More Argie Bargie

Author
Discussion

Asterix

24,438 posts

227 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
NomduJour said:
Asterix said:
Just wish the bloke next door would stop trying to key it.
Your driveway is closer to his house than yours, so it's only fair that you let him have it. And don't forget to apologise.
I think he's just trying to impress his kids as his Allegro is soooo uncool.

im

34,302 posts

216 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Asterix said:
im said:
I'm never selling that car as people were injured in it by a reckless 3rd party and I now find that I couldn't bear to lose it....EVER.
However, I've now invested in the car, it's become a classic and the values are rocketing. I also found some (black) gold in the glovebox.

Just wish the bloke next door would stop trying to key it.
Just as importantly I find it gives me a permanent parking spot in the really big and rather exclusive car park just down the road.

Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

245 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Oh I see, the bloke's Chinese - give him the car.

What? He's not Chinese; he's from Israel? Well, give him someone else's car - and don't forget to saw off the end of the exhaust pipe.

im

34,302 posts

216 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
Under no circumstances give the car to anybody all as it has long standing sentimental value...



...unless that bloke from across the street who you're always trying to impress asks you if he can have it. Then sell it to him for fk all as quickly as possible and hope nobody notices.

DMN

2,983 posts

138 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
No he's Russian, we're going to give him the Ukrainians car.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
DMN said:
The car is the remenants of an Imperialist Empire. We do not recognise its right to choice.
Thank God it's your friend and not you going to monitor the Ukrainian elections eh?

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
TEKNOPUG said:
What's your point?
He's not letting personal grievances get in the way, oh no not at all!

im

34,302 posts

216 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You obviously have a financial interest in the falklands staying British yes

DMN

2,983 posts

138 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Theres a parrot flying around somewhere.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

53 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
im said:
You obviously have a financial interest in the falklands staying British yes
Yes that is a factor, one factor.

Ayahuasca

27,427 posts

278 months

Wednesday 16th April 2014
quotequote all
The Falklands would probably be Argentine today, had the junta not invaded in 1982. They meant nothing to the UK, most Britons had no idea they existed, the UK has a long tradition of de-colonising so it's not as if we were keen to hang onto distant territories for the sake of it.

Self determination? Ask the Chagossian people of the British Indian Ocean Territory about that and see what they have to say.

The fact is that Mrs T went to war to create political capital and no current politician can afford to give that capital away. The 258 British casualties (and the shocking number of veterans who have since committed suicide) are a factor, but they are not that important in the scheme of things. More Britons have died putting down the Taliban, but we didn't feel they committed us to staying in Afghanistan. Some 200 Britons died putting down the Mau-Mau, but it didn't mean we felt we had to stay in Kenya.

Trivia: who was the first Briton to land on (what is now) mainland Argentina? First correct answer wins a juicy steak and a bottle of Malbec.


V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
Ayahuasca said:
The Falklands would probably be Argentine today, had the junta not invaded in 1982. They meant nothing to the UK, most Britons had no idea they existed, the UK has a long tradition of de-colonising so it's not as if we were keen to hang onto distant territories for the sake of it.

Self determination? Ask the Chagossian people of the British Indian Ocean Territory about that and see what they have to say.

The fact is that Mrs T went to war to create political capital and no current politician can afford to give that capital away. The 258 British casualties (and the shocking number of veterans who have since committed suicide) are a factor, but they are not that important in the scheme of things. More Britons have died putting down the Taliban, but we didn't feel they committed us to staying in Afghanistan. Some 200 Britons died putting down the Mau-Mau, but it didn't mean we felt we had to stay in Kenya.

Trivia: who was the first Briton to land on (what is now) mainland Argentina? First correct answer wins a juicy steak and a bottle of Malbec.
The British went to war in 1982 to liberate the Falklands, the Tories may well have made political capital but that was a subsidiary effect, it could have ended in military disaster. Falkland Islanders want the British military to stay, the Afghans do not want the British military to stay in Afghanistan (I assume, I've never asked them), likewise Kenyans re: British remaining in Kenya.

First Briton? Owen the Red, of Welsh stock, 1623. Please send a car round with prize.

Dog Star

16,079 posts

167 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
The British went to war in 1982 to liberate the Falklands, the Tories may well have made political capital but that was a subsidiary effect, it could have ended in military disaster.
+1.

I never understand these folk that insist that Thatcher went to war for her own gain. Absolute nonsense. She did so - with the great admiration of many - against the advice of just about everyone, and at huge risk to her career and the government.

I think that the result of the conflict hugely increased the reputation of our forces in the world. It would have been humiliating in the extreme for the UK to have failed to retake the Falklands, and woe-betide any politician who even considers ceding it (note that I don't say "handing it back") to the Argentinians.

Hats off to Thatcher - great woman bow

im

34,302 posts

216 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
it could have ended in military disaster
Er, how exactly could it have ended in failure given the strengths of the 2 militaries at the time?

That would have been quite some accomplishment to actually lose to them.

The only way we could have conceivably lost would have been if the politicians had decided to prematurely pull us out once we started to lose the odd ship.

At the time the whole world knew that once the taskforce arrived on station there was only going to be one outcome albeit with some British blood being spilt.

hidetheelephants

23,772 posts

192 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
im said:
V8 Fettler said:
it could have ended in military disaster
Er, how exactly could it have ended in failure given the strengths of the 2 militaries at the time?

That would have been quite some accomplishment to actually lose to them.

The only way we could have conceivably lost would have been if the politicians had decided to prematurely pull us out once we started to lose the odd ship.

At the time the whole world knew that once the taskforce arrived on station there was only going to be one outcome.
If the argies had got lucky with their exocets and put them into Invincible and Hermes instead of Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor, the whole thing would have been off.

barryrs

4,376 posts

222 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
im said:
Er, how exactly could it have ended in failure given the strengths of the 2 militaries at the time?

That would have been quite some accomplishment to actually lose to them.

The only way we could have conceivably lost would have been if the politicians had decided to prematurely pull us out once we started to lose the odd ship.

At the time the whole world knew that once the taskforce arrived on station there was only going to be one outcome albeit with some British blood being spilt.
I dont think you appreciate the difficultly if fighting so far from home and how easily we could have failed.

This documentary always stays in my mind as to the scale of the undertaking - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40knj0qg_Us

PRTVR

7,073 posts

220 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
im said:
V8 Fettler said:
it could have ended in military disaster
Er, how exactly could it have ended in failure given the strengths of the 2 militaries at the time?

That would have been quite some accomplishment to actually lose to them.

The only way we could have conceivably lost would have been if the politicians had decided to prematurely pull us out once we started to lose the odd ship.

At the time the whole world knew that once the taskforce arrived on station there was only going to be one outcome albeit with some British blood being spilt.
I do not think people realise how close we came to loosing, if we had lost one carrier it was game over, the problems of air v ships has been known about since the second world war, you just have to look at the damage inflicted on the fleet by the Argentinians, without sufficient air assets we were sitting ducks. The size of the opposing forces matter not if you cannot deploy them.

Halb

53,012 posts

182 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
DMN said:
Hong Kong was a 100 year lease.
The mainland bit, the island was forever, 'in perpetuity'.

DMN

2,983 posts

138 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
im said:
Er, how exactly could it have ended in failure given the strengths of the 2 militaries at the time?
Thats a good point, given at the time the Argentinians had better fighter planes, the Super-Sonic Mirage was more than a match for the sub-sonic Harrier. Their army had better rifles. Although both basically the same the Argentinian FN FAL had the option for full auto, the British version (the SLR) did not. They also had better second generation night vision kit, compared to the very basic 1st generation stuff we had. They even had decent personal locating radar, ideally suited to the vast open areas of the Falklands. Their ships where also evenly matched against ours, after all they had two Type 42 destroers equired with the same missles as ours.

The difference was all down to training that allowed our forces to over come the technology gap.

V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Thursday 17th April 2014
quotequote all
im said:
V8 Fettler said:
it could have ended in military disaster
Er, how exactly could it have ended in failure given the strengths of the 2 militaries at the time?

That would have been quite some accomplishment to actually lose to them.

The only way we could have conceivably lost would have been if the politicians had decided to prematurely pull us out once we started to lose the odd ship.

At the time the whole world knew that once the taskforce arrived on station there was only going to be one outcome albeit with some British blood being spilt.
Amphibious invasion against prepared defences without the benefit of air supremacy (no maritime Phantoms), fixed wing early warning radar (no Gannets) or airborne anti-shipping (no Buccs) was always going to be risky, even more so at such short notice and at such a distance.