Argentina to fly the flag of Las Malvinas at London Olympics
- Thread starter Casually Red
- Start date
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
The only people who think we should own ireland are weidros and wind up merchants (and bankers they do have a point though) and its 30 miles less distance between london and dublin than
the coast of argentina and the falklands!.
and you do own rather a large chunk of ireland on the same spurious colonialist premise
twistedAM
Left Of The Dial
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
could you learn to quote better please? it inhibits replies to your posts because you've made it rather impossible to quote from your post.
you say:
most british people probably would , however they arent most people . Theres rather a lot more people in Latin America than in Britian . And most of them wouldnt agree . Just as i dont agree with Britian holding onto the territory of my own nation it refused to relinquish using the excuse of the very same inbred fucking paisleyites it planted here who see themselves as superior to their neighbours .
i don't give a damn whether there are more people in latin america than there are in woking. i still think you're talking nonsense when you say that britain's defence and reconquest of the falklands was 'british imperialism encroaching across the globe'. as i expect you've noticed i very much agree with you on ireland, my difficulty with what you're saying here is that it is far from convincing.
you say:
well apart from this not being a say fuck competition your assuming your point is relevant . I would suggest your dismissal of the issue of the issue of sovereignty , which numerous governments in Latin America continually emphasise as the issue , is a tad irrelevant to the issue at hand . Sovereignty , and Britians right to violate argentinas .
this is a message board. people make points or claims and other people reply to those points. or insult each other. but if you by quoting respond to a point i make with something completely irrelevant to my point and then defend your actions by dismissing my point as irrelevant, i'm left wondering why you didn't present a counter-argument in the first place instead of acting like roger irrelevant yourself. i know you can: and since i was responding directly to your claim that the argentinians were attempting to recover their sovereignty from british imperialism it would have been nice to see you expand on why you thought the argentine government had a case.
you say:
when sovereignty appears to be the issue not just Argentina but numerous governments in that region keep raising then i think once can plausibly argue the issue is indeed sovereignty , and that many countries apart from argentina do plausibly argue it . No matter how much youd prefer it to be something else .
i don't doubt they keep raising it but i don't see how you can usefully or plausibly argue that argentina was in 1982 or is now 'attempting to recover its sovereignty', when that sovereignty had never been successfully asserted in the past, when british claims to the islands date back to the sixteenth century. this is one point where you could expand on what you're saying as you are not at present convincing.
you say:
as i said youd like it to be something else , a complete irrelevance . Dropping people out of planes or not dropping people out of planes is completely irrelvant to the issue, its not X factor . Ms Kirchner doesnt drop people out of planes . By your logic then her assertion of Argentinian sovereignty must carry more weight . But of course it doesnt , hence that issue is an irrelevance . Yet you insist on keeping raising it .
throughout this thread, following on from your post 37
you say:
everyone else where ? here ? I dont expect hardly anyone on a British forum to deviate from the British position of ownership .
because you have hardly presented a compelling case for anyone to consider changing their minds, let alone changing their minds.
you say:
most british people probably would , however they arent most people . Theres rather a lot more people in Latin America than in Britian . And most of them wouldnt agree . Just as i dont agree with Britian holding onto the territory of my own nation it refused to relinquish using the excuse of the very same inbred fucking paisleyites it planted here who see themselves as superior to their neighbours .
i don't give a damn whether there are more people in latin america than there are in woking. i still think you're talking nonsense when you say that britain's defence and reconquest of the falklands was 'british imperialism encroaching across the globe'. as i expect you've noticed i very much agree with you on ireland, my difficulty with what you're saying here is that it is far from convincing.
you say:
well apart from this not being a say fuck competition your assuming your point is relevant . I would suggest your dismissal of the issue of the issue of sovereignty , which numerous governments in Latin America continually emphasise as the issue , is a tad irrelevant to the issue at hand . Sovereignty , and Britians right to violate argentinas .
this is a message board. people make points or claims and other people reply to those points. or insult each other. but if you by quoting respond to a point i make with something completely irrelevant to my point and then defend your actions by dismissing my point as irrelevant, i'm left wondering why you didn't present a counter-argument in the first place instead of acting like roger irrelevant yourself. i know you can: and since i was responding directly to your claim that the argentinians were attempting to recover their sovereignty from british imperialism it would have been nice to see you expand on why you thought the argentine government had a case.
you say:
when sovereignty appears to be the issue not just Argentina but numerous governments in that region keep raising then i think once can plausibly argue the issue is indeed sovereignty , and that many countries apart from argentina do plausibly argue it . No matter how much youd prefer it to be something else .
i don't doubt they keep raising it but i don't see how you can usefully or plausibly argue that argentina was in 1982 or is now 'attempting to recover its sovereignty', when that sovereignty had never been successfully asserted in the past, when british claims to the islands date back to the sixteenth century. this is one point where you could expand on what you're saying as you are not at present convincing.
you say:
as i said youd like it to be something else , a complete irrelevance . Dropping people out of planes or not dropping people out of planes is completely irrelvant to the issue, its not X factor . Ms Kirchner doesnt drop people out of planes . By your logic then her assertion of Argentinian sovereignty must carry more weight . But of course it doesnt , hence that issue is an irrelevance . Yet you insist on keeping raising it .
throughout this thread, following on from your post 37
i've taken you to mean the falklands war when you're talking about argentine attempts to recover its sovereignty from british imperialism or any similar coinage. i know this thread's about the olympics and what the argentines will wear there - but it's also become, in part through your posts, about the falklands war itself. i've made it clear, in the exchange following your post 37 that i'm talking about the falklands war as you are (unless you mean something different by 'argentinian attempts to recover its sovereignty from british imperialism'). i've been answering points you've raised and if you don't like it then tough.
you say:
everyone else where ? here ? I dont expect hardly anyone on a British forum to deviate from the British position of ownership .
because you have hardly presented a compelling case for anyone to consider changing their minds, let alone changing their minds.
Kirchner keeps floating these ideas every year. It's for the internal audience, though the tabloids like the Fail, the Scum and the Express (sorry, couldn't think of a sarcastic reference to that one) keep hyping it up.
The bottom line is that the Argentine military has been cut back even further than ours, we keep good tabs on them, and we have sufficient kit down there to make a new attempt really messy for the Argentines.
They won't get to wear this, it's way too over the top for the IOC to accept, no matter what presedent may have been set.
The bottom line is that the Argentine military has been cut back even further than ours, we keep good tabs on them, and we have sufficient kit down there to make a new attempt really messy for the Argentines.
They won't get to wear this, it's way too over the top for the IOC to accept, no matter what presedent may have been set.
So have *that* discussion. It's one that has way bigger issues, a hideous 3k+ killing count, and decades of misery, that dwarfs that little island near Argentina.
This thing of yours about the Falklands, is, for you, Ireland by proxy.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
It's not unique to CR its part of a strong streak of anti colonialism that runs through irish republicans. And who can blame them for it.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
most people would say ireland's suffered centuries of misery. but perhaps you only remember back to the 1970s
DownwardDog
Riding a Brompton with a power meter.
They could take them if they really wanted to by:
a) SF operation to kill the Typhoon crews (there are only 5).
and/or
b) Fly civvie airliners full of troops into MPN and PSY and see if we have the arsehole to splash them. Which we probably wouldn't.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
seeing as we are doing a shit replay of the 80's, we probably are due for another pointless war over someplace most people don't realise we still own.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
The Argentines havent demonstrated any kind of ability to be able to do (a), and (b) might have worked before the last war but the garrison is probably too big, too well-armed and too alert (given that they would know that a flight was coming in and that it wasnt a "normal" flight* with quite a bit of notice) for them to try it now.
* given that the air service to the Falklands is sparse, and likely to get sparser.
Idaho
blah blah blah
There is no moral argument from either Britain nor Argentina about the ownership of the Falklands/Malvinas. It comes down to possession being 9/10s of the law. The only way Argentina could get moral legitimacy for owning the islands is to get the inhabitants to vote for it - and they queered their pitch in that regard. Too bad. Find something else to obsess about.
likesfish
You can't park here sir
a) Thats out of tom clancy MPA is huge and a fair distance from the sea so you have the problem of landing a large enough force without being detected Argentine Bravo 20 isn't going to cut it.
B so the british let the suspicous airliner land at MPA you've just delivered your attacking force in a unarmoured tube with no means of quickly getting out to fight. PSY is a short runway good luck landing there.
Argentina is no military threat to the islands period the varipous plans rely on the british being really really stupid and argentina getting a fucntioning military from santa claus this xmas
At the risk of being labeled a "green fascist" I'd suggest making the Falklands and surrounding sea (300 miles would do) an international land and sea reserve to preserve it's importance as a environmental resource.If those living there want to stay fine,as long as they respect the reserve and are not subsidised by outside sources (Britain or Argentina for instance).
spacemonkey
I Love Noodles
Nobody will care until someone starts tapping crude oil from the region.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
I hear that LOCOG has nipped down Athena and bought a job lot of these to decorate the Argengtine rooms in the Olympic Village
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
He doesn't have one.
Red's Falklands argument is so basic as to be not worth considering. It is that the overwhelming majority of Latin Americans and the Spanish, believe that the islands are Argentine sovereign territory, and that the Falklands are closer to Argentina than the UK. That's it, that's all he has.
As you've pointed out yourself on this thread, British sovereignty had been asserted over the uninhabited and probably unvisited islands some 200 years before Argentina was raped and murdered into existence. That kills the sovereignty issue stone dead.
The second point is obviously a straw man eating a red herring, since multiple precedents exist to cite proximity as immaterial to sovereignty, and sovereignty of the Falklands is quite clear as a matter of historical fact, to anyone besides Latin Americans and a handful of Irish Republicans anyway!
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
The problem is that the two situations are incomparable. Attempting to link them, or trying to parallel the Falkland Islands situation with other British colonial activity is historically ignorant, and can be shown to be quite easily.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
so what? it's an irish republican attitude to be onside of anyone who is in rivalry with britain. It's not about comparing the situations. It's about the bone deep antipathy towards british colonialism. I'm merely pointing out that it is not an attitude unique to CR.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
And I'm merely pointing out that it's a stupid one.
"My enemy's enemy is my friend" works for some, but should be abandoned if one's enemy's enemy fucks kids.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
It's never been a doctrine I'm fond of tbh, although i can see why it might be of terrible neccesity in extremis
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Noraid raised money for IRA, IRA takes 'aid' from Lybia, a country that bombs Pan Am flight 103. Noraid supporters outraged at terrorist incident
Fair point.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i've always heard there were question marks over libya's involvement.Noraid raised money for IRA, IRA takes 'aid' from Lybia, a country that bombs Pan Am flight 103. Noraid supporters outraged at terrorist incident
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
The newsmen I knew who covered the case in the Holland told me it was 100% Iran getting revenge. I believe them, but feel that they may have got Lybia to do the deed on their behalf.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
britain offers islamists covenant of security; britain outraged at 7/7Noraid raised money for IRA, IRA takes 'aid' from Lybia, a country that bombs Pan Am flight 103. Noraid supporters outraged at terrorist incident
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
According to the likeliest theory, was the PFLP-GC that was hired, not Libya.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Possibly, but it's Lybia who took the rap and coughed up the compo.
... something that has never bothered britain's ruling class... happy to make allegiances and pacts with all kind's of wrong 'uns.
Similar threads
