MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, November 27th 2021 - 19:56 UTC

 

 

Falklands hopes complete clearance of minefields will be completed at the end of the decade

Sunday, July 9th 2017 - 00:08 UTC
Full article 43 comments

The Falkland Islands hope that the complete clearance of the minefields, a legacy of the 1982 Argentine military invasion, can be finalized by the end of the decade and in the meantime it is actively considering post-clearance management of those sites that are released, particularly in the area surrounding the capital Stanley. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Hepatia

    Comment removed by the editor.

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 04:48 am - Link - Report abuse -5
  • Capt Rockhopper

    @Hepatia, no worries we will start returning the mines to you personally.

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 05:37 am - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Brit Bob

    Hepatia

    Can't be returned because they have never belonged to Argentina.

    Falklands- Never Belonged to Argentina :
    https://www.academia.edu/31111843/Falklands_Never_Belonged_to_Argentina

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 10:06 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Martin Spiers

    Hepatia
    Read all the documented historical accounts of the Falklands and accept that however so much the Argentina government wishes it to be, it never has and never will be part of your despotic regime!

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 11:05 am - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Clyde15

    H.

    Maybe England will but Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland won't ...so no deal.

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • gordo1

    Re Hepatitis

    Applause for the Editor!

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +5
  • DemonTree

    @gordo1
    Agreed! Her spamming has got even more annoying lately.

    But good for them that the mine clearance is going well, and I think there has only been one minor injury. I hope they do take conservation seriously as I heard the minefields had been very beneficial for the penguins, giving them somewhere safe to breed that humans (and sheep) could not enter.

    Jul 09th, 2017 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Capt Rockhopper

    @hepatia well what do you expect you are simply posting Spam?

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 02:39 am - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Malvinense 1833

    Message to Roger:
    We are at the disposal of any person or entity willing to organise a serious and respecful debate on the Argentine-British dispute over the islands, and offer to organise a similar event in Buenos Aires.
    We are also confident that those seriously interested in the matter will read both publicactions and will then be in a position to judge themselves.
    Professor Marcelo Kohen
    and Facundo Rodríguez, Advocate.
    Penguin News published in its issue of 22 July 2016.

    A good notice, the complete clearence of the minefields.

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 11:41 am - Link - Report abuse -7
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    You clearly have not received the message! There is NOTHING - en absoluto nada - to discuss or to debate.

    The Falkland Islands have never been part of the patrimony of the Republic of Argentina. Your attempts to usurp the archipelago in 1833 and 1982 were totally unsuccessful and the islanders have clearly stated their intention with regard to their future.

    The Argentine claims to the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands are nothing more that fairy tales, myths, lies, misinterpretations of historical events and, frankly, rubbish(basura).

    Your hypocrisy “A good notice, the complete clearance of the minefields” is noted! Who put the mines there in the first place? ARGENTINA!!!!!!!

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Malvinense 1833

    You do not want to debate because you lose. Same as the British government.
    “The Falkland Islands have never been part of the patrimony of the Republic of Argentina. Your attempts to usurp the archipelago in 1833”
    Explain in a debate.
    t's not hypocrisy, it's good notice for me.
    Chau gordo

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -6
  • Roger Lorton

    Which debate did we “lose”. Argentines don't debate. They make statements and then refuse to listen to anything that counters their supposed facts. There is no debate.

    There was no debate in the 17 years of talks leading up to 1982. Argentina wanted to talk, but Argentina did not wish to listen. Then Argentina chose war, and that was an end to the jaw jaw.

    The matter is settled.

    And nothing important happened in 1833. Just the ejection of trespassers warned in 1829 and 1832.

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 03:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +5
  • Malvinense 1833

    “There was no debate in the 17 years of talks leading up to 1982”
    There was no debate since 1833 !!!
    “And nothing important happened in 1833. Just the ejection of trespassers warned in 1829 and 1832”.
    And trespassers of 1764, 1765, 1780, 1781, 1785,1790, 1800 etc, etc, what happened!!?? You do not believe your own lies.
    There is no debate?
    Kohen is waiting for you.

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 03:41 pm - Link - Report abuse -5
  • Roger Lorton

    Kohen has me blocked on every medium other than Twitter, where he watches but does not respond. I expose frauds, I don't do 'respectful' with deceivers.

    There was a debate in 1834. There were debates in the 1880's. There were debates between 1967 and 1982. Debating is now over. Comes of Argentina choosing War War over Jaw Jaw. Never forget child, it was Argentina that wanted to talk, and Argentina that stopped talking.

    There was no trespass in 1764, nor 1765. Spain didn't arrive until 1767 and, according to Bougainville, had to he shown the way by a French Pilot.

    1780's? Nothing of great consequence during that period. Once a year excursions by the Spanish garrison to see whether the British had returned. We were always expected. And in 1790, Spain drew its horns in and recognised that all it could claim was a coastline 10 leagues either side of a settlement. Wow. That gave Spain part of Berkeley Sound. Nothing more.

    1800's - well France demanded a base in the Falklands in 1801 .... from England, not Spain (its ally), which should give you a hint, and in 1811 Spain left the south Atlantic claiming just one Island. Still claimed it in 1833, but did not complain that Britain had annexed it.

    Argentina was never in the game.

    Nor is Kohen :-)

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 03:56 pm - Link - Report abuse +5
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    You end your message “Chau gordo” - I have looked in several Spanish-English dictionaries and fail to find the word “chau”. I am also bilingual Spanish/English and have lived in Spain and several Latin American countries and have never heard this word before. What does it mean? Or is it some obscure word used only in the Argentine argot?

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    Gordo, surely it just means that he does not know how to spell 'ciao'?

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Brit Bob

    Malvinense

    A sovereignty claim without a case can only mean that the claim is illegitimate and worthless.

    Argentina's Illegitimate Sovereignty Claims: https://www.academia.edu/27599163/Argentinas_Illegitimate_Sovereignty_Claims

    Unless you know something different? ... tick...tock...

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 07:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • gordo1

    Demon Tree

    “Ciao” is Italian and is used more often than not in that language as a greeting. Idiot child Malvinense seems to use this odd word “chau” instead of the Spanish “adios”(goodbye)

    Jul 10th, 2017 - 08:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Malvinense 1833

    I am amazed at the aggressive way of expressing themselves of the British.
    example: “Idiot child Malvinense”
    Chau is a deformation of the Italian ciao, it is an informal farewell greeting.(in Argentina)
    “Ciao” in Italian is used more as a greeting to encounter two people than as a farewell.
    Chau: goodbye, bye, see you son.
    Now will you help me with English?

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • DemonTree

    @Malvi
    Excessive nationalism seems to bring out the worst in people.

    Gordo1 used to be married to a woman from Argentina, but I guess he never heard that greeting. I don't say 'ciao', but on TV I have heard people use it as both 'hello' and 'goodbye', so I guessed that was what you meant.

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 03:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • gordo1

    Demon Tree

    Where on earth did you get the idea I used to be married to a woman from Argentina? I have had expatriate Argentine friends in the Latin American countries where I have lived and worked and also in Spain - but to marry an Argentine woman? NEVER!
    I have never been to Argentina and have no desire to go there much less have any familial connection to an Argentine woman - God forbid!

    My wife is Latin American but she is from one of the much more civilised countries!

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 03:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Malvinense 1833

    Demon Tree: Chao or chau (Italian ciao) is an informal greeting characteristic of the Italian language and originating in the Venetian language from which it was adopted. In modern Italian and other languages ​​it is used interchangeably as “hello” or “goodbye”. In Argentina chau= goodbye
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTLNe-xpF44

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 04:01 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • gordo1

    So “chau” IS Argentine “argot” stolen, appropriately, from the Italian language!

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    Sorry Gordo1, perhaps I mixed you up with some other poster?

    @Malvi
    Back on topic, do you know why Argentina refuses to pay anything towards clearing the mines they left? I could understand them not wanting to pay if the British army was doing the job, but it is a private company.

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    I seem to recall that the reason that Argentina gives to the UN every year, is that they do not have control over the islands. I'll check that tomorrow but Argentina wants to send its experts in who are all military. The Islanders will not accept Argentine soldiers on their soil.

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Islander1

    As I understand it- under Ottowa Convention each signatory nation is responsible for clearing mines in its borders. UK would not encourage Arg to offer to pay - otherwise most of North Africa could ask UK to pay for all the WW2 mines laid across there- albeit for good reason at the time. Some retired Arg officers have I understood assisted with map locations etc in the early days and fair enough - but not physically on the ground here
    And certainly we Islanders would sooner have the mines remain than the Argies involved in any way in their removal- financial or physical. We know trust the Zimbabwean deminer teams - would I ever trust and Arg team saying it was all clear????!!!!!!!!!

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 09:04 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Malvinense 1833

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4679614/Argentinian-generals-plant-flag-Falklands.html
    Smoke british

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 10:09 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • DemonTree

    @Islander1
    Wow, there are really still mines from WWII lying around in Africa? Why doesn't the government offer some of that foreign aid they are supposed to be spending to help remove them?

    I guess that could be a reason for the UK not to accept money from Argentina, but it doesn't explain why they haven't offered any. I can see why you wouldn't want teams from Argentina doing the job though, especially if they are military.

    @Malvinense 1833
    You're the third person to post that stupid story on this site. I don't believe even your military is crazy enough for that.

    Jul 11th, 2017 - 11:05 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Roger Lorton

    Last entry I have is from 2011 when, before the State Parties to the Ottawa Convention, Argentina repeated that it would clear the mines when it had control of the Islands.

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 05:24 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    Crowing over a non event is very juvenile! If you have any sense at all you will realise that this information is totally false! ¡que boludo!

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 06:05 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Malvinense 1833

    Demon Tree: I do not know the agreement between London and Buenos Aires regarding demining.

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 11:20 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    “I do not know the agreement between London and Buenos Aires regarding defining.”

    Por supuesto, boludo. There isn't one!

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Malvinense 1833

    Visit us
    https://www.interpatagonia.com/villalaangostura/index_i.html
    Roger the debate is not done on facebook, twitter, Mercopress, Penguin News. Propose your willingness to debate formally and publicly.
    gordo1: Are you a teenager?

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 09:23 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • DemonTree

    @Malvinense 1833
    As far as I know there isn't one, and posters here have given some reasons the UK may not want one. I was wondering why Argentina had never offered to help pay for the removal of the mines, given they both laid them and claim the land.

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 10:00 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Malvinense 1833

    @Demon Tree: Argentina offered to withdraw the mines, there were talks between the two governments, but it seems that the British government was not very sure because of the implications in the dispute over sovereignty.

    Jul 12th, 2017 - 10:21 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    “Argentina offered to withdraw the mines”! Please cite the details of the “offer” and the source of your statement “it seems that the British government was not very sure because of the implications in the dispute over sovereignty.”

    PS Unlike you I am NOT a juvenile! However your postings are so uninformed and provocative they only deserve being ignored or being treated with disdain. For example, there is no “dispute over sovereignty” the United Kingdom does NOT dispute - Argentina DOES!

    Jul 13th, 2017 - 04:56 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Malvinense 1833

    I also assume that as a signatory to the Ottawa Convention, the United Kingdom has an obligation to deminerate the lands under its control.
    @gordo1 http://www.lanacion.com.ar/146759-la-argentina-quedo-obligada-al-desminado

    Jul 13th, 2017 - 11:07 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Clyde15

    M1833

    A bit pointless referring to an article written in Spanish which my on-line translator has been working on for 20 minutes and still hasn't come up with the translation.

    However:-

    “ Within ten years after ratifying the treaty, the country should have cleared all of its mined areas.”

    Sounds simple BUT the UK did not mine the areas ...that was ARGENTINA.

    From what I have read, there are still areas without exact plans of the mines locations and weather has moved many of them in the sub-soil.

    If Argentina offered to demine the areas it was not out of the goodness of their heart, but a chance to score a point in their sovereignty claims.

    Jul 13th, 2017 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Roger Lorton

    The UK has been given extensions to the 10 year limit; mostly as a result of islanders saying that there are more problematic areas in the world and that they should get priority.

    Jul 13th, 2017 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • gordo1

    Malvinense 1833

    “Para la Argentina, las Malvinas son parte del territorio nacional. De forma tal que el Estado asumió la responsabilidad de desactivar los artefactos colocados en el archipiélago durante 1982.” WHAT UTTER RUBBISH! So now please explain why Argentina is so stupid as to lay these mines on its own territory?

    Jul 13th, 2017 - 08:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • DemonTree

    So back in 1999 when Argentina was being more friendly there was an agreement to jointly look at the feasibility and costs of removing the mines. Did nothing come of that?

    @Clyde15
    It's very clear in the treaty that each country is responsible for removing mines on their own territory, no matter who laid them.

    I think Argentina also put mines on their borders with Chile, but has removed them since.

    Jul 14th, 2017 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    DT

    We say it's ours, they say it's theirs.

    To me, the treaty is irrelevant. The mines are being cleared to the satisfaction of the people who live there so that should be the end of the story. It does not affect anyone else.

    Apart from inconvenience, there is no great danger to the population.

    Jul 14th, 2017 - 03:54 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    @Clyde15
    They are only clearing the mines now because of the treaty; they let them sit there for 30 years because it was going to cost more than it was worth (in money and injuries/deaths) to remove them.

    But I guess techniques have advanced since then, and it will be good to get rid of the danger and free up that land for use, as long as they keep some areas fenced off for the penguins and other conservation.

    Jul 14th, 2017 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1

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