"We are going to get the Falklands back"

[keithisco]

How is holding the islands for about a dozen years back in the early nineteenth century a strong claim?

In which case the UK has the strongest claim.... so test it!!

Edited March 28, 2012 by keithisco

[stevewinn]

In which case the UK has the strongest claim.... so test it!!

if we were to test it and lost who is going to enforce the decision? and vice versa, and if no-one has a claim how would that work? we'd surely win on squatters rights.

[keithisco]

if we were to test it and lost who is going to enforce the decision? and vice versa, and if no-one has a claim how would that work? we'd surely win on squatters rights.

Test it and lose (if that is what the court decides).Test it and win. At least test it...Seriously, where is the problem in this???

[Mr Right Wing]

Test it and lose (if that is what the court decides).Test it and win. At least test it...Seriously, where is the problem in this???

Test what they have no legal claim

[stevewinn]

Test it and lose (if that is what the court decides).Test it and win. At least test it...Seriously, where is the problem in this???

i'll ask again, if we test it and lose who is going to enforce the ruling?

[hetrodoxly]

In which case the UK has the strongest claim.... so test it!!

why should we? and i hope your ready to go to court over my claim on your house.

[Mr Right Wing]

why should we? and i hope your ready to go to court over my claim on your house.

You cant do that.

There used to be a fishing pond there which he fished at for a few days before being moved on. Therefore he owns your house.

If you kick up too much fuss he might try sending the heavies around again to remove you from your property.

[Dirty Bubble]

There's no debate here, the islands are British. If Argentina was foolish enough to try and take them by force again they'd be limping back to port with half their fleet gone and perhaps more.

[Mr Right Wing]

There's no debate here, the islands are British. If Argentina was foolish enough to try and take them by force again they'd be limping back to port with half their fleet gone and perhaps more.

They have 4 years to do us.

Without an aircraft carrier we would be unable to project airpower down there so retaking the islands would be impossible. The first supercarrier leaves dock in 2016, will probably require sea trials and theres problems with the F-35C landing on aircraft carriers. Its likely it will be 2018 before we can use the thing.

Brazil has an aircraft carrier in service plus they are on Argentinas side. If they wanted to knock us out they could both attack Gibraltar, Ascension Island then take the Falklands. There would be no way we could win them back without the help of France and maybe the rest of Nato too.

I hope when it comes the PM has enough sense to let our nukes fly.

[stevewinn]

They have 4 years to do us.

Without an aircraft carrier we would be unable to project airpower down there so retaking the islands would be impossible. The first supercarrier leaves dock in 2016, will probably require sea trials and theres problems with the F-35C landing on aircraft carriers. Its likely it will be 2018 before we can use the thing.

Brazil has an aircraft carrier in service plus they are on Argentinas side. If they wanted to knock us out they could both attack Gibraltar, Ascension Island then take the Falklands. There would be no way we could win them back without the help of France and maybe the rest of Nato too.

I hope when it comes the PM has enough sense to let our nukes fly.

none of the south american countries that would possibly side with argentina have a blue water navy. even with our ships(Royal Navy) now numbering only 98. they have the equivalent capability of 200 ships from the 1970/80's the new Type 45 destroyers has the capability of 5 outgoing type 42 destroyers. the spiel goes (copied from Royal Navy website) In an "intensive attack" a single Type 45 could simultaneously track, engage and destroy more targets than five Type 42 destroyers operating together. we already have three type 45 destroyers in service.

[spud the mackem]

Hi,y'all, I've been having a read of the comments,and there's a lot of Moo Poo being said..The Argentine people are ok,we have a few here playing or managing footy,and I have been to Argentine,the folk are friendly and respectfull.Its their stupid leaders who are Sabre rattling again to try and drum up some support,to keep in power,and thats what its all about.I dont reckon the Brit folk want another shindig with them,but we will if it gets nasty,and we shall win it again so it will be 2-0 to us...There aint no such place as LAS MALVINAS, its called THE FALKLAND ISLANDS and will remain so for ever and ever amen.

[Space Commander Travis]

They have 4 years to do us.

Without an aircraft carrier we would be unable to project airpower down there so retaking the islands would be impossible. The first supercarrier leaves dock in 2016, will probably require sea trials and theres problems with the F-35C landing on aircraft carriers. Its likely it will be 2018 before we can use the thing.

Brazil has an aircraft carrier in service plus they are on Argentinas side. If they wanted to knock us out they could both attack Gibraltar, Ascension Island then take the Falklands. There would be no way we could win them back without the help of France and maybe the rest of Nato too.

I hope when it comes the PM has enough sense to let our nukes fly.

So you're saying that because mr. David Cameroon has been idiotic enough to dismantle most of the Royal Navy, they may have no choice in some future conflict with a far away land but to let the Nukes fly because there's nothing else they could use? That's a very eloquent testimony to mr. David Cameroon's fitness to govern, isn't it.

[stevewinn]

HMS Dauntless is being sent down to the south Atlantic. i guess it'll join up with HMS Daring

Edited April 2, 2012 by stevewinn

[Space Commander Travis]

So that's the entire navy down to deal with the Argies.

Good job we don't have any interests anywhere else that need looking after.

....

[Mr Right Wing]

So that's the entire navy down to deal with the Argies.

Good job we don't have any interests anywhere else that need looking after.

....

The Government has said on Sky News this morning that -

1. One Major oil find and three minor ones mean there is at least 400-500 million recoverable barrels of Brent north of the Falklands.

2. Drilling is starting south of the islands and they expect huge finds there due to seismic data. They expect that area to have more recoverable Brent than the North Sea which is one huge oil find.

3. Argentina would find it near impossible to defeat the forces on the island with their current military.

4. If they did defeat the forces it would be impossible for us to retake the islands.

I think when it comes out how much oil is down there South America might get greedy and help Argentina take them.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Mr Right Wing

[Mr Right Wing]

So you're saying that because mr. David Cameroon has been idiotic enough to dismantle most of the Royal Navy, they may have no choice in some future conflict with a far away land but to let the Nukes fly because there's nothing else they could use? That's a very eloquent testimony to mr. David Cameroon's fitness to govern, isn't it.

Mr Cameron isnt an idiot our country is near bankrupt.

If the Falklands are invaded again nukes would be the only thing we could use.

[Space Commander Travis]

Mr Cameron isnt an idiot our country is near bankrupt.

If the Falklands are invaded again nukes would be the only thing we could use.

So (a) scrapping the carriers, ( scrapping the Harriers that operated from them (and which would have been very useful in such a situation from land bases as well), thus necessitating incredibly expensive long-distance deployments of incredibly (over)- expensive Typhoons (because they're virtually all there is), and also © selling off one of the amphibious ships which experience from 30 years ago might also have taught would be very useful, to Australia, none of those were the actions of an idiot? or is leaving, as you suggest is the case, the only option being to leave a radioactive wasteland in any country that dares to cross the UK actually a sensible response, because the only thing that actually matters (tens of thousands of civilians not mattering, of course), is reducing this ludicruous Deficit?

[Mr Right Wing]

So (a) scrapping the carriers, ( scrapping the Harriers that operated from them (and which would have been very useful in such a situation from land bases as well), thus necessitating incredibly expensive long-distance deployments of incredibly (over)- expensive Typhoons (because they're virtually all there is), and also © selling off one of the amphibious ships which experience from 30 years ago might also have taught would be very useful, to Australia, none of those were the actions of an idiot? or is leaving, as you suggest is the case, the only option being to leave a radioactive wasteland in any country that dares to cross the UK actually a sensible response, because the only thing that actually matters (tens of thousands of civilians not mattering, of course), is reducing this ludicruous Deficit?

If we nuked one of their cities then told Argentina we would nuke one additional city per day until they left the Falklands Islands I bet they would leave.

Either that or they would go extinct.

[+and-then]

If we nuked one of their cities then told Argentina we would nuke one additional city per day until they left the Falklands Islands I bet they would leave.

Either that or they would go extinct.

MRW I have read your posts on this thread and I wonder if you're serious? I understand the anger and the hurt pride that would flow from such an action by Argentina but....really?

You would for the sake of hurt pride and loss of some oil revenue destroy your own country? Not to mention killing possibly millions of human beings who don't even care about the issue? Thank God there have until this day been no other nukes used since America destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It seems the horror of that lesson is fading in the modern world and THAT is frightening. If anyone uses them for any reason it will open a Pandora's Box of evil that will be unspeakable in it's consequences. I predict that even if America lost a city to a terrorist nuke, we would not necessarily respond with a nuke. To be sure, there would be very grave consequences and a horrific death count but with conventional forces I think...

No, nukes cannot ever be used again. If they are then no one anywhere will be safe.

[Corp]

I'm hoping that he's just a troll. Because it would be sad that someone would actually be so eager to murder millions of people.

[Mr Right Wing]

MRW I have read your posts on this thread and I wonder if you're serious? I understand the anger and the hurt pride that would flow from such an action by Argentina but....really?

You would for the sake of hurt pride and loss of some oil revenue destroy your own country? Not to mention killing possibly millions of human beings who don't even care about the issue? Thank God there have until this day been no other nukes used since America destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It seems the horror of that lesson is fading in the modern world and THAT is frightening. If anyone uses them for any reason it will open a Pandora's Box of evil that will be unspeakable in it's consequences. I predict that even if America lost a city to a terrorist nuke, we would not necessarily respond with a nuke. To be sure, there would be very grave consequences and a horrific death count but with conventional forces I think...

No, nukes cannot ever be used again. If they are then no one anywhere will be safe.

If a nation attacks my people then all responses should be on the table including the nuclear option.

If Argentina is sabre rattling because it wants a share of the oil it wont succeed. If it wants onboard it should be making friends with us instead and repairing the damage that it did with the first war. Britain doesnt give in to threats or hostile behaviour.

[Mr Right Wing]

MRW I have read your posts on this thread and I wonder if you're serious? I understand the anger and the hurt pride that would flow from such an action by Argentina but....really?

You would for the sake of hurt pride and loss of some oil revenue destroy your own country? Not to mention killing possibly millions of human beings who don't even care about the issue? Thank God there have until this day been no other nukes used since America destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It seems the horror of that lesson is fading in the modern world and THAT is frightening. If anyone uses them for any reason it will open a Pandora's Box of evil that will be unspeakable in it's consequences. I predict that even if America lost a city to a terrorist nuke, we would not necessarily respond with a nuke. To be sure, there would be very grave consequences and a horrific death count but with conventional forces I think...

No, nukes cannot ever be used again. If they are then no one anywhere will be safe.

If a nation attacks my people then all responses should be on the table including the nuclear option.

If Argentina is sabre rattling because it wants a share of the oil it wont succeed. If it wants onboard it should be making friends with us instead and repairing the damage that it did with the first war. Britain doesnt give in to threats or hostile behaviour.

[Finity]

Argentina won't be able to take it by force, they don't have the military power any more. Even when they did, they had 3x the numbers and still lost.

I bet she doesn't mention anywhere how Argentina itself was stolen from it's natives a few centuries ago by the people who still rule it? This is all about the oil they found there, nothing more. Once all the oil has been sucked dry no one will care.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Finity

[George Ford]

Some Argentinians burning an effigy of Prince William..

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/895027-prince-william-effigy-burned-in-buenos-aires-as-falklands-row-escalates?google_editors_picks=true

It's not a very nice thing to do now is it?!

[Mr Right Wing]

Some Argentinians burning an effigy of Prince William..

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/895027-prince-william-effigy-burned-in-buenos-aires-as-falklands-row-escalates?google_editors_picks=true

It's not a very nice thing to do now is it?!

'We demand justice so Britain doesn’t continue to pillage our environment and natural resources.’

I think that comments says it all and if large amounts of oil are confirmed Argentina and several of its South American allies may make a military attempt to take the Falklands.