If Argentina thinks it can take the falklands now god help them...our forces unexperienced but well trained back in 82 kicked their arses..our troops today are veterans of iraq and afgahnistan would destroy them.the only reason argentina want the islands is bcause of the oil under the sea. we want them for the same reason. they are ours and we will have the oil...so fuck you Argentina
@monsmoy1 The only trubble is that Britten lacks aircraft carriers today och could not get air superiority in a conflict on the falklands today. Just read a few days ago that high military officials in the brittish military doubts that they could commit to another Libia operation today after the latest cuts.
no argentines have ever lived on the falkland islands...they were never taken in force by the british...they were simply colonized like Spain colonized argentina...these islands are British and always will be
The only thing that could defeat the UK would be the UK Government itself. The current one has already done far more damage to British forces, particularly the navy, than Argentina could ever dream of... Even so, anyone stirring up trouble in the South Atlantic would get a nasty surprise just how quickly more strike aircraft could be deployed to the Mt Pleasant air base to supplement the flight maintained there. Provided the Government could be bothered, that is.
The Malvinas are Argentine, English corrupt empire and its allies only demonstrate their low human values. always trying to guide her economics at inhuman exploitation, expropriation of land and so on. British Empire always proved to be a parasite that lives on human blood. hopefully one day learn to fend for themselves for the benefit of a better humanity.
@ratalino73 if they all invaded, at once, there would be a total 14 frigates, 11 submarines, 1 aircraft and 11 minor attack craft. vs the british 13 frigates, 6 destroyers, 3 assault ships and 11 submarines. 1/4 of all the ships of the south america allies would be made in britain, and almost all of them are outdated. your not getting them back anytime soon.
@ratalino73 Oi hombre, they are the Falklands. Not the Malvinas. They are under the control of the government and country desired by their residents. So do one.
Article 1.2 of the Charter of the United Nations and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That principle underlies our position on the Falkland Islands. There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish.
why did get some twat to sing it like a pop concert. This was a war memorial, should have been given the same pomp and reverence as on remembrance day.
As a Falklands veteran of 82 I was proud to attend this 25th anniversary event and although missing out on the South Atlantic Medal by 12 days arriving shortly after the surrender it did not deter me from having a wonderful experience and remembering all those that did not return at this special event.
21 June 2011 - The UN General Assembly calls upon the administering powers to develop and finalize as soon as possible a constructive programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories to facilitate the implementation of the relevant resolutions on decolonization INCLUDING RESOLUTIONS ON SPECIFIC TERRITORIES (like UN Resolution 2065 and UN Resolution 3160, which were specifically created in order to solve the sovereignity dispute between Argentina and the UK).
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.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the Malvinas aren't a nation and have no right to self-determination; should Muslim areas of Bradford be allowed to join Pakistan if they wish? The Malvinas were seized by force by Britain in 1833 and the colonists who live there have no right whatsover to 'opt out' of Argentinian jurisdiction. The UK's stance is hypocritical when you consider the population of Diego Garcia, who were forcibly deported from the island by the British government. Not much respect for self determination there!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the Malvinas aren't a nation and have no right to self-determination; should Muslim areas of Bradford be allowed to join Pakistan if they wish? The Malvinas were seized by force by Britain in 1833 and the colonists who live there have no right whatsover to 'opt out' of Argentinian jurisdiction. The UK's stance is hypocritical when you consider the population of Diego Garcia, who were forcibly deported from the island by the British government. Not much respect for self determination there!
Capital de Las Islas Malvinas: Puerto Argentino (Stanley)
Distancia entre Londres, Reino Unido y Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 12.700 Kilometros / 8000 Millas
Distancia entre Rio Grande, Argentina y Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 800 Kilometros / 500 Millas
"Las Islas Malvinas pertenecen geográficamente al continente sudamericano, y por este motivo constituyen parte natural del dominio territorial Argentino, en cuya proximidad se hallan."
No hay nada de honor en su guerra. MALVINAS ARGENTINAS
Respect to the Marines, the Paras, the Ghurkas and the other Regiments, the Royal Air Force, the Royal Navy Surface fleet, the Fleet Air Arm, and the superb submarine arm.
Though they will rarely tell you, right at this moment a sub or two will be down there, watching, waiting.
hey Argie boy, what did your country do in World War Two? Willing the Nazis to win? You are a bunch of dirty fascists. We dont like fascists in our country. Next time you want to be fucked in your arse just give us a ring. Hopefully we will respond by just pushing a button next time. After all, why waste our efforts on scum. Come to think of it, what has Argentina ever done in the world except hide ex Nazis.
Well if truth be told there were a number of Argentines who were pro-Allied and desoite the country'sd netural stance in the war, there were a thousand Argentine volunteers who came over to fight for the allies.
So do read up on history before you piant folks with a broad brush, hmmmmm??? Pip Pip.
@delphine199 its a usless argentine video about gurkas. 1st of all. what would you argentines know about gurkas. and 2nd. most of you argentines tell lies about us. so i don't think for one minute all those words in that video are true.
Capital of the Falkland Islands: Puerto Argentino (Stanley)
Distance between London, United Kingdom and Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 12,700 kilometers / 8000 miles
Distance between Rio Grande, Argentina and Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 800 kilometers / 500 miles
"The Falkland Islands belong geographically to the South American continent, and for this reason are a natural part of Argentine territorial domain, in whose proximity they are."
We have the reply is NO to Argentina. They have self determination anyway, a true democracy, something you don't understand. And what nation in its right mind would choose to be governed by an inept and corrupt government like Argentina - Cristina Kirchner, a woman who is interested in money, plastic surgery and handbags.
mmmm...true democracy. Well considering that a true democracy doesn't exist anywhere in the world, and hasn't existed since Athens (and even that was a slave-owning society), you can't really speak from that perspective, can you rosie?? lol!!
Now as for Cristina Kirchner, shouldn't you be happy for them?? They are allies of Chavez in other words Leftists who were opposed to the right-wing government of Galtieri.
mmmm...true democracy. Well considering that a true democracy doesn't exist anywhere in the world, and hasn't existed since Athens (and even that was a slave-owning society), you can't really speak from that perspective, can you rosie?? lol!!
Now as for Cristina Kirchner, shouldn't you be happy for them?? They are allies of Chavez in other words Leftists who were opposed to the right-wing government of Galtieri.
@madjaime2007 As thousands and thousands of British (Falkland Islanders) have been born on the Falklands and hardly any Argentinians, your argument here like all your arguments has no foundation in fact - Argentina has no basic for a claim to the Falklands in law. And we have asked the Falkland Islanders who they would rather be governed by and the answer is a resounding NO to Argentina. Their government has self determination anyway.
@suryavajra the people that live in the falklands refer to themselves as british during the argentinian invasion, on man defended the union jack flying in his garden with a double barrel shotgun<------- thats pretty british
Then they have an identity crisis. I have read they consider themselves Kelpers or settlers just as most other people in the Americas are, and they insist on their right to be in the New World. But if they are infact British, they why don't they go back to Britain so they can be with their people?
@suryavajra thats the same as saying argentinians shouls all flock back to spain and americans shouls all run back to britain,germany italy etc so know they shouldnt they have more right to live their than those nazi hugging basterds
But Argentines don't consider themselves Spanish, and Americans don't consider themselves British, German or Italian. They are their own people. Here you say these islanders are British. So if it is true, then why not have them go back to Britain so they can be with their own kind??
You're using an Old World example. That doesn't exist here on this side of the world. Either the denizens of the Malvinas are people's of the New World or they are nothing more than colonialists of the Old. If the latter is the case, then they ought to go back, because we don't tolerate European colonialism in the Americas.
@suryavajra you have never had anything to do with the falklands except because you are so close to it, so give it a rest or we will be forced to kick your ass to high heaven again_____ end of
@suryavajra you keep going on about colonization, britain has not done that in along time but argentina seemed to have done it, in the 70's, so take that argument and shove it up your hole, im not english -.-
No I will not ''buggar off''. And if they want to be Brits why don't they ''buggar'' off to Britain and be Brits with all of their kind? It's a fair enough question. Why do they need an island off the coast of the Americas to be Brits?
@suryavajra thank you, i have to go now, i cant sit at a computer all day like some more lucky people, unfortunatly i have friends, darn! i wish i lived a sadlonely life like you, Your my hero...
Why thank you cheesewaffles. If you work at it, you'll get there too. Unfortunately you have too much faith in me. I have way too many girlfriends and have to get away from them awhile to be on you tube.
@suryavajra Came on by accident was looking for the declaration the video of maggie thatcher at the end of the war is good mate its got her talkin outside number 10 and they are playin rule brittania in the back ground
@suryavajra you keep going on about colonization, britain has not done that in along time but argentina seemed to have done it, in the 80's, so take that argument and shove it up your hole, im not english -.-
@sur Americans dont consider themselves British, German or Italian!? I once met an Yank who introduced herself as Irish-Italian, without even mentioning that she was from the US! Do you identify yourself only as an American?I'm sure i've read a comment or 2 of yours where you've waxed lyrical about your Indian heritage,& there are many people in the UK who call themselves Indian and British.The Falkland Islanders are both British & Falklanders,& they have ultimate right to decide their fate.
@suryavajra It is a semi-nationality i suppose, they have (under British law) full rights of self determination. What I take isssue with, is the idea that because they also consider themselves British, that they are therefore foreigners in their own land, squatters if you like, like an infestation that should be eradicated, which seems to be the view of many Argies (and you) it smells like ethnic cleansing to me.
Well not at all. We should not ever have ethnic cleanisings here in the New World. These were ills of the Old World that should frankly stay there. Nobody should be oppressed due to ancestry. A good 70-90% here in the New World are sons and daughters of immigrants.
It does however come down to nationality and perspective. Either you are a New World people or you are a colonial left over of the Old World. The choice is theirs.
@suryavajra Never had ethnic cleansing!!! What happened to the natives then? Or for that matter ever heard of what the mormons did when they got to Salt Lake City? Learn a bit of your own history pal. Oh, and where did many of the Nazis go when we kicked them out of Germany?! If the Falklanders choose to honour their heritage then thats their choice, as it is the people of Canada, Jamaica, Bermuda, French Guiana etc etc. ('Dont tolerate European Colonialism in the Americas', MY ARSE)
They cah have their heritage. So long as they are New Worlders. No. We do not tolerate European colonialism here in the Americas. These are free continenets. Take your colonial project elsewhere. Leave us in peace.
It's only fair to ask them to integrate and be a part of THIS hemisphere, isn't it? I mean if they want to be British, why don't they sail back across the ocean an be British along with 60 million of their fellow nationals? Again, this has nothing to do with ethnicity but with questions of nationality.
These countries are all settler nations. So while they are made of diverse people, these people also have to be willing to integrate, upon which they will be warmly embraced.
@suryavajra Sail back to where exactly? They live in their own homes, they have their own minds, they can think what they like and do what they like, they can even vote to become part of Argentina if they choose. They are Falklanders mostly of english, irish, welsh and scots ancestry but also scandanavian, and they are happier under the protective wing of Brittania than under the whim of a lets face it, shaky 3rd world republic of no more than 30 years standing! Which sounds the better to you?
Relax drunkest....do any research and you will find in fact that there are many ethnic Brits to have been proud Argentines for a hundred years on the mainland. Infact many of these people come from Patagonia.
@suryavajra Descendants of Welsh settlers that still speak the language, well aware of all that, i'm sure their very happy in their communities, why can't the Falklanders be allowed the same right?
@suryavajra Good point, but I actually substituted 'shacks' for 'communities' at the last minute! I was intending to be sarcastic, then thought better of it. Recently saw a documentary on their plight here in Wales (my home country) and they are a really poor, disadvantaged, and disenfranchised people (along with the remaining natives [who they've mingled well with]).
Well I'd have to take a look at that documentary if it's available on youtube. But they are Argentinian citizens and nobody can take that away from them.
@suryavajra Sury you are being a hypocrite - it is alright for he Afrikaners to stay in South Afrika but wrong for the British to stay in the Falklands where they are not displacing anyone since Argentinians are not the native ppls of the Falklands and according to your previous "rules" settlers are not invaders! Your hatred of all things British is showing! GOD SAVE THE QUEEN! ;-]
Ho'ws it being a hypocrite?? lol! If the Malvinas were its own independent republic, then i'd back it. The fact they are a colonial outpost means I don't support it, quite simple.
Afrikaners are their own nation. The Transvaal Republic and Orange Free States were not colonial outposts of the Dutch but their own independent, sovereign states. You see?
@suryavajra My Dear Sury you have such subtle layers to your beliefs they are not settlers they are colonists because they are connected to a country that already exist so by that reasoning any country that still has a tie to the British crown should also be considered colonial (Canada, Austrailia, Bahamas, etc.) Your hatred blinds you to all reason. Afrikaaners are just poor little misunderstood farmers and the British are the Great Satan. India has been free for over 60 years time to GTFOI.
Hello Animosity, you certainly said a mouthful in your usual agitated tone...lol! Let me calmly and logically refute all of these groubndless charges and wild eyed accusations as you've pitched all of these fast balls to the sweet spot of my bat. Watch me launch it all out of the park...lol
Point 1: I said nothing about any country with ties to the British Crown. Canada and OZ are independent countries that share the same Head of State as the UK. No problems there.
The Malvinas on the other hand are Overseas Territories ie colonies of Britain off the coast of the South American continent. How do you think the British or any European country would react if a country in the Western Hemisphere had an ''overseas territory'' right off the freaking coast of Europe? Not well, I'd imagine. Indeed I'd think they would react quite violently to the very notion.
Which brings me to Argentina. You paint the entire country something it's not.
Argentina has German immigrants showing up since the late 19th century. And while there a significant German minority you also have a significant Italian minority and believe it or not, a significant Welsh minority living there too. Argentina was never anti-Semitic. Indeed under Juan Peron, there were Jewish officials in his government, and Buenos Aires till this day has one of the largest Jewish populations of any city in the world. Peron never gave an anti-Semitic speech.
The so-called compounds you are talking about did exist in Chile. There was infact only one, and it was infamous for the large cult that built and live in the place. But to say all South American countries are like that is nonsense.
Now we get to India. Oh Boy!!!
If you read the actual history, you will find out that India in 1700 controlled 24% of the World economy. By 1947, India controlled only 4%. What is the common theme? British rule those 200 years.
The figures by the way, come courtesy of Cambridge's own Angus Maddison, a famous economic historian. Now, let's go deeper into British rule. The dirty secret, Lady Animosity is that the British actually were friends and allies with the feudal brutes you were talking about. Indeed you only have to look over the British -Indian Orders of Knighthood and find the who's who of the brutish nobles you're talking about. Under the British regime, the brutish nobles, (love that term!)
actualy ran their kingdoms and were autonomous. Interesting hey?? So it turns out that the so-called progressive Brits were playing footsie with the reactionaries.....Interesting hey??
So what about the Progressives of Indian society?? Those that went to Britain, goe their education there, and came back with Democratic ideals, training in history, and the arts and sciences and a modern concept of the world?? Those guys were locked up in jail coz what they wanted was (cont)
self-government. Something that Whitehall was unwilling to do, even though even the British civil-servants and the a couple of the Viceroys were pushing for Dominion status. So there you have it. Backroom deals, lust for power, command and control, propaganda.....It's all there. And the funny thing, or not so funny at all. I can substantiate everything that I've said here.
@suryavajra And if India had been left to stew in its own juices those brutes would still be running things since your ppl would never have had the education (provided courtesy of Great Britain) and the opportunity (by seeing how the British did things) to know that things could be different. In fact, if it wasn't for Britain and its colonization you and just about every other Indian would still be in India since wherever the British went u all were not far behind ( Africa, Fiji, Bahamas, etc.)
@suryavajra Whether they were or not they did and the Boers weren't out to do the Afrikans any favors and they didn't! You are a very inconsistent person. You love the Boers who hated your "coloured" ppl but you hate the British! What a strange creature you are!
Well the Boers only wanted their own two Republics (the smallest in the world at the time) and were content with that. Meanwhile the British established an Empire against the will of a quarter of the world. Somehow I don't think the Boers compare to the brutality needed to establish that kind of Empire. Ya know what I'm saying? lol!!
@suryavajra So you are talking about now but b4 you were referencing history. You are inconsistent. You condemn the Brits for their history of racial oppression but you excuse the Boers for theirs. Brits aren't colonizing the world now and they certainly weren't colonizing the Falklands -- these are English speaking ppl by choice. If the Boers get a pass then so should the Brits!
The Boers only wanted their own Republics. They had no desire to be part of the Union of South Africa. Hence they were not interested in being with anyone else let alone oppress anyone else. The Union was the love child colonial bureaucrats from you know where...lol!
@suryavajra But they did oppress others and your race was one of the groups they oppressed. Indians didn't join the ANC cause that it might be a fine way to spend the day. They joined it becuz they were being oppressed by the very ppl - you r defending. Again, I ask you how can you forgive the Boers who forced your race to carry pass books and segregated and humiliated your own race at every turn. How can you forgive them but not the British?
Don't be silly animosity....lol! The Boers were another people colonized and manipulated by the Empire. After the Second Anglo-boer war and all the bull crap they were put through, I can even understand why they'd be a little pissed off.
As it turns out, they made mistakes, because NP allowed the anger to dictate their policies, when it should of been shrewd policy.
I don't think so. I do know that in his younger days, Gandhi was in South Africa whipping up support for the British against the Boers and calling on the British to allow Indian volunteers to fight on the front line. That could be it. But again, many I've talked to, say they don't have a problem with Indians or anyone from the sub continent. Ironically the people who do have problems with the sub continent are those that allowed the Indians into Oxford.....Ironic?
@suryavajra They had a problem with Indians because they are not white --They used to call Indians -Blacks (look it up!) God you are in such denial - it's frightening!
@suryavajra Nope stay on the subject. I really want to know why you can accept and forgive oppression by Boers (they wouldn't even allow Indians in the same schools with them - yet you had Indians attending Oxford at this same time). They made your ppl step off the sidewalk into the gutter when a Afrikaaner was on the same sidewalk. The day to day humiliation that they suffered is documented in Indian newspaper of the time yet you can forgive the Boers and not the Brits! Where is the logic?
Simple as one South African told me, if your grandad and grandmom were either locked up or killed in a Concentration Camp and your parents grew up living the War for their childhood, you'd be more than a little pissed off. You would punish anyone and everyone who is different. Why?? You wouldn't trust anyone outside your group because you were badly hurt.
As for the Indians in Oxford....please. They ended up in jail once they got back to India.
@suryavajra Then it is all right for the Black SAs to do the same since being placed in a township is the same as a concentration camp so if the Black ppl in SA want to kill all the white ppl you shouldn't think it is wrong!
Well Zulus were interred in the Concentration Camps in the Second Anglo-Boer War, animosity. Half of the 19 or so concentration Camps in SA interred Black people. The Scorched Earth Policy was indiscriminate against Black and White. Get past the color issue, and you see the conflict for what it is. The Struggle for Power.
@suryavajra You know your arguments are specious. Obviously, color is an issue since SA policies were based on it. Everything is a struggle for power at some level. The Brits were just struggling for power - especially here in the Falklands it was a very definite struggle for power between two countries yet you side with the one run by a dictator. You are not being consistent.
Well the Brits were after two things. The Minerals ie Gold and diamonds, and the real-estate because they wanted a continuous belt of colonies from Cairo to the Cape complete with a rail way connecting the two. That would insure that their supply lines to the East would be secure. Or so the reasoning went....
The Boers were out to preserve their independence in a situation that was closing in around them. The Zulus too were out to preserve their independence.
@suryavajra What do the motivations for atrocities matter? The ppl who suffer under them don't hurt less becuz the abusers motivations are (in your mind at least) justified or acceptable. The Brits were struggling for power in the way that best suited their needs and the Boers were struggling for it the way that best suited theirs and now the Black SAs are doing the same. Why is their struggle illegitimate in your eyes?
Well lets look at in contect. The Brits were in Africa for what?? Not like the national security of Britain was in danger from a threat in Africa was it?? I mean neither the zulu or the Boere for that matter wouldn't want anything to do with Britain. Yet Britain was involved in a power game because they coveted the land and the resources that others had. That involves calculation and pre-meditation. Hard to really justify that. The Boers and Zulus wanting to (cont)
protect their respective land and families? Totally understandable. If one looks at in full context, then you see that culpability is not equal. One faction was doing what it was doing because they wanted to conquer others even though their national security did not depend on it.
@suryavajra The Boers were invaders just as surely as the Brits -- you are swept up with feelings of hate for the British that seem strange given that you have spent your entire life in the USA. I could see if your an India Indian but you a USA Indian separated by time and distant and language from whatever you think was done to India during the British Raj. If you accept the Boer version of history that they chose land that was unoccupied (which I believe is a patent falsehood) then(cont)
@Animosity2UandU maybe your strange brand of logic would make sense but I don't. I wonder did your parents hate the Brits? Not to pry but this ravenous hatred has to come from somewhere!
How amy I conveying hatred.?? Am I swearing at them?? Am I using any profanity about the Queen?? No I am not. I'm merely asking perfectly reasonable questions.....
@suryavajra You know I love you Sury, no matter how much I chide you, you have a great heart - most of the time -but let's face it - you hate the British with a passion. If Jesus were British you 'd drag him to the cross and crucify him a second time!
Well I love you too Animosity, no matter the fights, you're still a babe! lol! Or should I call you by the more formal, Lady Animosity?? lol!
But look, I really don't hate them...but what I kinda expect is some academic honesty. Either the British had an Empire like every other Western European Empire, in which case they also were jack asses in their own way and did some really shitty things or they were the best thing since sliced bread, in which case they should (cont)
defend their record with evidence and logic that would reinforce their position and not throw hissy fits and insults and claim whoever is on the other side of the argument is a vengeful, ungrateful child of a ''benevolent'' Empire, which I've heard over and over and over again...lol!
The problem is that the Brits want it both ways. To allay their egos they call themselves the Best empire, but when someone calls them out on their record, they go to the whole, ''well everyone else did it too, waaaaah'' argument....
prehaps your not understanding if british settlers had never landed there it would off been a french or spanish conlony and the USA as it is today would not off exsisted!!! dont be ignorant think about it bruuuv :) xxx
Okay maybee your not getting this?! ha forget the revolutionary war! and goo back to like the pilgrams you know the british ones? my point is what if they had never come? the chances are it would off been either the french or spain (ud hope for the french) and the USA would not be what it is today! thats my point plus u share common history with us your past is what makes you! xxx
Think if britian didnt exsist america would never had a revoultionary war! because theyd never off been a british coloney you fuck wit! god dam! the moronicness off you and your own history astonishes me! fuck!
This has been flagged as spam show
Google "Parachute 2 Club" for photo archive and genuine comments from members ex and serving of 2 PARA.
SupaDupa259 1 week ago
If Argentina thinks it can take the falklands now god help them...our forces unexperienced but well trained back in 82 kicked their arses..our troops today are veterans of iraq and afgahnistan would destroy them.the only reason argentina want the islands is bcause of the oil under the sea. we want them for the same reason. they are ours and we will have the oil...so fuck you Argentina
monsmoy1 3 weeks ago 5
@monsmoy1 The only trubble is that Britten lacks aircraft carriers today och could not get air superiority in a conflict on the falklands today. Just read a few days ago that high military officials in the brittish military doubts that they could commit to another Libia operation today after the latest cuts.
riverman83 6 days ago
@monsmoy1 suck my dick bastard brit!! you and your country is a bunch of shit!!
buscador311 4 days ago
no argentines have ever lived on the falkland islands...they were never taken in force by the british...they were simply colonized like Spain colonized argentina...these islands are British and always will be
monsmoy1 3 weeks ago 3
The only thing that could defeat the UK would be the UK Government itself. The current one has already done far more damage to British forces, particularly the navy, than Argentina could ever dream of... Even so, anyone stirring up trouble in the South Atlantic would get a nasty surprise just how quickly more strike aircraft could be deployed to the Mt Pleasant air base to supplement the flight maintained there. Provided the Government could be bothered, that is.
littmann03 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Malvinas are Argentine, English corrupt empire and its allies only demonstrate their low human values. always trying to guide her economics at inhuman exploitation, expropriation of land and so on. British Empire always proved to be a parasite that lives on human blood. hopefully one day learn to fend for themselves for the benefit of a better humanity.
MarkDeRaw 3 months ago
ARGENTINA BRAZIL VENEZUELA CHILE VS UK
ratalino73 3 months ago
@ratalino73 if they all invaded, at once, there would be a total 14 frigates, 11 submarines, 1 aircraft and 11 minor attack craft. vs the british 13 frigates, 6 destroyers, 3 assault ships and 11 submarines. 1/4 of all the ships of the south america allies would be made in britain, and almost all of them are outdated. your not getting them back anytime soon.
sabaton12341 2 months ago
@ratalino73 The sooner someone has a reason the nuke the whole of the shit hole known as south america the better right?
donpalmera 1 month ago
@ratalino73 0 - 1.
Bushcamper4Sale 4 weeks ago
@ratalino73 Oops. I mean 0 - 2
Bushcamper4Sale 4 weeks ago
@ratalino73 Fine just makes victory sweeter.
PMasonization 3 weeks ago
MALVINAS ARGENTINAS!!
HOY O MAÑANA!!
LAS MALVINAS FUERON ROBADAS EN 1883!
SIEMPRE SERAN ARGENTINAS OJALA ENTREMOS EN GUERRA NUEVAMENTE
ratalino73 3 months ago
@ratalino73 Oi hombre, they are the Falklands. Not the Malvinas. They are under the control of the government and country desired by their residents. So do one.
digireedoo 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Article 1.2 of the Charter of the United Nations and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That principle underlies our position on the Falkland Islands. There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish.
melina001a 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So proud of our boys!! Sailed 1000's of miles away from home, defeated the Hispanic dogs, in their own back yard and won :)
slothgoonies 4 months ago
why did get some twat to sing it like a pop concert. This was a war memorial, should have been given the same pomp and reverence as on remembrance day.
IRememberTheOldDays 5 months ago
A great video - apart from the Blairs and trolls.
EddieExile 5 months ago
@suryavajra And BTW I will be sending you a few links that deal with the Indian "colour" Issue as well!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
The Brits always know how to do the do! Go Britain - my favourite White people!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
As a Falklands veteran of 82 I was proud to attend this 25th anniversary event and although missing out on the South Atlantic Medal by 12 days arriving shortly after the surrender it did not deter me from having a wonderful experience and remembering all those that did not return at this special event.
j6lro 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
21 June 2011 - The UN General Assembly calls upon the administering powers to develop and finalize as soon as possible a constructive programme of work on a CASE-BY-CASE basis for the Non-Self Governing Territories to facilitate the implementation of the relevant resolutions on decolonization INCLUDING RESOLUTIONS ON SPECIFIC TERRITORIES (like UN Resolution 2065 and UN Resolution 3160, which were specifically created in order to solve the sovereignity dispute between Argentina and the UK).
111jasy111 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
honor to ALL the soldiers who died fighting for what they belived.
argentinians, our boys, and british.
franbr0 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the Malvinas aren't a nation and have no right to self-determination; should Muslim areas of Bradford be allowed to join Pakistan if they wish? The Malvinas were seized by force by Britain in 1833 and the colonists who live there have no right whatsover to 'opt out' of Argentinian jurisdiction. The UK's stance is hypocritical when you consider the population of Diego Garcia, who were forcibly deported from the island by the British government. Not much respect for self determination there!
kepuysac 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the Malvinas aren't a nation and have no right to self-determination; should Muslim areas of Bradford be allowed to join Pakistan if they wish? The Malvinas were seized by force by Britain in 1833 and the colonists who live there have no right whatsover to 'opt out' of Argentinian jurisdiction. The UK's stance is hypocritical when you consider the population of Diego Garcia, who were forcibly deported from the island by the British government. Not much respect for self determination there!
kepuysac 1 year ago
Black palate show some fuken respect u prick ! Were british not some half breed argie ape faces.rule brittania !
Harkenish 1 year ago 2
@Harkenish
Why don't you calm down and chill with the insults...
suryavajra 1 year ago
Capital de Las Islas Malvinas: Puerto Argentino (Stanley)
Distancia entre Londres, Reino Unido y Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 12.700 Kilometros / 8000 Millas
Distancia entre Rio Grande, Argentina y Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 800 Kilometros / 500 Millas
"Las Islas Malvinas pertenecen geográficamente al continente sudamericano, y por este motivo constituyen parte natural del dominio territorial Argentino, en cuya proximidad se hallan."
No hay nada de honor en su guerra. MALVINAS ARGENTINAS
panzerargentina 1 year ago
@panzerargentina I like how you have to put the real name in brackets, just so everyone has a clue what your going on about.
drunkest100 10 months ago
Respect to the Marines, the Paras, the Ghurkas and the other Regiments, the Royal Air Force, the Royal Navy Surface fleet, the Fleet Air Arm, and the superb submarine arm.
Though they will rarely tell you, right at this moment a sub or two will be down there, watching, waiting.
Respect.
TroyaE117 1 year ago
hey Argie boy, what did your country do in World War Two? Willing the Nazis to win? You are a bunch of dirty fascists. We dont like fascists in our country. Next time you want to be fucked in your arse just give us a ring. Hopefully we will respond by just pushing a button next time. After all, why waste our efforts on scum. Come to think of it, what has Argentina ever done in the world except hide ex Nazis.
pogmathon100 1 year ago
@pogmathon100
Well if truth be told there were a number of Argentines who were pro-Allied and desoite the country'sd netural stance in the war, there were a thousand Argentine volunteers who came over to fight for the allies.
So do read up on history before you piant folks with a broad brush, hmmmmm??? Pip Pip.
suryavajra 1 year ago
The Falklands are and always will be British!, the Argentines can say, do and posture all they want, it changes nothing, they are ours for eternity!
TheCharlie359 1 year ago
@delphine199 what when i am actually speaking the truth
UKsniper4 1 year ago
@delphine199 its a usless argentine video about gurkas. 1st of all. what would you argentines know about gurkas. and 2nd. most of you argentines tell lies about us. so i don't think for one minute all those words in that video are true.
UKsniper4 1 year ago
Capital of the Falkland Islands: Puerto Argentino (Stanley)
Distance between London, United Kingdom and Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 12,700 kilometers / 8000 miles
Distance between Rio Grande, Argentina and Puerto Argentino (Stanley): 800 kilometers / 500 miles
"The Falkland Islands belong geographically to the South American continent, and for this reason are a natural part of Argentine territorial domain, in whose proximity they are."
There is no honor in war. MALVINAS ARGENTINAS
panzerargentina 1 year ago
@panzerargentina - Try asking the people of these islands who they wish to be goverened by?
SialiaSialis1 1 year ago
We have the reply is NO to Argentina. They have self determination anyway, a true democracy, something you don't understand. And what nation in its right mind would choose to be governed by an inept and corrupt government like Argentina - Cristina Kirchner, a woman who is interested in money, plastic surgery and handbags.
rosie6212 1 year ago
@rosie6212
mmmm...true democracy. Well considering that a true democracy doesn't exist anywhere in the world, and hasn't existed since Athens (and even that was a slave-owning society), you can't really speak from that perspective, can you rosie?? lol!!
Now as for Cristina Kirchner, shouldn't you be happy for them?? They are allies of Chavez in other words Leftists who were opposed to the right-wing government of Galtieri.
suryavajra 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rosie6212
mmmm...true democracy. Well considering that a true democracy doesn't exist anywhere in the world, and hasn't existed since Athens (and even that was a slave-owning society), you can't really speak from that perspective, can you rosie?? lol!!
Now as for Cristina Kirchner, shouldn't you be happy for them?? They are allies of Chavez in other words Leftists who were opposed to the right-wing government of Galtieri.
suryavajra 1 year ago
Comment removed
suryavajra 1 year ago
@panzerargentina
find out this stat then shut up
How meny British have been born on the island compared to Argis
madjaime2007 1 year ago
@madjaime2007 As thousands and thousands of British (Falkland Islanders) have been born on the Falklands and hardly any Argentinians, your argument here like all your arguments has no foundation in fact - Argentina has no basic for a claim to the Falklands in law. And we have asked the Falkland Islanders who they would rather be governed by and the answer is a resounding NO to Argentina. Their government has self determination anyway.
rosie6212 1 year ago
@rosie6212
Aregentina has a claim. You may not like the claim, you may disagree with it vociferously and passionately, but they do infact have a claim.
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra the people that live in the falklands refer to themselves as british during the argentinian invasion, on man defended the union jack flying in his garden with a double barrel shotgun<------- thats pretty british
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
Then they have an identity crisis. I have read they consider themselves Kelpers or settlers just as most other people in the Americas are, and they insist on their right to be in the New World. But if they are infact British, they why don't they go back to Britain so they can be with their people?
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra thats the same as saying argentinians shouls all flock back to spain and americans shouls all run back to britain,germany italy etc so know they shouldnt they have more right to live their than those nazi hugging basterds
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
But Argentines don't consider themselves Spanish, and Americans don't consider themselves British, German or Italian. They are their own people. Here you say these islanders are British. So if it is true, then why not have them go back to Britain so they can be with their own kind??
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra well then its like saying all protestent ulstermen should go back to scotland or england which they shouldnt
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
You're using an Old World example. That doesn't exist here on this side of the world. Either the denizens of the Malvinas are people's of the New World or they are nothing more than colonialists of the Old. If the latter is the case, then they ought to go back, because we don't tolerate European colonialism in the Americas.
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra you have never had anything to do with the falklands except because you are so close to it, so give it a rest or we will be forced to kick your ass to high heaven again_____ end of
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
I am not Argentine myself. But I consider myself a citizen of the New World not of the Old.
But you even look at us cross eyed, Englishmen, you would not be able to sit down for six months...lol!! So take your little threats elsewhere...
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra you keep going on about colonization, britain has not done that in along time but argentina seemed to have done it, in the 70's, so take that argument and shove it up your hole, im not english -.-
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
It's not colonialism on their part. they are a Republic in the Western Hemisphere who have a territory dispute with you, who were a colonial power.
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra 'WERE' not anymore more there are more brits on that island than there are argys now buggar of
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
No I will not ''buggar off''. And if they want to be Brits why don't they ''buggar'' off to Britain and be Brits with all of their kind? It's a fair enough question. Why do they need an island off the coast of the Americas to be Brits?
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra sigh what happened in June 1982, yeah fuck off, now
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
Why?? Afraid of a little debate?? Why don't you make like a tree and leave....lol!
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra im not afraid of a debate ive just got better things to do, cause you know i have a life!
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
Well good for you. You have a life...lol!! I'm applauding you for having one!! Hip Hip Hooray!
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra thank you, i have to go now, i cant sit at a computer all day like some more lucky people, unfortunatly i have friends, darn! i wish i lived a sadlonely life like you, Your my hero...
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
Why thank you cheesewaffles. If you work at it, you'll get there too. Unfortunately you have too much faith in me. I have way too many girlfriends and have to get away from them awhile to be on you tube.
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra yeah ok.... whatever you say.... bye now, bye bye, bye ,cheerio cough championy cough
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
Or as my hardworking Argentine tango partner says, Hasta La Vista, baby!!! lol!!
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra What you doin on this 1 sury???your like dog shit pal your fuckin everywhere
THOMASBANTON 1 year ago
@THOMASBANTON
I suppose I should be asking you the same question, Thomas Banton??
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra Came on by accident was looking for the declaration the video of maggie thatcher at the end of the war is good mate its got her talkin outside number 10 and they are playin rule brittania in the back ground
THOMASBANTON 1 year ago
@THOMASBANTON
you mean the one took away all the milk from the preschoolers? lol!
suryavajra 1 year ago
@THOMASBANTON
btw, would you find dog shit in the Sahara or the North Pole?? lol!
suryavajra 1 year ago
@suryavajra that was the worst joke ever... -.-
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@11Cheesewaffles
I saw it on Back to the Future, the other day and thought it was a good time to use it...lol!
suryavajra 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@suryavajra you keep going on about colonization, britain has not done that in along time but argentina seemed to have done it, in the 80's, so take that argument and shove it up your hole, im not english -.-
11Cheesewaffles 1 year ago
@sur Americans dont consider themselves British, German or Italian!? I once met an Yank who introduced herself as Irish-Italian, without even mentioning that she was from the US! Do you identify yourself only as an American?I'm sure i've read a comment or 2 of yours where you've waxed lyrical about your Indian heritage,& there are many people in the UK who call themselves Indian and British.The Falkland Islanders are both British & Falklanders,& they have ultimate right to decide their fate.
drunkest100 10 months ago
@drunkest100
Well that's their ethnic heritage, yes. But NOT their national identity. There's a diff there...
British and ''Falklander'' makes no sense. Are you implying that ''Falklander'' is a nationality?
suryavajra 10 months ago
@suryavajra It is a semi-nationality i suppose, they have (under British law) full rights of self determination. What I take isssue with, is the idea that because they also consider themselves British, that they are therefore foreigners in their own land, squatters if you like, like an infestation that should be eradicated, which seems to be the view of many Argies (and you) it smells like ethnic cleansing to me.
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
Well not at all. We should not ever have ethnic cleanisings here in the New World. These were ills of the Old World that should frankly stay there. Nobody should be oppressed due to ancestry. A good 70-90% here in the New World are sons and daughters of immigrants.
It does however come down to nationality and perspective. Either you are a New World people or you are a colonial left over of the Old World. The choice is theirs.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra Never had ethnic cleansing!!! What happened to the natives then? Or for that matter ever heard of what the mormons did when they got to Salt Lake City? Learn a bit of your own history pal. Oh, and where did many of the Nazis go when we kicked them out of Germany?! If the Falklanders choose to honour their heritage then thats their choice, as it is the people of Canada, Jamaica, Bermuda, French Guiana etc etc. ('Dont tolerate European Colonialism in the Americas', MY ARSE)
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
They cah have their heritage. So long as they are New Worlders. No. We do not tolerate European colonialism here in the Americas. These are free continenets. Take your colonial project elsewhere. Leave us in peace.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra So long as they conform to what you think then? Interesting concept of freedom that.
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
It's only fair to ask them to integrate and be a part of THIS hemisphere, isn't it? I mean if they want to be British, why don't they sail back across the ocean an be British along with 60 million of their fellow nationals? Again, this has nothing to do with ethnicity but with questions of nationality.
These countries are all settler nations. So while they are made of diverse people, these people also have to be willing to integrate, upon which they will be warmly embraced.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra Sail back to where exactly? They live in their own homes, they have their own minds, they can think what they like and do what they like, they can even vote to become part of Argentina if they choose. They are Falklanders mostly of english, irish, welsh and scots ancestry but also scandanavian, and they are happier under the protective wing of Brittania than under the whim of a lets face it, shaky 3rd world republic of no more than 30 years standing! Which sounds the better to you?
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
What sounds better to me?? Are you asking me, which I'd prefer in their place??
Well as I said, either they are Europeans or Americans (broader sense of the word). I mean dude, it's not that hard.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra British or Argentinian? Come on its not that difficult even for a man nursing a major chip on his shoulder such as yourself!
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
Relax drunkest....do any research and you will find in fact that there are many ethnic Brits to have been proud Argentines for a hundred years on the mainland. Infact many of these people come from Patagonia.
So there you have it.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra
I mean live in Patagonia. But yes, have lived in Patagonia for generations.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra Descendants of Welsh settlers that still speak the language, well aware of all that, i'm sure their very happy in their communities, why can't the Falklanders be allowed the same right?
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
Well there you see!!! And they have their heritage and they are Argentinian citizens.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra They live in poverty for christs sake! Read up on them.
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
Now you are making a different argument. you said they were happy and speaking their own language.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra Good point, but I actually substituted 'shacks' for 'communities' at the last minute! I was intending to be sarcastic, then thought better of it. Recently saw a documentary on their plight here in Wales (my home country) and they are a really poor, disadvantaged, and disenfranchised people (along with the remaining natives [who they've mingled well with]).
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
Well I'd have to take a look at that documentary if it's available on youtube. But they are Argentinian citizens and nobody can take that away from them.
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra Who would want to haha! Good discussion suryavajra i'm sure we'll tangle again!
drunkest100 9 months ago
@drunkest100
Hey, I'd love to go to Argentina and tango with some of those girls....lol!
But yes! We'll definitely tangle soon! Have a great day!!
suryavajra 9 months ago
@suryavajra Sury you are being a hypocrite - it is alright for he Afrikaners to stay in South Afrika but wrong for the British to stay in the Falklands where they are not displacing anyone since Argentinians are not the native ppls of the Falklands and according to your previous "rules" settlers are not invaders! Your hatred of all things British is showing! GOD SAVE THE QUEEN! ;-]
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Ho'ws it being a hypocrite?? lol! If the Malvinas were its own independent republic, then i'd back it. The fact they are a colonial outpost means I don't support it, quite simple.
Afrikaners are their own nation. The Transvaal Republic and Orange Free States were not colonial outposts of the Dutch but their own independent, sovereign states. You see?
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra My Dear Sury you have such subtle layers to your beliefs they are not settlers they are colonists because they are connected to a country that already exist so by that reasoning any country that still has a tie to the British crown should also be considered colonial (Canada, Austrailia, Bahamas, etc.) Your hatred blinds you to all reason. Afrikaaners are just poor little misunderstood farmers and the British are the Great Satan. India has been free for over 60 years time to GTFOI.
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Hello Animosity, you certainly said a mouthful in your usual agitated tone...lol! Let me calmly and logically refute all of these groubndless charges and wild eyed accusations as you've pitched all of these fast balls to the sweet spot of my bat. Watch me launch it all out of the park...lol
Point 1: I said nothing about any country with ties to the British Crown. Canada and OZ are independent countries that share the same Head of State as the UK. No problems there.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
The Malvinas on the other hand are Overseas Territories ie colonies of Britain off the coast of the South American continent. How do you think the British or any European country would react if a country in the Western Hemisphere had an ''overseas territory'' right off the freaking coast of Europe? Not well, I'd imagine. Indeed I'd think they would react quite violently to the very notion.
Which brings me to Argentina. You paint the entire country something it's not.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
Argentina has German immigrants showing up since the late 19th century. And while there a significant German minority you also have a significant Italian minority and believe it or not, a significant Welsh minority living there too. Argentina was never anti-Semitic. Indeed under Juan Peron, there were Jewish officials in his government, and Buenos Aires till this day has one of the largest Jewish populations of any city in the world. Peron never gave an anti-Semitic speech.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
The so-called compounds you are talking about did exist in Chile. There was infact only one, and it was infamous for the large cult that built and live in the place. But to say all South American countries are like that is nonsense.
Now we get to India. Oh Boy!!!
If you read the actual history, you will find out that India in 1700 controlled 24% of the World economy. By 1947, India controlled only 4%. What is the common theme? British rule those 200 years.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
The figures by the way, come courtesy of Cambridge's own Angus Maddison, a famous economic historian. Now, let's go deeper into British rule. The dirty secret, Lady Animosity is that the British actually were friends and allies with the feudal brutes you were talking about. Indeed you only have to look over the British -Indian Orders of Knighthood and find the who's who of the brutish nobles you're talking about. Under the British regime, the brutish nobles, (love that term!)
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
actualy ran their kingdoms and were autonomous. Interesting hey?? So it turns out that the so-called progressive Brits were playing footsie with the reactionaries.....Interesting hey??
So what about the Progressives of Indian society?? Those that went to Britain, goe their education there, and came back with Democratic ideals, training in history, and the arts and sciences and a modern concept of the world?? Those guys were locked up in jail coz what they wanted was (cont)
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
self-government. Something that Whitehall was unwilling to do, even though even the British civil-servants and the a couple of the Viceroys were pushing for Dominion status. So there you have it. Backroom deals, lust for power, command and control, propaganda.....It's all there. And the funny thing, or not so funny at all. I can substantiate everything that I've said here.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra And if India had been left to stew in its own juices those brutes would still be running things since your ppl would never have had the education (provided courtesy of Great Britain) and the opportunity (by seeing how the British did things) to know that things could be different. In fact, if it wasn't for Britain and its colonization you and just about every other Indian would still be in India since wherever the British went u all were not far behind ( Africa, Fiji, Bahamas, etc.)
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well as it turns out the Brutes were still running things....lol! They were allies of the British or haven't you heard?? lol!
You really need to get the whole politics down. They really weren't out to do anyone any favors.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra Whether they were or not they did and the Boers weren't out to do the Afrikans any favors and they didn't! You are a very inconsistent person. You love the Boers who hated your "coloured" ppl but you hate the British! What a strange creature you are!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well the Boers only wanted their own two Republics (the smallest in the world at the time) and were content with that. Meanwhile the British established an Empire against the will of a quarter of the world. Somehow I don't think the Boers compare to the brutality needed to establish that kind of Empire. Ya know what I'm saying? lol!!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra You didn't address my point that the Boers hated your race! Why do you support a group that hated you so much?
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
I have friends who are Boers who are perfectly fine with me. They even taught me rugby....lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
Or atleast about rugby. Never got to play! lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra So you are talking about now but b4 you were referencing history. You are inconsistent. You condemn the Brits for their history of racial oppression but you excuse the Boers for theirs. Brits aren't colonizing the world now and they certainly weren't colonizing the Falklands -- these are English speaking ppl by choice. If the Boers get a pass then so should the Brits!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
The Boers only wanted their own Republics. They had no desire to be part of the Union of South Africa. Hence they were not interested in being with anyone else let alone oppress anyone else. The Union was the love child colonial bureaucrats from you know where...lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra But they did oppress others and your race was one of the groups they oppressed. Indians didn't join the ANC cause that it might be a fine way to spend the day. They joined it becuz they were being oppressed by the very ppl - you r defending. Again, I ask you how can you forgive the Boers who forced your race to carry pass books and segregated and humiliated your own race at every turn. How can you forgive them but not the British?
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
Comment removed
suryavajra 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Don't be silly animosity....lol! The Boers were another people colonized and manipulated by the Empire. After the Second Anglo-boer war and all the bull crap they were put through, I can even understand why they'd be a little pissed off.
As it turns out, they made mistakes, because NP allowed the anger to dictate their policies, when it should of been shrewd policy.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra Pissed off with your ppl - what did your ppl do to them? You aren't being logical and you know it.
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
I don't think so. I do know that in his younger days, Gandhi was in South Africa whipping up support for the British against the Boers and calling on the British to allow Indian volunteers to fight on the front line. That could be it. But again, many I've talked to, say they don't have a problem with Indians or anyone from the sub continent. Ironically the people who do have problems with the sub continent are those that allowed the Indians into Oxford.....Ironic?
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra They had a problem with Indians because they are not white --They used to call Indians -Blacks (look it up!) God you are in such denial - it's frightening!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
anyway, talk to you soon! gotta grab some dinner! lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
''Brits aren't colonizing the world''......Good. That's a good thing....lol! Now who's your favorite Spice Girl?
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra Nope stay on the subject. I really want to know why you can accept and forgive oppression by Boers (they wouldn't even allow Indians in the same schools with them - yet you had Indians attending Oxford at this same time). They made your ppl step off the sidewalk into the gutter when a Afrikaaner was on the same sidewalk. The day to day humiliation that they suffered is documented in Indian newspaper of the time yet you can forgive the Boers and not the Brits! Where is the logic?
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Simple as one South African told me, if your grandad and grandmom were either locked up or killed in a Concentration Camp and your parents grew up living the War for their childhood, you'd be more than a little pissed off. You would punish anyone and everyone who is different. Why?? You wouldn't trust anyone outside your group because you were badly hurt.
As for the Indians in Oxford....please. They ended up in jail once they got back to India.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra Then it is all right for the Black SAs to do the same since being placed in a township is the same as a concentration camp so if the Black ppl in SA want to kill all the white ppl you shouldn't think it is wrong!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well Zulus were interred in the Concentration Camps in the Second Anglo-Boer War, animosity. Half of the 19 or so concentration Camps in SA interred Black people. The Scorched Earth Policy was indiscriminate against Black and White. Get past the color issue, and you see the conflict for what it is. The Struggle for Power.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra You know your arguments are specious. Obviously, color is an issue since SA policies were based on it. Everything is a struggle for power at some level. The Brits were just struggling for power - especially here in the Falklands it was a very definite struggle for power between two countries yet you side with the one run by a dictator. You are not being consistent.
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well the Brits were after two things. The Minerals ie Gold and diamonds, and the real-estate because they wanted a continuous belt of colonies from Cairo to the Cape complete with a rail way connecting the two. That would insure that their supply lines to the East would be secure. Or so the reasoning went....
The Boers were out to preserve their independence in a situation that was closing in around them. The Zulus too were out to preserve their independence.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra What do the motivations for atrocities matter? The ppl who suffer under them don't hurt less becuz the abusers motivations are (in your mind at least) justified or acceptable. The Brits were struggling for power in the way that best suited their needs and the Boers were struggling for it the way that best suited theirs and now the Black SAs are doing the same. Why is their struggle illegitimate in your eyes?
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well lets look at in contect. The Brits were in Africa for what?? Not like the national security of Britain was in danger from a threat in Africa was it?? I mean neither the zulu or the Boere for that matter wouldn't want anything to do with Britain. Yet Britain was involved in a power game because they coveted the land and the resources that others had. That involves calculation and pre-meditation. Hard to really justify that. The Boers and Zulus wanting to (cont)
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
protect their respective land and families? Totally understandable. If one looks at in full context, then you see that culpability is not equal. One faction was doing what it was doing because they wanted to conquer others even though their national security did not depend on it.
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra The Boers were invaders just as surely as the Brits -- you are swept up with feelings of hate for the British that seem strange given that you have spent your entire life in the USA. I could see if your an India Indian but you a USA Indian separated by time and distant and language from whatever you think was done to India during the British Raj. If you accept the Boer version of history that they chose land that was unoccupied (which I believe is a patent falsehood) then(cont)
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU maybe your strange brand of logic would make sense but I don't. I wonder did your parents hate the Brits? Not to pry but this ravenous hatred has to come from somewhere!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
How amy I conveying hatred.?? Am I swearing at them?? Am I using any profanity about the Queen?? No I am not. I'm merely asking perfectly reasonable questions.....
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra You know I love you Sury, no matter how much I chide you, you have a great heart - most of the time -but let's face it - you hate the British with a passion. If Jesus were British you 'd drag him to the cross and crucify him a second time!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well I love you too Animosity, no matter the fights, you're still a babe! lol! Or should I call you by the more formal, Lady Animosity?? lol!
But look, I really don't hate them...but what I kinda expect is some academic honesty. Either the British had an Empire like every other Western European Empire, in which case they also were jack asses in their own way and did some really shitty things or they were the best thing since sliced bread, in which case they should (cont)
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
defend their record with evidence and logic that would reinforce their position and not throw hissy fits and insults and claim whoever is on the other side of the argument is a vengeful, ungrateful child of a ''benevolent'' Empire, which I've heard over and over and over again...lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
The problem is that the Brits want it both ways. To allay their egos they call themselves the Best empire, but when someone calls them out on their record, they go to the whole, ''well everyone else did it too, waaaaah'' argument....
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra
Yes, the empire without which the United States would not exist.
Myles0Harcourt 5 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt
Considering the US exists because it rebelled against the said Empire, I'd say that you're misrepresenting history, right there....
suryavajra 5 months ago
@suryavajra
So would the United States exist if the Kingdom of Great Britain had stayed on its island and not formed new colonies in other parts of the world?
Myles0Harcourt 5 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt
The United States exists because your Kingdom was kicked out. lol!
suryavajra 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@suryavajra
I repeat my question.
Myles0Harcourt 5 months ago
@suryavajra
the mans point is if british settlers didn't go to the new world well the north of america there would be no USA!
most probaly a bunch of lets face it failed states (bar brizil) xx
NiCe1TYLER 4 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
If the said British settlers did not rebel against the King there would be no USA. So there you have it.
suryavajra 4 months ago
@suryavajra
prehaps your not understanding if british settlers had never landed there it would off been a french or spanish conlony and the USA as it is today would not off exsisted!!! dont be ignorant think about it bruuuv :) xxx
NiCe1TYLER 4 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
I think you need to read some history, bro...lol! And then you'd realize the Spanish and French were allies in the Revolutionary War.
suryavajra 4 months ago
@suryavajra
Okay maybee your not getting this?! ha forget the revolutionary war! and goo back to like the pilgrams you know the british ones? my point is what if they had never come? the chances are it would off been either the french or spain (ud hope for the french) and the USA would not be what it is today! thats my point plus u share common history with us your past is what makes you! xxx
NiCe1TYLER 3 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
Actually bru, you are not getting it. It's all about the Revolutionary War. No Revolution, No USA. End of story.
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra
Think if britian didnt exsist america would never had a revoultionary war! because theyd never off been a british coloney you fuck wit! god dam! the moronicness off you and your own history astonishes me! fuck!
NiCe1TYLER 3 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
That's just silly....lol!
America had a Revolutionary War because of British policies that oppressed colonials.
suryavajra 3 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
Oh and Tyler, there's nothing nice about you.....you are MeanTyler.....lol!!!
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra i am nice :)
and everyone is intitled to there opionion but you abuse that sir sort your shit son! :<3 xxx
NiCe1TYLER 3 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
If everyone is already entitled to their opinion, then it's theirs by right and can't be abused.....Gotcha...Gotcha Mean Tyler...lol!
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra
haha it can be absued! as in you have the rite to have a pet dog but you dont have the rite to beat it or "abuse it" :) <3 xx
NiCe1TYLER 3 months ago
@NiCe1TYLER
you sure abuse the analogies and beat them...lol!
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra
yes yes i do! :P xxx
NiCe1TYLER 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No, we have very little common history. 1610-1776, that's pretty much it. We are two different entities, really.
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra Okay if those are my only two choices -- I opt for the best thing since sliced bread!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
In which case you have to be able to defend the record beyond the shadow of a doubt....lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra Uh uh - you can't give me just two choices then add on conditions after the fact!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago
@Animosity2UandU
Well best thing since sliced bread. That's quite a claim. Surely that must be defended and proven to all the naysayers...lol!
suryavajra 7 months ago
@suryavajra You gave me a choice between "shitty" and "sliced bread". The Brits aren't shitty so they must be sliced bread!
Animosity2UandU 7 months ago