MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
“Falklands/Malvinas current policy is a losing option and leads nowhere”
Argentina's current policy on the Falklands/Malvinas Islands sovereignty is a losing option because it is a 'maximalist' attitude with the purpose of ‘full recovery' of the disputed islands, said Argentine political scientist and writer Carlos Escudé. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThere is no reason to spend money on a military that cannot defeat all opponents. It is like spending thousands on a security system of a house with no doors. In such a case, better not to have any security system at all, and just hope for the best and invest the money elsewhere. Perhaps on some top-rate personal weapons. In country terms, I would invest in an anti-aircraft/missile shield.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 03:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0The British will never agree to the solution you proffer because quite frankly, they don't have to. I get it. But even if they did, they have been enemies of Argentina for 200 years, always undermining this country in direct and surreptitious ways. Britain would never agree to anything that might benefit Argentina in any shape or fashion.
“Argentina's current policy on the Falklands/Malvinas Islands sovereignty is a losing option because it is a 'maximalist' attitude with the purpose of ‘full recovery' of the disputed islands, said Argentine political scientist and writer Carlos Escudé.”
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Maximalist attitude”?
Does that mean Maximo and his La Campora propagandists will continue the existing K agenda, after his Mum is gone?
The Islanders are entitled to carry on in their traditional livelihood of nine generations, as shepherds.
Or they can diversify and turn their hands to fishing, scientific research, tourism, or oil production - whatever they wish.
That's fair.
Why should they restrict themselves or hand some of it to a jealous neighbour who cannot manage their own industries?
Already tried negotiation of resources and sovereignty - argentina was not satisfied- they took the islands by force and killed 3 Islanders, and 250 British military.
By the 1990's, the UK and Arg negotiated resource sharing and came to an agreement.
Subsequent President Nestor Kirchener was not satisfied and tore up those agreements.
Seems pretty futile, trying to share anything with ARGENTINA - it's never enough, and then they get pissy...
Now, the Falklanders are moving ahead without them.
The best long term status is what exists today, but without Argentina applying “sanctions” or constantly raising the Falklands as an issue. In other words, end all restrictions, stop talking about the islands, leave the people there in peace, and then pretend that neither the Falklands nor the UK even exist. That would be a boon for Argentina.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0A very good article by Argentine political scientist and writer Carlos Escude.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Only, one correction: the small town of Macondo were Gabo was borned and
inspired, is not in the Amazon Jungle. It is in the north part of Colombia near
the Caribian Coast.
Laughable that this “scientist” tries to draw a parallel between the Channel Islands and the Falklands - for many reasons
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Laughable you actually believe yourself possessing the capacity to give opinions on anything related to Argentina. When you have not ONE SINGLE TIME ever had anything positive to say, which proves your complete and inveterate prejudices and biases.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0There is some sense in what he is saying here although his Channel Islands analogy is completely bogus. Geographic proximity has no bearing on sovereignty and never has (leaving aside the fact that the Falklands are over fifteen times further away from Argentina than Jersey is from France).
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0What matters is who has legal title over the land and what is the sovereign will of the people who live on the land.
When Argentina removes the claim to the Falklanders' homeland from their Constitution and recognises and respects the Falklanders' right, under the UN Charter, to self-determination we will talk. Until then there can be no progress on this issue.
Although, as he says, the Republic of Argentina may have ceased to exist by then.
@7
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina will never again talk to a country like yours, on this or anything else. Certainly my generation that has yet to even really come to take control won't do it. Who talks to enemies?
No problem. The status quo is fine by us.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0I know it is.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0What I find somewhat amusing is that you probably think said status isn't fine with us. Aside the GOVERNMENT's usage of the Falklands question for its personal purposes, there is no cogent reason or like of argumentation to be proffered to make Argentina wish to seek a change of status. In the real word, it therefore must not be something with tangible benefits.
It is a sign of how utterly deluded the Argentine position is that even someone trying to inject some reality into the debate is still making unreasonable demands. Doesn't Argentina have enough maritime area (certainly a lot more than the UK) without needing to take the Falkland islanders sea as well? The islanders have the same rights as anyone else and do not have to give up their maritime rights unless they wish to. It isn't up to France or Germany, it is isn't even up to the UK since for us to impose a limit on the islanders territory without their consent would be colonialism. So like he said, let's reconvene in a 100 years and see where we are then - in the meantime, doesn't Argentina have any more pressing issues to deal with?
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Wow is this guy for real?
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Surely he will need body guards now. I especially liked the part “It's useful to attract votes of those less educated and that's all”.
A man after my own heart.
The fisheries have been British since 1774 :-)
Nov 12th, 2014 - 08:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0“It's not leading anywhere, it's pure rhetoric. It's useful to attract votes of those less educated and that's all”
Nov 12th, 2014 - 08:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's also handy for when things go wrong: a few hundred million pesos go astray, or a dubious company gets a government contract at exorbitant prices and cries of “Los Malvinas son argentinos” distract public attention wonderfully. Probably too valuable to give up.
@ 1 trollinthedark
Nov 12th, 2014 - 08:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say “But even if they did, they have been enemies of Argentina for 200 years, always undermining this country in direct and surreptitious ways. Britain would never agree to anything that might benefit Argentina in any shape or fashion.” This statement is outrageous as its intention is to emphasise mythical and/or non events and to ignore the outstanding effect of British investment in the Argentine economy during the 19th century and the early years of the 20th century. This British investment bore with it the immigration of thousands of British and Irish citizens who today make a considerable contribution to the Argentinine way of life.
To state that Britain has been an enemy of Argentina for 200 years contradicts all the evidence to the contrary including statements by leading Argentinian politicians and even presidents!
So, troll in the dark, just go away and troll in the dark!
It's always encouraging when somebody has the balls to stand up and publicly reject the Peronist mythology, and Escudé has longstanding form for this kind of thing (e.g http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Future_of_the_Falkland_Islands_and_Its_People/The_Falklands_Will_Never_Be_Argentine)
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0But he seems to have missed the point in this case, that the arrangement he proposes is just what Nestor Kirchner tore up a few years back.
I really like this article. Probably ranks as the best one ever on this site.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0I smile each tune I reread it.
I can't wait to the reaction of the Argentineans.
“”“Britain would never agree to anything that might benefit Argentina in any shape or fashion.”“”
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0not actually true - you had a positive agreement but ripped it up yourself: lets be honest - your politicians prefer to use the Falklands as a political tool far more than they actually want the Falklands or care anything about it.
The reality is that the situation is out of Argentina's and Britians hands - the UN has clearly shown its determination that the future is in the hands of the Islanders and unless you get a re-write of the UNs charter withe very day that passes their claim grows stronger and Argentina's weaker.
And STILL no Argentine seems to have grasped that ALL you have to do is persuade 3000 people that their future is brighter under Argentine colonial rule... and you just cannot do so (the referendum suggests you convinced 4)
That is now, and always has been, the ultimate fail point for Argentina.
I would be interested to see Argentines like Simon68, CD2, and even pgerman have to say.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0pgerman is a bit of a Malvinista, but he would likely be a good barometer for how that segment will react.
Troll in the dark : A warm welcome to the newest member of this forum , TIDT is a recent graduate of the Campora Trolling Academy of Lanus .
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ The British have been enemies of Argentina for 200 years ”
Really ? Do they teach ANY history at the Trolling Academy of Lanus ?
Anyway , Escude speaks a lot of sense , and is at least willing to recognise a conciliatory middle way , but as he himself points out , the whole Malvinas claim is simply rhetoric for the domestic consumption of the less educated , so it ain't going to happen .
TIDT : A question for you .
Do you live in Mendoza and do you have big feet ?
Corsica might have been a better comparison that the Channel Islands, but I do understand the point he is making. Italy, specifically Genoa, lost Corsica to France in the 1700's, yet still has a calm, working relationship with the island.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0I enjoyed reading the comments here of Carlos Escudé, a very unique Argentine considering the usual emotional ping-pong of statements on the subject. His ideas are both reasonable, some quite accurate, and pragmatic.
Impressive scholar, even without the beard.
Even though this Carlos character seems a bit more reasonable, he still doesn't get it.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0We are not going to give Argentina control over ANYTHING that we own,
(yes, trolls, we DO own these lslands & surrounding seas & you do NOT!).
So, NO, Carlos, Argentina does NOT get 50% of OUR fish.
You want to “negotiate”, Argentina?
What do you bring to the table? (it would want to be very, very good).
A minimum of one of your southern provinces, for a start.
But you don't have any chips to bargain with do you?
No?
Shut the gate on your way out.
Gracias.
The Islanders decide. They have.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0At least he has said that the current Argentine Gov. strategy is pointless and going nowhere.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's a start.
It certainly doesn't sound like Mr Escude thinks that Argentina in its present form will last out the century. I've never known a country discuss a topic between themselves as much as Argentina and The Falklands, it's always the sane discussion by the same people with the sane outcome.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0History should tell them that land only ever changes hands through war.
2 Troy Tempest and 3 Troll in the Darkness . . . Kudos! (You see? There are Argentines who are decent, reasonable members of world society. I hope that Mr. Carlos Escudé's statements are the prow of an ice-breaker that will lead to the breaking of the sinister, evil dam of Argentine ignorance and ridiculousness, led by a 21st-century Latin Hitler, (aka CFK).
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0Escude is what he looks like, almost a clawn....
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0He is coming from Di Tella era, when his policy to the islander was send teddy bear gift an d at the same time, sign a treaty which only was profit for UK. Argentina, could be for ages without diplomatic retations at all with UK, in fact is UK companies who are in Argentina territory and needed it. I dont know any argentinean company doing business in UK.
Moreover, he threating with whether Argentina would exist then, that is pointless. As such, I can say, Chile will exist if Peru, Bolivia an Argentina dont cuts in pieces, or Brazil, which the southern part want become independent. Even, UK could not exist like that, if the month ago voting applies again from scottish.
So too much talk, but indeed we are in war, a friendly one...Argentina doing what sould do, biting and stinging as mosquitoes...not more, not less. Just in case, Iam not camporist, nor peronist at all, simple and prour argentinean citizen. Greetings fellows!
Apart from the rather ridiculous double negative:
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Argentina is in no position to impose absolutely nothing,”
It was an interesting, if not mistaken article.
By the way, for those Argentines out there, what he meant to say was that Argentina is in no position to impose anything on the Falkland Islanders. What he said meant the opposite, which is untrue.
What he did get right is that Argentina is so defenceless, that she only lives by the good graces of Chile or Brazil. Either country would be capable of invading and conquering Argentina. Indeed, if Argentina's financial crisis gets any worse, they may be invited to do so by Mercosur, just to rescue the starving population. Chile might get everything in the south including Patagonia, whilst Brazil and Uruguay takes the remainder to the north.
As for the suggested parallel over the Channel Islands, it appears that the political scientist does not understand the constitutional position of these islands.
When William the Conqueror invaded Britain in 1066, he was Duke of Normandy and part of his realm was the Channel Islands. Ever since, all British monarchs have technically held the hereditary title of Duke of Normandy, even though Henry III gave it up in return for keeping the Channel Islands.
Many Channel Islanders would actually claim that they own the England - not the other way around, because the Duchy of Normandy captured and conquered England.
The Islanders are quite content with their position and limit their territorial waters, just as Gibraltar claims only 3 miles instead of the full 12 they are entitled to.
With the Falkland Islanders though, this is entirely different. They are under no obligation to hand anything over to Argentina. They signed an agreement with Menem over oil & fisheries which Argentina tore up unilaterally. Argentina threw away their rights at that point, just as they gave up the sovereignty claim in 1850 when they signed the Arana-Southern Treaty.
Very well said, Mr. Escude. I salute you opinion and proposal (and I´m Argentinian). At last somebody has the brain and balls to speak the (by now) evident truth.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0A win-win agreement on fisheries would be remarkable, and we may have had one if Nestor & Co wouldn´t have canceled what was done.
From now on all we should hear about those islands is that new and productive deals on oil and fishing have being reached. That, or we can continue to deepen a policy that so far has gotten nothing but a huge backfire for Argentina.
@27
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Escude was equally criticial of di Tella :
'The Falklands discourse of the late foreign minister Guido Di Tella was plagued with paradigmatic examples of “benign lies”. He wanted Argentines to believe that Argentina was going to recover the Falkland Islands through peaceful means, “seducing” the Islanders while accumulating a sufficient number of national successes so as to actually make it convenient for the average Islander to accept Argentine sovereignty. Di Tella did not accept the Islanders’ right to self-determination, but he was conscious of the fact that if Argentina did not succeed in making itself an attractive country, it would be impossible to get the British Government and Parliament to accept a transfer of sovereignty.
This type of lie is benign because the costs of failure, to Argentina, are low. Di Tella’s Christmas cards to the Falkland population will be remembered in Falkland history as the eccentric gesture of a well-meaning official who represented a neighboring country that once threatened the Islanders. The most important cost of this type of lie is the attempt to deceive the Argentines themselves. Because the Argentines already know intuitively that the Falklands will not be theirs again, this lie leads to an increase in the disillusionment of the Argentine people vis-à-vis a political class that is chronically dedicated to the ignoble art of lying.'
en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Future_of_the_Falkland_Islands_and_Its_People/The_Falklands_Will_Never_Be_Argentine
This article is mild compared to THE CASE OF ARGENTINA, which I recommend everybody who has not read it to do so:
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.argentina-rree.com/documentos/culture_escude.htm#_ftn1
In it he demolishes the much vaunted Peronista claim ‘we nearly won’ the ‘Malvinas’ war. He, quite rightly, makes the statement that Argentina were lucky that the British did not invade the mainland because they still had the ability to destroy our infrastructure (power plants, highways, government offices, etc.).
He also puts the lie to the puffery and overblown claims of Argentina ‘running’ the southern cone, leaving the US in the north and Argentina in the south.
With regards the present article it is more than balanced from the argie viewpoint but utterly unacceptable from ours.
“I don't know if Argentina will exist because we exist thanks to Brazil and Chile that are in agreement that we can continue to exist“
This shows great prescience in my judgement.
I think its a start unlikely to be effective but its a start.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ troll in the dark (in the dark ages?)
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The British.....have been enemies of Argentina for 200 years, always undermining this country in direct and surreptitious ways. ”
If you can possibly leave the Falklands issue out of it, please educate us with some examples of this 200 years of malicious intent?
Didn't Britain help Argentina gain independence from Spain?
Didn't British capital and expertise build the Argentine railway system and many of its industries and much of its agriculture? (eg., Norton wine - who started that?)
Hasn't Britain always supported Arge by importing much of Argentina's wine and produce? e.g.., I am visiting Britain now and just bought a tub of Argentine blueberries and not for a moment did I consider “undermining” Argentina by refusing to buy it. I'm sure if the wine and fruit and meat trade were in the other direction Arg would be boycotting ALL British imports. The only British thing I ever see on Arg supermarket shelves is “Salsa Inglesa” (Worcester sauce) and that only after what seems to be a 100% import duty. Imagine what would happen to the burgeoning Arg wine industry if Britain (and the EU) added 100% to the cost of Arg products?
Mr Escude gets half way there, but of course has to avoid getting stoned for heresy. He admits that the Islands belong to those who have been the stewards for the past 8/9 generations. He gets it in terms of self determination, even if he does not use those terms.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0And then he defaults to the absurd problem solvers woolly solutions box. If the land belongs to the people of the Falkland Islands, why should wish to give away half of their wealth. Its like giving a burgler your garden to keep out of the bedroom.
The Falkland Islands belongs to the people of the Falkland Islands. If Argentine people want to be good neighbours, and share in our nation building, then show some prospect and co-operate with us. There is actually plenty for all if the basics are right and properly respected.
But as others have said, the Argentine Govt probably has nom interest in a solution. The grievance itself is the goal.
But congratulations Mr Ecsude on your courage to be different.
Escudé is simply wrong about an ad hoc agreement. There is no ad-hoc agreement between the UK and France covering the waters surrounding the Channel Islands.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0He doesn't seem to appreciate that the Bailiwick of Guernsey and States of Jersey are completely separate jurisdictions, the Channel Islands are not a single unit. Territorial seas for both of these dependencies are claimed under UNCLOS, currently 3nm. Both dependencies would be completely within their rights to extend this limit to 12nm (or to the median with France, where applicable). Guernsey is in fact looking at doing exactly this.
If Escudé thinks that applying UNCLOS is a sensible model for resolving the dispute over the territorial waters, then I am 100% behind him!
@ 31
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Great article, thanks for the link.
I have being here for over a year reading these comments and nowbody understands the geopolitics involved. The Brits think Argentines are 99,9% Malvinistas. It just isn't the case. Any lawyer knows that UNGA resolutions of the 1960s are worthless and any common sense person knows that after losing a war there is no talking to be done.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The problem is what do you say to the people of the most populist country in the world??
If I had to put myself in the shoes of an official probably the truth is not one of them.
Its a political defeat that was created by Peron and the military and yet no generation of Argentine rulers has the willingness to pay the bill in political terms. And understandably so, why should they be forced to recognize a defeat that they did not cause?? They are only left with portraiting meaningless “advances” and “revindications” now and again. Its like a limits to a function when you input values to infinit into the function to get a tendency to always get closer to a point but that you never reach it.
They only thing that can change the princeple of relations between the two countries is if Argentina in the next 20 years or so fails to secure investments and recover energy independence they will probably have to go in search for local oil suppliers.
The reason that many British people think that 99.9% of Argentina is Malvinista is because it is in the Argentine Constitution.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 099% of Brits would not have any knowledge of the nuances of Argentine political history. Nor do they care.
They remember that British Servicemen died in 1982. That is all.
And for that reason alone it would be instant political suicide for any uk politician to consider anything other than full support of the Islanders.
It is rarely even discussed in the UK.
Sorry, but that is the truth.
A couple of points.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As regards sharing fishing. Look at the Falklands EEZ. Its an odd shape, normally when two EEZ overlap the boundary is set at the median point. This would shave about 30 nm off the Argentina EEZ from memory. The British defined the EEZ allowing Argentina the full 200 nm EEZ. They've already conceded the fishing rights to Argentina to avoid having to deal wuth the Argentine Government. The upshot is Britain is already conceding and sharing fishing resources, its just that Argentina doesn't recognise it.
Do they want more? Or as one poster referred to UNCLOS, then they would actually lose out compared with the current status quo.
And the British did agree to share the oil revenue with Argentina, in a classic example of cutting their nose off to spite their face, the Argentines repudiated the agreement. The window in which that could be reversed is closing, as once the arrangements are put in place to extract oil there is no way that investment will be abandoned to accommodate Argentina.
Other than that an interesting article but I doubt common sense is too common among the target audience.
@CD
Nov 12th, 2014 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't believe that anything like 99.9% are Malvinistas - but your government (and the previous one) ARE Malvinistas and therefore the FIs, the UK and pro-FI posters on here have no choice but to point that out. Our 2 countries have cooperated before and would be able to cooperate again if this futile obsession was dropped. Argentina is not the only country in the world where particular grievances can be revisited to get the people on side. However if you are right and the Malvinistas are just a sad minority, then surely there should be a silent majority of voters would could be persuaded to elect a rational leader who tells the people the true state of the nation and what he/she plans to do about it. Argentina could and should be richer than it is - it certainly used to be a century ago. How then can the people not want that again and be willing to vote for leaders who give them a credible rhetoric.
All this is just sad argie bloggers , knowing they have nothing, just trying to add mud to the conversation,
Nov 12th, 2014 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0they have nothing,
and will end up with nothing.
40.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 01:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Some important points.
There is Malvinistas and then there is just indifference. It's not Malvinistas and non-Malvinistas. How ever I really doubt Malvinas is a vote box for politicians, its not a national topic in election times. So we dont vote politicians in this issue. It will only a potencial loss of votes if any politician gives away or is seemed to pro western and weak. And this is a important distiction to make that you guys dont seem to understand.
A hundred years from now many things can happen, including that Argentina ceases to exist.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 01:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“.
”Argentina is an entirely defenseless country.
Currently in military terms Argentina is a midget
before Chile.
In a hundred years time I don't know if Argentina will exist because we exist thanks to Brazil and Chile ??
that are in agreement that we can continue to exist“, underlined the Argentine political analyst.
Likewise ”if Argentina was strong, I wouldn't be making these proposals, but [[pretending ]] to apply power policies when you don't have them, it is clearly counterproductive, because your are condemned to lose more than what you win in a systemic approach“.
”Argentina is in no position to impose absolutely nothing
Says it all really...
Firstly I would like to state that Escudé's essay is, as is usual with him, a ray of light in constantly darkening kirchnerverse. I do find it slightly disappointing that he says that Argentina “has a right to 50% of the resources”, when this is certainly not true, the resources belong to the Islanders and it is up to them if they wish to share with their neighbours or not.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 01:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As to the proportion of “Malvinistas” within the Argentine population, in the last 75 years the number of believers in the Malvinas myth has described a fairly standard Bell curve, staring from near zero in 1941 reaching a maximum of around 60% in the 1970's and dropping to around 25 - 30% today.
Unfortunately our politicians don't seem to realise that the Malvinas myth really has no power over the people any more, it is a bit like the story of the little boy who cried “wolf”, it has been over used and has lost its power to move the masses. Their needs are much closer to home, the need for security, the solution of the inflation, the salvation of the education and health sectors being probably the most important.
Perhaps we'll find that at least one of the candidates for next year's elections will take note of the real needs of the electorate and forget the nationalistic myths we've had to live with for a large part of my life!!!!!!!
Fact.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 01:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In the UK Latin American History & Politics is a very niche subject. It rarely comes up in conversation and press coverage is fairly sparse.
For the average Joe or Joanne in the street Argentina is not even on their radar. They might know it is where Tango and some wine comes from. Or maybe seen a nature documentary with that nice Mr. Attenborough.
I am not trying to offend anyone.
Just want to point out the difference in attitudes. I very much doubt this will make the News in the UK.
As far as 99.9% of the UK population is concerned, the matter was settled in 1982. Job done. Case closed. Nothing further to discuss.
Day to day life is completely unaffected by anything Argentina says or does.
The whole Falklands thing maybe a massive deal in Argentina, but it really is not in the UK.
Fact.
“”“” And this is a important distiction to make that you guys dont seem to understand.“”“
Nov 12th, 2014 - 02:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0erm.. yes we do - its pretty common knowledge that Argentine indoctrination over its populist demands for return of a ”stolen“ land start in junior school and never end.
That's a state determined indoctrination system that has very little basis in reality...
The very fact that no politician has a hope of election if he comes out and says ”we dont want those islands“ or ”Leave the islanders alone“ pretty much proves the opposite of your claim: there is no supposed ”Indifference“ among a large proportion of Argentina because they've been state indoctrinated into a false history... and going against that = abject failure.
That is no definition of ”Indifference“....
I am certian there are many rational Argentines out there who can google a real history - but if none of them dare say anything publicly then your ”indifference“ actually means ”fearful of drawing attention to non-state-edited false hsitory”....
you are simply part of the problem, and it isnt indifference... it is fear (whether or not you recognize it as such)... your politicians are too frightened of an indoctrinated masses to say anything pro-active, historically accurate or even recognizing the reality of the situation in the UN.
Fear is not indifference, its fear.
@15
Nov 12th, 2014 - 02:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The facts are clearly contrary to the revisionist British history you propose.
Investment is investment, NOT a favor. If it were, then you would be investing here now... but you are not. The British invested because they thought they could make a profit out of us, therefore there is nothing there to contradict the facts that Britain is hostile to Argentina and will always ne (whether the population knows this in Britain is irrelevant, they chose the government and if that government wants to attack Argentina, then it is doing so on behalf of the people that voted for such government).
@18
I really don't care about this situation between the UK and Argentina. As far as me goes, my life doesn't change at all whether we pursue friendship or enmity with the UK. Its a moot topic.
@20
British and US history is by far the most revisionist and un-factual. That has been proven in several articles. Which is why the worldview of the average person in those countries is so out in outer Saturn compared to the average European, Asian, and Latin American.
@21
Corcica, the Channel Islands, Bermuda, St Miquelon, etc, are different situations.
Italy and France have a mutually beneficial relationship. The UK and USA have a mutually beneficial relationship, the UK and France have it.
There is no beneficial relationship, existing or ocularly manifest in the offing, between the UK and Argentina.
@33
No you did not help Argentina gain independence from Spain. You helped Chile and Peru, maybe others. Argentina did it all by itself, and went bankrupt for it.
As for trade, enemies have trade throughout history. There is nothing remarkable about it. I've no problem with British boycotting Argentine goods, seems fair enough and at the end of the day, if I choose not to buy something because I don't like the taste of it, I am de facto boycotting it anyway.
What I do find fascinating is how people here taunt Argentina's defenselessness. Almost daring it to re-arm. Silly.
@47
Nov 12th, 2014 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Please give us a reason to invest in your country ( I assume Argentina ) because all I can see is the Government turning round and saying “ You are not investing enough so we are going to nationalise you” As happened to Repsol I believe. What incentive will the Government give to woo investors, apart from Russia and China.
isolda
Nov 12th, 2014 - 03:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”(yes, trolls, we DO own these lslands & surrounding seas & you do NOT!).”
dont be so childish
nobody wants the islets, nor your oil (it is not commercial oil, iso) nor your fish, nor your penguins.
personally, all i want is you, my dearest isolda.
@49 Ah paulie a true sleazebag must be Argentinian by upbringing
Nov 12th, 2014 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0To the Argentines:
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No!
BTW: Buenos Aires should look quite quaint when its reduced to rubble by UK nukes
@51
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually the Argies ought to thank the Yanks for saving their country in 1982 as Maggie wanted to take out all the infrastructure in Argie land to teach them a lesson. A lesson it seems they have not learnt.
51 pelotudo
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0another pelotudo talking about nukes, bombings and stuff.
it seems conq is not the only one, no?
must be genetic.
52 boludo
the yanks helped you, you boludo.
there is no way england can win at anything without the help of the yanks.
tha´s why the uk is like the colony of the u.s.
Any sign of those Gripens yet?
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here ?
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not yet. Everyone involved is probably down at Copacabana watching the Tangas.
I think this is the most honest article I have read on this board as well. The gentleman is just speaking the truth, nothing more.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 047, troll people point out Argentinas defenselessness in response to the tough talk from your fearless leader. When she threatens “grave repercussion” to the US she sounds like a fool. The reality is Argentina has the muscle of a well cooked noodle, so threats from the args is laughable. Your country can't afford a shot gun, so forget a military. Take to heart the article as it is true..
@55
Nov 12th, 2014 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No. Not in Brazil. Argentina wanted to buy some too. On the back of the Brazilian trade deal with Sweden. However, the Gripen is 30% British spec.
So Argentine part of the deal will get blocked. No problem for Brazil, but might have pay a little more per aircraft.
Brazil will get Gripens. Argentina will not, I think.
ilsen
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“So Argentine part of the deal will get blocked”
blocked by who?
the uk??
lol
LOL
@58
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/two-to-tango-argentina-looking-for-new-warplanes-022821/
I think that is what is being alluded to.
Shame that Senor Escudé has got so many things wrong. In reality, argieland's unrelenting stating of its position is indisputedly right. How will the world know the real situation unless it is constantly shoved under its nose. For example, surely less than 3,000 Islanders can understand that it is ridiculous to attempt to resist 41 million argies? Can anyone believe that argieland, internationally recognised in 1858, doesn't have a right to the Falkland Islands claimed by Britain in 1745? Isn't it right that argieland invaded and occupied a territory, started a war and lost it, actually won? Is it not right that argieland, with a legal jurisdiction that covers the entire planet, should be able to take legal action against everyone? I have to admit that I don't quite understand why argieland, with such a clear and unequivocal case, should keep changing it and decline to go to the ICJ? Obviously, Senor Escudé needs to be silenced in order not to undermine the argie case.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But let's look at reality. There's the dipshit @8. Excellent news. Total silence from argieland. Give us a taste. Start NOW.
@47. And still you 'speak'. Thought you weren't going to talk. Another argie lie.
@49. Aha, a rapist. Typical argie. Murder is next. Or have you already done that?
@53. You are slightly mistaken. I'm not the only one. 255 British servicemen and 3 Falkland Islanders is more than enough reason to wipe argies off the face of the planet. There is a debt to settle. I have to differentiate. There is a tiny minority of Argentines. Shit like pablo aren't Argentines. Not quite sure what, if anything, they are. Scum? Degenerates? Genocides? Vomit? Sick? Crud? But there's still a debt. A debt unpaid for 32 years. Given relative worth, how about 50,000 argies per year? 1.6 million. You probably kill that many yourselves. But we could make it 50,000 argies per British serviceman.
And you are such a dick. Which countries 'helped' argieland? Israel. Peru. Brazil. Libya. Soviet Russia.
#53
Nov 12th, 2014 - 05:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Talks about nukes is stupid. There is no way that the UK would use them against Argentina unless they acquired them and used them first.
There is also no need for the UK to get involved in an armed conflict with Argentina UNLESS they start it. Argentina seems hell-bent on it's own destruction with it's misguided policies and attitude of blaming everyone but themselves for their situation.
Meanwhile, the UK can sit back and enjoy the show.
#58
Yes!
60 genetic error
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0what you want, piece of scum, is irrelevant, even for fatty camoron.
and again, the leftovers of the uk are a nonentity.
that's why they have to settle for being the biatch of the United States.
1. HMS Dragon is the fourth of the Royal Navy's six Type 45 air defence destroyers. She is currently on Atlantic Patrol Tasking (South). She provides ongoing protection and reassurance to British interests in the South Atlantic.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-equipment/ships/destroyers/type-45-destroyer
That's the bottom line really.
2. Britain confirms that they will block any Gripen sale – and they can. Thank you for the link #59 Ekeko .
Paulie; “blocked by who? the uk?? lol”
yes paulie, blocked by the UK, as I said. You should check the facts before you come bouncing into other people's conversations and shooting your mouth off.
No Gripens for you and a UK Type 45 Destroyer free to roam the South Atlantic.
British diplomacy has already worked to delay Argentina’s proposed Super Etendard modernization, and also scuttled a reported deal to buy 16 second-hand Mirage F-1M fighters from Spain.
real Politik dumbo!
You seriously need to get out more - its a big world out there.
and who the f*ck cares if argentina does not get gripens and blablabla, you naboletti?
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0now the fact that the uk does not want argentina to buy them does not mean a shite.
the leftovers of the uk do not have any clout.
hahahaha! so funny when paulie makes a huge mistake and then sulks like a teenage, “it doesn't matter, we didn't want them any way!”
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your Minister would certainly disagree;
Argentina’s Defense Minister Agustin Rossi surprised just about everybody when he announced on Oct. 21 that his government intended to buy 24 Saab Gripen E fighters to re-equip his nation’s ancient Air Force.
But Rossi’s request appeared to ignore a likely insurmountable hurdle to the sale: Britain, its longtime foe, has a near veto on the export of the combat jet as a result of the substantial number of UK systems in the jet. More than 30 percent of the new version of the Gripen being developed by Saab is supplied by British industry.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20141108/DEFREG05/311080014/Argentina-Buying-Gripens-Brits-Say-No-Way-
“now the fact that the uk does not want argentina to buy them does not mean a shite. - the leftovers of the uk do not have any clout.”
Wrong again. The UK can veto the deal. Prove otherwise - with links.
You won't be getting anything from Israel either “the Kfirs’ J79 turbojets need American approval for re-export. America needs British support regarding Russia right now, so despite past snubs, the Obama administration will find it inconvenient to alienate Britain further”
or from Spain, or France;
British diplomacy has already worked to delay Argentina’s proposed Super Etendard modernization, and also scuttled a reported deal to buy 16 second-hand Mirage F-1M fighters from Spain.
So no Airforce for Argentina because the Brits won't allow it.
Bwahahahaha!
I hope this has been educational for you. You do know realise that Argentina has no clout on the international stage, don't you?
63 ilsen
Nov 12th, 2014 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Funny how RentBoy Pablo starts off saying “ The UK can't stop us buying new Gripens”
Then you, a fellow anonymous poster, gives him a confident and direct answer that the UK will indeed stop it - and CabanaBoy crumples immediately.
Very quickly he reverts to a face-saving,“ we dont care, who needs them anyway, not us... !”
Honestly, you would think he was in a schoolyard, pouting and clenching his little fists. :-)
Here Pablo... *pats Troll on greasy head and gives it a lolly *
@56
Nov 12th, 2014 - 07:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My benighted dolt, Argentina has chosen to disarm. There are many countries far poorer than Argentina, or where the citizens are far worse off, with far stronger militaries.
I agree Argentina can't threaten anyone, or your country, which is why I cheer for the Arabs. You need to learn some humble pie, and you will get it (and have already gotten it).
Meanwhile, keep spending 17 million US dollars for every 1 terrorist dollar... sounds like a magnificent plan for the terrorists to destroy your country from within, by simply sliding the financial rug from under you.
Looks like no Gripens for you, Argentina.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 08:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Go on trolls, tell us all how Argentina will develop its own modern fighter jets.
This should be hilarious.
@49 pablo nabolito,
l don't go for pimply teenagers with no brains, so you have no chance.
“”““So Argentine part of the deal will get blocked”
Nov 12th, 2014 - 08:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0blocked by who?
the uk??
lol
LOL”“”
Yes, you complete idiot, as they have already done: Deal Blocked - cant happen, wont happen.
So if we've got naff-all clout and yet we've still got enough to block you...
what does that say eh?
@66 Troy.
Nov 12th, 2014 - 08:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why thank you! Always nice to see a gentleman on these boards.
I really think it was a pathetic attempt at 'face-saving' by Polly. He really doesn't learn from his mistakes. I have tried to help him, with such pointers as;
a) read, (and understand), the article first
b) read, (and try to understand), the thread first (other posters comments)
c) back up your statements with facts
d) back up your facts with links, (don't expect others to try to find your sources)
e) try and make it relevant to the topic
f) don't lie
g) don't sulk and hate when you are wrong, but learn!
h) when it gets serious, I only post what I know to be true, and can support, so getting into a fight with me is foolish
I have tried to educate him, just as ElaineB did with tobi TTT, but I guess it is like trying “to plough the sea” as Bolivar once said in relation to trying to govern Lat. Am.
oh well... now watch him throw his toys out of the pram...
@67 TITD - the re-incarnation.
“My benighted dolt, Argentina has chosen to disarm.”
1) that's a bit rude to 56 dsullivanboston considering his well-mannered response
2) “Argentina has chosen to disarm” ??? How does your statement link to the fact that Argentina’s Defense Minister Agustin Rossi announced on Oct. 21 that your government intended to buy 24 Saab Gripen E fighters to re-equip your nation’s ancient Air Force?
Please explain how disarmanent involves attempts to buy military jets from Spain, Israel and Sweden (via the backdoor of Brazil)?
only in Argentina!
arf! arf!
@68
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I will be at Lafone on Jan 12. How about a cup of coffee? :-)
#67
Nov 12th, 2014 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You do live in Argentina ? You do read your own press and government statements? You still believe Argentina has CHOSEN to disarm ?
Why the attempt to buy modern combat aircraft if you wish to disarm ?
You keep boasting of your super intelligence and a grasp of world affairs that leave us mere mortals blinded by your insight, so, explain to us why you would re equip your air force if disarmament was a national priority...make it good !.
@67
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“My benighted dolt, Argentina has chosen to disarm.”
So says the “Man from MendaCity.”
Finally some news in the UK press re: Argentina
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/argentines-falklands-minister-there-is-absolutely-no-chance-of-another-invasion-9821944.html
do scroll down for the comments....
@72
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Have you ever heard of any nation in human history that did not buy ANY weapons in 30 years (since the mid 1980s)... What do you call any nation that buys no new weapons (or weapons to at least keep up whatever capability already achieved), AT THE SAME TIME old weapons and equipment either are retired, forced into retirement, or simply break down?
If every day, for 30 years, you have fewer and fewer weapons, what is the word for that?
Or do I need to teach you English? (the word is “disarmament”):
dis·ar·ma·ment
[ diss áarməmənt ]
1.reduction in arms: the process of reducing a nation's supply of weapons or the strength of its armed forces
2.giving up arms: the condition of having given up weapons
Duhhhh.
@75
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Re-arm-ament
1) to buy new aircraft
Duhhhh
Pelotudos and boludos and nabos:
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“blablabla...Britain, its longtime foe, has a near veto on the export of the combat jet as a result of the substantial number of UK systems in the jet. More than 30 percent of the new version of the Gripen being developed by Saab is supplied by British industry.”
so the plane has 30% of british components...LOL
then must be a shite.
they are doing argentina a big favor with that “near veto”.
british aircrafts are only known for their lack of quality and horrible accidents:
“The Comet was involved in 26 hull-loss accidents, including 13 fatal crashes which resulted in 426 fatalities”
Of course the comet was not the only one, we may add:
The Blackburn Botha
The BE9
The Fairey Battle (lol)
and the list goes on.
british + technology = monkey + jack knife
“Britain, its longtime foe,”
Nov 12th, 2014 - 10:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I thought it was a lie that Britain has historically been an enemy of Argentina. Here is a BRITISH newspaper confirming the obvious.
78
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0yep, that´s what they say.
i think they are / were an historical foe of 3/4 of the world
@77, So British aircraft are rubbish?, inc Avro Lincoln, BAC Canberra, Gloster Meteor etc, but good enough for the FAA?
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“””What do you call any nation that buys no new weapons (or weapons to at least keep up whatever capability already achieved), AT THE SAME TIME old weapons and equipment either are retired, forced into retirement, or simply break down?“”“
Nov 12th, 2014 - 11:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”Broke due to economic incompetence” is what most people call it.
I think Argentina only exists to make FIFA look good.
@81
Nov 13th, 2014 - 12:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Obviously you have no interest in being a serious adult. Off with you.
Ilsen
Nov 13th, 2014 - 12:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0I read the Independent article.
The comments were pure gold. I had to laugh. Especially what Daniel Filmus' name is an anagram of.
It is heartwarming that Argentine politicians are so concerned about the UK government saving money.... perhaps they believe there will be more for them to steal?
@77
Nov 13th, 2014 - 12:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Your talking about something that happened from 1947 onwards when technology weren't that great....
However.....
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerol%C3%ADneas_Argentinas_accidents_and_incidents
Oh dear.....
#67 Name one? Other than North Korea, I can't think of one country as backward and broke as the Args.. The funny thing is even if Britain allowed your cess pool country to buy some planes, you could never pay for them. And who would issue Arg credit to purchase them? NO ONE!
Nov 13th, 2014 - 01:12 am - Link - Report abuse 083 Anglotino
Nov 13th, 2014 - 01:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am glad you enjoyed the article, and the comments!
:-)
I am have great fun with all the trolls wriggling like worms on a hook, just bait for bigger fish!
arf!
They are twisting themselves inside out to respond, but no joy yet!
Paul has even resort to discussing the Comet, when was that? 50 years ago? in order to explain that whilst his Defence Minister is desperately trying to buy jets, paulie doesn't care and doesn't want them anyway.
oh bring on the clowns!
He just can't accept that the UK can block arms deals to Argentina, he still believes his Gov lies.
So funny!
Comets...
Nov 13th, 2014 - 02:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Airframes on the earlier planes would split - very advanced, the very first commercial jet airliners.
Nobody had encountered this before, but a solution was found.
The Aerolineas Argentinas Comet 4's that crashed were the later ones - they crashed due to pilot error.
One on landing, one during a training flight set down too heavily, another crashed into a Eucalyptus forest on takeoff.
Sorry, not the fault of the designers or builders, just argentine pilots or maintenance.
AA sure crashed a lot more C-47's and DC4's.
How's that Argentine jet aircraft industry doing??
Oh, yeah... Pampas- a warmed over 70's design.
Back on topic:
Falklands surge ahead while the Argentine economy stalls.
Sad for the people, but not those like Pablo
78 Troll in The Dark
Nov 13th, 2014 - 03:14 am - Link - Report abuse 079 paulcedron
Chile, Colombia and Mexico want to deepen friendship and trade with the UK. Ever feel like you have missed the boat?
How is that Gripen 'deal' working out? Brazil is going to shaft you on that one.
Great 'friends' you have.
Time to accept that Argentina is 'over'. The Falklands will take BA province and have general oversight. The rest can be split between Chile, Brazil and Paraguay.
You know it makes sense. Get help now!
History has shown that the B.O.T. has succeeded and Argentina has failed
Accept the inevitable. Or descend into a vnzla type hell...
Your only hope is to beg the F.I.G. to rescue you.
@85, 88
Nov 13th, 2014 - 03:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0And these two posts, in a lapidary nutshell, encapsulate to validate my “foreign free” position perspicuously and eloquently.
Whoever thinks Argentina can engage people that think like this can't even have their heads examined, as they will find out they have none.
haha! Last time I was in front of a mirror my head appeared to be quite securely in place.
Nov 13th, 2014 - 05:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think TITD has just won 1st place in the Loser Championship!
Good luck with your isolation, but don't forget to keep posting on the global internet.
hmmm... says it all really....
“This is pure logic because trying to dislodge the Islanders of their soil, after eight generations is unfair. They have been shepherds all their lives and since the Islands history“, argued Escudé.”
Nov 13th, 2014 - 07:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think that this is one of the most thoughtful and honest articles that I have read from the Argentine side of the dispute. Let us compare Mr Escude's work with the hateful, unproductive bile propagated by the Argentine government against the Falkland Islanders and the UK.
People on our side of the dispute may not agree with him completely, but what he is proposing is light years ahead of his government’s current policy and he deserves recognition for his courage in speaking words that some Argentines would regard as treason and the fact that he is offering hope for an eventual long lasting peaceful solution.
The fact that Paul cedric's rhetoric is particularly nasty today is no doubt, his extreme reaction to truth spoken by an Argentine with far more humanity and education than he has.
@71 Artillero601,
Nov 13th, 2014 - 09:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0l'm afraid that, that won't be possible.
Although it is nice of you to ask & l appreciate it.
Business trip for you?
Regards, l.
Me Escude is NEVER Richter. He proclaimed that Argentina belonged to the “first” world in the darle 90s. He “decided” then that each parte should get “one island” and so on and so forth. A so-called Mr Know All who is a shame to look at. Not only because of his ridiculous appearance.
Nov 13th, 2014 - 10:46 am - Link - Report abuse 089 Great non answer to a very specific question. I am sure you pulled the statement out of your colon and can't back it up. That makes you a true Argentine, the fact you are rooting for terrorists makes you personally trash
Nov 13th, 2014 - 12:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@92
Nov 13th, 2014 - 01:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No , Just a chance to visit the Islands . Well I'm sorry you are unavailable . If you come to Texas the beer will be on me :-)
Carlos Escudé
Nov 13th, 2014 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Escud%C3%A9
as well as his other achievements-
Escudé's academic work is associated with neomodernism and with peripheral realism
rule-makers, rule-takers and rogue states. It appraises the costs, for the citizens of weaker states without rule-making capabilities, of defying the order established by the stronger
he advised on Argentine foreign policy strategy vis-à-vis the Falklands War.
On 2010 he spoke in favour of the Cristina Fernández administration's foreign policy
.
@94
Nov 13th, 2014 - 02:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Terrorists are a needed part of human society to keep the likes of you on your heels, and humble you a bit. If you were humble people outright, terrorist would be irrelevant because you would not have pissed those countries with your continued humilliations and meddling in their affairs.
@97
Nov 13th, 2014 - 03:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stop pissing the FALKLANDS off and “ continued humilliation and meddling in their affairs” POT KETTLE BLACK You saying that Argies are terrorists?
isolda
Nov 13th, 2014 - 03:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“@71 Artillero601,
l'm afraid that, that won't be possible.”
well said iso.
let them know that you belong to me.
who the heck this artillero thinks he is?
@91 : Regarding the deHavilland Comet : When the redesigned Comet 4 entered service, it was flown by customers BOAC, Aerolíneas Argentinas, and East African Airways ( from Wiki) .
Nov 13th, 2014 - 04:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0British planes are such shit that Argentina operated the following types :
Lancasters , Lincolns , Meteors , HS748 ,BAC1-11 , Canberra and Britannia . There were others , I just can't remember them .
Have a good protest tonight .
Give them hell .
@99 :-)
Nov 13th, 2014 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 097, wow really really ignorant statement even from a cowardly argentine on a anonymous board. I believe we all get what we deserve in this life and it will be justice to see Argentina sink into malaise one more time...
Nov 13th, 2014 - 05:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Terrorists are a needed part of human society to keep the likes of you on your heels, and humble you a bit
Nov 13th, 2014 - 08:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Tell that to the families of those killed by a terrorist attack in Argentina some time ago,
and all the other terrorist attacks.
@87
Nov 13th, 2014 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Sorry, not the fault of the designers or builders, just argentine pilots or maintenance.”
It won't change even if they get the Gripen, unless someone else maintains them.
@97
“would not have pissed those countries with your continued humilliations and meddling in their affairs.”
So are you suggesting the Falkland Islanders become terrorists, because Argentina tries to humiliate the Islanders and meddle in their affairs?
There will be NO Gripens for Argentina. The UK has embargoed the trade deal.
Nov 13th, 2014 - 08:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Embraer Tucanos perhaps, but the new Gripens will remain “ on the beach ” as we say.
Nov 13th, 2014 - 09:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If they are good enough for Afghanistan, that other “A-list ” country, then they are good enough for Argentina.
Transfer of technology, manufacturing, and assembly has it's limits.
@99 paulcedron,
Nov 13th, 2014 - 11:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0FYI, I have never met Mr Artillero601.
However, he sounds like a Gentleman & not a witless teenager, such as yourself.
l repeat, paulie nabolito, you have absolutely NO chance.
@105 Thanks for the update.
Nov 13th, 2014 - 11:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No Mirage F1s
No Kfirs
No Gripens
Back to the Pamper to fly the flag.
Argentina needs to design a jet engine quickly-they borrowed a Rolls Royce Nene for the Pulqui on the 1950s, so they should have got their own engines by now....
127 isolda
Nov 13th, 2014 - 11:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ay iso...iso
we are meant to each other.
there is nothing we can do against that.
(107) Isolde
Nov 14th, 2014 - 12:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0Your loss babykins...
He will be all Arlette's...
;-)
109, 110
Nov 14th, 2014 - 02:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Creepy... and Creepy Jr.
Sorry if the truth is unconfortable but someone has to say it. I'm not so much for terrorists as I am “understanding” of why the came into existence.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 03:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0When you trample on people so much, they are bound to get pissed. If Europeans and North Americans cannot grasp that concept, then at some point one has to ask if they did not ask for it.
Shit, the ENGLISH of all people should know this concept very well. Quoting ISAAC NEWTON:
Lex III: Actioni contrariam semper et æqualem esse reactionem: sive corporum duorum actiones in se mutuo semper esse æquales et in partes contrarias dirigi. ”
“ Law III: To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction: or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts”
If you treat people like sh!t, and you kill them... they might tend to want to treat you like sh!t, and kill you back.
@112
Nov 14th, 2014 - 04:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0You tell 'em, kurepi! ;)
@113
Nov 14th, 2014 - 04:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0Problem is Argentina was there minding her own business while it was Brazil and Uruguay that were at war with you... and then you had the bright idea to invade US, at the time a rising world power.
Big mistake obviously, and the turning point in the war as up to that point it was YOU advancing in Mato Grosso, and controlling the government in Montevideo.
Let us see, Escude mentions islands from Britain and France....hmmm....France and Britain share a channel. In some places like Dover it is quite close, what maybe 20NM at most. Malvinas, 12,000 NM away, a whole hemisphere away and disputed by peoples displaced, and consistently disputed. Escude speaks of military might...so we still presume to rely on the old sword to settle scores; very 18th century. IJC will find the people there currently for what they are: squatters.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 05:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0@115 Sallus
Nov 14th, 2014 - 06:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0The UK and I'm sure the Falkland Islanders would welcome Argentina taking its sovereignty case to the International Courts of Justice.
All Argentina has to do is PROVE its sovereignty claim.
You see Sallus, unlike in Argentina you have to produce EVIDENCE of your claims. And then you also have to prove why your sovereignty claim (which your government always states goes back to the 19th century) outweighs the right to self determination as laid down by the UN Charter.
And then you will have to explain why Argentina, who currently so vehemently claim the islands, said nothing for more than 90 years, which under international law means that your claim has lapsed.
And then Argentina can explain why maps produced upon the creation of the Republic of Argentina for its embassies world wide clearly show that the Falklands were NOT Argentine territory.
And that is just a few of the things that Argentina would have to PROVE.
Just saying something is yours doesn't make it so.
115 Sallus#
Nov 14th, 2014 - 06:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0“IJC will find the people there currently for what they are: squatters.”
If you really believe that, stop talking about it and bring it on, bring it on!
“In some places like Dover it is quite close, what maybe 20NM at most. Malvinas, 12,000 NM away, a whole hemisphere away .......”
Proximity does not bestow any special rights to ownership; if it did the entire world would be involved in sovereignty disputes. Besides, due to its tiny population, the Falklands Islands needs a protector and since Argentina has demonstrated that it is totally unsuitable for that role, someone else has to do the job.
Sallus
Nov 14th, 2014 - 06:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0Pray tell...
1) what people were “displaced”?
2) how many were “displaced”?
3) what was the longest any of those “displaced” had ever been on the islands?
I see we have a new sock puppet on the block
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nah not another sock puppet, just another brainwashed and uneducated Argentinean.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Like we didn't have enough already.
@115 Sallus,
Nov 14th, 2014 - 10:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Squatters- that would mean ALL the Argentines that live in Patagonia.
Squatters on lndian land(after killing most of them of course).
So that makes them also receivers of stolen goods.
Stolen from dead people.
You might like to think before you post.
@119
Nov 14th, 2014 - 01:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I wonder how the guys on the squadron felt when he left the United States Force. It's a shame that he left, really, perhaps one of the guys might have reminded him that the last use of force in the Falklands was initiated by Argentina's fascist mitary dictatorship of the time.
Its not the truth, as you will never get that from an Argentine, just a stupid opinion. So if a Falkland Islander went to your country and bombed a cafe killing women and children a coward like you would support the bombing?
Nov 14th, 2014 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“When you trample on people so much, they are bound to get pissed”
@115
Nov 14th, 2014 - 01:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are talking bollocks, Argentina if it so wishes can take it to the ICJ I don't think the FALKLANDERS give shit anyway, since Argentina don't have the balls anyway. Argentina has just complained again to the UN about the UK militarizing the South Atlantic, they don't own the South Atlantic, get over it. They so much get a kick of going to the UN why not complain to the ICJ? Knobheads in the government haven't got a clue.
@110 Think , Darwin 2 days , Port Stanley 5 , amazing trip
Nov 14th, 2014 - 02:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@121 Thank you Isolde ... always a Lady !!
I cannot understand it....
Nov 14th, 2014 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Argentines are force fed the “usurption”. We are told that “every Argentine knows the history”. We are told that the injustice holds them back....so why do none of them ever ever answer my questions?
1) How many were evicted?
2) what was the longest any of the evicted had ever spent on the islands?
Simple questions, which we know can be answered in the “Argentine National Archives”.
Any takers?
Simple questions....you can get the answers in minutes with a bit of research.
126 - MonkeyM , does it matter if it was 1 person or 246 people? Do you think it just that one entity forcefully removing another after centuries of protest is correct? Why does a European 2nd class power want half way around the world with the squatting rights of 2500 people? Can you spell oil and fishing-
Nov 14th, 2014 - 03:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(125) Artillero601
Nov 14th, 2014 - 04:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 05 days in Puerto Estanley at Lafone House.
2 days in Darwin at.....................Boca House...?
Remember, if, under your mission, you are captured by the FIDF, don't reveal your grade nor your freaking surname (todavia se me yela la sangre, se me..;-)
Stick to the cover story about meeting Pomette Isolde for a cup of coffee...
It's a very good one...
Chuckle chuckle
@127
Nov 14th, 2014 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It does matter if it's only 50 people and that they had only been there for 6 weeks.
You seem to claim that the “rights of these 50 people” and their “6 weeks on the islands” are somehow more significant than 3000 “squatters” for 180 years.
So yes, I think that the 50 murderers and rapists (the crew of the SS Sarandi) had no rightful claim to the Falkland Islands, either in 1833 or today.
The Spanish on the islands between 1767 and 1811 voluntarily gave up their claim...not a single solitary one of them EVER became Argentine.
Britain neither has nor wants a claim...the Falkland islanders however, are the only ones with both a just and valid claim...they have no wish to be Argentine.
The only thing I can smell is bullshit...Argentinas ridiculous claim.
P.s.
Explain to me how Argentina came by Patagonia in 1880...was this one entity forcefully removing another...so bullshit and hypocrisy.
Sallus.....it does matter if the answer is '0', then you have absolutely no argument.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 04:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If no settlers were usurped what are you arguing about, how many british settlers replaced those that were usurped? and how come your murdering hero Rivero and his co-conspiritors were still on the Islands in August 1833 if they we all usurped and forcibly sent packing. Please answer with some facts, opinions are just opinions, unless you have no facts in, which case carry on with your opinions.
Here are some facts for you to start you off..
'His co-conspirators were two gauchos, Juan Brasido and José María Luna, and five Charrúa Indians, Manuel González, Luciano Flores, Felipe Salazar, Pascual Latorre and Manuel Godoy. They killed five men, Captain Brisbane, Juan Simón (foreman of the gauchos), Dickson, Antonio Vehingar and Ventura Pasos. The population of that time, mainly women and children, fled to the nearby Peat island, until rescued by the sealer Hopeful in October 1833, who then passed information about the murders to the British squadron at Rio de Janeiro.
and...
'After the Argentines had left, Commander Onslow recorded those that remained in the settlement - “William Dickson is an Irishman, Jean Simon, French, Antonio Werner and Charles Kusserley are German, while
William Jones is English. Benjamin Pearson hails from Jamaica. There are also three women; Antonina Roxa, and two black slaves, Gregoria and Carmelita who has a child.
Come on Sallus, you can do it, show some facts that prove the above wrong.
@128 jajajajaja !!!
Nov 14th, 2014 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In Darwin at Darwin House and BTW Arlette is a genious ! she handled all our reservations . On a different note , flying with American passport .. would it help ? :-)
The government summoned the charge d'affaires at the British Embassy, Richard Barlow, and presented him with a note of protest for new military exercises in the Falkland Islands
Nov 14th, 2014 - 05:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0148 Battery ('Meiktila') is a unique unit of specially trained men from the British Army and Royal Navy, tasked with calling in artillery and air strikes in support of UKSF and 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines.
The men of 148 are Commando trained and parachute trained and are proficient in stealth insertion via submarine, parachute, boat and helicopter. 148 Battery Fire Support Teams can accompany UKSF teams into action, using their specialist skills in controlling artillery and air strikes. Their particular expertise is in calling in Naval Gunfire Support. Fire control computers and gyroscope guns on modern British destroyers allow for highly accurate shelling of targets.
During the 1982 Falklands conflict, 148 Battery teams linked up with SAS and SBS units for several successful missions which included the shelling of Argentine positions on West Falklands and in and around Port Stanley on East Falklands..
http://www.cronista.com/economiapolitica/Argentina-denuncio-al-Reino-Unido-por-disparar-proyectiles-en-Malvinas-20141114-0076.html
@114
Nov 14th, 2014 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That doesn't stop people from wanting you dead, does it? Or in this case, shot for your shoes? ;)
@115 Sallus
Nov 14th, 2014 - 07:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You thieving Creole planters should be more care full about who you call “squatters”
http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/174627/patagonian-mapuche-group-declare-‘war’-on-argentina-chile
“The fight against the real enemy (…) the invaders, usurpers and destroyers of the (Mapuche) people.”
“Neither Argentineans nor Chileans, we are Mapuche Nation. The whole territory free and recovered for Our People.”
“We don’t want to be integrated, we want to be free,” they said and referred to the “right to rebel” as part of the Self-determination principle. “This is Our Land”.
Let’s face it the Native S. Americans would make for much better neighbours in the S. Atlantic than the Argies.
@125 Artillero 601
Saludos hermano.
You see Sallus....the number of Argentines evicted from the islands who'd been on the islands more than 6 weeks is ZERO. NONE. NADA.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You claim proximity negates sovereignty, but Argentina was over 1000 miles from the Falklands in 1833.
Just because you want the islands, and the islands population is small, doesn't mean you get them.
The islands were never Argentine, there was no usurption. you have been lied to.
#127
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I see we have been promoted from a third class power to a second class power.
Have you had Paulcedron's agreement to this statement ?
We would not want him to be upset in this matter,
@115
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Under your theory, the Faroe Islands, nearer to the UK than they are to Denmark should be British.
Under your theory Greenland is nearer to Canada than it is to Denmark, so why is it Danish?
According to your theory, why does Spain own Ceuta and Mellila when they are joined to Morrocco?
Why isn't French Guiana Brazilian (Brazil is nearer than France)?
Why doesn't Cuba belong to the USA? (According to your theory, it should).
Why do the French still own Islands near to Canada? Under your theory they should belong to Canada.
Why doesn't Sri Lanka belong to India? According to your theory it should be Indian.
Britain slaps down Argentina after blast at Royal Navy for opening fire off Falklands
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0BRITAIN today slapped down Argentine complaints about a “provocative” live-firing military exercise off the Falklands.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/535552/Falkland-Islands-Argentina-anger-Royal-Navy-opening-fire
,,,,
Argentine fury at frigate's gunfire
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/535552/Falkland-Islands-Argentina-anger-Royal-Navy-opening-fire
Argentina lodged a formal complaint over what it called a “provocation”.
The Argentine embassy said the live firing “constitutes a further provocation
The Argentine Republic rejects in the strongest possible terms the execution of naval and military exercises in an Argentine territory that is illegally occupied by the UK.
“This act constitutes an unjustified show of force. It also demonstrates a wilful disregard for numerous resolutions made by the United Nations
It said it was ” further proof of a systematic policy to entirely disregard UN resolutions
The British reply [typically]
An MoD spokesman said: ”Royal Navy warships undertake regular training in the use of their weapon systems
The Foreign Office said the incident was the third time this year that one of its diplomats had been summoned by the Argentinian authorities
There is no change to the UK's defence posture in the South Atlantic,
Perhaps it could have been a stronger reply ??? what say you….
.
#138 Briton
Nov 15th, 2014 - 02:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0I read your link, thanks.
RN warships must undertake regular training to maintain their combat readiness. The RNs presence in the South Atlantic helps maintain the area as a 'zone of peace'; they are therefore, ensuring that Argentina's 'peaceful' policy is enforced. They should be grateful!
“There is no change to the UK's defence posture in the South Atlantic” The Foreign Office’s reply was diplomatic and to the point, apart from saying nothing, that seems to be the best reply.
Besides, even so called 'second rate powers' are under no obligation to explain themselves to a bunch of nobodies!
Sun newspaper, today page four [ 4 ]
Nov 15th, 2014 - 07:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0SIXTY, NINE PER SENT 69% [for the argies benefit..lol
or European tax payers want ARGENTINA ousted from the G20
due to economic woes and strange behaviour on the global stage a latest poll found..
not as popular as they think..lol
and the UK is still giving the Argentines 'Aid' payments vis the EU.
Nov 15th, 2014 - 11:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This needs to stop. Why does a G20 country need Aid? Especially one that wishes harm to the UK and its BOTs?
Scandulous. I have emailed my MP.
#135 - The Argentine claim is not proximity. The claim is the fact that the UK forcefully removed Argentine rights in 1833 period . point finale. The dispute has endured since then and still remains. Argentina obviously has the backing of all of LATAM and about half of the Europeans countries. SO you and your measly 1300 adults should get used to the idea that you just might not get your grubby little hands on all that oil money. Remember only proximity matters to your lords, the UK from over 14k km away....it is just draining their coffers. I imagine that they will want payback....
Nov 19th, 2014 - 01:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sallus refuse to 'get it'
Nov 19th, 2014 - 01:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Islands belong to the Falklanders, not Argentina.
If you dispute this, you have two options;
1) The ICJ
2) War
but you do neither.
hmm....
This is because no-one truly supports you, you have no claim, and no military worth a candle.
Good Luck with that Sallus, just keep shouting in the wind. You have no capability, in any sphere, to change anything.
Argentina will continue to be a country that things happen to, rather than an actual force in the world.
Accept it.
143 - Ilsen=Isolde=Troy=Buzz=Briton=Bog=Clyde=Magic ect....
Nov 19th, 2014 - 05:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0“And he in a provocative assessment of Britain’s military capability to defend the islands, he added: ‘The verbal and military threats of the colonial power will continue to be met with Argentina’s demand for respect for international law and for UN resolutions.
‘In other words, the United Kingdom’s refusal to sit down at the negotiating table is compelling evidence that, in the question of the Malvinas Islands, the lion roars but does not inspire fear any more.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533338/Argentina-shrugs-British-military-threats-make-fresh-claim-Falklands.html#ixzz3JUOvfuoq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
What !?? The UK shrugging off International law, even Brits beginning to demand that the UK go to the table. Sorry Ilsen, pulled this from the English paper.
Here is another one from a neutral source: the US's Huffington post:
“The truth is that when it comes to the Falklands self determination is being used as a smokescreen. The real issue is the sizeable oil and gas deposits located in waters close to the islands, where drilling began by British oil companies in 2011. In 1995 both countries signed a joint declaration to cooperate on off shore oil explorations in the South Atlantic. In 2007 Argentina voided the declaration because Britain refused to view it as a step towards meaningful negotiations over sovereignty.
Any British government must be aware that it risks precipitating a South American trade embargo if...”
Ilsen: you are a bunch of squatters. You flaunt the UK's military. I have seen the World support for Argentina and the list is extremely long compared to only English vassals supporting the UK. Even the United States, your big stick in this world with a soft speak is Neutral. As the article states, do you really think the UK is willing to risk a trade embargo for the sake of 1300 oil money grubbers?
144 Sallus
Nov 19th, 2014 - 06:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Daily Mail.. Matt chorley and silly quotes from Timerman... ???
Sure... Well, that story is a year old, and we laughed it off the forum back then, too!
Nestor tried to link agreements over resources.. Sorry, no go, not since the Args broke the UN Resolutions by trying a land grab, in 1982.
The British haven't wavered on the sovereignty issue since '82.
Nestor thought he could get pissy and threaten, and get his way.
No Kirchner-inspired blockade is going to make a difference.
It's been 10 or 15 years... nothing.
Why would SA shoot themselves in the foot, for the sake of petulant Argentina, an Argentina going down the toilet, with dwindling influence.
@144
Nov 19th, 2014 - 09:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0What trade embargo is this, that the UK is risking exactly?
@144 Sallus
Nov 19th, 2014 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”Any British government must be aware that it risks precipitating a South American trade embargo if...”
Really? Britain buys more from Argentina than Argentina buys from the UK.
If South America wrecks its economy for the fairy tale'Malvinas dream' and embargoes-Brazil won't get the Gripen deal, if there is a British embargo on Rolls Royce aero engines, how are many of your airliners going to fly?
As Britain buys more from South America than the other way around, it's going to be LATAM that suffers the most and all for what -a fairy tale embellished with deliberate lies by Argentina about 1833 and self-determination?
There will be NO South America blockade against the British just for the sake of Argentina's silly dreams..
Nov 20th, 2014 - 12:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Both the Chileans and the Colombians welcome both merchant and Naval vessels to their ports. Brazil desperately wants to considered a First World Country and is not going to start a fight with a Permanent member of the UN Security Council. Not on behalf of their arrogant neighbours.
Bolivia and Venezuela will provide lip service. Nothing more.
It is a dream Sallus, nothing more. There will be no blockade. It is another lie from your Government.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!