The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


My point of view... from far away

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby gus » Thu Sep 29, 2005 2:43 pm

garbitsch wrote:
Piratis wrote:
What was your reaction to the occupation of Falkland islands by Argentina. What is your current reaction to the continuing Argenitinian claims on these British territories?

British Territories? You mean colony? Or you mean that the ancient British people moved there thousands of years ago?


Falkland islands belong to Britain, which this ownership is recognised by the international law. What happened to your faith in these laws?


Malvinas (the real name of OUR islands) belongs to Argentina, because in the Tordesillas Treaty 1494 (between Spain and Portugal) those islands were given to Spain. Then, when we became and independent state, in 1810 all those former Spanish colonies belonged to the new state, Argentina.

Dear friend garbitsch, don't you forget about the main reason of this topic... "the Cyprus problem"... or maybe you want to talk about the thousands of territories tha ilegally "belongs" to the biggest pirates of the world? I think you should try in another topic.
User avatar
gus
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: ARGENTINA

Postby garbitsch » Thu Sep 29, 2005 5:07 pm

Malvinas (the real name of OUR islands) belongs to Argentina, because in the Tordesillas Treaty 1494 (between Spain and Portugal) those islands were given to Spain. Then, when we became and independent state, in 1810 all those former Spanish colonies belonged to the new state, Argentina.


This was the answer I was looking for amigo. Gracias.
User avatar
garbitsch
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 2:21 am
Location: UK, but originally from Cyprus

Postby gus » Thu Sep 29, 2005 7:10 pm

garbitsch wrote:
Malvinas (the real name of OUR islands) belongs to Argentina, because in the Tordesillas Treaty 1494 (between Spain and Portugal) those islands were given to Spain. Then, when we became and independent state, in 1810 all those former Spanish colonies belonged to the new state, Argentina.


This was the answer I was looking for amigo. Gracias.


I really apreciate your high level. Euxaristo poly!
User avatar
gus
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: ARGENTINA

Postby Kifeas » Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:14 pm

gus wrote:
garbitsch wrote:
Piratis wrote:
What was your reaction to the occupation of Falkland islands by Argentina. What is your current reaction to the continuing Argenitinian claims on these British territories?

British Territories? You mean colony? Or you mean that the ancient British people moved there thousands of years ago?


Falkland islands belong to Britain, which this ownership is recognised by the international law. What happened to your faith in these laws?


Malvinas (the real name of OUR islands) belongs to Argentina, because in the Tordesillas Treaty 1494 (between Spain and Portugal) those islands were given to Spain. Then, when we became and independent state, in 1810 all those former Spanish colonies belonged to the new state, Argentina.

Dear friend garbitsch, don't you forget about the main reason of this topic... "the Cyprus problem"... or maybe you want to talk about the thousands of territories tha ilegally "belongs" to the biggest pirates of the world? I think you should try in another topic.



How did Britain get hold on these islands?
Who are the indigenous people living on these islands?
Have people been expelled from the islands after Britain got hold on them? Did Britain transfer it's own population there?
Where do the indigenus people who live on these islands want to belong to?
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby garbitsch » Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:57 pm

The first settlement on the Falkland Islands was by France in 1763. The French colony was at Port Louis on Berkely Sound. The French name Îles Malouines was given to the islands — malouin being the adjective for the Breton port of Saint-Malo. The Spanish name Malvinas is derived from the French adjective.

The United Kingdom first established a colony on the islands in 1765 unaware of the French colony in existence. After confrontation with Spain over sovereignty, an agreement was reached which yielded the islands to the UK. The French colony was ceded to Spain and abandoned previously, and the British abandoned their own colony in 1774, leaving a plaque behind to assert their continuing sovereignty.

The first Argentine claim to islands was in 1820, following independence from Spain in 1817. A settlement and penal colony was established by the Argentines on the islands in 1820. The settlements were later destroyed by the United States following a dispute over fishing rights. The United Kingdom invaded the islands in 1833, and expelled the remainder of the Argentine settlement, and began to populate the island with its own citizens.

The Royal Navy built a base at Port Stanley, and the islands became a strategic point for navigation around Cape Horn. The World War I naval battle, the Battle of Falkland Islands took place in December 1914, with a British victory over the Germans. During World War II, Port Stanley served as a Royal Navy station and serviced ships who took part in the Battle of the River Plate.

Sovereignty over the islands became an issue again in the latter half of the 20th century. Argentina, which never renounced its claim to the islands, used the newly formed United Nations as an avenue for pursuing its claims, and talks between the British and Argentine foreign missions took place in the 1960s. However the talks never came to any meaningful conclusion, and a major sticking point in any negotiations was the 2,000 inhabitants of mainly British descent who prefer that the islands remain a British colony.

On April 30, 1982, Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands and other British territories in the South Atlantic (South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands), encouraged in part by the United Kingdom's reduction in military capacity in the South Atlantic, and as a diversion from poor economic performance at home. World reaction to the invasion ranged from support in the Latin American countries, to opposition in Europe, the Commonwealth, and eventually the United States. The British sent a large expedition force to retake the islands leading to the Falklands War. After a short but fierce naval and air war, the British landed at San Carlos Water on May 21 and a land war followed until the Argentinean forces surrendered on June 14.

Following the war, the British increased their military presence on the islands, constructing RAF Mount Pleasant and increasing the military garrison. Falkland Islanders were also granted full British citizenship. Although the UK and Argentina since resumed diplomatic relations in 1989, no further negotiations on sovereignty have taken place.

www.wikipedia.com
User avatar
garbitsch
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 2:21 am
Location: UK, but originally from Cyprus

Postby Kifeas » Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:11 pm

In essence therefore, we are talking about some previously uninhabited islands with no indigenous people since time and memorial. Well, under these circumstances and since the only people are those of British decent and who wish to remain under British rule, then Britain has the first saying and right over these islands.

If there were indigenous people who either want independence or they associate themselves with Argentina, then it would have been an entirely different story.

Have I missed anything?
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby gus » Fri Sep 30, 2005 1:05 pm

Kifeas wrote:In essence therefore, we are talking about some previously uninhabited islands with no indigenous people since time and memorial. Well, under these circumstances and since the only people are those of British decent and who wish to remain under British rule, then Britain has the first saying and right over these islands.

If there were indigenous people who either want independence or they associate themselves with Argentina, then it would have been an entirely different story.

Have I missed anything?


File Kifeas: so according to your thougths, "the first who see a land (in recent history) is the owner of that forever" Wow! What a way of thinking! So according to these point of view there would be only about 10 or so countries in the hole world, because England, Spain, France, Portugal and a couple of Asian countries saw the rest of the planet "first"! Doesn't matter international law, not even international treaties! That's not the way a Cypriot could protect his rights!!!

Na sai kala!
User avatar
gus
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: ARGENTINA

Postby gus » Fri Sep 30, 2005 1:49 pm

[quote="garbitsch"]
Sovereignty over the islands became an issue again in the latter half of the 20th century. Argentina, which never renounced its claim to the islands, used the newly formed United Nations as an avenue for pursuing its claims, and talks between the British and Argentine foreign missions took place in the 1960s. However the talks never came to any meaningful conclusion, and a major sticking point in any negotiations was the 2,000 inhabitants of mainly British descent who prefer that the islands remain a British colony.

It's so the English way of see the things... What if you ask to the thousands of Turkish seltters in Northern Cyprus? What do you think they would answer? Do they want to be Greeks? This is the argument England always put first under any negotiations, the "self-determination" of the people that THEY have put there...! Simple logic!
User avatar
gus
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: ARGENTINA

Postby Kifeas » Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:44 pm

gus wrote:
Kifeas wrote:In essence therefore, we are talking about some previously uninhabited islands with no indigenous people since time and memorial. Well, under these circumstances and since the only people are those of British decent and who wish to remain under British rule, then Britain has the first saying and right over these islands.

If there were indigenous people who either want independence or they associate themselves with Argentina, then it would have been an entirely different story.

Have I missed anything?


File Kifeas: so according to your thougths, "the first who see a land (in recent history) is the owner of that forever" Wow! What a way of thinking! So according to these point of view there would be only about 10 or so countries in the hole world, because England, Spain, France, Portugal and a couple of Asian countries saw the rest of the planet "first"! Doesn't matter international law, not even international treaties! That's not the way a Cypriot could protect his rights!!!

Na sai kala!


No my friend, you didn't understand my point. My point has nothing to do with who saw the land first and who second. My point relates to the issue of what the majority of the legitimate inhabitants of one place (island) want to do. If the majority of the legitimate inhabitants of Malvinas want to belong to Argentina, then Malvinas should belong to Argentina. If the majority of the legitimate inhabitants want to belong to the UK, then the islands should belong to the UK. If the majority of the legitimate inhabitants want to be independed and run their own affairs independently and sovereignty, they then should be able to do so. In this case then Malvinas should become an independed state /country.

Now, the issue is who are the legitimate inhabitants of a place. If Malvinas was uninhabited and then Britain brought their own people, years before the establishment of international borders and international law -something which essentially begins with the establishment of the UN organization and the adoption of the Chart of the UN (or nations) then these people can be regarded as the legitimate inhabitants of the place.

I do not know the details of how the people that live in Malvinas islands found themselves there, nor whether there were indigenous inhabitants before them, which were expelled or ceased to exist. Perhaps you must enlighten me on this issue.
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Previous

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests