It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Uk 'vs Argentina (Present Day)

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Following Winchester Ranger T's thread What if the Falklands conflict happened now?, i would like to compare the present armed forces of both countries.

I would like to compare the Army, Navy and Air Force and decide wheter the UK could win in the South Atlantic today if Argentina was to lay claim to the islands once again!



Mic


[edit on 4/9/2005 by MickeyDee]




posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   
did that already.. actually with the argentinian forces.. They're in no state to fight a war.. Malaysia has a better airforce than the argentinians..topic over..



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Last time round the Junta believed the US would stay neutral as a favour (because they owed Argentina for covert support in Nicaragua); as we know it didn't happen quite like that. Now, with Tony Blair being Bush's best buddy it's impossible to see them making that mistake.

Which is a pity for Balir really, as he really needs a popularity boost right about now...



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   
There are several things that can come into play here. Any country wanting to grab land about 200 miles away can have a chance against a country needing to defend that same land 8000 miles away. Argentina would have the initiative. I think that is important. Maybe the Argentines have a chance to take and hold Falklands if these event occur.

1. Neutralize RAF. Priority. I don't know what strength RAF is. I read online that they maintain 4 TR-3 (?) Tornadoes at RAF Mt. Pleasant. Tornado is good bird but only 4? Even with EAW, a determined press on them might pay off. RAF could be attacked covertly on the ground. Buzo Tactico paid off once. Maybe again. If they just landed some spec forces by sub and maintained a morter attack on the airfield? If RAF could be neutralized then "Malvinas" could be reenforced by air or sea. NOT with conscripts. With regular army units. Maybe some of their mountain troops this time. Establish EFFECTIVE air patrolling of the Islands with A-4, Supe Entendard (can carry bombs) and Pucara. Maintain a CAP with Mirage III and V from island airfields. Any aircraft not being used for the above purpose should be put to flying around the islands, literally "looking" for -

2. RN attack subs! Subs must have whatever pressure the Argentines can put on them. Even a lear jet can force a sub to lay somewhat low. I don't feel that Argentine Navy can perform adequate ASW against Brit attack subs. To land heavy forces (i.e. armor) the Argentines would have to gamble on a high-speed landing force run, with whatever surface and air ASW can be mustered. The landing force will take losses. Just have to throw the dice and see.

3. Then it remains in the hands of Argentine AF to keep air-superiority. Argentine subs need to make their presence felt somehow against RN subs (hopeful?) or task force to retake islands. Maybe work closer to Acension?

Much of this is what Argentina did/tried to do the last time. I think they have a chance if they go all-or nothing. Would have to land a heavy, large, trained occupation force to keep the island, though. Probably would take cruise missle hits from RN subs. Those pesky things. So I'm reinventing the wheel to a large degree. Still think it's possible.

I do want to add that I have the HIGHEST respect and regard for the UK armed forces. I also admire the courage and competence of Argentine AF.



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Informative and generally unbiased report on the current situation from the BBC

news.bbc.co.uk...

In a nutshell it says that as we stand right now, the repeat of what happened in 1982 could not happen now. Not only due to the increased miltary strength of the British forces, but due to the general degredation of the Argentine forces over the past 20 years. Their numbers have reduced from 100,000 down to 40,000 and as such could not mount a credible and feasible operation to re-take the islands.

Weird statement where it talks of the press not being encouraged to report the exact number of aircraft or personnel, yet if you go to the Mt Pleasant website it clearly states that 4 x Tornado F3's are based there. Boy oh boy, those military types do like to create their own little conspiracies dont they !?

www.raf.mod.uk...



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by JungleMike
1. Neutralize RAF. Priority. I don't know what strength RAF is. I read online that they maintain 4 TR-3 (?) Tornadoes at RAF Mt. Pleasant. Tornado is good bird but only 4? Even with EAW, a determined press on them might pay off. RAF could be attacked covertly on the ground. Buzo Tactico paid off once. Maybe again. If they just landed some spec forces by sub and maintained a morter attack on the airfield? If RAF could be neutralized then "Malvinas" could be reenforced by air or sea. NOT with conscripts. With regular army units. Maybe some of their mountain troops this time. Establish EFFECTIVE air patrolling of the Islands with A-4, Supe Entendard (can carry bombs) and Pucara. Maintain a CAP with Mirage III and V from island airfields. Any aircraft not being used for the above purpose should be put to flying around the islands, literally "looking" for -

They have a detachment of rapier SAM systems to support the tornados.
There is also an infantry company ready to delay any attack.
[qoute]
3. Then it remains in the hands of Argentine AF to keep air-superiority. Argentine subs need to make their presence felt somehow against RN subs (hopeful?) or task force to retake islands. Maybe work closer to Acension?
[/qoute]
A Destroyer or Frigate is present in the Falkland Islands area for the majority of the year - including throughout the southern winter - and is at a maximum of 14 days notice from the Islands for the rest of the year.



Much of this is what Argentina did/tried to do the last time. I think they have a chance if they go all-or nothing. Would have to land a heavy, large, trained occupation force to keep the island, though. Probably would take cruise missle hits from RN subs. Those pesky things. So I'm reinventing the wheel to a large degree. Still think it's possible.

I dont, but we all have opinions...


M6D

posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 11:34 AM
link   
You forgot one thing, massive training and technoilogical advantage junglemike, sure a learjet could lay the pressure on a sub, but it has to find it first eh? thats what makes it hard, our subs are covered in acoustic tiles and are some of the quietist in the world, if anything our subs could lay the pressure on even harder then before. Not to mention a complete carrier fleet armed with CIWS, and proper assualt carriers, our navy wouldnt have the same weaknesses, the problems the argentinian airforce faced back tehn, the AIM 9 sidewinder? theyd still face that problem, as well as the 120 AMRAM, not very nice is it now?

as others have said, argentina stands no chance.



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by M6D
You forgot one thing, massive training and technoilogical advantage junglemike, sure a learjet could lay the pressure on a sub, but it has to find it first eh? thats what makes it hard, our subs are covered in acoustic tiles and are some of the quietist in the world, if anything our subs could lay the pressure on even harder then before. Not to mention a complete carrier fleet armed with CIWS, and proper assualt carriers, our navy wouldnt have the same weaknesses, the problems the argentinian airforce faced back tehn, the AIM 9 sidewinder? theyd still face that problem, as well as the 120 AMRAM, not very nice is it now?

as others have said, argentina stands no chance.

Umm....Are you british BTW?


M6D

posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Yeah, talk about over blown patriotism eh?



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by M6D
Yeah, talk about over blown patriotism eh?

Yeah, I never knew u where British.. lol sorry...



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   
with argentina.. no .. not possible.. Agreed.. But armed forces like Iran/SAudi Arabia/Turkey etc. placed in argentina's positions could very well pull it off..
Argentina needs an AF equivalent to the Malaysian AF or the Venezuelan AF..
not more than that..
The strange thing is that they're such a big country and they don't even have an AF like that..
Same with Brazil.. Lousy jets..

Only thing thats world class about the south america are the Venezuelan jets and the brazilian Embraers..



posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Argentina - even if it had an airforce like Venezuela's - doesn't station all it's most capable planes down on their eastern coast at the southern most tip; which is where they'd have to be to have the range to attack the islands.

Britain would see anything like such preparations a mile off......and reinforce accordingly in plenty of time (which is afterall the whole idea of the place).

That is why the detachment of fighters at Mt Pleasant is so few; there doesn't need to be any more permanently stationed there and those that are there are the perfect platform.

Ultra-long range, ultra-long loiter, outstandingly trained and maintained, more than modern and sophisticated enough, armed to the teeth.
In short - and no disrespect to the flyers and the machines from the Sth American continent - plenty good enough to pureé any Sth American airforce were they dumb enough to have a go.

But as said, those days are over; it isn't going to happen.


M6D

posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Youd be stupid anyway to strike at britain, youd be facing retaliation from a lot more then 4 planes :p



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Hey there's an extent to oversealousness..
next thing you'll be saying is that britain would be able to single-handedly protect hongkong if the need ever arose then..



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Hey there's an extent to oversealousness..
next thing you'll be saying is that britain would be able to single-handedly protect hongkong if the need ever arose then..

Duhh...we have JB and probablt Ian flemmings grand son...plus we have sean connery...WHO CAN STOP US???



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 08:40 AM
link   
That "trebec-something" guy on SNL...
He can always.. preoccupy Sean Connery...oh no ..but wait..
The connery on SNL is a Saddam-style decoy double!!
damn..


M6D

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Naturally! one of our SAS troopers..our super army soldiers as i like to call them! would probably do it like this..heed halo jump on to a mountain, as hes moutain boarding down probably snipe a whole batallion of argentian troops, and after that most likely go on to take out hte navy single handidly with his bayonet!

didnt you know ?



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by M6D
Naturally! one of our SAS troopers..our super army soldiers as i like to call them! would probably do it like this..heed halo jump on to a mountain, as hes moutain boarding down probably snipe a whole batallion of argentian troops, and after that most likely go on to take out hte navy single handidly with his bayonet!

didnt you know ?


And all before last orders



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Well...
not really....pongos dont like water...their tanks tend to sink..
The SBS could do it....but if they did they couldnt tell you and you probably wouldnt know and the SAS would get the credit.....as usual.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 01:20 AM
link   
makes you wonder why there wasn't a anti-argentine bond movie..
Or maybe there was? I'm not good at those old bond movies..
just goes to show that even movies on british intelligence services are directed at american interests..
North Korea for example..

A majority of S koreans hated that movie..



new topics




 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join