UK rebuffs Argentina on negotiations over Falkland Islands

posted at 8:01 am on January 3, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Call it Madison Avenue diplomacy, or at least the London equivalent of Madison Avenue.  Argentina’s president bought ad space in left-leaning British newspapers to publish an open letter to Prime Minister David Cameron, urging him to open negotiations on the transfer of sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.  Instead, Cameron sent a stark warning in reply that the UK “would do everything to protect the interests of the Falkland Islanders”:

In an open letter to Mr Cameron, published as an advert in the Guardian newspaper and the Independent, President Fernandez repeats calls for the islands – which are known as the Malvinas in Argentina – to come under the sovereignty of her nation.

The Argentine president says the islands were forcibly stripped from Argentina in “a blatant exercise of 19th Century colonialism”.

Downing Street said the prime minister would “do everything to protect the interests of the Falklands islanders.”

Mr Cameron’s spokesman said the people of the Falklands had shown “a clear desire to remain British” and the Argentine government should respect their right to self determination.

It’s difficult to know whether Argentinian president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner wants to be taken seriously, or just posture for domestic purposes.  A serious effort would use actual diplomats rather than the sales offices of the Guardian and Independent, in the UN if not in the UK.  This looks like political grandstanding, but it got perhaps a stronger response than Fernandez anticipated.  The reply makes it clear that the UK is prepared to defend the islands militarily yet again, if it comes down to that.

Fernandez’ position is complicated by a referendum scheduled for March among the 3,000 Islanders to determine the political will of the residents.  The current Falkland government made their position clear, stating that they were “not a colony,” and that their association with the UK was entirely voluntary.  “Unlike the government of Argentina,” the statement continued, “the United Kingdom respects the right of our people to determine our own affairs, a right that is enshrined in the UN Charter and which is ignored by Argentina.” That doesn’t sound as though the referendum will go well for Fernandez.

That’s why she now claims that the self-determination of the current residents of the Falkland Islands is irrelevant.  Argentina now argues that the British planted people on the island over the last 180 years of sovereignty, and that the people currently living on the islands — which are more than 250 miles away from Argentina, by the way — should be ineligible for self-determination.  It’s a cute argument, as it does away with the question of self-determination at all — but by the same measure, most Argentinians would be ineligible for self-determination, as their population came mainly from colonial expansion from a couple of centuries before.  What’s the cutoff?  181 years? 241 years? 369 years?

No one can be expected to take this seriously, but Cameron is clearly taking no chances.  Fernandez seems eager to exploit this to escape from the consequences of her economic policies by distracting Argentinians with fantasies of Las Malvinas again.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Quick, someone ask Barry about his revised position on the “Maldives.”

Red Cloud on January 3, 2013 at 8:05 AM

Maybe she is getting advice from her good friend Barry? That “people are ineligible for self-determination” theme sounds familiar.

indypat on January 3, 2013 at 8:06 AM

We travel back,in time……………….

Thatcher announces the Falklands invasion to the House of Commons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZaP0TgOpig

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:07 AM

Quick, someone ask Barry about his revised position on the “Maldives.”

Red Cloud on January 3, 2013 at 8:05 AM

He is more flexible after the election.

Oil Can on January 3, 2013 at 8:08 AM

What will our American Communists (the Democrats) do?

I’d ask about the gop but we now have ONE PARTY RULE in America so it doesn’t matter.

PappyD61 on January 3, 2013 at 8:10 AM

The Argentine president says the islands were forcibly stripped from Argentina in “a blatant exercise of 19th Century colonialism”.
=============================================================

Maybe Argentine could call Hopey up,as he too,has a disdain,er,
axe-grindation,for…..

….Colonialism!
(sarc)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:11 AM

We travel back,in time……………….

Thatcher announces the Falklands invasion to the House of Commons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZaP0TgOpig

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:07 AM


Thatcher the Milk Snatcher!

tom daschle concerned on January 3, 2013 at 8:15 AM

I’d ask about the gop but we now have ONE PARTY RULE in America so it doesn’t matter.

PappyD61 on January 3, 2013 at 8:10 AM

PappyD61:Found this earlier,ahem:)

Results for #FireBoehner

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23FireBoehner&src=hash

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:15 AM

Should we rally a few native Indian groups in Argnetina to petition to break away from the central government their lands were taken over 200 years ago? Given the logic of the madam in south amercia they’d have every right to throw off their chains.

theblacksheepwasright on January 3, 2013 at 8:16 AM

Falkland Islands dispute
************************

http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/falkland-islands-dispute

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:16 AM

I’ll put the military situation this way – Argentina has no conventional military ability to take the Falklands (at least until the garrison runs out of ammo), while Britain has no ability to take them back if the Argentines are successful in seizing them.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:17 AM

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:07 AM

Thatcher the Milk Snatcher!

tom daschle concerned on January 3, 2013 at 8:15 AM

tom daschle concerned:Say it ain’t so Joe!(sarc):)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:18 AM

Hasn’t GB mothballed all their aircraft carriers?

Resolute on January 3, 2013 at 8:19 AM

Why does this dingbat in Argentina think that leftist newspapers are a friendly outlet, when putting forth the message of forcibly taking a people from one country?

MNHawk on January 3, 2013 at 8:22 AM

I’ll put the military situation this way – Argentina has no conventional military ability to take the Falklands (at least until the garrison runs out of ammo), while Britain has no ability to take them back if the Argentines are successful in seizing them.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:17 AM

Steve Eggleston:A Slow-Motion Mexican Stand-Off me thinks!
(sarc):)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:23 AM

Hasn’t GB mothballed all their aircraft carriers?

Resolute on January 3, 2013 at 8:19 AM

True (and indeed, they have no Harriers left in service), but they have a lot more forces down in the Falklands than in 1982, including at least 4 Eurofighters.

Meanwhile, Argentina also retired its carrier, and to call the Argentine Navy amphibious forces a shadow of 1982 would be an insult to shadows.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:24 AM

In an open letter to Mr Cameron, published as an advert in the Guardian newspaper and the Independent, President Fernandez repeats calls for the islands – which are known as the Malvinas in Argentina – to come under the sovereignty of her nation.

I don’t get this. It sounds like:

“. . . calls for Poland to come under the sovereignty of Germany.”

or:

“. . . calls for Romania to come under the sovereignty of the es es es air.”

– but that can’t be.

Axe on January 3, 2013 at 8:25 AM

A Slow-Motion Mexican Stand-Off me thinks!
(sarc):)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:23 AM

Pretty much.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:26 AM

Hasn’t GB mothballed all their aircraft carriers?

Resolute on January 3, 2013 at 8:19 AM

Resolute:)
============

‘Falklands could not be held against Argentina’
02 April 2012
**************

Britain’s armed forces would struggle to defend, reinforce or retake the Falkland Islands if Argentina invaded again, a defence pressure group has warned.

A report from the UK National Defence Association (UKNDA) said defence cuts had placed the territories at greater risk than they had been since the 1982 invasion.

It warned that the islands’ coastline could not be defended from an invasion and that Argentina could use almost all of its armed forces to invade at a time when the British forces consisted of “just four Typhoons, a Type-45 Destroyer, and Rapier short range missiles around Mount Pleasant airfield”.

The UKNDA argued that Britain would not be able to deploy reinforcements in time and that forces stationed on the Falkland Islands would “necessarily have to hold Mount Pleasant airfield and its environs for a week before help arrived”.

The pressure group said an amphibious assault would be required to retake the islands and that 112 British ships were needed in 1982. But it said this number could not be raised now with amphibious warfare capabilities “dramatically reduced”, and a “considerably smaller” Royal Navy.

“There would be no fighter cover for the landing force and shipping,” their report said. “There is no carrier… There is no question of providing air support using RAF fighters. There are no bases within range. In-flight re-fuelling, given the number of re-fuels required for a round trip of 8,000 miles from Ascension, would be impossible in the face of the threat posed by the Argentine air force.”

But Brigadier Bill Aldridge, commander of British Forces in the Falklands reportedly said he was “entirely confident” he could “do the job that is required”.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman told the Press Association there was no evidence of “any current credible military threat to the Falkland Islands”.

“Unlike in 1982, we have a well defended airfield in the Falklands with ground-based air defences, and continue to have the ability to reinforce by air and sea,” the spokesman said.

“People should be reassured by the contingencies that we now have in place compared to 30 years ago.”
====================================

http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=19352

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Another ‘crisis’ where Obama can stick his nose.

Liam on January 3, 2013 at 8:28 AM

That’s like the Texas Republic being sold back to Mexico… Ain’t a gonna happin pard’ner…

Kuffar on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=19352

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:28 AM

That’s so pathetic as to be embarrassing.

We’ll none of this when Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge comes into her own, eh what. :)

Axe on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:23 AM

Pretty much.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:26 AM

Steve Eggleston:Looks like your accurate on the ability for the UK
to defend the FalkLand Islands,with that Defense
Management story,I posted above!:)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

This was in the Obama 2016 movie, wasn’t it. She must have seen it and discovered the US is in Argentina’s corner now.

Marcus on January 3, 2013 at 8:33 AM

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:28 AM

That’s so pathetic as to be embarrassing.

We’ll none of this when Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge comes into her own, eh what. :)

Axe on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

Axe:Yup,and to think Canada,bought a kabotched Submarine from the
UK,awhile back!:-O

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:33 AM

Speaking of the Military,another Jihady bites da dust!

The Associated Press ‏@AP

Pakistan: American drone strike kills Maulvi Nazir, a senior Taliban militant who fought U.S. in Afghanistan: http://apne.ws/S6E8SU -CJ

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/pakistani-officials-us-missile-strike-kills-13-people-including-top-militant-commander

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:35 AM

**Alert **

Breaking News: Jobless claims rise to 372,000 in latest week, up from 362,000 in previous week

https://twitter.com/Reuters

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:39 AM

The UK are a bunch of hypocrites.

Mr. Arrogant on January 3, 2013 at 8:39 AM

“Unlike the government of Argentina,” the statement continued, “the United Kingdom respects the right of our people to determine our own affairs, a right that is enshrined in the UN Charter and which is ignored by Argentina.”

Now that’s funny.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 8:43 AM

President Fernandez is doing it wrong. She should go into this referendum talking about how the UK wants to ban abortions for all women, that penguins should be given a “path to citizenship,” and of course make the claim that David Cameron causes cancer. Years of living in close proximity with sheep may well have developed a special breed of low-information voter.

Happy Nomad on January 3, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Why does this dingbat in Argentina think that leftist newspapers are a friendly outlet, when putting forth the message of forcibly taking a people from one country?

MNHawk on January 3, 2013 at 8:22 AM

1. She’s also a leftist.

2. Leftists are only for “self-determination” for themselves.

3. She and the Guardian agree that the people of the Falklands suffer from that most pernicious of social diseases, “false consciousness”, i.e., not comprehending that they would be “better off” ruled by a true socialistic Great Leader- like Kirchner.

Leftism is easily comprehended, once you understand the mindset.

And since it is inherently internationalist in nature (see “Revolution Without Borders”), expecting the Guardian not to side with Kirchner against either the (theoretically conservative, and therefore “evil”) Cameron government and/or the (obviously stupid- by their “standards”) people of the Falklands is about like expecting water to run uphill.

Or about like expecting Obama not to side with Kirchner before it’s over. Or expecting him not to cite the Guardian‘s support of Kirchner as clear evidence that he’s right in doing so. (See “self-referentialism” and “reflexive argument”.)

clear ether

eon

eon on January 3, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Looks like your accurate on the ability for the UK
to defend the FalkLand Islands,with that Defense
Management story,I posted above!:)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

The scenario’s been discussed on a naval sim group I’m a part of by some pros who don’t rely on the BBC for intel.

As for the dead tango, I can see the AoSHQ headline now – “Senior Taliban Leader Dies Of Fiscal Cliff Injuries, Missile Explosion, But Mostly Missile Explosion”

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Now that’s funny.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 8:43 AM

Speaking of no-information voters.

Happy Nomad on January 3, 2013 at 8:52 AM

That’s like the Texas Republic being sold back to Mexico… Ain’t a gonna happin pard’ner…

Kuffar on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

http://catalog.flatworldknowledge.com/bookhub/reader/10997?e=berglee_1.0-ch04_s03

The unofficial “sale” of the Southwest has been going on for several decades. The Mexification of Texas is almost complete.

PappyD61 on January 3, 2013 at 8:54 AM

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM

The scenario’s been discussed on a naval sim group I’m a part of by some pros who don’t rely on the BBC for intel.

As for the dead tango, I can see the AoSHQ headline now – “Senior Taliban Leader Dies Of Fiscal Cliff Injuries, Missile Explosion, But Mostly Missile Explosion”

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Steve Eggleston:Lol,on the Tango comment,haha!:)

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:57 AM

Why does this dingbat in Argentina think that leftist newspapers are a friendly outlet, when putting forth the message of forcibly taking a people from one country?

MNHawk on January 3, 2013 at 8:22 AM

You think people belong to a country? No one is being “taken” from a country.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 8:58 AM

Mr Cameron’s spokesman said the people of the Falklands had shown “a clear desire to remain British” and the Argentine government should respect their right to self determination.

Well there’s some selective reasoning for ya.

Also, sort of funny to see such objection to Argentina’s rationale here…with all the ranting against ‘imperialism’ etc.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

The long-running “Most Admired Woman In America”–Hillary–added to the lie last year by announcing to the world that Britain ought to negotiate with the Argentinians.

itsnotaboutme on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

Well there’s some selective reasoning for ya.

Also, sort of funny to see such objection to Argentina’s rationale here…with all the ranting against ‘imperialism’ etc.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

Good to see someone else gets it.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 9:01 AM

We travel back,in time……………….

Thatcher announces the Falklands invasion to the House of Commons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZaP0TgOpig

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 8:07 AM

I was stationed at RAF Lakenheath then.
It was a thrilling time to be in the UK!

itsnotaboutme on January 3, 2013 at 9:02 AM

Quick, someone ask Barry about his revised position on the “Maldives.”

Red Cloud on January 3, 2013 at 8:05 AM

…Oh oh!….poor JugEars… thought this was all about…”Muffdives”…!

KOOLAID2 on January 3, 2013 at 9:07 AM

The long-running “Most Admired Woman In America”–Hillary–added to the lie last year by announcing to the world that Britain ought to negotiate with the Argentinians.

itsnotaboutme on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

What lie?

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 9:09 AM

Typical leftist leader…..

Let’s distract from my failed policies and rally the people around that shiny object over there……

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 9:16 AM

“…that’s why if you check any of our most recent maps, you won’t find Buenos Aires.” –Commander Hayes, Star Control 2

Archivarix on January 3, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Also, sort of funny to see such objection to Argentina’s rationale here…with all the ranting against ‘imperialism’ etc.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

“Imperialism” has nothing to do with Argentina’s rationale. A potential oil bonanza is what is behind Fernández de Kirchner’s move. Last year, exploratory wells were drilled and could triple Britain’s ENTIRE petroleum reserves.

Fernández de Kirchner needs the Falklands for 2 reasons: 1) She needs the oil revenue because her monetary and fiscal Keynesianism has seriously hurt Argentina’s economy, and 2) She needs a good scapegoat and Da Joooooooooooooooooooooooos were unavailable.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:21 AM

Well there’s some selective reasoning for ya.

Also, sort of funny to see such objection to Argentina’s rationale here…with all the ranting against ‘imperialism’ etc.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

…yea…
…………kind of reminds me of when liberals were yelling “war is not the answer” and “stop the imperialist warmonger Bush”.. until their boy king started bombing the hell out of other countries and launching a war without Congressional approval against an oil rich country that did not attack us and posed no imminent threat…..
………….now liberals call it “smart power”…..there’s some “selective reasoning” for ya.

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 9:21 AM

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:21 AM

Hey, in case you missed it:

link

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 9:25 AM

Also, sort of funny to see such objection to Argentina’s rationale here…with all the ranting against ‘imperialism’ etc.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM

“Imperialism” has nothing to do with Argentina’s rationale. A potential oil bonanza is what is behind Fernández de Kirchner’s move. Last year, exploratory wells were drilled and could triple Britain’s ENTIRE petroleum reserves.

Fernández de Kirchner needs the Falklands for 2 reasons: 1) She needs the oil revenue because her monetary and fiscal Keynesianism has seriously hurt Argentina’s economy, and 2) She needs a good scapegoat and Da Joooooooooooooooooooooooos were unavailable.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:21 AM

And of course the UK just wants it for the pretty views.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:29 AM

I visited the Falklands a few years ago while on a cruise The locals I met while on shore are very British in a very maverick kind of way. They have no love for their neighbors west of them, 250 miles away. We took a jeep ride out to see a penguin colony and I was surprised to find the land so boggy and marshy. I remember wondering why anyone would want to bother with this island that has way more sheep than people. The people there have nothing in common with Argentina.

What is it about Argentina? The people of Chile have no love for their neighbor to their east. To my casual observation, the people of Chile were hard workers and had a much more vibrant economy. Whereas the economy in the capital of Argentina seemed to be frozen in time with numerous abandoned building projects all over the city. Apparently they had endured some sort of currency crisis and everything went into the tank. There were half finished high rise buildings all over with those huge cranes just idle. The area they take the tourists to where they do their tango dancing was downright seedy. Their equivalent of Rodeo Drive for fancy shopping was not busy at all. Is this foreshadowing for an Obama economy here?

karenhasfreedom on January 3, 2013 at 9:33 AM

There’s nothing particularly “selective” about Britain’s reasoning. The Brits systematically dismantled their own empire after WW2 – partly in good faith, partly because they were broke, partly because the US was unsympathetic to their residual imperial claims. Britain hasn’t been especially happy about American enterprises in the ME either. The Brits have experimented with devolution in Scotland and Wales. Short of dissolving their own country, they’ve been pretty consistent – for better or worse. Of course there are plenty of Brits who think their country is no longer self-determining. Maybe Cameron has his eye on public opinion re the EU.

Self-determination is an iffy Wilsonian ideal. It assumes that all peoples are equally capable of self-government; or, even if they aren’t, they are entitled to it. Something that libertarians, in any case, would presumably support – again for better or worse.

Seth Halpern on January 3, 2013 at 9:34 AM

When will Cristina Fernández de Kirchner give Argentina back to the Mapuche, Kolla, Toba, Guaraní, Wichí, Diaguita, Mocoví, Huarpe and the rest of the Argentine Amerindians, the indigenous peoples of Argentina, or does she believe her Spanish ancestors were not imperialists?

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 9:21 AM

I don’t know what the liberals were yelling.
But I do know lots of folks felt a strategic counter attack against those responsible made just a tad more sense than an opportunistic sloppy drawn out land war and occupation….that left 4400+ US Soldiers dead.
But fine…you weren’t one of them.
And here’s hoping the Brits don’t start claiming Argentina has WMDs…right?

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:37 AM

And of course the UK just wants it for the pretty views.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:29 AM

The UK has had it for 180 years…long before anyone knew there was oil anywhere around them. That said, I would completely support Falklanders right to declare their independence, if that is what they choose.

Just don’t fall for this whole “colonialist” crap from Argentina and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. You might wish to learn the history of Argentina first. Hint: It was a colony of Spain and Fernández de Kirchner is of Spanish and German descent.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:39 AM

Argentina now argues that the British planted people on the island over the last 180 years of sovereignty, and that the people currently living on the islands — which are more than 250 miles away from Argentina, by the way — should be ineligible for self-determination. It’s a cute argument, as it does away with the question of self-determination at all

Oddly, this is exactly what Guam has been trying to do, also.

GWB on January 3, 2013 at 9:40 AM

karenhasfreedom on January 3, 2013 at 9:33 AM

I guess in order to like the Falkland Islanders you need to dislike and denigrate Argentinians.
Thanks for the lesson.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Hey, in case you missed it:

link

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 9:25 AM

I didn’t miss it. I moved on. I told you that I was into that whole anarcho-capitalism/Rothbardian thingy and then I grew up. I spent enough of my time yesterday explaining my libertarianism to you.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:42 AM

What is it about Argentina?

karenhasfreedom on January 3, 2013 at 9:33 AM

It’s called socialism. Odd that it has such a poor batting average, yet everyone keeps trying to bring it up from the bush leagues anyway.

GWB on January 3, 2013 at 9:43 AM

Just don’t fall for this whole “colonialist” crap from Argentina and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. You might wish to learn the history of Argentina first. Hint: It was a colony of Spain and Fernández de Kirchner is of Spanish and German descent.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:39 AM

Yes, a long history of being a colony.
Your point?
(And I’m not necessarily supporting either claim here – I just don’t buy the UK’s dismissive response.)

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:45 AM

But I do know lots of folks felt a strategic counter attack against those responsible made just a tad more sense than an opportunistic sloppy drawn out land war and occupation….that left 4400+ US Soldiers dead.

Then you have a selective memory:

http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

sentinelrules on January 3, 2013 at 9:47 AM

And here’s hoping the Brits don’t start claiming Argentina has WMDs…right?

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:37 AM

….you mean like all the democrats on the Hill did for years before Bush even became President and while they were voting for the Iraq war??????

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 9:48 AM

No war for oil … er …. what!?

OldEnglish on January 3, 2013 at 9:49 AM

I didn’t miss it. I moved on. I told you that I was into that whole anarcho-capitalism/Rothbardian thingy and then I grew up. I spent enough of my time yesterday explaining my libertarianism to you.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:42 AM

I didn’t ask for you to explain anything to me, but I do think you should be aware of your false accusations and assumptions, especially when you are going to make an untrue claim about someone and base your arguments on that falsehood.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 9:49 AM

I just don’t buy the UK’s dismissive response.)

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Please don’t tell me you think that Fernández de Kirchner’s position – and her husband’s before her – on the subject have been anything but periodic saber-rattling, chest-thumping, and diversions for hometown consumption. Sure, Argentina would love to get the Falklands back, but Fernández de Kirchner has been and is pushing this because of the economy and an attempt to gin up nationalistic fervour as a diversion. This woman nationalised ALL private pensions only a couple of years ago and took over the central bank after its chairman refused to “just print money.”

The people of the Falklands will decide in March and I would be dismissive of Fernández de Kirchner and her claims if I were them, which they were.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:52 AM

A serious effort would use actual diplomats rather than the sales offices of the Guardian and Independent, in the UN if not in the UK.

Well, he’s just following how the communists took over the U.S.A. via the newspapers and media.

LoganSix on January 3, 2013 at 9:53 AM

I didn’t ask for you to explain anything to me, but I do think you should be aware of your false accusations and assumptions, especially when you are going to make an untrue claim about someone and base your arguments on that falsehood.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 9:49 AM

Sorry. I thought that you were a libertarian. Big apology and many sloppy smooches.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:54 AM

Dear Mrs K,

Nuts!

Love,

The Falkland Islanders

Sea Wolf on January 3, 2013 at 9:59 AM

karenhasfreedom on January 3, 2013 at 9:33 AM
I guess in order to like the Falkland Islanders you need to dislike and denigrate Argentinians.
Thanks for the lesson.
verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Nothing in my post denigrated Argentina. I just reported what I learned first hand while visiting all 3 counties. Did you know that Argentina and Chile are still arguing over a small, pretty barren rock disguised as an island at the very tip of South America?

karenhasfreedom on January 3, 2013 at 10:01 AM

The UK has had it for 180 years…long before anyone knew there was oil anywhere around them. That said, I would completely support Falklanders right to declare their independence, if that is what they choose.

Just don’t fall for this whole “colonialist” crap from Argentina and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. You might wish to learn the history of Argentina first. Hint: It was a colony of Spain and Fernández de Kirchner is of Spanish and German descent.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 9:39 AM

If memory serves, there have been a few referenda on the question, with each one coming down on the side of staying under the protection of the Crown.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 10:03 AM

…Or about like expecting Obama not to side with Kirchner….

Government is always evolving. Just look to Karl Marx.

He might do that based on the anti-tradition vein in socialism. Lefty’s have no problem revoking rights over 150 years old.

They think the Emancipation Proclamation could be voided any day now and people go back into chains. Just ask our VP.

However, I think we need the solution the UN, pop culture, academics and Hollywood would love here.

Interminable negotiations while the Brits arm and prepare the place like it is West Berlin during the Cold War.

They can call Iran for guidance.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:03 AM

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:37 AM
I don’t know what the liberals were yelling.

If you are so uniformed that you have no ideaswhat the democratic party was yelling on the streets….on the front pages….and through the MSM….then your lack of credibility on this issue speaks for itself.

But I do know lots of folks felt a strategic counter attack against those responsible made just a tad more sense

Responsible for what????
If what you mean is 9/11…then Bush did that in Afghanistan…with overwhelming approval from the same democrats that proclaim “war is not the answer”….
Now the same democrats that criticized Bush’s efforts in Afghanistan have had total power to enact their supposed “better,smarter plan” to win the “good war”….and they have failed miserably.Al-qaeda and the Taliban are taking back over while OBama heads for the exits.
Now the “smartest people in the room” have declared the “Taliban is not our enemy”…..and where Bush was destroying the mosques of the terrorist….Obama is now building them back.
Great “strategic” moves there genius.

than an opportunistic sloppy drawn out land war and occupation….that left 4400+ US Soldiers dead.
But fine…you weren’t one of them.

You mean the land war that eradicated a genocidal dictator that was responsible for over 1 millions deaths,2 major wars,and was a leading supporter of terrorism around the world and had broken their surrender agreement with us and defied over 17 UN resolutions.
Yea…. I supported that…just like I supported Bush’s surge that won the freedoms of the Iraqi people to establish their own form of democratic rule…….unlike OBama’s surge which has been an absolute failure and he now presides over the loss of the Afghanistan war that democrats bragged they had a superior plan to win all those years.
Guess that’s more of those fantastic “strategic” moves you were bragging about.

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 10:04 AM

And of course the UK just wants it for the pretty views.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Yeah. Like the US wanted Iraq for the oil.

It could pay our national debt several times over.

That is why we didn’t wipe out the population and steal it like any empire with any horse sense.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Cameron is playing a weak hand. If serious he better deploy more men and material in the Falklands because his gutting of the once great British military means a Falklands 2 campaign to expel a Argentine capture of the island would not go well.

Britain has no harriers or light carriers to transport them left active. They could pull em out of mothballs and retrain the crews but that would take months to years. Britain would be forced into a opposed landing with no air support and only destroyers giving air protection.

My suggestion would be maybe having at least 1-2 destroyers, 1 attack sub, a squadron of euro fighters, and enough ground troops to delay an invasion with the equipment for many more stored in the Falklands as the troops themselves are back in the ole country to be flown in as reinforcements via commercial at the start.

But if Argentina occupied the islands ala 80′s then Britain would be looking at a humiliation short getting US support but considering O is pres my guess is he would auto side with the more socialist of the two factions. Ohh did I mention his stated father fought the British yeah.

C-Low on January 3, 2013 at 10:11 AM

You mean the land war that eradicated a genocidal dictator that was responsible for over 1 millions deaths,2 major wars,and was a leading supporter of terrorism around the world and had broken their surrender agreement with us and defied over 17 UN resolutions…
Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Ask your average air head, and I could include a prominent MSM reporter here, (and you could probably add the Media Matters Asses reading this thread) and they list the US killing. That is all they know.

You bring up Saddam Hussein’s record and the face goes blank.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Still surprised that the Argies haven’t just invaded. The UK lacks the military ability to retake the islands, they barely *barely* had it back in 82.

The US and NATO would not lift a finger, the UN would write a sternly worded post-it, and the Argies get all the sweet mineral rights.

CorporatePiggy on January 3, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Do you guys follow this administration? Hillary offered to mediate in 2010. THAT was a victory for Argentina. We had our POTUS using the wrong name. Most of all Hugo Chavez, the ultimate maximum ruler and beloved by Hollywood morons Sean Penn, Naomi Campbell, and Danny Glover promised that Argentina would not be alone next time.

I say: good, we wipe them out and take the oil.

I’d get rid of the deficit.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:17 AM

If memory serves, there have been a few referenda on the question, with each one coming down on the side of staying under the protection of the Crown.

Steve Eggleston on January 3, 2013 at 10:03 AM

I don’t remember if there was an explicit up-or-down referendum, but do know that the islanders have been overwhelmingly pro-British and anti-Argentine for aeons. If the British were holding the Falklanders against their will, then I would have some sympathy for the arguments made by Argentina, but they are not. Further, from what I remember reading (and bear in mind that I was something like 4 at the time of the war) is that after the UN’s resolution in the 60s, the British government tried to get the people on the island to start thinking of a future with Argentina because it was so expensive. The people had no desire whatsoever to become part of Argentina regardless of how hard the government pushed.

By the 1980s, the relationship between the British government and the Falklanders was cemented and any idea of nudging the Falklanders toward Argentina had been abandoned. In fact, when Gordon Brown — and he was definitely no neo-colonialist, neo-imperialist, right-wing conservative — was PM he met with Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, he told her to go pound sand…not because he was chest-thumping, but because the Falklanders do not want anything to do with Argentina.

Resist We Much on January 3, 2013 at 10:29 AM

You bring up Saddam Hussein’s record and the face goes blank.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Exactly….
….because with liberals…our Soldiers deaths only mean something when they can score political points with them.

…you know…like MSNBC’s “Soldier’s death count” ticker disappearing right after Obama got elected…..
……doesn’t help democrats when their noble peace prize hero has a higher death count in Afghanistan than Bush did.

All those democrats have disappeared from the streets yelling “no blood for oil”…”war is not the answer”…..
….now they’re in the coffee shops patting themselves on the back for launching a war without Congressional approval that turned Libya and much of the surrounding area over to the jihadist…….”smart power” indeed.

Obama legacy:
Lost the Afghanistan war and turned Libya over to the jihadist…..
…….how “strategic”…..

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Just In!

The Associated Press ‏@AP

Argentina’s president calls on UK prime minister to relinquish control of the Falkland Islands: http://apne.ws/Umnri7 -KH

Argentina’s leader tells UK to give up Falklands
Jan. 3 10:04 AM EST
*******************

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/argentinas-leader-tells-uk-give-falklands

canopfor on January 3, 2013 at 10:40 AM

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 10:31 AM

If only the left’s version of reality was real!

The issues I see on the web are not comprehensive and someone who knows a lot more than I claims that there are several small areas with critters growing hair and fangs. He was talking about Afghan Theater and other places with worry while the press was glowing like they did about Sandy relief. Benghazi was a spot of rust, wait till you see what is under the paint on the rest of the fender.

I weep at the prospect of cleaning up the Mideast if present trends continue, like Iran getting nuclear material.

I don’t have an easy solution, either.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Seems you’ve got quite a whole mess of labels to throw around.
And all but whatever you choose for your own offered nothing else but ‘no blood for oil!’?
Sure.

and this:

….because with liberals…our Soldiers deaths only mean something when they can score political points with them.

The irony…

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 10:51 AM

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Weak is the ‘makes sense’ in this one says Yoda.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Argentines whinge on this issue when they are in political trouble at home.

Why don’t we understand, as many at State say: Latin America is the land of the future, and always will be.

Denver Bob on January 3, 2013 at 11:29 AM

“Can I haz bruises?” –Argentina

rdbrewer on January 3, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Fernandez is a ridiculous Peronist, a left wing fascist or, if you will, a Nazi (and no, the National Socialist German Workers Party was a left wing party rather than a right wing party. The world’s communists have succeeded in painting them as a right wing party). Fernandez, along with her husband, are gross incompetents who have destroyed the economy of their country. Simply stated, they cannot afford to go to war.

John Adams on January 3, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Is that the best you can do?

blink on January 3, 2013 at 11:38 AM

haha did you really need to ask? :)

Anti-Control on January 3, 2013 at 12:05 PM

…Oh oh!….poor JugEars… thought this was all about…”Muffdives”…!

KOOLAID2 on January 3, 2013 at 9:07 AM

If JugEars thought this was about Muffdives, he would be running away screaming.

cptacek on January 3, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Still surprised that the Argies haven’t just invaded. The UK lacks the military ability to retake the islands, they barely *barely* had it back in 82.

The US and NATO would not lift a finger, the UN would write a sternly worded post-it, and the Argies get all the sweet mineral rights.

CorporatePiggy on January 3, 2013 at 10:15 AM

I guess Argentina can have it if they can invade and win, and the UK can keep it if they can repel the invasion.

In other words, to the victor go the spoils.

Fair or not fair, right or not right. Doesn’t matter. Be stronger than your opponent or you lose.

cptacek on January 3, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Yeah. Like the US wanted Iraq for the oil.

It could pay our national debt several times over.

That is why we didn’t wipe out the population and steal it like any empire with any horse sense.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:08 AM

+1

cptacek on January 3, 2013 at 12:26 PM

And of course the UK just wants it for the pretty views.

verbaluce on January 3, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Perhaps the most vapid comment ever on Hot Air.

They’ve been there for almost 200 years and the possibility of oil and gas has only been apparent for the past few years.

What, precisely, was the war in 1982 fought over?

Tomblvd on January 3, 2013 at 12:49 PM

You mean the land war that eradicated a genocidal dictator that was responsible for over 1 millions deaths,2 major wars,and was a leading supporter of terrorism around the world and had broken their surrender agreement with us and defied over 17 UN resolutions…
Baxter Greene on January 3, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Ask your average air head, and I could include a prominent MSM reporter here, (and you could probably add the Media Matters Asses reading this thread) and they list the US killing. That is all they know.

You bring up Saddam Hussein’s record and the face goes blank.

IlikedAUH2O on January 3, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Well, he11, it’s not like Saddam killed anyone but his own people. So it must be OK. Right, verbaluce?

psrch on January 3, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Yeah, because Baxter Green’s comments articulated the known liberal hypocrisy regarding war.

I would have thought that verbaluce would have put enough effort into a reply to come up with something better than “labels” and a false attribution of irony.

Surely, there must be a better talking point somewhere that he could have found to paste – instead, he failed miserably.

blink on January 3, 2013 at 1:15 PM

Just to let you know, I come from the pov where I expect dolts like verbaluce to fail so miserably, and I figured you did, too! :D

Anti-Control on January 3, 2013 at 1:47 PM

“Unlike the government of Argentina,” the statement continued, “the United Kingdom respects the right of our people to determine our own affairs, a right that is enshrined in the UN Charter and which is ignored by Argentina.”

excerpt from statement by Falkland Islands government

.
Now that’s funny.

Dante on January 3, 2013 at 8:43 AM

.
It’s been almost five hours since your original post . . . . .

Have you recovered from the hilarity of it all, yet?

listens2glenn on January 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM

Seth Halpern on January 3, 2013 at 9:34 AM

My wife is Chilean (hence my nickname) and she would totally agree with you.

Recently we both read Berlinski’s biography of Thatcher, and she told me of how proud she was of Chile when Pinochet used Chilean radar to warn Britain of Argentine air launches (Thatcher, in her own book, mentions that the one day Chilean radar was shut down for maintenance resulted in a major loss for Britain).

We recently had a family of Argeninian touritst over for a visit, and later realized what was on display on our bookshelf: Statecraft by Thatcher, and a book mocking Che Guevera by Fontova. When I saw that I laughed and wondered what they thought.

Johnny 100 Pesos on January 3, 2013 at 2:16 PM

A MUST READ about the Falklands war – “Vulcan 607″ by Rowland White.

fred5678 on January 3, 2013 at 2:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2