Author	Topic:   Talking about other stuff
Noelia (Moderator)	posted 5/4/04 4:50 AM       Well, this is a very difficult situation. On one hand, we want to try to solve the conflict -peacefully, of course- and so, we dont want to talk about other stuff than that....on the other hand, maybe building a friendship first, by talking about other things, getting to know each other better and - why not? - having fun all together could make things easier.... If you ask my opinion, I would vote for this second option.. Maybe this huge rivalry has to finish before starting to talk about a solution. So, as for me, I welcome topics about other things that are not the 1982 war. I would like to listen to your opinion as well....Noelia http://espanglishfriends.tripod,com http;//www.geocities.com/nxz1978
Gabriel marchevsky	posted 5/5/04 9:34 PM     From Mercosur:Argentina is planning to significantly increase its naval presence in the South Atlantic to consolidate “open spaces” and protect fisheries thus preparing for “problems in the future”, said Argentine Defence Minister José Pampuro. “We are re-deploying strategically the Argentine Armed Forces, considering them almost exclusively as a defence force”, Mr. Pampuro is quoted in an extensive interview published this Wednesday in Buenos Aires city daily La Nación. This defensive redeployment means “protecting territory, consolidating some areas that can be described as open spaces, --a growing concept among the world’s main powers geo-strategy--, which in our country is closely linked to Patagonia”. With this in mind the Argentine Navy will be expanding to the South, “intensifying its presence in the Austral Sea (South Atlantic), fisheries protection, building new ports in Patagonia, in Santa Cruz and Chubut”, indicated Mr. Pampuro underlining that “many of the future problems will be linked to the development of the Austral Sea and the Navy is already looking that way, and this we openly support politically”. The Defence Minister said that Air Force tasks will be marked by a strong “mobility capability” both in interception and transport of troops, supplies and logistic support. The Argentine Army will consolidate its traditional strategy of occupying open spaces particularly in the south of the country to ensure protection of “water resources which will become the centre of future conflicts”, pointed out Mr. Pampuro. “We have two basic concepts for land forces, one static which means occupying certain isolated and distant areas of Argentina, and another highly dynamic with rapid deployment units, extremely advanced technically seated in Cordoba and Campo de Mayo (Buenos Aires)”.As to relations with neighbouring countries Mr. Pampuro ratified that Argentina’s defence policy “bets strongly in integration with Brazil and Chile”, through “joint exercises, information and production exchanges”.“With Brazil, we will be signing agreements on airspace and hydrogen energy development programs”, plus installing a joint system of mobile radars along Argentina’s northern border in collaboration with the Air Force.“Defence issues with Chile are doing very well”, said Mr. Pampuro revealing that Navy commanders from both countries will be meeting “to explore the possibility of jointly working in the development and construction of frigates”. PS: Para nuestros lectores de Mexico, tengan un muy feliz cinco de mayo.
Ernie Spencer	posted 5/7/04 12:11 AM       Gabriel,Nice to see you are around.Your report is what we call here 'Talking a good game of soldiers'.It is the actuality that counts.Regards,Ernie http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html Thomas Helsby's Account of the Murders at Port Louis.
Gabriel Marchevsky	posted 5/7/04 2:34 PM     Hi Ernie,I agree. That has always been the case and it will always be so.The US was instrumental with the British invasion of 1833, the war in 1982, and the fact that London is in no hurry to work at solving the dispute.I believe that Argentina should understand this and stop rattling the cage, and I also believe that as soon as the US support ceases, London will hand the islands to Argentina promptly.Best regards,Gabriel
Noelia (Moderator)	posted 5/7/04 7:14 PM       Gabriel, do we have mexican readers?- Best wishes! Noelia http://espanglishfriends.tripod,com http;//www.geocities.com/nxz1978
Ernie Spencer	posted 5/8/04 1:19 PM       Hi Gabriel,The rattling of sabres is just as unproductive as a seduction policy. If anything is to succeed in persuading Falkland Islanders that they should have any sort of close relationship with Argentina it would be the establishment of normality between them. Extremes and excesses just do not work and either cause resentment in the case of implied threats or outright amusement at ill thought out seduction.The establishment of normality is the key to friendship in the first instance.With regard to Britain eventually handing over the Islands to Argentina in the event of the USA losing interest this also seems very unlikely as both British Law and the UN Charter and subsequent resolutions permits all the Non-Self Governing territories (Former and existing Colonies) to make their own choice of future. Yes, if the Falklands freely chose association with Argentina (or any other South American state) Britain would clearly not prevent this happening and would even give support. Britain's record, in spite of its Imperial past, in allowing its former colonies and possessions to choose their own future path, no matter how badly they were prepared for it, is a matter of fact and better than most former imperial powers.Best wishes,Ernie http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html Thomas Helsby's Account of the Murders at Port Louis.
Gabriel Marchevsky	posted 5/9/04 1:15 PM     Hi Ernie,I have to disagree. Your analysis completely ignores Argentina’s claim. Do you really believe Argentina will sit still and allow the islanders to decide what they want to do with our land?Ernie, we are not asking a girl for a date. This girl already has a boyfriend. Her boyfriend stole our car and we want it back. We do not care about the wishes of the islanders. They will never freely choose association with South America. They are not Americans and do not wish to be Americans. Even the Palestinians, with all their ignorant hate, product of many years of radical brainwashing, have some of their people living and working in Israel. You wrote: “With regard to Britain eventually handing over the Islands to Argentina in the event of the USA losing interest this also seems very unlikely”Do you not remember 1981?Best regards,Gabriel
Ernie Spencer	posted 5/9/04 2:52 PM       Gabriel,Well of course I remember 1981 and previously what happened. The Governments of the day were of a different mind then but, and it is a big but, in our democracy those governments, even then, did not have the support of Parliament in handing the Islands over to Argentina without the full consent of the Islanders. Here the Government Governs only with the consent of Parliament, in the case of the Falklands that consent will clearly not be given in the forseeable future. This is where there is a difference between he fate of Hong Kong and the Falklands where the Treaty to return the Leased Territories was expiring which did not make Hong Kong a very viable proposition on its own plus Parliament forsaw the advantages of Chinese future trade, a decision which has proved to be correct in the long run. Britain still has the advantages of its businesses in Hong Kong with easy access plus good trade with China. In this City there is a large British Chinese community and a vibrant Chinatown area in the City Centre, we have a very active Chinese Vice- Consulate and benefit from a great deal of trade and genuine friendship. Gibraltar is also different as its fate is governed by Treaty and it has the option of integration within the EU. Spain and Gibraltar are very likely in the long run to settle for a solution within the EU to settle their differences. Hundreds of thousands of Brits already live and work in Spain (outnumbering Gibraltarians many times over) as is their right within the EU and many Spaniards live and work in the UK. There is a Spanish business within 200 meters of my home. In 1969 I was also in the forefront of supporting the right of Islanders to choose their own destiny I still hold that stance and will remain in that mind. If The Islanders choose Argentina that is different I would then not oppose their wishes in the same way as I support their wishes now. It is very imoportant for both the Falklands and Argentina that they take a sensible stance and establish normality between them. Why not give peaceful normal relations a chance to develop in to genuine friendship, cooperation and working together? Whats the rush to do otherwise?For the International community to agree to turn the clock back to the boundaries of 1833 anywhere in the world, without the full consent of the present inhabitants is just an impossible dream. Do you really think turning the clock back to that time without consent would really be in the interests of the world at large? Just think of the boundary upheavals such an unprecedented concession would cause in Europe, whose boundaries have altered in unrecognisable ways since 1833, never mind the rest of the world. No it is just not going to happen, it is not in the interests of the UN and indeed I believe they recognise that when they have called for negotiations. Of course my outcome for the negotiations would be to support my own views naturally.I think we are just going to have to disagree on this one.I believe the Falklands will continue to prosper by developing its oil, gas and mineral potential, its population will expand, and I hope many of those people will come from the mainland, there are Argentines and Chileans there already, and it will continue with its association with the UK, perhaps on a more formal and independent basis but it will continue.Historically Argentina has suffered from poor political judgement, I think in the case of the Falklands that error continues. There are better ways of solving the problem than by confrontation.You have probably noticed that the British Forces command in the Falklands has just changed to become British Forces South Atlantc command. This is a sign of the times and reflects, in my opinion a move to better co-operation and development between all the British South Atlantic Islands. In the meantime the headquarters of the BFSA remains in the Falklands covering all those territories.Best wishes,Ernie http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html Thomas Helsby's Account of the Murders at Port Louis.
Noelia (Moderator)	posted 5/9/04 11:20 PM       Dear Ernie and all: I think we are forgetting something here, first of all, confrontation shouldnt be the solution, NOT because one country is more powerful than the other, BUT because we want peace and we are not following the example of the tyrans of the world, I hope we all agree in this point. Secondly, about our political judgement, we believe the islands are ours and so we support Argentina's claim, I would dare to say that more than 90% of the country supports this claim, can you tell me that the same percentaje of british NOT LIVING IN THE FALKLANDS support the UK's claim over the islands? The point of view of the islanders is important but is not impartial, we are not stupid down here, If I could choose between being part of the UK or Argentina, I would choose to be part of the UK.....however, we are not trying to oblige the Falklanders to become Argentines, we only want the land, that belonged to us. If you are living in a territory that is part of a conflict the fault is not from Argentina, but from your ancesters that agreed (and trusted the military superiority of Britan over a new little country like Argentina) to be there. I also understand, that what your ancestres did, cannot be changed and you dont deserve to suffer for a good-bad choice made, but if you forget Argentina's right to claim, you're making us do the same....Best wishes, Noelia http://espanglishfriends.tripod,com http;//www.geocities.com/nxz1978
Ernie Spencer	posted 5/10/04 12:34 AM       Noelia,Your claim is a dated and unrealistic one that has its roots in dated 19th Century thinking based on imperialistic ambitions. Yes Argentina has this strange view that it wants to expand its territory to include lands that had nothing to do with its mistaken claim to inherit from Spain, Anarctica, SSSGI. This is Imperialism however you view it.Britain has largely divested itself of its Empire apart from a few Falklands like territories that still cling on to the mother country. It is not Britain that is clinging on to the past but the Territories themselves. Britain would be happy to see them go as would many of the population in the UK, most are quite indifferent but they are only a minor liability to a rich country and make no mistake that the British will defend the right of those territories to decide their own future at all costs just as they defend their own freedoms against agreesors. This is a duty and an obligation to themselves and the remnants of Empire as much a they would like them gone.Argentina lives in the past and for the past when it should be looking forward with confidence and perpetuates a myth to the advantage of nobody and the uncertainty of their own identity. Why not drag yourself into the 21st Century and adopt 21st Century attitudes towards freedom of choice for all peoples and syop living in the past.I cannot beieve that you wear crinoline dresses but your old fashioned attitude leads me to that conclusion!!Live and let live, what on earth does a few small islands mean to such a large and potentially rich country as yours. Please get on and develop what you have and enrich your lives in that way, the grass on the other side of the hill usually proves not to be as green as you might have imagined. Let Falkland Islanders stand or fall on their own merits and devices and stop your harrassment please.The British dispute was with Spain before Argentina ever existed as a nation. Argentina tried to colonise the Falkands and failed. Britain solved its dispute with Spain by taking possession of the Islands they have now given their title to the Islands to the Falkand Islanders to decide their own future as they wish this is true democracy and decolonisation. These people settled there over the years in good faith expecting to be treated in no less a manner than yourselves, probably in the same way as your forbears did in Argentina, maybe even before yours did.Why not live and let live? If you got possession of the Islands it would only be an empty satisfaction, a momentary victory then would would not know what to do with them. Just some more undeveloped land to waste as your waste youre existing resources.Best wishes,Ernie http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html Thomas Helsby's Account of the Murders at Port Louis.
Gabriel Marchevsky	posted 5/10/04 4:23 PM     Ernie,You wrote: "what on earth does a few small islands mean to such a large and potentially rich country as yours"This is an excellent question. The answer is, not much. As a matter of fact, the absolute best solution for us would be that a great natural disaster, such as an earthquake, would make all the islands in the South Atlantic completely disappear.We do not want the islands; we only want the threat to disappear. A NATO base in our back yard is nothing more than a time bomb.Living in the 21st century? I would like to believe that we do have that choice, but unfortunately the images from Iraq show a different reality.I am convinced that South America will be attacked sooner or later. This scenario would have already happened if Malvinas were just a few Km from Venezuela. I do not care about the history of Spain, I only care about the future prosperity of Americans. I do not want Argentina to colonize anything, I only want the sword hanging over our heads to go away. I regret the fact that Argentina has not learnt the lesson "speak softly and carry a big stick". Instead of working hard at equipping and training the armed forces, Argentina chooses to make the world think that we are a bunch of imbeciles by making false threats that nobody believes, and implementing idiotic policies such as sending little toy bears and naming Stanley "Puerto Argentino". Maybe we are imbeciles, we keep voting for these morons.I assure you I have nothing personal against the islanders. I do not doubt most of them are nice people, but my people come first.Argentina will not and should not drop the claim. Gabriel
Ernie Spencer	posted 5/11/04 8:59 AM       Gabriel,I think you over emphasise the presence of British Forces in the Falklands as NATO forces. There is no NATO command structure relating to the Falklands therefore there is no implied or actual threat of attack on the mainland. You will recall that British forces carefully avoided any attack on Argentine infrastructue in the 1982 conflict for those obvious reasons.The British forces are there in response to Argentine attitudes and continuing confrontation re sovereignty. If those attitudes changed the forces would go away. I am personally in favour of the de-militarisation of the Islands except for their own personal defence. But Argentina would also need to make a gesture.The forces there are small and commensurate with the threat posed by Argentina, or perhaps more likely a rogue element (not necessarily regular forces) that might carry out a symbolic attack or act of possession.You are clearly not imbeciles we all sometimes regret who we vote for and would do things differently if we could do them again. Thats democracy.I do not expect that Argentina would drop its claim but it would make more progress if it adopted a position of normalising relations with the islanders. No seduction, no confrontation, just normality to let things progress in a truly natural way. I believe this would pay greater dividends for everyone than present attititudes on both sides.Working together must be better than working against each other. Establishing trust needs to be the primary objective.Best wishes,Ernie http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html Thomas Helsby's Account of the Murders at Port Louis.
Gabriel Marchevsky	posted 5/11/04 12:46 AM     Ernie,The fact that the islands are available to NATO is a threat. There was no NATO command structure in Saudi Arabia either. The forces in the islands are formidable compared to the ones in 1982, but they are still not sufficient to deter an attack from mainland. However, this is an irrelevant point. Even if Argentina dropped the claim the islands would still be available to NATO. There was an attack against Argentina in 1982 by British commandos originated in Chile. The operation failed. The British forces did not avoid attacking Argentina for the reasons you explain, they simply lacked the resources to do so.You say "No seduction, no confrontation, just normality to let things progress in a truly natural way."This is my biggest fear. Your "natural way" will not work for the benefit of South America in the 21st century.The 19th and 20th century prove this. I prefer my own natural way, which is the political integration of South America. As always, anybody is welcome in our house.Best regards,Gabriel
Ernie Spencer	posted 5/12/04 8:44 AM       Gabriel,Like you I believe that Political Integration in South America as elsewhere, Europe for example, is desirable. It has transformed the EU from a group of warring nations to a community that largely cooperates and works together. Of course the old enmities surface sometimes but we do now have a peaceful way of dealing with them.If normalisation of relationships with the Falklands and Argentina leads to a willing integration with South America so be it. I would be happy with that.We will just have to disagree about NATO there is no access for NATO to South America via the Falklands. NATO is a force for peace and stability through strength and cooperation and thank goodness for that from my point of view. NATO has no agressive tendencies at all, it exists entirely to secure European peace and defence and is completely defensive but does retain attack capability for that purpose and is available under certain agreed circumstances for peacekeeping operations.Best wishes,Ernie http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html Thomas Helsby's Account of the Murders at Port Louis.

Back To Malvinas-Falklands  | Post New Topic