MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, May 29th 2022 - 01:32 UTC

 

 

Commons report reveals UK sold £ 2.3m of military equipment to Argentina

Friday, July 13th 2012 - 03:21 UTC
Full article 73 comments

The British government must exercise more caution in granting licences for the export of arms, according to a parliamentary report which mentions authoritarian regimes such as Bahrain but also areas of direct concern for UK such as Argentina and the Falklands. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Frank

    A million pounds (a year) doesn't buy much..... I hope they got cash up front.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 06:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Doveoverdover

    I have it on good authority that the shotguns were for the Buenos Aries Garrison Officer's Mess shoot. Top quality, they made up a not insignificant portion of the expenditure in the run up to the 30th Anniversary. Apparently, it was a morale boosting measure to try to give the members something else to think about at this time of great national sadness. This was one Argentinian initiative that won't backfire so long as the armourer uses only the finest oil available in the southern hemisphere.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 06:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Frank

    Are they the ones with the little flag that pops out of the barrel with 'BANG' written on it?

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 07:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Boovis

    “You all saw him...he had a gun...”

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 07:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steveu

    @4 Boovis

    A Bill Hicks fan, I see

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 07:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Iron Man

    “£2.3m of military equipment....”

    That's a lot of white flags.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 08:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Frank

    Ah... but these are the deluxe reversable ones.... red cross on one side..... plain white on the other..........

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 08:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Boovis

    @5 as true today as it ever was :)

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 08:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Britworker

    I think it's a little academic where they purchase them from, what they don't get from the EU or US, I'm sure they easily source from Russia and China.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • War Monkey

    Maybe we should just sell keep selling them stuff. Boobytrapped. Set to detonate if it ever goes near the Falkland Islands.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    I hope they made the Agies pay up front in US dollars. ;0)

    The truth is the Agentina's military is 30 years behind the UK military, and £2.3 million pound is a tiny drop in the ocean regarding a country's defence. I mean the Ministry of Defence spends millions of pounds a day on UK defences.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    Business is business - and I can't see the harm in giving CFK a shotgun to play with.

    “Ooooh is this a pair of binoculars?”

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • mcarling

    With Argentina's current aggression against the Falkland Islanders, I hope Britain will cease providing any and all military exports to Argentina.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LightThink

    This means that Britian never loves the FI settlers.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 10:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    l would have thought, NO arms or military equipment of ANY description should be sold to the pillocks.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    Stop worrying folks. We sell the Argentines a few shotguns etc and we lend the Falklanders a Type 45, a nuclear powered hunter killer submarine and Eurofighters.

    I know who's getting the best deal.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • WestisBest

    So how does this square with Argentina wanting a demilitarized South Atlantic?

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 10:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    CFK said she was boycotting imports from the UK, but then she was also going to take the oil companies to court.

    Maybe it's a good idea to sell her stuff to keep the ex-british ships going. If she uses them they'll be joing the Belgrano and the UK will have actually made some money out of Argentina-that is if they've actually paid real money.
    Don't they still owe UK money for those warships?

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 11:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Boovis

    18: yup, makes sense to sell them our old ships as we have the plans and prints for them, know their strengths and weaknesses, easier to destroy if push comes to shove. Also, fits with the age old British method: sell the world our old crap while keeping the best for ourselves, always one step ahead.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    To: all those craven “Apologists for our perfidious Arms dealers”...

    As I’ve been reiterating over the past few months, until I’m almost blue in the face, Big Business CANNOT be trusted –it’s only morality is based on MONEY and that’s it!!!

    Furthermore, all our pathetically mediocre, ineffectual MAJOR political parties, are on the Multinational Bankers’ and International Business Brokers’ payrolls!!!

    Jim, in Madrid.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • PirateLove

    Any military equipment would have had any sensitive technology ripped out before sale, so whatever they bought would be a empty shell, or obselete junk.

    !!ANY OLD IRON!!, !!SCRAP IRON!!

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 12:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @14 I don't see why you would think that. 0.3% of around £75m is more than reasonable. From my (British) perspective, happy to double it. What are you buch of tossers going to do with a few shotguns? How many would you like to lose on a future occasion? 6,000? 60,000? Glad to oblige!

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • British_Kirchnerist

    #14 Not as much as they love money thats for sure!

    #20 Exactly

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 05:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    guy guys

    this is old news,
    and it has been stopped,

    like it said most of her equipment is british made,
    very old by todays standard, but well made, [was it not]

    but you can relax now,
    argentina has found a new friend,
    and all future arms, may well come from CHINA

    a bit slanted, but beggers cant be choosers lolol.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 06:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • cLOHO

    23... Rumour has it Argentina loves money, they are printing loads of the stuff... But that's not a problem apparently just keep on printing

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • slattzzz

    2.3 million is not even half a seadart missile

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    Re: 21 PirateLove (#)
    Jul 13th, 2012 - 12:13 pm

    “Any military equipment would have had any sensitive technology ripped out before sale, so whatever they bought would be a empty shell, or obselete junk

    (WHO SAYS SO???, Jim).

    !!ANY OLD IRON!!, !!SCRAP IRON!!”

    Re: 22 Conqueror (#)
    Jul 13th, 2012 - 03:01 pm
    @14

    “I don't see why you would think that. 0.3% of around £75m is more than reasonable. From my (British) perspective, happy to double it. What are you buch of tossers going to do with a FEW SHOTGUNS? How many would you like to lose on a future occasion? 6,000? 60,000? Glad to oblige!”

    I wonder just how much, long-term, active, military experience you two have? I do hope it equals your indisputable expertise in uttering pure, unsubstantiated guesses in the form of meaningless sound bites!!!

    Perhaps the OFFICIALLY DECLARED value of the British armaments exported to Argentina, should be compared to the total sum spent by the UK taxpayer on Falklands’ defence, during the same period?

    Recently, it’s emerged on French TV that during the Falklands’ conflict, their Intelligence Service clandestinely despatched a team of technicians to Argentina –to repair many of the aggressor’s Exocets– which due to neglect, had become unserviceable. NOW, the French MOD denies any knowledge of the matter, bleating that they’re our true EU partners and staunch military allies. Also, so many “Black-ops” deals are done through third party proxies, that just WHO knows what’s REALLY happening? Remember the infamous case of the US Marine colonel, who involved the UK’s military in a certain “little foreign adventure”!!!

    Jim, in Madrid.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Musky

    @17 West Is Best
    Very good point.

    2.3 million is 2.3 million too much. I wouldn't sell them a pea shooter.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    You're singing my song, Musky.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • mickey5hins

    Argentina new BFF frigate runs aground off Palawan

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 09:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    sell sell sell even if it is to Argentina!!!
    What a bunch of wankers in the Uk government.The UK economy is in economic crises in so they have to sell to their enemy number 1.

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 10:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • PirateLove

    @27 read my comment was it wrong what i said?? you seem to think so, are we really going to sell sensitive technology to possible enemies? let alone for £2.3M
    you dont need military experience to know the answer to that, but you clearly think military experience valids any sort of comment. As for YOUR conspiracies they are just that CONSPIRACIES at least my comment is fact! Commander in chief Jim Handley (Conspiracy theorist)

    @31 I would sell my sh*t to an enemy too wouldnt you? Im sorry but £2.3M in obselete military hardware gets you sweet F*ck All, As for enemy number 1 ,they are not yet but they can if they wish but i doubt they are that stupid., lets face it,they wouldnt be enemy number 1 for long......

    Jul 13th, 2012 - 11:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    For: 32 PirateLove (#)
    Re: “As for YOUR conspiracies they are just that CONSPIRACIES at least my comment is fact!”, etcetera...

    If you don’t credit the veracity of my claim about French Intelligence Services’ activities the during the Falklands’ conflict, try visiting France’s State controlled international TV broadcaster’ Website: France24

    Better still, have a look here:
    http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/falkland-islands/45704/bbc-finds-evidence-french-helped-argentines-sink-our-ships

    Here are a couple excerpts from this SHOCKING report:

    “But at the same time, according to convincing evidence unearthed by the BBC, a group of French technicians in Argentina fine-tuned and repaired the five air-launched Exocet missiles the Argentineans had already purchased.”

    “But it's the attitude of the United States that still grates most of all. Their reluctance to support us against the Fascist Argentine Junta is well known. Initially, in April 1982, they even refused us permission to use the US operated airfield on Ascension Island (a British Crown Colony for Heaven's sake) to refuel RAF aircraft. In 2012 the US does not recognise our legal claim to the Falkland Islands which Hillary Clinton's staff insolently refer to as ‘Las Malvinas’...”

    SO MUCH FOR POLITICIANS!!!

    Sorry, Mate but in your case, I fear I’m wasting my time on a fat lipped, foulmouthed fool!

    Jim, in Madrid.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinense 1833

    Argentina is a country that spends less on weapons. It's a tabloid news.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 12:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    P.S.
    And, just today, it’s emerged that the US Fed. knew of Barclays’ LIBOR fiddle as far back as 2007!!!
    So much for BANKERS and politicians!!!

    Jim, in Madrid,

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 12:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Frank

    @31.... thats pretty crap english for an alleged strayan......

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 06:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    31

    What's the problem with selling to Argentina? After all, they are a peace-loving nation, are they not? That's what all you Malvinistas keep telling everyone.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 07:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    Hello Everyone,

    PROBLEMS WITH WESTERN COMPANIES IN ARGENTINA –GENERAL NOTE

    Perhaps the Argentinean Govt wants to find an excuse to kick out ALL western enterprises and replace them with ‘less conflictive’ Chinese firms.

    If so, they’re treading a dangerous path. For now that we in the West have allowed our ‘capitalist movers and shakers’ to export so many jobs to China’s quasi slave labour factories –LOOK JUST HOW PROSPEROUS WE’VE ALL SUDDENLY BECOME BACK HERE!!!

    By the way, for a little more ENERVATING NEWS about the Big Banks, do have a shufti here:

    http://en.mercopress.com/2012/07/14/visa-and-mastercard-agree-to-largest-settlement-with-retailers-over-card-fees?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily

    Jim, in Madrid.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 09:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Frank

    @30 It will be interesting to see where KFC and her goons stand on that..... given the Chinese claim to something so far from home and so close to another country claiming ownership...........

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 09:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • PirateLove

    @33 French helping argentina with their missiles is old news, when i mentioned conspiracy it was for the latter of your statement,

    as for my original comment was i wrong?, are we going to sell £2.3m worth of sensitive military technology to Argentina? yes or no? if we did i think it would be worth far more than 2.3million, dont ya think....

    !!ANY OLD IRON!!, !!SCRAP IRON!!

    by the way, personal name calling very mature, stick to the topic.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • KretinaK

    Argentina used to have the best beef in the world, but since Nestor and Cristina Kirchner have been in power, the beef industry has been completely destroyed. Nobody should eat the poor quality and polluted beef, it's not fit for human consumption. Argentine beef loaded with hormones, drugs and chemicals that have been outlawed in the USA and Europe and they have been known to ship rotten beef for export after it's been washed with bleach and ammonia, injected with formaldehyde and red food coloring.
    Lemons from Argentina are sprayed with toxic and dangerous chemicals that cause cancer and nerve damage and injected with artificial yellow coloring because the soil in Argentina is so depleted of minerals in that the lemons grow white on the trees and have no flavor.
    Industrial products such as tools, automobiles, machinery and appliances from Argentina are the worst and poorest quality in the world. Even the chinese won't buy them. There is no industrial standard, they use the lowest quality raw materials and no testing is done before they are shipped. This has caused people to be injured by unsafe products, many people have been electrocuted by Argentine washing machines and hot water heaters that leave the factory with short circuits.
    All countries should completely avoid ALL Argentine products permanently.
    Article about Argentina signing a military cooperation agreement with Venezuela, these people are looking to start a war.
    www.buenosairesherald.com/article/105945/argentina-venezuela-to-sign-military-agreement
    Did you hear about the new “militant” movement that Kirchners are starting that will make “La Cámpora” look like a group of kids in nursery school? It's called “Vatayon”, it's a Kirchner backed group that goes into the prisons of Argentina to recruit supporters for their political movement.
    www.facebook.com/#!/vatayonmilitante

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Musky

    @29 isolde
    At least its not 2.3million argentine pesos!

    @31 aussie sunsine
    i would be worried if these sales had been made since argentina started going stark staring bonkers regarding the falklands but it seems the figure is the tally of sales up until britain decided to turn off the exports, when CFK decided to go the full monty and play the global village idiot with Timmerman as the emergency backup idiot and Castro as village idiot role model to which all other idiots aspire.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 01:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    36 I agree!! It was 2 in the morning when I wrote it!! LOL

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @38 What a pity you're not in Britain. Should we bring together words like “ships” and “rats”? Also interesting that “ex-pats” also rhymes with “rats”. I have no time for either. But it's worth remembering the number of times the world has considered that England or Britain would be “finished”. Still here! Ex-pats and rats need not return. As for “military experience”, I can tell you this. No matter how glorious, I would not have sanctioned the Charge of the Light Brigade. But there are a few things I would sanction in respect of argieland. I would sanction another squadron of Typhoons to the Falklands in addition to the existing Flight. I would sanction a second hunter-killer submarine in the South Atlantic. I would sanction the deployment of RFA vessels to the South Atlantic loaded with enough torpedos and Tomahawk missiles to maintain a week's uninterrupted use. I would sanction the deployment of a ballistic missile submarine, fully armed, at an appropriate range. Of course, with the exception of the Typhoons, the other resources may already be “in range”. How strange that an apparent Brit should live in the territory of one of its enemies!

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 02:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steveu

    @33 Your comment about the US is interesting but not accurate

    The official stance of the US was to sit on the fence whilst they thought that Argentina might still back down

    When it was clear that this wasn't going to happen the US Defense Dept gave the UK lots of help via the back door - including free fuel for the Black Buck (Vulcan) raids

    Reagan tried to get Maggie to not humiliate Argentina just prior to the final surrender (I'm no great fan of the woman, by the way - the whole situation could have been avoided if they hadn't withdrawn assets from the S Atlantic prior to the invasion). Fortunately she told him politely where to go although a formal renunciation of the Arg sovereignty claim as part of the surrender wouldn't have gone amiss!

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 02:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    PirateLove

    French helping Argentina with their missiles is old news

    Old news may be old, as time goes on,
    But in military and political terms, its as new as yesterday,

    It gives you an insight to whom you can and cannot trust,
    And who not to tell,

    If ii am correct,
    [Please tell otherwise]
    The following countries had an input into the Falklands conflict, and no matter how small or irrelevant, gave aid, to argentina,
    Whether it was information, arms , intelligence , ect

    1, France
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975
    2 Israel
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975
    3, Peru
    4, Brazil
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975
    5, USSR or Russia .as its known,
    A few others were suspect,
    Although France did [ u-turn] and helped the British, at a later stage.
    30 years ago, but would the same countries, help them today ??

    just out of interest .

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 07:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @44
    Plus a flight of Tornado GR4s for good measure, with appropriate weaponry for theatre.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 09:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ynsere

    My advice to the British FO and Islanders: never let your guard down. Never allow Argentina to perceive internal discordance. Let past mistakes become lessons learned. Argentina is a past, present and future enemy.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 09:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinense 1833

    Discussions of war. Enough. We are waiting with open arms.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 10:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conor

    @49
    Yeah Right, just like in 82? Only the arms were loaded and they were pointed at children.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 10:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @49
    UK negotiates at length in 1970s/1980swith Argentina even offering concessions which should not have been offered without consultation withthe Islanders=result Argentina invades.
    Before UK forces reached FI in 82, even the Thatcher government offered to share sovereignity during diplomatic talks using USA=Argentina refused to withdraw.

    Lesson from this? Negotiating with Argentina going halfway leads to Argentine aggression.

    Defending Islands and supporting the FIs = No Argentine agression (yet, until CFK gets desperate by the end of her tenure as president).

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • PirateLove

    @46 you could possibly throw libya in there, but we will never know the full extent of assistance/interference on both sides, so wether your correct or not, who knows i certainly dont, but it is old news, we should be more concerned by what is possibly making its way to Argentina at the present on higher purchase.

    I would be interested to see if russia would trade arms with Argentina to be used against an EU country and a UN member, most other south americans countries i guess would stay fairly neutral it depends on who values EU trade the most, Israel is a possibility but i think they are soon going to need all their hardware they can get and it would not bode well for any possible EU membership in the future.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 11:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    Hello,

    For: 45 Steveu (#)

    Re: “@33 Your comment about the US is interesting but not accurate”

    It ain’t MY comment ol’ fruit but that of the BBC –usually a quite reliable and objective source for news. And surely, I must already have made abundantly clear, my lack of faith in ALL politicians, from ALL countries.

    Anyway, it’s pleasure to hear your RATIONAL cogently express opinion, even though it differs from my own.

    For unfortunately, far too many of the ‘bigmouthed bullyboys’ –who in reality, probably couldn’t even fight their way out a paper bag– contributing to this Thread, are almost certainly so deranged as to be in need of urgent, psychiatric treatment.

    Best wishes!

    Jim, in Madrid.

    Jul 14th, 2012 - 11:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steveu

    @54

    I think nothing was black and white - there was obviously a difference of opinion within the Reagan administration with one side not wishing to rock the boat in regards the relationship with LatAm countries and the other side wishing to fulfil its obligations to the “ special relationship” who we giving the UK as much covert help as possible

    I did find the fact we had to approach the US to access our own territory a bit galling. I also find that we are in the same situation with the Obama administration (although I'm not so sure that there is a pro British faction this time) but I think they need reminding that Diego Garcia is still a UK BOT and the lease is about to expire.

    I think Romney has more pro British credentials and so we'll need to wait and see

    I do agree with you about some of the stupid posts - from both sides of the debate

    Jul 15th, 2012 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • shb

    @steveu

    A number of Argentine posters keep thinking that obama and co (or any future president) would support Argentine action in the falklands. I keep telling them that we couold make life difficult for the USA if we withdrew our support for them in the international arena. Diego Garcia is an excellent example - I wonder if we can do the same with Ascension island?

    Jul 15th, 2012 - 09:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steveu

    @55 shb

    I see no reason why not. The US use of BOT's should be a commercial relationship. The DG base was negotiated in return for a discount on Polaris - I would rather see these deals in terms of hard money. Let's hope the same people that hired G4S for the Olympic security aren't involved in drawing up any contracts with Uncle Sam ;-)

    The “special relationship” is pretty one sided at the moment. Blair signed up for Bush's adventure in Iraq and we got diddly squat in return as a result (not that we should always expect a payback if we do it for the right reasons).

    Afghanistan is a bit different as it is under a UN mandate rather than US led (although they have many more boots on the ground so it is, de facto, US led)

    I certainly don't think Obama would become involved militarily either way but a few words (apart from those that Cameron prised out of him when they met recently) regarding the Islanders' right to self determination (ie as enshrined in the UN constitution) would have stopped a lot of the recent nonsense. The Argentinians are deluding themselves if they think Obama will give them any real support - maybe they are 51% in favour of Argentina (for reasons of influence in S America) but no more

    Anyway, it looks like economics will come to the rescue - Argentina is heading for hyperinflation and their protectionist measures means that CFK is going to be crossed off a few Christmas lists this year. The Chinese may palm them off with a few knock off items of military hardware but they will need paying in hard currency or commodities.

    If Chavez gets involved with Argentina, that will also alienate them from the US - even the most left wing administration to date.

    Jul 15th, 2012 - 11:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    52 PirateLove

    You may well be correct,

    After all, argentina has to obtain them from some one some where,

    And the UK is of the list .
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    The DG Base,
    The Americans are thinking of leaving this base, as they move more into the pacific basin,
    And it has been noted that the royal navy, should run use the base properly,

    Just a point .
    .

    Jul 15th, 2012 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • cLOHO

    33... Seem to remember raf aircraft refuelling at ascension islands in 82 so first in correct point. Sidewinder missiles came in handy from the US plus some great satellite imagery...I note the recent articles from US that Reagan was going to loan a aircraft carrier to uk if one was lost. So behind the scenes the yanks helped a bit.

    Jul 16th, 2012 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    The americans do a lot more, that people think,,

    and argentina does a lot LESS than people think,

    for action speaks louder that words,
    and CFK loves to talk .

    Jul 16th, 2012 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    The Argentinians assume USA support, but on examination of how many times the UK have helped the USA and how many times the Argentines have not, should tell anyone which side the USA are unlikely to dump when push comes to shove.

    The Argentinian posters on here don't mention that in addition to the UK the USA are/were also in Afghanistan, Iraq , Libya (Argentina=Gaddaffy Duck's buddies) and USA and UK forces near Iran (also Argy buddies).

    The Argentine form of diplomacy takes some understanding, when they ally themselves with countries the USA aren't too keen on and assume that the USA are going to reward them by taking their side on the Falklands.

    BTW, is it Canada or the USA that have a sovereignty claim on Argentina because Canada geese migrate down there? lol.

    Jul 16th, 2012 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinense 1833

    Conor and Pete Bog: The UK negotiated a short time.
    From 1833 to 1965 never really wanted to negotiate.
    In 1982, Galtieri and Thatcher committed serious errors.
    I as a citizen of Argentina and the world want to reach a definitive agreement and live in peace.
    Regards.

    Jul 16th, 2012 - 09:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    61 Malvinense 1833

    In a real world you may have a point,
    But just for a moment, lets get some things straight,
    So as not to confuse anyone,

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    It does not matter, how many years there were negotiating ,
    Whether it was one year- or a hundred years,
    [Argentina had no right]
    In invade an unarmed defenceless tiny innocent island,

    It does not matter how many errors Margaret Thatcher made, in 1980-82-or 86,
    [Argentina had no right]
    In invade an unarmed defenceless tiny innocent island,
    [and that’s the only fact of real interest]
    Is it not,
    Everything else is merely argentine excuses .

    .

    Jul 16th, 2012 - 10:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conor

    @61
    There has been peace since 1982, the Falklands have been protected and made safe under the wing of the United Kingdom, it is Argentine that refuses to let this debate die and so you continually poke holes at the UK and the islands, leave us all alone. Drop your pathetic claim and true peace will be achieved instantly.

    Jul 16th, 2012 - 10:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @61
    The last negotiations that might have given Argentina a benefit were walked out of by Nestor Kirchener.
    When the UK were negotiating with Argentina pre-1982 (quite wrongly because the UN Charter prescribes self-determination for all peoples), and after the UK reduced its forces on the islands (ie withdrew the hovercraft unit and was set to withdraw HMS Endurance) the Argentines response was to invade South Georgia (On which Argentina has never had any kind of claim), and the Falklands.
    Military Deterence is what Argentina respects, not negotiation.

    Jul 17th, 2012 - 12:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • BLACK CAT

    38 JimHandley (#)

    But Jim do you know the difference between a mussel (crustaceans to the likes of you, mollusca to me) and a crabyet? until you do “your elbow from your arse” springs to mind. Please note no complete words in capital letters were harmed during this posting!!!

    Jul 17th, 2012 - 01:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JimHandley

    For: 65 BLACK CAT (#)

    Re:
    “But Jim do you know the difference between a mussel (crustaceans to the likes of you, mollusca to me) and a crabyet? until you do “your elbow from your arse” springs to mind. Please note no complete words in capital letters were harmed during this posting!!!”

    Perhaps you have a valid point and at least, your reply IS humorous!
    However, I DID forewarn my correspondent than things were descending into the dark realms of pedantry.

    I suppose one’s definition of such ‘esoteric’ zoological terms depends on whether one elects to use the ORIGINAL Greek / Latin meanings or those defined by the modern English lexicon. I really don’t know, ‘cos studied having Physics, I’m not much cop at the Classics. Neither –as you’ve already observed– am I any good at the Fine Art of jocular piss taking

    Best wishes,

    Jim, in Madrid.

    Jul 17th, 2012 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • BLACK CAT

    66 JimHandley (#)

    I don't think there's much room in Jim's world for shell fish, I read your posts on, “Small Tuned Loop AM Broadcast Antenna” and Robin Hood is alive and well in Madrid” both good reads, tip my hat. The Robin Hood post was eye opening.

    Jul 18th, 2012 - 01:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinense 1833

    @ briton: And if you look at it from my point of view?
    In a real world you may have a point,
    But just for a moment, lets get some things straight,
    So as not to confuse anyone,

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    It does not matter, how many years there were negotiating ,
    Whether it was one year- or a hundred years,
    [England had no right]
    In invade an unarmed defenceless tiny innocent island,

    It does not matter how many errors Galtiri made, in 1982
    [United Kingdom had no right]
    In invade an unarmed defenceless tiny innocent island in 1.833,
    [and that’s the only fact of real interest]
    Is it not,
    Everything else is merely british excuses .

    Jul 19th, 2012 - 01:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conor

    @68
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! You really are a funny one Mr Malvinense, in 1833 your illegal penal colony was removed from our islands which discovered in the 1690's, your the invaders you held the islanders at gun point, your the ones who indoctrinate your children, so don't lecture me, give up your claim and concentrate on your on life in Argentine and not the lives of the islanders.

    Jul 19th, 2012 - 09:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Malvinense 1833

    @69 Mr Conor: hmmm 1.690
    This is a statement of confidence most that of certainty.
    Dr. Samuel Johnson. March 1.771

    Anyway I prefer to reach an agreement. Maybe sometime and have some beers with you and islanders.
    Regards.

    Jul 19th, 2012 - 11:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conor

    @70
    Actually the late 1600's is when the islands were first sighted/claimed for the Kingdom of England, now part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    Your offer of a bear would be lovely if your leaders drop the claim and stop threatening the islanders and escalating the conflict. So I guess we will be waiting a while then.

    Jul 20th, 2012 - 12:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lost1

    Please support this page - Falkland Islands Desire The Right - dedicated to Falkland Islands current affairs, keeping the islands free and poking fun at the lunacy of the Argentine government and their various claims and winding up their Internet trolls -

    https://www.facebook.com/Britain1592

    Jul 20th, 2012 - 05:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @68
    “[England had no right]
    In invade an unarmed defenceless tiny innocent island,”

    England did not invade the Falklands in 1833, the UK sent a few ships to eject the military garrison that the UPotRP sent in 1832, of which the UK protested.

    The islands were not defenceless either. The military force did more damage-the British did not kill anyone on arrival but the UPotRP commander was murdered by his own men and his wife raped.
    The military commander who was sent back. Pinedo, acknowledged (it is on record if you look it up) that the settlers were asked to stay by the British , not threatened with ejection as the Argentines claim today. But then again Argentina now claims that sovereignty is dependent on migrating birds, so what does that tell you?

    The reason why the military garrison did not fight against the British that arrived was because most of the UPotRP garrison was formed of British Mercenaries who refused to fight their own people.
    The UK had every right to ask the UP of the RP military to leave because they were not part of Vernet's settlement which had permission from the British to be there.
    As Britain had not renounce its claim on the Islands, it was entitled to exercise that claim, the only reason the Briitsh send ships was because a military garrison was sent there from UP ot RP. They were perfectly happy to let civilian setters live there.

    Ironically, the people that the British did eject were mostly British nationals, and of the people that were welcomed to stay, only two were British, most were from the UP of the RP( ie not Argentina as it did not exist then).

    Which makes a mockery of Argentinas claim of a transplanted population.

    Jul 22nd, 2012 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!