First Prev
of 6
Next Last
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#1 Jun 14, 2012
http://www.infobae.com/adjuntos/pdf/2012/06/5...

Which country in the world you want to share what he possesses and rightfully?.

Which country in the world you want to share what he possesses and rightfully?.

Not that the treaty of 1850 was over everything and had nothing more to discuss?.

I want to see the "wise" of this forum British justifying an estoppel after this ....
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#2 Jun 15, 2012
Veo que ningún gringo britanico tien las suficientes bolas para desmentir la existencia de esta propuesta.

Ni siquiera pueden decir una palabra al respecto....

Ofrecieron un Condominio en 1974.

Y la documentación original fue publicamente anunciada ayer en la sede de la ONU en New York, se dejo muy claro que sus copias estan en mi Cancilleria.

Ahora vengan a hablarme de mapas y estoppel.

Quiero escucharlos....
Diego

Santa Fe, Argentina

#3 Jun 15, 2012
ADONDE ESTAS DEANSTREET,....ESCRIBI.....
Terry Hill

São Paulo, Brazil

#4 Jun 15, 2012
francisco wrote:
http://www.infobae.com/adjunto s/pdf/2012/06/551320.pdf
Which country in the world you want to share what he possesses and rightfully?.
Which country in the world you want to share what he possesses and rightfully?.
Not that the treaty of 1850 was over everything and had nothing more to discuss?.
I want to see the "wise" of this forum British justifying an estoppel after this ....
Yes this is what the UK was prepared to offer to the Peron government In 1974.
I knew of this offer so I don't know why the poster refers to them as secret.
They are in the public domain. He died and the whole proposal collapsed.

It looks like an extremely generous offer; but it wasn't to be.
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#5 Jun 15, 2012
Y te quedaste sin Sramiento y Paz. No es asi Terry Gil?.

En 1974 reconociste un conflicto vos solo. Vos solo ofreciste. Reconociste un litigio con Argentina.

Ya no podes volver atras de eso....
JEM

Quarteira, Portugal

#6 Jun 15, 2012
I think section 5 says it all really.....we can talk but the islanders have the casting vote
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#7 Jun 15, 2012
The British proposal ....

Then received our counter-proposal ....

That was all too generous ....

There is no point arguing about what muriuo before birth.

Do not you think?.

And if we can resurrect it and make it birth.

Must first swallow the two flags on the islands for several years before we can say something about it.

Do not be so naive ....
JEM

Quarteira, Portugal

#8 Jun 15, 2012
Hey Francisco, you started the thread, just pointing out that even in 1974 they still had the caveat of the 'Islanders decide'. Not quite sure what you were trying to say in the above post, didn't really make sense or have any relevance.

francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#9 Jun 15, 2012
What I am saying has full relevance.
What matters is that UK recognized a conflict with us.
And for you and many other British trolls, ran the ridiculous arguments on estoppel, 1850, and many other stupid things like.

And on his proposal of 1974, I was clear, we offered an against proposed.And any island ability to decide about the future of the Islands would not be accepted by us without conditions.

Why you said you're not Candide....

If you don't like what I say or think. You can let read me!. Are not required....
JEM

Quarteira, Portugal

#10 Jun 15, 2012
OK.. I am not a Troll, I have not made any arguments regarding 1850 treaties. I am pointing out that the facts have not changed regarding the input of the people of the Flaklands to decide their future. I know this goes against every ingrained brainwashing thought you have been taught. Please do not insult me and start name calling just because I have adiferent opioin than yours, I was hoping for an adult debate where opinions can be made without being insulted.
Terry Hill

São Paulo, Brazil

#11 Jun 15, 2012
francisco wrote:
Y te quedaste sin Sramiento y Paz. No es asi Terry Gil?.
En 1974 reconociste un conflicto vos solo. Vos solo ofreciste. Reconociste un litigio con Argentina.
Ya no podes volver atras de eso....
I am trying to be as patient as I can with someone who appears to be slightly non compos mentis.
But it gets really boring having to explain the most basic concepts of negotiation and governance.

The document is a UK government internal product. All governments produce similar type products.
They also instruct their departments and sub-departments to develop counter-proposals.
So that they are all well informed of the pertinent issues involved. As a strictly internal document it's not part of the direct negotiations.

If you read the document carefully you will see the magic words "WITHOUT PREJUDICE".
Which means its simply to be an offer for consideration only, and is not binding on the party that made the offer.
On legal documents you will also see on the bottom of the pages EE&O which means exceptions for errors and omissions.
Simply put if I've made a mistake it can't be held against me.
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#12 Jun 15, 2012
En ningún momento yo te insulte....

Debate de adultos?.

Demostraste que no te interesa un debate adulto en el momento en que usaste el pretexto del Beagle.

Todos los trolls britanicos lo hacen....

Curiosamente, vos lo repetiste.

Que debo pensar?.

Que sos un tipo amable?.

Evidentemente no....

Ya te dije. Yo no hago las reglas. Mi gobierno tampoco las hace. Las hace la ONU. Y para la ONU lo que los islkeños piensen o digan no importa demasiado.

No te gusta?.

No les gusta?.

El año que viene pueden quejarse de nuevo frente a ella en el C-24.

A mi no me carguen sus problemas en la espalda.

No tengo obligacion de resolverlos....
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#13 Jun 15, 2012
1974, el año en que mediante un documento emanado desde la embajada britanica en Buenos Aires se termino con las siguientes mentiras en este foro 37 años despues:

1- Prescripción adquisitiva oponible a la Argentina.

2- Razón y vigencia del tratado de 1850 entre la Argentina y UK para poner fin a este conflicto.

3- Estoppel basandose en discursos presidenciales argentinos realizados delante del Congreso Nacional Argentino.

Todos esos ridiculos argumentos hoy bucean dentro de una cloaca. Todos bucean en la mierda....

Lastima....

P.S: Va a ser muy dificil continuar siendo un troll ingles despues de esto....
francisco

Resistencia, Argentina

#14 Jun 15, 2012
Ayer la ONU, una vez más, no le creyo una sola palabra a los isleños. Por eso, no se molestaron en votar el proyecto de resolución presentado por Bolivia y otros miembros del comite. la resolución fue aceptada por consenso sin una sola objeción realizada por algun de los miembro del comite.

Argentinos conquistadores?.

El mundo no les cree.

Argentinos colonizadores?.

El mundo no les cree.

Argentinos malvados que los perjudican?.

El mundo no les cree.

Ahora diran los isleños que NO a las propuestas argentinas sobre conexion aerea y pesca. Y diran que la Argentina es mala, muy mala.

Y la Argentina seguira ofreciendoles los mismo, no retirara su oferta de la mesa.

Y el año que viene. Cuando le digan a la ONU una vez más: "La Argentina es malvada". La ONU sabra que nuestras pacificas y amables peopuestas no han sido escuchadas y resolvera una vez más, con total consenso que no les cree una sola palabra a los isleños mentirosos del Atlantico Sur.

Ven?.

Es tan simple....

Since: Apr 12

Brazil

#15 Jun 15, 2012
Francisco,

This is an interesting document to read, but I wouldnt see the Falklanders accepting it.....they forced the British to honour commitments to them.(Who can blame them) Also they could do an awful lot of damage politically to any government.

Maybe one option the document didnt mention would be if the Falklands were split in half. West Falkland UK, East Falkland Argentina. The seas around the islands would be shared....There is an bad feeling and it would be wise to keep things seperate....and thats talking about things in 1974!

Its all changed now....and difficult to see when things would be favourable for anything like this to be discussed
francisco wrote:
http://www.infobae.com/adjunto s/pdf/2012/06/551320.pdf
Which country in the world you want to share what he possesses and rightfully?.
Which country in the world you want to share what he possesses and rightfully?.
Not that the treaty of 1850 was over everything and had nothing more to discuss?.
I want to see the "wise" of this forum British justifying an estoppel after this ....
francisco

Argentina

#16 Jun 16, 2012
Came.

The proposal was not carried out by the Argentina.

It passes by high that the proposal came from UK.

This proposal is an important legal value. She therefore recognizes explicitly a dispute between UK and the Argentina. Such recognition is ground with many of the twisted, imaginative and rigged driven legal theories here, in this forum by British trolls.

As to what you specifically told me in your post, you only dire: If then there is a possibility to fix this conflict shaped permanent and civilized to let both countries happy. If that possibility existed in 1974, see no impediment so that it does not talk and resolve this issue in the present with even greater advantages and for UK diplomatic victories.

On the other hand, it seems to me that a political symbolically perspective Argentina has left badly UK to suggest to the UN to its current position in relation to the conflict, it is one whim rather than a morally justified need.

Greetings Came.

P.S: The intelligent in both countries know we must fix this in one way or another....
Diego

Parana, Argentina

#17 Jun 16, 2012
camelunghi wrote:
Francisco,
This is an interesting document to read, but I wouldnt see the Falklanders accepting it.....they forced the British to honour commitments to them.(Who can blame them) Also they could do an awful lot of damage politically to any government.
Maybe one option the document didnt mention would be if the Falklands were split in half. West Falkland UK, East Falkland Argentina. The seas around the islands would be shared....There is an bad feeling and it would be wise to keep things seperate....and thats talking about things in 1974!
Its all changed now....and difficult to see when things would be favourable for anything like this to be discussed
<quoted text>
lo del condominio sería una excelente idea y terminaría con muchos años de peleas entre Argentina y Reino Unido...todos sabemos que no se puede pretender un pedazo de tierra a 14000kms de distancia como así también,todos sabemos que los hechos históricos del Virreinato del Río de la Plata nos dan la razón. Ni que hablar del derecho internacionl público.....sería bueno llegar a un acuerdo y abrirle los ojos al enfermo de Cameron

Since: Apr 12

Brazil

#18 Jun 16, 2012
Diego,

Just because I write a post which seeks to evaluate a possible compromise, doesnt mean I believe the Argentine claims are right.

At the moment we have two versions of the history of the Falklands.....but which side is telling the truth and which side isnt? Which side is bending or breaking rules and which isnt? Nothing is totally conclusive and trying to bring this to the ICJ to finally settle it requires everyone submitting to the court.

Because a lot of things happened a long time ago and those responsible are no longer here it might be wiser to reach a compromise......but that ultimatly depends on the Falklanders themselves to decide.....why should they suffer because of politics from bygone era when the world was a very different place?

We understand Argentina has a very colourful history with border disputes and enlarged its territories at the expense of its neighbours.....should we also go back in time and dig up these issues? If your neighbours had the same obsession Argentina has for the Falklands.....there would be constant war in South America.
Diego wrote:
<quoted text>
lo del condominio sería una excelente idea y terminaría con muchos años de peleas entre Argentina y Reino Unido...todos sabemos que no se puede pretender un pedazo de tierra a 14000kms de distancia como así también,todos sabemos que los hechos históricos del Virreinato del Río de la Plata nos dan la razón. Ni que hablar del derecho internacionl público.....sería bueno llegar a un acuerdo y abrirle los ojos al enfermo de Cameron
Ricardo

Laferrere, Argentina

#19 Jun 16, 2012
camelunghi wrote:
Diego,
Nothing is totally conclusive and trying to bring this to the ICJ to finally settle it requires everyone submitting to the court.
Facts are very conclusive, you just have to be objective and will see immediately that the UK only has the 1833 act of force and de facto occupation

And people here seems to ignore the fact that the UK made an official statement before the ICJ saying that the UK would not accept any judgement based in facts happened before 1974...
Which is absurd, since the core of the issue is their 1833 appropiation
In a very british devious indirect way they effectively said that they would not accept the ICJ rulings
CHECK IT

Since: Apr 12

Brazil

#20 Jun 16, 2012
Ricardo,

Any neutral observer would struggle with so many "objective" people advising them on this forum...instead it has become a place of pilgrimage for Psychology students to study the effects of propaganda. I kind of find this funny.

Anyway....CHECK IT?

I asked you to do some homework recently...and I had to do it for you. kkkkk Can you direct me to the place where the British have said what you wrote....I am lazy, and my dogmatic mantras need a rest....
Ricardo wrote:
<quoted text>
Facts are very conclusive, you just have to be objective and will see immediately that the UK only has the 1833 act of force and de facto occupation
And people here seems to ignore the fact that the UK made an official statement before the ICJ saying that the UK would not accept any judgement based in facts happened before 1974...
Which is absurd, since the core of the issue is their 1833 appropiation
In a very british devious indirect way they effectively said that they would not accept the ICJ rulings
CHECK IT

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
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.

Falkland Islands Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
If Argentina does collapse? (Feb '14) 8 hr Ace McCloud 205
Argentina’s lies at the United Nations (Apr '11) 13 hr pablo 30,128
Britain Obtained Legal Title to the Falklands b... 23 hr terry es MIERDA 35
80% of Uruguayans Consider Montivideo Should Ke... (Feb '14) Wed guggy es UN SORETE 782
Repatriate them all Wed MALVINAS ARGENTINAS 2
UK has no support over Falklands Wed guggy es MIERDA 20
EEZ of Argentina.MAlvinas falls within (Apr '12) Wed guggy es MIERDA 147
•••

Falkland Islands People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••