Las Malvinas AKA The Falkland Islands - why the argy-bargy?

by cedars 319 Replies latest members politics

• 

  dgp

  Moshe, the person could conceivably be someone of British and Argentine descent. I have met at least three such people and they are fully bilingual. And then, Argentina is not the most backwards country in the world (though sometimes some Argentines try very hard to push the country back). It might surprise some people, but Jorge Luis Borges, himself a great world writer in his own right, living in Argentina, spoke English and Spanish at home as a young child.

  I wouldn't suspect this person for being that well informed - politics is force-fed on us in a way it's never force fed on children elsewhere. Or for being able to debate, which is something Argentines are born with.

  That said, I do find it odd that this person should choose that particular nickname.
• 

  Think About It

  I don't think things add up either. No way a newly DF'd young JW woman would have this much passion for the Falklands, and choose the JWN name Las Malvinas. So for those banging on long time JWN poster Moshe, be sure you know who you are defending first. Good debate, but all for nothing. England owns it and is not going to just leave or be forced out.

  Think About It
• 

  tornapart

  Moshe - I hate to say this, but I think you can be quite spiteful at times. Give someone the benefit of the doubt before you go making nasty aspersions about someone's character (that you don't even know).

  I think this thread has been really interesting as I was in my early 20's when the Falkland invasion/war took place and I've never really understood why it has been such a big issue for Argentinians (who I personally have nothing against as individuals).

  Thanks to this thread I'm beginning to understand a lot more, from both sides. It's eye opening.
• 

  Lady Lee

  Still, this character, real or fictional, whoever this is, is being personally attacked because of the claim that she is single and pregnant. I'm not cool with that.

  I am not cool with it either. If you don't like a poster stay away from her threads or discuss the topic and stay on topic.

  Personal attacks are not welcome here. Check the Posting Guidelines below
• 

  cedars

  Agreed Lady Lee, I wanted to add my voice to similar sentiments earlier, but I had trouble posting.

  I do feel sorry for Emilie with this thread. I genuinely think that, like many Argentinians, she's been taken in by a cynical government ploy to distract from their own internal woes of corruption and economic turmoil. Rowan seems more objective about the whole thing, and I wish Emilie could take a leaf out of his book. I understand that Emilie refuses to let go of conflicts that were waged between our two nations that took place more than 150 years ago, but no matter how she phrases her questions, it just keeps sounding like sour grapes, or " están verdes" as they probably say in Argentina.

  Then there is the small matter of the islanders themselves, and that they overwhelmingly want to remain British. I fail to see what is left to discuss when faced with that damning fact alone? Emilie, try to see this from their point of view. Imagine you were a Falklands islander born and raised as a Brit, and you wanted to remain under British rule, but then (due to various political pressure) your government abandoned you and handed your home over to a neighboring country in a diplomatic gesture. Would you be pleased about that? Would you feel as though your rights had been respected? Or would you feel betrayed? I know how I would feel, and I can't help but sympathise with the islanders that this keeps rumbling on when they have already spoken loud and clear on the issue and the matter is closed.

  I know you keep raising historical arguments, but the timeline shown by besty on page 9 of this thread was pretty damning. Judging by the number of years the Islands were vacant prior to the arrival of the British, the penguins have more of a claim to the islands than the Argentinians do. Now all of a sudden there's a sniff of oil, and Argentina wants them back. I just can't fathom your seeming inability to face the facts (as well as the more subtle inuendos) of the situation.

  Your government keeps demanding "talks", but there is nothing to talk about. I can demand talks with the Mayor of London to seize control of the capital if I want to, but I know it won't get me anywhere. Why do you, an obviously educated and enlightened person, so easily go along with your country when it comes to this bizarre dispute?

  Cedars
• 

  Chariklo

  Lady Lee, it really is not a personal attack.

  If you read the whole thread, better yet the two threads together, the other being the Disfellowshipped! thread, (and yes, I have read your post there) you'll find that it is full of real discussion and debate, and very interesting it has been, too. Some of us are learning a great deal, and enjoying doing so.

  Moshe's contributions have been pithy but pertinent. Not attacking. And Emilie has given as good as she's got. She hasn't been personally attacked because of the claim that she's single and pregnant.

  However, eyebrows have been raised at the discrepancies, the confrontation, the apparent wish to dive straight in to draw out British opposition and paint it in a bad "colonial" light, and it is interesting in the context of current Argentinian actions under the guise of diplomatic exchanges (see above, and there's much more.)

  I am sending you a PM.
• 

  tornapart

  Chariklo.. I believe that Moshe did personally attack her. It was uncalled for and Lady Lee is right.

  And if her father was a war veteran then it's understandable she'd have personal feelings over the whole thing.
• 

  Chariklo

  Torn, he made a valid point, but possibly not in the most gentlemanly way. That's as far as I'll go with that.

  Of course, people on both sides have bad experiences in their families. I do not think that's what is going on here. If you read the whole thread, and consider how she presented herself here much less than a week ago...is it 4 days ago?...no more than 5...but against that the chosen name and how quickly she got into this subject, and the manner of her arguments, you may begin to ask questions yourself. Put that into the context of the Argentinian desire to paint Britain as imperialistic and colonial, and Argentina's other actions, some listed above, and you begin to see a different picture emerging.

  Basically, what you see here may not be what you are actually getting. Who would arouse more sympathy than an unmarried mum without family because of recent disfellowshipping, and, we are told, not even a boyfriend? Look at the arguments presented. Consider and reflect.

  Could this all be smoke and mirrors? I think Moshe suspected such, and I have a feeling he's got it right.
• 

  Las Malvinas son Argentinas

  So Charliko, moshe does have a point you say? Which one would that be? That I should have been on birth control and not gotten impregnated, or that I should name my child after the Malvinas and not bother with posting about this subject here on JWN? Oh wait, let me scroll down a little. So I am possibly a man because I do not openly wail on this forum about being without a man to raise my baby, and show concern over the impending arrival. My command of English makes me suspect, as well as the times that I post. Let the kangaroo court now be in session!

  When I started the “Disfellowshipped” thread, I made a simple introduction explaining that I was newly disfellowshipped and that I wanted to get reinstated in order to repair some family relations before going to the USA for grad studies. Besides my username and my slogan at the bottom of my posting, I did not come in here barreling in screaming about the Malvinas. A few people got the reference, and I was directed toward this thread for discussion about that. Further in the “Disfellowshipped” thread, I was asked to reveal more about myself. Despite initial reluctance, I told you in confidence what my current situation is. Some people could not understand why I would try for reinstatement, and so additional information was added (despite my reluctance). The conversation stayed civil on the “Disfellowshipped” thread with many pleasant remarks given. I appreciated them.

  The Malvinas discussion also got off to constructive start. Though I expressed my opinion on the Malvinas, it was not done too forcefully and I acknowledged the islanders’ rights and wishes, and tried to set out terms for a diplomatic solution. Several posters (cofty, cedars, and besty) countered with their own feelings, and they articulated the British position quite well. The presence of the islanders on the Malvinas is definitely an issue which should be taken into effect, and I have to agree with that. An Argentine voice was asked for, and I obliged. No hurt feelings on both sides.

  However, you decided you were going to open up wiki articles and throw an encyclopedia at my head, using half-baked logic about how Britain had always had legal claim to the islands despite a succession of Argentine governors in the 1820s. When I countered with that, you tried to insist that they really weren’t Argentine agents at all, even though they accepted their commission as Argentine governors in the islands. Like a victorious kid leading a gang, you danced and shouted about how I just wasn’t getting it, and did not want to listen. That’s when this conversation got nasty and personal.

  There is and can be no excuse for mocking and humiliating someone because they are disfellowshipped and pregnant. This wasn’t information I was quite ready to reveal, but I was encouraged to do so. My mistake. I never thought that this information would so quickly be used against me in a completely different thread about the Malvinas. The actual issues weren’t being discussed anymore, instead it was all about me. You played a huge part in that, Charliko. A moderator gets involved and you immediately shoot off a PM to her, no doubt to clear your own name and make the case that I am a troll or not who I say I am. It’s amusing to see the rats scamper when someone comes around that can actually do something about it. You are still stuck in your conspiracy theories about me. Am I that interesting for making a few remarks about the Malvinas that you would hear at almost any Argentine dinner table? Why the constant forced explanations when someone posts something sympathetic to me? I seem to be a new hobby for you, when all I did was give some personal information I now regret giving in the first place, and my opinions about the sovereignty of the islands. I just don’t get your level of negativity as much as I abhor moshe’s sexist and crude comments to me. As much as you do not want to make me the victim, you are doing just that.
• 

  cofty

  There is and can be no excuse for mocking and humiliating someone because they are disfellowshipped and pregnant.

  Indeed! This is supposed to be a forum for support for ex-JWs isn't it? Even ones who don't share our personal political opinions.

  LMSA - I disagree with your views on the Falklands for reasons I have explained above however I think you have conducted your side of the debate intelligently and with grace. Thank you.

  What others get out of psycho-analysing you is beyond me.

  moshe - Argue with the issues like some of us have done here, don't attack the person making points you don't agree with.

  Should LMSA apologise for having a good grasp of English? In my judgement LMSA is genuine but so what if she is posting from New Zeland just becasue she enjoys a debate? Its been a much more informative discussion on both sides than what passes for debate on lots of other threads.