South American states ban Falklands vessels from ports [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

South American states ban Falklands vessels from ports

Chair Umpire
12-29-2011, 07:25 PM
South American states ban Falklands vessels from ports

Stanley in the Falkland Islands Argentina has long claimed sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, which lie 400 miles from its coast

A South American trading bloc has agreed to close its ports to ships flying the Falkland Islands flag.

Mercosur, which includes Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, came to the decision at a summit in the Uruguayan capital, Montevideo.

But Uruguayan President Jose Mujica said British-flagged civilian ships that may supply the islands would still be allowed to use its ports.

The Foreign Office said there was "no justification" for the action.

The Falklands flag is flown by 25 boats, mostly fishing vessels operated in joint ventures with Spanish companies.

The Mercosur decision is the latest in a series by Latin American regional bodies designed to show solidarity with Argentina which has long claimed sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, which it calls Las Malvinas.

Britain has held them since the 1830s and says their future is not negotiable. The two countries fought a brief but bloody war over the islands in 1982.

Their dispute has flared again recently. Last year, Argentina accused the UK of breaking international rules by allowing oil drilling under a seabed off the islands, located in a vast area of potentially mineral-rich South Atlantic waters.
'Very concerned'

Britain has also refused recent requests to re-open negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falklands.

Uruguay proposed the move to close ports to Falklands-flagged vessels. Mr Mujica said: "We hold nothing against the UK. But we have a lot in favour of Argentina."
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

Malvinas is not an Argentine cause, it is a global cause, because in the Malvinas they are taking our oil and fishing resource”

Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner Argentinian President

He said solidarity among South America's neighbours was key to his country's foreign policy, adding: "For the moment, this means accepting that this territory is a colonial British position in our America."

However, the president of the Falklands Chamber of Commerce, Roger Spink, told the BBC that they were a small community, and felt increasingly under blockade.

"If we were Palestine, the European Union would be up in arms," he said.

The Foreign Office, who called on Uruguay's ambassador in London to explain the move last week, said it was discussing the developments "urgently with countries in the region".

A spokesman said: "We are very concerned by this latest Argentine attempt to isolate the Falkland Islands people and damage their livelihoods, for which there is no justification.

"It is not immediately clear what practical impact, if any, this statement will have, which mirrors the language already used by the Union of South American Nations in 2010.

"But no-one should doubt our determination to protect the Falkland Islanders' right to determine their own political future."
Oil exploration

The Foreign Office called on Uruguay's ambassador in London to explain the move last week.

The chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Richard Ottaway, said the situation was "very unsatisfactory", with the ban seeming to be a breach of international law and tensions in the region escalating.

Tory MP Patrick Mercer called the ban "needlessly provocative".

Shadow foreign minister John Spellar said: "While this looks like a bit of a flag-waving gesture, Argentina should be in no doubt of the united determination of all parties in the United Kingdom to protect the Falkland Islanders' right to determine their own future."

But former Foreign Office minister Denis MacShane said the "hostile action" was aimed at London, not the Falklands, and blamed the coalition for weakening Britain's international standing.

The Labour MP said: "South American leaders know that Britain has fewer friends than ever before because of David Cameron's isolationist approach in Europe and the indifference to the Obama administration as most cabinet members are close to US neo-Cons.

"Brazil and other countries know that thanks to Liam Fox's defence cuts, the UK no longer has aircraft carrier capability so British maritime power projection has been fatally weakened by the government."

Argentina's President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who took over the presidency of the trade bloc from Mr Mujica, thanked her fellow presidents for the show of support.

Delivering a speech to the summit, she said: "Malvinas is not an Argentine cause, it is a global cause, because in the Malvinas they are taking our oil and fishing resources.

"And when there is need for more resources, those who are strong are going to look for them wherever and however they can."

British companies are exploring for oil in the waters surrounding the islands, which are 400 nautical miles from the Argentine coast.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16280613

scoobs
12-29-2011, 09:18 PM
For my part as a Brit, I think we should give the damn islands back - it costs the British taxpayer a fortune to defend them - and to subsidise the Falkland Islanders themselves - and even if it is discovered that there's oil resources in the area, the British would struggle to exploit them without incurring a lot of trouble from South America - which on this issue is far more united than, say, 1982.

I don't think belligerence on the part of the Argentinian government is helpful, but then again I doubt a hearts and flowers policy would do any good either - the British Government maintains a policy of self-determination being key - the Falklanders' wishes are paramount - though why the Falklanders get this right when citizens on mainland Britain have no right to expect such a thing is anybody's guess. Clearly there will be no negotiations or flexibility shown by this current Government, a Tory Government with strong Thatcherite leanings on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the war, forget it.

rocketassist
12-29-2011, 09:53 PM
Fuck giving them back to Argentina. I personally reckon they should just grant the Falklands full independence as a sovereign nation.

scoobs
12-29-2011, 09:59 PM
Ummm....they don't want that, being as they are heavily subsidised by the British taxpayer.

safin-rules-no.1
12-30-2011, 01:06 PM
We should not 'give them back' imo - mainly because they were never Argentina's in the first place. The only claim to them they have is in terms of geography.

orangehat
12-30-2011, 01:48 PM
We should not 'give them back' imo - mainly because they were never Argentina's in the first place. The only claim to them they have is in terms of geography.

And the british claim to them is what exactly again? (Don't answer with official British rule currently/historically due to expansionism/imperialism)

buddyholly
12-30-2011, 03:30 PM
Possession

abraxas21
12-30-2011, 03:37 PM
We should not 'give them back' imo - mainly because they were never Argentina's in the first place. The only claim to them they have is in terms of geography.

categorically false

Black Adam
12-31-2011, 09:14 PM
Britain had settlers there before Argentina was even a country.

The locals had a referendum and chose to remain as part of Great Britain. End of story.

The SA contingent would be useless if it came down to a war.

shotgun
12-31-2011, 11:05 PM
The SA contingent would be useless if it came down to a war.

Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay don't care enough about this issue to get involved in a war with the Brits anyway, it's more about Mercosur politics than anything else.

This is very different from 1982.

safin-rules-no.1
01-01-2012, 07:59 PM
And the british claim to them is what exactly again? (Don't answer with official British rule currently/historically due to expansionism/imperialism)

categorically false
l
l
l
l
v
Britain had settlers there before Argentina was even a country.

The locals had a referendum and chose to remain as part of Great Britain. End of story.

:wavey:

orangehat
01-02-2012, 05:28 AM
It's just classic he claims she claims here.

British claim settlers while Argentina claims expelled settlers due to British presence. Who is to determine which is true? What is history, but a fable agreed upon?

ibreak4coffee
01-02-2012, 05:39 AM
He said, she said - true. But to me why Britain thinks its so important to hold on to these small islands in the 21st century is kind of a mystery. Empire is long dead, and I'm not sure realistically how much prestige they can derive from having them.

shiaben
01-02-2012, 05:49 AM
Never found out what the purpose of these islands were.

buddyholly
01-02-2012, 12:57 PM
He said, she said - true. But to me why Britain thinks its so important to hold on to these small islands in the 21st century is kind of a mystery. Empire is long dead, and I'm not sure realistically how much prestige they can derive from having them.

No mystery. Oil. I mean, why would you think Argentina would want them, if it is a mystery to you why Britain would want them.?

scoobs
01-02-2012, 02:27 PM
No mystery. Oil. I mean, why would you think Argentina would want them, if it is a mystery to you why Britain would want them.?
Argentina wanting them back pre-dates the formation of the United Nations, before there was even an inkling of any possibility of oil in the area.

abraxas21
01-02-2012, 02:38 PM
Britain had settlers there before Argentina was even a country.

french were the first ones. by your criterion france should claim the islands too perhaps?

ibreak4coffee
01-02-2012, 03:17 PM
No mystery. Oil. I mean, why would you think Argentina would want them, if it is a mystery to you why Britain would want them.?

Previous explorations around the Falklands have raised questions about the viability of extracting enough oil to make the investment worth it.

As for why Argentina might want the islands - taking aside natural resources, I'm sure England would have a problem if say Argentina had seized the Isle of Man or Guernsey.

buddyholly
01-02-2012, 04:21 PM
As for why Argentina might want the islands - taking aside natural resources, I'm sure England would have a problem if say Argentina had seized the Isle of Man or Guernsey.

A small one, easily rectified.

buddyholly
01-02-2012, 04:22 PM
Argentina wanting them back pre-dates the formation of the United Nations, before there was even an inkling of any possibility of oil in the area.

OK, forget the oil, then why would they want them?

Wanting them ''back'' may not be a relevant argument. Britain can equal that reason.

rocketassist
01-02-2012, 04:37 PM
There's no reason to have them other than nationalistic pride.

Sure they rely on the UK's riches but independence should be an option ahead of handing them back to Argentina.

scoobs
01-02-2012, 04:57 PM
It's just unfortunate to me that the war in 1982 has set back indefinitely the prospects of a sane resolution to this situation.

It costs the UK taxpayer a disproportionate amount of defence budget and skews our defence posture to protect a tiny group of islanders 6,000 miles away who evidently will use their "let me stay British" veto to maintain this status quo irrespective of larger issues - like how much better the UK's relationship with Argentina and South America might be if this "colonial issue" were resolved - it could be very beneficial for trade links, for example.

The 1982 invasion by the Argentinian Junta was grade A stupid, and it's a shame that, and British intransigence as a result, has frozen the situation in place. It is surely time for the UK Government to return to the position it was following in the 1970s under both Labour and Conservative governments, that of negotiating the sovereignty of the Falklands with Argentina, perhaps under some sort of leaseback scheme, similar to that which the UK had with China for Hong Kong.

Bearing in mind at the time of the Falklands, it would have been cheaper to give every islander (less than 3000) £1 million to relocate than it ultimately cost to re-take the islands on their behalf.

It's economic madness being overridden by pointless, jingoistic, nationalistic nonsense that we can no longer afford. Time to get back to the negotiating table.

abraxas21
01-02-2012, 05:28 PM
OK, forget the oil, then why would they want them?

Wanting them ''back'' may not be a relevant argument. Britain can equal that reason.

cant say im surprised to see you again defending the interests of the crown. God bless mother England. may her sun never set!

buddyholly
01-02-2012, 06:44 PM
cant say im surprised to see you again defending the interests of the crown. God bless mother England. may her sun never set!

Amen to that, brother!

Those war-mongering imperialist yank clowns would be in Toronto tomorrow if it wasn't for the Thatcher legacy (in a cinema near you.)

Black Adam
01-03-2012, 01:06 AM
french were the first ones. by your criterion france should claim the islands too perhaps?
Well done punk. Conveniently forgetting the results of the referendum held by the locals as I mentioned.

Black Adam
01-03-2012, 01:12 AM
We give Brazil £9 billion in annual aid, perhaps they need to be careful where they stand on these matters as Aid could be cut.


P.S. They have a bigger economy, we shouldn't be helping them in the first place.

buddyholly
01-03-2012, 01:27 AM
We give Brazil £9 billion in annual aid, perhaps they need to be careful where they stand on these matters as Aid could be cut.


P.S. They have a bigger economy, we shouldn't be helping them in the first place.

Don't worry. When Glennmirnyi is President, Brazil will give it all back with interest.

abraxas21
01-03-2012, 02:54 AM
We give Brazil £9 billion in annual aid, perhaps they need to be careful where they stand on these matters as Aid could be cut.


P.S. They have a bigger economy, we shouldn't be helping them in the first place.

i was quite suspicious of that amount so i googled it up and surprise, surprise, the first result was a 4 day old article from the ever glorious daily mail. going by your clown posting history, i assume you're an avid reader of it :lol:

but anyhow, the fact of the matter is that britain gives 9 billions in annual aid worldwide, not just to brazil. that's a disctinction that was clear even in the daily mail article but i guess one shouldn't expect much from the reading comprehension of its regular readers. much less some critical analysis...

abraxas21
01-03-2012, 03:01 AM
Well done punk. Conveniently forgetting the results of the referendum held by the locals as I mentioned.

i like your style.

you're like the typical southern english tory chav, aren't you? i wonder what you're doing in australia....

im not sure who i prefer, BH or you. i feel the differences are more in the form than in the content. while one expresses his points in a rather pompous and sarcastic manner like some type of neo-con hawk, the other is more of the average clown you could find semi drunk downing his pint in the bar around the corner. two different fellas but at the end the story repeats itself. it is as they say: same shit, different bucket.

buddyholly
01-03-2012, 03:49 AM
I'm not a clown and I drink gin, you moron!

Black Adam
01-03-2012, 05:32 AM
i like your style.

you're like the typical southern english tory chav, aren't you? i wonder what you're doing in australia....

im not sure who i prefer, BH or you. i feel the differences are more in the form than in the content. while one expresses his points in a rather pompous and sarcastic manner like some type of neo-con hawk, the other is more of the average clown you could find semi drunk downing his pint in the bar around the corner. two different fellas but at the end the story repeats itself. it is as they say: same shit, different bucket.

Let's start of with basic geography: New Zealand when I'm not in England

There are no tory chavs. That's an oxymoron. I am of no specific political party. Interesting that you'd use "right-winger" as an intended insult, it fell really short and comrade i feel your pain.

I feel it needs to be repeated: all the advanced little things in your life, things that make your life much better, come from the western world you hate so much.

Get rid of that chip on your shoulder whilst you still are sane.

Cheeky Chick
01-03-2012, 07:54 AM
Ummm....they don't want that, being as they are heavily subsidised by the British taxpayer.

Can you point me in the direction of some internet link stating how much the subsidy is?

I saw a programme some while ago and they were saying about being self sufficient...

or do you mean the subsidy as the cost of the military we have there?

btw have you seen the pictures of the events of 1982?

Stensland
01-03-2012, 10:27 AM
We give Brazil £9 billion in annual aid

who does?

shotgun
01-03-2012, 10:53 PM
Soon Brazil will give back whatever it owes to the UK in the form of an IMF aid. :D

Sean.
01-04-2012, 12:19 PM
The only reason Fernández has upped the rhetoric on the Falklands is because it's a vote winner. Argentina has no no more 'right' to them than Australia has to New Caledonia. :rolleyes:

Black Adam
02-03-2012, 09:46 AM
Reading between the lines, Prince William is there to buy us a few more weeks to get some more hardware down there because the Argentinians know it would be a PR disaster to attack when he is there in a humanitarian S&R role. The rhetoric coming out of Argentina is the same as it was in 1982 and I'm afraid it's not a question of "if" but rather "when".
Personally I'd sail a Nuclear submarine to remind them how things can go down. Says a lot about Argentine brains when they ignore their crumbling economy to worry about the Falklands, they're being punked by the Government.

_maxi
02-03-2012, 01:09 PM
Reading between the lines, Prince William is there to buy us a few more weeks to get some more hardware down there because the Argentinians know it would be a PR disaster to attack when he is there in a humanitarian S&R role. The rhetoric coming out of Argentina is the same as it was in 1982 and I'm afraid it's not a question of "if" but rather "when".
Personally I'd sail a Nuclear submarine to remind them how things can go down. Says a lot about Argentine brains when they ignore their crumbling economy to worry about the Falklands, they're being punked by the Government.

LOL you are so paranoid. In 1982 we had a dictatorship that was spent. A dictatorship that killed thousands of innocent civils (socialists, anarchists, journalists, intellectuals, and whoever they thought would somehow try to fight for a different system) in order to impose a neoliberal economy that years later led us to a big crisis in every aspect.

They made the war to have a reason for keeping the power. They lost it. Most of Argentinian high range militars were coward and sent the kids to fight.
It's sad but you cant judge the regular population for that. What the hell is the UK doing on islands that are 400 miles far away from our country, in our sea, which they re-occupied in 1833 throwing away the Argentinian gobernament that was established there. We are a country since 1810.
That should be discussed and negociated. We should be able to fix this without wars. And we will be able, because Argentina is not planning a war.

Anyway, don't think there's a war coming in. Argentina don't need nor want wars. It's David Cameron who is trying to bring this issue to another level by making stupid statements and trying to make you ignore the important problems of your kingdom. Your media is probably reproducing them as they would be certain.

We won't make a war. We want a peaceful resolution. And yes, it's a pity that due to a stupid dictatorship war we have now to carry the weight of being those who made a war 30 years ago. But things have changed.

Being objetive I can say that both governments have reasons to confuse it's people by giving to much importance to things that should not be so important. But the whole point of my post is, that we don't want a war. Tell me one signal that makes you think that we are thinking about a war.

Black Adam
02-03-2012, 01:36 PM
1. The Islands were under British rule before Argentina was even a country.

2. The citizens of the Falklands took a democratic referendum and decided not to be independent and remain under British rule.

3. Falklands are not even in Argentine waters.

4. Argentina is only bringing this up again because oil and gas may be in Falkland waters.

5. The UK is not going negotiate ownership of something it already owns.

Fact: there is nothing to negotiate about and any further Argentine aggressions may be considered an act of war and will be dealt with appropriately. The Royal Navy is already sending the new hi-tech HMS Dauntless in the event Argentina tries something silly.


P.S. Is your economy something you should be more concerned about?

_maxi
02-03-2012, 01:41 PM
I share scoobs POV.

buddyholly
02-03-2012, 01:50 PM
We won't make a war. We want a peaceful resolution. And yes, it's a pity that due to a stupid dictatorship war we have now to carry the weight of being those who made a war 30 years ago. But things have changed.
.

You are not up to date. It is already resolved. They are British!

rocketassist
02-03-2012, 09:06 PM
Who the fuck's arsed???

Why do both nations want these little islands with their small villages so badly?????

UK put so much taxpayers' money into it.. why?

Argentina want an Anglicized, British way of life island. Are you gonna force them to speak Spanish and start listening to tango music??? why???

Rant over. Give them independence, let them live alone without the tax benefits. And let them join CONMEBOL and get their arse spanked in every qualification game, lol.

Jimnik
02-03-2012, 10:06 PM
Who the fuck's arsed???

Why do both nations want these little islands with their small villages so badly?????
Unfortunately it's about pride. No nation wants to appear weak and give in.

Jimnik
02-03-2012, 10:16 PM
Personally I'd sail a Nuclear submarine to remind them how things can go down. Says a lot about Argentine brains when they ignore their crumbling economy to worry about the Falklands, they're being punked by the Government.
Unfortunately it's crumbling economies that cause these irrational conflicts. President Kirchner is probably losing support and this is the easiest way to score political points.

Notice how Argentina brings this issue up every time there's a recession.

abraxas21
02-04-2012, 01:54 AM
I feel it needs to be repeated: all the advanced little things in your life, things that make your life much better, come from the western world you hate so much.

Get rid of that chip on your shoulder whilst you still are sane.

thank "the western world" for trees and the sun! :bowdown:

abraxas21
02-04-2012, 01:57 AM
Unfortunately it's about pride. No nation wants to appear weak and give in.

i think thats the first and main reason but lately they've found oil near its shores and that has spiced things up quite a bit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-14925620

_maxi
02-04-2012, 11:47 AM
Unfortunately it's crumbling economies that cause these irrational conflicts. President Kirchner is probably losing support and this is the easiest way to score political points.

Notice how Argentina brings this issue up every time there's a recession.
1) The president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner is having right now her best public image ever. More than 68% of aprobation. And the number is arising every month.
2) We don't have a recession. Our economy gets better and better every year. What kind of newspapers do you read? the daily lie? we have social disparities which are a different thing, and some measures have been taken about it, such as giving money to the population if they send their children to school, but the capitalists are enjoying big times here in this country.
3) Argentina is ALWAYS asking for negotiation about this issue. All the years we ask for negotiation. Some years we ask for it several times.


Keep the lies away.

Corey Feldman
02-04-2012, 06:19 PM
the Argies better behave or we brits will go back and kick their asses again

ballbasher101
02-04-2012, 06:39 PM
Oil glorious oil. Oil you sexy thing. Oil you make the world go round LOL.

Jimnik
02-04-2012, 06:55 PM
1) The president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner is having right now her best public image ever. More than 68% of aprobation. And the number is arising every month.
2) We don't have a recession. Our economy gets better and better every year. What kind of newspapers do you read? the daily lie? we have social disparities which are a different thing, and some measures have been taken about it, such as giving money to the population if they send their children to school, but the capitalists are enjoying big times here in this country.
3) Argentina is ALWAYS asking for negotiation about this issue. All the years we ask for negotiation. Some years we ask for it several times.
1) Probably because of the Falklands ban. What was it before the issue came up?
2) I was talking about the UK's recession. Argentina figures every time UK has an economic downturn they can take advantage. Unfortunately they came up against the iron lady in 1982. This time it might work.
3) If that's true, what are Argentina's terms? Are they offering economic freedom, self-determination or just money?

Roadmap
02-04-2012, 08:34 PM
Britain doesn't rule the Falklands. They are self governing. Argentina wants the kind of control over the islands that we DON'T HAVE, against the wishes of virtually every man, woman, dog and child who live there. An infantile attitude, no doubt. This is simplistic, but let Argentinians settle. Perhaps they don't want to. Falklanders are not foreign in their own lands.

abraxas21
02-04-2012, 08:41 PM
1) Probably because of the Falklands ban. What was it before the issue came up?

you do know that the president is continuing the work of her deceased husband, right?

it's obvious that the kirchers have been quite popular in argentina or else cristina wouldn't have won the presidential election.


2) I was talking about the UK's recession.
such BS :lol:

this is what you said earlier :
Unfortunately it's crumbling economies that cause these irrational conflicts. President Kirchner is probably losing support and this is the easiest way to score political points.

Notice how Argentina brings this issue up every time there's a recession.

Jimnik
02-04-2012, 08:54 PM
OK, I might have been wrong on President Kirchner's popularity. I said "probably" not "for sure" because I never claimed to know the exact figures.

But the facts are Argentina brings this up every time there's a bad recession in the UK.

I really don't give a shit about this issue so I'm not going to bother fully educating myself on all the details.

abraxas21
02-04-2012, 11:19 PM
OK, I might have been wrong on President Kirchner's popularity. I said "probably" not "for sure" because I never claimed to know the exact figures.

But the facts are Argentina brings this up every time there's a bad recession in the UK.

I really don't give a shit about this issue so I'm not going to bother fully educating myself on all the details.

fair enough

i actually dont know that much about it either. however, there has always been bad blood over the falklands. i actually think that the main reason some argies dont like chile very much is that chile supported and collaborated with the brits during the conflict...

it just something that doesnt go away. then again, i think the brits have scalated the conflict by bringing that war ship to the area and many threatening comments. no need for that yet, imo.

Black Adam
02-05-2012, 04:04 AM
fair enough

i actually dont know that much about it either. however, there has always been bad blood over the falklands. i actually think that the main reason some argies dont like chile very much is that chile supported and collaborated with the brits during the conflict...

it just something that doesnt go away. then again, i think the brits have scalated the conflict by bringing that war ship to the area and many threatening comments. no need for that yet, imo.
You'll notice it all kicked of with Argies chatting shit. No discussion is ever gonna happen and of course Argentina will be schooled when it comes to war. Again.


i thought the sore loser thing was just limited to sports...

_maxi
02-05-2012, 11:48 AM
You'll notice it all kicked of with Argies chatting shit. No discussion is ever gonna happen and of course Argentina will be schooled when it comes to war. Again.


i thought the sore loser thing was just limited to sports...
I give you 24 hours to quote me exactly what was the "chatting shit" from Argentina. Otherwise you are just lying.

_maxi
02-05-2012, 04:06 PM
1) Probably because of the Falklands ban. What was it before the issue came up?
2) I was talking about the UK's recession. Argentina figures every time UK has an economic downturn they can take advantage. Unfortunately they came up against the iron lady in 1982. This time it might work.
3) If that's true, what are Argentina's terms? Are they offering economic freedom, self-determination or just money?
1) Hell, no. Her image is getting better since two years ago I think. He won an election few months ago with the higher % ever here.
2) I won't judge Tatcher. The people from the UK should. And I repeat, Argentina brings this issue every year several times so you are wrong.
3) Honestly I don't know. But a negotiation should start to see how to make both Argentina and the Kelpers happy, that's what I think. UK can't do whatever they want with the lands and the resources that are few miles away from our country. So we need to talk about it that's what I think. But no one is planning a war for this issue. At least not Argentina. That why I'm asking for the "chatting shit" because there wasn't any chatting shit from Argentina. All we did was to ask for negotiation as we always do. And to respect the UN resolution that every year tells the UK to negotiate with Argentina and the UK never listen to.

Peace.

buddyholly
02-05-2012, 05:01 PM
1) UK can't do whatever they want with the lands and the resources that are few miles away from our country. So we need to talk about it that's what I think.

Uruguay and Chile are zero miles away from your country, but I doubt that they get approval from Argentina before doing what they want with their lands and resources.
Distance is not a valid argument.
And I think the Kelpers, as you call them, have already made clear what will keep them happy. Neither Britain nor the Falkland Islanders has any obligation to keep Argentina happy.

rocketassist
02-05-2012, 06:12 PM
1) Hell, no. Her image is getting better since two years ago I think. He won an election few months ago with the higher % ever here.
2) I won't judge Tatcher. The people from the UK should. And I repeat, Argentina brings this issue every year several times so you are wrong.
3) Honestly I don't know. But a negotiation should start to see how to make both Argentina and the Kelpers happy, that's what I think. UK can't do whatever they want with the lands and the resources that are few miles away from our country. So we need to talk about it that's what I think. But no one is planning a war for this issue. At least not Argentina. That why I'm asking for the "chatting shit" because there wasn't any chatting shit from Argentina. All we did was to ask for negotiation as we always do. And to respect the UN resolution that every year tells the UK to negotiate with Argentina and the UK never listen to.

Peace.

We in the north hate her more than you do probably.

GugaF1
02-07-2012, 10:47 PM
As a Brazilian this "issue" is mind boggling to even have an argument over something. I have some Argentinian friends and I can only understand this in speaking with them, they grow up in Argentina with the Malvinas/Falkland being a question of pride, something that is unjust. But from a neutral standpoint it seems just so incredibly small to argue, much less fight over it. A cold, small, Alaska like little island. I wouldn't want it even for free.

South Americas is one of the only and fastest growing region in the World. Nearly all the countries are growing economically, Brazil is growing, Argentina is growing, come on, UK has its own issues to solve economically nowadays, Who gives a f*ck about this little island.

Black Adam
02-08-2012, 08:53 AM
As a Brazilian this "issue" is mind boggling to even have an argument over something. I have some Argentinian friends and I can only understand this in speaking with them, they grow up in Argentina with the Malvinas/Falkland being a question of pride, something that is unjust. But from a neutral standpoint it seems just so incredibly small to argue, much less fight over it. A cold, small, Alaska like little island. I wouldn't want it even for free.

South Americas is one of the only and fastest growing region in the World. Nearly all the countries are growing economically, Brazil is growing, Argentina is growing, come on, UK has its own issues to solve economically nowadays, Who gives a f*ck about this little island.
It's about the Principle.

Here's the Foreign Office's statement:
"The people of the Falkland Islands are British out of choice. They are free to determine their own future and there will be no negotiations with Argentina over sovereignty unless the islanders wish it."


There will be no talking with Argentina. The military ships are there to make sure if things escalate, the British citizens and interests are protected. Argentina is being a war-monger in this case.

_maxi
02-10-2012, 09:54 AM
I can't believe the bullshit from the press. And I don't mean the UK press, but the Argentinian one this time. They try to sell however they can. Now they are making big titles about our president speech and the Malvinas/Falklands issue just as a war would be going to happen. The people here is quite, peaceful. Everyone thinks that the 1982 war was a stupid decision and that it would be even more stupid to think of a war again. But the press makes it appear like the people would be concerned about the Malvinas/Falkands problem when it's not at all like that.

Black Adam
02-10-2012, 09:26 PM
If there's another war I hope that UK replies further by even bombing Argentina.

Next time they'd think twice.

_maxi
02-10-2012, 10:34 PM
If there's another war I hope that UK replies further by even bombing Argentina.

Next time they'd think twice.
There won't be. Keep dreaming. I see who the bellicose is.

Denaon
02-11-2012, 10:03 AM
There won't be. Keep dreaming. I see who the bellicose is.

It is quite obvious, isn't it? I wonder the meaning of his Nirvana in his profile :spit:
:bigclap: Maxi, thanks for making your voice heard and trying to explain Argentina's position.

Ain't it funny how, in a forum with dozens of argies (most of them quite argumentative), only Maxi decided to discuss this issue? The answer is simple. For most of us, a war is neither wanted nor expected not even worthwhile, it's not the way to get any kind of agreement about the Malvinas.

Denaon
02-11-2012, 10:06 AM
If there's another war I hope that UK replies further by even bombing Argentina.

Next time they'd think twice.

Think straight boy.

Black Adam
02-12-2012, 12:52 AM
There won't be. Keep dreaming. I see who the bellicose is.
Obviously because Argentina is all talk. UK has no need to talk because the Falklanders have no interest in discussing turning over their sovereignty to Argentina. End of Story.

All this complaining about nuclear arms in the region, :lol: the nukes have been there since 1982.


FYI, the Argentina military is a joke. The only people it can take on are its unarmed citizens. Without Maggie T you folks would still be under a military dictatorship. You owe us thanks, a fruit basket of thanks wouldn't be asking much.

abraxas21
02-12-2012, 05:28 PM
Obviously because Argentina is all talk. UK has no need to talk because the Falklanders have no interest in discussing turning over their sovereignty to Argentina. End of Story.

All this complaining about nuclear arms in the region, :lol: the nukes have been there since 1982.


FYI, the Argentina military is a joke. The only people it can take on are its unarmed citizens. Without Maggie T you folks would still be under a military dictatorship. You owe us thanks, a fruit basket of thanks wouldn't be asking much.

obvious troll is obvious