altus Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Not really no. It is obvious that if it were a Lib Dem dominated government they would be much more open minded to discussing it. Quoting one Lib politician who is towing the collective line doesn't really change that. More "obvious" stuff that is only obvious to you. You really do think the Lib Dems would negotiate away the Falkland Islanders' sovereignty don't you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Based on what evidence? Ah the joys of a security council seat. Based on the evidence of Lib Dem behaviour and policies over the years. I see the value of a very ethical set of politicians in the system, however they often come across as plain wet. With further regard to evidence I don't go around backing up my points with multiple links that people just ignore or disagree with anyway. That's taking Sheffield Forum too seriously, some mistake this for the Oxford Debating Society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 More "obvious" stuff that is only obvious to you. You really do think the Lib Dems would negotiate away the Falkland Islanders' sovereignty don't you. Well you know I never said that. I predict wet Clegg would sit down and propose allowing Argentina access to oil rights/profits or suggest some of their citizens move to the island in the 'spirit of sharing'. I believe my prediction of Clegg's approach is shared by the majority of voters who see the Lib Dems as wet compromisers. I accept I could be completely wrong and Clegg might send a few subs there instead but let's face it, I'm right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I've made nothing up. I've predicted out the obvious. Get angry all you like, the fact is most voters would agree with me on Clegg's/Lib Dem approach to this issue. We'll see how many are left after the 2015 election. Hmmm, an "obvious" prediction that was incorrect. Now you seem to think the next election is going to be a referendum on what you claim, despite evidence to the contrary, is the Lib Dems policy on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Of course he is. As you would expect. But I'm quite sure I could tell them just the same thing...It's not a big deal. In one report in the Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9342973/Respect-the-Falklanders-David-Cameron-tells-Cristina-Kirchner-in-row.html quotes "David Cameron on Tuesday night had a furious face-to-face showdown with the Argentine president over the Falkland Islands." That gives the impression that they had a screaming stand up row. It was nothing of the sort, especially as it involved interpreters translating what they were saying! Spin! Not quite the usual diplomatic stance taken by national leaders though,"screaming row" can be relative... You probably could have told her the same thing but the impact of your "rant" would be less than none.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Well you know I never said that. The ellipsis at the end of post 9 was certainly meant to lead people to draw that conclusion. I predict wet Clegg would sit down and propose allowing Argentina access to oil rights/profits or suggest some of their citizens move to the island in the 'spirit of sharing'. I believe my prediction of Clegg's approach is shared by the majority of voters who see the Lib Dems as wet compromisers. I accept I could be completely wrong and Clegg might send a few subs there instead but let's face it, I'm right. There you go making things up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Hmmm, an "obvious" prediction that was incorrect. Now you seem to think the next election is going to be a referendum on what you claim, despite evidence to the contrary, is the Lib Dems policy on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands. I say a prediction e.g. we'll never know, you state it is incorrect, your faith in the Lib Dems is touching. Fortunately or unfortunately there'll be few left after 2015 judging by current opinions. I doubt the Falklands will be an issue in 2015 as I believe it's a non event anyway. What is true is that the Lib Dem's wet image has been made wetter and they are generally seen as sell outs. An unfair accusation really since they had to accept the situation as it was. However most people don't see it like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 The ellipsis at the end of post 9 was certainly meant to lead people to draw that conclusion. There you go making things up again. Why not set up a SF poll asking people what they think Clegg's reaction to Argentina would be if he were PM? You know what the outcome would be. Using words like ellipsis to look clever doesn't do you any favours either. You simply exacerbate the stereotype of Lib Dem's and their supporters as upper middle class 'do gooders' with no experience of reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bladesman Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Actually, the Argentinian president was reportedly flustered by his approach/what he said (and/or his alleged refusal to accept her alleged envelope allegedly marked 'UN - Malvinas') and mumbled something too fast for her interpreter to translate. He also reportedly snubbed her by turning his back on her and walking away without any farewell at the end of the 'conversation'. So reports the US Washington Post and the French Le Point. So, part-spin (headline, as expected of the Telegraph), but part-truth as well. It was anything but friendly, and you have to bear in mind the context and level of that 'incident': heads of states having less than all-smiles natters is big diplomatic stuff. If Cameron did all that he reportedly did, by diplomatic standards that's about the equivalent of a foot in the @rse. It doesn't bear any comparison with e.g. your discussions with your mate down the pub or, for that matter, some MPs having at some verbal aggro in the Parliament. If any of it is true then it isn't really a lot different to her snubbing a letter handed directly to her in person from the Islanders themselves. She did that last week and her minder told them to pop it into the embassy even though she was right there to receive it in person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Flip side of the coin, would it have been weak of him to pass up the opportunity to tell Fernandez where she can stick her claim to the Falklands? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.