MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Malvinas bilateral sovereignty negotiations are 'inevitable' because of growing world consensus
Bilateral negotiations with the UK over the Falklands/Malvinas Islands sovereignty are 'inevitable' because of the growing international pressure and consensus among countries, forecasted Daniel Filmus head of the Argentine Foreign ministry Malvinas Islands Affairs Office. His statement comes on the 32nd anniversary of the Argentine military invasion on the Falklands in 1982. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesHey Argentina, you had your chance to sit down and talk last year in London.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0And what did you do? You RAN away in front of the WHOLE WORLDS MEDIA.
The world knows you for what you are. Insincere. So no, there isn't a world consensus except in your own tiny minds.
All the world wants is a peaceful solution to ANY dispute, regardless of what that dispute is. The world isn't taking sides.
Try taking your case to the International Court of Justice. If you won't, then the world knows that Argentina is a crackpot country, which only uses is spurious claims to distract its own population from the absolute mess it's made of the country.
And look! They're doing it again!
Pathetic much?
We will talk when you recognise and respect the Falklanders right, under the UN Charter, to determine their own future.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0I can't believe he used the word “victims”.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Apparently, the Falklands are a colony, Argentina is against colonialism, but the islanders are not colonised so arent the victims of colonialism, but Argentina is the victims of colonialism even though Argentina is borne out of being a colony....
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Jesus Christ...where do you start with that pile of shit?
50th anniversary of a dead Resolution ?? Wow :-)
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Congratulations Snr Filmus you have earned another cigar! I thought I told you to take the rest of the month off? By the way, this is great stuff, if your passing pop in for a blow job. I think you have eaned it KFC
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just amazing how each year they produce the same verbal tripe, changing a few words about, full of falsehoods and find a new plonker each year to spout it!
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0Dream on!
With its Falklands neurosis, Argentina is the nutter on the bus of the world community. Everybody just smiles politely and humours the nutter in the hope that he'll go away and start bothering somebody else. Everybody understands this except the nutter. This is one of the things that make him the nutter.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Please Mr Filmus just give me the reference number of the UN General Assembly resolution that states the negotiations 'must' be be bilateral?
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0The last UNGA resolution dealing specifically with the Falklands was in 1988 and that 'requested' the UK and RGland to 'initiate' negotiations, nothing whatever about who could or could not take part. In fact further on in that resolution it also called upon the UN Secretary General to use his 'good offices' to further the negotiations, who he not be a third party?
'Filmus insisted that the UN resolutions establish a difference with other colonialism cases since the Islanders are an 'implanted population'.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Insist all you want, but show us where they actually say this and how that overides thae current UN stance on 'Self Determination'
“it's Argentina that has been deprived of sovereignty rights, we are the victims”. Filmus then claimed that “the English invasions of 1806 and 1807 where the unquestionable attempts of Britain to turn Argentina into a British colony”.
Hey Filums, learn your history, stop lying, GB were fighting the Spanish, not Argentina, you wern't even 'invented' then.
He really is after Timmerman's court jester job but Timmerman has set the bar so high with his fake European conference complete with fake representatives of EU nations that turned out to be Argentine.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0UN Secretary General Ban-Ki-Moon on Wednesday May 19th 2010 when speaking at a forum on de-colonization in Noumea, New Caledonia -
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The world’s 16 remaining territories that still do not govern themselves must have complete freedom in deciding their future status”
He didn’t say “with the exception of the people of the Falkland Islands’
.
http://www.speroforum.com/a/33140/Remaining-nonselfgoverning-territories-must-have-full-freedom-of-choice-Ban-says
Also, the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 21st June 1971, repeated 16th October 1975, paragraph 52 stated
'Furthermore, the subsequent development of International Law in regard to non-self-governing territories, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, made the principle of self-development applicable to all of them.'
paragraph 52 www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/53/5595.pdf
the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, has confirmed that Britain is not in Breach of any UN Resolutions when he said:-
“I don’t think Security Council members are violating relevant UN resolutions. The impression is that people who are living under certain conditions should have access to certain level of capacities so that they can decide on their own future. And that is the main criteria of the main UN bodies. Having independence or having some kind of government in their territories. I don’t think it’s an abuse or violation of relevant UN resolutions, the UN has been working strongly from its very beginning to help non autonomous territories to achieve independence ”, he said in an interview with Tiempo Argentino, a Buenos Aires based newspaper.
He's right about the part in this tirade of his, that his side is acting in arrogance.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. The man is a complete goon with no coherent policy, no coherent arguments and no coherent story.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Until such time as the Argentine Government addresses in a rational and open minded manner the UN doctrine on self determination there is no where for them to go. For all our sakes and our sanity, grow up.
Incredible how naïve Argentina is. They talk about eventual sovereignty in almost every statement. They care little for respect of a people. They BRUTALLY invaded our home thirty two years ago today and they expect us to forgive and forget. Dream On . We made our choice in our referendum when 99.98% voted to remain British.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Many of us still bear the scars of that invasion so is it any wonder we are as determined as ever to have nothing to do with Argentina. They had their chance to accept our way of life but no they had to use force . They still have an embargo placed on our Country . Not the kind of actions from someone who wants to win hearts and minds.
We have the right to live the life of our choosing. We have the right to be defended against aggression . We also have the right to economically develop our future in any way we choose .
Its inevitable , ha ha ha .
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0crap,
world history is flooded with inevitable , impossible , cant do , wont do,
but out of interest, our history is full of can do , will do , have done ,
nothing is inevitable or impossible,
silly twits.
“UK must sit down to discuss the situation”
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ok!
That’s it, very clear what Britain has to do...
““The UK double standard is traditional...”
Ok! Again
Absolutely true and Britain must take notes about it and be aware of the implication of this...
Ok!
“it's Argentina that has been deprived of sovereignty rights, we are the victims”
None can deny that and is the reason why the world support Argentina’s claim...
Oh! I have to stop ridding because this guy Filmus is so precise that tere is no need to read anymore...
Two weeks ago it was Memorial Day, and today is Veterans Day...what country in the world celebrates a war that they started...and lost. Remembering the Veterans is one thing...that should have been Memorial Day...a day of shame when they sent over 600 young men to die for a dictatorship.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0we are the victims
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0yes
president Danny,
you are always the victim, but never the aggressor..
“Malvinas bilateral sovereignty negotiations are 'inevitable' ”
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0ORLY? *yawn*
MY god they are still going on about non binding UN resolutions! The rest of the world knows they went out of the window when Argentina invaded, not that they had any weight anyway, infact that's why Argentina invaded isn't it? What is wrong with these people? even doing a mock invasion, its so embarrassing! must be something in the water over there!
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0”...the UN resolution is most precise: the interests of the Islanders must be respected but not the wishes. Argentina is committed to that”.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0How can Argentina respect the Islanders interests while ignoring their wishes and refusing to even talk to them. Argentina is apparently arrogant enough to think it can dictate what's in the Islanders best interests. It's a very odd sort 'democracy' they practice in Argentina.
No wonder the Islanders voted 99% in favour of remaining a British Overseas Territory.
@17 DanyBerger,
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0“UK MUST sit down to discuss the situation”
Where does it say MUST, Danyboy?
You're telling lies, aren't you Dany?
And then l had to laugh,
“Argentina has been deprived of sovereignty rights, we are the victims”
What about the land that Argentina stole from Paraguay in 1871?
Did you not deprive the Paraguayans of their sovereign rights?
Are not the Paraguayans victims of Argentine theft?
Wouldn't you say so, Dany?
What do you think?
And Dany, do you really think that the “whole world” supports Argentina's ridiculous “claims”?
The WHOLE WORLD, Dany! Then please tell me why the “WHOLE WORLD” doesn't do something about it.
Why doesn't the whole world force the UK to give you the Falklands.?
Don't you think Dany, that you are exaggerating just a little?
Or perhaps, just plain lying?
What do you think, Dany?
Boring!!! no talks mr muppet face, yawn, only Argentina could come up with this bullshit.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps Danny is just misunderstood,..lol
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor guy, can you imagine having a job where everyday you use lies and half truths to embarrass yourself?
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sad thing is he's probably too stupid to realize it.
Reminds me of Think and his crew.
The Islanders want to keep the Argentines out, but are to few to do it all by themselves.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The British are obliged to help them protect their country.
The Argentines are totally obsessed with the “Malvinas”.
The rest of the world is totally indifferent. All those initiatives taken by Mr. Filmus or Mr. Timerman are not mentioned at all in most media worldwide. There are hundreds or thousands of other issues that are considered more important than all this Argentine nagging about the “Malvinas”.
lol Yankeeboy, Briton, I think Danny is perhaps being sarcastic lmao, I mean, nah no way, the Agrentines don't have a sense of humour..
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Indeed, a 'growing world consensus' that is forcing the UK to do absolutely nothing except ignore Argentina's mouthings.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why? Because no one really cares; what happen 180 years means jack in today's world, especially when put in to context with what Argentina did to Paraguay, Patagonia etc many decades later. This is just for internal consumption - takes their minds of the lynchings and impending meltdown in that land.
Sovereignty is non-negotiable, the Falkland Islanders have made that perfectly clear as is their right. So what is there to negotiate?
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Danny - can I give you yet another reason why we have no intention of discussing our sovereignty with you. There is group of 20 plus so called v Arg veterans here this week(some are some are far to young) - airfares and hotels paid for of course by your taxes (no way these folks could have afforded it otherwise).
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Like all such groups, on arrival they are given a polite friendly “pep-talk” by the Falkland Islands Police on what is accepted as reasonable behaviour whilst here - and what is not- ie anything to do with politics and flags in public.
So last night a group of these “veterans” attempted to drape an Arg flag over the tourism“Welcome to the Falklands” sign in Stanley - they were seen by a group of local who approached them suspicious of their plans - the Argentines promptly legged it fast complete with blue and white rag.
Your countrymen really are as good at running today as they were 32 years ago!
The day your country starts to grow up - then after a while once we can actually see that Argentina is a sensible mature Democracy - then relations may improve - but I think I will be long dead before Argentina actually matures.
Ah' ferrt een yurr jeneral deereshon Filmus
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentines are victims of the British w.r.t. the Falklands like the Germans were victims of Poland with the Gleiwitz Incident. We now even have them claiming here that they were “victims” of the first nations people attacking them when their implanted european founders “peacefully” settled the southern cone.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 01:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fascists never change. Always with the same goose-step.
By the way: Which “Caribbean countries, some of them Commonwealth members are already voting in support of Argentina on the issue”?
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 01:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What's that?
34 Some countries have stated that they support negotiations which is not the same as supporting Argentina.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 01:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They just go from bad to worse! How can the decent people of Argentina put up with this idiot's meandering opinions! What a load of bulls--t!
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 01:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0An embarrassment for Filmus and Argentina to choose an “anniversary” of the Argentine military invasion on the Falklands in order to make that statement because it can only heighten the resolve of the Falkland Islands, of Britain and of the allies of the Falklands such as Canada to reject the implicit timing and context of Filmus' statement - that Argentina still regards that unlawful and immoral invasion as having legitimacy.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 02:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@17 DanyBuggeredRegularly
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 02:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“UK must sit down to discuss the situation”
Not a chance!
That’s it, very clear what Britain has to do... Britain HAS to do NOTHING!
““The UK double standard is traditional...”
Only in argieland where you get shot for using intelligence.
Absolutely untrue and Britain must take notes about it and be aware of the implication of this, which is that it may have to obliterate argieland.....
“it's Argentina that has been deprived of sovereignty rights, we are the victims”
Having illegally occupied British sovereign territory for all of 2 months.
Nope!
And, in 1982, being a bunch of brainless fools, as are their successors, the argies managed to bring another principle of international law into force. Having started a war, and occupied a British territory, they lost sight of the FACT that, at the end of a conflict, a territory belongs to its possessor. At the end of the Falklands War, Britain “possessed” the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. And now argieland has NO claim at all. All that “history” means nothing. None of the GA resolutions mean anything. Because GA resolutions are NON-BINDING. Britain isn't obliged to comply with any of them. And the C24 is pointless and discredited. And so Britain doesn't bother.
Bet you don't have an intelligent, factual response, do you, DanyBuggered?
And the end result is that you don't have a single possible hope. Even if your hag-ridden excuse for a “country” tried something military, you'd be splattered.
And if 190 UN members said “You have to negotiate”, we'd still say “No”.
“UK must sit down to discuss the situation”
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UK was more than willing to negotiate last year. They refused on the grounds that they didn't want to recognise the legitimate inhabitants of the Falkland Islands.
Argentina has in the past also required that the outcome of negotiation is they get whatever they want, which is capitulation, not negotiation.
Argentina is the one unwilling to have honest discussion, this much is undisputable.
“Argentina has been deprived of sovereignty rights, we are the victims”
No. Argentina cannot be deprived of sovereignty, as they never held it to begin with. Britain holds sovereignty now, despite an attempt by Argentina to usurp the islands (“usurp” is the word they like to misuse, isn't it?)
As said above, the UN Secretary General has said Britain is not in violation of any resolutions. The only *binding* resolution that was violated was the directive for Argentina to remove their forces following the illegal invasion in 1982.
There have been a resolution in 1988 requiring the initiation of negotiations, but there's nothing about Argentina getting what they want.
Indeed, given the facts of the case, the only fair and equitable outcome of negotiation would be Argentina revoking their claims to the Falklands forever.
There is another problem with Argentina they colonized de Mapuche or Araucanian and other indigenous peoples who are the original inhabitants and owner of the south of Argentina. They were and still are subjected to a live of subjugation and with total disregard of their human rights and fundamental freedom. In 1860 before the brutal annexation of their territory by Argentina they organized themselves in a constitutional monarchical government. Here their map:
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.mapuche-nation.org/english/html/kingdom/1860-KAP-Map.html
The trash of Colin Roberts:
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://malvinasislasargentinas.blogspot.com.ar/2014/03/los-chagosianos-contra-el-futuro.html
By the way, some argue that the Boeing 777 disappeared from Malaysia, be in this mafia island of Diego Garcia ...
Is interesting to note the tremendous ignorance on the british side on this subject. Mr Filmus explained the argentine position that is not a position of ignoring the fact there are british people living on the islands; But explaining they are not recognised as a different people from those living in the european islands.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What the british tried to do last year in London is to present islanders as a different government separated from the one that governs britain, what for the argentine representative see similar as if common citizens of London would be presented as a third party.
For Argentina, Latin America and the international community represented by the UN, the islanders living in Malvinas are british living in a disputed territory, not a separated government from the uk.
It would be very helpfull that the uk put its pants, and act like a grown and mature nation and sit to the negotiation table and help resolve this dispute once and for all.
@lsolde
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 01- Why always latinos react first and think later?
Go to the article, look for the first paragraph, then in between the “ and “ close to the final you will see it...
2-“What about ... Paraguay in 1871?
I will say what always Britons say in situations like this...
Ok, may be the Paraguay stuff was not right, point made...
But just because may be Argentina did something wrong in old history does not make something to be emulated, legal or permissible to the rest of the world, especially you of course.
Also I would tell you that you should congratulate Argentina for learn her lesson and for the determination that has to prevent you to make the same mistake. After all you are not going to change one wrong doing from the past with more wrong doing in the present.
Please desist now because it not morally right and the world will not respect you anymore like civilised persons.
3-“And Dany, do you really think that the “whole world” supports Argentina's”
Of course I do, because I have learned to think like Britons you know.
So Argentina has support from Belgrano, Nuñes, Retiro, Las cañitas, Puerto Madero, Recoleta, San Isidro, etc (Around 100). plus the rest of the ARG commonwealth like Córdoba, San Luis, Mendoza, Buenos Aires, Santa Fe ( Like 22 more uff). And then don’t forget Argentina’s allies around the world like Uruguay, Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Isla Martin García. Uff a really big list here.
As I said before the whole world do you need more?
4-“Dany, you are exaggerating just a little?”
Well if you are going hate me because you are anti-British that is not my fault.
We have provided you and the world with trains, Popes, water, air, etc. If you don’t like British thinking just give your stuff back.
@Islander1
Come to BS AS with your 1000 soldiers to a place that i know with British flags and Tshirt saying Falklands are Brits. And you will see how faster you and your soldiers will run...
Come on do it what can you lose?
@ Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is only Argentina's opinion that the Falkland Islanders are exactly the same as the British who live on the Falkland Islands.
The UN, however, doesn't agree. You see, the Falkland Islands, being on the list for decolonisation PROVES that they have a completely distinct and separate culture than to those who live on the British Isles.
The Falkland Islands also have their own democratically elected body to represent them. So it is perfectly reasonable to have these elected representative present at ANY discussion involving THEIR islands.
That is what EVERY UNGA resolution states, that their interests MUST be taken into account. And the ONLY people who can decide what the interests of the Falkland Islanders are, ARE the Falkland Islanders themselves.
Why should they listen to a bunch of national socialist dictators that want to steal their homes, their land, evict them and tell them that they don't have the same human rights as the other 7 billion people on the planet?
No one in their right mind would allow that.
So Argentina trots out the same old lies, which get them nowhere, whilst the British will guarantee that ONLY the Falkland Islanders get a say on what happens to them, their land, their islands and their political affiliations.
If Argentina doesn't like that, then feel free to refer it to the International Court of Justice, which is, after all, the ONLY body in the WHOLE world that can order a change of sovereignty.
But Argentina doesn't because it knows that ALL of it's claims are lies, lies and more lies.
If the Falklands are yours, PROVE IT at the ICJ, otherwise continue on your extremely impotent tact that keeps you looking ridiculous to all civilised people in the world.
And every time your government tries one of these stunts, it just reveals how DESPERATE they are to distract the people of Argentina, and you show just how gullible you are to believe them.
What we have to remember about Mr Filmus is that the sole reason for his existence and the only thing that puts food on his plate, is to propagate the Argentine myth about the Falklands. He has no other reason to live.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is the same as the defence barrister representing Oscar Pistoriuos, the guy is telling blatant lies, but that is what he is paid to do.
Rgs in general are cowards. They like to scream and pound on the table but if someone does it back to them they get quiet and meek very quickly.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The only people they are tough with are people that are weaker than themselves..
True bullies and cowards.
#40
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 03:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes Jose and some people also believe in the Easter Bunny !
#41
Discuss the Falklands with Argentina.
ARGENTINA. The Falklands are ours. It is in our constitution.
UK. No they are ours ,
What is there to discuss ?
Dear Daniel Filmus ,do you ever get the feeling you are trying to poke butter up a porcupine's ar*e with a red hot needle......you have an impossible task and you are making a mess of it....it's time you was posted to Tierra del Fuego.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0*le sigh*
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I guess it's this time of year again. Oh well, better get in the spirit I guess.
HAPPY FAILED WAR OF AGGRESSION DAY ARGTARDS!
LEPRecon #43,
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The UN, however, doesn't agree. You see, the Falkland Islands, being on the list for decolonisation PROVES that they have a completely distinct and separate culture than to those who live on the British Isles.”
You really thinks so?. you think the UN consider the uk are colonizing the population in the islands ergo they keep them in the colonial list to liberate islanders from the colonial rule of britain?. Really? IS that what you suggest?.
Fact is the UN keeps the islands in the colony list becouse they are in fact, a british colony, but a british colony not necesary needs a colonized people. You dont need to colonize martians to have a colony on Mars.
Facts about UN:
1- They(UN) recognize the islands have a british colony.
2- They recognize there is a sovereignty dispute over the land of that colony.
3- They consider in almost all resolutions about those islands that the solution to the sovereignty dispute is key to the decolonization process.
4- They recognize the islands are administered by britain. ( all information about the islands that are requested by the UN are not made to the Malvinas government but to the british government in London).
5- Almost all resolutions on all bodies of the UN about Malvinas request a peacefull sovereignty negotiations between the UK and Argentina.
The UN have never in all its resolutions about the islands name islanders “government” as a partie in any negotiation process that include the territory they are living in. That is not the case of the UK and Argentina.
The Claims made by Argentina are, as has been reiterated many times, merely aspirations based on fairy tales, myths, lies and misinterpretations of questionable historic events such as the Treaty of Tordesillas, the Nootka Sound Treaty, and the Bull of Pope Alexander VI all enacted well before Argentina was even a dream for the inhabitants of the River Plate region and has, thus, no legal claims to the Falklands archipelago. To cap it all in 1850 Argentina ratified the Arana Southern Treaty in which they acknowledged not having any claims of any nature agains the United Kingdom.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is a growing world consensus that Argentina has no hope of getting the Falklands and so many nations have decided to either ignore them or say anything to shut them up in the full knowledge that it aint going to change a damn thing.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@49 Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UK put the Falklands on the decolonisation list.
The people who live on the Falkland Islands settled it before Argentina became a country. Prior to their arrival there were NO indigenous people. So the Falkland Islanders ARE the indigenous population.
Now Argentina was COLONISED against the wishes of the indigenous population, so perhaps Argentina should be de-colonised.
The FACT is that the Falkland Islanders were the 1st PERMANENT settlement on the Islands. The were from many nations - only 2 were British, the rest were from all over. It is their land. In 1833 the United Provinces of the River Plate (not Argentina) tried to steal the islands. They failed.
In 1982 the Republic of Argentina tried to steal the islands. You FAILED. You lost. And the Falkland Islanders are FREE to choose to remain as they are, join another country or to become an independent country.
In March 2013, they choose to remain a British Overseas Territory.
Here are some more FACTS for you. ALL UN Resolutions regarding the Islands call for a peaceful end to the sovereignty dispute. NONE of them say that the British have to hand sovereignty over to anyone. That is an Argentine LIE.
Another FACT. UNGA resolution 2065 was VIOLATED by Argentina in 1982, which leaves the UK under no obligation to talk to Argentina. You broke it, you can't turn back the clock and pretend it never happened.
Another FACT. UNSC resolution 501 was VIOLATED by Argentina in 1982. Security Council resolutions are LEGALLY binding. So the ONLY country to have violated UNGA and UNSC resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands is Argentina. Which again leaves the UK under NO OBLIGATION to talk to Argentina.
The decolonisation process is designed to assist the Falkland Islanders to achieve full independence, it is NOT a tool to allow another country with aspirations of empire to colonise it.
The ONLY thing preventing the Falkland Islands full independence is Argentine aggression.
To say anything to shut my government up is your way to say nations support our claim. You should try to know yourselve better.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 04:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@53 Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 05:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is my right as a free person to say what I like. If you and your government are so intimidated by it then that's your problem.
It is my right as a free person to refute the lies I see the Argentine government and posters like yourself as I see fit.
It is your right to put forwards counter arguments, which you obviously cannot do, hence why the hissy fit.
Most countries that YOUR country states supports its position DON'T. They support, just like the UN resolutions, a peaceful end to the dispute. They don't say which side they are on.
And even if they have, how many of those countries that did say it supported Argentina have actually followed that verbal support by actual deeds?
Chile hasn't. Uruguay hasn't. Peru hasn't. Colombia hasn't. Equador hasn't. Venezuela hasn't. None of the Caribbean countries have, including Cuba.
In fact NOT ONE country has done more than mutter a few supportive phrases, that in most cases fall extremely short of outright support, and they have continued with business as usual with both the UK and the Falkland Islands.
Those are the FACTS.
I suggest that instead of quoting UN resolutions, you should actually try reading them. Go on the UN homepage, select your language, and then you can read to your hearts content.
And then you can come back and give us a direct quote (including chapter, paragraph and line) where ANY UNGA or UNSC resolution refers to the Falklands as a 'special' case OR that negotiations actually means that the UK transfers sovereignty.
Good luck on your search because none of your La Campora trolls or Malvinistas have ever been able to find them...because they DO NOT EXIST.
http://springtimeofnations.blogspot.com/2012/06/what-is-colony-united-nations.html
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0LEPRecon, my response was not meant to your comment but to Anbar post.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0About your comment Nº52:
QUOTE:“The UK put the Falklands on the decolonisation list”
Indeed. The uk recognized the islands as a colony back then. What changed in the islands since then? not much. Perhaps you can name what changes exist between the islands now and the islands back then that makes the islands a non colony from your point of view?.
QUOTE:“The people who live on the Falkland Islands settled it before Argentina became a country. Prior to their arrival there were NO indigenous people. So the Falkland Islanders ARE the indigenous population.”
Prior to british arrivals, there were 50 years of spanish and later argentines succesions of governors and administration with permanent pacific and solitary population that if we count only Malvina Vernets succesors there would be more than 200 argentine descendants living on the islands.
QUOTE: “Now Argentina was COLONISED against the wishes of the indigenous population, so perhaps Argentina should be de-colonised.”
That shows your lack of culture and education.
Prior to the vicerroyalties created by Spain, there was no nation stablished here. No law was broken, when founding the vicerroyalties that later became independents. The uk instead, recognized the argentine
nation without making any protest of british claim in the islands while administered (the islands) by Argentina when in 1825 signed the treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation between all the territories of Argentina and the territories of her magesty.
QUOTE: ”The FACT is that the Falkland Islanders were the 1st PERMANENT settlement on the Islands. The were from many nations - only 2 were British, the rest were from all over. It is their land. In 1833 the United Provinces of the River Plate (not Argentina) tried to steal the islands. They failed.”
A terrible lie. The first permanent settlement was french, with more then 100 people.
@56 “Prior to the vicerroyalties created by Spain, there was no nation stablished here”
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Tell it to the first nations people. Or is nation building OK when YOU and your predecessors couple it with cultural and actual genocides, Spain had no right to invade the new world anymore than Napoleon had the right to invade the rest of Europe. What a lie you Malvanazis live, dancing on the mass grave under your predominantly feet and waging your finger at the Falklanders who just want to live in peace as neighbors.
Yeah Gface, they are just poor south americans trying to live in peace as neighbors.... in south america.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 06:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@56
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 06:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Christ , don't tell the French , that they had a settlement on the FALKLANDS otherwise you could be looking to have joint sovereignty with France. Good luck with that as we don't get on too well with the Frogs. There were no idigenous Indians in Patagonia, jesus do you not know your own history?
@56 Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Being decolonized means that the people who are being decolonized get to have their own government, choose for themselves (referendum), and decide what is in their own best interest.
Argentina's attempts to take the islands, by hook or by crook, is an attempt to colonise them.
The French settlement wasn't permanent as they would still be there, wouldn't they? I'm not disputing that France and Spain has settlements, as did the British, but ALL of those settlements were removed.
The 1st permanent settlement were the people from Vernet's venture. They decided to remain on the islands under British protection and rule. Gosh, even back in the 19th century the British were giving people a say. Oh, and it is impossible for any of those Vernet's colonists to be Argentine, as Argentina DIDN'T exist until 1853. In fact, Vernet sought permission from the British to set up his colony. Strange that if it wasn't British territory.
Also Vernet left the Falkland Islands way prior to 1833, and showed little interest in them thereafter. So I doubt any of Malvina Vernet's descendants would be living on the islands no matter whether the British or the United Provinces of the River Plate (still no Argentina) had prevailed on 3 Jan 1833.
These are actual verifiable facts. You should try looking at the Argentine national archives. In there you will see just how badly you've been lied to all your life. Only 4 colonists left - NONE of them were from the territory that would evolve into Argentina. The rest were military, who had mutinied and murdered their commanding officer and raped his wife.
The indigenous people of South America had some of the greatest civilisations ever seen on the planet - but they weren't white catholics so I suppose in your eyes they weren't people, let alone a nation.
Anyone in Argentina who isn't from a native amerindian is descended from colonisers. Try and twist it anyway you like, but your ancestors stole their land from them.
golfcronie, France recognized spanish sovereignty of Malvinas back then, and they gave to Spain their colony, so there is not much they can do now.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There was indigenous aboriginals in Patagonia, so it is you who do not know my history and talk about things you have no idea about.
Ok, explain the Conquest of the Desert, did not General Roca subdue and kill thousands of indigenous indians to usurp and colonise Patagonia? ( Tell me what year was that before or after Argentina became a Pepublic ) Tell me who threw thousands of dissidents out of military planes, ok it was the Junta, nothing to do with Argentiana.( And when was that?)
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 07:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You signed the islands away in 1850 and DO NOT have a valid sovereignty claim. The UN ICJ has made 4 Advisory Opinions and 1 Judgment that ALL state, 'the right to self-determination is applicable to ALL non-self-governing territories.' There are no exceptions.
Convention of Settlement Treaty 'Convention between Great Britain and Argentine Confederation for the Settlement of Existing Differences and the re-establishing of Friendship signed at Buenos Aries, November 24, 1849.
'The treaty of peace leaves everything in the state in which it was found unless there is some stipulation to the contrary. IF NOTHING IS SAID ABOUT THE CONQUERED COUNTRY OR PLACES, THEY REMAIN WITH THE CONQUEROR AND HIS TITLE CANNOT AFTERWARDS BE CALLED INTO QUESTION.' (Elements of international law with a sketch of the history of science, Henry Wheaton, 1836, p238 and Elements of International Law and Laws of War, H.W. Hallett, 1866, p353.
Look at the wording of the title of the Treaty - 'Convention Between Great Britain and Argentine Confederation for the Settlement of Existing Differences and the re-establishing of Friendship.' In the ICJ Libya Chad judgment the ICJ ruled regarding the meaning of text and stated, 'a treaty must be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in their context and in the light of its obligations and purpose. Interpretation must be based above all upon the text of the Treaty.
Argentina DOES NOT have a legal claim to the Falklands.
@62 There was no conquest of the desert. Of course. And there were no Jews in Poland.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 07:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0God you ARE disgusting, aren't you.
64
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 07:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Irrelevant peace treaty...to end military action in the Anglo-French blockade of the Río de la Plata.....
CONQUERED COUNTRY...?
...are you referring to the Falklands...was there a war...who was the Conquerer and who was the Conquered...?
I must have missed that particular war....
Seems like a bit of irrelevant international law...
'The treaty of peace leaves everything in the state in which it was found ”
It did... previous to the treaty there was a sovereignty dispute......
...and... wait for it...what do we have now...that's right a sovereignty dispute...
Glad that's all cleared up.....
Britain DOES NOT have a legal claim to East Falklands.
golfcronie, Argentina indeed killed thousens of aboriginals in Patagonia. Argentina indeed, killed too, thousens of civilians during the dictature. Those acts against humanity does not deprive us from the right of all argentines of possesion to our territory. You compare apples with oranges. You try to name an atrocity happened in my nation to present the british imperialism and colonization as some kind of salvation to humanity. Quite the contrary. If we talk about sovereignty, present your proof that the uk is right, dont say that we are a less developed nation to justify a british sovereignty in south america.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0LEPRecon you post Nº 60 is completely, full of crap, also tipical british indoctrinated absurd history view of events.
In response to that bs comment 60:
Decolonization is not only referred to people. There are more than one kind of colonization. Please i invite you to find a dictionary and learn at least the basic.
IF we recover the part of our territory colonized by britain, it would not be a colonization. It would be like any other argentine territory, a federal territory part of Argentina. And as you know the rest of the territory of Argentina are not listed in the colony list of the UN ergo, when the british returns Malvinas the colonial situation will end.
About the first PERMANENT settlement, you talk of “ first permanent” about the continuity of the british settlement in time. But ask any historian, take british sources and you will find out that the british, was certainly not the FIRST PERMANENT settlement. In any case, you should have said the settlement that lasted longer. Checks your definitions. Argentina existed officially since 1816 and even your nation officialy recognise that. So are you that arrogance that you will claim the year of our existence to 1853?.
Vernet left the islands taking ships that were breaking the law, he did not left the islands becouse of getting boring.
Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0After signing the Convention of Settlement treaty President Mitre referred to the 1850 treaty in Argentine Congress on 1st May 1865 stating, 'there was nothing to prevent the consolidation of friendly relations between their country and those governments.' (Britain and France) In the PICJ Legal Status of Greenland Case of 1833 the Court stated that Norway could not object to a Danish claim of sovereignty because a Norwegian official previously made a statement inconsistent with such a claim.
Brit bob, a sovereignty dispute is not an impediment to have friendly relations. At all, under no circunstancies.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@47: It just gets better. “Our genocidal fascism in the doesn't negate our right to be fascists!”
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You lost the Falklands round of the 19th century 8-year-0ld football game that everyone, ESPECIALLY the Argentines WERE were playing over the Western Hemisphere. You never complained when you won and got the to dance on the necks of the dead. OH but when you LOSE over such a small set of remote Islands compared to the vast tracks land you won two centuries ago in what we can call your FIRST Dirty War... then it's a crime against humanity. How can the adult world take you seriously?
Dude. Stop. Digging. Or at least have the guts take it to the ICJ so the adult world can hand your government's pathetic legal arguments back to you. Laughter at the “Breathtaking Inanity™” of the Malvanista Argument is optional.
@64 A-Voice
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You missed out conquered 'places'. Argentina makes great play about their forcibly displaced population. The treaty is relevant.
Here's anther one for you to chew on:
Island of Palmas Case. The Court stated 'the Netherlands title of sovereignty acquired by continuous and peaceful display of sovereignty during a long period of time held good. The Court rejected the claim of a presumption of Spanish sovereignty stating that 'no such claim can be based in international law on the titles involving the United States as successor to Spain.'
Look everyone!!!
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0On this most special of occasions argentina has chosen to mark the day by humiliating herself on the world stage!!
Nothing, but nothing makes the anniversary of a war that she ultimately ( and comprehensively ) lost by wheeling out all the loonies in your government to make the most outlandish statements to the worlds press.
“Malvinas bilateral sovereignty negotiations are 'inevitable' because of growing world consensus”
Our own sun going supernova in about 50bn years, that's what I call 'inevitable'.
This solar system crashing into the next one along ( Andromeda ) in about 100bn years, that's what I call 'inevitable'.
But this??? nar, this is right up there with that other statement:-
“We've sunk HMS Invincible”
Pure fantasy!!!
those crazy argies!!! they will have their dreams!!!
67 Liberato
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 08:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0''when the british returns Malvinas the colonial situation will end.''
No, it won't. There would still be Falkland Islanders here and you would have colonised us.
We are not Argentines, and we don't want to be part of Argentina. You could only rule us by force, as you tried to before. We would never stop resisting you, and we would never stop petitioning the UN for our freedom. We would then be a colonised people and be a better case for the decolonisation committee than we are now.
Your politicians continual comparing of us to Italians and Welsh in Argentina is facile and stupid. There is no comparison at all. You are comparing 'apples with oranges'. They chose to go to Argentina. We didn't, and neither did our forbears for almost 200 years.
There can be no progress in this matter for as long as you continue to base your case on falsehoods.
The chief of these is that Falkland Islanders have no say in our future. This is false. Even if the UN agreed to this, (which it doesn't), the UK doesn't agree. They have said that they will do nothing without the participation and agreement of the Falkland Islands Government. They are allowed to decide this because they have sovereignty.
Another falsehood is that this is all about economics. It isn't, and that explains why your current strategies aren't working. They won't work in the future either.
The other glaring falsehood is that Falkland Islanders are no different than any other 'British'. If that were true (and it isn't), you would have no difficulty taking over the Falklands. We would not be here arguing now; we would all have gone 'home' long ago. Your difficulty is that this is our home and we will fight tooth and nail for it. We'd also fight anyone else for it, including the 'British' if we needed to (which we don't).
That doesn't leave you with much does it? The French giving a few huts to the Spanish in 176- whatever? Really?
Monty monty, You have a problem with becoming argentinian, but why you enjoy so much living in South America without being a south american?
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@72 And let's never forget nor forgive that this celebration is not about “liberating” the islanders or even enslaving/expelling/exterminating the islanders (though the latter was clearly a feature not a bug) . It was to preserve the Junta and their Dirty War on Argentina for a few more years since the they were just about to get ousted and the crowds suddenly cheered them on and STILL do it. More kidnappings, more torture, more coerced adoptions of dissidents, more dropping people in the sea from helicopters. And the Malvaistas and Malvanazis here are just fine with it. No price too great for the Argentines to pay so long as the Islanders were under a jackboot of a Junta they still proudly celebrate with coins like the Germans celebrate the invasion of Poland -- oh wait, they don't.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Gface, we are not the military junta, we do not praise the junta. You brits always compare us with the junta. We are being a democracy since 30 years now. You talk of the junta as present while those dictators were being judged and still are being judged.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Let me remind you that 1 millon iraquians are dead becouse the uk said that Saddam had weapons of mass destructions that were never being found and im not talking about 30 years ago, im talking about much much less time ago.
75 GFace
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and EVERY 02nd April KFC should be calling the families of the fallen to BA and saying “Sorry” to each and every one of them for the wasted lives.
She should be apologizing to them for the sacrifice their sons made on a fools crusade.............
But this? all this?? this is just grotesque.
#77 yeah and the british government should say sorry for the invation of Iraq and the stolen oil. OH wait, the oil is still being stolen.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 09:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@78
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh dear deflection again. Iraq is a democracy now it was not before. They can make their own minds up just like the FALKLANDERS can. Has Argentina said sorry to the Indians in Patagonia? No I expect is the answer. When will you and the Argie Government get it in their heads that SELF DETERMINATION is non negociable. What has Argentina got to offer the FALKLANDERS please do tell. I await wiyh bated breath your answer.
@76. You don't praise the Junta? What a lie.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Remember that line of German Euro coins minted on the 75th anniversary of Germany “retaliating” against the Gleiwitz incident? It's “national side” shows the 1942 borders of the Greater Reich and featuring a zoomed-in Poland with a iron fist or claw around it and text saying that recovering Prussia is a “European Cause”. The dates of course are the dates where the Nazis were expelled from Poland then the end of WW2 to the mint date well after Germany “de-Nazified.”
Its apologists pathetically insist that it is to remember the people who had to fight for the Reich and the protests are just vindictive anger from people who refuse to see the historical rights of Germany to rule that region of what is now Poland and that Germany is now a democratic repubic so what it does now toward Poland is just hunky dory. And unlike you, the Germans even say it's ok to disagree with their inflation statistics whereas for you it's a crime to even do basic ALGEBRA and publish the results, let alone teach a lie of history that if your government really believed it they'd be taking it to the ICJ (They know it's a lie so they don't and just keep it there to string along a nation who is are less bunch of suckers then when your *celebrated* Junta pulled it on you in '82).
But 21st century democratic Germany doesn't thave such a coin. YOU DO. Don't EVER tell the lie here that you've “De-Junta-fied” You mint it. You OWN it.
Yeah, that's a really good look for anyone that sees it from the outside (or for that matter anyone on the inside with a conscience). And I'm not british by the way. I view this “conflict” from outside of the Commonwealth bubble or the Facscist lie in which were marinated or the regional nationalistic racist “solidarity” against the big bad Norte that your government insists is neighbors trapped by the slow pace of continental drift have to play to be “neighborly” while they discretely talk to the Islands.
Your “democracy” cost the lives of 1 millon people that were not british, in a foreign, and more important, a sovereign nation. That “democracy” is a laugh, a puppet made at your government needs, a democracy where its oil are not like in the past in iraqian hands but in british and north american hands.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Supporting the Iraq invasion, you make me guess you give a s... about sovereignty, democracy, freedom, etc...
@43 DanyBerger,
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not a lot of your intelligent & well thought out reply makes much sense,
Oh well, thats paco for you.
As to your first question:-
1)
why always Latinos react first & think later,
l don't know Dany, can you tell me why?
What do you think, Dany?
2)
At least you admit that it was wrong for Argentina to steal land from Paraguay.
And Argentina can make amends by publicly apologising to Paraguay, offering compensation & giving the land back to them.
That seems fair to me,
What do you think about that, Dany?
3)
lts a very impressive list of WHOLE WORLD support, Dany.
Most of Argentina's provinces, l see, with a few neighbouring countries thrown in.
What about some of the countries that really count, like the European Union or Canada or Australia or, well any Modern lndustralised Democracy like for example, Sweden.
A lot more important places than Argentina's provinces, wouldn't you say, Dany? Please tell us what you think about that, Dany?
4)
You know Dany, l really don't think that you have thought too much to your replies.
l certainly am not anti-British as you imply.
Whatever gave you that idea?
At the end of your replies, you were not making too much sense.
But if l can help. Go & have a big mug of strong coffee & leave the drugs alone.
We can converse later if you like,
What do you think, Dany?
à bientot Dany
did not Saddam Hussein invade another country? I thought he invaded Kuwait and set light to all the oil fields or am I wrong? He deserved to be given a beating. Tell me who gave him a trial and executed him. The government of Iraq. A democracy.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 10:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@81 There is a vibrant protest culture in the UK opposing the current war. We see a lot of it on the TV. It gets more billing than the pro-war protests. But you. We saw the crowds in 1982 when you invaded your Poland (or was it your Czechoslovakia, or Manchuria? Denmark? So hard to tell). It was a Nurenburg Rally only further south. No antiwar protests to be seen from a country who was on the brink of overthrowing them. And it worked like a charm. Your previous generation got off on it. The thought of holding guns to the islanders heads was too much for you to pass up. No civil discourse against the war. No protests. The Moms weren't dancing to bring the boys home. Just incandescent anger but NOT when they invaded, but when they let you down.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Take to the ICJ if you dare. But your government won't. Because they know they have no case. Just something to make gullible suckers like you drool when they ring The Malvinas Bell. It worked in 1982. It works in 2014. Drool in “Liberatad” for the fascist victory you were eventually denied and will never have a chance of redoing.
golfcronie:
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0quote: “did not Saddam Hussein invade another country? I thought he invaded Kuwait and set light to all the oil fields or am I wrong? He deserved to be given a beating. Tell me who gave him a trial and executed him. The government of Iraq. A democracy.”
After Saddam invaded Kuwait until the british/north american invasion, Iraq's air were constantly flown by harrier jects, iraq's economy was under an embargo, and its military controled by Nato.
So if british jets controled Iraq's sky, i wonder how couldnt they note there were no weapons of mass destruction?.
Saddam did not had a fair trial. Snipers were killing every lawer that dared to represent Saddam. Do that seems a fair trial to you?.
I despice Saddam, but even the worse scum deserve a just trial. You? You just give a damn. You full you mouth with such words as democracy, freedom, justice and then you care less than the opportunity to taste their oil.
Grow up and tell your government to investigate the war on iraq. To put in jail those responsable to take your nation to war with a lie as an excuse to grab some expensive oil resources.
Gface, If you people are anti Iraq war, then chase the responsible and bring them to justice. Stop the torture of suspect of terrorism. Stop producing opium in Afghanistan. Stop supporting a coup de etat in Ukraine. Stop training and giving weapons to libyans terrorists to grab cheap oil. Stop supporting and training syrians terrorist to change the regime.
Our military that made the bad things you claim on us, are being judged or were judged, and are being sentence to prison or are complying with prison.
@85. Gee “Lib”. Your hot mess haws been on the table for longer then the Iraq War. YOU FIRST. (also Still thinking I'm british I see.. whatever... ). Stop throwing rocks in your glass house of unrepentant fascist nostalgia. Germany, Italy and Japan got over the war they started ages ago and never look back fondly. Why can't you? The France, the UK, the US and the rest are friends now when back in your fantasy year of 1833? Well... Condemn the 1982 invasion, don't celebrate it. Meet with the Islanders, don't run from them (but happily meet with the Iranians to blow off the AIMA bombing). Be a costly punisher for people who think that they can still win that 18th century 4-year-old futball match or ring the Malvninas bell to distract form domestic incompetence. Or is the Malvinas bell just too pretty a song to listen to... Then you can do your whataboutery BS. But right now your countries celebration of 1982 or all to see pretty much invalidates your right to criticize what the US and UK did in 2011 just as it would a Japan that still thinks the Rape of Nanjing was a necessary act of “peace” or a Germany who still wants its East Prussia.
Apr 02nd, 2014 - 11:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You cant forget a nation that are still holding our land, and controling it from the other side of the planet, and with ambitions to the antartic and the control of the south atlantic.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 12:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Islanders do not alow me to reside there, do not alow me to buy land or invest there. Islanders control its demography as to not alow other voice than the pro british voice. Have you not looked at their census?. Have you not talked to them?.
The islands are considered by the UN as a non self-governing territory. Which means that whatever government implanted in the islands is not legitimate and respond only to the metropolis that administer the colony. Thats why my government would not sit with islanders unless islanders are sitting in the british sit.
@87. The Islanders control their land with more autonomy than you would ever offer them, not in 1982, not in 2014. The british have their backs. You can never do the islanders what you tried to do to them in 1982. They are free. And there is nothing you can do about it!
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 12:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0When will this idiot realise that most of the rest of the world couldn't give a flying f@ck about Argentina's claim to the “Malvinas”.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0QUOTE: “The Islanders control their land with more autonomy than you would ever offer them, not in 1982, not in 2014. The british have their backs. You can never do the islanders what you tried to do to them in 1982. They are free. And there is nothing you can do about it!”
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 12:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thats is what you say. For Argentina, south america and the UN the islands remains being a non self-governing territory.
#89 I dont care the world, i care about me and my nation.
@90. You know nothing about how the FIG does business obviously. Perhaps you should READ Mercopress and learn how they do business and not be a good loyal Malvanista. The UK on paper handles foreign policy and its deterrent force (just like the US manages an independant Micronesia's defense) but the UK gives them sizable local control, more than you fascists would now or in 82. You are projecting your own colonialist intuitions (ruled from Ushuaia my ass, your Secretary of East Prussia is housed in Buenos Aires). The Islands are inevitably going to devolve to independence. And you won't be able to stop them either run the GA, SC or in the bogus C24 Great Blue Father which won't even bother to visit the islands.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 01:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0weeeell thats the problem with unilateralism. Dou you think the uk will say one day they will grant independence to the islands and the problem will be solved while you cant convince the international community that the islands are self governed, self determined and with no colonial situation?.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Like i said before, for Argentina, South America, Asia, Africa, Europe and the uk that is represented too in the UN, the islands are a non self-governing territory with a special and particular colonial situation that differs from other cases of colonialism in light of the sovereignty dispute. And remain listed with the remaining 16 non self-governing territories in this 21 century.
@92
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 08:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0The islands are on the list of NSGTs because the UH pit them there. The only way off the list as has been repeatedly confirmed by the UN, is by exercise of self-determination. If Argentina has any brains, it would be clamouring for the removal of the Falklands from the list, as the Chinese did for Hong Kong back in the 70s. But then of course you would lose the only argument you have that resonates, false as it may be. And so you are condemned forever to fail in your aim, although some might argue that is exactly what your masters want.
#92
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 09:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0Do you really think that the rest of the world gives a toss about Argentina's claim to the Falklands ?
You government is using it purely as a distraction to whip up nationalistic support as they have nothing else to offer.
I think if you look at Iraq closely, you will find it is/was Iraqis killing other Iraqis in sectarian violence....the same with Afghanistan.
If you looked at the reason for the no -fly zone, it was to stop Sadam Hussein from trying to wipe out the marsh Arabs in the south and the Kurds in the north.
Your posts at #78, #81 and#85 are so full of half-baked platitudes that a reply would need the length of a book to refute them.
Anything before 82 doesnt count”
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 09:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0You tried you lost.
End of arguement welcome to have another crack I'm sure the mpa could use the entrtainment dont worry I'm sure the prince and his scary yellow chopper can rescue your kayaks
@ Isolde
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 10:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Irony, just irony Isolde but You are...
My forbidden lover I don't want no other
My forbidden lover I don't want no other
I fell in love
And I didn't want to do it cause I knew
That your love wasn't true
You try to hide that sinister appearance
And the lies, uff those alibies
You give your love to anyone who asks
Yes you do
And I know that it's true ue ue
But still I care
And I want to see you there
When I need, yes indeed you are...
My forbidden lover I don't want no other
My forbidden lover I don't want no other
I can't resist
That very strong urge to have you dear
Oh please come here
Just let me love you
Anytime and any place we dare
We'll just let them stare
You want to love everybody
And everything you can
You're the typical girl rl rl
Yet still and all I'm at your beck and call
When you need, yes indeed you are...
My forbidden lover I don't want Oops! (no sound here)
My forbidden lover I don't want no other
My love is forbidden
We keep our love hidden
My love is forbidden
We keep our love hidden
Chiqui chi... chiqui chi...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jct4fQhm9CE
96'@
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 10:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0A sense of humour..
#92
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 10:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0Do you really think that the rest of the world gives a toss about Argentina's claim to the Falklands ?
You government is using it purely as a distraction to whip up nationalistic support as they have nothing else to offer.
I think if you look at Iraq closely, you will find it is/was Iraqis killing other Iraqis in sectarian violence....the same with Afghanistan.
If you looked at the reason for the no -fly zone, it was to stop Sadam Hussein from trying to wipe out the marsh Arabs in the south and the Kurds in the north.
Your posts at #78, #81 and#85 are so full of half-baked platitudes that a reply would need the length of a book to refute them.
So Pope meets Argentine combatants and they behave all lovey dovey.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 11:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Then Pope meets Filmus and they behave all lovey dovey.
Then this week Filmus and CFK are shouting pirates, colonialists, printing notes with someone else's country on it, celebrating and glorying in the deaths of hundereds of Argentine and British soldiers and a number of defenceless civilians during a UN declared illegal invasion etc.
So my question is this? Will this Argentine Pope carry on giving succor to this clearly facist colonialist Argentine government, or is he man enough to break free of CFKs clutches and make it clear to the world that he is not there just to be her stooge.
The Falklanders should print a collectable 5 pound note, with Argentina on it, covered in the union jack,
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0With the words, thinking of you..lol
74 Liberato
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 11:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0''You have a problem with becoming argentinian, but why you enjoy so much living in South America without being a south american?''
I have no idea what this comment means. Do you have to be Argentinian to be a South American? No, clearly not.
''Islanders do not alow me to reside there, do not alow me to buy land or invest there.'' Absolutely not true. There are Argentines here. All you have to do is apply for a job, be appointed and move here. The immigration system works the same for you as it does for anyone else.
''The islands are considered by the UN as a non self-governing territory. Which means that whatever government implanted in the islands is not legitimate and respond only to the metropolis that administer the colony. Thats why my government would not sit with islanders unless islanders are sitting in the british sit.''
No, it doesn't mean that. That word 'implanted' is just another of those lies you people like to bandy about but doesn't actually mean anything. How is it 'implanted'? By what mechanism? No, we vote for our government and they govern. That's it. The UK government still has the right to step in if there is a case of poor governance- corruption, financial mismanagement, abuse of human rights and so on. It never has.
It's worth noting that the government of Argentina would be a clear example of 'poor governance' by our standards- just another reason why it is not in our interests to become part of Argentina.
All it needs is a native Falklander with a British passport to engage in discussions with Filmus etc.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0UK would agree.
This is 'bilateral'.
Nobody expects a 'negotiated outcome'.
They could do like North and South Korea ... talk for decades and keep everybody happy ... and it gets CFK off her self-imposed hook.
@99 “or is he man enough to break free of CFKs clutches and make it clear to the world that he is not there just to be her stooge.”
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 01:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why do think he moved to Rome! Who can blame him.
Trouble is in all likelihood he laid down the law with her that there was no way in hell that he'd play her game. He can call for peace. He call for nice nice. He can pray for the souls of the dead lost on all sides in a war that his country started, his people cheered for in the streets like Hitler Youth at Nuremberg, and STILL think was a good idea “in principle” and their moral right to invade their poland and hold guns to people's heads. And days like yestruday (and I suspect the rest of the week continue to drive home how bankrupt they are). But Father Frank can't take a politically-centered viewpoint. He'd loose all credibility AND be the object of affection for any fascist, dictator and president for life who has a neck that is just out of reach of their jackboots. But of course we are talking about the Queen Malvanazi CFK herself. Not the best catholic though. Instead of seeing the virgin mary in bread mold she sees a map of her very own Sudetenland, with flag on it and coins with her face on it celebrating her trumph so every tick, twitch and sneeze coming from her personal “Argentine Pope” will be seen by her as affirming that “Gott mit uns!” And enough of her fascist cult will swallow it while the pathetic apologists like “Liberato”, Axel and and the rest will continue to carry water for her will drink the chunky milk and pretend that they are De-Junta-fied.
@100
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 02:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the Yanks had not asked us to spare Argentinas humiliation by wrecking their infrastructure in 1982, then maybe we would have had a 5 Pound note as yopu suggest.
@104 Hitting the mainland would have made them feel even more the victims of the british rather than the fascist aggressors that they were.
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But at minimum I think the biggest mistake (either to placate the American anti-communists or to leave hope that they could come to a peace settlement that favored the human rights of the Islanders) was not to put war criminals like Menéndez, Piaggi, Dowling and Astiz. We hear about how they were disciplined not only for letting down their country by loosing (have the Malvanazis ANY shame?) and for being caught not being nice to their own people in a country awash with Little Echmanns still on the lam, but NOT for their dishonorable and criminal treatment of civilians and other war crimes. This was a terrible mistake. It is one thing to be a fascist monster in your own country, but when you share it with others for the sole reason to keep being a murderous fascist at home, the people back home forfeit “first dibs” ESPECIALLY when they cheered on the invasion and still... ahem... “commemorate it” with such transparent pride.
@57 Liberato
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“What changed in the islands since then? not much. Perhaps you can name what changes exist between the islands now and the islands back then that makes the islands a non colony from your point of view?.”
From my point of view which you did not ask for (t however, his blog is a multi-logue not a dialogue):
1/- In the 20th century the Governor from the UK had a vote on laws passed in the Falkland Islands.
In the 21st century the governor has no say or vote on the laws passed in the Falkland Islands.
2/- The Falkland Islands Government issue fishing and oil exploration licences.
Prior to 1982, when they were a colony the Falkland Islands had little say over their economy.
If they were still a colony it would be the UK government issuing fishing and oil exploration licenses not FIG.
3/-In 1988/1989 the FIDF was offered L85 rifles by the UK. FIG opted instead to buy the Steyr AUG rifle from Austria (Austria is not part of the UK by the way).
If the Falklands were a colony, the L85 rifles would have been imposed on the FIDF-with no choice.
4/- If I as an Englishman wish to work, live or buy property in the Falkland Islands I cannot (like an Argentine, Chilean, Scotsman or Chinaman ) do any, without permission from FIG.
If the islands were still a colony of the UK, I would not need permission for any of these from FIG-I would get it from the UK government (i.e. in the Northern Hemisphere).
@62
“France recognized spanish sovereignty of Malvinas back then, and they gave to Spain their colony”
Incorrect-Bougainville did not want the Spanish to take his settlement, however the Spanish and French royal families were interlinked and forced Bouganville to sell.-Bouganville did not give the settlement away, Spain paid for it.
France settled the islands first but only a year before Britain did.
Spain did not get Port Louis till 1767-Britain had been there two years-so France was there first, Spain was there third.
Watch Argentina Defy a U.S. Judge
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 06:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.atfa.org/
They do not even understand the basic uttering they talk abt,
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 07:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What goes for the Falklands and brits, would in evitable include Argies,
So if they should all go home,
Argentines should go home,
If we should give up what the Argies say do not belong to us,
Then argentine should give back all the land it has stolen,
If they have a right to blockade the islands,
We have a right to blockade them,
And the list goes on and on,
The difference being,
We aint thieves..
108 Briton
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 08:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think everyone has missed the point somewhat, allow me to explain.
The Falklands Islands are British right???
and they are connected to argentina and share the same continental shelf...yes?
So that would mean that argentina is part of British sovereign territory just like the Falkland Islands are?
I mean, we are not greedy, we will give back the bits of argentina that were stolen ( yes, that's right, Stolen ) from her neighbours and we will give back the lands that belonged to the indigenous population.
The rest of it? after we've ejected the “implanted” population and turned B.A into the largest boating lake in South America, it might be quite a nice place to go for a holiday.
How can so much bilge come from the mouth of ONE deluded idiot ?
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When is Filmus going to wake up ?
Hello, interesting comment of Pete Bog number 106. Im going to answear that:
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 11:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 01-In the 21 century, a former judge born in britain that travel for 2 weeks to Turks and Caicos, accused the government of corruption. Without any investigation that prove the accusations, the mp was removed, the constitution was removed and the government went directly controled by the governor named by britain.
So the islanders alegations that the british are only responsible for defense and foreign relations are pure crap and a pantomime even without mention that the constitution was made in London.
2-quote:“The Falkland Islands Government issue fishing and oil exploration licences.”
Well our provinces issue the police, the parking tickets, the oil licences and mining licences, etc. Does it means they are independent from Argentina? or less argentines?.
As you sugest the islands were a colony prior to 1982 ( 32 years ago!!!!) i cant forget to mention nothing happened after the war. The constitution order came in 1985 and gives power to the queen to make laws for the peace, order and good government?. The governor have powers to do everything as he considers, makes laws, stay the time the queen see fit, etc.
Now you will be thinking, ok thats a 1985 charter of a constitution. Well the 2008 constitution ( same year that Turks and Caicos went down to british iron governor) grant same powers to make laws for peace, order and ..... Good government!!!!! to the queen. About the governor power, his powers are the same, he can do anything!!!!!!. Im not going to copy and paste textually the constitution but its pretty much the same as the charter of 1985.
3- Wow the islanders picked the weapons they wanted!!!! Do they pick the granades too?.
4- almost half the population was born in britain or other bots so dont bs me. You only need to pick the phone and ask and islanders to get you the papers.
France did not sell. They recognised spanish sovereignty and Spain paid the expenses,
@111
Apr 03rd, 2014 - 11:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What has Argentina got to offer the FALKLAND ISLANDERS? Remember it is in their interests to know. Now speak up and tell us all exactly what can Argentina offer.
Negotiations did not started yet. As President Kirchner had said repeatedly, we are not asking to be given the reason, we are asking to negotiate in order to find a solution to the sovereignty dispute. There are no proposals, no ideas to offer islanders, becouse this is not a product to sell. This is a sovereignty dispute.
Apr 04th, 2014 - 12:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0If you have nothing to offer then we have nothing to negociate as sovereignty is not being discussed without the will of the FALKLANDERS. It is called SELF DETERMINATION, which is something you do not seem to understand. You try all sorts of tactics but unless you talk to the FALKLANDERS you are pissing in the wind.
Apr 04th, 2014 - 12:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0IT is called ARROGANCE!!!!!. This is not something we are selling. We are talking about a sovereignty dispute. A dispute recognized by the UN. And a non self-governing territory with a colonial situation,
Apr 04th, 2014 - 12:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0So no matter what you say, what the uk say, what islanders say. You have something to say, go and lie as always to the UN or do as always and act unilaterally.
But until negotiations go ahead, the islands will remain listed with the other 9 british colonies in the colony list.
@115. Then take the damn sovereignty dispute to the ICJ! The rest of us in the big big world are all looking at you and wondering why you don't? If the law and the rest of us are universally on your side, it should be a easy open and shut case. Brits out. Argentines in. Islanders forbidden by law to do the math on the inflation stats and probably much much more.
Apr 04th, 2014 - 01:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0There is of course one big problem. You have NO case. The law and precedents are against you. And still you whine about “arrogance.”
Stop hypocritically going on about “arrogance” and be humble for a minute and ask yourself why you don't put the judgment on the FI up to the rest of the world in the ICJ. But you know why don't you. You have no case. The precedents are against you. You have no chance of winning over the Falklanders thanks to 82. And you can't invade them like you did then and now “commemorate” with no sober reflection with what it meant to the Islanders that you can't decide to ignore, dehumanize, delegitimize or... well that seems to be it since your movement doesn't have the guts to talk to them, which makes the rest of us not take anything you say about the Falklands seriously.
Grow up. Move on. And maybe think about paying your creditors so the rest of us can start taking Argentina seriously again.
More arrogance!!!!!, Yeah you are the big world, the big world are the best, you can invade without proof, killing millons, dividing between themselves the natural resources, without being accused of nothing, without being condemned, without being stopped. The big world with their veto power are invincible!!!!. They decide when a dictator is good for business, or bad for their people and should be removed, by military means or by destabilizing their economy. You said it yourself, we are a debtor nation, that should only worry about its economy and paying its creditor, not pushing for a claim, Even if valid, becouse for your kind of scumbag, we have more things to worry about.
Apr 04th, 2014 - 02:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0Time will tell. until then, we will claim what is rightfully ours. In the ICJ, in the General Assembly, in the Decolonization committe, in youtube, whatever we decide. The same is valid for you, you can take us to the ICJ if you like, making some changes like the non recognition of cases as old as the Malvinas dispute. But what you can not do yet is to legitimate the colony at the eyes of the world.
The UN recognize the sovereignty dispute and the colonial situation in the islands. They use both names (Malvinas and Falklands) to identify the islands in all public documents, not just the british name. They recognize that the special and particular colonial situation in the islands differs from other cases of colonialism in light of the sovereignty dispute. They recognize other 9 british bots as in a colonial situation.
So if you definitely has a case, prove it, or go unilaterally as the US and the UK always abide and ignore the UN, South America, Argentina and me and move on which islanders repeteadly say they are doing great!!!.
@117 More projection on your part. Who acts unilaterally? Who tore up the oil agreements? Who invaded in volition of the UNSC and UNGA? But Let's go down your list. Time will have the Islands as an independent member of the Commonwealth, further away from your grasp. The Decolonization committee and UNSC cannot adjudicate sovereignty disputes, only refer plaintiffs them to the ICJ, which your government refuses to go to (as an outsider, I cannot, it's on you since the UK and FI are fine with the status quo -- hold your government accountable and tell it to put up or shut up and stop stringing you along). The GA voted in 2008 that self-determination does NOT get trumped when someone outside of the colony-colonizer relationship calls “dibs” when you and Spain tried to pass a rider on it. You walk away over and over by refusing to talk to the Islanders, prerequisite conduit for talks with the UK in accordance with 2065, and you have some of the lamest excuses imaginable. I mean come on! Have you ever THOUGHT to send a delegation to the islands to get to know the people who you want to rule (or do you just want to ethnically cleanse them like your forefathers did to the natives). And for the most gobsmacking lame venue you claim, Youtube is great for viewing home movies of kittens and might help you with your daughter in making that Frozen disney princess hair style but it's not very good for diplomacy and making international case law. And with that, how can ANYONE take you seriously.
Apr 04th, 2014 - 03:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Grow up and stop being such a brat wanting your candy and validation. You can start by visiting the islands which you certainly CAN do as a tourist, I don't even think you need a visa, just a passport (the islanders here can fill you in). You will learn far more than you did in school where they obviosuly lied to you.
Or you can just stay at home and sulk like you have since 1982 and long before that. And somehow I think that;s what you'd prefer do to.
Great answer GFace,
Apr 04th, 2014 - 08:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0Will it sink in? Doubt it.
But you can see his/her attitude by his 10th line:-
“Time will tell. until then we will CLAIM WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY OURS”
It(the Falklands)are NOT “rightfully yours”. Liberato.
Have NEVER been yours & NEVER will be yours.
111 Liberato
Apr 04th, 2014 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Am I understanding you correctly; do you think the queen actually rules the UK? And by extension, us? Really? You think the UK is some kind of totalitarian state where the the queen rules directly?
If you do think that, then there is no point even talking to you. You are so stupid I'm surprised you are still breathing.
And we don't have to 'prove' anything. We have sovereignty of our country, and a peaceful solution that suits us just fine. If you want something to change, then the burden of proof rests with you.
Get this into your midget brain; this isn't about the UK, or Iraq, or even colonialism. It's about our right not to be bullied by you. Nothing the UK has done in the past gives you the right to dominate and subjugate us. We have basic human rights under the UN charter, and no UN resolution can be interpreted in a way that takes those rights away.
109 toooldtodieyoung
Apr 04th, 2014 - 06:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Good idea.
,,,,,
116 GFace
115. Then take the damn sovereignty dispute to the ICJ
,,,,,,,
They want something for nothing,
They won’t fight for it in court,
Thieves is all they are,
And of course the distraction from their own problems..
///
115 Liberato
You are wrong, and you know it, argies asre putting their dislike of the british, abover the rule of law,
You can shout and scream as much as you want,
The fact is,
Take it to the ICJ, or go home and forget it,
.
'Get this into your .. brain (Liberato #117) ;
Apr 04th, 2014 - 07:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0this isn't about the UK, or Iraq, or even colonialism.
It's about our right not to be bullied by you.
Nothing the UK has done in the past gives you the right to dominate and subjugate us.' (Monty69, #120)
Of all the totally 'British' well-argued postings,
this statement hits the spot, damning the Argentine position with true elan.
Briton, you are joking right?. A british accusing us of thieves?????Why dont you tell your government to return the oil licences of Iraq to the real owners ok?. The same goes with Lybia.
Apr 04th, 2014 - 10:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Malvinas claim exist, since they were invaded by the british in 1833. It is not a claim made as a distraction from economic problems.
“Malvinas bilateral sovereignty negotiations are 'inevitable' because of growing world consensus”
Apr 04th, 2014 - 11:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0what a load of b*llocks!
Take it to the ICJ. Liberato, I beg you to take it to the ICJ.
You request it is decided on YouTube??!?!!!?
Truly. you are an idiot.
hahahaha
BHaaaahahahaha!
123 Liberato
Apr 05th, 2014 - 02:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0The British are perfectly well able to accuse you of being thieves, regardless of whether they are thieves or not.
Your argument is an example of a logical fallacy, the 'appeal to hypocrisy'. It's a fallacy because you remain thieves whether or not Britain or anyone else is a thief also. You are free to point it out if you wish, but it in no way diminishes your own thievery.
hahaha Monty your response is laughable. So regardless if the british are thieves or not, you think somehow is worse being Argentina a thieve too?. As if its not bad enough if the british steal or not, you think in thievery the british have some kind of higher moral ground?.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 02:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Is Liberato really Stevie?
Apr 05th, 2014 - 03:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Does it matter?
Probably not.
Both complete f*ckin idiots. ...
You may as well admit what we all know, Liberato.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 09:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina is a thief.
You stole land from Paraguay
You stole Patagonia from the natives, after you had killed most of them.
You would like to steal our lslands.
And then, if you could, l would guess that Chile or Uruguay could be next.
What a pity for your colonial imperial ambitions that we are your stumbling block! lol!
We are not a stone in your shoe, rather a big boulder in your illegal roadway.
Ha!
126 Liberato
Apr 05th, 2014 - 01:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My response is entirely consistent with all my other responses.
I don't care who Argentina stole its territory from.
I'm quite happy for you to say the you 'inherited' your territory from Spain, and the the accompanying genocide was nothing to do with you.
I don't care about any aspect of Britain's colonial past. Nothing that Britain did in the past is my responsibility or my fault.
I am not on any 'moral high ground', and neither are you.
That leaves me, here, and you there, both products of a similarly murky colonial past.
And you want to do what, again? Just remind us of your intentions again...
You seem to be saying that the Spanish/ Argentine brand of colonialism somehow trumps the British one. Are you?
Monty69, we are both product of colonialism. Different colonialism, but colonialism it is. The difference is that we (and this you can verificate) ended being a colony two hundred years ago, while you never had a different definition than a colony. Which means you are still being a colony, and remain one of the 10 british colonies around the globe still in the process of decolonization.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#
Apr 05th, 2014 - 05:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0130
Why are you so uptight about “colonies” ?
We keep getting told that we must decolonise our relics of Empire even if the Inhabitants don't wish it.
As far as I know, most are too small to survive on their own.
What's your brilliant solution ?
In the case of the Falklands, you fought a war for it and lost.
It's irrevocably ours until the Islanders decide otherwise
Decolonisation of British colonies right now!
Apr 05th, 2014 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The world is demanding that or Britain will suffer isolation, economy sanctions and even military action if that is require...
Your future of your little nations it is right in your hands.
@132 Crappyburger....stupid and pathetic.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0130 Liberato
Apr 05th, 2014 - 06:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0why not give Argentinians a vote tomorrow and see who they want to be, British or argentine,
if they choose British-then so be it,
but if they choose to be argentine, can we then just dismiss this illegal rubbish vote and force them to become British,
what ever argument you wish to put up
we know-you know, that if the shoe was on the other foot, you would righty disagree,
thus the free democratic vote of the islanders will stand,
they want to be British, and nothing, but nothing you or Danny or your government can do , will alter this fact,
unless of course you again embark to war,
is that what you want, more innocent deaths to acquire a peoples who want nothing to do with you,
very democratic...
still,
no doubt Danny will rush home to Argentina to join up to fight the nasty brits, is that right Danny..
@132 DanyBerger,
Apr 05th, 2014 - 07:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not you again?
The “world” is demanding……
Sure its not the “whole world”is demanding……?
And even military action yet?
But, of course, not from Argentina, eh Dany?
Who are you going to try to get to do your fighting for you, Dany?
Go back to sleep & chase the Dragon in your dreams, Dany.
What do you think, Dany?
@ 132 DanyBirdbrain wrote:
Apr 05th, 2014 - 07:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Decolonisation of British colonies right now!
The world is demanding that or Britain will suffer isolation, economy sanctions and even military action if that is require...
Your future of your little nations it is right in your hands.”
That is the most idiotic piece of stupid nonsense I have read in my entire life. Evety line contains a major error. You completely made my day.
“even military action if that is require...” however, reminds me that Argentina and the UK are still at war, there were no peace treaty. Is it time to nuke Buenos Aires to stop the ramblings?
#132
Apr 05th, 2014 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Dany, Dany, you've lost the thread somewhere. Even for YOU this is a total piece of delusional nonsense.....and that's saying something !
You actually BELIEVE the crap you have just posted ?
The world is demanding that or Britain will suffer isolation, economy sanctions and even military action if that is require...
OK then, name all the countries
1) Who will isolate us
2) Who will operate economic sanctions
3) Who will take military action against the UK
I will need definitive proof of statements made by each country to verify your “threat”.
As you have made this statement ,and as you never lie, it should be a simple matter for you.
Dany = Stevie = totaly disconnected from reality....not even worthwhile taking their posts into account.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 09:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0God you all have so much more patience than I do.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But truly the most interesting part of all that was in post 130:
”The difference is that we (and this you can verificate) ended being a colony two hundred years ago, while you never had a different definition than a colony. ”
I doubt Liberato can see the hypocrisy in what he wrote there.
Is this growing world consensus going to be as successful as the one against Russia annexing the Crimea?
Apr 05th, 2014 - 10:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“”“”“”“”The difference is that we (and this you can verificate) ended being a colony two hundred years ago,“”“”“”
Argentina stopped being a colony of Spain, indeed; sadly Argentina continues to be the Colonizer of Patagonia.
So it rather depends how you ask...
nice try though.
Dany you so funny.
Apr 05th, 2014 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you.
Lol!
@Jack Bauer & Briton
Apr 06th, 2014 - 08:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Is my fault that you behave so uncivilised and steal other people belongings?
I guess not, If you for once would enjoy the civilised western would and stop with this nasty behaviour you will see that the world will open their arms to you.
But not you prefer to sick with the old style of living. Have you ever thought in working like the rest of the world?
@Briton
“ want to be British, and nothing, but nothing you or Danny or your government can do , will alter this fact,”
None is against their wish to be British but the land is Argentine and that is the thing that is in dispute and not the wish of the islanders.
“unless of course you again embark to war,”
Wars are not so bad in fact your little nation is always jumping to any war available even if that war have nothing to do with you.
Are you playing the hypocrite again?
I don’t know why are you so concern about another war, after all you say that your Army can project more military power around the world than Russia.
Will be a picnic, a piece of cake for you and the argie’s army will run in 2 hours...
Unfortunately for you Danyboy, the land is NOT Argentine.
Apr 06th, 2014 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0You haven't managed to steal it yet. lol!
But you have tried,twice.
Do you think that you are tough enough to try a third time?
What do you think about that, Danyboy?
Now say after me, l'll say it slowly for you.
The people are British,
The land is British,
There, Dany that should be simple enough for you to understand.
Was it too fast? would you like to hear it again? lts no trouble to me.
Well we'll see how fast you can run, if you come back. lol!
#137
Apr 06th, 2014 - 10:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0Come on Dany, step up to the plate and answer my points at #137
142 DanyBerger
Apr 06th, 2014 - 10:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Wars are not so bad in fact your little nation is always jumping to any war available even if that war have nothing to do with you.”
I think that you will find that politicians “jump” into any war available. Where was the biggest demonstration against the Iraq war????
Where was it Dany? was it in B.A??? was it Dany?? No it wasn't, it was in London. Operation Iraqi freedom was a politicians war, not a nation's war
Which was the First country to vote AGAINST bombing Syria??? Was it argentina?? was it Dany? It wasn't was it?
It was the UK!!
Your “Nation” is only interested in killing it's own Citizens or throwing nuns out of planes or waging war against 3,000 un-armed civilians but when it requires REAL courage, your nation is found sadly wanting.
Clown.
@Clyde15
Apr 06th, 2014 - 01:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I will need definitive proof of statements made by each country to verify your “threat”.
As you have made this statement ,and as you never lie, it should be a simple matter for you.”
“Come on Dany, step up to the plate and answer my points at #137”
Sorry but...
Do we have any labour contract signed where stipulates that I have to work for you collecting information?
Really I don’t remember to have signed any contract like that and you?
@toooldtodieyoung
Sorry no answer yet...
I’m trying to understand what you have been trying to say.
toooldtodieyoung: your comment number145 is the most pathetic i've ever seen. Polititians war?????
Apr 06th, 2014 - 03:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You british accuse us argentinean of what a military dictatorship did to our population, wihout us having elected them while you, that you have voted your polititians take you to war!!!!! for oil resources with the mayority of concent from the british citizens.
Where are iraq's weapons of mass destruction?????
Pathetic, all of you brits.
Still won't be getting the Falklands tho.....
Apr 06th, 2014 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0time to stop sulking. ...
#146
Apr 06th, 2014 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you Dany for that reply. It just confirmed what I thought .
You have no information or proof of any sort. Just reverting to bluster when challenged.
It's just one of your many made up remarks with absolutely not a vestige of truth.
#147
What do you call poison gas and nerve gas filled shells and bombs ?
Totally indiscriminate and only of use against a civilian population.
He had used them against the Kurds in the North and the Marsh arabs near Bahsra.
You lot are even BELOW pathetic.
Why did YOUR people not raise a rebellion against the Junta, The armed forces were your own brothers and mother's sons. Surely they would not have fired on their own people ?
I can only assume that a good proportion of your countrymen agreed with the take over !
Clyde15, i think you did not understood the question. Let me ask you again, did the uk and the US found weapons of mass destruction on Iraq?. I think Blair explained it very preciselly when he admitted there was not enough intelligence evidence to start a war, and that there was no weapons of mass destruction found.
Apr 06th, 2014 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But “may be” britain already knew this having controlling Iraq's air space daily with harriers since the first gulf war.
“Why did YOUR people not raise a rebellion against the Junta”
I think this question shows your little interest on our history. You did not even cared of googling it or going to youtube. Should i teach you about history when i guess you have not a minimun interest as to formulate that stupid question? i should i leave this question to be answear by itself.
I think ill better let you find out that there was 30.000 dissapeared in that junta.
Danny danny,
Apr 06th, 2014 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0if the land is Argentine,
then for the love of [the man upstairs]
take it to the ICJ,
but you wont, because it aint yours, full stop.
#150
Apr 06th, 2014 - 07:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The answer is no , they did not other than poison gas.
The intelligence was faulty and relied on Iraqi defectors who were happy to take the money and make up plausible stories.
However, with Sadam's non cooperation in allowing inspectors in, it could not be proven certainly, but S.Hussein was giving every indication that he was working on acquiring them.
I think you give Britain too much credit in controlling Iraq's air space.
I believe the USA was involved to a much greater extent than us.
Again that would not fit in with your version of events that it was only Britain who had anything to do with the war
As to your second point it seems simple to me. If there was no support for the Junta, what was there to stop a mass uprising of the population ?
Certainly there would have been deaths but you could have succeeded.
How did the impossible suddenly become possible after you were defeated in the Falklands War ? The Junta were removed then. Why not before ?
Would the military shoot against their own brothers and sisters ?
Was not the bulk of your army made up from conscripts... at least that is what you are continually telling us.
1 millon iraqians dead becouse of an intelligence faulty?
Apr 06th, 2014 - 08:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 01 millon iraqians dead becouse the british trusted defectors that lied?.
1 millon iraqians dead becouse Saddam was no cooperating in allowing inspectors in, while britain and the US use white phosphorous and depleted uranium in ammunitions in all wars they are involved? white phosphorous in the Malvinas war or depleted uranium on iraq's invasion comes to mind.
Britain didnt need a satellite to oferfly and take pictures of iraq's facilities. They could just take a harrier jet at 10 fit from the objective to see with its own eyes what was going on.
You cant invade a foreign nation based on doubts, dubious information, or political pression from oil firms.
What about SAS operations in Lybia?. All knows there were SAS operating, training the terrorist and helping them to overtake Ghadafi regime?. OR the british bombing of civilians?.
You give Britain too less credit in its foreign “interventions”.
You obviously have no idea how can exist a dictatorship in any nation. You think the people like to be ruled from a guy they didnt choosed. But at the same time, You think that you are alowed to invade those nation if they dont suit british interests.
Saddam was armed to the bone by western nations in the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam was alowed to use chemical weapons in that war becouse they were fighting the iranian revolution that did not suits northamerican and british interests. Until that guy, nationalized oil, he was an ally of the west in the middle east. But later he became a dictator. An evil man.
Bin LAden was trained by the CIA to destroy te russian no matter how they destroyed the future of Afghanistan, they helped the Talibans and Bin LAden with anti air missiles. Then he became the enemy and bush called on all nations on earth to be with him or against him at the best hitler style.
You british supported our military junta, politically (against communism), military ( the camberras and combs used in malvinas),
Dany, yr #142 ...so the Brits stole your belongings ? and If the Brits stop this nasty behaviour the world will open its arms to them ?
Apr 06th, 2014 - 08:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Incredibly pathetic, but entertaining. Interesting to see how a delusional mind works.
7. 1767 - French settlement handed over to Spanish control
8. 1770 - Spain expelled British colonists
9. 1771 - Britain allowed to return, but Spain reserved right to sovereignty
10. 1774 - British colony abandoned
11. 1820 - Recently-independent Argentina took possession
12. 1831 - US declared the island “free of government”
13. 1833 - Britain took possession from Argentina
14. 1842 - Britain declared colonial administration
What is this obsession with the British involvement in Iraq?
Apr 06th, 2014 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What is with this deliberate misspelled “iraquians”
Bit like Toby and his false EUians and weird obsession with the British involvement in Iraq...
oh, hang on a minute!
#153
Apr 06th, 2014 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your ignorance is showing again. What you are saying is that we killed 1,000,000 Iraquis. The casualties had nothing to do with an internal struggle, still going on , between shi'ites and sunnis ?
Depleted uranium was used by the A-10 anti-tank aircraft and tanks, you don't use this ammunition against troops. At the time of its use, the long term effects of the fragments and dust were not realised.
s.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4441822.stm....use of white phosphorus
Didn't your whiter than white military have Napalm in the Falklands and were going to use it...or does that not count in your moral compass.
I think that you believe the harrier is a wonder weapon...not surprising....but it does not have the ability to see through underground installations buried in concrete and inspect centrifuges and stocks of heavy water. It needed inspectors on the ground to physically examine the factories and underground plants suspected of producing fissionable material. If you remember, the weapons inspectors were refused entrance...at gunpoint...to go where they thought there may be infringements.
Do you actually have a clue at what was happening in Libya... obviously not. There was a popular uprising from Benghazi with a movement to overthrow a DICTATOR. Ghadafi then turned his army and air force loose and started to bomb his own civilian population. Intervention was made by Britain and France..REPEAT FRANCE !!!! to weaken his capabilities to do this. The SAS did not instigate any uprising but chose military targets to be attacked.
OR the british bombing of civilians?.
You know that civilians were targeted. Were you there to see this or is it just another of your wishful thinking moments.
I had to check to see how we came so far off topic
.Malvinas bilateral sovereignty negotiations are 'inevitable' because of growing world consensus
Guess what , it was you at post' #78. Do you wish to come back to the subject ?
clyde clyde, the inspectors incident i assume you are talking about, happened like ten years before the invasion of 2003. Before the war, a UN inspector team was sended to Iraq and they (according to Hans Blix who was the head inspector) textually said : “We had worried that our inspectors might be taken hostage, but as it turned out the Iraqis had been very helpful during our time there.”
Apr 07th, 2014 - 01:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0And guess what? they did not found weapons of mass destruction!!!!!!!. Only conventional weapons. And beside Blix report to the UN, the US and the UK acted unilaterally, without UN concent and without taking account of the report of Blix.
About the Malvinas war, who used chemical weapons? Was it Argentina? or was it Britain?. There was no doubt the british used white phosphorus granades in argentine fox holes.
About Libya: a popular uprising from Benghazi with a movement to overthrow a DICTATOR?????. That dictator had a private army led by the son of ghadafi, fully trained and completely armed by britain before this “Libyan spring”. Its economy fully influenced by britain at the point they had several meetings with blair, as PM and as libyan adviser with big contracts won by shell and BP at the expenses of liberating libyan terrorist in scotish prisons.
This rebels that you claim are the only responsible for the war, had a little help from the british SAS, the same guys that trained libyan forces in the past.
All this is not product of my imaginagion. If you dont believe me there are plenty of british sources i can quote from, that demostrate the british involvement in these “Springs”. Like in Syria.
Well lets concentrate on the Malvinas then. They are considered, as always have been, a non self-governing territory in the process of decolonization. The UN keeps them on the list, not becouse they consider britain is subjugating a people in the islands, but becouse they consider the territory is managed from London by the same british nationals that reside in the islands.
@154 :To my fellow posters in this forum, i.e, the rational ones (and you all know who you are ), would like to apologise for screwing up the end of the a/m msg. I had decided to do a bit of research to rub the Trolls faces in some historical facts, but half-way through decided it would be a waste of time. I cut it short and forgot to delete the last part. Sorry.
Apr 07th, 2014 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ Clyde15
Apr 07th, 2014 - 04:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Dear Clayde15, don’t try to play the smart boy with me please.
I don’t like to reply seriously captious questions. and you?
Keep trying.. would you?
@ Briton
Who is “the man upstairs” , to begging with?
@ Jack Bauer
And your point is?
After all that, the Falklands are still British.
Apr 07th, 2014 - 08:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Doesn't matter about Iraq or anything. The Falkland Islands are NOT and NEVER will be part of Argentina.
Argentina can talk till the cows come home. They might even talk with the UK. Won't change anything. Only talking to the Islanders might change the status quo.
Might! Doubtful.
The Iraqi War
Apr 07th, 2014 - 08:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Tony Blair said today that he had no idea when the Chilcott Enquiry would present its findings about, inter alia, his culpability in the creation of the war. He didn't know if it would result in him being brought back 'to answer questions' - a journalistic euphamism for being tried for War Crimes.
It is my opinion that the enquiry will be spun out until Blair and Chilcott - and most of the main players, like Bush, are dead.
Liberato is not all wrong, neither is Clyde, etc.
The 'war motives' might have been vaguely 'humanitarian' and anti-sectarian in the first instance, but the lure of oil and big business overtook everything - leaving in its wake the hundreds of thousands of (continuing) sectarian deaths of the innocent and the not so innocent.
The USA has a remarkably short 'war-memory' - having been engaged is so very many wars over my lifetime. The true stories of culpability will have been well shredded and buried these many years.
Blair is 'home and dry'
... but he will always be the pariah;
and NEVER a 'welcome guest at the feast' in the United Kingdom.
Dante's Divine Comedy placed him in the 8th level of Hell - it is the right place for him.
#159
Apr 07th, 2014 - 10:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0I don't have to play the “smart boy” with you.
You post supercilious remarks purporting to be the truth..
When asked for proof, your reply is “I don't have to prove it”
As to captious questions, that is stock in trade for you.
“The world is demanding that or Britain will suffer isolation, economy sanctions and even military action if that is require..”.
All I asked was who is going to carry out these actions.
China, Russia, USA, the Commonwealth the EU.?
If you are so sure of your facts, you must know the answer, so why don't you make it public ?
#157
“at the expenses of liberating libyan terrorist in scotish prisons”
You obviously know nothing about Scottish politics.
The Scottish parliament is run by the Scottish National Party who dislike the Labour party and the Westminster government even more.
Freeing Magrahi was the equivalent of putting up two fingers to Westminster.
Megrahi was freed on compassionate grounds by the Scottish Government on 20 August 2009 following doctors reporting on 10 August 2009 that he had terminal prostate cancer and was expected to have around three months to live.
Under Scottish..(not English).. law, as a humanitarian act, terminally ill patients may be released to die at home.
The UK government had NO jurisdiction in this matter.
Of course, the conspiracy theorists cannot accept this as it must be a UK plot to gain something from it.
Whether it was right or wrong to release him is a matter of conjecture but I do not think that Westminster had any leverage on the Scottish parliament.
What did Scotland gain from it, threats of economic sanctions from groups in the USA. Hardly an advantage !!!
Dany@159 (and # 142)....my point is that you sound like a cry-baby....get over it.
Apr 07th, 2014 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@157 Liberato
Apr 07th, 2014 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”the territory is managed from London by the same british nationals that reside in the islands.'
And so the dastardly Brits have mastered the trick of being in two places at once
The only world consensus I see is that our Government is held by a band of motherflickers...
Apr 07th, 2014 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0LE MONDE
Apr 07th, 2014 - 08:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“La Grande-Bretagne plus insulaire que jamais”
David Cameron faces EU isolation
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/91350d0e-7f91-11e3-b6a7-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2yEfSYusK
Britain once a world power when was a friend of Argentina and the west and look at her now, isolated even by Portugal
It is not really sad?
@166 Dany...
Apr 07th, 2014 - 09:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0the so-called 'isolation' refers to the fact that GB and the rest of Europe don't agree on ONE issue...a loooong way from being 'isolated', in the sense that Europe would turn its back on England.
And, I suppose that by your “Britain once a world power when was a friend of Argentina and the west and look at her now, isolated even by Portugal”....are you trying to insinuate that Britain is no longer a world power because of the bellicose relatioship with Argentina ? Don't make me laugh....ha ha ha.....
157 Liberato
Apr 07th, 2014 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0''The UN keeps them on the list, not becouse they consider britain is subjugating a people in the islands, but becouse they consider the territory is managed from London by the same british nationals that reside in the islands.''
Who appointed you the spokesman for the UN? That's what you think. The UN has never, ever, said it.
Well if that's the case anyway, you won't have any problem 'negotiating' with representatives from the Falklands, will you?
@157
Apr 07th, 2014 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“There was no doubt the british used white phosphorus granades in argentine fox holes.”
And no doubt that the Argentines used napalm and booby trapped schools.
I don't know whether your soldiers using beds (instead of a toilet) as a toilet was your crude attempt to use chemical warfare or not?
Monty, This is what the UN considers of why the Malvinas islands are still on the list of non self-governed territories:
Apr 08th, 2014 - 02:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Quote: ”According to a draft resolution that the Special Committee approved by consensus, a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom was the only way to end the special and particular colonial situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)“
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Quote: ”The General Assembly would reiterate that the only way to put an end to the special and particular colonial situation on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) was a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom,“
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Quote: ”The Special Committee on Decolonization today approved a draft resolution on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)* by which the General Assembly would reiterate that the way to end that “special and particular colonial situation” was the peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom.“
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Quote1: ”...a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom was the only way
to end the special and particular colonial situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)“
Quote2: ”By other terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would acknowledging the special and particular
colonial situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), which differed from others in light of the sovereignty
dispute.“
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Is interesting to note that all resolutions regarding the islands, GA and DC always talk about sovereignty and the phrase ”the only way”
ain't gonna happen folks. and I don't have a dog in this fight. what is sometimes reported internationally is that this issue is an overused diversion by politicians in Argentina to deflect attention from the dismal domestic economic record. in other words, the citizens of Argentina are being “played”. if Argentina truly had its act together, perhaps the Falk landers would prefer a closer association with them without resorting to violence. bottom line: I doubt anyone on those islands is planning on learning Spanish any time soon.
Apr 08th, 2014 - 02:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0@170 Liberato,
Apr 08th, 2014 - 07:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0But all that means nothing to us……
And we still will not talk to you!
Why should we?
Anything we give to you means a negative for us.
You have nothing that we want, therefore you can offer nothing to us.
Haven't you got the message yet?
We don't want or need you.
Please just go away.
170 Liberato
Apr 08th, 2014 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Draft resolutions of the Decolonisation Committee? You're having a laugh.
That bunch of paid up Argentine cronies isn't the UN
Quote2: ”By other terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would [be] acknowledging the special and particular colonial situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), which differed from others in light of the sovereignty dispute.“
The crucial phrase here is 'would be'. If it ever adopted such a resolution, which it hasn't, and won't, either.
@ 170
Apr 08th, 2014 - 08:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0May I respectfully suggest that you read and comprehend UNGA resolution 1654. That is the one that sets up what has become known as the C24. Their mandate is to 'suggest and recommend' to the GA how its resolution 1514 can be implemented. Nowhere are they (C24) mandated to set UN policy.
In my opinion in recent years they have become that corrupt they want the UNGA to lie.
The last time the UNGA accepted a 'resolution from the C24 without major modifications was 1984. The following year although the C24 passed a similar resolution to 1984 the Fourth Committee altered it to remove all references to any previous UNGA resolution and only requested that any solution that the UK and RGland came to was in accordance with the UN Charter. That continued until 1988 when the Fourth Committee and the UNGA then ceased to issue any resolution specific to the Falklands.
Now on to why I believe the C24 wants the UNGA to lie. The C24's draft resolution, applicable to the Falklands for 2013 is available as UN Document A/AC.109/2013/L.7 and the UN press release covering this is available here:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/gacol3257.doc.htm
Now please note the first paragraph/sentence ”The Special Committee on Decolonization today approved a draft resolution on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)* by which the General Assembly would reiterate that the way to end that “special and particular colonial situation” was the peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom.”
How can they expect the UNGA to 'reiterate' something they have never stated in the first place?
In other words they they want the UNGA to state that they have previously stated that the Falklands are a “special and particular colonial situation”. The UNGA have never stated that. The C24 started trying to 'get that through' in 1984!
Biguby, If you have readed the resolution 1654, you would know that the c24 mandate , is to suggest, recommend and more importantly, to examine the aplication of the declaration as described in article 4 of that resolution.
Apr 09th, 2014 - 02:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Quote: ”Nowhere are they (C24) mandated to set UN policy“.
The work of the c24 is to examine the situation of the non self-governing territory and monitor the process of decolonization; and to indicate, the General assembly, when all condition have been fulfilled to eliminate a territory from the list under its supervision.
The UN webpage have a web describing all definitions related to c24 functions that is temporarilly out in the english version. Perhaps the spanish version could help you out.
http://www.un.org/es/decolonization/questions_answers.shtml
Quote: ”The last time the UNGA accepted a 'resolution from the C24 without major modifications was 1984. The following year although the C24 passed a similar resolution to 1984 the Fourth Committee altered it to remove all references to any previous UNGA resolution and only requested that any solution that the UK and RGland came to was in accordance with the UN Charter”.
Almost all resolutions said that solutions have to be in accordance with the UN charter. Since resolution 2065 to the one you mentioned made in 1984.
Resolutions continued in the GA until madrid talks in 1990 where both sides agreed to put the dispute within an umbrella (an agreement not aproved by congress but that is respected even to this day). Those agreements are not based in sovereignty only, but in all aspects of the future of the islands.
Quote: “How can they expect the UNGA to 'reiterate' something they have never stated in the first place?”
It is a text. Not a UN resolution. Resolutions are made by the GA (General Assembly). The c24 examine the situation and make draft resolutions.
As im not a specialist, i respectfully gave you my view about this as much as i like to read. Nevertheless we ARG do not control c24.
@ 175
Apr 09th, 2014 - 09:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0I have read UNGA resolution 1514 and just about every other UN GA resolution I can find dealing with the decolonization plus ALL UNGA resolutions dealing specifically with the Falklands.
I largely agree with your comments in #175 except for a couple of small, linked, details.
1. As I stated the last UNGA resolution dealing specifically with the Falklands was 43/25 in 1988. Should you be aware of any in 1989 and 1990 please give us the reference numbers because I am unaware of them.
2. I concur that there were 'agreements' reached in 1990 but in my opinion it was the joint statement issued by the UK and Argentina in October 1989 that stopped any further UNGA resolutions specific to the Falklands:
http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/bi-24305.pdf
paragraph 2 (ii) of that reads:
“No act or activity carried out by the United Kingdom, the Argentine
Republic or third parties as a consequence and in implementation of
anything agreed to in the present meeting or in any similar subsequent
meetings shall constitute a basis for affirming, supporting, or denying
the position of the United Kingdom or the Argentine Republic regarding
the sovereignty or territorial and maritime jurisdiction over the
Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the
surrounding maritime areas.”
As you agree with, and appear to comprehend the mandate of the C24 can you offer any suggestion why it may have degenerated to the farce it has become? In the case of the Falklands they do virtually nothing but discuss sovereignty when, by their own admission, see UN document A/5800/Rev1, that is outside their mandate and even, in my opinion, outside the mandate of the UN General assembly.
Biguggy, you are right on your points 1 and 2. The last UNGA resolution dealing specifically with the Malvinas was 43/25 in 1988. From that moment no other resolutions talked about the islands in the GA by express of Argentina and the uk with the Joint statement made in 1989 (less than a year later) , that put the islands sovereignty within an umbrella formula to restort the diplomatic and economics relations.
Apr 09th, 2014 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your quote of the paragraph 2, means that what is the goal of this joint statement expressed in paragraph 1, should not be considered a basis for affirming supporting or denying the position of the uk or Argentina. Which means the uk and Argentina create a formula on sovereignty, over which both side resume political, economic and social relations without affecting both sides sovereignty claims. It was called the sovereignty umbrella.
Nevertheless, it is the job of the C24 to continue examining the decolonization of the islands, and making draft resolutions, even if no GA resolution arouse becouse of the sovereignty umbrella.
C24 did not degenerated, it continued to examine the situation of the islands, as aimed in the resolution 1514 to : ”bringing to an end everywhere colonialism in all its form, one of which cover the case of the Malvinas islands (Falklands)” (text quoted from res 2065).
What you british must understand is that:
1-Every C24 draft resolution, recognize there is a colonial situation, and that there is a sovereignty dispute. That committe, do not resolves sovereignty disputes, so they ask both sides, Argentina, and the UK, to negotiate in order to end the sovereignty dispute.
2-Every GA resolutions regarding Malvinas recognize the sovereignty dispute y the colonial situation and ask both nations to negotiate. So you can accuse too the GA of being corrupt and a body paid for by Argentina, becouse not one resolution regarding the islands favour the british side.
The c24 aim is to bringing to end end colonialism in all its forms.
Look, The Falkland Islands population have the Right to Self-Determination.
Apr 10th, 2014 - 01:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0End of Story.
They chose to be a B.o.T.
Until THEY decide otherwise, it it is no one elses' business.
Just give it up. All of you.
Everyone has the right to self determination. Even the population on Malvinas. But not in Malvinas. The british have the right to self-determination in britain, not on somebody else's territory. And Malvinas islands are not Britain and not a british territory or “Falklands” territory if you wish to call it that way.
Apr 10th, 2014 - 01:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0@179 Liberato,
Apr 10th, 2014 - 07:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ah but thats not how we see it.
To us, the Falklands ARE British territory.
And we don't care what you think.
So, to us, your whole reasoning makes no sense & ours does.
Nice of you to admit that the land is called the “Falklands”.
We're making progress at last.
But as l said, we really don't care about your views, they are irrelevant.
@177
Apr 10th, 2014 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UN officially refer to the Islands as ”Falkland Islands (Malvinas)” pages 438 and 439 of UN Document A/5800/Rev1 refer.
When someone else responds, so that I may utilize all 2000 characters for my reply, I will detail what I perceive to be the other errors in your posts.
Isolde, i have no problem with the name Falklands, becouse i recognise there is other side of this dispute that use a different name than the one i use. I personally dont use that name, but i accept that for some are the Falklands and for some are the Malvinas.
Apr 10th, 2014 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For the UN, they are the Malvinas islands( Falklands) or the Falkland islands (Malvinas) using both names as they recognize there is a sovereignty dispute.
I dont know you, ergo i cant care less about what you think or believe. Call it like you want. For me, its pure british colonialism that want the world to believe they are rightfully owners of the south atlantic, part of south america and the antartic.
@ 177
Apr 10th, 2014 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I can just about agree that the C24 had a mandate to discuss the decolinisation of the Falklands in accordance with UNGA resolution 1514. They do not now have and have never ever had any mandate whatever to discuss sovereignty disputes. This fact was acknowledged by some members during the early meeting of the sub-sub-committee. In my opinion they had no mandate to even invite the UK and Argentina to try to find a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute. The GA can request and invite such negotiations but they cannot demand them and they most certainly cannot, and have not, limited who can take part in those negotiations.
The last UNGA resolution dealing specifically with the Falklands and that was 43/25 in 1988. That resolution also called upon the Secretary General to utilize his good offices to help with those negotiations. Would he not be a third party?
I agree that no UNGA resolution specific to the Falkland Islands has favoured the UK's sovereignty claim. However by the same token none have favoured Argentina's claim either, which is as it should be the UNGA has no mandate to settle sovereignty disputes. In my opinion the resolutions from the GA favour the position of the Islanders. That is that they have the right to determine their own political status.
I do not believe the GA is corrupt. Virtually powerless certainly.
It is my opinion that in 1965 the C24 overstepped their mandate by commenting at all on the sovereignty dispute other that to note that it existed.
I agree a 'Colonial Situation' existed in the Falklands in 1965, I do not agree it still exists today. The Islanders have decided what they want their political status to be. The C24 cannot recognize that because to do so could/would be seen as taking sides with one of the parties to the sovereignty dispute which is incompatible with item 2 (ii) of the Joint Statement of October 1989. Therefore even their current 'draft resolutions' are meaningless in light of the joint statement.
Biguggy, I think i see your point. You think that in some way the neutrality of the UN is flawed to the Argentine side. But at the same time you think is correct the acting of c24 about decolonization and GA in the year 1965 where you assume the islands were a colony?. Is that right?
Apr 11th, 2014 - 12:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0@184
Apr 11th, 2014 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0In my opinion both the UNGA and the C24 made fundamental errors in 1965. The major one being that they stated 1514 applied to the Falklands without reservations, conditions etc. That a 'colonial situation' existed I do not doubt, using any of the normally definitions of 'colonial'.
1514 only gave one option - full independence.
1541 gave two more options, still not suitable for all 'colonial situations'.
2625 gave a 4th option - any other political status freely chosen by the people - suitable for the remaining BOT's, in my opinion.
In my opinion since 1965 the UNGA have been limited by what they can do by virtue of having agreed with the C24 in 1965, i.e. 1514 applies. I do not believe that should have ever been stated without reservations/ conditions etc. however as it was we all have to live with it and 'living with it' means acknowledging that as the UNGA have said it applies, without reservations etc. Article 73 also applies which in turn means that the 5 ICJ statements that ALL NSGT's have the right to self-determination also applies.
Then we have the 1989 joint statement which in essence means that no 3rd party's comments can mean anything, and that would include the C24. It is therefore upto the UK and Argentina to agree how the situation is to be sorted out but that does not mean that they can violate International Law to do so.
Where do you think the situation can go from there?
@182 Liberato,
Apr 11th, 2014 - 09:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The British are not claiming any part of South America or the South Atlantic.
Our claim for a slice of Antarctica happened at least 50 years before Argentina decided that they wanted the same territory.
The Falklands were claimed before Argentina even existed as a nation.
What gives your country the right to decide that they own British territory.?
And don't give me the Proximity argument.
That means absolutely nothing.
lf you were honest you would say that Argentina sensed British weakness & decided to force the UK to disgorge some territory.
Argentina's “claims” to British Antarctica came in 1942 when Argentina thought that the UK was going to lose the war.
Like a bunch of Hyenas attacking a wounded Lion.
You whole claims are laughable, & Argentina does not believe them either or they would have taken their case to the ICJ.
That you don't, shows “the whole world”(favourite malvinista phrase!)that even you know that your “claims” are ridiculous.
Finally, we do not claim the South Atlantic.
lt is lnternational waters, open to everyone & we will continue to sail on it as we have been doing long, long before Argentina existed.
lt certainly does not belong to Argentina.
You are opportunists, just seeing what you can get away with.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!