MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
When Germany promised 'the return of Texas' if Mexico declared war on US
The United States of America entered World War I in April 1917 and it is widely believed that turned the tide of the conflict. The wartime leader was Woodrow Wilson, whose progressive accomplishments were significant between 1912 and his re-election in 1916. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesBritain slaps down Argentina after blast at Royal Navy for opening fire off Falklands
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:16 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….
.Germany, mmm lol
Not very accurate reporting, only approximately 1 million American troops arrived in France between summer (by time that crossed Atlantic it was summer) 1918 and the end of the war. And during that period only 500,000 (approximately) saw front line action. The rest were either based in the states or in the UK.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 09:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Germans were already losing as a result of low morale and inability to replenish their numbers lost during the spring offense! So the war had already been won, the hundred day offensive would still have been won with out the Americans. Who were using the full frontal offensive tactic losing large numbers of men, despite such tactic being dropped by the British and french precisely because of the high losses incurred when using it!
No disrespect to the Americans,
Nov 14th, 2014 - 09:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0but they do say, we would have won, it was just a matter of time..
Who won the war was Russia! At Stalingrad.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0WJcrIy8F8&index=17&list=FLmXPTu1f8AdGlizWNiASx2A
Without Russia the world would be speaking German and Japanese now.
Wrong war you idiot.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 10:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Bloody pathetic Brazilian education system.
Brazil has offered their children to fight the war for democracy. We do not fight by the stock exchanges. We fought for the right to work and have a decent life.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You want us to aggress our neighbors? We attack the Iraq?
You want us to sustain the war of yours?
NEVER!
Yeah that made no sense whatsoever.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 10:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Let the other guy login and explain it instead.
Pity Brazil isn't fighting for democracy in Cuba or Venezuela.
We have strengthened democracy in America. We do not destroy democracy in the nest.
Nov 14th, 2014 - 11:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAbZjCigrYM&list=FLmXPTu1f8AdGlizWNiASx2A&index=192
Brasileiro - I'm sorry but you are making no sense whatsoever - I can't even work out the gist of what you are trying to say.
Nov 15th, 2014 - 12:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0@4 you got the wrong war.
@6 you are talking about sending children to fight for democracy at the same time as not fighting in the Stock Exchanges. Then you want to attack your neighbours one of whom appears to be Iraq!!
@8 you claim you do not want to destroy democracy in the nest??????? whatever that means.
Please give me a few clues as to what your point is vis a vis Germany offering to return Texas etc to Mexico if they declare war on the USA a hundred years ago
Came in late.....then claimed victory.....yeah, sounds about right...
Nov 15th, 2014 - 12:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0@9
Nov 15th, 2014 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0Vis a vis. Germany was defeated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJWh9wcz4Qs&list=FLmXPTu1f8AdGlizWNiASx2A&index=358
Bahahahahaha so close to the truth there!
Nov 15th, 2014 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0#1 - Briton - aka Imperius Britannica - Sounds like the UKrs are taking notes from Kim Jung Un and North Korea test firing of artillery and missiles every time they want some attention. It was like having that retard Harry on the Islands just before the '82 anniversary. Provocation after provocation. Argentina, Brazil and LATAM should have a live fire exercise every then off the coast of the UK and Falklands every year? Maybe Brazilians should start patrolling long range bombers off the coast of Wight and turn around...just like the Russians. Provocation.
Nov 15th, 2014 - 01:09 am - Link - Report abuse 013
Nov 15th, 2014 - 01:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Does Brazil own the Isle of Wight...?
..Shit...I'm gonna have to Google that one.....
Yes Brasileiro, - Get your mate to log back in to the 'Brasileiro' profile.
Nov 15th, 2014 - 06:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0The guy who's English isn't very good.
You're even more of a trumpet than him....
@13 Has Harry even been on the islands? I thought William had done a tour, Harry was busy defending British interest elsewhere
Nov 15th, 2014 - 08:04 am - Link - Report abuse 016DaPict- Correct- prince Harry has never been to the Islands. There sure are plenty of ignorant arses about from the Arg side who write on here as well as their Foreign minister and others!
Nov 15th, 2014 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Every RN warship test fires and exercises its guns whilst on deployment- so I would guess it has happened around the Islands at least 300-500 separate times since 1982 - and the Argies have only just realised that this is actually what warships and planes and soldiers do all over the world - practise and train!!
Theirs apparently do not - which is why their ships planes and army does not work - even those ships that can still float!
A bit like having a car in the garage but never actually turning the ignition on to see if the battery is OK!
What a race of arses they are.
@13. Let's get a few things straight, nincomPOOP. The Falkland Islands are over 300 miles from the world's OTHER cesspit. They do NOT belong to the cesspit. If you had the brain of even a slug, you would be able to understand that. Britain DISCOVERED the Islands in 1690. They were uninhabited. Argieland din't exist. Because the world has a modicum of kindness, argieland was able to become a recognised country in 1858. 168 years before the world even knew you existed. You've been a pain ever since. Sending a pirate to the Islands. Still, most argies are criminals. Then sending a gang of murderers and rapists. Don't you have any normal, civilised people in your cesspit? Even in '82, you sent the murderer and war criminal Aziz!
Nov 15th, 2014 - 10:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0You're very fortunate because of your situation. You do realise that you don't have any ammunition that works, don't you? So your “navy” can't fire anything. Your 'complaint' is more about jealousy. Just remember that the Royal Navy can sail into the Rio de la Plata and shell Buenos Aires anytime. But we wouldn't. Far easier for our submarines to lay offshore and use cruise missiles. The capacity to launch 200 missiles at a time. Then the sub sails away to a Royal Fleet Auxiliary and reloads. You can treat the UK and the Isle of Wight the way you should treat the Falklands. They belong to someone else. At sea, if you are perceived as a threat, you will be sunk. Your other “idea” is a joke. Let's see these Brazilian long-range bombers! And, before you mention tankers, ever seen what happens when an airborne tanker explodes?
Brasileiro,
Nov 15th, 2014 - 11:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0You are about as intelligent as paulcedron.
That is to say, not very smart at all.
About the level of a retarded flea.
You two should go into a comedy act, together.
nongs
@ 13 Sallus
Nov 15th, 2014 - 11:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Are you trying to take Gollums job as the chief liar of TDC?
You are not even close, idiota.
@13
Nov 15th, 2014 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Maybe Brazilians should start patrolling long range bombers off the coast of Wight”
Maybe it should. Why they would want to I have no idea what-so-ever.
Also, I think you'll find they don't have any long range bombers...
So your point, if you had one, is rather a moot one.
I'm not even going to reply to Brasilero, to busy laughing. Can't believe he got the wrong war. Too funny!
Back on topic, whilst it maybe interesting to some, it is hardly topical. I'm not sure why Mercopress is publishing this. It is not 'news', I remember learning about this in school.
PS: Sallus = US Air Farce
#13
Nov 15th, 2014 - 02:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think the expression “retard” fits you perfectly. Why don't you check on your facts before you post or is it that you are a congenital liar ?
Prince Harry has not been to the Falklands, anyone could have checked this.
Argentina (snigger, snigger), Brazil and Latam, should have a live firing exercise off the UK and Falklands. Does the Argentine navy have ships that can leave port ? If the exercises are outside territorial waters, go ahead. Nothing to us. That is if your ships could stand the N.Atlantic weather with no ports in which to take shelter and refuel. Do they have refueling and reprovisioning capabilities ?
Brazil sending “long range bombers” to the Isle of Wight. Why would they do this. Look at this seriously.
Firstly, Brazil has no long range bombers and a round trip is 9, 000 miles.
The RAF managed this in 1982....outwith the capabilities of any Latam. country.
A nation's territorial airspace is 12 miles from it's coastline. This means a corridor in the Channel of approx. 25 miles between England and France in which the aircraft could legally fly. This narrows to a closure between Dungeness and Gris Nez, so, the aircraft would have to execute a turn while staying within their International Flight corridor. No easy task.
Meanwhile they would have been escorted by the RAF and the French air force from well out in the Atlantic and shadowed continuously towards their respective air spaces. Any sign of hostile intent would lead to their destruction.
If you wish to use analogies, try plausible ones !
From your number 1 fan !
Hardly any news... But I wonder if the US would have invaded Canada in the 1930s Mexico would have being pushed into war by the British Empire against its northern neighbor.
Nov 15th, 2014 - 04:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They will probably outbread the Americans and by the next century they will be independent or join up with Mexico.
Briton - aka Imperius Britannica ???????
Nov 15th, 2014 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0One has not seen this name before [ Imperius Britannica ]
and how do you know him,
why do you argies always get confused what war is what.
#23
Nov 15th, 2014 - 10:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The USA had a scenario on this very subject in the 1930's and came to the conclusion that they would not win but that it would be a draw or mutual stand-off. Canada would not be the pushover expected.
@25
Nov 16th, 2014 - 12:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Operation Blue I believe the US called it.
It never happened. So get over it!
Nov 16th, 2014 - 02:37 am - Link - Report abuse 026 posts on what might have been, jeez...
22 - Clydetard - sounds like you have made those turns? You boast quite a bit for a belligerent Brit. Are all of you like this? Quick to show how big your machine is- Who said anything about “any sign of hostile intent would lead to their destruction” as you put it shows pre meditated intent.
Nov 16th, 2014 - 03:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am pretty sure that Brazil would make it a joint exercise with live fire and the such with the Spaniards and the Portuguese. I doubt the French would do anything. As the English put it: training and live fire; just not off our English coast.
Oh do sod off Stevie dear, you are not fooling anybody here.
Nov 16th, 2014 - 04:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0@ 29 ilsen
Nov 16th, 2014 - 11:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's the third incarnation for Guzz / Stevie / Sallus, not sure of the US Airfart.
What's the betting he is not on here for long?
@28 Sallus
Nov 16th, 2014 - 11:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just how would Brazil (I say Brazil because we all know that Argentina has got any money) fund this 'exercise'? Because it would cost millions in fuel alone...and don't think that Portugal or Spain would give Brazil free fuel, that would NEVER happen.
They might find that conducting live firing exercises off the English coast very difficult due to the number of international sea lanes that are around the coast and protected fishing areas, which are protected by UNCLOS. Thus any live firing would be illegal and Brazil would find itself in a lot of trouble.
However, if Brazil wanted to go and conduct joint military exercise with any other country on earth, that would be their right. It wouldn't be provocative as long as they stayed out of other countries territory, including airspace.
What wouldn't be their right is to overfly another countries territory without their permission, or breach another countries national waters (12 mile limit).
And you would be really naive to believe that France, Britain, Spain, Portugal or any other country wouldn't shoot down a military aircraft that illegally entered it's airspace and was considered a danger. Of course they would intercept and try to escort the craft away, but if it refused then it would be destroyed.
Even Brazil would do that if another countries military aircraft illegally entered its airspace. Its called 'self-defence' and is covered under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
Article 51, by the way, was invoked by the British in 1982 after Argentina had illegally invaded British territory and ignored a binding UNSC resolution (501) to removed ALL Argentine military forces from the islands.
So in 1982 Argentina was in breach of international law and the UK was acting within international law.
However I fail to see what real relevance this is to a story that Germany offered Mexico Texas if they invaded the US, unless of course you are desperately trying to deflect away from Brasilieros humiliation. LOL
#22
Nov 16th, 2014 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Another example of the intelligentia of Argentina. If you had a brain you would be dangerous.
Have you actually thought about what you posted at #13 ?
No, actually, I am a reasonable type of guy....others would tear you up for arse paper.
If Brazil mounted the type of exercise you are proposing it would be regarded as a hostile act....just as the Russians probing towards UK airspace is regarded as potentially hostile.
#28
You obviously don't have a clue about military protocols. Any unannounced encroachment by a foreign power towards any nation's territorial waters or airspace would be challenged and if perceived a threat, would be dealt with.
You seriously think that two NATO allies would join in a live firing exercise off the British coast....with Brazil ? To prove what ? How deluded can you get.
If Brazil wishes to “live fire”off the British coast, they could ask to join one of the Joint Warrior exercises held twice yearly and open to NATO and other “friendly” countries. They would be able to use the firing range at Cape Wrath, in the N.W. of Scotland in conjunction with other NATO countries.
Obviously Argentina would be excluded as a Non friendly nation and one without a navy.
I am not “boasting” as you ignorantly put it. I am just pointing out the facts, the difficulties in mounting your scenario and possible consequences.
The aircraft scenario is an impossibility. Live firing is also an almost impossibility. As you seem to be an “expert ”on these matters, where would this take place. Off Cornwall, in the Irish sea, off the Scottish Atlantic coast, North Sea, the Channel ?
All this just because a British ship conducted firing exercises of the coast of it's sovereign territory, 180 miles from Argentina. I suppose we should send a notice of complaint when the Argentine military conduct firing exercises 180 miles from the Falklands.
I see that your posts have the typical troll attribute of having nothing to do with the subject.
#32 -
Nov 16th, 2014 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Subject in this Mercopress article read:
“When Germany promised 'the return of Texas' if Mexico declared war on US” and then your very last statement reads:
“I see that your posts have the typical troll attribute of having nothing to do with the subject.”
and yet the “typical troll attribute” (as you put it), is a labeled English “Briton”....please read:
1 Briton (#)
Nov 14th, 2014 - 08:16 pm
Report abuse
Britain slaps down Argentina after blast at Royal Navy for opening fire off Falklands
BRITAIN today slapped down Argentine complaints about a “provocative” live-firing military exercise off the Falklands.
www.express.co.uk/news/uk/535552/Falkland-Islands-Argentina-anger-Royal-Navy-opening-fire
Belligerent Briton is the typical troll Clyde. Brasilero, boas mensagens , não pare para estes empurrões. Thanks all, lots of stammering on your end.
28 Sallus /Farce
Nov 16th, 2014 - 10:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“ Clydetard - sounds like you have made those turns? You boast quite a bit for a belligerent Brit. Are all of you like this? Quick to show how big your machine is- Who said anything about “any sign of hostile intent would lead to their destruction” as you put it shows pre meditated intent.”
Congratulations - you are well off-topic and off-target!
Live fire exercises by the British in the South Atlantic today, have nothing to do with the Germans coaxing the Mexicans to attack the USA, a century (100 years) ago.
Live-fire exercises by the RN, minding their own business, off the coast of their own territory, the Falkland Islands, over a thousand (1,000) miles away from Brazil, is hardly a provocation, deliberate or otherwise.
If you are determined to feel offended, we can't stop you.
If you are trying to unearth indicators of hostile intent, I am sure you can find a way to interpret things as you wish.
However, it flies in the face of peaceful trade missions from the UK to the rest of LATAM, and diplomatic overtures and friendly visits by UK diplomats and the Royal Family.
From your petulant sulking, perhaps you feel jealous that you are not receiving enough attention?
Sallus...what is your fixation with Portugal. You seem to think the Portuguese support Argentina, where did you get this from? As I said in another thread, most Portuguese couldn't care less about the Falklands issue, you rarely even see it appear in the media there was this though, comments are interesting. a lot siding with self determination. And you do know that Portugal is the UK oldest ally.
Nov 16th, 2014 - 10:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://expresso.sapo.pt/referendo-numas-ilhas-mais-falkland-do-que-malvinas=f792732
comments are interesting. a lot siding with self determination. And you do know that Portugal is the UK oldest ally.
You are just deluded, I think need to get out in the big wide world and educate yourself. And Spain distanced themselves from your government when they released a supposedly joint statement on the two countries joining forces for the sovereignty cause.
35 - Buzz. I read the entire article that you posted. It does not state one overt claim of Portuguese alliance with the Uk or the Falklands. It has the summary of the self determination vote and that it. What gives? If anything it highlights the following:
Nov 16th, 2014 - 11:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Em junho passado, na cimeira do G20 no México, David Cameron pediu à Presidente da Argentina que aceitasse a vontade dos habitantes das ilhas. Cristina Fernández de Kirchner respondeu-lhe com uma resolução das Nações Unidas, de 1960, que ordena o ”fim do colonialismo em todas as suas formas e manifestações“.
Here is a rough translation for you:
” This past June, at the G20 summit in Mexico, David Cameron requested that the Argentine President accept the will of the Island inhabitants. CFK responded with the UN resolution of 1960 requesting the end of all Colonialism in all its forms and manifestations.”
Nice article - thanks. Here is a blog for you in English so that you see clearly:
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-americas-blog/british-analysts-side-with-argentina-on-falkland-malvinas-dispute-or
Who is deluded??
I did the Google translate as well - CFK partially quotes a non-binding, resolution that is 55 yo, is not specific to the Falklands, must work with all provisions of the UN Charter, which specifies the interests ( wishes) of the inhabitants must be respected.
Nov 17th, 2014 - 12:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Since that time Argentina has defied that UN Resolution and others, by trying to COLONISE the Islands using military force, against the express wishes of the inhabitants.
So... CFK's reference is outdated and irrelevant- what's your point?
Sorry, Sallus,
Nice lively debate I suppose, two opposing British scholar views, an historical misquote or two, and snide remark about the sheep outnumbering the voters... hmm, what is that all about ? Sheep don't vote -!the author knows how disingenuous his remark is.
He does however acknowledge that the Islands have been administered by the British for 200 years, the inhabitants are descended from settlers of that time, and they have British citizenship.
Since that time, the Falklands are economically self sufficient and self governing.
Let's get back to the topic at hand, which is not Argentina.
Nov 17th, 2014 - 05:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/books/review/the-nazis-next-door-by-eric-lichtblau.html?_r=0
“In the wake of World War II, America recruited a few leading German scientists in order to advance our space and military programs and to keep these valuable assets from falling into Soviet hands. This is the broadly accepted script about Nazis in America. In fact, as Eric Lichtblau, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter for The New York Times, relates in “The Nazis Next Door,” we welcomed approximately 10,000 Nazis, some of whom had played pivotal roles in the genocide.”
@36 Sallus.... Where did I say 'the article' expressly supported the Falklanders, I actually said the comments were more positive towards self determination. Obviously the Argetinian 'Macho, can't loose face' complex is coming through, you make things up, just so you can pretend you were right.
Nov 17th, 2014 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0I will ask again, please provide proof that Portugal side with Argentina. You seem, like your government to think that if a country does not publish an affirmation of their support for the Islanders, then they, by default must support Argentina. What you haven't grasped is that the UK and the Falklanders do not go around whining and squealing to all and sundry about the islands, they have sovereignty and therefore do not feel the need to have it confirmed at any and every opportunity.
Oh and neither did I say the 'article' mentioned any alliance, you made that up as well, another lie, misrepresentation of the facts or whatever you want to call it.
But just to help with your education,
..The Anglo-Portuguese Alliance (or Aliança Luso-Britânica), ratified at the Treaty of Windsor in 1386.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Portuguese_Alliance
and guess what Portugal offered in 1982 when you invaded the Falklands....yeah Sallus Portugal side with Argentina, but only in your head.
39 - Buzz: here is a lot of proof and I don't have to go back almost to Crusader days to get proof. Most of these are from 2013 or thereabouts. Guess what Buzz, even your best friend of all time, the US is neutral on this. Good luck. No British kool aid in these. Can you hear it??? That is the sucking noise that you are going to make as the oil revenue youthought you were going to get is gone. The links are attached, even Ireland is on board.
Nov 17th, 2014 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0El senador Daniel Filmus y el diputado Guillermo Carmona se reunieron con sus pares en Dublin
http://tiempo.infonews.com/nota/93161/parlamentarios-de-irlanda-respaldaron-el-reclamo-de-negociacion-por-malvinas
Parlamentarios de Irlanda respaldaron el reclamo de negociación por Malvinas
“La Argentina suma apoyo de Portugal y España al reclamo por las Malvinas”
http://tiempo.infonews.com/nota/93161/parlamentarios-de-irlanda-respaldaron-el-reclamo-de-negociacion-por-malvinas
China y Rusia avalan el reclamo argentino por las Islas Malvinas
Expresiones de simpatía por la Argentina
http://tiempo.infonews.com/nota/93161/parlamentarios-de-irlanda-respaldaron-el-reclamo-de-negociacion-por-malvinas
Apoyo francés ante el Club de París y el juicio con los fondos buitre. Diario Clarín (consultado el 19 de marzo de 2014)
«U.S. Position on the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands». US Department of State. Consultado el 22 de febrero de 2013. http://tiempo.infonews.com/nota/93161/parlamentarios-de-irlanda-respaldaron-el-reclamo-de-negociacion-por-malvinas
#40
Nov 17th, 2014 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0An article produced by Argentinians. Can you refer us to any statement made in the Irish Press or in any Irish government press release. I can remember when Argentina made this claim and the Irish govt. denied it.
As my Spanish is not up to it can you translate the articles into English as this is an English language site..
In any of these articles does it say that any of these countries acknowledge Argentina's sovereignty over the Falklands OR does it say that talks should be made to resolve the matter ? English text please.
40 Sallus
Nov 17th, 2014 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A Spanish speakers translation of a supposed Irish source or British sources, for an Argentine readership - sure, that convincing!!
Sallus,
Nov 17th, 2014 - 09:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You believe what you want to believe,
lt changes nothing.
The Falklands have NEVER been yours.
Hope this helps!
Well, “Sallus” held our attention for all of 5 min.
Nov 17th, 2014 - 09:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who's next?
Sallus....Thank f*ck for that, thought I would have to waste my time and go over all that with you, but 41-43 seems to have summed up what I was going to say. Thanks guys.
Nov 17th, 2014 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just like to add though that the Estoril Meeting, didn't say anything regarding support for Argentine Sovereignty
Sallus is a fraud, don't give him the oxygen. He is just here to sap your energy.
Nov 18th, 2014 - 12:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0for the real Sallus, go here, the images are more 'pleasing'...
http://www.sallusmodafeminina.com.br/
*hat tip to HansNiemund*
:-)
41 Clyde - Here are two US articles for you to read, in English. Sorry you don't speak Spanish or Portuguese for other articles. It is hard not to find an article in English or Spanish that is biased in one direction or another:
Nov 19th, 2014 - 06:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2013/08/argentina-falklands-and-un
http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2013/08/argentina-falklands-and-un
#46 - Ill sen : Sallus is short in Portuguese for Salutations in certain municipalities of Brazil, usually spelled with one 'l'. You should get used to speaking either Spanish or Portuguese. It is like dealing with 3rd graders. Your mate must be sick of you.
. Ms Fernández's backers did not appear to see the paradox in their praise for
Nov 19th, 2014 - 01:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Economist article seems to be about Mad. Kirchner/Timerman and their acolytes
“the principle of self-determination and the fact that all but three of the 1,517
valid votes cast by Falklanders in a March referendum were in favour of remaining part of Britain. The islanders, Mr Lyall Grant insisted, merely want to control their own future through wise resource management. A lot, he might have added, like the Argentines.”
John Wight. One man's views.
I asked you to point out WHERE the Irish government said that Argentina had the sovereignty of the Falklands...not comments by journalists.
Clyde- The votes of less than de facto 1200 Uk transplants that the remaining 300 some people of Scot/Welsh/English descent, well of course the farce vote of self determination will go the way of the UK. That is not the point. The islands are occupied by colonialists. Both articles did not have tacit support for the UK. Neutral country, honest assessment and at the end of the day, the UK will have to reckon with Argentina and apparently LATAM.
Nov 19th, 2014 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 49 Sallus
Nov 19th, 2014 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At present, you are vying with POLLY for the title 'The thickest argie on MP'.
This is remarkable considering how little time you have been posting on here, OR are you Guzz / Stevie, etc.?
#49
Nov 20th, 2014 - 12:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0See my request for a reply at #48. Where is the OFFICIAL evidence that the Irish government have stated that the Falklands are ARGENTINEAN territory and the that the UK should hand it over to ARGENTINA.
You seem to think that was agreed....show me the official statement.
Again, you make the point that the islands are full of British colonialists.
I would partly agree with this on the basis that any group of people travelling from their homeland of origin to a stay in foreign land are colonialists.
In the case of the Falklands THERE WAS NO INDIGENOUS POPULATION.
When the “settlers, mainly of Hispanic origin” moved south from the river Plate settlement into what is now Greater Argentina, they were colonising a land that HAD an indigenous population. That is the proper definition of colonisation. Most of your population have arrived within the last 100 or so years. Isn't THAT colonisation ? Do you intend to return to your probable European roots.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!