MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Negotiations for a Falklands third humanitarian project confirmed by UK ambassador in Argentina
Kirsty Hayes, British ambassador in Buenos Aires admitted that relations between Argentina and UK have been “complex”, and London has always made efforts to improve them, but ”there will be no sovereignty discussions on Falklands' sovereignty because what is most important is not our (British) perception or that of Argentina but the Falkland Islanders opinion.” Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesJust disinter them and return them to Argentina, their families would appreciate the gesture, I'm sure, and it would make life easier for us without the endless traipsing through camp of bereaved families and idiots with that flag.
Apr 30th, 2024 - 09:21 am - Link - Report abuse +7@FitzRoy: It is not necessary to dig them up, they are in their land, Argentina. Even if they deny it.
Apr 30th, 2024 - 11:23 am - Link - Report abuse -7Malvi. you used to be a good rational debater, not any more, you know the truth but continue to play along with the disproved garbage,
Apr 30th, 2024 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +5@Juan
Apr 30th, 2024 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -7No. They have not refuted anything. They only deny the historical facts. For this reason, his country always refused to engage in dialogue with Argentina. Over time, his country changed its arguments, aware of the weakness of its position.
I couldn't reply to monkey because the post was closed.
I want to say to Darragh that he is somewhat right and that I am somewhat right too.
I beg to differ Malvi 1833, in the short space of time i have been on this site i have seen everyone of your dubious claims destroyed, the Falklands where, are and will continue to be British until the islanders want it to change, whether that is independence or they become Argentine for the first time, then that is their choice, and i wish them well whatever that choice will be in the future, and as Darragh has repeatedly said its now that matters, move on and stop this silly nonsense,
Apr 30th, 2024 - 07:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +5“They only deny the historical facts”
Apr 30th, 2024 - 11:09 pm - Link - Report abuse +3If that were true you would have shown which ones.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
“... they are in their land, Argentina”, which is why Argentines have their passports stamped when they arrive. Buttercup, you know the facts. Facts, not the propaganda you continue to spout.
May 01st, 2024 - 09:03 am - Link - Report abuse +4Dialogue, Marv?
May 02nd, 2024 - 12:29 am - Link - Report abuse +5We talked.
From 1966 to 1982 we talked.
https://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2023/07/1960-to-1971.pdf
(https)://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2023/07/1972-to-1982.pdf
Then Argentina stopped talking and opted for trial by combat.
Argentina lost.
There is simply nothing left to say.
The matter is settled.
Malvi
May 02nd, 2024 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Over time Britain has passed its former Empire over to the people who live there, mostly peacefully. Much of the Americas was once British and now is run and controlled by the inhabitants.
The Falklands are no different.
You still haven’t read the Sarandi logs have you, I will try to find a copy for you.
I will ask you a question, had Onslow arrived on the 3rd Feb 1833 not 6th of Jan who do you think would have been on the islands?
Pinedo would still have left, taking all the folks who boarded the Sarandi before Onslow arrived, and the militia had already contracted the Rapid.
Answer; the same 24 people who were on the islands on Feb 2nd. Nobody was forced to leave.
Onslow could have taken the flag down and history would have continued.
@Magic Very generous of Britain to hand over its former empire to the people. Much of those territories conquered by blood and fire.
May 07th, 2024 - 01:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0However, I must recognize the slow return of those lands. There are still some territories, including the Malvinas Islands. I suppose that at some point they will return the islands to the corresponding country, the Argentine Republic.
Regarding your question, I know the records of the Sarandí, the Onslow report, the names of the inhabitants who remained, the entry into port for repairs of the whaling ship Rapid, I know everything related to the history of the islands because I wanted to know if my country or the UK was right. Based on everything I investigated, my country is right and the islands belong to it.
If Onslow arrived on February 3, he might have found the garrison plus the remaining inhabitants. The story would be the same. Usurpation.
Perhaps at that moment he found the colony deserted, without any settlers.
Pinedo might have returned with more settlers later, perhaps with Vernet on board.
Be that as it may, the islands were not res nullius. They did not even dare to occupy them after the Spanish abandonment because they knew that the islands did not belong to them. The story would be the same. Usurpation.
The mere lowering of a country's flag by a foreign captain like Onslow constitutes an act of war.
I would like to know if you think of the same in the event that a foreign captain lowers the flag of his country in any of the British Isles.
Regards.
“I suppose that at some point they will return the islands to the corresponding country, the Argentine Republic.”
May 07th, 2024 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hey stupid that is an impossibility, even if they wished too.
“With the completion of the Referendum ...the Islands are now ”decolonized”.
“UN Charter; DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES; Article 73; Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for ..peoples have not yet attained .. self-government recognize the principle ..b. to develop self-government, ...”
October 16th,1975
The ICJ presents its advisory opinion on two questions concerning Western Sahara; “The validity of the principle of self-determination, defined as the need to pay regard to the freely expressed will of peoples, ...” The Court also states; “The Charter of the United Nations, in Article 1, paragraph 2, indicates, as one of the purposes of the United Nations: “To develop friendly relations among nations based on ...the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples . .” This purpose is further developed in Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter. ...the subsequent development of international law in regard to non-self-governing territories, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, made the principle of self-determination applicable to all of them”
Judge Dillard, .. adds; “ .. it is for the people to determine the destiny of the territory and not the territory the destiny of the people.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!