Jump to content
IGNORED

Argentina


Super

Recommended Posts

Saw that this morning. Step ups on a First World War Memorial, disgusting. And their slogan "To compete on English soil, we are training on Argentine soil" really is taking the piss.

The Falklands have been British for centuries, the Islanders want to be British. The argument saying they're closer to Argentina than Britain and that Spain controlled them for a bit centuries back so now we should have them really is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, it has caused a fair it of condemnation in their own country, that war memorial is for all that died in the Falklands, British and Argentine. They have scored a massive own goal here. many Argentines that fought in the war are asking very awkward questions now.

I must ask, how were they allowed to film it? If you want to film anything like that in any country you have to ask permission first and get all sorts of permits first to even take the filming kit into a country!

So it looks like customs on the Falklands screwed up right royally, or do not have enough control of their borders. This would be the biggest question for me.

A cheap shot film, being shot down by their own countrymen, will have done a lot more damage to Kirchner in her own country, than we could ever have done. Amazingly short sighted considering how popular she is in South America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is incredible to think that we still give many millions in aid to Argentina although much of that is via the EU aid budget to which we contribute. Yet another example of how successive governments have given up huge chunks of our sovereignty without consulting the British public. With regard to TRL's point about control of the Falklands' borders how can we expect this when we no longer have control of the border of the Britsh mainland again thanks to the EU which has prevented us for so long from deporting the vile Abu Qatada and allows indiscriminate immigration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is incredible to think that we still give many millions in aid to Argentina although much of that is via the EU aid budget to which we contribute. Yet another example of how successive governments have given up huge chunks of our sovereignty without consulting the British public. With regard to TRL's point about control of the Falklands' borders how can we expect this when we no longer have control of the border of the Britsh mainland again thanks to the EU which has prevented us for so long from deporting the vile Abu Qatada and allows indiscriminate immigration.

marshy, excellent comments. As far as I'm aware, under English constitutional law, Parliament has no power to give governance to a foreign power - whether it be the European Union or Argentina - unless we have been defeated in war. Thus the signing of the EU Treaty of Rome and the EU Lisbon Treaty by some of our politicians was nothing short of treason.

You can't see it any other way other than that the British politicians that have handed increasing control of the UK to the EU are guilty of High Treason. Soldiers, sailors and airmen fought in two terrible world wars to stop a single European Federal State from taking over Great Britain. As for Argentina, the Argentinians should thank us for introducing football to their country. :whistle2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Argentina has vowed to formally complain to the United Nations about Britain sending one of its most modern warships to the Falkland Islands.

The country's President Cristina Fernandez announced plans to go to the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly as tensions escalate.

She declared: "We will present a complaint to the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, as this militarisation poses a grave danger to international security."

It's just struck me; wishful thinking maybe, but the fact Argentina have gone to the UN & diplomatic measures suggests they don't really want to try a military option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks to the EU which has prevented us for so long from deporting the vile Abu Qatada and allows indiscriminate immigration.

Abu Qatada's deportation was blocked under UK legislation which doesn't allow deportation to country's that may have obtained conviction using torture. The UK supreme court ruled he could go but his appeal was held in the European Court of Human Rights and they found the deportation would conflict with British law.

The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU. The court is binding in the Council Of Europe area - 47 countries, many not EU members.

I don't agree with the way this case has been dealt with, but to blame the EU is inaccurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Argentina has vowed to formally complain to the United Nations about Britain sending one of its most modern warships to the Falkland Islands.

The country's President Cristina Fernandez announced plans to go to the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly as tensions escalate.

She declared: "We will present a complaint to the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, as this militarisation poses a grave danger to international security."

It's just struck me; wishful thinking maybe, but the fact Argentina have gone to the UN & diplomatic measures suggests they don't really want to try a military option.

All to do with the Argie economy being ****ed. A right-wing administration seeking an external bogeyman to distract from their own ineptitude.

Sound familiar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abu Qatada's deportation was blocked under UK legislation which doesn't allow deportation to country's that may have obtained conviction using torture. The UK supreme court ruled he could go but his appeal was held in the European Court of Human Rights and they found the deportation would conflict with British law.

The ECHR is nothing to do with the EU. The court is binding in the Council Of Europe area - 47 countries, many not EU members.

I don't agree with the way this case has been dealt with, but to blame the EU is inaccurate.

Thanks for that. Point taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All to do with the Argie economy being ****ed.

And there being oil around the Fawklands.

If you study the history Argentina have no claim really. Britain was there before the Spanish bought their colony from the French.

The most important thing is that the people who have made their home there for over 150 years are British and want to remain so.

If the Argies keep this up I'd happily cut off all aid and stop trading with them, as well permanently station the vanguard class sub that was moved there recently.

Maybe we can fix our economy by rebuilding the empire starting in South America eh? :) Be a nice prezzy for Liz's jubilee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My ex lived in Argentina for a few years. Its a big thing out there and gets votes. As we all know they have no claim and the only thing going for them is geography.

I remember from history there being good economic ties between the UK and Argentina. Can't find anything online about that though. Still the argies are a very strange people in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Through the Falklands, Maradona, Beckham etc Argentina v England has got to be one of few and perhaps the only intercontinental derby match.

This has always amazed me how England are always portrayed as the villains. I know the decision to go to war was made in London, but it was the U.K. that went to war with Argentina, not just England. Scotland or Wales v Argentina are never regarded as grudge matches (I know the Argies rarely play the taffs or jocks anyway !).

I find it incredible how the jocks treat Maradona as some sort of hero after he cheated us in 1986. Just four years earlier, British men were fighting the Argies. I think that more Scots and Welsh died than Englishmen during the Falklands war, with the Scots Guards suffering heavy losses on Mount Tumbledown. How could the Scottish put the result of a football match above the lives of their own servicemen, so soon after the conflict ?

It beggars belief i.m.o.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has always amazed me how England are always portrayed as the villains. I know the decision to go to war was made in London, but it was the U.K. that went to war with Argentina, not just England. Scotland or Wales v Argentina are never regarded as grudge matches (I know the Argies rarely play the taffs or jocks anyway !).

I find it incredible how the jocks treat Maradona as some sort of hero after he cheated us in 1986. Just four years earlier, British men were fighting the Argies. I think that more Scots and Welsh died than Englishmen during the Falklands war, with the Scots Guards suffering heavy losses on Mount Tumbledown. How could the Scottish put the result of a football match above the lives of their own servicemen, so soon after the conflict ?

It beggars belief i.m.o.

Add Man United into that as well, with all theri Argentina Argentina Argentina chanting nonsence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abu Qatada's deportation was blocked under UK legislation which doesn't allow deportation to country's that may have obtained conviction using torture. The UK supreme court ruled he could go but his appeal was held in the European Court of Human Rights and they found the deportation would conflict with British law.

The lawyers of this country cannot continue to play the role of world Policeman at British taxpayers' (our) expense. If Abu Qatada's deportation results in him being executed in his native country for his crimes then it's absolutely none of our business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lawyers of this country cannot continue to play the role of world Policeman at British taxpayers' (our) expense. If Abu Qatada's deportation results in him being executed in his native country for his crimes then it's absolutely none of our business.

Too right. Nobody cares about what happens to this scumbag anyway. Get him on the next plane possible, whatever treatment he gets is his problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too right. Nobody cares about what happens to this scumbag anyway. Get him on the next plane possible, whatever treatment he gets is his problem.

exactly - nobody gives a shit, this goes deeper than the lawyers who make this stupid decsions can even imagine.

As for the argentina thing, and being a young lad at the time of the war and remembering some of the things we all witnessed puts it all into persepctive when i see a young lad walking down the street wearing the blue and white stripes of argentina - WTF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lawyers of this country cannot continue to play the role of world Policeman at British taxpayers' (our) expense. If Abu Qatada's deportation results in him being executed in his native country for his crimes then it's absolutely none of our business.

Would've been better still if we'd not let the **** in, in the first place!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has always amazed me how England are always portrayed as the villains. I know the decision to go to war was made in London, but it was the U.K. that went to war with Argentina, not just England. Scotland or Wales v Argentina are never regarded as grudge matches (I know the Argies rarely play the taffs or jocks anyway !).

I find it incredible how the jocks treat Maradona as some sort of hero after he cheated us in 1986. Just four years earlier, British men were fighting the Argies. I think that more Scots and Welsh died than Englishmen during the Falklands war, with the Scots Guards suffering heavy losses on Mount Tumbledown. How could the Scottish put the result of a football match above the lives of their own servicemen, so soon after the conflict ?

It beggars belief i.m.o.

They do it to annoy us more than anything, plus the media hype it up, and it works, but jokes on them, most of the SAS are Scots! Anyways, this ad is in poor taste, people died there and shit.

Not sure how it would look it we did the same in Normandy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would've been better still if we'd not let the **** in, in the first place!

According to wikipedia: in September 1993 he fled with his wife and five children to the UK, using a forged UAE passport. He requested asylum on grounds of religious persecution and this was granted in June 1994. 1994 was during John Major's Conservative Party tenure. This means that the Conservative Party should be made liable for all costs associated with his illegal stay in this country. That could result in a £million+ bill for the Tories - NICE !!!!!! :icecream: Get your wallets out Tory boys and girls - and PAY FOR YOUR MISTAKE. :photo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...