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.

 

Falklands again?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Is Argentina preparing to invade the Falkland islands again?

scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com...




posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   
they could be, while still i think argentines would lose in a falklands war conflict again!!

they may also feel the time is right because the royal navy is under re-furbishment (new ships, carriers, subs etc).



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by st3ve_o
they could be, while still i think argentines would lose in a falklands war conflict again!!

they may also feel the time is right because the royal navy is under re-furbishment (new ships, carriers, subs etc).



They may also believe we don't have the political or public willpower this time.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Argentina still clearly wants the Falklands but I dont know. The only reason I think Galtieri attacked was because he didnt really think the UK would react.

I cant see them in a rush for another military showdown. UK military technology has gotten so much better since 1982, Argentina not so much

[edit on 26-2-2006 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Whether they are planning to attack again or not, i really don't think it would be a very smart move!

Because i believe if they tried it again, Britain could end up retaliating in a far more agressive way than last time.

This time they could actually attack main land Argentina.
Either way it would be a very foolish move on the Argentine's side.

Anyone who thinks the British do not have the capability, then please think again!



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Isnt Falklands a British colony ? and in this brave new world of 'liberty' doesnt this mean that this colony has to be let off ?
I dont know the demographics of the Islands but I would think that that land is more native to the Argentinians than the British but thats just a gues . Also the islands in the South Atlantic, isnt it just too 'away' for it to be really part of the the UK .
I can understand things like Gibralter, its still in Europe but Falklands is really way off.
Anyway this is my opinion.


[edit on 26-2-2006 by IAF101]



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAF101

Isnt Falklands a British colony ? and in this brave new world of 'liberty' doesnt this mean that this colony has to be let off ?
I dont know the demographics of the Islands but I would think that that land is more native to the Argentinians than the British but this is just a guess.

The Falklands are populated by britts and they want to belong to UK. They don´t want to belong to Argentina.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAF101
Isnt Falklands a British colony ? and in this brave new world of 'liberty' doesnt this mean that this colony has to be let off ?
I dont know the demographics of the Islands but I would think that that land is more native to the Argentinians than the British . Also the islands in the South Atlantic, isnt it just too 'away' for it to be really part of the the UK .
I can understand things like Gibralter, its still in Europe but Falklands is really way off.
Anyway this is my opinion.

[edit on 26-2-2006 by IAF101]


The Falkland Islands are populated by British citizens who wish to remain under British protection/control. There is no reason for Britain to give these Islands to Argentina - so they'll have to fight for them!



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredH
Is Argentina preparing to invade the Falkland islands again?


- Short answer?

No.

It's speculative tabloid guff, pure and simple.
Short on verifiable fact and long on comment and opinion (as sadly so much of our so-called 'news' is these days).

It's also utterly reliant on people being ignorant of what the specifics are of an Argentine military supposedly "twice the strength" it was in 1982.

I suggest people go look at "Argentine strength" and see just how ill equipped for any such campaign they are when set against the permanent UK forces there......particularly as 'we' can see any such preparations for attack long before they happen (unlike in 1982 when 'we' were reliant on US satellites) and reinforce in good time.

The truth is that whilst the Argentinian state and people undoubtedly still aspire to own the Malvinas/Falkland islands there is absolutely zero credible indication that they are in any way preparing to launch a military attempt at making that happen.

The Argentinians may well be irritating the local Falklanders by seizing or being troublesome over the sea rights down there (that kind of trouble comes and goes over the years).
I think the real agenda at work here is depicting Argentina alongside Venezuela (and later it will be also Brazil and Bolivia et al.....they too have had the audacity and sheer gaul to elect people concerned with their interests before others.
How outrageous.
).
That and the usual complaint about military spending and size (hence the tory rent-a-mouth......ignoring the tory record on defence cuts and complaining about how come UK spending isn't the highest in the world blah blah blah).

Those countries are becoming a lot more vocal about their interests and their rights and desire to a future free from the degree of interference they believe they have suffered.

After the ME I expect South America to become the next troubled area of the world as they try to throw off the weight of 'the Munroe doctrine' and all that out-dated 'sphere of influence' stuff (which we found unacceptable with Russia back in the day but are supposed to ignore or support when it comes to the US & South America, for some reason).

(edit to correct date, spotted CarlosG!
)

[edit on 26-2-2006 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   
1992? same typo twice?

I doubt they will have another go soon, although their leader has been having a go at Blair.

If they did decide to attack the 1500 man british force would be overwhelmed, they only have about 4 planes and 2/3 helicopters. But when the main force got there it wouldn't last long.

BTW the Falklands have massive oil reserves to the south, but costly to drill at the moment. Worth keeping.

The citizens are also British (fully British) so they have to be protected.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by CarlosG
BTW the Falklands have massive oil reserves to the south, but costly to drill at the moment. Worth keeping.


yeah ive heard about that, i know the falklands current largest industries are agriculture and fishing!!

but i know theres MASSIVE amounts of oil and gas reserves within its territorial waters (which a quote from a website).

=====
"could prodcue 500,000 barrells of oil per day, and that would make it the largest oil producing region in the world for the next decade".
=====

those waters have yet to be exploited - so you can defianly see why the UK wants to keep hold of the falklands.


www.american.edu...


[edit on 26-2-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by CarlosG
1992? same typo twice?


- Indeed; well spotted, ta!


If they did decide to attack the 1500 man british force would be overwhelmed, they only have about 4 planes and 2/3 helicopters.


- It's worth pointing out that the Argentine military is not all stationed down on the most southern tip of Argentina and that their necessary preparations would be seen long before the preparation for any attack got very far.

I would also say that any attempt to send planes and invasion craft would be savaged horribly even if only by those forces now present on the islands already.
This would be no 1982 and I would not be so ready to imagine a successful invasion were they to try.


BTW the Falklands have massive oil reserves to the south, but costly to drill at the moment. Worth keeping.


- Maybe but that is something that has been talked about for decades with no realisation of those supposed assets yet - IIRC the issue of reserves down there is subject to dispute and proven reserves are not particularly impressive.

Besides that is to miss the point, in terms of oil and gas it isn't really about the Falklands.
IIRC South Georgia is the big deal because it is the gateway to Antarctica and that is where the big money is supposed to be in relation to those resources.


The citizens are also British (fully British) so they have to be protected.


- Maybe so but the day they become more trouble than they are worth is the day they offered a ticket to the UK and a little start money or the choice to stay where they are under a different flag.
Those high and mighty principles are always subject to political whim.


R21

posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   
I did 2 tours in the Falklands, once in 84 and again in 94. The place is a natural fortress, and any invading force would incure huge casualties.

True it is sat on a load of oil, and it is also a stepping stone to S.Georgia, the gateway to the antartic. So when the easy option (middle east) becomes exhausted or too expensive, all efforts will turn there.

The Falkands are of great strategic value, and are therefore highly desirable.

As to the rightful owners.... now thats another topic.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 06:12 PM
link   


Argentina 'arrests' British squid trawler

Oliver Balch in Buenos Aires
(Filed: 26/02/2006)

Argentina has impounded a British trawler in a dramatic escalation of a dispute over squid fishing rights off the Falkland Islands, raising tensions between the two countries..............................................

Full Story




this is starting to get interesting. does anybody have any information on what aircraft(fighters,bombers etc) argentine have purchased and if they have purchased any anti-ship cruise missiles and which ones they have.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Chavez is pulling a castro... the sooner y'all get that the sooner we can all get over it.

He has to posture hard to keep himself in power. And as to a brit loss of the falklands... they only wish they could pull that off.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I think that this is just hype ,what with the situation in Venuzuela myself,people just looking for an angle.

It would however be good timing on behalf of Argentina ,what with all of Britains overseas comitments at the moment,

I think any incursion would be suicidal for the Argentinians,because this time around there bases on the mainland would/could be hit hard ,with Tomahawks From the SSN fleet.

Only speculation on my part but ill bet there are regular patrols around the Falklands territorial waters as a matter of course for the RN'S SSN fleet,

We would soon see how commited the Argentine people would be to re-invading the Falklands if a Tomahawk took out Diego Garcia.



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I doubt the Argentinians would be put off by the RN hitting Diego Garcia - it's a USN island base in the Indian Ocean!

en.wikipedia.org...

Current force in the Falklands is a 'tripwire' force designed to make an attack too costly / buy some time. With our (few) galaxy fleet reinforcement in considerable strength is now feasible.

Argentina would lose too many ships / forces to make it worth their while however if they could get ashore in numbers I doubt we have the forces now to dislodge them



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
I doubt the Argentinians would be put off by the RN hitting Diego Garcia - it's a USN island base in the Indian Ocean!




True but it would take them, by surprise!

I meant Rio Grande come on it was half past 2 in the morning when i posted that





posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Wouldnt we nuke them with mini nukes maybe? as any attack now against British forces wouldnt be tolerated, especially if it was from Argentina we would attack their mainland for sure and bases there and deverstate them, as for if Argintina got a foot hold on Falklands we would blow the hell out of them with our airforce im sure, Britain is miles ahead what it was in 1982 and we slaughtered Argentine then and we would again if we had too, im British and i would support a war if they tried it again id want them sorted proper good this time round, we would deffinalty not let Falklands go after all we fought 1 war to get them off it, you think we let them have it now.



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by blobby
Wouldnt we nuke them with mini nukes maybe?

If you want to do this, theres only one person for the job -






Margaret Thatcher forced François Mitterrand to give her the codes to disable Argentina's deadly French-made missiles during the Falklands war by threatening to launch a nuclear warhead against Buenos Aires, according to a book.

Rendez-vous - the psychoanalysis of François Mitterrand, by Ali Magoudi, who met the late French president up to twice a week in secrecy at his Paris practice from 1982 to 1984, also reveals that Mr Mitterrand believed he would get his "revenge" by building a tunnel under the Channel which would forever destroy Britain's island status.

Taken from The Guardian.

Blair hasn't got the kahunas.

BRING BACK MAGGIE!




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join