Why Argentina WILL Invade the Falklands & How Iran are Involved

reply to post by Power_Semi
You might have some valid points, but this is not one of them. the Strait of Hormuz is 34 miles wide with a depth sufficient to use the near coastal waters as well in the event a tanker was sunk. Even if you stay 10 miles away from the Iranian coast, you would still have 24 miles of clear safe waters. Iran would like the world to think just one or two would block the whole thing..... NOT SO.
QUOTE ********************************************************************************************
With all of the tension in the middle east between Iran and the US over the straight of Hormuz (and Iran threatening to shut it), and the obvious outcome of military action should they shut it, you can see how Iran, Venezuela, & Argentina could all work together to their own benefit.

If Iran shut the Straight of Hormuz, AND at the same time, or shortly thereafter Argentina / Argentina and Venezuela invaded the Falklands, then it would split the US-UK alliance.

Britain would not be able to respond to both events, they would have to go to the Falklands and not be involved in Hormuz.

Originally posted by ollncasino
reply to post by Power_Semi

 

Perhaps the UK and Argentina could come to a deal.

The UK gives the Argentines the Falklands if the Argentines give the Argentine mainland back to the South American natives?

Not that there are many natives left in the stolen land that is called Argentina, as the Argentine conquistadors killed most of them.

how can it be an Argentine conquistador who conquist argentina?lol it was a spain conquistador, In 1534, the conquest was left in the hands of Pedro de Mendoza, thanks to an agreement signed with Charles V .


and dont take this replay away its not out of topic!

if argentina really wanted the islands back they would have been putting agents on the island for a while and destroying the place from within piece by piece
they dont need to openly attack in a military sense , if they really wanted it , they would use subterfuge over a period of time .

Originally posted by David291
reply to post by RockLobster

 

They did do that to our people, remember ...? Want to do it again too... So to be fair, I would do the same just to send them a message. I would of done the same during the first war, just so they don't do it again. I mean, if they can "get away" with doing it is to us, from what a lot of you saying anyway. I don't see why, we shouldn't do it to them aswell.

Ahh, true. Most of you think the argies are right

Edit: Do remember, they are the ones being hostile.

edit on 12/2/12 by David291 because: (no reason given)

What i am trying to say is ----> there is NO REASON to invade any country who does not pose a SEVERE threat .

The Falklands are British , Argentina needs to be quiet , but acting like a b@st@rd and invading Argrentina slaughtering everything in your path is hypocritical, immoral, barbaric behavior .

Originally posted by sapien82
Argentina doesnt have to do anythign with their military , they can just attempt to take over the falklands by subterfuge!
Send in some special agents and do things that way instead of an all out invasion .

As for a previous poster going on about how the UK will split up because of scotland leaving ,
thats not likely to happen , despite us scots loving our dream of an independent nation.
It's something which should just remain a dream , because it wont get us anywhere really.

We just need to forget the bloody past and bury the hatchet with england as none of the #
that acutally happened to scotland happened in our lifetimes.
Except maybe thatcher being a complete # to us but thats entirely different.

Amen to that

The EU would love to see it happen to then recruit a new Euro member and bleed it dry

We have been united as a union for just as many good years as the bad and bloody ones, and achieved so much together along with the Welsh & Northern Ireland, we have all kicked lumps out of each other for many years. many years many moons ago i might add, a return to division would likely turn the UK into Europe's very own middle east

All jokes aside, its time to move on from our country's infant days & divided bloody past time, lets leave it there in the past and move on, its... "united we stand divided we fall"

Originally posted by sapien82
if argentina really wanted the islands back they would have been putting agents on the island for a while and destroying the place from within piece by piece
they dont need to openly attack in a military sense , if they really wanted it , they would use subterfuge over a period of time .

Pretty sure the S.A.S would have something to say about that


second

Originally posted by Gloster
how can it be an Argentine conquistador who conquist argentina?lol it was a spain conquistador, In 1534, the conquest was left in the hands of Pedro de Mendoza, thanks to an agreement signed with Charles V .

The Argentineans committed genocide of the Patagonian aborigines in the late 1880’s. You can blame a lot on the Spanish and get all het up about the British Empire and colonialism, but the Argentineans are as guilty as anyone. At least the Falklands were uninhabited so no one was harmed, apart from a few seals and the odd penguin.

To the OP. This is all about politics and flag waving on the part of Kirchner et al. All the threats and ranting is coming from Argentina - the sea blockade, the prevention of direct flights from South America, making life difficult for companies dealing with the Falklands and the complaining to the UN. You would have thought that Argentina would be more effective if they tried to be friends to the Falkland Islanders – hearts and minds and all that. They’ll get nowhere by being constantly nasty.

As to a fight. It won’t happen, mainly because Argentina is a democracy and there are too many checks which would prevent a war being initiated. If it did then it would not be pretty, even with the self imposed restraint the UK would force on themselves.

Regards

Argentina must have a death-wish. Messing with the UK = messing with the USA, and we're still the top dog on the block by far. Chavez is gonna love this crap.

reply to post by jaketyson85


In what respect? Who do you have in such numbers and with the capability to do what was done in '82? Perhaps you could contribute some F-22s to a no-fly exclusion zone? That is as long as they fly below 10,000ft, and it doesn't rain.

This is an excellent thread, credit to the OP.

You have raised some very interesting points - I personally believe we are just seeing another example of extreme brinksmanship from both sides!

The William move was very well thought out from the British Govt - irrespective of thoughts on the British, the British Govt and colonialism, he is relatively popular in South America and across the world - an attack in his presence would galvanise worldwide support for the British defence of the Islands.

unfortunately they only have 19 major combatants from which to choose

21 frigates, 8 destroyers, ~15 subs... it's much more than 19.

The UK buys time on US satellites.

No. It only did that in 1982, due to delays and complications with Skynet being fully operational, and the huge amounts of round the world comm traffic of the engagement.

there was a very small army base before the Falkland's war.
and america did not want England with them in Iran.

the army base on the Falkland's could fight off a lot.
even sinking ships and shoot down all air craft that attack.

did you know that when argentine first attack Falkland's.
that the troops there hit one of the ships below the water line.
I dont think it sank. it was a MILAN tank weapon.

I am a brit and I read all about it at the time.

one of the jokes from the times is,
( one of the argentine officers sent 10 solders to take out a fox hole.
non came back so he sent 20. still no news. so he sent 40.
later one of them came back shot up. he says
"Its a trap, there is two of them!" )

and yes the argentine solders ware crap.

the solders on the Falkland's had orders to surrender?

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity


All this grief for a worthless pile of rocks, some ingrate kelp eating sheep interferers & "national pride", whatever that is.

It's really getting silly.

Actually it's more about this these days -

The Falkland Islands stand to benefit from an enormous $176bn (£111.7bn) tax windfall from oil and gas exploration, according to a major new report.

A group of UK-listed companies is involved in exploring four major prospects this year, with the largest, Loligo, potentially holding more than 4.7bn barrels of oil. By comparison Catcher, the biggest discovery in the North Sea of the past 11 years, is believed to hold only 300m barrels

www.telegraph.co.uk...

The UK will never let the Falklands fall out of their hands as longs there's huge oil there.

reply to post by Power_Semi


No side is right in this matter.

1. England shouldn't be there
2. England shouldn't be sending Nuke subs to that region breaking all the treats for the Latin America region and provoking Argentina and other Latin American countries.
3. England has control of the region and Argentina should just let it go.

It's a mess.

reply to post by thomas_


Why should the Spanish conquistadors who control Argentina have more rights to oil around the Falkland Islands than the British, when it has been the British who have occupied the Island for the last century, long before anyone knew there was gold there.

By all accounts, the Spanish Conquistadors were among the biggest bunch of buggers in all of history.

Originally posted by Power_Semi


What I said is that we do not have the capability - we do not even have an aircraft carrier in service at the moment - how do you fight a naval war without one?

Our only realistic chance would be to stop the invasion before it happened.

Don't be silly, Set aside the subs we have, which are amongst the best in the world, we also have this, which IS the best in the world, even the Americans don't have anything this advanced:



Argentina could throw every missile, aircraft and ship they own at just one of these Type 45's 30 times over, and it would still have enough left over to last till Christmas! The type 45 IS a navy!

reply to post by woogleuk


Yep, could not agree more.

This, plus a sub combo is THE deterrent. Don't mess with this........it will embarrass you.

Argentina apparently needs names for more football teams.............

News
World news
Argentina
Argentina names top football league after ship sunk in Falklands war

The British nuclear-powered submarine HMS Conqueror sank the cruiser with three torpedoes on 2 May 1982. It was outside the British-declared exclusion zone but the prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, ruled it was a threat and approved the attack.

reply to post by Wotan


I love when someone puts the cards down on the table and hits a Royal flush. Loved the post my friend.

I can't recall the specifics, but one of my British friends said that his father got drunk one night and said that the government faked the Falklands War and filmed it in Scotland. Anyone have any inside info on this?