http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17946838 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17946838)
QuoteArgentina has riled the Falkland Islands by broadcasting a political advert filmed on the territory without authorisation.
The advert features an Argentine athlete training in the Falklands ahead of the London Olympics in July.
It ends with the slogan: "To compete on English soil, we train on Argentine soil."
Falklands legislator Ian Hansen dismissed it as a piece of "cheap and disrespectful propaganda".
The advert - broadcast in Argentina on Wednesday night - is the latest measure by Argentina to reassert its claim to the British overseas territory it calls the Malvinas.
Produced by the Argentine presidency, it is titled Olympic Games 2012: Homage to the Fallen and the Veterans of the Malvinas.
It shows Argentine hockey captain Fernando Zylberberg running and exercising in the Falklands capital Port Stanley, interspersed with shots of penguins and the windswept South Atlantic.
Mr Hansen said the video had been filmed without permission from the islands' authorities.
He accused Argentina of trying to "politicise the Olympics in service of its territorial ambitions".
"It is deeply sad to see Mr Zylberberg clambering over a war memorial. Sadly this illustrates the disrespect the Argentine authorities have for our home and our people," Mr Hansen said.
"At no stage does the video feature any Falkland Islanders - a clear reflection of Argentina's policy, which is to pretend that the people of the Falkland Islands do not exist."
Last month saw the 30th anniversary of the start of the Falklands War, when Argentine forces invaded the islands before being defeated by a British task force.
Argentina wants the UK to negotiate on sovereignty, but the British government says it will not discuss the issue without the agreement of the Falkland islanders.
Eh, here we go again. :D
They're called Malvinas, not Falklands. :contract:
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 06:29:51 AM
They're called Malvinas, not Falklands. :contract:
Not by anyone whose opinion matters.
Btw, Falklands have legislators? I thought only sheep live there.
Anyway, I think it is absolutely ridiculous for the UK to claim sovereignty over a small rock off another country's shore, located on the other side of the globe from the UK.
They've been doing it for the last 400 years, why stop now?
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 06:41:30 AM
Anyway, I think it is absolutely ridiculous for the UK to claim sovereignty over a small rock off another country's shore, located on the other side of the globe from the UK.
Was it ridiculous for us to claim sovereignty over vast swathes of the world a couple of centuries ago? Australia's not in the English Channel, after all. Do you feel the same about the British Antarctic Territory or the Pitcairn Islands or Bermuda?
The US will not give up Baker Island. No way. :angry:
Quote from: 11B4V on May 04, 2012, 06:58:11 AM
The US will not give up Baker Island. No way. :angry:
Population 0, main industry guano :D
I'll tell you, maybe the biggest, best thing for the UK and its military is to lose the Falklands--then, maybe when they realize they are helpless and neutered to do anything about it, maybe it'll teach the UK to stop doing things stupid shit like, I dunno, erasing its Royal Navy air arm.
But I doubt it. The decay and disappearance of such a fine military tradition throughout history is simply so incredibly disappointing.
At least if there was a decent fight of it, MMP could put out a wargame. :moon:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 04, 2012, 07:07:10 AM
I'll tell you, maybe the biggest, best thing for the UK and its military is to lose the Falklands--then, maybe when they realize they are helpless and neutered to do anything about it, maybe it'll teach the UK to stop doing things stupid shit like, I dunno, erasing its Royal Navy air arm.
But I doubt it. The decay and disappearance of such a fine military tradition throughout history is simply so incredibly disappointing.
Yeah, but giving in to the Argentines? Isn't that the greater of two evils? :P
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 04, 2012, 07:07:10 AM
I'll tell you, maybe the biggest, best thing for the UK and its military is to lose the Falklands--then, maybe when they realize they are helpless and neutered to do anything about it, maybe it'll teach the UK to stop doing things stupid shit like, I dunno, erasing its Royal Navy air arm.
But I doubt it. The decay and disappearance of such a fine military tradition throughout history is simply so incredibly disappointing.
I know next to fuck all about the military, but I'm sure there is still a Fleet air arm.
Quote from: Gups on May 04, 2012, 07:12:41 AM
I know next to fuck all about the military, but I'm sure there is still a Fleet air arm.
Alas, no fleet.
Gotcha.
Quote from: Brazen on May 04, 2012, 06:52:05 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 06:41:30 AM
Anyway, I think it is absolutely ridiculous for the UK to claim sovereignty over a small rock off another country's shore, located on the other side of the globe from the UK.
Was it ridiculous for us to claim sovereignty over vast swathes of the world a couple of centuries ago? Australia's not in the English Channel, after all. Do you feel the same about the British Antarctic Territory or the Pitcairn Islands or Bermuda?
It wasn't as ridiculous back then as it is now. We don't do a lot of things today we used to do 400 years ago. It's called progress.
Also, Australia is obviously not a "small rock off another country's shore" so not sure how that is a valid analogy. :P
And yet we do a lot of things we did back then, it is called sensible. I am not sure who gets to decide.
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:21:03 AM
It wasn't as ridiculous back then as it is now. We don't do a lot of things today we used to do 400 years ago. It's called progress.
And giving a semi-self-governed colony to a country that's going to dismantle it and pretend its citizens don't exist is progress how, exactly?
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 04, 2012, 07:23:11 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:21:03 AM
It wasn't as ridiculous back then as it is now. We don't do a lot of things today we used to do 400 years ago. It's called progress.
And giving a semi-self-governed colony to a country that's going to dismantle it and pretend its citizens don't exist is progress how, exactly?
There are app. 3000 people living in the Falklands. There's no way it can count as anything semi-self-governed.
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:24:54 AM
There are app. 3000 people living in the Falklands. There's no way it can count as anything semi-self-governed.
What do you mean?
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 04, 2012, 07:28:44 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:24:54 AM
There are app. 3000 people living in the Falklands. There's no way it can count as anything semi-self-governed.
What do you mean?
3000 people living on a rock cannot build a self-governed, self-sustained community. That's probably less than the number of English tourists residing at any time in the Canaries. So I don't see how this should be relevant in giving the Malvines back to Argentina, which is obviously a natural sovereign there.
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:30:46 AM
3000 people living on a rock cannot build a self-governed, self-sustained community.
Sure they can. We did it for the better part of 2 centuries.
The Falklanders have significant powers. They could, for example, easily call for talks with Argentina and merge with that country if they got sick of UK oversight. For some reason, though, they seem extraordinarily resistant to the idea :hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:24:54 AM
There are app. 3000 people living in the Falklands. There's no way it can count as anything semi-self-governed.
Mart, we recognize smaller units than that as sovereign- Vatican City, Malta...
Your love of bureaucracy is showing- with pop. 3,000, the only thing there isn't room for is bureaucratic bloat (or a military, but arrangements could be made with another sovereign, and really, isn't that kind of like what the situation is now?).
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 04, 2012, 07:37:04 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:24:54 AM
There are app. 3000 people living in the Falklands. There's no way it can count as anything semi-self-governed.
Mart, we recognize smaller units than that as sovereign- Vatican City, Malta...
Uhm. Malta has over 400 thousand residents. :huh:
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:30:46 AM
3000 people living on a rock cannot build a self-governed, self-sustained community. That's probably less than the number of English tourists residing at any time in the Canaries. So I don't see how this should be relevant in giving the Malvines back to Argentina, which is obviously a natural sovereign there.
Why not? They've got an elected legislature and a separate judiciary that follows UK and ECHR rulings, they've control of everything but defence and foreign policy. They're not sovereign but they're more self-governing than the DOM-TOM, for example.
I don't understand the view that sovereignty should follow some geographical interpretation and not the wishes of the people, that seems peculiar. Especially when one country's got a history of military rule, unstable democracy and a dodgy record on human rights and the economy.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 04, 2012, 07:43:59 AM
Especially when one country's got a history of military rule, unstable democracy and a dodgy record on human rights and the economy.
Let's not get overboard there. Argentina is not a paradise either. :P
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:39:17 AM
Uhm. Malta has over 400 thousand residents. :huh:
Wrong Malta. :contract:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta
What do you recommend then Mart? Each country only gets the piece of land on which its capital is based then can only bid for other islands or territories within 500 miles of its coastline or borders?
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 04, 2012, 07:47:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:39:17 AM
Uhm. Malta has over 400 thousand residents. :huh:
Wrong Malta. :contract:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta
That's not Malta. They are not even resident in Malta. And they do not have a territory. You fail.
Quote from: Brazen on May 04, 2012, 07:48:03 AM
What do you recommend then Mart? Each country only gets the piece of land on which its capital is based then can only bid for other islands or territories within 500 miles of its coastline or borders?
Well, there is no hard and fast rule, but it's one of these "I know it when I see it" cases. I think a situation in which one country holds sovereignty over an isolated and very small piece of land located just off the border/shore of another country is extremely bizarre.
Poland is a lot closer to Russia than the Falklands are to Argentina.
I hope next time the Brits lob a few fusion bombs on the Argies. Shut them up a bit.
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:50:38 AM
Well, there is no hard and fast rule, but it's one of these "I know it when I see it" cases. I think a situation in which one country holds sovereignty over an isolated and very small piece of land located just off the border/shore of another country is extremely bizarre.
They're not that close, it's 300 miles away, not Tierra del Fuego. I mean the Canaries, to use your earlier example, are closer to Morocco.
Quote from: The Brain on May 04, 2012, 07:57:26 AM
I hope next time the Brits lob a few fusion bombs on the Argies. Shut them up a bit.
That's your solution for everything.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 04, 2012, 07:58:49 AM
They're not that close, it's 300 miles away, not Tierra del Fuego. I mean the Canaries, to use your earlier example, are closer to Morocco.
It seems a lot closer on the map, like a quarter inch or so.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 04, 2012, 07:58:49 AM
They're not that close, it's 300 miles away, not Tierra del Fuego. I mean the Canaries, to use your earlier example, are closer to Morocco.
Or Rhodes (and countless other Greek isles) to Turkey.
Give the Falklands to Argentina. It's a nice precedent for when the Germans reclaim some of that territory to the east.
Quote from: barkdreg on May 04, 2012, 08:24:28 AM
Give the Falklands to Argentina. It's a nice precedent for when the Germans reclaim some of that territory to the east.
Except that Germany renounced all such claims.
They could renounce their renouncement.
Quote from: Syt on May 04, 2012, 08:27:43 AM
Quote from: barkdreg on May 04, 2012, 08:24:28 AM
Give the Falklands to Argentina. It's a nice precedent for when the Germans reclaim some of that territory to the east.
Except that Germany renounced all such claims.
Hey, if you can renounce them you unrenounce them. nounce, re-renounce... whatever you can get them back :D
Quote from: Syt on May 04, 2012, 08:07:38 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 04, 2012, 07:58:49 AM
They're not that close, it's 300 miles away, not Tierra del Fuego. I mean the Canaries, to use your earlier example, are closer to Morocco.
Or Rhodes (and countless other Greek isles) to Turkey.
:huh: No man is an island.
You'd think the Argies would try a " you win more friends with honey" approach, if they were serious about getting the islands. Immediately open up access to the Islands, try and be a good neighbour, then in a few years offer a deal somewhat similar to what Hong Kong got - substantial self-rule, guarantees about the English language, allow dual citizenship. There would be substantial benefits to Falklanders to being tied more closely to South America, and the UK itself would love to give up the cost of defending the Islands.
But of course the Argies aren't serious...
Quote from: Barrister on May 04, 2012, 08:49:00 AM
You'd think the Argies would try a " you win more friends with honey" approach, if they were serious about getting the islands. Immediately open up access to the Islands, try and be a good neighbour, then in a few years offer a deal somewhat similar to what Hong Kong got - substantial self-rule, guarantees about the English language, allow dual citizenship. There would be substantial benefits to Falklanders to being tied more closely to South America, and the UK itself would love to give up the cost of defending the Islands.
But of course the Argies aren't serious...
I think many Argies would favor that approach. The problem is their bitch president and all the idiots who voted for her.
Every time I think Argentina can't get any worse, it does. They just nationalized YPF. WTF.
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:50:38 AM
Well, there is no hard and fast rule, but it's one of these "I know it when I see it" cases. I think a situation in which one country holds sovereignty over an isolated and very small piece of land located just off the border/shore of another country is extremely bizarre.
If it is so bizarre and ridiculous you should be able to at least come up with a reason that is somewhat convincing. I see nothing bizarre about it, extremely or slightly, due to the history of the Americas we have situations exactly like this all over the place.
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 09:03:50 AM
I think many Argies would favor that approach. The problem is their bitch president and all the idiots who voted for her.
Every time I think Argentina can't get any worse, it does. They just nationalized YPF. WTF.
Yeah she is the first Argie politician to be hamfisted about the Falklands deal :P
And yes Argentina is a constant disaster zone. I can see why those three thousand Falklanders would just assume stay with the UK.
Quote from: Valmy on May 04, 2012, 09:05:37 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:50:38 AM
Well, there is no hard and fast rule, but it's one of these "I know it when I see it" cases. I think a situation in which one country holds sovereignty over an isolated and very small piece of land located just off the border/shore of another country is extremely bizarre.
If it is so bizarre and ridiculous you should be able to at least come up with a reason that is somewhat convincing. I see nothing bizarre about it, extremely or slightly, due to the history of the Americas we have situations exactly like this all over the place.
I have an example for you.
Ownership of a number of the islands in the Canadian high arctic were discovered by Norwegians, and thus they Norway arguably owned them by right of discovery. Those rights were ultimately sold to the UK in the early part of the 20th century, and then transfered to Canada. I gather this was because Norway had no feasible way to control or exploit those islands and that they were clearly a part of the overall arctic archipelago which was owned by the UK.
:huh: If Argentina wanted to buy the islands and the UK wanted to sell them I'm sure a deal could be made.
Quote from: The Brain on May 04, 2012, 09:16:33 AM
:huh: If Argentina wanted to buy the islands and the UK wanted to sell them I'm sure a deal could be made.
Yep. But that would first require Argentina to admit they actually belong to the UK first. Plus Argentina has no money.
They could trade them against nationalized Spanish companies.
Quote from: Barrister on May 04, 2012, 09:11:23 AM
I have an example for you.
Ownership of a number of the islands in the Canadian high arctic were discovered by Norwegians, and thus they Norway arguably owned them by right of discovery. Those rights were ultimately sold to the UK in the early part of the 20th century, and then transfered to Canada. I gather this was because Norway had no feasible way to control or exploit those islands and that they were clearly a part of the overall arctic archipelago which was owned by the UK.
Well in Canada there is St Pierre and Miquelon.
Quote from: Syt on May 04, 2012, 09:19:09 AM
They could trade them against nationalized Spanish companies.
:lol:
We should tell Argentina they're welcome to the Falklands if they win more medals than us at the Olympics :contract:
Quote from: barkdreg on May 04, 2012, 08:24:28 AM
Give the Falklands to Argentina. It's a nice precedent for when the Germans reclaim some of that territory to the east.
See, that's where you fail with retorts like this directed at me - I have consistently claimed that Poland would be better off if ruled from Berlin (or Stockholm, for that matter) than from Warsaw (or Moscow or Vatican).
Quote from: Valmy on May 04, 2012, 09:08:03 AM
Yeah she is the first Argie politician to be hamfisted about the Falklands deal :P
I'd say by far she's been the worst since the junta.
QuoteAnd yes Argentina is a constant disaster zone. I can see why those three thousand Falklanders would just assume stay with the UK.
So much potential there, so much former greatness. Shows you what damage unfettered populism can do over time.
I don't see you can catch Marty in an inconsistency on this one. He lives in a country that's circular. By definition it has no irregular territorial appendages.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 04, 2012, 09:59:54 AM
I don't see you can catch Marty in an inconsistency on this one. He lives in a country that's circular. By definition it has no irregular territorial appendages.
Not to mention, our borders are pretty natural - two rivers on the Western and the Eastern border, a sea shore in the North and a mountain range in the South.
And all it took were two world wars and a bunch of genocides. :P
Did someone spike Marty coffee with an extra dose of stupid?
Yeah but it took two devastating wars where we redrew the map of Europe twice to get it in such a pleasing shape.
Quote from: Valmy on May 04, 2012, 10:04:17 AM
Yeah but it took two devastating wars where we redrew the map of Europe twice to get it in such a pleasing shape.
I edited my post just to say that (plus an extra few genocides :P).
Quote from: Valmy on May 04, 2012, 10:04:17 AM
Yeah but it took two devastating wars where we redrew the map of Europe twice to get it in such a pleasing shape.
You can't make a perfectly circular omelet without breaking a few eggs.
Marty's idea that countries should be able to rule areas that are close to it has some merit. The US should be able to annex Canada.
There are any number of stupid little islands just south of the USA :hmm:
Poland was ruled from Berlin once in history so far. That went really well.
What I don't follow is why Marty wants to give more territory for the Argentine government to control. Based on performance they should be in line for a reduction.
Quote from: alfred russel on May 04, 2012, 11:41:33 AM
What I don't follow is why Marty wants to give more territory for the Argentine government to control. Based on performance they should be in line for a reduction.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if Marty were a Spanish speaker who frequented an Argentine forum he would be arguing the exact opposite.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 04, 2012, 11:50:47 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on May 04, 2012, 11:41:33 AM
What I don't follow is why Marty wants to give more territory for the Argentine government to control. Based on performance they should be in line for a reduction.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if Marty were a Spanish speaker who frequented an Argentine forum he would be arguing the exact opposite.
Are you accusing him of . . . trolling? Mart??? :o
Quote from: Syt on May 04, 2012, 12:01:49 PM
Are you accusing him of . . . trolling? Mart??? :o
Not strictly speaking. He very well could buy into his own narrative about heroically speaking unpopular trurths.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on May 04, 2012, 11:19:19 AM
There are any number of stupid little islands just south of the USA :hmm:
Also Bermuda.
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
What Euro sympathy?
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
Marty is just an idiot.
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
Even the rabidly leftist folks on Austrian DerStandard forums don't support the Argentinians on this.
One of these days, mighty Canada will finally retrieve Saint Pierre and Miquelon from the vile French oppressors from far across the Impassable Ocean of the Atlantic. God Wills It™.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 04, 2012, 12:07:58 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 04, 2012, 12:01:49 PM
Are you accusing him of . . . trolling? Mart??? :o
Not strictly speaking. He very well could buy into his own narrative about heroically speaking unpopular trurths.
:D
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
Not so much Euro, but rather more an Iberian/South American vs. Anglo-Saxons thing... over here, everybody calls the islands 'Malvinas' and don't see them as a rightful part of the UK.
It's a clash of cultures, really.
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 04, 2012, 01:16:25 PM
It's a clash of cultures, really.
More like a violation of the Rio Treaty, the OAS, and The Monroe Doctrine.
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 04, 2012, 01:16:25 PM
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
Not so much Euro, but rather more an Iberian/South American vs. Anglo-Saxons thing... over here, everybody calls the islands 'Malvinas' and don't see them as a rightful part of the UK.
It's a clash of cultures, really.
IIRC, there is (or was) some French sympathy as well. Wonder what the guidos think?
The Monroe doctrine isn't binding on the civilized world, and has long been abandoned. The Rio Treaty sees the Argentinians as the aggressors.
Also, Poland should be ruled from Krakow, by Hans Frank.
What is odd is Marty claiming that this makes LESS sense today than in the past, when the opposite is in fact true.
Technology has made physical locality less for a relevant political factor to governance, culture, and economics than in the past, not more so.
"In this day and age" actual cultural and political ties are vastly more meaningful than measuring distances on a map.
The Falklands are far out of Argentina's 200 mile economic exclusive zone but more importantly the kelpers want to overwhelmingly remain British. I hope Kirchner chokes on a dick.
While I certainly support our special allies in regards to the Falklands (after all, who cares where some piece of land is - what matters is what the people want a lot more than where the spot of dirt they are living happens to be located, especially when it is a spot of dirt in the middle of the ocean), I don't really see the advert as especially egregious.
Argentina thinks the Falklands should be theirs, the Brits don't agree. As long as the Argies don't engage in violence to press their claim, they have every right to engage in some propaganda to try to convince people to support the claim. It won't really work, I don't think, since the people they need to convince aren't going to be convinced by such things.
Certainly whining about "politicizing the Olympics" is silly - that shipped sailed a long time ago.
Argies are the Greeks of the Americas. Generally despised and thoroughly degenerate.
Quote from: JonasSalk on May 04, 2012, 01:06:48 PM
One of these days, mighty Canada will finally retrieve Saint Pierre and Miquelon from the vile French oppressors from far across the Impassable Ocean of the Atlantic. God Wills It™.
SSBNs, Rafales and the Charles de Gaulle spit in your God's face :frog:
Quote from: Zoupa on May 04, 2012, 09:14:26 PM
Quote from: JonasSalk on May 04, 2012, 01:06:48 PM
One of these days, mighty Canada will finally retrieve Saint Pierre and Miquelon from the vile French oppressors from far across the Impassable Ocean of the Atlantic. God Wills It™.
SSBNs, Rafales and the Charles de Gaulle spit in your God's face :frog:
Unlikely.
Quote from: JonasSalk on May 04, 2012, 01:06:48 PM
One of these days, mighty Canada will finally retrieve Saint Pierre and Miquelon from the vile French oppressors from far across the Impassable Ocean of the Atlantic. God Wills It™.
But, unlike the argies, we actually value local self-determination. :huh:
They are only 20km or so from Canada and only have about 6,000 inhabitants, the difference is that the Canadians are not arseholes :cool:
The advert was produced by the local subsidiary of a British advertising firm btw, the profits will flow back to London :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17963577
Countries should rule places close to them- how do you define where the country is? I mean...are the Falklands closer to Argentina than Britain? Aren't they closer to Britain with a grand distance of 0km what with being British?
Or is the capital of a country how you define the country?
I remember once in a fit of bordom making a map which redrew the borders of Europe on account of which land was closer to which capital. Messed things up a fair bit.
Quote from: JonasSalk on May 04, 2012, 01:06:48 PM
One of these days, mighty Canada will finally retrieve Saint Pierre and Miquelon from the vile French oppressors from far across the Impassable Ocean of the Atlantic. God Wills It™.
Do Canadians and French people know about the existance of those islands?
I only found out about them accidentally a few years ago. And apparently most Brits had no idea about the Falklands' existance before the war.
Quote from: Tyr on May 05, 2012, 12:51:32 AM
Quote from: JonasSalk on May 04, 2012, 01:06:48 PM
One of these days, mighty Canada will finally retrieve Saint Pierre and Miquelon from the vile French oppressors from far across the Impassable Ocean of the Atlantic. God Wills It™.
Do Canadians and French people know about the existance of those islands?
I only found out about them accidentally a few years ago. And apparently most Brits had no idea about the Falklands' existance before the war.
I dunno about most Canadians, but I knew about St. Pierre from a book by a reasonably famous Canadian author Farley Mowatt:
The Boat that Wouldn't Float.
Some trainee teachers I knew, before the Falklands invasion, saw some jobs advertised for newly-qualified teachers to take up posts in the Falklands. The salaries were attractive, tax-free and/or "remote islands allowance". So they asked me what part of Scotland were they near and would they be able to get home for weekends :lol:
They were only girls of course :P
Most of us blokes knew where the Falklands were from our stamp collecting days.
That could be a pretty cool posting for a year or so.
When older of course.
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 01:24:14 PM
IIRC, there is (or was) some French sympathy as well. Wonder what the guidos think?
There certainly wasn't officially. It's well-known that our most helpful and supportive ally during the war was France - and that was in the middle of a Socialist Presidency.
Quotereasonably famous Canadian author
KNOWN IN THUNDER BAY!
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 05, 2012, 06:44:54 AM
Quotereasonably famous Canadian author
KNOWN IN THUNDER BAY!
MEET PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND'S VERY OWN DAVE, TONIGHT AT WICKHAM BOOKS ONLY
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 09:54:09 AM
Quote from: barkdreg on May 04, 2012, 08:24:28 AM
Give the Falklands to Argentina. It's a nice precedent for when the Germans reclaim some of that territory to the east.
See, that's where you fail with retorts like this directed at me - I have consistently claimed that Poland would be better off if ruled from Berlin (or Stockholm, for that matter) than from Warsaw (or Moscow or Vatican).
You can't blame us for not knowing that since you only post it on Polish message boards.
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 04, 2012, 01:16:25 PM
Quote from: derspiess on May 04, 2012, 12:29:10 PM
Is Euro sympathy toward Argentina re: 'Malvinas' a lefty thing?
Not so much Euro, but rather more an Iberian/South American vs. Anglo-Saxons thing... over here, everybody calls the islands 'Malvinas' and don't see them as a rightful part of the UK.
It's a clash of cultures, really.
Some Portuguese people see them as the Argentine Olivença ? ;)
Just because you call them Malvinas does not translate necessarily into support. Most Portuguese don't care or don't know nowadays.
The French call them Malouines as well but that does not translate into real sympathy. The Argentine Junta has never been exactly popular and some see this war as the way Thatcher managed to stay on power so colour me skeptical.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 05, 2012, 06:48:21 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 05, 2012, 06:44:54 AM
Quotereasonably famous Canadian author
KNOWN IN THUNDER BAY!
MEET PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND'S VERY OWN DAVE, TONIGHT AT WICKHAM BOOKS ONLY
Dave from PEI is a good guy.
Iberians that support the argentine claim over the Falklands must be masochists. Afterall, the argentines nationalise spanish companies ever so often.
It seems their hatred of Brito-Anglo-Saxo-Normans over-rides their national interests.
I imagine Spaniards support Spain's claim to the Falklands because it mirrors their own claim to Gibraltar.
I think Bolivia just nationalized a Spanish-owned electricity distributor.
Quote from: Barrister on May 05, 2012, 03:22:54 PM
I imagine Spaniards support Spain's claim to the Falklands because it mirrors their own claim to Gibraltar.
like I said: masochism.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on May 04, 2012, 07:47:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:39:17 AM
Uhm. Malta has over 400 thousand residents. :huh:
Wrong Malta. :contract:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta
Thats the Kniggots Hospitalier, not Kniggots of Malta. It's not the only crusading order of kniggots out there today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_order
the TO runs hospitals etc. in germany and austria today.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança
Some Portuguese people see them as the Argentine Olivença ? ;)
Just because you call them Malvinas does not translate necessarily into support. Most Portuguese don't care or don't know nowadays.
The French call them Malouines as well but that does not translate into real sympathy. The Argentine Junta has never been exactly popular and some see this war as the way Thatcher managed to stay on power so colour me skeptical.
I don't think so, because I often correct those 'Malvinas' people [i.e. basically everybody] that a war was fought over the isles to keep them called 'Falklands'. The reaction is invariably a 'not in my book, they're not'.
Btw, the French elections are on and they started in St. Pierre and Miquelon:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lefigaro.fr%2Fmedias%2F2012%2F05%2F06%2Fe482d336-9755-11e1-a519-10040b45a524-800x532.jpg&hash=24d8d7f91b34d8ef6efa92b3291aad4c6d85b36f)
Do these people look like frenchies or canucks?
They look like they just came out of the cold.
A transparent ballot box :hmm:
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 06, 2012, 08:28:11 AM
Do these people look like frenchies or canucks?
Poll worker dude and the chick in white both look very French to me.
Fun fact : almost two-thirds of them voted for Flanby according to RTBF.
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 06, 2012, 08:28:11 AM
I don't think so, because I often correct those 'Malvinas' people [i.e. basically everybody] that a war was fought over the isles to keep them called 'Falklands'. The reaction is invariably a 'not in my book, they're not'.
Just how often do these islands come up in conversations in Portugal?
The Falkland Islands are UK territory, pls move on.com
Quote from: Valmy on May 06, 2012, 10:17:40 PM
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 06, 2012, 08:28:11 AM
I don't think so, because I often correct those 'Malvinas' people [i.e. basically everybody] that a war was fought over the isles to keep them called 'Falklands'. The reaction is invariably a 'not in my book, they're not'.
Just how often do these islands come up in conversations in Portugal?
Seldom if at all nowadays, except perhaps for some leftists and I'm sure they have better things to do now.
Quote from: Martinus on May 04, 2012, 07:50:38 AM
Quote from: Brazen on May 04, 2012, 07:48:03 AM
What do you recommend then Mart? Each country only gets the piece of land on which its capital is based then can only bid for other islands or territories within 500 miles of its coastline or borders?
Well, there is no hard and fast rule, but it's one of these "I know it when I see it" cases. I think a situation in which one country holds sovereignty over an isolated and very small piece of land located just off the border/shore of another country is extremely bizarre.
So sovereignity is to be decided by what YOU think is right and proper? :wacko:
They voted, they dont want to be argentine, argentina only want the seabed... get over it marti, argentina doesn't have a case, its all blustering like the nationalisation of spanish oil companies by South american governments.
V
Quote from: Martim Silva on May 06, 2012, 08:28:11 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança
Some Portuguese people see them as the Argentine Olivença ? ;)
Just because you call them Malvinas does not translate necessarily into support. Most Portuguese don't care or don't know nowadays.
The French call them Malouines as well but that does not translate into real sympathy. The Argentine Junta has never been exactly popular and some see this war as the way Thatcher managed to stay on power so colour me skeptical.
I don't think so, because I often correct those 'Malvinas' people [i.e. basically everybody] that a war was fought over the isles to keep them called 'Falklands'. The reaction is invariably a 'not in my book, they're not'.
Btw, the French elections are on and they started in St. Pierre and Miquelon:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lefigaro.fr%2Fmedias%2F2012%2F05%2F06%2Fe482d336-9755-11e1-a519-10040b45a524-800x532.jpg&hash=24d8d7f91b34d8ef6efa92b3291aad4c6d85b36f)
Do these people look like frenchies or canucks?
OMG, so much smugness it's unbearable.
French. French.