Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

"We are going to get the Falklands back"


Socio
 Share

Recommended Posts

It isn't just down to numbers though is it...it's HOW they are trained.I agree politicians will decide the outcome but we have a big enough force to secure the Islands if Argentina did invade.We will just pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq and leave it to the good old USA....oh no...hang on...they are doing that to us..

I agree it looks good on paper comparing the two forces, But how are the UK going to reach the Falklands we have no aircraft carriers. HMS Ark Royal - decommissioned - HMS Invincible - decommissioned - HMS Illustrious has only Helicopters. we've mothballed the sea harrier and selling them to the yanks for ten pound each.

Lets hope its all quiet on the western front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 360
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mekorig

    26

  • Space Commander Travis

    30

  • keithisco

    26

  • Mr Right Wing

    38

It isn't just down to numbers though is it...it's HOW they are trained.I agree politicians will decide the outcome but we have a big enough force to secure the Islands if Argentina did invade.We will just pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq and leave it to the good old USA....oh no...hang on...they are doing that to us..

Hmmm....to a certain extent I'd say. It's more like what's in those numbers (i.e. technology). Probably the most important figure in that link is how much each country dedicates to their defense budget.

I don't think being well trained helps much when a bunker buster, dropped from high altitude, lands on your lap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm....to a certain extent I'd say. It's more like what's in those numbers (i.e. technology). Probably the most important figure in that link is how much each country dedicates to their defense budget.

I don't think being well trained helps much when a bunker buster, dropped from high altitude, lands on your lap.

Well were talking different warfare nowadays though really.It would probably be a bombing mission first off to weaken them if they did invade.Some of our subs are probably already in the waters around the islands.Training of individual troops is important in a land assault but dont forget that even using technological warfare,our troops will be more highly trained than they are.I hope it doesn't go that far though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree it looks good on paper comparing the two forces, But how are the UK going to reach the Falklands we have no aircraft carriers. HMS Ark Royal - decommissioned - HMS Invincible - decommissioned - HMS Illustrious has only Helicopters. we've mothballed the sea harrier and selling them to the yanks for ten pound each.

Lets hope its all quiet on the western front.

Yes lets hope so...we are stretched enough as it is financially and by troop numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes lets hope so...we are stretched enough as it is financially and by troop numbers.

We dont need to send troops to liberate the Falkland Islands. We can just nuke 1 Argie city per day until they get the message and surrender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We dont need to send troops to liberate the Falkland Islands. We can just nuke 1 Argie city per day until they get the message and surrender.

Well thats one way of doing it...youre wrong but it certainly is an option...plus i cant see Chile and Uruguay being happy that nukes are flying all over the place and possibly leaving there lands infected with radiation...we could always nuke them too maybe?

Edited by BrianPotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well thats one way of doing it...youre wrong but it certainly is an option...plus i cant see Chile and Uruguay being happy that nukes are flying all over the place and possibly leaving there lands infected with radiation...we could always nuke them too maybe?

Don't nuke Chile. Chile is a big ally of Britain and the Chileans will almost certainly support us in the event of another war with the Argies.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't nuke Chile. Chile is a big ally of Britain and the Chileans will almost certainly support us in the event of another war with the Argies.

Yeah i know..i was just replying to a nuke all post.We would probably use Chile as our base if it did transpire that we had another scuffle with Argentina.We wouldn't have had the first conflict if Maggie had taken Pinochets warning up saying that.Would Typhoons/Tornados be able to get to the Falklands from Chile without refueling ?

Edited by BrianPotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before any pirate began to run in cricles like headless chickens, do not worry, thanks to a line of goverments in the last years, the Argentinian Armed forces arent in any shape to attack the Malvinas, even reach them.

Don't nuke Chile. Chile is a big ally of Britain and the Chileans will almost certainly support us in the event of another war with the Argies.

I think you are getting behind a good 15 years in the past on international relationships. Argentina and Chile have much better relations, and more important, much more trade, some of that trade vital for Chile, like gas. For now Chile is behaving like an adult country, trying to commerce and have good relations with anyone.

Also, i love when some crazy pirate began to yell for the nuking of Argentina. It so nutty. :D :D ;D :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, i love when some crazy pirate began to yell for the nuking of Argentina. It so nutty. :D :D ;D :rolleyes:

Es que hay amputados de cerebro para todo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before any pirate began to run in cricles like headless chickens, do not worry, thanks to a line of goverments in the last years, the Argentinian Armed forces arent in any shape to attack the Malvinas, even reach them.

I think you are getting behind a good 15 years in the past on international relationships. Argentina and Chile have much better relations, and more important, much more trade, some of that trade vital for Chile, like gas. For now Chile is behaving like an adult country, trying to commerce and have good relations with anyone.

Also, i love when some crazy pirate began to yell for the nuking of Argentina. It so nutty. :D :D ;D :rolleyes:

I think Nuke was a silly term but how is the UK being pirates for protecting what is there's?...ps Chile would do the right thing in an emergency..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Nuke was a silly term but how is the UK being pirates for protecting what is there's?...ps Chile would do the right thing in an emergency..

Ummmm...taking in count that the british were famous for their pirates and their stealing of territory all along thei history, i think pirate is an apropiate moniker. BTW, the british expelled an already established population on the Malvinas and took it, like they tried with Buenos Aires twice before. :innocent:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm...taking in count that the british were famous for their pirates and their stealing of territory all along thei history, i think pirate is an apropiate moniker. BTW, the british expelled an already established population on the Malvinas and took it, like they tried with Buenos Aires twice before. :innocent:

Piracy?...yes that was a past indiscretion but we were not alone...The point of it all really is that the Falklands is a British land regardless of how,through history,we came by it...lets live in the modern time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We dont need to send troops to liberate the Falkland Islands. We can just nuke 1 Argie city per day until they get the message and surrender.

Ah, the Dr Strangelove approach to international relations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm...taking in count that the british were famous for their pirates and their stealing of territory all along thei history, i think pirate is an apropiate moniker. BTW, the british expelled an already established population on the Malvinas and took it, like they tried with Buenos Aires twice before. :innocent:

Welll, it's rather more complicated than that. ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_islands#History_to_1982

The first reliable sighting is usually attributed to the Dutch explorer Sebald de Weert in 1600, who named the archipelago the Sebald Islands.

In 1690, Captain John Strong of the Welfare en route to Puerto Deseado was driven off course and reached the Falkland Islands instead, landing at Bold Cove.[14] Sailing between the two principal islands he called the passage "Falkland Channel" (now Falkland Sound), after Anthony Cary, 5th Viscount Falkland, who as Commissioner of the Admiralty had financed the expedition.[14] The island group takes its English name from this body of water.

The French navigator and military commander Louis Antoine de Bougainville founded the first settlement on Berkeley Sound, in present-day Port Louis, East Falkland in 1764.

And then, and only then,

Spain acquired the French colony and placed the colony under a governor subordinate to the Buenos Aires colonial administration.

So in fact, on that basis, the Netherlands and France would have a stronger claim that Spain/Argentina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm...taking in count that the british were famous for their pirates and their stealing of territory all along thei history, i think pirate is an apropiate moniker. BTW, the british expelled an already established population on the Malvinas and took it, like they tried with Buenos Aires twice before. :innocent:

And historically, Britain belonged to the Romans at one time. What's your point? We live now, the islanders want to be part of the UK now and, frankly, want nothing to do with Argentina now. But, hey, that's no defence to Argentina wanting to control them because some other people once lived there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mekorig, on 25 June 2011 - 05:50 PM, said:

BTW, the british expelled an already established population on the Malvinas and took it, like they tried with Buenos Aires twice before.

The British did no such thing.

In fact, it was the BRITISH who were expelled - by the Spanish.

It was the French who created the first colony on the islands. Then the British, who didn't even know the French were there, then claimed a part of the western Falkland Islands for Britain.

The Spanish then came along, AFTER the British and French, and acquired the French territory in the islands which the French agreed to give them. Fair enough. But then the greedy Spanish then kicked the British - who were there before them - out of the Falklands because they wanted the British part of the islands!

In the early 1800s, what became Argentina started to claim the islands but this was after the British had already settled them.

The English (not the British because this was before England and Scotland unified in 1707 to become Britain) were probably the first Europeans - the first people from the whole of the "Old World" - to set eye on the Falklands. And this occurred centuries before Argentina was even born.

According to Wikipedia:

When English explorer John Davis, commander of the Desire, one of the ships belonging to Thomas Cavendish's second expedition to the New World, separated from Cavendish off the coast of what is now southern Argentina, he decided to make for the Strait of Magellan in order to find Cavendish. On 9 August 1592 a severe storm battered his ship, and Davis drifted under bare masts, taking refuge "among certain Isles never before discovered." Consequently, for a time the Falklands were known as "Davis Land" or "Davis' Land."

In 1594, they were visited by English commander Richard Hawkins, who, combining his own name with that of Queen Elizabeth I, the "Virgin Queen", gave the islands the name of "Hawkins' Maidenland."

In 1600, Sebald de Weert, a Dutchman, visited them and called them the Sebald Islands (in Spanish, "Islas Sebaldinas" or "Sebaldes"), a name which they bore on some Dutch maps into the 19th century.

English Captain John Strong sailed between the two principal islands in 1690 and called the passage "Falkland Channel" (now Falkland Sound), after Anthony Cary, 5th Viscount Falkland (1659–1694), who as Commissioner of the Admiralty had financed the expedition and later became First Lord of the Admiralty. From this body of water the island group later took its collective name.

Now we'll get onto the bit when the greedy Spanish, who arrived in the islands AFTER the British, claimed the islands as theirs and kicked out the British.

The French navigator and military commander Louis Antoine de Bougainville founded the first settlement on Berkeley Sound, in present-day Port Louis, East Falkland in 1764. In 1765, the British captain John Byron explored and claimed Saunders Island on West Falkland, where he named the harbour Port Egmont and a settlement was constructed in 1766. Unaware of the French presence he claimed the island group for King George III. Spain acquired the French colony and placed the colony under a governor subordinate to the Buenos Aires colonial administration. Spain attacked Port Egmont, expelling the British presence in 1770, this brought the two countries to the brink of war but war was avoided by a peace treaty and the British return to Port Egmont.

In 1774, economic pressures leading up to the American Revolutionary War forced Great Britain to withdraw from many overseas settlements. Upon withdrawal the British left behind a plaque asserting her continued claim. Spain maintained its governor until 1806 who, on his departure, left behind a plaque asserting Spanish claims. The remaining settlers were withdrawn by the United Provinces of the River Plate in 1811.

In 1820, storm damage forced the privateer Heroína to take shelter in the islands. Her captain David Jewett raised the flag of the United Provinces of the River Plate and read a proclamation claiming the islands. This became public knowledge in Buenos Aires nearly a year later following the publication of the proclamation in the Salem Gazette. After several abortive attempts, Luis Vernet established a settlement in 1828 after seeking authorisation from both British and Argentine authorities.

A dispute over fishing and hunting rights resulted in a raid by the US warship USS Lexington in 1831. Although Vernet claimed that the settlement was destroyed, the Lexington only reports destruction of arms and a powder store. The Islands were declared free from all government, the seven senior members of the settlement were arrested for piracy and taken to Montevideo.

In November 1832, Argentina sent Commander Mestivier as an interim commander to found a penal settlement but was killed in a mutiny after 4 days.[25] The following January, British forces returned and requested the Argentine garrison leave. Don Pinedo, captain of the ARA Sarandi and senior officer present, protested but ultimately complied. Vernet's settlement continued, with the Irishman William Dickson tasked with raising the British flag for passing ships. Vernet's deputy, Matthew Brisbane, returned and was encouraged by the British to continue with the enterprise. The settlement continued until August 1833, when the leaders were killed in the so-called Gaucho murders. Subsequently, from 1834 the islands were governed as a naval station until 1841 when the British Government decided to establish a permanent colony.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_falklands

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And historically, Britain belonged to the Romans at one time. What's your point? We live now, the islanders want to be part of the UK now and, frankly, want nothing to do with Argentina now. But, hey, that's no defence to Argentina wanting to control them because some other people once lived there.

Sorry people about my over the top Dr Strangelove type nuke them all comments lol

I will point out that Argentina has never had a claim on the Falklands it was Spain that did. Argentina was a rebel colony which declared its independance from the Spanish and as such has no right to try and use Spains claim as its own. Furthermore France and Holland both have stronger claims than Spain and the British claim is strongest of all as we have settled the island and been there for centuries.

The Argentinian mentality is a strange one to me. I wouldnt call it an underdog mentality its more like one where someone loses their prize marble to another boy and along comes his midget brother claiming its his and demanding it back. He has no claim on the marble as it was never his to begin with and the other lad won it fair and square. To top it all off the game of marbles happened 2 years ago lol.

Edited by Spark Plug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say let the buggers try and take them it'll give the british government a kick up the ass and force them to stop cutting back the military. As for the argies i seriously doubt they could beat a single unit of the marines stationed there let alone have the guts to go toe to toe with the SAS or SBS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say let the buggers try and take them it'll give the british government a kick up the ass and force them to stop cutting back the military. As for the argies i seriously doubt they could beat a single unit of the marines stationed there let alone have the guts to go toe to toe with the SAS or SBS.

Id leave it to the Gurkha's....they scared the life out of them the last time we had a spat. :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would Typhoons/Tornados be able to get to the Falklands from Chile without refueling ?

I don't think so. Tornados had to be refuelled three times in the air by VC10 and Tristar air-to-air refuelling aircraft en route to Libya when they flew from RAF Marham in Norfolk and Libya is much closer to Britain than Argentina is.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Id leave it to the Gurkha's....they scared the life out of them the last time we had a spat. :devil:

article-1080104-023926ED000005DC-819_468x318.jpg

During the Falklands War the Falkland Islanders managed to get propaganda through to the Argie conscripts that the British Army Gurkhas were cannibals. The Argies also got very scared when stories were passed on to them about what the Gurkhas did with their deadly Kukri knives, the same knife that a Gurkha used to behead a Taliban in Afghanistan last year.

During the Falklands War, Soldier magazine ran a story of British Army Gurkhas preparing for deployment to the South Atlantic as part of 5 Airborne Brigade's contribution to the Falklands War.

Titled "Mountain Men Prepare To Show Their Steel" it showed images of British Army Gurkhas sharpening their Kukri knives and charging etc. These images were later reproduced in an Argentine military publication under the headline "Los Barbaros Gurkhos" (The Barbarian Gurkhas) which painted a picture of doped-up, knife wielding savages in the pay of the Crown who would kill prisoners. All the article achieved was to unintentionally scare Argentine soldiers witless.

There was also a famous incident during the Falklands War where a British Army Gurkha recce patrol stumbled onto an Argentine anti-aircraft troop and by simply drawing a kukhri and waving it aggressively, got them all to surrender. The knife was later auctioned off for charity, raising £300.

It seems if Britain wants Argentina to lay off the Falklands all it has to do is have a couple of hundred Gurkhas (the British Army has 4,000 of them) permanently stationed on the islands. The Argies, who are scared to death of them, would never attempt to take the islands.

Edited by Blackwhite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

article-1080104-023926ED000005DC-819_468x318.jpg

During the Falklands War the Falkland Islanders managed to get propaganda through to the Argie conscripts that the British Army Gurkhas were cannibals. The Argies also got very scared when stories were passed on to them about what the Gurkhas did with their deadly Kukri knives, the same knife that a Gurkha used to behead a Taliban in Afghanistan last year.

During the Falklands War, Soldier magazine ran a story of British Army Gurkhas preparing for deployment to the South Atlantic as part of 5 Airborne Brigade's contribution to the Falklands War.

Titled "Mountain Men Prepare To Show Their Steel" it showed images of British Army Gurkhas sharpening their Kukri knives and charging etc. These images were later reproduced in an Argentine military publication under the headline "Los Barbaros Gurkhos" (The Barbarian Gurkhas) which painted a picture of doped-up, knife wielding savages in the pay of the Crown who would kill prisoners. All the article achieved was to unintentionally scare Argentine soldiers witless.

There was also a famous incident during the Falklands War where a British Army Gurkha recce patrol stumbled onto an Argentine anti-aircraft troop and by simply drawing a kukhri and waving it aggressively, got them all to surrender. The knife was later auctioned off for charity, raising £300.

It seems if Britain wants Argentina to lay off the Falklands all it has to do is have a couple of hundred Gurkhas (the British Army has 4,000 of them) permanently stationed on the islands. The Argies, who are scared to death of them, would never attempt to take the islands.

:tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so. Tornados had to be refuelled three times in the air by VC10 and Tristar air-to-air refuelling aircraft en route to Libya when they flew from RAF Marham in Norfolk and Libya is much closer to Britain than Argentina is.

Well thats a damn shame then considering our aircraft carriers are mothballed.

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.