Will Brown give Argentina the Falklands?

[JonRB]

TankRizzo said:

Might be a silly question, but is the Government allowed to give away sovereign territory without the approval of the Queen? The land belongs to the Crown, surely?

Good call. But would the Queen risk a fight like that? She basically does and says whatever the government tells her to because she knows which side her bread is buttered on.

Charles, on the other hand, were he King would be far more inclined to get stuck in. Which is somewhat of a two-edged sword.

Personally I think the royalty have run their course and are largely irrelevant. I think they're cash-neutral though, as they do contribute to the tourist industry so please don't think I'm one of the moaners who claim they sponge. But by the same token, I don't think they have a huge amount of worth either.

Edited by JonRB on Wednesday 25th March 21:18

[s2art]

JonRB said:

TankRizzo said:

Might be a silly question, but is the Government allowed to give away sovereign territory without the approval of the Queen? The land belongs to the Crown, surely?

Good call. But would the Queen risk a fight like that? She basically does and says whatever the government tells her to because she knows which side her bread is buttered on.

Charles, on the other hand, were he King would be far more inclined to get stuck in. Which is somewhat of a two-edged sword.

Personally I think the royalty have run their course and are largely irrelevant. I think they're cash-neutral though, as they do contribute to the tourist industry so please don't think I'm one of the moaners who claim they sponge. But by the same token, I don't think they have a huge amount of worth either.

Edited by JonRB on Wednesday 25th March 21:18

I think you are mistaken, and the governor of the Bank of England would agree. Some strange constitutional things going on at he mo.

[Bosshogg76]

offroading.net said:

Alfa_75_Steve said:

offroading.net said:

As of late last year no Typhoons down there, only tornado F3s. Would be interesting if Brazil fancied a go LOL

Still, F3 vs Skyhawk.....

I thought the F3s were being replaced by Typhoons last year?

Not enough Typhoons & pilots at the mo, still wonder how many active aircraft AAF has against how many skyflash are in stores down there? Think "options for change" has reduced our capability to hold onto the Falklands if it kicked off.


Faith...Hope..Charity.....

F3's will be around for a little while longer, as we are still churning them out from AMF, and have just completed the latest round of servicing s on the Falklands jets. No offical date has been set for the Buphoon to take over, as it keeps slipping to the right.

Skyflash??? how far behind the times are you??

[chris-ST220]

offroading.net said:

reading the history books one of the options put to Maggie was to launch a denuked trident at BA just to prove a point

I should hope not Trident didnt come into service with the navy till circa 1994

[offroading.net]

Bosshogg76 said:

Skyflash??? how far behind the times are you??

LOL, old speckled hen induced rose tinted glasses, will be dreaming of F4k's tonight..

Still, 4 F3's down there (with thier aim-120's ) wonder how many incoming they could deal with?

[Alfa_75_Steve]

offroading.net said:

Bosshogg76 said:

Skyflash??? how far behind the times are you??

LOL, old speckled hen induced rose tinted glasses, will be dreaming of F4k's tonight..

Still, 4 F3's down there (with thier aim-120's ) wonder how many incoming they could deal with?

I can't see dealing with a handful of Skyhawks and a few ropey old Israeli built French fighters would be a huge issue - the Harriers dealt with them quite effectively last time around.

From my reading, it appears that the Argentinian pilots were told not to engage in head to head conflict with our fighters, as they knew they'd lose too many - so they concentrated purely on hitting ships.

Would have thought the Argentinians weren't stupid enough to risk their entire air force in a direct fight with Tornados.

[Bosshogg76]

offroading.net said:

Bosshogg76 said:

Skyflash??? how far behind the times are you??

LOL, old speckled hen induced rose tinted glasses, will be dreaming of F4k's tonight..

Still, 4 F3's down there (with thier aim-120's ) wonder how many incoming they could deal with?

Better a Speckled Hen than a Fighting Cock. Adstantes.

Dreaming of 'tooms eh?

How many incoming shot down? first you'd have to get an F3 into the air before you could find out

[offroading.net]

Alfa_75_Steve said:

From my reading, it appears that the Argentinian pilots were told not to engage in head to head conflict with our fighters, as they knew they'd lose too many - so they concentrated purely on hitting ships.

Thats what lost them the war, if they had the balls to take on the harriers and got lucky the fleet would have lost its CAP capability, it was seriously stretched with all harriers in working order

Alfa_75_Steve said:

Would have thought the Argentinians weren't stupid enough to risk their entire air force in a direct fight with Tornados.

Bet there are only 2 in flying order at any one time, and also reckon they will be sat on the ground most of the time and only have a 4 missile load when flying CAP anyway to save life on the missiles and fuel. We underestimated thier military last time..not saying I think they will now, just we don't have the capability to stop a good effort if they do.

[AlexKP]

No Prime Minister will hand over the Falklands as long as there are people alive who recall the war. It would be political suicide.

[offroading.net]

chris-ST220 said:

offroading.net said:

reading the history books one of the options put to Maggie was to launch a denuked trident at BA just to prove a point

I should hope not Trident didnt come into service with the navy till circa 1994

more beer induced haze, is written in Sharkey Wards book "Sea Harrier Over the Falklands", must have been Polaris.

[offroading.net]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

But good old Gordy has done a few things no sain Prime Minister would do LOL
Didn't nulabia do thier usual trick of leaking a document to test the water about sorting a timeshare deal with the islands a few years back?

[mel]

offroading.net said:

Alfa_75_Steve said:

From my reading, it appears that the Argentinian pilots were told not to engage in head to head conflict with our fighters, as they knew they'd lose too many - so they concentrated purely on hitting ships.

Thats what lost them the war, if they had the balls to take on the harriers and got lucky the fleet would have lost its CAP capability, it was seriously stretched with all harriers in working order

Alfa_75_Steve said:

Would have thought the Argentinians weren't stupid enough to risk their entire air force in a direct fight with Tornados.

Bet there are only 2 in flying order at any one time, and also reckon they will be sat on the ground most of the time and only have a 4 missile load when flying CAP anyway to save life on the missiles and fuel. We underestimated thier military last time..not saying I think they will now, just we don't have the capability to stop a good effort if they do.

On your first point I'd say that the stratagy of targetting floating assets was shown to have been far more effective than air to air combat would have been against far superior aircraft, the loss of the Atlantic conveyor alone took out almost the entire heavy lift capability of the task force (7 sea kings & 4 chinooks) and only narrowly missed taking out (14? I think) harriers in one go! Had they managed to hit a carrier (which ironically they thought the Atlantic conveyor was) they would have rendered any CAP pretty much useless in one hit!

Your second point about having a constant in the air presence is frankly tosh, the mountain sites situated at the extremeties of the islands land groups provide more than enough warning of any inbound unauthorized air.

[catso]

I'm sure that if he thought it might get him back in power after an election then he would, the man is an utter and would do anything to remain powerful.

Please don't dodge the swear filter - Gazboy

Edited by Gazboy on Thursday 26th March 01:15

[offroading.net]

mel said:

On your first point I'd say that the stratagy of targetting floating assets was shown to have been far more effective than air to air combat would have been against far superior aircraft,

Was the conclusion of the most senior harrier pilot in the war. At the time the harriers were vastly outnumbered, if the AAF targeted the harriers rather than hit & run attacks on surface ships it would have been a very different war.

mel said:

Your second point about having a constant in the air presence is frankly tosh, the mountain sites situated at the extremeties of the islands land groups provide more than enough warning of any inbound unauthorized air.

When I said flying I meant capable of flying, not actually in the air. Still what is the cold startup time on an F3? against flying time from the mainland, plus the state of readiness of all aircraft?

Edited by offroading.net on Wednesday 25th March 23:21

[Orb the Impaler]

JonRB said:

But would the Queen risk a fight like that? She basically does and says whatever the government tells her to because she knows which side her bread is buttered on.

I'll argue this one - HRH has more class in her little finger than clueless little nobodies like Winky and his thinly-disguised class war scum can even dream of, and a family history of sticking it up foreign agressors. Not to mention risking her own offspring in combat (and before anyone plays down their involvement - what did YOU do?).

They might be expensive but IMO a country needs a figurehead (and not some self-serving st like Brown & Co). We're privileged in having probably the classiest most heavyweight figurehead on the planet right now who has respect and gravitas in spades.

[Mark.H]

I dont understand this. It seems simple to me if they want to take the islands back that much...

Firstly, they'll never get their hands on the falklands while its inhabited by UK Citizens.

So what the Argies need to do is send people there to "inhabit the islands" peacefully, hell, any bugger can become a UK Citizen nowadays cant they???

If they keep putting more and more of their people on the islands then eventually there will be enough of a voice on them to support the claim that the islanders want to be part of Argentinia...The Argies could then oust the Original islanders and repatriate them to the UK and the remaining officially recognised citizens of the UK who are remaining (actually Argies!) demand independance and the UK let them go. The Argentinan Gov' could even provide aid for the new settlers to make their homes. I mean, bearing in mind the Oil that comes with the territory surely a few million would be worth it in the long run!

Edited by Mark.H on Thursday 26th March 06:01

[Racingdude009]

In 1982 the UK went to war with Argentina over the Falklands knowing that the oil and minerals there are worth Billions.

Gordon is hardly going to give away valuable minerals.

[Einion Yrth]

Racingdude009 said:

In 1982 the UK went to war with Argentina over the Falklands knowing that the oil and minerals there are worth Billions.

Gordon is hardly going to give away valuable minerals.

What, like the gold the one-eyed tt more or less gave away before?

[markh1]

I went to the falklands on the 20th aniversary of the war and spoke to quite a few locals who are prouder about their British sovereignty than most of UK residents. I really hope that for the sake of the islanders and the vets that giving the Falklands to the Argies is not even given the slightest thought.

[JonRB]

Orb the Impaler said:

JonRB said:

But would the Queen risk a fight like that? She basically does and says whatever the government tells her to because she knows which side her bread is buttered on.

I'll argue this one - HRH has more class in her little finger than clueless little nobodies like Winky and his thinly-disguised class war scum can even dream of, and a family history of sticking it up foreign agressors. Not to mention risking her own offspring in combat (and before anyone plays down their involvement - what did YOU do?).

They might be expensive but IMO a country needs a figurehead (and not some self-serving st like Brown & Co). We're privileged in having probably the classiest most heavyweight figurehead on the planet right now who has respect and gravitas in spades.

Perhaps, but you completely fail to address the point of mine that you're quoting. I'm sure the Queen has class, integrity, respect and gravitas. But all those are largely irrelevant in this particular case; would she see it as an acceptable risk to test-case her notional titular power against parliament? I suspect not as everyone concerned knows that the monarchy are a Paper Tiger.
I have no doubt in my mind that there is legislative contingency for pulling a monarch's teeth should they try and throw their notional weight around.

Edited by JonRB on Thursday 26th March 09:49