Post by Sea Eagle on Sept 16, 2004 7:01:11 GMT -3
Noelia:
I have read with interest your conviction that your claim to the Falklands is legitimate. The best summary that I can find that elucidates the basis of the Argentine claim to the islands is as follows:
Por Derechos Geográficos: Plataforma Submarina.
Por Derechos Históricos: Bula Inter.- Caetera del Papa Alejandro VI y Dumun Si Quidem del 3 y 4 de mayo de 1493 y al tratado de Tordecillas entre España y Portugal del 3 de Junio de 1494, como instrumentos relevantes para la determinación de los derechos de España sobre las Islas Malvinas.
Por Derechos Jurídicos: Sucesión de Estados: Uti Possidetis, Ejercicio del Dominio eminente a partir de 1810: Efectiva Ocupación.<br>
Before we can debate the validity of each point from our own view perhaps you could confirm that you agree that this is the basis of the claim. Or indeed you may wish to add to, or remove, some of the points for accuracy from your aspect.
Much is said from both sides about the legitimacy of the opposing points of view but the actuality is very rarely examined.
I think you will agree, from both sides, that validity must stem from some basis that is better than just a gut feeling or passionately held belief.
As this is your site I thought looking at your views first would be best then we could move on and debate the Falkland Islanders position also.
Best wishes,
Ernie
I have read with interest your conviction that your claim to the Falklands is legitimate. The best summary that I can find that elucidates the basis of the Argentine claim to the islands is as follows:
Por Derechos Geográficos: Plataforma Submarina.
Por Derechos Históricos: Bula Inter.- Caetera del Papa Alejandro VI y Dumun Si Quidem del 3 y 4 de mayo de 1493 y al tratado de Tordecillas entre España y Portugal del 3 de Junio de 1494, como instrumentos relevantes para la determinación de los derechos de España sobre las Islas Malvinas.
Por Derechos Jurídicos: Sucesión de Estados: Uti Possidetis, Ejercicio del Dominio eminente a partir de 1810: Efectiva Ocupación.<br>
Before we can debate the validity of each point from our own view perhaps you could confirm that you agree that this is the basis of the claim. Or indeed you may wish to add to, or remove, some of the points for accuracy from your aspect.
Much is said from both sides about the legitimacy of the opposing points of view but the actuality is very rarely examined.
I think you will agree, from both sides, that validity must stem from some basis that is better than just a gut feeling or passionately held belief.
As this is your site I thought looking at your views first would be best then we could move on and debate the Falkland Islanders position also.
Best wishes,
Ernie