---

I believe HMS ILLUSTRIOUS & HMS OCEAN Still exist!

---

---

Argie Order of Battle......not much changed since last time.

---

---

What you going to fly off them?

---

---

their country would probably now be on the same level as our other ex colonies

---

---

Which ex-colonies are you referring to? Not Zimbabwe, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Somalia, etc, I presume.

---

---

just give the ARgies another excuse to get worked up

---

---

A series of military options are being actively considered as the war of words over the islands intensifies.

It is understood that additional troops, another warship and extra RAF Typhoon combat aircraft could be dispatched to the region ahead of the March referendum on the Falkland Islands’ future.

---

---

How Britian's current military forces compare to 1982:

1982

Armed Forces Personnel: 320,000
Ships: 2 Carriers, 2 Assault ships, 32 Submarines, 15 Destroyers, 46 Frigates, 1 Ice Patrol Ship, 12 Hydrographic survey ships, 15 Patrol ships/craft, 29 Minesweepers and minehunters, 45 Royal Fleet Auxiliary
Aircraft: 400 plus

2013

Armed Forces personnel:160,000
Ships: 0 Carriers, 9 Submarines, 7 Destroyers, 13 Frigates, 2 Assault/Helicopter Carriers, 2 Assault/Command Ships, 3 RFA Landing Ships, 3 Survey ships, 1 Ice Patrol Ship, 4 Patrol Ships, 15 Minehunters, 10 Royal Fleet Auxiliary
Fighter Aircraft: 130

---

---

Falklands could not be held against Argentina'
02 April 2012

Britain's armed forces would struggle to defend, reinforce or retake the Falkland Islands if Argentina invaded again, a defence pressure group has warned.

A report from the UK National Defence Association (UKNDA) said defence cuts had placed the territories at greater risk than they had been since the 1982 invasion.

It warned that the islands' coastline could not be defended from an invasion and that Argentina could use almost all of its armed forces to invade at a time when the British forces consisted of "just four Typhoons, a Type-45 Destroyer, and Rapier short range missiles around Mount Pleasant airfield".

The UKNDA argued that Britain would not be able to deploy reinforcements in time and that forces stationed on the Falkland Islands would "necessarily have to hold Mount Pleasant airfield and its environs for a week before help arrived".

The pressure group said an amphibious assault would be required to retake the islands and that 112 British ships were needed in 1982. But it said this number could not be raised now with amphibious warfare capabilities "dramatically reduced", and a "considerably smaller" Royal Navy.

"There would be no fighter cover for the landing force and shipping," their report said. "There is no carrier… There is no question of providing air support using RAF fighters. There are no bases within range. In-flight re-fuelling, given the number of re-fuels required for a round trip of 8,000 miles from Ascension, would be impossible in the face of the threat posed by the Argentine air force."

But Brigadier Bill Aldridge, commander of British Forces in the Falklands reportedly said he was "entirely confident" he could "do the job that is required".

A Ministry of Defence spokesman told the Press Association there was no evidence of "any current credible military threat to the Falkland Islands".

"Unlike in 1982, we have a well defended airfield in the Falklands with ground-based air defences, and continue to have the ability to reinforce by air and sea," the spokesman said.

"People should be reassured by the contingencies that we now have in place compared to 30 years ago."

---

---

But Brigadier Bill Aldridge, commander of British Forces in the Falklands reportedly said he was "entirely confident" he could "do the job that is required".
. . ."

"Unlike in 1982, we have a well defended airfield in the Falklands with ground-based air defences, and continue to have the ability to reinforce by air and sea," the spokesman said.

---