Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 8th, 2013, 11:46 AM   #201

Black Dog's Avatar
Idiot of the year 2013
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Damned England
Posts: 8,408
Blog Entries: 2

It all helps them with their jingoism, that's why we shouldn't. No response other than a promise to respond militarily is all the answer we should give them. If we start getting involved in a war of words beyond that, it's fuel to their propaganda fire. A way of working up their public to avenge "insults" in our press.
Black Dog is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 8th, 2013, 12:11 PM   #202
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Suffolk
Posts: 372

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Dog View Post
It all helps them with their jingoism, that's why we shouldn't. No response other than a promise to respond militarily is all the answer we should give them. If we start getting involved in a war of words beyond that, it's fuel to their propaganda fire. A way of working up their public to avenge "insults" in our press.
True, but ignoring them either isn't gonna make the problem disappear. We've been doing that for years, and still we are talking about the Falklands. And not in a historical sense, but a modern one.
RewardMe is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 12:22 PM   #203

Black Dog's Avatar
Idiot of the year 2013
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Damned England
Posts: 8,408
Blog Entries: 2

They can't do it without support from their public, though. This isn't Galtieri's crew in charge. And they're fully aware that they were beaten last time, and this time, Britain has more change of US/UN support. Well, maybe
Black Dog is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 03:42 PM   #204

Mangekyou's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: UK
Posts: 6,094
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Dog View Post
They can't do it without support from their public, though. This isn't Galtieri's crew in charge. And they're fully aware that they were beaten last time, and this time, Britain has more change of US/UN support. Well, maybe
I agree with your thoughts on this Black Dog. I think with the current economic sanctions in Argentina, its clear to see that they need a distraction to help them.

The sun's response was a bit silly in that regard, because it helps add to anti-British mentalities.
Mangekyou is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 04:07 PM   #205
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,173

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Dog View Post
...they're fully aware that they were beaten last time, and this time, Britain has more change of US/UN support.
...but no aircraft carriers
Poly is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 04:18 PM   #206
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,173

Quote:
Originally Posted by constantine View Post
My guess would be mostly c...and that c was the cause of b. Britain had made some serious mistakes in the decades leading up to the Falklands affair, sacrificing military spending for social spending...but the conflict seemed to put things back on track.
Are you aware of how desolate the Falkland Islands are...few would want to be stationed there for long.

Plus garrisoning the Falklands was very expensive - an air base had to be built as well as an infrastructure to support it.

The British armed forces are smaller and weaker (nuclear weapons aside) now than they were in 1982.

In 1982 there were two aircraft carriers (albeit one ready for de-commissioning) and two in building

Today there are no operational aircraft carriers in the RN (and no carrier aircraft)

If Argentina were to snatch the Falklands away a second time, I don't think the British armed forces would be capable of taking them back.
Poly is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 04:27 PM   #207

rehabnonono's Avatar
inveterate antagonist
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: the Boomtown Shenzhen
Posts: 2,178

Quote:
Originally Posted by RewardMe View Post
Why shouldn't we reply with a bit of jingoism now and again? We've been listening to Kirchner's rants for a few years now. And we've put up with it, in our own passive way. Even after the insult on the Falklands war memorial. Sometimes, someone, just has to say what we/me? are all thinking and that's to tell them to "**** off and back away".
Reasons for not allowing Jingoism: Because the British have done enough of it, the British should be above it, but most of all because people can die for no better reason than the public wanted to vent their patriotic emotions, rather than look at their real frustrations. Jingoism allows other countries to exploit fear and do something really stupid... like start another war.
rehabnonono is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 05:38 PM   #208

Major Wilson's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Norway
Posts: 515

Quote:
Originally Posted by RewardMe View Post
Why shouldn't we reply with a bit of jingoism now and again? We've been listening to Kirchner's rants for a few years now. And we've put up with it, in our own passive way. Even after the insult on the Falklands war memorial. Sometimes, someone, just has to say what we/me? are all thinking and that's to tell them to "**** off and back away".
Because no one will take you seriously. And there's no need to fuel the fire by joining in.

The Argentine president doesn't deserve a response or needs any assistance in her downfall. She's managing that rather well on her own. But it's a pity she'll drag the entire country with her.
Major Wilson is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 05:49 PM   #209

Major Wilson's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Norway
Posts: 515

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
Are you aware of how desolate the Falkland Islands are...few would want to be stationed there for long.

Plus garrisoning the Falklands was very expensive - an air base had to be built as well as an infrastructure to support it.

The British armed forces are smaller and weaker (nuclear weapons aside) now than they were in 1982.

In 1982 there were two aircraft carriers (albeit one ready for de-commissioning) and two in building

Today there are no operational aircraft carriers in the RN (and no carrier aircraft)

If Argentina were to snatch the Falklands away a second time, I don't think the British armed forces would be capable of taking them back.
Weapon systems have come a long way in the 30 years since the 1982 war. If Britain positions one Type 45 off Western Falklands, that single ship will take care of every fighter jet that Argentina could put into the air - either from airfields on the mainland or from Port Stanley. Nuclear subs will take care of surface ships and whatever diesel subs Argentina might have. So the British Armada will probably be able to enter Falkand waters without getting Exoceted, bombed ot torpedoed.

So a second Falklands war will again be a conventional ground war but with no air support for the Argentine army. The British forces, incidently all professional soldiers, will be supported by Apache helicopters. The odds are on Britains side.
Major Wilson is offline  
Old January 8th, 2013, 06:44 PM   #210

Ancientgeezer's Avatar
Revisionist
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
Posts: 5,317

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
Are you aware of how desolate the Falkland Islands are...few would want to be stationed there for long.

Plus garrisoning the Falklands was very expensive - an air base had to be built as well as an infrastructure to support it.

The British armed forces are smaller and weaker (nuclear weapons aside) now than they were in 1982.

In 1982 there were two aircraft carriers (albeit one ready for de-commissioning) and two in building

Today there are no operational aircraft carriers in the RN (and no carrier aircraft)

If Argentina were to snatch the Falklands away a second time, I don't think the British armed forces would be capable of taking them back.
The Falklands is its own Carrier.
In 1982 there was just a platoon of Royal Marines and an survey vessel (HMS Endurance) to defend the Falklands, South Georgia and the rest of British Antarctic territory. There was no air asset, nor air defences.
Today there is a full length runway with 4 Typhoons, in -flight refuelling and sea-king helicopter support. There is a capable local air defence missile system.
A 1200 man ground force is in place and a rapid reaction unit and additional aircraft can be deployed via Ascension within 24 hours. A type 42 or 45 Frigate or guided missle vessel is on permanent patrol together with an Ice patrol vessel and an RFA support ship and it is reputed that at least one Trafalgar or Astute nuclear sub is on patrol in the region, if not one can be on station within 10 days from Britain or 5 days if diverted from the Caribbean.
Thee is a listening station in the Falklands that, if the quality of those in Cyprus, Scotland and formerly in Hong Kong, can tell how many sheets of toilet paper Mrs Kirschner uses, let alone troop and naval movements.
The Argentine fleet is in mothballs from shortage of spares; they also no longer have an aircraft carrier and even their locally-built corvettes are laid up. Out of 60 vessels only 16 are seaworthy. As of December 2012, the Argentine Navy has fuel for 48 hours of operation.
The Argentine airforce is down to 7 Mirage III and 7 Mirage 5, neither of which have the range to reach the Falklands and return without in-flight refuelling. That leaves the Argentine A4 Skyhawks, essentially a 1960s aircraft and these are equipped for ground attack only.
The Argies have produced very brave pilots and sailors, but you cannot build a castle from pig-pooh. The country is broke beyond belief and despite the visits of their president to China and Russia on arms-buying sprees, they can't pay and so have yet to receive anything.
There is not a question of having to re-take the Falklands again, just defending it and there is no credible Argentine threat at present--the Argies know it, the British know it and all talk of it is just puff.
Ancientgeezer is online now  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
bashing, falklandsget, ready


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Getting the Economy ready for WWI Isoroku295 War and Military History 11 December 7th, 2010 08:35 AM
Hitler-bashing is boring. throughthepastdarkly European History 230 August 23rd, 2010 03:21 PM
Getting ready in the summer... ttanner History Teachers 2 May 30th, 2009 01:50 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.