NationStates Jolt Archive

Well if Chavez says it must happen! Who does this guy think he is? I think Blair's appropriate response would be to say this: "Blair: Venezuela must be returned to Spain.". I wonder how that would fly? Anyway this guy is trying to be the Neu Simon Bolivar/ Che Guevara wrappped in one. I think he should make t-shirts of himself with a commie beret. That way his memory will live with disgruntled youth forever. What should the UK's official response be?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/02/10/venzuela.chavez.reut/index.html

"Blair: Venezuela must be returned to Spain."
That's not really the case, but we had better charge up the carriers anyhow and hope the missles don't hit any hot gotan joints.

Haha! Yeah, he's only saying that to try an get mroe popular support. Heh, he probably secretly hopes that the UK won't give the Falklands back as then he can't use it as a rallying point of oppression by the west.

Culturally I don't believe the Falklands belongs to anyone. It's just a strategic island that Argentina doesn't like other countries owning because of its proximity.

Well if Chavez says it must happen! Who does this guy think he is? I think Blair's appropriate response would be to say this: "Blair: Venezuela must be returned to Spain.". I wonder how that would fly? Anyway this guy is trying to be the Neu Simon Bolivar/ Che Guevara wrappped in one. I think he should make t-shirts of himself with a commie beret. That way his memory will live with disgruntled youth forever. What should the UK's official response be?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/02/10/venzuela.chavez.reut/index.html

If chavez wants it fine, he can pay top petro-dollar for them and hand them to argentina..two rocks in the south atlantic covered in sheep, whats the going rate???

Well if Chavez says it must happen! Who does this guy think he is? I think Blair's appropriate response would be to say this: "Blair: Venezuela must be returned to Spain.". I wonder how that would fly? Anyway this guy is trying to be the Neu Simon Bolivar/ Che Guevara wrappped in one. I think he should make t-shirts of himself with a commie beret. That way his memory will live with disgruntled youth forever. What should the UK's official response be?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/02/10/venzuela.chavez.reut/index.html
He just wants to stir a rubble... his attacks on Bush are much better :D

His attack on the British premier shifted his aim following a new flare-up with Washington, sparked when Chavez last week expelled a U.S. Navy attache for alleged espionage and compared Bush to Adolf Hitler.

Chavez used Thursday's speech to prod U.S. President George W. Bush again, calling him a "nut case."

Bush: Panama, Cuba, Phillippines must be returned to US

If chavez wants it fine, he can pay top petro-dollar for them and hand them to argentina..two rocks in the south atlantic covered in sheep, whats the going rate???
There is actually evidence that there is oil under those islands. Believe me, the UK would be dumb to give those up. Maybe when the CVFs are done, Chavez can be the first to feel their wrath. The UK will finally have a good carrier and aircraft (F-35).

Bush: Panama, Cuba, Phillippines must be returned to US

EXCUSE ME!!! The philipines was never really part of the US, after my forebears beat the spanish our former colonial masters decided to 'sell us' to the US, which prompted the US-Philipine war which i might add took a while to conclude (at much cost in terms of dead civilians), the US victory was also helped by the treasonous peace signed by General Aguinaldo (a filipino general who had betrayed the true father of the revolt, Andres Bonafacio) and by the fact they were fighting against filipino freedom fighters armed mainly with spears and such.

Maka-Diyos, Makatao, Makakalikasan, at Makabansa

EXCUSE ME!!! The philipines was never really part of the US, after my forebears beat the spanish our former colonial masters decided to 'sell us' to the US, which prompted the US-Philipine war which i might add took a while to conclude (at much cost in terms of dead civilians), the US victory was also helped by the treasonous peace signed by General Aguinaldo (a filipino general who had betrayed the true father of the revolt, Andres Bonafacio) and by the fact they were fighting against filipino freedom fighters armed mainly with spears and such.

Maka-Diyos, Makatao, Makakalikasan, at Makabansa

Neither were Cuba and Panama, which was precisely my point. But thank you for freaking out over absolutely nothing.

Since he's obviously not getting much of a reaction out of Bush (i.e., Bush doesn't seem to give him a second thought, the CIA hasn't assassinated Chavez, and there are no carriers off the Venezuela coast, contrary to Chavez's assertions that they are right there), he's looking for another boogeyman to distract his constituency.

Chavez: "Look! What can that be!"

*everyone turns their heads and looks*

Neither were Cuba and Panama, which was precisely my point. But thank you for freaking out over absolutely nothing.
sorry got the wrong end of the stick :rolleyes: :( ;)

Never! We shall never give up those tiny islands and their sheep...and the fifty odd people living there. It's about the only territory we have left...

Never! We shall never give up those tiny islands and their sheep...and the fifty odd people living there. It's about the only territory we have left...

Not true, there's St Helena, antoher desolate rock in the middle of the atlantic.

Not true, there's St Helena, antoher desolate rock in the middle of the atlantic.

We're making a collection of them...

Not true, there's St Helena, antoher desolate rock in the middle of the atlantic.
And don't forget Gibraltar, a desolate rock off the Mediterranean!

And don't forget Gibraltar, a desolate rock off the Mediterranean!

Oh yeah i forgot about that..jesus, my wife's family are from just across the border from the rock and they bloody hate it (despite the cheap goods and so forth).

I want to live in Gib!

Oh yeah i forgot about that..jesus, my wife's family are from just across the border from the rock and they bloody hate it (despite the cheap goods and so forth).

Meh. Chavez is a nutcase anyway. Leave our damned mini-Empire alone!

I want to live in Gib!

I am going to work in Gib at some point this year hopefully, but i have been there and its bloody horrible (highrise blocks, sailors, moroccans) even the sunny weather is tempered by atlantic winds!

Is Chavez an Idiot? If we gave back the Falklands there would be Protests all over Britain and an Armed forces rebellion in the falklands. If we gave the Falklands back 255 peolpe would have died for nothing!:mad:

I am going to work in Gib at some point this year hopefully, but i have been there and its bloody horrible (highrise blocks, sailors, moroccans) even the sunny weather is tempered by atlantic winds!

Get a bike or scooter theres no place for cars in Gib! (when on a visit last year)

Is Chavez an Idiot? If we gave back the Falklands there would be Protests all over Britain and an Armed forces rebellion in the falklands. If we gave the Falklands back 255 peolpe would have died for nothing!:mad:
Valid point, and if there are resources underneath it then it should be held for the benefit of the UK. Anyhow cannot see the Argentine military making any moves not for some time to come anyhow.

Valid point, and if there are resources underneath it then it should be held for the benefit of the UK. Anyhow cannot see the Argentine military making any moves not for some time to come anyhow.

Since the 1982 war we have a garrison of 1,170 troops just incase they try again, we also have HMS Endurance on Arctic patrol and a Destroyer in the region

EXCUSE ME!!! The philipines was never really part of the US, after my forebears beat the spanish our former colonial masters decided to 'sell us' to the US, which prompted the US-Philipine war which i might add took a while to conclude (at much cost in terms of dead civilians), the US victory was also helped by the treasonous peace signed by General Aguinaldo (a filipino general who had betrayed the true father of the revolt, Andres Bonafacio) and by the fact they were fighting against Filipino freedom fighters armed mainly with spears and such.

Maka-Diyos, Makatao, Makakalikasan, at Makabansa
A Filipino with a spear and a machete is not an enemy to be taken lightly. You folks are some fighting SOBs. Anyway, the US doesn't want to take over the Philippines again. We're happy with the current friendly relationship.

A Filipino with a spear and a machete is not an enemy to be taken lightly. You folks are some fighting SOBs. Anyway, the US doesn't want to take over the Philippines again. We're happy with the current friendly relationship.

Too true, we like fighting each other just as much anyone else!

Unfortunately I don't speak a word of Filipino so what does "Maka-Diyos, Makatao, Makakalikasan, at Makabansa" Mean?

Unfortunately I don't speak a word of Filipino so what does "Maka-Diyos, Makatao, Makakalikasan, at Makabansa" Mean?

For god, the people, nature, and country...its the national motto.

Why don't they just give me the Falkands?

Here is the oversight
Falkands discovered by Dutchman.. (sorta)
Dutch William of Orange took over the British Monarchy after resotration
English go in 1690

then possesion changes between british french and spanish

1820 argentina claims islands (after independance from spain.)

British invade in 1833

1982 argentina invades

BUT THEN THEY INVADE south georgia what is with that?


Anyway,

As far as the information I have been provided. The British were first to land a force, and the primary original inhabitants were British. It is in that respect and has been for it's vast history from the information I have read, British.

Geographically of course it does seem a bit out of place but we must remember British Imperialism.

From the appearance it seems very British (this could be propaganda I'm seeing) but what crack is Chavez smoking?

Of course the Argentines could invade ... but would they beat the EU?

allot more of them would prolly have to be smokin crack to beleive that.


I still think they should give me the Island (not that it isn't already mine as sovereign) but you know all the jazz in the handover.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/falklands/linepre1982.html

I did'nt know this "Margaret Thatcher confirms Chilean support in 1982." Did any of you?

What should the UK's official response be?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/02/10/venzuela.chavez.reut/index.html
How about "Hey chaves, you fucking socialist asshole! FUCK OFF!"

How about "Hey chaves, you fucking socialist asshole! FUCK OFF!"

No use Cruise missiles to level the Capital Building or send in an Undercover SAS Squadron to find Chaves and Extract him for Human rights trials.

Lets ask the sheep on the Falklands who they would prefer, theres plenty of them.

Lets ask the sheep on the Falklands who they would prefer, theres plenty of them.

Britain I would guess (They were put by the first Settlers were'nt they or are they Natives?)

Quite possibly the most idiotic conflict of the past half century.... over islands on the other side of the world from the 'owner' :rolleyes:

The last remnants of Empire I guess.

I did'nt know this "Margaret Thatcher confirms Chilean support in 1982." Did any of you?

Yes. Pinochet publicly supported Thatcher during the Falklands War in return for her continued support of his dictatorship. Sort of a recripocal deal. Thanks Maggie, for supporting one of the bloodiest dictatorships in Latin America in the 20th century. bitch

It's funny.. there was me thinking "Hmm.. it's been a while since we've had some news about what's currently troubling Chavez.. Has he died or something?".

How about "Hey chaves, you fucking socialist asshole! FUCK OFF!"

Somehow I doubt that Blair would be happy to use 'socialist' as an insult. He's certainly prepared to piss all over the notion, but use it as an insult? Nah.

Somehow I doubt that Blair would be happy to use 'socialist' as an insult. He's certainly prepared to piss all over the notion, but use it as an insult? Nah.
Considering that Labour is (notionally) Left and all....

Oh wait.. so is Chavez....

Quite possibly the most idiotic conflict of the past half century.... over islands on the other side of the world from the 'owner' :rolleyes:

The last remnants of Empire I guess.

However unimportant the Falklands may be economically, the victory in the Falkands war was critical in re-electing Margaret Thatcher in 1982. If that had not happened, Britain would have then elected a Labour government, and our decline would have continued and accelerated.

If that had not happened, Britain would have then elected a Labour government, and our decline would have continued and accelerated.

Decline, how so? Do you mean economically? Internationally? What?

Yeah, good call on relecting her by the way.

Britain I would guess (They were put by the first Settlers were'nt they or are they Natives?)
Settlers i think:p

Decline, how so? Do you mean economically? Internationally? What?

Yeah, good call on relecting her by the way.

Both economically, and internationally. Although the reforms caused mass unemployment in the mid 1980s, the fruits made us the most successful mature economy of the 1990s. Our international profile also improved greatly under Thatcher. She made so much of an impression that Izvestiya called her the "Iron Lady" (what higher compliment could there be from a Soviet newspaper!).

No use Cruise missiles to level the Capital Building or send in an Undercover SAS Squadron to find Chaves and Extract him for Human rights trials.

And which human rights abuses do you plan to accuse him of pray?

Incidently, am I the only one on the thread who thinks we should just let the Falkland Islanders vote on it?

Incidently, am I the only one on the thread who thinks we should just let the Falkland Islanders vote on it?

It would be a pointless exercise, because more than 99% of the Falkland Islanders want to keep the association with Britain.

It would be a pointless exercise, because more than 99% of the Falkland Islanders want to keep the association with Britain.

Exactly, they are better off financially i suspect under westminsters rule than if they they were ruled by the corrupt jokers in Bueno Aires.

It would be a pointless exercise, because more than 99% of the Falkland Islanders want to keep the association with Britain.

Yes but if a referendum was held and they voted to remain with the UK then Chavez would most likely back down.

Exactly, they are better off financially i suspect under westminsters rule than if they they were ruled by the corrupt jokers in Bueno Aires.
Financially? They're sheep farmers living on a rock 8,000 miles away from Westminster. You think Westminster gives a shit about them these days?

Falkands no longer serve a purpose post Cold War.

Yes but if a referendum was held and they voted to remain with the UK then Chavez would most likely back down.
You think so? I think it's a 50/50 chance that he will just claim that the vote was rigged and use that accusation to rally his people against the UK. He's good at distracting his people. He uses wacky accusations to do it.

Three words. BRING IT ON.

Frankly, a true war, one that is in response to a threat to Britain, would be good for the nation, and, well, frankly beating the Argentine forces once more would be somewhat amusing.

Frankly, a true war, one that is in response to a threat to Britain, would be good for the nation, and, well, frankly beating the Argentine forces once more would be somewhat amusing.
Just so the missles don't blow up any sweet gotan joints.

Just so the missles don't blow up any sweet gotan joints.

Suits me, we would still crush the morons.

Three words. BRING IT ON.

Frankly, a true war, one that is in response to a threat to Britain, would be good for the nation, and, well, frankly beating the Argentine forces once more would be somewhat amusing.

Considering that the government this year scrapped our maritime air superiority fighters, victory is no longer guaranteed.

Suits me, we would still crush the morons.

So, are all Argentines morons, or just the people who disagree with you?

Considering that the government this year scrapped our maritime air superiority fighters, victory is no longer guaranteed.
We are in a sort of pickle at the moment regarding air superiority/defence especially since we're stil relying on the type 42's. Maybe we could cadge a few proper destroyers off the US if it comes down to it?

You think so? I think it's a 50/50 chance that he will just claim that the vote was rigged and use that accusation to rally his people against the UK. He's good at distracting his people. He uses wacky accusations to do it.

I see. Could you please provide me with an example of that?

We are in a sort of pickle at the moment regarding air superiority/defence especially since we're stil relying on the type 42's. Maybe we could cadge a few proper destroyers off the US if it comes down to it?

We shouldn't have too!

Three words. BRING IT ON.

Frankly, a true war, one that is in response to a threat to Britain, would be good for the nation, and, well, frankly beating the Argentine forces once more would be somewhat amusing.

How would a war be good for the nation? :confused:

So, are all Argentines morons, or just the people who disagree with you?

The argentines in government, yes, if they espouse such a concept having already being thoroughly beaten, and, so is Veron, Crespo, Simeone, Riquelme, Sorin et al.

How would a war be good for the nation? :confused:
In this case, the Venzulan and Argentinian alliance could teach the British how to tango once they lost.

How would a war be good for the nation? :confused:

I daresay losses would be minimal, and the vixtory would raise public morale and nationalistic sentiment.

You think so? I think it's a 50/50 chance that he will just claim that the vote was rigged and use that accusation to rally his people against the UK. He's good at distracting his people. He uses wacky accusations to do it.

Most world leaders do use wacky accusations to distract people. Bush and Blair use terrorists, many European countries use immigration, Chavez uses the CIA and the US in general.

I daresay losses would be minimal, and the vixtory would raise public morale and nationalistic sentiment.

But another war? We haven't finished the last two yet.

And just what we need: more blind, jingoistic nationalism; perfect.:rolleyes:

But another war? We haven't finished the last two yet.

And just what we need: more blind, jingoistic nationalism; perfect.:rolleyes:

Personal opinion, I would contend that Labour's Britian signally lacks nationalism, it is a multicultural abyss, a war in the British tradition (winning by virtue of naval supremacy) would restore some of that pride.

Personal opinion, I would contend that Labour's Britian signally lacks nationalism, it is a multicultural abyss, a war in the British tradition (winning by virtue of naval supremacy) would restore some of that pride.
Why does it need a top up of pride? The country seems to be doing perfectly fine without it. :confused:

Why does it need a top up of pride? The country seems to be doing perfectly fine without it. :confused:

No it bloody does not. :mad:

No it bloody does not.
OK, Ohio, calm down. You are not a national Britisher yet.

No it bloody does not. :mad:
Ok then, how is it not fine? :rolleyes:

Ok then, how is it not fine? :rolleyes:

How long do you have?:)

OK, Ohio, calm down. You are not a national Britisher yet.

Do you people never listen to Hawthorne Heights?

Of course I'm British old sport, how silly of you.:)

How long do you have?:)
Actually, nevermind. ;)

Do you people never listen to Hawthorne Heights?
Nope, mate.

Nope, mate.

That might just explain it.

Richmond is demanding the return of West Virginia. They claim that their historic homeland must be liberated & returned to its people.

That might just explain it.
Ye' de der prolla' jus' splained it all Iys tells ya, yup.

The argentines in government, yes, if they espouse such a concept having already being thoroughly beaten, and, so is Veron, Crespo, Simeone, Riquelme, Sorin et al.

Right, so that would be none of them, as it is Chavez who seems to be talking about it.

But wait, he isn't talking about a war either.

If there's another war, I hope they wait until the Type 45 is operational.

A conventional shooting war would do wonders for the British military. It would be the perfect excuse to redeploy troops from Iraq, for a start, and it would give those troops a real enemy to get their teeth into. Insurgency battles against fanatics without uniforms sap morale - chewing up some pathetic conscripts in an almost totally civilian free environment would probably make a nice change.

And then afterwards, the troops can come home from some R&R. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr Bush, what was that? You want them back in Iraq? Well, we just fought an actual war, not an occupation... maybe next decade? Or after that?

The Falklands were never inhabited by the Argentinians and were only claimed by them in recent history due to the islands' close proximity to Argentina. The vacant islands were inhabited largely first by British settlers and should remain that way. Argentina has no plausible claim to the Falklands.

His Idi Amin tenedencies are becoming more more apparent. (As I predicted).

It can't be long before he starts ethnic cleanising or somesuch.

Right, so that would be none of them, as it is Chavez who seems to be talking about it.

But wait, he isn't talking about a war either.

The premise remains the same, and a lack of declared intention is not implict of their not wanting the Falklands.

Incidentally, would you have any idea who the named individuals are?

... were only claimed by them in recent history due to the islands' close proximity...
Yeah, the British don't have a history of that at all :rolleyes:

If there's another war, I hope they wait until the Type 45 is operational.

A conventional shooting war would do wonders for the British military. It would be the perfect excuse to redeploy troops from Iraq, for a start, and it would give those troops a real enemy to get their teeth into. Insurgency battles against fanatics without uniforms sap morale - chewing up some pathetic conscripts in an almost totally civilian free environment would probably make a nice change.

And then afterwards, the troops can come home from some R&R. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr Bush, what was that? You want them back in Iraq? Well, we just fought an actual war, not an occupation... maybe next decade? Or after that?
Heh! I like your thinking!

Financially? They're sheep farmers living on a rock 8,000 miles away from Westminster. You think Westminster gives a shit about them these days?

Falkands no longer serve a purpose post Cold War.

They're not just sheep farmers, but they do have quite a good sqid fishing economy =P

Anyhow, it should be the inhabitants who decide which country thye want to belong to, and that would currently be the UK.

Yeah, the British don't have a history of that at all :rolleyes:

:P remain on topic

How long do you have?:)

Ok, lets hear a few complaints.

:P remain on topic
I had to get it in. :p

Ok, lets hear a few complaints.

Political Correctness
Ridiculously high taxation
Labour government
multiculturalism
positive discrimination
lack of sovereignty

The premise remains the same, and a lack of declared intention is not implict of their not wanting the Falklands.

Incidentally, would you have any idea who the named individuals are?

For a second, I thought I was missing a crucial piece of information with respect to Latin American politics, as I had to Google the names.

Then I found out I just haven't been paying enough attention to something that is probabaly far more riveting to the average Argentinian. :D

Political Correctness
Ridiculously high taxation
Labour government
multiculturalism
positive discrimination
lack of sovereignty

1)Nothing wrong with that per se.
2)Look at Sweden
3)Thats a good thing compared to the oppostion :p
4)Thats a good thing
5)Example?
6)Example? (Please God don't let this be another whiny EU rant :rolleyes: )

Then I found out I just haven't been paying enough attention to something that is probabaly far more riveting to the average Argentinian.
I'm lost. Could you, like, explain that?

Political Correctness
Ridiculously high taxation
Labour government
multiculturalism
positive discrimination
lack of sovereignty

And how would a war would magically fix these?

And how would a war would magically fix these?

It might fix the labour government. (I pray for that everyday).

Political Correctness
Ridiculously high taxation
Labour government
multiculturalism
positive discrimination
lack of sovereignty

How has any of that effected your life for the negative? You ever actually being in a situation when you desperately needed to use the word 'paki' but that damn "PC gone mad" beast stopped you? You ever actually worked so that you had to pay taxes? Have you personally suffered because other cultures are tolerated alongside the British one? You ever lost a job where you were more qualified to a "damn darkie"? As for lack of sovereignty - Britain just isn't strong enough nowadays to stand alone. We are strong, but not a superpower - we should remain proud of our past, but accept our dominance is at an end and become part of something bigger and better, not act like whiney little kid who lost his toy and wants it back.

1)Nothing wrong with that per se.
2)Look at Sweden
3)Thats a good thing compared to the oppostion :p
4)Thats a good thing
5)Example?
6)Example? (Please God don't let this be another whiny EU rant :rolleyes: )

1). Essentially an imposition upon my freedom of speech
2). Utterly unnecessary if we did not fund the apathy of the poor, and maintain that rotting edifice of socialism, the NHS.
3). As a Tory, I disagree, at least they have decorum, class and tradition.
4). Not to the extent it currently is.
5). Positively discriminating in favour of black and asian police officers, in a white nation
6). Marching to the beat of Bush's drum

1). Essentially an imposition upon my freedom of speech
2). Utterly unnecessary if we did not fund the apathy of the poor, and maintain that rotting edifice of socialism, the NHS.
3). As a Tory, I disagree, at least they have decorum, class and tradition.
4). Not to the extent it currently is.
5). Positively discriminating in favour of black and asian police officers, in a white nation
6). Marching to the beat of Bush's drum

1)To what? Be rasict if the need takes you?!
2)Again, look at Sweden... please!
3)*snorts* Hah! Chech back to the mid 90's and the sleaze that plagued the Tories
4)Meh. Welcome to Europe.
5)No its called redressing the imbalance. When you have a rascit/bigoted police force- its a good thing to favour the others.
6)Its been like that since... the 1950's. Nothing new there.

"Must" my arse. We kicked their arse 24 years ago and I'll be damned if we don't do it again. Blair won't be stupid enough to return them, either.

5). Positively discriminating in favour of black and asian police officers, in a white nation

Britain isn't a white nation anymore. And even so, white officers in England and Wales outnumber their ethnic minority counterparts by about twenty to one.

"Must" my arse. We kicked their arse 24 years ago and I'll be damned if we don't do it again. Blair won't be stupid enough to return them, either.
Although he did try to do just that with Gibraltar, again with the majority of residents preferring to remain British.

1)To what? Be rasict if the need takes you?!
2)Again, look at Sweden... please!
3)*snorts* Hah! Chech back to the mid 90's and the sleaze that plagued the Tories
4)Meh. Welcome to Europe.
5)No its called redressing the imbalance. When you have a rascit/bigoted police force- its a good thing to favour the others.
6)Its been like that since... the 1950's. Nothing new there.

1). An ethnic individual is afforded the right, yet I am not.
2).Once more, by the age of 40 I will be earning in the region of £800000, why should I lose nigh on half of that to a cause I will never benefit from
3). The new Tory generation are a damn sight better than Labour in any incarnation
4). still ought to be redressed
5). The police force is not bigoted, it is honest
6). I daresay we could alter it if we had the bollocks

"Return" nothing. Argentina never owned them in the first place, and the people that live there are British.

Proximity has nothing to do with it.

I think Chavez should keep his nose out of what doesn't concern him. Giving back the Falklands would be a betrayal of the soldiers who fought and died in the war.

1). An ethnic individual is afforded the right, yet I am not.
2).Once more, by the age of 40 I will be earning in the region of £800000, why should I lose nigh on half of that to a cause I will never benefit from
3). The new Tory generation are a damn sight better than Labour in any incarnation
4). still ought to be redressed
5). The police force is not bigoted, it is honest
6). I daresay we could alter it if we had the bollocks

1)HUH?! No, no one is afforded the right to be racist.
2)Welcome to sharing-land. You don't like it- stay where you are. It has worked for Europe and continues to do so.

5)HAH! RUC anyone?
6)Dean Acheson: Britain has lost an Empire and still has not found a role in the world. And that was in the 1950's.

Why don't they just give me the Falkands?

Here is the oversight
Falkands discovered by Dutchman.. (sorta)
Dutch William of Orange took over the British Monarchy after resotration
English go in 1690

then possesion changes between british french and spanish

1820 argentina claims islands (after independance from spain.)

British invade in 1833

1982 argentina invades

BUT THEN THEY INVADE south georgia what is with that?


Anyway,

As far as the information I have been provided. The British were first to land a force, and the primary original inhabitants were British. It is in that respect and has been for it's vast history from the information I have read, British.

Geographically of course it does seem a bit out of place but we must remember British Imperialism.

From the appearance it seems very British (this could be propaganda I'm seeing) but what crack is Chavez smoking?

Of course the Argentines could invade ... but would they beat the EU?

allot more of them would prolly have to be smokin crack to beleive that.


I still think they should give me the Island (not that it isn't already mine as sovereign) but you know all the jazz in the handover.

Ha! the EU!, ignoring the fact that they'd debate it for the next 50 yrs etc. they would never get involved. The French are anglophobes and the spanish would be against it purly out of spite over the fact they covert Gibralter ( spouting the wrongs of colonialism, neatly ignoring the spanish colony within sight of Gib that they clutch onto). Besides which given that we gave the Argentinians a thorough kicking the last time they tried it i don't think we have much to worry about.

1)HUH?! No, no one is afforded the right to be racist.


Wow. Would you like some mayonaise with your totalitarianism? Or on the side?

There are, of course, permitted and prescribed conducts; but surely the quality of actually being a racists that is to say, the thoughts and feelings in a person's head, should be his own and beyond government inteference.

Well, your probably one of those who believes there is 'too much free speach' as well. Just remember that when the next government wants to muzzle you.

It's quite simple. Give self determination to Gibraltar, to N. Ireland, to the Falklands. They want to stay part of Britain? Fine, they will. If anyone tries to take them that is unjustified use of force against the freely expressed will of the people, and we're fully justified to kick their arses. If they just moan about it, we can point at the level of support for remaining British, and wave two fingers at them. If the popular opinion changes, we can say farewell to our windblown rocks, and not really lose anything. Nuff said.

More interesting...
Political correctness _has_ gone too far. Not because you can't say 'p*ki' or other thing like that. Because ordinary people are worried about getting done for expressing perfectly reasonable thoughts. Especially in the cases where it's kids whose parents don't seem to care being little $hits. People see that the 'victim' is assumed to be in the right, and are scared away from doing the right thing.
Don't look at Sweden, even the Swedes are getting fed up with high taxation. We can run an effective National Health Service on far less than is currently being spent. Vast amounts of money are being wasted; better that it had remained in our pockets.
Nothing inherently wrong with a Labour government, but this lot are getting to have been in too long. Time for a change. Pity we just had a general election. You need Labour, to increase spending on services. You then need the Tories, to cut away waste. Spending is high, as is wastage. Time for the Tories...
Nothing wrong with coexisting with other cultures. It enriches your own. Sometimes we forget to celebrate our own cultural achievements, however, leading others to lose respect for what is still the dominant culture in this country. A sort of leftist cultural cringe, as bad in its way as the right wing raucous trumpet of Little Englanders.
Positive discrimination is anything but positive. It is still discriminatory. It should be just as prohibited as any other kind. I'm not aware of it existing on a large scale in this country.
I don't think sovereignty is a problem, right now. Not for this country.

Why does it need a top up of pride? The country seems to be doing perfectly fine without it.

Pride in Britain has become something of an issue. There doesn't seem to be much of a real pride in the British, though whether this is truly a bad thing needs to be questioned. After all, if we are all too patriotic then we have jingoism, but if we lack some basic sense of British-ness (which we still retain, though in a lite format and possibly slipping) then there is no unity behind the country.

Political Correctness
Ridiculously high taxation
Labour government
multiculturalism
positive discrimination
lack of sovereignty

1) Whether or not society imposes PC on you, it does not mean you must accept it. It is not an imposition on your free speech unless you choose to make it so.
2) Look to Norway.
3) If you honestly think the Tories can come up with a comprehensive government to take over Labour, you have another thing coming. I am not particularly fond of EITHER parties, but atm Labour has the experience and people to back it up; Tories have a lot of bark but no bite.
4) I could go off and have a rude comment at you, but I won't. Multi-culturalism is a GOOD thing. Look at any great Nation, Empire, Dynasty - lack of multi-culturalism meant that they were likely to decline. The Romans and the Chinese, some of the greatest Empires, had multi-culturalism (with a major export of their own culture); without, they quickly fell into disrepair.
Besides of which, multiculturalism brings half-breeds, who are often HAWT. Go to California, see the many mixed breeds there and you understand why it has such a great reputation for beautiful gals :P
5) Please give evidence so I can do some reading.
6) We never made superpower status even under Churchill. What does Labour have to do with it?

1). Essentially an imposition upon my freedom of speech
2). Utterly unnecessary if we did not fund the apathy of the poor, and maintain that rotting edifice of socialism, the NHS.
3). As a Tory, I disagree, at least they have decorum, class and tradition.
4). Not to the extent it currently is.
5). Positively discriminating in favour of black and asian police officers, in a white nation
6). Marching to the beat of Bush's drum

1) No, it isnt. Look above.
2) NHS should undergo major revisions, true. However, by saying that we should not help the poor you are ignoring the basic Christian tenets that British civilization is based on (and Im not even Christian, mind) and promoting class-division.
3) They might have that (debateable) but they can't handle a government.
4) White supremacy being great and all...:rolleyes:
5) So, are you one of those lads who rage about coloured people onthe streets, and then when you see a predominantly white company being bought by the chinese go, 'OMG! This is just wrong.' WEll, there's another thing coming for you, lad; plenty of 'white' companies utilise coloured people. Shouldn't you be shocked? Oh, I'm sorry, that's where your whole 'supremacy' bit comes in and says, oh well, that's their place. Then I'll show the effects of a predominantly white-dominated international world (1800s on) and see how its been doing.
6) That's by a government's choice. Tories dont seem to be against it that much.

You ever actually being in a situation when you desperately needed to use the word 'paki' but that damn "PC gone mad" beast stopped you? You ever actually worked so that you had to pay taxes? Have you personally suffered because other cultures are tolerated alongside the British one?

1) I can call my friends paki. They call me chink. I call my white friends whitey if I feel so inclined. If some PC-freak comes at you, why worry? It's your piece of mind. This argument is redundant; you are against PC because you can't stand to say, 'Well, sorry, but it's my choice' to the PC people. FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OF THOUGHT, neh?
2) No, not yet. Freely admitted. I am still underage.
3) No. Because, I AM ONE OF THE OTHER CULTURES. well, a mix really. Chinese-American/British. My friends come from...well...OTHER CULTURES. The world is much better for...guess what...OTHER CULTURES. There have been cultures existing far longer than the British that still exist (chinese) and I don't see them raging at the White man as being an upstart. Maybe declaiming for his death, but considering what the white man has done you can give them some space for anger management.

1). An ethnic individual is afforded the right, yet I am not.
2).Once more, by the age of 40 I will be earning in the region of £800000, why should I lose nigh on half of that to a cause I will never benefit from
3). The new Tory generation are a damn sight better than Labour in any incarnation
4). still ought to be redressed
5). The police force is not bigoted, it is honest
6). I daresay we could alter it if we had the bollocks

1) No - they are not. There are no laws that say "Anyone who isn't white is allowed to be as racist as they like, but white people are not!". Public opinion might see the majority picking on the minority as worse than the other way round, because the majority have the power.
2) The fact you are so damn sure when you haven't even got a job at the moment is why it's fair - let's face it, you wouldn't be guarenteed an £800,000 job by the time you are 40 if you were born to a poor income family would you? What is this job anyway? Some present from daddy?
3) Cameron isn't bad, but there's still a lot of the 'old racist army major' types in there who have no idea what happens in the real world and are constantly ranting on about bringing back national service, keeping the darkies in their place and advocating public flogging.
4) Why?
5) Heh - keep telling yourself that mate. I take it you never saw the documentry with the secret undercover footage of Met police acting like racist thugs? It's not the case for most police and it's getting better, but there's still bigotry there.
6) A labour government is more likely to stand up to the US than Tory. You will have noticed most left wing people prefer to side with Europe. It's just Tony Blair ain't left wing.

White officers outnumber minorities by about twenty to one? That's about right...minorities aren't that much of the population.
EDIT: I know minorities are over 1/21 of the population. I just meant that the figure isn't so far out.

And we are a white nation. Predominantly. We just have fun and funky colourful bits as well.

Multiculturalism did Rome and ?China? good. But they kept confidence in their own culture. That is _very_ important.

?China? cos as far as I'm aware Chinese culture has always been racist. Middle Kingdom and all that. However I will bow to greater knowledge.

Labour/Tory/whatever. Won't 'stand up' to the US when they see our foreign policy interests as being aligned. Which they certainly seem to do at the moment, and have done for some years. Don't see that one changing any time soon, as by the time we change government (2009, anyone?) the Americans will have a new Administration, probably distancing themselves from Iraq etc.

Multiculturalism did Rome and ?China? good. But they kept confidence in their own culture. That is _very_ important.

?China? cos as far as I'm aware Chinese culture has always been racist. Middle Kingdom and all that. However I will bow to greater knowledge.

1) Rome and China assimilated. Rather than dominance, they allowed other cultures into their sphere of rule and exported their own culture through merchandise and philosophy; they encouraged members of other cultures to rise to high station so that they could see how well off the imperial country was, and to aspire to that kind of glory. They didn't see much point in trying to subjugate.

2) Yes, chinese culture is/was racist. However, unlike white supremacy, they did not say, you must conform to our standards. They were confident in their superiority (if not justified) and did not take action from there. They were equal opportunity, if anything; even if they were racist towards other cultures, they treated their own countrymen as bad as they did the other races.

Sometimes we forget to celebrate our own cultural achievements, however, leading others to lose respect for what is still the dominant culture in this country. A sort of leftist cultural cringe, as bad in its way as the right wing raucous trumpet of Little Englanders.

That I can agree with, and I was very happy to see the celebration of Trafalgar. There is a fine line between recognising and celebrating our own cultural achievments, and then attacking the achievments of others, and not recognising the cost of our cultural achievments (the Empire brought with it prosperity, trade and technology - it also ruined civilizations and poisoned many races attitude towards the white man)

Assimilation is the way to go. Not total assimilation, just one of core values. If you have a separate group in society that doesn't share your values that is bad for society.

I wasn't thinking of the Empire as a cultural achievement, myself, more a political one.

It's quite simple. Give self determination to Gibraltar, to N. Ireland, to the Falklands. They want to stay part of Britain?
That does pose an interesting question however. How do you determine who gets a right to self determination? The Falklands and Gibraltar are obvious contenders being so remote from their 'owners' and being clearly the product of fromer colonialism. Northern Ireland ditto because of the strong emotions it evokes. But where do you draw the line. Does Scotland get a choice? What about small communities, small villages even? If they wanted to form countries of their own does their country have to give them this right?

But where do you draw the line. Does Scotland get a choice? What about small communities, small villages even? If they wanted to form countries of their own does their country have to give them this right?

Not somemuch countries but delegating power at the most local level would have a utopian appeal. sounds a bit like what the CNT and POUM attempted during the spanish civil war.

I would say geographically or culturally distinct areas. Hard line to draw, and islands would have an advantage.

So Scotland would qualify. As would Wales. As would (if applied there) essentially all of Spain's regions. However, say, Cornwall? Or Yorkshire? No...

EDIT: Forgot to mention, kudos for the Catch-22 name...

Well if Chavez says it must happen! Who does this guy think he is? I think Blair's appropriate response would be to say this: "Blair: Venezuela must be returned to Spain.". I wonder how that would fly? Anyway this guy is trying to be the Neu Simon Bolivar/ Che Guevara wrappped in one. I think he should make t-shirts of himself with a commie beret. That way his memory will live with disgruntled youth forever. What should the UK's official response be?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/02/10/venzuela.chavez.reut/index.html
Hey. an educated response.
True , we could all do with giving stuff back, ....but where would it end? And who say's what's who's to give back????? Ohhhh deep stuff. America gives it back to Spain, Portugal, the UK, ? then we give it back to the Indians....who? Sioux? Irapahooyacallthem? Deep thread.....nice .....

Maybe the whole human race should give back the world to the Neanderthals. Yeah! I claim the Earth as the last of the Neanderthals.