MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
OAS declaration in support of Malvinas UK/Argentina talks; Canada disagreed
The Organization of American States, OAS, meeting in general assembly approved on Tuesday a declaration urging negotiations on the Falklands/Malvinas Islands dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWhich Commonwealth nations supported this statement? Good for Canada!
Jun 17th, 2015 - 05:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0Same as last year, and the year before - and every year, without end and without effect. An impotent organisation
Jun 17th, 2015 - 06:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Oh yes, the OAS has only ONE civilized member country: CANADA!
Jun 17th, 2015 - 06:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0Philippe
Exactly what has Argentina got to offer the FALKLANDERS? I can't think of 1 simple thing.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 07:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Gawd, same thing every year and it means nothing.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 07:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nothing at all!
It's the diplomatic equivalent of getting likes on Facebook. Feeds an ego but doesn't change the droll existence of Argentina.
You can never trust these canadians. They have no scruples. What kind of people can not be bought for a price? Idiotas. No es especial.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 08:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0“We know that through dialogue someday Argentina will recover its territorial integrity”
Jun 17th, 2015 - 08:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Of course, Argentina has not lost their territorial integrity in the first place, as the Falklands and SGSSI are not Argentinian territory, nor have they ever been. It is quite impossible to “recover” what never belonged to you in the first place.
Once again, the Malvinas Lie rears its ugly head.
As I've pointed out multiple times (and no doubt shall again in the future), there are only two ways to resolve this dispute that are undeniably fair and equitable to all parties (Argentina, Britain, Falkland Islanders):
1: Argentina agrees to take the case to the ICJ, the only organization quaified to rule on a sovereignty dispute. Given the facts, they will no doubt lose, but must abide by any decision.
(There has been at least one case in the past where Argentina lost at the ICJ, then illegally declared the decision “null and void” - this must not be permitted to occur should ICJ arbitration be agreed.)
2: Argentina drops their false claim to the Falklands, removes all objections to their removal from the C24 list, and apologises to the C24 and the UN for wasting so much time on a claim they *knew* to be a lie.
But that's really the big point, isn't it - the Malvinas Lie. Argentina's pushed the myth of being expelled from “their” territory, instead of what really happened. They even sink so low as to teach the Lie to their children.
They claim Britain refuses negotiations, but it was Timerman that walked out on talks for no good reason last time they were held.
I agree that progress needs to be made on this subject, but it will not happen unless Argentina agrees to stop lying.
@ 7 Excellent post.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 10:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0So there we have it: Canada says NO!
So not every country in the world supports Gollum (looking more like the puppet Brains from “Thunderbirds” in those glasses) or even “Film-me-now before-I-burst-into-tears” who is so bored or pissed he has fallen asleep during clearly the best speech given at the conference. Ha, ha, ha.
I bet Riki Mashed Potato Head is fuming from his hide-out in Canada.
Argentina doesn't want the islands, they want the grievance. If they wanted the islands, they wouldn't have done everything imaginable to ensure the islands will they never be theirs.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 10:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think that Canada is on the wrong continent. And the inhabitants of the Falkland Islands (excluding penguins). I confess that I know nothing about Canada. However, it would be good for we, Latinos, learned about Canadian trade in order to start the blocking tactics.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 10:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0said it once and say it again ARGENTINA ALWAYS THE VICTIM-Feel sorry for these other Spanish speakers (plus the Portuguese speakers) that they have to listen to this shit year after year and like idiots buy into The Argentine fairy tales.the British have no need to sit and discus anything with the Argentines especially with a pre determined outcome WHY WOULD THEY-all talking was put to rest in 1982 .Can anyone tell me what prizes the allied forces bestowed on Nazi Germany after they were defeated?????
Jun 17th, 2015 - 11:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor old Argies!! You never learn!! Of course the majority of SA and Carribbean countries and Mexico and even USA could not give a tinkers bum about you and your silly claim- but for the sake of a bit of peace and not to have your lunatic president squealing in their ears they naturally back a totally meaningless motion that just calls for talks!
Jun 17th, 2015 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0From this wishy washy motion you lot all now invent that the world backs your Sovereignty claim!! It does not! All it says is in effect that jaw jaw is better than war - war. but beyond that they could not give an arse about you!!
Canada sees right through you and can see that there is no base for talks - when your side has already well declared that the ONLY result could be you winning!
USA can see through you as well - you just try and provoke a real argument- then you will see whose side Washington backs - at the moment they do not give a damn about you.
@10. Hahahahahahahaha. What have you got that anybody wants? Here's a little bit of information. The UK has FIVE times more bilateral trade with Canada than Brazil. FIVE times. You're just a bit player. And a tiny bit player at that. In 2014, Canada exported $2.2 billion to Brazil and imported $3.5 billion. A measly $5.7 billion. The UK's trade with Canada was $27.1 billion. Tiny little, 'failing' Britain. Hahahahahahahaha. Broken Brazil!
Jun 17th, 2015 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0so 1 out of 35 members of the OAS supports the islets, or england, or the leftovers of the uk in this issue?
Jun 17th, 2015 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and that member is canada, some sort of english colony?
not that bad.
now, lets see who supports argentina in its claims:
Antigua and Barbuda
Barbados
Belize
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominica (Commonwealth of)
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Grenada
Guatemala
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Jamaica
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Suriname
The Bahamas (Commonwealth of)
Trinidad and Tobago
United States of America
Uruguay
Venezuela
as we can see, many of them are part of the commonwealth.
and we also have your beloved chilotelandia and the u.s. in this list.
as i wisely said, nobody gives a shite for the isleteers.
@14
Jun 17th, 2015 - 12:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Poor Paul, let me help here. When somebody says they support “negotiation”, what hey actually mean is they don't want to take sides. Which means in turn that they don't really care, which then in its turn means they're quite happy with the status quo. The only people who actually share your outrage that your rapists, murderers, and mutineers were sent packing two centuries ago are a few fellow latino-supremacists from the PIMPLE countries, and a couple of other loonies and dictatorships acting for their own reasons. But don't take my word for it, ask the UN.
paulcedron Dear DICK HEAD when will you get it into your stupid immigrant brain that none of this matters if it did why is Tin man trotting around the globe talking the same shit year in year out?? do the RIGHT thing and take your grievance to the ICJ WHATS STOPPING YOU?????
Jun 17th, 2015 - 12:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 013. I thought the Brazil-Canada bilateral trade was even lower. And with regard to trade Latin America-Canada?
Jun 17th, 2015 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps, we can block all trade Latin America-England too.
Let's see how much it costs each of the islanders!
16 Imbecile
Jun 17th, 2015 - 12:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0it seems you are a lot more imbecile than what i thought, eh?
the problem, you imbecile isleteer is that england or the leftovers of the uk or whatever is the name of that country, wants a tri-partite meeting.
and as the whole fucking world knows, except you, the islets have no entity to have an international meeting about sovereignty.
thats why they have the foreign office.
the foreign office represents the islets, since they are one of their anachronic colonies.
got it now, you imbecile?
Distraction.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0rotting roadkill:
Pay your debts.
@ paulcedron And as I said DICK HEAD why would a FIRST world country want to sit and have a cosy chat with a bunch of in planted immigrants with Spanish Jewish or Nazi German sure names who have a pre determined outcome on their agenda ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 018 Impotent imbercile, after all your foul words and years of whingeing by Argyland nothing has changed, nothing will change and the Falkland Islands will get richer and richer Bahahaha… looser!
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It appears that the declaration is in direct conflict with the CHARTER OF THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Chapter IV FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF STATES
Part One Chapter II PRINCIPLES Article 3
The American States reaffirm the following principles:
a) International law is the standard of conduct of States in their reciprocal relations;
b) International order consists essentially of respect for the personality, sovereignty, and independence of States, and the faithful fulfillment of obligations derived from treaties and other sources of international law;
e) ..and has the duty to abstain from intervening in the affairs of another State. ...
Article 11
Every American State has the duty to respect the rights enjoyed by every other State in accordance with
international law.
Article 12
The fundamental rights of States may not be impaired in any manner whatsoever.
Article 13
The political existence of the State is independent of recognition by other States. Even before being recognized, the State has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its preservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate concerning its interests, to administer its services, and to determine the jurisdiction and competence of its courts. The exercise of these rights is limited only by the exercise of the rights of other States in accordance with international law.
Article 19
No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. The foregoing principle prohibits not only armed force but also any other form of interference or attempted threat against the personality of the State or against its political, economic, and cultural elements.
Article 20
No State may use or encourage the use of coercive measures of an economic or political character in order to force the sovereign will of another State and obt
@ paulcedron Not wanting to rub salt into your dirty woinds but try reading this
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Possession is nine-tenths of the law is an expression meaning that ownership is easier to maintain if one has possession of something, or difficult to enforce if one does not”.
Now my dearest DicK Head paulcedron I take it you know which part of that saying refers to you
'now, lets see who supports argentina in its claims:'
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually Paul, I didn't read any where in that declaration that said they supported Argentinas claims, what they support is negotiation and a peaceful resolution to the dispute over the sovereignty issue.
Argentina proposed and prepared this draft resolution and placed in front of OAS.
This is what your government asked for..
REAFFIRMS the need for the Governments of the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to resume, as soon as possible, negotiations on the sovereignty dispute, in order to find a peaceful solution to this protracted controversy.
DECIDES to continue to examine the question of the Malvinas Islands at its subsequent sessions until a definitive settlement has been reached thereon.
So all that voted would indeed be happy for the outcome to be settled with either the UK handing over sovereignty or Argentina dropping it's claim. No where do I see a text in this draft resolution saying that Argentina must have sovereignty and by adopting the resolution you are siding with Argentina and its claim.
You have been indoctrinated to believe that anyone who agrees with peaceful negotiation to reach a definitive outcome must be siding with Argentina, when clearly the text says nothing of the sort. Canada didn't sign as they see through the Argentine game, they know that even neutral statements are used as propaganda for the masses and twisted to show support for your 'Malvinas Cause'
@18 cara de dos ortos podridos
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you an idiot? “The statement, a copy of previous documents calls on the need for both governments to “resume as soon as possible negotiations on the sovereignty dispute” to find a “peaceful solution” to the controversy.”
This is quite an anodyne statement and means nothing and there are no hidden implications. Great Britain is quite happy to talk to Argentina about the Falkland Islands but when the opportunity arose in London in 2013 Timmerman walked out of Foreign Secretarys's office as he objected to the presence of one person in the room.
Just why should the representatives of the Falkland Islands not be included in the proposed negotiations?
Nabo!
@18
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What is the source of all the misinformation that paulcedron posts?
Not only does he need his mouth be washed out with a very strong disinfectant but his statements are pure comedy in their fatuity!
Paulcedron- Oh dear - yet again you open your mouth and all the brown stuff falls out of it and you end up deep in in it all over again! When will you ever learn - or is your real name Timmerman or Christina?
Jun 17th, 2015 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are in the same self-infatuated fantasy bullshit class as them.
Nothing sweeter than to see paulcedron swatted by others like the dirty nasty vile talking fly he is
Jun 17th, 2015 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you make just a few minor changes to a paragraph in the article, it puts the subject in a historical perspective and showing the true evil of Timerman and CFK.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Reich Minister Timerman refers to the Falkland Islanders as a 'non people' since they were 'implanted' and thus with no rights to Lebensraum (”living space”) or self determination, while Reich President Fernandez refers to them as 'non-Latin squatters' and calls for a Final Solution to relocate the non-desirables.”
(Timerman is a disgrace to his religion and father's name.)
OAS is filled with all the losers from SoAM that couldn't get a job at IMF WB IDB but were just politically connected enough to get into OAS.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 02:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They're the dumbest laziest bureaucrats I've ever had to associate with.
All you really need to know on this matter is the following:
Jun 17th, 2015 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina doesn't matter.
Uh, rotting roadkill:
Jun 17th, 2015 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What can you get with all those ringing endorsements and pats on the back?
Will your beer magically refill?
Will your dog come home?
Will your wife leave her lover?
Will your burgeoning national debt disappear?
Will prices come down?
Will the soccer team win a cup?
Will the dog feces evaporate from the sidewalks?
Will ole turkey neck be rejuvenated?
??
LOL.
nada.
zip.
zero.
nothing.
looks like that piece of shit paulcedron lost his tongue
Jun 17th, 2015 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You can’t help laughing at this latest episode of delusion and illusion from the Kirchner regime. A country of 40 million has failed utterly to bully and frighten 3,000 peaceful “non-people”. Just shows how weak and useless la Presidenta Corruptina’s campaign has been, wasting so much time, energy and money on a failed campaign of intimidation. Kirchner, Timerman, Filmus, you have suffered a humiliating defeat and the rest of the world can’t help laughing at you.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 06:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There already is a “peaceful solution” to the controversy. No need to talk about it.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Once again a big thank you to our Canadian cousins. It takes a lot of courage for one country to stand up in front of many and say that you're all wrong and we don't agree with you. Life would be far easier for them to capitulate and go along with the masses, but they have decency, morals and fairness in their blood.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Family sticks together.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Jun 17th, 2015 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Falkland Islands receives US support on the issue of “self determination”
The United States Should Recognize British Sovereignty Over the Falkland Islands
The Obama Administration has backed Argentina’s calls for a U.N.-brokered settlement for the Islands and so far has refused to recognize the outcome of the referendum. This policy poses serious risks to U.S. interests and is an insult both to Britain—the U.S.’s closest ally—and to the rights of the Islanders.
www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/03/the-united-states-should-recognize-british-sovereignty-over-the-falkland-islands
a campaign that it is waging solely to distract its own citizens from the ongoing collapse of its economy. By supporting Argentina’s demand, the U.S. risks alienating Britain and encouraging Argentina to take even more aggressive actions. The question of sovereignty was emphatically settled in 1982. It should not be reopened, and the U.S. should stop suggesting that it can be.
Interesting reading.
.
Friends are for life, not just a Christmas..
.
OAS declaration in support of Malvinas UK/Argentina talks
Jun 17th, 2015 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Ottawa was in disagreement. “The Canadian delegation does not wish to associate to the text” said Canadian official Jennifer Loten”
Smart woman, you just gotta love our brothers and sisters from Canada.
By the way, would someone please, please, PLEASE tell BottyBoypaulie at 14 that his post there is WRONG.
All those countries that he has listed? They only support the re-starting of talks......AND I know for a fact that Chile only put it's name to that list to show token support to argentina.
Chile knows that the sun has almost set on argentina and Chile future lies with trading and education links with other countries ( the U.K ) so we also must tip our hat to Chile.
#38 toooldtodieyoung
Jun 17th, 2015 - 08:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How correct you are. Imagine living next door to a temperamental mad woman that's always complaining that everyone's against her and she's constantly complaining about everything. Worse yet, it's not like you can move away. You are stuck living a nightmare next door to the perra. So to placate her nasty temper and insure she doesn't firebomb your garden shed or something, you tell her: yes, I agree, yes, of course, sure it's yours.... Anything to shut up the screeching witch....
In the meantime, you maintain your superb relations with the UK and weekly flights to Mount Pleasant. (You also put you name on a waiting list for a Type 45 when they decide to sell it in about 15 years or so.)
remember note USA/CANADA and EU not agree.Go away and hibernate till the year 3000,as may have them then if we agree.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Did Chile vote in favour of the argentine position?..wow.....great...
Jun 17th, 2015 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For the record, this is historically and proudly consistent with Canada's past position on the Falklands.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At the OAS in 2012, Prime Minister Stephen Harper personally vetoed an Argentine request to get the Falkland’s issue into the heads of state’s concluding communiqué.
And to quote John Baird, Canada's (great) former foreign affairs minister, “The issue of Canada’s policy does not change, we support the self-determination of the people of the Falkland Islands, as we do people everywhere around the world”.
Canadian company Barrick Gold (largest gold mining company in the world) has lobbied Ottawa to tone-down its stance on the Falklands (due to its mining interests in Argentina); fortunately to no avail.
As I've previously stated in another thread (sorry for the repetition), John Baird has since retired, but I expect that he is not done with politics quite yet (being only 45 years old), as he is considered one of the most effective, competent, popular and decent Canadian politicians of his generation. I would not be surprised to see him re-enter politics and even become our Prime Minister one day ...... which, incidentally, would also make him Canada's first (openly) gay PM.
Cheers,
D
#41 pgerman
Jun 17th, 2015 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's embarrassing for me, but of course my government voted in solidarity with the criminals in Argentina. Yes, we're hypocrites and cowards. Chile is not perfect...
Feel better?
37. One man - Obama - made that decision.
Jun 17th, 2015 - 10:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Every day - Jimmy Carter thanks God for Obama because thusly Carter will be deprived of having the distinction of being the worst American president of all time.
All Americans are repsonsible for Obama's presidency - including those who vigorously opposed him. Only when he is replaced can this stain start to be removed. In the interim - your patience please.
#44 chronic
Jun 17th, 2015 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We all were hopefull of the Obama administration...
The American Navy visitors after a few drinks in the evening open up and deride Obama big time. This includes black officers. They don't like him.
Where foreign policy is concerned Obama as been a complete and utter disaster he as treated some of Americas closest allies poorly to say the least.
Jun 18th, 2015 - 12:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well done Canadian government.
Jun 18th, 2015 - 01:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well done Ms. Loten !
The text just says that there should be a solution to the problem.
Jun 18th, 2015 - 06:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nowhere does it state that Argentina has sovereignty nor that Argentina should get the islands.
Same thing is said every year.
Irrational words: “Implanted” people...How many Argentinians were “implanted” to the Region ? To use that term shows a basic inhumanity anyway.
Jun 18th, 2015 - 08:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0If the Falkland Islanders are an “implanted population” as our much lamented Foreign Minister constantly states, why on earth did the British “implanters” implant 50+ different ethnicities instead of only implanting brits??????
Jun 18th, 2015 - 12:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It doesn't really make sense does it??????
Now why would Canada be against finding a solution to the Malvinas/Falkland dispute???????
Jun 18th, 2015 - 03:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@51 aussieshunshinee
Jun 18th, 2015 - 04:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Any dispute was solved on 14 June 1982 when the fascist murderous Argentine Junta was given a good shoeing by the British and freedom and democracy was returned to the PEOPLE of the Falklands.
Everything else is just Argentina sour grapes because they couldn't do a land grab, which meant that they couldn't follow on with this land grab with another land grab by invading Chile.
Remember that Argentina erroneously claims almost all of South America.
If Argentina has a case then I suggest they take it to the ONLY body in the world that can hear it and rule upon it. And that body isn't the OAS, or the UNGA or the UNSC or MERCOSUR or UNASUR or the G20 or in fact any other body that Argentina has moaned to.
Why oh why, if their soverignty claim is so solid, haven't they gone to the International Courts of Justice?
Can you answer that aussiesunshinee?
I can answer it. It's because Argentina hasn't got a VALID LEGAL claim against the Falkland Islands beyone “I wants it”.
But nothing Argentina can say or do can trump the right to self determination.
The only way that could happen is if the UN ceased to exist, and thus the UN Charter, but then the UK wouldn't be bound by it either and would just bomb the sh!t out of Argentina next time they tried some stupid stunt.
Remember it is ONLY the UN that is protecting Argentina, but unfortunately it also protects the Falkland Islanders from Argentinas colonial imperialist ambitions.
@18
Jun 18th, 2015 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“the problem, you imbecile isleteer is that england or the leftovers of the uk or whatever is the name of that country, wants a tri-partite meeting.”
So as you Argentines want talks with the British, and according to you the Islanders are British(rather than a separate people), there should be no problem whatsoever if Falkland Islanders are in a British delegation for talks, should there?
Before 1982 (Franks Report 1983) Islanders were present when talks between Argentina and the UK took place, with Argentina's agreement. It is against the Islander's interests not to be allowed representation, which is part of 2065.
If Argentina keeps banging on about res 2065, don't you think it is time Argentina actually reads the resolution, which is weighted in the Islander's favour?
The point is about de-colonisation you moron, that the world wanted the UK to give power to the people that live on the islands.
Whilst pre-1982 they did not, it is true to see that since 1982 the UK has ceded more constitutional more powers to the islanders, thus leading to de-colonisation.
It is only because Argentina wants to colonise the Islands that they still retain political ties with the UK
*52 It would be interesting to see if The UK government would accept the International
Jun 18th, 2015 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Court of Justice to rule on this case. Remember that no case can be heard in the Court
unless both countries agree. How would the oil exploration dispute be heard
since it depends on who has ´TITLE´to the islands, which on its own is
complicated. then, we have the islanders´claim to self -detremination
which is not recognised by the UN.Let us suppose for a minute that the
Court rules in Argentina´s favour. Would the UK be prepared to renounce
all the capital invested on the islands? It has fought a war over them, it
has guaranteed the population self -determination and has invested
heavily on the islands. Would the UK be prepared to renounce all this if
the court ruled against it ???
It is not only Argentina that is weary of going to the International Court of
Justice but The UK, too.
“It is only because Argentina wants to colonise the Islands that they still retain political ties with the UK”
Jun 18th, 2015 - 06:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But you cannot colonise a territory which is already part of your country.
That is called integrity.
Well,
Jun 18th, 2015 - 07:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0why don't we all go to the ICJ then,
@54 aussiesunshinee
Jun 18th, 2015 - 07:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yet the British did invite Argentina to take it's case to the ICJ on 3, read it THREE, separate occasions.
You'd've thought that IF Argentina's claims were so SOLID AND TRUE that they would've jumped at the chance, right?
But Argentina won't go BECAUSE nothing they say can trump the UN Charter. And the UN Charter states that ALL people have the right to self determination. There are NO exemptions.
Even Ban Ki-Moon, the Secretary General has stated that ALL NSGT's have the right to self-determination. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Argentina has lied and lied and lied and lied and lied and lied and continues to lie regarding the Falklands. But unfortunately for Argentina their lies are so easily disproved that any attempt to legally change sovereignty over the islands would fail. AND THEY KNOW IT.
So the ONLY legal option open to Argentina is to persuade the Falkland Islanders to vote to become Argentine. It shouldn't be hard considering that, according to the glorious leader CFK, Argentina is the land of milk and honey with hardly any poverty. I mean surely any sane person would want to live there, right?
Oh, of course Argentina lies and lies and lies and lies and lies about everything including about poverty which is running at more than 25% of the population, not below 5% like your beloved leader stated. I mean how deluded or bare faced do you have to be to stand on the world stage and state that your country is better off than Germany? Especially when your boasts can be so easily DISPROVED.
So the reasons no Falkland Islander (even those of Argentine heritage) would voluntarily choose to become part of Argentina are obvious. Argentina is a failing state. The Falkland Islands are booming.
There is NOTHING Argentina can offer the Falkland Islanders that is better than they have now.
So without the Islanders agreement there CANNOT be any transfer of sovereignty. That's international law for you though.
Soon Argentina will disappear up it's own arse.
@54
Jun 19th, 2015 - 08:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why on earth should the UK take the case to the ICJ? Because Argentina is consistently behaving like the nutter on the bus with a diplomatic campaign that can never amount to anything more than a minor irritation? What kind of whining big girl's blouse of a country would go to court for a thing like that? (Argentina ....)
What's much more remarkable is Argentina's failure to go. Argentina after all is the plaintiff which wants to overturn the status quo, and if Argentina is to be believed it's a win-win situation for them. Imagine if Argentina proposes going to court, and the UK refuses, there's a major propaganda victory right there, just for the price of sending a letter. The poor Brits would never hear the end of it, and neither would anybody else. And then of course, if the UK did agree to go to court, well Argentina is bound to win, what with the strength of its case. Isn't it?
I mean, what's to fear with a case based upon an inheritance that was never left to you by a colonial country that was never in undisputed possession, a mythology of Argentine administration that never was, an expulsion of settlers that never happened, dubious interpretations of treaties that Argentine was never a party to, repudiation of a treaty that Argentina actually was a party to, rejection of every development in international law, democracy, and human rights that took place in the 20th century, and last but not least, a lost war?
What have you got to lose?
“The statement, a copy of previous documents calls on the need for both governments to “resume as soon as possible negotiations on the sovereignty dispute” to find a “peaceful solution” to the controversy.”
Jun 19th, 2015 - 10:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0This innocuous statement is hypocritical and does not reflect Argentina’s true agenda. What they really want to say is:
“resume as soon as possible negotiations on the transfer of sovereignty to Argentina” However they won’t say that because they know that few countries will support it.
So they resort to lies and deception, but since the entire ‘Malvinas myth’ is based on lies, beat ups and deceptions, that’s not surprising.
The only country that comes out of this with its integrity intact is Canada; the rest should hang their collective heads in shame.
@55:
Jun 19th, 2015 - 10:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0“But you cannot colonise a territory which is already part of your country.
That is called integrity.”
Exactly right - since the Falklands are *not* part of Argentina, Pete Bog was indeed correct when he said “...Argentina wants to colonise the Islands...”
@58:
Good points. As the party (falsely) claiming a dispute, Argentina should be the ones to take the case.
IIRC, didn't Britain try to take the case to the ICJ themselves in the 70s, only to be refused on those grounds?
“I mean, what's to fear with a case based upon an inheritance that was never left to you by a colonial country that was never in undisputed possession, a mythology of Argentine administration that never was, an expulsion of settlers that never happened, dubious interpretations of treaties that Argentine was never a party to, repudiation of a treaty that Argentina actually was a party to, rejection of every development in international law, democracy, and human rights that took place in the 20th century, and last but not least, a lost war?”
Good points all.
As I've said before, Argentina can take the case to the ICJ, or they can come clean, admit they've lied all along, and end their fake claim. Those are the only two outcomes that are fair to all three parties in the dispute.
Problem is, neither of those outcomes give Argentina the Falklands, so they'll never go for it.
@55 Juanfoster
Jun 19th, 2015 - 02:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We've been through all of this before but I never tire of it-sorry folks
“But you cannot colonise a territory which is already part of your country.”
When a country wants to take over a country against the wishes of the Indigenous people it is called colonialism.
Therefore, Argentina wishes to colonise the Falklands.
Please state your evidence that the Falklands is a part of the Argentine not British.
If the Falkland Islands are part of Argentina, why are all the signs there in English when the official language of Argentina is Spanish?
Why for instance do all incoming aircraft file flight plans to the Falkland Islands Government and not to Argentina?
Your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
Cue the usual arguments where the Malvanista's evidence is dissected and neutralised.
Argentina just want to live in the past and try to gain a modern day empire full stop.
Jun 19th, 2015 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 061
Jun 19th, 2015 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“When a country wants to take over a country against the wishes of the Indigenous people it is called colonialism.”
indigenous ´people?
wrong
“Therefore, Argentina wishes to colonise the Falklands.”
Again, they are an integral part of Argentina.
Try to compare it with Gibraltar, for example.
It is an integral part of Spain.
Then both are colonies of a foreign, alien country.
“If the Falkland Islands are part of Argentina, why are all the signs there in English when the official language of Argentina is Spanish?”
Because the occupants speak English.
It is not an indicator of anything
@ John Fester
Jun 20th, 2015 - 11:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0”Because the occupants speak English. (SIC) , it is not an indicator of anything.”
Other than they are od superior intellect to those who use the lowest level of Jibber-Jabber, such as yourself.
Now piss of and play with your 1950's aeroplane.
Love Chrisine, ha, ha, ha.
@ 63 Juanfoster
Jun 20th, 2015 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Interesting comparison considering that Gib has been separated from Spain for 400 years, which is 200 years more than Argentina has been separated from Spain.
British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands dates back to 1765, some years before the Republic of Argentina even existed.
The Argentine province of Tierra del Fuego, of which Argentina purportedly claims the Falkland Islands forms a part, did not itself become part of the Republic of Argentina until half a century after the British recapture of the Islands in 1833.
The Falkland Islands have never legitimately been administered by, or formed part of, the sovereign territory of the Republic of Argentina.
And therefore cannot violate the territorial integrity of Argentina.
Not complicated.
@63 John
Jun 20th, 2015 - 01:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“indigenous ´people?”
Yes-the Falkland Islanders are originated from the original occupants of the Islands(i.e. before people emigrated to the Islands, there were no native peoples displaced). Therefore the Falkland Islanders have over 180 years developed as a race=Indigenous
To dispute this you therefore must outline people born on the Islands that pre-date the Falkland Islanders lineage.
That includes the multi-national settlers (no Englishmen among those-until later in the year when Thomas Helsby showed up-who stayed in 1833).
(i.e. Dickson=Irish Brisbane=Scottish)
“Try to compare it with Gibraltar, for example.
It is an integral part of Spain.”
Like Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of Morrocco?
Like Pierre St Miquelon is an integral part of Canada?
Right?
“Again, they are an integral part of Argentina”
Explain why you believe the Falkland Islands are an integral part of Argentina?
“Because the occupants speak English.
It is not an indicator of anything”
So why, when the Welsh Argentines speak Welsh, are the official signs and documentation in Spanish and not Welsh??
Why is the Falkland Island official documentation not in Spanish?
You will find the English signs ARE an indicator that the islands are not Argentine, because putting it in simple terms, Spanish is the official language of Argentina-therefore the signs should be in Spanish, on the Falklands for it to be administered by Argentina even if the people speak English.
There are English and Welsh speaking Argentines, but the signs and official documentation in Argentina are Spanish-for a reason.
Therefore by saying that the Islands are 'integral' they must be administered by Argentina, with all the documentation in Spanish-however, government documentation and signs in the Falkland Islands are in English.
Over to you.
63 Juanfoster
Jun 20th, 2015 - 06:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you have a point, as a matter of fact, you have a very good point,
now I wonder where you got this point , CFKs indoctrination perhaps , Argentine education of brainwashing , argentine historical records [argentine version 2,
you see, your points are only as factual as is told to or indoctrinated for you,
so yes you have a very good point of view, from an indoctrinated argentine educated point of view,
but as you will find on this blog,
the truth is very very different in the real world, is it not.
Chicureo @ 43
Jun 22nd, 2015 - 12:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0“It's embarrassing for me, but of course my government voted in solidarity with the criminals in Argentina. Yes, we're hypocrites and cowards. Chile is not perfect...”
Exactly the same goes for my country, Uruguay. In due course we'll have to apologise. In the case of Uruguay, the “oficial” position does not reflect the feelings of the majority of the population. As a small nation that has been bullied by Buenos Aires since colonial times, we know what it's like to have Argentina as a neighbour.
@63 JuanFoster
Jun 22nd, 2015 - 05:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Gibraltar, physically, is NOT part of Spain - geographically it is part of the Iberian Peninsular just like Andorra, Portugal and, of course, Spain. Neither is Gibraltar politically part of Spain as under the terms of Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht he Spanish Crown formally ceded the territory in perpetuity to the British Crown in 1713. This was confirmed in later treaties signed in Paris and Seville.
Argentina is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, according to Transparency International, and its corrupt president, Cretina Kirchner, tries to hide her criminality behind the Falklands issue. Kirchner has turned Argentina into the Zimbabwe of Latin America and as her catastrophic policies inflict more and more damage, she seeks to ramp up the “great cause” of 3,000 British people living in peace and contentment hundreds of miles from her benighted country. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad for the lovely people of Argentina.
Jun 22nd, 2015 - 08:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It does seem nothing changes.The language is still the same.All you get from Argentina people is plain ignorance,as we Britains,Yes We Great Britains speak in a way as understandable.The Argentine people on here the only language they speak is bad /rude/incoherrant and noy understandable.The situation with the Falkland Islands and Argentina Argument does not hold water in anyway.The Argentine goverment has no rights to the falklands ,never had and never will.No good bringing Gibraltar into row.Gibraltar is British ,and will remain so.Yes we know Spain does does not like idea Gibraltar been belong British ,but spain does not keep attacking gibraltar.Argentine should understand Falklands are british ,have been and will always remain British Goverments control.As the world knows the argentine goverment/country is so corrupt,also finances are in the crap,like Greece.So Argentina wants to get off British backs,we british have HARD SPINES,no argentine whippersnappers will touch British control of falklands.So look after your own corrupt goverment and country.The situation will never change ,so be quiet ,accept and stop beeing an annoying people.Thanks
Jun 22nd, 2015 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!