Argentina to state Falklands case

Dubbadub wrote:

<quoted text>
Great comments, historical facts, quotes, everything it's very interesting. Unfortunately I can see the answers you'll get off them, and they will be more of the same old rubbish they have been saying before.
When provided with historical facts and evidence they cannot handle it, their usual response is to try argue further using the same old rubbish points they have used before, they might ignore it and never answer it, or they might attempt to be funny or they might come back with a bunch of disciminatiory slurs.
Believe me I've been there before. Just like to say though very interesting points you have made.

Thanks,Dubbadub.We Argentines knows and the Irish know very well what is the values of the word,or treaty signed by the english.I do not want to generalize,because there are englishmen for wich the words and treaties are to be respected.But in this case(as are many cases that you my dear Irish friend,probably knows,that england just did not observed) is a blatant breach of the treaty.
Treaty of frienship...signed with england it is just garbage....
oíche mhaith duit!,(I hope my translator is correct).

The Advocate wrote:

<quoted text>
Please.
The only reason the US didn't enter WWII immediately was because of the large GERMAN POPULATION in the US at the time. Argentina's Germans came mostly in the 19th - 20th centuries. The US already had a sizeable German population since the 1700s.

The reason America didn't enter WWII right away is because it was none of our business until the Japanese attacked us.

Giggs wrote:

<quoted text>
True.
But I personaly wont go running off to the middle east like I would to the falklands.

That shows how STUPID you are!!
MALVINAS ARGENTINAS! SQUATTER!PELOTUDO!

FaithUSA wrote:

<quoted text>Native American Literature? They didn't even have a written language....What hieroglyphs on rocks? You are not a Mexican. And no, I would not say that to any American Jew (Noam Chomskey should be sent to Gitmo). You should know...you are an American Jew. Anyhow, there is a difference between the Castillian Mexicans and the whacked out orange Indians.

Goes to show how much you know of your country if you can't even recognise authors like Sherman Alexie. It doesn't matter if a language is written or not, it's still a language.

"Im not a Mexican?" Are you claiming to be an expert on me? Ha! I'm an American Jew precisely because I am Mexican and live IN THE AMERICAS.

You wouldn't say that to any American Jew PRECISELY because they're just as American as their neighbours.

And as for the "orange Indians..." That doesn't even merit an analysis. That was pure racism.

There is no such thing as the "malvinas".

FaithUSA wrote:

<quoted text>The reason America didn't enter WWII right away is because it was none of our business until the Japanese attacked us.

Funny.

The Italians and the Germans were part of the Axis too. No one in the US cared much when your "ethnic forbears" were being assailed by their European neighbours. But it certainly became their business when the Japanese attacked.

So then, if the Italians and Germans were also part of the Axis, then why is it that only Japanese Americans and Japanese immigrants were kept in detainment camps in California?

The Advocate wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you even know the definition of imperialism? Here, I'll provide an example of dictionary.com to keep it simple for you:
im·pe·ri·al·ism&#8194; &#8194;[im-peer-ee-uh-liz- uhm]
noun
1.
the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.
The Falklands, along with Argentina, were controlled under the same viceroyalty. The Islands are nowehere near Britain, so yes, wanting to extend control over them is Imperialism. And you've never answered the question of what interest does the UK have in the islands. As for Argentina, they sit right next to its oil deposits as well as economic maritime zone. The Islands are not in Europe. They are in South America.
To espouse war is a horrendous policy. Nice to see how much of a supporter of peace and diplomacy you are.

-The falklands have been in British possession well over a century.

-They've been British longer than anyone on the planet has been alive.

-They've been British for longer than Argentina has existed

-Argentina has only become particularly interested in them at two times. 1) When their military junta was doing badly and needed a distraction and 2) When oil reserves were discovered there.

-The people who live there want nothing to do with argentina

-Britain has never threatened Argentina, Argentina threatens the falkland islands on a daily basis

-The only reason we have any forces on the islands is because Argentina threatens them

-Argentina is currently running a de facto naval blockade in the falklands. Any ships attempting to trade with the falklands are sumarily stopped and searched, sometimes numerous times on the one journey. Currently the islanders can't even get access to fresh vegetables.

SO you're the one supporting imperialism. Britain is merely acting in the interests of the people who live there. Perhaps you shoudl read your own definition.

The Advocate wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny.
The Italians and the Germans were part of the Axis too. No one in the US cared much when your "ethnic forbears" were being assailed by their European neighbours. But it certainly became their business when the Japanese attacked.
So then, if the Italians and Germans were also part of the Axis, then why is it that only Japanese Americans and Japanese immigrants were kept in detainment camps in California?

Because they were Asian. They are not like us. Everyone knows that.

The Advocate wrote:

<quoted text>
Please.
The only reason the US didn't enter WWII immediately was because of the large GERMAN POPULATION in the US at the time. Argentina's Germans came mostly in the 19th - 20th centuries. The US already had a sizeable German population since the 1700s.

What about all the leading Nazis that were allowed to hide there after world war 2 ?

The Advocate wrote:

<quoted text>
Goes to show how much you know of your country if you can't even recognise authors like Sherman Alexie. It doesn't matter if a language is written or not, it's still a language.
"Im not a Mexican?" Are you claiming to be an expert on me? Ha! I'm an American Jew precisely because I am Mexican and live IN THE AMERICAS.
You wouldn't say that to any American Jew PRECISELY because they're just as American as their neighbours.
And as for the "orange Indians..." That doesn't even merit an analysis. That was pure racism.

Oh please! Mexicans are not "Americans" neither are South Americans....let's not split hairs. That like saying being anti-Arab makes you "anti-Semitic"...wel l you know the bullsh*t circular logic. I don't even know what you are getting at. I like Jews. I have been called a "zionist" and a "zionazi" more times than I can count. So don't try and run that flag up your pole....as for all the other charges...well, I'm guilty.

Revo wrote:

<quoted text>
What about all the leading Nazis that were allowed to hide there after world war 2 ?

That doesn't count. That doesn't mesh with his myopic world view.

I can read wrote:

<quoted text>
-The falklands have been in British possession well over a century.
-They've been British longer than anyone on the planet has been alive.
-They've been British for longer than Argentina has existed
-Argentina has only become particularly interested in them at two times. 1) When their military junta was doing badly and needed a distraction and 2) When oil reserves were discovered there.
-The people who live there want nothing to do with argentina
-Britain has never threatened Argentina, Argentina threatens the falkland islands on a daily basis
-The only reason we have any forces on the islands is because Argentina threatens them
-Argentina is currently running a de facto naval blockade in the falklands. Any ships attempting to trade with the falklands are sumarily stopped and searched, sometimes numerous times on the one journey. Currently the islanders can't even get access to fresh vegetables.
SO you're the one supporting imperialism. Britain is merely acting in the interests of the people who live there. Perhaps you shoudl read your own definition.

Thank you!

I can read wrote:

<quoted text>
-The falklands have been in British possession well over a century.
-They've been British longer than anyone on the planet has been alive.
-They've been British for longer than Argentina has existed
-Argentina has only become particularly interested in them at two times. 1) When their military junta was doing badly and needed a distraction and 2) When oil reserves were discovered there.
-The people who live there want nothing to do with argentina
-Britain has never threatened Argentina, Argentina threatens the falkland islands on a daily basis
-The only reason we have any forces on the islands is because Argentina threatens them
-Argentina is currently running a de facto naval blockade in the falklands. Any ships attempting to trade with the falklands are sumarily stopped and searched, sometimes numerous times on the one journey. Currently the islanders can't even get access to fresh vegetables.
SO you're the one supporting imperialism. Britain is merely acting in the interests of the people who live there. Perhaps you shoudl read your own definition.

good one bro!

Carlos wrote:

humberman99,
Piensan violar el "Tratado de Tlatelolco"???
El Tratado para la Proscripción de las Armas Nucleares en la América Latina y el Caribe (más conocido como Tratado de Tlatelolco) es un tratado internacional.
Además de los países latinoamericanos este Tratado ha sido firmado por Estados Unidos, Gran Bretaña, los Países Bajos, entre otros
Saludos!

we want to have sex with your president.Tell her to come quick as there are plenty waiting.

FaithUSA wrote:

<quoted text>Yes. Let's.
Your country was very supportive of the Nazis.
http://www.mundoandino.com/Argentina/German-s...

Con su beneplacito....

humberman99 wrote:

<quoted text>
we want to have sex with your president.Tell her to come quick as there are plenty waiting.

Vos si que tenes mal gusto!.

I can read wrote:

<quoted text>
-The falklands have been in British possession well over a century.
-They've been British longer than anyone on the planet has been alive.
-They've been British for longer than Argentina has existed
-Argentina has only become particularly interested in them at two times. 1) When their military junta was doing badly and needed a distraction and 2) When oil reserves were discovered there.
-The people who live there want nothing to do with argentina
-Britain has never threatened Argentina, Argentina threatens the falkland islands on a daily basis
-The only reason we have any forces on the islands is because Argentina threatens them
-Argentina is currently running a de facto naval blockade in the falklands. Any ships attempting to trade with the falklands are sumarily stopped and searched, sometimes numerous times on the one journey. Currently the islanders can't even get access to fresh vegetables.
SO you're the one supporting imperialism. Britain is merely acting in the interests of the people who live there. Perhaps you shoudl read your own definition.

- La mera posesión no te da justo titulo. Hace falta algo más....

- Eso es lo de menos.

- Eso no interesa.

- Falso!. La Argentina siempre ha reivindicado su soberania por las islas. Y dudo que el petroleo que haya alli sea un buen negocio.

- Eso no es lo que importa al final de cuentas.

- No hay amenaza de ningún tipo a las islas y su gente. De hecho si por nosotros fuera, tendrían vuelos desde Buenos Aires todos los días con pasajes a precios más razonablemente baratos que los de LAN. Y no tenemos ningina fuerza militar amenazando a las islas desde el Continente. Todos los aviones de nuestra Fuerza Aerea estan a cientos de kilometros más al norte. Al igual que las principales unidades de nuestra Armada.

- Las fuerzas que tienen desplegadas son desproporcionadas en relación a la real amenza que puedan enfrentar en el Atlantico sur.

- Si nos hemos puesto duros es porque ustedes se burlan de nosotros con medidas unilaterales sobre un territorio en disputa. Hay resoluciones de la ONU que dicen que no hay que tomar medidas unilaterales en este caso.

- Por esa gente UK no hozo nada desde 1847 hasta 1983. Y lo único que ellos son es un pretexto mediante el cual tu país justifica su permanencia en un lugar de su interes y que claramente con esa permanencia y lo que devenga de ella perjudicaran a mi país.

ahora tambien lo unico que falta es que nos tilden de nazis cuando la argentina fue el pais de america latina que mas alimentos les dio en la segunda guerra mundial (y por cierto nunca los pagaron) y por cierto nos cagaron como siempre al decretar la inconvertivilidad de la libra al final de la guerra. nuestro pais siguiendo su postura historica se declaro neutral en el conflicto lo cual para ustedes (siempre dueños de la verdad of course) era que somos nazis nada mas alejado de la realidad y por otra parte no se que tiene que ver esto con el robo y el despojo de malvinas. es lo mismo que si alemania hubiera invadido gran bretaña ¿hubiera estado bien ? por favor saquense las caretas y no traten de defender lo indefendible

francisco .....se cagan en la onu solo se ajustan a derecho cuando la onu les da via libre para invadir irak para invadir afganistan con el pretexto de que hay armas nucleares o quimicas (y luego no encuentran ni un petardo) ahora si las resoluciones de la onu les vienen en contra (como sucede desde 1965) se las pasan por el culo y es asi porque ellos son los dueños de la verdad y la fuerza el derecho bien gracias