More Argie Bargie
Discussion
RichyBoy said:
It may have been mentioned already. 
I see the IOC have now criticised the Argentinian advert for politicising the games. Perhaps this was the (misplaced) fear of the UK ad agency who airbrushed HMS Belfast off the London 2012 poster. Still any criticism of the Argies is good, show them up to be the petulant fools that they are.
Ayahuasca said:
Hold on - I travel there several times a year and getting nuked would be inconvenient.
Do you go for the willied women or are you selling all our State secrets to our Arch-Nemesis, the French, errr, Germans, errr... Who are we hating today? 
Honestly - In my experience Argies are lovely people - It's politicians who are a
holes...M.
That would be very entertaining!TeamD said:
Traveller said:
TeamD said:
Can we not just nuke Buenos Aires and get on with our lives? I understand that the tridents are getting a bit past the use-by date so we might as well.
Sure, but expect retaliation of a similar kind, how about a great big dirty bomb going off in the middle of London? Making it glow for 50 years, think Canary Wharf or Manchester IRA bomb with added glow. You do not need full fat nukes to do serious damage.
Ayahuasca said:
If an RG civilian airliner from Argentina landed on a regular, scheduled basis at MPA for a number of months until it became part of the furniture, I wonder what we would do if one day the airliner turned out to be a C130 loaded with RG special forces?
People mention this all the time so I suspect that the garrison at mount pleasant would probably have a contingency plan for precisely this occurrence. 1: The missile batteries probably ID this flight each time it comes in. Even once on ground the aircraft is still targetable and the men vulnerable until they have dispersed away from it.
2: Even if 90 special force get on the ground what exactly will they do? You would have 90 well trained men on the ground, but with only what they can carry on their belt kit, and foot mobile. It would take them 10-20 minutes to get from the hard standing to where the Typhoons are hangared or the soldiers based.
If they were quick they could possibly kill a lot of people, maybe smash some facilities and equipment. However they would be facing a larger professional infantry formation which has much better local knowledge, heavier weaponry and much more supplies. On top of that you then have several hundred non infantry personnel and various Navy/RAF servicemen plus the Falklands defence force.
However the principle issue is that this "hold until relived" mission relies on them being relieved. They could potentially dig in and try to hold part of the airbase however the sheer size of the place would prevent 90 men from holding even a substantial fraction of it against several hundred opposition forces.
Relief para troopers (no that the terrain is good for para landing) would have to be dropped outside of the range of the Rapier system (so 15 miles to be safe) and would be out numbered by the defenders who would have heavier weapons, more supplies and road and helicopter mobility.
The only way the Argentines could reasonably invade the islands would be to use amphibious forces. These have two issues, 1 they are easy to spot preparing, loading and leaving for the islands, 2 they are relatively easy to sink using nuclear subs. Even if you take the subs out of the equation, disable the Typhoons, and place enough special forces in the vicinity of Mount Pleasant to deter landing aircraft there for a few days the RAF can still land C17 aircraft at Port Stanley air-field if push comes to shove. If they land a few force multiplies like some Apache helicopters, some light guns, light armoured vehicles and lots of ATGMs then your amphibious landing is off.
In short there are so many things which need to go right for the Argentines that it isn't really credible for them to be able to invade. Beyond the initial spear point where you have an element of surprise you would then have to reinforce against an alerted enemy who has significant capability to interdict this reinforcements. RAF and Navy cruise missiles and long range strikes would make the Argentine air-force and navy evaporate within a week or so, in 1982 they had weeks of uninterrupted naval supply to build up their forces.
NightRunner said:
Could we not just propose a proper democratic solution?
A referendum on the Falklands:
Do you want the Falklands to be:
1- British
2 - Argentinian
Whatever they say goes.
For the islanders? A referendum on the Falklands:
Do you want the Falklands to be:
1- British
2 - Argentinian
Whatever they say goes.
Any democratic decision strikes me that it will fall on deaf ears in Argentina. They don't want the people but the land, and as such any right of self determination shown by us or them will be met with more tired rhetoric.
Just have to start tuning out her rantings and ravings and accept them as someone trying to divert attention from the real problems in her own country.
Talksteer said:
2: Even if 90 special force get on the ground what exactly will they do? You would have 90 well trained men on the ground, but with only what they can carry on their belt kit, and foot mobile. It would take them 10-20 minutes to get from the hard standing to where the Typhoons are hangared or the soldiers based.
To be fair, I spent most if my tours on FI either pissed or hungover & it would've taken twice as long as that just to put one boot on Back of the net? Only if yoiu like an own goal...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southame...
Argie hocky player in the Olympics ad now likely to be dropped.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southame...
Argie hocky player in the Olympics ad now likely to be dropped.
Well the Govt has now decided to buy jump jets for the carriers.
About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
ExFiF said:
Well the Govt has now decided to buy jump jets for the carriers.
About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
Nope. Stupid, stupid decision. About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
ExFiF said:
Well the Govt has now decided to buy jump jets for the carriers.
About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
Great; you know what's going to happen now, the Pentagon will announce axing the 35B to save money.About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
ExFiF said:
Well the Govt has now decided to buy jump jets for the carriers.
About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
Worst possible decision - means we can ONLY operate expensive, limited range jump jets and helicopters from the carriers, instead of a full range of aircraft, nor can we inter-operate with other country's carrier aircraft.About turn on new variant of carrier fighters
Too late for this thread mind but must be good news.
MartG said:
Worst possible decision - means we can ONLY operate expensive, limited range jump jets and helicopters from the carriers, instead of a full range of aircraft, nor can we inter-operate with other country's carrier aircraft.
Didnt we just get rid of some cheap, limited range jump jets with an amazing servicability record? So we replace them with expense, limited range jump jets which will be a complete nightmare to keep servicable? I see what they have done there!! 
superlightr said:
cant we un-mothball, buy back our Harriers? If not why not contact our buddies in the USA and buy/lease a dozen US AV8B to use until 2020 when the catapult can be fitted and use the planned aircraft?
The yanks bought all of our harrier and were amazed at how well we had looked after them.Apparently it was like buying a showroom full of brand new cars to use as spares
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff