Obama signs off on negotiation resolution of OAS re: Falklands

[California Girl]

It is Sunday morning, the 12th June and I am sitting here having breakfast while I read this. I am a Falklands war vet ex 3rd Battalion the Parachute Regiment (3 Para). On this date twentynine years ago, 3 Para was involved in a two day battle to take Mount Longdon from the Argentinians. We lost 23 men with 47 wounded during that action. Shortly I will be leaving to attend a memorial service to remember those 23 friends and heroes who made the ultimate sacrifice on the 11th and 12th June all those years ago.

To say that I consider Mr Obama's position on this to be an insult to our fallen would be an understatement. I would like to say more about him, but I refuse to bring any disgrace on the uniform I once wore.

In Memorium:

Mount Longdon
11/12 June 1982

Sergeant Ian McKay VC
Corporal Stephen Hope
Corporal Keith McCarthy
Corporal Stewart McLaughlin
Cfn Alex Shaw REME
Corporal Scott Wilson
Lance-Corporal Peter Higgs
Lance-Corporal Christopher Lovatt
Lance-Corporal James Murdoch
Lance-Corporal David Scott
Private Richard Absolon, MM
Private Gerald Bull
Private Jason Burt
Private John Crow
Private Mark Dobsworth
Private Anthony Greenwood
Private Neil Grose
Private Peter Hedicker
Private Timothy Jenkins
Private Craig Jones
Private Stewart Laing
Private Ian Scrivens
Private Philip West

We will never forget you.

Today, I shall pray for your fallen comrades. God bless them, and their families.

 

[xsited1]

It is Sunday morning, the 12th June and I am sitting here having breakfast while I read this. I am a Falklands war vet ex 3rd Battalion the Parachute Regiment (3 Para). On this date twentynine years ago, 3 Para was involved in a two day battle to take Mount Longdon from the Argentinians. We lost 23 men with 47 wounded during that action. Shortly I will be leaving to attend a memorial service to remember those 23 friends and heroes who made the ultimate sacrifice on the 11th and 12th June all those years ago.

To say that I consider Mr Obama's position on this to be an insult to our fallen would be an understatement. I would like to say more about him, but I refuse to bring any disgrace on the uniform I once wore.

In Memorium:

Mount Longdon
11/12 June 1982

Sergeant Ian McKay VC
Corporal Stephen Hope
Corporal Keith McCarthy
Corporal Stewart McLaughlin
Cfn Alex Shaw REME
Corporal Scott Wilson
Lance-Corporal Peter Higgs
Lance-Corporal Christopher Lovatt
Lance-Corporal James Murdoch
Lance-Corporal David Scott
Private Richard Absolon, MM
Private Gerald Bull
Private Jason Burt
Private John Crow
Private Mark Dobsworth
Private Anthony Greenwood
Private Neil Grose
Private Peter Hedicker
Private Timothy Jenkins
Private Craig Jones
Private Stewart Laing
Private Ian Scrivens
Private Philip West

We will never forget you.

 

[Blagger]

The only reason that Argentina is rallying influencial support for their territorial claim to the Falkland Islands is because a sizable oil well has been discovered within the territorial waters of the islands. Drilling has already commenced, thus Buenos Aires has renewed it campaign to claim the islands.for themselves, so as to benefit from what Britain is in the process of tapping.

However, Britain will never relinquish its legitimate hold on the Falklands for one simple reason. It's a tangible remnant of what has remained an unchallenged legacy: what was once the mightiest empire the world has seen. Without wishing to patronize you all, America will never know the pride the comes with having a nationalistic stake (by association) in what was an empire as vast as what Britain possessed and nurtured. The Falkland Islands fell under the shadow of the empire, and as a result of that we'll never negotiate their sovereignty with a nation that has proved hostile in the past. The Falklands War acted as a reminder to the world that Britain will defend its property and those that declare allegiance to her. If Argentina were to repeat their mistake of using military force, Britain would annialate them. And it's worth remembering that you can only so far until Westminster contemplates its nuclear assets.

The simple fact of the matter is that Britain legitimately owns the Falkland Islands, and in case the undeniably treacherous Obama administration and any uppity Argentinian wetback needs conformation to that effect, I'll let one of Newsweek's front covers from the early '80s convey a simple, yet very clear reminder:

 

[Polk]

Pretty outrage to say there is no dispute, noting that Argentina has been challenging Britain's claim since the 1830s and they've fought a minor war over the issue.

The Mexico analogy doesn't hold, as we legally annexed those territories.

We won those territories in a WAR. Texas fought and defeated the Mexicans and when we admitted it to the Union we fought a war with Mexico. They lost and we forced them to sell the territories of the Southwest to us as part of the Peace deal.

Britain has had a continuous claim on the Falklands since the 1600's. And a permanent inhabitation for almost 200 years. And they won the war in 1982.

Argentina has no claim. No legit claim. If they do then Mexico has a claim on the American South West.

Britain hasn't had a continuous claim since the 1600s. Britain did have a colony on the island in the 1760-1770s, but later withdrew and did not return until the 1830s. However, in the intervening years, the British also signed a treaty with Spain dropping their claims to South American colonies.

 

[California Girl]

Pretty outrage to say there is no dispute, noting that Argentina has been challenging Britain's claim since the 1830s and they've fought a minor war over the issue.

The Mexico analogy doesn't hold, as we legally annexed those territories.

We won those territories in a WAR. Texas fought and defeated the Mexicans and when we admitted it to the Union we fought a war with Mexico. They lost and we forced them to sell the territories of the Southwest to us as part of the Peace deal.

Britain has had a continuous claim on the Falklands since the 1600's. And a permanent inhabitation for almost 200 years. And they won the war in 1982.

Argentina has no claim. No legit claim. If they do then Mexico has a claim on the American South West.

Britain hasn't had a continuous claim since the 1600s. Britain did have a colony on the island in the 1760-1770s, but later withdrew and did not return until the 1830s. However, in the intervening years, the British also signed a treaty with Spain dropping their claims to South American colonies.

Nor has Argentina. Fact. But, what actually matters is the opinion of the Falklanders themselves. They consider themselves British and ain't no one on the planet that has the right to take that from them.

It's over. Done. Britain won, Argentina lost. If they're butthurt, tough shit. The Falkland Islands are British. And British they shall remain. And Obama and his minions (like you) can go fuck yourselves instead of whining about something that is not our business.

 

[José]

Originally posted by RetiredGySgt
They lost and we forced them to sell the territories of the Southwest to us as part of the Peace deal.

I couldn't have said it better myself... The country was strong-armed into ceding half of its territory and "signed" the treaty under military occupation and threats of full anexation.

Everyday I wipe my anus with paper that's worth way more than Guadalupe-Hidalgo, Sarge.

But nevermind... Mexicans are taking back what's rightfully theirs as we speak... if not de jure, at least, de facto.

 

[José]

J/K people... Mexico lost any right over its northern provinces (not when they signed that ridiculous piece of paper UNDER DURESS but when they lost the will to fight for them).

 

[Polk]

We won those territories in a WAR. Texas fought and defeated the Mexicans and when we admitted it to the Union we fought a war with Mexico. They lost and we forced them to sell the territories of the Southwest to us as part of the Peace deal.

Britain has had a continuous claim on the Falklands since the 1600's. And a permanent inhabitation for almost 200 years. And they won the war in 1982.

Argentina has no claim. No legit claim. If they do then Mexico has a claim on the American South West.

Britain hasn't had a continuous claim since the 1600s. Britain did have a colony on the island in the 1760-1770s, but later withdrew and did not return until the 1830s. However, in the intervening years, the British also signed a treaty with Spain dropping their claims to South American colonies.

Nor has Argentina. Fact. But, what actually matters is the opinion of the Falklanders themselves. They consider themselves British and ain't no one on the planet that has the right to take that from them.

It's over. Done. Britain won, Argentina lost. If they're butthurt, tough shit. The Falkland Islands are British. And British they shall remain. And Obama and his minions (like you) can go fuck yourselves instead of whining about something that is not our business.

Nor has Argentina what? They'd have a continuous claim since they've been an independent state. It's also odd to claim the status should be determined by the "Falklanders", noting that the British expelled the Argentine inhabitants when they took the island. Using your logic, if illegal immigrants keep pouring over the border from Mexico, they can claim the US is required to return the entire southwest to Mexico.

 

[California Girl]

Britain hasn't had a continuous claim since the 1600s. Britain did have a colony on the island in the 1760-1770s, but later withdrew and did not return until the 1830s. However, in the intervening years, the British also signed a treaty with Spain dropping their claims to South American colonies.

Nor has Argentina. Fact. But, what actually matters is the opinion of the Falklanders themselves. They consider themselves British and ain't no one on the planet that has the right to take that from them.

It's over. Done. Britain won, Argentina lost. If they're butthurt, tough shit. The Falkland Islands are British. And British they shall remain. And Obama and his minions (like you) can go fuck yourselves instead of whining about something that is not our business.

Nor has Argentina what? They'd have a continuous claim since they've been an independent state. It's also odd to claim the status should be determined by the "Falklanders", noting that the British expelled the Argentine inhabitants when they took the island. Using your logic, if illegal immigrants keep pouring over the border from Mexico, they can claim the US is required to return the entire southwest to Mexico.

Which part of 'this is none of our fucking business' is overly complicated for you? We are not the world's government - despite what Obama and the Obamanation might think.

However, since you seem determined to make it our business, Britain offered to put the case before the UN for their decision - which Argentina refused? Why? Because Argentina knew it did not have a legitimate claim. So, instead, they tried to take the islands by force - British Armed Forced died to give the Falklanders back their island - and rightly so.

So, since they chose war instead of peace - they can fucking live with the consequences of having taken on the Brits - and lost. Fuck 'em. And fuck Obama for thinking his opinion means jack shit outside the US. Keep your liberal noses out of other people's business.

 

[Trajan]

Britain hasn't had a continuous claim since the 1600s. Britain did have a colony on the island in the 1760-1770s, but later withdrew and did not return until the 1830s. However, in the intervening years, the British also signed a treaty with Spain dropping their claims to South American colonies.

Nor has Argentina. Fact. But, what actually matters is the opinion of the Falklanders themselves. They consider themselves British and ain't no one on the planet that has the right to take that from them.

It's over. Done. Britain won, Argentina lost. If they're butthurt, tough shit. The Falkland Islands are British. And British they shall remain. And Obama and his minions (like you) can go fuck yourselves instead of whining about something that is not our business.

Nor has Argentina what? They'd have a continuous claim since they've been an independent state. It's also odd to claim the status should be determined by the "Falklanders", noting that the British expelled the Argentine inhabitants when they took the island. Using your logic, if illegal immigrants keep pouring over the border from Mexico, they can claim the US is required to return the entire southwest to Mexico.

you need to read this ....again;


During the lengthiest period of time when any Argentinian inhabited the Falklands, between 1826 and 1833, there never was any government representation in the islands. There was a governor only between 1829 and 1831; back then there were only some 40 people, workers at a fishery owned by the “governor”, a French entrepreneur from Hamburg named Louis Vernet.

Vernet had been ceded Soledad Island (East Falkland) for commercial exploitation as payment for a debt the Buenos Aires Government owed him. Aside from Vernet’s worker, among which Argentinians were a minority, a few gauchos and adventurers lived in the Falklands.

Vernet’s daughter was the only person born in the Falklands during that precarious settlement. “Precarious” since there was no town hall, no churches, nor any civil society of any type. Aside from the couple of years of the Frenchman’s enterprise, there was nothing more than a pirate encampment.

In 1833 the Falklands had some 20 inhabitants of various nationalities. All were expelled by the British. Interestingly, shortly after, dictator Juan Manuel de Rosas offered more than once to cede the islands to the United Kingdom to pay off a debt Buenos Aires owed British banking institutions. However, London ignored the Argentinian claim or offer.

The United Kingdom founded a colony in the Islands 165 years ago. That was when, for the first time in history, a constant human presence was established permanently in the Falklands. Generationally speaking, the Falklanders have been longer in the Falklands than the majority of Argentinians in Argentina. There should be no doubt, then, that the Falklanders are the legitimate masters of the Falklands, and that their will is to be respected, within the framework of the right of self-determination recognized by international law.



did you know that the UN blessed Britains 'reconquest' of the Falklands after the 'war' was over?

 

[California Girl]

Nor has Argentina. Fact. But, what actually matters is the opinion of the Falklanders themselves. They consider themselves British and ain't no one on the planet that has the right to take that from them.

It's over. Done. Britain won, Argentina lost. If they're butthurt, tough shit. The Falkland Islands are British. And British they shall remain. And Obama and his minions (like you) can go fuck yourselves instead of whining about something that is not our business.

Nor has Argentina what? They'd have a continuous claim since they've been an independent state. It's also odd to claim the status should be determined by the "Falklanders", noting that the British expelled the Argentine inhabitants when they took the island. Using your logic, if illegal immigrants keep pouring over the border from Mexico, they can claim the US is required to return the entire southwest to Mexico.

you need to read this ....again;


During the lengthiest period of time when any Argentinian inhabited the Falklands, between 1826 and 1833, there never was any government representation in the islands. There was a governor only between 1829 and 1831; back then there were only some 40 people, workers at a fishery owned by the “governor”, a French entrepreneur from Hamburg named Louis Vernet.

Vernet had been ceded Soledad Island (East Falkland) for commercial exploitation as payment for a debt the Buenos Aires Government owed him. Aside from Vernet’s worker, among which Argentinians were a minority, a few gauchos and adventurers lived in the Falklands.

Vernet’s daughter was the only person born in the Falklands during that precarious settlement. “Precarious” since there was no town hall, no churches, nor any civil society of any type. Aside from the couple of years of the Frenchman’s enterprise, there was nothing more than a pirate encampment.

In 1833 the Falklands had some 20 inhabitants of various nationalities. All were expelled by the British. Interestingly, shortly after, dictator Juan Manuel de Rosas offered more than once to cede the islands to the United Kingdom to pay off a debt Buenos Aires owed British banking institutions. However, London ignored the Argentinian claim or offer.

The United Kingdom founded a colony in the Islands 165 years ago. That was when, for the first time in history, a constant human presence was established permanently in the Falklands. Generationally speaking, the Falklanders have been longer in the Falklands than the majority of Argentinians in Argentina. There should be no doubt, then, that the Falklanders are the legitimate masters of the Falklands, and that their will is to be respected, within the framework of the right of self-determination recognized by international law.



did you know that the UN blessed Britains 'reconquest' of the Falklands after the 'war' was over?

I think this is more about Obama's hatred for Britain than logic, Traj. The borg have been instructed to hate Britain and side with anyone against them. Fuck 'em.

 

[Trajan]

logic flees where obamabots tread....

 

[Polk]

You may want to read the texts of the resolutions. They condemn Argentina's invasion, but also note the need of both parties to come to a negotiated settlement.

It's also pretty darn absurd to claim the British colony represents the first time the island had constant human presence when they expelled the existing inhabitants of the island to create their colony.

 

[California Girl]

You may want to read the texts of the resolutions. They condemn Argentina's invasion, but also note the need of both parties to come to a negotiated settlement.

It's also pretty darn absurd to claim the British colony represents the first time the island had constant human presence when they expelled the existing inhabitants of the island to create their colony.

So, if the Argentine's has such a great case for ownership, why didn't they want the UN to resolve the dispute? Why'd they choose war instead? Because their claim is bullshit. Because the Falkland Islanders want to remain British. That's why. They knew they wouldn't get their way through the UN.... so they figured they'd just take the islands.... unfortunately, for them, they misjudged the British resolve to defend their territory. I don't know why they thought that Britain would back down. They've never run from a fight before, and they weren't gonna run from the 'might' of the Argentines.

It is not our business.... and you liberals need to learn to keep your fucking noses out of other countries business.

And, another thing.... If Obama's so fucking butthurt over the Falklands, why the hell hasn't he spoken out about Northern Ireland? I know why he hasn't. Do you?

 

[Colin]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdxvedxPhNU]YouTube - ‪Sabaton-Back in Control‬‏[/ame]

We shall not be moved!​

 

[California Girl]

Oops. Today in the British Parliament, a question was asked

"Will the Prime Minister raise with President Obama the issue of the Britain's sovereignty with regard to the Falkland Islands. The 'special relationship' between the two countries should require the US to support Britain's sovereignty."

In other words... message from Britain to the United States 'side with us or mind your own fucking business'.

Go Britain! LMAO