Menú
Inicio
Visitar el Sitio Zona Militar
Foros
Nuevos mensajes
Buscar en los foros
Qué hay de nuevo
Nuevos mensajes
Última actividad
Miembros
Visitantes actuales
Entrar
Registrarse
Novedades
Buscar
Buscar
Buscar sólo en títulos
Por:
Nuevos mensajes
Buscar en los foros
Menú
Entrar
Registrarse
Inicio
Foros
Area Militar General
Malvinas 1982
Explotación y usurpación de recursos en las Malvinas por Gran Bretaña
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
Estás usando un navegador obsoleto. No se pueden mostrar estos u otros sitios web correctamente.
Se debe actualizar o usar un
navegador alternativo
.
Responder al tema
Mensaje
<blockquote data-quote="francisco alberto sprovieri" data-source="post: 1120379" data-attributes="member: 4782"><p>And all we can do is what we always do in such binds: cry God for Harry, William and St George. Summon up the dispatch box blood. Replace fair dealing with synthetic rage. Forget the Falklanders' best interests yet again.</p><p>There's oil in the seas around the islands. There are oilmen flocking to Puerto Argentino. What there isn't, though, is any big company involvement in looking for it or developing a proper industry that would make the 3,000 (though not George Osborne) rich. For where do you sell that oil? Where do you bring it ashore? How do you unlock a potential future that axiomatically excludes Argentina?</p><p>Honesty includes the one element that David Cameron leaves out. If you're going to give the Falklanders a choice and referendum on what comes next, then the choice needs to be real, not rhetorical mush. Could the heirs of Ridley do a deal with Fernández de Kirchner? Of course they could. That's option A on the ballot form. But what can we, the taxpayers of Britain, offer as option B? Do we want to keep paying and paying as the decades roll away? Paying to sustain a little colony that can't grow and prosper without fear. Shouldn't we be allowed to say what future we can afford to offer the Malvinas beyond a status quo we can't sustain? Our choice for them.</p><p>For, sooner or later, oil and forgetfulness will contrive to sell the islanders out in any case. That's the dirty secret behind the bluster, and the truth that needs recognising at last. If Cameron's <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/31/david-cameron-europe-editorial"><u><span style="color: #0066cc">vetoes in Europe don't last three weeks</span></u></a>, why suppose they will last three centuries in the south Atlantic? Why not solve it now?</p><p></p><p>Peter Preston, The Guardian.</p><p><span style="color: rgb(204,204,204)"><span style="font-size: 10px">--- merged: Feb 3, 2012 4:22 AM ---</span></span></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Lamento mi inutilidad informatica, no puedo cambiar Fal*** por Malvinas, no se como hacerlo... .</p><p></p><p></p><p>Abrazo.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="francisco alberto sprovieri, post: 1120379, member: 4782"] And all we can do is what we always do in such binds: cry God for Harry, William and St George. Summon up the dispatch box blood. Replace fair dealing with synthetic rage. Forget the Falklanders' best interests yet again. There's oil in the seas around the islands. There are oilmen flocking to Puerto Argentino. What there isn't, though, is any big company involvement in looking for it or developing a proper industry that would make the 3,000 (though not George Osborne) rich. For where do you sell that oil? Where do you bring it ashore? How do you unlock a potential future that axiomatically excludes Argentina? Honesty includes the one element that David Cameron leaves out. If you're going to give the Falklanders a choice and referendum on what comes next, then the choice needs to be real, not rhetorical mush. Could the heirs of Ridley do a deal with Fernández de Kirchner? Of course they could. That's option A on the ballot form. But what can we, the taxpayers of Britain, offer as option B? Do we want to keep paying and paying as the decades roll away? Paying to sustain a little colony that can't grow and prosper without fear. Shouldn't we be allowed to say what future we can afford to offer the Malvinas beyond a status quo we can't sustain? Our choice for them. For, sooner or later, oil and forgetfulness will contrive to sell the islanders out in any case. That's the dirty secret behind the bluster, and the truth that needs recognising at last. If Cameron's [URL='http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/31/david-cameron-europe-editorial'][U][COLOR=#0066cc]vetoes in Europe don't last three weeks[/COLOR][/U][/URL], why suppose they will last three centuries in the south Atlantic? Why not solve it now? Peter Preston, The Guardian. [COLOR=rgb(204,204,204)][SIZE=2]--- merged: Feb 3, 2012 4:22 AM ---[/SIZE][/COLOR] Lamento mi inutilidad informatica, no puedo cambiar Fal*** por Malvinas, no se como hacerlo... . Abrazo. [/QUOTE]
Insertar citas…
Verificación
¿Cuanto es 2 mas 6? (en letras)
Responder
Inicio
Foros
Area Militar General
Malvinas 1982
Explotación y usurpación de recursos en las Malvinas por Gran Bretaña
Este sitio usa cookies. Para continuar usando este sitio, se debe aceptar nuestro uso de cookies.
Aceptar
Más información.…
Arriba