|
Post by Maquilishuat on Mar 5, 2005 6:29:47 GMT -3
Hello All:
The intollerance seems to prevail in the archipelago. After reading "no flags, we are British" for the common people who have theirs sons buried on the Malvinas, I imagine the type of tollerance that will be present in the (possible) next war. This time, if this saddness happens, the civilian population will be treated accordingly by any invader army.
Again, this is not the scenario I support, but anyone with something between their ears may see that this dispute will have other sad episodes. The balance of power may shift and these days of cheap intollerance for sure will be remembered.
Poor islanders.
Saludos, Maquilishuat
|
|
|
Post by Sakura26 on Mar 6, 2005 3:36:24 GMT -3
Hello Otto!
I fully agree with you. Intollerance, in any form (religious, political, whatever...) is a sign of fear. I wouldnt mind if someone would fly a british flag in a cementery here because the person that died was british...would you mind the same in Brazil? No, because the fact of a foreign flag flying in your national territory does not attempt against your government. I could be wrong, but I have the feeling that Islanders are indeed looking for war... why? well because they know we cannot defeat Britain and that will definetely prove we are "the evil ones"... These friendly movements Argentina is wisely doing are scaring them, that's why they are making pressure with stupidities such as the flags or the commercial airplanes... It makes me happy though, if they are defending themselves, it's because we're gaining territory.... Being psychologically weak is worse than being military weak... sooner or later you're beaten.
These are my OWN personal beliefs and could be wrong, I am not speaking for Argentina or its government
Noelia
|
|
|
Post by Johnmcd on Mar 6, 2005 20:52:38 GMT -3
Noelia, You may have read a recent posting of mine on the FM forum on this subject. If you have then you will know my feelings. Those words, when condensed, are simply that Argentine nationals should not have conditions placed upon them when they visit the Darwin war memorial on the islands. Indeed, this may turn out to be a shameful moment in modern day island history.
But let me tackle your comments, which you state are your own words and not that of the Argentine government or people. They appear to be angry words.
The islanders have been heedless, caught in habitual mind stuff, where they can’t let go, or not allowed to let go. Yes, they are scared of Argentina. They are scared that when the families of the dead do arrive on the place where their loved ones have fallen then a piece of the islands will go away from them - forever. Least we forget the islanders do through the continuous process of keeping their homeland secure from threat. This is something I have always understood and will support, not because of their nebulous ‘wishes’, but because - it is their home.
Stupidities, as you mention, over the commercial flights and flags are entirely impermanent. All ‘stupid’ conditions change, as they will, when we all take time to examine the suffering ‘stupidity’ causes.
There is nothing you have to get that you don’t have already.
Best wishes, John.
|
|
|
Post by Sakura26 on Mar 7, 2005 0:48:18 GMT -3
John
I have not gone to the FM forum in months, if I mentioned something that was mentioned there, it was an absoulte coincidence.
I still believe that a pilot of aerolineas argentinas will not take over the islands. And I also think that a mother (daughter, son, father, brother, sister) of a soldier buried in the island, carrying a flag of the Nation he died protecting, is not a threatening to any country, no matter how powerful or weak it is...
So yes, for me, it is nothing but an attempt to provoke Argentina and awake our already buried anger, because a single mistake from us, would mean victory for them.
Who decides which countries are dangerous and wihch are not? Who has such a clean historical background to dare to call Argentina "dangerous" ?
Brazil, Colombia, Paraguay, Venezuela, NOBODY in latinamerica (countries we share borders with) think Argentina is dangerous, who on Earth is Britain to put us in a stupid black list? In fact, Britian among other countries are in latinamerica's black list, putting the world in danger, threatening the world, playing with nuclear stuff.....
Come on John, before throwing the first stone, be sure you're clean.... My comments, far from being stupid, are more than accurate.
Noelia
|
|
|
Post by Johnmcd on Mar 7, 2005 5:19:48 GMT -3
Noelia, I'm not throwing stones at all. In a reply to Hutch on this same sublject (FM Forum) I wrote this:
I understand all the reasons you give. I also fully understand, much to my frustration, that the British government must act within the constraints imposed by the ’wishes’ of the islanders and their own imposed moral force on this issue. Those moral forces do not represent mine - not one little bit.
The Darwin memorial was fully funded by Argentineans to commemorate the many young men that died. Respect and dignity for them rises above mere issues of sovereignty and there is no reasonable basis for those Argentine visitors not to fly their own national flag where their own nationals lie - not in this day and age.
I know full well the islanders do not want a propaganda coup on their doorstep, but the negative way this whole issue is being dealt with will filter back to Argentina as mistreatment of the families on the moment they finally inaugurate this memorial. Is this calculated to further disturb relationships instead of healing wounds? One bloody well wonders!
What must the families do? Come quietly, say some words, say some prayers then silently leave, in case they upset the islanders for having the temerity of seeing where the those 17, 18, 19 year old kids lie buried. Not much different to our dead - no different at all, because they can’t speak from the grave and tell you all that they wished they were still alive and not having their Mums and Dads crying over them.
Sorry, Hutch this whole issue upsets me a great deal. I buried some of our own and seen the shattered dead of those young Argentines and it grips me that some prick of an island councillor has laid conditions on how those kids must be remembered.
As I said, it would not happen here.
|
|
|
Post by Sea Eagle on Mar 7, 2005 11:43:18 GMT -3
Dear All,
I have not posted much here recently but I think in this thread some intervention is required.
This is not in reality intolerance but reaction to long term provocation.
I disagree to some extent with the Councillors remarks, though I am not sure by what local ordinance they can forbid the showing of an Argentine Flag at the Darwin Cemetery. Even as a condition of a visit there would have to be some legal basis for making that condition, which to my mind as a condition of a visit would not in any event be binding on any individual who decided to do otherwise unless it had the force of law. Would they be charged with an offence for showing an Argentine Flag at their relatives graveside? I cannot imagine with what offence. Even in the Falkland the rule of law exists and to break a law that law must first exist.
Reflecting on the principle as a general rule, in visiting war cemeteries in France and Belgium I do not recall seeing any foreign flags flying except at Vimy Ridge in France, which territory France ceded to Canada in perpetuity so that they could do just that. Yes I saw US Flags on individual graves. Even when friendly flags are flown officially they are flown side by side with the national flag as I recall. Equally I saw no German flags flying at their war cemeteries in France and Belgium which I visited out of respect, and certainly no Swastika flags.
Primarily it must be remembered that the Argentine Flag is a symbol of occupation and oppression for Falkland Islanders so lets not get too high up on our high horses about their dislike of the flag.
Secondly the remains of the Argentine fallen were left in the Falklands by the choice/order of the Argentine government as a symbol of their claim to sovereignty over the Falklands, and we were polite enough not to repatriate them forcibly as we could have done, so lets not forget that. On the other hand only a handful of the land based British fallen remain in the Falklands because where possible most of the relatives wanted their loved ones home and as near to them as possible. The writers on this Forum may have forgotten that gesture of total contempt towards Islanders by Argentina but the Islanders nor I have forgotten that. So every visit of the relatives of the fallen is an Argentine official poke in the eye to Falkland Islanders to remind them of their sovereignty claim. This effect and possible reluctance was coldly calculated by Argentina in exploitation of their own dead many years ago. So I do not condemn them out of hand for saying, "We know why the bodies of your fallen have been left here and the cemetery has been made an emotional symbol and why you constantly up the ante on the matter, simply for cheap publicity for your cause using the bodies of your own heros, so don't come here waving flags and rubbing our noses in it."
Having got that off my chest, I made a suggestioin some years ago (ostensibly calling the Argentines bluff over the matter) that the area of the cemetery should be donated to Argentina as part of their national territory as a gesture of potential friendship. Then they could fly their flag and rattle their drums there as much as they liked. This is not without precedent; as a gesture towards a former enemy. Longwood House and its environs in St. Helena, where Napoleon spent his latter years as a prisoner of the British, was given to the French and is part of their national territory administered by a Consul.
So there are two sides to every story, and John if you want to name 'pricks' there are few on the Argentine side who originally contrived this unfortunate scenario, and no doubt calculated the future propaganda benefit you could point the finger at.
Unlike the Argentine military of the past Falkland Islanders, even though they have the material capability, do not dispose of the bodies of their erstwhile 'enemies' by flying them out and dumping them in the South Atlantic. Cheap shot I know but no cheaper than yours. They have always treated the fallen with complete respect, particularly when they know the whole situation was set up by Argentina to take the piss out of them, and they continue to show respect in spite of the machinations of the Argentine propaganda machine. They may be foolish and ill advised to try to ban personal flag gestures, but no more than that. It is a natural human reaction to provocation.
Regards,
Ernie
|
|
|
Post by Sakura26 on Mar 7, 2005 15:38:03 GMT -3
Hello Ernie
I'm really glad you posted in this thread, because what you said really pushed me back to Earth. I admit I was losing the ability to see things from both sides, I guess sometimes these discussions become so much like a body combat that I cannot think about anything but attack and defend myself. But then, I read a posting like yours, and I quickly remember there's another point of view, and that there are things I was missing in this discussion.
I certainly never imagined that the visits of the relatives of the fallen in the Falklands war was a "poke in the eye" to anyone...now you mentioned it, I think it could be truth. The thing is, that here many Union Jack flags fly around Buenos Aires, and no one feels threatened by them.. Some people wear clothes with the british flag, some others have purses with it, or hats not to mention that all important hotels here (Hilton, Sheraton, Holiday Inn etc...) have the Union Jack flying at the entrance, and that is not a worry for any of my countrymen.
Flags have different meanings in different situations. Flags at the entrance of hotels surely mean "welcome all nations" flags in ships declare the nationality of the ship, flags in Congresses or Government Houses mean "we are ruling this nation" and for me, and surely everyone else a flag in a cementery, only means "your nation appreciates your sacrifice "... nothing threating really.
Donating the cementery area to Argentina is a really nice gesture. I dont think the FIG would ever do that, but it is a nice gesture though. The real utopia here would be to finally solve this conflict in a way everybody loses something but also gets something... really hard indeed.
But first of all, before doing anything, people must learn to forgive and forget.... If argentines go to the Falklands flying flags and cursing at locals, and Falkland Islanders keep feeling like we're going to invade the Falklands using an aerolineas argentinas airplane, then any attempt to friendship and solution our governments do, it's completely useless....
That is no doubt the most difficult part of the conflict. Probably more difficult than choosing what to do with the land.
Regards Noelia
|
|
|
Post by Sea Eagle on Mar 9, 2005 12:36:02 GMT -3
Noelia,
I am glad that this Forum actually makes it possible for us to come back to earth and converse on a sensible and friendly level.
There does need to be more contact between Falklands people and Argentine people, at a physical level I mean, until this happens it will be difficult to put the old stereotypes to one side.
I do understand the reluctance of FIG to allow flights by AA, and I hope you do too, but I think really that this is just a response to the the posturings of the Kirchner administration against the FIG. Prior to Kirchner barriers were gradually breaking down. The hesitiation to my mind is the worry FIG have that Argentina will manipulate the situation to make AA the sole provider of air access to the Falklands and, as I am sure you can imagine, they have a flash of 1970's deja vue here and really cannot allow this to happen as they see it as a high risk situation to their security. At the moment they have a very civilised arrangement with Lan Chile which allows them passenger access and essential access to private Chilean medical facilites which they can buy as required. Business also develops as a result. It is a matter of trust and unless Argentina cools its demands, say under the sovereignty umbrella for a long period of years as I have suggested, I do not see how this trust is to be rebuilt in the short term. At the moment I think Argentina is shooting itself in the foot as well as making itself appear small minded to the world, which lets face it does not know really what is happenning in the South West Atlantic.
You will probably have seen the shock recorded by the Canadian Parliamentary delegation to the Falklands recently at Argentina's attitude to the Falklands and how they would react to a country treating Canada in the same way.
John of course has a down on FIG because he does not agree with their version of democracy. If I lived there there are probably things I would disagree with but this could apply to any country in the world.
Otto surprises me when he continues to hold up the spectre of future war. I don't know why he does this because he must know that the British have never been reluctant to defend the freedom (as they see it) of people other then themselves in spite of their record of Empire.
Perhaps we need a sense of humour to begin with. I remember when I was attending school in England many years ago (showing my age now) I went on a school trip to Switzerland, Germany and Austria. This was literally only seven years after WWII. Arriving at our destination in Austria we were walking to our Pension from the village train station and as we passed three men sitting on a roadside seat one called out "Englishmen, what city have you come from?" Someone replied "We have come from Manchester" the man said "I have been to Manchester" innoccently someone replied " Oh thats interesting, did you like it? ". " It was OK" the man said, "but I did not see that much as it was dark and I was only flying over it" there was silence for a few moments then we all started laughing at his dark humour. After a brief conversation we all parted in a friendly manner. As another reminder on arriving at the Pension there were photos displayed of people in military uniforms bearing Nazi insignia, the deceased family members of the owner. There were moments of discomfort but they soon passed and frienships developed.
Whatever the situation, eventually one must face up to the realities that exist and deal with them.
Things are always as they are and rarely as we would wish them to be. One must first accept the realities of a situation before it is possible to confront them, address them and find a way to move on.
I think we are doing that here in our own small way.
Best wishes,
Ernie
|
|
|
Post by Sakura26 on Mar 10, 2005 10:19:29 GMT -3
Hello Ernie
I understand perfectly what you say. I understand the feelings of the islanders because we have the same feelings here.
But I also see that the only possible way for this hate to finish is that Argentina gives up the claim, right? No other solution seems to match the wishes of the islanders.
The problem is, that Argentina cannot and will not give up the claim, mostly because we shouldn't give up a territory we believe it's ours. What makes our claim less legitimate than Britain's? Dont say the population of the Falklands, that is an obvious answer knowing this population was set there by them.... It is true, that Britain is militarily stronger and that is what made Argentina step back in 1982.
But there are other things involved in a war. Britain thought - mistakenly - that by beating our army they were also beating our spirits. As much as this may sound as some kind of cheap philosophy, it's a truth hard to deny. Any brainless monkey with a big army can destroy Irak or steal a couple of Islands in the South Atlantic, but it requires a strengh beyond british possibilities to tame Argentine beliefs.
I read some paragraphs of Lyubo's book. I was interested especially in a line in which he stated that any taxi driver here would agree that the Falklands will never be recovered by Argentina. That really made me laugh. Either Lyubo crossed the border to Chile without noticing or didn't understand Spanish very well.
Take it from me, that I talk to taxi drivers every day, that we all believe we're going to get them back. I would dare to say that a 99% of the ARgentine population believes the Malvinas are ours and we're going to get them back, someday. Funny or not, that IS a big percentage. I dont think 99% of Mexicans actually think they could get the territories stolen by the United States back someday...
Now, there's something else. I have stated here tips about our relationship with Britain about this topic. Since I do understand that the wishes of the islanders have to be respected, I would like to know if the feeling is reciprocal, and then I'll ask you this little question:
Do the islanders understand that the territory they are living in was once part of Argentina but was stolen, by Britain, who set its own population there?
If you answer is "No, we deny it once belonged to Argentina" then the clear translation is "The only way for this conflict to be solved is that Argentina gives up the claim"
And here, we're again at the beginning.
Regards Noelia
|
|
|
Post by Sea Eagle on Mar 10, 2005 12:40:31 GMT -3
Sakura,
Do the islanders understand that the territory they are living in was once part of Argentina but was stolen, by Britain, who set its own population there?
Well I just don't have time to go into all the historical details, suffice it to say for the time being that I understand that I and I guess the majority of Islanders do believe that Argentina is convinced that the Falklands are an integral part of their national territory. Do they understand that belief to be an indisputable fact? No of course not. There are always two interpretations of any point of view (at least). They have a different perspective and understanding of the situation than you do.
Let me put a point to you. At the United Nations your country declares that the Falklands and the South Atlantic Islands (S. Orkneys and S. Georgia) are an integral part of Argentina as a result of its heritage from Spain. (I have clearly read what they say). Without wishing to offend you this is a downright lie.
If you inherited anything (and I dispute that a revolutionary situation is an inheritance, it is in fact a violent taking of territory from the former owner.) you inherited a disputed territory with regard to the Falklands and with regard to the other islands they were totally outside the Spanish hegemony and within the Portuguese sphere in regard to the Treaty of Tordesillas.
I think if and when you are prepared or able to face these indisputable facts then it will be possible to begin a meaningful dialogue.
Sometimes the truth hurts and is difficult to swallow.
Best wishes,
Ernie
|
|
|
Post by Sakura26 on Mar 11, 2005 0:12:08 GMT -3
Hello Ernie
Let's suppose for a while that I agree with you and I do think that Argentina inherited a disputed territory stolen to the portuguese. A thief that steals to a thief has more rights than the first one? If this is the pattern of thinking, let's not talk crap about human rights and the wishes of the islanders.
So, it can't be solved historically...what about geographically? It is part of the continental platform shared with Argentina, it's clearly part of our territory.
Now you will reject that too because it's too obvious and too dangerous....what's the other one... oh yes, "if Britain has no historical rights, and no geographical rights, it has military rights"... is that it? Britain took the islands because they were able to?
And WE are the dangerous ones here?
Regards Noelia
|
|
|
Post by Maquilishuat on Mar 11, 2005 10:55:07 GMT -3
Hello All;
"So every visit of the relatives of the fallen is an Argentine official poke in the eye to Falkland Islanders to remind them of their sovereignty claim. "
Well, every day that passes with the invaders still on Argentinean territory is also a poke in the eyes of Argentineans.
What is focused here, besides the dispute, is the prevailing intollerance. mixing up the honest grieve by the fallen ones with the dispute.
As I said before, during a second round (which inevitably will come) the civilians will be treated accordingly to the respect they had for human rights and decency.
Saludos, Maquilishuat.
|
|
|
Post by Sea Eagle on Mar 11, 2005 12:28:26 GMT -3
Otto,
Regrettably it was a conscious decision of Argentina not to have their fallen repatriated in the first place. This was done as a symbol of their claimed sovereignty over the Falklands. They will have to put up with the aggravation that has caused. Undoubtedly to treat their fallen as political pawns in this way was a major act of disrespect. Which is not to say I agree with all that is said and done.
One day when Argentina has matured as a nation and has fully recovered from the downward slide in to the abyss that has been happening since the 1930's they will for sure take a more pragmatic view of the events that unfolded beginning 240 years or so ago long before Argentina was a twinkle in anybodies eye.
I feel confident there will not be a second round as you like to postulate. Common sense will prevail and they will find bigger fish to fry that taste much better.
Regards,
Ernie
|
|
|
Post by Johnmcd on Mar 11, 2005 14:15:45 GMT -3
Ernie, The Argentine dead were more less buried where they fell, same as the British. I know that you want to parcel this all up and slap it against the Argentine authorities as their fault for not bringing their dead home. Would that be exhumed whole bodies only? what about the legs, arms, heads etc?
You know very well the harm this whole Darwin epidode is causing - stop making polite excuses...please! How can someone like you that knows so much know so little?
Best wishes, John.
|
|
|
Post by Sea Eagle on Mar 11, 2005 15:39:57 GMT -3
John,
If you read carefully I am distributing the blame. The FIG is not blameless. It is a very emotional subject I know that.
If you look back to the reports of the day you will be able to confirm that this was a deliberate ploy. The Falklands is Argentina therfore they stay where they are.
Please don't use the body bits argument on me you should know better. Most of the Brits were repatriated whatever state they were in. Exactly as they have been from Iraq this last week or so.
I refuse to fall out with you over this subject there is too much emotion involved.
Happy Red Nose Day,
Ernie
|
|