The Falklands

[guttierrors 0]

political jousting , nothing will happen in the falklands. Syria is a more pressing concern tbh, does jamouse look a bit like cabaye?

[ewerk 26316]

What the hell is wrong with you? Did your mother not breast-feed you when you were a child or something? What is the root of this aggression?

 

I don't suffer fools at all. That is the root of my aggression. Good blokes have nothing to fear, I'm a lovely chap to the right people!

 

The irony

[SouthernMag 0]

Despite some stiff competition from Toon Man and SouthernMag, you're walking the Worst Newcomer award.

 

You've got me shitting myself now. I'm fucking petrified that some fat, friendless cunt sat safely behind his keyboard is giving me his made up award.

 

I think I'm just going to go back to work and enter the real world again instead of talking to some utter mutant on here...

aha, he nearly has 15,000 posts. So true....

 

o, hai ewerk

 

[ewerk 26316]

I don't think there's much more I need to say about you two.

[Guest CabayeAye]

I don't think there's much more I need to say about you two.

 

No, there isn't. You need to look inwards instead and try and work out where you went wrong in life.

[Kitman 2188]

I have mixed views on the Falklands, and I lived through the conflict. To boil it down, I believe we were probably right on the principle of sovereignty - on the basis that the people who live there were technically British citizens and didn't want to be annexed by Argentina - but wrong in all other respects.

 

Firstly to me it's a bit silly that a godforsaken rock in the middle of the Atlantic is treated as part of British territory and we have/had any sort of responsibility to defend it, especially given that Britain's historical claims to the islands are somewhat murky.

 

Secondly I don't think the interests of 3,000 people and a few sheep justified the expense and lives lost of the original conflict. Assuming it was about them and not oil in the first place.

 

I don't agree with Britain owning the Rock of Gibraltar but I can at least see the strategic importance of it. I was very cynical about Mrs Thatcher and her motives for the conflict and I still am. As much as Galtieri and co were an obnoxious regime I'm still not sure what the point of the conflict was, other than a vote winner.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

I agree with some of your sentiments Kitman, but in a fight between the Argentine military dictatorship of the time and Thatcher's government, I don't hesitate in siding with the latter. It's a good thing that we played a part in the end of that regime, and the word 'obnoxious' falls far short of describing its character.

Edited February 14, 2012 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[Kitman 2188]

I agree with some of your sentiments Kitman, but in a fight between the Argentine military dictatorship of the time and Thatcher's government, I don't hesitate in siding with the latter. It's a good thing that we played a part in the end of that regime, and the word 'obnoxious' falls far short of describing its character.

 

You're right about the junta. Of course we've been happy to do business with evil dictators before and since, scruples don't usually play a part in most countries' foreign policy.......

[CleeToonFan 1]

Think the main problem is Argentina are giving it the big 'imperialistic' bullshit, but they don't have a reasonable argument to owning them. The Channel Islands are closer to France than Britain, does that make them French? If the Falklands wanted independence i'd say fair enough, but why should we give them to some random nation who shouldn't have them.

[Kitman 2188]

Think the main problem is Argentina are giving it the big 'imperialistic' bullshit, but they don't have a reasonable argument to owning them. The Channel Islands are closer to France than Britain, does that make them French? If the Falklands wanted independence i'd say fair enough, but why should we give them to some random nation who shouldn't have them.

 

Is the 'imperialist' angle bullshit though? According to Wiki it was annexed as a naval base and settled as a colony to provide a staging post for rounding Cape Horn in the 1830s.....there was an Argentine garrison there already that was forced to leave at gunpoint, and Argentina has as much historic basis to its claim as the Spanish and British before the navy moved in to claim it.

 

I'm not sure I get the comparison with the Channel Islands either because it's what 20 miles? from Britain. It would be more like the equivalent of Japan annexing the Shetland Islands in the 19th century, building a naval base there and filling it full of Japanese goat herders. And then telling the UK to fuck off at gunpoint every time they asked for it to be returned. Not a perfect analogy, given the continuous population of the Shetland Islands since the Dark Ages and their proximity to Scotland, but perhaps something more like how the Argentinians see the issue.

 

Not that I'm making excuses for Argentina, or even care about The Falklands.

[CleeToonFan 1]

Think the main problem is Argentina are giving it the big 'imperialistic' bullshit, but they don't have a reasonable argument to owning them. The Channel Islands are closer to France than Britain, does that make them French? If the Falklands wanted independence i'd say fair enough, but why should we give them to some random nation who shouldn't have them.

 

Is the 'imperialist' angle bullshit though? According to Wiki it was annexed as a naval base and settled as a colony to provide a staging post for rounding Cape Horn in the 1830s.....there was an Argentine garrison there already that was forced to leave at gunpoint, and Argentina has as much historic basis to its claim as the Spanish and British before the navy moved in to claim it.

 

I'm not sure I get the comparison with the Channel Islands either because it's what 20 miles? from Britain. It would be more like the equivalent of Japan annexing the Shetland Islands in the 19th century, building a naval base there and filling it full of Japanese goat herders. And then telling the UK to fuck off at gunpoint every time they asked for it to be returned. Not a perfect analogy, given the continuous population of the Shetland Islands since the Dark Ages and their proximity to Scotland, but perhaps something more like how the Argentinians see the issue.

 

Not that I'm making excuses for Argentina, or even care about The Falklands.

If you can call it 'Argentina', they did own it for just over 10 years, the Spanish owned it, and the British have, they are the two main people in the settlement of Falklands. What I meant is that it may very well be imperialism by the British if you so please, but then surely it is with the Argentinians too? Since it's never properly been theirs? The Channel Islands are right next to France and a channel away from Britain, but they're British. I don't care about the Falklands too much either, and like I said if they wanted to be independent i'd happily let them. But giving them to a country who they don't belong to is where I stand the line. The European population of Argentina who have never properly owned the islands calling Britain imperialistic whilst wanting some islands full of people who don't want them, not see the pot calling the kettle black?

[Kitman 2188]

Think the main problem is Argentina are giving it the big 'imperialistic' bullshit, but they don't have a reasonable argument to owning them. The Channel Islands are closer to France than Britain, does that make them French? If the Falklands wanted independence i'd say fair enough, but why should we give them to some random nation who shouldn't have them.

 

Is the 'imperialist' angle bullshit though? According to Wiki it was annexed as a naval base and settled as a colony to provide a staging post for rounding Cape Horn in the 1830s.....there was an Argentine garrison there already that was forced to leave at gunpoint, and Argentina has as much historic basis to its claim as the Spanish and British before the navy moved in to claim it.

 

I'm not sure I get the comparison with the Channel Islands either because it's what 20 miles? from Britain. It would be more like the equivalent of Japan annexing the Shetland Islands in the 19th century, building a naval base there and filling it full of Japanese goat herders. And then telling the UK to fuck off at gunpoint every time they asked for it to be returned. Not a perfect analogy, given the continuous population of the Shetland Islands since the Dark Ages and their proximity to Scotland, but perhaps something more like how the Argentinians see the issue.

 

Not that I'm making excuses for Argentina, or even care about The Falklands.

If you can call it 'Argentina', they did own it for just over 10 years, the Spanish owned it, and the British have, they are the two main people in the settlement of Falklands. What I meant is that it may very well be imperialism by the British if you so please, but then surely it is with the Argentinians too? Since it's never properly been theirs? The Channel Islands are right next to France and a channel away from Britain, but they're British. I don't care about the Falklands too much either, and like I said if they wanted to be independent i'd happily let them. But giving them to a country who they don't belong to is where I stand the line. The European population of Argentina who have never properly owned the islands calling Britain imperialistic whilst wanting some islands full of people who don't want them, not see the pot calling the kettle black?

 

I see your point but my problem is I see even less sense in Britain owning it. However we can't give it to Argentina anyway after men have died to 'defend' it. Maybe we should give it to Peru.

[Guest alex]

I agree with some of your sentiments Kitman, but in a fight between the Argentine military dictatorship of the time and Thatcher's government, I don't hesitate in siding with the latter. It's a good thing that we played a part in the end of that regime, and the word 'obnoxious' falls far short of describing its character.

 

You're right about the junta. Of course we've been happy to do business with evil dictators before and since, scruples don't usually play a part in most countries' foreign policy.......

Like Pinochet.

[Kitman 2188]

I agree with some of your sentiments Kitman, but in a fight between the Argentine military dictatorship of the time and Thatcher's government, I don't hesitate in siding with the latter. It's a good thing that we played a part in the end of that regime, and the word 'obnoxious' falls far short of describing its character.

 

You're right about the junta. Of course we've been happy to do business with evil dictators before and since, scruples don't usually play a part in most countries' foreign policy.......

Like Pinochet.

 

Exactly. And Saddam Hussein, probably

[Sonatine 9990]

Not to worry, Sean Penn will sort it out.....

 

 

Sean Penn accuses Britain of 'colonialism' over Falklands

 

Sean Penn has accused Britain of colonialism and urged the government to open negotiations with Argentina over the Falkland Islands.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hollywood actor Sean Penn Photo: AP Photo/Chris Pizzello

 

 

 

9:43PM GMT 13 Feb 2012

Comments

 

 

At a meeting with Argentine president Cristina Kirchner, the Left-wing Hollywood actor referred to the islands "the Malvinas Islands of Argentina" and said Britain should entered into a UN-sponsored dialogue over their sovereignty.

 

 

"The world today is not going to tolerate any ludicrous and archaic commitment to colonialist ideology," he said during the meeting in Buenos Aires.

 

 

“I know I came in a very sensitive moment in terms of diplomacy between Argentina and the UK over the Malvinas islands.

 

Related Articles

• 
  Argentina: UK sending nuclear weapons to Falklands11 Feb 2012
  
• 
  Argentina accuses UK of sending nuclear missiles11 Feb 2012
  
• 
  Falkands are Britain's 'last refuge of declining empire' claim10 Feb 2012
  
• 
  UK and Argentina 'must stop escalating conflict over Falklands'10 Feb 2012
  

 

"And I hope that diplomats can establish true dialogue in order to solve the conflict as the world today cannot tolerate ridiculous demonstrations of colonialism.

"The way of dialogue is the only way to achieve a better solution for both nations,” he said, according to the Buenos Aires Herald.

The Oscar-nominated Penn has long been a friend of South American nationalism, visiting both Venezuela's Hugo Chávez and Cuba's

The government has consistently refused to take part in any negotiations over the status of the islands, saying that they will remain a British territory as long a majority of the 3,000 islanders wish them to.

Last week, Argentina submitted a formal complaint to the UN, accusing Britain of "militarising" the South Atlantic by sending HMS Dauntless, the Royal Navy's most advanced ship, to the region.

Tensions between the two nations are running high as the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War approaches.

[ewerk 26316]

[Sonatine 9990]

Can't argue with that tbf

[Guest alex]

Sean Penn

I'd also expect the Telegraph to know Cuba's in the Carribean rather than in South America.

[Guest CabayeAye]

Sean Penn - what an utter, utter cunt.

 

Although I wouldn't expect anything less from Americans, they've collectively been cunts about the Falklands for decades, especially in light of the fact that we backed them with plenty of blood and treasure in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Howay 12452]

Aye sure we'll do that Sean, as soon as your country opens negotiations with the Native Americans about how they can go about getting their land back at least they have a claim to it ffs the Argies have no claim at all. Does he not see how contradictory he's being accusing us of 'colonialism' yet wanting to placate the Argies colonial desires .

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3196]

So America is going to give Alaska back to the Russians then?

[ewerk 26316]

They paid for Alaska fair and square.

[Howmanheyman 26804]

Expect Sean Penn to star in Mel Gibson's latest thriller, 'Las Malvinas', where Mel plays a Falkland islander desperate to rid his country of the rule of the foul, Imperialistic, evil, effete English as he fights alongside his Argentine Cousins in a herioc struggle as the freedom fighter loses his Wife and kids in a bloody murder by the English War Lord, Jeremy Moore.

 

"Thatcher may take my kids milk, but she'll never take my artistic licence as a Hollywood Actor/Director!!"

[Guest CabayeAye]

Expect Sean Penn to star in Mel Gibson's latest thriller, 'Las Malvinas', where Mel plays a Falkland islander desperate to rid his country of the rule of the foul, Imperialistic, evil, effete English as he fights alongside his Argentine Cousins in a herioc struggle as the freedom fighter loses his Wife and kids in a bloody murder by the English War Lord, Jeremy Moore.

 

"Thatcher may take my kids milk, but she'll never take my artistic licence as a Hollywood Actor/Director!!"

 

Wouldn't surprise me TBF. BBC will probably fund it too.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

I agree with some of your sentiments Kitman, but in a fight between the Argentine military dictatorship of the time and Thatcher's government, I don't hesitate in siding with the latter. It's a good thing that we played a part in the end of that regime, and the word 'obnoxious' falls far short of describing its character.

 

You're right about the junta. Of course we've been happy to do business with evil dictators before and since, scruples don't usually play a part in most countries' foreign policy.......

 

I didn't suggest moral scruples came into Thatcher's thinking. Myself having scruples, I side with Thatcher's government in that battle. Scruple-doople-doo.