Cargando la pagina... por favor espere!



No puedes ver la pagina? Click aqui
 
Foros de discusión El Malvinense
Bienvenidos al foro del diario digital "El Malvinense", para expresar sus ideas sin censura. Activo desde mayo 2008
 
InicioInicio  FAQFAQ   BuscarBuscar   MiembrosMiembros   Grupos de UsuariosGrupos de Usuarios   RegistrarseRegistrarse 
 PerfilPerfil   Entrá para ver sus mensajes privadosEntrá para ver sus mensajes privados   LoginLogin 

Aquel 3 de Enero de 1833... That January the 3rd, 1833
Ir a página Anterior  1, 2, 3, ... 9, 10, 11  Siguiente
 
Publicar nuevo tema   Responder al tema    Foros de discusión -> ¿Por qué son argentinas?
Ver tema anterior :: Ver tema siguiente  
Autor Mensaje
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Mie May 21, 2008 6:47 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

El Tordillo

?Do not worry about the inflexibility of his friend "Hutch."?

Facts are inflexible. You seem unable to accept reality, which is something we see a lot in Argentines.

?On the one hand, is a product of their own ignorance??

I have shown a greater knowledge of the FI, FI history, Argentine history and world history than most Argentines.

??the continued bombardment of information absolutely pro-brit?nica that only supports his thesis??

The continued bombardment of facts.

"an optimistic speculation casual pirates ".

I never said that did I? No.

Onslow used no physical violence, he used no physical force at all. Pinedo just left.

And it seems his ultimatum did not contain a direct threat of violence.

??carrying?settlers Argentines??

We know that the UK did not force all the Argentine civilian colonists to leave the FI in 1833. If it had done so then Rivero would have had no one to murder.

Your little history still ignores the fact that I am right.

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Mie May 21, 2008 6:52 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

[quote:e78af17c85="Hutch"]

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833.[/quote:e78af17c85]


1- No hubo violencia f?sica porque Pinedo se rindi? para evitar derramamiento de sangre y porque al ser solo 14 soldados argentinos contra el triple de ingleses, evit? el uso de fuerza f?sica, lo que no indica que las islas no fueran argentinas, simplemente fue una rendici?n sin tirar un tiro.
Esto no quita la respondabilidad a Gran Breta?a, que amenaz? con el uso de la fuerza y usurpa las islas, habiendo previamente reconocido a Pinedo como el defensor de la soberania argentina en las islas y por ello le ordena se rinda para evitar derramamiento de sangre.


2- No fueron expulsados, porque ese mismo d?a, los soldados ingleses se fueron de las islas, dejando tan solo una guarnici?n peque?a para defender la bandera brit?nica que flameaba all
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:07 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

As we can all see I am still right about these two points

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used by the UK in 1833.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833.

El Tordillo

?Personally, I understand that Mr. "Hutch" has no intention to accept our arguments, but is willing to impose theirs as a truth and unwavering.?

You seem to still to prefer to live in a fantasy land and not read what has been written and think for yourself. What I have said is the truth, you must start to break away from all the propaganda you have been told to believe and think for yourself.

I do have no intention of accepting arguments that are lies, as many Argentine arguments are.

Yes, there are UK documents that say such things. And? These have not changed anything have they? Most of them are not that high ranking either. Those documents do not alter the facts that I have explained either.

And despite these documents (written a long time ago in most cases) Argentina is too cowardly to take her case to a competent court. Why?

Patricio

So you finally accept that I am correct ? that there was no physical violence, no violence or physical force used by the UK in 1833. Excellent.

Pinedo withdrew offering no resistance, he abandoned the FI and was put on trial in Argentina when he returned. He could have resisted no matter what the odds but chose not to. We do not know what Onslow would have done if Pinedo had decided to fight.

??which threatened the use of force??

Please provide proof that this is true.

??having previously recognized Pinedo as the defender of Argentine sovereignty on the islands??

So what? He was recognised as the head Argentine.

?There were expelled because the same day??

We know that the Argentine civilian colonists were not expelled from the FI by the UK in 1833. This is a fact.

??leaving only a small garrison to defend the British flag??

I do not think that this is true. As far as I know, no British forces were left on the FI in 1833 by Onslow. If they had been then they would have stopped Rivero.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:07 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

El Tordillo

?Falkland never was and never will be NATION under the current circumstances.?

It might be in the future. Argentina?s behaviour makes it more likely.

The Islanders were given British citizenship as that was the only one they could have ? the FI are not an independent state and so they could not have FI citizenship, they are not citizens of any S American state and so the sovereign power in the FI ? the UK ? gave them British citizenship.

If they choose at some point to become independent that is their right and the UK will support that.

Your argument is actually more dangerous to Argentina than to the FI. If you consider the Islanders to be the same as Welsh and English, then the FI become an integral part of the UK itself and not an overseas territory. This means that they are as British as I am, that the land they are on is as British as London and they do not need self determination as they are on a part of the UK.

If they are British citizens of a de colonised overseas territory there is at least a chance that they may exercise their self determination and want to be part of Argentina.

Prior to Argentina?s moronic invasion, it was far harder for an Islander to claim British citizenship. This was changed after the war to guarantee them the same democratic rights as others.

It was discrimination and past of the messy end of empire. It was discrimination, it was wrong and it was changed.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:11 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

Intimidar a otra persona con el uso de la fuerza, es violencia

Pinedo fue forzado a dejar las islas

ESA es la realidad

Lo dem?s son fantas?as sin ninguna base racional

Saludos, JPL.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:11 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

As we can all see I am still right about these two points

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used by the UK in 1833.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833.


JPL

?Bullying another person with the use of force, violence is?

It is not physical violence, it is not physical force. You can squirm and twist all you like JPL but you can not avoid the reality that no force was used by the UK in 1833. None at all.

We have not even seem that Onslow used threats of force against Pinedo

Maybe Pinedo was in fear of some force being used but none was used. That is a fact, no matter how much Argentines wish it was not.

?Pinedo was forced to leave the islands?

But no force, no physical violence of any kind was used.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:13 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

Forzar que alguien haga algo en contra de su voluntad


Hutch, No se si usted peca por ignorante o por conveniencia, pero hay distintas formas de fuerza, forzar que alguien haga algo en contra de su voluntad, que no es necesariamente la aplicacion directa de violencia f?sica

Las 2 "hechos" que ud. repite hist?ricamente, son incorrectas y mientras m?s las repite sin ninguna raz?n para apoyarlas, m?s en rid?culo est? quedando, Hutch.

Saludos, JPL.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:14 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used by the UK in 1833.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833

I am still 100% right JPL. It is not ?hysterical? it is the facts and your refusal to comprehend them is amazing and a sign of how desperate you are to continue to believe in known propaganda lies.

?Forcing someone to do something against their will?

And? Pinedo may not have originally wanted to leave the FI but he did with absolutely no physical force of any kind being used. We have not even seen any proof that Onslow threatened to use force, though I accept he may have done.

??but there are different forms of force??

Has anyone disputed this? No. But we are talking about the FI in 1833 and we know for a fact that the UK used no physical force of any kind then. None. Pinedo ran away, no force was used.

??which is not necessarily the direct application of physical violence??

And we are talking specifically about physical violence, physical force. your attempt to define all kinds of force is just a way for you to run away and hide from reality.

?The 2 "facts" that you. Repeats hysterically, are incorrect??

You are a liar. Both of the facts I have to repeat are both true. Think for yourself JPL and stop letting your government and / or media make a fool of you.

??it is becoming more ridiculous??

Your refusal to accept reality is ridiculous and you look more and more foolish. But we see that far too often with so many Argentines.


I repeat the truth again -

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used by the UK in 1833.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:14 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

Con ese criterio, en abril de 1982, tampoco se us? la fuerza ni se expuls? a ning?n civil.

No hubo acci?n incruenta, ning?n brit?nico fue herido.

No se expuls? a ning?n kelper, todos se quedaron en las islas por propia voluntad.

En 1833, hubo una amenaza a la Argentina de que depusiera sus armas, o se atenga a las consecuencias.

En 1982 hubo una amenaza a los brit?nicos de que depusiera sus armas, o se atenga a las consecuencias.

En ning?n caso hubo heridos ni muertos, por tanto, seg?n tu criterio, no hubo uso de fuerza.

Si Pinedo corrió en 1833, en 1982 Hunt se escondió sobre su escritorio y luego se fue corriendo a Uruguay.

¡Cuantas similitudes!
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
mensajes_anteriores



Registrado: 20 May 2008
Mensajes: 582

MensajePublicado: Jue May 22, 2008 5:16 pm    Asunto: Responder citando

We see I am still 100% correct.

1) No force, no physical violence of any kind was used by the UK in 1833.

2) The civilian colonists on the FI were not expulsed by the UK in 1833


Patricio

??in April 1982, nor was used force..?

Wrong and a lie and so very obviously wrong and a lie. Argentina did use force and violence in 1982 during her invasion.

??or were expelled any civilian.?

Did anyone claim that Argentina expelled any civilians at the time?

?There was no action bloodless, no British was injured.?

That does not make what happened right, good or justified. The lack of deaths on the UK side is a testament to their training and professionalism as much as to any Argentine plan to try not to kill the defenders.

?There were expelled any kelper, all stayed on the islands by choice.?

Who claimed that any Islanders were expelled from the FI in 1982?

They stayed on the FI because it was their home and the UK was coming to liberate them. Where else would they have gone?

?In 1833, there was a threat to Argentina that depusiera their weapons, or abide by the consequences.?

There was no violence or force used. We have not even seen evidence that there was a clear, direct threat of force. Pinedo chose to leave and was not forced to do so by any violence.

?In 1982 there was a threat to the British that depusiera their weapons, or abide by the consequences.?

There was not a ?threat?. There was a full scale military invasion with violence and massive danger.

?In no case was hurt or killed??

Argentines died and there were injuries in 1982.

??therefore, as you approach, there was no use of force.?

Total rubbish - I do not believe you are foolish enough to believe that Patricio. It is a very foolish thing to say though and you just look absurd by even claiming it.

In 1833 there was no physical violence used at all. Not a shot fired. No force used.

In 1982 there was a large military invasion with lots of gunfire and some deaths. The two are very, very different as even a child could see.

There was a large use of force by Argentina in 1982, do not claim that there was not, you just look foolish.

?If Pinedo ran in 1833??

Which he did do and offered no resistance. For this he was pit on trial when he returned.

??1982 Hunt hid on her desk??

Hunt was clearly and obviously different to Pinedo as you know ? his forces opposed the Argentine landings and when it was clear that further resistance was futile and would just lead to needless deaths he sought to end the fighting.

??and then was running Uruguay.?

Wrong and another lie. He was deported he did not leave of his own volition or run away like Pinedo did. He did his duty as well as he could.
Volver arriba
Ver perfil de usuario Enviar mensaje privado
Mostrar mensajes de anteriores:   
Publicar nuevo tema   Responder al tema    Foros de discusión -> ¿Por qué son argentinas? Todas las horas son GMT - 3 Horas
Ir a página Anterior  1, 2, 3, ... 9, 10, 11  Siguiente
Página 2 de 11
Cambiar a:  
Podés publicar nuevos temas en este foro
No podés responder a temas en este foro
No podés editar tus mensajes en este foro
No podés borrar tus mensajes en este foro
No podés votar en encuestas en este foro


phpBB Argento basado en phpBB © 2007 phpBB Argento

Page generation time: 0.0647s (PHP: 74% - SQL: 26%) - SQL queries: 15 - GZIP enabled - Debug on