VILLAFC2000

How much do we pay Hutton a week.

It would be great to know - does anyone roughly know?

Any one else think that AM is genuinly clueless - no I mean completely clueless.

How some one like hm can get away with earning 2 million per year. I would say the majority of villa fans who work there balls of day in day out could not do a worse job.

He picks a different team every sodding week. I know we have injuries and niggles, but still - he just does not know our strongest team let alone defense from attack.

Crickey - What a shocker.

Realistically what is the least amount of points we need to stay up...?

What do the fans who were highly critical, disappointed and not overly happy with the style of football, wages and transfers of MON think about the situation we are in now.

Are we worse off or better without MON..?

Crikey.

QPR won fair play to them - I am not sure we would of shown that initiative if we were at home.

Although its a good time to play them.

When is DB back - we need some goals.

shocking Football - I cant believe they charge £ 25 they should be paying fans to watch and put up with it.

Will 3-4 points be enough to keep us up?

LOL- Cant see us getting much from this game, although Weinman is on good form. Lets hope they get a player sent of - Cant see that happening at OT.

United usually match City toe to toe, If they get an early goals it could be 3-4 - 0.

^^^^^^^

Should have put £100 on it - How much would I have won back though, probably not a lot!!!

Is Heskey starting today - if so that says it all!

LOL- Cant see us getting much from this game, although Weinman is on good form. Lets hope they get a player sent of - Cant see that happening at OT.

United usually match City toe to toe, If they get an early goals it could be 3-4 - 0.

Is it not raining in Aintree...?!

Which horses will this suit best?

Carruthers looked decent the other day - An away game away at Liverpool needing a result a player might bottle it, he came on and won a penalty straight away, he looked to have good composure and technicall ability.

I hope for the same team and and Wienman in for Heskey.

Looks like United have got the League.

Is it a case of Fantastic Fergie or Manchini Mahem.

You have got to give Fergie credit another League in the bag. However should Manchini have done better with the players he has.

Weinman - Good sub, grab us a goal!

Bannan has put in a good shift today!

Cant see us getting much out of this. They may be on poor form bu class is permanent and class in temporary or something along those lines away...!

Suarez and Gerrard against Heskey and Herd and a make shift defence.

Weather you like it or not there are genuine arguments for both sides.

Okay, we know the UK argument (and that of the Islanders themselves) is the self determination of all peoples, as per the founding charter of the UN.

Perhaps you can share with us the "genuine arguments" that Argentina has for its claim?

What we do know is that the only country who believes the Islands should remain British are you guessed it the British -who would have thought it.

There is no point sugar coating this fella, your statement is utter rubbish and based on a position of complete ignorance of the facts. I can't be bothered to list every country that contradicts what you've said but the Lisbon Treaty / EU Constitution recognises and supports the current status of the Falklands - that's 26 countries other than the UK.

My Argument is only rubbish in your oppinion.

No.it's.not.

You say Britiain is the only country that supports self determination for the Islanders.

The Lisbon Treaty says the entire EU supports self determination for the Islanders.

Therefore you statement is factually wrong.

Don't you understand that?

There are lots of people including Sean Penn and Morrisey who believe in these views.

Wow, 'celebrities', you're rolling out the big guns of intellectual argument now. Should we all convert to Scientology too?

It can be argues that both sides have a credible claim to the Islands for reasons that I have already discussed.

No, it really can't.

Who are the big nations such as America backing...?

America is quite rightly sitting on the fence. They know Argentina doesn't have the means to change the status quo, so why cause themselves headaches in their own backyard by openly supporting the UK position when neither they or we gain nothing from it?

When it actually came down to fight over the Islands in '82 the US supplied UK with crucial technological and intelligence help, as did the French. That is how you measure a country's real stance over an issue, not the unsurprisingly diplomatic stance taken in peacetime by, er, 'diplomats'.

I think the USA have actually said that they would like to sit on the fence because they would prefer there to be negotiations - I think that's a good idea. War is not a good thing at all no one benifts from it not in the long term.

Good read.

A single flame, which will burn for 74 days in remembrance of British service personnel killed in the Falklands, was lit on Monday as the prime minister, David Cameron, reaffirmed Britain's determination to uphold the islanders' rights to determine their own future.

Three decades after Argentinian troops seized Port Stanley, the capital of the south Atlantic islands, Falklands veterans and widows of those killed gathered at a service of remembrance at the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire.

Margaret Allen, just 23 and newly married when she lost her husband, able seaman Iain Boldy, 20, lit the flame which will burn for as long as the conflict lasted as part of commemorations in Britain, Argentina and the Falklands.

In a gesture of reconciliation, Cameron issued a statement saying it was a day to remember the 255 armed forces and Merchant Navy personnel and the 649 Argentinians who died, along with three islanders, in the short but bloody conflict. "Today is a day for commemoration and reflection: a day to remember all those who lost their lives in the conflict – the members of our armed forces, as well as the Argentinian personnel who died," he said.

Saluting the heroism of the South Atlantic Taskforce, he added: "Britain remains staunchly committed to upholding the right of the Falkland Islanders, and of the Falkland Islanders alone, to determine their own future. That was the fundamental principle that was at stake 30 years ago: and that is the principle which we solemnly reaffirm today."

In Britain, Sara Jones, widow of Lieutenant-Colonel "H" Jones, commanding officer of 2 Para, killed during the battle of Goose Green and awarded the Victoria Cross, joined veterans and families of those who fell. Before the service, she said "the islanders have always been fiercely British and want to stay that way. I would like to believe that we would, if we could, do it again" if Argentina launched a fresh invasion.

A small group of Argentinian war veterans spent the day in the islands and held a quiet ceremony at the cemetery where hundreds of Argentinian soldiers are buried. Juan Carlos Lujan, one of the veterans, told the Associated Press: "To return to this little piece of land, which for me is a little bit of my country … is so pleasing. To be among the people that were once our enemies, that which we can now live together with, it's just really proof that we human beings are not like animals."

The commemorations took place as it was confirmed HMS Dauntless, one of the Royal Navy's newest and most powerful destroyers, will set sail from Portsmouth to the Falkland Islands on Wednesday, a day before the 30th anniversary of the taskforce's departure.

Argentina has complained to the UN of the UK's "militarisation" of the south Atlantic following news of the six-month deployment of Dauntless, which the Ministry of Defence has said is on routine mission taking over patrols from the frigate HMS Montrose.

The runup to this anniversary has been fraught with tensions between London and Buenos Aires, with the Argentine government of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, reasserting its claim to the archipelago.

Threats to boycott British cargo, turn away British-flagged cruises, sue British investors and banks, and block offshore oil development have imbued islanders with a sense of unease.

"Thirty years and now we find it again, we are worried we are going to go through it all again, another invasion. We do not, we do not want to see this again," islander Mary Lou Agman said as several hundred of the islands' 3,000 residents turned out for a commemorative march by the small Falkland Islands Defence Force.

The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, rejected claims Britain would be unable to defend the islands against a fresh Argentinian assault. "We have the assets, the people, the equipment in place to do so. We will defend them robustly," he said, adding that there was "not the slightest intelligence to suggest that there is any credible military threat to the Falklands".

Vice-admiral Sir Tim McClement, who was responsible for co-ordinating a turning point in the war – the torpedo attack which sank Argentinian cruiser General Belgrano, with the loss of 323 lives – said he had no regrets.

He told the Portsmouth News: "There is no doubt in my mind that sinking the Belgrano was absolutely the right thing to do, firstly for the survival in case the pincer movement worked against our carriers and, secondly, it demonstrated intent to the Argentinians."

Britain has controlled the Falklands since 1833, but Argentina claims it inherited rights to "Las Malvinas" from Spain.

Weather you like it or not there are genuine arguments for both sides.

Okay, we know the UK argument (and that of the Islanders themselves) is the self determination of all peoples, as per the founding charter of the UN.

Perhaps you can share with us the "genuine arguments" that Argentina has for its claim?

What we do know is that the only country who believes the Islands should remain British are you guessed it the British -who would have thought it.

There is no point sugar coating this fella, your statement is utter rubbish and based on a position of complete ignorance of the facts. I can't be bothered to list every country that contradicts what you've said but the Lisbon Treaty / EU Constitution recognises and supports the current status of the Falklands - that's 26 countries other than the UK.

My Argument is only rubbish in your oppinion. There are lots of people including Sean Penn and Morrisey who believe in these views. It can be argues that both sides have a credible claim to the Islands for reasons that I have already discussed.

Who are the big nations such as America backing...?

Originally posted by VILLAFC2000

Remind me Americas view again.

Election year, innit?

So will America back it after the Election and have they supported it in the past..?

yawn

What we do know is that the only country who believes the Islands should remain British are you guessed it the British -who would have thought it.

A) How the **** can you know this?

The Falkland Islands is a country that thinks it should remain British and that is clearly, the single most important country.

If we go by your Logic, Nice in France should be Italian or maybe it should be Greek, they founded it after all. Italy should split itself up as should France (both countries aren't that old comparatively) and gawd knows what we'd do with the Prussians...

A.) David Cameron tried to get America to back the British with the Falklands - they said no. Which makes you think if they dont even back it then pretty much not many other countries are going to.

Now I am pretty sure Coutnries who support Cameron have not come out and backed it as much as latin countries have backed Argentinas claims.

"Latin American and Caribbean nations have backed Argentina's claim of sovereignty to the Falkland Islands in a growing dispute with Britain over plans to drill for oil off the islands in the Atlantic".

"At the Rio Group summit of 32 countries hosted by Mexico, Argentina presented a statement quoting Mexican President Felipe Calderon as saying that "the heads of state represented here reaffirm their support for the legitimate rights of the republic of Argentina in the sovereignty dispute with Great Britain".

B.) David Camerons stance has been let the people of the Flaklands decide whats best.he Argentinians would argue about the genuine legitimacy of the people living on the Islands and weather or not they have claims to being wholey indigienous to the Islands. For example How old are the islands, who was living on that Island 500 years ago, 1000 years ago. How did the people get on that Island and so on.

What we do know is that the only country who believes the Islands should remain British are you guessed it the British -who would have thought it.

I don’t know where you are getting this information from. I would guess that most democratic countries would say that the people of the Falkland Islands should vote on what they want and be free to choose their own destiny.

"Please feel free to show me the thoughts and opinions of the people and leaders of the free world whether it be the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, Italy, Spain, etc, etc. Some I am sure will have sympathy for the position of Argentina. Most I expect will want the people of the islands to have a say".

"If we could turn back the clock I am sure things would be different, but we can’t. We simply can’t just turf these people out, as I wouldn’t expect other “immigrant” populations be thrown out; such as in Northern Ireland, or the Anglo Saxons across Britain, or the Normans across Britain, etc".

lol - The Argentinians would argue about the genuine legitimacy of the people living on the Islands and weather or not they have claims to being wholey indigienous to the Islands. For example How old are the islands, who was living on that Island 500 years ago, 1000 years ago. How did the people get on that Island and so on.

You have argued very strongly that Britain is pretty much 100% correct when it comes to the Falklands. So its very suprising when one of Britains largest allies, America whom we have special relatiobships with, turn around and say we are not backing you....! This makes it all the more impausable especially when the Falkland are loaded with Oil.I wander why.

Its clear where Latin Americas views are

"While a new military conflict is seen as highly unlikely, the dispute could jeopardise Britain's drive for closer economic and trade ties with emerging Latin America powers such as Brazil that it hopes will kickstart the stagnating British economy".

Now I am not saying this will definately happen but then I am not saying it def wont happen. The fact of the matter is it could happen, as Latin America believe symbolically that the Falkands should be Argentinian.

If Latin America are neutral then why did Argentina win support from regional bodies and the latin American trading bloc who banned port visits from Falkland Flagged ships....? But they are still neutral aren't they - naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat (Borat Style).

Remind me Americas view again.

America think there should be negotiations.

I am sure its in out interests to get on with Latin America, but if they don't want to get on with us, as much as other competitive economic countries - then there is a problem. Unless you can predict the future.

This seems to be your rationale for giving away the Falklands. However, as already been explained, Latin America doesn't actually care about this issue that much at all, therefore we're still going to be able to "get on" with Latin America whether we keep the islands or not, therefore your point is completely invalid.

I am not sure you can be the one to judge the future of what Latin America wants or does not want - this is a very complex issue which does not just come down to a simpleton viewpoint of yes or no. The fact of the matter is no one really knows. Unless you have personally spoken to a number of Latin American leaders its difficult to know - its not as straight forward as you make out - no where near.

What we do know is that the only country who believes the Islands should remain British are you guessed it the British -who would have thought it.

However what we do know is that there is Plenty of Natural resources in and around the Falklands. If History has tought us anything in the past its that countries will go to extreme measures to get a good deal from it.

Brazil could bennifit very much if Argentina were to regain the Islands - Although if you were Brazil you would not scream this from the rooftops for obvious reasons - its called politics.

I'm not judging anything. However, simple logic dictates that the likes of Brazil are not going to cut off links with us over the Falklands. It wouldn't be in their best interest to do such a thing.

Actually, not many countries support the Argentinian claim. Most countries are neutral and believe that the islanders should have the right to choose their future, which is coincidentally the British position as well.

There are a lot of countries that remain neutral. A lot of the Latin American countries have been in favour of the the Falkands returning back to Argentina

Neutral thats Exacly the point.

Lol - If Brittain is so correct about the Falkands its suprising that America remain so neutral considering their special relations.

Oh so we are talking and basing views and oppinions on simple logic now are we -hmmmmm superb you cant make that up.

Its a good thing the Islands are close to Britain and not Argentina - oh wait a minute they are not...>!

I am sure its in out interests to get on with Latin America, but if they don't want to get on with us, as much as other competitive economic countries - then there is a problem. Unless you can predict the future.

This seems to be your rationale for giving away the Falklands. However, as already been explained, Latin America doesn't actually care about this issue that much at all, therefore we're still going to be able to "get on" with Latin America whether we keep the islands or not, therefore your point is completely invalid.

I am not sure you can be the one to judge the future of what Latin America wants or does not want - this is a very complex issue which does not just come down to a simpleton viewpoint of yes or no. The fact of the matter is no one really knows. Unless you have personally spoken to a number of Latin American leaders its difficult to know - its not as straight forward as you make out - no where near.

What we do know is that the only country who believes the Islands should remain British are you guessed it the British -who would have thought it.

However what we do know is that there is Plenty of Natural resources in and around the Falklands. If History has tought us anything in the past its that countries will go to extreme measures to get a good deal from it.

Brazil could bennifit very much if Argentina were to regain the Islands - Although if you were Brazil you would not scream this from the rooftops for obvious reasons - its called politics.