MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, July 19th 2019 - 20:53 UTC

 

 

Falklands' defense review full statement from Secretary Fallon expected soon

Tuesday, March 24th 2015 - 04:55 UTC
Full article 52 comments

A statement from UK Defense secretary Michael Fallon relative to the Falkland Islands' garrison is expected sometime this week, according to reports in the British media. The Falklands' military response capacity has been a matter of much ongoing debate among analysts and former officers, as Argentina allegedly is involved in increased military expenditure. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • downunder

    ”Argentina's Foreign minister Hector Timerman has rejected point blank that suggestion arguing the Islanders are a ”non-people“ while President Cristina Fernandez refers to the Falkland Islanders as 'squatters'. '

    So he thinks that the Falkland Islanders are 'non-people'! This is not some stupid troll sounding off on MP, but the Foreign Minister of a supposedly civilised country. What a disgrace this pathetic little man is, he is not worthy to be part of the human race.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 07:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • zathras

    1 downunder (#)

    You beat me to it, but it needs repeating...
    ”Argentina's Foreign minister Hector Timerman has rejected point blank that suggestion arguing the Islanders are a ”non-people“ while President Cristina Fernandez refers to the Falkland Islanders as 'squatters'. '

    Not Forum Trolls, but elected leaders of a sovereign state spouting such racist abuse is pretty disgusting.

    Argentina owes the People of the Falkland Islands so many apologies.

    Don't forget...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05p6gj6
    New Series of An Island Parish starting this Friday, 1900 BBC Scotland time, I believe 2000 in England.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 08:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    Surely even a dumb argie believes what the Sun tripes out?

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rufus

    I have to admit that the “No More Page 3” campaign had it all wrong, there should be far more pictures of semi-naked women in the paper, after all each one displaces a page full of what they laughably call “news”.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 10:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    the result of all this will be: more and more isolation for the isleters.
    they wanted more integration with uruguay, chile and blablabla?
    ÉSTA! lol

    no more flights to or from the islets flying in our wonderful airspace.
    no more flights to punta arenas.
    your conection with the civilized world is over, isleters.
    lol

    “British oil company Rockhopper Exploration revealed significant discoveries of oil”
    yeah, right...LOL X 1 MILLION.

    “We regret that the UN Decolonization Committee continues with its outdated approach,” said a Foreign Office spokesman”
    so, a twat ruled by a 300 year old queen, who is in favour of having a decadent empire with 16 colonies, says that the un decolonization committee is outdated...LOL X 1 BILLION.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Englander

    The Argentines view the Falkland Islanders in a similar way to how the Nazis viewed the Jews. Cameron has been negligent to the point of criminal in running down the UK's defence. If there is another invasion, then the British people will demand a resolute and determined response.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • M_of_FI

    @5 - Paul

    It is highly disturbing, but not a surprise, that you believe what you say Paul. Why? Because you take pleasure in your forecast of the isolation and downfall for a group of people who happen to be born on an island near your country. But in turn, I take pleasure in the fact my very existence and the political rights granted to me in the Falkland Islands gives you anguish and frustration. All I have to do is simply breath and that annoys you. That is a victory for me and the other Falkland Islanders.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 01:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    Poor little minisized paulie! he can never understand can he?
    Argentina can withdraw the Lan overflight if it wants to.
    result?
    1. A fair amount of International condemnation will come Argentina,s way for breach od Int Air Transport Agreements they have signed up to years ago.

    Arg veterans and next of kin will no longer be able to visit the Islands and get their much needed peace of mind.

    So go ahead silly boy - ask your little president to do it!

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 01:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    You could still continue the flights without Argentina's approval.

    With the exception of Antarctic communities, Puerto Toro, Chile is the southernmost permanently inhabited community on the globe, the only community on Earth that is situated below the 55th parallel south, with coasts and waters belonging to the Atlantic Ocean. It's a moderate diversion, but flights would be completely viable between Mount Pleasant and Punta Arenas. (Assuming our socialist government would not make some stupid pact...)

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 02:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    it is easy.
    this twat fall-on-shite wants to militarize our wonderful mar argentino even more?
    then the consequences will be more isolation for the islands.
    it doesn't matter what some chilotes say here in this 4th class site.
    the fact is that bachelet, like the rest of the governments of latin american countries, will support the argentine position, independently of who is in charge (la yegua, macri, la gorda carrió, scioli, you choose).

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • José Malvinero

    The certainty of the invaders over “its” sovereignty over the Malvinas Argentinas Islands:
    “It is not at all clear to me that we never ever held sovereignty over these islands”, Duke of Wellington, Prime Minister, 1829.
    “The British occupation of 1833 was at the time an act of wanton aggression”, Memorandum of the British Foreign Office official, 1946.
    “The only question was who had the best claim as we are attaching for the first time the islands. I think undoubtedly were the United Provinces of Buenos Aires”, Ronald Campbell, secretary of foreign affairs, 1911.
    “Sitting down hard on the islands and avoid talking to the Argentines, because we could not sustain our arguments in court”, legal counsel for the Foreign Office, Gerald Fitzmaurice, 1936.
    “Britain fully recognizes the sovereignty of the Argentine public authorities on the territories in which proclaim their jurisdiction...”, Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Trade between Argentina and Great Britain, 1825, (after the Argentina take possession, 1820).
    “If you carefully read the memorandum of December 1910, surely must have realized that Argentina's attitude is not ridiculous or childish. I had assumed that our right to the Malvinas Islands was irrefutable. This is far from being the case”, Sir Malcolm Robertson, ambassador to Argentina, 1927.
    “While the Committee believes that the historical evidence is finely balanced, we are forced to conclude that the weight of evidence argues for the position of Argentine bonds to the islands, at least the eastern islands, which was, while the British occupation in 1833, more substance than it was or is accepted by government officials in the UK. In this conclusion we are supported not only by the evidence we were given during the investigation but also by doubts on this matter were repeatedly expressed by British officials during the early part of the century”, Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Commons, in 1982, immediately after the war ...

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 03:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    Oh yes, we support you alright.
    We now officially recognize the “Las Malvinas” and vote in all non- binding declarations in favor of Argentina. Your countrymen are a pain in the ass and thank God at least that we have a tall wall, called los Andes, to isolate them.
    Our great hope is that someday you will renounce corruption rejoin the group of civilized nations.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 03:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CKurze30k

    @10:

    Fallon doesn't want to “militarize” the Falklands at all. He's reviewing the forces put there for *defensive* purposes, to defend the legitimate inhabitants of the Falkland Islands.

    It wasn't too long ago that one of the powers of Mercosur launched an illegal invasion and attempted to subjugate the Islanders.

    Are you honestly saying that the Islands should be isolated simply for taking legitimate self-defense precautions?

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 03:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Usurping Pirate

    Fighting talk from both sides , eh ?
    It must be coming up to April .

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 03:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    Paulie- all this prattle about “militarization”!!!

    Please give us ONE - just a teeny little ONE example of where Britain has further militarized the South West Atlantic since 1982.

    I do not mean replacements
    I do not mean where old weapons-planes or ships are replaced with new ones

    None of the above have anything to do with the world “militarization” do they?
    They are just like you when your old car gets old and falls to bits - you replace it - does not mean you are a more aggressive roadhog and driver does it|?

    Some facts for you:

    During the 1980s post 1982 the Royal Navy used to keep FOUR destroyers and frigates on full time patrol around the Islands .

    Now we have ONE small patrol vessel with a little 30mm gun and just ONE frigate or destroyer here for a few weeks once every 3-4 months or so!

    At one time post 1982 the Army had pretty well a full Battalion of 1000 men in the Islands - nowadays we have a reinforced Infantry Company of about 150.

    So come on then - where is this massive “militarization” you and you idiotic Govt talks about?

    Give us some examples - or stop talking the same tripe as you Ambassador embarrassment in London does!

    Even the £180million on equipment and building replacements is spread over 10 years - it is peanuts and just carries on the existing policy of replacing old when it gets beyond usefull life.
    Not new investment!

    But then Paulie- you and lady muck in your embassy in London have not got the brains to understand anyway!

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 04:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steve R

    Perhaps it is time that we actually did militarize the Islands, after all that is what the idiots in charge of Argentina are forever telling the world. Lets install some nukes, up troop numbers, have a permanent naval presence of a couple of destroyers and a dozen fighters.
    Then start regular direct flights to Ascension and on the the Islands. Ban the imports of anything from Argentina stop any flights from Argentina overflying or landing at any British territory, same with Argentinian flagged shipping (if they have any) Any time they mention the islands complain to the UN and post open letters in every south american news paper LOL

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 04:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • malen

    These are the “increased invasion threats coming from Arg” that MP ignoresssss
    www.lacapital.com.ar/la-ciudad/Regresan-los-primeros-estudiantes-rosarinos-que-viajaron-a-Malvinas-20150309-0027.HTML
    www.elpatagonico.net/nota/274580/

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Usurping Pirate

    @11 : All that stuff was written at a time when economically Britain virtually owned Argentina , and at that time most Falklanders would have probably have been glad to have closer links with the continent.
    Now that Argentina has descended into a fifth rate narco state run by a mad bipolar witch and a cabal of mafia dons , there ain't no way the British are going to negotiate the future of those people away .
    Nice try though , your head troll must give very good marks for that .

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    #17
    Maybe you should supply translations as ...“no speako dago”

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    grandpa
    you no speako dago, nor italiano, nor englisho, nor spagnolo, nor alemanno, nor coccolicche.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Enrique Massot

    Relax, everybody. Argentina's priority are not the Malvinas right now. However, Argentina must annually re-state its claim over the islands least the British would claim abandonment.
    Time and history are on the Argentina side, so it's ineluctable that eventually we will recover what is ours. Without a drop of blood, of course.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 05:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    #21&22

    The Falklands do not belong to Argentina, just as Gibraltar does not belong to Spain, Ceuta and Melilla do not belong to Morocco and, Belize does not belong to Guatemala, northern Chile does not belong to Bolivia and the western part of Guyana does not belong to Venezuela.

    Cry and stomp all you want, make a big scandal to divert attention from your horrific economic problems and corruption, but ”possession is 9/10ths of the law and you have no moral ground for your fantasies.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Englander

    Not sure what kind of scenario you could possibly have in mind but it is ineluctable that there will be large number of casualties on both sides. And even if you succeed in your perverted aim, we'll be back, just as sure as night follows day, to reclaim what is indisputable British sovereign territory.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Philippe

    The UK MoD has clearly stated: “Malvinazi brigands keep out- or else.”

    Philippe

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anbar

    “”Time and history are on the Argentina side, so it's ineluctable that eventually we will recover what is ours. Without a drop of blood, of course.“””

    History certainly is NOT on your side - its very firmly on the side of the British.

    Time - with every year, 'history' now sides ever more and more with the Islanders own rights, regardless of the UK OR Argentina.

    So the one thing you certainly do not have, is time.

    tick tock tick tock... goes the self-determination clock.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    14 Usurping Pirate

    “Fighting talk from both sides , eh ?
    It must be coming up to April”

    Much LOLz. Yup it sure is.

    Isn't it about now that the argentines start to “celebrate” a war that they started and that ended in their humiliating defeat to an army that they out numbered 3 to 1 and that was 8,000 miles away from it bases?

    Was it last year that they “re-enacted” the Falklands invasion by staging invading Tierra-del-Fuego?

    You couldn't make this s**t up. You gotta love 'em.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 07:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Ramping up the Falklands rhetoric is an easy way of scoring points.
    Opponents of her rule also point out that Falklands discourse is a useful distraction from the continuing controversy over the death of Alberto Nisman, the prosecutor who accused Ms Kirchner of collusion to cover up a terrorist attack.
    Ever since the January 18 death of Nisman, the president has had to cope with criticism of both her handling of the 1994 terrorism investigation, and of the circumstances surrounding Nisman's death itself
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/11491467/Falklands-defence-Why-is-Argentina-considering-an-aircraft-deal-with-the-Russians.html
    self evident…
    UK Report: Rebuild Conventional Forces
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/11491467/Falklands-defence-Why-is-Argentina-considering-an-aircraft-deal-with-the-Russians.html

    The SDSR and Future Force 2020 were based on the fundamental assumption that British forces should be structured to deploy a single brigade formation to a single key theater such as Afghanistan and sustain it there
    Michael Fallon dismissed the committee's recommendations
    The suggestion that we need to rebuild our defense capabilities is nonsense.
    we have been able to commit to spending over £160 billion on equipment over the next decade to keep Britain safe — including new joint strike fighters, hunter killer submarines, two aircraft carriers and the most advanced armored vehicles.

    stop scaring the children, the argies are already playing war games with there toys, you will upset them.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    @11 Jose Malvinero

    Presenting one side of a debate without the other, or the final outcome, is like Alberto Bertorelli's lauding of Italian victories in WW2 :

    28.08.1936 Eden responds to Ambassador Henderson, noting; “… you should be aware that the legal basis of the claim is far less weak than at one time supposed…

    In the first place, 100 years possession, whether disputed or not, should found a perfectly sound title to sovereignty over the islands in international law, and there should be very little danger of such a title failing of recognition by the Permanent Court of International Justice or an international tribunal. Meanwhile, each year that passes, and in addition the celebration of the centenary of British occupation, strengthen His Majesty’s Government’s case. At the same time there is reason to doubt whether, in fact, Argentina ever had any grounds of claim to the islands at all. In the diplomatic exchanges of 1833 the case would seem to have been argued upon the wrong grounds by both sides.

    It would seem that the events in the 18th century were irrelevant, that the islands had become completely unoccupied in 1811, and that they had to be considered at that time as ‘res nullius’ open to the occupation of any State. Further, unless the occupation of the privateer Vernet, whom the Argentine Government tried rather unsuccessfully to clothe with their authority, can be considered to have been an Argentine occupation, the islands were ‘res nullius’ at the time of the British reoccupation in 1832. To sum up, His majesty’s Government’s case may be considered to rest upon two alternative grounds -

    (i) The islands were res nullius at the time at the time of the British occupation in 1832 ....

    (ii) If (i) is wrong, and if, in 1832, Argentina had possessed sovereignty, Great Britain has been in peaceable, though not undisputed, possession for 100 years, and has therefore acquired a title by prescription.”

    https://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1900-1944/

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    21-Enrique- you must smoke the same stuff that paulie does!
    Time is on your side?????????????
    Time WAS on your side prior to April 1982 I agree - the political uncertainty was causing young people to leave the Islands- there was no investment- no growth and a rapidly declining population and economy collapsing.

    But you silly lot went and “blew it”” and cheered your Dictators when they invaded!

    Since 1982 we have no political uncertainty about our future(its in our hands)
    A growing economy
    Outside Investment
    A growing population
    Young people return to the Islands after their studies and education
    Rising Living Standards
    etc etc etc

    Argentina meanwhile slides further downhill.

    yep - time is definatley on OUR side.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Well we aint that worried, its just political talk, the referendum is due,

    after all, if it was true and things were that bad, the British would surely re-enforce the Falkland's NOW, not wait until they smell the coffee,

    Secretary Fallon quoted 160 billion over ten years, sounds a lot, but divide it by ten and see what you get per year, he quotes and increase of just over 320 odd million for increase defences, that's less than the type 26, that was quoted around 350 million,

    the missiles will not arrive for another couple of years,

    its just referendum talk,

    unless ?????
    then fate will take a hand , CFK will certainly leg it to Russia or Cuba,
    And the poor argies will have to pick up the pieces again,

    still,
    it will give her bloggers something to cry about, if they are still alive.

    just saying like.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 08:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    so all this mess because that “prestigious” LOL tabloid “the sun”, said: “increased invasion threat from Argentina“, arguing that Buenos Aires was being supported by Russia in its efforts to boost its military potential”.

    now, as far as the fucking world knows, except the english, the sun is not famous for its investigative journalism.

    giving credit to the sun would be as giving credit to the english “intelligence” services.

    maybe these wankers of the sun, MI5, MI6, etc should investigate why the fuck isis is rooted in their society instead of promoting the militarisation of the mar argentino.

    guess the honest, impoverished, sacrificed british taxpayer will not be happy to spend 200 billion dollars more in the stinky islets.

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    #20
    Correct as usual,I no speako englisho...that is yours and Malen's attempt at English
    #31
    200 billion dollars more in the stinky islets.
    I can see that arithmetic and economics are not your strong point either although you are the king of hyperbole..

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    #32 Clyde

    He's definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer...

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Alberto Bertorelli

    Should Decima Flottiglia MAS Commandos or San Marco Marines or Folgore Paratroopers land and neutralize Mt Pleasant airfield it'll be game over for Britain:

    ”If the Falklands are ever captured by Argentina it will be impossible to win them back, says Woodward. “We could not retake the Falklands. We could not send a task force or even an aircraft carrier. If we had been in this state in 1982, the Falklands would be the Malvinas. We rely on sending reinforcements by air, but that would be impossible if we lost control of the airfield at Mount Pleasant” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150339/Falkland-Islands-Britain-would-lose-if-Argentina-decides-to-invade-now.html

    Mar 24th, 2015 - 11:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Tarquin Fin

    That's right. I've seen the armada's secret blueprints of gigantic slingshots with angry bird shaped bombs that we are going to use in the next invasion.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 12:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Alberto Bertorelli

    Tarquin Fin: You shouldn't underestimate the Decima Flottiglia MAS Commandos, for using three fast boats carried aboard the Regia Marina destroyers Crispi and Sella, they destroyed HMS York while anchored in Suda Bay, Crete. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_on_Souda_Bay

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 12:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    11 José Malvinero
    Besides your deliberate misquote of the Duke of Wellington the UK can rely on the following Peace treaties which are recognised binding international law. The Peace of Utrecht, which explicitly bars any Argentine claim of succession.
    “...it is hereby further agreed and concluded, that neither the Catholic King, nor any of his heirs and successors whatsoever, shall sell, yield, pawn, transfer, or by any means, or under any name, alienate from them and the crown of Spain, to the French, or to any other nations whatever, any lands, dominions, or territories, or any part thereof, belonging to Spain in America.”
    Also, the Nootka Convention: ”...Article VI provided that neither party would form new establishments on any of the islands adjacent to the east and west coasts of South America then occupied by Spain....... there was an additional secret article which stipulated that Article VI shall remain in force only so long as no establishment shall have been formed by the subjects of any other power on the coasts in question. This secret article had the same force as if it were inserted in the convention.......The United Provinces of the River Plate was not a party to the convention. Therefore it is defined in the convention as 'other power' and the occupation of the settlement (at Port Louis) by subjects of any other power negated Article VI and allowed Great Britain to re-assert prior sovereignty and form new settlements.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootka_Convention
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootka_Convention

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    @36

    I'm wondering just how we're supposed to be threatened by an Italian unit from WWII?

    Quite a track record, though, sounds like they'd have fit right in with the Argentine Military :

    “Anti-partisan actions

    The Decima was mostly employed in anti-partisan actions on land, rather than against the Allies at sea. Their anti-partisan actions usually took place in small villages, where the partisans were stronger. Some examples:

    Forno: 68 persons, mostly civilians and some partisans, were killed by a combination of SS members and Xª MAS forces.[21][22]

    Guadine: Random violence to terrorize a population believed to be supporting the rebels, almost complete destruction of the village by fire.[23]

    Borgo Ticino: Together with the SS, murder of 12 civilians, pillage and destruction of the village by fire on the grounds that three German soldiers had been wounded by partisans.[24]

    Castelletto Ticino: In order to give ”a demonstration of firmness“ against ”crime“, a Xª MAS officer had five petty criminals publicly gunned down, having taken care to gather a large crowd in order to terrorise them.[25]

    Crocetta del Montello: Episodes of torture with whips and gasoline and summary executions of partisans.[26]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decima_Flottiglia_MAS

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 12:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    Breaking News
    Malvinas defense review full statement from Secretary Fallon:
    ”Argentina is only interested to recover the islands under peaceful negotiations.
    Most of the world supports Argentina's claim.
    Not even the Americans supports our claim.
    Malvinas belong to Argentina.
    Argentinians were right about Jeremy Clownson.
    We can't keep up with so many Russian Bear bombers flying over our English soil.
    Now we have to borrow French carriers(our new buddies), what could possibly go wrong?”

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 03:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia

    Irrespective of the level of UK defense funding the Malvinas will be returned within the next 25 years.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 03:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • downunder

    #21
    “Time and history are on the Argentina side, so it's ineluctable that eventually we will recover what is ours. Without a drop of blood, of course.”

    “Without a drop of blood” How many deaths occured in and around the Falklands in 1982? That statement has well and truly been overtaken by events!

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 07:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @40 Hepatia

    It's always 25 years with you, isn't it?

    You've been quoting 25 years for the last few years, and it's STILL 25 years AWAY!

    So in other words you are recognising that Argentina will never gain sovereignty over the Falklands, not today, not tomorrow and certainly not in 25 years.

    But I guess we can wait until 2040, and if you are still alive, you will still be quoting 25 years.

    Every second, minute, hour, day, week, month, year and decade that passes strengthens the Falkland Islanders rights, and shows just how weak Argentina's claims are.

    @21 Enrique.

    You apparently forget there was a period of 91 YEARS where Argentina didn't even mention the Falkland Islands or claim sovereignty of them. Your supposed 'claim' lapsed long before Peron started using the 'Malvinas myth' to indoctrinate and control the population of Argentina.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 07:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    #34
    What makes you think that paratroopers could suddenly land at Mt. Pleasant airfield undetected ? Please tell us why ITALIAN troops should attack the Falklands ? Are you declaring war on the UK...total fantasy on your part.
    If the Falklands were invaded then I think the British reaction would be to hit the Argentinian mainland with cruise missiles targeted against air force bases and naval installations, thus preventing any reinforcements.
    Airdropped Parachute regiment troops could be flown in by C-17's and A300M Atlas using air-to-air refuelling.

    Sandy Woodward was making a case for saving the navy from more cuts.
    He was assuming -wrongly- that the situation now is the same as in 1982.
    The difference bring that we now have a garrison of troops on site instead of 60 men.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 10:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Martin Woodhead

    Argentina doesnt have the capability to land any decent size force on an airfield defended by sams the sas considered a similar plan to be “ op certain death” back in 82
    Landing anywhere else uk forces can just wait for you to surrender because your miles from mpa lack transport and supplies.your just get cold wet and tired.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 10:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    No disrespect but the brain dead are walking again.
    Paulcedron
    Have you ever studies the sun,
    It’s famous for two very good reasons,
    1, it rises every day,
    2, it sets in the evening…..lol
    ……
    Marcos Alejandro
    Britain, can and will stand alone if required,

    When the chips are down, we don’t need help in the way you expect,

    All Argentina will achieve by creating Falklands part 2 is bloodshed,
    And you will lose again,
    Russia is looking only for a distraction against the embargo against her.
    ,,,,,,,
    Alberto Bertorelli
    No doubt you and other like minded Argies now think that others will now come to your aid and fight your fight,
    Italy, Russia, perhaps even Greece, china, other South American countries, or even Spain.

    Any boy would we be out numbered,
    Still, bring it on; if that is what you want, all decisions have consequences
    ,
    Hepatia
    To you goes the mathematical question,
    25 x 1,000
    You work it out, expert…

    Britain has /or will be sending two Chinooks down south,
    but these are only replacing these two that was withdrawn 6 years ago.

    Apparently the only war that may well erupt before CFK gets kicked out, will probably be between her and her people.

    and again she will lose.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 11:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    39 Marcos AlejandroWrong again what is legally binding is the views of nations of 1833 since there is a bar in applying such present-day views retroactivly.
    In 1833 not one nation supported Argentina's claim their “silence” is indicative of support for the UK.
    “Customary international law; Silence as consent;
    Generally, sovereign nations must consent in order to be bound by a particular treaty or legal norm. However, international customary laws are norms that have become pervasive enough internationally that countries need not consent in order to be bound. In these cases, all that is needed is that the state has not objected to the law....”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_intern...

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 12:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • brianF.I

    @31 Are you actually retarded or paid by your tin pot dictatorship? I want a serious answer. You are clearly a Peronist indoctrinated retard who worships the Kirchners and everything they do. Bet you have a shrine of that twat Nestor in your tin shanty house.

    200 BILLION!?!?!?! Wow you are retarded if you believe that.

    Also, you are not a pilot, or an architect and you have never been to university. GO AWAY and let the adults have a serious discussion for once.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 01:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • paulcedron

    47 imbecile
    you want what?
    and who the fuck cares what you, brainless 3rd class pleb, want?

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 01:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • brianF.I

    @48 LOL Thought that would get a reaction. Did i upset you Piggy Pauly?

    I want an answer. Are you retarded or are you paid by your tin pot government to spend your days commenting on various sites spreading propaganda.

    Stop supporting the Kirchners you idiot LOL.

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 02:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    21 Enrique Masso
    Unfortunately for you the reverse is true, time has been entirely on the UK's side. It has cemented her claim of sovereignty while Argentina has irretrievably lost any entitlement to a legal claim. Any opportunity to use force by Argentina is now past. One she is too weak, and secondly she would be subject to such an an economic blockade by the UN that her fragile economy would be irretrievably damaged.
    If the UK were to become too weak militarily to ensure the Islands protection, she could unitarily submit the issue to the ICJ for a legal advisory opinion. The inevitable result would so shock world opinion and condemn Argentina to a permanent pariah status.
    Your hero Kohen agrees thus: “Time is running against Argentina because the British have possession of the territory,”
    International Hague Court “only alternative” for dispute
    http://en.mercopress.com/2004/06/23/international-hague-court-only-alternative-for-dispute

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 06:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    Some nationalities are just impossible to reason with. They only recognize international law when it's in their favor.

    The Falklands do not belong to Argentina, just as Gibraltar does not belong to Spain, Ceuta and Melilla do not belong to Morocco, Belize does not belong to Guatemala, northern Chile does not belong to Bolivia and the western part of Guyana does not belong to Venezuela.

    Argentina stupidly invaded the islands thinking that a daughter of a shopkeeper would realize the futility of trying to retake from over 8 thousand miles away...

    “Ron, I'm not handing over. I'm not handing over the islands now. I didn't lose some of my best ships and some of my finest lives to leave quietly under a ceasefire without the Argentines withdrawing.” (Margaret Thatcher 31/05/1982 to Ronald Reagan)

    God bless Baroness Thatcher

    Mar 25th, 2015 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • downunder

    51# “God bless Baroness Thatcher”

    Hear, hear!

    Mar 26th, 2015 - 07:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0

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