Wow… (ah the good old useless debatable days, how I missed them 
)
Well my origional post still stands, I do not want to repeat myself.
And how did you land up saying that the Argentina Air Force is better than the RAF?? Pick your battles. 
Guys, don’t put gas on fire.
Please stick to the topic.
Thanks!
Whatever you say Colonel :lol:
Like when the RAF, outnumbered, won the Battle of Britain?
Compare old equipments of the FFAA with the RAF,do you think it´s easy
to fight against technology?.
The FFAA didn’t fight the RAF - they fought the Fleet Air Arm, armed with a handful of subsonic 1960s VSTOL jets.
Sorry, Erwin, but you can’t still believe that Britain somehow lost 1000 killed, or whatever it was - here are the generally accepted stats:
Argies: 655 killed, 1,100 wounded, 11,313 prisoners
Brits: 255 killed, 746 wounded
No, really it’s not.
I don’t think any of those that have read that site hate it, that would be silly and childish, in fact from the comments received from other posters they find it highly amusing !
It wouldn’t take more than a few minutes of checking on the web to ridicule the cas figs.
But it would be even easier just to use logic…
No, really it’s not.
I don’t think any of those that have read that site hate it, that would be silly and childish, in fact from the comments received from other posters they find it highly amusing !
It wouldn’t take more than a few minutes of checking on the web to ridicule the cas figs.
But it would be even easier just to use logic…[/quote]
really?some guys from the arrse tried to hack it,but they failed ,childs
No, really it’s not.
I don’t think any of those that have read that site hate it, that would be silly and childish, in fact from the comments received from other posters they find it highly amusing !
It wouldn’t take more than a few minutes of checking on the web to ridicule the cas figs.
But it would be even easier just to use logic…[/quote]
really?some guys from the arrse tried to hack it,but they failed ,childs[/quote]
Of course they did, that’s all they do.
:roll:
But it’s still a very funny site !
Erwin, if the UK spent millions of pounds for 2 Islands and some fish, why did Argentina want two islands and some fish? Why did and does Argentina want two Islands and some fish?
Its not like the Falklands are really close to you anyway is it? Why not lt the bloody falkland Islanders decide what they want to be and just forget about it.
The war is long over, I admire the courage of Argentinas pilots, I even admire the audacity of the plan. But you lost, fair and square, you need to get over it and move on I think.
Because of the national sovereignity,we have pride (i search pride in the translator,it´s orgullo in spanish,i guess),we don´t want nobody in national territory.
The kelpers are british,we don´t want any british in our national territory.
Those two islands are on our submarine platform,enough reasons,and there are more.We had population there first than you.
UK wanted the islands because empires need territories in every continent and zone,to refuel and ressuply troops,navy and aircrafts for the uk’s imperialist proposals.The islanders were put by you,return those bennies to the uk,so,they can be roast beefs,and not a second class citizen in two aislated islands.We can put argentinians in the islands,and then respect their opinions.
THIS IS FINISHED.STOP!!!.
the discussion finish like always,you think the islands are yours,i think the malvinas are argentinian (and gibraltar is spanish for obvious geographic reasons i still think).
i can´t change your opinion,and of course,you can´t change my opinion.
This is finished,please,stop.
Im busy,i don´t want stupid discussions.
Because of the national sovereignity,we have pride (i search pride in the translator,it´s orgullo in spanish,i guess),we don´t want nobody in national territory.
The kelpers are british,we don´t want any british in our national territory.
Those two islands are on our submarine platform,enough reasons,and there are more.We had population there first than you.
UK wanted the islands because empires need territories in every continent and zone,to refuel and ressuply troops,navy and aircrafts for the uk’s imperialist proposals.The islanders were put by you,return those bennies to the uk,so,they can be roast beefs,and not a second class citizen in two aislated islands.We can put argentinians in the islands,and then respect their opinions.
THIS IS FINISHED.STOP!!!.
the discussion finish like always,you think the islands are yours,i think the malvinas are argentinian (and gibraltar is spanish for obvious geographic reasons i still think).
i can´t change your opinion,and of course,you can´t change my opinion.
This is finished,please,stop.
Im busy,i don´t want stupid discussions.[/quote]
OK, I fully understand your point. you genuinely believe that the Islands are yours, we agree to differ.
I would like to know though when Argentina had a population there first? When did Argentina gain independance from Spain? And were there Argentinians on the Islands at this date? Im not sure, but i will attempt to find out. can we start a new thread on it and have a reasonable discussion or is there one already?
My friend Erwin and I are currently having an out of topic discussion on the above.
We are discussion The Falkland Islanders right to be there, why Argentina wants them and why anyone would want them in general. Feel free to join in, but please no flame war!
I will kick off with some historical data.
In 1771 the Spanish Empire ceded the Falklands to Britian.
The British left the Falklands in 1774 leaving behind a plaque claiming them for the British Empire.
The Spanish Empire visited the Malvinas in 1806, leaving behind a plaque claiming East island for Spain.
Argentina was declared independant from the Spanish Empire in 1816.
So, who actually owned the Islands, Spain or Britian?
And, if Argentina has a claim what is it based on? For Argentina could possibly claim all of the former Spanish Empire?
We come to the old question that is thrown up, Gibralta is claimed by the UK, so why cant Argentina claim the falklands? Well a counter to this would be Spain Claims Cetua in North Africa and still has a colony there?
I think the best thing to do, would be to make the Falklands an independant member of the commonwealth, with UN guarantees.
This I believe would solve the problem.
I know that we were kicked from them before you habitated them.bluffcove said me the americans kicked us from there,but i dk a shit about that.
they were from spain when we were their colony,and then,when we were liberated they were our heritage.
we can start in the falkands topic.thanks
firefly,excuse me,im seeing that you want to have serious discussions.
excuse me,as you can see,im a ultra nationalist,of right,but i like the democracy.
(i will enjoy to debate with you,a debate only between you and me,to secure the peace in this thread,and then,if you want,we can join more persons to the discussion)
I will start my friend :):
the reasons we think about they´re argentinian are:
straight of argentinian sovereiginty
Heritage from Spain.
proximity.
They are geographic ubicated in proximity to the patagonian coast.
They have the same weather and economy as the Republic of Argentina
They are in our continental platform, that by the international straight after the Convention of Geneva of 1958, belongs to the coastal state.
Straight of emergent dominion by the pontifical situation
Discovery and occupation of the territory.
Usucapión.
Straight of first occupant
We can mention dates when england recognized the rights of the malvinas:
1713: The treaty of Ultecht between Spain, Great Britain, and France confirms the Spanish property of its traditional territories in the Américas, that include the Malvinas.
1790: Spain and Great Britain sign the convention of Nootka, where Great Britain formally resigns to any colonial ambition in South America and the adjacent islands.
1825: Great Britain recognizes the independence of the United Provinces of the River of the Silver, and some does not make objection on the Malvinas subject, in the Treaty of friendship, navigation and commerce signed between both countries.
both spain and uk had the same rights for the sovereignty of them,but,the first in living there were spanish,and then the british,the british abandoned the malvinas,but,there were some spanish there,who were the first on living there,and when the we declared the independenche,the population were argentinians but in then (i dk if after or before the independence was),but they were kicked from the islands by british (i suppose they were british,but bluffcove said me there were americans= confusing).
the point is that those men who lived in the islands were argentinian after we declared independence,and somebody kicked them,and britain ocuppied the islands them.We are doing a just claim i think.
if you make the falklands a member of the commonwealth,that means,point for the uk,because the commonwealth is like a cooperations society between englands,and independent countries (ex-british colonies) and british colonies.
spain don´t claims the islands,so,they are out of this now,and the spanish here,are now argentinian (the british in the falklands no,the british population in argentina is really small,but,you there are lots of welsh people,but,they weren´t in the falklands,so,they are out of this),and the welsh here are those who wants the independence of wales from the uk.
Argentinians really wants those islands,because of national sovereignity,and honour too.
of course,this is what argentinians think,i know about the british point of view,and i believe the interest in this islands is big,since the uk is an empire,they need territories in all the world to mantain their condition of empire (im not talking of uk as an imperialist country,you have your reasons of having the falklands,you think they´re right,i think mine’s are right).
your turn firefly (i want to have the discussion only with you for now please,thank you mate).
sorry,read this (british deaths):
CONCLUSION: TOTAL FALLEN: 1053 TOTAL DAMAGED Or LOST SHIPS: 32 TOTAL LOST AIRSHIPS: 154
http://libreopinion.com/members/elmalvinense/bajasbritanicas.html
excuse me mate,im going to have a discussion with firefly in other thread,i want to debate with him,then we can debate what you want.thank you
sorry,read this (british deaths):
CONCLUSION: TOTAL FALLEN: 1053 TOTAL DAMAGED Or LOST SHIPS: 32 TOTAL LOST AIRSHIPS: 154
http://libreopinion.com/members/elmalvinense/bajasbritanicas.html
excuse me mate,im going to have a discussion with firefly in other thread,i want to debate with him,then we can debate what you want.thank you[/quote]
We lost more aircraft than we actually sent down there then? How did we manage to retake the Islands with all of our aircraft shot down (most of them twice by the looks of it) and most of our ships sunk?
sorry,read this (british deaths):
CONCLUSION: TOTAL FALLEN: 1053 TOTAL DAMAGED Or LOST SHIPS: 32 TOTAL LOST AIRSHIPS: 154
http://libreopinion.com/members/elmalvinense/bajasbritanicas.html
excuse me mate,im going to have a discussion with firefly in other thread,i want to debate with him,then we can debate what you want.thank you[/quote]
We lost more aircraft than we actually sent down there then? How did we manage to retake the Islands with all of our aircraft shot down (most of them twice by the looks of it) and most of our ships sunk?[/quote]
read the article please.
FINISHED DISCUSSION,im continuing a civilizated debated but with firefly.
I don’t need to read the article, it says we lost more aircraft than we actually sent to the Falklands - how is that possible?
Erwin, why can you not see when propaganda is lying to you?
straight of argentinian sovereiginty - what does this mean? Sovereignty was French, Spain, Spain/GB jointly, Spain, Argentina, Britain
Heritage from Spain. - fair enough, but an extremely weak argument
They are geographic ubicated in proximity to the patagonian coast. - So what? - Gibraltar, Channel Islands, Ceuta, Corsica, French Guiana etc etc etc…
They have the same weather and economy as the Republic of Argentina - Weather? So what! It’s got the same weather as Scotland too! Economy - I didn’t know that Argentina’s economy was based around fishing and sheep farming and used the Falklands Pound!
They are in our continental platform, that by the international straight after the Convention of Geneva of 1958, belongs to the coastal state. - The 1958 convention says no such thing - the only reference to the continental shelf or platform is Art. 26.2: 2. Subject to its right to take reasonable measures for the exploration of the continental shelf and the exploitation of its natural resources, the coastal State may not impede the laying or maintenance of such cables or pipelines - nothing about sovereignty, except Article 2 The high seas being open to all nations, no State may validly purport to subject any part of them to its sovereignty. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by these articles and by the other rules of international law.
Straight of emergent dominion by the pontifical situation - In inglés, por favor
Discovery and occupation of the territory - Discovered and occupied originally by France, currently occupied by Brits
Usucapión - In inglés, por favor
Straight of first occupant - 1st occupants were French (albeit briefly)
Now, let’s talk about the right to self-determination:
The islanders are almost exclusively British and hold British citizenship, and voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to remain British.
How did they behave when under occupation?
Argentina attempted to make several unwelcome changes to the culture of the Falkland Islands, in spite of earlier assurances that the Islanders’ way of life and cultural identity would be maintained. Argentina changed Port Stanley’s name to “Puerto Argentino”, made Spanish the official language of the Falkland Islands, and commanded traffic to drive on the right by painting arrows on the road indicating the direction of traffic and changing the location of street and traffic signs. Despite the arrows, islanders defiantly continued to drive on the left, demonstrating their determination to remain British.
So what you’re really saying is that you want the sovereignty of some damnèd little rocks in the South Atlantic & don’t give a hang about the wishes of the occupants? I.e. you want to occupy the islands against their wishes?
[quote=“BDL”]
I don’t need to read the article, it says we lost more aircraft than we actually sent to the Falklands - how is that possible?
Erwin, why can you not see when propaganda is lying to you?[/quote]
Plese,the article,i dk how many planes did you sent,maybe the help of french,and american planes.