It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Argentina accused of plotting Falklands blockade

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Don't rise to the bait people!

There are 4 Tycoons, 1 Hercules and 500 soldiers on the Falklands according to Wikipedia. Add to that at least 1 Astute class Submarine.




posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by elpistolero1
Go Argentina!. the Malvinas will be Argentinian once again!!, screw the UK


Are you a buffoon? Or did you just skip history class?

Do some research.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by elpistolero1
Go Argentina!. the Malvinas will be Argentinian once again!!, screw the UK



You are an ignorant chap- how can they be Argentinian "once again", when Argentina NEVER owned them

We won't back down on this



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Put it to the vote for the people. didnt they do the same thing for Gibralter a few years back?



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed
Put it to the vote for the people. didnt they do the same thing for Gibralter a few years back?


Yes, and much to the fury of Spain it was embarrassingly one-sided. There was one in 1967 and another one in 2002. The 2002 vote was about sharing sovereignty between the UK and Spain. It was rejected 98.48% to 1.03%, with 89 spoiled ballots.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


squabbling over barren islands with a population of less than 3,000 people with a crappy climate in the middle of nowhere.

Very productive.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Why doesn't Cameron just put it to a referendum by the people of the Falkland Islands over who they want to be sovereign under?

Surely a resounding yes to the continuation (Which is what we are promised) of Britain's rule will bring the issue to a close?



These people were imported to the islands and cannot be allowed to determine policy” said Daniel Filmus, head of the Senate foreign affairs committee and a leading member of Mrs Kirchner’s ruling Victory Front alliance.

“When we reclaim the islands, we will respect their way of life, but under no circumstances should we be negotiating with them.”



Carlos Kunkel, a long-time ally of Mrs Kirchner and fellow Peronista in his youth, went even further. In rhetoric that would not look out of place in the Victorian era, he painted London as a flagging colonial power, desperate to keep what remained of its fraying empire.

“David Cameron is pursuing a policy of piracy and aggression because at home the economy is collapsing, there are riots in London, and Scotland and Wales want to escape the English empire,” he claimed.

“The islanders are a transplanted people who live in an occupied British enclave. You cannot talk about self-determination in those circumstances.”


Telegraph



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


squabbling over barren islands with a population of less than 3,000 people with a crappy climate in the middle of nowhere.

Very productive.


How can they be barren if they have a population? Would you not defend your interests?

Those people want to REMAIN British, so the Argentinians have no right nor any reason to go against that, Argentina have never owned the islands besides a failed attempt at re-colonising.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Soshh, that's a fascinating quote that shows just how empty the Argentinean claim on the islands is. "Those people can't choose! They were imported! Harrumph!"
Right, so the fact that they've been there for more than 150 years means that they're imported? Why that means that Argentina must give up Patagonia at once! And the US must surrender the Dakotas!
I sense the heavy hand of Argentina's internal politics here.... is there an election due there perchance?
edit on 1-2-2012 by AngryCymraeg because: Typo



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 

Troops out of Afghanistan and sent to defend British people in the Falklands. Defend the oil reserves too, let the richness of the oil pay for proper defence of Stanley. Those islands are far more British than Argentina is Spanish, Italian, Native American Indian, whatever it is supposed to be. The colonial story about Britain is like the pot calling the kettle black coming from that Kirchner woman



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Woah calm down calm down. I forgot, question anything to do with Britain and the Brits jump you.

Falkland Islands economy revolves around fishing.. most crops don't grow in the cold wet climate do they? Just grassy islands. And tourism, though who would want to go there I don't know.. The UK spends more protecting the islands than the islands entire economic output.

Just seems weird, to me anyways.. that anyone, be it brits or argentines would squabble for so long over such islands.

EDIT: Granted I did not know of the oil exploration, that obviously would change things if it was a viable source.
edit on 2/1/2012 by Rockpuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 


I understand that argument but it doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's not like Ireland/Northern Ireland where the Protestant settlers from England imposed themselves on the indigenous Catholic Irish.

It is not like Palestine where the Zionists attempted to portray the land as uninhabited.

The Falkland Islands are a group of islands that have been contested over by the British, Spanish, Portuguese Americans and Argentinian. The first people to actually inhabit the islands were British.

Ok, they are situated quite close geographically to Argentina, 300 miles away. So what? They are outside of internationally recognized Argentinian waters as ordained by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

www.un.org...



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


You don't know much about what you're talking about. Are you American?

Don't worry then, it doesn't concern you anyway.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by DAZ21
 


Thanks for proving my point friend.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Haha.

At least pick a side. And the one worth joining is the British side, as if you know the island history, the Argentinians really don't have an argument. They just smell oil.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


About 90% of Argentineans are the result of 'imports' as well, which makes it all the more funny for us! The Argentine government accuses Britain of dodging negotiations but even if there was anything to negotiate, how exactly are we supposed to negotiate with these wankers? Piracy? The Falklands be arrrrs me Argiees!



Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
reply to post by Soshh
 


I understand that argument but it doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's not like Ireland/Northern Ireland where the Protestant settlers from England imposed themselves on the indigenous Catholic Irish.

It is not like Palestine where the Zionists attempted to portray the land as uninhabited.

The Falkland Islands are a group of islands that have been contested over by the British, Spanish, Portuguese Americans and Argentinian. The first people to actually inhabit the islands were British.

Ok, they are situated quite close geographically to Argentina, 300 miles away. So what? They are outside of internationally recognized Argentinian waters as ordained by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

www.un.org...


I fully agree. However they have somehow managed to convince everyone that there is an issue here and that we are at fault. The UN is not about to tell them to eff off and so they can persist with the stance in the quotes as if it was a valid argument.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


I had to LOL at the 4 Tycoons.......hell they don't need our protection then just a offshore bank account


4 Typhoons for those who need to know.

Wolfie



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


I'm with you on the referendum idea, everyone write to your MP. I f they have a vote and it's observed by the UN the the Argentinian Government will have to stop their Bleating, they have never had and still have no claim to the Island, whose inhabitants wish to remain part of Britain :-)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DAZ21
 


If I were forced to side with anyone it would be the Brits just because of the population. As far as I know anyways there was no indigenous population on the Islands, and the concept of Argentina only existed since 1816. Aside from the oil, of all the wars raging around the globe it's almost humorous to see two nations fighting over these little islands. I mean, if it was a tropical paradise with beautiful native women I'd understand! But the Falkland Islands seem to gloomy.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by DAZ21
 


If I were forced to side with anyone it would be the Brits just because of the population. As far as I know anyways there was no indigenous population on the Islands, and the concept of Argentina only existed since 1816. Aside from the oil, of all the wars raging around the globe it's almost humorous to see two nations fighting over these little islands. I mean, if it was a tropical paradise with beautiful native women I'd understand! But the Falkland Islands seem to gloomy.


Haha, it might be. Just a well kept secret, can't have everyone fighting over it.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join