VILLAFC2000

Noting the 'event' that Mrs Kircher held in Ushuaia yesterday, she apparently invited all the South American leaders. None came, which I think is called distancing yourself from something. Latin America will make noises of sympathy for Argentina, but they really don't give a shit about the Falklands dispute. LOL - Brazil and Argentina have grown closer and closer as a result of the Falklands - In particular the trade links which are very strong together even today. Your seem to beforgetting the natural resources the Falklands have. Do you think these natural Resources could bennifit Brazil in any way if Argentina reclaimed the Islands - hmmmmmmmmm...? We have recently all witnessed the extreme lengths countries will go to for a wee bit of Oil - Some would argue including this country. To rule this out would be naive. Unless of course you argue the point that its OK for ONE country to invade but not the other. I would not judge the basis of your argument on one meeting I would judge the whole picture. Weather you like it or not there are genuine arguments for both sides.

Here's hoping. The Tories only need to win over the BBC, Sky, The Sun, Times, Grud and the Indy to ensure the media are behind them and not Labour.. Maybe not quite as clear cut as you suggest Peter. Out of interest what do you think of Camerons chances of getting in. I think a lot of it hinges on the economy.

It's interesting where they will go over the next couple of years. Most of the press will always back the tories, with rare exceptions like when they can't see a difference between the tories and labour (1997). But they are wary of backing an incompetent bunch who are widely hated. So at the moment, they are having a right go at Cameron and his little cabal. I would imagine the press would like to oust Lord Snooty and his chums, find someone a bit less patronising and corrupt, provoke a split with the pathetic Lib Dems, and support the tories wholeheartedly in the hope of a straight majority at the next election. Yes it will be interesting to see. Have you got the latest polls...?! Also for Livingstone and Borris. This one will be close.

Your correct it says something along those lines but perhaps you could also tell me what the UN says in 6th paragraph - UN resolution 1514...? YAWN.

Yes, because all wars are the same right? :| If you don't believe they should be turfed out, how come you have repeatedly said that they should be moved to the UK? As people keep on stressing, Latin American countries aren't going to stop trading with us over this. Your argument for giving the Falklands to Argentina is that it would hurt us not to. In actual fact, it won't make one bit of difference. Oh for a minute I thought you said they are NOT comparable at All.. ! Are you saying that NO people were not killed and there were NO injuries in both wars. Turfed out - You will find I have not said that phrase " they should be turfed out". In actual fact I have pointed out a number of possible scenario's and not once have I used your words " Turf ouf" - Nice try though seagull. I have also pointed out the local residents should be allowed to stay on the land. Latin Courtliness arent going to stop trading with us. Who can possibly predict the future. My point is Brazil is going to be a huge economic powerhouse- The Uk are not overwhelming known for their popularity especially in Latin America. There is always the POTENTIAL for Latin American countries to re-think there relationships with the UK is there not Its better to get on with them then not They're not comparable. Err, what? When did I say there were no injuries or deaths? :? S Nope, you never said they should be turfed out but you said words to that effect. You said if they want to remain British they should be moved here, but what if they want to stay in their homeland? We can get on with Latin American without bowing down to Argentine bullying. Nobody is going to stop trading with us over this. So theres quite a few similarities between to the two events then, you made the point they could and were not a like and could not be compared one single bit, hence your quote "They are not compatible at all" I will say it again for the umteenth time. There are a lot of options available. I mearly stated that if they love Britain so much and want to be Brttish then they should have every right to stay in this country - which is quite different from ethnic cleanising...! I have also mentioned that they should be able to stay on the land as well if they want - damm right they should have that right. 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.

Evening all, Just a few questions. 1.) Has he been playing well for his olympinicous 2.) Who is paying his wages. 3.) Could we not re call him for the last few games.

who are thew media backing at the moment petterns...?!

Yes, because all wars are the same right? :| If you don't believe they should be turfed out, how come you have repeatedly said that they should be moved to the UK? As people keep on stressing, Latin American countries aren't going to stop trading with us over this. Your argument for giving the Falklands to Argentina is that it would hurt us not to. In actual fact, it won't make one bit of difference. Oh for a minute I thought you said they are NOT comparable at All.. ! Are you saying that NO people were not killed and there were NO injuries in both wars. Turfed out - You will find I have not said that phrase " they should be turfed out". In actual fact I have pointed out a number of possible scenario's and not once have I used your words " Turf ouf" - Nice try though seagull. I have also pointed out the local residents should be allowed to stay on the land. Latin Courtliness arent going to stop trading with us. Who can possibly predict the future. My point is Brazil is going to be a huge economic powerhouse- The Uk are not overwhelming known for their popularity especially in Latin America. There is always the POTENTIAL for Latin American countries to re-think there relationships with the UK is there not Its better to get on with them then not

I seem to recall many of VT's wisest sages disputed such notions that "it was the Sun wot won it" indeed taking 97 when the Sun switched sides to Murdoch , thus entering the epoch now knowing as WMWE (when Murdoch wasn't evil) Labours % of votes in opinion polls constantly dropped (from 56% in Spring 96 to 46 % come the election ) (interestingly the lib dems support rose and they were not backed by any paper at that time) so I'm not so sure that Murdoch actually delivers an election despite successive parties cosying up to him ...maybe Murdoch need to take a leaf from Unite where it seems it is possible to influence an election ..and invites to dinner as it now transpires .. Yes, I don't imagine anyone really thinks that the support of one press baron is the only thing you need to win an election, or that it can outweigh all the thousands of other factors that bear on decisions about voting. But it's hugely influential all the same, which is why people buy newspapers, and why politicians seek their support. You don't doubt that, I suppose? In both of your opinions who do you think the media will back at the next GE....?

Oh really you cant just go over to another country and invade them. Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? It was wrong for the right wing dictatorship to invade the Falklands no doubts about that at. but for those who have mentioned this already Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? Pop corn and a kettle any one...?! Yes, because the Iraq War and the Argentine invasion of the Falklands are comparable... :| LOL - Whats your point. It was NOT OK for the Argentinians to invade the Falklnads but it was OK for British Troops to invade Iraq in an illegal war where at least 100 000 people were killed where some reports even suggest up to 1 000 000. Yes its big bad terrible Argentina alright - we are a superbly humain Country we would never dream of invading a country killing loads of people just for oil WOULD WE...!?.Thats why we are such a popular country - everyone loves us and the Americans...Dont they...! . Nothing like a bit of popcorn and a black kettle after all you can just go over and invade CAN YOU "you can't just turf them out". They're completely different situations. This isn't about whether or not you think the Iraq War was wrong or right. Agree or disagree with it there's no denying that Saddam's regime was pretty damn brutal. Can't say the same for the government in charge of the UK at the time of the Argentine invasion of the Falklands. There's also the matter of motive. We didn't invade Iraq to annex it, where as that's exactly why the Argentinians invaded the Falklands. They're just not comparable at all. Also, your argument for wanting to give away the Falklands and kick the natives out is pathetic. Do you really think the likes of Brazil are going to stop trading with us over the Falklands? Your whole logic is flawed and I think your attitude towards the people that actually live on the Falklands is deplorable. My logic is flawed I believe I made a similar comment much earlier on with regards to other posts. They are not compatible at all? They were both wars for a start, which cost a lot of money and a lot of people lost their lives. As for kicking the natives out – It depends how you define native Didnt the French land there in 1764 and create a port..?! I have already said a few times that I think the people who live there should be well within their rights to stay there if they want. Let me say this agian so you understand. No one should be turfed out as you put it, if they dont want to be. Pretty much the majority of Latin America believe the Falklands should not belong to the UK. Brazil is going to be hudge. Who can predict the future I would sooner have Brazil on our side though. You have your oppinon I have mine. Churs.

Thank you, Abba Eban. Got to love a bit of Abba..!

Well, well, well we agree that the Iraq War was indeed an illegal invasion in 2003. I am glad we agree on something. Firstly I would like to point out that I don’t believe in war – its brutal there are no winners only causalities. If History teaches us anything its that men and nations behave appropriately once they have exhausted all other alternatives. Do I believe in the right wing extremism that Argentina imposed? Absolutely not what happened was ridiculous. I think there could have been other ways to have resolved the situation – who knows. People are quick to take the moral high ground and point out and criticize Argentina for invading the Falklands aggressively but seem to forget that we invade countries illegally, apparently for oil. The argument I have is that there are often two sides to the story that are not always evenly put across. To suggest that I believe the Island should be ethnically cleansed is laughable. If the Islanders want to remain British I truly believe they should absolutely have the right to remain British that does not mean the land has to belong 100% British. I find it difficult to accept that in 2012, Territory 12 000 miles away deserves to be British for eternity. 30 years on, not only is Argentina a democracy but Argentina and South America are extremely vital economic trading nations. Brazil is one of the fastest developing BRIC nations in the World. We the UK are in times of economic hardship. This changes the dynamics in a lot of aspects. It’s in our interests to keep positive relations with as many countries as possible. Thats just my opinion..! So its wrong to invade Iraq for money, ie oil. But its okay to allow two thousand people to have their land taken from them because its in our financial interests to do so. Interesting double standards there. Or its not OK for Argentina to invade but its OK for us to invade. The people dont own the land, the land owns them.

Out of Interest is this an April Fools..? http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/apr/01/cameron-shaun-ryder-advise-tories

Well, well, well we agree that the Iraq War was indeed an illegal invasion in 2003. I am glad we agree on something. Firstly I would like to point out that I don’t believe in war – its brutal there are no winners only causalities. "If History teaches us anything its that men and nations behave appropriately once they have exhausted all other alternatives". Do I believe in the right wing extremism that Argentina imposed? Absolutely not what happened was ridiculous. I think there could have been other ways to have resolved the situation – who knows. People are quick to take the moral high ground and point out and criticize Argentina for invading the Falklands aggressively but seem to forget that we invade countries illegally, apparently for oil. The argument I have is that there are often two sides to the story that are not always evenly put across. To suggest that I believe the Island should be ethnically cleansed is laughable. If the Islanders want to remain British I truly believe they should absolutely have the right to remain British that does not mean the land has to belong 100% British. I find it difficult to accept that in 2012, Territory 12 000 miles away deserves to be British for eternity. 30 years on, not only is Argentina a democracy but Argentina and South America are extremely vital economic trading nations. Brazil is one of the fastest developing BRIC nations in the World. We the UK are in times of economic hardship. This changes the dynamics in a lot of aspects. It’s in our interests to keep positive relations with as many countries as possible. Thats just my opinion..!

According to Wiki the 1m estimate was based on polling a sample of 2,000 people to ask if any members of their household had died. I'm not clear how they tried to ensure that the sample was representative - by its nature, the conflict seems like a hard thing to get a representative sample of. The Lancet estimate is based on household survey data, comparing death rates before and after the conflict to find estimated "excess deaths", which will include both violence and also things like shortage of medical supplies, destruction of the infrastructure and other contributory factors. Death certificates were available in 92% of the cases where people were asked for them. This seems a bit more robust to me. That gives an estimate of 650,000. Still a lot of people though - wouldnt you agree...?!

Oh really you cant just go over to another country and invade them. Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? It was wrong for the right wing dictatorship to invade the Falklands no doubts about that at. but for those who have mentioned this already Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? Pop corn and a kettle any one...?! Yes, because the Iraq War and the Argentine invasion of the Falklands are comparable... :| LOL - Whats your point. It was NOT OK for the Argentinians to invade the Falklnads but it was OK for British Troops to invade Iraq in an illegal war where at least 100 000 people were killed where some reports even suggest up to 1 000 000. Yes its big bad terrible Argentina alright - we are a superbly humain Country we would never dream of invading a country killing loads of people just for oil WOULD WE...!?.Thats why we are such a popular country - everyone loves us and the Americans...Dont they...! . Nothing like a bit of popcorn and a black kettle after all you can just go over and invade CAN YOU "you can't just turf them out".

lol - that will do...!

We probably need 6 points to stay up. Liverpool v Aston Villa 0 points Aston Villa v Stoke 1 point Man Utd v Aston Villa 0 points Aston Villa v Sunderland 1 point Aston Villa v Bolton 1 point West Brom v Aston Villa 1 point Aston Villa v Tottenham 0 points Norwich v Aston Villa 1 point Would 38 points be enough....?

It will be 4 or maybee 5 0....! Mccleish OUT..!

Where are Clarke, Cueallar, Dunne..?

Pop corn and a kettle? yep you heard..! weeeeeeeeeeeeeey!

In what sense? He wasn’t an MP until 1987... Now that is worth a ! Yep, that's a tremendous example of total pwnage! George Galloway supported the invasion of the Falkands are you saying he didnt. Who cares what Galloway thinks? But if he wasn't even an MP, he didn't as you say, vote on it. You appear to have been found out big time in a blatant assumption. What do you mean I have been found out - he supported the invasion of the Flaklands are you saying he didnt...?!

Oh really you cant just go over to another country and invade them. Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? Oh dear. 1 million is yet another fact you appear to have picked for effect rather than accuracy. The body count for Iraq currently standc at between 105,890 and 115,694. Appalling of course, but not as you say,1,000,000. Check your facts please. Of course if you started an illegal war - would you try and make casualties total high or low....? According to the Landsit the journal of the bristtish medical association it was 1 000 000. The point is its a lot people.

Oh really you cant just go over to another country and invade them. Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? It was wrong for the right wing dictatorship to invade the Falklands no doubts about that at. but for those who have mentioned this already Do you remember that illegal war we had with Iraq which 1 million people died in...? Pop corn and a kettle any one...?!

In what sense? He wasn’t an MP until 1987... Now that is worth a ! Yep, that's a tremendous example of total pwnage! George Galloway supported the invasion of the Falkands are you saying he didnt.