Who Should Own '.Patagonia?'

Who Should Own '.Patagonia?'

There are 480 comments on the The Atlantic story from Apr 23, 2013, titled Who Should Own '.Patagonia?'. In it, The Atlantic reports that:

Argentina's "territory" is under threat -- both physically and virtually -- according to its president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Atlantic.

First Prev
of 24
Next Last
Biguggy

Corner Brook, Canada

#509 Dec 16, 2013
Gustavo wrote:
<quoted text>
Inglaterra no tiene un elemento histórico que avale de que las islas Malvinas alguna vez les perteneció, lo han demostrado todas las veces que se los invitaron a resolver la disputa por distintos medios. Están flojos de papeles por eso no aceptan las invitaciones.
Gobiernos británicos que dijeron tener derechos, otros que han dudado de esos derechos, Otros que nos querían arrendar las islas, otros reconocieron la disputa, otros que nos iban a reconocer la Soberanía de las islas, y después de la guerra se emperraron en aceptar la invitación de la Argentina apoyada por la Comunidad Internacional para darle un punto final al conflicto. Desde hace 46 años que la disputa Malvinas es reconocida internacionalmente por más de 150 países.
Please note it Britain or the UK not England.
In my opinion the UK does have very good historical information that they have sovereignty over the Islands.
The dispute was settled in 1850 and the actions of the government of Argentina for 30 years after that support their acknowledgement of that fact. No protests and comments from 2 presidents and 1 vice-president at the opening of congress to the effect that Argentina had no disputes with anyone is very compelling evidence.
Recognising that a dispute exists, spurious as Argentina's claim is, does not mean that Argentina is in the right.
Biguggy

Corner Brook, Canada

#510 Dec 16, 2013
dean bob guggy SON MIERDA wrote:
<quoted text>
spurious? Since 1833 Argentina is complaining...
United Nations,C-24 CHAIRMAN
“The English have no arguments to avoid dialogue in Malvinas "
Diego Morejon Pazmiño Argentina defended position in the dispute and called to respect the UN resolutions for a bilateral negotiation.“There is a discussion of colonialism, invasion, but of sovereignty," he said.
by:Javier Borelli
From New York.
I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
uk the BIG prostitute,will be DESTROYED!
"Since 1833 Argentina is complaining..."
Strange that you 'forget' to mention that in 1850 Argentina signed a Peace Treaty with the UK that settled ALL differences and then did not complain, in any way for 30 years, and during that 30 years 2 presidents and 1 vice -president, at the opening of congress, made statements to the effect that Argentina had no disputes with anyone? Or was that just Argentina lying again?
As for that Dude Diego the fact that he refers to 'England' and not the UK or Britain just shows how little grasp he has of the situation. Plus the fact that the reported comments of the chairman of a very minor UN sub-sub-committee carry no weight against the published two Advisory Opinions of the ICJ to the effect that ALL NSGTs have the right to self-determination.
guggyes PUTO

Richmond Hill, Canada

#511 Dec 16, 2013
Biguggy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Since 1833 Argentina is complaining..."
Strange that you 'forget' to mention that in 1850 Argentina signed a Peace Treaty with the UK that settled ALL differences and then did not complain, in any way for 30 years, and during that 30 years 2 presidents and 1 vice -president, at the opening of congress, made statements to the effect that Argentina had no disputes with anyone? Or was that just Argentina lying again?
As for that Dude Diego the fact that he refers to 'England' and not the UK or Britain just shows how little grasp he has of the situation. Plus the fact that the reported comments of the chairman of a very minor UN sub-sub-committee carry no weight against the published two Advisory Opinions of the ICJ to the effect that ALL NSGTs have the right to self-determination.
Explaoned VERY WELL by Dr Kohen and Dr Shadow.....Youa re an ASS!
Anyway,uk WILL BE OBLITERATED!

REPARATION of brits crimes http://www.britishreparations.org/index.php

UN C-24 CHAIRMAN: I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
1 post removed
Biguggy

Corner Brook, Canada

#513 Dec 16, 2013
guggyes PUTO wrote:
<quoted text>
Explaoned VERY WELL by Dr Kohen and Dr Shadow.....Youa re an ASS!
Anyway,uk WILL BE OBLITERATED!
REPARATION of brits crimes http://www.britishreparations.org/index.php
UN C-24 CHAIRMAN: I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
Argentina wanted it to be a Colonial Situation in 1964/5, please see UN document A/5800/Rev1, and they got their way with UNGA resolution 2065, you know the one you love so much. now you say they want it changed. I say just get the UNGA to agree that they made a mistake in 1965 and 2065 is invalid. Should be easy with all the world support RGland has.
guggy es MIERDA PURA

Scarborough, Canada

#514 Dec 16, 2013
Biguggy wrote:
<quoted text>
Argentina wanted it to be a Colonial Situation in 1964/5, please see UN document A/5800/Rev1, and they got their way with UNGA resolution 2065, you know the one you love so much. now you say they want it changed. I say just get the UNGA to agree that they made a mistake in 1965 and 2065 is invalid. Should be easy with all the world support RGland has.
Sure guggy..but the UN Chairman think this:

UN C-24 CHAIRMAN: I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
uk the EVIL EMPIRE WILL BE OBLITERATED!

REPARATION of brits crimes http://www.britishreparations.org/index.php
Biguggy

Port Aux Basques, Canada

#515 Dec 16, 2013
guggy es MIERDA PURA wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure guggy..but the UN Chairman think this:
UN C-24 CHAIRMAN: I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
uk the EVIL EMPIRE WILL BE OBLITERATED!
REPARATION of brits crimes http://www.britishreparations.org/index.php
Diego is not the Chairman of the UN he is the Chairman of a very minor sub-sub-committee and has a severe case of LMF when it comes to putting his person views, as reported, before the sub-sub-committee that he chairs.
LMF = Lack of Moral Fibre
guggy es MIERDA

Richmond Hill, Canada

#516 Dec 16, 2013
Biguggy wrote:
<quoted text>
Diego is not the Chairman of the UN he is the Chairman of a very minor sub-sub-committee and has a severe case of LMF when it comes to putting his person views, as reported, before the sub-sub-committee that he chairs.
LMF = Lack of Moral Fibre
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhahhhhhhhhhhhhhh
you lordtrah,taff,and all the brits scum are NOOOOOOOOOOOBOOOOOODY!
aahahahahahaahahahahahah

uk the EVIL empire will be obliterated!

United Nations,C-24 CHAIRMAN
“The English have no arguments to avoid dialogue in Malvinas "
Diego Morejon Pazmiño Argentina defended position in the dispute and called to respect the UN resolutions for a bilateral negotiation.“There is a discussion of colonialism, invasion, but of sovereignty," he said.
by:Javier Borelli
From New York.
I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
Terry Hill

São Paulo, Brazil

#517 Dec 16, 2013
guggy es MIERDA wrote:
<quoted text>
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhahhhhhhhhhhhhhh
you lordtrah,taff,and all the brits scum are NOOOOOOOOOOOBOOOOOODY!
aahahahahahaahahahahahah
uk the EVIL empire will be obliterated!
United Nations,C-24 CHAIRMAN
“The English have no arguments to avoid dialogue in Malvinas "
Diego Morejon Pazmiño Argentina defended position in the dispute and called to respect the UN resolutions for a bilateral negotiation.“There is a discussion of colonialism, invasion, but of sovereignty," he said.
by:Javier Borelli
From New York.
I would say that Malvinas is a misplaced theme within the Decolonization Committee . Because we are not talking about a colony. It is an Argentine territory occupied by a foreign power. It is a military occupation of a foreign power “. Forceful words emanating from the legitimate voice of the Committee on Decolonization of the United Nations , chairman, Diego Morejon Pazmiño
Obliterate! Your loser nation cannot even maintain the drains of your capital, while your naval ships sink while at their moorings, and your air-force is equipped with bankrupt Spain's discards. To obliterate anything you need competency and capability of which you or your nation have neither. So I guess you must be talking through the old PELOTUDO again.

Oh yes they do have the best argument of all, that there is no requirement to settle disputes under international law, so the UK will just allow Argentina's totally ineffective protests to whistle in the wind.
Never heard that one before, but its in line with all your other assertions, as its proved in at least half a dozen facets of international law to be absolutely wrong. Just like your wonderful country veering between absolute corruption and absolute incompetency. Incidentally that is not the voice of the UN, that is the sole preserve of the SG who says the UK is not in violation of any relevant resolutions. That was just the corrupt uttering of a inconsequential third world politician with no legal credentials.
Cedric Slinn

Saint-vincent-de-tyrosse, France

#518 Jan 20, 2014
Patagonia belongs to the Mapuche people with whom the Spanish signed an agreement recognising their independence. Their sovereign territory covers the Southern half of what is now Argentina.
The Mapuche Nation suffered immensely when Argentina and Chile launched an illegal combined military invasion of Mapuche territory in 1862. This occupation continues even now.
They elected a Frenchman as King in the mid 19th century who founded a Royal dynasty which exists to this day. King Orélie Antoine de Tounens was inaugurated as the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia’s first monarch.
This hereditary Royal Dynasty resides in France today where a new monarch has just been elected.
The Regency Council of the Kingdom of Araucanía and Patagonia met on January 9, 2014, under the direction of Prince Regent Philippe de Lavalette, and selected His Excellency Baron Jean Michel Parasiliti di Para, Duke of San Pedro de Hueyusco, Grand Inquisitor of the Order of St Lazarus of Jerusalem and former President of the Council of the Kingdom, as the successor of Prince Philippe I.
He now reigns under the title Prince Antoine IV. Long live the King!
Cedric Slinn

Saint-vincent-de-tyrosse, France

#519 Jan 20, 2014
Look at this website of the Mapuche people the only rightful owners of Patagonia
http://www.mapuche-nation.org/english/html/ki...
Argentina has since 1862, illegally occupied the Southern half of the territory claimed by Argentina. Imperial Argentina is now forcibly occupying in a colonial fashion the land of the Mapuche.
Argentina's claims are to the Falklands and Patagonia are of very dubious legal substance.
As far as I can see claims are based on the right of the Spanish conquistadors to forcibly steal territory from the rightful owners and then give away to whomsoever they like. Not content with that, when it suits Argentina, they stole by force the Mapuch territory in Patagona in the 19th century, despite the Mapuche (not having been defeated) having signed a treaty with the Spanish recognising their right to Patagonia.
Not content with that Argentina quotes the settlement with the Spanish Viceroyalty of the River Plate as legal justification for its claims on the Falkland Islands. By what right could the Spanish go round the world giving other peoples countries away to their friends?
Doc

UK

#520 Nov 2, 2014
Cedric Slinn wrote:
Patagonia belongs to the Mapuche people with whom the Spanish signed an agreement recognising their independence. Their sovereign territory covers the Southern half of what is now Argentina.
The Mapuche Nation suffered immensely when Argentina and Chile launched an illegal combined military invasion of Mapuche territory in 1862. This occupation continues even now.
They elected a Frenchman as King in the mid 19th century who founded a Royal dynasty which exists to this day. King Orélie Antoine de Tounens was inaugurated as the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia’s first monarch.
This hereditary Royal Dynasty resides in France today where a new monarch has just been elected.
The Regency Council of the Kingdom of Araucanía and Patagonia met on January 9, 2014, under the direction of Prince Regent Philippe de Lavalette, and selected His Excellency Baron Jean Michel Parasiliti di Para, Duke of San Pedro de Hueyusco, Grand Inquisitor of the Order of St Lazarus of Jerusalem and former President of the Council of the Kingdom, as the successor of Prince Philippe I.
He now reigns under the title Prince Antoine IV. Long live the King!
Let us counter the propaganda of Filmus and the Argentine's claim on the Falklands by supporting King Antoine IV as sovereign of Patagonia.
cedric es mIERDA

Richmond Hill, Canada

#521 Nov 2, 2014
Cedric Slinn wrote:
Look at this website of the Mapuche people the only rightful owners of Patagonia
http://www.mapuche-nation.org/english/html/ki...
Argentina has since 1862, illegally occupied the Southern half of the territory claimed by Argentina. Imperial Argentina is now forcibly occupying in a colonial fashion the land of the Mapuche.
Argentina's claims are to the Falklands and Patagonia are of very dubious legal substance.
As far as I can see claims are based on the right of the Spanish conquistadors to forcibly steal territory from the rightful owners and then give away to whomsoever they like. Not content with that, when it suits Argentina, they stole by force the Mapuch territory in Patagona in the 19th century, despite the Mapuche (not having been defeated) having signed a treaty with the Spanish recognising their right to Patagonia.
Not content with that Argentina quotes the settlement with the Spanish Viceroyalty of the River Plate as legal justification for its claims on the Falkland Islands. By what right could the Spanish go round the world giving other peoples countries away to their friends?
Argentina was occupying MAlvinas.The brits signed a TREATY of COMMERCE and Friendship and navigation in 1825.NO RESERVE by the brits.
BTW,the Mapuches are paid by the brits MINING companies,the mapuche are from Chile,not Argentina.The mapuche BS,are based in bristol.All the members but one,are Anglosaxon..
Ahahahahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
THE UN DOES NOT have any claim.Anyway,if the territory is already occupied,for over 100 years,WITHOUT protest,Acquisitive prescription applies....
1 post removed
Deanstreet

Stanley, Falkland Islands (Malvinas)

#523 Nov 2, 2014
Treaty of Commerce and Friendship..

Correct..

And that is all it was..

Nothing else..
dean es ULTRAMIERDA

Richmond Hill, Canada

#524 Nov 2, 2014
Deanstreet wrote:
Treaty of Commerce and Friendship..
Correct..
And that is all it was..
Nothing else..
SHUT UP PIECE of JUNK!
Friends..Ahhh
MALVINAS ARGENTINAS!
NUKE the brits SOB!
Deanstreet

Stanley, Falkland Islands (Malvinas)

#525 Nov 2, 2014
Hmmm...
Doesn't dispute this..
dean es ULTRAMIERDA

Richmond Hill, Canada

#526 Nov 3, 2014
Deanstreet wrote:
Hmmm...
Doesn't dispute this..
PELOTUDO!
MALVINAS ARGENTINAS!
BTW,why your location says:satanley(MALVINAS)???
Groo

Edmonton, Canada

#527 Nov 3, 2014
An interesting fact about the 1825 treaty of commerce. On signing, Britain requested information on the United Provinces, simply as no-one knew the make up or strength of the infant country.

The reply was published as a book in 1825, it includes the question regarding the make-up of the country and then the reply, which gave great detail of the Cities, military, boundaries, farming and fishing.

The reply included areas that the United provinces government assumed to be part of the country, including Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia territories.

One place not mentioned at all, guess where that is!!
groo es ULTRAMIERDA

Scarborough, Canada

#528 Nov 3, 2014
Groo wrote:
An interesting fact about the 1825 treaty of commerce. On signing, Britain requested information on the United Provinces, simply as no-one knew the make up or strength of the infant country.
The reply was published as a book in 1825, it includes the question regarding the make-up of the country and then the reply, which gave great detail of the Cities, military, boundaries, farming and fishing.
The reply included areas that the United provinces government assumed to be part of the country, including Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia territories.
One place not mentioned at all, guess where that is!!
MALVINAS was part of BUENOS AIRES.SOme of the 20 governors posted in MAlvinas,even were BORN in BUENOS AIRES!
BritBob

Southampton, UK

#529 Nov 4, 2014
groo es ULTRAMIERDA wrote:
<quoted text>
MALVINAS was part of BUENOS AIRES.SOme of the 20 governors posted in MAlvinas,even were BORN in BUENOS AIRES!
Les Miguel, none of the so-called Governors went anywhere near the Falklands. The UK recognised the new regime in BA asked about its territory but no mention was made of the Falklands. The first illegitimate claim was made in 1829 and Vernet's and Mestivier's occupation of 18 and 2 months was protested. In any case, neither periods qualify for 'long, undisturbed and peaceful possession.' Lol
2 posts removed

Since: Oct 12

Huinca Renanco, Argentina

#532 Jan 20, 2015
Argie wrote:
<quoted text>
Nop, los mapuches no son pueblos originarios de la Patagonia Argentina, son chilenos, son llamados también araucanos.
Los araucanos o mapuches son expulsados de chile por los españoles y comienzan a desplazarse en la patagonia argentina entrando por lo que es hoy Neuquen y Rio Negro, luego los enfrentamientos entre mapuches y tehuelches dan por final la victoria de los mapuches.
Los antiguos habitantes han sido los tehuelches, etnia nomade y cazadora, costumbres pacificas.
Los araucanos o mapuches, originarios de la Araucanía trasandina, que invadieron el territorio argentino atraídos por la inmensa riqueza móvil del ganado equino y bovino, al que agregaron la sal que extraían del territorio pampeano para formar un "combo" y venderlo en el cautivo mercado chileno; que para lograr ese objetivo conjugaron su capacidad militar con la comercial cayendo sobre los pueblos de nuestra llanura y devastándolos, luego del pillaje; que masacraron a los tehuelches, el verdadero pueblo originario de nuestra Patagonia.
El general Julio Argentino Roca entre sus filas tenía más de 800 soldados aborígenes Tehuelches.
Los registros de mapuches sobre su idioma como su intromision en estos territorios datan desde 1860 en adelantes no existe registros arqueologicos, ni paleotológicos que demuestren una fecha anterior a la de 1800.
Si me decís que fueron expulsados por los españoles,estamos hablando de antes de 1816;entonces ¿Cómo podría haber en ese momento un territorio llamado Patagonia Argentina perteneciente a la Argentina?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 24
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 5 min Truth is might 315,275
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... (Dec '16) 11 min Frindly 291
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 29 min Scout Larry 16,892
News Longtime GOP Texas Gov. Perry wins another term (Nov '10) 30 min Truth is might 24,371
News Naked man arrested was high on LSD chasing seag... 30 min anonymous 1
News Time to settle immigration debate, once and for... 35 min HOLLA ISABELLA 9
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 38 min Quirky 1,565,661
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 55 min CodeTalker 279,910
News Can Trump pardon anyone? Himself? Can he fire M... 2 hr Palin s Turkey Th... 62
News Democrats, civil rights group aim to block Trum... 5 hr RoxLo 147
More from around the web