MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
The people of the Falkland Islands and their right to Self-determination
In March 2013, the people of the Falkland Islands went to the polls. With a turnout of 92%, 99.8% of the electorate voted to remain a British Overseas Territory. This was self-determination in action, and self-determination remains at the heart of the Falklands' relationship with the UK today. The following video covers the period from 1968 to the current situation and celebrations in 2013 of such an historic referendum Self-determination is a fundamental human right enshrined in Article One, Paragraph Two of the United Nations Charter. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThe Falkland Islands are Argentine; they were forcibly seized by the British Empire in 1833.
Mar 17th, 2025 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse -4The islands were part of Spain, a fact recognized on several occasions by London.
The islands were left uninhabited due to the struggles for independence and self-determination of the current Argentine Republic.
Key dates of Argentine self-determination: 1810 and 1816.
Argentina took possession of the islands in 1820 without British protest.
London recognized Argentine independence in 1825 without claiming the islands. Madrid recognized Argentine independence in 1863, ceding its territory, including the Falkland Islands.
The current inhabitants of the islands arrived after the territory was seized from Argentina.
The inhabitants of the islands are not a people subjugated by a colonial power but are part of the same colonial power.
The self-proclaimed people of the Falkland Islands do not have the right to self-determination like other human beings at certain times in history, such as Nigeria, Rhodesia, South Africa, etc.
The 1982 conflict serves as a stark reminder that the islands are not British; they have been claimed by Argentina since 1833, and each of the crosses in the Argentine cemetery are markers of sovereignty that will tell all citizens of the world who visit the islands that Argentina will continue to fight until it recovers them.
Malvi
Mar 17th, 2025 - 12:42 pm - Link - Report abuse +2What did the UN ICJ say about the applicability of self-determination in 2019? Self-Determination Non-Self-Governing Territories (1 pg): https://www.academia.edu/100673806/Self_Determination_Non_Self_Governing_Territories
Malvinense 1833
Mar 17th, 2025 - 01:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You are so wrong. I notice you avoid all that period before Spain and I notice you avoid the agreement by Spain to return all British possessions on the falkland islands to what it was in 1776. That agreement effectively stopped any dispute between Spain and Britain.
Along come Argentina who broke away from Spain and who was nowhere near the islands in 1816 but attempted to try and sneak these islands away on the pretences Spain gave them to you.
That was never the case and you were removed in 1833 rightfully and again in 1982 . The reason you still only elude to this as a claim, because that is all it is a mythical claim. One you are not prepared to take to the ICJ because you know you don't have a case. So why keep up the lies. Time you started concentrating on the mess you have made Argentina and it's people. They are sick of the persistent claim, because even they now know it's all a myth. Argentina simply did not exist in 1776 or indeed in 1816. They never got their agreement with Spain untill 1863. So how on earth could Argentina even hoped to get anything that Spain may or may not once have had. The case is so weak it is a joke.
Now I challange you to take it to the ICJ and ask them why the Falkland Islanders under the UN charter have the right to determine their own future. I would love to hear how you get on with that one.
1833, you are a fraud. nothing you have posted is remotely true, no credibility , nothing more than a silly fanatic wasting his life on a pack of lies, time your wife or husband sat you down and had a chat,
Mar 17th, 2025 - 02:13 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Falklands Free:
Mar 17th, 2025 - 02:54 pm - Link - Report abuse -4I may be mistaken, but the only country that refused to enter into talks from the beginning of the conflict was yours.
It has often been said that the English clandestinely established themselves in Port Egmont.
Spain returned the fort and port to save English honor. And indeed, that agreement ended the dispute over the islands. The English recognized Spanish sovereignty and withdrew, while the Spanish remained on the islands, occupying them.
If Argentina wasn't close to the islands in 1816, imagine England then.
You also forget that Argentina took possession of the islands in 1820, a fact published in The Times of London without a single English claim.
«Uti possidetis iuris means that the territory belonging to the old colonial administration is transferred to the newly independent State. No express cession of sovereignty is required by the colonial power. The new State inherits the same territory by virtue of its existence as a State. The fact that Spain had not formally recognised Argentina, and only signed a Treaty of Recognition, Peace and Friendship on September 21st, 1863, is absolutely irrelevant for the sovereignty dispute. Moreover, by virtue of this treaty, Spain recognised the Argentine Republic or Confederation as a free, sovereign and independent Nation, made up of all the provinces appearing in its Federal constitution in force, besides the territories that legally belong or will belong in future to that Nation.
Article 4 further recognises the 25th of May, 1810 as the date of Argentine succession to Spain’s rights and obligations.»
Credits: Kohen - Rodríguez
“The Falkland Islands are Argentine; they were forcibly seized by the British Empire in 1833.
Mar 17th, 2025 - 03:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The islands were part of Spain, a fact recognized on several occasions by London.”
“..It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modem 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 confidential draft of CONVENTION OF PEACE, arranged with H. E. the Honourable Henry Southern Esquire, and referred by him to the Government of H. B. M. and which is the same that same that has been accepted without any alteration by the Government of H.M., and signed by the Argentine and British Plenipotentiaries, after the exchange of their respective powers,” Juan M. De Rosa.
Buenos Ayres, December 27th 1849. Chamber of Representatives
Legal Definition of uti possidetis
: a principle in international law that recognizes a peace treaty between parties as vesting each with the territory and property under its control unless otherwise stipulated
https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/uti%20possidetis
Fanatical Argie troll, how wrong you are, about everything,
Mar 17th, 2025 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina tried to block the islanders right to self determination at the UN, it was rejected outright, you live in a stupid fantasy world, if never giving up fighting for the islands means posting lies year after year, then you will be sadly disappointed as it achieves diddly squat, as for your claim that the UK recognised Argie authority, only on planet Uranus and not in the real world, as for Kohen-Rodriguez, what they write is nothing more than a fantasy novel akin to a childs comic, the Malvinas myth was invented in the 1940s by Peron, when asked why he made up this nonsense, his reply was it makes a good story,
so in short either put up and take your claim to court or stfu, you bore people to death, i fell sorry for your family,
Malvi
Mar 17th, 2025 - 10:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Are the people of Canada a subjugated people by colonial power or Australia?
What about Argentina?
Your African examples are not relevant, the Falklands like almost all the Americas are a European people.
The Argentine natives were of course massacred by the Spanish invaders and more recently in patagonia by the Argentines.
It is interesting you grant the Spanish Argentines in 1810 the right to self determination but deny the same right to the falkland islanders
Argentina did not take possession of the islands in 1820...it made a claim in full knowledge of at least two other claims.
Nobody was evicted, its all bollox.
you are the last troll standing on this site.
All the others disappeared when the peronists were voted out and Milei came in....why do you think that was?
you were the only one daft enough to believe the malvinista bollox not on the payroll!!!
Argentina is not Spain.
Mar 18th, 2025 - 05:57 am - Link - Report abuse +1Spain maintained its own claim to the Island of Soledad (the only island that it claimed in 1811) until 1863.
In 1863, Spain saluted the Union flag at Stanley.
Argentina?
Argentina was never in the game.
”Peace treaties
Mar 18th, 2025 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Classical international law
When two states had been at war, the ensuing peace treaty was interpreted to mean that each party got a permanent right to the territory it occupied at the conclusion of hostilities, unless the contrary was expressly stipulated. Probably the most influential 19th century textbook, Henry Wheaton's Elements of International Law, asserted (in text virtually unchanged through successive editions for 80 years):
The treaty of peace leaves everything in the state in which it found it – according to the principle of uti possidetis – unless there be some express stipulation to the contrary. The existing state of possession is maintained, except so far as altered by the terms of the treaty. If nothing be said about the conquered country or places, they remain with the conqueror, and his title cannot afterwards be called in question. During the continuance of the war, the conqueror in possession has only a usufructuary right, and the latent title of the former sovereign continues, until the treaty of peace, by its silent operation, or express provisions, extinguishes his title for ever.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uti_possidetis
Malvinense 1833
Mar 19th, 2025 - 10:31 am - Link - Report abuse +1You appear to be the last man / woman standing.
The rest have faded away. The Peronist party have been subdued. Few want to hear their lies any more.
The whole if Argentina was created in a lie.
You actually fought with your mother country to become independent. That proves you were a fanatical lot even back then, prepared to kill your own bothers for a piece of South America.
You even butchered many of the indigenous people of Pataonia in your greed to steal more land. That is exactly what you tried to do regarding these islands. Only problem was Britain did not take kindly to land grabbers. They kicked you out. You have resented them ever since.
All your jetty talk about agreements and that we don't say nothing is all bull and you know it. Try telling the truth for once. Tell the world that you don't actually recognise us, that you think we don't exist. You even rejected our referendum because it did not favour you.
Tell the truth about Argentinas first attemp at settling on these islands that your lot was trying to colonise the islands, yet no mention of that takes place when you cry wolf in the UN about Britain colonising us. No best you keep that one out of real politics isn't it.
So why don't you stop all this one person rules the world stupidity , get down of your high horse and start living .
One thing we can proudly say here is that we are British and through the UN have the absolute right to choose our own destiny.
We don't need Argentina, why would we. We have everything we want and connections with other friendly neighbours. I know that annoys you but it is what it is. Now go back under your rock and forget about us.
1833 UK annexation, conquest and subjugation in Puerto Soledad.. different welsh in Chubut Province. They live free as argentinian welsh with their culture. They can be free in their lands, free on opinions and can have Starlink net for example. Keeping the principle of territorial integrity in our country. Different case with the invasors in Malvinas. Both the UK and Russia violated the right to territorial integrity. Russia invaded Crimea and eastern Ukraine, forcibly establishing a Russian population in its territory, using the primitive law of the strongest. There is no difference in procedure; the difference lies in the fact that the UK is not condemned as it should be. Only the UN issued a resolution with Resolution 2065, which the UK also fails to comply with, using the excuse of the right to self-determination, which does not apply, as it does in the land invaded by Russia in Ukraine.The Malvinas Question has been classified by the United Nations as a special and particular case of colonial decolonization, where there is an underlying sovereignty dispute and therefore, unlike traditional colonial cases, the principle of self-determination of peoples is not applicable. IT IS VERY CLEAR. END OF DISCUSSION
Mar 19th, 2025 - 12:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Both the UK and Russia violated the right to territorial integrity.”
Mar 19th, 2025 - 01:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Only Russia, Butter-cup.
Argentina is barred from using “territorial integrity” as an argument. As it is a post UN law and cannot be applied retroactively.
”...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 Jennings a Judge of the International Court of Justice from 1982. He also served as the President of the ICJ between 1991 and 1994. So in spite of your typical Argentine propensity for lying your argument is shown for the fraud that it is.
Another clueless Argie fanatic crawls out of the cess pit, let me make it clear to you, the UN have said self determination over rides everything, and it includes the Falklands despite your false claim that it does not apply to the Falklands, the matter is closed and no matter how much crying complaining and lying about a so called mythical Malvinas it will change nothing, even your president knows this, their is nothing special about you claim, it is false and a lie, now that is the end of story,
Mar 19th, 2025 - 07:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The UN issued a resolution with Resolution 2065, which the UK also fails to comply with”
Mar 19th, 2025 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That is because it was superseded by the following resolution which the Argentina fails to comply with.
“It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modem 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
Falklands Free:
Mar 20th, 2025 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse -2-You actually fought with your mother country to become independent. That proves you were a fanatical lot even back then, prepared to kill your own bothers for a piece of South America.-
Have you heard of George Washington?
-The only problem was Britain didn't take kindly to land grabbers.-
I think the most inappropriate country for moral questioning is precisely Britain.
Even today, they continue to grab lands around the world, one of them being the Malvinas/Falklands.
-Tell the truth about Argentina's first attempt at settling on these islands that your lot was trying to colonize the islands-.
Argentina made no attempt to settle, as IT WAS SETTLED on the islands.
When we achieved independence, the Spanish province became Argentina. We've been here for a long time. Buenos Aires has been here for almost five centuries, so it's a lie when they say Argentina didn't exist.
We only want justice, and if the territory belongs to the United Kingdom, then and only then will the British in the Malvinas/Falkland Islands have the right to self-determination. The problem is that the United Kingdom always knew that the islands did not belong to it.
“We only want justice ...if the territory belongs to the United Kingdom ... the right to self-determination.”
Mar 20th, 2025 - 10:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0CONVENTION OF PEACE firmly gives the 'colour of right' via uti possidetis
: a principle in international law that recognizes a peace treaty between parties as vesting each with the territory and property under its control unless otherwise stipulated.
Article 1
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
2 To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and ...
They did through the UN Charter article 73.
“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 ..of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, ..b. to develop self-government, ...”
Malvinense 1833
Mar 21st, 2025 - 09:39 am - Link - Report abuse +1You only want to believe the part that involves the mythical claim. Argentina definitely did not exist five centuries ago. Argentina was created the day they claimed independance in 1816. When for several years they fought against their own brothers Spain who infact were the powers of the then Spanish empire. So Argentina in effect did not and never had existence before that time.
You often refer to the UK as a colonising land grabbing power. I need to remind you that Spain was doing exactly the same . Then Argentina was created and guess what, you continued with that theme. You invaded other land and removed the indigenous people for your own greed. You in effect colonised Patagonia. Yet you have never once admitted to all those things. The reason is, because it destroys your claim over the islands.
Britain was defending these islands when you decided to chance your luck in 1820. You were repeatedly asked to leave and you refused. You assumed that because you had defeated the Spanish empire to create Argentina , you would defeat the British Empire by taking British possessions. You failed because Britain was also a powerful empire that even went on to defeat the Spanish empire. You persist with this myth because you hope one day to beat Britain over territory. It will not happen as the United nations laws are there to protect people from aggression.
You are a nothing. A trouble maker. A liar. You will never own these islands in any shape or form. The Falkland Islanders will determine their own future and they will manage and exploit all their own resources. We know Argentina only wants what we have around us and is the reason for this continued mythical claim.
Could not have put it any better FF, a tunnel visioned fanatic who only sees what he wants to see, ignores vast amounts of recorded history, tries to claim Spanish history as his own, lies about about the UPs incredibly weak claim and the so called imaginary metropolis of an Argie town, because its the nonsense he has been fed for years, Kohen-Rodriquez i ask you, who in their right mind believes that bloody fairy tale, and finally he prattles on about Justice, he does not know what the word means, go to the ICJ if you think you have any case, but his governments never will they have no legal leg to stand on. they are still sore about losing the dispute with Chile,
Mar 21st, 2025 - 10:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0when i first started reading this site i sort of respected his views even though i knew them to be false, but as each of his points where defeated one by one like all fanatics do he was unable to accept that he had lost the debate and resorted to just down right lying and parroting the same debunked drivel, he has no credibility, i will never give up fighting he says, even that is pathetic, posting lying threads on a site that very few people read is hardly earth shattering is it,
@Falklands Free: There is no mythical claim; there are countless historical documents that prove that the British usurpation is not a myth.
Mar 21st, 2025 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -1The only myth here is that the islands belonged to Great Britain.
The myth that there was always a British claim, which has always been proven to be a lie.
Before Argentine independence, Spain and then its successor, Argentina, were present in the territory. Great Britain was not on the ground.
After the brief clandestine presence in Port Egmont and its withdrawal, there was never any further claim, which is logical after recognizing that the islands belonged to Spain.
In 1816, as you say, Argentina was a Republic, recognized by Great Britain in 1825 without any claim to its supposed right to the islands.
That is why it is false when you say that in 1820 Argentina risked its fate; there was no claim or defense of anything.
As for the natives, it is a very weak argument to justify their seizure of the islands from an independent nation. I must also remind you that many of the murderers of the natives were English, and they profited by sending their heads to the Anthropological Museum in London, so I repeat: the British are the least qualified to object on moral grounds
.
@Roger Lorton has lost all seriousness. Spain maintained its claim to the continental and insular territory until 1863, so it's absurd to say that Spain claimed only one island in 1811.
In 1863, the captain of a ship saluted Stanley's flag out of courtesy. It's equally absurd to say that because of this, the Spanish state recognized British sovereignty.
The only myth here is to say that the islands are British.
The Malvinas Islands are Argentine.
“That prove that the British usurpation is not a myth”
Mar 21st, 2025 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“On 17 June 1833 the first major protest by Argentina referred to the succession to Spanish rights as the basis of its claim. Spain's rights to the Falklands were, in turn, based upon the prior occupation by and purchase from France and by the abandonment of possession by Britain. Palmerston's response on 8 January 1834 was to refer to the communications that had taken place in 1770-1 as demonstrating no intention on the part of Britain of relinquishing its claim, and included the often quoted statement that ”the Government of the United Provinces could not reasonably have anticipated that the British Government would permit any other State to exercise a right as derived from Spain, which Great Britain had denied to Spain itself”
Malvi
Mar 21st, 2025 - 12:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I believe you know full well that everything you are writing is bollox. Those paid by the Peronist government to flood every media outlet with malvinista nonsense have all disappeared. You are the last troll standing.
West Falkland was indeed part of the Viceroyaly of Rio Plata. So was Paraguay, Uruguay and much of Bolivia. Modern Argentina includes territories that were not part of the Viceroyalty.
What happened through agreement of people, self determination, and conflict was alignment to new national borders.
It is utter utter nonsense to claim that any area of the Viceroyalty unclaimed, became part of Argentina.
Absolutely zero people “lived” on the islands between 1810 and 1826, although there was a large whaling, fishing and sealing activity with used the islands.
Nobody to claim self-determination, no successor population, in fact quite the opposite. Spain vacated the islands, and the Spanish population returned to Spain via Uruguay.
NO INHERITANCE.
it is then utter utter nonsense to claim that the Argentine attempts to populate the islands between 1828-32 were done without knowledge of the British or Spanish claims. Utter nonsense, so Argentina ignored other claims with its support of the Vernet business and its attempt to usurp the islands in 1832.
Britain regained control of the islands without bloodshed on Jan 6th 1833, not a single person was forced to leave the islands against their will.
You know the facts, you know you are lying, is it because nobody in your real life gives you attention?
1833 is a complete joke and not to be taken seriously and that is being polite,
Mar 21st, 2025 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@Jack Jones nitrojuan is not a new poster, he is someone we know well who has just changed his name,
Citation to my last post that was omitted.
Mar 21st, 2025 - 01:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0P.35 Sovereignty and the Falkland Islands Crisis D.W. Greig
-West Falkland was indeed part of the Viceroyalty of Rio Plata.-
Mar 21st, 2025 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse -1False. Both islands were part of the Viceroyalty.
Explain to me then why there was no population on East Falkland?
Explain to me then how it is possible that Great Britain had a naval station in Rio de Janeiro but not on East Falkland? The island was British, wasn't it?
-Modern Argentina includes territories that were not part of the Viceroyalty.-
Absolutely zero people lived on the islands between 1810 and 1826.-
The territorial changes experienced by modern Argentina or the supposed “absence” of population in no way favor the British position; they don't “make” the Isles British.
On the contrary, without a population, how is it possible for the islands to be British?
Without a population?
San Martín1816
Three years later, General José de San Martín, at the time Governor of the Province of Cuyo, sent a letter from Mendoza dated August 14th, 1816 to the Lieutenant Governor of San Juan informing him of a note of the Minister of War proposing that criminals “that are imprisoned in the jurisdiction of your command sentenced to the prisons of Patagones, Malvinas, or others, are sent to this capital”.
Credits: Kohen-Rodríguez
https://www.argentina.gob.ar/noticias/conoce-la-carta-en-la-que-san-martin-se-refiere-las-islas-malvinas
-Nobody to claim self-determination, no successor population, in fact quite the opposite.-
Governing Junta of Buenos Aires: The Buenos Aires Junta notified the “Navy Commander of this Station” of the order dated December 13th, 1806 by virtue of which ”for the matter of expenses and payments, the settlement in the Malvinas be regarded henceforth as a ship at sail, and all employees in that location as dependents of the same ship”
Enough with your 'word salad' personal opinions
Mar 21st, 2025 - 04:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All legal possibilities support the UK's sovereignty, and zero support an Argentine claim.
In addition,
“Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims … One must conclude that Argentina failed to do so through neglect. ... However, … Great Britain acquired definitve title to the Islands by prescription before 1982.
...But, over critically reviewing the bases for Argentina’s claim to sovereignty, one must conclude that Argentina never developed definite title to the Islands. None of the bases argued by Argentina are conclusive in establishing sovereignty.
Applying the rules concerning the mode of extinctive prescription to Great Britain's claim results in a different conclusion.
Extinctive prescription involves possession... one could conclude under general principles of
international law that this was a sufficient to extinguish Argentina's claim.
Regardless of the conclusion reached above, however, the establishment of the world courts changed the situation so that diplomatic protests were no longer sufficient to keep Argentina's claim to sovereignty alive.
To avoid losing her claim by extinctive prescription, Argentina should have submitted her claim to the international court ... For over 50 years prior to 1982, Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims.”
The Falklands (Malvinas) James Gravelle
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107; Washington, D.C., Winter 1985
I have already answered your questions multiple times
Mar 21st, 2025 - 04:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Britain, Spain and Argentina had sovereignty CLAIMS over the islands between 1810 and 1832. None of them exercised sovereignty, no population, no sovereignty.
All were aware of the others CLAIMS.
Argentina ignored the CLAIMS of Spain and Britain when it attempted to usurp the islands in October 1832.
Fortunately the usurpation failed due to mutiny.
Britain has exercised sovereignty with a population ever since.
You lost Malvi...you are trying to claim that Britain didn't exercise sovereignty between 1767 and 1832. You are correct.
Argentina only exercised sovereignty for about 20 days in 1832, before Mestevier was murdered.
Spain exercised sovereignty for 45 years.
So what.
your claim is a failed 20 day usurpation in November 1832, which you then lie about by claiming it was evicted, even though Pinedos logs prove otherwise.
Myth, fairy tales and lies.
Fanatical Argie troll, Kohen -Rodriguez are nothing more than fantasists, they are not historians of any consequence and yet you desperately cling to every word they have written. what a sad little character you are, get a life you bore people with your rubbish,
Mar 21st, 2025 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Furthermore, if the Islanders are not to be considered the “peoples” for the purpose of self-determination, there is currently no other entity available that would qualify. No portion of the population of Argentina, apart from the sovereignty claim, has such ties to the Islands as to give it a status as a “peoples”. The Islanders, therefore, are the entity to be considered as a peoples for the purpose of self-determination.
Mar 22nd, 2025 - 10:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0Second, the principle of self-determination has previously taken precedence as the procedure favored in decolonization. Third, the
use by the United Nations of the term “interests” rather than “wishes” does not mean that the principle of self-determination
does not Fourth, the application of the principle of self determination is not barred despite the Islands’ small population,economic and geographic relationship to Argentina, and the Islanders wish to retain their ties with Great Britain and not become independent. Finally, the “essential point” in the view of Great Britain, is that the Islanders and their ancestors have been in possession of the Islands for 149 years.. Furthermore, the claim recognizes that the “peoples,” whose “wishes” should be respected, are the Islanders. Although the argument can be made that this conclusion is self-serving, Great Britain’s claim in this regard is
correct. The Islanders are the proper entity to be classified as the “peoples’’ for the purpose of applying the principle of self-determination; there is no other logical entity.”
The Falklands (Malvinas) James Gravelle
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107; Washington, D.C., Winter 1985
https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/llmlp/58062115_27786D_1/58062115_27786D_1.pdf
I don't know why you are all still arguing with malvenese. he's a dyed-in-the-wool smeghead
Mar 22nd, 2025 - 03:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You're all wasting your time.
@darragh, agreed, i stopped responding to his shit months a go, let him live all alone in his delusional world, if it make him happy then bully for him, it does not change one single thing posting his stupid lies for the last 8 years,, just down vote the troll and leave it at that, all that matters is the Falklands continue to prosper and grow which they will, he is not even bright enough to see how he is making a complete pillock of himself, then fanatical fantasists never do,
Mar 22nd, 2025 - 04:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I don't know why you are all still arguing with ...”
Mar 22nd, 2025 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He's simply incidental. I don't get in slightest emotional about it. I simply like producing the fruits of my research. Which always shows what a complete horse's ass he is.
No argument there, is there?
So my primary aim is to win, by being right.
Problem is Terrence, he brings nothing new to the table, its just repeating the same lies that have already been exposed, at some point it becomes tedious and he is no longer worth debating with, he does just to get a response, a sad character dont you think,
Mar 22nd, 2025 - 07:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0None of you bring anything new to the table! The Falkland Islands are not part of Argentina... period!
Mar 23rd, 2025 - 07:53 am - Link - Report abuse -1It is 2025 and Argentinians are still reliving 1825 while the rest of world has moved on.
“He brings nothing new to the table”
Mar 23rd, 2025 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0So what! There is a consequence in 'silence'
“In law, the silence of a party implies his consent.. A maxim of crime and consent. qui tacet, consentit-lit. he who is silent agrees. 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.
My main point is to provide the irrefutable proof of Argentine fraud.
And provide a conclusive answer, to who is in the right.
@Terrrence, many posters have given him irrefutable proof that the Argentine claim is a fraud, a lie and a myth, posters have been doing this for how many years, but he his so far gone that he can not accept the truth. Juan is correct, ignore him, he cant do anything other spout lies , i am sure we all have better things to do than converse with an indoctrinated buffoon,
Mar 23rd, 2025 - 11:50 am - Link - Report abuse -1“I am sure we all have better things to do than converse with ...”
Mar 23rd, 2025 - 02:57 pm - Link - Report abuse -1So you opine.
“Opinions are like buts everyones got one. Just some stink more than others.”
Guys
Mar 24th, 2025 - 10:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0No need to have any issues amongst ourselves.
My view on Malvi is that his is, and has proven to be unique amongst the Malvinas trolls.
Some of the Peronist trolls may have been paid to bombard sites like these with propaganda, some are lunatics, some are anti-British alcoholics living in Scandinavia!
Malvi, bless him, is an independent fully indoctrinated Malvinista.. He has read extensively every piece of propoganda supporting what is clearly an unbelievably weak Argentine claim, and dismisses out of hand all the evidence supporting the islanders/British claim. It simply doesn't matter what conclusive answer he is given, he will ignore it, and turn up on the next thread with the same nonsense.
Malvi is correct, Britain did not have full sovereignty in 1832. It had a sovereignty claim. A claim fully known about by Argentina, and fully ignored.
Argentina also did not have full sovereignty in 1832, it also had a claim. In its attempt to ignore the British claim and usurp the islands, it prompted Britain, to reassert its sovereignty, which it has exercised ever since.
Argentina never had sovereignty, ignored the British claim, then made up an expulsion myth, which cost 900 lives in 1982.
Malvi dishonours the 900 with every post he makes, reasserting the various lies and myths which cost them their lives.
Malvi probably needs psychiatric help.
Most certainly he needs de programming, his obsession with fantasists Kohen Rodriquez is like a kid with the Beano or Dandy, his last breath on his death bed will probably be Malvinas Malvinas ahhhhhhhh,
Mar 24th, 2025 - 01:47 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Posters have been doing this for how many years.”
Mar 24th, 2025 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Including this poster, so this isn't my first rodeo.
So don't tell your Granny how to suck eggs.
@Monkey
Mar 26th, 2025 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse -2-Britain, Spain, and Argentina had sovereignty claims over the islands between 1810 and 1832.
False. The only countries that exercised sovereignty during that period were Spain and Argentina.
-All were aware of the other claims.
False. The malicious and belated British claim arose with the appointment of Luis Vernet as Governor of the islands.
-None of them exercised sovereignty, no population, no sovereignty.
False.
The treacherous attack by the corvette Lexington, flying a French flag and destroying the village, demonstrates that the islands were inhabited with Argentina exercising sovereignty.
Fortunately, there is also the personal diary of María Sáez de Vernet, where she describes daily life on the islands during those times.
I could continue describing events that occurred on the islands under Spanish or Argentine administration.
You cannot mention anything about what life was like for a British population, because there simply was no British population. They managed to seize the islands after a mutiny and the assassination of the Argentine governor, and they did expel the Argentine population, as Captain Pinedo explained and detailed in the trial.
The British right to self-determination does not exist because of the usurpation of the territory from another country and because the population is part of the usurping power.
Regards.
Well were they doing that, when the garrison murdered their commander. and raped his wife.
Mar 26th, 2025 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You couldn't even control your own militia. If you can't do that, then you sure can't be exercising sovereignty (the authority of a state to govern itself or another state) Google Dictionary. The British had to subdue them.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!