The_Rev Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Just some general musings, but the Falklands have been increasingly in the news in recent weeks. The 30th anniversary of the war is this year, but relations between ourselves and Argentina seem to be as bad as ever. They want the islands, we own them. I dont think they have been a part of Argentina at any point in history, and they certainly arent part of Argentina culturally so I dont think any side is clearly in the right over this. In the last couple of months we have all but accused Argentina of organising the blockade against Falkland Island flagged ships at South American ports. They have complained publicly about us sending Prince William on a tour of duty there, and complained again about us sending a destroyer, HMS Dauntless, to the islands. Why are we so publicly showing them that we consider the islands ours? I think now it has emerged that the islands have more natural resources than we first thought then the chances of us letting go are less than ever so what will become of this? Argentina cant invade again can they? I think even when our resources were stretched to their fullest in Libya and Afghanistan we still possess the firepower to crush them with or without NATO help (and they would be duty bound to help if we needed, wouldnt they?) so what does happen next? A few more months of posturing then back to normal or something more serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastEndVillan Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Are the Tories likely to be re-lected at the next general election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I think we should get a pre-emptive strike into Buenos Aires, just in case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted February 8, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 8, 2012 It is certainly coming to the boil down there and both sides backs are very clearly up on this one. I think many different factors come in to play on this one, on the one hand you have an Argentinian government eager to use a nationalistic and popularist policy to deflect attention from domestic issues and than on top of this you have the financial implications of the recent discovery of oil. Then you have a British military that everyone knows is over stretched at this moment in time and facing large cuts, it is perhaps no surprise that Argentina see this as a good time to test our resolve. Add into the mix the 30th anniversary and the fact the son of Thatcher is eager to protect our interests and you get quite a potent cocktai. This has been brewing for some months but has moved on at pace in recent weeks with the accusations in both directions of colonialism and our rather provocative actions of sending a war ship and a Prince. Meanwhile they are trying to cripple the Islands financially but obstructing and destroying their traditional industry and main source of income, fishing. I think our rather public demonstration of strength is designed to be a mix of intimidation ie, you don't want to try your luck a second time. And a bit of a bluff to try and hide our actual lack of military strength or capability at this particular moment in time. I think they tried to call our bluff a little and now we are bluffing right back. Argentina would be foolish to invade and I doubt they will be the possibility is there so we are trying to nip it in the bud. There is absolutely nothing to discuss as far as the British government are concerned the islands are our territory it isn't even up for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 If it were to kick of, they'd only be 1 winner, right? Sounds like utter stupidity from the Argies if they pick a fight even now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I think now it has emerged that the islands have more natural resources than we first thought then the chances of us letting go are less than ever so what will become of this? I'm sure I read somewhere that initially the Falklands were about giving us more chance of a stake in Antarctica ... saying that I'm sure Russia have a stake and they aren't exactly close .. the oil at the time of the conflict wasn't viable and can be ruled out the equation when it comes to 1982... it was more about an invasion of British territory in the same way that we would probably defend Scotland if someone invaded it ( though if it was Wales we'd probably say keep it ) I doubt the Argies have the capability to invade the Vatican yet alone the Falklands , but then our military strength isn't much better these days so I suspect a deal will be cut somewhere along the line so that the Argies get a slice of the oil money personally we should just say to the Argies , try it again and we wont stop until we've got the union flag flying over Buenos Aries ... but we have enough debts of our own without taking on Argentinas :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 8, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 8, 2012 No. It's posturing. IIRC the Argentinian premier is incredibly popular and appears to be using the Falklands thing as a way of putting the tin hat on her popularity, as well also protecting against that popularity waning in the difficult political and economic times we have now. And we're happy to let her do that because it benefits us as well, we still feel strongly about the Islands, obviously, and Cameron can easily win favour by returning the posturing in kind. It's unlikely to descend into conflict largely because we won't let it - we would struggle to defend the Falklands now from Britain, and so have spent rather a lot of money making the Falklands increasingly defended on their own merit, something we will continue to do, making the Islands unappealing to take and more obviously causing any attempt to take them be an act of conflict immediately, again something that would deter the Argentines from trying it. Add in the warship and we're flexing muscles we don't really have any longer, with the distinct message being 'Come on, pack it in...'. In 1982 the only reason they took the Islands is because the Junta was in trouble and wanted a swift shot of nationalism in the arm to aid their popularity, and they thought we'd not escalate the situation, perhaps not even bother to stop them at all, making things easy. None of that would happen now. There is indeed believed to be rather a lot of oil off the Falklands, something that's been suspected for donkeys but was always known to be difficult to get to given the ocean conditions in that part of the world, and the Falklands would be the perfect staging point for an oil extraction endeavour to begin now that it's more viable (and possibly pressing). NATO would probably not get involved either, by the way. They largely didn't last time (although the Americans aided us the quiet). I adore the irony of Argentina's pouting on this, by the way. They accuse us being a colonial power (snigger) whilst proposing some colonialism of their own. Hypocrisy at it's finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted February 8, 2012 Author Share Posted February 8, 2012 They are absolutely there for military purposes too, less so now but I think they were definitely for that purpose during the cold war (I mean, just look how many fights the US had with Japan over tiny islands in the Pacific during WW2) as having a base which enables you to cut off shipping routes if you really want to is a very handy thing to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Argentina do not have the military capability to invade again. This isn't 82 and we have substantially reinforced our presence there since then while they have let their forces go to utter rat shit. They are gobbing off because they are militarily impotent and can't do anything else. Laugh at the washed up porn star look alike they have for a President. It's all she's good for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 War is always good for the economy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Damn Argies. Always trouble, but you can't fault their steakhouses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Its all Tevez fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Laugh at the washed up porn star look alike they have for a President. It's all she's good for. :?: She is doing a better job as leader of her country than Cameron is in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 8, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 8, 2012 We are a bit busy in Afghanistan at the moment, which may have occurred to the Argentinian Iron Lady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 We have no aircraft carries. Our forces are over-stretched. The whole of South America is united in favour of the Falklands being transfered to Argentine sovereignty. There is a shit load of oil in the region. The only thing in our favour at present is that it appears that the Islanders hate the Argentinians. If it does kick off, we are not in a good state to defend the Islands this time round, with little support in the region, and the US indifferent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Like all things it should come to a democratic vote; what do the islanders want? Surely in the end it should just become an independent country, however that won’t happen as soon as that happens the Argentinians would take advantage. Whilst South America as a whole is ‘posturing’ support from the Argentinians, below the surface everything is continuing as normal; you can catch a plane to Chile, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Laugh at the washed up porn star look alike they have for a President. It's all she's good for. :?: She is doing a better job as leader of her country than Cameron is in the UK. There speaks the voice of political prejudice over reason. If it does kick off, we are not in a good state to defend the Islands this time round, with little support in the region, and the US indifferent. With respect mate, that's nonsense. Even with our Armed Forces in their currently depleted state, we would beat the granny out of Argentina if they kicked off with us. The key point is this: they do not not have the capability to project the power necessary to overwhelm the UK forces resident on the Falkland Islands. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I dont think they have been a part of Argentina at any point in history, and they certainly arent part of Argentina culturally so I dont think any side is clearly in the right over this. Bit of a grey area that one I think. Britain and Spain both had settlements there in the 18th century, but they both withdrew, leaving behind only a plaque as a claim to sovereignty. In the meantime, a colony was established with the permission of the United Province of River Plate, but the British returned in the 1830s and reclaimed it - peacefully. Britain has the strongest historical claim, certainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J.Rimmer Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 The first thing to rmember is that in 1982 we had some 40 Royal Marines on the islands when Argentina invaded. Today we have a new airfield and several hundred troops, all geared up to preventing another Argentinian landing. What's more, we have every right to beef up our presence on the islands, as it was not us but the Argentinians who started military operations against the islanders 30 years ago. We should always be on alert for another attempt. Finally, these islands belong neither to us nor Argentina. They belong to the Falkland Islanders. The idea of handing the islanders over to a society that has such scant regard for democracy and the principles of self determination, is rightly abhorrent to any British government. As for the Argentinian military, it has only ever been used to murder its own civilians (over 15,000 in the lead up to 1982). To hand over British people to the tender mercies of such monsters is unthinkable. I hope our politicians have to guts to state to the world that for the Argentinians to claim 'respect' fom us is quite out of the question. They deserve no respect and that is exactly what we should show them. Incidentally, in 1982 I used to ask people from other countries how many British people and how many Argentinian/Spanish people lived on the islands. Everyone I asked came up with some imaginary and woefully inaccurate proportional split. The truth was that ALL 1800 Falklend Islanders were British. We should show the finger to these strutting idiots and point out to the rest of Latin America exactly what kind of shit they are shovelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Johnny Rico and his ruffnecks are from Buenos Aires Far to much for the british army to handle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts