Posts by Las Malvinas son Argentinas

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

Israel/Palestine is the same principle, different century. It is not an exact equivalence in the historical sense, but has similarities with the concept of settling militarily conquered land. This is why we had so much fuss over whether or not the invasion of 1833 happened or not. According to the internal memos of the British Foreign Office, it did. Once you establish that there was an invasion and subsequent occupation of land, then the morality behind the entire venture is questionable. Israel/Palestine is on a much bigger world stage and involves thousands of more people, so how about I refine the analogy to a more smaller and suitable level? There are a few thousand Israeli settlers in the Syrian Golan Heights. Should a referendum be held, Israel would likely be the winner. It still doesn't morally make the territory Israeli by popular vote.

That the 1982 invasion was a mistake is logic I can buy into. It certainly didn't accomplish anything but guarantee that the British are holding onto the territory. A simple case of messing with the bull and getting the horns. Asking nicely would have been a more feasible option. Our bad. We did lose 323 civilians and soldiers on the ARA General Belgrano when it was both outside the British declared exclusion zone and was headed back to port. But oh the casualties and feebleness of war...

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

I answered your question. Since the legal title to the land was dubious in the first place, this brings up several issues which have been subsequently glossed over. If the islanders want British administration, then they can have it. But sovereignty belongs to Argentina. When the maps are drawn up, they should be called "Malvinas/Falklands" with the flag of the Sun of May prominent. The same way sovereignty would still belong to the UK should any third party decide to occupy and populate a sparsely inhabited or uninhabited adjacent British island. Military conquest doesn't establish legality. Israeli settlements were built on mostly unused Palestinian communal farming land. Does that make the settlements legitimate and therefore the settlers entitled to a vote? Of course none of the Spanish/Argentines from the removal are still alive. That wasn't a serious question. It doesn't change the fact that they were forcibly evicted by a country which had abandoned the same islands and renounced her sovereignty several times over before unilaterally deciding she wanted them again.

Colonialism is indeed a loaded word, designed to draw the reader to a desired conclusion. There are different lengths to which it was applied. The British, Spanish, French, Dutch, Portuguese, and later the Germans and Belgians are all guilty of it. The Napoleonic Wars put an end to most of Spain's colonial ambitions, and her former colonies rose up in revolt. It was within this vacuum that the unique nature of the Malvinas dispute comes into play. Since they had no native population, the rights to the Malvinas came with which country actually settled the country. We can talk all day about the indigenous population of the Americas if we want, but it only amounts to a boiling pot of psuedo-logic designed to distract from the real issue. The French settled Isla Soledad, sold their rights to the Spanish, and was ruled out of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata. Argentina next took control over the Malvinas after a short gap, and it was only after the residents were forcibly removed by the Americans and finally by the Royal Navy in 1833 that this control ceased. Two wrongs don't make a right. There was no reason other than control of strategic islands and implantation of a new colony that we have this situation today. That is why I dub it colonialism at its worst. There was simply no excuse for it, and it was a blatant act of dispossession.

I realise that the prevailing opinion is that it's just a 'rock' as Diest put it. Then let's apply this principle to its greatest extent. Find the most forlorn 'rock' that you own, and give it to us. But I'd much rather have the 'rock' that is actually ours. Nuestra Malvinas.

Forums are made for discussion. It's not easy for some to hear a contrary viewpoint. I hear them all the time here about the Malvinas. Some are reasoned arguments, while others are lacking for quality and substance, while playing around with facts. It amuses me to no end about how many British intellectuals, journalists, historians, and public figures share much of the same feelings as I have about the Malvinas. To add to that chorus, we have a steady retinue of 'neutrals' such as Obama, Clinton, Scty. General Ban Yi Moon, and Vladimir Putin, who espouse the same argument that the much maligned Cristina Fernandez is taking to the court of world opinion. There's a legitimate dispute regarding the islands. Let's talk. Unfortunately, according to Simon Jenkins' opinion piece in the Guardian, 3000 people hold an effective veto over British foreign policy.

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

sbf -

I have said before that I have no desire to disrupt the islanders' lifestyle and unique culture. My modus operandi has been to explain the facts and history related to the dispute, and thus apply the Argentine position. The Argentine station on Isla Soledad (later renamed to East Falkland) was sacked, its population forcibly deported, and all that remained was a prison colony and a few Argentine gauchos. It was an act of piracy at worst, and colonialism at its best. As Israel is finding out, military conquest does no establish legal title to the land. The Falklanders are there and well established, but they live on land which was invaded and thereafter settled. Britain's main argument for removing the Malvinas from the UN's official list of colonised territories is that the islands are semi-autonomous. While this is somewhat true, they still make up an overseas dependency of the UK. They do not have Dominion status like Australia or Canada - the mark of de facto if not de jure independence.

I look at the historical parallels everywhere and apply the situation when applicable to the Malvinas. Israel has settlements and should they ever take a vote, they would be unilaterally annexed to Israel. Does that mean that the illegal occupation should be legitimatised due to the settlers having a vote? How about a Tibetan plebiscite now that the Han Chinese make up the majority in Tibet? The concept of 'self-determination' has unfortunately been an abused one in the post-colonial age. Now did the British take a poll of the Argentine gauchos and the recently deported Malvineros who were just dusting themselves off in Buenos Aires? Would they have even cared what these people thought about what government they desired? They rounded up who they could and sent them packing to Montevideo, while letting the people useful to them (such as the remaining members of Argentine governor Luis Vernet's administration) stay should they accept British control. Fast-forward to 180 years later, and that seems to have cleansed the consciences of the reformed colonialists. Simon Jenkins of London's Guardian argues that the 'Falklands' are a colonial anachronism and supported leaseback. The islands would remain under British administration, while legal title to the islands would belong to Argentina. We don't seek a colony. They can have their own governor and legislative body. But you can't ignore history and selectively apply the 'self-determination' principle only when its beneficial to your cause. That the islands have and will continue to have a British character is not what we are concerned about. We seek a dialogue regarding our rights to the islands, as anyone who finds themselves on the ass-end of imperialism might attest to.

Qcmbr - At least James Peck had a Malvinas related story to it. We were speaking about the audacity of Argentine athletes making a Malvinas protest at the London Olympics. The Peck case demonstrates that there are strong and often abrasive attitudes on both sides of the dispute. Wales had nothing to do with this conversation and you unilaterally brought it into it in an apparent attempt to make an absurd point.

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

Whatever happens at the Olympics, it wont be as bad as the abuse that Falklander James Peck has suffered for taking Argentine citizenship in order to see his children in Buenos Aires. Argentines applaud him for taking citizenship which was available to him. He still retains British citizenship. The Kelpers responded with death threats.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/17/world/americas/father-caught-in-argentina-britain-row-over-falklands.html?pagewanted=all

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRIJygFeb3E

Pink Floyd - The Final Cut. 1983

F*** all that we've got to get on with these
Got to compete with the wily Japanese
No need to worry about the Vietnamese
Got to bring the Russian bear to his knees
Well, maybe not the Russian bear,
maybe the Swedes
We showed Argentina
now let's go and show these
Make us feel tough
and wouldn't Maggie be pleased?

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

Hong Kong’s 99 year lease was only for what was known as the ‘New Territories”. Hong Kong proper and Kowloon were actually ceded to Britain ‘in perpetuity’ by the feckless Qing Dynasty. Since China wasn’t going to renew the lease, it would have been impractical to return the New Territories while keeping the other two. The New Territories were Hong Kong’s lifeline, and their return to China would have left the city almost completely dependent on the mainland anyway.

Thatcher’s government was espousing a leaseback agreement with the PRC at about the same time as they were discussing the same thing with Argentina regarding the Malvinas. The PRC rejected the leaseback and insisted on all three territories being returned in 1997, and got their wish in 1984. Argentina accepted the leaseback option in principle. Thatcher’s deputy, Nicholas Ridley, was in support of this plan and went to Stanley to sell it to the islanders. The islanders rejected it, and the Falklands lobby in the Commons started to get more vocal and so the government started stalling Buenos Aires. It was within this vacuum that the junta made the decision to retake the islands. The HMS Endurance was to be withdrawn, and the invasion was to originally happen during the austral winter of 1982. A few drunken Argentine scrap metal workers on South Georgia decided to raise the Argentine flag and shoot wildlife, which prompted the British to dispatch a nuclear submarine to the area. The junta pulled the trigger prematurely, and the debacle of the Malvinas War thus began.

Every indication points to the British government wanted to rid itself of its colonial responsibility in the Malvinas from the 1960s up until the 1980s. Simon Jenkins notes in his book “War in the Falklands” that had Argentina been a tad bit more patient (perhaps for a Labour government?), the Malvinas would have eventually been hers under a leaseback agreement. The principle here is one of military belligerence. China was even more stubborn than Argentina in refusing any British administration whatsoever after 1997. But they had the foresight that time was on their side, which unfortunately, the Argentine junta did not realise. The military action and subsequent war subjugated the anti-colonial Falklands speculations to the socialist fringe and leftist intellectuals in the UK. Had China decided to invade in the 1980s, who knows what would have happened? China then was a lot weaker than it is today. But the proximity of China to Hong Kong and the fact that it was even further than the Malvinas leads me to believe that the UK would have eventually accepted it as a fait accompli. The Malvinas by comparison are hundreds of kilometres from the nearest Argentine base in Rio Gallegos. They were just barely within the range of the Argentine Mirage warplanes, which meant that any attacking planes had little time to play with when hitting their targets. This had to figure in the decision at Whitehall on their decision to send the taskforce. Hong Kong was an unsustainable proposition. The Malvinas were a lesser gamble and a much needed morale boost after the British humiliation at Suez in 1956. The aggression of 1982 trumped existing British uncertainty over the invasion of 1833, and the current stalemate has resulted. We have the 1833 invasion of the Malvinas and the Ulster Plantations of the 1600s, yet when the demographics become favourable, we hear no shortage of the self-determination principle. 180 years too late from my perspective.

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

I'll freely admit that the concept of self-determination is Cameron's best argument for keeping the islands. My point has always been that this is the only valid British talking point; the legal title to the islands has always been of a dubious nature. British control of the islands is now a fait accompli after so many years of settlement and administrative control. Now it's a matter of not being able to put the toothpaste back into the tube, and this stalemate demonstrates this analogy quite aptly.

182

David Cameron Confronts Cristina Fernandez (UK v Argentina)

by cofty in

cameron briefly confronted the argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner when they met at the g20 meeting in mexico today.. the prime minister told ms fernandez she should "respect the views" of islanders who are taking part in a referendum on the issue of control.

- read more at bbc.... i never thought i would offer praise of a tory leader but hey credit where its due..

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

Being that the sources are themselves British officials who were part of Cameron’s mission to the G20 conference in Los Cabos, I find it of little note that they thought Fernandez was ‘rambling’. It’s a standard reaction to say that of someone when they have something lengthy to say in a response that you do not want to hear. Fernandez, for her part, was only asking the UK government to come to the table and talk about outstanding issues regarding the Malvinas – the same position held by many others, including the UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. Cameron for his part thought that the self-determination referendum in the islands should be the end of the matter. He spoke with the confidence of someone already assured of the vote’s outcome.

It is Argentina’s eternal misfortune that the concept of ‘self-determination’ was an inapplicable one to the British government in the 1830s when it came to their own interests in the South Atlantic. The Hague Convention of 1907 wasn’t in effect, and naturally laws cannot be applied ex post facto. All Argentina could do was go to the UN Committee on Decolonisation in New York and raise her periodic objections. Our foreign minister, Hector Timmerman, made a few comments after the Cameron-Fernandez confrontation while detailed the Argentine position on the matter.

It’s of no consequence to me that I am indirectly accused of ‘rambling’ on the Malvinas thread. The curious thing about that is that after I quoted from several British sources that they knew their legal title to the Malvinas was tenuous under modern international law, a couple posters then ceremoniously cleansed their hands of the argument and claimed they had better things to do. It was a natural reaction, since they were unprepared to offer commentary on the various British Foreign Office admissions that I had detailed. Now we get to the accusation of ‘rambling’. Being the only articulator of the Argentine position, and answering several posters’ questions or comments in the same post, my comments did indeed jump from one point to another. If you seek to discredit them by labeling them as ‘rambling’, then that's your prerogative. My true sin was in challenging the self-perceived intellectual authority of a few by offering my own commentary which wasn’t in line with the prevailing opinion. A few egos might have been wounded, but that was not my intention at all. Lest I be accused now of ‘rambling’ further, I’ll bring my comments to a close.

16

District Convention Lunches... Invisibly present since... (1995)?

by darthfader in

thanks to billy the x for connecting the "invisible lunch".... .

anyone remember when they quit providing lunch?

was it around the same time that the publications went to "complete donation bases"?.

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

I always found the District Conventions disgusting exercises in close proximity to people you'd typically ignore at a similarly attended sport event. How can all those people eat in a relatively quiet environment and not lose their appetites?

30

A Pettion for US Residents to Suspend Tax Exemption From Religious Cults deadline July 1st

by discreetslave in

this petition is to actively encourage congress to revise usc title 26 501 (and possibly 170) so that all tax exempt organizations must promote freedom of religion and speech to its members and employees.. .

congress should authorize the irs to promulgate regulations; investigate members, employees, and former members complaints; and enforce legislation.

an organizations tax exempt status should be suspended for not less than 3 years that does not promote freedom of religion and speech to its members and employees and instead intimidates or coerces them.. .

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

I did not realise that the amount of a pay cheque could definitively prove a point one way or another. After all, van Gogh sold his artwork for bowls of soup. Plug in that logic, and an example of Thomas Kinkade's work would trump De sterrennacht.