Argentina to fly the flag of Las Malvinas at London Olympics
- Thread starter Casually Red
- Start date
)
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
I was unaware of that . If I remember correctly the paratroop regiment were decorated by Elizabeth Windsor for their Derry massacre in 1972 . And just the other day I was reading about the decision to beginning of an actual inquest into the killing of a 15 year old victim in the same city , who had his head almost blown clean off with a GPMG from a range of 7 feet . Only took almost 40 years to have an inquest , much less bring anyone to account.
http://www.derryjournal.com/news/lo...rmy_threat_on_day_of_teen_s_killing_1_3312644
12 year old Majella OHare suffered almost an identical fate ,again at close range with a GPMG , some years after that and they only got around to apologising earlier this year . Still no criminal charges for shredding a child with a machine gun at point blank range though .
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/28/ministry-defence-apology-majella-ohare
Bearing in mind the only one of them who ever got sent down for killing a civilian was Lee Clegg , who then got a pardon from on high and was reinstated to the British army , this holding to account business seems neither regular nor ..well..actually true .
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Quite.
Casually Red and Trampie are "making smoke"; attempting to derail the thread into an argument in which they might not get their arses kicked so compehensively.
It's funny!
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
And this relates to the Falklands ........ how exactly?
Come on, Red. This is about the Falklands.
Surely that's why you started the thread .... to debate the issue!
So I withdraw my comments about you and Trampie being a pair of ignorant cocks.
Let's start again and approach this as neutrals. Fair?
I'll start:
Why does Argentina have a more legitimate claim to the Falkland Islands than the UK?
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
The faces of the occupation:
bearing in mind i spent over 30 years looking at identical scenes almost every time i looked out my front window - and that they were going on for much longer than that before i was ever born - I find it rather hard to empathisise with the inbred little englanders flying the empires flag on Las Malvinas and their few months of being discommoded. Especially when I bear in mind the Argentinians managed not to kill or maim a single islander when they were there much less round them up and put them in camps . Are you saying all that makes the Argentinians bad or something ?
how bad does that make the opposition look then ?
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
excellent fucking post
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
except im not neutral , and its about Las Malvinas. Britian has no legitmate business laying claim to another territory 8000 miles away from its shores . Its imperialism , pure and simple . You plainly get your kicks from still being a shadow of a former imperial power which has the benefit of superior military technology to a developing Latin American state , which permits you fuck them about in their backyard 8000 miles away. Thats the only basis of your legitmacy , just as it was with everyone else the uk fucks about with in their backyard , whether at Suez , Crossmaglen , Basra , Helmand or anywhere else the UK insists on projecting/inflicting itself. Except 8000 miles away is stretching it even by those standards .
Now the basis for the addendum to the argentinian claim lodged at the UN weighs about 40 0dd kilos , and has been 12 full years in preparation. Britian has no more right to cliam that territory than spain would to claim any bit of argetina and its islands. Its an imperial hangover that flouts UN conventions on former imperial powers respecting the sovereign integrity of former colonies and being bound to leave that sovereign territory intact and undivided. Insisting a territory 8000 miles away from your shores in a different hemisphere is your possession is nothing but imperialism by an stretch of the imagination . And argentina has a fully legitmate right to challenge and reject imperialism on it offshore islands.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
im replying to the false claim made in his fucking post . Its not your business who i reply to or dont . Although i understand the rbuttal is something youd regard as unhelpful.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
What has this got to do with the people who were born on the Falkland Islands and are the descendants of Islanders going back 150 years? Maybe the English should be sent back to Normandy, Norway, Germany etc. Should the residents of Pitcairn be thrown off that island? What about New Zealand? What about erm.... Argentina?
Lets assume that the Argentinians did claim the island first. So what? Did they have the right to do so? What the fuck is this; finders keepers? If so, why not give it to the French as they got there before anyone?
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
spot on . Their military capability would pose some problems , thats why the sovereignty of hong kong was ultimately respected . And the USAs too .
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
The residents do have a claim to it though, and THEY wish to remain part of the UK.
dylanredefined
Not a house elf a tiger
Yes but trampie and casually red hate the English and would happily see them and anyone who supports them dead.Just so they could feel better.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Apart from, inter alia, the suggestion people going to the falklands were coerced - the bit about 'we took the from britain and put them there',
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
This is a total strawman . Argentina have never demanded the islanders leave . They had full control of the place for months and never kicked them out , which would have been quite easy . The argentinians dont object to the presence of the islanders and never have .The notIon that the islanders would have to leave is a complete fiction . Its not about kicking anyone out , bar the british military and oil companies .
The territories lie off their coast , Britians coast is 8000 miles away . Spain laid claim to argentina once . That claim today would be invalid . Its not about first , its accepting you dont have an empire , like spain , and youve no right to be claiming argentinian territory 8000 miles way today . Something Spain doesnt do any more either .
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
thats bollocks frankly
dylanredefined
Not a house elf a tiger
Is it fuck.Your only interest in the Falklands is too piss off the British.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
nope , your actually wrong there .
Doesn't matter a damn, the Islanders don't want to be Argentinian, same as the Gibraltarians (?) don't want to be Spanish.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
Why does distance matter?
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
fuck them
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
if its 8000 miles away it plainly isnt in the UK and the UK has no business going there . Its a part of somewhere else the UK fancies owning . Which makes it imperialism.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
And again, why does distance matter?
No it doesn't. Imperialism is the foreign imposition of power on peoples who do not want to be subject to that power.
Great! So the interests of nation-states trump the wishes of individuals and their communities. And you're calling me the imperialist?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Ok, now we're getting somewhere. You've become a little less Father Ted and a little more Dougal McGuire.
If we agree that you're correct in the present day (and I do), by what right does Argentina have a stronger claim, given that their nation wasn't in existence before 1813 and Britain first settled the islands in 1766. This is really important, Red, so please offer your opinion.
But it isn't is it?
This is the bear-trap ....... Whereas there are dozens of examples of genuine Brit Imperialism, this isn't one.
Never happened.
I'll stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you in condemning most of "the British Empire" (I'm an Irish/nignog, btw) but you've backed the wrong horse with the Falklands.
I really don't!
Which ones? What a load of bollocks. Yer making stuff up!
What "imperialism", on what basis?
You're entire argument is based on no more than "it's like this because I say so".
That's fascist.
If we agree that you're correct in the present day (and I do), by what right does Argentina have a stronger claim, given that their nation wasn't in existence before 1813 and Britain first settled the islands in 1766. This is really important, Red, so please offer your opinion.
But it isn't is it?
This is the bear-trap ....... Whereas there are dozens of examples of genuine Brit Imperialism, this isn't one.
Imperialism is ... said:
Never happened.
I'll stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you in condemning most of "the British Empire" (I'm an Irish/nignog, btw) but you've backed the wrong horse with the Falklands.
I really don't!
Which ones? What a load of bollocks. Yer making stuff up!
What "imperialism", on what basis?
You're entire argument is based on no more than "it's like this because I say so".
That's fascist.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
[quote="ItWillNeverWork, post:
ok then, pakistan can claim bradford . Many thousands of its nationals and descendants live there . Poland can claim huge bits of this country too .
imperialism is also about violating national sovereignty by claiming other nations territory. Nobody except for US troops live on Guantanamo bay . Nobody lived in the Suez canal . Its still imperialism . Your analysis is flawed in that regard . If it were true britian could claim bits of any small countries shoreline and exploit its resources on the basis nobody lived there .
well for a start i havent called you an imperialist , you completely imagined that . And the rights of nation states to their sovereign territory and resources certainly do trump any tiny national minoority who refuse to integrate with the dagos and instead pledge allegiance to some old german 8000 miles away . Further more that doesnt equate to imperialism in any manner .
If the residents of Bradford opted to give their allegiance to Pakistan tomorrow Id refute they had any right to disrupt British sovereignty . Id take the position that Britians integrity as a nation state most certainly dfid trump any communties right to transfer sovereignty somewhere else thousands of miles way . And that doesnt make me an imperialist either .[/quote]
ok then, pakistan can claim bradford . Many thousands of its nationals and descendants live there . Poland can claim huge bits of this country too .
imperialism is also about violating national sovereignty by claiming other nations territory. Nobody except for US troops live on Guantanamo bay . Nobody lived in the Suez canal . Its still imperialism . Your analysis is flawed in that regard . If it were true britian could claim bits of any small countries shoreline and exploit its resources on the basis nobody lived there .
well for a start i havent called you an imperialist , you completely imagined that . And the rights of nation states to their sovereign territory and resources certainly do trump any tiny national minoority who refuse to integrate with the dagos and instead pledge allegiance to some old german 8000 miles away . Further more that doesnt equate to imperialism in any manner .
If the residents of Bradford opted to give their allegiance to Pakistan tomorrow Id refute they had any right to disrupt British sovereignty . Id take the position that Britians integrity as a nation state most certainly dfid trump any communties right to transfer sovereignty somewhere else thousands of miles way . And that doesnt make me an imperialist either .[/quote]
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
But the UK are not just suddenly 'claiming' the Falklands; that happened centuries ago. The situation now is what must be taken into consideration. I would agree with you if the Falklands had been part of Argentina since the 1800's, but they have not.
It's their right to integrate with whoever they want.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
[quote="Spymaster, post: 1
while your still doing your alf garnett
on the same basis they have a right to reject any spanish claim to their territory, which also predates the existence of Argentina as an independent nation . Whether a spaniard or an englishman laid claim to Argentinian territory first is neither here nor there . No gang of spanish decendants would have any right to claim the bit of argentina territory it inhabited belonged to spain , even if they spoke the same language . Whether its spanish or British claiming their territory is neither here nor there . No colonial power has a right to claim argentine territory as its own no matter how long its claim dates from . Whether the bit they lay claim to is Buenos Aires or Las Malvinas makes no difference . Whether its a spanish or British claim makes no difference . When the colonial claim dates from makes no difference . TArgentina claimed its rightful sovereignty over its national territory when it established its independence . That nations sovereign integrity must be respected in its totality by all imperialist powers , whether spanish or British . Spain eventually got the message and did that . Britian hoiwever has not .
Your argument would make sense if it was Spain laying claim to Las Malvinas , however it isnt . Although i suspect thats why youve relied so heavily on this spanish descendants non-argument to try and equate/conflate the 2 .
the notion that this time theyre fucking around thousands of miles way isnt imperialism..honest guv ..is fanciful . Its imperialism . The presence of their loyalists on the territory doesnt make it any less so . Spain could find loyalists in argentina too if it put its mind to it .
yes it is happening . Theyve gone thousands of miles out of their way to project their superior military technology to help themselves to argentinian territory and resources . Using the presence of a few hundred inbred loyalists to justify it
have i fuck . I wouldnt have backed it hong kong or guantanamo either .
United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. (Adopted by the UN General Assembly on 14th December 1960).
Article 6 states:
"Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations."
no its not
nope , and fidel castro and hugo chavez arent fascists either .
while your still doing your alf garnett
on the same basis they have a right to reject any spanish claim to their territory, which also predates the existence of Argentina as an independent nation . Whether a spaniard or an englishman laid claim to Argentinian territory first is neither here nor there . No gang of spanish decendants would have any right to claim the bit of argentina territory it inhabited belonged to spain , even if they spoke the same language . Whether its spanish or British claiming their territory is neither here nor there . No colonial power has a right to claim argentine territory as its own no matter how long its claim dates from . Whether the bit they lay claim to is Buenos Aires or Las Malvinas makes no difference . Whether its a spanish or British claim makes no difference . When the colonial claim dates from makes no difference . TArgentina claimed its rightful sovereignty over its national territory when it established its independence . That nations sovereign integrity must be respected in its totality by all imperialist powers , whether spanish or British . Spain eventually got the message and did that . Britian hoiwever has not .
Your argument would make sense if it was Spain laying claim to Las Malvinas , however it isnt . Although i suspect thats why youve relied so heavily on this spanish descendants non-argument to try and equate/conflate the 2 .
the notion that this time theyre fucking around thousands of miles way isnt imperialism..honest guv ..is fanciful . Its imperialism . The presence of their loyalists on the territory doesnt make it any less so . Spain could find loyalists in argentina too if it put its mind to it .
yes it is happening . Theyve gone thousands of miles out of their way to project their superior military technology to help themselves to argentinian territory and resources . Using the presence of a few hundred inbred loyalists to justify it
have i fuck . I wouldnt have backed it hong kong or guantanamo either .
Nope .
United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. (Adopted by the UN General Assembly on 14th December 1960).
Article 6 states:
"Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations."
the imperialism that sees a former imperial power laying claim to a colony 8000 miles way on someone elses coast line in a different hemisphere and using that as an excuse to swipe their national resources . That imperialism .
no its not
nope , and fidel castro and hugo chavez arent fascists either .
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
[quote="ItWillNeverWork, post: 10744226
theyve been claimed by argentina since its independence from another competing colonial power in the region . As far as Argentina , and indeed the rest of latin america , is concerned they always have been part of argentina whether an imperialist power claimed them or not .
its not their right to violate the sovereignty of a sovereign nation . Nobody has a right to do that . Britian routinely forgets that unfortunately .
theyve been claimed by argentina since its independence from another competing colonial power in the region . As far as Argentina , and indeed the rest of latin america , is concerned they always have been part of argentina whether an imperialist power claimed them or not .
its not their right to violate the sovereignty of a sovereign nation . Nobody has a right to do that . Britian routinely forgets that unfortunately .
Sovereignty is a legal definition, and the sovereignty of the Falklands legally resides with Britain. Same as the Channel Islands which, you'll have noticed, have not been invaded by the French who are a lot nearer.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
It resides there under British law . Which isnt any more superior to Argentinian law . Which also claims legal sovereignty over their offshore islands , many thousands of miles from Britian. France doesnt claim any sovereignty over the English channel islands . Neither does Argentina .
Similar threads
