 - 01:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Chubut was first settled (in terms of white settlement) by Welsh colonists. As you said it was 20 years later that they sought Argentine annexation. Remember at the time, the region was not a province but a territory. Just like with the USA, Argentina started as 8 provinces and over time grew to 24 through annexations, wars, indian displacement, and a purchase.
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/9594/290pxmapaargentina1821.jpg
- What is today Misiones province was won from Brazil due to the Cisplatine War. It was then settled by Danes, Poles, Italians, Norwegians, Ukranians, Portuguese and Croatians.
- What is today Chaco and Formosa provinces were won in the Paraguay War, settled by Italians, Serbs, Poles, Basques and Russians
- What is today La Pampa province was taken from the indians in the War of the Desert, it was settled by Italians, Irish, French, and Andalucians
- What is today Rio Negro, Neuquen and Chubut was annexed in the Lebensraum campaign of the 1870s, it was settled by Italians, Lombards, Germans, Swiss/Austrians, and Welsh
- What is today Santa Cruz province was annexed even as it was disputed with Chile and even the United Kingdom (since the area, just like the Falklands, was mainly English settled at the time, but because Argentina-UK trade was surging at the time it seems the British saw no threat in their nationals falling under Argie jurisdiction). It was settled by English, Scotts, and Spanish
- What is today Tierra del Fuego was negotiated with Chile, who held at the time the entire island. It was settled by English, Spanish, Russians.
- What is today western Salta and Jujuy provinces was negotiated with Chile and part purchased from Bolivia.
- Isla Martin Garcia was annexed from Uruguay
- Laguna del Desierto was arbitrated by John Paul II to Argentina
Those are all the territorial expansions in Argentina history. The two failed ones were southern Bolivia during the independence period, and the Falklands in 1982.
pavote bloggs, spaniards didnt kill all the natives, get your facts right instead of repeating like a parrot all day lies, there are natives still alive and also as they mixed during 300 years with the spaniards many argentines have native descendance like me. repeating like a parrot lies doesnt make them become true. we recovered our land, and its ours, of southamericans.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 01:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 081 Malen
Apr 15th, 2012 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You need to get your eyes checked or improve your English. Where did I say the Spaniards killed all of the natives?
How about answering the question though? How is it different for the Spaniards (and Italians and Germans and Swiss, etc) who moved to the land which is currently called Argentina and the Brits who moved to the Falklands?
@81
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think with all due respect it is slightly disingenous argument. Ok, you can have the argument in practice because of Argentina's position on the Falklands in terms of “first settlement” rights. But lets be all honest, had there been natives in the Falklands, they would have been killed too. Just like what happened in British North America.
Lack of negative action does not imply a positive action. So the people in the Falklands did not kill natives. That does not mean they would have coexisted with them. Second, the Falkland Islands Wolf, the unique mammal to the islands, did go extinct. Which would tend to suggest that if any natice creature proved a threat to the livelyhood of the arriving settlers, it was dealt with.
I'm not trying to troll, just keeping it real.
I have already answer that question many times. you know the answer already if you come here from time to time.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@83
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I forgot to mention Argentina did lose mediation with Chile over the southernmost islands off the coast of Tierra del Fuego.
83 Tobias
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are quite right about the issue of killing natives but that aside, how is each situation different? Malen says he has answered before but I have only been on this site a few weeks and I don't live on it. His answer must be so long or difficult to remember that he was unable to repeat it.
I don't get your point about the warrah though; what do you mean? I don't know a lot about it but I always thought it was more like a fox than a wolf. Anyway, I'm not sure what it's got to do with the argument. Just like, as you rightly pointed out, the fact about the natives being killed probably is, a little tenuous also.
If there was a population, a gaucho, there was a native. that british are fond of exterminating all, by expelling people ansd transplantate theirs or exterminating the warrah, because it ate their sheeps, no doubt.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0the truth is that no argentine can go to the isles to buy land. argentines are forbidden, while english people here can settle with absolutely freedom.
The reason I bring the Falklands wolf or fox (most places say a wolf) is because it went extinct by human action in the 1860s. Which means it was certainly a direct result of settlement. Their extinction was probably caused by loss of habitat as land was taken for pasture, and surely due to some skin hunting and also over-culling because they would prey on the sheep or farm animals.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The point was, it was a species that was a nuisance to the inhabitants, and it was not allowed to remain. It would be a crude but worthy indication of how the interaction with native settlers might have gone if they did not fully cooperate with the white settlers (which if you take the entirety of the Americas from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego, the trend suggest they would have resisted, rightfully so)... Everyone must draw their conclusions from there, I would conclude that it would not have been totally peaceful, but of course there is no way of proving that since it never materialized as there were no natives there.
87 Malen
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wrong. There is no distinction between Argentine nationals or most other nationals in the immigration policies of the Falkland Islands. An Argentine would have to only go through the same process as a Chilean , Uruguayan or an American. You are completely wrong on that one.
You may be right about the warrah, I wouldn't know but are we saying the life of a warrah had the same value as that of a human now? Or are you saying that the life of a native American was only the same as that of a warrah?
joe bloggs how many argentines live on the isles?? 25, it speaks for itself.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0second british are implanted, argentines no. I mean, its easy to notice that, an argentine toma mate and eat asados as indians did. do you understand what Im saying??
there is a grey wolf living in TDF, it was not exterminated. can coexist. but you love killing, according to what I see you like so much arms and so on. It doesnt surprises me the extermination in 1800.
90 Malen
Apr 15th, 2012 - 03:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are wrong and not really interested in learning the facts so i won't take any more time to expalin. Of course not many Argentines live in the islands but that's because not many attempt to. If you guys all love the place like you say you do, why do so few of you attempt to move here?
Anyway boys and girls, I have to go. Mrs Bloggs has a list of chores for me longer than list of names of Argentine POWs in 1982.
The same case as Canada/St.-Pierre et Miquelon ,is thet of Aruba,Bonaire,Curacao, administred by the Netherlands and very near the coast of venezuela.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 03:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So far as I know Chaves never claimed them.
@92... yet.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 03:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What did Canada say about 1833 this sounds like a person who want to make their point in a conversation wich stated 150 years ago and want to validate his point from the last few words he heard. We shouldn't wonder why he English live in d nial, we will like to ask Canada how many children did their bombs killed in Afghanistan, Iraq and libya as far as I knew even the Libyan embassy in Canada was targeted in this lawless country we call Canada. Let's not forget the 14 kid Canada kept in wantanamo bay Cuba in the US illegal jail to be torchered, Canada here is a message from one of your tax contributor, stop looking abroad and fix the problems with the natives you executed to build a golf field a few years ago and please clean up the water you polluted to kill the native way of life. Thank you.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 03:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yet again, some pearls from the Globe & Mail comment section:
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0sampan44
“”“It was an Englishman who first set foot upon the islands and there were no natives.”“”
That is the reason Americans own the Moon.
scott thomas
This is an editorial?
Bob and Doug
Following the logic of this article, if Hitler had managed to hold onto Poland for a bit longer, time enough to get some settlers in place, would it be a simple matter of democracy that the settlers and their descendants don't want to return to Polish rule? I'm not so sure.
And why won't the Brits agree to arbitration to settle the dispute? Are they afraid of something? If there's an agreement, both sides know where to stand. Seems like the most productive way forward, a lot better than just sending in state of the art weaponry.
Doct. Con_fu_se_us-GM variety
If Goa could be annexed by India after 450 years of Portuguese (colonial) rule, why can't Argentina lay claim on Falkland?
BWL2
This editorial and the right wing agenda behind it are a disgrace. Our authoritarian newspaper rattling the chain of its owners again. Why can't we have a decent national newspaper, a decent foreign policy, and a decent national government. Ideology and war mongering at work, poisoning everything for corporate gain.
Morning Dove
Are you kidding? The British Empire have murdered people for their resources for centuries. Take a look at yourself and your own issues of being a sovereign being. If you think the British are the good guys than God help us.
ajt
Yes sir, self determination should rule; except in Palestine, Lebanon, Spain, Tibet, China, Hong Kong (funny how quickly they got over the Chinese acquisition), Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. etc. etc.
Your editor needs to delve back in history a little more.
@94 Criticising Canada for polluting a river? That's rich from an Argentine. Unbelievable filth and pollution in Argentina:
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbYKcfEmIzk
Apparently the level of pollution results in “slow learning capacity in children”.
#95 look back in history?? Why go soo far in the past when Afghanis and Libyans are suffering Canadian injustice in the present.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 096 Alexei
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I knew things were bad in BA, my Argentinian neighbour has told me a few things to watch out for if I was ever stupid enough to go there.
However, this is nothing short of astonishing, especially when we have all the 'we are the best' crap from the Argies.
I wonder if they have heard of the old saying 'don't crap on your doorstep'?
38
Apr 15th, 2012 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nobody gives a damn about Argentina's spurious claims to the Falkland Islands except Argentinians. Everyone else in South America offers meaningless quiet words of support just to appease the CFK regime.
The UN resolution is meaningless it's what they do when one party 'shouts, screams and cries foul' about a territorial claim even when it is spurious.
Questions have been raised about Argentina’s claims based on contiguity and continuity. As for contiguity, as the Falklans/Malvinas are 480 kilometers away from the nearest Argentine territory, Chile, it is argued, could make an equally good claim to possession due to the situation of the islands and the presence of Chilean territory in the Strait of Magellan. As for the continuity principal, some scholars point out that there is no proof that the Falklands/Malvinas are a prolongation of Patagonia. The only fact that has been established with certainty is that the continental shelf, from the Devonian period, has several strata which are more reminiscent of those of the Dwylea conglomerate in South Africa than those of South America. Thus the fact that the islands are situated on the shelf does not demonstrate that they are a prolongation of Patagonia....to be continued
Apr 15th, 2012 - 08:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think
Apr 15th, 2012 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We both know a lot of those posting comments in there are Argentinians trolls.
Anyway here are the top 3 rated comments
Imago Dei
12:17 PM on April 14, 2012
Yet another poorly executed editorial by an otherwise excellent paper.
Firstly, the author (intentionally?) misrepresents Argentina's claim over the Falkland's as based simply on geographical proximity. Honestly, the claim is plenty dubious as is. There's no need to cheat. Secondly, the author maliciously and erroneously claims that Argentina's president “managed to provoke a riot” outside a British embassy. Since when does seeking international arbitration for a territorial dispute (even with some strong language) lead to “we support and encourage the firebombing of an embassy”? Thirdly, and perhaps most dubiously, the author gets the population of the Falkland Islands wrong. 1,800? Try 3,140 as of 2008. Does nobody fact check editorials?
I am also for the continued self-determination of the Falklanders. Since they want to be British, they should remain so. But for goodness sake, at least put some effort and thought into writing an editorial for our nation's paper of record.
Score: 18
DG2010
10:58 AM on April 14, 2012
Argentina drags out the Falklands-Malvinas issue to detract from its own malaise.
If I were a resident of the Falkands I would give you one guess as to which country I would rather be subject to.
Score: 10
Just Me16
5:22 AM on April 15, 2012
Argentina has never owned the islands and has no valid claim whatsoever as the Falklands are beyond the 200-mile territorial limit.
www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/argentina-shame-on-you/article2401928/comments/
@95 Think,
Apr 15th, 2012 - 08:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You were wetting your pants at the Globe & Mail article, weren't you Think?
Selective examples of readers comments again.
A lot of Canadians probably never think of the Falklands & don't know the (true, not Argentine) story about them.
Plus of course we get the Argentines pretending to be Canadians, like in that ridiculous poll just a while back when RGs pretended to be British.
What do you say to poster # 101 Steve's “pearls”?
l notice that you didn't include them.
Also my deeeear Think, you still haven't answered the question that l asked you.
The answer to which we ALL await with bated breath, to whit:-
¿“WHY DO YOU THINK THAT YOU ARE NOT A SQUATTER, BUT SAY THAT WE ARE”?
Don't try to squirm your way out of it.
The spotlight is on you.
lts time for you to face the Public.♥
THINK: ”If Goa could be annexed by India after 450 years of Portuguese (colonial) rule, why can't Argentina lay claim on Falklands?” Very good question.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 09:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 01. Perhaps because India didn't need to cross the South Indian ocean to attack Goa, they just drove across the border.
2. Portugal didn't have Margaret Thatcher as their PM at the time.
3. Indian forces were well disciplined and Portugal was entirely demoralized.
So why can't Argentina seize some other country's territory other than the UK’s?
More pearls from the other side of the Andes:
1. Chilean Patagonia has been attempted, and you could have in 1978, but now our forces are far superior to Argentina. I will not humiliate you with a comparison (you know, the F-16s, German Leopard tanks and Scorpène submarines, etc…), but even your morale is wretched. Perhaps within ten years or so, you could re-arm and retrain, but you’d have to have to count on us falling asleep. (Doubtful because of previous experience, and despite our bilateral treaties, we have good reason not to trust you.)
2. Invade Brazil perhaps? “Not a snowball’s chance” in Salvador Bahia…
3. Bolivia: Easy to defeat, but they really do carry a grudge. We had a very minor disagreement on some costal property of theirs in the 19th century and they still are making a fuss over it. Plus, what is there to steal in the southern provinces?
3. Paraguay? Somewhat more difficult to occupy, but within your capabilities. Despite their small size, they’d probably bloody your nose in the first days and then start a bothersome guerilla war. Nice farmland however and it would solve your current shortfall of mate tea.
4. Uruguay? A little country with most of their soldiers stationed in Haiti or the Congo as United Nations peacekeeping forces. You could take the capital in minutes by hydrofoil and logistically your forces could support the occupation. There is even a historical claim on part of the country. Blame the conflict due to ecological damages t
@103 - Isolde, poor Think is having a nervous breakdown because they have just realised that they have got absolutely no international support for their spurious claims.
Apr 15th, 2012 - 10:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He's had to go to CFK's HQ for the official policy on this, which will no doubt be, the world's out to get us we're the victims, blah, blah, blah...
THINK: Sorry about the final part missing:
Apr 15th, 2012 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As I was suggesting, blame the conflict due to ecological damages to the environment due to the paper mills… Of course, you would still get a little bit of flack from a few Latin American states, but at least comrade Chavez would stand behind you. (At least as long as he lasts…) Big upside to this invasion would be Punta del Este, better weather than the Falklands and immediate access to Argentinean deposits. An added plus… They actually speak a similar language to yours! Finally, you’d be able to eliminate them from ever beating you again in the Copa America… perhaps even exile Forlan.
Think, there lays the solution: Pick a fight with someone you can defeat. Right now, with the UK stationing only 4 jet fighters and one little destroyer (Even perhaps a sub…) in their territory, you wouldn’t stand a chance. You could dream about continuing this delusion of eventually stealing the oil and fisheries from the islanders, but most of the western world is looking upon your nation with pity and contempt.
My advice is to overrun Uruguay instead! The residents are accustomed to the annual summer invasions from you anyway. They have a good bife de chorizo and the Tanat wine is very drinkable.
A gentleman once said, only the desperate argue with history,
Apr 15th, 2012 - 11:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And losers will always quote the past,
But the clever ones must not lower themselves to such primitive pettiness.
Only the future counts,
.
Thanks posters!!! now I can add the second part!!!!
Apr 16th, 2012 - 02:01 am - Link - Report abuse 02nd part.......From a strictly legal standpoint, Judge Huber stated in the Islands of Palma case (1929) that contiguity in and of itself was not a legal principal capable of providing a basis of title in international law: “[I]t is impossible to show the existence of a rule of positive international law to the effect that islands situated outside the territorial waters should belong to a state from the mere fact that its territory form the “terra firma”. This statement was confirmed by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the North Sea continental shelf cases, in which Denmark and the Netherlands based their claim inter alia on the doctrine of proximity, i.e., that the part of the continental shelf closest to the part of the state in question falls automatically under that state’s jurisdiction. In these cases the ICJ rejected any contiguity approach. As for continuity, it is argued, the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf and Contiguous Zone, Article 1, now contained in the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, Article 76, does not support the view that costal states have sovereignty over islands above the continental shelf. On the contrary, it laid down the doctrine that islands had their own “continental shelves”, and that the rights of coastal states over these shelves were limited to research and exploitation of natural resources.
98 ChrisR It's a huge country they've 'acquired'. They can't have messed it all up. Give them enough time I suppose. It must take a special kind of talent to have all those resources and all that land yet still f*** up everything so spectacularly.
Apr 16th, 2012 - 08:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0104 LEPRecon
Apr 16th, 2012 - 02:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Has “Think” called anyone a “Turnip” yet?
If he hasn't then things must be quite bad..................
someone should do something.......
@109 - toooldtodieyoung - I don't believe that Think is in the mood to play today.
Apr 16th, 2012 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He's probably still being indoctrinated with the rest of the party favourites. No doubt he'll be along shortly, calling people turnips, and turning this into the greatest triumph in Argentine history.
The reason the new version of history is taking so long to get out to the party faithful, is that Cristina can only type with 2 fingers. LOL
@briton 106
Apr 16th, 2012 - 04:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hear hear. Although I enjoy debating history with the malvinistas (and telling them that basically thier version is very very far from the truth) the here and now are what is important.
The people on the falklands need to be able to get on with their lives without constant harrassment. The rest of the UK would like to be able to carry on it's business without watching for another stab in the back from the Argentinians.
The Argentines themselves could do with a leadership actually interested in running their country properly and making some real inroads into poverty, crime and corruption, instead of digging up spurious arguments from over 180 years ago.
agreed
Apr 16th, 2012 - 08:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0history is very interesting,
but when it comes to the falklands / argentina,
only the future is of interest,
and argentina musat withdraw its stupid claims, before she destoys everything for her silly childish obsesion with the british falklands .
The Falklands are geographically a part of Argentina and that is where it ends.
Apr 17th, 2012 - 04:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0CFK, who is trying to be a female “caudillo” is just a puppet in the hands of some malevolent clique who are pursuing their own hidden agenda (OIL). She is simply the Prozac president and is not liked by many in Argentina.
Her day of reckoning will also come
Ozgood #113 “The Falkland Islands are geographically a part of Argentina and that is where it ends.”
Apr 17th, 2012 - 11:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Wrt TFI,
the British Isles have similarly disagreed that they are geographically a part of France.
And that's where it ends.
@113 Ozgood. The Falkland Islands are about as much a part of Argentina as Australia is.
Apr 17th, 2012 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just because they are geographically closer to the South American sub-continent doesn't automatically make islands the property or Argentina or any other South American country.
In fact, if geographic proximity was a factor in nations claiming lands, then the world would constantly be at war.
The Dutch could claim that Belgium was theirs, or Germany. The Russians could claim that China was theirs. China could claim that India was theirs, and so on and so forth. This may have been true at one time, but the world doesn't play by those rules anymore
So no the Falklands have nothing to do with Argentina; the Argentinians who signed a treaty in 1850 recognising that the Falklands were British. Then the Argentinians changed their mind, ignored the treaty, and illegally invaded the Islands, terrorising the people, and treating them and their property shamelessly. These same Argentinians who ignored 2 UN resolutions telling them that they had behaved illegally. And finally these same Argentinians who lost their ill gotten gains in a WAR with Britain.
Any way you look at it, Argentina has no histortic, legal or moral claims to the Falkland Islands, and the people who live their have the right to determine to whom THEIR allegience is. Whether it be to Britain, Argentina, Chile, Brazil, the USA, China or even just to themselves.
No one has the right to DICTATE what the future of the islands are, except their inhabitants, and Britain will defend their right to self-determination by any and all means necessary, until the day THEY decide that they don't require our assistance.
argentina if finnished,
Apr 17th, 2012 - 03:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0poor argentina , sad argentina , debt ridden argentina ,
un loverble argentina , unwanted argentina ,
and all because of CFK the world oldest plastic .
axel.
Apr 17th, 2012 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0the peaceful solution is to leave the Falkland islanders alone.
they don't speak Spanish they dont want to be Argentinean
they are 300 km from your coast
113 Ozgood (#) Suggest you read postings 100 and 107. Proximity is NOT recognised under INTERNATIONAL LAW. That's where it ends.
Apr 17th, 2012 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina: shame on you”; Editorial from Canada’s Globe and Mail
Apr 17th, 2012 - 10:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What a garbage editorial! My God......Any idiots writes in newspapers...
AHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHHAAHAHH
@119 Malvinero1,
Apr 18th, 2012 - 05:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina “claims” OUR land.
What garbage My God......Are they idiots....?????????
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH
MARTIN WOODHEAD.
Apr 18th, 2012 - 04:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That solution only benefits the islanders, in the same way that claim for self determination, we claim for our territorial intergity. None u. n resolution has never asked the u. k to return the islands to arg., in the same way that none of them neather invoked the right to self determination for this dispute, like it did for others colonial situations, nor expressed that the sovereignty must be discussed only if the islanders wish it. Politicians from both sides omit important information about this dispute all the time, thats' why we must investigate, i made two exhaustive investigations about this dispute. I dont deny that perhaps the right to self dermination is applicable for the population from the islands, on the other hand, i dont deny eahther that maybe our government didn't act correctly in some oportunities respecting the dispute. But at the same time, if the u. n has only asked the two parts of the conflit to resume the negotiations and find a pecaeful solution, it must respected, if the u. n has never asked the u. k to return the islands to arg., the islanders will continue being british as long as they want, but it doesn't mean that we can't find a fair solution for the sovereignty issue which is the main problem. When your side, and the islanders reject sistematicly all the resolutions, and distort what is expressed in our constitution regarding our claim for the islands, that's not acting correctly eather. Our analysis can't be just one sided, unfortunatelly that's what i find here everyday, which is pathetic and mediocre.
@121 I think you'll find the UK/FIG invoked the right of self-determination for the falkland islanders a long long time ago. They've done nothing but invoke the right of self determination. In 2008 the Argentinians tried to get self-determination to have the clause of being secondary to perceived national unity, which was denied because only despotic south american states agreed with Argentina.
Apr 18th, 2012 - 05:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is no distortion of your constitution. It clearly states:
“First.- The Argentine Nation ratifies its legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over the Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur Islands and over the corresponding maritime and insular zones, as they are an integral part of the National territory.
The recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respectful of the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the principles of international law, are a permanent and unrelinquished goal of the Argentine people.”
The wording of this provision “full exercise of sovereignty” leaves nothing to discuss, nothing to negotiate. The Argentinians have made it very clear they want to bring nothing to the negotiation and want nothing out of negotiation but “full exercise of sovereignty”. How is that a distortion?
Imbecile.
Axel thats what the Ilsanders want the UK can and will defend them at the cost of blood and treasure and can now do with overwhelming force.
Apr 18th, 2012 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The islanders dont wnat to be argentinan
They dont share a culture with you after your invasion you treated the islanders with contempt since your defeat you have whined and attempted to bully the ilanders at every oppurtunity.
You bring nothing to the negociations except empty threats.
South georgia and the sandwhich islands were discovered and administered by the British and still argentina attempts to claim them.
go do one
RG Trolls this is your Reichmistress...please repond to this news article or similar...but ignore the Oil Company Nationalisation story. Please await further orders ''heel click'
Apr 18th, 2012 - 08:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Axel,
Apr 18th, 2012 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No NEGOTIATIONS ON SOVEREIGNTY.
No buts, no whys or whyfors, no nothing. Nada. Nuzzing.
There is nothing to discuss.
Got it?
You want OUR land? then go to court or try to invade again.
Axel,
Apr 19th, 2012 - 01:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0No NEGOTIATIONS ON SOVEREIGNTY.
No buts, no whys or whyfors, no nothing. Nada. Nuzzing.
There is nothing to discuss.
Got it?
You want OUR land? then go to court or try to invade again
isolde: AHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Next time we will invade london,england,and finish the master pirates,once and for all!
RG Trolls this is your Reichmistress...please repond to this news article or similar...but ignore the Oil Company Nationalisation story. Please await further orders ''heel click'
AHAHHAHAHHAAHAH,who cares comming from uk,a country that is the past......
@126 Malvinero1,
Apr 19th, 2012 - 07:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Please try to invade London.
Love to see you try! lol
lf all your forces are in the UK, the Falklands forces will invade & conquer Argentina.
Actually only the southern piece.
The piece that really belongs to us.
Then we'll see who is AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHHHHHHHHHH
a cunning plan by the malvinero.
Apr 19th, 2012 - 09:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0To defeat the UK by “forcing” them to occupy Argentina and try to sort it out :)
GREEK YOGHURT. MARTIN WOODHEAD. ISOLDE.
Apr 19th, 2012 - 02:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I already explained in diferent oportunities about the article of our constitution, and said too what c. f. k expressed before the u. n and in others forums. Firstly, the expression full sovereignty can be open to more than one interpretation, if we would share the sovereignty with the u. k, we would be exercising our full sovereignty, it doesn't mean that the only one outcome or us is the transference of sovereignty to arg., beside even c. f. k said that arg. is not asking th u. k to recognize that the islands are argentine, it's only asking to resume the negotiations and find a peaceful solution. On the other hand, it's obvious that you are going to keep on victimizing only the islanders, and avoid to recognize that you are not acting corretly eather. In my case, i recognize that perhaps my country didn't act correctly in some oportunities, because i dont do such partial anaysis like you do all the time.
@axel
Apr 19th, 2012 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why does Argentina want sovereignty of the FI?
There is no ban on Argentines moving to the FI if they choose, the FI have a reasonable % South American population already.
@129 Axel.... Shared Sovereignty IS IN NO WAY Full Sovereignty.
Apr 19th, 2012 - 05:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0share [shair]
noun
1. the full or proper portion or part allotted or belonging to or contributed or owed by an individual or group.
2.one of the equal fractional parts into which the capital stock of a joint-stock company or a corporation is divided.
full [fool]
adjective, full·er, full·est, adverb, verb, noun
adjective
1. completely filled; containing all that can be held; filled to utmost capacity: a full cup.
2. complete; entire; maximum: a full supply of food for a three-day hike.
3. of the maximum size, amount, extent, volume, etc.: a full load of five tons; to receive full pay.
4. (of garments, drapery, etc.) wide, ample, or having ample folds.
5. abundant; well-supplied: a yard full of litter; a cabinet full of medicine.
So shared means to hold an incomplete portion, with someone else holding a portion, full means to hold something completely. That means that if Argentina gets shared sovereignty, which it won't, then it'll still want full sovereignty. This has been expressed in the past that your lawmakers wanted shared sovereignty in order to then get full sovereignty. Then, like with YPF and the 1850 treaty of conciliation and friendship, they will without question go back on their word and try to grab full sovereignty by force, showing no honour whatsoever.
Entering into negotiations based upon Argentinas constitutional demands for naught but full sovereignty under a framework [UN] in which the Argentinians have absolutely no respect, is just lunacy. They cannot be trusted to respect the democracy or self-determination of the Falkland Islanders, and they simply want the military off the islands so they can invade.
Where was the Globe when Canada started to kill Libyan women and children in Libya, will Canada rather support Argentina arming terrorist to attack the british thefting Argentine oil in Islas Malvinas argentina?? Or do canadians hate Muslims and all other minorities??? Globe and mail is a whitetrash newspaper similar to our friends in mercopress.
Apr 19th, 2012 - 09:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Might be best for Falklands NOT to trade with Argentina: “In 2008, Maybe best that Falklands don't go near Argentina: ”Argentina surpassed its neighbors and the United States: it now has the highest prevalence of cocaine use in the Western Hemisphere: approximately 2.6 percent of the country's population aged 15-64 uses cocaine, a 117 percent increase since 2000.”: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/19/argentina_drug_war
Apr 19th, 2012 - 11:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#133 ignore Muslims all you want but at least unlike canadians we don't bomb muslim women and children to theft their country's resources, next gime Globe and mail writes something maybe they can add the truth about afghanistan and libya rather then talk trash about Argentina.
Apr 20th, 2012 - 08:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0@129 Axel,
Apr 20th, 2012 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0The answer is NO, Axel.
NO Discussions on Sovereignty,
NO “Negotiations”
NO Shared Sovereignty.
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
#135 You seem really quite agitated. As a women of colour (or so I'm led to believe) from (somewher in) the far east, who came to the Falklands (I assume) by choice, I'd have thought you'd keep more of a sense of perspective. (Btw I'm still up for a political truce to discuss filling in the gaps on your fascinating past)
Apr 20th, 2012 - 09:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0@136 B_K,
Apr 20th, 2012 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0l'm not in the least agitated,
lts nearly impossible to get through to Axel, but its fun to stir him up.
He's nowhere near the fun that Think is, though.
Why do you want to know my background?
lts had its ups & downs.
l suppose white IS a colour.
l don't come from the Far East, l merely spent the first 30 years of my life there.
Just for you:-
English & French were spoken in our home in lndonesia but l was looked after by our native employees & spent most of my day with them before l ever started school.
l learned to speak 2 lndonesian languages(there are at least 10 major languages in lndo) before l could converse with Mum & Dad.
Years later l met an Englishman who had been raised in Kenya.
He only spoke Swahili until he was 6 or 7 yo.
lts not uncommon with expatriat children when looked after in their formative years by local people.
Don't know about others, but our employees(if l say servants, Think will nearly wet himself with excitement!)got a great thrill at having a white child around who could converse with them but not very well with their own parents!
Was quite common in lndia in the days of the Raj.
Satisfied now?
137 lsolde
Apr 20th, 2012 - 10:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0What a fascinating childhood and from what I have gleaned from the snippets you give from time to time an equally fascinating adulthood.
Beats being a psychotic alledged Scot, who is extreme leftist, does not want independence (it will cost him money) and is fixated on a rubber doll. :o)
@137 In the electromagnetic spectrum White light is inclusive of a wide bandwidth of colours. It's fine for white people to say they are all colours, yellow, green, blue... that's if we were as white as ghosts.
Apr 20th, 2012 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0In argentina if people are brown, they normally starve them or push them under trains. If they're black they normally genocided, as shown when most of their black community were killed.
GREEK YOGHURT.
Apr 20th, 2012 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are as ignorant and hipocrite as usuall. Firstly, what was expressed in our constitution is, plena soberanía, in english it would be full sovereignty, but for us, the expression plena soberanía can be ope to more than one interpretation, thats' why i tell you that if we would share the sovereignty with the u. k, we would be exercising our plena soberanía or full sovereignty. On the other hand, you make such a fuss for the soposed not respect by argentina of the u. n, but at the same time, you reject sistematicly all the resolutions that call the two parts of the conflict to resume the negotiations and find a peaceful solution, isn't it a lack of respect too?. Beside, the argument of the signed agreement in 1850 is just a stupid argument which is absolutly irrelevant, in my investigation i explain why i think this. In the rest of the world there are diferent places with shared administrations, so, if the islanders want to remain british, nobody can change that, but it doesn't mean that we can't find a fair solution for both people regarding the sovereignty issue which is the main problem. On the other hand, if you are so worried about our constitution, you should remember that whatever it says respeting our claim for the islands, the u. n has never asked the u. k to return the islands to arg., it has only called the two pars of the conflict to resume the negotiations and find a peaceul solution, you are just making no more than the usuall ignorant comparisons that you do all the time, and make such partial analysis, thats' why you reffer ypf, but you dont say a word about the lack of inverstments by that entreprise and the wrong decitions that our gov. took some years ago regarding ypf. Study, you are not imbecil, you are just a hipocrite whose analysis are always just one sided.
@140 Look Argtard, we're not stupid. You are. You stated in your constitution that 'full sovereignty' is the long term aim of the peoples of Argtardia. That prevents any kind of negotiation under any kind of international arbitration or even UN umbrella which recognises the self-determination of the Islanders (2008). The UK doesn't reject the UN resolutions, we were negotiating and then you started a war, then we were negotiating and then Nestor decided to walk out of negotiations.
Apr 20th, 2012 - 01:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You're clearly an imbecile, continuously quoting UN resolutions from before Argentina turned negotiations into a military conflict. You even forget that your imbecile president walked out of UN-proposed negotiations on resources. Your mind is as small as your ability to recall simple facts.
The 1850 agreement stands, your country signed it. end of story.
The UK stands by the decision that respects the FIG to not enter into negotiations about their sovereignty without their agreement. The UN clearly states peace is “based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples” (UN Charter Chapter I, Article I) and the UK should “accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these [overseas] territories” (UN Charter Chapter XI Article 73).
Argentina has a historical precedent of never upholding any contract or bond that it's ever signed, UN Charter included. There is simply no reason to share sovereignty with Argentina. What are you proposing that would change this? What are you bringing to the negotiation table other than child-like whinging?
ntering into negotiations based upon Argentinas constitutional demands for naught but full sovereignty under a framework [UN] in which the Argentinians have absolutely no respect, is just lunacy. They cannot be trusted to respect the democracy or self-determination of the Falkland Islanders, and they simply want the military off the islands so they can invade
Apr 20th, 2012 - 02:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0AHAHHAHAHAAHAHAH
Looks who is talking about respect and international law.The numjber one country killer,irak,afganistan,libia....wher eis international law,there?/ yogui: YOU ARE AN IDIOT!
#137 Thanks for that Isolde, it does sound interesting.
Apr 20th, 2012 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#138 Certainly more interesting than a psychotic, ultra-left, alleged Scot who doesn't want independence because it costs too much and is fixated on a rubber doll, but then no-one like that posts here. It may or may not be more interesting than the rational, Old Labour, genuine Scot who doesn't want independence out of an oppostion to petty nationalism and a real sense of British identity and patriotism and who supports the beautiful and radiant Cristina, and does post here =)
@142 No, an idiot is someone who enters into a contract with an Argtard or Argtardia and expects them to uphold their side of the deal. That's quite apparent.
Apr 20th, 2012 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Time to revisit the British Pirate Oil Adventure in Malvinas…………:
Apr 20th, 2012 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Rockhopper’s PNR and Competent Person's Report from today says:
*** ”225 MMbbls” ***
Think said on the 01/03/12 :
”My uneducated guess:
CPR: ≤ 235 mmbbl”
http://en.mercopress.com/2012/03/01/argentina-escalates-trade-brawl-with-uk-suggests-eu-unasur-analyze-malvinas-dispute (15) Think
Not a bad “guess” from an old brainwashed Argie geezer from the Andes ….... Huhhhhh?
As I read the news today, Rockhopper’s oil is NOT commercial.
The market seems to agree with me….: Rockhopper down -7.80% on negative CPR news.
Seems to be that the future of the British Pirate Oil Adventure in Malvinas very much depends from the forthcoming results of the current Borders & Southern drilling….
My uneducated guess?..............:
The last 3 days of BOR share price craze have been a typical ”pump & dump” operation.
The well is a Duster…………………
@138 ChrisR,
Apr 20th, 2012 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks Chris.
You're making me laugh about CFK being a rubber doll!
l call her a pump up rubber mattress.
GREEK YOGHURT.
Apr 21st, 2012 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0The only one argument that a mediocre like you can use, is the militar invasion of 1982, but you omit that after the war, the u. n continued calling the two parts of the conflict to resume the negotiations and find a peaceful solution. I have never denied that perhaps our government didn't act correctly in some oportunities, according to the words of our ministers, our government decided to recall the oil agreement that it had signed with the u. k in the past, because it didn't benefit arg., i dont know if it's true or not, but at the same time, you have never accepted to discuss about the sovereignty which is the main problem, thats' not acting correctly eather, anyway i know that an ignorant mediocre like you won't never do any critic respecting this situation. On the other hand, you dont realise about the pathetic doble standart that you and many of your compatriots use all the time when they reffer our constitution, according to your view, arg. would accept only te transference of the sovereignty to our country, which woudn't be a negotiation but a submition, however your side has always manifested that the u. k would talk about sovereignty only if the islanders wish it, isn't it also a submition?. Perhaps it would be necesary to remind you that allthough the right to self determination is included in the charter of the u. n., none resolution has never invoked that right in any of the resolutions that were expressed for the malvinas-falkland cause, like the u. n did for diferent colonial situations, and never expressed eather that the sovereignty must be discussed only if the islanders wish it, anyway i dont discard that may be self determination applicable of the islanders, but as long as the u. n continues calling the two parts of the conflict to resume the negotiations and find a peaceful solution, with out any invocation of self determination for the islanders, arg. wil be abble to keep on claiming for the islands.
Hurrah for Canada's Globe and Mail!
Apr 21st, 2012 - 03:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Philippe
@147 Axel,
Apr 21st, 2012 - 08:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Claim as much as you like, Dear Axel.
But we are NOT going to talk to you about Sovereignty & we are NOT going to give you OUR lslands.
Argentina invaded british soil killed British soldiers were defeated militarily are unwanted by the islanders have no military power or anything the UK needs yet expect us to give you the islands?
Apr 22nd, 2012 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sgt MAJ MUIR had it about right
“fuck off you spic Barstards”
MARTIN WOODHEAD. ISOLDE.
Apr 22nd, 2012 - 09:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ISOLDE: You can reject the negotiations as much as you like my not dear isolde, but dont complain if our government takes hard decitions regarding this dispute, because the intransigence of your side has a huge responsability in the actual scenario, only a miopic like you would blame only argentina. On the other hand, why dont you comply with your promess?, you told me a few weeks ago that you were not going to answer my coments anymore, however i find that you reffer to me almost everyday.
MARTIN: Like i told to greek, the only one argument that you can use, is the war, however it's necesary to remind you that despite the war, the u. n continued calling the two parts of the conflict to resume the negotiations and find a peaceful solution. The u. k can continue cleaning it's ass with the resolutions as much as it likes, but it wont impide that we keep on claiming for the islands only diplomaticly. I dont know if we will recover them or not some day, but we dont need to militarize the country, in order to fight for our sovereign rights over a territory.
Real Politik, Axel.
Apr 23rd, 2012 - 05:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0The UK can afford to protect TFI out of its small change - until a larger conflict commands its attention elsewhere. Argentina de-militarised as a political act to protect the 'government' from military take-over, and has no power to exercise in the matter except rhetoric.
Having over-played her hand in world public fora, CFK/Timerman find nations extremely circumspect and unwilling to afford much support on the ground.
It is probable that she has gone as far as she can down this tactical route, so what are her options? Keep pricking away at her claims to TFI, the other islands and the Antarctic sector? Wait for her country to collapse economically so people focus elsewhere? Wait 'til the Euro collapses and the political environment changes? Wait 'til the UK becomes embroiled in another 'Blair's War'?
Waiting involves the passage of time - CFK does not have time.
She will be flattened by 'the steamroller of fate' before her window of opportunity opens.
The UN is always going to call for talks jaw jaw is always better than war war.
Apr 23rd, 2012 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Unfortunatly Argentina brings nothing to the Talks at all.
Uk gives into argentina demands it looks weak on the world stage which isnt terribly important except the UK doesnt have to give in Right and Might are on thre UK side in this one for once. (hey every 100 years or so the UK has to do something right :))
ilsanders dont want to be argies dont speak spanish or have any links with you so little advantage for them to argentine.
big disadavantages poor economy argentines being macho dicks and pushing the islanders about (YOU DID IT LAST TIME) Why should they trust you? You havnt managed to do anything in the last 30 years to make the islanders like you.
To SUM UP you cant threaten or bribe either the UK or the Islands so do one.
@151 Axel,
Apr 23rd, 2012 - 11:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes Dearest Axel, l did say that l wouldn't talk to you anymore.
But you post so much rubbish & lies, that l cannot resist stirring you up.
l've tried to fight it but its a losing battle. l've really, really tried. :-)))
Since sr Think has gone quiet, you're IT.
What are these hard decisions that your government might make, Axel?
More threats, ooh, l'm scared. ha ha Another failed invasion?
The mood in Britain & here is much more hardline now.
lf you dare to even try to invade again you won't get off so lightly next time.
Don't take that as a threat,Axel, just a piece of friendly advice. :-))))
Of course l blame only Argentina.
Argentina is the one making all the trouble.
Just get on with trying to improve your broken country & keep your nose out of our affairs.♥
GEOFFWARD2. MARTIN WOODHEAD. ISOLDE.
Apr 23rd, 2012 - 01:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When i read your comments almost everyday, i conffirm that you know so little about us, you just buy easily the partial information or the lies that are published in the press.
Like i said before, the only one argument that you can use, in order to justify the militarization of the islands, and the rejection to resume the negotiations, is the war of 1982. On the other hand, you are so pathetic that you dont realise about how incoherent your comments are, i mean that when you talk about arg., you recognize that arg. has no capacity in order to invade the islands again, but at the same time you justify the excesive militarization of the malvinas-falkland because you want to protect them from a soposed new invation by arg., how can you be so ignorant?. Beside, if you love to invoke our constitution every time you reffer our clame for the islands, let me remind yo that it says perfectly that in order to recover the sovereignty of the islands, it must be under the respect for the international right, it doesn't say absolutly anything about the use of militar forces. On the other hand, when i reffer the hard decitions that our government took, i mean the denounces against the oil corporations which are exploring in the islands, and i mean also the restriction to the ships that provide the oil exploration in the archipelago. Anyway, i never denied, that may be my country didn't act correctly in some oportunities, i read that it didnt comply totally with some of the agreements that it had signed in the past with the u. k, i dont know if it's true or not, but at the same time, you never accepted to discuss about the sovereignty which is the main problem, accept it or not, that's not acting correctly eather, anyway i dont expect that miopic people like you do any critic about the behaviour of your side.
152 GeoffWard2
Apr 23rd, 2012 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I do so love your summary about the fate of CFK: “She will be flattened by 'the steamroller of fate' before her window of opportunity opens.”
We can only hope the thing comes along sooner rather than later. :o)
We don't fucking trust you.
Apr 23rd, 2012 - 03:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The force is there to make some pathetic nationalist stunt very difficult to pull off.
We wont discuss sovereignty because we don't have to the islanders don't want you. You have nothing we need and your no threat.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!