MercoPress, en Español
Get our news on your inbox! Suscribe x
Montevideo, August 19th 2022 - 04:52 UTC
Bolivian president Evo Morales defended his claim of sea for Bolivia and Malvinas for Argentina, during the last of his two-day very militant visit to Argentina before flying late Thursday to Brazil for the Mercosur summit. Read full article
”Sea for Bolivia”
“Malvinas for Argentina”
And an asylum for delusional presidents.
If Bolivia gets access to the sea, should Argentina return Tierra del Fuego to Chile?
Another mad irredentist.
There are a lot of land locked countries...what makes this commie think Bolivia should just be able have access to the Pacific?
”Sea for Bolivia is like the first half of a match“
In the - very unlikely - event of Bolivia winning their first half, will they bother with the second half?
So a century and a half ago Bolivia LOST a war with Chile.
Can we have the bits of Northen France back that belonged to us?
Oh and India that was ours.
Australia, nah they can keep that.
Trying to re-write history.
Morales is a joke.
Quite, quite mad.
Somebody call the nurse.
Argentina has no legitimate claim to the Falklands but does have a delusional view of the islands' history. Consequently it cannot “reclaim” them. It can only invade them and seek to annex them as it did with vast areas of Paraguay's Chaco after the War of the Triple Alliance and as it has also tried to do with Chile's islands in the Beagle Channel. There are also strong arguments for independence for Tierra del Fuego, which was occupied by Argentinian colonists who slaughtered most of the indigenous peoples. Formosa, Misiones and Tierra del Fuego were all annexed by Argentina. Give them back.
Nuclear oblivion for Bolivia.
Or perhaps Morales could be shoved out where he can be executed. Simple choice, Bolivia. Get the egotistical maniac executed or suffer the consequences.
@8. Wasn't Patagonia colonised by non-spanish Europeans in conjunction with indigenous Araucanians and Mapuche? Overtaken by spanish and argie genocide. Give it back.
Territorial dispute are quite the fashion in Latin America, thanks to the Peronists.
“Sea for Bolivia is like the first half of a match“.
So, Sr Morales thinks that Bolivia will “recover its coastline” before Argentina can steal the Falklands. Interesting.
Question is, have the Pope and or the Argy Gov publicly stated their support for his cause?
Or does he think everyone will just believe him?
Maybe in Bolivia some will, the air is pretty thin up there.
Plus the fact that their brains are addled by chewing coca leaves all day long. How can a country progress when everyone is high ( and I dont mean the altitude )
Again a simple problem with a equally simple answer,
yet so hard to implement.
all you have to do, is unite Bolivia with Argentina,
then Bolivia get access to the sea.lol
An excellent solution whereby Cowpat's side of the bargain is for his 'armed forces' join with Argentina's to fight the gringos
Morales wouldn't like to get the hiding & the humiliation that argentina got in 1982.
Malvinas for Britain. There. We win
has almost certainly been infected with the CFK losers disease...lol
We should just threaten Morales with Paraguay.
After all they made Bolivia look silly in 1932-35.
Bolivia already have access to the sea. The don't need more just the complaint.
Nice of this little man to be so concerned about the Falkland Islands but he really needs to deal with the massive problems of deprivation, starvation and corruption in Bolivia. While he gets his knickers in a twist over the free and independent Falklands, La Paz is paralysed by rioting miners, 700 Bolivian soldiers are dismissed for sedition and the movement for a breakawy state in the province of Santa Cruz grows in strength. You need to watch your back, Sr Morales.
Morales' claim that the Argentines support his Sea for Bolivia and that the Bolivians support Malvinas for Argentina shows what an idiot he is.... neither could really give a damn about what the other country wants....these 'noble' claims are restricted to a few nationalistic politicians in government, on either side, but are not shared by the 'people' of either country.
But I suppose he has to open his mouth and say something, even if totally stupid and very far from reality.
”Morales wouldn't like to get the hiding & the humiliation that argentina got in 1982.2
Exactly. His pledge is a death wish.
Well put-the Falklands is just another smoke screen from a failed Latin American leader to mask their own failures.
If Senor Cowpat visits the UK, I would gladly provide my 1970s vintage muck spreader to ferry him to his adoring crowds.
the Falklands is just another smoke screen from a failed Latin American leader to mask their own failures.
Exactly. And whenever any nation on earth wants to try and get something from Argentina, or get back at Britain for some imagined slight, all they have to do is add their voice to the Malvinas Argentinas rant. It doesn't always work, though. CFK's crowd are a double-crossing lot.
Two drunks propping themselves up.
Argentina has already re-written history, you do realise that they didn't lose the Falklands War, they let us win to avoid massacring us in a massive counter attack. The Pope told them not to do it. Surely you all knew that.
No doubt Bolivia would send its rapid naval reaction group tp help Argentina in the next invasión of the Falklands. The acronym for thidpowerful forcé , Grupo de Reaction Immediato Naval (GRIN) perhaps sums up their usefulness
@17 Isolde La Guerra del Chaco by Alejandro Sienra (not very readble) traces the campaigns in detail. To start with the Paraguayan army had only one rifle for every five soldiers, the rest being armed with machetes. However when the Bolivians ran away they quickly captured enough arms to not only chase the German led invaders from Paraguayan terretory but invaded a part of Bolivia.
If there is one thing that Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Uruguay have learnt from the two very bloody wars it is Dont mess with the Paraguayans
l agree. l've read another book about the Chaco War & l was impressed with the toughness of the Paraguayan soldiers. Many of them were barefoot, their feet must be as tough as leather to survive the Chaco. And the book said that a lot of them had no rifles but did carry swords.
l remember now, one of the books was about William Lane, a man who wanted to found the perfect society, a Utopia, in Paraguay.
Most of his migrants were from Australia & a community of Australians lived in Paraguay. Think that they've been assimilated into the population by now.
Some of them were in the Chaco war.
Yes an Aussie Utopia in Paraguay and like all Utopian dreams it didnt work. Pretty racist too almost as bad as the Mennonites who referred to the Guarani Indians as Unsere shwaze Arslochen
@25 If there is one thing that Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Uruguay have learnt from the TWO very bloody wars it is Don´t mess with the Paraguayans”.
Now, Mr. Redpoll, aren´t you aware that this VERY intention IMMEDIATELY forced the 1865 war on Argentina...? It had already erupted between Brazil and Paraguay. President Mitre only wished to keep our neutrality. Consequently, he refused permission to paraguayan troops to reach Brazil through Corrientes, an Argentine province. Marshall Francisco Solano López was politely expeditious: His army invaded the Province, imposed on it Martial Law, and continued its Brazilian businesses. The paraguayan Declaration of War arrived at Buenos Aires AFTER the invasion news.
Now, King Albert and Mitre, somewhat forcefully, shake hands. Belgium mismatches Argentina, on the basis of sheer size, but Emperor William and Marshall López suspect at once their affinities. We miss Bethmann-Hollweg, but his voice (in off) speaks in Spanish : LA NECESIDAD CREA DERECHOS.
And where is here our (when Argentines, necessary) guilt...?
@28 I am afraid your google translator has failed you and your post is not very intelligible. Perhaps you could repeat it in Spanish. I have not studied the land campaigns of the war in detail, my interest being in the naval actions.
There is no doubt that Solano Lopez egged on by his paramour Elizabeth Lynch to be the Napoleón of South America started the war.
To that he ramped up political tensions, particularly with Brazil and the final spark was his capture of the Brazilian steamer the Marques de Olinda at Corumba.
As you say he then mistakenly invaded Corrientes which brought Argentina into the war.
Under the secret clauses of the Alliance treaty Parguay was to cease to exist as an independant country with Argentina getting all the Chaco provinces while Brazil incorporated the rest of the country east of the Paraguay river but after the war the allies fell out and Braazil did not fancy having its rival Argentina as an immediate nieghbour.
In consequence Argentina received as spoils of conquest Formosa and Missiones and Brazil some terretory in the north.
Can you please explain your last two sentences. What did King Albert of the Belgians and Káiser Wilhelm have to do with the war? And least of all von Bethman-Hollweg who was eight years old at the time?
@29 redpoll Of course, I was thinking simultaneously in TWO different space-time frames, in order to establish an historical parallelism between them, namely the WWI German invasion of Belgium, and the beginning of the Triple Alliance War; by way of tentatively drawing correspondences between their respective facts and protagonists: King Albert-Mitre; Belgium-Argentina, and Káiser Wilhem-López. Bethman-Hollweg is missing in this picture, because I can´t find his paraguayan counterpart, save Marshall López himself. Consequently, the voice of the Imperial Chancellor (already grown up, of course) translate into Spanish their perfectly identical conclusion in dealing with innocent Corrientes.
So you see that the wise advice on the behavior with paraguayans have become utterly wrong in our case.
@30 argfellow Under the Treaty of Ildefonso 1777 Paraguay was a much larger country than it is today, most of what was her original terretory being lost in the War of the Triple Alliance by conquest to the victorious powers.
My question is this: Should the lost terretory be returned to Paraguay or is the right of conquest paramount?
Commenting for this story is now closed.If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!
Get our news on your inbox!