MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, December 2nd 2021 - 04:40 UTC



Malvinas issue should be addressed at UN General Assembly suggest Argentine lawmakers

Thursday, May 1st 2014 - 06:45 UTC
Full article 76 comments

Members from the opposition addressed a letter to President Cristina Fernandez recommending that in the coming UN General Assembly Argentina presents a resolution-draft calling for the Falklands/Malvinas Islands sovereignty claim to be discussed in the assembly and not at the Decolonization Committee or C24. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Anglotino

    And the General Assembly, constrained by the UN Charter, will do what exactly?

    It absolutely amazes me the time and effort this country expends on a fruitless pursuit.

    There is no possibility of the Falkland Islands every becoming part of Argentina.


    There has never been a plausible process since 1982 and thanks to CFK, the well is poisoned for at least a generation. And by then it'll be too late.

    Farcical statements with arbitrary dates of 20 or 25 years are nothing but teenage mastubatory fantasies.

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Teaboy2

    Well i hope it does go back to the General Assembly, since the previous UN general assembly resolution clearly supported the islanders right to self determination and called on negotiations in the interest of the islanders - In no way did the previous resolution state that the UK and Argentina should discuss sovereignty over the islands. But not only that, self determination is one of the founding principles the the UN was founded on and legally required to respect and uphold.

    As a result of the last resolution and subsequent discussions there was an agreed joint fisheries and hydrocarbons program, that would have seen Argentina having a major part in fishing, the oil industry and extraction involving the islands - Argentina pulled out of both under CFK's late husband.

    Why did they pull out? Simple, they want it all for themselves and don't care about the interests of the islanders - If they did, then Timerman would have met the islanders representatives along side William Hague when Timerman was in the UK last year.

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    What a waste of time and energy!

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    Yes Argentina waste the UNGA time by flogging this dead horse AGAIN!

    I mean it's not like the UN has any other pressing a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine possibly causing World War III, have they?

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Buzzsaw

    I think the English translation of the document must be missing the part that was favourable to Argentina, it doesn't even mention the sovereignty dispute.

    The General Assembly, Having considered the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) and having received the report of the Secretary-General,
    Aware of the interest of the international community in the peaceful and
    definitive settlement by the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of all their differences, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

    Taking note of the interest repeatedly expressed by both parties in
    normalizing their relations, Convinced that such purpose would be facilitated by a global negotiation between both Governments that will allow them to rebuild mutual confidence on a solid basis and to resolve the pending problems, including all aspects on the future of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

    1. Reiterates its request to the Governments of Argentina and the
    United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to initiate negotiations
    with a view to finding the means to resolve peacefully and definitively the
    problems pending between both countries, including all aspects on the future
    of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), in accordance with the Charter of the
    United Nations;

    2. Requests the Secretary-General to continue his renewed mission of
    good offices in order to assist the parties in complying with the request made
    in paragraph 1 above, and to take the necessary measures to that end;

    3. Requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at
    its forty-fourth session a report on the progress made in the implementation
    of the present resolution;

    4. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its forty-fourth
    session the item entitled ”Question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)”.

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CKurze30k


    I think it's Section 1 they're talking about.

    In Argentina's mind, “the means to resolve peacefully and definitively the
    problems pending between both countries” would include their fake claims of sovereignty.

    Of course, there is a “peaceful and definitive” solution that would solve that dispute fairly, but it involves Argentina doing the right thing and relinquishing their claim, something their political leaders don't have the courage or honesty to do.

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Buzzsaw


    But section 1 also includes,

    'in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations'

    Which, as most know (well almost all, just a few Argentinians that will argue) means their 'right to self determination'.

    I just do not get why the some people seem to think that a neutral statement that doesn't possitively, categorically, comes out 100% in support the Falklanders, means it supports Argentina.

    I guess if they beleive unblinkingly that they had something stolen off them, any comment that doesn't completely side and show 100% support the other party, can be viewed in their eyes as supporting their cause.

    May 01st, 2014 - 08:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    Like most Argentine actions, the point of this is to perpetuate their grievance rather than resolve it.

    It should be quite clear after 50 years that most members of the UN just do not want to take sides, nor get involved in the (false in this case) question of self-determination verses territorial integrity. This is at it should be, since it is not the role of the UNGA to adjudicate on these matters, as long as there is a court specifically created for that purpose.

    Under these circumstances, the only resolution that can be passed is the usual anodyne, lowest common denominator one calling for dialogue and peaceful settlement. Nobody could possibly object to this (except of course Argentina itself, which rejects both).

    The only people fooled by this circus are the Argentine general public, but that is the whole point. Not even the Peronists are dumb enough to go to court with an argument claiming territorial integrity over a territory they cannot show was theirs, for the simple reason that it never was.

    There is an interesting analysis of the hopelessness of the Argentine position at the UN here :

    May 01st, 2014 - 08:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Brit Bob

    The UN needs to stop pussyfooting around and ask the UN ICJ for an Advisory Opinion on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands. Four Advisory Opinions and one ICJ judgment have already confirmed unequivocally, that the right to self-determination IS applicable to ALL non-self-governing territories. This is international law. Comprende?

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    should be addressed at UN General Assembly ,

    including argentines flagrant disregard of the islanders human rights,
    and the abuse threats and intimidation it dishes out to them

    perhaps these clever argentine lawyers should take it to the ICJ.

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    The Argentines have got it bad,
    Like a rejected lover, they just cannot take NO for an answer.
    Good for a laugh though.
    But a pity for Argentina that they cannot move forward & stop wasting money on such a fruitless cause.
    Really Sad.

    May 01st, 2014 - 10:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GALlamosa

    The Falklands question has been discussed in the C24 since well before 1988. Another attempt to reinvent history.

    Of course the Argentines don't really want a solution, they just want something to moan about.

    May 01st, 2014 - 11:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • yankeeboy

    Uk should just ignore them like the USA ( and the rest of the world) does. Pretty soon they'll be thinking of selling all of their embassy property around the world so they will be even easier to ignore.

    May 01st, 2014 - 11:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    perhaps if Britain broke of relations with them,
    and said, until you grow up, we want nothing to do with you,

    and by the way, no more money , cash , dosh , etc..

    May 01st, 2014 - 12:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino


    May 01st, 2014 - 02:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    It shouldn't take much intelligence to recognise that the C24 decolonisation committee has no relevance to sovereignty. Even the last (biased) Ecuadorian Chair had to say that. Why have there been THREE Ecuadorian Chairs in a row? So onward to the General Assembly and, eventually, a recognition that NO General Assembly resolution is binding. Therefore, not only the Falkland Islands, who are not members and cannot be bound, but also Britain can say “Get stuffed”. NO-ONE is going to force either, least of all inconsequential argieland.

    So, with a bit of luck and if this gets as far as the GA, Britain will take the opportunity to delineate every argie lie. There's plenty of them, all backed up by historical evidence. How argieland has been misleading the UN since 1964.
    Shouldn't be too hard to circulate a copy to every UN member!

    May 01st, 2014 - 03:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    It was the world in the form of the GA that voted to give the Islanders (and the Gibs) the right to self-determination in the first place, and a long time ago. Even drawing up a list so there could be no mistake about who was included.

    And then has confirmed this right in every relevant resolution since. Which anyone who has read them, will know.

    TinPot claims “over a hundred countries support Arg” on the issue.

    As there are only 193 (or so) members of the GA, the result should be a foregone conclusion.

    If what TinPot says is true.

    Question is does TinPot have the Pelotas to put it to the test???

    Personally I can’t see any liberal democracy in the world supporting the Argy position that “the Islanders have no rights in this”, snowballs chance in hell.

    Can’t wait for the argument on “implanted populations” from Arg, in front of the world!!!

    Not to mention telling the world what the resolutions they passed actually meant, as opposed to what the world actually thought they meant, when they voted for them.

    Explaining to the Eritreans, Kosovars and South Sudanese (to mention but a few) how territorial integrity over rules self-determination, oh and did I forget to mention the Russians, fresh back from their Crimean holidays.

    May 01st, 2014 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    The argies (NOT the people) remind me of a dog one of my friends had, a Jack Russell terrier.

    He was a mature dog when we first met and he did an awful lot of growling and rushing in to bite my ankles.

    I used to train my own gundogs and recognise that hierarchy is everything in the canine world and there really is a dog psychology in play, all the time.

    So I said to my friend, I will stop him doing this to me and I won’t hurt him or hit him. By then my friend was intrigued as to how I would achieve it.

    So in comes the dog all snappy and full of bluster. I picked him up by the loose skin of his neck, like his mother would to scold him / teach him manners and I bit him very gently on one ear the put him carefully on the floor. Anybody who says you cannot read a dog’s face should have seen his.

    No more snapping with me, in fact he always came to me when I visited so that I could pick him up and fuss him.

    The argies are the dog, they need a firm hand and told to behave. The UK should do the work and make a real job of it.

    May 01st, 2014 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Wireless

    Maybe someone should point out to CFKs opposition that the UNGA is prevented from discussing the matter of the Falkland Islands by Official UNGA Documents signed by the Republic of Argentina and the United Kingdom in 1989 during Bilateral Agreements made in Madrid, Spain.
    The Agreement specifically states that Both Argentina and the UK have to agree to the matter being discussed by the UNGA, otherwise the UNGA will be breaking the UNGA held Agreement.
    Argentine Politicians are so short sighted in their objectives, and lose track of the history of events so easily, particularly when their own rhetoric is a well known Big lie of 80+ years standing.

    May 01st, 2014 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Perhaps these clever lawyers would argue that technically the uk and France should not be on the UNSC, and thus should be replaced by Argentina and , Spain ,
    thus giving them four aces [ being friends with Russia and china ]
    thus revoke all previous agreements and resolutions ,
    and give the Falkland's and Gibraltar to Spain and Argentina in perpetuity,

    then having done this, why not use their aces to inherit all the lands that they feel they are technically entitled to, like south America,

    perhaps they really believe they are entitled to everything or anything they want.

    like all indocronoughts even fairies look a sure thing

    May 01st, 2014 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @ Chrissy

    not you again silly boy?

    You do know that is not normal behavior don't you? You look more of a fool than

    May 01st, 2014 - 06:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    It appears you are guilty of becoming a Troll...didn't I read you complaining on the other thread of name calling...?
    You reap what you sow......

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 21 Mendocinovino

    You remind me of that little terrier only when you got to know him all the bluster was because he was frightened. Poor thing.

    Once you got him over that he was a lovely dog, his name was Ben,

    Guess what I am going to tag you now? Only difference is you will never be a lovely person, but who GAF?

    Bye Ben!

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Britworker

    What exactly do they think that the UN are going to do. Russia has just invaded the sovereign territory of another country and helped itself to a big chink of their land at gun point and the UN has done precisely NOTHING!

    Do they seriously think that they will obtain a resolution telling the UK to hand the islands over to Argentina, ignoring hundreds of years of history and against the expressed wishes of the occupants who have lived there for generations?

    Keep dreaming Argentina, you are only fooling yourselves.

    May 01st, 2014 - 08:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    What have you got against ChrisR?

    May 01st, 2014 - 08:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • so_far

    1) UK Position in 2014

    “....minister Swire said that the UK fully respects its obligations and underlined that Great Britain does not use and will not use nuclear arms against states with non nuclear arms.”

    2) UK nuclear ethical behavior scared of humiliation and begging France, USA and Chile for help for not lost the war against ARGENTINA:

    Mitterrand French President about Tatcher PM: “With her four nuclear submarines in the south Atlantic, she's threatening to unleash an atomic weapon against Argentina…”

    ”...Provoke a nuclear war for a few islands inhabited by three sheep...”

    Well.....need to admit, UK mentality is a bit comunity need to wait few decades for expect a civilized behave from UK and return Malvina's islands to their legal only one owners....argentines

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund


    Perhaps one of these days, the concepts of evidence and corroboration will catch on in the Malvinaverse, and then where will be?

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Falkland Islands

    ”26 ?? what a load of old crap, try to speak english or don't bother.

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    Ah so I can only ACEPT name calling and abuse? I cannot give it back? I see. In that case let me turn around, bent over and let Chrissy slide it in.
    If you want to attack me and use bully boy tactics because you don't agree with me then don't cry fowl when you get it back. That is what I have against that halfwit.

    @ chrissy

    One thing I'm never frightened of are bully's. Verbal or otherwise. You are a typical case. Perhaps an only child. Parents dragged you up and left you to your own devises. Got used to picking on other kids. Shouted and screamed until you got your own way or were you heard. Probably did the same in your workplace by the sounds of it. No manners. But if you do that to the wrong person you will get a kickin'. So far from being afraid of you I will be in your face. If you did it to someone else I''d be in you face again. Why, because bully's are cowards thriving of the misery of others.
    Now go wag the dog or whatever it is you like doing to them!

    luckily this is on the internet or you would be in A+E and I would be locked up....:)

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    No one is asking you to “submit” to anyone.
    There is far too much hate in this world.
    l understand the desire to hit back, l get it myself.
    But you can't do anything as this is the internet & we rarely meet face-to-face.
    We all get frustrations.
    Can you just ignore perceived insults?
    l have been insulted on this forum by others, mostly malvinistas, but they don't count. lol!
    Actually, l like their insults, it shows that l am annoying them, lol.
    Oh well, fight on, at least its entertaining!

    May 01st, 2014 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Keith York

    @ Mendocinovino

    Before you press submit comment take a breath to read the suggestions. It doesn't always get it right and some imbecile with try and pull you apart over it on here. Sad but true.

    As far as I can tell the first interaction the two of you had was on the “New Queen's portrait to mark her 88th birthday”

    ChrisR replied to a comment of yours and I quote:-

    ”38 ChrisR (#)
    Apr 26th, 2014 - 07:18 pm
    Report abuse
    @ 37 Mendocinovino

    Not you again, stupid boy?

    Do you really think that any child destined to be the Sovereign is left to fend for themselves in the hope they will “come good”? They are mentored by the most intelligent and experienced people available in the world from a very young age.” etc etc etc

    So it appears ChrisR is the antagonist here. Not Trolling dear boy were you? Throwing out blanket insults doesn't make you look very enlightened.

    May 01st, 2014 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    Not at me....
    You take give it kind.
    Or you can wait lurking in the shadows and attack without provocation even when a post is not directed at you personally.....
    Yeah that really makes you the better man.......NOT.... for internet threats...BORING unless there is a possibility you can meet..
    ....been there, read the book, worn the tee-shirt...never any takers...;-)))) to win a debate quoting that's what I'm talking about.

    maybe I'll win one....some time....
    ...there are many characters on here...get used to them, you will never change them.....

    May 01st, 2014 - 10:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CabezaDura2

    The problem with the Argentine opposition in general but most notably the socialists is that they have a very poor political agenda and proposals, and that is considering all the wrongs in the country and all that is worth critizing the Ks, they choose to pick up on a topic that is a none issue and the Ks have being over sabre rattling for the past years.

    If the socialist want to be the tough guys they have their own backyard Santa Fe to prove themselves which they are loosing control of due to the drug wars.

    May 01st, 2014 - 10:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    I don't believe anything in this article at all.....
    “The military presence in the Falkland Islands is purely defensive in its nature”

    ...what military is purely defensive in modern warfare....
    The British Gov reckon they have enough assets to repel another attack...
    Most folk are now aware that modern warfare is about destroying the oppositions ability to wage war.....Communication...airfields...etc...

    “Swire rejected point blank that the British presence in the region represents ”a military threat”

    Of course it's a military there any other point in it being there....'s all wordplay....

    May 01st, 2014 - 11:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @34 A_Voice

    Of course its defensive. It is the minimum amount of forces required to defend the Falklands until reinforcements arrive.

    They would only become offensive if Argentina were stupid enough to try and attack the Islands.

    And then the UK would ensure the Falklands defence by ensuring that Argentina couldn't attack the Islands by destroying Argentina's offensive weaponry.

    So it is defensive until an aggressor attacks, then it will all become very offensive.

    Of course it's all a moot point. Argentina can't even run itself, it has no money, and it's military is so starved of funding that it's doubtful it could invade a nunnery, let alone make it across the hundreds of miles of ocean to attack the Islands.

    May 01st, 2014 - 11:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CabezaDura2

    At the end of the day the islands are a de facto British possesion and they can place whatever military asset and practice whatever maneuvers and missile tests they wish. That is fact and reality.

    Menem had agreed in Madrid with Britain in the early 1990s a understanding which involved each other side sharing information as to how many troops, planes and ships were in the region and what practices takes place, etc.

    Does anyone know if this understanding hasn't being broken by Nestor Kirchner in 2007??

    May 01st, 2014 - 11:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • malicious bloke

    I actually hope the RGs try and attack again.

    Then they could try and attack some of our ships in Gibraltar again then whine about us sinking one of their ships in the warzone being a war crime.

    Argentines are such spastics XD

    May 01st, 2014 - 11:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Falkland Islands

    @37 agree!

    May 02nd, 2014 - 12:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    “Finally minister Swire said that the UK fully respects its obligations and underlined that Great Britain does not use and will not use nuclear arms against states with non nuclear arms.”

    the problem is not if england will use or not nuclear weapons.
    the problem is that they have them.
    you know, they are not the smartest of the bunch, are they?

    “Nuclear weapons: an accident waiting to happen
    In July 1956, a plane crashed in Suffolk, nearly detonating an atomic bomb. In January 1987, an RAF truck carrying hydrogen bombs skidded off a road in Wiltshire. Other near-misses remain top secret. Who is really at risk from Britain's nuclear weapons?”

    “Sir Ronald Oxburgh, the chief scientific adviser at the Ministry of Defence, claimed that 19 accidents had occurred with British weapons between 1960 and 1991”

    May 02nd, 2014 - 04:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • reality check

    Smarter enough to deal with your lot, thousands of miles away from their bases though, hey what?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 05:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino

    I'm still waiting for paulcedron to make a point.

    Any stolen?
    Any go off accidentally?

    Guess the answer is no.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 07:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    It was certainly broken in 1982. Did Argentina say they were going to hold exercises on the FALKLANDS?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 09:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    I'd be interested to hear from Paul and the other Malwhinos what they judge to be an acceptable number of force personnel and equipment should be allowed on the islands?

    I would image no more than 30 Royal Marines or so, i.e back to pre April 02 1982 levels perhaps.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 09:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Heisenbergcontext

    @34 A_Voice

    Just because the British forces stationed in The Falklands can be used offensively doesn't mean their primary objective isn't defensive.

    A few years ago an Argentine official ( can't remember his name sorry ) candidly admitted Argentina would've tried to re-take the Islands if they weren't so well defended. In that context not having an effective military deterrent would amount to negligence on behalf of the U.K.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Porkchop

    Where is the signed letter calling for the Argie Government to take their case to the ICJ?

    Come on Argentina, stop beating around the bush with nonsense. Head to the ICJ if you feel your claim is so strong. The fact you refuse to do so speaks volumes. Fairly okay at talking the talk but absolutely terrible at walking the walk.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    AVoice- the only State to make a threat down this way has been Argentina:
    Miitary Invasion in 1982 and ignored binding UN security Council resolution

    Current Arg Govt has referred to “re-occupation” by them - BUT for the prescence of the British Garrison.

    Arg Navy and Coastguard has harassed and challenged 3rd party civilian vessels in international waters.

    Seems pretty clear who the aggressor is.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 11:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 31 Keith York
    “Not Trolling dear boy were you?” Bit of a condescension thrown out there maybe?

    No, “dear father” (condescension returned), I was not; simply reacting to a crass individual who seems to think it amusing to denigrate my Royal Family, I suspect that it may not be your Royal Family. That is something I will not now or ever accept why the Queen is on the throne.

    People, even those whose first language is not English, who comment on here should take care to get there statements into correct English or suffer the results. We English language people can only react to what is written, good or mediocre like much of it from Espanol users, understandable really.

    I have no idea who you are but I know you are a recent addition and a perplexing one at present. I rarely agree with A_Voice but one part of his comment @ 32 fits you nicely:

    “Or you can wait lurking in the shadows and attack without provocation even when a post is not directed at you personally”....” Yeah that really makes you the better man.......NOT”

    So there we are, I have been on here for three years this month and yes, I sometimes “lose” it a bit over topics that are dear to me. Mendocinovino always tries to upset the Brits and on this occasion he succeeded with me. So what?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 11:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Keith York

    I've not be called a “new addition” for some many generations! “dear father” is closer than you think. I admit I am a lurker on here. Early last year I joined this site. Rarely commenting. Mostly reading (and laughing).
    Your condescension returned was a small test of mine. Thank you for accepting the challenge. Had you ignored it then I may have thought I had been harsh on you. The fact you “returned” it indicates to me that you too do not like any form of insults thrown at you for no apparent reason.

    What do you think of the topic at hand though?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 12:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    wise words. Point taken. I just can't stand bad manners, rude people and bullys. Oh...and I hold a grudge.

    So.....ChrisR. under advisement. clarify just points of yours.
    1. simply reacting to a crass individual who seems to think it amusing to denigrate my Royal Family.
    2. People, even those whose first language is not English, who comment on here should take care to get there statements into correct English or suffer the results.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    The problem is not if England will use or not nuclear weapons.
    The problem is that they have them

    England does not have nuclear weapons,
    But the United Kingdom does,
    And so do the Americans, Russians, Chinese, Korea, and north Korea, India and Pakistan, and Israel, and Iran is suspected,

    And no doubt a few including Brazil and Argentina and others, would like to,

    To condemn one you must in all fairness condemn all, otherwise you give the false impression that ENGLAND is the only nation to have them , and would use them on poor defenceless argentines,
    And again—totally false and untrue full information, that militants and other use as propaganda..

    no more insults please, just be polite and read the blogs properly and reply gently or sarcastically if required, but hard core insults are not worthy of educated people,


    May 02nd, 2014 - 01:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CKurze30k

    On nuclear weapons - I've read these forums for a couple of years before I joined to post.

    I seem to remember some Malvinists who claimed that since international law won't let them invade the Falklands again, they should ignore international law regarding nuclear weapons.

    One disgusting example in particular often referred to it as a “nuclear defense” program, but in the same post would oh-so-subtly mention using it to take the Falklands, under the threat of using it on either the legitimate inhabitants of the Falklands or the UK Parliament in acts of state-sponsored terrorism.

    Surely such threats agains civilian targets are just as bad, if not worse than threatening action against military targets?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 02:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    Good point and good point.
    I seem to have picked up two stalkers along the way. Captain Poppy and Toy Tempest. What's their story/problems?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 02:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 48 Keith York
    “What do you think of the topic at hand though?”

    At first I thought it was the usual griping about the Falklands that happens every few weeks depending on the latest disaster the Argentine people are having to accept from the K government, In fact I don’t think that is what is behind it, never mind it was promoted by the “opposition”, it seems to be the only chance Argentine has of bringing something “fresh” to the argument.

    The argument from the argie side is of course their well rehearsed pack of lies and it is doubtful if the UN GA will even accept the application

    Who knows, by the time the topic comes up TMBOA will be gone and the new government will be in the firing line of the repost. It looks good in the Argentine papers though: that’s what counts.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • boufiewolf

    16 Thanks for that link, there was a few things that I wasn't aware of.
    I too have been laughing at some of the posts on here for a couple of years now but some of these insults go way to far below the belt. I just wish we could just all have a good debate but there's no accounting for the keyboard warriors on here on here.
    Argentina though will probably be arguing this till the cows come home and still won't get anywhere. The weight of history is not on their side.

    May 02nd, 2014 - 04:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    [- some of these insults go way to far below the belt - ]
    And most of us agree with you, very good debates / arguments , good and funny, humorous and serious,
    thanks all............
    As for CFK and her dream of father Christmas [-UN-]
    Giving her the greatest xmas gift, she is totally from another planet X
    but eye will state this,
    As long as this world And the unmighty UN And the majority of people believe in freedom , and democracy [ we keep saying it ]

    CFK via Argentina will never get the British Falkland islands,
    they can, shout scream , cry , sob , even demonstrate outside the UN,
    A free society will never ever freely hand a free people over to a dictatorship.
    Unless you know more than we do......
    latest news on TV , loads dead and Ukraine they now say, is sliding into civil war.

    And we will be watching just in case CFK tries to take advantage,
    just my opinion..

    May 02nd, 2014 - 05:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    paulcedron @39

    Just what is the point you are trying to make? Your juvenile random postings really are pathetic!

    May 02nd, 2014 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    Coming back to the topic in hand.....

    The Argentine law makers suggest Argentina should take their case to the UNGA and not the C24.

    This is partly sensible, if you actually wanted to bring the situation to a head.

    The C24 is useless to Argentina, sympathetic (as it has a massive regional Latam bias) but useless. 50 years of sympathy hasn't bought sovereignty one iota closer.

    So why doesn't CFK and her cronies pursue the UNGA more passionately, why the annual farce at the C24.

    The answer is simple, that despite CFK claiming global support, she knows she doesn't have fact, if the UNGA were to be actual put on the spot and asked to vote, it is very likely it would fall down on the side of the islanders....and where would that leave the Malvinas question?

    Of course, as we know, the UNGA is not the place either for sovereignty disputes, the correct arm of the UN is the ICJ.

    Again, if as CFK claims, Argwntinas case is the only one with historic, moral, geographical and legal strength, she should be hammering their door down.,,but she isnt.

    What she is doing is preparing for the next all expenses paid jaunt to New York to see the C24...a sympathetic body completely irrelevant to the Argentine claim.

    One can only ask oneself why...?

    May 02nd, 2014 - 08:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    keep it shut fatty

    May 02nd, 2014 - 11:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    39, 58 Sonny Jim

    Instead of insulting and boring your betters, with inane “whataboutery”,
    while you are surfing away your time in the Internet World of Fantasy and Speculation, you might want to take these in :

    May 03rd, 2014 - 02:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Falkland Islands

    @ 56, I agree with you, paulcedron can only then come back with insults at 58, because he knows Argentinas claim is false and all lies.

    May 03rd, 2014 - 03:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Perhaps as she knows she is going, she may have nothing to lose, and the new government may well end up taking the blame ,

    she is very clever and manipulative what it suits her.
    just a thought.

    May 03rd, 2014 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ynsere

    The real reason for this initiative is that it has been found that 30% of the population of Argentina live below the poverty line.

    May 05th, 2014 - 03:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @39 paulcedron

    “the problem is not if england will use or not nuclear weapons.
    the problem is that they have them.”

    One-it is the UK or Great Britain with the nukes-not England. If you still cannot differentiate between England and the UK, you need to look at a map to U.N.D.E.R.S.T.A.N.D.

    The UK is not the only country on earth with nuclear weapons and there is no need for them to be used against Argentina.

    If Argentina is stupid enough to copy the Imperialism of your General Galteiri, who (although in the Army) I note was not leading his Argentine troops in 1982 on the Falklands against the British troops, but crapping his pants , 1000 miles away, then the UK has enough convential firepower to destroy the bases from which Argentine ships of aircraft come from, without any need to use nuclear weapons.

    In fact if the UK had one or two T45 destroyers in place, they could destroy your entire air force as it crossed the Argentine coastline, and just one UK hunter killer sub could destroy your entire navy without any need to attack Argentina itself.

    So, as long as your nutcase, Toytown Trumpton government don't attack the Falklands you are perfectly safe.

    You Argentines are also so moronic and stupid that you do not seem to realise that even if the UK elected to use nuclear weapons against Argentina, something that would only happen if Argentina used nuclear weapons against the UK first, that the missiles would almost certainly be fired a long long way from the South Atlantic as they have a considerable range-for the SIMPLE reason that there would be no chance of Argentina finding a Trident Submarine (to destroy it), before it could fire.

    Therefore in the almost non existent event that the UK were to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike against Argentina, the LAST PLACE they would put a Trident Submarine would be ANYWHERE in the South Atlantic.

    I hope now, you understand the 'bleedin' obvious.

    May 05th, 2014 - 05:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    and who said that they (uk, britain, england, you choose) are going to use nuclear weapons?
    again, the problem for the uk is the mere fact of having nuclear arms.
    they have had more than 20 accidents in +/- 30 years.
    as the article said:
    ““Nuclear weapons: an accident waiting to happen”
    “Who is really at risk from Britain's nuclear weapons?””

    May 05th, 2014 - 05:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    @64 paulcedron
    Thanks for your concern, but that really is for us to worry about, don’t you think, being complicated and all that.

    You should be worrying about Argentina trying building nuclear powered subs, with rubber band technology.

    What are they going to call it the ARA Argy Cooker?

    May 05th, 2014 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    “..but that really is for us to worry about..”
    well, that depends on where the accident will occur.

    “Argentina trying building nuclear powered subs, with rubber band technology”
    the last thing i can be worried about is if argentina builds a submarine.
    with rubber band technology or propulsed by farts.

    guess there are better things to invest the money than in a sub, a warship and all that crap.
    a new fortuna III for instance

    May 05th, 2014 - 06:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    They say, whilst Nero was playing dominos Rome was destroyed lol
    so it seems,
    whilst your brainwashed government and deluded CFK are worrying abt the British Falkland's,
    Argentina is burning its self out and going down hill fast..

    be a true argy and tell her she is wrong.

    May 05th, 2014 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    “be a true argy and tell her she is wrong.”
    we don´t have to “tell her”,
    we vote here.
    she lost the last legislative elections and surely the fpv will lose the presidential.
    guess you don´t know too much about electing your own authorities in the islands, do you?

    May 06th, 2014 - 02:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino

    I'll be so sad to see CFK depart.

    She's done so much for the Islanders.

    I'd chip in for a statue for her.

    May 06th, 2014 - 05:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    CFK, Best General that we've got.

    May 06th, 2014 - 10:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Agreed lol

    May 06th, 2014 - 11:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    considering the strong international support the falklands are receiving (lol), from countries like the u.s., spain, ireland, brazil, italy, france, germany, uruguay, the rest of latin america, the whole africa, rusia, etc etc etc etc, it seems that cameron is one of the best argentinian diplomats

    May 07th, 2014 - 12:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    NO ONE supports us, we are all alone, a small tiny minute little island,
    thousands of miles away, ignored and avoided by the rest of the world,

    lonely and isolated, no one talks to us,
    And yet we are still big enough , ugly enough to stop you or anyone else who tries to steal what is not theirs, all by our

    May 07th, 2014 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    @ 72 paulcedron
    Then put it to a vote.

    Argentina propose a UNGA resolution calling for, “the UK negotiate sovereignty of the Falklands, directly Argentina”.

    That should do it.

    TinPot doesn’t seem to have the Pelotas though.

    No “courage of his convictions”.

    Why do you suppose that is????

    May 07th, 2014 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Argentina propose a UNGA resolution calling for, “the UK negotiate sovereignty of the Falklands, directly Argentina”.

    Would reply-take it to the ICJ.
    wail wail, its not

    May 07th, 2014 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog


    “ I'd chip in for a statue for her.”

    I might chip in too.

    Let's be positive-a great whacking big statue of Christina somewhere roughly in the vicinity of Port Louis, could be a great perch for Turkey Vultures-perhaps the good inhabitants of PL could fill her gaping mouth with meat so the Vultures and other birds could use her as a bird feeder. At last! CFK useful for generations to come on her beloved Islands.

    May 08th, 2014 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

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