Argentina to fly the flag of Las Malvinas at London Olympics

[trampie]

So how does that work with reference to the Falklands then?

In boxing lineal terms, France held the territory originally and then sold it to Spain so Spain held the territory, Argentina then got independence from Spain and got the islands transferred to them, so the line is France, Spain and now Argentina.
Where does Britain come into it ?

 

[trampie]

If mel gibson did do a film about welsh history which event would it be.

Gibson wouldnt make a film about Welsh history, you would need a Welsh actor for such a part surely, pity Richard Burton is dead isnt it.

 

[Spymaster]

In boxing lineal terms, France held the territory originally and then sold it to Spain so Spain held the territory, Argentina then got independence from Spain and got the islands transferred to them, so the line is France, Spain and now Argentina.

So nothing to do with 'indigenous populations' at all then.

Where does Britain come into it ?

In the bit that you just missed out.

France's claim was no stronger than Britain's in the first place.

Can you also show us when and how Argentina "got the islands transferred to them"?

You should give Cristina a bell mate, you're inventing arguments that she hasn't even thought of!

 

[DotCommunist]

iirc the americans even had a go at them during ww1 to deny the germans a staging point. Although, iirc, they just trashed the whaling port

 

[Spymaster]

The last surviving indigenous people should have sovereignty over their land and not Johnny comelatelies ....

So you're arguing for control of Argentina to be passed to their 1.6% indigenous population that they haven't murdered yet, right?

 

[trampie]

Can you also show us when and how Argentina "got the islands transferred to them"?

Uti possidetis juris

 

[Spymaster]

iirc the americans even had a go at them during ww1 to deny the germans a staging point. Although, iirc, they just trashed the whaling port

Not sure about that. The Yanks did trash Vernet's trading post but that was in the 1830s.

 

[Spymaster]

Uti possidetis juris

Can you explain how you would see the principle applied to the Falkland Islands? It applies to newly formed states seeking independence, but if we did cite it in the case of the Falklands it would strengthen the British claim!

Whilst you're confusing yourself with latin legal terms, take a look at terra nullis.

 

[Giles]

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 .

What about Spain and Ceuta and Melilla then?

Giles..

 

[trampie]

Can you explain how you would see the principle applied to the Falkland Islands?

Whilst you're confusing yourself with latin legal terms, take a look at terra nullis.

There we are then, its either uti possidetis juris or its terra nullis, therefore its either Argentinian, line of lineage France-Spain-Argentina or its no mans land, so what is it Spymaster ?

 

[Spymaster]

There we are then, its either uti possidetis juris or its terra nullis, therefore its either Argentinian, line of lineage France-Spain-Argentina or its no mans land, so what is it Spymaster ?

Are you just cut and pasting some other dullard's argument without understanding what you're posting?

Uti possidetis juris goes out the window because Spain had less of a legitimate claim to the Falklands than Britain.

Terra nullius is the principle upon which Britain claimed the islands in the first place (occupation of territory to which there is no previous sovereign claim).

 

[Giles]

your notion of democracy is its confined to the small group of people on argentina territory who have allegiance to britian , who then have a veto over the wishes of everyone else who lives on argentinian territory for territorial unity . Much the same as it has always worked in Ireland . And youve a cheek to be talking about the strong arm of the state when one considers the military resources Britian has sent accross 8000 miles to uphold that minority veto .

The Falklands are 300 miles or more away from Argentina, though, aren't they?

It is not like the Isle of Wight or some island that is within their coastal waters.

You cannot even see the Falklands from Argentina.

If we extend a general "right" for a country to lay claim to any other bit of land 300 miles off their shores, there's be a lot of conflicts all over the world.

Why do they care so much about these small windswept islands? When the inhabitants don't even want to be Argentinian anyway.

Giles..

 

[trampie]

Are you just cut and pasting some other dullard's argument without understanding what you're posting?

Uti possidetis juris goes out the window because the Falklands is not and never has been a state seeking independence.

Terra nullius is the principle upon which Britain claimed the islands in the first place (occupation of territory to which there is no previous sovereign claim).

The British have no claim then, 'occupation of territory to which there is no previous sovereign claim' you say, well the French claimed it they had a settlemen of 250 people there, they sold it to the Spanish for cash, the Spanish left a plague behind claiming sovereignty, the Spanish then gave independance to Argentina, Argentina get the Falklands through international law uti possidetis juris which is a law that states any newly formed sovereign states should have the same borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence.

Where is the British claim Spymaster ?

 

[Spymaster]

The British have no claim then, 'occupation of territory to which there is no previous sovereign claim' you say, well the French claimed it they had a settlemen of 250 people there ...

The British claim had already been made at this point in 1690 by John Strong who claimed the islands for the crown, and named the channel between the two main islands 'Falkland Sound'.

they sold it to the Spanish for cash,

After being asked to leave by the Brits, the French sold a settlement to the Spanish in 1767. The British had already reasserted sovereignty and established the Port Egmont colony in 1765/6. The French cannot sell British territory.

the Spanish then gave independance to Argentina, Argentina get the Falklands through international law uti possidetis juris which is a law that states any newly formed sovereign states should have the same borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence.

The islands were not Spain's to give!

At worst the territory was disputed, which renders void any concept of uti possidetis juris.

 

[trampie]

Strong merely landed there, the French inhabited it.

 

[Spymaster]

Strong merely landed there, the French inhabited it.

Even if we accept that (the Brits didn't, hence the request for the French to leave), sovereignty of the territory would have been disputed at the time of the French sale of Port St. Louise, and therefore Spain's claim sucks.

 

[trampie]

Are you just cut and pasting some other dullard's argument without understanding what you're posting?

Uti possidetis juris goes out the window because Spain had less of a legitimate claim to the Falklands than Britain.

Terra nullius is the principle upon which Britain claimed the islands in the first place (occupation of territory to which there is no previous sovereign claim).

The French occupied it first Spymaster not the British.

The French then sold it to the Spanish who then gave Argentina independence in doing so Argentina then gained the Falklands as any newly formed sovereign states should have the same borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence 'uti possidetis juris'.

Game shot and match to trampie.

 

[agricola]

Even if we accept that (the Brits didn't, hence the request for the French to leave), sovereignty of the territory would have been disputed at the time of the French sale of Port St. Louise, and therefore Spain's claim sucks.

Indeed, and lets not forget that the purchase is not what the Spanish (and therefore Argentine) claim is based on. That claim is based on the Treaty of Utrecht, and ultimately on the Papal decision to split the New World between the Spanish and Portugese.

 

[trampie]

Even if we accept that (the Brits didn't, hence the request for the French to leave), sovereignty of the territory would have been disputed at the time of the French sale of Port St. Louise, and therefore Spain's claim sucks.

'Even if we accept that', dawning on you now is it Spymaster.

 

[agricola]

The French occupied it first Spymaster not the British.

The French then sold it to the Spanish who then gave Argentina independence in doing so Argentina then gained the Falklands as any newly formed sovereign states should have the same borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence 'uti possidetis juris'.

Game shot and match to trampie.

The problem with this trampie is that the Spanish did acknowledge - though did not release their own - the British claim in 1771.

 

[Pickman's model]

The French occupied it first Spymaster not the British.

The French then sold it to the Spanish who then gave Argentina independence in doing so Argentina then gained the Falklands as any newly formed sovereign states should have the same borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence 'uti possidetis juris'.

Game shot and match to trampie.

can you now address the chinese claim to taiwan?

 

[Pickman's model]

The British have no claim then, 'occupation of territory to which there is no previous sovereign claim' you say, well the French claimed it they had a settlemen of 250 people there, they sold it to the Spanish for cash, the Spanish left a plague behind claiming sovereignty, the Spanish then gave independance to Argentina, Argentina get the Falklands through international law uti possidetis juris which is a law that states any newly formed sovereign states should have the same borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence.

Where is the British claim Spymaster ?

and south georgia? where's the argentine claim to south georgia?

 

[trampie]

can you now address the chinese claim to taiwan?

I should start charging for my services, China and Formosa and even South Georgia for that matter will have to wait, lol, its Saturday afternoon therefore its rugger and footie.

 

[Spymaster]

The French occupied it first Spymaster not the British.

French sovereignty was disputed by the British on the grounds of prior discovery. That's why they were asked to leave. Disputed territory cannot be sold!

So not only was Spain's acquisition from France therefore totally dubious, but the territory had been unquestionably continuously settled by Britain by the time of Argentinian Independence in 1820, so the concept of uti possidetis juris cannot possibly apply.

Why don't you get this?

 

[Spymaster]

Indeed, and lets not forget that the purchase is not what the Spanish (and therefore Argentine) claim is based on. That claim is based on the Treaty of Utrecht, and ultimately on the Papal decision to split the New World between the Spanish and Portugese.

Quite. As I mentioned before, Trampie is inventing arguments that even the Argentinians don't try to employ.

 

[rekil]

A dossier of previously unpublished photos of dictatorship victims who washed up on the Uruguayan coast from 1976-1983 were handed over to the courts the other day. Bodies were tied so there was no chance to survive being dropped into the sea and reports detailed castrations, rape with 'sharp objects', and various other signs of torture.

 

[Pickman's model]

A dossier of previously unpublished photos of dictatorship victims who washed up on the Uruguayan coast from 1976-1983 were handed over to the courts the other day. Bodies were tied so there was no chance to survive being dropped into the sea and reports detailed castrations, rape with 'sharp objects', and various other signs of torture.

yes but they were ARGENTINIAN islands, so the nature of the argentine regime is immaterial

 

[rekil]

I'll get called a 'reactionary' now.

 

[MikeMcc]

I doesn't matter, they're British. They are going to stay British and nothing is likely to change that in the foreseeable future. Can we now find something more constructive to argue about?

 

[Andrew Hertford]

I doesn't matter, they're British. They are going to stay British and nothing is likely to change that in the foreseeable future. Can we now find something more constructive to argue about?

Indeed. I hear that Argentina are to fly the flag of Las Malvinas at the London Olympics. Any comments?