South American block on Falkland registered vessels.

I really should have said united Kingdom as my country – I got caught in the same trap others did 🙂

However I am warned off by the mods for obsessive arguing so cannot debate the is further 🙂

zokes – Member
And TJ, it appears that boats are out of the question, but where do you stand on bridges? Should I tell my in-laws on Anglesey to tear up their British passports?

they will be inconsolable when they realise they don’t have his love! 😉

stop press TJ loves them!

TandemJeremy – Member
However I am warned off by the mods for obsessive arguing so cannot debate the is further

the new Edinburgh defence? 😉

Great isn’t it. True as well 🙂

So – why do we defend the Falkland islanders and not the chagossians?

Maybe what we’re defending is that the land is British? So regarding the Falklands, it’s British and folk live there, reference the chagossians, perhaps the islands are like a bit of mod land. It’s British, but you can’t live there even if your forefathers did. And while there might be cheeky trails, watch out for unexplored ordinance while you’re at it!

Edit: Dammit, in behind the mods!

Free Inchgarvie from the British oppressors!

Thirdly, the Islanders always made it clear that they wished to remain British andconsistently resisted any change in their constitutional relationship with the United Kingdom.

So why defend their right to return (if that is what you are saying) and not the right of the Falklands to maintain the status quo of their sovereignty. Where is the consistency?

Ok again two points
1. We put the people there they are not the islanders they are settlers – settlers who booted out the argies as well
2. The UN rules the people have no say for the reasons i mention
, on the question of the Malvinas Islands, had determined that such a principle did not apply, he said, since the inhabitants of the South Atlantic Islands had not been subjugated to a colonial power.

Yes a lot of time has passed but no one has explained to me yet why it would be ok for say Israel to invade Palestine send them all away , settle there with a jewish population and then “respect the wishes of the population there to stay Jewish/Israeli from that pooint forward…Can I assume you would all be fine with this principle in action?

What claim , beyond imperialism and expansionism, would we have to an sland that far away from us?

The world changes all the time, populations move around….its not always pleasant when done by force but trying to reverse hundreds of years of immigration, colonisation etc seems pointless

Not pointless but impossible IMHO

With the falklands it would be rather simple to address the issue gieven how small it is and how small the population is. i am sure we can find them a windy wet and cold island with F all on somewhere of Scotland they can call home.

ernie_lynch are you an argie? seem very informed

Half Argie. Although almost born Argie – my mum left Argentina when she was 8 months pregnant with me and returned 3 years later. Most of my relativities are Argies.

And yes, I understand the passion which all Argentines feel about the Falklands, and btw most of Latin America too. Yet despite that I am actually fairly ambivalent about the whole issue. I just think the UN resolutions on the Falklands are the way forward. IMO Britain really needs to let go of the past and not hang on to remnants of a former empire. And that goes for all former European colonials powers and far flung outposts such Hong Kong, Macau, etc.

The UN rules the people have no say for the reasons i mention…

Don’t you think it’s relevant that that was not, in fact, a “UN ruling”, but the words of an Argentinian diplomat speaking as an observer at the UN Special Committee on Decolonization? http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/06/guam-falkland-islandsmalvinas-subject.html

Edit: to be clear, I see that you did give a link to a link which wasn’t originally displayed on my screen, and in that it was clear who said the words. Apologies for confusion and unnecessary sarcasm.

With the falklands it would be rather simple to address the issue gieven how small it is and how small the population is. i am sure we can find them a windy wet and cold island with F all on somewhere of Scotland they can call home.

There’s no need for that. Under UN resolutions the interests of present Falklands Islanders are to be protected. They can remain with wide ranging rights such as property rights etc. A gradual handover of sovereignty and decolonisation is all that is required. Sooner or later Britain will lose her South Atlantic colonies, there’s really no point hanging onto the 19th century.

which was not, in fact, a “UN ruling”

It is a UN ruling. The UN considers the Falkland Islands to be a colony, for that reason the wishes of the present occupiers are not paramount.

Yet despite that I am actually fairly ambivalent about the whole issue. I just think the UN resolutions on the Falklands are the way forward. IMO Britain really needs to let go of the past and not hang on to remnants of a former empire. And that goes for all former European colonials powers and far flung outposts such Hong Kong, Macau, etc

I suggest you need to talk to some of the people who’s future you are so keen to change. Let us know what they say to you. 😉

I’d also love to understand how a population can’t self determine to continue their current status, or change it if they so wish. If devolution/ independence or the status quo is up for a vote for the Jocks why not the islanders?

There’s no need for that. Under UN resolutions the interests of present Falklands Islanders are to be protected. They can remain with wide ranging rights such as property rights etc. A gradual handover of sovereignty and decolonisation is all that is required. Sooner or later Britain will lose her South Atlantic colonies, there’s really no point hanging onto the 19th century

when do the French get the Channel Islands? after all they are closer to the France as geography seems to be your main criterea for ownership

Sooner or later Britain will lose her South Atlantic colonies, there’s really no point hanging onto the 19th century.

Why? Because they’re geographically far away?
Edit: High five

Aren’t Argentina just as culpable about hanging onto the past?

I suggest you need to talk to some of the people who’s future you are so keen to change.

Me ? Why me ? You need to address that issue with the UN. I really couldn’t give a toss who owns the Falkland Islands, why should I ? I just recognise Argentina’s legal and legitimate claim.

I really couldn’t give a toss who owns the Falkland Islands, why should I ? I just recognise Argentina’s legal and legitimate claim.

🙄

Aren’t Argentina just as culpable about hanging onto the past?

Moreso. Losers clinging on to some historical grievance are much more pathetic than winners celebrating their past. Football teaches us this.

Apologies for confusion and unnecessary sarcasm

I have come to expect it from your every post 😉

I’d also love to understand how a population can’t self determine to continue their current status, or change it if they so wish.

would it be ok for say Israel to invade Palestine send them all away , settle there with a jewish population and then “respect the wishes of the population there to stay Jewish/Israeli from that pooint forward…Can I assume you would all be fine with this principle in action?

forgive the repeat but this is what happened just a long time ago..can you really not see that this does not mean you suddenly have rights that need respecting..if you do disagee could you explain with reference to the Israeli example i cite as to why this would be ok.

You should contact the UN as well with your argument
Its like you arguing we should respect the bike thiefs view of what should happen to your bike and not yours.

🙄

when do the French get the Channel Islands? after all they are closer to the France as geography seems to be your main criterea for ownership

at least they are in the same hemisphere
Not sure why you think the distance is irreleavnt tbh..How can it be “ours” at that distance? Imagine if Brazil had the Isle of Mann

a winner earlier

Even if it is a colonial hangover, that still gives the UK more “entitlement” to the island than Argentina will ever (legitimately) have. If the populace want self determination, then fine let them vote on it. That would satisfy the UN ruling.
At the end of the day, the UK can put its fingers in its ears and completely ignore all of the boring, macho posturing and sabre rattling from the argies. They do not have anywhere near the capability to take it and nobody else is bothered about it enough to do it for them. It really is a case of tough tits, argie. No amount of bleating will change that.

forgive the repeat but this is what happened just a long time ago..can you really not see that this does not mean you suddenly have rights that need respecting..

when do we get the half of France we have a legitimate claim to back?

If the populace want self determination, then fine let them vote on it. That would satisfy the UN ruling.

No it wouldn’t “satisfy the UN ruling”.

Can’t we just nuke the shitty little falkland islands? End of the problem.

@junkyard

A perfect example!

Imagine if Brazil had the Isle of Mann

If they’d had it for several hundred years, there were only Brazilians living there and we as a country had never actually owned it, (i know we actually dont own it) then it would be fair enough maybe? Be a nice place for a holiday, racing and carnival!

Under UN resolutions the interests of present Falklands Islanders are to be protected. They can remain with wide ranging rights such as property rights etc. A gradual handover of sovereignty and decolonisation is all that is required.

how this works in Argentina

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AMR13/002/2011/en/92609f9e-c461-4311-be18-43a6145d4b1e/amr130022011en.html

Can I assume you would all be fine with this principle in action?

I’m not unveiling (yet 😉 ) whether I think it is fine or not, but Israel, the Palestinian Authority and (not officially) Hamas have all accepted this in practice. None of them believes that the 1967 borders will exactly be resurrected and none of them believes that population transfer for all of the post-67 settlements would occur in the event of a final settlement.

now it may have been lost in all the rhetoric but back to the original point. Boats under the Falklands flag won’t be allowed entry to various south american ports. Reports suggest this could be as many as up to 25 vessels, mainly fishing boats. I’m just curious as to how many of this fleet are actually affected by this ban. Presumably, if none of them dock on the mainland this means bugger all apart from the political slanging match??? Anyone?

I’m just curious as to how many of this fleet are actually affected by this ban

none, they can all fly the red ensign instead IIRC

Trolling again B n D Why not ask the french people what they want to do 🙄
why not explain with the Israel example why it would be ok. That is what i have asked numerous times now …cant understand why all you folk dont explain it to me ?? Surely its easy…. you know you are on weak ground and wont even enter the field as your argument is that weak

That would satisfy the UN ruling.

FFS have you read the thread No non and no

At the end of the day, the UK can put its fingers in its ears and completely ignore all of the boring, macho posturing and sabre rattling from the argies.

YES YES YES this is the kind of sensitive non sabre rattling kind of an attiutude we need well done you for doing as you preach..admirable 🙄

No it wouldn’t “satisfy the UN ruling”.

Actually you’re correct. All the UN states is

to proceed without delay with the negotiations… with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the problem, bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations and of General Assembly UN Resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas

So we just need a bit of a chat, agree to disagree and that’s it. Done.

this is the kind of sensitive non sabre rattling kind of an attiutude we need

Actually, it is. Rather than reply with an equally aggressive stance. Keeping mum is positively passive in comparison to current argie rhetoric.

having read the u.n link, am i the only one that sees the massive irony in all those south american countries and russia championing decolonization 😆

seriously guys, a little self awareness might not go amiss.

why not explain with the Israel example why it would be ok. That is what i have asked numerous times now …cant understand why all you folk dont explain it to me ?? Surely its easy…. you know you are on weak ground and wont even enter the field as your argument is that weak

start a different thread, I’m sure you will get plenty of contributions

back on topic, I suggest you go and tell the islanders how other people can determine their future and come back and tell us what they say.

Not sure why you think the distance is irreleavnt tbh..How can it be “ours” at that distance?

at what distance do you have to give up sovereignty please give us a number

Not sure why you think the distance is irreleavnt tbh..How can it be “ours” at that distance?

How can Germany not be French at that proximity?
… I don’t understand where you’re drawing the lines

Junkyard – you’ve asked people again about the Israeli’s, but I’m afraid you’ve still not come back to me with an answer on the validity of a possible Mexican claim to the southern United States… 😉

ps – I don’t accept your proposition that the The UN ruled the people have no say for the reasons – since UN Resolution 38/12 specifically states

Reaffirming the need for the parties to take due account of the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII) and 37/9,

why not explain with the Israel example why it would be ok

You and TJ do love to rail against a hypocrisy that no-one is espousing, don’t you?

at what distance do you have to give up sovereignty please give us a number

start a thread I am sure you will get lots of answers

Zulu I did start reading Wiki on texas tbh but then it just confused me as I was skimming there was alot there to read can i take the Fifth?

Excellent kona now explain why if Israel did this it would be ok …perhaps you are claiming noone on this thread said we should respect the wishes of the people of the island ?

These just end up as pointless attempts to point score ..no one will use Israel as and example they are on to losser trying. i wont give a definitive answer re distance for the sme reason – both sides have a point but one that is ahrd to define.
It is rather a dull sport and has reminded me why i left the politcs stuff alone for a while

Had eneough banter Happy Christmas see you all when I get back to work and it is another quiet day.

EDIT: Evn though i wont read it dont forget to say I flounced or accuse me of loosing or some other usual STW “winners ” stuff- winner meaning stayed on thread longest ….no one changes their view.