MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, March 29th 2024 - 12:47 UTC

 

 

Malvinas negotiations will take place 'sooner than later' forecasts Cristina Fernandez

Wednesday, March 5th 2014 - 05:11 UTC
Full article 143 comments

“Sooner than later” Argentina will be able to discuss with the UK “the Malvinas Islands sovereignty issue” as indicated by the UN resolutions, said Argentine president Cristina Fernandez during her speech to the General Assembly opening the 132th legislative period last Saturday, March first. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Gordo1

    Dream on, lady! There is no legal requirement for Britain to negotiate something that is not negotiable without the approval of the people of the Falklands/Malvinas.
    Your words are nothing more than political gestures!

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 06:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • stick up your junta

    Good luck on that one

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Redrow

    Negotiations could have taken place last February but Timerman refused to show up. Not that they would have resulted in a transfer of sovereignty since the offer of absolutely nothing may not convince that many FIs. I suspect that Argentina may need to consider a new tactic.

    Maybe her point about the unemployed youth is code for “we have completely and utterly failed but we might be luckier with the next generation”. Though her idea that the currently unemployed youth will grow up to work in the Foreign Office may make sense in the land of la Campora but strikes me as unlikely over here.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    Sure they will. But since the 'Malvinas' are non-existent, one wonders whom they are going to negotiate with?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • jaydub

    Pigs might fly

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Britworker

    My prediction is that there will be no negotiations on the Falkland Islands sovereignty. In a few years I also predict that this woman will either be dead or be the subject of an internationa arrest warrant for embezzlement.
    I wonder who's prediction will come true?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Martin Woodhead

    No threat to the falkands or uk
    Nothing of value to to the uk
    What exactly is argentina bringing to the negotiations 150 years of whining?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • downunder

    “Malvinas negotiations will take place 'sooner than later' forecasts Cristina Fernandez”

    Since words are all she has got in regard to the Falklands, she would say that wouldnt she?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Room101

    If Argentina is a “region of peace” what's the sabre-rattling and rearming about?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anbar

    Public acknowledgement that her policies have utterly failed.

    Bet that must've hurt.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ilsen

    What is it with Lat Am leaders and 3 hour speeches? Is it some form of affliction? Is it contaigous?

    And still failed to mention Inflation and Insecurity (crime-levels)!!

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rufus

    So they're expecting negotiations Real Soon Now?

    As someone who follows these things, people have been saying that we'll have nuclear fusion power stations Real Soon Now since the 1960s. The current estimate for having one working and generating power if everything goes to plan (and generally dealing with nuclear reactors even the slightest deviation from the exact letter of the plan is enough to cause significant delays) is 2033 at the earliest.

    Frankly I'd imagine that of the two, nuclear fusion is the one more likely to happen first.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • falklandlad

    Has she found another tree to fall out of? Utter clap trap for the peronista masses.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GALlamosa

    I checked with my friendly MLA, and apparently we have had not received any request for discussions. So “sooner” might be a relative term.....maybe sometime after the next Argentine election ? Or two generations after the Argies cease their childish and vindictive campaign against Falkland Islanders ? Or when the pigs are successfully flying ?

    I am sure we all look forward to receiving your letter.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    Where, oh where, have all the trolls gone?

    (Sung to the tune “Where have all the flowers gone?”)

    Ha, ha, ha, deluded bitch.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    She had to be reminded to mention the Falklands? LOL! I think we can confirm she has privately admitted defeat.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Klingon

    I had to go Congresso early that morning when she spoke.
    Miles and miles of buses parked around the city bringing the lousy Kamporistas into the city.

    1000's of people there waving flags and handing out T shirts to wear.
    Not 1 of them had a full set of teeth.
    Glad to get out of there,,,,uuugh
    This is her voting block ignorant and always will be poor lazy peasants looking for a free hand out.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • thorpeman

    She will be pushing up the daisies before Argentina gets anywhere on that score! Looking at the economies I'd suggest they put the Falklands government in charge of bringing Argentina under control.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    Yes, yes, Cristina,
    We've all heard geese fart before.
    Go and do something constructive, you silly woman.
    Go and paint your toenails or something……

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendoza Canadian

    Three hours of ranting and raving and she didn't mention the economy or crime. Maybe she forgot about that too. Of course she does want to prohibit demonstrations on the streets...guess maybe she knows what is coming. I would say that what happened in the Ukraine and VeneCuba has her a bit worked up.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 11:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    The younger generations in the UK have no interest in being colonizers...this is true.

    That is why they live in land that has been Britain for thousands of years.

    the younger generations in Argentina however live on land stolen from the indigenous people in both the 16th and 19th centuries and they wish to colonise further land inhabited by the British since 1833 and claimed since 1690.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    ElaineB, I think its the result of that clot - part of the Presidents brain is missing! Remember Spitting Image, they would have done a nice job on her. Its a great pity that Maggie and her henchman Norman arent still with us the shows would be rivetting.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 11:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    To all our Argentinian trolls.

    Do you believe anything that this woman says?

    Sooner than later isn't a time line, is it?

    They had the chance last year to sit down and negotiate but they ran away, absolutely TERRIFIED by 2 people.

    How brave your government is. You must be so proud of them.

    Let's list their achievements, shall we?

    1. Gainded sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.....NOPE.
    2. Paid off, or negotiated settlement, of Argentina's foreign debt....NOPE.
    3. Increased production of LNG and Oil after taking over YPF.....NOPE.
    4. Stopped or controlled inflation.....NOPE.
    5. Reduced crime......NOPE.
    6. Reduced poverty......NOPE.
    7. Improved Argentina's standing and respect in the world......NOPE.
    8. Increased Argentina's military capability.....NOPE.
    9. Prosecuted those responsible for the AIMA bombing.....NOPE.
    10. Improved Edcutation and Health in Argentina......NOPE.
    11. Embezzeled money into their own off-shore bank accounts....YES.
    12. Humiliated Argentina on the international stage......YES.

    So as we can see, the won decade has been completely a waste of time.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 12:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CabezaDura2

    17

    You missed the best part...CFk's fascinating speeches for hours and hours.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 12:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @22 That did occur to me. Maybe she needs a little prompting these days, it is not uncommon after brain surgery.

    @17 Nooooo! Argentines with terrible teeth! LOL I have noticed the same but we are told here that only the British have bad teeth.

    I was supposed to be hopping over to Argentina on this trip - I am in Chile again - but it seems to be pushed back to July. I will need a full security detail by then.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 01:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    “.....the young generations are not interested in being colonizers, because they are suffering the disasters of a world that condemns the young to no jobs and no future”, added the Argentine leader

    Ha, ha, ha!!!!!

    ”Projection” anyone.........?????

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Martin Woodhead

    Apprantly argentine barbeques are very good so maybe lay one of those on and people will turn up for free food and wine.
    Still wont hand the islands over but you get your talks

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 01:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Bubba

    kind of like negotiating with Iran over the nukes.. one side talks the other side wants..

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GFace

    If she wants to negotiates she know the phone number for the FIG. She can call anytime. They even went to London to meet directly with Timerman the kapo who was happy to meet with the people who murdered Argentine Jews in Buenos Aires but was too afraid to meet with two elected representatives of the islands that they pretend to want. But no. Nope, not interested in talking let alone with having “negotiations” be it sooner or later.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 03:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Condorito

    “the young generations are not interested in being colonizers, because they are suffering the disasters of a world that condemns the young to no jobs and no future”

    The young with no jobs and no future? They have never had it so good and so easy.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 04:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • reality check

    “Sooner or later.”

    My money is on later, much, much, much later, maybe!

    Call it a gut feeling.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steveu

    Shall we invite Elvis and Lord Lucan along as official observers?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 04:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • knarfw

    Only if they ride in on Shergar.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 04:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    19
    ...“We've all heard geese fart before.”
    ....I haven't...didn't even know geese farted...
    23
    To all UK Trolls....
    It's easy to list failings of any Government...for instance.....
    List: The 100 worst failures of David Cameron's Government. ...LestWeForget.
    http://www.greenbenchesuk.com/2013/10/list-100-failures-by-david-camerons.html

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • M_of_FI

    @34 - A_Voice

    You are correct. It is easy to list the failings of governments. Particular the Argentine Government that has a 100 year history of failure. And it isn't new failures, they keep making the same mistakes (e.g. corruption, economics, human rights, etc.).

    It got to the point that Argentina's 100 year history of failures made the cover of the Economist and two thorough and well-researched articles were dedicated to the subject. It was truly interesting. You should read it A_Voice, it will give you a sense of perspective on what Argentina and its Government should be focussing on.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 05:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @34 O.K. Let us see the list you have of the failures of the Argentine government. You said it is easy.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pirate Love

    @34 try to stick to the story at hand you are sounding desperate to distract,

    SELF DETERMINATION.......Argentina will accept this “sooner than later” after they change its government.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • nololly

    I 'Think' the KFC strategy is to say something just to deflect attention from her abject failings and remind her numbskull supporters of some cause that unites them. It used to be annoying but now its simply worthy of a yawn. Despite a year of full on 'diplomatic' effort by Gollum, blockading the Islands, setting up a Ministry (complete with failed minister), and a series of sham events and rallies Argentina is not one centimeter nearer their colonial goal! Now there will be a museum. I wonder whether they will put the various documents treaties and maps from their own national archive in it that confirm British sovereignty? I 'Think' not!

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    36
    Tit for Tat.....I said it was easy, I didn't say I was going to do it....
    That is for the UK Wannabe's and Trolls to do...
    If I were to think of a word to sum up the UK it would be...decline....
    37
    I was replying to the deflection @23....
    Or is it OK for others to start deflecting.......?
    38
    It is the strategy of all Governments to deflect.....Period....
    Have the British put the various documents treaties and maps from their own national archive in their own museum to confirm British sovereignty? I 'Think' not!
    .....unless it goes something like....owned by the Spanish, claimed and settled by Argentina...stolen by the British........

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @39 It must be difficult for you to swallow the fact that the Falklands will never be part of Argentina.

    What do you think of CFK's failing memory?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    40
    It must also be difficult for you to swallow the fact that the UK has been in decline for the last 200 years....its power it's wealth and its influence....
    The Russians don't even bother listening to Britain anymore....
    It's only a matter of time before they lose their place on the UN security Council....
    Sad...all very sad....

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    In the Patagonia museum in Punta Arenas Patagonia there is a nice map dated 1840. The 'Malvinas' are on it and on each of the main Islands it says Great Britain territory. The documents that prove Great Britains sovereignty are in the Argentinian national archive. Deflection deflected.

    Has KFC lost it, forgetting to mention her main deflection stunt and having to be reminded. Our Prime Minister is always on the ball, such a sloppy performance would be punished.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Be serious

    What is she smoking?

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    41 A_Voice

    This is like everything else you post either sophistry or your very humble opinion. Which is like derrières, in the big scheme of things everyone's got one. Which qualifies your latest meandering as appropriately, and utterly meaningless.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 07:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • nololly

    Smoking - perhaps someone has put something in her Mate? What is in the stuff anyway? Too much of that and a few Pisco Sours and you would be well away!
    We are all well aware of Argentinas failings and Britain's many recent successes. Foreign money is flocking to London, monied people from everywhere are buying London property, our creative industries are booming, our music is 'the best in the world', F1, the Premier League, falling unemployment leading Europe out of a massive world recession, high tech manufacturing steadily recovering, falling crime, its all great news. Poor old Arg they have got to get a grip and dump their loser government soon or it will be 20 years before they can begin to enjoy life again.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    44
    Well we'll all listen to Terence Hill .....
    That Britain has not been in Decline for the last 200 years....
    I think that a history book and a map might just show otherwise.....
    45
    So Johnny foreigner is buying up London...and you see this as progress.....
    Britain is being swallowed by the rest of the world...soon there will be only England left, but still owned by foreigners and occupied by European migrants......

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino

    Still boring A_Voice

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Unfortunately CFK forgot to thank those English people,
    You know, the children of those nasty English pirates,
    For any future help in the Falklands that they can give,

    And those same people will tell her to Soddy offy.
    .

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @41 Not at all. The Empire was over decades ago and only seems to play on the minds of Argentineans because they covet it so much. As for influence, we still have it. You seem to confuse 'influence' with 'bullying' which is the way CFK would wield power if she had any. Gun boat diplomacy is way in the past but soft power is the modern weapon. You still think what you see on the news is the whole story. It is what happens behind closed doors that really matters. Something you will never witness.

    Your comment regarding the UN Security Council is so misinformed I am inclined to pass it around to give everyone a good laugh.

    Russia is a whole other subject. So, back to the subject of this thread. The Falklands will never be part of Argentina.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Talking about pirates,
    It was the royal navy that helped many a slave to freedom,
    And stopping slave traders from abusing them.

    Two years at sea freeing slaves: Fascinating 200-year-old ship's log details how Royal Navy fought to stop brutal trade
    • Log book from the British slave-hunter HMS Black Joke

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2572967/Fascinating-200-year-old-ship-log-details-Royal-Navy-fought-stop-slave-trade.html#ixzz2v7eQIw3Y

    Follow us:
    .

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ilsen

    I sometimes wonder, knowing British humour as I do, if the UK supports these BOTs just to niggle and annoy places such as Argentina. Like a small boy poking a stick into a dog in cage, just to make it bark.

    Just to show the UK has something they don't.

    Like a powerful economy, global soft power and influence on the world stage. hmmm... just a thought jeje!

    Argentina is so weak right now, shame for a country with so much potential... Botox can't mask everything!

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    It must be hard to be “Chit FucK. Thinking up new lies, deluding the population and demanding more money and more sacrifices.
    Fortunately, it won't last much longer. 5 years ”naturally” or 5 years months if we need an SAS death certificate. And, once the Slag of the South is gone, we can kill who we like. Best thing to do with argies is to shoot them. But not Argentines. Let's work on the basis that Argentines represent 1% of the argie population. Shoot the rest!

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    51 ilsen

    Oh, my friend, how well you know us!!! I consider my defense £'s well spent just so's it P*sses TMBOA right off!!

    If it ensures the likes of Joe Bloggs and all the other Falkland Islanders can live in peace while sticking it to everyone in argentina who think they have a right to the place..... Oh man, now there is a joke that is NEVER going to get old.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • malicious bloke

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zva7I60LpeE

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    I would like it to be known that I in no way agree with Conquerer's comment in Post 52. I find them appalling and I think he is a disgrace. The same applies to another of his posts on a different thread that he made at about the same time.

    53 Too Old
    Your MP name should be Too Good.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    55 Joe Bloggs

    What would life be? What would life be Joe, if once in a while you couldn't have a laugh at the Argentine president?

    I mean, I don't know what's funnier, the fact that she says these things or the fact that some people in argentina believe it.

    You take care Joe... Enjoy the rest of your day.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @55 I stopped reading posts by him a long time ago.

    @51 I am genuinely interested in hearing all points of view.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • AzaUK

    your right “I'm sure the majority of the English people, particularly the young generations are not interested in being colonizers” because there not colonizers

    that's like soo 19 century

    hahaha

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    “ when recently at the Celac meeting in Havana it was agreed that this part of the world is designated as a 'region of peace'.”

    Thanks to HM Forces this is a region of peace as Argentina hasn't invaded the Falklands since 1982.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    46 A_Voice

    Your the one who is asserting “It's only a matter of time before they lose their place on the UN security Council....”, without one scintilla of proof. So while you you may consider your humble opinion important, it bears absolutely no weight, other than proving you have a derrière

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 10:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    60

    Think and proof? Ah ha ha ha ha!

    Chuckle chuckle

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 11:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    Joe, I didn't quite hear that? Did you say Think is a poof - you might be right there! Our Spring is just beginning, the snowdrops are giving way to the daffs and summer is just around the corner, and everything is fine. Its just a matter of time until Columbia replaces Argentina in the G20 a little bird whispered to me…

    Chuckle chuckle

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 11:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    62 Captain Silver

    Where do you live? UK? If so, you could really do with some Spring weather. Our days are drawing in and I have more outside work to do before winter so I need to pull my finger out.

    Mar 05th, 2014 - 11:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    In the beautiful Chiltern Hills Joe. Just 40 miles from London. Midsomer murders territory. Its been very wet here, we are just venturing out in our gardens to tidy up. Village wine club tonight - Chilean wines we brought back from our trip there in February, really nice. We even had an Argie Malbec blend from Salta which was quite nice too. I am looking forward to a nice 7 day trip on my bike in April but can't decide where to go. I am out every day regaining fitness after all the rain.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 12:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    49
    In one paragraph explain why you think a tiny declining power should retain its privileged place on the UN Security Council and meddle in Global affairs....indefinitely.
    ...without mentioning Trident....
    58
    your right....there not
    You're right.....They're not

    That's soo like... barely literate....
    60
    Did you say anything, that meant anything in that post.....?
    It's not enough to inanely babble and hope to appear informed.....
    ...are you still sore about the secret agreement proof...?
    ...that was soo... like yesterday......move on....

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 12:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    65 A_Voice

    http://en.mercopress.com/2014/02/05/argentina-grateful-to-grenada-for-malvinas-claim-support-promises-cooperation
    Of course your are referring to to your complete humiliation, in the above thread where you were exposed as a fraud and a liar. The final post #246 is the pièce de résistance, as Pascoe and Pepper incorporating Argentine historian Diego Luis Molinari and Professor Dolzerput put paid to your nonsense. Thanks again for bringing up your recent debacle.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 01:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    @65 - interesting point in declining power.

    As an economic nation the UK are some of the most productive on the planet based on population size.

    There has been a considerable reduction in the size of the UKs military. This is a normal response for moving over to an expeditionary armed force structure in times of peace.

    Peace might I add that the UK and our allies sacrificed with blood, sweat, tears and finances to keep the world free from facism and the 3rd Reich.

    The most interesting point is that the UK is law abiding, outward looking and hardworking. It is why as a population of around 65 million will always remain a considerable contributor to innovation, world culture and trade.

    Our military capability can always be increased when the next evil ideology raises to claim the world.

    It really is quite frightening the mind set, corruption and lies that circulate the Argentine government. They will continue to struggle with the leaders they have had for the last 50 years.

    I genuinely hope you normal Argentines take CFK and her crooks out of the picture, lock her away for the rest of her life, and return to being a productive and respected member of the international community.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 01:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    66
    Ah ha!...you are still sore.....I knew it.....was that the thread where I reduced your claim for East Falkland down to conquest and the secret article.....as your proof...
    ...did you ever really read that secret article....?..Did you notice what was missing....I didn't have the heart to point out the obvious after proving all your points were irrelevant as proof.....
    To leave you with conquest as your only proof of entitlement seemed unsporting of me......;-)))
    Especially when Britain have always done their damnedest to avoid a claim of conquest....

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 01:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    68 A_Voice

    Why would I feel sore? when I have the complete satisfaction of showing that Nootka gave the UK an absolute claim to all the Islands, after Argentina's attempted usurpation. Moreover, the Peace of Utrecht barred Argentina from any pretended claim of inheritance from Spain, leaving the UK with uncontested proprietary of the Islands.
    Conquest, is just a further entitlement, that is supported both under international law and by the UN. Thus: “the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modern prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created ‘prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law’.”
    Akerhursts Modern Introduction to International Law by Peter Malanczuk.
    The UK can advance further legal claims, Argentina doesn't have a legal prayer. Her claim was stillborn from the onset. What a masochist you must really enjoy getting beaten down.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 04:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    Conquest.....hahahahahah....

    Quite a conquest...the removal of 50 militia (according to the Argentine National Archivies) who had been on the islands 60 days (according to the Argentine National Archives) who had already murdered their captain Esteban Mestevier and raped his wife in front of their children (strangely absent from the National archives) without a shot being fired....wow!

    It's hard to think of any area of the Americas who's sovereignty is less of a conquest.

    The remaining population of the islands, was a small business who at the time of the “conquest” was currently under the management of two Britons.

    Perhaps the conquest was attempted in November 1832.

    So a more accurate history:

    Discovered by the British
    Settled by the Britiah
    Settled by the Spanish
    British voluntarily left
    Spanish voluntarily left
    Vernet business...Vernet voluntarily left
    British Settlement...for 180 years

    Oh yes...and 60 days of Argentine rape and murder in 1832

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 07:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    A_Voice

    There is a very simple way to solve this 'dispute'. Argentina (as the plaintiff) can take the UK to the ONLY LEGAL body in the world that can solve a sovereignty dispute. The International Court of Justice.

    All Argentina has to do is show the evidence that:

    Argentina 'inherited' the Falklands from Spain (there has never been ANY provision for that in International Law EVER in the history of the world).

    Prove that the British acted illegally in 1833 (whilst simultaneously proving that Argentina a) existed and b) didn't act illegally themselves) by the laws of 1833 (which they didn't because in 1833 territory was only yours if you could defend it - and the United Provinces couldn't defend it and NEVER returned).

    And then all Argentina has to do is explain why 200 years plus of continuous occupation by the Falkland Islanders and their ancestors and the right to self-determination (as guaranteed by the UN Charter) should be overturned.

    So it is all very easy, isn't it?

    And because we all know that Argentina's claims are based on half-truths, fairy-tales and outright lies, we also know why Argentina avoids going to the only place on Earth that could give them what they want, and instead crawls, begs and pleads to ANYONE else, knowing that they cannot help them.

    So when the 'Dear Leader' CFK says talks will be held sooner than later, what does she actually mean? Sooner than next year? Sooner than the next decade? Sooner than the next century? Sooner than the next millennium?

    And every DAY, WEEK, MONTH AND YEAR that goes by weakens Argentina's already pathetically weak claim and strengthens the Falkland Islanders legitimate rights.

    Poor pathetic A_Voice. So very desperate know. Are La Campora still able to pay you?

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 07:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Martin Woodhead

    We may be a tiny declining world power
    Only 6th largest economy
    4 th largest defence budget
    22nd most populus country
    Biggest financial market
    International renown for the bbc,music books and film.
    We are doing ok hows argentina doing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
    Below gabon so doing worse than an african country oh dear.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 09:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • nololly

    #72 Never mind Gabon, Belgium seems to continually trump Argentina?

    How big (or tiny) is Belgium?

    Lol!

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    71 Lep

    Great post and as for “sooner than later”, IF something changes over time and in, say, 75 years, there are talks (only talks), the ancestors of Sussie, Marcos and Think will all be on Merco Press saying they were right about talks after all.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    69
    Well if you insist on me embarrassing you further....
    Lets have a look at this secret article that according to you...shows that Nootka gave the UK an absolute claim to all the Islands, after Argentina's attempted usurpation.

    “SECRET ARTICLE
          Since by article 6 of the present convention it has been stipulated, respecting the eastern and western coasts of South America, that the respective subjects shall not in the future form any establishment on the parts of these coasts situated to the south of the parts of the said coasts actually occupied by Spain, it is agreed and declared by the present article that this stipulation shall remain in force only so long as no establishment shall have been formed by the subjects of any other power on the coasts in question. This secret article shall have the same force as if it were inserted in the convention.”
    Read it again.....what's missing in this legal document......
    That's right..... the Islands.....not included in the secret agreement...

    “respecting the eastern and western coasts of South America”

    “shall not in the future form any establishment on the parts of these coasts situated to the south of the parts of the said coasts actually occupied by Spain,”

    “of any other power on the coasts in question.”

    ..the devil's in the details of any legal document...or in this case.....Not!

    What a masochist you must really enjoy getting beaten down.....

    I will repeat again for those of you that have not followed the argument...
    Britain has not ever had any legal, historical or otherwise entitlement to East Falkland.....
    Apart from illegally occupying it in 1833 and squatting on it for 180 years....
    Self determination is all you have to take to the ICJ.....and of course...THEFT!!!

    GIVE UP EAST FALKLAND....
    THEFT IS STILL NOT LEGAL ENTITLEMENT.....

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 11:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @75 A_Voice

    PROVE IT.

    The Spanish dropped their sovereignty claim to the Falklands (including East Falkland) and saluted the British Flag on their way out thus RECOGNISING that the British had sovereignty of the Islands.

    The didn't recognised Argentina as anything other than a rebellious colony until nearly 20 year AFTER they'd dropped their sovereignty claim.

    Plus you are also forgetting that in International Law (prior to the UN Charter), territory was only yours if you could hold it. The legal point is that the UK, in 1690, declared sovereignty of ALL of the Islands, did so again in 1765, and were then subsequently recognised by the SPANISH as having FULL sovereignty of the Islands.

    Argentina has to PROVE that it has an historic, legal or MORAL right to any of the South Atlantic Territories, including the Falklands.

    So if their claim is so solid, take it to the ICJ. If you're not willing to put your money where your mouth is, then you are accepting that the British have FULL sovereignty over the whole of the Falklands, east or west.

    So nothing in your post matters. You don't have the Falklands, you never had any rights to the Falklands, and you never will.

    And if theft is NOT A LEGAL ENTITLEMENT, then Argentina has no right to ANY of the territory that it calls Argentina. Because, my La Campora troll, ALL of Argentina AND it's natural resources were STOLEN from the original inhabitants.

    You really will have to do BETTER than that.

    Argentina only ever tried once to seriously stake their claim. That was 1982 and they got their arses handed to them. UTI POSSIDETIS - a legal term that means land stays with the winning side after a conflict.

    Whatever La Campora are paying you, it's obviously far too much.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 12:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @75
    Seeing as you profess to be so knowledgable regarding Argentina, perhaps you could give us your opinion on “ The Conquest of the Desert” when Roca “usurped ” Patagonia”. You have illegally been squatting in Patagonia less time than what you call the squatters in THE FALKLANDS. Perhaps we can come to an arrangement with you, you can have the FALKLANDS and we can have Patagonia.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    75 A_Voice
    The relevance of which according to both Wiki and Getting it right: by Pascoe and Pepper
    ”an extra secret article removed the restriction on new establishments if any other power did make an establishment south of “the parts of those coasts already occupied” by Spain. In the late 1820s , Argentina did in fact form an establishment at Port Louis in the Falklands, south of coastal areas already occupied by Spain in 1790. By a strict interpretation of the Nootka Sound Convention, Britain therefore became entitled to form an establishment in the Falklands as soon as Argentina had become established there.
    Argentine historian Diego Luis Molinari believes that the secret clause in the Nootka Sound Convention was specifically put in by Britain with the Falklands in mind, and that Britain’s reassertion of sovereignty in 1833 was an exercise of Britain’s rights under this clause. In the opinion of Professor Dolzer, the Nootka Sound Convention was a purely bipartite agreement between Britain and Spain, which means that Argentina could not benefit from its provisions in any way.” What's the difference? they're the experts quoting experts. your simply a sophist with nothing but your own unqualified humble opinion.
    You have failed to show any legal basis for Argentina's claim while I have shown two treaties that support the UK's claim to the exclusion of all others.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 12:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @39 I 'Think' you'll have to 'clarify' that. The Islands were discovered by Britain in 1690. They were “officially” claimed by Britain in 1765. There is no record that any other country actually ever legally “claimed” them. The ignorant French built a settlement in 1764. In 1776, Spain buys the French settlement. Nothing else. Just the settlement. In 1770, the Spanish try “muscle” with 5 Spanish ships and 1400 troops. The British settlers must have been very frightening! In 1771, the Spanish king backed down and paid up. In 1774, Britain decides to evacuate many overseas territories having more important things to deal with. Sovereignty was NOT relinquished. In 1820, an American pirate turns up and claims the Islands for “argieland”. However, such attempted acts by criminals aren't legal. Then, in 1828, there were the treacherous acts of a turncoat kraut. In 1833, Britain re-asserted its sovereignty. Is it possible your “brain” will explode when understanding the truth?
    @41 You need new words in your vocabulary. “British Army”, “Royal Air Force”, “Royal Marines”, “Royal Navy” and “Trident”.
    @44 Isn't the “Voice” thing Scottish? And therein lies the explanation. watching his demi-god “Fish-face” (Salmond) being shown up as a lying, thieving incompetent must come hard. Probably the only “hard” thing between the two of them!
    @49 Take the long view. The reality is that, believe it or not, Britain is the steel fist in a velvet glove. But one thing Mouthy has got right. Before long, Russia won't have a seat on the Security Council. Likely to be replaced by India. The world still thinks of Russia as if it were the Soviet Union of the 60s and 70s. But Russian “forces” are now about 1/3rd of those of the U.S. Even got beaten by little Chechnya.
    @55 Yeah, being “namby-pamby”. Being willing to stand up to tyrants is a mark of nationhood. Verbally, if possible. Think on this. I am one of the people who decides whether there are British forces in the Falklands!

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 01:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    76
    Show me one single legal document that the Spanish have signed transferring the Sovereignty of East Falkland or the Falklands to Britain......
    I'll save you some time and research......there isn't one.....
    78
    Stop grasping at straws...
    As I have quoted the secret article in full....it DOES NOT mention the Islands, whereas article six does....
    The article refers to the eastern and western coasts of South America....
    The article obviously only refers to the mainland in any legal terms.....
    ...therefore the secret article and your “Proof” is irrelevant....
    Any legal team would state the obvious...
    You again have not shown a single legal claim by Britain for the Sovereignty of East Falkland....
    Apart from YOUR claim of Conquest.....
    ...Admit defeat.....
    There is NO and never has been a legal claim for East Falkland....
    Explain how the Utrecht treaty supports the UK's claim to the exclusion of all others....
    ...Squatters rights I suppose....is that your proof...?

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 01:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    “the world's eyes are opening and sooner than later we will be able to discuss the sovereignty issue as mandated by United Nations”.

    Can anyway inform me as to ANY UN Resolution that states or implies that the UK MUST discuss the SOVEREIGNTY of the Falkland Islands with Argentina as I am unable to find one although I am sure that those more knowledgeable about the UN will be able to help me forthwith.

    Thanking you in advance.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 01:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Benson

    @81
    There isn't one, as confirmed by Ban Ki-moon.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 02:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    75 A_Voice
    Oh! yes the Islands are included, here is the evidence of your deliberate fraud by omission. This is the correct citation of Nootka.
    ARTICLE VI
    It is further agreed with respect to the eastern and western coasts of South America and the islands adjacent, that the respective subjects shall not form in the future any establishment on the parts of the coast situated to the south of the parts of the same coast and of the islands adjacent already occupied by Spain; ...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Apcbg/Nootka_Sound_Convention
    So no surprise as you exemplify your national ethos for duplicity.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 02:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    Can you not read....?
    @80
    “As I have quoted the secret article in full....it DOES NOT mention the Islands, whereas article six does....”
    ..whereas article six does.....did you miss that.....?
    Where is the fraud by omission...?
    Your proof is that Argentina contravened the secret article as another power....NOT article six....
    I will repeat again...the secret article refers to the South American mainland ONLY...your argument as stated ...that...
    ”an extra secret article removed the restriction on new establishments if any other power did make an establishment south of “the parts of those coasts already occupied” by Spain. 5 In the late 1820s (see sections 12 and 14), Argentina did in fact form an establishment at Port Louis in the Falklands, south of coastal areas already occupied by Spain in 1790. ”
    Are you now changing your tune....?
    If the secret article is irrelevant and only legally refers to the mainland...why do you keep quoting it...?
    Article six only clearly refers to the respective subjects...Spain and Britain....
    In what way does article six prevent Argentina (another power) from establishing a settlement on East Falkland as a successor to Spain's colonial possessions...?
    It's great to see you switching from the relevance of the Secret Article...to Article six...but now read article six and explain in full how this gives Britain Sovereignty of all the Islands.....(East Falkland)
    ...it doesn't...
    So I'm still waiting for the legal document that gives Britain Sovereignty of East Falkland.....

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 03:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @57 How unfortunate for you. It bespeaks a closed mind. Shall we explore a little? You are a small community of, what, 2,932 people. You have a British garrison of around 1,200 troops, 4 RAF combat aircraft, an on-station patrol vessel and regular visits by RN destroyers and frigates. Possibly submarines. A few hundred miles away is a vicious state that wants your land. The only thing that stands between you and it is the British garrison and reinforcements from the UK. But you can't understand that lies, threats and invective have to be forcibly rejected. For some time, I have told argie trolls what Britain is capable of. I have written to my MP, a Secretary of State, to urge greater protection for the Falklands and its people. In return, you insult me. Perhaps it's part of the “Scottish” ancestry. Perhaps I should reverse my views? Perhaps I should tell my government that the Falklands aren't really important to the uk. Any oil won't benefit us anyway. Perhaps I ought to think, and say, that the British garrison should sail home. Scots are ungrateful for what they have been given for 307 years. Seems like Falklanders aren't much different. Why would I recommend to my government that British troops should be sent nearly 8,000 miles to help ungrateful people? Would the British government send troops if the British people were against it? There is a genocide going on in Syria. But enough mistaken British people got up on their hind legs and said “Not our business”. Could that happen to the Falklands? And yet you insult a supporter?
    @65 You're quite right. The UK is a declining power. What do we make? The best main battle tank. The best air defence destroyer. The best fleet submarine. Coming soon - the best aircraft carriers. Wonder who designed all those things Americans like to have on their carriers? Angled deck, landing system, catapult, steel deck, jet aircraft, radar, the carrier concept. Whoops. It was the British.
    @80 Funny. I'll come back to it.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • axel arg

    MORE THAN A DECADE IN OUR LIVES.
    Cristina's last statements was mostly brilliant, although i don't agree on her partial lecture in relation to the taking from lugano, beside it's true that she didn't say a word about insecurity, which is people's main concerning.
    On the other hand, it's false to say that she didn't refer to inflation, the problem is that orthodox economists expect her to say that inflation is due to monetary emission, and public expenditures, which is a very partial view, but none of them never say absoluty anything about the abuse that oligopolic corporations commit every time they increase the prices of the products, without having made enough inverstments, after having had huge profits, which are between 100% and 1000%, i would like to know what are the profits of important corporations in developed nations. She has always refered to this issue, including in her last statement.
    On the other hand, as it was expectable, she didn't mention absolutly anything about the posibility of discusssing the right to legal abortion at the congress, unfortunatelly, thousands of women day every year in argentina, because of illegal practices of it. I will always keep on defending women's right to choose over their own bodies.
    I have always said that despite some serious falencies of her government, and some flagrant contradictions, and beyond that we are still a very unequal society, nobody can deny that she has taken measures which benefit most popular sectors, that's why, in my opinion, it's the best government of the last 48 years, beside, she is doing now, what raul alfonsin couldn't do, when we recovered democracy in 1983.
    Whoever wins presidential elections in 2015, he won't be able to apply the neoliberal policies that conservative parties would like to apply, because people have already empowered of all the achievements that we got in the last ten years, nothing will be the same in the country, after kirchnerism.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 03:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    85
    Wow Elaine's comment must have really hurt.....
    I can't resist stating the obvious, but how is Elaine going to read your reply if...
    and I quote...“@55 I stopped reading posts by him a long time ago. ”
    Never mind...I still read your posts...if that helps..?...
    BTW if everyone else has failed to state credible evidence of historical legal British entitlement for East Falkland, what makes you an ex...“do you have anything to declare?” officer..can do better.....?

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Tarquin Fin

    Dear Axel,

    Your posts are an insult to reason. Be a man and take your political campaign to the streets. If you dare, go ahead and try to explain all those so called “achievements” door by door ... you'll end up with a few broken bones.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @87
    Still nothing to say about Patagonia, you hypocrit, you can have EAST FALKLAND and we can have Patagonia.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    So after 2+ hours none of the participants on this thread is able to supply me with an appropriate UN Resolution stating that the UK MUST discuss SOVEREIGNTY of the Falkland Islands with Argentina.
    I can only conclude from the non-existence of such a resolution that Ms Kirchener is guilty of a terminological inexactitude or maybe she is being economical with the truth or possibly as we say here in Ireland she is a 'fecking liar'

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 04:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    90
    your wish is my command......
    Resolution 2065 (XX), 16 December 1965
    http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/UNGARsn/1965/71.pdf

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @91
    Does it not state that the interest of the population has to be taken into account?

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @91 A_Voice

    I believe that UN resolution is invalid. It was invalidated by Argentina in 1982.

    However the resolution doesn't state that the UK has to discuss sovereignty with Argentina, it states that any dispute between the UK and Argentina should be solved peacefully taking into account the INTERESTS of the population of the Falkland Islands.

    So now try to produce an ACTUAL UNGA or UNSC resolution that states that the UK must negotiate the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands away.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    92
    yes.....
    also.....

    Reaffirming the need for the parties to take due account of the interests of the population of the islands in accordance with the provisions of the General Assembly resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

    4. Requests the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to consolidate the current process of dialogue and cooperation through the resumption of negotiations in order to find as soon as possible a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute relating to the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6, 40/21, 41/40, 42/19 and 43/25;
    5. Reiterates its firm support for the mission of good offices of the Secretary-General in order to assist the parties in complying with the request made by the General Assembly in its resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas);

    http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/UN/AC109-L6.PDF

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    80 A_Voice
    Here it is yet again for the lame, bewildered, and deliberately obtuse.

    Peace of Utrech

    Article VIII
    “it is hereby further agreed and concluded, that neither the Catholic King, nor any of his heirs and successors whatsoever, shall sell, yield, pawn, transfer, or by any means, or under any name, alienate from them and the crown of Spain, to the French, or to any other nations whatever, any lands, dominions, or territories, or any part thereof, belonging to Spain...”
    Since Argentina is barred, and in violation of two treaties between two other nations, it along with Nootka. It legally triggered UK to protect its interests in the only appropriate way, as Argentina had ignored two official protests.
    Entende, bye, bye Argentina, hello the only nation left with a bona-fide claim, the UK.
    So the UK has three treaties to support it's claim while Argentina is specifically barred. So who has the the only right, and whom has none? Quick it isn't rocket science.
    75 A_Voice
    The operative words are “these coasts” and “by article 6 of the present convention it has been stipulated ” in the secret article. Which Art.VI explicitly states “and of the islands adjacent”
    There was no theft from Argentina as she was barred from any entitlement to the Islands by prior treaties.
    84 A_Voice
    Argentine historian Diego Luis Molinari believes that the secret clause in the Nootka Sound Convention was specifically put in by Britain with the Falklands in mind, and that Britain’s reassertion of sovereignty in 1833 was an exercise of Britain’s rights under this clause.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    @94 A_Voice

    No legal or imperative requirement is indicated. The only forum which can decide matters of sovereignty is the International Court of Justice. Why doesn't Argentina take all its lies, fairy tales and myths to the ICJ?

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    95
    Poor effort.....
    Argentina were not obliged to inherit treaties between Spain and Britain...
    There is no precedent in international law that a new state..country ...inherits treaties....
    The operative words are.....
    “respecting the eastern and western coasts of South America, that the respective subjects shall not in the future form any establishment on the parts of these coasts”

    Wriggle all you like, but the article is quite clear....
    Not Islands hundreds of miles away........Coasts of South America....
    Any credible lawyer would laugh at you interpretation.....
    Accept the fact that you are wrong and live with it....
    ...in future instead of accepting other peoples words.......read the document yourself.....
    Not a single legal entitlement for Britain to East Falkland....
    Even the treaty of Utrecht doesn't give entitlement to Britain by default.....

    Perhaps we should invent one....
    “In the event of Spain selling pawning or transferring or LOSING her colonies, Spain's possessions immediately become the property of Britain.....”
    add that one while I'm not looking.....
    You really haven't got a leg to stand on.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTduy7Qkvk8

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ynsere

    Does Cristina mean she's about to take the flight from Rio Gallegos to go and negotiate with the proper people? She can't take the presidential plane, it might be snatched by creditors.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 06:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @97
    Still waiting on your responce with reference to the usurpation of Patagonia? You have nothing to say?

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 08:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    97 A_Voice
    Hardly a poor effort on my part as this is not my interpretation but that of a Argentine historian et al
    The only one that is wriggling is you with all the appearance of a caught trout. As all your rebuttals rely on your own unqualified humble opinion, which counts for nothing. Whereas mine rely on the original treaties and expert interpretation.
    Nootka Convention 190
    “...Neither of the contracting parties was prepared to allow another power to control the passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. ...”
    German Yearbook of International Law 1983
    JÖRG FISCH: The Falkland Islands in the European Treacy System 1495—1853 106
    So this appears to be the accepted view in international legal academia.
    No one has suggested that Argentina that is bound by treaties between Spain and Briton. But the treaty Peace of Utrech does is exclude Argentina's claim, and establishes a legal basis for the UK. While all Argentina can rely on is force of arms, and then when the party she has acted against reciprocates in kind, she has the temerity to complain.
    The words are “and of the islands adjacent” so they are abundantly clear and are not qualified as to distance, so your just trolling. As D.W. Greig writes in his “Sovereignty and the Falkland Islands Crisis” on Nootka.
    “Falklands, which equally undoubtedly were islands adjacent to coasts”
    In conclusion, my legal legs are profusely rooted in precedent, while yours and your nation's are up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 09:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    Ahhh! A_Voice, Lunatic's little sock puppet.

    Let us all not forget that.

    (Lunatic of Chew Butt = El Think, except he never does.)

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    97 A_Voice

    Well then Think, if, as you say:-

    “Argentina were not obliged to inherit treaties between Spain and Britain...”

    and

    “Even the treaty of Utrecht doesn't give entitlement to Britain by default.....”

    and ( my favourite )

    “Any credible lawyer would laugh at you interpretation.....”

    If all that be true ( which it isn't ) then surely a trip to the ICJ is just a formality then huh?

    Yeah???

    So... ( and please forgive me for not understanding ) given all the above, why hasn't argentina done so already???

    Huh, Think??? huh????

    You know what I THINK?? I THINK that it is you who should:-

    “Accept the fact that you are wrong and live with it....”

    and it is you that is making the “Poor effort.....”

    and it is YOU that is talking B*llocks.

    Poor widdle A_Voice, widdle Think's sock puppet. Can't THINK for itself, can't get anything right.

    You go on my boy, you go on talking your B*llocks, better still, keep talking to that woman hater THINK, you two would make a lovely couple.......

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 09:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    A voice

    Britain gained sovereignty of East Falkland because it was available in 1833 to be colonised.

    When Britain first claimed sovereignty in 1690 it did so for the whole archipelago, however as you rightly state, they lost the rights to East Falkland to Spain when they failed to maintain a civilian population.

    Spain continued to exercise sovereignty of East Falkland until 1811. When they voluntarily left their claim became no more or less relevant than Britians historic 1690 claim.

    Argentina never had a civilian population on East or West Falkland, and at the point of 1833 there was a small (near failed) business being run by two Britons, and a militia from the UP that had arrived 2 months earlier.

    It is stretching the imagination that these constitute an Argentine “population”. Indeed even Argentina has stopped calling it that.

    As far as “squatting” for 180 years is concerned....so what...? Argentines have squatted for 500 years, most British for 20,000 years....

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @97 Voice

    ”The operative words are.....
    “respecting the eastern and western coasts of South America, that the respective subjects shall not in the future form any establishment on the parts of these coasts”

    Correct - the Falkland Islands are not part of the South American coasts as the UK (less than 20 miles from France) is not a part of the French coast.

    The Falkland Islands are not connected by land to the South American continent and no credible lawyer would dispute that fact.

    So they cannot be part of the coast-they are 'off the coast' (ie the Isle of Skye is off the coast of Scotland-not on it).

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @94 A_Voice

    On 2 April 1982, Argentina INVALIDATED all UN resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands. That means that the UK is under NO obligation to discuss the weather with Argentina, let alone sovereignty.

    However, the sovereignty dispute was resolved on 12 June 1982 when the UK kicked the Argentine's out of the Falklands for good.

    The UK also took and takes into account the interests of the people of the Falkland Islands (which Argentina won't do), and the people of the Falklands have overwhelming voted to remain a British Overseas Territory.

    The British have offered to sit down with the Argentine government and discuss areas of mutual benefit to both Argentina and the Falklands, most recently in February 2013, and the Argentine Foreign Minister proved that Argentina isn't really interested in talking by running away in front of the whole worlds press!

    How very embarrassing for Argentina to be shown to be cowards, liars and completely insincere in front of the whole world.

    So nothing you have written, nothing the Argentine government has said or done will change the FACT that the Falkland Islands will be British for as long as the people who live there wish it - that's called taking their interests into account.

    So keep up your impotent ranting, because that is all you'll ever have.

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 11:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    100
    To sum up your evidence for British sovereignty claim for East Falkland.....
    Treaty of Utrecht....
    ..a treaty between Spain and Britain..that Spain would not sell, pawn,transfer etc...in the future...blah de blah...
    It didn't ...Spain lost it's colonies of the Viceroyalty of the River Plate which included East Falkland....
    Nowhere in the treaty does it state that Britain would be able to claim East Falkland...so no legal entitlement....
    Nootka Convention..
    Article 6
    This stipulated that neither party would make further establishments on the coasts or “adjacent” islands already held by Spain...
    Another agreement that does not anywhere show a claim of entitlement for Britain for East Falkland.....
    Nootka Convention..
    Secret Article....
    Only mentions quite clearly ...the East and West coasts of South America and is therefore irrelevant to the Falklands.....
    Again does not show a legal entitlement for Britain to East Falkland....

    So what else do you have...?
    Nothing....
    This is the reason Britain favours self determination...because they have no claim and excuse for occupying East Falkland in 1833 after having abandoned West Falkland for 60 years....
    It is a case of land theft by Britain...there was a settlement already there, it originated from the Argentine Republic that was already recognised by Britain officially.
    The Governor for this colony had been appointed by the Argentine Republic...
    There is no credible evidence of a British Sovereignty claim for East Falkland...

    When you find one..let me know....and stop repeating the same old tired excuses for Piracy....by Britain....

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 11:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    106
    So take it to the ICJ.

    Simples

    Mar 06th, 2014 - 11:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    @105

    All very interesting, except it was made irrelevant in 1850, in 1945, in 1982, and repeatedly every year since the Falklands became a NSGT.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 12:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    106 A_Voice
    “It didn't ...Spain lost it's colonies of the Viceroyalty of the River Plate which included East Falkland....”
    It's immaterial to Briton, as any violation of the treaty allows it to take what ever steps are necessary to mitigate the breach which is thus: “transfer, or by any means, or under any name, alienate from them and the crown of Spain, to the French, or to any other nations whatever, any lands, dominions, or territories, or any part thereof,”
    A_Voice says your honour that “Secret Article....Only mentions quite clearly ...the East and West coasts of South America and is therefore irrelevant to the Falklands....
    But I offer in rebuttal the historians and international jurists or their writings as follows Dr. Graham Pascoe, Professor D.W. Greig, Professor Jörg Fisch, Professor Dolzer, Dr. Diego Luis Molinari. Who will clearly show that Article VI and the the Secret Article are so intrinsically related that the violation of the former triggers the the exercise of the latter by the UK. Thereby, under Nootka giving the UK clear claim to the Islands over all other pretenders.

    The Court: ”What exactly is A_Voice's expertise?“

    The UK cannot steal what is already theirs by colour of right. ”a settlement already there, it originated from the Argentine Republic“. Was in effect, an illegal mutinous garrison. As Argentina has already conceded, there was no disturbance of any settlement. ”There is no credible evidence of a British Sovereignty claim for East Falkland...”. Already shown Nootka, thanks to Argentina.
    The only people that engaged in piracy were the Argentina agents Jewitt and Vernet.
    Self-determination is again another irrefutable legal right, and there are still more. While Argentina cannot claim even one right under international law, but we all knew that anyway.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 02:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    109
    Stop quoting other peoples opinions and stick with the facts....
    Nowhere in any of the treaties is there a British entitlement to legally seize East Falkland from Spain or anyone else.....
    I have stated what the treaties state and also what they do not state...
    I have neither added nor taken away any words....
    I have been waiting for you to prove a British entitlement and you haven't..
    Keep reading and quoting opinions...they will not alter the facts.....
    Britain does not have a claim....for East Falkland other than piracy....

    105
    On 2 April 1982, Argentina INVALIDATED all UN resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands. That means that the UK is under NO obligation to discuss the weather with Argentina, let alone sovereignty.

    Really...then I suggest you look at the date on the link from the UNGA...May 2012..
    www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/UN/AC109-L6.PDF

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 02:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    110 A_Voice
    “Nowhere in any of the treaties is there a British entitlement to legally seize East Falkland”
    Nootka clearly releases the UK from any prior obligation preventing them from seizing East, West, North or South Falklands. Triggered by establishment having been formed by the subjects of another power(Argentina) on the coasts in question. So I have proved ad nauseum, that both by treaty and international law the correct legal view. The fact that you want to obfuscate the issue and deny it doesn't change the the legal criteria one iota.
    Piracy is your unqualified interpretation, but only pertains to Argentine agents, as international law is clearly on the UK's side. So you can stamp your little feet and bang your little pots but it isn't going to alter the legal reality. That Argentina has twice attempted illegal usurpations, albeit unsuccessfully. Nor does it appear that the situation is likely to change in her favour.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 03:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    A voice

    Stop quoting your opinions and stick to the facts.

    There was no Argentine settlement on the islands, there was no Argentine governor there.

    There was a small business being run by two Britons that remained both before 1832 and 1833. no Argentine “governor” or any other such title there.

    There was a militia who'd been there two months, and had already murdered the guy appointed “governor”.

    Stop pretending either of these are an Argentine settlement and stick to the facts.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 07:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Joe Bloggs

    ICJ :)

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 09:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Martin Woodhead

    Problem for argentina
    You cant threaten the UK
    Your spectacularly economically incompetant
    Dont really have a leg to stand on.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 09:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    @113 Joe Bloggs,
    Agreed, ICJ.
    Argentina- put up or shut up!
    But l don't plan to pack, anytime soon.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    110 A_Voice

    Re: 105 LEPRecon
    “That means that the UK is under NO obligation to discuss the weather with Argentina, let alone sovereignty.”

    Is in fact correct under international law, as any råesolutions emanating from the UNGA are mere advisements and not binding.
    Whereas,“there is no obligation in general international law to settle disputes”.
    Principles of Public International Law, third edition, 1979 by Professor Ian Brownlie

    “The precise scope of the obligation is, however, that states should settle disputes peacefully, not that they should settle them. In other words, there is no general rule requiring a state to settle its grievances. Rather, the rule is that if a state does decide to settle, this must be done in a peaceful manner.”
    page 275
    Textbook on International Law By Martin Dixon
    http://books.google.com.br/books...

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 10:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    In any event, the UK has never refused to discuss sovereignity or anything else with Argentina, despite the 1982 invasion. The UK has simply declined to discuss the sovereignity of the Falkland Islands without the approval and participation of Falkland Islanders.

    Really monstrous, piratical, imperialist and colonial, that is.

    A sane, rational and democratic country would draw the obvious conclusion as to the way forward, but this is Argentina we're talking about, and it is clear that the dispute is more valuable to the Argentine political class than the actual islands would be.

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 11:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    @110 A_Voice

    Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of): draft resolution

    And so?

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 12:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Well, depending on ones point of view,
    their is nothing stopping the great Argentina navy , air force or its troops from coming to the UK and forcing us to give you the islanders,

    so what's stopping you,
    [scared ?? surely not ]
    after all we are only a tiny weensy little island are we not, lolol...

    Mar 07th, 2014 - 08:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • screenname

    Why on earth is anyone trying to argue a legal case with malvinista wind-up merchant Think/voice/dod/etc,etc?

    If any malvinista was able to come up with anything that could be credited as even a half decent point, then surely it would be malvinista lawyer-in-chief Marcelo Kohen...and he would have managed to slip it into the UN's Audiovisual library of international law.

    So come on folks! Can anyone find as much as a dig at the Falklands from Marcelo at the UN legal guidance website?

    http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ls/Kohen_bio.pdf

    Mar 08th, 2014 - 12:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • dab14763

    ...Spain lost it's colonies of the Viceroyalty of the River Plate which included East Falkland....

    Spain lost to Argentina only those territories over which Argentina established and maintained effective control. Argentina did neither on the Falklands. So, if any part of the Falklands was Spanish, it was still Spanish in 1833, and therefore Spain's prerogative to complain about any action the UK took there, not Argentina's. And Spain never did.

    Mar 08th, 2014 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @106

    “It didn't ...Spain lost it's colonies of the Viceroyalty of the River Plate which included East Falkland....”

    Argentina was not mentioned in Nootka, it is therefore a third party-Britain did not expel Spain in 1833-and could not have broke the convention.

    Spain accepted British sovereignty of the Falklands in the 1800s (I will supply the date if you require this) by visiting Stanley (not Pt Louis) and saluting the Union Jack.

    @110 AVoice

    “Really...then I suggest you look at the date on the link from the UNGA...May 2012..”

    AND???????
    At the very top of this is:

    “Special Committee on the Situation with regard
    to the Implementation of the Declaration on the
    Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries
    and Peoples ”

    It is therefore the job of this committee to ensure that the Falkland Islands achieve Independence.

    Therefore if the committee is fulfilling its remit the only solution to the so called 'colonial situation' is for the UK and Argentina to work out how the Falkland Islands achieve independence.

    Becoming a colony of Argentina will not 'de-colonise' the Islands.

    As the so called special committee cannot even follow its own remit (i.e. perform its function properly') there is no justification, whatsoever,for the UK to take any notice of it.

    It also states in the passage you have quoted that the interests of the population (i.e. that of the Falkland Islands NOT that of Argentina or the UK), must be taken into account.

    Therefore, as the Argentines take NO notice whatsoever of the interests of the Islanders, there is NO justification for the UK to acknowledge a committee that does not even understand its own remit.

    @115 Islolde

    “But l don't plan to pack, any time soon.”

    But will the Islands offer CFK political asylum when she packs her bags? After all she has done more to highlight your cause than anyone else.
    As she is so keen on Port Louis perhaps there might be a shanty going in the general vicinity somewhere in the hills?

    Mar 08th, 2014 - 07:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • downunder

    # 121 Precisely!

    Mar 08th, 2014 - 07:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    @122 Pete Bog,
    Lol!

    Mar 08th, 2014 - 09:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    Well done Pete, some great points.

    @Isolde, thought I'd say a quick hi, and hope you've had a good week.
    Really do think Argentina should take it to the ICJ. Their behaviour is down right silly and quite uncivilised. It should be resolved within the confines of international law.

    We all know why Argentina will never take it to the ICJ though.

    Mar 08th, 2014 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    @125 JGF,
    No, they never will.
    They keep hoping for a miracle though.
    Perhaps the Chinese Navy appearing over the horizon & “convincing” us to meekly surrender to their Argentine Allies.
    They would rue the day that they ever got into bed with the Chinese.

    Mar 09th, 2014 - 09:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    @126 - I completely agree. It's such a shame that the Argentine Government will continue to sacrifice the Argentine people for their own private interests.

    You'll continue to get the full backing of the UK. There are far to many rational minds to allow in this day and age the kind of ideologies that would destroy the free world.

    It will be a proud day for both the UK and the Falklanders when you can have full independence and a special relationship with us based on confidence, trust and the rule of law.

    Mar 09th, 2014 - 09:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @110
    Show me the treaty that shows that the indigeinous population allowed you to annexe Patagonia, anyway we have East Falkland and we are going to KEEP IT.

    Mar 09th, 2014 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • niphotos

    Now listen hear you stupid and silly woman ,stand in front of the mirror, don't be surprised if it cracks , now shake your head , hear anything ? ., no ?.......thought so , obviously confirms lack or absence of brains , now what about this inflation problem and the unemployed plus the corruption in your country ??, seems you forgot about that , no wonder , no brains to fix a broken and corrupt government !!

    Mar 09th, 2014 - 03:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CabezaDura2

    Cry for me Argentina is nearly reaching the 400 comments and the threads covering Falkland/Malvinas topic is static. Somethings seemething seems to be changing here lately

    Mar 10th, 2014 - 01:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    I've just read through the comments on here and I have to state Terrence Hill you make a compelling case. Kudos for being a legal legend.

    Keep your chin up Falklanders as you always do, we're here for the long run to keep the Argentine mafia off your backs (with your solid support too of course).

    Mar 10th, 2014 - 03:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Argentina could not inherit the islands upon independence anyway as Spain did not have De facto control since 1811.

    • the Arana-Southern Treaty of 1850 (the 'Convention of Settlement'), ended all possible claims by Argentina on the Falkland Islands.[27][94]
    • That Argentine leaders indicated in the 1860s that there was no dispute between Argentina and Britain, and that Argentine maps printed between 1850 and 1884 did not show the islands as part of Argentina

    So no case , no claim , .

    Mar 10th, 2014 - 07:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @132 Briton

    Good point, and the country that Argentina claims to be Argentina, but wasn't until 1853, didn't replace the Spanish in 1811, so there was no continuation.

    Mar 10th, 2014 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    A-VoiceofThinkedOver

    “Stop quoting other peoples opinions and stick with the facts.... ”

    “I have stated what the treaties state and also what they do not state...”

    LOL,
    AVoid doesn't want Terence referring to the legal opinions of distinguished historians and academics,

    But he DOES want us to take his own opinions as facts - whoever he is !

    A-Voice, he who is deliberately evasive about who he is - what unknown political and national affiliations and motives shape his 'opinions????

    What a joke, thoroughly trashed by Terence with logic and expert testimony!!

    What a joke he is!! :-)

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 04:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia

    The Malvinas will be returned within the next 25 years.

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 05:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    @135 Hepatia,
    Perhaps you'd like to share your inside information with the rest of us mere mortals?
    1) what or who are the malvinas?
    2) who are they(whatever they are)going to be returned to?
    3) why should that interest us?
    4) why 25 years?, whats so special about 25 years? why not 24 or 26 years?
    Answers please.

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 07:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Leiard

    @135

    in 2012 you also told us “The Malvinas will be returned within the next 25 years.”

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 08:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    135 Hepati

    And the moon is made of cheese.

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    @135 - for something to be returned they must have first belonged to Argentina.

    The Falkland Islands have never been nor will the property of Argentina backed by historical fact and international law. Your imperialist dreams will be stopped and your attempts to blockade and discriminate the Falklanders will be stopped and always will be stopped by the UK and the Falklanders.

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 12:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @135 Hepati

    “The Malvinas will be returned within the next 25 years”

    If by the Malvinas you mean the Falkland Islands yes, they will be returned to the Falkland Islanders within 25 years (even though technically the UK has not taken them away), by the UK, who will not need to be the Islander's guardians when you abandon your Hitleresque Nazi ideals.

    However if Argentina continues to be wannabe Imperialists (the South American Third Reich )I expect the Islanders will delay independence until Argentina grows up and joins the 20th (maybe even the 21st) century.

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 04:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    perhaps 135 Hepatia knows things we don't,
    perhaps he is going to get them back single handed .lol

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    141 Briton

    “The Malvinas will be returned within the next 25 years.”

    Wasn't that what laughing boy timerman said when he came to London? and completely didn't meet members of the FIG?

    Didn't he scurry to a side office in the same building and give some half-witted press conference where he uttered that nonsense?
    Or was it at his hotel?

    Anyway, the point was that he did the conference at exactly the same time as he was supposed to be meeting the FIG and the Foreign secretary.

    Oh timermen, you are such a coward!!!

    Mar 11th, 2014 - 10:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    And he is very deluded..

    Mar 12th, 2014 - 06:59 pm - 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!