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: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


As is the liberation of New Mexico and Texas from imperialistic American ambitions. Long live Mexico!
edit on 2-2-2012 by Flavian because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maxatoria
funny how we keep hearing that the monroe declaration is somehow going to free the america's from colonial presence when it was never its intention, its intention was to halt expansion from the european's not to reverse it, so if it was british it stays british




We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.


Ssh, don't confuse him with something like facts. He doesn't understand those and likes to twist them until he thinks he is correct.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


Actually, this was only true for a period during the Cold War. We have our own codes these days. Nice try though.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


believe whatever you like .But we control your nuclear arsenal.If it were not for us americans,you british would be living under Hitler or Trotsky and singing 'the internationale' or seig Fuhrer'



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


I will, don't worry. I also know for a fact we have our own codes. Don't let something inconvenient like fact get in the way for you though, it doesn't usually stop you.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
reply to post by Flavian
 


We americans would like to have falklands for ourselves.


the only thing to do there is molest penguins according to the military people i've talked to who were stationed there



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxatoria
 


That is not strictly true - plenty of scope for training for our World class Bog Snorkelers!



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


well it doesn't matter.We have the radiolocation codes and thus we can still find and neutralize the tridents.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxatoria
 


Hundreds of billions of barrels of oil too. The reserve there is larger than Iraq. It will be a mighty good conquest.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Cloud_Striffe
 


Thank you for your post, and your English is far superior to my Spanish.

The UK offered Argentina a full and equal share of the oil deposits located around The Falklands.
This would have included the development of a large oil refinery on the Argentinian mainland.
This would have provided a much needed boost to the Argentinian economy and provided many well paid jobs etc.
It would also have helped foster far better relationships between the UK / Argentina and the Islanders themselves.
Surely a win - win situation.

But Kirchner in her arrogance declined the very generous offer to pursue Argentina's sole claim to The Falklands, something that has no legal, historic or moral basis and one that will never succeed as long as the Islanders wish to remain British.
Kirchner even arrogantly dismisss the Islanders right to self-determination as defined in the UN Charter.

Her only motivations appears to be self-aggrandisement on the international stage and deflection from the many falings of her domestic policies.

She is playing on the emotions and romantic nature of the Argentinian people who are the only one's who are missing out and are yet again being sold down the river by their leaders.

I sincerely hope that no-one from either of our countries has to pay the ultimate sacrifice just to feed her ego and further her carear.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 




Reagen was a traitor for not nuking the UK, and should of been hanged for treason for willfully ignoring the Monroe Doctrine.


Who was 'Reagen'?

Nuking the UK? You really are an odious little person aren't you.

The Monroe Doctrine?
A doctrine is a policy and not law and as such it has no legitimacy in US, UK or International Law.
And it was a policy 200 years ago.



The nations of Europe have no business in the Western hemisphere.


You do realise just how stupid this statement is bearing mind the USA's origins and those of probably every other nation in the Americas.



Britain may be able to stave off Latin America militarily today, but it cannot survive long term economic warfare.


What, so Argentina and Uruguay are going to stop selling us corned beef?
That'll really shake the UK to the core!



And it most certainly cannot survive long term military hostility.


With who?
Don't be so stupid.
No-one is going to war over this.....if we did it would be over a damn sight quicker than it was last time.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 




The liberation of Falklands,Scotland and Ireland from English oppression is at hand.


Zzzzzzzz

What a surprise, more anti-English bigotry and bile from ATS's own one-trick pony.

You really are obsessed with England aren't you - I suspect it's based on some deep rooted jealousy and desire to be English.

reply to post by LeBombDiggity
 




Curiously, it's a principle they won't extend to Scotland in any shape or form whatever.


Strange, considering you are well aware that a referendum on Scottish independance is scheduled.

Methinks you just told a blatant and deliberate lie.

Now why would a Frenchman be doing that?

reply to post by biggilo
 


If I could applaud you I would Sir.

Unfortunately what you posted doesn't sit right with the pre-conceived bigotted ideas of far too many of our American members etc.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
The liberation of Falklands,Scotland and Ireland from English oppression is at hand.


Is it really?

Or are you just saying things because you'd like them to be that way.

Go ask a Falklander resident and ask how they feel.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by malcr

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
There was an interesting article in the Guardian about a week ago that said that young Argentineans don't care about the Falklands, especially those that have been there and seen how British the place is. What makes me wonder is how many Argentineans actually believe that the plucky tango-crazy people of the Falklands are yearning for a return to Argentinean rule?

"return"? What return, the Argentinians have never ruled the occupants of the Falklands EVER. That is what is so stupid about the claim. The predecessor to Argentina (River Plate) occupied the islands for a few years when the British had buggered off to fight a war with the US........and we know how long ago that was!!!


Mate, I was being sarcastic.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 



TextThe Monroe Doctrine is a policy of the United States introduced on December 2, 1823. It stated that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression requiring U.S. intervention.[1] The Doctrine noted that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries

en.wikipedia.org...
so i dont think any one should have been shot for treason or what ever you were saying and we sure as hell should not have "nuked the UK" over it as well as they are allowed to handle their own internal matters as the faulklands are British soil there for they are exempt from said Monroe doctrine

again really dude nuke the uk? oh yeah and they haven't worn red coats for some time now



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


u dont speak for all americans and im sure you dont speak for even most americans why would we want those islands? britian owns it and is our best ally why would we need to take it? and what is this obsession all of a sudden with nuking the uk whats with all the pent up hostility twords that place america has and will mostlikely always be allied with the UK .NO one will get nuked over those islands as argentina has no nukes and the british wouldnt waste one on them why you keep trying to get people to hate the united kingdom?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


we took those places in a war with mexico and captured their leader and he cut a shady deal(to save his life) and we paid them (albeit poorly,but hey how many people who lost land got payed for it?) and if a few votes in congress would have gone diffrently we would have annexed the whole thing so i dont think the "occupation" of texas or new mexico is at risk of ending any time soon.... or about as likely as Argentina taking those islands from the Brits or even pulling off an econiomic victory against them



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


propaganda the british won the battle of britan hitler had given up on sea lion and while battered they were no where near broken we helped but russian man power british stiff upper lip and american merchandise and shipping helped out in europe but keep twisting facts to make people think that all Americans(im assuming you are one)are foolish and not versed in how the world works yeah were a cool people (most of us) but were not omnipotent beings like Q from star trek that are personal responsible for saving the whole wide world from 1900-1945 we had a hand in things but by no means are we solely responsible for any ones existence except for perhaps the Israelis



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


in all fairness that was one of the few things he said that made sense(the Monroe doctrine part thingy)as in we used it during the cuban missle crisis to justify our blockade of cuba(and its current state) and used it several times during the cold war to condemn communism in Latin America during the cold war,so i do think its still relevent today but britian gets special privileges rest of your post was spot on (didnt mean to offend ya lol or defend that guy)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by KilrathiLG
 


we don't get any special deals since we dont ask for them and the monroe declaration is pretty clear that what belonged to the old world countries stays theirs and the USA keeps its sticky beaks out of the affairs (as it should) and the use of the declaration to embargo cuba etc has no impact on the UK since we dont own those countries or are trying to influence them

but anyway these threads always end up with the same few people bashing the brits and us brits bashing back so its a mini troll war which follows reality as the argentinians seem to lose all the time



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxatoria
 


The Monroe Doctrine was initially an agreement between the USA and the UK to prevent French and Spanish expansionism and interference in the newly independant American nations etc.

The US relied on the Royal Navy to enforce this policy.

There were obviously mutual benenfits and many regard this as the beginning of the 'special relationship' between the two nations.

Whilst the US has used it on several occassions to justify their policy that still doesn't make it legal and binding in International Law.
It's a policy, not Law.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join