MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
No Parallels between Falklands and Chagos
In a move that will no doubt be greeted favorably in Buenos Aires, the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly demanded on Wednesday that Britain give up control over the Chagos Islands. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThat's right...:
May 24th, 2019 - 10:41 am - Link - Report abuse -4***“No Parallels between Falklands and Chagos”***... cause parallels never meet...
But an awful lot of Adjacencies..., that sooner than later will find their natural Vertex...
Well isn't it not obvious that Britain has strategically showed some acknowledging or “bowing” attitude regarding Chagos with the Falkland's in mind, in order to create or build some kind of contrast argument? DUH!
May 24th, 2019 - 10:45 am - Link - Report abuse -5In any case, rightly so. They are completely different cases, and it changes absolutely nothing in the area of Argentina being a country equal to all other countries deserving of political and historical acknowledgment, not deserving of any more slandering offensive indifference about this argument it has against Britain dating back to 1833. There are no points in common with Chagos whatsoever. The Malvinas Falkland dispute like I said a billion times, has never been a case of colonialism. Britain simply expelled by force (attacked) the already administrating and established government of Bs As off the Islands, when they had yet never consolidated, but merely continued to claim against Spain, had left or abandoned their settlement, and had never put forth a claim against the Vice Royalty of La Plata and subsequently the United Provinces when those state entities were already administrating the islands. It simply bullyingly and opportunistically took them back illegitimately. It's a case of arguing sovereignty over territory, or territory usurpation if you take the Argentine side, so nothing to do at all with Chagos or Colonialism. I'm sure Britain understands this, but plays dumb in letting its own intentional miss filling at the United Nations in 1946 or whenever go forward, helped by the Argentine as well not seeing this, who continue also to talk about Colonialism. Right? Very convenient for Britain today in its move with Chagos. Unfortunately for Britain, many real scholars and politicians in different political environments have already called attention to what I'm talking about. ... So keep trying to run off with the goods Britain! Still trying to fool the world while you run off spewing forward your own very convincing self explanations.
Patrick Edgar
May 24th, 2019 - 10:57 am - Link - Report abuse +4Britain met force with force. Argentine acquiescence to the absolute right of the UK by her failure to respond to diplomacy protests.
“silence gives consent. Thus, who keeps silent consents; silence means consent; silent consent is same as expressed consent; consent by conduct is as good as expressed consent. This is an implied term in law....”
Soma's Dictionary Of Latin Quotations Maxims And Phrases
Interestingly, in a televised interview [Channel 4 News, UK , 23rd of May 2019] The President Of The Chagos Islands Council said Chagossians, living in the UK, would prefer that The Chagos Archipelago remains a British Overseas Territory. Also, he stated that Chagossians would rather live as UK citizens on Diego Garcia, similar to how citizens on Pitcairn Island live [Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands, are a British Overseas Territory in the southern Pacific Ocean]; rather than be ceded to Mauritius. He discussed how, despite their original displacement by the UK, Mauritius treated the Chagossians appallingly – despite an agreement with the UK to assist them. Furthermore, Mr Vincatassin suggested that Mauritius made the Chagossians surrender their right of return to the Chagos Archipelago and are simply motivated by the ‘rent’ they hope to take off the Americans; or perhaps to ‘give them to India’.
May 24th, 2019 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Brit Bob
May 24th, 2019 - 01:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Then the answer is simple, hold a referendum for the Islanders, and if they wish to remain as a British Overseas Territory. Then so be it, and thus they are decolonised, and as a further gesture of reconciliation pay them just compensation for the monies stolen by the Mauritians.
That's not true Terence. The British hardly met force when they came back to take the Islands from the Argentine. You sound sometimes like you don't know the actual story. The Argentine had been attacked by the Americans, and were barely hanging on. Not always does the principle of “consent by silence” apply Terence. You're talking about a principle of law that involves two necessary elements 1) lack of definition, ongoing process or ambiguity, and 2) time passed. If I leave my house vacant for the summer, and when I return I find squatters in the garage, just because I proceed to re occupy my house omitting to deal with the squatters, does not mean they earn their right to stay. Besides, you're missing the whole point. Britain never affirmed, or consolidated nor was ever recognized by the sea faring international powers of the day for the islands belonging the them, though they probably were all aware that both Spanish and British empires were contesting them. They had no right to expel Argentina. With or without previous Spanish possession. The Islands were simply already being handled by the mainland, Britain never established permanent settlement. Argentina on the other hand was settled when it was attacked. Britain did not rule them at that time, or ever for that matter. It had fought, but lost and left. British people on the Internet, not your government actually, like to state that “the Islands had been British since yadda yadda yadda”, but you must be reminded that such statements are completely false. Britain “claimed” the Islands, nothing more. Even Falklanders today will refrain from saying they were on the islands from before 1833, in fact even that is a stretch. They've only been on the islands since 1845 or 46, 47 or so. So while Argentina DID have the right to protest. Britain actually did not. It could only dispute the claim against Argentina. Hence why it had to come back and remove the Argentine garrison forcefully. ... Get it right kids.
May 24th, 2019 - 02:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -5Patrick Edgar
May 24th, 2019 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse +5“That's not true ... Britain never affirmed, or consolidated nor was ever recognized ... It had fought, but lost and left”
Britain did affirm in the joint Anglo Spanish Declaration of 1771. They were prior to it prepared to go to war over Islands. As Palmerston, later said. “Britain had always disputed and denied the claim of Spain to the Falkland Islands, and she was not therefore willing to yield to Buenos Ayres what had been refused to Spain.”
Recognized, those countries have already legally recognized UK sovereignty by their initial ”silences“ of 1833, and have already ”consented“. Not one country supported an Argentine claim.
”will refrain from saying they were on the islands from before 1833” Thats because it's not true, and unlike you lot are not steeped in viveza criolla.
Still not taking the tablets then Pat.
May 25th, 2019 - 07:00 am - Link - Report abuse +1Adjacent Think? Nothing more than a 100 miles away is adjacent according to international law.
So let's cut to the chase here - was this article written by Brit Bob? ;-)
Jesus! Terence, you're not saying anything different! It still is just a claim to the islands. It is arguing against Spain on a preexisting discourse. It never had its sovereignty recognized by anyone else other than ITSELF!! ... It is incredible to see when I read people like Roger Lorton that the British people even to this day are so blind to their countries self-centered selfish arrogant attitude, thinking it has some inalienable right to whatever it wants over others! The world is not a place to grab your first dibs before others do sir. Regardless of having invented ships, telescopes, ink or bronze plaques. You must settle and live somewhere to deserve and earn the place. This fundamental truth has indeed made it to international law. Colonialism started showing its various foul aspects and political social flaws centuries ago, yet Britain and a handful of its cronies are still fighting to morph it and have it prevail. We all came to this planet together. In our human nature we all equally share what we will never stop knowing as a world belonging to the human species as a land all people must share, before countries or governments with power do. The fact that we have devised ways of administrating it does not at all mean we are doing it correctly, does it? Obviously. Water has always one source yet it is drank by EVERYONE wherever. YOU ARE NOT A DIFFERENT SPECIES. That's why in international law sovereign recognition by others is an essential part of nation building! You people are just so set back in feudal times it is unbelievable! I believe it has to do with hanging on to your monarchy conditioning the way your society thinks about other peoples and their countries.
May 25th, 2019 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse -1There is an argument here that must be honored if you indeed are not the scourging war mongrels of the planet and do want to see an end to wars in the world. If you don't, then maybe it is your country that requires extinction as it is getting in the way of others learning to get along.
Ramble on Pat - you make no sense. There was a dispute between Spain and Britain over the Falklands.. Argentina was never a party to that dispute and has no claim.
May 25th, 2019 - 10:59 am - Link - Report abuse +2And if the world was not a place where 'first dips' counted, Spain would not have had South America and you would still be in Italy.
International law and history favours the British in the Falklands and in Gibraltar come to that. In the Chagos? I would need to know more about the original sovereignty, but getting somewhere first, really does count.
Don't be ridiculous, the La Plata Vice Royalty WAS a Spanish province at the time Spain included Malvinas in its Empire. The Islands were managed through Buenos Aires, not through Madrid. You're prejudices blind your logic Roger. ... sadly.
May 25th, 2019 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse -3No, the world is not a place for first dibs to have right over others, hence whey ALL COLONIAL POWERS have been resignating themselves to let go, Britain is simply the one lagging behind stubbornly and selfishly trying to stay more powerful than the rest. I'm amused by how you make past mistakes of Spanish contemporary justifications for your country today. You're so blind to your own shenanigans ! “International Law” is not a holly rod given to mankind by god itself. It is flawed. All laws are flawed and tend to fall short of being humanly fair, including “international law”. More so International law as it was spun by a small and powerful interest group lost within the broad expanse of world history, yet we use them until they become changed, corrected or amended... but that starts going into an area that to you is like breathing on Mars, so ... I won't expand on it. Suffice to say, countries of Anglo Saxon derivation seem to be very keen on self centered judgement, demanding and expecting adhesion to law imposed as universal law, as law is the verbal argument by which to substitute the rod or weapon, which in other times knows no reason and only seeks solely egocentrically the vanquishing others. ... I don't know how well you've been following or observing events these days in particular those going on regarding Venezuela, but this is indeed a very interesting and intense time. A time of revelation in which everything is becoming un cloaked. The United States's government has become a show boat of Anglo Saxon sentiment towards others in general, inherited in the ways its government thinks. Telling countries to not have weapons, or to not build islands in the ocean as if it owned the world. Just like Britain thinks it owns...
Patrick Edgar
May 25th, 2019 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +3“It still is just a claim to the islands”
“Britain ...was ever recognized by ... international powers of the day for the islands belonging the them”
“As late as 1886 the Secretary of State found it necessary to inform the Argentine Government that as ”the resumption of actual occupation of the Falkland Islands by Great Britain in 1833 took place under a claim of title which had been previously asserted and maintained by that Government, it is not seen that the Monroe Doctrine, which has been invoked on the part of the Argentine Republic, has any application to the case. By the terms in which that principle of international conduct was announced, it was expressly excluded from retroactive operation.“
P.60 Sovereignty and the Falkland Islands Crisis D.W. Greig
”The world is not a place to grab your first dibs before others do“ It was the way it was, and that is defended under international law as unalterable. Argentina tried the same and she lost.
”...The rule of the intertemporal law still insists that an act must be characterized in accordance with the law in force at the time it was done, or closely on the next occasion. ...
The Acquisition of Territory in International Law By Robert Yewdall Jenningsa Judge of the International Court of Justice from 1982. He also served as the President of the ICJ between 1991 and 1994.
The fantasy of an inheritance continues to draw breath in Argentina. But Argentina is not Spain and Spain recognised British sovereignty at Port Stanley in 1863.
May 25th, 2019 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Argentina was never in the game Pat.
The UN? Bunch of prats, weak kneed crooks and scoundrels best ignored.
May 26th, 2019 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Show me something that states “the Falklands are rightful British territory” produced in any other language, or country that is not English or an English speaking country Terrence.
May 26th, 2019 - 02:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Patrick Edgar
May 26th, 2019 - 09:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +3“Show me something that states “the Falklands are rightful British territory”
I have it on the very highest authority'
The jurist Rosalyn Higgins President of ICJ arrived at a similar conclusion when she pointed out: ”No tribunal could tell her [Argentina] that she has to accept British title because she has acquiesced to it But what the protests do not do is to defeat the British title, which was built up in other ways than through Argentinas acquiescence.“
”However intensely Argentina may disagree, Britain has clearly built up good title to the Falkland Islands under International Law over the last 150 years.“1
Rosalyn Higgins, wrote: ”Attractive an aphorism though [self-determination] is, it still has to be said that the territorial issue does come first. Until it is determined where territorial sovereignty lies, it is impossible to see if the inhabitants have a right to self- determination” (Dame Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process - International Law and How We Use It, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994).”
Regarding the right of self-determination and the Falkland Islands here it is in simple terms: in 1946 the UN agreed to place the Falkland Islands on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. The UN states that the inhabitants of all Non-Self-Governing Territories have a right to self-determination. The Falklands are on the list, so they enjoy the right to self-determination.
Show me an effective challenge to British sovereignty in the last 186 years Rambling Sid Regini.
May 27th, 2019 - 07:19 am - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina has never been 'effective' Italian Pat.
Just to point out the obvious...
May 27th, 2019 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse -1Argie Poster Patrick Edgar makes a quite simple and straight request...:
***“ Show me something that states “the Falklands are rightful British territory” produced in ANY OTHER LANGUAGE, OR COUNTRY THAT IS NOT ENGLISH OR AN ENGLISH SPEALING COUNTRY”***
Anglo Poster Terence Hill replies with the opinion of Engrish Native Baroness Rosalyn C. Higgins, GBE, QC..., married to the fastest Engrish Native Baron ever, Terence Langley Higgins, KBE, DL, PC ...
The opinions of this very noble & honourable Engrish Dame were..., of course..., published in Engrish..., in Engeland...
Anglo Poster Roger Lorton asks his “follow up” question without having the kindness of first replying to Argie Poster Mr. Patrick Edgar's request...
I am seriously beginning to THINK..., that there ain't no any statement out there about...: “The Falklands being a rightful British territory”... produced in ANY OTHER LANGUAGE, OR COUNTRY THAT IS NOT ENGLISH OR AN ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRY...
Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
May 27th, 2019 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I don't jump through hoops at the behest of those that attempt to hijack an issue, and stifle debate because their unable to refute the truth.
But since you are attempting to restrict those that are con. Where is there any legal opinion that even gives Argentina a look in? Since I can show two past presidents of the ICJ who's published legal opinions absolutely put the kibosh to such a pretension.
The EU recognises the Falklands as British territory, in all 24 languages... until the end of October.
May 27th, 2019 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Evidently...
May 27th, 2019 - 05:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Anglo Turnip Terence Hill...,(the one with a baaad case of binocular triplopia)..., can't find nothing..., PRODUCED IN ANY OTHER LANGUAGE, OR COUNTRY THAT IS NOT ENGRISH OR AN ENGRISH SPEAKING COUNTRY THAT STATES...: “The Falklands are rightful British Territory”...
Mr. Roger Lorton is quite probably still recuperating after Sunday's mango wine...
Mr. DemonTree...
And yet again laddie..., inform yourself..., so you can learn, improve and respond correctly...
Big difference between stating from innermost conviction that...: “The Falklands are rightful British Territory”..., and the legal obligation of a Union of Former Colonial Powers (to a soon former member) to assist their Member States in matters including claims over sovereignty...
https://www.academia.edu/36185212/The_duty_of_sincere_cooperation_and_its_implications_for_autonomous_Member_State_action_in_the_field_of_external_relations
Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
May 27th, 2019 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“Can't find nothing.” Like I said I don't jump through hoops. I don't need to I have irrefutable evidence that demolishes Argentine's fake claim. What does a paper on EU member country relationships have to do with the present issue? What is pertinent is “There is no obligation in general international law to settle disputes”.
Principles of Public International Law, third edition, 1979 by Professor Ian Brownlie
and
“The General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modern prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created ‘prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law.”
Akehursts Modern Introduction to International Law. By Peter Malanczuk
The E.U. recognized the Falkland Islands as a disputed territory by Argentina under British administration. Same definition as the United Nations. Not the same as a British Territory.
May 27th, 2019 - 08:26 pm - Link - Report abuse -4From the EU website:
May 27th, 2019 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +3”The Overseas Countries and Territories (as per Annex II of the Treaty on the functioning of the EU):
...
- Falkland Islands (UK)”
https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/regions/overseas-countries-and-territories-octs/oct-eu-association_en
Innermost conviction is not a big factor in foreign relations. Common interests, cultural ties, and trade links are.
In short..., laddie..., you can NOT show Mr. Patrick Edgar NOTHIN' that states “the Falklands are rightful British territory” produced in any other language, or country that is not English or an English speaking country...
May 27th, 2019 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse -1The best you can show Mr. Patrick Edgar is an EU statement about the Falklands being a British Overseas Territorry..., produced to cater for their common interests, cultural ties, and trade links...
Common interests, cultural ties, and trade links that..., hopefully..., will be seriously reduced in the immediate future...
Everything must be sacrificed on the altar of Brexit...
May 27th, 2019 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But the same applies to the countries that support Argentina. Common interests, cultural ties, and trade links.
Just busy Think. As for other nations that support Britain vocally, who cares?
May 27th, 2019 - 10:47 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Argentina has been unable to get a UN GA Resolution for 30 years now, so it seems that the UK has all the support it needs without people shouting it out. Quiet diplomacy. Argentina, on the other hand, has a lot of vocal support - albeit rather less if you take out the Spanish-speaking nations - and yet has achieved nothing diplomatically after 186 years of whinging.
Hardly important who expresses their support, far more important is who gives it where and when it counts.
Better to be quiet and influential, than noisy and impotent.
“Better to be quiet and influential, than noisy and impotent.”
May 27th, 2019 - 11:06 pm - Link - Report abuse -1So why did you vote for the latter? Screeching about sovereignty is more Argentina's style, wouldn't you say?
Screeching? Not all at all DT. My little voice is never raised. I am merely persistent in identifying the flaws in Argentina's arguments. As for impotent? Am I? Perhaps. So hard to tell.
May 27th, 2019 - 11:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +1There was a vote?
I was talking about voting to seriously reduce our common interests, cultural ties, and trade links. But perhaps not living in the UK the last three years you've missed out on the general craziness.
May 28th, 2019 - 12:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0Hard to miss, even from this distance.
May 28th, 2019 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse +2Am I in favour of exiting from the current arrangements with the EU? Yes. Will that reduce our common interests? Unlikely, after all they will still be 'common' regardless of our political relationship. Cultural ties? Why would they change?
It is our political and trading arrangements that change, but it is only change - not abandonment. Other nations have agreements with the EU without being a part of its structure, so why not the UK? Some doors close, others open.
Not that we've left yet. Not that certain that we ever will.
Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
May 28th, 2019 - 02:25 am - Link - Report abuse +1“NOTHIN' that states “the Falklands are rightful British territory” By the same token there isn't one facet of international law that supports an Argentine claim. Every judgement that has been made concerning such claims supports the UK and every opinion from judges of the ICJ likewise.
”The Island of Palmas tribunal of the PCA at the Hague explicitly recognized the validity of conquest as a mode of acquiring territory when it declared in its decision that:
“If a dispute arises as to the sovereignty over a portion of territory, it is customary to examine which of the States claiming sovereignty possesses a title—cession conquest, occupation, etc.—superior to that which the other State might possibly bring forward against it.“
”There is a general principle, in international law jurisprudence, that claims may be extinguished by the passage of time.
“The principle of extinctive prescription, that is, the bar of claims by lapse of time, is recognized by international law. It has been applied by arbitration tribunals in a number of cases. The application of the principle is flexible and there are no fixed time limits…. Undue delay in presenting a claim, which may lead to it being barred, is to distinguished from effects of the passage of time on the merits of the claim in cases where the claimant state has, by failing to protest or otherwise, given evidence of acquiescence’”: I Oppenheim 526 and 527. See Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (1953), Chap. 18; King, Prescription of Claims in International Law, (1934) 15 B.Y.I.L. 82. Cf. prescription, acquisitive.
So the UK can prove jurisdiction as to title, and the last time I looked they have tossed a claim that exceeded thirty years.
Moreover, you cannot apply modern law. With so much precedent in their corner, they look like their claim is in pretty good shape.
@RL
May 28th, 2019 - 06:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Cultural ties, maybe not, but it's going to reduce common interests and trade links drastically.
“Other nations have agreements with the EU without being a part of its structure, so why not the UK?”
You know the answer by now. Because we have a special, and complicated relationship with an EU member state. That's the real sticking point in May's deal, despite barely being mentioned before the referendum. And an example of how non-military support can be valuable - to Ireland.
Complicated is correct.
May 28th, 2019 - 10:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0I said from the Chequers announcement that the backstop was the deal killer. It still is. Common interests are simply not affected because they remain of interest to us both, so - for example - we will still vote together within the UN as a block where our interests meet.
Brexit is about changing the political relationship and the trade relationship. Detaching ourselves from restrictive EU rules - eg. on State aid for industries such as British Steel - and allowing our own international trade agreements.
Ireland has become the tail wagging the UK dog. It is really of little importance. The deal that idiot Blair signed means that eventually NI will join Eire anyway. We need to get away from that.
“we will still vote together within the UN as a block where our interests meet”
May 28th, 2019 - 12:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They didn’t vote with us on the Chagos islands. There's no reason to think they'd vote with us on the Falklands anymore. And they will vote against us on Gibraltar, not because they believe it's rightful Spanish territory, but because Spain is in the EU.
“Ireland has become the tail wagging the UK dog. It is really of little importance.”
On the contrary. No one anticipated it when we voted, but Ireland is almost the single factor that has prevented the UK achieving what the Brexiters promised: a hard Brexit accompanied by a trade deal with the EU. If not for that border, we'd almost certainly have left by now. And how does a small country have so much quiet influence over a larger one? Membership in a bigger union. That power is what we're giving up.
“The deal that idiot Blair signed means that eventually NI will join Eire anyway.”
You mean the deal that ended the Troubles and the violence and deaths in NI? It wasn't inevitable, but it probably is now.
Well..., well..., well...
May 28th, 2019 - 03:16 pm - Link - Report abuse -1That's the Side of the DemonTree I like...
The reasonably informed..., Real-Politik capable one...
Just keep in mind that for your above Brummie K9 luuuving interlocutor there is only one tail that may wag the UK dog... Its name is Malvinas..., Las Malvinas...
By the way Rodge..., how's that Lang-An of yours doing...?
Our interests didn't meet on Chagos DT.... why would you think that they would? There are no votes on the Falklands - that was the deal in 1989 but then the EU didn't much support us when there was. Gibraltar? No, the EU will vote with Spain, but then there is no vote about Gib either. Another quiet deal that means that every year Britain & Spain sit down and produce a bland statement which goes no further.
May 28th, 2019 - 11:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The deal that ended the Troubles was a sell-out by Blair IMHO. The terrorists were losing and knew it but Blair bowed to the USA and signed it. With get-out-of-jail free cards too.
And I believe that NI leaving was always inevitable. The Republicans are just waiting for the demographics to favour them.
Lang-An? No idea what you are muttering about old man.
“Our interests didn't meet on Chagos”
May 29th, 2019 - 12:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0In the past the EU would have generally supported us even when our interests didn't meet. In this case it wouldn't have made a difference, but next time it might.
But votes are not the main issue. Spain only reopened the border with Gib because of the EU. Once we leave they can cause a great deal of trouble and expense without doing anything so drastic as closing it again. I know you're keen on Brexit, but you're not stupid. You can admit there are downsides, right?
As for the good Friday agreement, why would we want to keep NI if they don't want to stay? But I don't think you're right that leaving was inevitable. This shows the situation before the referendum:
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-says-yes-to-a-border-poll-but-a-firm-no-to-united-ireland-30622987.html
Note that 20% of Catholics said they'd vote to stay in the UK.
PS. I had fish & chips for tea, are you jealous? ;)
I am jealous, but in 2 weeks I can do the same.
May 29th, 2019 - 12:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0The EU has never been a guaranteed supporter. Even in 1982 it took a huge amount of pressure from Maggie to get them to bring in economic sanctions and even then Eire and Italy kept trying to cause problems at the UN. And if NI voted to go I wouldn't want to try and keep them. Likely that the Troubles would return though, just not aimed at us.
Of course their are downsides to Brexit. If it was all a garden of roses then the nation would not be split - something which it clearly still is. TM going isn't likely to change that. If the whole debacle went to a General Election I have a feeling that we would still end up with a hung parliament. I'm yet to be convinced that we will actually leave simply because cancelling the whole thing is now the easiest course of action. Cancel and start the debate again.
Mr. Roger Lorton...
May 29th, 2019 - 06:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0I was talking about that troublemaking alfa dog your Missus let you keep at the time of your feminine induced Pattaya exodus..., remember...?
Evidently I recalled wrongly the racial identity of the mutt...
Hope he's still enjoying the mango tree shade...
From the top...that is...
Pat to him..., if so...
Peace out...
Fred the Dog? 12 years old and lying by me feet in front of the fan. Overweight, bad hips, bad eyes but his nose still works. Found that snake in the kitchen a few weeks ago. Left it to me to get it out mind. Fred's a Thai street dog. They generally look like Dingoes. I suspect that Dingo is the default position for dogs.
May 29th, 2019 - 06:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Patted. ;-)
Nice...:-)
May 29th, 2019 - 06:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0@RL
May 29th, 2019 - 08:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Even in 1982 it took a huge amount of pressure from Maggie to get them to bring in economic sanctions”
You can't expect miracles, but they did support us and economic sanctions are a bigger deal than a UN vote.
“Likely that the Troubles would return though, just not aimed at us.”
Indeed. I think the current Irish PM recognises that, he said a few months ago that a 50% + 1 vote for reunification would not be a good outcome and they should wait until there's more consensus before considering a border poll.
And yeah, the nation is still totally split. I think few people have changed their minds and another hung parliament pretty likely. For me, I would be very happy if the whole thing was cancelled, but it would still leave a lot of issues unresolved. And change is happening on the continent too; the previous centrist parties lost a lot of seats to Euro-sceptics and environmentalists this week. Though none are agitating for their own country's exits anymore, they all want reform.
Strange world we are living in DT. Boris gets a summons for an inability to count, while Blair got away with .................
May 29th, 2019 - 10:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0I grow tired of the shenanigans over Brexit. The pound drop has hit me hard. I figure I've paid for something not delivered. I'd consider changing my citizenship but I have to be able to sing the Thai anthem..... (feel free to join in the chorus) ....
ประเทศไทยรวมเลือดเนื้อชาติเชื้อไทย
เป็นประชารัฐ ไผทของไทยทุกส่วน
อยู่ดำรงคงไว้ได้ทั้งมวล
ด้วยไทยล้วนหมาย รักสามัคคี
ไทยนี้รักสงบ แต่ถึงรบไม่ขลาด
เอกราชจะไม่ให้ใครข่มขี่
สละเลือดทุกหยาดเป็นชาติพลี
เถลิงประเทศชาติไทยทวี มีชัย ชโย
Looking forward to fish & chips and a decent ale ;-)
“Boris Johnson has been ordered to appear in court over claims he lied by saying the UK gave the EU £350m a week. The Tory leadership candidate has been accused of misconduct in public office after making the claim during the 2016 EU referendum campaign. It is a private prosecution launched by campaigner Marcus Ball, who crowdfunded £200,000 for the case.”
May 29th, 2019 - 11:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0This must be the first time a politician has been prosecuted just for lying. Could set quite a precedent...
If you want to crowdfund a private prosecution of Blair over the Iraq war, I'll definitely donate to it!
The Thai alphabet is very pretty. We had a client from Thailand for a while and had some trouble uploading the characters correctly. Can you read those lyrics?
”Looking forward to fish & chips and a decent ale ;-)”
:) It would be fun to live abroad for a while, but I wouldn't want to do it permanently. Chip shops aren't exactly fine cuisine, but I'd really miss them, and a lot of other things too.
The world is a smaller place DT. To be fair I live in the sticks outside the Gateway to Issan and found a fair replica fish & chips at a little place outside the town a couple of weeks ago. Since then I've discovered a totally Thai Italian place. It was ok but then I do love a gang keo wan too.
May 29th, 2019 - 01:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Pies ..... hard to find a decent pie outside the ex-pat/tourist areas.
;-)
True. I'm impressed you can find fish and chips in a fairly out-of-the-way place, though. I have a friend who travels a lot for work, he went to pizza place in China and said it didn't remotely resemble the real thing.
May 29th, 2019 - 02:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So what's it like living in the Thai sticks? Peaceful?
You silly Engrishmen...
May 29th, 2019 - 03:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0See what you have done...!
You just gave me the cravings after a blødende indianer i kano med tæppe og hele krigs malingen...!
That's not very politically correct.
May 29th, 2019 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But tastes great...
May 29th, 2019 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0With lots of risted løg and remoulade...
Yummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmy....
Can't you get them in Patagonia?
May 29th, 2019 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not the “Real Thing”...
May 29th, 2019 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Closest thing is some 11 drive hours away...
Hate you guys..., pray to them Gods in Asgard that you choke in your bloody flaccid Engrish chips and drown in that watered down, lukewarm Engrish horsepiss you have the Chutzpah of calling beer...
;-)))
Lol, owned. Maybe you should of lived in the German bit of Argentina instead of the Welsh bit. I already ate the chips, but I'll pray to Tiw, Woden, Thor, and Frige that the real ale revival continues.
May 29th, 2019 - 09:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Last couple of years I've been able to find London Pride, London Porter and Fuller's ESB out in the local town's main mall. Thais are also grasping that French Fries are not chips so in that particular restaurant they offered both. Not as good as your high street, but they are learning. Tourist areas always have this stuff of course, but again recently I came across a sort-of English breakfast. Spoiled by the German-style sausage but other than that, pretty good. I am looking forward to a decent steak mind. Theirs (Australian I suspect) are generally boot-like.
May 29th, 2019 - 10:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0DT, I suspect that living in the Thai sticks is much the same as the sticks anywhere else. It's quieter. It's greener. It's cheaper but I don't see as many elephants :-)
That's cool. What about the important question though: can you get Marmite there? And I wonder what the Aussies do to their steaks?
May 30th, 2019 - 11:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'm moving to the sticks soon, and not sure I'm happy about it. It's greener, but not necessarily quieter and bound to be more expensive. Also no elephants.
Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
May 30th, 2019 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“NOTHIN' that states “the Falklands are rightful British territory”
So there is nothing in international law that can support Argentina, and undo the precedent handed down in The Island of Palmas case, that totally vindicates the UK. Nor is there a precedent that shields Argentina from a claim of extinctive prescription by the UK. Thats what happens when you make bogus claims, you end up looking like a complete pillock.
REF: “Parallels between Falklands and Chagos”:
May 30th, 2019 - 05:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What are they wrt the food in different countries?
Yes DT, Marmite can be found although Vegemite is more available. I actually prefer the latter.
May 30th, 2019 - 10:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:o)) we moved on ;-)
@Roger Lorton
May 31st, 2019 - 02:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Paella - paella de mariscos; maybe?
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!