This is RT News, short for Russian Television, and presents Kremlin view of the Western media topics. All the anchors sound right, editing is familiar, everything looks and feels like CNN or BBC: One is correct to say that RT News is technically a anglo-american news broadcast - except the viewpoint is Russian. Unaware the western audience will not automatically categorize it as foreign and alian so the message sinks in until you consciously realize the message is not what you expected.
"Known locally as Las Malvinas"???? What kind of journalism is this? If by "locally" we mean the population of the islands, just go there and see how far you get with your "Las Malvinas". The islands are inhabited by a population calling themselves "Falklanders" or "Falkland Islanders". This local population does not recognise Argentinian sovereignty. Whatever happened to democracy?
See how the British Petroleum destroyed all US Coast in USA Florida ... All ecosystem are dieing. A lot of US citizens in Florida support the pollution ... It's no more acceptable.
.
I understand why Argentina doesn't want the same. The British Petroleum & Co have no rights to destroy our environment or to come with nuclear weapons in America.
Thieving Spaniards. Argentina didn't existing when we settled on the islands so how do you explain giving them back to their 'rightful' owner?
You're just upset because 100's of years ago, when you were pillaging gold and committing genocide upon the native south American peoples the British were attacking your ships on their way back to Spain and WE were taking all that lovely gold back to England. We didn't know where it was coming from or that it was blood money. All we knew is that our Que
@noreplyism - the kettle call 'black' the pot!!! "...when we settled.." in the islands. You robbed the Spaniards' possession. Like you bomberded Valparaiso, like you robbed all the treassures in the Caribbean seas, like you "settled" in Africa and generated the Boiers War (and sacrifized the Aussies), like you "settled" in India, ... enough? With all its Glory and Pomp and Circumstance, Britain is no longer 'Great" and its Government was always a Pirate to others in the World. Stop!
You have again scrapped your naval air. Your fleet is skeletal.
You no longer have ships to send a naval force so any emergency reinforcement must be by air.
Therefore your intelligence services are now the tripwire. If UK cannot airlift reinforced infantry and more Typhoons/Tornados on to the islands BEFORE the Argentines arrive, UK is going to lose the islands.
You have cut it too close; you MUST have the ability to defend the islands to keep the Argentines out.
@8LyJu8 if you want to talk to your neighbours the door is open but you will not get an invite and you will not set the agenda. The president of Argentina is not showing good neighbourly relations and at some point will only cause further problems I doubt she will be able to intimidate the Brits to her way of thinking she obviously does not see the lessons from 1982. We don`t believe in war either Argentina started the last one and the action they take now are the foundations for the next one.
@Oder1001 No they are not. UK didn't talk abou the Islands. We claim them not now, we claim them since 1833. Now Cameron can handle the economical situation en UK, thats why you started to pay attention, he's just trying to provoke a war and rise his popularity (just what happened to Tatcher). We are a democracy now, we now what happened (18-19 yo guys making the conscription, were sent to a war with no preparation and arms destroyed by the junta). And we won't help Cameron.
@8LyJu8 Jorge Anaya & Leopoldo Galtieri did not talk. They decided that war, or the risk of war, WAS the only way to solve this particular "something".
The road to war, and death for almost 1000 people, began in Buenos Aries.
Not slamming Argentina; I know your country takes these islands very seriously. I know that in your country it's not called an invasion, it's called a liberation.
@8LyJu8 - yeah...tell that to the Boers, to the Indians, to the people of the Colonies that wanted Independence and never got it, like Scottland, Ireland, etc Explain just WHY are the Irish so opposed to England then? There MUST be a reason why the length of the IRA and the British forces' battle, no? "No curse comes with no reason..."
@121ego South Africa became a Republic in 1961, India in 1948 and 54 countries attained independence between 1948/1990 the10 British territories left including the Falklands can choose at any time to have independence, there no more British colonialism forced on any peoples and unlike Latin America Indian natives had India returned to them, how many lands in Latin America were given back to the original inhabitants?.... NONE! work on your own humanity before you talk about others
@Oder1001 Wrong! There are laws in Argentina about that. We have lands, who want is recognized first as native, second as argentinian. We are quiet happy about that. From a native descendant.
The members of the newly former CELAC (Community of Latinamerican and Caribbean States) unanimously approved one month ago a document in support of Argentina’s claim and anticipated they would request the intervention of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. The document reiterates the standing interest of Latinamerica and the Caribbean that the UK accepts to hold talks with Argentina so as to find “on the shortest time possible” a peaceful and definitive solution to the dispute.
the people of those islands migth be british but their occupaying argentina territory!!!!!! if they wants to be british that's their choice their british heritage,they have to share the land with the argentinian people, that would be a best solution for this dispute,no one is forcing these islanders to be argentinian they actually invade the lands that belongs to the nation of argentina.
@elargentinounico1982 they are Falkland Islanders and the live on their own territory you have not proved in court its yours, possession is 9/10th of the law.
@Oder1001 argentina can prove it anytime britain just refuse or denied negotiations just at it did in 1982, recently britain say it will do not negotiate so was britain afraid of it since they rule the world since they can do anything they want or say in the united nations happy new year anyway.
@elargentinounico1982 Yes you had negotiations going on and you had agreements on fish and resources, flights you walked out and chose war and decided the way to resolve was war you lost the war...game over, the UK does not have to entertain Argentina the issue is now resolved by a process of Argentina`s choosing. the CJ is available to attempt mediation but the Brits are under no obligation to go along with if Argentina is serious and abide by the verdict then UK would agree Happy new year
@8LyJu8 the trouble with treaties that Argentina makes with the UK concerning the islands is that they have broken every one they have signed, you cannot opt out over the responsibilities of your government`s previous behaviour because it was a dictator ship the failure of that dictatorship to prevent the UK retaking the islands, caused your population to remove it from power, No maybe you did not vote for it, but the majority of Argentine approved of the invasion.
@badd3sl3y Never is a strong and powerful word to say england was able to won the war becuase chile and USA helped to win it plus england is a potency powerful empire compare at the time with argentina who is now one of the 4economies of latin america.
@8LyJu8 20% of all foriegn investment in Argentina is British why don`t you kick them out? the reason you don`t is because those businesses give jobs to people in Argentina
@Oder1001 Well.. actually we could, we have a lot of investiments offers, opposite to what you -apparently- believe. However, it's about Malvinas, not about economy. The same if from there.
@8LyJu8 a spokesman for your government recently said they have no intention of restricting UK business in Argentina, I will tell you what I believe don`t you guess you will only get it wrong.
Saying Falklands are British is like saying chinatowns in USA are Peoples republic of China territory because they are populated by the Chines thousand of miles from China, pure BS, but the Brits have the upper hand for now and there is little anyone can do.
Britain still acts as if its the superpower of the 1800s but the fact is theyve become Uncle Sams lap dog, a former Brit colony, oh the irony.
Britain should remember one thing, what goes around comes around.
@PanterausfG What are you talking about? The People on the Islands are Britons and want to stay part of the Queens Realm. They live in Freedom & Democracy and could vote to leave the Realm. Argentina has no claim over the Islands, Just because the Islands are 300 miles away from Argentina does not the Islands theirs! They have no claim or nothing its pathetic, Argentina makes fools out of themselfs. You ask the people of Islands who are they? They will tell you!!! THERE NOT ARGENTINE!
@martynrobin121 Argentina do have a rigth to claim this territory that have been occupied by the british since early 1650or i'm not sure about how early the british settle in these islands but the fact is that the native indians from argentina first settle in there and during the spanish colonies before argentina was a nation the expelled the argentians from their territory and england settle in there to the present day,
The People who have been living on the Islands for centurys have more claim than Nation, They live in Freedom and wish to stay part of the Queen Realm. The People make it very clear they want NOTHING to do with Argentina. You say the Islands are occupied?
However the Islands have not been occupied since the illegal Argi invasion, You ask the People of the Falklands, They will tel you proud they live in FREEDOM & DEMOCRACY!!
@martynrobin121 they first were ocupied illegaly by english settlers in 1650or 1662 argentina just tried to recuperate it in their right by geogrraphy by owns right in 1982 not illegaly meant or sir.
@elargentinounico1982 I know they teach you at school about geography of the islands and the tell you its on the Argentine continental shelf, proximity geography has no legal basis international law, the North pole sits on the Russian shelf but does not belong to Russia,UK is 22 miles from France but does not own the UK. Greenland is closer to Canada but belongs to Denmark international boundaries are defined by international law the Falklands are outside Argentina`s international boundaries.
@Oder1001 1- Malvinas where in the territories that Spain gave Argentina after our independence. Some argentinians lived there until 1833 where England occupied them illegllay until today. 2- December 12th, 1965 UN adopted the Resolution 2065 (XX) wich said that Argentina and the United Kingdom hace to negociate the Malvinas sovereign, making clear that malvinenses decision it's not enough, and there's a disputy for the territory.
@8LyJu8 British settled the islands in 1765 Spain settled in1767. In 1774 the British with the upcoming war in the American colonies withdraw leaving a plaque maintaining sovereignty.In 1811 Spain withdrew and like the British left a plaque maintaining their sovereignty. In1836 Spain renounce its claims in South America, Spain did administer its settlement from the Spanish colony of the Rio Del Plata, Argentina did not exist at this time and could not have colonised before it existed.
@Oder1001 - nice and dandy. You forgot to mention England invaded TWICE Buenos Aires (15.000 brits) were taken prisioners and returned to England. The territory is on Argentinian platform. Why don't the Brits give independence to Scottland? They ARE in their OWN country, no? Maybe the solution is to allow the people there to form an independent Government, with sovereign rights given to Argentina, and give them their OWN Passports.
@121ego England attacked the Spanish colonies of the Rio del Plata as punishment for Spanish support of the French , you must study British history a bit more 15 000 troops in those days were nothing, When they went to war with the US they used 100 000 troops and 300 ships that`s an invasion force, now I know its a big deal in your history but in Brit history you will find it under the minor argument section."ownership is not defined by geography" In 2 years Scotland votes on independence
@Oder1001 First occupants were frenchmen. France gave the territory to Spain. Argentina became independet in 1816 with the Malvinas included. (SO it existed as an own country in 1833, and was recognized by the UK, with our territories)
@Oder1001 2.2-Until now UN keeps giving resolution for negociations (like in July 12th 2008). 3-The Malvina's war (1982) was under a dictatorship ("Proceso de Reorganización Nacional" 1976-1983). An illegal government, wich nor Argentina or any country recognize (that's why the Paris Club doesn't count it's debt).
@8LyJu8 it was Argentina that walked out of talks cancelled agreements and invaded and lost the war breaking all the UN rules on negotiations. it may have been an illegal government in Argentina but that does not excuse its actions and aggression to the islands on the second 2 April 82 if the population had removed the Junta from power instead of celebrating the invasion you may have had a point ,but they did not the Argentines supported the illegal government.
The British FIRST arrived on the Falklands Islands 1690, Settled & laid claim 1700s. There was NO-HUMAN life on the Islands, Argentina did not even exists, Ask Spain! Today 2012, The Falklands & its People live in Freedom & Democracy, They wish to stay part of the UK its their human right, They want nothing to do with Argentina.
@elargentinounico1982 british settlement 1765 Spain1867.native Indians may have visited the islands from Patagonia at some point but were not present when the Brits turned up, Patagonia only became part of Argentina in the 1820 Rosas conquest of the desert. only military personnel was expelled Vernet settlers very few were Argentine and four civilians left of their own free will.
@Oder1001 Free will? Are you serious? So: a ship from UK naval force arrived, expelled military parsonnel and the civil go on their free will. Can you tell me another fairy tale?
@PanterausfG Indeed, It's why Britain although being one of the smallest world powers, Is still capable of ruining anyones day through force projection, Cry us a river
they can rant & rave about all the billions of barrels of oil planned to be dug up, but they can't take on our military. (5th most powerful military in the world & best trained army & special forces with powerful allies).
@lilyeve222 There are not official oil yet. And I wouldn't be so proud. Do you know what war is? War: when somebody behind a desk decide to send people who don't know, and don't care, and won't know and won't car to kill or be killed just because he's not capable to make the job for wich he was elected to (if he was elected).
The best way of comprehend the lack of equality and justice in the world : A bunch of pirates unload in 2 islands and then say its their. This world is a joke.
You're right, the Args. have been misled. Decades of propaganda in the classroom, learning the words of Paul Graussac, have created several generations of Args. who have been manipulated & lied to.
To understand the mindset, you only have to recall the views of those Args. involved in the invasion in '82, they were told and genuinely believed that they would be welcome as liberators, and found out with surprise that they weren't.
@Jonny2Jags We can say the same about you. UN established (even in 2008) that Malvinas is a colony, that there's a soveregnty dispute.
And the "soldiers" didn't go by their own decision. They were sent because they were making the conscription. Soldiers (real soldiers, well prepared soldiers) were maintained at their house.
quick question - if argentina were to close ports to oil from falklands region would it still be an economically viable project? to drill and sail back to uk or usa.
(b) as above, but if brazil and uruguay sided with argentina.
Sept 2010 – Uruguay prevents HMS Gloucester from docking in Montevideo in act of solidarity with Argentina.
Jan 2011 – Brazil bans HMS Clyde from docking in Rio de Janeiro in act of solidarity with Argentina.
Jun 2011 - The United States Goverment supports a “draft declaration on the question of Malvinas” adopted by the Organization of American States by unanimous consent. The resolution calls upon Argentina and Britain to enter into negotiations over sovereignty.
@Jonny2Jags You sound like you'd love to be a British goverment officer. Admit it. 'Monologues' are the ones written by Sir davyjones68 with his 19 responses to me LOL
I think you'll find that a lot of my Union flag waving buddies, as well as myself, have read what 'davyjones68' wrote, so technically it wasn't a monologue.
I'm interested on your take on something, indulge me on this. Why is it, would you say, that Cristina Kirchner doesn't exercise her 'right' as an Argentinian, and visit the Falkland Islands, and explain herself to the people there?
The last 'president' to visit was Gen.Galtieri, correct?
@Jonny2Jags Yes. And some former kelpers, who decided to be argentinians declared that, after the "war", was an anti-argentinian propaganda. So, better for us be far away from there, except we have double citizenship.
We're suppossed to leave comments here, davy. Not monologues. Regarding ICJ, read UN Charter Article 33. Before ICJ, we can choose many options: negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation... Actually that is what the UN has said to both countries for long long decades already. The problem is that the UK is behaving unilaterally beyond the UN which lies on the fact that the UK holds a permanent seat at the UN Security Council and is an important member of NATO and G8. Muscle still prevails :(
@111jasy111 Lol..yeah sorry it took a bit of fitting in :-) I don't usually go off on such a rant,I was just a bit bored last night,apologies...If we were behaving outside the guidelines of the U.N I'm sure far more powerful countries,like U.S.China,Russia,would come down on us like a ton of bricks,the C-24 isn't a provider of resolutions,if the G.A or S.C pass a resolution then we would abide by it...and muscle doesn't always prevail,brains always win in the end.
The population living on the islands today was not a people in the legal sense of the term as they and their ancestors were British either by birth or by origin. They did not constitute a nation or specific ethnicity. They had never been subdued by a “metropole” to be subjects of self-determination. As an Argentine citizen and descendant of a pioneer of Argentina’s sovereignty over those territories, she was convinced of the sovereign rights that her country upheld over Malvinas. 21 June 2011
@111jasy111 And with all due respect to Maria Vernet,she is wrong,On 2 January 1833, the small sloop HMS Clio arrived at Port Louis – she was the ship sent by Britain to pay the first of an intended series of annual visits. On 3 January her captain, John James Onslow, hauled down the Buenos Aires flag and hoisted the Union Jack but his orders were not to molest any civilian inhabitants he might find in the Falklands.
MARÍA ANGÉLICA VERNET said that In less than two years, the population of Puerto Soledad had reached more than 100 stable inhabitants adding that the island had become a trading post, whose main activities had included cattle raising and fishing. The colony organized by Luis Vernet had had a mainly Argentine population, which had been dispersed and replaced by British immigrants in 1833.
21 June 2011 - UN Decolonization Committee in NYC. MARÍA ANGÉLICA VERNET said her family's roots lay deep in Malvinas' history. Her great-great grandfather, Luis Vernet, had been the first political and military commander for Malvinas. The political and military command office for those islands and others adjacent to Cape Horn in the Atlantic had been created in June 1829 to enhance the domain exercised by Spain since 1767.
@111jasy111 Louis Vernet was in the Falklands with the permission of the British government,he actually acknowledged British sovereignty and supported it,with regards to the comandancia,on 10th of June 1829 the Buenos Aires government issued a decree setting up the “Political and Military Command of the Malvinas, and that the British government made an official diplomatic protest to Buenos.
@111jasy111 The British viewpoint was that the islands belonged to Britain, and that Buenos Aires had no right to do anything there. That formed the basis for Britain’s diplomatic protest of 19 November 1829, which preserved Britain’s rights.It should be remembered that no country in the world accepted that the islands belonged to Buenos Aires – Britain regarded them as British, the United States regarded them as open to anyone.
@111jasy111 Spain still claimed them, and France may perhaps have harboured designs on them, regarding them as rightfully French since they had been first settled by France.It should be noted here too that the government in Buenos Aires at that time was far from legal.It was led by General Juan Lavalle, who had seized power in a coup the previous December and murdered the lawful governor,
@111jasy111 Manuel Dorrego. After Lavalle’s overthrow later in 1829, Brigadier Juan Manuel
Ortiz de Rosas took power lawfully – and declared all the Lavalle government’s acts null and void....therefore you have no legitimate,lawful claim over the Falkland Islands.
@111jasy111 “you are not to disturb them in their agricultural or other inoffensive employments.”All Onslow did was to order Pinedo to remove the Argentine garrison of 26 soldiers, with their wives and children; Pinedo protested ineffectually but duly sailed in the Sarandí on 5 January.It is important to note that the civilian residents of the islands were not expelled. Captain Onslow’s
report reveals that he obeyed his instructions scrupulously,
@111jasy111 – in fact he went to great lengths to persuade the inhabitants, some of whom were dissatisfied with their life in the islands, to remain Captain Pinedo of the Sarandí confirmed this in his statement to Port Captain Patricio Linch on his return to Buenos Aires – he said Onslow had told him that:those inhabitants who freely wished it should remain and both they and their property would be
@111jasy111 When the Clio arrived, there were 33 genuine resident civilian settlers; Captain Onslow gave them a free choice of staying or leaving; he applied no pressure on them to leave and indeed encouraged some to stay. Only four of them chose to leave – they are named in books by the prominent Argentine historians Ernesto J. Fitte and Mario Tesler,Argentina’s current leading expert on the Falklands:
@111jasy111 It's my opinion that you are being controlled by your government to believe in a myth regarding the Falkland Islands,please keep an open mind,and review the entire history of the islands and its people,research the real history and you might form a different opinion where all sides CAN negotiate from,you can post whatever you want on this matter,as it stands you won't change our opinion,just as we won't change yours,so take it to court and let an independent jury decide.
@111jasy111 If you take it to court our case would be laid out as follows...(1) The 17th and 18th-century treaties between Britain and Spain did not prohibit British possession of the Falklands.
(2) The Argentinians have quoted the 1771 Anglo-Spanish agreement incorrectly. The agreement as
finally signed preserves the claims of both Spain and Britain, not Spain alone. There was no secret promise by Britain to evacuate the Falklands after the restitution of Port Egmont.
@111jasy111 (3) The Argentinians have incorrectly described the history of the 1820s in the Falklands. David Jewett did claim the Falklands then for Argentina, but he had not been sent there. He did not attempt to apply fishing regulations, or Argentine laws, or tell any foreign ships to leave.His claim was not announced formally in Argentina or even mentioned in his report.
@111jasy111 (4) Argentina’s claim that the 1825 Treaty of Friendship and Navigation with Britain supports its claim to the Falklands is incorrect. There was no one from Argentina in the Falklands at that time, and the
Treaty does not describe Argentine territory at all.
@111jasy111 (5) The Argentine claim that Britain expelled an Argentine population from the Falklands in 1833 is false; the settlement continued, and most of its inhabitants were from Buenos Aires.
@111jasy111 (7) Argentina dropped its claim to the Falklands by ratifying the Convention of Settlement in 1850. The failure to mention that this ended Argentina’s claim to the Falklands is a gross distortion of history, as are the statements by Argentine historians that the British Foreign Secretary accepted in 1849 that the matter was “pending” or “postponed” – the reverse is true.
@111jasy111 After 1850 Argentina dropped all protests to Britain over the Falklands, and did not mention the Falklands to Britain for 34 years. The dropping of the Argentine claim was confirmed by Argentine leaders in their Messages to Congress in the 1860s, and the Falklands were not mentioned in any Message to Congress for 91 years until 1941.
@111jasy111 (8) The Argentine claim was artificially revived in 1884, by non-diplomatic means – the “Affair of the Map” – but after failing to change Britain’s position Argentina dropped the matter again for several
@111jasy111 (9) The Argentinians have never had a valid claim to South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. These islands were only claimed by Argentina after the Second World War, after decades of acquiescence and after acknowledgement of Britain’s sovereignty there(10) The Argentine argument that Islanders have no right to self-determination is absurd. They have the
same rights as any other immigrant population of the New World.
@111jasy111 In conclusion Argentina doesn't have a valid case to assume sovereignty over the Falklands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.ALL THESE ISLANDS ARE RIGHTFULLY AND LAWFULLY BRITISH.The Falklands dispute was ended over 150 years ago with Argentina’s agreement; there is no need for any “solution”,or any "negotiation"...now take Argentina's case to court and see where it gets you.
@davyjones68 Basically: you are absolutely wrong. I think was your government wich control your knowledge. But I don't believe you won't even try to understand our standpoint. So I see useless explain everything to you, so, I comeback to my life.
@111jasy111 And just out of interest,why do you think your government won't take it's case to the I.C.J?...it's a perfectly legitimate request,and if you are serious about your claim on our territory,then it's the first option open to you if you want to make a claim for sovereignty,why not petition your government to do this instead of insulting and moaning to innocent British people who have never done anything to you personally.
21 June 2011 - The UN Decolonization Committee adopted a resolution reiterating that the way to end the “special and particular” colonial situation in Falklands is through peaceful, negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and UK. By terms of the text, introduced by Chile’s representative, the Committee regretted that despite widespread international support for negotiations, longstanding General Assembly resolutions on that question hadn't been implemented by the UK
21 June 2011 - The UN General Assembly will call on the administering Powers to cooperate and finalize as soon as possible a programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories. The General Assembly will urge agencies of the UN to provide assistance to these Territories and those agencies will be urged to provide information on environmental problems facing the Territories and on the ILLEGAL EXPLOTATION OF THE TERRITORIES' MARINE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.
21 June 2011 - The UN General Assembly will call on the administering Powers to cooperate and finalize as soon as possible a programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories. The General Assembly will urge agencies of the UN to provide assistance to these Territories and those agencies will be urged to provide information on environmental problems facing the Territories and on the ILLEGAL EXPLOTATION OF THE TERRITORIES' MARINE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.
@Eddieposted Mister Roger Edwards know that the UK is currently not thinking about the possibility of a joint sovereignity, unlike in the 60s or 70s, because as Camerun said "full stop, end of story" etc...
It's the UK goverment that is behaving like an intransigent spoiled brat.
@111jasy111 And your president and many of your government officials resort to calling the U.K "pirates" "thieves" "colonialists"...and you call us spoiled brats!!! the people mof the Falkland Islands have the right to self determination as laid down by the United Nations charter,we are just ensuring those rights are protected...or don't you agree that they have the right to determine their way of life and preservation of their culture?
Since the UN recognize the islands are an area of dispute between the UK and Argentina, both parties must REFRAIN from any kind of unilateral activities that changes the situation in the area.
You can read that on UN General Assembly Resolution 31/49.
Rockhopper Exploration is an oil extraction company based in London and its share is 100% English.
'Self-determination' rights in this case are basically the coward disguise used by the UK to maintain and sustain its colonial system
@111jasy111 That resolution was passed on the 1st of December 1976...your governments act of aggression on the Falkland Islands in 1982 makes that resolution null and void as it was an act of war on another U.N member...the U.K AND all the E.U recognise British sovereignty in the Falklands,and if we have a colonial system...what are Argentina trying to do by claiming another countries land?
@davyjones68 it is not even a colony (according to UN standards).. it is a colonial enclave..white british people transplanted to argentine territory in an act of complete aggression..which argentina tried to solve by peaceful means for 150 years!
@111jasy111 That is only partly true I'm afraid,the population of the Falklands is drawn from all around the world,including Argentina...it is what happens when uninhabited lands are colonised...note "uninhabited"...a little bit like what the Spanish did with South America...and Argentina have never had any peaceful intentions towards the Falkland Islands or it's people...which is why they are so heavily defended,
@davyjones68 think about the issue trying to avoid the military conflict of '82. you are simply not aware of the relationship between islanders and argentines during the 20th century. they needed help from the mainland and the mainland was always generous towards them. you are probably repeating what you read from the british side so that information is probably scarce. in 1833 the islands were habitated by the argentines. in present time the majority of islanders are british as it always were..
@111jasy111 Vernet had a business interest in the Falklands and was there with the permission of the British to whom he requested permission,at no point did we relinquish our claim over the Falkland Islands,you simply put the Argentine flag up over our land without permission,a bit like you did on South Georgia in 1982,just because we give you permission to persue a business on our land doesn't give you sovereignty over it.
@111jasy111 And so the mainland should be generous to them,you are neighbours,that's how you become friends and change peoples minds,but would you be a friend of a neighbour that is constantly aggressive and threatening towards you? You are trying to change the minds of the wrong people,the citizens have the final say over who owns the Falklands,not the Brits or the Argies
@davyjones68 it occurs that almost every islander is brit since their ancestors were sent by britain to occupy the islands. they were always ethnically and culturally brit. so basically this is foul play. i'd support the final say if 50% of the population were argentine. then it'd be correct to let the islands decide. but it's not the case. there is a reason this issue pisses me off not just because it affects my country but because the flagrant colonial system is still alive in the 21st century
@111jasy111 Well most of Argentina is colonised by Spanish and Italian migrants,how do you think the indigenous people feel about that? of course most of the islanders have British ancestry,it's a British colony! but it's not exclusively British,There are descendants Of Argentine settlers from 1833,plus other nationalities.You seem to think that the British people want to colonise everyone,if the islanders wish to be Argentine then we wouldn't mind one bit!
@111jasy111 Have you ever heard of the Faroe Islands? they are only 300 km of the coast of the U.K,but they are proud citizens of the Kingdom of Denmark,and good luck and peace to them,do we threaten them? or insult them? do we question their right to decide their own destiny?...no we live side by side in friendship,Argentina should think of the Falklands as having Britain as a neighbour,you could have worse neighbours you know.
@davyjones68 faroe islands historically belonged to vikings not britons. no britons were expelled either. britain never complained. i don't mind having britain as a neighbour if you mean a join sovereignity.
@111jasy111 You mean like how the Falkland islands historically belong to Britain? you will have to ask the islanders over the question of joint sovereignty,it's their island and their call.
@111jasy111 If you look at your last line "in 1833 the islands were habitated by the argentines. in present time the majority of islanders are british as it always were.." the emphasis is on "were" and "present"...you have just admitted the fact,we don't live in 1833,this is 2011...the British have been there since 1833...the Argentine presence was there for 5 years...so who do you honestly think the rightful owners are?
@111jasy111 In 1833 the act of colonisation was not an act against the rules of International law and was common practice among all nations of power,Argentina was founded using this method,Great Britain withdrew from Empire many many years ago,however people in certain areas of the world still want to remain British citizens,it is therefore the duty of the U.K to protect those citizens,argue the point with the Falkland Islanders,or take it to court.
@111jasy111 I actually believe you think all the Argentine propaganda regarding the Falklands from 1944 onwards is real...wake up mate and smell the roses,Kirchner is just using the situation to gain support for her government,your country has far greater problems to address,she is just deflecting your attention away from them,and using the Falklands and the nasty Brits is a way to gain popularity and votes.
@davyjones68 You are swallowing English propaganda. The case of Falklands/Malvinas becomes known around 1945 since it coincides with the creation of the UN. Go figure. Before that, only English silence regarding this issue. Who are we, third world south american saveges, to complain towards the English lion? Didn't we know that not so long ago Br
@111jasy111 You live in the past,even your rhetoric gives this away...Argentina didn't exist as a nation when we claimed and settled the Falkland Islands,come to think of it...whose land did you steal to set up your young nation? when are you going to leave Patagonia then? you are the descendants of European immigrants just as the people of the Falklands are,you have the right to self determination...why shouldn't they?
The UN Decolonization Committee today adopted a consensus resolution reiterating that the way to end the “special and particular” colonial situation in Malvinas is through peaceful, negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the UK. By the terms of the text, introduced by Chile’s representative, the Committee regretted that, despite widespread international support for negotiations, longstanding General Assembly resolutions on that question hadn't been implemented.
The UN General Assembly will call on the administering Powers to cooperate and finalize as soon as possible a programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories. The UN General Assembly will urge agencies and organizations of the UN to provide assistance to these Territories and those agencies will be urged to provide information on environmental problems facing the Territories and on the ILLEGAL EXPLOTATION OF THE TERRITORIES' MARINE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.
@111jasy111 We will not be negotiating on any sovereignty matter regarding the citizens of the Falkland Islands,unless they request it,simply because there is nothing to "negotiate"...the only way you can take the islands is by force...care to try it?
@MrWillybrand In short, the UK is refusing to enter talks and find a peaceful solution about this controversy. This is happening long decades before and after the military conflict of 1982.
HMS Gloucester...what a pity for Uruguay that President Mujica has no balls and can't stand up for the rights of his people and has to bend to the will of Argentina.
HMS Clyde...simply re-routed and docked in Chile, where our good friends ensured a warm welcome, & benefited from the trade & inevitable prestige the arrival of HMS Clyde brought.
.....and Britannia still rules the waves around the Falklands....lol
@Jonny2Jags what a pity for Chile that President Pinera has no balls and can't stand up for the rights of his people and has to bend to the will of the British Empire. Still, Chile supports Argentina's rightful claim at the UN, like the rest of Latin America. Gracias hermanos Chilenos. Anyway lol while you can because your 'Falklands' are bound to be a forgotten name like Tanganyka.
Britain discovered, named, and claimed rightful sovereignty of the Falklands, which did NOT have an indigenous population to 'invade'.
Let us be clear, the word 'invade' means to 'enter by force in order to conquer'...EXAMPLE: this describes what Spain & Portugal did in South America which led to the deaths of 10 million indigenous people.
Argentina was FIRST to 'invade' the British Falkland Islands in 1982.
@Jonny2Jags Britain invaded and expelled Argentines in 1833, long long decades after Britain have left the islands for good. For more information check the news today. The UN Decolonization Committee is having a meeting in NYC and the great-great-grandaughter of Luis Vernet, commander-in-chief of the settlement in Malvinas at that time, will participate as petitioner.
It was in 1765 at Port Egmont on the Falkland Islands that Capt Byron formally claimed the islands for Britain. Simple question for you 111jasy111: DID ARGENTINA EXIST AT THAT TIME?
There were NO civilian residents expelled in 1833.
Actually, I do accept that Louis Vernet and his expeditions provide Argentina with a claim for the islands, you've obviously been doing some research, congratulations, but the UN Decol' Cmmttee is all about theatre, and will get Argentina NOWHERE.
@111jasy111 We did not expel the Argentines in 1833...we expelled their illegal garrison on OUR territory,the remaining Argentine citizens were invited and encouraged to stay,all but 4 people stayed on the islands,and their ancestors still live their today,the 4 people that left went of their own free will,you need to understand the real history before you start spouting your governments propaganda,Argentina will never own the Falkland Islands,the people don't want them,accept it and move on.
@111jasy111 It's not a lie it's the truth...the REAL truth...the U.K does respect U.N resolutions and sends many brave men and women to fight and die for them,put your case to the International court of justice,and we will happily abide by the outcome of their decision.
@Jonny2Jags What would you do if it's proven that the British Empire expelled the natives Patagonians that inhabitated the islands? Who invaded first then?
Britain invaded first when the islands were inhabitated by natives, Britain invaded were inhabitated by spaniards and Britain invaded when inhabitated by argentines in 1833.
Argentina peacefully asked to solve this situation for 150 motherfucking years already.
Mentioning 1982 all the time is the coward's last resort.
Funny how Hillary Clinton got involved yet USA claim Hawaii
mainlinecully 3 days ago
This is RT News, short for Russian Television, and presents Kremlin view of the Western media topics. All the anchors sound right, editing is familiar, everything looks and feels like CNN or BBC: One is correct to say that RT News is technically a anglo-american news broadcast - except the viewpoint is Russian. Unaware the western audience will not automatically categorize it as foreign and alian so the message sinks in until you consciously realize the message is not what you expected.
SamuliGloersen 5 days ago
"Known locally as Las Malvinas"???? What kind of journalism is this? If by "locally" we mean the population of the islands, just go there and see how far you get with your "Las Malvinas". The islands are inhabited by a population calling themselves "Falklanders" or "Falkland Islanders". This local population does not recognise Argentinian sovereignty. Whatever happened to democracy?
simonsaintgilles 1 week ago
.
See how the British Petroleum destroyed all US Coast in USA Florida ... All ecosystem are dieing. A lot of US citizens in Florida support the pollution ... It's no more acceptable.
.
I understand why Argentina doesn't want the same. The British Petroleum & Co have no rights to destroy our environment or to come with nuclear weapons in America.
.
British Colonialism must End now.
.
anasthase100 2 weeks ago
Thieving Spaniards. Argentina didn't existing when we settled on the islands so how do you explain giving them back to their 'rightful' owner?
You're just upset because 100's of years ago, when you were pillaging gold and committing genocide upon the native south American peoples the British were attacking your ships on their way back to Spain and WE were taking all that lovely gold back to England. We didn't know where it was coming from or that it was blood money. All we knew is that our Que
noreplyism 4 weeks ago
@noreplyism - the kettle call 'black' the pot!!! "...when we settled.." in the islands. You robbed the Spaniards' possession. Like you bomberded Valparaiso, like you robbed all the treassures in the Caribbean seas, like you "settled" in Africa and generated the Boiers War (and sacrifized the Aussies), like you "settled" in India, ... enough? With all its Glory and Pomp and Circumstance, Britain is no longer 'Great" and its Government was always a Pirate to others in the World. Stop!
121ego 2 weeks ago
@noreplyism Spaniards? Argentina didn't existed in 1833? Can you read about history first?
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
why british seek problems everywhere in world for century's?? just discusting.. :/
Titaniumomeega 1 month ago
Britain:
You have again scrapped your naval air. Your fleet is skeletal.
You no longer have ships to send a naval force so any emergency reinforcement must be by air.
Therefore your intelligence services are now the tripwire. If UK cannot airlift reinforced infantry and more Typhoons/Tornados on to the islands BEFORE the Argentines arrive, UK is going to lose the islands.
You have cut it too close; you MUST have the ability to defend the islands to keep the Argentines out.
Re-build your Navy!
Ca1861 1 month ago
@Ca1861 We are rebuilding our navy and could take the argies easy anyway :)
LyNxAbObbLe 1 month ago
@Ca1861 We are people, we talk. Not like other countries wich believe that the only way to solve something is with a war.
8LyJu8 1 month ago
@8LyJu8 if you want to talk to your neighbours the door is open but you will not get an invite and you will not set the agenda. The president of Argentina is not showing good neighbourly relations and at some point will only cause further problems I doubt she will be able to intimidate the Brits to her way of thinking she obviously does not see the lessons from 1982. We don`t believe in war either Argentina started the last one and the action they take now are the foundations for the next one.
Oder1001 1 month ago
@Oder1001 No they are not. UK didn't talk abou the Islands. We claim them not now, we claim them since 1833. Now Cameron can handle the economical situation en UK, thats why you started to pay attention, he's just trying to provoke a war and rise his popularity (just what happened to Tatcher). We are a democracy now, we now what happened (18-19 yo guys making the conscription, were sent to a war with no preparation and arms destroyed by the junta). And we won't help Cameron.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 Jorge Anaya & Leopoldo Galtieri did not talk. They decided that war, or the risk of war, WAS the only way to solve this particular "something".
The road to war, and death for almost 1000 people, began in Buenos Aries.
Not slamming Argentina; I know your country takes these islands very seriously. I know that in your country it's not called an invasion, it's called a liberation.
But that war started in Buenos Aries.
UK fought back. That's not a crime.
Ca1861 1 month ago
@Ca1861 The war started with a dictatorship established by USA. We didn't choose them, all my family was opposed to that "war".
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 We didn't "establish" anything! You are Argentina, your people would never have condoned such a thing.
Argentina makes it's own decisons and did so back then...
Ca1861 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 - yeah...tell that to the Boers, to the Indians, to the people of the Colonies that wanted Independence and never got it, like Scottland, Ireland, etc Explain just WHY are the Irish so opposed to England then? There MUST be a reason why the length of the IRA and the British forces' battle, no? "No curse comes with no reason..."
121ego 2 weeks ago
@121ego I don't get what you are talking about.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 - sorry man, I missinterpreted your words.
121ego 2 weeks ago
@121ego Don't worry, lady ;)
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@121ego South Africa became a Republic in 1961, India in 1948 and 54 countries attained independence between 1948/1990 the10 British territories left including the Falklands can choose at any time to have independence, there no more British colonialism forced on any peoples and unlike Latin America Indian natives had India returned to them, how many lands in Latin America were given back to the original inhabitants?.... NONE! work on your own humanity before you talk about others
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 Wrong! There are laws in Argentina about that. We have lands, who want is recognized first as native, second as argentinian. We are quiet happy about that. From a native descendant.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The members of the newly former CELAC (Community of Latinamerican and Caribbean States) unanimously approved one month ago a document in support of Argentina’s claim and anticipated they would request the intervention of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. The document reiterates the standing interest of Latinamerica and the Caribbean that the UK accepts to hold talks with Argentina so as to find “on the shortest time possible” a peaceful and definitive solution to the dispute.
111jasy111 1 month ago
the people of those islands migth be british but their occupaying argentina territory!!!!!! if they wants to be british that's their choice their british heritage,they have to share the land with the argentinian people, that would be a best solution for this dispute,no one is forcing these islanders to be argentinian they actually invade the lands that belongs to the nation of argentina.
elargentinounico1982 2 months ago
@elargentinounico1982 they are Falkland Islanders and the live on their own territory you have not proved in court its yours, possession is 9/10th of the law.
Oder1001 2 months ago
@Oder1001 argentina can prove it anytime britain just refuse or denied negotiations just at it did in 1982, recently britain say it will do not negotiate so was britain afraid of it since they rule the world since they can do anything they want or say in the united nations happy new year anyway.
elargentinounico1982 1 month ago 2
@elargentinounico1982 Yes you had negotiations going on and you had agreements on fish and resources, flights you walked out and chose war and decided the way to resolve was war you lost the war...game over, the UK does not have to entertain Argentina the issue is now resolved by a process of Argentina`s choosing. the CJ is available to attempt mediation but the Brits are under no obligation to go along with if Argentina is serious and abide by the verdict then UK would agree Happy new year
Oder1001 1 month ago
@Oder1001 No. War don't decide anything, treaties do. We didn't make anyone with UK, plus we reaffirm our position in the 1994 Constitutional reform.
And Argentina was under a dictatorship, and illegl government wich we didn't choose.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJ 1994 Constitutional reform means nothing to the UK!
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 Really? In 1999 Argentina and the UK made a treaty about flights to Malvinas, and there was no complain at all.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 now your president say`s she tear it up! just like the Argentines did in 82. the complaints are all Argentinian manufactured
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 No, our claims are based in international laws.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 then go to the ICJ and get international acknowledgement and approval. it is your country that refuses to resolve the issue in court.
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 the trouble with treaties that Argentina makes with the UK concerning the islands is that they have broken every one they have signed, you cannot opt out over the responsibilities of your government`s previous behaviour because it was a dictator ship the failure of that dictatorship to prevent the UK retaking the islands, caused your population to remove it from power, No maybe you did not vote for it, but the majority of Argentine approved of the invasion.
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
quality not quantity
jackydefo 2 months ago
Argentina will never be able to take the British Islands from the UK.
badd3sl3y 2 months ago
@badd3sl3y Never is a strong and powerful word to say england was able to won the war becuase chile and USA helped to win it plus england is a potency powerful empire compare at the time with argentina who is now one of the 4economies of latin america.
elargentinounico1982 2 months ago
@elargentinounico1982 I can say never as it will never happen, they will always be British, and will remain British until Britain is no more.
badd3sl3y 2 months ago
@elargentinounico1982 Yes and 20% of all foreign investment in Argentina is British they own a big chunk of it.
Oder1001 2 months ago
@Oder1001 Because they have benefits from here. If not: ¿why so many british companies are in Argentina when they could give job to their coutrymen?
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 20% of all foriegn investment in Argentina is British why don`t you kick them out? the reason you don`t is because those businesses give jobs to people in Argentina
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 Well.. actually we could, we have a lot of investiments offers, opposite to what you -apparently- believe. However, it's about Malvinas, not about economy. The same if from there.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8 a spokesman for your government recently said they have no intention of restricting UK business in Argentina, I will tell you what I believe don`t you guess you will only get it wrong.
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 I'll not. I know that economically talking Argentina and the UK are partners for convenience.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@8LyJu8
whats this Malvinas??
USAJackUSA 2 weeks ago
Saying Falklands are British is like saying chinatowns in USA are Peoples republic of China territory because they are populated by the Chines thousand of miles from China, pure BS, but the Brits have the upper hand for now and there is little anyone can do.
Britain still acts as if its the superpower of the 1800s but the fact is theyve become Uncle Sams lap dog, a former Brit colony, oh the irony.
Britain should remember one thing, what goes around comes around.
PanterausfG 2 months ago
@PanterausfG What are you talking about? The People on the Islands are Britons and want to stay part of the Queens Realm. They live in Freedom & Democracy and could vote to leave the Realm. Argentina has no claim over the Islands, Just because the Islands are 300 miles away from Argentina does not the Islands theirs! They have no claim or nothing its pathetic, Argentina makes fools out of themselfs. You ask the people of Islands who are they? They will tell you!!! THERE NOT ARGENTINE!
martynrobin121 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@martynrobin121
"What are you talking about? The People on the Islands are Britons and want to stay part of the Queens Realm."
Their problem, if they want to live in Britain maybe they should actually go to Britain.
"Argentina has no claim over the Islands, Just because the Islands are 300 miles away from Argentina does not the Islands theirs!"
LOL and a few English colonizing it over 1000 miles AWAY from Britain makes it British ?
No wonder the Irish hate your guts.
PanterausfG 2 months ago
@martynrobin121 Argentina do have a rigth to claim this territory that have been occupied by the british since early 1650or i'm not sure about how early the british settle in these islands but the fact is that the native indians from argentina first settle in there and during the spanish colonies before argentina was a nation the expelled the argentians from their territory and england settle in there to the present day,
elargentinounico1982 2 months ago
@elargentinounico1982 So Argentina has no claim!
The People who have been living on the Islands for centurys have more claim than Nation, They live in Freedom and wish to stay part of the Queen Realm. The People make it very clear they want NOTHING to do with Argentina. You say the Islands are occupied?
However the Islands have not been occupied since the illegal Argi invasion, You ask the People of the Falklands, They will tel you proud they live in FREEDOM & DEMOCRACY!!
martynrobin121 2 months ago
@martynrobin121 they first were ocupied illegaly by english settlers in 1650or 1662 argentina just tried to recuperate it in their right by geogrraphy by owns right in 1982 not illegaly meant or sir.
elargentinounico1982 1 month ago
@elargentinounico1982 I know they teach you at school about geography of the islands and the tell you its on the Argentine continental shelf, proximity geography has no legal basis international law, the North pole sits on the Russian shelf but does not belong to Russia,UK is 22 miles from France but does not own the UK. Greenland is closer to Canada but belongs to Denmark international boundaries are defined by international law the Falklands are outside Argentina`s international boundaries.
Oder1001 1 month ago
@Oder1001 1- Malvinas where in the territories that Spain gave Argentina after our independence. Some argentinians lived there until 1833 where England occupied them illegllay until today. 2- December 12th, 1965 UN adopted the Resolution 2065 (XX) wich said that Argentina and the United Kingdom hace to negociate the Malvinas sovereign, making clear that malvinenses decision it's not enough, and there's a disputy for the territory.
8LyJu8 1 month ago
@8LyJu8 British settled the islands in 1765 Spain settled in1767. In 1774 the British with the upcoming war in the American colonies withdraw leaving a plaque maintaining sovereignty.In 1811 Spain withdrew and like the British left a plaque maintaining their sovereignty. In1836 Spain renounce its claims in South America, Spain did administer its settlement from the Spanish colony of the Rio Del Plata, Argentina did not exist at this time and could not have colonised before it existed.
Oder1001 1 month ago
@Oder1001 - nice and dandy. You forgot to mention England invaded TWICE Buenos Aires (15.000 brits) were taken prisioners and returned to England. The territory is on Argentinian platform. Why don't the Brits give independence to Scottland? They ARE in their OWN country, no? Maybe the solution is to allow the people there to form an independent Government, with sovereign rights given to Argentina, and give them their OWN Passports.
121ego 2 weeks ago
@121ego England attacked the Spanish colonies of the Rio del Plata as punishment for Spanish support of the French , you must study British history a bit more 15 000 troops in those days were nothing, When they went to war with the US they used 100 000 troops and 300 ships that`s an invasion force, now I know its a big deal in your history but in Brit history you will find it under the minor argument section."ownership is not defined by geography" In 2 years Scotland votes on independence
Oder1001 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 First occupants were frenchmen. France gave the territory to Spain. Argentina became independet in 1816 with the Malvinas included. (SO it existed as an own country in 1833, and was recognized by the UK, with our territories)
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@Oder1001 2.2-Until now UN keeps giving resolution for negociations (like in July 12th 2008). 3-The Malvina's war (1982) was under a dictatorship ("Proceso de Reorganización Nacional" 1976-1983). An illegal government, wich nor Argentina or any country recognize (that's why the Paris Club doesn't count it's debt).
8LyJu8 1 month ago
@8LyJu8 it was Argentina that walked out of talks cancelled agreements and invaded and lost the war breaking all the UN rules on negotiations. it may have been an illegal government in Argentina but that does not excuse its actions and aggression to the islands on the second 2 April 82 if the population had removed the Junta from power instead of celebrating the invasion you may have had a point ,but they did not the Argentines supported the illegal government.
Oder1001 1 month ago
@Oder1001 No we didn't: how can you show a visible opposition to a dictatorship wich put rat into pregnant women's vagina? Are you mad?
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@elargentinounico1982 What are you talking about? LEARN HISTORY:
The British FIRST arrived on the Falklands Islands 1690, Settled & laid claim 1700s. There was NO-HUMAN life on the Islands, Argentina did not even exists, Ask Spain! Today 2012, The Falklands & its People live in Freedom & Democracy, They wish to stay part of the UK its their human right, They want nothing to do with Argentina.
FALKLANDS WILL LIVE IN FREEDOM NOT OCCUPATION.
SOUTH AMERICAN FACIST SCUM!
martynrobin121 1 month ago
@elargentinounico1982 british settlement 1765 Spain1867.native Indians may have visited the islands from Patagonia at some point but were not present when the Brits turned up, Patagonia only became part of Argentina in the 1820 Rosas conquest of the desert. only military personnel was expelled Vernet settlers very few were Argentine and four civilians left of their own free will.
Oder1001 2 months ago
@Oder1001 Free will? Are you serious? So: a ship from UK naval force arrived, expelled military parsonnel and the civil go on their free will. Can you tell me another fairy tale?
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@PanterausfG Indeed, It's why Britain although being one of the smallest world powers, Is still capable of ruining anyones day through force projection, Cry us a river
1MagicAndMayhem1 2 months ago
they can rant & rave about all the billions of barrels of oil planned to be dug up, but they can't take on our military. (5th most powerful military in the world & best trained army & special forces with powerful allies).
lilyeve222 2 months ago
@lilyeve222 There are not official oil yet. And I wouldn't be so proud. Do you know what war is? War: when somebody behind a desk decide to send people who don't know, and don't care, and won't know and won't car to kill or be killed just because he's not capable to make the job for wich he was elected to (if he was elected).
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
The best way of comprehend the lack of equality and justice in the world : A bunch of pirates unload in 2 islands and then say its their. This world is a joke.
confucio9n 4 months ago
@confucio9n I'll agree with you england is a powerful empire.
elargentinounico1982 2 months ago
our islands fuck off
jackydefo 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Argentina is all bark no bite.
dopehousex3 5 months ago
Yay we get some oil from our island. mmm yummy british oil! i hope they send it back to the UK
wank0r 7 months ago
@wank0r
to bad but we also need oil :) will make a deal with Argentina i dont think the UK would be stupid to attack America
DarkSamurai305 5 months ago
@DarkSamurai305 mmm yummy oil comming home to UK so we can eat it and make love to it
wank0r 5 months ago
@wank0r
O.o u really act like an American now your talking about food
DarkSamurai305 5 months ago
@wank0r There's no official oil. However recently was discovered an oil reserve wich is about 1/3 of what was known before in Argentina mainland.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
@bluemule179
You're right, the Args. have been misled. Decades of propaganda in the classroom, learning the words of Paul Graussac, have created several generations of Args. who have been manipulated & lied to.
To understand the mindset, you only have to recall the views of those Args. involved in the invasion in '82, they were told and genuinely believed that they would be welcome as liberators, and found out with surprise that they weren't.
But, yes, I take on board what you say.
Jonny2Jags 7 months ago
@Jonny2Jags We can say the same about you. UN established (even in 2008) that Malvinas is a colony, that there's a soveregnty dispute.
And the "soldiers" didn't go by their own decision. They were sent because they were making the conscription. Soldiers (real soldiers, well prepared soldiers) were maintained at their house.
Plus: our arms were destroyed by the junta.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
quick question - if argentina were to close ports to oil from falklands region would it still be an economically viable project? to drill and sail back to uk or usa.
(b) as above, but if brazil and uruguay sided with argentina.
HLecterPHD 8 months ago
@HLecterPHD
Sept 2010 – Uruguay prevents HMS Gloucester from docking in Montevideo in act of solidarity with Argentina.
Jan 2011 – Brazil bans HMS Clyde from docking in Rio de Janeiro in act of solidarity with Argentina.
Jun 2011 - The United States Goverment supports a “draft declaration on the question of Malvinas” adopted by the Organization of American States by unanimous consent. The resolution calls upon Argentina and Britain to enter into negotiations over sovereignty.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111
I must be helpful and tell you that there will be no talks over the future sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.
As far as the governments of the UK and of the Falkland Islands are concerned, there is no issue to resolve.
The Falkland Islanders themselves are almost entirely British and maintain their allegiance to the United Kingdom.
Thank you for your continued interest, but you and your nationalist buddies are wasting your time writing 'monologues' here -lol ;O)
Jonny2Jags 8 months ago
@Jonny2Jags You sound like you'd love to be a British goverment officer. Admit it. 'Monologues' are the ones written by Sir davyjones68 with his 19 responses to me LOL
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111
Well, no, you're wrong, as usual.
I think you'll find that a lot of my Union flag waving buddies, as well as myself, have read what 'davyjones68' wrote, so technically it wasn't a monologue.
I'm interested on your take on something, indulge me on this. Why is it, would you say, that Cristina Kirchner doesn't exercise her 'right' as an Argentinian, and visit the Falkland Islands, and explain herself to the people there?
The last 'president' to visit was Gen.Galtieri, correct?
Jonny2Jags 8 months ago
@Jonny2Jags Right. And you're basically answering your own question.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@Jonny2Jags Yes. And some former kelpers, who decided to be argentinians declared that, after the "war", was an anti-argentinian propaganda. So, better for us be far away from there, except we have double citizenship.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
We're suppossed to leave comments here, davy. Not monologues. Regarding ICJ, read UN Charter Article 33. Before ICJ, we can choose many options: negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation... Actually that is what the UN has said to both countries for long long decades already. The problem is that the UK is behaving unilaterally beyond the UN which lies on the fact that the UK holds a permanent seat at the UN Security Council and is an important member of NATO and G8. Muscle still prevails :(
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Lol..yeah sorry it took a bit of fitting in :-) I don't usually go off on such a rant,I was just a bit bored last night,apologies...If we were behaving outside the guidelines of the U.N I'm sure far more powerful countries,like U.S.China,Russia,would come down on us like a ton of bricks,the C-24 isn't a provider of resolutions,if the G.A or S.C pass a resolution then we would abide by it...and muscle doesn't always prevail,brains always win in the end.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 You are wrong. It's not that same a rasolution opposed to, for example, UK, USA or Germany, than to Argentina, Mexico, Chile, et cetera.
Evidence: un. org/News/Press/docs/2008/gacol3178.doc.htm
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
Eddie's claim is based on delusion and jingoism.
111jasy111 8 months ago
The population living on the islands today was not a people in the legal sense of the term as they and their ancestors were British either by birth or by origin. They did not constitute a nation or specific ethnicity. They had never been subdued by a “metropole” to be subjects of self-determination. As an Argentine citizen and descendant of a pioneer of Argentina’s sovereignty over those territories, she was convinced of the sovereign rights that her country upheld over Malvinas. 21 June 2011
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 And with all due respect to Maria Vernet,she is wrong,On 2 January 1833, the small sloop HMS Clio arrived at Port Louis – she was the ship sent by Britain to pay the first of an intended series of annual visits. On 3 January her captain, John James Onslow, hauled down the Buenos Aires flag and hoisted the Union Jack but his orders were not to molest any civilian inhabitants he might find in the Falklands.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 And you believe that?
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
MARÍA ANGÉLICA VERNET said that In less than two years, the population of Puerto Soledad had reached more than 100 stable inhabitants adding that the island had become a trading post, whose main activities had included cattle raising and fishing. The colony organized by Luis Vernet had had a mainly Argentine population, which had been dispersed and replaced by British immigrants in 1833.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@Eddieposted Well there you go Mr Jasy...thanks for that Eddie,a little bit more information than I could provide.
davyjones68 8 months ago
21 June 2011 - UN Decolonization Committee in NYC. MARÍA ANGÉLICA VERNET said her family's roots lay deep in Malvinas' history. Her great-great grandfather, Luis Vernet, had been the first political and military commander for Malvinas. The political and military command office for those islands and others adjacent to Cape Horn in the Atlantic had been created in June 1829 to enhance the domain exercised by Spain since 1767.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Louis Vernet was in the Falklands with the permission of the British government,he actually acknowledged British sovereignty and supported it,with regards to the comandancia,on 10th of June 1829 the Buenos Aires government issued a decree setting up the “Political and Military Command of the Malvinas, and that the British government made an official diplomatic protest to Buenos.
Aires against the decree.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 The British viewpoint was that the islands belonged to Britain, and that Buenos Aires had no right to do anything there. That formed the basis for Britain’s diplomatic protest of 19 November 1829, which preserved Britain’s rights.It should be remembered that no country in the world accepted that the islands belonged to Buenos Aires – Britain regarded them as British, the United States regarded them as open to anyone.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Spain still claimed them, and France may perhaps have harboured designs on them, regarding them as rightfully French since they had been first settled by France.It should be noted here too that the government in Buenos Aires at that time was far from legal.It was led by General Juan Lavalle, who had seized power in a coup the previous December and murdered the lawful governor,
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Manuel Dorrego. After Lavalle’s overthrow later in 1829, Brigadier Juan Manuel
Ortiz de Rosas took power lawfully – and declared all the Lavalle government’s acts null and void....therefore you have no legitimate,lawful claim over the Falkland Islands.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 “you are not to disturb them in their agricultural or other inoffensive employments.”All Onslow did was to order Pinedo to remove the Argentine garrison of 26 soldiers, with their wives and children; Pinedo protested ineffectually but duly sailed in the Sarandí on 5 January.It is important to note that the civilian residents of the islands were not expelled. Captain Onslow’s
report reveals that he obeyed his instructions scrupulously,
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 – in fact he went to great lengths to persuade the inhabitants, some of whom were dissatisfied with their life in the islands, to remain Captain Pinedo of the Sarandí confirmed this in his statement to Port Captain Patricio Linch on his return to Buenos Aires – he said Onslow had told him that:those inhabitants who freely wished it should remain and both they and their property would be
respected as before
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 When the Clio arrived, there were 33 genuine resident civilian settlers; Captain Onslow gave them a free choice of staying or leaving; he applied no pressure on them to leave and indeed encouraged some to stay. Only four of them chose to leave – they are named in books by the prominent Argentine historians Ernesto J. Fitte and Mario Tesler,Argentina’s current leading expert on the Falklands:
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 It's my opinion that you are being controlled by your government to believe in a myth regarding the Falkland Islands,please keep an open mind,and review the entire history of the islands and its people,research the real history and you might form a different opinion where all sides CAN negotiate from,you can post whatever you want on this matter,as it stands you won't change our opinion,just as we won't change yours,so take it to court and let an independent jury decide.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 If you take it to court our case would be laid out as follows...(1) The 17th and 18th-century treaties between Britain and Spain did not prohibit British possession of the Falklands.
(2) The Argentinians have quoted the 1771 Anglo-Spanish agreement incorrectly. The agreement as
finally signed preserves the claims of both Spain and Britain, not Spain alone. There was no secret promise by Britain to evacuate the Falklands after the restitution of Port Egmont.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (3) The Argentinians have incorrectly described the history of the 1820s in the Falklands. David Jewett did claim the Falklands then for Argentina, but he had not been sent there. He did not attempt to apply fishing regulations, or Argentine laws, or tell any foreign ships to leave.His claim was not announced formally in Argentina or even mentioned in his report.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (4) Argentina’s claim that the 1825 Treaty of Friendship and Navigation with Britain supports its claim to the Falklands is incorrect. There was no one from Argentina in the Falklands at that time, and the
Treaty does not describe Argentine territory at all.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (5) The Argentine claim that Britain expelled an Argentine population from the Falklands in 1833 is false; the settlement continued, and most of its inhabitants were from Buenos Aires.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (6) Argentina did not inherit a unitary claim to the Falklands from Spain, and its claim is further
weakened by the lack of foreign recognition in the 19th century and by Louis Vernet’s preference for British sovereignty.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (7) Argentina dropped its claim to the Falklands by ratifying the Convention of Settlement in 1850. The failure to mention that this ended Argentina’s claim to the Falklands is a gross distortion of history, as are the statements by Argentine historians that the British Foreign Secretary accepted in 1849 that the matter was “pending” or “postponed” – the reverse is true.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 After 1850 Argentina dropped all protests to Britain over the Falklands, and did not mention the Falklands to Britain for 34 years. The dropping of the Argentine claim was confirmed by Argentine leaders in their Messages to Congress in the 1860s, and the Falklands were not mentioned in any Message to Congress for 91 years until 1941.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (8) The Argentine claim was artificially revived in 1884, by non-diplomatic means – the “Affair of the Map” – but after failing to change Britain’s position Argentina dropped the matter again for several
decades.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 (9) The Argentinians have never had a valid claim to South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. These islands were only claimed by Argentina after the Second World War, after decades of acquiescence and after acknowledgement of Britain’s sovereignty there(10) The Argentine argument that Islanders have no right to self-determination is absurd. They have the
same rights as any other immigrant population of the New World.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 In conclusion Argentina doesn't have a valid case to assume sovereignty over the Falklands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.ALL THESE ISLANDS ARE RIGHTFULLY AND LAWFULLY BRITISH.The Falklands dispute was ended over 150 years ago with Argentina’s agreement; there is no need for any “solution”,or any "negotiation"...now take Argentina's case to court and see where it gets you.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 19 responses... LOL
111jasy111 8 months ago
@davyjones68 Basically: you are absolutely wrong. I think was your government wich control your knowledge. But I don't believe you won't even try to understand our standpoint. So I see useless explain everything to you, so, I comeback to my life.
8LyJu8 2 weeks ago
Britannia ruled the waves and had 25% of the world under its possession? How dare we think our claims would be heard
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 And just out of interest,why do you think your government won't take it's case to the I.C.J?...it's a perfectly legitimate request,and if you are serious about your claim on our territory,then it's the first option open to you if you want to make a claim for sovereignty,why not petition your government to do this instead of insulting and moaning to innocent British people who have never done anything to you personally.
davyjones68 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
21 June 2011 - The UN Decolonization Committee adopted a resolution reiterating that the way to end the “special and particular” colonial situation in Falklands is through peaceful, negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and UK. By terms of the text, introduced by Chile’s representative, the Committee regretted that despite widespread international support for negotiations, longstanding General Assembly resolutions on that question hadn't been implemented by the UK
111jasy111 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
21 June 2011 - The UN General Assembly will call on the administering Powers to cooperate and finalize as soon as possible a programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories. The General Assembly will urge agencies of the UN to provide assistance to these Territories and those agencies will be urged to provide information on environmental problems facing the Territories and on the ILLEGAL EXPLOTATION OF THE TERRITORIES' MARINE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.
111jasy111 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
21 June 2011 - The UN General Assembly will call on the administering Powers to cooperate and finalize as soon as possible a programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories. The General Assembly will urge agencies of the UN to provide assistance to these Territories and those agencies will be urged to provide information on environmental problems facing the Territories and on the ILLEGAL EXPLOTATION OF THE TERRITORIES' MARINE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@Eddieposted Mister Roger Edwards know that the UK is currently not thinking about the possibility of a joint sovereignity, unlike in the 60s or 70s, because as Camerun said "full stop, end of story" etc...
It's the UK goverment that is behaving like an intransigent spoiled brat.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 And your president and many of your government officials resort to calling the U.K "pirates" "thieves" "colonialists"...and you call us spoiled brats!!! the people mof the Falkland Islands have the right to self determination as laid down by the United Nations charter,we are just ensuring those rights are protected...or don't you agree that they have the right to determine their way of life and preservation of their culture?
davyjones68 8 months ago
Since the UN recognize the islands are an area of dispute between the UK and Argentina, both parties must REFRAIN from any kind of unilateral activities that changes the situation in the area.
You can read that on UN General Assembly Resolution 31/49.
Rockhopper Exploration is an oil extraction company based in London and its share is 100% English.
'Self-determination' rights in this case are basically the coward disguise used by the UK to maintain and sustain its colonial system
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 That resolution was passed on the 1st of December 1976...your governments act of aggression on the Falkland Islands in 1982 makes that resolution null and void as it was an act of war on another U.N member...the U.K AND all the E.U recognise British sovereignty in the Falklands,and if we have a colonial system...what are Argentina trying to do by claiming another countries land?
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 it is not even a colony (according to UN standards).. it is a colonial enclave..white british people transplanted to argentine territory in an act of complete aggression..which argentina tried to solve by peaceful means for 150 years!
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 That is only partly true I'm afraid,the population of the Falklands is drawn from all around the world,including Argentina...it is what happens when uninhabited lands are colonised...note "uninhabited"...a little bit like what the Spanish did with South America...and Argentina have never had any peaceful intentions towards the Falkland Islands or it's people...which is why they are so heavily defended,
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 think about the issue trying to avoid the military conflict of '82. you are simply not aware of the relationship between islanders and argentines during the 20th century. they needed help from the mainland and the mainland was always generous towards them. you are probably repeating what you read from the british side so that information is probably scarce. in 1833 the islands were habitated by the argentines. in present time the majority of islanders are british as it always were..
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Vernet had a business interest in the Falklands and was there with the permission of the British to whom he requested permission,at no point did we relinquish our claim over the Falkland Islands,you simply put the Argentine flag up over our land without permission,a bit like you did on South Georgia in 1982,just because we give you permission to persue a business on our land doesn't give you sovereignty over it.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 And so the mainland should be generous to them,you are neighbours,that's how you become friends and change peoples minds,but would you be a friend of a neighbour that is constantly aggressive and threatening towards you? You are trying to change the minds of the wrong people,the citizens have the final say over who owns the Falklands,not the Brits or the Argies
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 it occurs that almost every islander is brit since their ancestors were sent by britain to occupy the islands. they were always ethnically and culturally brit. so basically this is foul play. i'd support the final say if 50% of the population were argentine. then it'd be correct to let the islands decide. but it's not the case. there is a reason this issue pisses me off not just because it affects my country but because the flagrant colonial system is still alive in the 21st century
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Well most of Argentina is colonised by Spanish and Italian migrants,how do you think the indigenous people feel about that? of course most of the islanders have British ancestry,it's a British colony! but it's not exclusively British,There are descendants Of Argentine settlers from 1833,plus other nationalities.You seem to think that the British people want to colonise everyone,if the islanders wish to be Argentine then we wouldn't mind one bit!
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Have you ever heard of the Faroe Islands? they are only 300 km of the coast of the U.K,but they are proud citizens of the Kingdom of Denmark,and good luck and peace to them,do we threaten them? or insult them? do we question their right to decide their own destiny?...no we live side by side in friendship,Argentina should think of the Falklands as having Britain as a neighbour,you could have worse neighbours you know.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 faroe islands historically belonged to vikings not britons. no britons were expelled either. britain never complained. i don't mind having britain as a neighbour if you mean a join sovereignity.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 You mean like how the Falkland islands historically belong to Britain? you will have to ask the islanders over the question of joint sovereignty,it's their island and their call.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 If you look at your last line "in 1833 the islands were habitated by the argentines. in present time the majority of islanders are british as it always were.." the emphasis is on "were" and "present"...you have just admitted the fact,we don't live in 1833,this is 2011...the British have been there since 1833...the Argentine presence was there for 5 years...so who do you honestly think the rightful owners are?
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 In 1833 the act of colonisation was not an act against the rules of International law and was common practice among all nations of power,Argentina was founded using this method,Great Britain withdrew from Empire many many years ago,however people in certain areas of the world still want to remain British citizens,it is therefore the duty of the U.K to protect those citizens,argue the point with the Falkland Islanders,or take it to court.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@111jasy111 I actually believe you think all the Argentine propaganda regarding the Falklands from 1944 onwards is real...wake up mate and smell the roses,Kirchner is just using the situation to gain support for her government,your country has far greater problems to address,she is just deflecting your attention away from them,and using the Falklands and the nasty Brits is a way to gain popularity and votes.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 You are swallowing English propaganda. The case of Falklands/Malvinas becomes known around 1945 since it coincides with the creation of the UN. Go figure. Before that, only English silence regarding this issue. Who are we, third world south american saveges, to complain towards the English lion? Didn't we know that not so long ago Br
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 You live in the past,even your rhetoric gives this away...Argentina didn't exist as a nation when we claimed and settled the Falkland Islands,come to think of it...whose land did you steal to set up your young nation? when are you going to leave Patagonia then? you are the descendants of European immigrants just as the people of the Falklands are,you have the right to self determination...why shouldn't they?
davyjones68 8 months ago
Camerun vs UN?
111jasy111 8 months ago
@Eddieposted ugly gay cunt here again?
flyingxk 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The UN Decolonization Committee today adopted a consensus resolution reiterating that the way to end the “special and particular” colonial situation in Malvinas is through peaceful, negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the UK. By the terms of the text, introduced by Chile’s representative, the Committee regretted that, despite widespread international support for negotiations, longstanding General Assembly resolutions on that question hadn't been implemented.
111jasy111 8 months ago
The UN General Assembly will call on the administering Powers to cooperate and finalize as soon as possible a programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories. The UN General Assembly will urge agencies and organizations of the UN to provide assistance to these Territories and those agencies will be urged to provide information on environmental problems facing the Territories and on the ILLEGAL EXPLOTATION OF THE TERRITORIES' MARINE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 We will not be negotiating on any sovereignty matter regarding the citizens of the Falkland Islands,unless they request it,simply because there is nothing to "negotiate"...the only way you can take the islands is by force...care to try it?
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 not by force but by UN resolutions. your country should respect them.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 Take it to court then like a civil democracy would do...what are you afraid of?
davyjones68 8 months ago
@MrWillybrand In short, the UK is refusing to enter talks and find a peaceful solution about this controversy. This is happening long decades before and after the military conflict of 1982.
111jasy111 8 months ago
March 2010 – Hillary Clinton says that the US would be willing to mediate between Britain and Argentina.
Sept 2010 – Uruguay prevents HMS Gloucester from docking in Montevideo in act of solidarity with Argentina.
Jan 2011 – Brazil bans HMS Clyde from docking in Rio de Janeiro.
If the UK keeps refusing to enter talks this situation will escalate.
And nobody wants that except for a few warmongers.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111
HMS Gloucester...what a pity for Uruguay that President Mujica has no balls and can't stand up for the rights of his people and has to bend to the will of Argentina.
HMS Clyde...simply re-routed and docked in Chile, where our good friends ensured a warm welcome, & benefited from the trade & inevitable prestige the arrival of HMS Clyde brought.
.....and Britannia still rules the waves around the Falklands....lol
What was your point...again?
Jonny2Jags 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jonny2Jags what a pity for Chile that President Pinera has no balls and can't stand up for the rights of his people and has to bend to the will of the British Empire. Still, Chile supports Argentina's rightful claim at the UN, like the rest of Latin America. Gracias hermanos Chilenos. Anyway lol while you can because your 'Falklands' are bound to be a forgotten name like Tanganyka.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 you invaded the Falklands and you call us warmongers?
you cowards did not have the balls to even declare war against us when you invaded Britain.
you are the warmongering imperialists who want to occupy British land against the will of the natives.
MrGilles1990 8 months ago
@MrGilles1990 Natives? They were British citizens sent by the UK to occupy Argentine territory.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@MrGilles1990 Britain invaded first.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111
No, as usual, you're wrong.
Britain discovered, named, and claimed rightful sovereignty of the Falklands, which did NOT have an indigenous population to 'invade'.
Let us be clear, the word 'invade' means to 'enter by force in order to conquer'...EXAMPLE: this describes what Spain & Portugal did in South America which led to the deaths of 10 million indigenous people.
Argentina was FIRST to 'invade' the British Falkland Islands in 1982.
Jonny2Jags 8 months ago 12
@Jonny2Jags Britain invaded and expelled Argentines in 1833, long long decades after Britain have left the islands for good. For more information check the news today. The UN Decolonization Committee is having a meeting in NYC and the great-great-grandaughter of Luis Vernet, commander-in-chief of the settlement in Malvinas at that time, will participate as petitioner.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111
It was in 1765 at Port Egmont on the Falkland Islands that Capt Byron formally claimed the islands for Britain. Simple question for you 111jasy111: DID ARGENTINA EXIST AT THAT TIME?
There were NO civilian residents expelled in 1833.
Actually, I do accept that Louis Vernet and his expeditions provide Argentina with a claim for the islands, you've obviously been doing some research, congratulations, but the UN Decol' Cmmttee is all about theatre, and will get Argentina NOWHERE.
Jonny2Jags 8 months ago
@111jasy111 We did not expel the Argentines in 1833...we expelled their illegal garrison on OUR territory,the remaining Argentine citizens were invited and encouraged to stay,all but 4 people stayed on the islands,and their ancestors still live their today,the 4 people that left went of their own free will,you need to understand the real history before you start spouting your governments propaganda,Argentina will never own the Falkland Islands,the people don't want them,accept it and move on.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@davyjones68 Stop lying and respect UN resolutions.
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111 It's not a lie it's the truth...the REAL truth...the U.K does respect U.N resolutions and sends many brave men and women to fight and die for them,put your case to the International court of justice,and we will happily abide by the outcome of their decision.
davyjones68 8 months ago
@Jonny2Jags What would you do if it's proven that the British Empire expelled the natives Patagonians that inhabitated the islands? Who invaded first then?
111jasy111 8 months ago
@111jasy111
I like the question, not for its own sake, but the implication that you accept that Argentina WAS the first to invade the Falklands in 1982.
Thank you for that. It just goes to show that even you see the cracks in Argentina's claim...
Jonny2Jags 8 months ago
@Jonny2Jags What? Try harder, mate.
Britain invaded first when the islands were inhabitated by natives, Britain invaded were inhabitated by spaniards and Britain invaded when inhabitated by argentines in 1833.
Argentina peacefully asked to solve this situation for 150 motherfucking years already.
Mentioning 1982 all the time is the coward's last resort.
111jasy111 8 months ago