Las Malvinas.

bumper234 · 31-03-2014 9:21pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

I'd like to examine Jawgaps final and ultimate post on this thread, well his second final and ultimate post.
I think it tells much about his style of debating matters.

Why might one bring up the references to TLAM's not being nuclear, or the pedantic point about the HMS Victoria in the overall context.
I think his style of debating is summed up by his reference to these points.
They were irrelevant and referred only to side arguments, void of importance related to the purpose of the thread.

I would have to agree with him that I_am_pie kept it real, something Jawgap was incapable of doing during his whole time here. And although Jawgap himself adds, in a joking way, that he was postulating uselessly, I genuinely do find that to be the case in the majority of his posts.

In response to him saying "no doubt you'll have some hilarious observation on your part in your next post - well no I don't, which ironically proves him wrong one last time posthumously. A fail from the grave.

I hope that Jawgap will read this and learn a lesson from his mistakes in defeat, perhaps even develop a style of debate that is more dis-passionate, takes facts into account objectively rather than getting tied up in tribalism, reduce his butthurt and perhaps even become honest in his debating style.

Adios

A bit like the Argies did?

The Diabolical Monocle · 31-03-2014 9:24pm

bumper234 wrote: »

A bit like the Argies did?

You must be his long lost son.

(or like the Brits in our own fine country

)

The Diabolical Monocle · 31-03-2014 9:27pm

bumper234 · 31-03-2014 9:29pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

You must be his long lost son.

(or like the Brits in our own fine country )

So you say they didn't learn anything from their defeat?

Jawgap · 02-04-2014 9:36am

32 years ago today it all kicked off.........and I don't mean this thread.......

How the troops were recalled in the pre-mobile phone era......

The Diabolical Monocle · 02-04-2014 11:12pm

Also, speaking of anniversaries, nearing the 50th anniversary of UN resolution 505 calling for Britain and Argentina to solve the issue bi-laterally.

IIRC At one point there was even an attempt by London to buy off the earlier planted population, to get them out of the way so GB could have good relations with south America.

argentine-letter-to-david-cameron-ad-falklands.jpg?w=625

argentine-letter-to-david-cameron-ad-falklands.jpg?w=625

bumper234 · 03-04-2014 7:51am

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Also, speaking of anniversaries, nearing the 50th anniversary of UN resolution 505 calling for Britain and Argentina to solve the issue bi-laterally.

IIRC At one point there was even an attempt by London to buy off the earlier planted population, to get them out of the way so GB could have good relations with south America.

Do you think that the Falkland Islands should be just handed over against the wishes of the majority of the population even though the majority people of the islands wish to stay British?

Do you think that Northern Ireland should be just handed over against the wishes of the majority of the population even though the majority of people of Northern Ireland wish to stay British?

Do you think that Gibraltar should be just handed over against the wishes of the majority of the population even though the majority of people of Gibraltar wish to stay British?

knucklehead6 · 03-04-2014 8:17am

Ah bumper bumper bumper..... Have you learned nothing??

TDM and his buddies will call any referendums that state the wishes of the inhabitants of the Falklands, Norn Iron. or Gib to remain as part of the Union in NI's case and British Overseas Territories in the case of the Falklands and Gib as illegal plebiscites, which aren't recognised by (insert various organisations here)

If those same plebiscites went the way of independence, or reuniting with Ireland, or Spain, or in the case of the Falklands, joining with Argentina (as when the falklands were retaken by the British, Argentina didn't even exist) then the non recognition of those various organisations would be conveniently ignored and the will of the inhabitants would be paramount.

bumper234 · 03-04-2014 8:20am

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Ah bumper bumper bumper..... Have you learned nothing??

TDM and his buddies will call any referendums that state the wishes of the inhabitants of the Falklands, Norn Iron. or Gib to remain as part of the Union in NI's case and British Overseas Territories in the case of the Falklands and Gib as illegal plebiscites, which aren't recognised by (insert various organisations here)

If those same plebiscites went the way of independence, or reuniting with Ireland, or Spain, or in the case of the Falklands, joining with Argentina (as when the falklands were retaken by the British, Argentina didn't even exist) then the non recognition of those various organisations would be conveniently ignored and the will of the inhabitants would be paramount.

So if Scotland vote to split from Britain in the referendum he will say that's ok but if they vote to stay as part of Britain then that will be wrong?

knucklehead6 · 03-04-2014 8:23am

bumper234 wrote: »

So if Scotland vote to split from Britain in the referendum he will say that's ok but if they vote to stay as part of Britain then that will be wrong?

Yep. Going by what i've seen so far anyway!

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 9:25am

Does anyone else not the see the irony of the President of a country, formed following the expulsion (by colonists / former colonists) of a colonial power now seeking to impose that country' will and authority on a territory outside its 200 mile EEZ? And before anyone sets off on the 'continental shelf' argument - check out our continental shelf! (if that argument holds true then we better start learning French!)

If proximity is to be the determinant of sovereignty and we're just going to start ignoring properly run plebiscites to arrive at decisions about self-determination.......then can't the Brits claim back this island? Or what about their Angevin Empire? And who gets the Isle of Man? Could Norway claim Shetland? etc...etc... etc..

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 9:30am

.........and speaking of anniversaries.....

This day in history the Battle of Grytviken took place.......

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 12:52pm

well...avoiding the issue of ME once again, and the things I ...or 'my type' probably believe. Anyhoo....the u.n called for bilateral negotiations between UK and Arg.
To me and my type that sounds like a great idea. In fact it sounded good to the UK too who didn't object.
Unfortunately there's 2500 people on land the size of N.I who think they alone should make the final democratic call for 100 million + people.
Rightly they are not recognized as a people or nation or state by the un who sees ... as anyone can... that they are no more than Britons on a disputed territory. They have zero culturally separate identity, vast majority of people there have Briton/english parents or were born in UK, many of the local population live there only seasonally.

Is it that unreasonable to consider that the issue should be resolved by the two entire countries who founded and fought, back and forth, for the place over hundreds of years. Rather than by the local population exclusively.
Two entire nations hold a stake in the issue. 100,000,000 people should have a say ... not just 2500 locals.

bumper234 · 03-04-2014 1:05pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

well...avoiding the issue of ME once again, and the things I ...or 'my type' probably believe. Anyhoo....the u.n called for bilateral negotiations between UK and Arg.
To me and my type that sounds like a great idea. In fact it sounded good to the UK too who didn't object.
Unfortunately there's 2500 people on land the size of N.I who think they alone should make the final democratic call for 100 million + people.
Rightly they are not recognized as a people or nation or state by the un who sees ... as anyone can... that they are no more than Britons on a disputed territory. They have zero culturally separate identity, vast majority of people there have Briton/english parents or were born in UK, many of the local population live there only seasonally.

Is it that unreasonable to consider that the issue should be resolved by the two entire countries who founded and fought, back and forth, for the place over hundreds of years. Rather than by the local population exclusively.
Two entire nations hold a stake in the issue. 100,000,000 people should have a say ... not just 2500 locals.

So you think Argentina and Britain should vote on it?

41.09 million (2012)
Argentina, Population

63.23 million (2012)
United Kingdom, Population

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 1:09pm

Jawgap wrote: »

If proximity is to be the determinant of sovereignty ..

I certainly never suggested this.

Although now that you mention it, it probably should be considered as a factor.

The place is effectively a small English hamlet 14000 km from home after all.

bumper234 · 03-04-2014 1:14pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

I certainly never suggested this.

Although now that you mention it, it probably should be considered as a factor.

The place is effectively a small English hamlet 14000 km from home after all.

So because it's far away it should just be forgotten and the people should be forced to change nationality?

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 1:15pm

bumper234 wrote: »

So you think Argentina and Britain should vote on it?

41.09 million (2012)
Argentina, Population

63.23 million (2012)
United Kingdom, Population

Yep....pretty much.

I know if I was from GB I'd want to.

Its hugely important to the average Briton, although most don't even know much at all about the place.

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 1:21pm

bumper234 wrote: »

So because it's far away it should just be forgotten and the people should be forced to change nationality?

Oh Absolutely. That's exactly what I said.

Let me guess ...I probably ...something something ...kill them all sieg heil.

bumper234 · 03-04-2014 1:22pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Yep....pretty much.

I know if I was from GB I'd want to.

Its hugely important to the average Briton, although most don't even know much at all about the place.

If it was voted on then almost every British citizen would vote to keep the Falkland islands as a British territory. The Falklanders have the final say and they decided their fate when they voted to stay British, Why should Argentina get to force thousands of citizens to change citizenship?

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 1:24pm

Also on the 3/4/82.......

United Nations Security Council resolution 502 was adopted.

Under this resolution the UNSC expressed its concern at the invasion of the Falkland Islands by the armed forces of Argentina, and demanded an immediate cessation of hostilities between Argentina and the United Kingdom and a complete withdrawal by Argentine forces.

The UNSC also called on the governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to seek a diplomatic solution to the situation and refrain from further military action.

It was adopted by 10 votes to 1 against (Panama) and four abstentions (China, Poland, Spain and the Soviet Union).

The Resolution (502), open the door for the UK to invoke Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, allowing it to claim the right of self-defence.

Re-affirmed by Resolution 505.

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 1:29pm

bumper234 wrote: »

If it was voted on then almost every British citizen would vote to keep the Falkland islands as a British territory. The Falklanders have the final say and they decided their fate when they voted to stay British, Why should Argentina get to force thousands of citizens to change citizenship?

The Brits would more likely vote to give up the Channel Islands

. I doubt, given their expenditure of blood and treasure, they'd vote them away.

Even when the initial invasion took place you had the bizarre sight of Michael Foot supporting Thatcher!!!! Would any UK political party (of note) advocate voting them away to Argentina?*

*rhetorical question.......

bumper234 · 03-04-2014 1:31pm

Jawgap wrote: »

The Brits would more likely vote to give up the Channel Islands . I doubt, given their expenditure of blood and treasure, they'd vote them away.

Even when the initial invasion took place you had the bizarre sight of Michael Foot supporting Thatcher!!!! Would any UK political party (of note) advocate voting them away to Argentina?*

*rhetorical question.......

The PM who loses the Falklands would kill off his political party for decades to come, there is no way they would even bring it to vote especially after the Falklanders voted to stay British.

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 1:37pm

bumper234 wrote: »

If it was voted on then almost every British citizen would vote to keep the Falkland islands as a British territory. The Falklanders have the final say and they decided their fate when they voted to stay British, Why should Argentina get to force thousands of citizens to change citizenship?

I've more faith in the GB population . once it became a more prominent political mainstrem issue and not the stuff of tabloid readers and military fantasists I think progress would definitely be made.
Argentina don't want to change anyones nationality.

knucklehead6 · 03-04-2014 1:44pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

I've more faith in the GB population . once it became a more prominent political mainstrem issue and not the stuff of tabloid readers and military fantasists I think progress would definitely be made.
Argentina don't want to change anyones nationality.

Apart from the people living there....

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 2:23pm

The 'Advanced Group' assembling at Gibraltar before heading south over the course of the 2 and 3 April.......

2 subs (Spartan and Splendid) were already enroute at this stage with Conqueror set to follow on the 4/4/82.

Interesting to note that the RN's current group of surface ships doesn't much exceed the number of the ships in this photo......

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 2:49pm

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Apart from the people living there....

What makes you think that ?

I've never heard of any political will from Argentina to change the nationalities of the islanders.

Sauce ?

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 2:53pm

A British MP, like him or not, trying his best to cut through the rabble rabble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IbbbmwFLno

A 50 peso note. Featuring the islands.

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 3:10pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

What makes you think that ?

I've never heard of any political will from Argentina to change the nationalities of the islanders.

Sauce ?

Brown please.....

icon_hp_custom-484703c7c6c35a6bff48129c94a1c1da9ab861fa-s4.jpg

The Diabolical Monocle · 03-04-2014 3:18pm

Jawgap wrote: »

Brown please.....

Oh, so nothing then.

Britain and Argentina were on verge of sharing Falklands...

http://www.theweek.co.uk/americas/falkland-islands/45857/britain-and-argentina-were-verge-sharing-falklands

...handed to President Perón by the then British ambassador to Argentina, James Hutton.

Guess that makes a British ambassador and a British MP to be some of 'my type'.

Jawgap · 03-04-2014 4:02pm

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Also, speaking of anniversaries, nearing the 50th anniversary of UN resolution 505 calling for Britain and Argentina to solve the issue bi-laterally.

I........

WTF???

According to the UN UNSC Resolution 505 passed on 26 May 1982? Did I just lose 18 years.....?

UNGA Resolution 505 is 62 years old - is that the one being referred to? It's to do with "Threats to the political independence and territorial integrity of China and to the peace of the Far East, resulting from Soviet violations of the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance of 14 August 1945 and from Soviet violations of the Charter of the United Nations."

Las Malvinas.

Comments