Argentina to raise Falklands UK 'militarisation' at UN!

[Climber]

Google it. I'm not going to spend my evening doing it for you. We're not talking about loans, it's about aid.

I am sorry to bother you , here

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/...gentina_en.htm

Now, the article is still crap. just read what "aid" is the UK taxpayer is "aiding". Education, Small business and Mutual cooperation. The article is suggesting that you should hit Argentines where it hurts? I don't get the way you think, you think your country should hit Argentine education aid, small business and cooperation?

Where is the WB, IMF and stuff loans that the article suggest you are paying?



it makes me sad and at the same time laugh. I just thought the we were the only ones doing and saying clownish stuff here.

[happyslapper]

(you make it sound as though I wrote the article!)

It's still aid though, isn't it.

And, as the papers are keen to portray it, the British tax payer is giving money to a belligerent state. Mis-spent aid is very much a hot topic here at the moment, so combine it with the Falklands and a flashy headline, and you've got something that sells papers.

[armored_diplomacy]

-Why on earth would Argentina build SSNs?
-A domestic SSN would likely be vastly inferior to a foreign bought SSK,
-since Argentina have no submarine industry or construction experience (that I know of).
-Argentina would be far better off shopping for a nice long ranged SSK with AIP.

- Why not? remove Kirchner´s and just leave Argentina as a sovereign country: it´s up to us to decide whether a SSN is a needed asset for our defense.
- Of course a first SSN locally built would be just a trial; it would take some years of learning, testing and developing know-how before counting on it.
- Argentina does have submarine-construction experience; out of the six TR-1700 bought 4 were suppossed to be built here, since there was infrastructure. Sadly, years of insignificant budget and lack of interest have had its effect on it.
- Agree on that.

----

Now let´s check an article:

Falkland Islands: Why we can't accept Cristina's 'kind' gesture

...
Making herself look kind and understanding of our needs can be the only reason for this about-face by the Argentine President, but before we can bring ourselves to believe in the sincerity of her stated desire “to give peace a chance” she will have to cancel her government’s restrictions against shipping, which are contrary to the international laws of the sea, and lift the ban on charter flights which did so much damage to our tourism industry and so much good to Ushuaia. (She will also, of course, have to remove the clause from the Argentine Constitution which allows no other outcome for sovereignty talks, but that the Falkland Islands become Las Islas Malvinas and an Argentine possession.)
In fact, if the Argentine President is really concerned to increase our connectivity to the outside world, why does she not declare an open skies policy and let Aerolineas Argentinas compete openly and honestly with other airlines to provide our commercial air link to the outside world? I am fairly sure, however, that Argentina’s struggling flag carrier would not be the airline of choice for people here and Buenos Aires would not be the favourite destination.

http://en.mercopress.com/2012/03/02/...s-kind-gesture

[Climber]

We have actually given billions of pounds in aid directly to Argentina in the period 1990 to 2002, and continue to spend UK tax-payers money sponsoring various development programmes in Argentina - post-natal medical care, and *drumroll* anti-corruption programmes being two that I can recall (though from the look of it those escaped the attentions of Sun and Telegraph journalists.

Until 2014 we will continue to give development aid to Argentina through the EU. Only 3 months ago it was decided that the EU should stop.
link

The figure given to Argentina annually by the EU and World Bank is around $2bn. The IMF also holds an emergency reserve of $7.4bn for Argentina. All three of these organisations have the UK tax-payer as a major contributer, and the UK Govt as (among others of course) an approving authority.




http://en.mercopress.com/2011/08/01/...tional-weapons

It's laughable in my opinion, proposed by people who clearly have little or no undestanding of the engineering complexity of such vessels.

(you make it sound as though I wrote the article!)

It's still aid though, isn't it.

And, as the papers are keen to portray it, the British tax payer is giving money to a belligerent state. Mis-spent aid is very much a hot topic here at the moment, so combine it with the Falklands and a flashy headline, and you've got something that sells papers.

You dindt write the article, you just commented what you think. And I commented in your post.

Aid provided to mostly NGO's and by the EU, not the UK

And we are not in a state of belligerency, we have Embassies, businesses and cultural relationships. What we have a territorial dispute, as you have with Spain, an ally in NATO, and member of the EU.

As I said, the Island are being used by politicians of both sides for obscure purposes. Nothing else. They both are escalating things just for budgets wars, oil, or power. The People have nothing to do with it.

[happyslapper]

You dindt write the article, you just commented what you think. And I commented in your post.

Aid provided to mostly NGO's and by the EU, not the UK

And we are not in a state of belligerency, we have Embassies [there's an Arg embassy with no ambassador in London], businesses [which are being instructed to stop doing business with Britain] and cultural relationships [which are also being abused]. What we have a territorial dispute, as you have with Spain, an ally in NATO, and member of the EU.

As I said, the Island are being used by politicians of both sides for obscure purposes. Nothing else. They both are escalating things just for budgets wars, oil, or power. The People have nothing to do with it.

I'm sure the Falkland Islanders would differ with you quite starkly on the issue of belligerence.

The fact remains that UK tax payers' money goes to Argentina in the form of aid. You can take issue with how it gets there, and with the worthiness, but the fact remains.
The papers were correct in principle.

I'm the first to say how silly and overblown things have become, but can completely empathise with the feeling that we are being over-tollerant of a country which has as a state policy the aim of harming British citizens. That's not an extreme view, nor is it an ignorant one - it's a natural reaction to circumstance.

[Al-Bundy]

Even in a hypothetical scenario where UK agrees to negotiate the island and the UN takes charge of the case the only thing the UN can do is to have a referendum in the local population.
What will Argentina do after the referendum results?

[Climber]

I'm sure the Falkland Islanders would differ with you quite starkly on the issue of belligerence.

The fact remains that UK tax payers' money goes to Argentina in the form of aid. You can take issue with how it gets there, and with the worthiness, but the fact remains.
The papers were correct in principle.

I'm the first to say how silly and overblown things have become, but can completely empathise with the feeling that we are being over-tollerant of a country which has as a state policy the aim of harming British citizens. That's not an extreme view, nor is it an ignorant one - it's a natural reaction to circumstance.

Whatever the Islanders think, the fact is we aren't.
No Ambassador means squat, Its all cheap politics from the Argentine government, and you know that. British companies work here and have no plans to get out, like GSK ( GSK big man here is my closest friend), cultural ties are being abused? what do you mean? Many cultural events are being made by the British Embassy in BA.

And the papers weren't right at all, there is no WB, IMF, or real UK money that goes to Argentina Government.

[happyslapper]

Whatever the Islanders think, the fact is we aren't.
No Ambassador means squat, Its all cheap politics from the Argentine government, and you know that. British companies work here and have no plans to get out, like GSK ( GSK big man here is my closest friend), cultural ties are being abused? what do you mean? Many cultural events are being made by the British Embassy in BA.

And the papers weren't right at all, there is no WB, IMF, or real UK money that goes to Argentina Government.

Not being belligerent?

I think you've just lost all credibility. The rest is not seeing the woods through the trees.

[Climber]

Not being belligerent?

I think you've just lost all credibility. The rest is not seeing the woods through the trees.

There is a dispute.

I dont see the Argentine people nor the nation being hostile and aggressive, other than in this dispute against the UK. There is no state of war or armed conflict. I could care less about my credibility, as i said this is all a smoke screen by 2 troubled governments. Thats all, all the rest, opinions, papers, articles, etc, its all bull crap.

[CJvR]

- Why not?

Cost, complexity, lack of experience, questionable need, etc...

- Of course a first SSN locally built would be just a trial

Sure, a trial that would probably cost as much as two operational top of the line SSKs.

- Argentina does have submarine-construction experience; out of the six TR-1700 bought 4 were suppossed to be built here

So Argentina have experience in NOT building submarines...

[armored_diplomacy]

So Argentina have experience in NOT building submarines...

Assembling submarines you mean ?

[happyslapper]

There is a dispute.
I dont see the Argentine people nor the nation being hostile and aggressive, other than in this dispute against the UK. There is no state of war or armed conflict. I could care less about my credibility, as i said this is all a smoke screen by 2 troubled governments. Thats all, all the rest, opinions, papers, articles, etc, its all bull crap.

Climber, I don't know if you're being delusional or dishonest.

Argentina is being deliberately and blatantly belligerent against the Falkland Islands. Whilst that's always been the case, at no point in the last 29 years has it been quite as flagrant as it is right now.

A sovereignty dispute is one thing, matching it with a campaign of economic, political, and cultural destruction is quite another.

There's plenty of BS floating around in the press, and believe me I share your frustrations, but there are simple truths involved too, which stretch far beyond the flippancy with which you describe it.

[Climber]

Climber, I don't know if you're being delusional or dishonest.

Argentina is being deliberately and blatantly belligerent against the Falkland Islands. Whilst that's always been the case, at no point in the last 29 years has it been quite as flagrant as it is right now.

A sovereignty dispute is one thing, matching it with a campaign of economic, political, and cultural destruction is quite another.

There's plenty of BS floating around in the press, and believe me I share your frustrations, but there are simple truths involved too, which stretch far beyond the flippancy with which you describe it.

I am not being dishonest, maybe we are lost in translation. As i see, there are 2 governments doing political things as a smoke screen for obscure political reasons. nothing else, the media plays the game also. We, the people, we are in the middle and we are not belligerent in any way, at least I am not.

[mayflower232]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975

How France helped both sides in the Falklands War

In his memoirs, former UK Defence Secretary Sir John Nott describes France as Britain's "greatest ally" during the Falklands War. But formerly secret papers and other evidence seen by the BBC show that was not the full story.
Before the war, France sold Argentina's military junta five Exocet missiles.
At the time, few suspected that the regime's longstanding claim on the Falklands would lead to war, and the sale went largely unnoticed. But when in May 1982 these Exocet missiles were used to strike Britain's HMS Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor, with the loss of 32 British lives, near panic ensued in London.

[Ought Six]

There is a dispute.

I dont see the Argentine people nor the nation being hostile and aggressive, other than in this dispute against the UK. There is no state of war or armed conflict. I could care less about my credibility, as i said this is all a smoke screen by 2 troubled governments. Thats all, all the rest, opinions, papers, articles, etc, its all bull crap.

Argentina is waging economic warfare against the Falklands. That is very belligerent act. To try and argue otherwise is laughable bullsh1t.