Personally I have found this debate to be extremely interesting and I thank LMSA for her input. It's obvious that it's something Argentinians are passionate about, I didn't realise how much so until she spoke of it. I think it's a real shame that such an informative debate should have become vindictive and personal just because someone is putting a side across that they feel strongly about. LMSA has just as much right to feel strongly about the 'Malivinas' as Brits do about the 'Falklands'.
Las Malvinas AKA The Falkland Islands - why the argy-bargy?
by cedars 319 Replies latest members politics
-
-
rowan
dgp, you raise some very interesting points. Indeed we are put in the bind of defending KK or be deemed unpatriotic.
This woman is following the Chavez tactic of silencing opposition, putting pressure on independent journalism (though tax collecting audits, seizing financial control of audio-visual media, now trying to seize control of the only business that provides newspaper paper). Taxing the middle class to the point of asfixia to support her political clientelism. Seizing approximately 1 billion dollars from all private citizen's AFJP accounts (our equivalent to IRAs) to finance her last political campaign. It has been proven that Chavez was contributing heavily for her first election. google "antonini wilson's suitcase". When the suitcase scandal exploded, she accused the USA goverment of practicing "trash politics". That woman is an embarrasament.
(BTW, when people say Obama is socialistic, seriously, you have NO IDEA what is to live under a socialistic goverment)
Back home, anybody who reads anything other than the goverment propaganda realizes the Malvinas issue is nothing but smoke.
-
cedars
I'm not sure whether anyone's posted this link yet, but I thought this was quite a moving statement on behalf of the falkland islanders in response to a recent provocative olympics advert that was filmed by Argentina (in which an Argentine athlete was filmed running up and down a war memorial)...
http://www.falklands.gov.fk//news/
Of course, this is one man's statement, but it seems to set out the position of the islanders rather clearly. It baffles me that Argentina thinks there is anything to discuss...
Cedars
-
dgp
Rowan: The Romans knew it: Panem et circenses (bread and circuses). I'm afraid Cristina is only interested in the "circuses" part, and that is why she has taken what Argentines view as a legitimate concern to make them look the other way while she does her thing.
That said, at least she's a lot better looking than Chávez :-), and she doesn't break the crap-o-meter every time she speaks.
-
Chariklo
The actual issues weren’t being discussed anymore, instead it was all about me. You played a huge part in that, Charliko.
Well, I'm not sure how you worked that out. I would have thought I'd done a very great deal trying to sort out the real truth about the history of the islands.I've certainly spent a huge amount of time researching the Falklands history from the fifteenth century onwards, and very interesting and enjoyable it's been, too.
I've discovered far more than I ever knew and far more than I've put on here. I can even now talk about the birdlife...and I don't just mean penguins...though there are more varieties of penguins than I ever knew existed!It's been astonishing to discover that some of the birds we see here are also all the way down south...imagine what are really very small birds travelling across the whole world as they migrate! Anyone want to know? I'm beginning to fancy a birdwatching holiday way down south!
This wasn’t information I was quite ready to reveal, but I was encouraged to do so.
Not on this board, Emilie. You laid it all out in your first ever post here, in the Disfellowshipped! thread. And, as I said before, we welcomed you and were all prepared to support you. Naturally your name was indeed commented on, and you said yourself that you had expected it.
No-one, as far as I know, thought you were a man. What made you think that? I certainly didn't.
All I have done is bring you back again and again to the actual facts, and each time I and others have done so you've shifted your ground, as has been said before. As someone said earlier, you are very strongly bringing out your government's line, whereas I and others have tried very hard to find out what the real facts are. Rowan, your own countryman, has expressed a contrary view of Argentina's actions.
Your nickname was a surprising choice, as others have pointed out, and your subsequent reluctance to reason on the historical evidence puzzling.
Nevertheless, if I have caused you genuine distress, I am very sorry, and hope you will accept a genuine apology.
PS: No, my PM to Lady Lee was nothing to do with exonerating myself. I have nothing to exonerate myself for.
-
besty
The omission of the Malvinas issue in the British/Argentine agreements assumes that there were no agreements forthcoming on the issue itself. Both governments could not agree on anything related to the islands, hence they were not mentioned. Argentina refused to cede sovereignty on them, and Britain refused to acknowledge Argentine claims.
@LMSA: Is this in reference to the 1850 Convention for the settlement of existing differences and restoration of perfect relations of friendship?
-
tornapart
Cedars... a great find. I think this says it all doesn't it?
-
tornapart
Chariklo. I'm a birdwatcher too and would love to see the birdlife and animal life there. My friend has been living there for the last couple of years and works for the TV there. She's taken some wonderful photos of all the bird and animal life there. They are fantastic.
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Chariklo - That is not what happened, and it can be easily resolved by a quick look over the thread. My posting was about being disfellowshipped and trying to get reinstated in order to remove that label on me before I left. People started speaking about the Malvinas, and so we removed that from the thread and directed here. The comment was then made about what else there was about me than the Malvinas, as well as why I was taking such a tortuous course with re-instatement. Personally, I felt that we needed to get off the Malvinas subject on that thread, and against my better judgment, I revealed the reason for being disfellowshipped. “Throwing it all out there” would have involved putting it all in my introductory posting. I didn’t do that and I didn’t intend to reveal that until a little later. As for whether or not I was called a man, you can re-read one of moshe’s posts where he used the hybrid pronoun of ‘s/he’.
What you call ‘shifting my ground’ is a bit misleading, but I do admit that the Nootka Convention now sounds more ambiguous than I thought before. But your contention that Argentina did not have governors on the Malvinas during the 1820s was patently false. Just because they weren’t housed in a colonial style official residence, and in one case actually ruled from a ship, does not erase the fact that there was an Argentine presence there. You and I can argue all day about how extensive this presence was or why you don’t think it constituted a colony or not. Unfortunately, you seem to have a very black and white viewpoint of things, and you base your argument on the fact that the Argentines did not have a settlement or administration on the Malvinas like the British would have had, thus the claim is somehow weak. My interpretation is different than yours. You give your opinion and I give mine. Several other posters articulated the British position just fine and it made perfect sense to me. You on the other hand tried to ram yours through, while heavily implying that anyone in disagreement with you was in heavy denial. Why? I stated my position and thoughts on the Malvinas and welcomed other trains of thought.
I don’t need an apology from you, especially since it wouldn’t be a genuine one even if given. You weren’t the one who tried to humiliate me with personal information like moshe did, but you defended it and were in an obvious state of ecstasy because of it. If anything, I think this would call for some personal reflection on your own behaviour, and not some sort of hollow and forced apology to me. I am a big girl and have been called worse. What does bother me are the depths of what some people will do to force their opinion and interpretation on others, trying to stifle dissent of any kind. Perhaps you can find a better and more suitable outlet for your claimed penchant for research like writing up a treatise or thesis and add that to the already voluminous material on the Malvinas rather than bully your way in and force it upon someone who has a different interpretation and does not agree with you.
-
Chariklo
Thanks, Emilie. You've confirmed what most of us have been saying.
And by the way, I say what I mean and I mean what I say. I do not lie, nor would I ever choose to live a lie.
Have I bullied my way in? Others can judge.
Cedars... a great find. I think this says it all doesn't it?
Well said, Torn! Yes, great find! And yes, the birds look fantastic, and I would seriously hope to go there!
Along with Rowan's very helpful and informative post above, and Emilie's own post immediately before this, those directly involved, from Argentina and the Falklands, have unanimously demonstrated what this dispute is all about, as well as its true character.
I merely draw everyone's attention again to the real and as yet largely untapped resources in the Falklands, South Georgia, South Sandwich, and the British Antarctic Terrirories of South Orkney, South Shetland, Grahamland.
We haven't heard the last of Argentina.