Imperialistic Argentina once more extends its soiled talons

[saxitoxin]

Courtesy of the precocious Zamba - here's a 90-second cartoon song that provides a more accurate history of Las Malvinas and the Britisher pirating attacks and how they are motivated by desperation at their collapsed empire than anything else said by the revisionists in this thread to date - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Eh1B4a-RMA&t=3m13s

[Chariot of Fire]

Courtesy of the precocious Zamba - here's a 90-second cartoon song that provides a more accurate history of Las Malvinas and the Britisher pirating attacks and how they are motivated by desperation at their collapsed empire than anything else said by the revisionists in this thread to date - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Eh1B4a-RMA&t=3m13s

(though my favorite part is the retarded British ginger boy with the simpleton accent who shows up at 6:10 ... "dumbdy dum dum" )

"The retarded British ginger boy......"

My, what an agreeable person you must be to come out with comments like that.

[Symmetry]

Why bother revising history? Ask the people who live there now. If they no longer want to be British, let them choose. It's not as if there's a a rival group of Argentinian people who have a claim to the area.

[saxitoxin]

Courtesy of the precocious Zamba - here's a 90-second cartoon song that provides a more accurate history of Las Malvinas and the Britisher pirating attacks and how they are motivated by desperation at their collapsed empire than anything else said by the revisionists in this thread to date - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Eh1B4a-RMA&t=3m13s

(though my favorite part is the retarded British ginger boy with the simpleton accent who shows up at 6:10 ... "dumbdy dum dum" )

"The retarded British ginger boy......"

My, what an agreeable person you must be to come out with comments like that.

I was describing what was in the animated feature. I did not script or animate it. However, out of an abundance of sensitivity I have edited my comment so the fragile ears of the easily offended will be able to completely insulate themselves from popular opinion if they choose not to watch it.

This is a discussion thread, not a monologue thread. If you don't desire to engage people in conversation, but simply irrationally repeat the same simple talking point put out by David Cameron's PR agency to the total disregard of the many reasonable refutations of it, you might investigate a blog, Twitter account, or open mic hour at your local comedy club.

This is a thread for those who can think freely, form independent opinions and express their thoughts in a dynamic and coherent manner, not a thread to prove you're able to copy and paste a press release.

[saxitoxin]

"Royal Navy" veterans agree with Saxi:

Should Argentina invade and take Mount Pleasant, there is no hope the UK could mount a recovery operation.

The reality is that Argentina is not (yet) equipped to attack the Falklands even if it has the political will. However with a planned increase in defence spending of 50%, ... its military may present a very credible threat in the next 5-10 years.

http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/wordpre ... nd-islands

The kelpers can become part of Argentina today and all become multi-millionares, or part of Argentina 5 years from now and settle for a Red Cross refugee tent in Crystal Palace. Two options.

The Admiral Sir Sandy Woodward - who led the British recapture of Malvinas in 1982 - agrees (who is more qualified than him?):

If the Falklands are ever captured by Argentina it will be impossible to win them back, says Woodward. “We could not retake the Falklands. We could not send a task force or even an aircraft carrier. If we had been in this state in 1982, the Falklands would be the Malvinas. We rely on sending reinforcements by air, but that would be impossible if we lost control of the airfield at Mount Pleasant.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... e-now.html

He also criticized the UK regime for their decision to send a member of the ruling family last year "to serve":

“To put a royal in the front line is quite inconvenient. You have to take special measures to make sure he doesn’t lose his life. That means you service his aircraft three times as carefully as anyone else’s. If something goes badly wrong, you’ll be blamed. So you protect the Royal Family from their own wish to serve. They are a liability on the front line.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... e-now.html

Even with 500% better equipment 30 years ago and American resupply support, Britain almost lost, Woodward says (if the UK hadn't been friends with Augusto Pinochet who kept the crack Argentine troops tied down, they would have):

What people fail to realise, he says, is how close Britain came to losing the war. “If the Argentines had held out for another week on land then we would probably have lost it. Our people were in the open. It was snowing. The sheer wear and tear of two months at sea in vile conditions meant our ships were wearing out. The offshore group was on its last gasp. It was as close as that.”

[Symmetry]

I hold no pride in the British victory- I think it was a dumb war, and the best outcome of it was that Argentina achieved democracy and the Falkland Islanders gained independence.

I see no benefit in replaying the conflict.

[saxitoxin]

the Falkland Islanders gained independence.

lolwut

Maybe I can pick-up some more literature on this at the local "Falkland Islands" Embassy.

In any case, the UN Decolonization Committee disagrees with that weird rewriting of reality.

[Symmetry]

the Falkland Islanders gained independence.

lolwut

Maybe I can pick-up some more literature on this at the local "Falkland Islands" Embassy.

In any case, the UN Decolonization Committee disagrees with that weird rewriting of reality.

Fair point, I stand corrected.

[saxitoxin]

The hereditary ruling family of the UK is planning a carnival to celebrate the war against the Argentine people of 1982. The carnival will be filled with music, dancing, games, doorprizes and other fun. Celebrity comedians will headline the event at which the murder of more than 600 Argentines will be feted.

A pirate, who was invited to attend, vapidly commented:

"They're such wonderful events and it's lovely to mix with royalty, celebrities and some of my old friends," he said.

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Falklan ... story.html

(repeat this quote with an Alicia Silverstone from "Clueless" California accent)

[Chariot of Fire]

I don't really care if there's a legal basis or not for Argentine claims to the Malvinas...I'll support Argentina regardless of any basis in law or ethics for their claims.

(repeat this quote with an Alicia Silverstone from "Clueless" California accent)

[saxitoxin]

Forty-eight members of the Italian parliament delivered a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon yesterday calling for the world body to intervene to aid Argentina in its internationally recognized legal claim to Isles Malvinas, the portion of Argentina currently under a UK military occupation. The letter was authored by Ricard Merlo, a Buenos Aires-living Italian citizen who holds one of the four seats in parliament reserved for Italians living abroad.

http://www.buenosairesherald.com/articl ... gnty-claim

The lawmakers have announced their intent to introduce a resolution in the Italian parliament expressing Italy's support for the Argentine people against the UK military occupation.

[saxitoxin]

Following a comprehensive UN investigation, the United Nations Decolonization Committee yesterday unanimously adopted a resolution demanding Britain enter into negotiations with Argentina over the future of Las Malvinas. Will the UK continue to flaunt international law and the will of the UN?

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/06/1 ... -malvinas/
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/ ... 39.doc.htm

Seventeen nations spoke at the vote and all 17 supported the demand UK negotiate. UK was unable to find a single friend to speak in support of the pirate position. Highlights:

COSTA RICA - Saul Weisleder reaffirmed his country’s recognition of the Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands as an integral part of the territory of Argentina. Since 1833, that territory had been subjected to a violation stemming from a colonial dispute.

EL SALVADOR - Joaquin Maza Martelli reiterated his delegation’s position of principle that the question of the Malvinas, South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime space belonged to Argentina. The justification of the United Kingdom to stay in the region stemmed from “an attitude that history had rendered obsolete”, he said.

COLOMBIA - Fernando Alzate Donoso reiterated his country’s support for Argentina’s claim in the sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas. He regretted that in spite of the time that had elapsed since the adoption of the General Assembly resolutions on the dispute, it had not yet been resolved.

BOLIVIA - Raphael Arconodo said that, yesterday, the Special Committee had heard a “courageous and convincing” statement by President Christina Fernández de Kirchner of Argentina, in which she described dreams of a world without colonialism.

The neo-conservative David Cameron responded to President Kirchener's pleas for peaceful negotiation by saying he would "never negotiate" and threatening to go to war.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpres ... 552175977A

[Symmetry]

The people who live there spoke against it, they were ignored.

[saxitoxin]

The people who live there spoke against it, they were ignored.

The fussing of squatters are irrelevant. The justness of evictions are decided in courts, not in catcalls and shrieks on the doorstep after the police have arrived. Britain refuses to respect international law by even heeding a summons.

Why does Britain hate the system of international law the civilized world has crafted for peaceful resolution of disputes? Why is Britain stuck in the Dark Ages?

[Chariot of Fire]

International Law?

Care to quote the clause pertinent to this dispute, where Britain is in breach of it, and what the penalties are?

Thought not. f*ck off.

[saxitoxin]

International Law?

Care to quote the clause pertinent to this dispute, where Britain is in breach of it,

David Cameron responding to a rational and diplomatic call for bilateral discussion from the United Nations by frothing at the mouth and ranting like a mad man about blasting Argentina to smitherines is a violation of Article 33, Section 1 of the UN charter:

The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

and what the penalties are?

This:



Outlaw states, like any criminal, must be subject to a police response to enforce compliance with the laws civilization has decided upon for the rational and just governance of relations between nations and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Britain can't keep up this policy of intransigence forever. Eventually the patience of the modern, law-abiding nations of the world will wear thin and a police force will be assembled.

[saxitoxin]

The liberation of Las Malvinas moves from Dream to Inevitability as events of the world help the peoples of South America march forward toward the destiny that awaits them and the final chapter of 600 sad years of colonialism.

UK Army to Lose 17 Units

The Army will lose 17 major units as it cuts 20,000 regular soldiers, the defence secretary has said. Philip Hammond told MPs that the units to go included four infantry battalions and two sections in the Armoured Corps. The number of regular soldiers is set to fall from 102,000 to 82,000. The Army will be about half the size it was during the Cold War era - it had more than 163,000 troops in 1978.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18716101

[BigBallinStalin]

International Law?

Care to quote the clause pertinent to this dispute, where Britain is in breach of it,

David Cameron responding to a rational and diplomatic call for bilateral discussion from the United Nations by frothing at the mouth and ranting like a mad man about blasting Argentina to smitherines is a violation of Article 33, Section 1 of the UN charter:

The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

and what the penalties are?

This:



Outlaw states, like any criminal, must be subject to a police response to enforce compliance with the laws civilization has decided upon for the rational and just governance of relations between nations and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Britain can't keep up this policy of intransigence forever. Eventually the patience of the modern, law-abiding nations of the world will wear thin and a police force will be assembled.

I didn't agree to those international laws. Should they still be binding even though no one cared to ask for my consent?

[Symmetry]

One would hope that the UN would abide by basic principles of self-determination, rather than the ethnic cleansing of an island.

[saxitoxin]

One would hope that the UN would abide by basic principles of self-determination, rather than the ethnic cleansing of a nation.

They did - I already posted this a page ago; the UN has decided to endorse the right of self-determination of the Argentine people specifically, and the 400 million people of Latin America, generally.

People Before Profits
People Before Pirates

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=162628&start=285#p3778193

[Symmetry]

One would hope that the UN would abide by basic principles of self-determination, rather than the ethnic cleansing of a nation.

They did - I already posted this a page ago; the UN has decided to endorse the right of self-determination of the Argentine people specifically, and the 400 million people of Latin America, generally -

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=162628&start=285#p3778193

Your support for ethnic cleansing of the Falklands is well documented within the thread, and elsewhere. That I oppose your favoured policy is also well documented.

The Argentine people already have the right to self determination, that they don't have the right to determine the rights of others is kind of the point.

[saxitoxin]

One would hope that the UN would abide by basic principles of self-determination, rather than the ethnic cleansing of a nation.

They did - I already posted this a page ago; the UN has decided to endorse the right of self-determination of the Argentine people specifically, and the 400 million people of Latin America, generally -

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=162628&start=285#p3778193

Your support for ethnic cleansing of the Falklands is well documented within the thread, and elsewhere. That I oppose your favoured policy is also well documented.

I support the rule of law. The United Nations is the maker of law.

You don't support the rule of law. Therefore, you support piracy.

Symmetry and friends discussing Las Malvinas.

[Symmetry]

One would hope that the UN would abide by basic principles of self-determination, rather than the ethnic cleansing of a nation.

They did - I already posted this a page ago; the UN has decided to endorse the right of self-determination of the Argentine people specifically, and the 400 million people of Latin America, generally -

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=162628&start=285#p3778193

Your support for ethnic cleansing of the Falklands is well documented within the thread, and elsewhere. That I oppose your favoured policy is also well documented.

I support the rule of law. The United Nations is the maker of law.

You don't support the rule of law. Therefore, you support piracy.

Would you like to see the people of the Falkland Islands, who you describe as "squatters", cleansed from the Falklands?

[GreecePwns]

Saxi, the solution is easy. Argentina should export its people to the island and hold a referendum, immediately upon gaining the majority in population.

oh no, they must wait a few generations. only then does occupation of a foreign land become legal and or widely recognized. It works in Cyprus and in Israel, why not here?

Funny. There's one common factor in all three of these cases.

[saxitoxin]

One would hope that the UN would abide by basic principles of self-determination, rather than the ethnic cleansing of a nation.

They did - I already posted this a page ago; the UN has decided to endorse the right of self-determination of the Argentine people specifically, and the 400 million people of Latin America, generally -

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=162628&start=285#p3778193

Your support for ethnic cleansing of the Falklands is well documented within the thread, and elsewhere. That I oppose your favoured policy is also well documented.

I support the rule of law. The United Nations is the maker of law.

You don't support the rule of law. Therefore, you support piracy.

Would you like to see the people of the Falkland Islands, who you describe as "squatters", cleansed from the Falklands?

Yes. Surely I've been pretty clear on that point?

In every country in the world, every day, squatters are evicted after a thorough and thoughtful court ruling. To date, only one group of squatters has threatened to use nuclear weapons to avoid paying their back rent (the kelpers).