Good. Now if someone would kick some American ass and some Israeli ass, the mentioned would quit being so pompasstic.
Royal Navy sends attack submarine HMS Sceptre to the Falklands
- Thread starter Blackleaf
- Start date
If they go to war, i predict a tactical victory for Britain and a Strategic Victory for the people of the Falkland Islands
Last edited:
To annag tha Faulklands islands are British and are a sovereign territory, they do not and never have belonged to Argentina, it is not a case of Britain trying to bully a third world country but merely taking prudent measures to avoid giving off the wrong message, that is the reason for deploying an SSN to the region. It is better Britains shows it takes the matter seriously to avoid a war then to be flippant and get involved in one, if it was up to me i would send a couple of T boats there as well, and a dozen more Eurofighters to be on the safe side.
Argentina -
5 destroyers
10 corvettes
1 maybe 2 subs
United Kingdom-
2 Aircraft carriers
1 helicopter carrier (which can also launch Harriers)
4 Landing ships LPD
7 Destroyers
16 Frigates
7 Attack subs
1 or more Missile subs
7 Corvettes and patrol boats
The new Royal Navy type 45 probably has as much anti air on that one ship as the whole armada did last time..... Also the UK has C17's which could get troops parachuting in within a day....
Argentina knows this (hell, if I know it then they better) and they'll stick to the only option left, "diplomatic" barking. It's a Chihuahua yapping at the bulldog, the chihuahua yaps but keeps its distance...
5 destroyers
10 corvettes
1 maybe 2 subs
United Kingdom-
2 Aircraft carriers
1 helicopter carrier (which can also launch Harriers)
4 Landing ships LPD
7 Destroyers
16 Frigates
7 Attack subs
1 or more Missile subs
7 Corvettes and patrol boats
The new Royal Navy type 45 probably has as much anti air on that one ship as the whole armada did last time..... Also the UK has C17's which could get troops parachuting in within a day....
Argentina knows this (hell, if I know it then they better) and they'll stick to the only option left, "diplomatic" barking. It's a Chihuahua yapping at the bulldog, the chihuahua yaps but keeps its distance...
A few years ago someone (and I forget who) pointed out that there has never been a war between two democracies. Assuming Argentina and Britain are both democracies I see little likelihood of a war.
I'm not sure I follow you here. Do you mean another war? Or are you quoting someone's quote from before 1982?
Also, I'd like to point out, having been in the RAF during the Falklands War in 1982 and on 6 hours standby, I'm still disgusted at the fact that the only country that provided real support to the UK was Chile.
Chile provided a land base for some of our special forces to come in through the back door as it were.As well as for aircraft.
Which is why, grateful for this, Margaret Thatcher was happy to repay the favour and receive Pinochet in England many years ago for medical treatment. The British public have long memories and didn't forget Pinochet's help, in fact the only foreign help offered and provided. Also they haven't forgotten that the US and Regan didn't provde help when requested, som uch for the Special Relationship. And that France had for years been selling some of the same weapons to Argentina that the UK forces were using AND didn't stop sales during the Falklands War!
I'm done!
If I remember correctly, Argentina was a military dictatorship at the time, and Pinochet was a brutal dictator himself and one mean SOB.
Correct on both counts! By no means am I defending him.
But war is war and he helped us. Obviously not out of the goodness of his heart but clearly applying the old adage "My enemy's enemy is my friend" He was doing it for himself in other words.
My post is more, I suppose, a reflection of the anger of the day, felt by the military and public alike, directed towards all our usual allies of the day that neither offered nor provided assistance. YET years later the UK was there to back up the US in both Gulf Wars and in Iraq and in Afghanistan.
James
In this case, the bully is the mouse that roared. As Coldstream said, Argentina is trying to divert the public's attention.
I liken this to the little belligerent guy in the bar. He has to go after the big guy, because he lacks something in someway. It doesn't matter whether or not it's legitimate, he's going to go after that big guy.
Can you give us a personal account of the feelings the Islanders had on the issue?
I have an excellent source for the feelings of the Argentine's that were forced to fight the Brit's the first time around. And it ain't pretty...lol.
Last edited:
Actually, the lack of assistance was a refusal by Reagan to assist when he was asked for assistance by Margaret Thatcher.
Exactly. Well said, you're the first person on this thread who actually knows why the Falklands War was started by the Argies in 82.
To further discredit this Malvinas nonsense, put this in your pipe and smoke it!
When the UK first settled the Falkland Islands Argentina as a state DIDN'T EVEN EXIST! It was simply a Spanish overseas territory. Argentina can't claim something that was settled by others before it even existed!
When the UK first settled the Falkland Islands Argentina as a state DIDN'T EVEN EXIST! It was simply a Spanish overseas territory. Argentina can't claim something that was settled by others before it even existed!
I prefer Kanicinik.
That's a good point.
But with International bodies discussing continental shelf claims, who knows how that will play out.
I've never been to tuaisceart Meiriceá...but I'd like to get to see Boston and Vancouver some day. :angry3:
