Falkland Islands to Argentina?

The fact remains that if Argentina invaded the Falkland again, with the current economic crisis and lack of UK's naval capability, probably overturn the outcome of 1982...Harry's visit is very significant ... hey guys .. we are friends...;)

I like this dude... really

harryDM260107_468x575.jpg


 
racing_kitty said:
Argentina claiming the Falklands would be like the US trying to claim the Bahamas just because Miami is >200 nautical miles from Nassau. The islands were uninhabited when the Europeans landed there. Even though the French surrendered their settlement to Spain, that doesn't really change the fact that the British got there first. Vernet didn't give two shits about the land, all he wanted was to make money clubbing seals about the head (and he did a rather miserable job at that). As far as I'm concerned, the British are completely in the right in asserting their presence in the Falklands. The inhabitants want to remain subjects of the crown, so let them. Argentina can go piss up a rope.

ETA, and so can Roger Waters.
Click to expand...
IIRC The US had claimed (and abandoned said claim) before the British.

What isn't being mentioned is the Right to Self Determination (?). i.e. shouldn't the people living on the island get a choice? They have chosen to be British and should be allowed to vote on membership in the UK, Argentina, or Independence as a Protectorate.
 
mike_cos said:
The fact remains that if Argentina invaded the Falkland again, with the current economic crisis and lack of UK's naval capability, probably overturn the outcome of 1982...
Click to expand...

The UK is in a much better economic position than many other countries right now (not exactly a "crisis" like in some European countries), so that's not really an issue. Naval capability isn't everything either. There's only one fact, and that's that Argentina doesn't have the balls to attack the islands again. Especially since they are much more heavily defended than they were the first time. On top of that, the Argies are still mostly stuck using the same equipment that they had in the 80s, so they're not exactly in a great position to overtake anything. Only some of their SOF units are worth a damn, and yet they're still no match for ours.

SOWT said:
What isn't being mentioned is the Right to Self Determination (?). i.e. shouldn't the people living on the island get a choice? They have chosen to be British and should be allowed to vote on membership in the UK, Argentina, or Independence as a Protectorate.
Click to expand...

They have consistently voted in favour of us actually. They damn sure don't want to have anything to do with Argentina! All those fuckers care about are the profits to be had from around the island.
 
Rapid said:
Naval capability isn't everything either.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about Argies's SOF or equipments... but... How will you deploy a landing force with aerial cover without a strong naval capability? Punta Arenas Airbase is not always available... Has UK an available Battle Group? Airwing Carriers? SAS ans SBS are now deployed in A'stan... Do you think UK is able to combat on 2 fronts? It's not a criticism.. but real question.
 
Argentina could probably storm the Falkland's in the short term. The long term consequences would be great. If it took the British several weeks to respond they would have time to recruit other support from Europe and the US. Plans could be developed and would probably have direct consequences to Argentina itself. The ensuing campaign to free the Falkland's would probably cost Argentina most of there air and navel assets and probably a serious chunk of there other military capabilities. They could run a bombing campaign against Argentina until they screamed no more and never have to put a boot on the ground.

I can't see a scenario, if the Argentinian took over the Falkland, that we wouldn't send at least one battle group to support the British.
 
I doubt they could take the islands again. The UK was caught having tea last time and they only had a small garrison. Now there are oodles of troops there and doubtless they'll have a well defined plan, unlike last time.
 
The UK also has this little thing called the commonwealth. There would be a bit of protesting from the hippy elements but if asked Argentina would find itself facing professional forces from the UK, Canada, Australia and NZ and we might possibly be able to get the Fijians in there as well.

I predict Argentina would last 2 weeks before being beaten, invaded and find thmselves being used as slave labour.

Wait wrong century but you get the idea.
 
mike_cos said:
I agree with you about Argies's SOF or equipments... but... How will you deploy a landing force with aerial cover without a strong naval capability? Punta Arenas Airbase is not always available... Has UK an available Battle Group? Airwing Carriers? SAS ans SBS are now deployed in A'stan... Do you think UK is able to combat on 2 fronts? It's not a criticism.. but real question.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article I posted earlier? It pretty much answers all your questions. There's no doubt we'd be able to fight on both fronts (UKSF), and as the other guys have mentioned, we probably wouldn't be completely alone either. There might be limitations to particular naval capabilities, but there are ways around that issue.

It's all practically irrelevant anyway, because Argentina knows they'd risk getting butt-fucked if they moved on the islands. They are just stirring the pot and trying to distract their citizens from the real problems in their own country (part of the reason why they invaded in the past as well).
 
Rapid said:
Did you read the article I posted earlier?.

There might be limitations to particular naval capabilities, but there are ways around that issue.

They are just stirring the pot and trying to distract their citizens from the real problems in their own country (part of the reason why they invaded in the past as well).
Click to expand...

Yes I did..:thumbsup:...

Might be?.. LOL ... other ways around?.. Uncle Sam? 2012 is not 1982

I agree completely with you about last your sentence...
 
mike_cos said:
Might be?.. LOL ... other ways around?.. Uncle Sam? 2012 is not 1982
Click to expand...

No, not Uncle Sam. I'm tired of referring to the article, so I'll just quote it here:

Much has changed in strategic terms. Nowadays, it could be won back through long-range air power, says Professor Michael Clarke, director of the Royal United Services Institute. The lack of carrier aircraft is an impediment. Many, including former head of the military General Sir Mike Jackson, have said it would now be impossible to recapture the islands. Clarke disagrees. Bombers from Ascension - backed by refuelling planes - could destroy Mt Pleasant air base if it fell into Argentine hands. Once Argentine defences had been nullified, special forces could be dropped onto the islands. So it is possible - but politically, there is probably no heart for such a campaign, Clarke says.
Click to expand...

Not only is it possible, but I also disagree with Clarke about there being "no heart for such a campaign". Like others have said, in the beginning there might be some hippies who would oppose any conflict, but I think everyone would be surprised by how many more people wouldn't want to give up the islands just like that. Again, that's all assuming those Argies would have already defeated the garrison of +1200 troops on the island, plus the nuclear-powered submarine, frigates and jets which are already there as well... which I really doubt they could with their limited capabilities.

Even in the unlikeliest event that they did take the island's forces completely by surprise and defeated them, I think a lot of 'strategists' are forgetting that it would be very hard to let any of those deaths go unavenged. That's the factor which would push the UK into the conflict.
 
Rapid said:
No, not Uncle Sam. I'm tired of referring to the article, so I'll just quote it here:
Click to expand...

As my wife's Argentinian and lived through Malvinas '82, I'll bump this thread while preparing a response for the wiki gurus who read and believe more than what they've lived through.

For Mike_COS
Como argentino de mi esposa y vivido a través de las Malvinas 82, voy a topar este tema mientras se prepara una respuesta para los gurús de wiki que leen y creen más de lo que he vivido.
Click to expand...

Before you say "Fuck Argentina", know your SA and exactly who the audience is.

Argentina has a voice, a conscience, and a good argument.


8-)
 
RB said:
Before you say "Fuck Argentina", know your SA and exactly who the audience is.
Click to expand...

Hermano, io non ho mai detto "vaffanculo Argentina"... non vedo perchè dovrei... che cazzo è il mio SA esattamente?

Hermano, yo nunca dije "mierda la Argentina" ... No veo por qué debo hacerlo ... ¿Qué mierda es mi SA exactamente?

Hermano, I never said "fuck Argentina" ... I do not see why I should ... What the fuck is my SA exactly?

Rapid said:
I'm tired of referring to the article, so I'll just quote it here
Click to expand...

If you are tired... rest.
 
I served with quite a few Brits who were either there or served with guys who were there. I remember when it happened very well.
I for one would like to hear the good argument.
 
mike_cos said:
Uhm... this thread probably does not lead to anything good... I may have touched a sensitive nerve... Mods.. what do you think about?
Click to expand...

Not much ;)

We don't stop discussion just because of differing opinion.
We all have a chance to learn something here.
 
Back
Top