HMS Dauntless in South Africa; will pay courtesy visit to the Falklands
The Royal Navy’s Daring class Type 45 destroyer HMS Dauntless is in Cape Town, mid-way through her six-month deployment to the Falklands relieving HMS Montrose according to British defence news.
The operational deployment is the warship’s first since she was commissioned into the fleet in 2010. Since then she has been put through an intensive period of sea trials and training to prepare her for operations, according to the Royal Navy.
The destroyer will maintain a continuous presence protecting British interests in the region, carrying out maritime security operations off West Africa and the wider South Atlantic.
The Royal Navy said the ship’s deployment was long “pre-planned and routine” and that it was purely coincidental that the ship set sail around the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War.
The Ministry of Defence said the warship would only pay a courtesy visit to the Falklands.
Apart from protecting British interests in the Atlantic, HMS Dauntless’ program includes port visits in both West and South Africa, with an emphasis on enhancing maritime security.
Some of the African countries where Dauntless has paid visits to include Sierra Leone and Ghana and during Exercise Saharan Express she trained with personnel from Gambia, Senegal and Morocco.
Teams from these countries boarded the warship and learnt how to tackle a variety of maritime problems including piracy, illegal fishing and the illicit trade in drugs, weapons and people smuggling.
HMS Dauntless is 152 metres long and is the second of six Daring Class Type 45 destroyers that are replacing the Type 42 class of ship.
The Type 45s are armed with high-tech Sea Viper anti-air missiles and will be able to carry 60 troops. They also have a large flight deck, which can accommodate helicopters, the size of a Chinook, and can take on board 700 people in case of a civilian evacuation.
The UK originally sought to procure air defence ships as part of the eight-nation NFR-90 project and later the Horizon Common New Generation Frigate programme with France and Italy.
The Type 45s take advantage of some Horizon development work and utilise the Sea Viper missile system (the SAMPSON radar variant of the Principal Anti-Air Missile System).
The ships are fitted with the 114 mm Mk 8 Mod 1 medium-calibre gun system for shore bombardment and two 30 mm guns. There is provision for the installation of two close-in weapons systems such as the Raytheon Phalanx.
In an “intensive attack” a single Type 45 could simultaneously track, engage and destroy more targets than five Type 42 destroyers operating together. The Daring class are the largest escorts ever built for the Royal Navy in terms of displacement, at around 8.000 tons. The ships have a designed top speed of more than 27 knots and a range of more than 7.000 nautical miles.
See Admiral Lord West, the former First Sea Lord and Falklands veteran coments
Suggested Stories
-
May 25th 2013
Falkland Islands elected lawmaker will attend C24 regional seminar in Ecuador
-
May 23rd 2013
Falkland Islands wish for normal neighborly relations with all South American neighbors
-
May 22nd 2013
Falklands and other BOT should be given a seat in the Commons, says MEP Farage
-
May 21st 2013
Falkland Islands: it’s a three-side debate; Argentina must recognize Islanders right to decide their future
133 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
The Royal Navy: HMS Dauntless Tour:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFDIDus8j0I
HMS Dauntless to deploy to Falklands 31.01.12:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmT2-apbm-k
Without HMS Dauntless 'it would be game over for the Falklands':
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RN4l4rOJgzI
Just shows how ship to ship warfare has declined since 1945. Also the cold-war emphasis on anti-sub warfare is more or less dead apparently.
Yes sir, I can't wait.
My guess is the reality will be a rotating visit to the falklands by all the T45's from now on, I just can't see them leaving anything to chance, not with all the shit coming from the dictator duo at the moment.
Or in reality,
We just don’t wish to embarrass them [ again ] .lol.
.
It will just take time and money,
Lets just hope, the money arrives before time runs out .
One question I have for those who are experts on such matters:
Do missiles, like Tomahawks, have a fall back guidance system if either, the Chinese knock GPS out, or if the US decides not to lend it to you?
Fall Back Guidance? As in turn around and come home?
lend us what,
these are latest R/N ships,
and do not fire tomahawks
as far as i know .
They are equipped to carry them with a few alterations to the launchers but the RN prefers that the Submarine service operates them for better tactical efficiency i.e. Stealth, element surprise and secrecy etc.
General characteristics
Type: Guided missile destroyer
Displacement: 8,000 tonnes, standard[3]
Length: 152.4 m (500 ft 0 in)
Beam: 21.2 m (69 ft 7 in)
Draught: 7.4 m (24 ft 3 in)
Propulsion: 2 shafts Integrated electric propulsion(IEP);
• 2× Rolls-Royce WR-21 gas turbines, 21.5 MW (28,800 shp) each
• 2× Wärtsilä 12V200 diesel generators, 2 MW (2,700 shp) each[4]
• 2× Converteam electric motors, 20 MW (27,000 shp) each
Speed: In excess of 29 kn (54 km/h; 33 mph)[5]
Range: 7,000 nautical miles (13,000 km) at 18 kn (33 km/h)
Complement: 190 (accommodation for up to 235)
Sensors and
processing systems: • SAMPSON multi-function air tracking radar (Type 1045)
• S1850M 3-D air surveillance radar (Type 1046)
• 2× Raytheon I-band Radar
(Type 1047)
• 1× Raytheon E/F-band Radar
(Type 1048)[6]
• Ultra Electronics Series 2500 Electro-Optical Gun Control System (EOGCS)[7]
• Ultra Electronics SML Technologies radar tracking system
• Ultra Electronics/EDO MFS-7000 sonar
Electronic warfare
and decoys: • UAT16
• Surface ship torpedo defence (SSTD)
Armament: Anti-air missiles;
Sea Viper air defence system.
48 cell SYLVER A50 VLS, for a combination of 48;
Aster 15 missiles (range 2-30 km)
Aster 30 missiles (range 3-120 km)
Guns;
1× BAE 4.5 inch Mk8 Mod. 1 gun
2× 30 mm guns
2× Phalanx CIWS
2× Miniguns
6× General-purpose machine guns
Provision for but not fitted with;
2× Quad Boeing AGM-84 Harpoon launchers (8 anti-ship missiles)
BGM-109 Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles
Aircraft carried: 1-2× Lynx HMA8, armed with;
• 4× Sea Skua anti ship missiles, or
• 2× anti submarine torpedoes
or
1×Westland Merlin HM1,[8]armed with;
• 4× anti submarine torpedoes
Aviation facilities: • Large flight deck
• Enclosed hangar
@18 not yet but the hunter killer carries loads...........................oooops i've done it again
these are very powerfull ships,
CFK would need alien back up on this one,
or just go back to her dream world .lol.
@22 no alien would touch her with a barge pole except BK of course
Fxxcking key board,
My mistake,
I meant you guys,
[sorry.
.
I am not referring to the stock pile, I am referring to guidance. Without GPS/satellite guidance, there must be an alternative (albeit less accurate) method for getting the weapon to its target.
@briton
“lend us what”
GPS
The US can deny access whenever they want, that is why the EU is spending a fortune on their own Galileo system.
i thought we had our own,
interesting .
at $500,000 a pop you don't want them to fall on empty pampas.
@27 briton
The US military owns the GPS satelites. They kindly make it freely available to humanity so we can use it in our cars, phones, etc. But of course they can black it out when ever they want.
The Russians and Chinese have their own GPS because you can’t be a global power without it, hence the EU’s own system which is a few year behind schedule.
There has been some debate in the UK about over reliance on US GPS in the military. Securing GPS access will be even more critical as unmanned AVs become more common.
The same would go for any RG attempt to jam GPS ( which can be done) even if they knew how.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
They coulnd't find a better a teacher!!
Contour mapping and star alignment.
Essentially the UK can still hit anything with its most powerful weapons regardless of the state of the GPS network. If you think about it logically it wouldn't make sense for the UK to have a single point of failure for its most important missions.
@7 The “kill” part of ASW is generally carried out by the helicopters. The 1 or 2 Lynx helicopters carry 4 Sea Skua anti-ship missiles or 2 anti-submarine torpedoes. If Dauntless is carrying a Merlin helicopter, it will have 4 anti-submarine torpedoes.
@10 Dauntless apparently has 2 Phalanx CIWS.
@16 GPS is used to determine the launch point. Nothing else. It is the same with ballistic missile submarines. If GPS is “unavailable” they use other methods such as inertial navigation or “dead reckoning”.
@25 The “guidance” is “on-board”. Just think about it. Would you base your armaments around a satellite system that can be removed with a cluster of satellite-killer missiles? Of course not. So GPS is not used for “guidance”. Incidentally, let this dispel the nonsense that the USA can stop the UK firing its nuclear ICBMs. They can't. We might discuss an intended action with them but, at the end of the day, the decision is ours. Regarding the ballistic missile submarines, a lot can rest on the shoulders of the captain. If the UK command structure is wiped out, e.g. by a massive nuclear strike, he can place his boat at the disposal of US authorities OR act independently. “Some people” might want to consider the likely course of action for a ballistic missile submarine captain convinced that his family and the families of all those aboard his vessel have been obliterated by some nutty latinos.
And there are 3 GPS under construction 1 by EU (Galileo) the other by China (Beidou) and the last by Argentina (Antares).
The system requires 24 sats with synchronic trajectory to have always 3 sat at minimum available to provide identification and timestamp from sats over a given earth’s zone to perform reversed triangulation by the receptor point.
So I guess that the US turn off would not have much impact in few years to come.
In order of size
Arg - Almirante Brown Class destroyer - 4 in service, displacement 3'360 tons, age ~30 years
Arg - ARA Hercules (amphibious command ship) - 1 in service, displacement 4'100 tons, age ~36 years
Britain - Type 23 Frigate - 13 in service, displacement 4'900 tons, age ~25 years
Britain - Type 26 Frigate - entering service in 2020, displacement 5'500 tons
Britain - Type 45 Destroyer - 4 in service, 1 completed, 1 building, displacement 8'000 tons, shiny
So you see, Argentina's largest surface combatant is smaller than the Royal navy's smallest and most obsolete frigate. Not only that but the ARA hercules is basically a modified Type 42 destroyer, a vessel totally obsolete in the face of its replacement. Add to that HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark (amphibious assault ships) and HMS Ocean and HMS Illustrious as helicopter carriers.
So you can see, even in this interval before our two new carriers are finished and we can launch fixed-wing aircraft again, the Royal Navy has more than enough surface combat power to obliterate any opportunist raid by Argtard forces.
And thats before we even get into submarine forces
When you say
The system requires 24 sats
Do you mean 24 actual satellites, set in strategic positions as to cover the earth.
As one knows not of these things,
It is always wise to ask those who knows these things,
It seems to me, that it is getting pretty well crowded up there,
.
Well, in others civilized parts of the world, we dont see it that way.
If in the visit of courtesy of this ship, you are going to make coctails or parties, remember pointing the friendly missiles to the Falklands or to any oil exploration platform you have arround. Just in case, we have nothing to do with this.
@43 Yes we have to have violence in order to protect OUR people from people like YOU. If you think we believe a single word you lot say about being “peaceful”, think again. The one thing that we do know is that every time YOU, figuratively, open YOUR mouth, YOU are lying. As the phrase has it “How do you tell if a latino is lying? His lips are moving.” The phrase can be amended to take account of writing or using a keyboard. YOU lie. YOU break agreements. YOU break treaties. YOU sign and ratify important international documents, and then breach their contents on a daily basis. At least somewhere like North Korea or Iran is fairly open about its attitudes and intentions. YOU are sneaky, lying, underhanded cowards who would like the world to believe that YOU are a democracy. YOU aren't. YOU are a dictatorship with a false “democratic” veneer. YOU can't even be honest about what YOU are.
No, I certainly wouldn’t base my armaments around a satellite system, it would be madness given that the Chinese have demonstrated they can kill satellites (the Russians can presumably do the same). Good to know they can make do without GPS for important weapons systems.
@43 Malen
“UK has naturalized violence in their culture ”
What nonsense. There is more violent crime in Argentina than in the UK. If you refer to the military, then you just have to remember that 65 years ago 44,000 London civilians were killed by German bombs, not to mention the bombing of other cities. The UK had tried to appease Germany. The point is, you never know when a mad (wo)man might take power in another country.
The Falkland Islanders suffered in 1982 because there was a mad man in power in Argentina. They are totally in their right to be prepared for future eventualities.
In Chile we have learnt too and I sleep well at night knowing that today Argentina wouldn’t dare threaten our territorial integrity.
We have stepped up our presence because of the hostile language from “el Presidente”, and Adolf Timerman. Any nation who were on the receiving end of your abuse would respond the same way as the UK.
The UK have no intention of bombing you, provided you don't decide to invade the FI again.
And yes you are right, we can be a violent nation, so when you decide to up your military budget and take another pop at us, don't start crying when your soldiers get another running through.
Oh I forgot....and once again, you are a Pratt.
The UK murder rate is falling despite an increasing population
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9411113/Murder-at-lowest-level-in-30-years.html
Only 550 in a population of 60 million plus which is less than 1 in 100,000 of population
Argentina's murder rate 5.5 per 100,000 in 2010 (last freely avaiable data)
Conclusion Argentina is 550% more violent than the UK
There is an African saying, you may not have heard it but it's one that the British Armed Forces have taken to heart and it goes like this:-
“Talk softly but carry a big stick”
Please meet HMS Dauntless. One of the many “Big Sticks” that our navy have. Now are you ready to listen to some “soft talking”?
It stands in complete contrast to KFC's policy of “Scream and rant loud enough until someone talks notice of you”
Poor turism, poor fisheries, poor everything! No money, No class.
UK PM Kamoron announced the UK austerity will continue until the year 2020. Military reduction is expected in the UK. Tax on cornish pasty don't bring enough revenues for the UK economy to survive.
Same situation here in the USA. The USA goverment is BROKE.
This means the USA is planning to close military bases including several military bases overseas.
Is time to think differently.
@50 think you'll find the UK defence budget deficit has been wiped out, hence both carriers will now enter service together, and type 26 frigates will begin build shortly, and today we took delivery of the first f35 lightning II, so we ain't thinking differently
You are perfectly right Mr Slattzzz, however the deficit may be gone but the MOD is still wasting so much money just by being in existence, I prefer the UKIP proposal= Disband the MOD and have a procurement agency replace it with less then 400 Military personnel rather then 40,000 civil servants.
There are 2 only GPS (Global Position System) actually working 1 is owned by US and the other belongs to Russia (GLONASS).
And there are 3 GPS under construction 1 by EU (Galileo) the other by China (Beidou) and the last by Argentina (Antares).
Proof or yet again you are talking rollocks...... the only Antares I know of makes tracking stuff for trucks...
from wiki...'Other satellite navigation systems in use or various states of development include:
GLONASS – global satellite navigation system maintained by Russia, available worldwide.
Galileo – a global system being developed by the European Union and other partner countries, planned to be operational by 2014
Beidou – People's Republic of China's regional system, currently limited to Asia and the West Pacific[123]
COMPASS – People's Republic of China's global system, planned to be operational by 2020[124][125]
IRNSS – India's regional navigation system, planned to be operational by 2012, covering India and Northern Indian Ocean[126]
QZSS – Japanese regional system covering Asia and Oceania
'
All the earlier chat lads... about all the hardware. Looking forward, should the scottish referendum return true; does the royal navy lose some of their kit to a would be scottsh navy?
...
basically no,
There are many military and discussion sites on this subject, that explains why not,
Basically its MONEY ,
She cannot afford it,
And they would basically have to start from scratch,
Buying things is expensive enough,
But unless you can upgrade and fully maintain, they it is a waste of resources .
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
44 Conqueror
Thank you .
.
thanks for that - some folks would be concerned about voting for having no sea defense capability whatsoever..
look at this,
see what you think.
its just an opinion .
Scroll down to
[McSubmarines’. ]
thinpinstripedline.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2012-01-01T00:00:00Z&updated-max=2013-01-01T00:00:00Z&max-results=50
thanks
For Mr. Conor.
It is well known that foreign trade bans are in those countries (South Sea),least stringent , and that no man not authorized by the King of Spain can trade except for the use of force or stealthily. Any gains to be obtained must be by violence from the rapine, or fraud.
Samuel Johnson, English writer. 1771.
Any resemblance to reality ...
That says an English writer in 1771, in a report commissioned by his government.
Is clearly that Malvinas are not British.
Regards.
24 sats (constellation) makes more reliable the system to cover earth but with just 12 you have full coverage.
You just need 3 sats to make the triangulation by getting the identification of the sat and timestamp given by the sat so the receptor can make a “syncro” with sat nuclear clock and calculates distances depending on how long takes the signal.
The Chinese will put 30 sats for their Beidou GPS and they already have 8 sats operational, the Americans just has 24 sats.
EU will put 30 but at the moment are in the stage of testing nuclear clocks and there is only one operational.
So let’s say that will not be EU GPS until 2025 at this rate launching.
In the first stage EU “GPS” will be complementary to US system.
The sats are currently being assembly in Rome (Italy) in Thales Alenia & Telespazio (French/Italian partners) facilities.
“It seems to me, that it is getting pretty well crowded up there,”
Yes will be in near future...
@Frank
And since when I have to prove anything to you idiot?
GPS (Global Positioning System) do you understand what that means?
As I said before only 2 the American and the Russian are operational.
The Chinese in process to be come Global they only need just 4 sats more in space and the rest including the Galileo (Galilei) are in experimental/testing phase.
“Cant remember Argentina being a country in 1771”
And I cannot remember any country with the name Falkland even in 2012 and you?
And I cannot remember any country with the name of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1771 either and you?
And that what proves?
Ah! I know that FI is still an oppressed colony of UKoGBaNI under The United Nations Special Committee of Decolonization.
'And since when I have to prove anything to you idiot?'
You offensive little bit of pigmy shit.... you said that RG was developing its own GPS system..Antares.... you were talking crap... nothing new there for a peronista ..... back it up sunshine or shut the fuck up...prat
'And there are 3 GPS under construction 1 by EU (Galileo) the other by China (Beidou) and the last by Argentina (Antares). '
Dickhead....
Ah Mr Danny are you moaning again?
“Its sad, so sad...its a sad sad situation.”
You always seem to complain about British this and British that and like the rest of your fellow Argentines and you think this will somehow get you the Falklands. Is this another failure in a long line of failures that successive Argentine People and governments have carried out? All political, military, social etc methods have failed, so give up and get on with your life.
Who is going to trust an Argentine GPS?
61 - Duny burger
The first recorded landing on the Falkland Islands occurred in 1690, and was made at Bold Cove near Port Howard on West Falkland to replenish the water supplies of British ship 'Welfare' commanded by John Strong, who named the stretch of water between West and East Falkland 'Falkland Sound' after Lord Falkland, who was a financial supporter of Strong's voyage, Treasurer to the Navy and shortly to become First Lord of the Admiralty.
ireland was added to the union in 1800, so iam pretty sure that England , a United Kingdom , the Royal Navy all exisited when the the first British landing took place, whereas Argentina didnt exist!!! you change time or history its a fact.
The Falklands is a self governing overseas territory not a country , fail to see your point.
your clutching at straws again, nobody believes a word you post
“And since when I have to prove anything to you ”
You don't have to prove anything, but the Malvinista's inability to prove anything means you cannot win arguments-therefore if you make the effort (if you are capable of doing so) to win those arguments you might be taken seriously. Instead, you are viewed correctly as a joke.
Argentina keeps saying they don't have to prove anything to the world or take any notice of world opinion when it is against them, then complains when the UK ignores them.
If you don't make the effort to PROVE ANYTHING then you have lost an argument as an argument is not won by burying your head in the sand and bypassing it.
@61
“And I cannot remember any country with the name Falkland even in 2012”
Go to the Falkland Islands where all the legal and government documents have the name 'Falkland Islands' blazed all over them.
If the Islands were called the Malvinas or Scraggpaddockpoint land, or Albatrossatina , or WhenIwastherica that's what would be:
1/- On all the signs on the Island.
2/- On all the government paperwork
And guess what? There are:
1/- No Malvinas signs on the Islands
2/-The government is not MIG
3/-The government legal and official paperwork does not have Malvinas on it.
If you don't believe this-go the the islands and see for yourself.
@61
“Ah! I know that FI is still an oppressed colony”
Who is oppressing them? How can they be oppressed if the FIG runs the place?
It is not the UK issuing fishing licences around the FI-it's FIG
It is not the UK issuing oil licences around the FI-it's FIG
The UK has no influence on democratic elections in the FI-the FIG runs them.
The UK wisely, dictates NOTHING to FIG, just supports FIG with military protection against the imperialist state to its west. ie Argentina.
Are you nervous for something?
And what have you proved? Absolutely nothing because you didn’t understand simply.
Global means covering the world while the others as you have pointed out regional so RPS do you understand the difference?
@cLOHO
If you go to a court to defend yourself for a traffic light infraction you will end in jail for the lack of rigor with your self made proofs.
@Pete Bog
“means you cannot win arguments”
Are we in an argument contest? Wow!!!!!!!!!!
I didn’t know that.
And what I will win by defeating you all the time?
And the judges of the contest will be just Conqueror by chance?
Rules please?
@58 The South Sea is in the Pacific. Did you understand “South” or did you just get lucky, dimwit?
@61 Perhaps you should think more about the actions of the State of Buenos Aires. Historically, not part of argieland. Nor is it mentioned as one of the previous names in the argie “constitution” (i.e. gangster pact). Not part of argieland between 1853 and 1860. Strange how the Falkland Islanders don't seem to feel “oppressed”, except by argieland (The Great Slime). Nor does the UN mention “oppressed”.
@68 YOU don't get to “compete” in a “contest”. YOU just get to die. And be turned into fertiliser. With a health warning. “Exceptional levels of sh*t”.
You have stated that you are a businessman, if you run your bussiness like your arguments it will not take 35.7% inflation to bankrupt you, you'll do it all by yourself!!!!!
The chinese and ESA are still in the experimental stage with sat nav systems.
Here is an interesting bit of info for you - you would'nt think that relativity (Einsteins theories about mass, speed, gravity and space-time interacting) would affect your everyday life. But it does when you use GPS.
There are 2 sets of signals - ground and satellite - the 2 sub systems talk to each other. The movement of the satellites has to be compensated for, as does thier placement in the Earths gravitational field - because gravity and speed affect the rate at which time moves. If this was not done the siganls would in short order become catastrophically unrelaible - you give you readings literrly miles out!
At that time, 177 years that the islands contained in the maps.
The British admit that Francisco Camargo could land on the islands 150 years before he came Strong.
Read back to Samuel Johnson.
www.facebook.com/Britain1592
You can make up or spout all the propaganda you want, like the lies taught to rg children, shameful...like the nazis indoctranating the German youth against the Jews. The islands are British and there is nothing your humiliated broke country can do about it jajajajajajajaja
you dont understand the truth,
because you cant handle the truth,
and if there was any justice in this world, CFK would not be inpower,
such blindness!!! They were never Argentine, even in '82 you were an occupation force, and not a very good one at that!
just wrong will do.
> Read back to Samuel Johnson.
You are confusing reporting and condoning, and in any event Samuel Johnson was neither a member of the British government, nor a paid agent of it.
But are you seriously trying to argue that a rather obscure reference by an 18th century essayist somehow outweighs or justifies an invasion in 1982 resulting in 1000 deaths?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB3QSDu1iX0
The future is ours.
Who will replace, Dauntless
Will it be
Daring
Diamond
Dragon
Or
Defender.
Either way, it’s going to be great news,
.
Tell that to Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, khadafy, Hitler, Archduke Ferdinand... the list goes on, if you don't get rid of her maybe someone will do it for you.
@81 Hans: “Samuel Johnson was neither a member of the British government” Perfect.
Samuel Johnson wrote the essay at the request of the english government. Clearly doubt the discovery british of the islands and mentions that the South Sea is the domain of the king of Spain.
Nothing absolutely nothing to justify a war. I always ask please reach an agreement or understanding for the benefit of future generations.
In a agreement, both parties gain and lose something. However, both parties win the most important thing: Peace.
Regards.
No no no no no....as always you spin the usual nonsense and this whole peace and love crap. Both sides win and lose? Really? Well according to your user name the only winner is Argentina and the losers are both the United Kingdom and the Falklands. Because after all any “agreement” in your eyes has to result in you lot getting final sovereignty doesn't? So please drop the whole peace act we know exactly what you and your country and its leaders desire; everything while we are left with nothing.
That's the pot calling the kettle black if ever I heard it. FFS! LOL!
Can anyone tell me if Marcos is actually Mike Bingham?
Peace is what you've had since the last war you started.
If you really do want to maintain that peace, then perhaps you should be questioning the whole state sponsored neurosis that led to the war, instead of trawling about in the musings of an 18th century essayist looking for arguments to support an already discredited case.
Nowhere else in the world .....
Noblesse oblige!
I’m really glad to know that some people like you have a high intellectual level.
Doesn’t matter if we agree or not in some issues, but you are absolutely right about how the ground signals provide more reliable and accurate data.
: )
www.helium.com/items/2341712-could-the-falklands-war-take-place-again?page=2
Our politeness
Your aggression.
Just a thoughty.
.
Quiet isn't it :-)
'But Verdu told The Associated Press that the problem is nationwide and cannot be blamed on the military junta that ended decades ago. Since Argentina's democracy was restored in 1983, its security forces have killed 3,400 people in custody, “most of them young, poor and dark-skinned,” she said. “It's absolutely an everyday thing in all of Argentina's provinces.” Adolfo Perez Esquivel, a Nobel Peace Prize winner for his work investigating the abuses of the dictatorship, told Radio Salta that abusing suspects is an endemic practice throughout the country's security forces, and that the national government unfortunately limits its human rights policies to what happened between 1976 and 1983.
Read more: www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/Argentines-outraged-over-police-interrogation-3722788.php#ixzz21KMuM2SY';
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmqXtMmWolA
False. Byron arrived clandestinely, nailed his flag and left. Meanwhile, in Port Louis from 1764 there was a colony belonging to the kingdom of France. Why do you want to change history?.
@84 Conor: Love crap, peace crap, the lesson was not learned :-(
Certainly, Dauntless beautiful baby.
same old, same old :-)
@80 briton, thanks you.
thats ok.
Some pretty spectacular moustaches in that piece of war porn.
His argument is very weak.
I would not say is irrelevant, because the islands were occupied before the arrival of British clandestine. This indicates that the islands does not belong to them.
Before 1850, Britain resign publicly to the islands. In 1648, 1667, 1670, 1713, 1729, 1732, 1763 (It is clear the insignificance or inutility of the acts of Byron and McBride, violating the term of this agreement) 1771, 1790, 1823, 1825, etc, etc,
Spain is irrelevant in 1860, had lost almost all its colonies and new countries emerged.
As briton says, is just a thought.
To all our British friends:
- If you believe in democracy respecting human rights.
- If you believe in respecting the right of Chagos Islanders to determine their own future in their home land.
- If you want the UK to stop violating several articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- If you believe that the indigenous Chagossian, who have suffered for over 45 years, must be allowed to return to their homeland, the Chagos Islands, without further delay.
Sign the petition calling on the British government to work to allow the banished Chagossian people to return home immediately.
The peoples of the world who believes in democracy, human rights and self determination will be thankful.
Thank you!
I've signed it.
Given your support for the Chagossians, will you now also be supporting self-determination for the Falkland Islanders?
Self-determination does not apply to and imported population that by force expelled previous inhabitants. So I won´t.
Goodness. Inhabitants expelled? Who were they?
Thank you for supporting human rights!
I told you already I signed the petition. Those refugees in Mauritius got a rotten deal, no doubt about it.
Now tell me where the poor Argentine refugees are and I'll send them some blankets.
You say, “Self-determination does not apply to and imported population that by force expelled previous inhabitants.”
But the Chagossians were an IMPORTED population, who worked on the Plantations, so you obviously don't support their right to self-determination. Also all but 600,000 of all Argentinians are imported population so by your standards none of them have the right to self-determination either, and they did expell the original inhabitants.
But I suppose the Chagossians didn't expell anyone so maybe that's okay by you, and since the Falkland Islanders didn't expell anyone either it's gratifying to know that you support their right to self-determination too.
To all our Argentine friends:
- If you believe in democracy respecting human rights.
- If you believe in respecting the right of Falkland Islanders to determine their own future in their home land.
- If you want the Argentine government of CFK to stop violating several articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- If you believe that the indigenous Falkland islanders , who have suffered for over 150 years, must be allowed to live in peace in their homeland, , without further delay.
Sign the petition calling on the argentine government of CFK to work to allow the Falklanders to live without threats or abuse
The peoples of the world who believes in democracy, human rights and self determination will be thankful.
Thank you
.
=@98 Boovis “that applies to only one part of the islands, not the islands as a whole, so it's still a moot point”. Ahaa! very good! So why do people evicted from Puerto Soledad, why occupied all the islands?
Only the garrison was expelled
=His argument is very weak.
Argentina’s argument is very weak. It’s based on a Spanish inheritance that never happened
=I would not say is irrelevant, because the islands were occupied before the arrival of British clandestine. This indicates that the islands does not belong to them.
Britain had the prior claim. And France, by declaring its settlement illegitimate, lost any rights as first occupants
=Before 1850, Britain resign publicly to the islands.
Britain has never resigned the Falklands. The newer treaty overrides the older treaties
=In 1648,
1648 Spain accepts its territories are those it holds, relinquishing any claims to territories it doesn’t hold, including the Falklands
=1667,
See 1648, no prior Spanish occupation, therefore no prior Spanish sovereignty.
=1670,
1648
=1713,
Article 8 said to return Spain’s dominions to the way they were during Charles II’s reign (1665-1700). As per 1648, Spain’s dominions did not include the Falklands during his reign
=1729,
1648
=1732,
1648
=1763 (It is clear the insignificance or inutility of the acts of Byron and McBride, violating the term of this agreement)
See 1648, and, what agreement?
=1771,
Status quo ante treaty, did not affect the situation, and Spain had established no valid prior claim.
=1790,
Doesn’t apply, the Falklands are not adjacent to South America,
=1823, 1825, etc, etc,
Recognition of a state doesn’t imply recognition of that state’s territorial claims. And in 1823 and 1825 there was no Argentine presence in the Falklands to recognise
=Spain is irrelevant in 1860, had lost almost all its colonies and new countries emerged.
Relevant to inheritance. Spain only started relinquishing its claims in 1836, didn’t recognise Argentina till 1859/1863.
The existence of a garrison in the Malvinas means an act of sovereign government of Argentina. Is not existed by magic.
In 1982 Argentina expelled the British guanición, not their people, then why react so violently?
*Britain had the prior claim. And France, by declaring its settlement illegitimate, lost any rights as first occupants.
France occupies the islands, incorporated into his kingdom. England did not protest.
France first occupant recognize Spanish sovereignty and transfer the islands. England did not protest.
France announced this transfer to the British ambassador in Paris. London did not protest.
The English had hidden their colony at Port Egmont. Never communicated to the other powers.
The incident came when the Spanish seek and find the colony furtive.
can not believe it, look on google earth and tell me if the islands are not adjacent to the mainland ... incredible!!!.
perhaps a little trip to gibralter, might liven things up a bit .
just a fishy thought
Some people have even suggested a possible doomsday scenario -a cascade failure whereby one satellite being hit and bursting produces enought debris to set of a chain reaction. This is a bit extreme and unlikely. But I can see space junk impacting on orbital operations for a long time to come.
@islas Malvinas and Malvinese 1833.
What a surprise - you don't actually belive in self determination and I bet you really could'nt give a damn about the chagosians.
Don't forget that it was Spain that first used force in the Falklands - to expel the British colony in 1771.
The colony established by Vernot had asked for our permission to settle. The only thing we objected to was the United Provinces establishing a garrisaon and appointing a governor, thus claiming the place, when we also had an active claim.
Funnily enough the RN showed up to kick out the garrison and haul down your
In 1982 you launched another unprovoked attack on the British community in the Falklands. You planned to ethnically cleanse the islands by forcibly removing all the inhabitants. You killed hundreds of our servicemen in a pointless war.
The Falklands are hundreds of miles off your coast - we could claim the Faeros if we applied your criteria. What about South Georgia - that is even further away! Are you just jealous or something?
So you think that you own the southern hemisphere?
The principle that islands belong to the nearest adjacent mainland will come as as something of a shock to, inter alia, :
- the Moroccan citizens of Madeira and the Canaries
- the Mauretanian citizens of Cape Verde
- the Indian citizens of Sri Lanka
- the US citizens of Cuba
- the Mozambican citizens of Madagscar
- the French citizens of the United Kingdom and Ireland
- the Canadian citizens of Greenland
etc, etc.
Some of them, I imagine, will be happier than others with their new status.
@113
The Treaty of Utrecht only restored Spanish possessions in the Americas prior to the War of Spanish Succession. Or on other words, it has nothing to do with the Falklands at all.
But this incessant Malvinista digging for arguments in documents written 300 years ago and 100 years before Argentina even existed is really rather revealing. The more it goes on, the more it shows how feeble your case really is.
You may well be correct,
I remember looking at a discovery program, that compared it to the rings of Saturn, but not as crowded,
But they did suggest that a few companies were trying out various thing to try and [pick them up]
Good luck to them, whoever they may be .
.
You can not mention that agreement allowed Byron to reach the islands.
You can not mention that agreement allowed eject the Argentines on the islands.
You basa in 1592? 241 years in 1833
You basa in 1690? 143 years in 1833
As long as you Great Britain recognized the independence of Argentina, the government concesionaba land, appointed governors, charged tax on foreign fishing.
Britain made no mention to its alleged rights, this is clear because the islands were not his. (british). Until he woke up his imperial ambition.
Anyway I still hope to reach an agreement sometime.
Show me the agreement that says the Falklands are Argentine.
The entire Falklands saga has been debated here (and elsewhere) ad nauseam, and it is perfectly clear that the Argentine case is no more than an attempt to claim a Spanish inheritance that was never left to you.
Bur all this historical nitpicking is completely irrelevant anyway. The determining date in the whole story is not 1592, 1690, 1771, or 1833, it is 1982. Nobody is going to repel an invasion with the loss of 1000 lives on both sides and then act as if nothing happened because somebody has come up with an obscure new interpretation of the Treaty of Utrecht.
[indocrination sounds just right ]
The British gave Vernot permission to set up his colony. He went out of his way to get it because he was aware of our claim and was concerned that increasing British activity in the area in the future may have come into conflict with his settlement. He actually asked for Brritain protection as well.
We lodged strong complaints with your govt when the garrison was established and you raised yout flag - claiming the place- and appointing a governor. You were warned......................
Why don't you try to get some tribal cave paintings to back up your claims next, or perhaps some treaty with the Romans.
@ Briton - The way ahead in access to LEO is a single stage to orbit spaceplane, have a look at SKYLON on the internet - it's a British concept. I would rather the £12 billion spent on the olympics had been spent making SKYLON a viable system - and revolutionising our advanced industries.
Here here, That Skylon plane is an incredible and astonishing piece of British Engineering and design your right an extra £12 billion and Britain could man independent space missions.
Britannia could, dare I say it....rule the stars! Now that would be one hell of a patriotic anthem.
Many people went with Captain Pinedo (highest authority at the time) on his boat.
The people who stayed in the islands does not legalize the British encroachment.
During World War 2, London was bombed by the Germans. Today they are friends and allies.
So, why the UK does not want to talk to Argentina?
Answer: Because they know their historical mistake and does not know or will not desire fix it.
You are confused. That list is out of context.
You must mention the treaty of 1790 and the outlook is different.
In addition the people of France did not expel the British.
U.S. citizens did not expel the Cubans.
The Canadians citizens did not expel to Greenland citizens
Do not be dishonest.
Try living in the current year 2012. You have a resource rich country with plenty of land, gas and oil. Stop trying to legitimise wanting to claim some tiny islands 300 miles from Patagonia's coast which would be little or no benefit to anybody in Argentina.
falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/snub-or-climb-down/
“Argentina spuriously accuses Britain of having seized the Falkland Islands from them in 1833, even though the British claim goes back to 1765. What really happened was that the pretensions of Buenos Aires to the Islands became known in 1829 and Argentina was given a diplomatic warning to stay away from the British territory. They ignored this, and in 1832, sent an armed garrison to seize control. The Royal Navy sent two ships who suggested that the garrison leave. They did so without bloodshed. Argentina tried for the second time in 1982, and as a result, nearly 1000 young soldiers, sailors and airmen lost their lives.”
I tink that's clear and succinct.
The UK can be friends with Germany because Germany is a stable, responsible democracy which has renounced its fascist past and its former territorial pretensions.
Both the UK and the FIG have repeatedly stated their willingness to talk to Argentina on any matter except sovereignity, which matter is closed unless and until the islanders decide otherwise. See the upcoming referendum. The matter of sovereignity is closed, of course, not because of Dan Brown discoveries in documents of the 18th century, but because the 1982 Argentine war of aggression has made any other position impossible.
The numerous examples of islands in the world which do not belong to the nearest adjacent mainland country show quite clearly that proximity does not make sovereignity.
thanks for that info,
i will look at it.
And when will you return?
Argentine claims dating back to 1820 with possession. This was documented by The Times.
In 1982, Argentina regained the islands with the regrettable loss of one life. He was an Argentine navy. No British soldier was killed or settlers.
The plan was to take the islands to negotiate and begin withdrawing troops within 5 days.
Incredibly, the Royal Navy, enlisted in record time their ships.
London knew the Argentine plan and did not stop him?
Argentina has no territorial claims, his territory was usurped. I recall that the aggressor was the United Kingdom in 1833.
Nowhere in the South Pacific and South Atlantic, the UK had colonies, which was banned by treaty.
Only Malvinas, after an act of force.
Today is an overseas territory obtained in a way dishonorable.
The United Kingdom also defends with Dan Brown documents. Remember to Samuel Johnson, discovery???, occupation??? No.
british lies have short legs.
Regards.
“1765? Pardon the islands were occupied already”
Yes, by France at Port Louis in 1764.
Not by Argentina.
Spain took over the French claim in 1766, one year later than 1765.
After the peace treaty signed by Britain and Spain in 1771, both sides retained claims.
In 1810, Spain did not give up its claims to the Islands-it did so in the mid 1800s. Therefore Argentina could not have inherited Spanish claims to the Islands , as Spain continued to claim the East Island , until its claim was dropped.
“Argentine claims dating back to 1820 with possession”
British claims date from 1765 with possession, that's 55 years earlier.
”The plan (regarding 1982) was to take the islands to negotiate and begin withdrawing troops within 5 days.”
UN resolution 502 asked for the withdrawal of military forces-Argentina refused this and their forces had to be ejected.
The UK supported the Peruvian peace plan which envisaged a UN force occupying the Islands.
Argentina rejected ths.
Argentina rejected all compromise which inevitably led to the UK rejecting compromise.
Argentine territory was not usurped in 1833. Vernet's settlers were there with the permission of the UK who protested when the UP ot RP garrison arrived in November 1832. Britain had not dropped its claim on the Islands, so it could not logically 'invade' its own territory
The UP ot RP garrison was not made up of a majority of South Americans, but were 80% British Mercenaries. That's why they refused to fight Captain Onslow when he landed in 1833.
So ironically the people that were allowed to stay were mainly of South American origin, (ie they preferred British rule to South American rule, especially the slaves that were freed), and the garrison that was expelled was ......80% British.
“Nowhere in the South Pacific and South Atlantic, the UK had colonies, which was banned by treaty.”
This is interesting. Tell us more. Which treaty banned the UK having colonies in the South Pacific and South Atlantic?
I don't see any benefit to anybody in going yet again through the events of 1833. It is perfectly clear to anybody who takes the time to study these events and the preceding history that the Malvinista version is an article of faith rather than a reasoned historical analysis.
And I'm sorry to say I can't sympathise any more with your contention that the 1982 invasion was a mere 5-day excursion that went wrong thanks to wicked Brit perfidy. You had plenty warning and many more than 5 days to remove your 10,000 short break trippers before the Task Force got there, as well as a mandatory UN resolution telling you to do precisely that. But you preferred to stick around with the APCs and the holiday napalm you brought with you, and the minefields you must have laid by mistake.
Curious also that Amaya's plan called, not for a cheery wave goodbye after 5 days, but for the ethnic cleansing of all the islanders, while Lami Dozo later stated that the next stage of the plan was to attack Chile. But maybe that was just a misunderstood excursion too.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!