PN, they would know if we told them!
what i'm say is there are 3 issues that conflate and produce a picture, and we should be wary about believing that the picture they paint to us is the same picture that Mrs Kirchner sees.
1. the actual, technical correlation of forces.
2. the political, subjective decisions she makes about the capability of our forces in situ, our ability to increace those forces, our willingness to increace those forces, and our willingness to re-inforce without 100% proof that a threat is developing.
3. the political, subjective decisions she makes about her chances political survival without a grand gesture/successful attack.
we also, imv, need to be careful about judging the success of our deterant on the basis that there has not been an attempt to re-take/attack the islands - its possible that there has not been any serious thought since the 1982 war within the Argentine body politic of military action, and so the concept of deterence hasn't really been tested. its also worth rembering that our deterence posture has changed - since 1982 we've said that if you attempt to invade we'll give you a shoeing, and even if you're succesful we'll sail down in our carriers and we'll give you another shoeing and take them back.
now however thats changed - we now say 'certainly we'll give you a shoeing if you try to invade, but if you do succeed, you can keep them'. its worth thinking about.