Argentina Drags Politics to London 2012

cherryghost

Mods, feel free to move this to the appropriate forum as I couldn't find anything more suitable than the politics forum.

In another update in the Argentina vs England claim of the Falkland islands, Argentina has moved with a draft proposal for their new Olympic 2012 crest. The crest is simply two ribbons either side of the Falkland islands, the ribbons dressed in Argentina colours, with the words 'Las Islas Malvinas son argentinas' emblazed across it. This literally translates into 'The Malvinas islands are Argentine'.

It currently hasn't got that much press interest but if pressed ahead it would certainly put a dent into not only the English-Argentine relations, but the olympic spirits itself.

This only garnered my attention as my wife is Argentine, who is pretty much disgusted by the move that was pressed by the president herself, according to local media in Argentina. I too think its a pretty cowardly way to get their message across and just add further tension between the two countries.

So what do others think of this move? Will it ruin the spirit of the olympics? Are Argentina going a step too far? Should politics be dragged into the olympic games in this manner?

Slightly more detailed article here

OS119

i'm happy with it - it merely makes the Argentine political class and the people who vote for them look even more ridiculous that they do normally.

whatstherush

Did England not set a precedent by insisting they wear the poppy at a football game recently.

ednwireland

Enderman wrote: »

So what do others think of this move? Will it ruin the spirit of the olympics? Are Argentina going a step too far? Should politics be dragged into the olympic games in this manner?

that was ruined a long time ago

although i do have my holidays booked and tickets to a couple of events

I am pie

Out of interest OP do you have a link to anywhere (spanish is fine) other than the MercoSur Free Press ? Coincidentally my fiancé is also Argentine !

She's no fan of the current government but like most Argies is fairly passionate on the Malvinas question ! We tend not to talk about it too much : )

Not disputing your story, but I'm interested to read it as i couldn't find it in Clarín or La Nacion ?

Cheers

goose2005

I hope the Brits respond by asking the Americans to return the 13 colonies.

cherryghost

Hi I am Pie. It wasn't covered on Diario Clarin YET, but was covered last week in Yahoo Argentina news, and El Diario to name but a few.

Forgot to post the draft crest last night:

JustinDee

Enderman wrote: »

Mods, feel free to move this to the appropriate forum as I couldn't find anything more suitable than the politics forum.

In another update in the Argentina vs England claim of the Falkland islands, Argentina has moved with a draft proposal for their new Olympic 2012 crest. The crest is simply two ribbons either side of the Falkland islands, the ribbons dressed in Argentina colours, with the words 'Las Islas Malvinas son argentinas' emblazed across it. This literally translates into 'The Malvinas islands are Argentine'.

It currently hasn't got that much press interest but if pressed ahead it would certainly put a dent into not only the English-Argentine relations, but the olympic spirits itself.

This only garnered my attention as my wife is Argentine, who is pretty much disgusted by the move that was pressed by the president herself, according to local media in Argentina. I too think its a pretty cowardly way to get their message across and just add further tension between the two countries.

So what do others think of this move? Will it ruin the spirit of the olympics? Are Argentina going a step too far? Should politics be dragged into the olympic games in this manner?

Slightly more detailed article here

Its only a submission. People send all sorts to be considered by committees like that, I'd venture to say.
An article with very little to it but sensationalism methinks.

coffeetogo

Every Olympics has had politics dragged into it in some shape or form.

The IOC are similar, but as evil as, FIFA when it comes to turnign a blind eye for the sake of keeping their sponsors onside.

The Olympics hasn't been about the Olympic spirit in a long time, the dollar rules the roost and people won't care about conflicts between two countries as long as athletes, TV stations and spectators turn out.

This point that Argentina are trying to make will be completely diluted by everyone involved.

cherryghost

JustinDee wrote: »

Its only a submission. People send all sorts to be considered by committees like that, I'd venture to say.
An article with very little to it but sensationalism methinks.

It's a submission supported by more than 5 political parties, so it's been taken very seriously over there at the moment, or so I'm told

User Friendly

whatstherush wrote: »

Did England not set a precedent by insisting they wear the poppy at a football game recently.

Different competition,nothing to do with the Olympics.

JustinDee

Enderman wrote: »

It's a submission supported by more than 5 political parties, so it's been taken very seriously over there at the moment, or so I'm told

Its just populist tosh. Will never see the light of day.
A viral spark that catches on over airwaves or in print. Will fizzle out as quickly.

JustinDee

User Friendly wrote: »

Different competition,nothing to do with the Olympics.

Nor was it a political statement.

I am pie

Enderman wrote: »

Hi I am Pie. It wasn't covered on Diario Clarin YET, but was covered last week in Yahoo Argentina news, and El Diario to name but a few.

Forgot to post the draft crest last night:

There it is !

I reckon this is partly in response to the UK sending their prince and future king over there to irritate them in his helicoptor.

Personally I think it's OTT. I know herself may have a different view however !

getz

Enderman wrote: »

Mods, feel free to move this to the appropriate forum as I couldn't find anything more suitable than the politics forum.

In another update in the Argentina vs England claim of the Falkland islands, Argentina has moved with a draft proposal for their new Olympic 2012 crest. The crest is simply two ribbons either side of the Falkland islands, the ribbons dressed in Argentina colours, with the words 'Las Islas Malvinas son argentinas' emblazed across it. This literally translates into 'The Malvinas islands are Argentine'.

It currently hasn't got that much press interest but if pressed ahead it would certainly put a dent into not only the English-Argentine relations, but the olympic spirits itself.

This only garnered my attention as my wife is Argentine, who is pretty much disgusted by the move that was pressed by the president herself, according to local media in Argentina. I too think its a pretty cowardly way to get their message across and just add further tension between the two countries.

So what do others think of this move? Will it ruin the spirit of the olympics? Are Argentina going a step too far? Should politics be dragged into the olympic games in this manner?

Slightly more detailed article here

falklands always raises latin tempers,i remember during the falklands war,i went to spain on holiday and we kept waiting at malaga airport as the spanish played,andrew loyed webbers dont cry for me argentina,over the speakers ,my wife is from gib and she was mad as hell.

trendyvicar

Argentina - another bunch of clowns who don't know the meaning of self determination.

irishh_bob

Enderman wrote: »

Mods, feel free to move this to the appropriate forum as I couldn't find anything more suitable than the politics forum.

In another update in the Argentina vs England claim of the Falkland islands, Argentina has moved with a draft proposal for their new Olympic 2012 crest. The crest is simply two ribbons either side of the Falkland islands, the ribbons dressed in Argentina colours, with the words 'Las Islas Malvinas son argentinas' emblazed across it. This literally translates into 'The Malvinas islands are Argentine'.

It currently hasn't got that much press interest but if pressed ahead it would certainly put a dent into not only the English-Argentine relations, but the olympic spirits itself.

This only garnered my attention as my wife is Argentine, who is pretty much disgusted by the move that was pressed by the president herself, according to local media in Argentina. I too think its a pretty cowardly way to get their message across and just add further tension between the two countries.

So what do others think of this move? Will it ruin the spirit of the olympics? Are Argentina going a step too far? Should politics be dragged into the olympic games in this manner?

Slightly more detailed article here

i visited argentina in 2004 , its a cliche at this stage to say such and such a country should be wealthy but this is certainly the case with argentina , millions of acres of the best land on earth , great climate , buenos aires is a fantastic city and stylish in places

as for the falklands , i spoke to argentinians while i was there and i was surprised by the number of people who were opposed to the invasion by thier army in 1982 , seems the goverment use the issue as a populist rallying call whenever support is weaning

getz

trendyvicar wrote: »

Argentina - another bunch of clowns who don't know the meaning of self determination.

the argentina people are lovely but are easily guided ,every time thing are going wrong at home,they bring up the island question,when they invaded last time ,the soldiers believed that they were liberating the island from british oppression,and the locals were going to greet them with open arms,

I am pie

Many are/were opposed to the war, but you be hard pushed to find anyone over there who would even say 'The Falkland Islands' never mind consent that they are not Argentine !

As to why the country has failed to become a wealthy to the extent it possibly could have, I would argue they have fallen victim to Populism in the form of Peronism and have never really had a mature relationship with the US. Too much of their focus is around trade restrictions and artificial promotion of an internal/local market.

US interference in the whole region (see Operation Condor amongst others) sowed the seeds for some very disfunctional dictatorships to remain in power for too long in the whole region.

getz

I am pie wrote: »

Many are/were opposed to the war, but you be hard pushed to find anyone over there who would even say 'The Falkland Islands' never mind consent that they are not Argentine !

As to why the country has failed to become a wealthy to the extent it possibly could have, I would argue they have fallen victim to Populism in the form of Peronism and have never really had a mature relationship with the US. Too much of their focus is around trade restrictions and artificial promotion of an internal/local market.

US interference in the whole region (see Operation Condor amongst others) sowed the seeds for some very disfunctional dictatorships to remain in power for too long in the whole region.

its not going to turn into one of those,lets blame the yanks threads is it ?

I am pie

getz wrote: »

its not going to turn into one of those,lets blame the yanks threads is it ?

What ? Why so sensitive ?

Did you miss the bit where i mentioned populism / peronism ?

Anyway. I'm done here. Definitely not getting into a 'Argentina's Problem Is...' thread with you. No interest ! ...i can get that from my OH, in-laws & argie friends anytime I need to have that particular conversation.

trendyvicar

getz wrote: »

the argentina people are lovely but are easily guided ,every time thing are going wrong at home,they bring up the island question,when they invaded last time ,the soldiers believed that they were liberating the island from british oppression,and the locals were going to greet them with open arms,

Sounds very like The Irish used to be manipulated regarding Northern Ireland. Must be a Catholic thing.

trendyvicar

I am pie wrote: »

Many are/were opposed to the war, but you be hard pushed to find anyone over there who would even say 'The Falkland Islands' never mind consent that they are not Argentine !

As to why the country has failed to become a wealthy to the extent it possibly could have, I would argue they have fallen victim to Populism in the form of Peronism and have never really had a mature relationship with the US. Too much of their focus is around trade restrictions and artificial promotion of an internal/local market.

US interference in the whole region (see Operation Condor amongst others) sowed the seeds for some very disfunctional dictatorships to remain in power for too long in the whole region.

Operation Condor was not US led, it was an alliance between 'southern cone' countries including Argentina and Chile with US input. It was extremely successful and literally smashed the 'left' (both democratic and militant) in the 'southern cone' arena. It completely debunked the nonsense that 'liberal democracies' mouthed about the impossibility of crushing insurrectionary movements in places such as Northern Ireland. Needless to say, no 'yellow cards' were issued!

Chile became successful economically under Pinochet.

Killer Pigeon

I just don't understand why the Argentinians are so passionate about the Falklands. I mean there are probably near zero Argentinians living on the damn islands in the first place and the Falklands have been traditionally British. Britain held the claim to the Falklands long before Argentina did, plus there were no indigenous people living on the islands before the Europeans came. I mean, won't they just give it a rest like.

BlaasForRafa

trendyvicar wrote: »

Operation Condor was not US led, it was an alliance between 'southern cone' countries including Argentina and Chile with US input. It was extremely successful and literally smashed the 'left' (both democratic and militant) in the 'southern cone' arena. It completely debunked the nonsense that 'liberal democracies' mouthed about the impossibility of crushing insurrectionary movements in places such as Northern Ireland. Needless to say, no 'yellow cards' were issued!

Chile became successful economically under Pinochet.

And the whole "disappearing" of thousands of people was just a by-product of that political agenda was it?

Fratton Fred

Guatemala still claims ownership of Belize. A claim based entirely on the 1494 treaty of Tordesillas. I believe this gets dragged up every now and then to unify the people.

If Argentina wanted to make a deal of the Falklands, why wasn't it raised at the Rugby World cup?

JustinDee

trendyvicar wrote: »

Operation Condor was not US led, it was an alliance between 'southern cone' countries including Argentina and Chile with US input. It was extremely successful and literally smashed the 'left' (both democratic and militant) in the 'southern cone' arena. It completely debunked the nonsense that 'liberal democracies' mouthed about the impossibility of crushing insurrectionary movements in places such as Northern Ireland. Needless to say, no 'yellow cards' were issued!

Chile became successful economically under Pinochet.

Oh peace.
I am by no means anti-US or anti-West etc but the above is the worst and most monocular passage of apologeticism possible on the subject of regime manipulation in South America.
There was far more than just "US input" involved. The US had vested interests in the region. As did the USSR with the regimes they influenced.
It was a win-at-all-costs theatre of proxyism.

Me senses say 'resub' when I read your posts.

I am pie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Guatemala still claims ownership of Belize. A claim based entirely on the 1494 treaty of Tordesillas. I believe this gets dragged up every now and then to unify the people.

If Argentina wanted to make a deal of the Falklands, why wasn't it raised at the Rugby World cup?

Either they felt the Rugby World Cup (rightly or wrongly) it was not a big enough stage, that it was particularly prescient given the Olympics is in the UK or (and i can't remember and haven't checked) Prince Wills hadn't been sent over with his helicoptor to the Falklands to annoy the mainland neighbours yet !

trendyvicar

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

And the whole "disappearing" of thousands of people was just a by-product of that political agenda was it?

It wasn't a by-product - it was implicit in the entire process. Whilst Ireland sat on it's collective ar*e during the cold war (as usual), people like Pinochet took the war to the Marxist enemy.

trendyvicar

JustinDee wrote: »

Oh peace.
I am by no means anti-US or anti-West etc but the above is the worst and most monocular passage of apologeticism possible on the subject of regime manipulation in South America.
There was far more than just "US input" involved. The US had vested interests in the region. As did the USSR with the regimes they influenced.
It was a win-at-all-costs theatre of proxyism.

Me senses say 'resub' when I read your posts.

I was talking about operation Condor specifically, not about The US policy in general.

Fratton Fred

I am pie wrote: »

Either they felt the Rugby World Cup (rightly or wrongly) it was not a big enough stage, that it was particularly prescient given the Olympics is in the UK or (and i can't remember and haven't checked) Prince Wills hadn't been sent over with his helicoptor to the Falklands to annoy the mainland neighbours yet !

There are 2000 British service personnel in the falklands, along with a pair of eurofighter typhoons, but one guy in a rescue helicopter is upsetting the Argentines.

Oh please.

This whole thing is some jumped up ejit trying to get a bit of publicity with a bogus crest for the olympics.

I am pie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There are 2000 British service personnel in the falklands, along with a pair of eurofighter typhoons, but one guy in a rescue helicopter is upsetting the Argentines.

Oh please.

This whole thing is some jumped up ejit trying to get a bit of publicity with a bogus crest for the olympics.

Ah now , don't be disingenuous. One guy in a helicopter...pfft, come on. Wise up would ya.

If you cannot understand why the future king of the country you believe is occupying part of your country would be a slightly inflammatory choice of helicopter rescue pilot in that disputed territory then you are plain daft, and lacking in any kind of empathy!

Very very disingenuous.

woodoo

I don't know what Britain is doing still down there anyway. Let go you sentimental old fools.

trendyvicar

woodoo wrote: »

I don't know what Britain is doing still down there anyway. Let go you sentimental old fools.

I suspect it's because the people who live there are British and wish to stay that way.

On a similar note, when do you think the sentimental Irish will stop electing parties committed to Irish unity? They don't even have the excuse of majority support in the area concerned that The UK has in The Falklands.

BlaasForRafa

trendyvicar wrote: »

It wasn't a by-product - it was implicit in the entire process. Whilst Ireland sat on it's collective ar*e during the cold war (as usual), people like Pinochet took the war to the Marxist enemy.

So mass murder is fine as long as your a fascist is it?

trendyvicar

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

So mass murder is fine as long as your a fascist is it?

It was certainly effective in both Chile and Argentina in dealing with the Marxist threat. Whether it was all murder or not is different matter.

It's doubtful whether The Chilean or Argentine states were fascist - strictly speaking that is.

gurramok

Batsy wrote: »

I'm actually right (as I usually am).

And it was FIFA who were making an unnecessary fuss over the poppy issue. They said England couldn't wear poppies because teams are not allowed to wear "political, commercial or religious symbols" on their shirts. However, the poppy is none of those things. The wearing of the poppy is our way of showing our gratitude to the soldiers who have given their lives for freedom and democracy, to allow even those ungratefuls who belittle their sacrifice (many of whom are on this forum) to be free.

Wrong as usual Batsy. Your govt has hijacked the poppy for political ends as it commemorates all British war dead from the Irish War of Independence to those slain in NI to the latest fatality in Afghanistan. FIFA were correct in banning its wearing so Argentina in this case is following the precedent set by the English FA of bringing political symbols into sport.

JustinDee

gurramok wrote: »

Wrong as usual Batsy. Your govt has hijacked the poppy for political ends as it commemorates all British war dead from the Irish War of Independence to those slain in NI to the latest fatality in Afghanistan. FIFA were correct in banning its wearing so Argentina in this case is following the precedent set by the English FA of bringing political symbols into sport.

It isn't a political symbol.
Like any cause it can be hijacked politically but this literally can cover any cause. A tax cut isn't political. A new hospital isn't political either. Nor is the commemoration of those who perished at war.

'Argentina' isn't doing anything of a kind either. Some pot-stirrer came up with a cause-du-jour, that's all. Won't get any more oxygen before fizzling away into the forgotten.
Amazed it has even gotten this far here.

JustinDee

trendyvicar wrote: »

It was certainly effective in both Chile and Argentina in dealing with the Marxist threat. Whether it was all murder or not is different matter

Meaning what exactly?

trendyvicar wrote: »

It's doubtful whether The Chilean or Argentine states were fascist - strictly speaking that is.

How were the Junta in any of these countries not fascistic in their method and/or ideology?

Your posts are reading like being written by someone taking the contrarian line in order to get a rise.
All very familiar . . .

JustinDee

gurramok wrote: »

Yes its political, its associated with the modern British Armed Forces who co-incidentally represent the British govt, that is political. And Cameron recently described it as a symbol of British national pride.

Jumping on the bandwagon of a cause such as that is political and thats what their PM is doing there. How dare the British discuss "national pride" (hardly a political statement either).

Army v Navy annual rugby match is associated with the "British Armed Forces who co-incidentally represent the British govt". Is that a political rally?
No need to be so subjective.

Fratton Fred

I am pie wrote: »

Ah now , don't be disingenuous. One guy in a helicopter...pfft, come on. Wise up would ya.

If you cannot understand why the future king of the country you believe is occupying part of your country would be a slightly inflammatory choice of helicopter rescue pilot in that disputed territory then you are plain daft, and lacking in any kind of empathy!

Very very disingenuous.

I have no doubt the Argentinian version of the daily mail has made a big deal of this.

Most Argentinians of average intelligence probably see this for exactly what it is, a future monarch being given no special dispensation and having to muck in with everyone else.

The Falklands is considered the worst posting in the armed forces, so Wills is being sent there to prove a point.

It is very very disengenuous to think that this was a deliberate slight against Argentina.

gurramok

JustinDee wrote: »

Jumping on the bandwagon of a cause such as that is political and thats what their PM is doing there. How dare the British discuss "national pride" (hardly a political statement either).

Army v Navy annual rugby match is associated with the "British Armed Forces who co-incidentally represent the British govt". Is that a political rally?
No need to be so subjective.

Army&Navy organisations are political, don't be ridicoulousy strawman using that as a political rally. You're trying to say the poppy is not political when its proven on this forum it is that it is hence its right that political symbols are discouraged in sport. Isn't that what the Olympics is about?

I am pie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I have no doubt the Argentinian version of the daily mail has made a big deal of this.

Most Argentinians of average intelligence probably see this for exactly what it is, a future monarch being given no special dispensation and having to muck in with everyone else.

The Falklands is considered the worst posting in the armed forces, so Wills is being sent there to prove a point.

It is very very disengenuous to think that this was a deliberate slight against Argentina.

You're being extremely one-eyed here, your perogative I suppose. I see you have walked away from the 'just some guy in a helicoptor' routine !

It's a PR exercise to demonstrate that the Falklands / Malvinas are still British. In fairness it's all part of a silly diplomatic spat which probably makes the papers a little more over there than in the UK, but a silly diplomatic it is nonetheless. The UK are playing their part as are the Argentinians, as it ever has been.

Batsy

woodoo wrote: »

I don't know what Britain is doing still down there anyway. Let go you sentimental old fools.

1) Because the people wish to remain British;

2) Because the islands have never belonged to Argentina, apart from briefly in 1982 after it invaded them.

Fratton Fred

I am pie wrote: »

You're being extremely one-eyed here, your perogative I suppose. I see you have walked away from the 'just some guy in a helicoptor' routine !

It's a PR exercise to demonstrate that the Falklands / Malvinas are still British. In fairness it's all part of a silly diplomatic spat which probably makes the papers a little more over there than in the UK, but a silly diplomatic it is nonetheless. The UK are playing their part as are the Argentinians, as it ever has been.

I suppose Will's posting in Wales was to prove that Anglesea is British as well.

I am pie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I suppose Will's posting in Wales was to prove that Anglesea is British as well.

Seriously? You're comparing the territorial status of Anglesea and the Falklands ?

I think that's where this discussion just stopped becoming worthwhile.

All the best now.

Fratton Fred

I am pie wrote: »

Seriously? You're comparing the territorial status of Anglesea and the Falklands ?

I think that's where this discussion just stopped becoming worthwhile.

All the best now.

The Argentians have as much right to Anglesea to be honest.

This is part of a normal rotation that pilots from RAF valley regularly do. If William was not sent, then it would indicate special treatment which it has been made very clear he will not get.
The fact that you and/or the Argentinians are reading this as some sort of political demonstration says more about you and them than it does the British government.

I am pie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Argentians have as much right to Anglesea to be honest.

This is part of a normal rotation that pilots from RAF valley regularly do. If William was not sent, then it would indicate special treatment which it has been made very clear he will not get.
The fact that you and/or the Argentinians are reading this as some sort of political demonstration says more about you and them than it does the British government.

I'm not interested in the territorial issue. In fairness both sides have a claim, however this is completely academic in terms of your ridiculous position.

Do regular postings usually involve newspaper coverage, i.e. propaganda ?

If you don't understand the subtleties of diplomatic tit for tat point scoring then that's your own lookout. In your facile world everything the British do is decent, fair and upstanding.

You're a dying breed lad. Keep drinking the union jack kool aid.

Fratton Fred

I am pie wrote: »

I'm not interested in the territorial issue. In fairness both sides have a claim, however this is completely academic in terms of your ridiculous position.

Do regular postings usually involve newspaper coverage, i.e. propaganda ?

If you don't understand the subtleties of diplomatic tit for tat point scoring then that's your own lookout. In your facile world everything the British do is decent, fair and upstanding.

You're a dying breed lad. Keep drinking the union jack kool aid.

If all else fails, attack the poster.

Fratton Fred

gurramok wrote: »

I have. It was suggested that poppy wearing was not political. Just so happens that Britain had a military engagement with Argentina where said serving soldiers are funded from the sale of the poppy.

If the poppy is worn by England in the Olympics, it would offend the Argentines. Likewise the Argentines imho should not mess about with their crests as its bringing politics over the Malvinas into the Olympics.

Its Las Malvinas, or the Falklands. Mixing the two is grammatically incorrect.

Britain won't be wearing the poppy at the olympics, so any comparisons are pointless.

I am pie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If all else fails, attack the poster.

Nice one, ignore every part of the post(s) referring to diplomatic tit for tat, pretend that 'Wills' is just one of the boys, ignore the sensitivities of a whole country in terms of what loosing a war means then cry ad hominen on the basis of an off the cuff remark.

Sounds like your position is increasingly feeble to me.