I cannot see the U.S. refusing to assist, if needed.
Assist who - the British or the Argintinians?
Las Malvinas AKA The Falkland Islands - why the argy-bargy?
by cedars 319 Replies latest members politics
-
slimboyfat
-
cedars
hotspur - isn't "raping the economy" what happens when you let public spending spiral out of control, leaving the country completely exposed to any future worldwide economic downturn? Isn't that exactly what our last government effectively did?
cuckoo in the nest - as a Brit living in Europe, I can assure you that the "chinless wonder" has by no means alienated Britain from it. The UK still exerts great influence, and always will - but it has the right to say "no" if asked to sign up to something against its interests - an area in which Labour proved completely spineless, seemingly signing whatever treaty the EU put infront of them. As I recall, in the commons debate surrounding the European veto, there was support for Cameron's stance from both the Labour and Tory benches.
I really didn't want this to turn into a party political debate, in starting this thread I was really more interested in the Falklands and the views of any Argentinians on this bizarre stand-off.
n.b. I wouldn't describe myself as pro-Conservative or pro-Labour. I just want to see the most responsible and capable government in power. Ed Milliband gets right on my nerves with his nasal and juvenile whinging... tearing government policy to shreads without offering any viable alternative as to what he would do. If Labour could mount a responsible and articulate opposition with genuine alternatives to Government economic policy in the current climate, under a polished and articulate leader such as David Miliband, then I might be more inclined to listen to Labour. As it is, they seem to be in hopeless disarray, and the fact that they are lumbered with such an irritating leader reveals their key weakness, which is that they are a party run chiefly by the unions for the unions, who in turn have their own agenda.
Cedars
-
Diest
The US would back a fellow english speaking nation. Not to mention I think the US owes the Brits, after Iraq and Afganistan. I dont think Argentina will do more than rattle its rusty saber.
-
Qcmbr
The UK have intelligence assets in Argentina so any attack would not be the surprise it was. We also have far upgraded hardware and our soldiers are veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. The US wouldn't dare not help the UK since we are their sole unwavering supporter with military and financial muscle. Argentina would be suicidal to try and take the islands again considering that they would be unable to move anything via ship (UK has nuclear subs in the area) and their airports would be at risk from tomahawk missile attack (also submarine based.) Also there are now Eurofighters stationed there that would shoot down anything the very aged and decrepid Argentinian air force could put up in the air. The new missile guided destroyer being deployed there is almost a direct response to the previous war and is bristling with anti- aircraft weaponry and radar features. No Argentinian aircraft in 400 km has a chance once it enters the envelope.
The odds are utterly flipped this time around and the Argentinian military knows it. If we find oil in the area in any great quantity expect the military presence to double.
-
hotspur
Cedars - I was thinking more of what happened in the 80's which has set the economic pattern of our times. Coal mines shut down, North Sea oil 'mortgaged'.. the list is endless in terms of the home economy. I agree with you about Milliband... can't stand the guy and until that part is sorted the country will continue to spiral. Unless manufacturing is restored and a sense of worth is re-installed in the work force, the UK will just be a whisper in the grass.
As for The Falklands... there is some very good detail in this book about Intelligence blunders, cartainly appertaining to the diplomatic ineptitude of The Falklands. Also, some excellent insight into the Dieppe fiasco of WWII in which Mountbatten doesn't feature well.
I think all that Argentina can hope for is world wide sympathy... military action would be futile and suicidal but, that's with a rational mind and most of us here knows where irrational thought can end up.
-
finallysomepride
From what I remember the UK recieved only verbal support from Australia, but New Zealand provided two frigates for Indian Ocean patrols, making more British ships available for the conflict.
See wikipedia
The Commonwealth of Nations closely linked to the United Kingdom (who is also a member) condemed the Invasion of the Falklands and publicly supported the UK, who they recognise as the rightful owners of the islands, Of the Commonwealth nations, New Zealand made available the frigates HMNZS Canterbury and HMNZS Waikato as replacements for British ships in the Indian Ocean, freeing British vessels for deployment to the Falklands, and both New Zealand and South Africa terminated their diplomatic relations with Argentina. [ 32 ]
-
finallysomepride
Are the Argentinian troops any more willing to fight now as in the previous conflict? as from what I remember from the 80s is that the Argenenian soldiers really weren't that interested in fighting.
-
cedars
hotspur - thanks for clarifying, yes I agree that one thing leads to another, and decisions were taken in the past that have a knock-on effect today. I'll also look up that book you've suggested when I get the opportunity.
On the one hand, I can't see the Argentinians being stupid enough to attempt an invasion, but on the other hand they've tried it before in fairly recent history, and they seem to be making similar noises now. It's difficult to comprehend, but then so are many things going on around the world.
Cedars
-
St George of England
First of all this post has the wrong title. It should be THE FALKLAND ISLANDS aka the malvinas.
Being one of the older ones here I well remember the last dispute in 1982 and whilst I am sure we could not rely on David Cameron to be very effective in a re-run, much of the damage to our armed forces equipment had already been caused by years of Labour government under the all-time idiot Tony Blair and his side kick.
It was interesting during the Falklands situation that the WTS took sides with Argies by labelling The Falklands as the malvinas on the map in the Yearbook. So much for remaining neutral.
The Argies no doubt think they will inherit easy pickings from oil reserves etc, much like Alex Salmond and his quest for Scottish independence but as there are several friends here from North of the Border perhaps I had better not go down that road.......
George
-
Vidqun
I remember reading that British Intelligence was caught napping last time round. An invasion was the last thing they expected, and the heads of the top brass would roll in the aftermath. The Argies did appeal to the US for assistance, but was turned down. Who knows what will happen the second time round? I doubt whether the British forces will be able to launch an expedition of this nature second time round (with all the budget cuts). Last time they had to commandeer civilian ships as transports.