Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958

Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958
Falkland/UK/Argentina - self determination thread.
Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 68

Thread: Falkland/UK/Argentina - self determination thread.

  1. #1

    Default Falkland/UK/Argentina - self determination thread.

    Thank you for your message. I feel sad for all those who lost brave men in the conflict on both side's. They all have families left behind. Also for all the vets of the conflict who I know are still suffering. But on my visit recently rumour has it that the British Government what talks to start. I am strongly opposed for many reasons. Firstly the loss of British lives but more importantly for the Islanders, some of whom are 8th generation Falkland Islanders. Its like saying to Australia give your country back to New Zealand. But they are a large and wealthy Island.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Cordoba-Argentina
    Posts
    6,392

    Default

    What talks are you talking about Sue ?

  3. #3

    Default

    I believe that the British Governent want to open negosiations with Argentina about the best way forward to solve the ongoing battle over the Islands. I think they feel it costs too much to garrison the Islands. But I feel that the Islanders have been on the Islands for hundreds of years and it is their homeland. Wny should they give this away when they know nothing else, have done no harm to Argentina and the Argentine is such a huge counrty, why do they need it and displace all these people?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Cordoba-Argentina
    Posts
    6,392

    Default

    The argentine administration have no plans to displace anybody. Moreover the Argentine constitution invites "Every men of good will in the world" to work and live in our country.

    I believe that the British Governent want to open negosiations with Argentina about the best way forward to solve the ongoing battle over the Islands.
    That sounds good but I think those rumours are not true, the relations between the 2 countries about this subject are quite cold lately.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sue Williamson View Post
    I believe that the British Governent want to open negosiations with Argentina about the best way forward to solve the ongoing battle over the Islands. I think they feel it costs too much to garrison the Islands. But I feel that the Islanders have been on the Islands for hundreds of years and it is their homeland. Wny should they give this away when they know nothing else, have done no harm to Argentina and the Argentine is such a huge counrty, why do they need it and displace all these people?
    Wars are usually fought on account of poor politico/economic decisions on one side or another. In other words they are begun by politicians. Politicians rarely get anything right and it's usually the people of whichever country , that is left to live with burden of their incompetence. In the case of the Falklands/Malvinas in 1982, it arose because of poor economic policies of both British and Argentine governments. The British defence cuts sent out the wrong signals to the Argentines, and it was an opportunity for the Argentine government to distract its people from its own economic blunders. As usual, men died on both sides.

    If any talks are to come about now, they are probably on account of the growing costs of garrisoning the islands. Again, the British tax payer is left with the economic burden. Sooner or later talks will begin, some sort of agreement will be made, and the British will slowly reduce their presence on the islands.

    In the meantime, we will continue to salute Baroness Thatcher, whose economic policies got us entangled in a war which saved her and her government from what would have been a very definate defeat in the following election the 'Falklands Factor'.


    "Although God cannot alter the past, Historians can"


    Samuel Butler


  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 32Bravo View Post
    In the meantime, we will continue to salute Baroness Thatcher, whose economic policies got us entangled in a war which saved her and her government from what would have been a very definate defeat in the following election the 'Falklands Factor'.
    And thank God she did, the Labour Party at that time had been taken over by the Trotskyite wing of the Labour Party, which had been thoroughly penetrated by, shall we say, "Eastern European interests", which had led Michael Foots 1983 manifesto to be little more than a surrender document to the Soviets in as far as it concerned defence.
    1884 electric cartridge. Look similar to anything?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,928

    Default

    Nonsense


    "Although God cannot alter the past, Historians can"


    Samuel Butler


  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    Not at all, unilateral nuclear disarmament was a central feature of the 1983 manifesto, a policy advantageous only to the Soviets, which is why they pushed it so hard via their proxies.

    Given the connections and politics of various high-ranking Labour Party members at that time, this is somewhat suspicious...
    1884 electric cartridge. Look similar to anything?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,928

    Default

    Yes, it was a part of their manifesto. That's as far as I'm willing to agree.

    I doubt that Mr Foot and his coleagues were so easily led by the Soviets. We may not agree with their policies, but they weren't politically niave, neither were they friends of the Soviet Union (perhaps Mr Scargill? - but that's another story).

    When the Falkands were invaded, Mr Foot was the first poltician to stand up in Parliament and sound anything like a statesman, as he demanded that the government take action.


    "Although God cannot alter the past, Historians can"


    Samuel Butler


  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    Former KGB agent Oleg Gordievsky accused Michael foot of being a Soviet "agent of influence" (agent Boot) (although Michael foot sued and won against the paper which published this).

    He was also a high profile member of CND, an organisation penetrated and "guided" by the Stasi (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stasi-Files-...1913042&sr=8-1) to maintain its position as for unilateral, and not multilateral disarmament.

    Given the number of Labor Party politicians with links to rather unsavoury communist front organisations, including some of the current lot, Charles Clark for instance,, I don't think it's too much of a stretch...
    1884 electric cartridge. Look similar to anything?

  11. #11

    Default

    So what do you consider is the best way forward and what are your thoughts reference the Islanders?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    British Empire
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sue Williamson View Post
    So what do you consider is the best way forward and what are your thoughts reference the Islanders?
    Self determination. If they want to be joined with Argentina then allow it. If they want to remain British then allow it. If they want to remain British but with closer trading ties to Argentina or if they want nothing whatsoever to do with either country then it's their choice.
    The Gurkha soldier
    Bravest of the brave
    Most generous of the generous
    Never had country
    More faithful friends
    Than you

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bedford, UK
    Posts
    184

    Default

    I'd second that, they should be allowed to determine their own future. It isn't the business of either the British or Argentine Government.

    I can understand the mistrust of the Islanders, they were treated badly by the Foreign Office who would happily have gotten rid of them given half a chance. For years the FO worked to undermine their interests, it was quite disgraceful.

    The problem as I see it, is that the Argentine Government is not prepared to acknowledge their right to self-determination. Neither is it prepared to accept recognised means of resolving sovereignty disputes. The only thing they're prepared to accept is negotiations leading to them being given sovereignty. Negotiations with a pre-determined outcome aren't negotiations.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,928

    Default

    Michael Foot, a Soviet agent? I'm speachless, but not because I believe it.

    Let's be clear on this, I'm not a leftwing, socialist/communist whatever. I don't have any particular favourites when it comes to party politics. I prefer to step back and look at things and make up my own mind. I'm probably wrong on most issues, but I don't go much on what I read in any individual newspaper, I try to balance it with what I read, see and hear elsewhere in the media, and of course what I study in history.


    S.W. there has to be some form of honourable accomodation which is acceptable to both sides.

    If I remember correctly, the Falklands was a coaling station for the fleet and the whalers, much the same as Aden had been. Even before 1982, it had passed its sell-by-date, and I would suggest that that was one of the reasons the Argentine government felt it could get away with the invasion.

    As the clock is ticking, Britian is investing in new large-deck carriers, which will enable larger fixed-wing aircraft to operate from them, together with the new commando carriers: Albion, Bulwark and Ocean, these would make any future plans of invasion by Argentina, rather silly. Much of the future planning for Britain's Armed Forces is for out-of-are operations, and so, as a result, the British government will be better able to launch a task force to defend the islands than they were in 1982. That being the case, it will become easier to reduce the present garrison.

    Even so, Argentina is not considered an enemy of Britain per se, and the only reason that there is potential for enmity is the islands. The Islandsers' needs cannot be ignored, but there has to be some sort of solution figured out. If it is left solely to the self-determination of the Islanders, things will not change. There has to be change, and better brains than mine need to be employed to bring it about. Watever the solution, it will be required to satisfy both the Islanders and the Argentinians. Perhaps an accomodation such as Hong Kong, we hand over sovereignty to the Argentine, on the condition that we have the run of the place for the next five hundred years or so?
    Last edited by 32Bravo; 06-17-2007 at 12:56 PM.


    "Although God cannot alter the past, Historians can"


    Samuel Butler


  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 32Bravo
    Perhaps an accomodation such as Hong Kong, we hand over sovereignty to the Argentine, on the condition that we have the run of the place for the next five hundred years or so?


    I see what you're getting at, but to move of topic for a moment, I've got a particular gripe about the HK HOTO.
    It was only the NT that were leased for ninety-nine years, the 'Fragrant Harbour' itself was never ceded to the British government, neither that of the time, nor any subsequent.
    It was given in perpetuity to the people of Great Britain and the impending rule by the PRC caused not a little consternation amongst the population, not least due to the atrocities at Tienanmin Square in '89. Those that could afford to do so gapped it, but many could only wait and see.

    Now I've got that off my chest please crack on.
    "Don't call me stupid !" - Otto 'Galtieri' West.
    __________________
    Stupidity should be a crime. Ignorance should be punished.
    Refusal to accept corroborated facts should result in a chainsaw enema.

    a luta continua, em adiante a vitória
    __________________

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •