Falklands again
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Yearning for sun and sea
Age: 82
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Falklands again
I read this morning that the new Argentine president was doing the usual posturing over the Falklands and how they must be handed back etc, according to the UN Articles etc.
I believe the Argentine financial situation isn't that good, but what possibility is there that they could mobilise a force to march in, or attempt to, what do you think HMG/MoD would do? Also you in the Military, what would your reaction be.
I'm not in the Forces although some of my family are, but it got me thinking. On the one hand I would be as angry as most if the Argentinians took it a stage further but wonder what Brown & Browne would do.
GF
I believe the Argentine financial situation isn't that good, but what possibility is there that they could mobilise a force to march in, or attempt to, what do you think HMG/MoD would do? Also you in the Military, what would your reaction be.
I'm not in the Forces although some of my family are, but it got me thinking. On the one hand I would be as angry as most if the Argentinians took it a stage further but wonder what Brown & Browne would do.
GF
It also puts into sharp focus the comments from some quarters (Jacko) that the CVF programme should be scrapped, due to the current crises we are engaged in. We need to future proof ourselves. This region is going to become more and more valuable in the decades to come. The Antarctic treaty which has 46 signatories now, is up for modification in 2011. The Falkland Islands are the UK's closest deep water port and airfield to the territory that the UK claims. Without a strong PURPLE presence in that region, we will get "turned over" by those other nations inthe area, who will claim the oil and mineral rights for themselves. You only have to look at what is going on in the Arctic with Russia and Canada to see what is happening.
Gone are the wars of ideology and religion, we are entering an age of wars over resources (although you could argue Japan's entry into WWII was over resources).We need to be prepared and that means a truely mobile Army, a strong and logistically competent airforce with a strong sea-base to support both those operations.
Gone are the wars of ideology and religion, we are entering an age of wars over resources (although you could argue Japan's entry into WWII was over resources).We need to be prepared and that means a truely mobile Army, a strong and logistically competent airforce with a strong sea-base to support both those operations.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know reading the article in The Sunday Times regarding the lack of warships and HMG not paying for the ones we do have to sail anyway, we couldn't retake the Falklands even if we had to. Well done Gordon Broon, hope you're proud, history will judge you as you deserve......
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well we there is some hope , XH558 is now airborne again
But then we could send down one of our Carriers and beat the Skyhawks back with our Sea Harriers.... errr.... same Government got rid of them too!
GR9s with sidewinders it is then!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GR9s with sidewinders it is then!
Still if we gave up/lost the FI we'd all be able to claim op allowances wouldn't we?
Hellbound
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Blighty
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Submarine with a remit to sink anything and everything military entering 'British' waters would do the trick. Not too worried about the immediate Air threat, but any invasion in suitable numbers would need to come by sea. No messing about, a clear message that says 'don't cross the line' then follow it up with a spearfish or 2 at anything that wants to try. Of course, if they want to start hostilities, just sink them wherever they are until they go away. Maybe even a Tomahawk with no warhead (Initially) into the BA Town Square.
Make it absolutely clear that we do not have the time or energy to mess about and then sort it out in the UN afterwards.
Make it absolutely clear that we do not have the time or energy to mess about and then sort it out in the UN afterwards.
With people still bleating about the Belgrano and whether it was steaming towards/away from the Task Force (like it makes a difference which way it was heading . . . .), can you imagine the outcry were another Argie ship to be sunk, even if it was pounding away at Port Stanley at the time!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Submarine with a remit to sink anything and everything military entering 'British' waters would do the trick. Not too worried about the immediate Air threat, but any invasion in suitable numbers would need to come by sea. No messing about, a clear message that says 'don't cross the line' then follow it up with a spearfish or 2 at anything that wants to try. Of course, if they want to start hostilities, just sink them wherever they are until they go away. Maybe even a Tomahawk with no warhead (Initially) into the BA Town Square.
Make it absolutely clear that we do not have the time or energy to mess about and then sort it out in the UN afterwards.
Make it absolutely clear that we do not have the time or energy to mess about and then sort it out in the UN afterwards.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point is not that we couldn't retake the Falklands but that the land/sea/air assets that we have in theatre will certainly prevent the Argentinians from taking them in the first place.
RIC v Argentinian army I know who my money is on!
RIC v Argentinian army I know who my money is on!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if the Argies commandeer privately-owned merchant vessels to transport the troops and equipment?
With their civilian crews and some other foreign nationals aboard "as observers"?
Just quietly load them aboard at night, get them all near the islands, and sail one into Port Stanley (with the troops below-decks) under pretext of a mechanical problem?
And then declare war, with the radio broadcast being the signal to "disembark troops"?
And use merchant ships for all troop (and UK citizen evacuation/"repatriation" via Uruguay) operations... all warships being kept well clear?
OK, then what?
With their civilian crews and some other foreign nationals aboard "as observers"?
Just quietly load them aboard at night, get them all near the islands, and sail one into Port Stanley (with the troops below-decks) under pretext of a mechanical problem?
And then declare war, with the radio broadcast being the signal to "disembark troops"?
And use merchant ships for all troop (and UK citizen evacuation/"repatriation" via Uruguay) operations... all warships being kept well clear?
OK, then what?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure they can work it out for themselves, after all some of the Argentinian chaps showed great iniative in 1982 ( in a strange way I think from their point of view the chap/s who engineered the trailer launched Exocet for instance were well worth a medal and even a decent lifestyle ).
On the other hand, don't give them ideas, we did that with publishing the withdrawal of Endurance 1...I expect they have enough 'intelligence' - in every way including Spike Milligan - to know not to try it but...
On the other hand, don't give them ideas, we did that with publishing the withdrawal of Endurance 1...I expect they have enough 'intelligence' - in every way including Spike Milligan - to know not to try it but...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Obvious
WEBF,
a cue for you & the Seajet - as you should know I completely agree with you - hope you enjoyed the pics on the 'Seajet' thread...
The Harrier 2+ is now so obvious a choice it's painfull...
a cue for you & the Seajet - as you should know I completely agree with you - hope you enjoyed the pics on the 'Seajet' thread...
The Harrier 2+ is now so obvious a choice it's painfull...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nostrinian,
Sounds sensible to me and no doubt a lot of others - I thought I was reasonably informed but the F-16's are disturbing news to me - though obviously depends on tanks / tankers, weapons fit etc...
We've had too much bleating lately about ' couldn't manage another Falklands War ' etc, giving the wrong message - get the Astute /s going asap, Trafalgars being a bit obvious in the meantime & some off-the shelf AMRAAM carrying Harrier 2+ on a CVS ( or even one or two on other 'platforms' & stop sodding around - Las Malvinas ain't going to happen !
Sounds sensible to me and no doubt a lot of others - I thought I was reasonably informed but the F-16's are disturbing news to me - though obviously depends on tanks / tankers, weapons fit etc...
We've had too much bleating lately about ' couldn't manage another Falklands War ' etc, giving the wrong message - get the Astute /s going asap, Trafalgars being a bit obvious in the meantime & some off-the shelf AMRAAM carrying Harrier 2+ on a CVS ( or even one or two on other 'platforms' & stop sodding around - Las Malvinas ain't going to happen !