MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Taiana admits Tories are ‘tougher’ on Malvinas but promises a ‘hot’ June
Argentine Foreign Affairs Minister Jorge Taiana admitted that the new conservative British government of PM David Cameron is taking ”a tougher stance” than its predecessors towards the Argentine claim on the Falkland/Malvinas Islands' sovereignty. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules“President Cristina Kirchner's government would ”insist“ on the matter in every international forum.”
May 27th, 2010 - 09:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0.........except the ICJ which is the only one that could resolve the matter.
The re-enactment of dying soldiers in a celebration parade is the most peculiar piece of propaganda that I've heard of in a long time.
The only think hot in June is the air coming from the Argentine leadership. All words and no action as usual.
May 27th, 2010 - 09:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nice to see that they pull out their veterans who were draged off the streets to fight to save the bacon of a corrupt and merderous regime. I suppose they forget that the British military treated them with a lot more care, attention and compassion than their own officers did.
I see Poor Old senor Tainia is desperately trying to save his job in time for next election, some classic phrases though......How can someone be anti-history? As opposed to pro history?
May 27th, 2010 - 09:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0With the world cup in June maybe Maradona and his cohorts will be haranguing Nelson Mandela and other world leaders about the justice of the Argentine cause?
May 27th, 2010 - 09:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Comment removed by the editor.
May 27th, 2010 - 10:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0The annual C-24 meeting is scheduled for June which is why we are sufferring the usual crap at this time.
May 27th, 2010 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Funny how Argentina claims that the British are 'anti-history' when it is exactly the reverse ... still, if a policy holds good with your stupid electorate I suppose I can see why they stick to it.
History favours the British.
International law favours the British.
The UN Charters favour the islanders.
The Falklands are British - Nuff said :-)
Am I being a bit slow on the uptake or is June the beginning of winter in Argentina?
May 27th, 2010 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Hardly hot, and I'm sure that they won't want to ramp it up too quickly when there's still another 16 months worth of milking it to do before the elections next October.
If Argentina is serious about the Falkland Islands why does it not start to build a relationship with the FIG. If Argentina was to help with trade, education, emergency health care and infrastructure it may help to gain some support for it's claim. Building some bridges with the people of the islands might help to gain some international sympathy for its stance. As it is Argentina's recent tantrums over oil exploration smack at simple money grabbing or political points scoring.
May 27th, 2010 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This has to be the best article I have ever seen on MercoPress. Either the Taiana is the best liar in the world or he wrote a speech on Argentina and the just switched the words Great Britain with Argentina.
May 27th, 2010 - 01:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is absurd to claim that the Falklands is a British colony, it is self-governing with an elected government. Argentina are the ones wanting to impose their cultural, economical, social and poltical will on the people of the Falklands. To say Britain is anti-history, Argentina is the country that twists and spins the truth in their favor. To say 30 odd people from the region where Argentina is now recognised lived in the Falklands in the 1830s claimed the islands and Argentina also says they were ejected! There is solid proof that they stayed on the islands!
And one final point, Argentina abide international law? What about Argentina's objective to distrupt air links and shipping to and from the Falklands, which violates UN Law. Argentina are hitting an all time low, and the Argentine people are just lapping it up as it massages their egos and pride. Keep this coming, you are only hurting your claim!
The march by the vets of the Falklands/Malvinas war was not a government “propaganda” happening. The government would not invite the group to participate in the parade, so they decided to do it on their own. The vets have been rather mistreated by this government, as anything military is taboo to the president and her followers.
May 27th, 2010 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The 'soldiers' wearing crosses on their backs were actors not war veterans. It was designed and intended to be emotive to an Argentine audience. That is what propaganda is.
May 27th, 2010 - 03:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'd imagine viewers from other nations found it rather disturbing.
Sorry about the confusion. There were two marches by the “vets”. The one which I was writing about was the one at the end of the military parade, not the one by the actors.
May 27th, 2010 - 03:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But you would agree Jerry that the march by the actors posing as vets did constitute propaganda?
May 27th, 2010 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is all highly amusing for me considering that I've recently been accused of “cheap nationalism” in these comments. If I wanted to learn how to do “cheap nationalism” I would go to Argentina for lessons...
It's amazing. On this very day, MercoPress carries an article about a representative of the Falkland Islanders telling a UN decolonisation seminar that the Islanders are happy with the way things are and Argentines still don't get it. And we mustn't forget ivo getting another one of his comments removed.
May 27th, 2010 - 11:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Now I want to start a project. I'm no good at poetry, lyrics or anything like that, so perhaps everyone could help in creating a song.
It won't take much to figure out the tune.
It should start, “Just say goodbye Argentina,”
I understand the Falklanders will not be interfering with any hydrocarbon explorations outside Falkland’s territorial waters. Seems the Falklanders, unlike the Argentineans, are not prepared to become pirates or invaders.
May 27th, 2010 - 11:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Agent0060 I think you may have something there ... The Falkland Islands Song ...
May 27th, 2010 - 11:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0” Just say goodbye Argentina,
The truth is you never owned us ......
Next line please :-)
hahaha what a bunch of ignorants!!!! All british!!!!
May 28th, 2010 - 03:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0.......“If Argentina was to help with trade, education, emergency health care and infrastructure it may help to gain some support for it's claim.”.......
- Errrr we did that in the past and it was fruitless!!! there are many ignorants and blind people there. Confuse 2000 english speaking people with “self-determination” since 1982 was not difficult for UK, GOOD JOB!!!!
........“What about Argentina's objective to distrupt air links and shipping to and from the Falklands, which violates UN Law.”.......
- BULLSHIT!!!!!!!! It is our air space and it is our sea. We have all the right of regulating the traffic between our ports in our waters (Malvinas waters is our waters).
To all of you:
Fuerza Bruta is a group of artists who personificated many things and many people of our history. They made a personification of Plaza de Mayo Mothers, angry argentines in 2001 protesting in banks and Malvinas soldiers among other people in our history. They also burnt a giant constitucion that represented the death of democracy and many other things.
None of these things were propaganda but our history, if you don't understand this kind of celebrations, then avoid writing too much sh*t, you bunch of ignorants!!!!
Happy birthday Argentina!!!! Malvinas will be back anytime soon!!!
” Just say goodbye Argentina,
May 28th, 2010 - 05:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0The truth is you never owned us ......
your mad existence
Jorge No big brother Nicotine to hide behind now little man?
May 28th, 2010 - 10:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0Correct you did try that in the past, but became increasingly frustrated when baby couldn’t get the rattle, so instead shot at a couple of British science vessels and embarked upon intimidation of the Falklands islands, ending with your little adventure in 1982.
I see that the racism truly comes through now “Confuse 2000 english speaking people with self-determination”, so British peoples are not allowed self determination? How progressive, do you have a poster of Hitler in your room per chance?
You’re the Ignoramus Gigantus mate, you cannot debate anything properly other than spouting foul mouthed diatribes and refuse to see anyone elses points of view, pathetic you would be a prime candidate for the Nazi party LOL!
Jorge I don’t see any Argentine air force in this picture?
http://www.thebppa.com/images_library/photo_view_2857.jpg
or this one (2nd form the top do you notice the flag on the tail?
http://www.thebppa.com/images_library/photo_view_2857.jpg
Nor do I see any argentine authorities policing the Falklands territorial waters in this picture?
http://www.thebppa.com/images_library/photo_view_2857.jpg
Nor do I see an Argentine law enforcement authority in this picture
http://www.thebppa.com/images_library/photo_view_2857.jpg
I also read through the minutes of your congress and TDF’s sentate, turns out not a single law has been enacted in the islands for the 180 years? So where is your right if you can’t even legislate on the nature of stamps in the Falklands?
I agree though about Fuerza Bruta they are artists representing your history, thank you for clarifying that.
And yes Happy birthday Argentina I for one unlike Jorge, wish the country all the well for the future and look forward to the day when Argentina respects the Falklands as a people and full member of the international community and they proceed into the future as friends not the bully and the bullied.
Just say goodbye Argentina
May 28th, 2010 - 10:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0The truth is you never owned us.....
All through your wild days
Your mad existence
We kept our promise
To keep you distant
Come on everyone!
As through the camp one winter morn
May 28th, 2010 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0To Stanley city fair rode I,
There armed lines of marching men
In Armtraks passed me by.
No pipe did hum, no battle drum
Did sound its loud tattoo
But the Angelus' bells o'er the Stanely swells
Rang out in the foggy dew.
Right proudly high in Stanley town
Hung they out a flag of war.
'Twas better to die 'neath a Free Falkland sky
Than at Suvla or Sud el Bar.
And from the ports of Portsmouth and Gibraltar came
Strong men came sailing through;
While Argentina's Huns with their long-range guns
Sailed in through the foggy dew.
The bravest fell, and the requiem bell
Rang mournfully and clear
For those who died that winter-tide
In the middle of the year.
While the world did gaze with deep amaze
At those fearless men but few
Who bore the fight that freedom's light
Might shine through the foggy dew.
And back through the camp I rode again
And my heart with grief was sore
For I parted then with valiant men
Whom I never shall see more
But to and fro
In my dreams I go
And I kneel and pray for you
For slavery fled
Oh, glorious dead
When you fell in the foggy dew
@ Rhaurie. I am truly, truly impressed. Unless someone comes up with at least three more verses to “Just say goodbye Argentina”, I think you must be the winner.
May 28th, 2010 - 12:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD3nGn-3Xec
May 28th, 2010 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not as good as these guys :)
Rhaurie you are THE man!
May 28th, 2010 - 01:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hehe it's a little slightly modified Irish tune, I feel that the Falklands struggle for freedom from the threat Argentine Imperialism has similar parallels with Ireland's struggle from British Imperialism, don't get me wrong I deplored the IRA and Shite Fein's use of violence to decide a matter on the verge of being settled politically, but the sentiment is there a small island nation struggling for recognition against a larger neighbor which refuses to recognize the inhabitants as human beings worthy of the rights they enjoy because they go against their own concepts of nation, geographic proximity, and definition of people.
May 28th, 2010 - 01:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just think about it, if you replaced the word Falklands with “Ireland” and “Argentina” with “19th century Britain”, I would be at a lost to tell the difference between the two situations.....
Too much crap from you rorie!!!!
May 28th, 2010 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Self-determination is for people oppressed by colonialism, british are the colonizers. No self-determination here!!!!!!!
We tried a different approach between 1971-1982 and 1990-2003 and the upshot of this was fruitless for us. The ball is on your side, unless you change your attitude, there will not be a significant change in the argentine policy toward islanders no matter what the pirate governor says.
Very good analogy Rhaurie, right on the dot! Will the other reader get the point?....
May 28th, 2010 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If there is a will ....there is a way. Argentina needs to get a reality check and be a world player. There are people living in the islands who are proud of their heritage. That should be respected in todays world!
Get instead in economic cooperation with the islands, recognise their government, open tourism to the islands.....etc!
From my “American” point of view I think “recognition” of the Falklands government will be the cornerstone to solve this problem. ...if you love them....set them free!! (Sting)
what crap el parrata? look at the argument and stop looking up your own arsehole, the only “crap” here is the stuff pouring from your backside which by misfortune of a birth defect is located where your mouth should be.
May 28th, 2010 - 03:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0self-determination is not just for people opressed by colonialism it is a universal right, you yourself are the descendants of colonizers, why did you suddenly invoke the rights of man in 1816? and when did you suddenly stop being the colonizers?
The Falklanders in my opinion are not “colonizers” anymore but a unique separate peoples it's such a crying shame that your horrific racist imperial bias cannot progress beyond the 18th century.
What attitude do we need to change Parrot? that we will willingly bend over and let take over a peaceful unique peoples against their will? Argentina the great progressive country!
when will you stop this cave man imperial mentality Jorge? The world doesn't work in your 2D world anymore you can't just go demanding land because you disagree with their rights to be a people? why Jorge isn't that what Britain did oh not so very long ago? You're not Cecil Rhodes bastard child are you?
Good day my facist latin American neo-imperialist friend!
.........“The Falklanders in my opinion are not “colonizers””.......
May 29th, 2010 - 12:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0- you'r right! in your opinion!!! Your opinion is crap!!!!
There is no country claiming my land. There is no comparison!!!
You instead are pirates who try to justificate colonialism in XXI century by the engendro of self-determination. If they want to be british, then go to Britain!!! If you insists on your provocative and agressive attitude toward Argentina, then face the consecuences.
How old are you to call me a child???? If you are too old, then take your pill (not the blue one) and go to sleep!!!!!
We do not have to justify, we don't have to even talk ......... the islands are as independent as they wish to be and good for them. They don't actually need Argentina!
May 29th, 2010 - 12:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Jorge, I am born in the Islands for many generations. I have no family in Britain, this is my home country. What you say to us is exactly the same as if the few remaing indigenous indians from the pampas said to you - get back to Spain/Italy you squatter. First and foremost I am a Falkland Islander - secondly - because there are only a few of us and we are directly threatened by a bunch of nasty bullies - we need to belong to a larger nation to protect us - and because of language and heritage that country is naturally Britain.
May 29th, 2010 - 01:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0You would impose on us exactly the same type of old fashioned European type colonialisn that we got rid of several decades ago.
Your President must be congratulated. By 2003 the previous years of conciliation and keeping the sovereignty under the neutral umbrella by your previous presidents 1990-2003 had achieved a young generation of Islander - to young to really remember 1982, who were starting to think that maybe Argentina was not so bad after all and maybe -one day? - well within a year of Kirscheners we had instead a young generation who are now even more hardline - even more antiArgentine that those who were here and suffered your invasion in 1982. You now have a whole population united in one thing- HATRED of Argentina - well done the Kirscheners .
Tim. from the UK, were happy to spend as much as it takes to keep you guys living in peace.
May 29th, 2010 - 03:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's close to our nations hearts, You not feel “British” but we have a place in our hearts for you guys.
Jorge, 15 maybe 16 years old I reckon judging by your view of the world.
May 29th, 2010 - 03:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Jihad Jorge ejaculated ”- BULLSHIT!!!!!!!! It is our air space and it is our sea. We have all the right of regulating the traffic between our ports in our waters (Malvinas waters is our waters).“
May 29th, 2010 - 08:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0THe waters around the Falklands are NOT Argentine...end of story!
Jihad Jorge ejaculated ”There is no country claiming my land. There is no comparison!!!“
How convenient! Why is that?...oh yes, you killed most of them when you colonised South America. Argentine hypocrisy and denial knows no limits. Go back to Europe Jorge...
Jihad Jorge ejaculated ”You instead are pirates who try to justificate colonialism in XXI century by the engendro of self-determination. If they want to be british, then go to Britain!!!“
The only country trying to impose colonialism in the 21st C is Argentina. End of story!
”If you insists on your provocative and agressive attitude toward Argentina, then face the consecuences.”
Is that a threat? Neither UK nor the FIG are being provocative or agressive towards Argentina...it is the other way around. Argentina is being provocative and agressive towards the islanders and is trying to deny them their human rights. The world would not stand for a repeat of your actions in 82...and Argentina knows that.
@Christopher UK
May 29th, 2010 - 11:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The world would not stand for a repeat of your actions in 82...and Argentina knows that”
And who is going to stop Argentina to do that, can you name them please?
The united kingdom.
May 29th, 2010 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yup, NicoDin ... the good old UK
May 29th, 2010 - 02:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I love to cover a few points:
May 29th, 2010 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@23 Rhaurie. It is good and , having checked it out, I find that it is actually about the British LIBERATION of the Falkland Islands in 1982. Nevertheless, my suggested competition was for posters on this site. Unless anyone has other contributions, I think you must be the winner.
@32 zethe. Your comments suggests you are Argentine. Try to read Tim's comment. He describes himself as a Falkland Islander. I don't have a problem with the Islanders associating themselves with the UK, but you could try getting at least basic facts right especially if, unlike tossers such as jorge!, gdr and NicoDin, you're trying to be reasonable.
Now we must all bear in mind that 80% of Argentines suffer from anxiety relating to insecurity, their economic situation and their health. This is partly from paranoia and partly from the, not unjustified, fear that Britain will piss on them from a great height.
Argentines must be aware that British Tomahawk missiles, a capability unfortunately not available in 1982, can hit them from either the Atlantic or Pacific coasts of South America. And the Argentines know that they have no credible defence. For all its claims, and Russian-supplied equipment, Iraq couldn't.
And for the sake of bigmouth NicoDin, appropriate sources tell me that the British Armed Forces have military equipment they've never shown anyone. Best advice for you and your compatriots is to start digging your shelters now. You might be OK if you get about 50 feet down.
38 agent0060:
May 29th, 2010 - 08:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What...?
I've made two comments, one supporting the Falklands islanders, and the other telling NicoDin that the united kingdom will stop Argentina if they decide to repeat their actions.
I haven't even stated any facts to get wrong...
What part of “from the UK” and “It's close to our nations heart” Made me sound like an Argentine?
I don't understand why people keep going on about Tomahawk's because there is no situation where we would use them on Argentina in the case of a invasion. The only targets would be either occupied FI(which would be stupid) or the Argentine mainland, and we aren't in the business of firing missiles at civilians.
@39 zethe. This is YOUR post at #32.
May 30th, 2010 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Tim. from the UK, were happy to spend as much as it takes to keep you guys living in peace.
It's close to our nations hearts, You not feel “British” but we have a place in our hearts for you guys.
===============================================
If I've misunderstood you, I apologise. However, try some punctuation. And I'm afraid your second sentence/paragraph doesn't even SOUND British.
As far as Tomahawks are concerned, I would invite you to consider certain thoughts.
1. In 1982, Britain used artillery and naval gunfire in the Falklands. How are cruise missiles different? Except that our forces don't have to get so close.
2. Britain first used cruise missiles in 1999 during the Kosovo War (Royal Navy use of Tomahawks). The use of Tomahawks continued with their use by the Royal Navy in the 2001 Afghanistan War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Storm Shadow missiles were used by No.617 Squadron RAF during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. I remember the TV pictures of cruise missiles being fired at Baghdad.
3. If Argentina starts something all sorts of places are legitimate targets. Military installations (airfields, bases, ports), military equipment (aircraft, ships etc) and troops. Industrial installations (anything that may contribute to a war effort) and government installations (offices, communications, political leaders).
And, in war, you do what you have to do to win. I have no problem with this on 2 counts. If a belligerent nation of 40 million invades/occupies a peaceful nation of 3,000 and British armed forces have to go there to correct the situation, then the belligerent has asked for all it gets. And the Argentine/South American posters on here give no indication of being military personnel. They are civilians, guilty of believing their political leaders' distortions and of encouraging their military.
Compare 1918 and 1945. What was more effective?
Jorge.... The time of colonisation has finished, we are now in XXI century...
May 30th, 2010 - 11:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wonderful!!!
Now comes the 100 billion Usd question??What the hell do you think yuo are argumenting for?? Colonialisme??
No , of course not! It is called NEO-COLONIALISME.
You want the political geographic map turned back to 1833. Very well!!!, At that time whole wsw part of your country still belonged to the indegenous people (remember it was before Quonqest of the desert)
Yes , colonisation is disgusting... Right?
Do you have a mirror?
“If I've misunderstood you, I apologise. However, try some punctuation. And I'm afraid your second sentence/paragraph doesn't even SOUND British.”
May 31st, 2010 - 02:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0I missed out the word might. Apart from that i don't see anything that even suggests i am Argentine. I just can't see it.
”We are happy to spend as much as possible to keep you guys living in peace, You might not feel British(as he earlier stated) but we have a place in our hearts for you guys”
Isn't exactly the sentiment of a nationalist Argentine.
The main difference being that Tomahawks are vastly more expensive, unnecessary and are not in unlimited supply.
The Argentine mainland is too far away to pose any significant threat to a task force, which is why we would not use Tomahawks on the mainland. And it would be political suicide to start firing Tomahawks on to the occupied Falklands islands.
Tomahawks are to the majority of the population paired with trident/nuclear weapons. The press would have a field day.
And the main point being that they don't pose a significant threat to have to resort to using expensive missiles, any invasion force would be a few thousand troops which would not even reach the islands due to the Garrison on the islands currently.
NicoDin wrote “And who is going to stop Argentina to do that, can you name them please?”
May 31st, 2010 - 10:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well the UK for one. But I would have thought that Argentina would be forced to stop any attack on the Falkland Islands by its military. After all...it would be against its own constitution to try to take the islands by force.
Christoper you forget that Argentina is also in the united nations and does not believe in self determination, unless of course it applies to something they want.
May 31st, 2010 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0They're all for the rules unless the rules stop them having something they want.
According to other (Argentine) posters, Cristina is dangling new (Russian) weaponry in front of the military. With all the friendship and solidarity being expressed between South American nations, why would they need it?
May 31st, 2010 - 03:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Calm down my little Neo-Imperial Fascist friend all that right arm exercising has obviously got the blood going a bit! Your fascist nationalism outrage could damage your health!
May 31st, 2010 - 05:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Jorge my dear fellow you are claiming a land with different laws, different government, with a different people, different culture, and is not under your control/laws/jurisdiction and this has been the case since 1833 clrearly and debatably since before the state of Argentina has been created, now what does colonialism involve you ask? Let us refer to Anna Loomba an African historian and politics writer specialising in colonialism, her definition as stated in her much acclaimed book “Colonialisn in a post colonial world”, refers to it as:
“a relationship between an indigenous (or forcibly imported) majority and a minority of foreign invaders. The fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonized people are made and implemented by the colonial rulers in pursuit of interests that are often defined in a distant metropolis. Rejecting cultural compromises with the colonized population, the colonisers are convinced of their own superiority and their ordained mandate to rule”
Now dear fellow what is Argentina wishing to do? You have to admit Jorge that argument that Argentina is behaving in a colonial manner is quite compelling? Now claiming self-determination in the Falklands as an example of colonialism? Dear fellow has the fascist section of your brain disconnected the blood flow to rational thought? Really define how this is colonialism in as little petulant swear words as possible!
As for aggressive, I was unawares that the ocean guardian rig presents a clear and present danger to Argentina? OH the inhumanity!
How old I am is none of your concern, I refer to you in the most relevant age group I feel your disgusting little outbursts represent…
Now run along and play with your Hitler dolls…..
”According to other (Argentine) posters, Cristina is dangling new (Russian) weaponry in front of the military. With all the friendship and solidarity being expressed between South American nations, why would they need it?”
Jun 01st, 2010 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Russian equipment is about as useful as a condom with the end chopped off.
@zethe. I have to stop you again. You have to go back through comments etc. throughout this site to see that our rabid Argentines are happy for the Islanders to live on this territory. They will agree to the Islanders living with their own ways, customs, laws and so forth PROVIDED that the territory belongs to Argentina. In fact, I think that you can even find one comment that the Falkland Islands are actually the M******* province of Argentina. Must be careful not to give them the slightest pretext.
Jun 02nd, 2010 - 12:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The expense of Tomahawks? Yes, they're not cheap. But you may have noticed that we don't parade them through Parliament Square every year. We don't buy them, or build Storm Shadows, in order to polish their casings. We have them so that when the need arises we can use them.
Threats from the Argentine mainland? I have to suggest you go back to your history. 1982 to be precise. Where do you think the aircraft came from that dropped those bombs and fired those Exocet missiles. The mainland is the source for that offensive weaponry! You don't sit out there saying “We can bat away anything they send.” You eliminate the source. As far as firing cruise missiles at the occupied Falklands? Well, not first choice, but you should read up on destructive radius and note that these missiles are “smart”. Impact point 10 metres or less from target.
Confusion with Trident/nuclear missiles? Well, Trident is a missile. Nuclear? Tomahawks can be fitted with nuclear warheads. However, British cruise missiles generally have conventional warheads.
No threat because of Island garrison? Please research size of Argentine invasion force in 1982. Then research strength of current British garrison. 1982 invasion force - 60,000. Current garrison - 500 + RAF + RN.
This is why it is important for the Argentines to understand that there is no part of Argentina out of range of submarine-launched cruise missiles. Then we can argue about history, prescription and self-determination as much as you want.
Remember how much of a commotion we got over sinking their ship? It would be considered a crime of war for us to start throwing missiles at the Argentine mainland, And we would loose the moral high ground.
Jun 02nd, 2010 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Again, like i said. unnecessary. This is what artillery and/or air strikes are for. it's tens of thousands of pounds cheaper, and works just as well. Just because we have them it's not the answer to everything.
60,000 invasion force...i must have got this confused with another Falklands war.
At the end of the war we took about 11,300 men as POW's. with 600 dead, that makes their force at about 12,000. I'm unsure where the other 48,000 went. or how a force of around 5,000 British troops won that war.
Last time i read we had 2,000 men at the RAF base, i could be mistaken.
The thing you fail to understand is that it's not about numbers. They have a standing army of around 70,000 at the moment. In order take the Falklands islands they have to be able to move said army to the islands. This requires ships to land on shore and unload it's troops.
The RAF base will know the moment any ship enters within 150-200 miles of the islands. At which point the submarine and destroyer in the area would be notified, and a few euro fighters would take off to intercept. After sinking one of their ships full of troops, you think they'd carry on? of course not.
They can't take what they can't reach.
@ zethe. Sorry, so many mistakes.
Jun 02nd, 2010 - 08:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who cares about the Belgrano? Except relatives, of course. Try some facts. Britain had already informed Argentina, via the Swiss, that there were no limits on where it could or would take action. As for it heading away, try to figure out how long it takes a ship to turn round.
Artillery and/or air strikes? Show me the artillery with a 300 mile plus range. And we have 4 Typhoons down there. Excellent. But I think you'll find they are air superiority aircraft. Not ground attack. And even if they were ground attack, compare their capability against 16+ cruise missiles. You obviously have no idea of military realities.
Size of the invasion force? Try reading this lot. http://www.naval-history.net/NAVAL1982FALKLANDS.htm . As far as the difference between the size of the invasion force and the number of POWs, I think you'll find that they withdrew their invasion troops and replaced them with a conscript occupation force. Not difficult, is it?
According to Wikipedia, their current standing army is 41,000. I've already told you the size of the British garrison, so I won't repeat it. And if you think they couldn't land? Well, we did.
Do come back out of Dreamland. British troops are amongst the best, if not the best, in the world, but they cannot perform miracles. The garrison is there as a deterrent. A signal that Britain is more committed now than in 1982 when the normal garrison was 40 Royal Marines. How long would it take to ship 10,000 troops down there? I'll give you a clue. It took the Typhoons 5 days to get there.
But the “real” deterrent is what our submarines can do. The Argentines know. What they don't know is how many there are. What we don't need is someone telling them that, although we have these capabilities, its OK because we won't use them.
Britain will do what is has to. That means anti-ship missiles from the on-station warship, Tomahawks from the subs and the Typhoons for air superiority.
And hope our guys can hold on.
“Who cares about the Belgrano?”
Jun 03rd, 2010 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well, actually a lot of people in the UK did. Don't get me wrong. i support the decision to sink the ship. I'm just saying that there was a massive debate over the situation, a missile aimed at the Argentine homeland would be 10 times worse.
...The typhoon is NOT just an air superiority aircraft. It is a multi-role fighter with air-to-ground capabilities.
Again, you you totally miss the point. It's not 60,000 or 10,000 vs 500.
It's getting said troops to those islands.
My point is not that our troops would beat a force 10 or 20 times the size of it. My point is that the Argentine force would NOT reach the islands.
The landing craft would be destroyed before they got close to the islands. The moment the ships entered radar range they would have a destroyer, a sub and several typhoons en route. If they decided to push on those troops would die.
Using cruise missiles. What are we going to hit? honestly, their arms industry? They don't have one. Their aircraft bases? This is what the SAS were crated for. A missile armed to destroy a airbase would have to have a large explosive range, the SAS were created(in ww1) for the purpose of messing up airfields. they did this in the last Falklands. A cruise missile might take out some of the aircraft but there's no guarantee. 20 sas members sent into the base would mean total destruction of all aircraft.
My point is not that we couldn't use them, or shouldn't use them. it's that we wouldn't(unless things got desperate). because we have other tools best suited for those purposes.
REALMENTE LEER LO QUE ESCRIBE EL PUEBLO PIRATA DE ESTOS INVASORES INGLESES ES LAMENTABLE, DAN LÁSTIMA , ESTAN A MILLAS Y MILLAS DE DISTANCIA DE SU NACION INGLATERRA Y VIENEN A USURPAR TERRITORIOS QUE NO LES CORRESPONDE, POR ESO NADIE LOS QUIERE EN EL MUNDO POR PIRATAS, POR FORASTEROS, POR INVASORES POR ESO PIDO QUE OJALA ALGUN DIA NUESTRAS QUERIDAS MALVINAS ARGENTINAS VUELVAN A NOSOTROS AL GRAN PUEBLO ARGENTINO Y AHORA EN EL MUNDIAL SALGAMOS CAMPEONES DEL MUNDO Y JUGUEMOS CON ESTOS PUTOS INVASORES DE INGLATERRA MAL NACIDOS
Jun 03rd, 2010 - 08:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0agent0060: Just a couple things i wanted to point out that i missed on my original post(need an edit option.)
Jun 03rd, 2010 - 08:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Falklands base has over 1000 troops. not 500.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4094818.stm
Your link you posted, while very correct. you've read it wrong.
It states that the Argentine navy was 30,000 strong, army 60,000 strong. It does NOT say that Argentina deployed 60,000 troops onto the islands. The article you linked refers to the total size of the Argentine armed forces.
The original invasion force consisted of around 1-2000 marines. After the British declared the task force was to be sent Argentine(quote from your link)
Occupation Forces - With the islands secured by the Marines, a relatively small Army garrison was air-lifted in to Stanley, but once the British Task Force was on its way, army strength built-up to over 10,000 troops.
They did not remove forces from the Falklands. they strengthened the islands. This coincides with the 10,000+ POW's we captured at the end of the war.
Further information on the Typhoon. it has six different types of roles:
1:Air-superiority - six BVRAAM (beyond visual range) / AMRAAM air-to-air missiles on semi-recessed fuselage stations and two ASRAAM short-range air-to-air missiles on the outer pylons
2:Air interdiction - four AMRAAM, two ASRAAM, two cruise missiles and two anti-radar missiles (ARM)
3:SEAD (suppression of enemy air defences) - four AMRAAM, two ASRAAM, six anti-radar missiles
4:Multirole - three AMRAAM, two ASRAAM, two ARM and two GBU-24 Paveway III/IV
5:Close air support - four AMRAAM, two ASRAAM, 18 Brimstone anti-armour missiles
6:Maritime attack - four AMRAAM, two ASRAAM, six anti-ship missiles
Diego, that's a Spanish name, right? I bet you also have a Spanish surname and Spain is miles and miles from South America.
Jun 04th, 2010 - 01:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0Case closed.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA diego shatt app you retarded cunt, i am here by naming this diego, unless there are any objections, as jihad diego, or cunt for short,
Jun 05th, 2010 - 12:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0anyway jihad diego, shut your noise, your boring, you attract only the attention of people who would break your nose if ever they came in contact with you, so do yourself a favour puto, say nothing, because all that comes out of your mouth is the same that comes out of my arse, shit, you stupid cunt
Editor, you have work with thorson. Something has happened in his infancy, maybe he was left by his parents or something like that. He always talks about asses, aparently he likes “que se lo rompan”, lol. Poor guy!!!
Jun 05th, 2010 - 09:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!