Forum menu
I fnd it interestng that the Lefties have moved their position here, from previously arguing that the Argentines had a valid claim to the FI
Whereas I would categorise myself as a 'leftie', yet believe that the Falklands are British and should remain British... (might be something to do with where my Mother grew up)
Well george galloway has made himself look like a prize cock on the 10 o'clock show on channel 4 talking about this issue. Suggesting the fauklanders should be moved to north yorkshire and given a million pounds each to keep them happy. Hmm maybe they actually want to live there and be british. Hmm he almost sounds as rational as tj
you said his [b]view[/b] had moved from argentina having a valid claim
Nope, I said his [b]argument[/b] had moved from that to talking about the fact that the Chagos and FI were being treated differently
Which is [i]exactly[/i] what he's done
Maybe you should actually read what I said Junky, instead of distorting it, I didn't mention anyone changing their [i]views[/i] only changing their [i]argument[/i]
I would categorise myself as a 'leftie'
I think Z-11 uses the term leftie only when it suits him. He conveniently forgets that when "Old" Labour where in government, which I'm sure he would categorise as leftie, Argentina did not dare to invade the Falklands. They waited until Z-11's beloved Thatcher was PM, and they were convinced she wasn't bothered about the FI. Her Foreign Secretary was forced to resign over the cock up.
I believe the islands belong to argentina and they have the only satisfactory claim, however I do also give credence to the right self determination of the islanders.A stance I have held consistently
IIRC you stated that the islanders could self determine as long as it wasn't to self determine as British. You expanded on that to state that Britain was the main island and that any of the other islands were not part of Britain.
all here if you need to refresh to be consistent 😉
Whereas I would categorise myself as a 'leftie', yet believe that the Falklands are British and should remain British... (might be something to do with where my Mother grew up)
the same could be said of others posting contrary views on here 😉
No biganddaft did I did not. 🙄
I did point out an inconsistency in the way others were using the word "britain"
But, erm, you're wrong Ernie
Argentine forces [b]did[/b] invade, they landed on Southern Thule in '76 and the "Old Labour" government failed to remove them, rejecting the use of military force
Fully documented in Hansard
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1978/may/10/thule-island-and-the-argentine
Note these pertinent words from 1978...
Is it not very dangerous to leave that sort of situation hanging in the air for 18 months or longer, and [u]would it not really encourage the Argentine Government to try something more ambitious, and even more dangerous?[/u]
As for arguing that the Falkland Islanders want to remain British well of course they do - they're British, but there is no free movement to the Falkland Island, anyone who is Argentine isn't allowed to live there. Not exactly surprising then is it ? Besides, there's no problem with them remaining British. However if it is important for them to live under British sovereignty then the obvious answer is that they should live in the British Isles, not 8,000 miles away from them ffs.
Ernie agreeing with Gorgeous George 😉
christ that is desperate Zulu it is there for all to see who is distorting [ ok to be fair it is just a barrel scrappingly poor argument in an attempt to safe face]
you clearly say his view which is not his argument it is what he thinks.
FWIW and if it helps I am happy to concede that you often dont mean what you say and often say what you dont mean.
Christ it really is the playground on this thread
who posted this?
FWIW I have no time for places not in Britain but that want to be British. I thin the islands should be given independence under UN protection. Same as Northern Ireland or Gibralter.
go on, who posted this?
own up 😉
TandemJeremy - Member
No biganddaft did I did not.
cough! 😉
, Argentina did not dare to invade the Falklands.
Argentine forces did invade, they landed on Southern Thule in '76
Southern Thule is a collection of the three southernmost islands in the South Sandwich Islands: Bellingshausen, Cook, and Thule (Morrell)
at least make it a challenge dude
is south thule part of the Falklands then?
In what sense is he wrong?
i bet you now claim you never said that even though you say ernie is wrong - he is not they did not invade the FI
they landed on Southern Thule in '76
😀 So what did Maggie do when she became PM ? Take Southern Thule back ? No ! She withdrew the little protection that the Falklanders had ! Smart move eh ?
BTW why the winky big and daft ?
And since I wrote that some time ago, I think we can safely say that it's Gorgeous George who agrees with me - not the other way round.
which at that time was part of the Falkland Islands Dependency Junky...
Again, from Hansard
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is true, as reported in the Observer on Sunday, 7th May, that 40 Argentinians are occupying Thule Island[b] in the Falkland Dependencies[/b], and if so, what action they propose to take.
So, you're Wrong...
Biganddaft. what point are you trying to make?
Both things are possible. I think that is a decent solution however I doubt the islanders would accept that.
It is not a simplistic thing that you try to make it out to be and its perfectly possible to accept the islanders have a say but they chose something I think is wrong.
I simply did not say what yo claim I did - even out of context the quote does not say it.
🙄
big_n_daft - Memberwho posted this?
Apart from trawling through other people's history big and daft, have you actually got a point you want to make about the Falklands ? Or is that too challenging for you ?
And since I wrote that some time ago, I think we can safely say that it's Gorgeous George who agrees with me - not the other way round.
i'm sure he would appreciate the nuance 😉
Ricky Gervais hit the nail on the head.... Its like fending off an irritating dwarf
so they were dependencies of the FI rather than part of the FI. Is that like say the FI are dependencies of the UK but not part of them ...is it that sort of thing 🙄
Oh we could do this pin dance for days but it is late
i'm sure he would appreciate the nuance 😉
And I'd like to appreciate what the hell you're on about.
So apparently Gorgeous George has today said something that is vaguely simular to something which I said some time ago, and ? Why is that significant ? Am I supposed to be upset or something ? Do you even know why you mentioned it ?
Stop winking at me and explain yourself please.
Biganddaft. what point are you trying to make?
you selectively misrepresent your views, in this case that you believe that the islanders should not be able to self determine as British
you denied this
I substantiated my statement
ernie_lynch
Apart from trawling through other people's history big and daft, have you actually got a point you want to make about the Falklands ? Or is that too challenging for you ?
trawl through my history and you will find my substantive view
it's the same now,
I don't feel the need to deny my position when someone quotes what I've said back at me
I believe the islands belong to argentina and they have the only satisfactory claim
Don't you mean they belong to the Buenos Aires government of 1776? I'm struggling to see what claim any later administration there has on them.
I forgot
😉
just for ernie
Bigandaft.
why do you feel it necessary to misrepresent what I say so badly?
I simply did not say what yo claim nor does the quote even out of context say that.
FWIW I have no time for places not in Britain but that want to be British. I thin the islands should be given independence under UN protection. Same as Northern Ireland or Gibralter.
is not the same as
in this case that you believe that the islanders should not be able to self determine as British
When I have clearly said I believe in the islanders right to self determination
TandemJeremy - Member
I simply did not say what yo claim I did - even out of context the quote does not say it.
to nail the lie
the full post
TandemJeremy - Member
Teamhurtmore - I pointed out the hypocrisy - thats all. that and ainflamatory spanish phrase. I didn't actually state what I thought should be done with the islands did IFWIW I have no time for places not in Britain but that want to be British. I thin the islands should be given independence under UN protection. Same as Northern Ireland or Gibralter.
Posted 1 month ago # Report-Post
or had someone hijacked your account?
big_n_daft - Membertrawl through my history and you will find my substantive view
No thanks I'd rather not bother.
I asked you what was the point of digging up an old post of mine and claiming that it represents the same thing as Gorgeous George has apparently said today.
Your inability to answer the question suggests that you yourself don't know why you did it. Which is rather sad.
Can yo not read? difficulty in comprehension? Obviously so
that does not say
in this case that you believe that the islanders should not be able to self determine as British
When I have explicitly said several times I believe in the islanders right to self determination!
If the choice was mine thats what I would do - thats what I believe is right but its not my frikking choice is it? Its the islanders choice and they make a diffenrt choice.
Jeezo - how hard of thinking are you?
Why such pathetic attempt to try to show me as something I am not?
When I have explicitly said several times I believe in the islanders right to self determination!
If the choice was mine thats what I would do - thats what I believe is right but its not my frikking choice is it? Its the islanders choice and they make a diffenrt choice.
that's OK then, they can have a vote, you'll support the outcome, and if it's that they want to remain British you'll regard it as a national duty that we defend the people, the territorial integrity of the islands, and ensure that there is a future for the population respecting their cultural identity and rights just as you would for Scotland
Mods: do us all a favour and ban the big *hitters for a day or so as they are spoiling my late night half cut browsing of your fine site. Pure unadulterated drivle, OUT
It’s always a pleasure to see the usual suspects who are "more informed than anyone else" and "have a more enlightened view than anyone else" determining peoples fate, people that they have never met, or in fact, have never even visited in their homeland to discuss their view on the situation, or to ask their opinion or wishes. It’s just the usual, they should belong to Argentina because its closer, blah, blah, blah, colonialism, empire, blah blah, etc., etc. So, judging by that logic, Argentina should also claim south sandwich island, south Georgia, etc. etc. all the way to Antarctica. But, the internet is a wonderful place to get the "facts" but to be isolated from the reality. So all the usual who are all for democracy and freedom of speech, to decide that the opinion and wishes of the majority do not count, isn't that a dictatorship? For a country to lay claim to another smaller country against the peoples wishes isn’t that colonialism? but what do I know, I am just an old sailor that has spent sometime in the South Atlantic, who's three main memories from that area in the 80's, was how the people there just wanted the whole situation to go back to how it was before the conflict and to return to their previously lives (which, thanks to Argentinas actions, could never really happen), the size of the kelp forests (****in enormous) and also why the **** didn’t the Argentinians map their minefields instead of just dropping them out of a ****in helicopter wherever they decided. The third one can only really be appreciated when you actually realise where you are.
Anyway, enough said. Out.
It’s always a pleasure to see the usual suspects who are "more informed than anyone else" and "have a more enlightened view than anyone else"
Whilst you on the other hand are an expert who's opinion is valid because you are "an old sailor that has spent sometime in the South Atlantic" ? I see. Makes you wonder why these cheeky gits think they have a right to any opinions when they quite possibly haven't even been on the Isle of Wight ferry.
So all the usual who are all for democracy and freedom of speech, to decide that the opinion and wishes of the majority do not count, isn't that a dictatorship?
Well no one can doubt your democratic credentials, eg, [i]"My opinion is valid - yours isn't"[/i]
But here's one of those "facts" which you speak of in : [i]"the internet is a wonderful place to get the "facts" but to be isolated from the reality."[/i]
Three years after the Falklands War UN Resolution 40/21 called on both sides to initiate negotiations concerning the future of the Falkland Islands. The vote was overwhelming, 107 in favour to 4 against.
Included among the 107 in favour was Britain's 'closest friend and ally' the Unites States. The 4 who voted against were, the UK, Belize, Oman, and Solomon Islands.
I think it's fair to say that Britain is isolated, almost every country in the world supports Argentina's position concerning the need to negotiate the decolonisation of the Falklands. And I think [i]you[/i] appear to be isolated from the reality
I think it's fair to say that Britain is isolated, almost every country in the world supports Argentina's position concerning the need to negotiate the decolonisation of the Falklands. And I think you appear to be isolated from the reality
But as someone with argentinian relations what is your view ernie?
oh, found it
As for arguing that the Falkland Islanders want to remain British well of course they do - they're British, but there is no free movement to the Falkland Island, anyone who is Argentine isn't allowed to live there. Not exactly surprising then is it ? Besides, there's no problem with them remaining British. However if it is important for them to live under British sovereignty then the obvious answer is that they should live in the British Isles, not 8,000 miles away from them ffs.
btw do your family have a claim for property on the island or is this just an opinion based on your cultural heritage?
btw, can you let me know when you and TJ are going to have an exchange on the right of the islanders to self determine as British and stay exactly where they are. 😉
I think it's fair to say that Britain is isolated, almost every country in the world supports Argentina's position concerning the need to negotiate the decolonisation of the Falklands. And I think you appear to be isolated from the reality
Complete utter total unadulterated PISH.
God you lot are boring.
As usual I see an interesting thread read the OP, then instead of reading from the begining I check the last page....
Oh what surprise the usual arguments of the ego pushers. Another thread I won't bother reading, cheers guys.
Three years after the Falklands War UN Resolution 40/21 called on both sides to initiate negotiations concerning the future of the Falkland Islands. The vote was overwhelming, 107 in favour to 4 against.Included among the 107 in favour was Britain's 'closest friend and ally' the Unites States. The 4 who voted against were, the UK, Belize, Oman, and Solomon Islands.
I think it's fair to say that Britain is isolated, almost every country in the world supports Argentina's position concerning the need to negotiate the decolonisation of the Falklands. And I think you appear to be isolated from the reality
I'll repost what I said before:
zokes - MemberI still haven't the foggiest what the UN, Argentina, or anyone else expect to get out of talks. They will probably go somewhere along the lines of:
Argentina: "We'd quite like control of the islands"
UK: "We'd rather you didn't"
UN: "Could you share?"
UK and Argentina: (in unison) "No!"
So, what, exactly, is the point in 'negotiating'? Argentina wants them, we have them, and don't want to hand them over. Negotiations are usually supposed to lead to a compromise. This situation is intractable, both sides want what the other wants least.
For anyone unfamiliar with what happens with negotiations over something this intractable, take a look at the middle east....
Most countries in the world have been artificially formed by conquest, war and takeover. By displacing peoples, forcing change.
This has been the way of the world for hundreds/thousands of years. Does not always make it "right", sometimes for progress, sometimes not.
Does displacing people from Diego Garcia and having a US base make the world a better place? mibbies aye, mibbies no. Did displacing the crofters for sheep in the highlands make it a better place....
Life it not always fair
Its all about oil right?
Well, UK will need facilities, workers etc. Closest place is Argentina. In return for port access, facilities share the oil rights, exploration rights. No negotaion on soverignty, unless by FI decision, but good movement can be had, everyone a winner.
As to the talk of the FI gaining a Oil Wealth fun, I think not..... not after the price the UK paid back in '82
Got fed upp with with all the pedants posting over 4 pages of dross.....are there any MTB'ers who post on here from FI??
i'd be interested in there perspective on the OP
...is this just an opinion based on your cultural heritage?
I'm fairly sure I haven't given my opinion on whether Argentina has valid claims to the Falklands, and I would be surprised if I had as it's actually something which I don't feel very strongly about. I can see that you have apparently trawled through my history desperately trying to find a clue. I do have an opinion though.
My suggestion that people who want to live under British sovereignty should perhaps live in Britain was simply offered as a solution to a problem. In the same way that I would offer a simular solution to Italians who want to live under Italian sovereignty, or Germans who want to live under German sovereignty, etc.
What I am interested in though, is the apparent ability of some individuals to live in denial of the awkward and inconvenient facts by putting their fingers in their ears and saying, "Na..na..na..na..not listening". Actually I find it quite fascinating. Here's a classic example :
wrecker - MemberI think it's fair to say that Britain is isolated, almost every country in the world supports Argentina's position concerning the need to negotiate the decolonisation of the Falklands. And I think you appear to be isolated from the reality
[b]"Complete utter total unadulterated PISH"[/b].
Clearly it's not "Complete utter total unadulterated PISH", as these facts shows :
Three years after the Falklands War UN Resolution 40/21 called on both sides to initiate negotiations concerning the future of the Falkland Islands. The vote was overwhelming, 107 in favour to 4 against.
Included among the 107 in favour was Britain's 'closest friend and ally' the Unites States. The 4 who voted against were, the UK, Belize, Oman, and Solomon Islands.
Three years after the Falklands War UN Resolution 40/21 called on both sides to initiate negotiations concerning the future of the Falkland Islands. The vote was overwhelming, 107 in favour to 4 against.Included among the 107 in favour was Britain's 'closest friend and ally' the Unites States. The 4 who voted against were, the UK, Belize, Oman, and Solomon Islands.
You're missing the point.
initiate negotiations concerning the future of the Falkland Islands
Does not mean or insinuate "we all agree with argentina" in anyones imagination. It's a typically soft UN [i]request[/i] that we have a nice chat.
ernie, did the UN resolution that was voted in favour of specifically mention the decolonisation of the FI? or is this something you added on?
I can see why virtually everyone would vote for negotiating, but doubt they voted for decolonisation.
I can see why virtually everyone would vote for negotiating
Really ? Well that puts them at odds with the UK government. The UK government will not support any negotiations with Argentina concerning the Falklands. As I said, the UK is isolated in this issue - something which you called "Complete utter total unadulterated PISH"., despite the fact that it's true.
The UN considers the Falkland Islands one of the remaining 16 colonies which need to be decolonised.
This negotiating then, what are the terms?
I'm happy to negotiate with someone in the UK who's never had ownership of my belongings I have in storage there. I'll happily negotiate for years over whether I should keep them or whether they can have them, but I'm not going to change my stance one iota.
(This could get repetitive)
The UN considers the Falkland Islands one of the remaining 16 colonies which need to be decolonised.
But who were displaced by this colonisation? To my knowledge, the penguins still live there quite happily...