JC
|
| posted on 2/1/12 at 06:55 PM |
|
|
As I understand it, the Argentinians would need major re-equipping in order to gain the capability to take the islands from the UK by force (without
assistance.....). The forces/plans in place are sufficient to defend the islands.
|
|
|
|
|
foskid
|
| posted on 2/1/12 at 08:20 PM |
|
|
No, No and thrice No
I was there a couple of decades ago, not the end of the world but you could see it from there.
I would not care to go there again for any reason. Nothing there but a load of sheep and a lot of closely related people.
If we need a foothold in Antarctica it would be better I we had a permanent outpost there, abandoned the malvinas to the Argies and resettled the
Falklanders on the Scottish isles, plenty of room up there, or even the Isle of Wight (might deter the french). Probably a far cheaper option than
keeping a permanent military presence there.
That seems a far better solution than the option of another "conflict" the cost of which could well be the last straw for this country not
to mention the probable loss of life for those involved.
@ wilkingj-----"We dont have death squads, and people dont just "dissapear" due to their religeous or political beliefs." Are
you entirely sure about that? Diana , David Kelly? that's just 2 that spring to mind without any effort.
He knows nothing and thinks he knows everything. That points clearly to a political career.
George Bernard Shaw
|
|
|
Alfa145
|
| posted on 2/1/12 at 08:30 PM |
|
|
We can't even secure our own boarders here so not sure how we can defend lands far away....
|
|
|
StevieB
|
| posted on 2/1/12 at 08:35 PM |
|
|
I think it's less about the number of aircraft carriers and more about the troops on the ground (pretty much as it was last time).
There are a number of troops on rotation through the islands and a fast jet contigent from the RAF, so that would keep back any attempted invasion.
We can also project our power around the globe much more efficiently and quickly than the last time round, especially when we already have plenty
boots and kit on the ground.
Then there's the quality of troops. We gave them a damn good thrashing last time using troops who had largely not been very far or done
anything other than prepare for the USSR to steam roll across europe.
Currently we have well equipped, very experienced, and battle hardened troops after 10 years of front line fighting. Those same troops would also be
exteremely highly motivated as they would be undertaking the combat opertaions they are so good at in defence of their own sovereign territory.
I don't think the average Argy troop could compare in kit, motivation or ability.
|
|
|
bobinspain
|
| posted on 2/1/12 at 09:10 PM |
|
|
http://thevelvetrocket.com/2010/02/21/could-britain-re-take-the-falkland-islands-again-its-not-1982-anymore/
This makes interesting reading and pretty salutary too.
Since this article was written, we've lost a lot more materiel and men from our armed forces. eg armed forces personnel in 1982 numbered
320,000.
Currently, there are 189,000.
[Edited on 2/1/12 by bobinspain]
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 2/1/12 at 10:28 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Toprivetguns
I'm still in hope of Turkey leaving Cyprus, same difference.
Eh? you been to Cyprus? I think Syria has a better claim to ownership than Greece.
Sorry, I love Greece and I love the Greeks but Cyprus is logically part of Turkey. It's so far up inside Turkish territory if it went any
further it would be in the middle east.
Anyway, if you want look at the history of the partition it's cos the Greek Cypriots started an uprising against the Brits which didn't
exactly include the Turkish Cypriots in their plans. End result civil war. I know that's not the popular opinion but hey....
Sod the division, go up the Karpaz peninsula. See the Greek and Turkish Cypriots side by side and go and sink a few beers.
|
|
|
bobinspain
|
| posted on 3/1/12 at 10:20 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
quote:
Originally posted by Toprivetguns
I'm still in hope of Turkey leaving Cyprus, same difference.
Eh? you been to Cyprus? I think Syria has a better claim to ownership than Greece.
Sorry, I love Greece and I love the Greeks but Cyprus is logically part of Turkey. It's so far up inside Turkish territory if it went any
further it would be in the middle east.
Anyway, if you want look at the history of the partition it's cos the Greek Cypriots started an uprising against the Brits which didn't
exactly include the Turkish Cypriots in their plans. End result civil war. I know that's not the popular opinion but hey....
Sod the division, go up the Karpaz peninsula. See the Greek and Turkish Cypriots side by side and go and sink a few beers.
BenB
Would that it were so simple, ('logic' and all that, but it's not).
Going back to the fifties and sixties, EOKA, Enosis, Makarios ring any bells? Or come to that, Turkey relinquishing any claim to Cyprus going back
nearly 100 years.
I'm with you on the Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots getting on generally, and yes Cyprus is a splendid place for a cold Keo (or 12).
My favourite was the Limassol wine-festival where 'sippers' (small testube-like sized glasses) and 'gulpers' (mid-sized
carafes) were handed out on payment of a very modest entry fee. After that, it was a free-for-all, with sippers being discarded in favour of gulpers,
no matter what the quality of the contents. Many a night/day was lost doing that, and kokinelli had a lot to answer for. I recall my first full-kebab
was around £1.50 for all you could eat and drink.
The air corridors between Brize Norton and Akrotiri were stacked with RAF VC10s and Britannias, full of families being repatriated when partition was
declared in 1974. (It stopped us going up to Famagusta for a 'jolly).' Most inconsiderate!
Incidentally, any Syrian claim to ownership has never been mentioned within earshot whether in Cyprus, on one of my eighty-four visits there in the
70s (I counted 'em in my logbook, sad I know!), nor anywhere else for that matter. (Nearly forgot, I was there a couple of times in the eighties
too for Lightning APCs. 6 week 'jollys' with the Binbrook lads.---Splendid, happy times).
Happy 2012 and beyond.
Bob.
|
|
|
DRCorsa
|
| posted on 3/1/12 at 11:05 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
quote:
Originally posted by Toprivetguns
I'm still in hope of Turkey leaving Cyprus, same difference.
Eh? you been to Cyprus? I think Syria has a better claim to ownership than Greece.
Sorry, I love Greece and I love the Greeks but Cyprus is logically part of Turkey. It's so far up inside Turkish territory if it went any
further it would be in the middle east.
Anyway, if you want look at the history of the partition it's cos the Greek Cypriots started an uprising against the Brits which didn't
exactly include the Turkish Cypriots in their plans. End result civil war. I know that's not the popular opinion but hey....
Sod the division, go up the Karpaz peninsula. See the Greek and Turkish Cypriots side by side and go and sink a few beers.
As i have already told, Cyprus is an integral part of Hellenic civilisation. Yes, Cyprus is today much closer to Turkey than Greece, but the same goes
with the Aegean islands close to Turkish coast (Asia Minor). Do you think Turks should conquer Aegean islands just because they are so close? I
don't think so. Over the centuries, Cyrpus was under the command of Egyptians and Persians but during the Hellenistic period (after Alexander
the Great), Cyprus was totally Greek, with the same language and religion as the mainland Greeks.
Ι don't want to set a political fire here, but if you read the history you will see that Turks conquered Greek lands with fire and
blood, while Greeks "conquered" the whole Europe by their civilisation.
Cyprus is Greek in language, culture and religion since Homer's time. Ottoman Turks came to the island some 400 years ago. Then, in 1974 Turks
invaded the island and killed a lot of Greek Cypriots in two phases. Today the 1/3 of the island is under the command of Turks and the Turkish state
there is illegal and unrecognised.
[Edited on 3/1/12 by DRCorsa]
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 3/1/12 at 11:14 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by StevieB
I think it's less about the number of aircraft carriers and more about the troops on the ground (pretty much as it was last time).
There are a number of troops on rotation through the islands and a fast jet contigent from the RAF, so that would keep back any attempted invasion.
We can also project our power around the globe much more efficiently and quickly than the last time round, especially when we already have plenty
boots and kit on the ground.
Then there's the quality of troops. We gave them a damn good thrashing last time using troops who had largely not been very far or done
anything other than prepare for the USSR to steam roll across europe.
Currently we have well equipped, very experienced, and battle hardened troops after 10 years of front line fighting. Those same troops would also be
exteremely highly motivated as they would be undertaking the combat opertaions they are so good at in defence of their own sovereign territory.
I don't think the average Argy troop could compare in kit, motivation or ability.
Last time there was a, very small, detachment of Royal Marines on the Island prior to the invasion who, in the greatest tradition of the Booties, gave
the Argies a bloody nose before being forced to surrender. The need for air cover (and hence Carriers) has more to do with taking the Islands back if
required rather than fighting off an invasion. The standing force on the Island is much larger now and includes over 1000 personal and 4 Typhoon
fighters.
We shouldn't be in the position to be doing this type of thing again....South Georgia
South Georgia
& NP 8901 on the Falklands itself.
NP8901
Remember when discussing the demise of the armed forces that the UK is an Island nation surrounded by sea and that it takes more than a few months to
build new ships to defend these islands when the ones we have are sold or scrapped.
Jeff
HMS Antrim
1982 and all that.
[Edited on 3/1/12 by jeffw]
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 3/1/12 at 11:26 AM |
|
|
This is an interesting graph
|
|
|
richard thomas
|
| posted on 11/1/12 at 05:55 PM |
|
|
Bit late into this one....but.....
With Mount Pleasant airfield operating highly capable Typhoon aircraft (no matter what speculation says, they are better than the press would have -
see Libya conflict for proof) against the Argentine ageing air fleet (effectively not much more modern than it was back in '82....it's not
only the UK suffering cutbacks in defence spending), rapid troop and aircraft reinforcement strategy (can shift stuff fast these days), and one of
them terrifying Astute's - capable of launcing deep into Argentine territory - lurking nearby (maybe....and maybe not - but if you were in the
position of pushing the button to deploy Argentine troops against the Falkland Isles it would be at the forefront of your mind i guess....? Astute is
exactly what it is described as - a 'deterrent'...) I think that the Falklanders (British nationals on British territory remember with as
much right to have their sovereignty defended as those living in the Orkeney's, for instance) have a fair chance of keeping the Union flag
flying high....
I think somebody commented previously that Argentina has never owned the islands....so they can't reclaim something they never owned....if they
do then I am going to claim back the house next door to me using the same logic...I can because my neighbours don't have an Astute in the back
garden to put me off.....
Just my two penn'orth.....
|
|
|
