Will we witness another Falklands War ?
Comments
-
Porgy wrote:Lagavulin wrote:
Interesting that. I stand corrected. :oops:GavH wrote:Lagavulin wrote:The U.S government of the time gave us f**k all support. We had to beg the French and Aerospatiale, from what I've read, to stop supplying Argentina with their Exocets.
That's not actually correct. The Regan administration (with the late Al Haig) of the time offered us one of their carriers and when Thatcher refused that, they gave us a shed load of Sidewinder missiles for the Harriers instead. That was fairly crucial. As for begging the French and Aerospatiale, that didn't actually work. MI5 had to buy as many of the Exocets known to be on the open market as they could to prevent Argentina getting them.
the united states provided support to both sides - I seem to remember Thatcher being annoyed by the level of US support. I've got a book about this at home - might have a quick browse when I get home.
I was living in Plymouth druing the Falklands War so my opposition to the war didn't exactly go down too well among my friends at school who were to man (boy) pro thatcher, and rabidly jingoistic.
Once a soft liberal walked all over nonce always.............0 -
youll get banned again calling people nonces
im sure you well know what a nonce is.......................?'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
Pokerface wrote:Doubt it. Can't afford it. Wars ain't cheap.
The Kirschners would do anything to stay in power. Just like Galtieri did in 1982; good thing he lost the war.
If the Kirschners take the military option and it goes belly up, it will be civil war in Argentina.
I still believe the island - Malvinas - should belong to them, though.0 -
northernneil wrote:i'd be surprised if Argentina's population had much of an appetite for a fight, they were humiliated quite badly in 82' when we had been caught unaware both in terms of defensive cover for the island and the surprise nature of the attack.
You'd be surprised! Trust me, they'll fight for those islands again, and again, and again!0 -
nicensleazy wrote:Lets hope it doesn't happen!
Yeah, considering I start at Plymouth on Sunday for basic training....I didn't sign up to get shot at :shock:0 -
MadammeMarie wrote:
I still believe the island - Malvinas - should belong to them, though.
Maybe they should have once upon a time. However, they tried to have a fight for them, they lost, we won, they're ours now
0 -
What baffles me the most, from what I have read, is why has it taken over 25 years since the war to start drilling for the oil?
Surely Maggie knew something about the odds of "black gold" being down there back in the original conflict and should have gone all out to find it while the Argentinians were licking their wounds.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm
I read this a few hours ago during breakfast (despite it being my floating day off) and it adds a bit more fuel to the fire...================
2020 Voodoo Marasa
2017 Cube Attain GTC Pro Disc 2016
2016 Voodoo Wazoo0 -
Tempestas wrote:nicensleazy wrote:Lets hope it doesn't happen!
Yeah, considering I start at Plymouth on Sunday for basic training....I didn't sign up to get shot at :shock:
I know you're saying that tongue in cheek, but I wouldn't risk saying that to any of the old lags when you get on board, it might not go down to well. And definitely not in the earshot of any marines on board, many of them will have lost friends recently.
When the TA started to be actively deployed in the 2nd Gulf War and Afghanistan, lots of them bolted when it became likely they would be doing actualy military stuff, you know, like dodging and firing bullets at people. The ones who were left behind know what they signed up for.0 -
It was tongue in cheek, I understand what I am signing up for as my father, grand father and great grand father have all served. But point noted about keeping quiet, sometimes I can speak before my brain engages the brakes...0
-
Good on you for taking it the way it was meant, anyone signing up has my respect. Good luck with your new career 8)0
-
blackpanther wrote:Once a soft liberal walked all over nonce always.............
you're out of order!
you once called me a do-gooder and lumpd me in with the wishy washy christian left lberals that i hate.
then you call me a liberal - liberals being almost the worst possible scum - worse than Tories in my opinion, nearly as bad as BNP.
And what's that about being a nonce? :evil:
So please mind your language.0 -
MadammeMarie wrote:Pokerface wrote:Doubt it. Can't afford it. Wars ain't cheap.
The Kirschners would do anything to stay in power. Just like Galtieri did in 1982; good thing he lost the war.
If the Kirschners take the military option and it goes belly up, it will be civil war in Argentina.
I still believe the island - Malvinas - should belong to them, though.
The ARgentine claim is based on the fact that they were once a colony of Spain and teh Spanish had a settlement on the Falklands which they abandoned some 40 years before the current British settlements were created. Does 140 years of continuous occupation, the fact that there is no living person who has ever met an Argentinian resident of the Falklands and the fact that the last 6 generations to be born on the Islands were, are and wish to remain British count for nothing?
If not, I presume you would support a British claim over Calais which was regarded as British until the 15th century."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
Tempestas wrote:nicensleazy wrote:Lets hope it doesn't happen!
Yeah, considering I start at Plymouth on Sunday for basic training....I didn't sign up to get shot at :shock:
Its always better to have a cabby back at them. Basic training, you are in for a bit of a shock.......... 0 -
MadammeMarie wrote:I still believe the island - Malvinas - should belong to them, though.
I still believe Ireland should still belong to us.
(and that is as sensible a statement as yours)0 -
A Further military conflict in the Falklands would be unthinkable. Argentine Navy, neutralised by one sub, which could happily deal with the whole 13 combat surface vessels, I don't think the argie 3 diesel electric subs would trouble one or 2 trafalgar class RN boats.
That would leave it largely down to an air conflct (unless they could convince someone a land assault would make sense, don't think the Politicians would have the nerve to order a torpedo into a troop carrying ship, so would be worth a go but would need air support/superiority too). The Argies would certianly have numerical advantage over the 4 Tornados in the Falklands, however the Falklands Air Defence is such those 4 would be up and fighting before a strike was effective, Tornado is faster, better armed, better counter measured and better piloted than the Mirage or A4s the argies could throw at them. Clealry they could also be rapidly re-inforced with more Tornado or if we wanted to show off a flight of Typhoon could be flown down within a few days, I am sure if we got stuck the good old US would repay the favour of our support of their aims in the Middle East to protect some sovereign soil too, but lets hope sanity prevails eh?fay ce que voudres0 -
NitrousOxide wrote:What baffles me the most, from what I have read, is why has it taken over 25 years since the war to start drilling for the oil?
Surely Maggie knew something about the odds of "black gold" being down there back in the original conflict and should have gone all out to find it while the Argentinians were licking their wounds.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm
I read this a few hours ago during breakfast (despite it being my floating day off) and it adds a bit more fuel to the fire...
Because it took decades to get the technology to drill in the North Sea... and if you think the North Sea is inhospitable, just try the South Atlantic.0 -
fnb1 wrote:A Further military conflict in the Falklands would be unthinkable. Argentine Navy, neutralised by one sub, which could happily deal with the whole 13 combat surface vessels, I don't think the argie 3 diesel electric subs would trouble one or 2 trafalgar class RN boats.
That would leave it largely down to an air conflct (unless they could convince someone a land assault would make sense, don't think the Politicians would have the nerve to order a torpedo into a troop carrying ship, so would be worth a go but would need air support/superiority too). The Argies would certianly have numerical advantage over the 4 Tornados in the Falklands, however the Falklands Air Defence is such those 4 would be up and fighting before a strike was effective, Tornado is faster, better armed, better counter measured and better piloted than the Mirage or A4s the argies could throw at them. Clealry they could also be rapidly re-inforced with more Tornado or if we wanted to show off a flight of Typhoon could be flown down within a few days, I am sure if we got stuck the good old US would repay the favour of our support of their aims in the Middle East to protect some sovereign soil too, but lets hope sanity prevails eh?
i bet you love airfix kits'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
Its hotting up....just watching the 10 oclock news, some Army chap from Argentina shouting his mouth off.........but there again, haven't they always done that!0
-
The Argy-bargies sabre rattling
Wars follow oil, so the likelihood is odds on there will be one.
If they have any sense though they will wait until the oil is flowing out the ground/sea then attack.Life is like a roll of toilet paper; long and useful, but always ends at the wrong moment. Anon.
Think how stupid the average person is.......
half of them are even more stupid than you first thought.0 -
Watch this space!0
-
i'm watching...0
-
We seem to think that They will play the game by our rules, using weapons and strategies that we can anticipate and counter, that may not be the case.0
-
Cressers wrote:We seem to think that They will play the game by our rules, using weapons and strategies that we can anticipate and counter, that may not be the case.
you thinking they are gonna bust out the custard firing tommy guns ala the 1976 musical extravaganza Bugsy Malone? Whenever I see an adult on a bicycle, I believe in the future of the human race.
H.G. Wells.0 -
I think there has been drilling of the Falkland some years ago but the wells were dusters IIRC.
If you look at the Argie claim in detail, then half the nations in the world could lay claim to the other half using the same criteria. As well as oil, there is another reason why UK retains the Falklands. That is that it gives Uk a share of Antarctica. That may not mean much just now but in no one really know what resources are under that ice and we can not afford to be left out in the cold.I have only two things to say to that; Bo***cks0 -
Cressers wrote:We seem to think that They will play the game by our rules, using weapons and strategies that we can anticipate and counter, that may not be the case.
Seeing as their equipment is bought from other people, it seems reasonable to expect that they won't come up with ray guns.
The limiting factor with a war like this would always be political anyway. Unlikely either side will risk tens of thousands of deaths over this."I hold it true, what'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost;
Than never to have loved at all."
Alfred Tennyson0 -
So war follows oil ...B*ugger.. I'm off to get my tin hat.
http://irishresources.wordpress.com/200 ... ch-inland/0
