More Argie Bargie

[jmorgan]

Regiment said:

For everyone wanting a good laugh but lots of doom and gloom from the Daily Mail...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077813/Fa...

They forgot to mention what happened before those marines surrendered (ref first picture, real or still from that TV drama??)


Edit. Looks like that image is real.

Edited by jmorgan on Friday 23 December 12:43

[Saddle bum]

Regiment said:

For everyone wanting a good laugh but lots of doom and gloom from the Daily Mail...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077813/Fa...

Should that scenario ever transpire the true, violent, nature of the British people would surface.

A far right wing Government would be in power in no time flat, the old style politicos could very well find themselves in "protective custody"

Money and the means would be found to get the Islands back.

The Islands would be retaken, at a terrible cost to both sides. Then Britain could very well find itself ostracized in a far from friendly world.

Nobody would like us, but we would not care.

[Zaxxon]

Anyone worried about the decline of British military should take a glance at the Argentinian military. They have stagnated since 1982 and could not mount anything like an invasion.

The only time we need to worry is if they were backed by Brazil, then we would be pretty screwed. Although I would be surprised if Brazil wanted to suffer global indignation for doing so.

[anonymous-user]

Jackleman said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

If UK and/or the oil industry want to hang on to the Falklands then someone better commit to some pretty serious investment in defence of the realm down there!

As mentioned above, it is all sitting in Portsmouth doing fk all! 4 brand new, state of art destroyers all moored up alongside each other. It makes me wonder whether we need half of this kit or armed forces this size when you see assets of that value doing nothing. We clearly are not under that much of a threat!

That's not nice all the boys will be home for christmas having a p*ss up, anyway no one would attack @ christmas when your defences are down would they ? How uncharitable.

[jbi]

Zaxxon said:

The only time we need to worry is if they were backed by Brazil, then we would be pretty screwed. Although I would be surprised if Brazil wanted to suffer global indignation for doing so.

Brazil has a small dated airforce which would not be able to gain air superiority even if they wanted to take part in an invasion (which they would not)

Interestingly, all 9 of Brazils frigates (they have no destroyers) are of British origin

It's all talk and bluster

[hidetheelephants]

Ordinary_Chap said:

warch said:

Ordinary_Chap said:

Picking on the islanders is the lowest of the low for me regardless of their feelings about who the island belongs to.

I agree, the main reason the UK is committed to protecting the Falklands is because it is what the majority of the population want. I'm pretty sure all the parties involved could thrash out a deal over oil rights if thats the problem. I don't think another war would be a great idea, as I understand it we're not equipped for this kind of warfare anymore.

The war if they started would be so hopelessly one sided I don't think even as bonkers as they are they'd ever go there.

So that leaves them with trying to cause maximum trouble for the islanders by encouraging their neighboring countries to support their bullying of the islanders.

I'd suggest no oil rights for them or support of their economy until they change their ways and drop their claims over the islands.

The current bks only affects 20 or so trawlers, the Falklands register has no large ships on it; it will have sod all effect on anything. There was a bilateral agreement in place to deal with oil exploitation but Kirchner decided to tear it up in 2007 for no discernable reason.

There is commercial oil down there but it won't be quantified until they test drill it all, which at the speed they're doing it now will take decades. Estimates of the recoverable oil are just guesses really, but it's the same rock the Brazilians are getting their oil out of so I'd say it's a good bet. The Falklands Oil and Gas Co. claim up to 60 billion barrels are down there spread around the 4 basins, which would make it roughly equal in size to the Norwegian sector of the North Sea. If so there are going to be a lot of very rich Bennies walking around.

From the Telegraph's comment page; I like the hypocracy of this;

telegraph said:

Argentina and its neighbours are firmly of the view – misguided though it is – that British ownership of the islands represents the last post-colonial venture in Latin America.

Apparently they've all forgotten that the French still retain French Guiana, and have successfully kept what little indigenous population remains as vassals. Now that's a dirty little secret worth shouting about.

Edited by hidetheelephants on Friday 23 December 14:13

[DonkeyApple]

rovermorris999 said:

Let's hope the UK government isn't caught short like last time.

Let's see.......How many aircraft carriers do we have? Planes to fly from them?

What cold weather equipment do we have for an army that has been fighting in the desert for 20 years?

What amphibious equipment do we have?

We have absolutely no way to take back the Falklands if there are troops on them. None.

We can sink their battleships but couldn't remove troops.

[muffinmenace]

DonkeyApple said:

Let's see.......How many aircraft carriers do we have? Planes to fly from them?

What cold weather equipment do we have for an army that has been fighting in the desert for 20 years?

What amphibious equipment do we have?

We have absolutely no way to take back the Falklands if there are troops on them. None.

We can sink their battleships but couldn't remove troops.

We've got amphibious assualt carriers, three in fact. We flew sorties over Lybia from the UK, the same could be possible for bombing Argentia, and was in the first war. The RAF would be a 'bit hot', but the Argie's have the grand total of fk all to fight with so it'd be over sharpish.

[DonkeyApple]

muffinmenace said:

We've got amphibious assualt carriers, three in fact. We flew sorties over Lybia from the UK, the same could be possible for bombing Argentia, and was in the first war. The RAF would be a 'bit hot', but the Argie's have the grand total of fk all to fight with so it'd be over sharpish.

We only just managed to get them back last time. We have half the navy and suitable air force now to take them back if we needed to.

I doubt there is much coincidence to upsetting the French and now these silly stirrings down in the Atlantic.

Leaders have over spent and need to keep their people happy.

The Argentinian military is a joke but I doubt we could extract them if they landed. Not without being extremely brutal which the rest of the world would not allow. For starters the whole of the EU would be against us as would Obama.

There may be prudence in moving enough kit down there to stop a legion of muppets landing in the first place as I doubt we could extract them after.

[Chicharito]

It's a tricky one to call - although we no longer have carrier capability, our military tech. has moved on a long way since the early 80s - whereas the Argentines have lost capability as well as relying on the same 1950s kit they had back when they invaded last time, too.

They'd never attempt a ship based invasion these days, as their old clunkers would be sitting ducks for our subs (I believe we have at least one sub on patrol down there) - and I can't see them getting any transport plane even close to the islands. Even if they could, they can't land big numbers out of a handful of knackered old Hercules.

[DonkeyApple]

Chicharito said:

It's a tricky one to call - although we no longer have carrier capability, our military tech. has moved on a long way since the early 80s - whereas the Argentines have lost capability as well as relying on the same 1950s kit they had back when they invaded last time, too.

They'd never attempt a ship based invasion these days, as their old clunkers would be sitting ducks for our subs (I believe we have at least one sub on patrol down there) - and I can't see them getting any transport plane even close to the islands. Even if they could, they can't land big numbers out of a handful of knackered old Hercules.

You'd have to rely on sinking the transports as they left national waters. I almost feel that's too aggressive for the modern world.

Also, I'm not sure how many subs we have and what they state they are in. Also I'm sure they have more than us in those waters?

I'm sure the French have updated the Arg airforce and air assault capabilities while we now have almost no remote air capability so little way to protect our shipping and we don't have enough shipping to handle the kind of losses we did last time.

While we do have an enormous amount of very modern kit it's all painted beige and fitted with aircon not heaters.

Absolute brutality before a foreign foot landed on British soil would be the only option.

[Ozzie Osmond]

DonkeyApple said:

While we do have an enormous amount of very modern kit it's all painted beige and fitted with aircon not heaters.

Yup, if the South Americans cut up rough it's not easy to see a "win" for Blighty. However, it would be rather bad form....

[Ordinary_Chap]

DonkeyApple said:

Chicharito said:

It's a tricky one to call - although we no longer have carrier capability, our military tech. has moved on a long way since the early 80s - whereas the Argentines have lost capability as well as relying on the same 1950s kit they had back when they invaded last time, too.

They'd never attempt a ship based invasion these days, as their old clunkers would be sitting ducks for our subs (I believe we have at least one sub on patrol down there) - and I can't see them getting any transport plane even close to the islands. Even if they could, they can't land big numbers out of a handful of knackered old Hercules.

You'd have to rely on sinking the transports as they left national waters. I almost feel that's too aggressive for the modern world.

Also, I'm not sure how many subs we have and what they state they are in. Also I'm sure they have more than us in those waters?

I'm sure the French have updated the Arg airforce and air assault capabilities while we now have almost no remote air capability so little way to protect our shipping and we don't have enough shipping to handle the kind of losses we did last time.

While we do have an enormous amount of very modern kit it's all painted beige and fitted with aircon not heaters.

Absolute brutality before a foreign foot landed on British soil would be the only option.

This time VS last time isn't comparable.

We are in far better shape to protect the islands this time, not that the argies would be able to beat our island defences anyway.

Last time we had no island defences, warships with untested anti-missile systems and such a woeful lack of preparation which is one of the reasons we suffered heavy losses.

Besides even if we didn't have any of that, I'd be quite willing to put money on us succeeding in a remote assault.

[mat13]

If it really came down to it i think we could re take the islands, we have the assault craft, and we've got a battle hardened army, when it comes down to it there's no substitute for experience, especially when that experience comes equipped with better vehicles and better weapons.

Also four euro-fighters doesn't sound a lot but they could take out the argies old birds before they could even see them, especially when backed by the ground defenses based on the islands.

[DonkeyApple]

Ordinary_Chap said:

This time VS last time isn't comparable.

We are in far better shape to protect the islands this time, not that the argies would be able to beat our island defences anyway.

Last time we had no island defences, warships with untested anti-missile systems and such a woeful lack of preparation which is one of the reasons we suffered heavy losses.

Besides even if we didn't have any of that, I'd be quite willing to put money on us succeeding in a remote assault.

I'd like to think so but I do feel the only key is in first defense as we just could take them back at all easily.

I don't think we have the ability to operate an air force at distance from sea. I suspect they have much more modern Mirages and Exocets with as many extra as they want being donated by the French.

I'm sure we have fewer ships than last time.

Arguably our personnel are highly practiced and we'd hope not to make the same errors as last time but then so would they.

I'm sure the only option is to stop them landing in the first place.

However, so long as EU members do not stir it up too much I can't actually see anything happening.

[Chicharito]

DonkeyApple said:

I'm sure the French have updated the Arg airforce and air assault capabilities while we now have almost no remote air capability so little way to protect our shipping and we don't have enough shipping to handle the kind of losses we did last time.

Their air capability is significantly poorer than it was 30 years ago - they never really replaced the stuff they lost during the first conflict, and their only upgrade seems to be an Israeli upgrade of the Daggers to Finger spec., but they only have a couple of those in flying condition anyway.

Their navy consists of a few ancient ex-US frigates, their flagship is a Type 42, and they have some small gunship / Corvettes.

They have absolutely no chance of making a successful invasion, and even if they did manage to land troops, they wouldn't be able to land enough numbers to hold the islands.

[MX7]

Having read all this, why is Kirchner bringing up the essence of Galtieri back? Does she not remember what happened to him?! A touch of 'The Mental'?

[anonymous-user]

It appears the Argentinians have internal problems of their own with the government cracking down on a T.V and newspaper media group.
DC says his bit here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-16320959

[Northern Munkee]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The islanders must be relieved it's the Tories in charge, I can't imagine the miliband sounding as convincing, even if he said something similar, i wouldn't trust him/them. He speak with forked tongue

[Northern Munkee]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The islanders must be relieved it's the Tories in charge, I can't imagine the miliband sounding as convincing, even if he said something similar, i wouldn't trust him/them. He speak with forked tongue