MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands’ hero and 1982 governor Sir Rex Hunt honoured by Foreign Secretary
The British Government’s, “pride and thanks,” was expressed at Sir Rex Hunt’s memorial service in London last Tuesday. Sir Rex Hunt was Governor of the Falkland Islands when the Argentine military invasion on 2 April 1982. After the conflict Sir Rex who the Argentines expelled from the Islands returned to this job at Government House in Stanley. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules.“... illegal aggression”?????????
Jun 13th, 2013 - 11:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Illegal aggression” was the January 3, 1833, asshole.
@1 Reasserting our sovereignty in 1833 was not illegal, placing a penal colony on an island more than 1000 miles away from your borders, when said island was already claimed by Britain was illegal though.
Jun 13th, 2013 - 11:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0The islands were never part of your territory as at the time you did not even have sovereignty of Patagonia or tierra del fuego, as it wasn't till between 1890 and 1910 when you gained sovereignty of those areas by illegally slaughtering the native Indians.
The 1982 war was basically Argentina repeating what it did in 1833 but on a much bigger scale, by attempting to assert sovereignty by military force on the islands population. But again, like in 1833, Britain successfully reasserted it sovereignty!
You simply can not claim land that belongs to others as yours just because you want it, just like you can not claim your neighbors house as yours!
@1 ILLEGAL AGGRESSION!!! Attitudes and actions for which the scumhole of argieland is infamous. Argieland was “born” in a situation of illegality and aggression. It is not “legal” to rebel. And, as for “aggression”, let's ask the ghosts of the Onas, the Yamana, the Tehuelches, the Guaycurúes, the Wichis, the Guaranies, the Toba, the Diaguita, the Comechingones, the Charrua, the Yaros, the Bohanes, the Chanas and the Querandi. The wars against the National Party of Uruguay and against Paraguay. And the “Conquest of the Desert”. Deliberate and admitted aggression against the indigenous people. There was even aggression against France and Britain in the mid-19th century and against Britain during World War 2. And the aggression against Britain and the intended aggression against Chile in 1982. As can be seen, always aggression against people perceived to be weaker or otherwise occupied.
Jun 13th, 2013 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Jose - The invasion of the Falklands was classed as Illegal by the UN, so you'd better take up your issues with them. The day after the RG's illegal invasion the UN released a resolution asking you to leave - you did not. You preferred an international humiliation to talks and reason - now any claim that Argentina had, is dead and buried. The Falklands are British, were British, and always will be British as long as the people who live there wish to remain so.
Jun 13th, 2013 - 01:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 01 José Malvinero
Jun 13th, 2013 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I love it when morons like you give your uninformed opinions.
General theory of law and state by Hans Kelsen : translated by Anders Wedberg. p. cm. Originally published: Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1945
Kelsen was a professor at Vienna, Cologne, Geneva, and the German university in Prague. He wrote the Austrian constitution adopted in 1920 and served as a judge of the Austrian Supreme Constitutional Court (1920–30). After immigrating to the United States in 1940, he taught at Harvard, the University of California at Berkeley, and the Naval War College, Newport, R.I.
214 THE ELEMENTS OF THE STATE
....Taking possession through military force of the territory of another State against the latter's will is possible, however, without any military resistance on the part of the victim. Provided that a unilateral act of force performed by one State against another is not considered to be war in itself (war being, according to traditional opinion, “a contention between two or more States through their armed forces” and hence at least a bilateral action) annexation is not only possible in time of war, but also in time of peace. The decisive point is that annexation, that is, taking possession of another State's territory with the intention to acquire it, constitutes acquisition of this territory even without the consent of the State to which the territory previously belonged, if the possession is “firmly established.” It makes no difference whether the annexation takes place after an occupatio bellica or not.
@1 Just to add to what travellingscotsman has said, let me point out that the UN resolution released after the ILLEGAL argie invasion was a Security Council resolution. Unlike the NON-BINDING General Assembly resolutions that your cesspit likes to trot out, a Security Council resolution IS BINDING on all members. Please note that argieland has NEVER had a seat at the UN titled “junta”. YOU are responsible. But, like all argies, too cowardly to admit your crimes. Make no mistake. Your “country” was, and remains, criminal. YOU are a criminal.
Jun 13th, 2013 - 03:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Crises expose character and test mettle.”
Jun 13th, 2013 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How true throughout the ages of man.
What a pity that Argentina has NO mettle and as things go will NEVER have anyone with mettle for the foreseeable future.
Oh dear, never mind.
Ha, ha, ha.
Poor Jose, ,
Jun 13th, 2013 - 06:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Desperation breeds insults , breeds hate
Starts wars, and kills the innocent
And the JOSES of this world run and hide until its all over..
.
8
Jun 13th, 2013 - 10:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As if qualify someone as it deserves to be as serious! The trouble is, the war, yes , which made the pirates itself in 1982. Or that walking 14,000 km war fleet away is not making war?. The pirates war that lead so many places like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.., etc.., And that only today not to speak of the past. As if qualify someone as it deserves (insulting, yes) were more serious than stealing territories, resources to their rightful owners as England long been practiced in all latitudes.
Ha ha ha, these poor kelpers (used) believe that in 1982 the British casualties in killed and wounded that equaled or exceeded the then inhabitants of the Malvinas, was for them! It was just the perfect justification for asentase against all right, militarily, in the Malvinas. The proof is that the millions of square miles in dispute is the only game of this magnitude in the world. “Self-Determination”: other ha ha, idiots.
Amazing how these guys get on victims
Buah, buah!, Poor us the Brits, so innocent and good we are and above insult us. Buah, buah!
9 José Malvinero
Jun 13th, 2013 - 10:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Briton did the same as Spain did, and Argentina did in turn to Spain, with one small caveat they had a claim from 1765 which preceded Spain's.
[9]
Jun 14th, 2013 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The facts are one cannot claim, what one does not own,
If you take it to the ICJ then we would both agree on there decision,
And get on with our lives,
[[What say you]
ICJ==ICJ==ICJ==.
Pathetic and unfortunate:
Jun 15th, 2013 - 03:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor Man. It was an instrument of racism, colonialism and imperialism 20th century English and unfortunately UK today want to continue it in the 21st century everyone despises.
Beyond the Argentine military criminality, since the Argentine people never approved the 1982 invasion, did absolutely nothing to solve the conflict of sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.
May God forgive him for his cowardice and mistakes.
12
Jun 15th, 2013 - 04:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Are you moron? For you, the Malvinas are Argentine? If the answer is “yes,” how you talk of “invasion”?!!. If the Malvinas are Argentine, can not “invade” the territory itself. Are you Argentine?
@12
Jun 15th, 2013 - 07:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“It was an instrument of racism, colonialism and imperialism ”
What a perfect description of Argentina today Raul. Thanks che.
13 Jose malvinero
Jun 17th, 2013 - 06:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Dear fellow:
Although I try and idiot, I think you make a valuable and valiant defense of our Malvinas Islands. I am so Argentine and Latin American as you.
Argentina suffered four British invasions (1806-1807-1833-1845). In 1982 Argentina tried to reclaim the islands, but the method was not adequate. However, on reflection, I recognize that the right word is recovery and invasion. I was wrong about the meaning of the word to express myself.
The word invasion is characteristic of racism, colonialism and imperialism English. It is proven historically that Argentina was never colonialist and imperialist with your neighbors. The facts prove unjust war with Paraguay. Argentina lost part of its territory (Formosa) by Hayes arbitration for Paraguay. Besides Gen. Peron returned to Paraguay flags as a sign of respect and shame of an unjust war. United Kingdom participated in the war supporting the genocide of Paraguay.
Beyond the meaning of words and looking into the distance and analyzing the historical and social processes, the recovery of the Malvinas Islands by force in 1982 by a genocidal military government was a mistake, because before 1982, United Kingdom military supported the implementation of state terrorism in Argentina and Latin America as a whole, following the doctrine of national security backed by the United States.
Remember the constitution Argentina and will never be colonialist and imperialist as the UK.
“La Nacion Argentina ratifies its legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and insular areas to be an integral part of the national territory. Recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the principles of international law, are a permanent and unwavering goal of the Argentine people. ”
An Argentine hug!
Mail: Face1354@hotmail.com
15 raul2
Jun 17th, 2013 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First of all, pardon the expression. I have not mastered well this language of our “beloved” usurpers and one on this blog is always a little exalted with both hypocritical writing here.
Anyway I disagree with absolutely disqualify the method used by the military in 1982. If one studies the situation in early 1982, were not many options if we wanted to defend our sovereignty. In addition, if all or almost all Argentines believe in the sovereignty of Argentina in the Malvinas Islands and are for his recovery, why a government conducts what disqualifies it as folly? But paradoxically, it seems not crazy sending the British invasion fleet that year, 1982. There is evidence that Britain was seeking war. In that sense, it may not have been the best method. However, there was no usurpation for 150 years unbroken, and that has value.
Regarding your example of the Paraguay War, could not be better, as they fill their mouths with that and our Desert Campaign in Patagonia Argentina becoming the holy innocents, when they instigated these wars to, unscrupulously, defend their spurious interests. In the case of the independence of the Banda Oriental, are no strangers, neither.
Another hug for me!
THE MALVINAS ARE ARGENTINES
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!