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.

 

Falkland Islands to hold referendum on sovereignty

page: 12
13
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by deepankarm
No, i am reffering to the daydreaming british who are yet to wake up in the post colonial world.



why do you not then condemn Argentina for seeking to return to colonialist ways with the Falklands?




posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick
Argentina for all intensive purposes is a 3rd world country with beautiful women. The only time they ever even make the news is when they're crying over a 2 mile big island. Who cares what the Argentinas "say" they're going to do?


P.s. my dad just got back from Argentina, said the food sucked


Why did your dad go there? If you did not care, what they say they are going to do, then why are you posting here about it?



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


Germanicus is that you?
Just curiuous.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 


Why does China care about some puny islands thousands of miles away when they have Australia, its resources and all of their inhabitants as their slaves? China wants very little from this side of the world.. I suspect your women are in trouble though!...



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by Physic
 


Germanicus is that you?
Just curiuous.


Is the answer pertinent to to the topic?



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
www.bbc.co.uk...

President Kirchner is flapping her bingo wings at the UN, she has got no chance the people who live there want to remain British and that is that.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TritonTaranis
 


This is the joke of the century.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


So would you care to answer the question I keep posing, or are you going to ignore it like all the other anti-British people?

Do you think the people of the Falklands should be able to decide their own fate, or should Argentina be able to force them into somethign they dont want?



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


they should not allow the settlers vote, as they are the ones who stole the property..get it?

Note this headline this morning and how it says" recaptured" not "reclaimed"




(Reuters) - Prime Minister David Cameron warned Argentina on Thursday that London stood "ready and willing" to defend the Falkland Islands, 30 years after Britain recaptured the South Atlantic archipelago whose sovereignty remains a hotly contested issue.


Be like if I came over to your place and squatted it with some friends and then when came time to get the title to the property, we would be the majority in the household and claim it as ours, even though it is rightfully yours...
edit on 15-6-2012 by Physic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


Who is this King you're banging on about? You also are clearly unaware of the distinction between "The Crown" and the Monarch. "The Crown" is the British state, the monarch is some old dear whos ancestors handed over pretty much all the Crown Estate to the Government in return for a salary. Our Queen only has a personal wealth in the low tens of millions and is pretty much powerless.

Anyway, that's all I can be arsed with. You're clearly an idiot so I won't waste my time.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


Those "settlers" descend from people who have lived there longer than most of the ancestors of the people in Argentina!

And yes, "recaptured" would be the correct term to use if you are sezing something back by force. "Reclaimed" sounds like you've gone to a lost and found to get your socks back.

Christ all mighty...



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Those there before the illegal colonization, should be allowed to vote, those who established the illegal squatting colonization should not be allowed to vote, and if decided to expel them, that should be acceptable and they will be able to move, same as the ones forced off the land before them, however those paying tribute to the Crown and Taxes,, sure have other territory to move back too, wherever home was before, this is like the Gaza Strip in ways....
edit on 15-6-2012 by Physic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Physic
reply to post by stumason
 


Those there before the illegal colonization, should be allowed to vote, those who established the illegal squatting colonization should not be allowed to vote, and if decided to expell them, that should be acceptable and they will be able to move, same as the ones forced off the land before them, however those paying tribute to the Crown and Taxes,, sure have other territory to move back too, wherever home was before, this is like the Gaza Strip in ways....
edit on 15-6-2012 by Physic because: (no reason given)


It was not illegal they have been living there for 7 generations, by your reckoning the people of Argentina should not be able to vote because they to are squatting.
Are you just trolling because you really don't have a clue.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


Actually a more accurate analogy would be people moving into a vacant plot in a street then working hard over a period of time to build a small but loved home and then years later the new owners of the house next door to the plot claiming it as their's simply because it's next door even though they have absolutely no legal or moral right to it whatsoever.

Perhaps you should spare some of your moral indignation etc for the Amerindians who Argentina deliberately mudered to the point of extinction to feed Argentina's desire for colonial expansion - but then again that wouldn't fit in with your anti-UK bigotted agenda would it.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


7 generations or 1, what about the 1 generation before them, that they ran off from the island .... can they recapture their land or should they be the ones to vote on the issue, other ones who stole it.

Are you just so convinced it is yours, and no need for discussion and end of the matter, as that is what the King says, and you have to agree with it?

If I am troll?

Does that make you a shill?
edit on 15-6-2012 by Physic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


I do agree and empathize with them and if they had not ran off the majority of the original settlers and inhabitants then would be more sympathetic.

Really what it comes down to is a thorough review of the history and treaties signed and broken over the years to conclude who is rightful owners...

If you settle in a disputed territory where the title and land deed is dispute, and ran off the ones who opposed your side of it, and laid claim to it in their absence..worked the land and lived on and prospered and survived, would think you all back rent and fees for land use, to those who were disposed of and exiled.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


OMG what King? there was not a generation of any type before we settled there, yes a prison and some jailers (29 of them) thats it....do some reading.
Like I said before by your reckoning the US,Canada, Argentina should all leave because they took land from the indigenous people. grow up and stop trolling. BTW where are you from?
edit on 15-6-2012 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


What king?




posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
reply to post by Flavian
 


This is nothing other than a publicity stunt, the vote is already pre-determind. I doubt it will end the Argentinian claims to the islands.


In the murky conspiracy driven world of ATS, it is easy to forget that sometimes things are what they are. Which in this case is to point out the wishes of the islanders - whose voices might otherwise get drowned out in the argument between Argentina and UK.
Dear me of course it is already 'pre-determined'. But only in the sense that we already know how the islanders feel about it. However it needs to be official rather than anecdotal.

Having said all that, I couldn't give a stuff how it pans out. In one sense I would like them to vote for Argentina - it would save us a packet. Though I don't see why they should be allied with one country or another. We have British descendants all over the world - but it doesn't mean they are British.
Blood was shed to protect a small bunch of people who no doubt would rather drive sharp pointy sticks in their eyes than come anywhere near the UK.
Will it end the Argentiniam claims? Probably not. IMO it's beyond silly that either country thinks these benighted islands are worth shedding blood over.

edit on 15-6-2012 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Physic
 


But you are basing Argentina's claim on an illegal Penal Colony that was in operation for a matter of months - UK claims stem from well before that.

And 200 years of continued settlement far outweigh any possible agreement that may or may not have been contravened all them years ago.

Argentina has never had a permanent settlement on the islands - their claims are tenuous at best and are nothing but neo-colonialism - but because it fits in with your bigotted viewpoint of things you are perfectly willing to ignore that or the simple fact that the whole Argentinian history is based on colonialism itself.

Kirchner had the chance to both provide a much needed boost to the Argentinan economy and to greatly improve and develop relationships with the Islanders which could quite easily the sovereignty issue given time.
That she chose to decline the offer in favour of trying to elevate her own personal image speaks volumes of just exactly where her priorities lie - and they most definately are not in the best interests ofthe Argentinian people.

But I guess that's ok is it?

ETA.
Oh, and I forgot to mention;
'They' did not run off the Argentians, they were given the chance to stay on - an offer the majority took up willingly.
edit on 15/6/12 by Freeborn because: Add ETA



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join