africanspur
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2010
- Messages
- 9,319
- Supports
- Tottenham Hotspur
Have to pronounce Africa in a gap yah way there but I'll let it slide.
Cheers, my first ever.Have to pronounce Africa in a gap yah way there but I'll let it slide.
it shows, dont do it againCheers, my first ever.
That's depressing. Why don't you cheer us both up by writing a list of the good things about Africa now?
Yep, as my continent suffers with the legacy of colonialism, with the West's continuing soft power on the continent, with China increasingly encroaching as well, with the HIV and AIDS epidemic, with war, with famine and drought, with disgustingly poor health care, with unrivaled corruption, with terrible women's rights, with poverty, with brutal right-wing dictatorships, with genocidaires and humans rights abusers, with subsistence economies being ruined by countries higher up the development ladder telling us what to do and how to do it, in the process destroying whatever structures we have ....
A list of good things about Africa? The words of a man who's never visited the dark Continent clearly.That's depressing. Why don't you cheer us both up by writing a list of the good things about Africa now?
Incidentally, looking at that list, the worst thing for me is corruption, wherever it is I fecking hate it.
Here's his update from the 23rd -I still can't quite believe that Sean Penn gave a statement on the Falklands situation, it's like something out of Team America.
WTF?!? Pseud's Corner ahoy!Sean Penn said:the raconteurism of Patagonian fishermen.
What I'd do to have leaders even half as good as Lula across Africa. And yes, it would be nice to have leftist leaders across Africa, democracy or no, would likely do a great deal more for the population than the utter imbeciles we have now.Africa could do a lot worse than a 'rise of the new left' of their own. A very necessary counterweight to the neoliberalism that went before it in South America, some countries Brazil (Uruguay and a couple of others too) have even been able to keep a leftist flavour but measured to work in a capitalist system (one of the big successes of Lula in Brazil is providing a good blueprint for the rest to follow).
Depending on how Venezuela goes this October (I think) we could see the end of the more radical left wing governments in the region, for more moderate one's like we see in Brazil.
what? he is in character, "the wrath of my name is sam"
I can't believe that's genuine; someone satirising celebrities with political aspirations couldn't have written anything more amusing.Here's his update from the 23rd -
Sean Penn: The Malvinas/Falklands
"This is not a cause of leftist flamboyance nor significantly a centuries-old literary dispute. But rather a modern one, that is perhaps unveiled most legitimately through the raconteurism of Patagonian fishermen. One perhaps more analogous to South Africa than a reparation discussion in South Carolina. As a result, we must look to the mutual recognition of this illusive paradigm by both countries."
Possibly one of the most pretentious, pompous articles I've ever read.
What next, Rob Schneider on Darfur?
i think not, in fact, i read somewhere that the law used by the authorities to stop the ships was clearly not aplicable to this case, it was writen for war vessels or fishing ships without permits
Why does Britain need to concede anything? What exactly could it concede?why cannot both sides sit down with the Falkland representatives and come to an agreement. all sides need to concede something.
going to war..again...would be the worst thing for all parties.
Joke, Brian!
I can never tell with some of your jokes sometimes, especially when somebody tries to equate my domestic views with anything overseas.
If it's in limerick form it's generally a fair bet
We could concede that we are pig-headedly sticking to our guns, that we're not a Catholic country, and, therefore ,that we don't care what a 16th century Pope said.Why does Britain need to concede anything? What exactly could it concede?
*applauds*this are the kind of things that makes polititian careers blossom and poor people die
for over what?
let's supose there are gazillions of barrels of oil, so? do you think any of that money will go to your pockets?
it wont, it will go to the already megabillionaires that will be even richer
if the people of every country showed their leaders they don't want to die just to make some rich guy richer -and that's what the wars are fought for- we could be a happy world
Britain is happy with its position, it is the Argentine government that insists on making this a political issue. If Kirchner wasn't constantly threatening the people of the islands and their right to self determination, people in Britain wouldn't even be thinking about the Falklands.what do you care? i dont care, you shouldnt too
this are the kind of things that makes polititian careers blossom and poor people die
for over what?
let's supose there are gazillions of barrels of oil, so? do you think any of that money will go to your pockets?
it wont, it will go to the already megabillionaires that will be even richer
if the people of every country showed their leaders they don't want to die just to make some rich guy richer -and that's what the wars are fought for- we could be a happy world
They don't have a right of 'self-determination' they're not an indigenous population but a bunch of colonists from 8,000 miles away.If Kirchner wasn't constantly threatening the people of the islands and their right to self determination, people in Britain wouldn't even be thinking about the Falklands.
So what would it be then? After Argentina takes control of the territory against the wishes of its inhabitants...forcibly remove the islanders from their homes? Occupy the islands against their wishes and keep them at gunpoint as they go about their lives? Ship in thousands of Argentinian citizens to politically and culturally overpower the islanders?I'm with Sean Penn on this.
mate, the argentinian military has the fire power of a small USA town in 4 of julyBritain is happy with its position, it is the Argentine government that insists on making this a political issue. If Kirchner wasn't constantly threatening the people of the islands and their right to self determination, people in Britain wouldn't even be thinking about the Falklands.
exactly! what the feck will we do with the falkalnders? tell them they are argies? and then, what?So what would it be then? After Argentina takes control of the territory against the wishes of its inhabitants...forcibly remove the islanders from their homes? Occupy the islands against their wishes and keep them at gunpoint as they go about their lives? Ship in thousands of Argentinian citizens to politically and culturally overpower the islanders?
Those are the three options if you believe the islands should be handed over to Argentina against the wishes of the people.
What kind of twisted thinking is that?They don't have a right of 'self-determination' they're not an indigenous population but a bunch of colonists from 8,000 miles away.
I agree that the Falklands issue is being raised in Argentina purely for reasons of political gain for the current administration. That's what I mean - it is not the British who are particularly bothered about the islands, it is the Argentines. Britain doesn't want anything to change, so it would like for the issue to just go away.mate, the argentinian military has the fire power of a small USA town in 4 of july
we cant threaten shit, you know what is going to happen to argentina and it's seudo foreign policy on this matter? we will recieve a lot of moral suport from the UN and our south american friends,
all those "friends" will keep trading with Great Britain, Europe and Asia, while we, the amazing argies, that think we know it all, will be blocked
because that's the next step and the only conclusion for what argentina is trying to do with great britain
but at least, we can avoid a war that we cant fight,
exactlyWhat kind of twisted thinking is that?
Being 'indigenous' should not offer political privilege in this day and age. Somebody who has spent his/her entire life in a particular place has just as much of a right to call it his/her home as somebody whose ancestry in that territory goes back far enough to be classed as 'indigenous'. It' not even the case that an indigenous population was dispossessed to make way for them - there never was an indigenous population, as you know.
I agree that the Falklands issue is being raised in Argentina purely for reasons of political gain for the current administration. That's what I mean - it is not the British who are particular bothered about the islands, it is the Argentines. Britain doesn't want anything to change, so it would like for the issue to just go away.
*bows**applauds*
You could say the same about Argentina itself.They don't have a right of 'self-determination' they're not an indigenous population but a bunch of colonists from 8,000 miles away.
He does this every so many pages, gets proven that he's wrong, stays out for a while then says it again.You could say the same about Argentina itself.
There was never any indigenous Argentine population on the islands. How come you give more weight to the wishes of the descendants of Spanish and Italian colonists than you do to those of the descendants of British colonists?
This reminds me of Joey's letter in Friends when he used Thesaurus a little too eagerly.Here's his update from the 23rd -
Sean Penn: The Malvinas/Falklands
"This is not a cause of leftist flamboyance nor significantly a centuries-old literary dispute. But rather a modern one, that is perhaps unveiled most legitimately through the raconteurism of Patagonian fishermen. One perhaps more analogous to South Africa than a reparation discussion in South Carolina. As a result, we must look to the mutual recognition of this illusive paradigm by both countries."
Possibly one of the most pretentious, pompous articles I've ever read.
What next, Rob Schneider on Darfur?