Jump to content

Load your weapon, hoist the union flag and prepare to set sail dune


Thorpe-le-Saint

Recommended Posts

the falklands would be over quicker than last time....in our favourgod knows how many lessons were harshly learned last time that are practiced and practiced again and again since

 

I think something similar was said about Iraq and Afghanistan, and probably will be said about Iran & North Korea when we have a pop at them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

probably because they are british islands..???

 

Actually, I do know that, mate.

 

I was referring to the bloody big base the US has there, and my point was they don't mind the Brits having Diego Garcia because it suits their strategic interests.

 

Didn't make that clear, I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

errrr....yes, iraq and afghanistan are very like a small collection of islands in the middle of no where

 

The size of the countries is irrelevant, both of these conflicts were supposed to be short-lived, a matter of months IIRC in the case of Iraq (I can't be bothered to look up any quotes). My point is that the government & military bigwigs in this country have a habit of underestimating the opposition, from your comment, it seems to have spread to the rank & file as well.

Edited by Dimond Geezer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The size of the countries make no matter, both of these conflicts were supposed to be short-lived, a matter of months IIRC in the case of Iraq (I can't be bothered to look up any quotes). My point is that the government & military bigwigs in this country have a habit of underestimating the opposition, it seems to have spread to the rank & file as well.

 

ummm...seriously...?

 

there could not be any less similarities between afghanistan and the falklands..

I can assure you, we don't under estimate our potential enemies...that is why are the best at training our forces and why nations from around the world pay for us to train them

 

come to think of it...have you ever worn a uniform...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Onwership of that land is disputed between two ancient peoples with equal claim, imho. Totally different from the Falklands, which have been British since time immemorial.

Now please don't exaggerate. Time immemorial dates from 3rd September 1189 and the Falklands have been continuously British since 1833. Argentina's independence was not recognised by Spain until 29th April 1857.

 

We don't need aircraft carriers there now that we have a proper airfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UK has very little moral right to the Falklands in reality - I'm sure that if the Isle of Wight had Argentine sovereignity the UK would be up in arms (!) - but very much more so if big reserves of oil were suspected to be within the boundaries. The scale is pretty similar in relative distances per size of country. I'm not suggesting that sovereignity should be fought over but does the UK really have any moral negotiating position?

 

It depends if you believe that it is morally right for a population has the right to self determination. Oh and by the way have a look at the map and see how close the Isle of Wight is to the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to address several recent points if I may:

 

The RAF has hundreds of advanced Tornado & Typhoon aircraft - Yes it has, but mainly based in the UK they are no bloody good at all 7000 miles away from the Falklands.

Because of the airbase we no longer need aircraft carriers - Again, lose that one fixed runway and the lack of carrier air power could/would become crippling.

The RN could retake the Falklands easily - With no proper aircraft carriers or Harriers (flogged off to the yanks for spare parts) air defence of the fleet would rely entirely upon a handful of Type 45 destroyers. The overall number of vital Frigates & Destroyers available for Task Force AAW & ASW defence has more than halved since 82. The RN today is in its weakest state for many centuries.

The Argentinian Air Force is weak - It's all relative, unlike the last time we now have precisely no 'Sea Harrier' fighters to oppose them. The Argentine economy is doing surprisingly well of late and plans for a F16 purchase have been mooted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again, its all about the oil, or at least the potential for it ... so no, non negotiable, if we did strike oil, it would pay off our national debt ...

 

Have we actually found oil. I remember Desire striking lots of sand and the sp diving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to address several recent points if I may:

 

The RAF has hundreds of advanced Tornado & Typhoon aircraft - Yes it has, but mainly based in the UK they are no bloody good at all 7000 miles away from the Falklands.

Because of the airbase we no longer need aircraft carriers - Again, lose that one fixed runway and the lack of carrier air power could/would become crippling.

The RN could retake the Falklands easily - With no proper aircraft carriers or Harriers (flogged off to the yanks for spare parts) air defence of the fleet would rely entirely upon a handful of Type 45 destroyers. The overall number of vital Frigates & Destroyers available for Task Force AAW & ASW defence has more than halved since 82. The RN today is in its weakest state for many centuries.

The Argentinian Air Force is weak - It's all relative, unlike the last time we now have precisely no 'Sea Harrier' fighters to oppose them. The Argentine economy is doing surprisingly well of late and plans for a F16 purchase have been mooted.

 

Except we tried that in the last war with little actual effect with the black buck raids I suppose the argies could try a pebble island style raid on the airstrip at Mount Pleasant but I wouldn't give them much chance (even then pebble island was about destroying aircraft not the airstrip )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Faulkland islands, there wouldn't be any post-war guerilla resistance from locals.

 

Well guerilla warfare requires certain things like places to hide and a decent sized population to provide logistics and support....not sure the falklands has the right circumstances for guerilla warfare being an island doesn't give you many places to run after the hit.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, but, he comes from a group of islands even farther off the shore than the Falklands are, which was annexed by America! I wonder if he wants to give Hawaii back too? Hmmmm

 

Obama is just like the rest of them, imo - blooming hypocrite.

 

It's alright for the Arabs to rise up against their governments but if a US citizen wants to protest about the global financial system, they get a water-cannon sandwich.

 

He'd love to have the UK out of the Falklands because it'd likely be American corporations who swept in to establish the infrastructure and make the moolah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well guerilla warfare requires certain things like places to hide and a decent sized population to provide logistics and support....not sure the falklands has the right circumstances for guerilla warfare being an island doesn't give you many places to run after the hit.....

 

Slash the locals wouldn't object to us protecting them from an Argentinian takeover!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except we tried that in the last war with little actual effect with the black buck raids I suppose the argies could try a pebble island style raid on the airstrip at Mount Pleasant but I wouldn't give them much chance (even then pebble island was about destroying aircraft not the airstrip )

 

If memory serves, Pebble Island was a simple grass landing strip for light aircraft only - quite a different matter to MPA.

 

On the wider point, if there is one bloody lesson the long history of warfare teaches us, it is that you must never underestimate the opposition. Would it be a easy matter for the argies to successfully invade the Falklands again - absolutely not. Would it be impossible for them to devise a method of damaging that crucial runway for a day or so ....... well the yanks thought that the Japanese would never dare to attack Pearl Harbour didn't they ?

 

Our whole defensive strategy for the Falklands depends upon that one runway - I suggest that reliance represents a point of vulnerability that a audacious enemy could exploit to their advantage one day.

 

I say the decision by the current government to abandon our 'Carrier Strike' capability for a decade (or more) in the last defence review was a strategically dangerous one. A reckless decision that didn't save that much money in the grand scheme of things, and one that may well come back to bite us one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ummm...seriously...?

 

there could not be any less similarities between afghanistan and the falklands..

I can assure you, we don't under estimate our potential enemies...that is why are the best at training our forces and why nations from around the world pay for us to train them

 

come to think of it...have you ever worn a uniform...?

 

Ummm... yes seriously.

 

You said "the falklands would be over quicker than last time....in our favour",

I don't know why the size of the theatre of war has any bearing on inaccurate estimations as to the length of the war. As a nation we have consistently underestimated how long all of the recent conflicts will take. As as example I'll use the recent Libyan conflict, it started in March when we were told it would last until June, it fact it continued until October, which to me looks like an underestimation.

 

I'm not sure why you have brought our ability to train other nations forces into this, my sole point was regarding your statement I've quoted above, over confidence is not a good trait, neither is it condusive to a favourable outcome.

 

The answer to you question is yes, although, again, I'm not sure of the relevance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found this website not exactly scientific but it attempts to rank countries by military power

 

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

 

The UK is ranked 5th in the world

Argentina is ranked 31st in the world

 

Ultimatly as long as the British goverment has the political will I can't see how Britian can end up losing to Argentina in a war over the islands we have a bigger navy, airforce and army with better equipment (despite all the cutbacks) than Argentina has (whose military is smaller now than it was in the last war). Argentina knows it as well.

 

The last war showed that the UK has the political will to keep the islands, the last war was fought becuase the Argentinan goverment at the time thought the UK wouldn't fight to get the islands back. I can't see Argentina invading any time soon it won't stop them posturing for home consumption though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found this website not exactly scientific but it attempts to rank countries by military power

 

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

 

The UK is ranked 5th in the world

Argentina is ranked 31st in the world

 

Ultimatly as long as the British goverment has the political will I can't see how Britian can end up losing to Argentina in a war over the islands we have a bigger navy, airforce and army with better equipment (despite all the cutbacks) than Argentina has (whose military is smaller now than it was in the last war). Argentina knows it as well.

 

The last war showed that the UK has the political will to keep the islands, the last war was fought becuase the Argentinan goverment at the time thought the UK wouldn't fight to get the islands back. I can't see Argentina invading any time soon it won't stop them posturing for home consumption though.

 

I have analysed this and concluded that we should invade Qatar - in time for the World Cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. However we must be careful not to overlook such posturing, and to be seen to ignore it. That was the mistake Thatcher made before 1982 with similar posturing, encouraging Argentina to think we wouldn't react to an invasion. That mistake cost many lives and many millions of pounds in a war that might never have happened had the UK reacted more strongly earlier.

 

)

 

You don't honestly believe that was a mistake on the British governments part do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...