MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Argentina buys 16 Mirage F 1 from Spain; half have air-refuelling capacity
Argentina has confirmed the purchase of 16 second hand Mirage F-1 decommissioned from the Spanish Air force in an operation valued at 170 million Euros. The expenditure is contemplated in the 2014 budget bill approved in the Lower House and which awaits debate in the Senate. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules500 miles? So they can't even get to the Falklands and back?
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Is she MILITARISING THE SOUTH ATLANTIC?
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:07 am - Link - Report abuse +1Got to give her credit, never fails to amuse me.
She will be buying Galleons next, We have some muskets in the museum that she could buy.
LMAO
@1. they don't need to go to the malvinas and back (although air-fuelling is an option) because the islands are still under the de facto administration of a decadent colonial power.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:23 am - Link - Report abuse -2i am sure argentina will, however, be able to provide adequate security to the islands and its population once the situation is rectified.
cheers.
Good luck with that, only one c130 to refuel, that'll be taken out first leaving you with zero air power, and don't talk to us about colonialism while spaniards are still holding south america against the will of the indigenous population, hypocrite.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:27 am - Link - Report abuse +1@4. i am sorry, but you must be misinformed. there are not countries in south america that depend nor answer to the spanish government.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0I said spaniards, not the spanish government. Placing a population in a place already populated by someone and declaring independence does not legitamise the crime. There was no indigeinous population in the falklands, south america however was populated by various tribes and peoples on whose blood you choose to operate your corrupt regimes. It's a shame that generations of brainwashing have convinced you of the “nobility” of your cause.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:33 am - Link - Report abuse +1@6. you don't know what you are talking about. its a bit more complicated than that. and you are mixing up concepts, times, situations, etc. that have no parallel to the malvinas case. i would expand on this but i have explained it in depth before on these forums and i have a feeling this wouldn't be the last time, either.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 06:00 am - Link - Report abuse -1and you are right, there weren't indigenous people in the malvinas - there was, however, a legitimate argentine garrison there.
@7 Troneas
Oct 01st, 2013 - 06:15 am - Link - Report abuse +1You make me laugh. Keep it up.
There was an illegitimate garrison there from the United Provinces, and prior to it's arrival Britain warned the UP that the Falklands was British territory and not to send it. That protest was sent in 1832 prior to the UP dispatching it's illegal military penal colony.
You are also overlooking the fact that there were civilian colonists on the Islands prior to the arrival of the illegal UP garrison, and they were there WITH the permission of the British.
And NOT only that, the military personnel mutinied, murdered their commanding officer, raped his wife before her children, and then ran riot around the Islands threatening the civilians safety.
HMS Clio arrived and assisted the Sarandi in rounding up these CRIMINALS, and then asked Sarandi to leave.
The Sarandi left WITHOUT a shot being fired.
You see you can't just turn up with your military on someone else's land and expect them just to accept it.
Added to that is the fact that after the Sarandi left, HMS Clio also left, leaving the civilians colonists to get on with their lives.
Despite there being NO British military on the Islands the United Provinces never returned. Strange that, isn't it?
And then to top it all off, the Argentine government signs a treaty of perfect friendship with Britain stating that they had NO outstanding disputes, That's strange isn't it? Also maps produced by the Argentine government in the 1850's clearly show that they didn't believe that the Falklands were Argentine territory.
Face it, your government has bought out dated fighter aircraft, which they have a limited ability to refuel, and wouldn't make it to the Falklands, even if your government were insane enough to try another illegal military act. The fallout from such an act would be devastating for Argentina.
Take it to the ICJ if you have a case. If you won't then you are tacitly agreeing that the Falklands are British.
@3 “decadent colonial power”
Oct 01st, 2013 - 07:23 am - Link - Report abuse +1You sound like a caricature student leftie. Nobody talks like this anymore.
The UK has given/accepted independence for all of its imperial possessions and granted/accepted self-determination to the rest - whereas Argentina still occupies Patagonia having wiped out most of its inhabitants. Note that decadent doesn't just mean excess consumption, it means a nation in moral decline. No G20 government is exhibiting greater moral decline than your own - it is a kleptocracy that lies about its statistics, its foreign reserves and its history.
@8 Nice summary! I think your last sentence is spot on.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 07:24 am - Link - Report abuse +1@7
Oct 01st, 2013 - 07:29 am - Link - Report abuse +1Just two words to you sir. SELF DETERMINATION.
You will never in your or my lifetime see the FALKLANDS under Argentinian rule, unless the FALKLANDERS wish it. But at the moment I see you will not even accept they exist let alone have a dialog with them.
Target practice for sea viper, I bet they get tracked across the Atlantic every inch of the way.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 07:31 am - Link - Report abuse +1They may as well have bought byplanes, they have no idea how far behind they have fallen, the Falklands can rest easy.
@Troneas
Oct 01st, 2013 - 08:00 am - Link - Report abuse +1this “legitamate” “Argentine” “garrison” that you claim.
Firstly, there were two different groups on the islands on january 6th 1833 when the HMS Clio arrived.
The first was the remnants of the Vernet business that had been set up in 1828. The business had largely failed due to the Lexington raid, Vernet had long since left the islands, the business was under the leadership of the British Matthew Brisbane, and numbered 20-30 people. The business was there under the permission of the British and nobody from that business was eviced. There were descendents from this community living on these islands until relatively recently.
I dont see this group as being a legitimate (it was), Argentine (it wasnt), garrison (it wasnt).
So that cant be it.
The second group was the small band of militia under Pinedo that arrived in November 1832 (just 7 weeks prior). I say under Pinedo, because during that seven weeks they had murdered their Captain Esteban Mestevier and raped his wife during a mutiny. This group was warned of Britain 1690 sovereignty claim before they set sail, and attempted to usurp West Falkland and put the Brisbane community under their colonial yoke.
I assume then it is this group of 50 murdering rapists whod been on the islands 6 weeks that is your “legitimate Argentin garrison”.
Yes, then you are correct “there is no parallel with the Malvinas cause” it is UTTERLY PATHETIC, ERRONEOUS, AND BASED ON FANTASY AND LIES.
Pilots and technical teams will have to be trained.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 08:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well that goes without saying.
I suppose Spain are also including a team of Aviation Historians as part of the deal.
“”“and you are right, there weren't indigenous people in the malvinas - there was, however, a legitimate argentine garrison there.”“”
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:06 am - Link - Report abuse +1All together now.....
Oh NO THERE WASNT!
“”“”and you are mixing up concepts, times, situations, etc“”“”
talking to yourself is the first sign of madness. ¬_¬
How else would you fly to the Mythical Malvinas but in a Mirage?
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:12 am - Link - Report abuse +1Don't be hard on Troneas, gents.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse +1He knows no better,
he was brainwashed at school,
of course he is too lazy to do his own research or he knows that he is wrong(& he knows that his country is wrong)& goes along for the ride.
You never know, l think the malvinistas hope that one day, we'll say to them,
“ok, you can have the Falklands” & they wouldn't even have to fight for them.
Well l've got news for you bozos & its not pretty.
This is our land(i.e. ITS NOT YOURS)& we are NOT going to give it to you lot of lying, dishonourable, thieving, hypocritical, whinging scumbags.
So get used to our presence.
Obviously there will be a need to buy 7 more C130 refuelling planes; the other 8 Mirages - along with the bulk of the rest of the air force - might sensibly resort to well-tried and practiced kamakazi tactics.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Because of the relatively short transit times with fast jets, it will be absolutely necessary for the GCHQ/NSA teams (S.A. division) to maintain their real-time close scrutiny of all military messages and those emanating from the Casa Rosada.
Nice aircraft and effective in it's day. Absolutely NO threat even with air-to -air refueling capabilities.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:40 am - Link - Report abuse +1Air defence on the Falklands will monitor all Argentinian military communications on the mainland and be well aware of any activity deemed hostile. No doubt a reception committee would be waiting for them. Knock out the tankers at long range. The FI's combat radius is about 250 miles and with only 11,000 lbs dry thrust, it would have to engage afterburners to stand any chance against a Typhoon.
Of course this means using fuel at a rate which would make it impossible to get back to it's base. The expression Kamikaze comes into mind.
Like Venecuba, they have money for armaments but not for paying their debt or providing housing for the poor. And the 2014 budget includes an amount of 4 million pesos per day for “futbol para todos”.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse +1You've got to wonder why they would buy such outdated hardware that is several generations behind a Typhoon and no match for a Typhoon in any sense of the word. Lams to the slaughter springs too mind and thats before we mention Type 45's and the Islands own excellent air defenses.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 11:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0Surely it would make sense for the Argentine air force to buy less aircraft but more modern aircraft than end-of-life jets that seemingly can't fulfill any role?
I've got an air pistol in pieces at the bottom of a drawer somewhere. I wonder if they'd like to buy that too.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 021. I heard they are buying them for parts.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They aren't buying them to attack the Falklands. They are buyin them because they are cheap and their air force needs something to fly. You need to keep all the mechanisms and experience of an air force in place or it would take a generation to build up from scratch again.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It could be described as an exercise in treading water in the hope that one day they could afford something actually capable of putting up a fight.
Everybody is talking about this purchase as if Argentina was suicidal enough to attack RAF Mt. Pleasant with this junk… I believe this is a way to regain Spain’s favor by taking the same trash nobody wants and perhaps level things with the other bordering neighbors want…
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:33 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Now if you to laugh at the Argentine LA-DRONES be my guests
http://www.perfil.com/politica/El-Ejercito-argentino-proyecta-nuevos-drones-para-vigilar-las-Malvinas-20130901-0017.html
I sense complacency in this thread. Precisely how Argentina intends to launch another invasion of the Falklands is a vast topic for speculation, but they will try sooner or later, one way or the other. It would not hurt to assume that they do have some military capability and plan accordingly.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 3 & 7 Troneas
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.falklandshistory.org/historia-falsa.pdf
The question would be what do the other SA countries have....there is no worry of Argentina being attacked by RAF....
Oct 01st, 2013 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In the land of the Blind the one eyed man is King!
Given this increase in the Argentinian military capacity, and that Mirage Aircraft have the capability to carry Nuclear Armed missiles. Surly we should be shouting about the Argentinian military build up?
Oct 01st, 2013 - 01:04 pm - Link - Report abuse +1But seriously, when el Presidente has (another) hissy fit claiming UK military build up and confusing (on purpose) Nuclear Armed with Nuclear Powered Submarines. This should be immediately countered with reference to the Argentinian military acquisitions.
Oh and not certain but I believe these F1M's are equipped with Martin-Baker ejection seats. If someone could confirm that. If so, I wonder who'd get the contract to service the seats?
It is a fact that many third-world countries purchase second-hand aircraft.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 01:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Future war scenario......Argentina votes in another nutter/Dictator....said Dictator declares war.....Britain hits refueling plane...immediate ceasefire.....war finishes....Brits take piss out of Argies for next 30 years !
Oct 01st, 2013 - 01:24 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I hope Spain are asking for payment upfront
Oct 01st, 2013 - 01:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@2 I wanted to say that! shouldn't we be on our way to the UN to “denounce” this?
Oct 01st, 2013 - 01:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@3 Like argieland provides “security” for Uruguay? Refusing to dredge the Martin Garcia channel so that Uruguayan ports aren't “overburdened”? Objecting to Uruguayan pulp mills so they don't obscure the pollution from a certain argie town?
@7 There hasn't been a “legitimate” argie garrison on the Falkland Islands in 323 years. From the ludicrous papal bull to the “claim” based on the actions of a pirate. From the actions of another pirate to those of an unrecognised state. From the landing of a bunch of murdering rapists to the re-establishment of direct British rule. From a repudiated treaty to an illegitimate invasion and occupation. Not one.
@28 “what do the other SA countries have”. Nothing to be concerned about. The RAF currently has 222 frontline combat aircraft. All of them “modern”. Unlike SA crap. All properly serviced and maintained. Unlike SA crap. Then there's the RN. 270 “first wave” land attack cruise missiles. Then reloaded. Then there's those “boats” 7,000 miles away. Top secret plans cannot be divulged. But a “situation” can be “rectified” in around 32 minutes.
30
Oct 01st, 2013 - 01:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ooo great comment Bob...... - UK sells 72 retired Harrier jump jets for $180m to US
@34
Oct 01st, 2013 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah but not as flyable aircraft for actual use, they were used for some of their key components.
34Avoiceofthinkedover
Oct 01st, 2013 - 02:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0nothing of consequence to say, right Think?
Argentina in 1992 have under facto government, but now, all sudamerica are united. Take care with that.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 02:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -133
Oct 01st, 2013 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't think you quite understood my post @28...
Let me spell it out....not for defence or attack against the RAF...but for defence or attack against other bordering countries....
35
So...they did or didn't sell them to a third world country?
36
Except....ridicule a ridiculous comment....no charge, all part of the service...
MP....can I get paid now?
...nothing of consequence to say, right Troy?
Sounds like Argentina would have done better purchasing from Airfix, would have been cheaper too. The French will charge them through the nose for spares and they will keep breaking down like French cars of that era.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1#37 South America united? United at bitching and sniping at one another more like! Watch out they intend to gang up and hurl peanuts and bananas at us! Like a bunch of bullying cowardly kids in the playground. Please line up behind Gollum and hurl insults at the enemy, then run away quick when teacher comes out.
@37 anticolonialism
Oct 01st, 2013 - 03:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Quite clearly you have difficulty with the English language so please just don't publish basura here!
Well theres no doubt that Argentina is currently way behind Britain in terms of fighters. However, regarding the islands, Argentina will inevitably at some stage reach and exceed the *standard air defense capabilities of the islands. (certainly within 20 years)
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse -1From there on its Britain adjusting and investing (taxpayers money) in defence of the islands to match Argentinas choice of air defense budget as Argentina sees fit. An effective tax on islander paranoia, Argentina setting the level.
The point will be reached where theoretical air superiority is in Argentinas hands. Once projected air superiority (vs islands alone) is on Argentinas side (and it will eventually occur) all will recognize the futility of the situation, its illogical nature, and whos side time is really on.
At root level the islands are an inherently unstable structure, its the strong metal cord stretching 12,000 km that keeps it upright. Nature is not on the islands side. If GB cut the cord tomorrow, and Britons do talk of it, you'd in all probability be invaded. Or at the very least soon contract in population to the point where its just not practical. Its an artificial and dependent structure.
Argentina naturally grows and expands and advances at an exponential rate way beyond the islands, that is the country's default position.
Be smart, you're living on the 2nd most sparsely populated lands in the world and time is not on the islanders (or Britains) side for this one. Why remain an isolated pariah state for 40 or 50 years and then leave your kids to negotiate from a much weaker position.
(having also damaged Britains future markets and reputation and strategic interests in S.America along the way).
@41
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Everything you just said is non sense and this one line explains why; “If GB cut the cord tomorrow, and Britons do talk of it,” There is virtually no talk of doing any of that in Britain and when it is mentioned it is usually confined to a small number of Lefties like Tony Benn or George Galloway., no British Government would abandon their people and the islands as it would be political suicide.
You know nothing of British affairs and the islands.
You also forget that Argentine had Air superiority in 1982 and still lost.
120+ High subsonic and Supersonic Fighter and bomber aircraft against 30 Low Sub-sonic Harries, No harriers lost in air to air combat and most casualties were the result of pilot error. The Argies on the other hand had nearly their entire air force destroyed or crippled beyond repair, a fact that is still evident today.
Argentine never could challenge Britain Militarily, Economically or politically and it never will. You are on a long list of Nations that Britain has thrown into the dirt when it comes to war.
@37
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“...all sudamerica are united.” Can I assume you mean South America? If so - in what way are they all united? 'You' aren't even united within the miniscule demographics of this obscure website.
Venezuela & Columbia have approached armed confrontation in recent times. Columbia & Nicaragua are arguing about territory, we all know how Paraguay feels about Venezuela. Brazil & Uruguay are exasperated with Argentina ( I'm sure you will recall Dilma's truncated visit to her southern neighbour a few months ago and the Uruguayan leaders' characterisation of CFK that caused mass chortling across the continent ). Chileans find Bolivians hysterical and are perennially suspicious of Argentina. Need I go on?
@39
Off topic I know but I have to ask: which French cars? The Peugeot 504 was legendary for it's reliability and toughness in East Africa.
@41 I think the tendency is opposite the technology gap is ever increasing... Those Typhoones the UK has in the islands are the last manned aircraft that are going to be manufactured, as the next ones will be all like sitting down to play a PC air fighter simulater... 3 world nations are barely coping to keep up to date in the advances…While big companies like Boeing, BAE, etc are getting ever bigger. It just takes massive amounts of money in research and development to be in the game. And the Chinese themselves are having to hack and hack in order to copy more or less what the western powers have….
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The biggest danger for UK and the west is within itself, and that is a completely different issue… But the technology gap WILL INCREASE
Your comments may have held some validity pre 1982, post 1982, they are far removed from the reality. There will be no change in the MAJORITY of public opinion in the UK for at least three generation, if evers. Those will be the generation of the men who fought there, the generation of the children of the men who died there and the generation of their children.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse +1That makes the best part of a century, taking us to around 21o0, by then in all probability, the islanders will have achieved independence and invested their oil revenue in securing their island, still supported by the UK and the UN priciple of Self Determination.
Good point there sir, especially about the Chinese, you wouldn't believe the amount of technology the Chinese have ripped of the Russians as well, apparently its driven them mad.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@44
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:33 pm - Link - Report abuse -1You are so naive. The west will be destroyed not with technology, but with terrorism.
@47
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Tobias, your nation will be destroyed by self-indulgence long before the west is destroyed by anything.
@47
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Still here coward?
@48
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are using hyperbole to deflect from the fact Europe and the USA will never be left alone by terrorists until they are subjugated or destroyed. I'm not saying anything you don't know already.
@47 Terrorism is way to overrated in itself. The prime victims of terrorism are the Muslims in the Middle East themselves and this is no coincidence as Terrorists groups are looking for gaining power in precisely those constituencies...But Political correctness and multiculturalism that the west is suffering plus decreasing birth rates of the natives will eventually make a gap for Muslim extremism (not terrorism) to serve itself in the decades ahead of us
Oct 01st, 2013 - 04:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Toby, The last time you wrote the same bull crap I asked you how Terrorists could destroy a nation. You never replied.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:02 pm - Link - Report abuse +1How do you see that playing out and bringing down THE most powerful nations in the world?
An outline would suffice.
I'm beginning to think the psych nurse leave her computer unattended about this time everyday so you hop on.
Your meds are definitely off
@50
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'M using hyperbole?????!!!!!!
Hyperbole is YOUR stock in trade!!!!
Just like Argentina. AMIA? Kenya last week? Not exactly denizens of what you would call the decadent West
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Tobias
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:23 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You seem to conveniently forget that the British have been being attacked by Irish terrorists since the 1970's.
We didn't crumble, we didn't run. We didn't set up 'truth' commissions, we stood firm.
And now there is peace in Ireland for the most part. There are still a few extremist nutters, but there always are.
As for 'muslim' terrorists, you underestimate the determination of FREE people to live their lives the way they want, and not give in to this small number of extremists who use 'religion' as an excuse to inflict violence (the problems in Northern Ireland were all to do with religion too).
But we will never give in to terrorists like Argentina has. We will stand firm and strong.
Now run along to Timmy's eh, and get yourself a coffee. Grown ups are talking here.
@41
Oct 01st, 2013 - 05:56 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Everything you have said in that very long sermon tells me just how far behind you are. The UK has been waging war for a very very long time and winning. While Argentina are buying these ancient aircraft, we are developing unmanned drones with sophisticated weaponry you can only dream of.
Put that aside, GCHQ is likely to become the worlds most advanced centre of cyber offensive technology. How funny would it be on the Eve of the next war with Argentina, we switch off their power grid, disable their satellites or shut down their internet.
Keep thinking small Argies, that suits us just fine.
@56 Well cyber war is that is relatevely very cheap, not like investing in conventional forces and armament ...So that’s a good alternative exactly for countries like Argentina to turn to as the technology gap increases. They are obliged to
Oct 01st, 2013 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The problem is it’s relatively easy to launch attacks... But it’s very difficult to defend countries assets from cyber war. This is true for the US, Israel, Argentina, Brazil, China, UK, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia etc… It is something very dangerous and its imperative that some sort of rules or pre consensus is reached amongst the big players in the world about its use.
Now if the Argentinians were to buy old Sea Kings with the little pingy things, then I would be more concerned - but that would still be a tactical rather than a strategic matter.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 06:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0......
Good discussion generated by Vestige @ #41
Well lets hope the terrorists accidently bomb Toby's house in CANADA
Oct 01st, 2013 - 06:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0One would have to conceive the thought that Argentina harbours thought of re-conquering the Falklands,
Oct 01st, 2013 - 07:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +1This will be their aim as long as they harbour nutters, dictators, and power hungry people looking for that all allusive victory,
But in reality one thinks they are not stupid, their aim may well turn out to be occupation of a small piece of the islands, a symbol [if you like]
Something to humiliate the British, and give them power status among other South America states, to illustrate [we can if we try]
As we all know that have zero chance of re-invading,
To save future face, one could expect some sort of attack, no matter how minor,
We would think the British would be aware of this,
[would it ever succeed, doubtful, but possible.]
Just a thought..
.
Guys, I really don't think that Toby lives in Canada.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 07:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Alex VARGAS (Pirat Hunter) does, but looking at his FB site, he is even too stupid to be Toby.
Toby seems to know very little about Canada and life here. His only reference to Canada is the Queen, or spectacular tragedies.
His use of English/ N. American slang is hopeless.
@55
Oct 01st, 2013 - 08:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How have Argentines “given” in to terrorists? Illuminate me please. Did we cease going out at nigh altogether, to cower and quiver in our homes? Did the Jewish Argentines sheepisly avoid rebuilding their community center? Do we avoid crowded places today ? Did we take our revenge out on the good muslims in Argentina, or on muslim children in their countries (like the Americans and British did after their attacks?)
You talk out of your un-callipygian ass.
#41
Oct 01st, 2013 - 08:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Argentina naturally grows and expands and advances at an exponential rate way beyond the islands, that is the country's default position.
Do you mean territorially ?
Argentina will exceed the air defence capabilities of the islands in 20 years. Explain how this will happen. You know of ALL future developments in ground to air missile technology ?
The Islands COULD be independent long before your 20 years.
Then it would be a case of aggression against a sovereign country.
Your country could expect sanctions from the UN or armed intervention on the Argentinian mainland not by troops but by other nasties.
So your preferred solution is to hand over the islands and population to the tender mercies of Argentina ? We have seen how this has worked in the past !
#60
Just possible BUT I presume our armed forces would remove them forcibly. That is what they are there for !
@62 You are right, the Argentines have not given in to Terrorists as LEPRecon says... But CFK has. And got nothing out of it. She suffered an Iranian humiliation and gained nothing from it.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And now she is begging Obama on Twitter to list the AMIA case when The US-Iran reengage each other for the nuclear program....
GUYS, GUYS!
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0These things only have a range of 500 miles.
Just enough to get them to the Falklands AND GET SHOT DOWN!
Excellent target drones for the “press and forget” missiles on the Typhoons and no need to worry about a Martin Baker contract, the whole things will be destroyed.
That is, if TMBOA dares to send them.
I think all they will be used for will be to taunt the radar screen around the Falklands; they have absolutely no merit in a modern air force. But there again the argies have no merit anyway.
Don’t ya just luv them! The Dark Country: the laughs go on and on.
Ah! the RG version of knock, knock ginger.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Better be careful though, they could wind up getting their ears boxed by the RAF. Not to mention the rest of them, the bits they can find that is.
Clyde. No - as a country, in all other aspects, other than territory.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 10:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Population, economy, infrastructure, technology, history, culture you name it.
All air defense technology - nope... but I do know that air defense and attack move hand in hand. Otherwise only one of them would be a category.
Its a question of relative budgets and national growth.
(20 million pop. in the 60's - 40 million today) (50 years - double in population)
(100 billion gdp in the 90's. 400 billion today) (30 years - 4 x gdp)
(gdp growth > pop growth)
On this alone - a point likely will be hit where Argentina's air force will grow beyond what the islands alone can in theory cope with.
(consider that in the 60's the islands were disputed by Argentina, as they are today, huge national growth since then in Argentina, little population change in islands, defense - grudge still alive, the projection is reasoned )
Beyond that point, quickly or slowly, relative power only grows in Argentina's favor.
Hypothetical wars. None proposed by me. I dont foresee any.I didn't write of any. I do foresee a point where negotiation is scratched off Argentinas list though. Thats strategically not a good thing - despite what Im probably about to hear. Argentina can and will wait, that much we know.
Its in the islanders best interests to get in before this tipping point.
Nothing to do with my preference. Think it out.
Everyone ignores the fact that this aircraft is being bought for the Argentine military. For 6 months of its history (8 months if you count 1830s) the Argentine military was used to attack the Falklands. For most of the remainder of the time it was used to attack Argentine civilians and indigenous South Americans armed with relatively primitive weapons. It strikes me as a good purchase more than able to carry out the most likely military missions that a future argentine government might need it for - oppressing its own people and carrying out genocide missions against the legitimate owners of the country.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 10:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0only argentine trolls would see the purchase of relics as a coup, a little food for thought before they orgasm to death.
Oct 01st, 2013 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ever wondered what was also going on around the world at the time of Mirage F1s first flight, Lets find out!!!
Mr Ed final episode and star treks first
average UK house price 4000
halfway point in the Vietnam war
Harold Wilson was PM & L.Johnson was Pres.
martin luther king and ghandi were still alive
black and white movies were still the norm
007 was still being played by Sean connery
“The Beatles” were more popular than jesus
and of course England host and wins THE WORLD CUP!
Arg trolls still think you've got a bargain?? well played spain,
Just like The Belgrano......hook line and sinker!
68)What a pack of lies!! Argentina for half a century was at civil war ever since it became independent…And what about the wars with Brazil (3 years) and the Triple alliance war (6 years)??
Oct 01st, 2013 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I only logged in to log out. .You guys kill me. LOL
Oct 01st, 2013 - 11:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 052 yankeeboy “How do you see that playing out and bringing down THE most powerful nations in the world?
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 04:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Easy.
First, put British forces in charge of your security.
Second, supplied a few rebels with wire cutters.
”Generals forced out after deadly Afghanistan base attack at Camp Bastion ”
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57605412/generals-forced-out-after-deadly-afghanistan-base-attack-at-camp-bastion-last-year/
Oh goody; some new target practise for the RAF tornados
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 05:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0Poor Marcos.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 05:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Quick divert the thread. Divert the thread.
Who knows you may even get paid this time.
Who knows what future air warfare will look like. In terms of cost it may favour the Falkland Islanders or it may favour Argentina, who knows. What is certain is that it will take a lot longer than 20 years for Argentina to catch up with UK military technology and then effectively deploy such assets.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 08:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0As for Spanish military aid to a known enemy of the UK - watch this space.
Be serious
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 09:49 am - Link - Report abuse +1Agreed.
The only way for Argentina to catch up to the UK militarily would be to buy brand new weapons and equipment off the shelf. They don't have the capacity to develop their own.
The only way to do this (because we all know that military hardware is expensive) is to spend billions of US$ on equipment AND training your military personnel to use and MAINTAIN it.
We all know that Argetnina's politicians would rather stuff those lovely dollars in their overseas bank accounts rather than spend it on Argentina, and they have a history of not looking after the equipment they already have, so I think this 30-40 year gap will continue.
Argentina would have to really change the way it is managed in order to become a successful country, but there isn't the will for them to do this.
As I have said before, Argentina is just as entitled to purchase military aircraft as any other sovereign country. The aircraft purchased are not top of the range but are still capable machines in the right hands.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 10:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Provided they are not used to “threaten” the Falklands by making “mock attacks” then the UK should have no problems with them.
'... their aim may well turn out to be occupation of a small piece of the islands, a symbol. Something to humiliate the British, and give them power status among other South America states. ... To save future face, one could expect some sort of attack, no matter how minor.'
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 10:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0Briton #60
My guess is that there would be incursions on a variety of island-groups, like the SSIs and South Georgia and the South Orkneys; each one attempted, not by the Argentinian military per se, but by 'scientists' who just happen to be serving armed forces (like is presently the case in the Antarctic Peninsular).
This follows the old track of Argentinian scrap metal groups landing at Grytviken in 1982, followed by a military group when they were not repulsed.
This spreads the incursions over areas too great for the UK to actively repulse, and allows Argentina to claim that they are simply indulging in scientific research - allowed under the Antarctic Treaty protocols.
Thus it enters the interminable arena of UN debate and 'resolutions'.
This progressively pressures the Falklands.
The UK may well find themselves called upon to repulse WITH FORCE supposed scientists in distant island groups.
Is this the deposit:
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 11:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2440020/Pimp-forced-90-transsexuals-Paris-prostitution-using-threat-black-magic-arrested-boarded-flight-Argentina.html
78 GeoffWard2
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 12:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well something would have to be done to cleanse the islands of this vermin, so why not a bit of actual in-theatre target practice?
Who knows, if the Brits are careful on their approach they may get a round off before the “glorious and victorious” argie army manage to run away!
How can anybody with half-a-brain consider that even if The Dark Country have 40 years to “prepare” they will ever be able to defeat the British forces?
Their “preparation” consists of waving flags and shouting things in the Plaza de Mayo, and then denying it when they are defeated. It was ever thus.
@80 - ChrisR
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 01:31 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Agreed. Argentina are still at least 30-40 years behind the UK from a military point of view.
Even if they started improving now, the UK is still also improving, so the gap won't close.
The ONLY way to close the gap completely would be to throw billions of US$ at their military for decades to come. Not only in procurement, but in training too. Only their economy couldn't cope with that, especially as the 'great unwashed' that keeps the government in power constantly demand something for nothing, and the government constantly stuffs their various off-shore bank accounts with money.
However, GeoffWard does have a point regarding the 'so-called' scientists. They will attempt to 'put' them on British soil for 'research' purposes only, and if removed will cry about how they're being bullied.
Personally, any Argentine citizen on any South Atlantic British Territory WITHOUT the proper permits should be ejected.
No other country in the world would just allow military personnel from foreign powers (especially belligent foreign powers) to illegally occupy their territory - for ANY purpose.
So we should remove them. The whole world is sick and tired of Argentina's selfish, childish actions anyway. No one will listen. No one will care.
They Are called “MALVINAS” and not Falklands. The purchase in not closed yet.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 04:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Regards from Argentina
@82
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +1flaps, you can call those islands in the South Atlantic anything you want, but internationally they are known as the FALKLANDS. Pray tell me what purchase you are referring to ?
Regards from UK
IAI Kfir C.10 offered much higher capacities.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Regards
83 golfcronie
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 06:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sounds like they are going to renege on this deal as well!
What a surprise that would be.
#84
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Yes, but still a dated design. Not in the Typhoon class.
The USA would have a veto on it's sale as it uses a lot of American technology, including the engine.
.acig.org/artman/publish/article_12.shtml
PS. The islands are called the FALKLANDS......ask any of the people who live there
You think IAI offers components c.10 vetoed by USA? ;)
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 08:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Regards
#87
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 09:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Point me to the article that says that IAI are offering their mothballed KFIRS to Argentina and I could give a more reasoned reply.
- The J79 was released by the U.S. to our country in 1996.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -1- Engines carry kfir have been assembled in Israel by Lahav with many parts and components manufactured there.
- U.S. General Electric still produces replacement parts for the J79.
- Every time Israel offered the Kfir to Argentina, never an objection came from the U.S..
Regards
87 flaps
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 09:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0IAI Kfir C.10 : it's dead, no longer produced: oh, so is your “new” junk.
Your “air force” must almost have the same motto as the USSR did when they changed dictators. “Here's the new boss, same as the old boss”.
So your motto is “Here's the new junk, same as the old junk”, don't you think?
Ha, ha, ha.
In 1982 with junk and accidentally go to war, Argentina gave a beating they'll never forget one of the greatest naval powers of the world.
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 09:40 pm - Link - Report abuse -1However, Argentina does not intend to take the Falkland Islands by force, quite the opposite. The only thing that is Cameron used to handle problems in Britain.
Regards
Sounds like “flaps” is dreaming...
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Much more expensive for Argentina to switch from old Mirages to old KFIRs - pilot Trainers and training program$ needed.
Repair equipment and tools needed, training of mechanics, parts inventory etc etc.
Oh, scratch that - they never maintained the Mirages!
@91 flaps,
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 01) l'm sure we could rustle up a few Gladiator bi-planes for you, if you paid us well enough. US Dollars, or Pounds only please.(none of that mickey-mouse money that Argentina uses!).
2) The country is called the Falklands btw. Just thought that you would like to know this fact. (malv-whatever only exists in your imagination).
Errr, you do know that its 2013 & not 1813, don't you?
Hope this helps.
“IAI Kfir C.10 offered much higher capacities.”
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Good luck with this target drone against the Typhoon, T45 destroyers and if they are lucky to actually fly over the Falklands our ground to air, 4 mile range missiles that are a constant worry to Argentina even when the expired rounds are fired off.
If you are unlucky, a British sub will be in the South Atlantic, and the Kfir c10's return (if any are lucky enough to escape) to their airbase might meet an airfield already visited by our friendly Tomahawks.
@91 Flappy
Oct 02nd, 2013 - 11:59 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You clearly don't no much about history, it was British who were the underdogs of the war, not Argentine, you Argies had some of the most modern and up to date equipment during the conflict. And yet the RAF and Fleet Air Arm with 30 slow poorly armed and highly dangerous to fly Harriers absolutely trashed the 120 or so Supersonic and High Subsonic aircraft of Argentine without losing a single plane in air to air combat.
The attacks on Royal Navy ships were nothing more then Flukes.
Care to disprove?
I think “flaps” is just a licenced 'variant' of the obsolete “TIT”
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 03:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0#88
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0You still did not answer my question......CURRENTLY where is your evidence that Israel is offering to sell it's redundant Kfirs to ARGENTINA?
I subscribe to Flight Global Defence, Air Forces Monthly and Janes Defence review and cannot remember seeing anything about this.
Of course, I could have missed it so can you direct me to any article confirming a request to purchase these aircraft by the Argentinian government.
I could take you to task over the naval battles in Falklands waters but it would take hundreds of pages to cover it.
However, our naval staff knew they were going to lose ships in this situation. Casualties had to be taken to save the carriers , without which the war would have been lost.
Read the books on the subject. Yes the RN suffered but at the end of the day they were still there and fighting. Your navy sailed off scared shitless at the thought of meeting up with them.
Do you think Nelson would have crashed through the Armada if he was scared of losing a ship or two?
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 01:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Tactics is different from strategy, and I agree with Clyde.
@ 91 flaps
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 01:28 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I think we all understand that you have to “puff-up” your country’s lamentable performance in the 1982 war.
MUCH greater numbers of combatants, comparable navy equipment, less than 500 miles from your coast, all the public behind the Junta, what more could you have had in your favour?
WE, on the other hand, steamed 8,000 miles at “the drop of a hat” and within a very short time you lot gave up! Surrendered! Cried it wasn’t us, it was the Junta!
Next time, and I do think that Argentina has a death wish, irrespective of the bunch of Peronista scum are in charge, to “retake” the Falklands (there are NO Malvinas you twat) and just what will happen then?
Not too sure of exactly WHAT will take place other than I am SURE of the result: the Brits will kick your arses off the islands.
I REALLY, REALLY, hope that our forces are then allowed to teach the cunts who voted for the scum you call a government a lesson and bomb your arses back to the stone age. No power stations, no railway, no main road transport system, no functioning airfields commercial or military for a 500 mile radius from BsAs. This limited response should not result in the deaths of women or children unless the bunch of cunts in charge use them as a shield to prevent us from destroying such targets.
But that is just me being over lenient. There are some who think we should annihilate the Peronistas to put a stop to this nonsense forever and stuff the deaths of women and children. But that would only bring us down to the argie level and there is no way we should ever do that, even though we could.
@95 Connor J, you clearly don't have much grasp either, Argentina wasn't fighting UK alone but UK supported and supplied by the US. The much vaunted UK air force was supplied with state of the art AIM 9Sidewinders withouth them they weren't able to shoot down a flying fuck (not to say fuel, sat intel, all provided by your cousins that saved your asses once again).
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 02:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@100
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So what?
The point is Argentina lost, as Argentina deserved to lose. And if we are to believe the diaries of Jim Renschler, who participated in the attempted Haig peace mission, most of the Argentine military knew full well they would lose, yet the only thing that stopped Galtieri withdrawing from the islands, was the howling mob outside the Casa Rosada.
http://09b37156ee7ea2a93a5e-6db7349bced3b64202e14ff100a12173.r35.cf1.rackcdn.com/Arcdocs/Rentschler.pdf
#100
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina was not fighting the UK alone,
@101 HansNiesund
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks for providing that information. It's a perspective I haven't encountered before and is fascinating. Rentschler writes very well, the most telling detail being the inability to keep the Casa Rasada's toilets clean.
103 Casper
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 05:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks for that little gem which is fully understandable as they would all be shitting themselves in case the UK bombed the place.
LOL's
@104 ChrisR
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cheers. I was simply astounded that these testosterone-fuelled fools were going to go to war with one of the most powerful, professional and highly motivated military forces in the world and they couldn't even clean the bloody toilets in their own presidential palace - the same dunnies they offered to the delegation that were trying to prevent them from making a terrible mistake. What were they thinking????!!!! Madness!
I also enjoyed the thumbnail descriptions of the insufferably arrogant Mitterand and the description of Reagan cowering before a withering Thatcher broadside. I love this stuff!
@100
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 07:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You don't seem to no much either, the UK at the time was already using the Sidewinder. The MOD put in a request for more as they feared the UK didn't have enough for the war. In reality very few were used.
Fuel? Intelligence? All overhead satellite imagery was mostly useless as a result of the heavy overcasting during the war. Saved our arses again? I think you should read up on Britain during the war to understand that that claim is nonsense.
The US did virtually nothing and if anything was of a problem then a help.
The UK had little or no support while the Argies held all the cards received tonnes of equipment and held the home front advantage and still lost to an inferior force.
Oh and BTW its one “n” in ConorJ not two.
@106 Conor J
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually the UK had excellent intelligence on Argentine naval positions courtesy of the Norwegians. Argentina had supplied information on the locations of all of their vessels to the Soviets, the Norwegians intercepted the signals and passed them on the U.K.
Another story I love...
@103
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 08:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Juicy extracts for those who can't be bothered downloading the whole thing :
'In the meantime, Gompert, Dean Fischer, Scott Gudgeon, and I have found the
perfect symbol for this country: the putrid toilet on the ground floor of the Casa
Rosada. Yeah, a number of us have to cop micturitions, and though reluctant to
help us, the security creeps inside the Casa – heavily into leather, these guys, I
love their polished boots, shoulder straps, and riding crops – lead us around a
pretty palm-shaded interior courtyard, off the edges of which there is a corner
with two urinals. Some corner! – it is inundated with pipi, huge puddles of it
thoroughly soaking the pile of shredded newspaper which supposedly helps one
service the nearby squatty-roo. Doesn’t this sum up the regime distinctive flavor? '
'This may be the lowest point of the whole project, dramatized by the FLASH
from B.A. which puts the Embassy's crypto files and equipment “two hours from
burn” and by the clandestine reporting we have received from inside the S.I.A.,
Argentina's goon-ridden security service which has already targeted a number of
Embassy personnel who are, in that entity's quaint parlance, “to be disappeared” '
106 Conor J
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The UK had little or no support while the Argies held all the cards received tonnes of equipment and held the home front advantage and still lost to an inferior force.”
The Brits were a SMALLER FORCE they were NEVER an inferior force.
I am sure you inadvertently missed this point, but it is important.
@107/109
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I wasn't already aware of that story, I guess its another reason why I love our Norwegian Cousins.
@109
When I say inferior I mean it as a generic term to describe our forces short comings and disadvantaged position in terms of;
-Total Manpower avaliable
-Fighter Aircraft avaliable
-Quality of said aircraft
-The Larger Argie Air force
-The Larger Argie Army/Marine numbers on the islands
-The logistical nightmare of an 8,000 mile long supply line
-Lack of quality Ground to Air weaponry
-The Argies on their own front door
-The Argies having equipment that was pretty much equal to ours and in a number of cases superior
-Poor quality of ship to ship communication
-Lack of CIWS
-Lack of a totally effective CAP as a result of Aircraft numbers
-Lack of Airbourne transports
-The Argies receiving enormous amounts of technical information and weaponry
-The Argies having a supply line of less than 400 Miles
-The enormous area of operations that would stretch the small British force to the limit
-Launching an invasion and successful amphibious assault in the middle of Winter
in the South Atlantic.
The list goes on as to how disadvantaged our boys were, remember what the US Navy said about getting the islands back? A “Military Impossibility” but what won the day was British Resilience, Bravery, Training and Professionalism which to this day is second to none. That is were our boys were the superior force.
These traits have always allowed us to win against more powerful enemies in the past.
@109
Oct 03rd, 2013 - 09:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't tell the Argies but BAE Systems are working on making a smaller prototype of the Railgun to fit to destroyers and the Artillery. Imagine a gun that is powered by electricity and sends a projectile at 5,400 mph. Does not need explosives as anything it hits at that speed ceases to exist. Just Google Railgun.
@111 Ohh no does that mean to say we are all going to die??
Oct 04th, 2013 - 02:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0what is wrong with so many of you jingoistic posters!
Oct 04th, 2013 - 07:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Have any of you killed anyone in battle?
Armchair warriors are the biggest danger.
Put the dispute between UK, Spain and Argentina into perspective.
Decent Argentinians were killed fighting over a rock in the south atlantic because of a name. Do we really want the same to happen over another rock?
I'm British, proud of it, and I don't see the merits in Spain's claim or Argentina's but then I don't see the claim of the UK either. Fighting over bits of rock, and in the case of the UK and the South Atlantic, a bit of rock so far away that it makes so much sense for someone to shove the Argentian politicians in a room with UK politicians to come up with a decent accommodation. The logistics for the UK are a nightmare. Its about oil and gas, and its easy enough to consider the inhabitants as British if they wish, but have joint status on 'ownership' of any rock, allowing cooperation not the pathetic wrangling on all sides, and the same goes for Gib. Its people that matter, not nationalist names on a bit of rock anywhere.
@112 CabezaDura,
Oct 04th, 2013 - 08:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0No, not all of you.
Just some of you, especially if you try to invade British territory again.
Your choice & your move.
So many lols! British, you are funnier than a sitcom sometimes!
Oct 04th, 2013 - 08:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Armchair warriors.
Oct 04th, 2013 - 09:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0I lost mates in the Falklands War, and most of you don't seem as though you have ever seen a dead mouse let alone a dead human being with their gut ripped apart by a shell.
Don't be too quick to fuel up my piece is bigger than yours, as it always ends in tears.
Wannabe generals, stick to computer games, where the blood isn't real and nor are the casualties.
We fought in the Falklands because we are a professional fighting force and go where we are directed to go, not based on whether we believe its right or not.
I've got some really decent Argentinian ex oppos now and a more hospitable people I've yet to find, even though I was one shooting at them in past.
It is a crazy situation, when the only thing that really counts is the people, and yes the people who live on the Falklands/Malvinas, and to me the name of the rock means jack sh*t.
How much money saved if we reached a joint sovereignty arrangement, how much safer place it would be because some of you write like its a picnic spot, well it bl**dy well isn't. Its an isolated area where logistics is a nightmare and will continue to be so.
The only real solution is talk talk talk, but not about who has the biggest gun. This idea that South America is growing and Brit power is waning, is no different because its just as purile and still heads towards some poor btd or other finding themselves with their guts hanging out for a bit of rock.
Self determination yes, but what an island is called, let it be called Falkvinas, Malfalk, who cares, it is a bit of rock like all the other bits of rock that have seen countless wars by politicians in the name of people that then get caught up in believing them when its usually a smokescreen for economic woes, which is what the Falkland War was for BOTH SIDES, with decent people killed on both sides for what?
@116
Oct 04th, 2013 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I too have fought for my country. There are principals we have to adhere to in all walks of life. The UK DID NOT start the FALKLANDS war, Argentina did, Why does Argentina want the FALKLANDS? I have asked this question many times on here and have yet to have an answer, perhaps you could come up with one. The UK believed it right to send a task force to the FALKLANDS because the UK had the backing of the UK population( Did you not see the cheering crowds wishing the task force well?)
@116 oliver
Oct 04th, 2013 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As golfcronie said, Argentina started the Falklands War. They threatened to murder the Falkland Islanders, and tried to steal their homes.
Assuming you are actually an ex-British service person (which I am not convinced by your comments), you are p!ssing on the memories of your 'mates' who lost their lives during the conflict.
They weren't fighting for Queen and Country or the economy, they were fighting for freedom. They weren't fighting for the politicians, they were fighting for the people of the Falklands, so those people could live their lives as THEY wish to do, and not be at the mercy of a fascist regime, which was already responsible for murdering nearly 30,000 Argentine citizens.
British servicemen sacrificed their lives for freedom, yet you sully their memory. You should be ashamed of yourself.
If Argentina has a legitimate grievance then it should take it to the International Court of Justice, and present their case. They didn't, they tried to illegally seize it. They still try to illegally seize it.
There cannot be joint sovereignty unless the people of the Falkland Islands wish it. They don't. And who the hell are you to tell them they MUST?
Being a ex-service person, you would, I assume understand the principle of self-determination, and fully support it.
However, your views are remarkably FASCIST, in my opinion, as someone who is an ex-service person myself.
Argentina started the war. The UK didn't intend for there to be a war.
Argentina threatened to ethnically cleanse the islands of it's people and implant it's own.
Argentina broke international law by this act. Argentina that IGNORED the Laws of Armed Conflict numerous times.
Argentina that is the ONLY aggressor in this case. Only last year Argentina's defence minister publicly stated that the ONLY thing stopping Argentina from a repeat of 1982 was the British Forces stationed there.
It is you that sounds like an 'armchair' general to me or more likely a WALT.
Shame on you
Golf. I don't dispute who started it at all, so why introduce it as if I didn't know. We all know how it started and it was way out of line. A very mistake, made by a politicians trying to get themselves out of a hole.
Oct 04th, 2013 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And we don't have politicians here doing the same?
Come on, I lost mates and wear the badge with pride, and never would I detract from the professional guys we have, sent to do a job, and do it, without question.
But the point is not about the professionalism of our troops or even who started it, its about finishing it, and to use a phrase a lasting peace.
You must have both missed the point about the need for self determination, which I wholeheartedly support? So you obviously missed the most crucial point.
But to me it is the self determination that is important, rather than whose name is on the rock.
I remember T Mason 2nd para and the great job they did too, but its not about who gave who a hiding, and where the Argentinians forces didn't really get a choice in the matter, any more than we did, so don't treat them like scum, as they are no different to you or I. They died the same, with the same colour blood. A futile waste.
So why you are commenting on self determination when I've already posted that? We agree, i just don't like sabre rattling that does nothing to solve a problem that would give the very peace for the islanders we should be concerned about.
119 oliver
Oct 04th, 2013 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You seem very confused considering you are supposed to have fought somewhere in the British Forces. I tell you frankly I have never seen this sort of bleeding heart post anywhere. We have many ex-servicemen who post on here and they are proud to have fought for the cause.
Argentines are very nice people but they are not representative of the argies who are mainly Peronistas and total about 15M of the 40M in Argentina. Regrettably they hold the 25M Argentines to ransom and are systematically bleeding the country dry with their corruption.
Argies are troublemakers and are paid by the cretinous government of Argentina to create as much bad feeling as they can among their own people towards the British over the Falklands. They are supported by the “Malvinas veterans” who have just been awarded a medal FOR LOSING THE WAR.
You are welcome to think that the Falklands war was for the economic woes for both sides if you wish, though I think many on here see it very differently. It really was the Junta out to exterminate the people of the Falklands for their own ends. We were lucky to have Margaret Thatcher to literally SAVE these people from death. I don’t give a toss whether this got her re-elected or not as I always voted for her anyway, but left to you these mainly British people would be DEAD.
If you don’t like thoughts like these I suggest you don’t read them, but weeping over your beer whilst defending the actions of cowardly argie thugs in uniform cuts no ice on here, of that I am sure.
@119 oliver
Oct 04th, 2013 - 05:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Some of the Argentine troops behaved deplorably towards the CIVILIAN population of the Falklands. Mock executions, deportations, holding them prisoner with NO access to food or water.
Added to this is the FACT that Argentine troops flew the white flag, then opened fire KILLING the British soldiers who came forwards to discuss a truce.
Then there is the FACT that Argentine troops laid land mines randomly without marking their locations - a war crime - which you would know IF you really are an ex-service person, and the FACT that Argentine troops booby-trapped the children's desks in the school with HIGH explosives once they realised they were losing.
Whilst I agree that not all Argentine troops were 'scum' as you put it, it doesn't negate that these people committed WAR CRIMES.
You believe that the only way for peace is for the Falklands Islanders to give away their freedom and their homes. You P!SS on the very memories of the men who fought and died for their freedom.
If Argentina has a grievance, then they should take it up with the ONLY international body in the world set up to deal with it, the International Court of Justice.
Yet Argentina refuses to go. You have to wonder why IF their claim is so solid and just, don't you?
Well, even a cursory glance at the actual evidence shows that Argentina has NEVER held sovereignty of the Islands. All they want to do is expand their territory which is AGAINST international law.
The people of the Falklands will be proudly be defended by the British Armed Forces until the day that the people who live there no longer wish it.
Both the British government and the Falkland Islands Government have agreed to sit down with Argentina and talk. But Argentina doesn't want to talk. It doesn't want to negotiate. It just wants to steal someone else's property.
The Falklands will remain free of the fascist jackboot whilst any British soldier, sailor or airman still draws breath.
119oliver
Oct 04th, 2013 - 06:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Golf. I don't dispute who started it at all, so why introduce it as if I didn't know. We all know how it started and it was way out of line. A very mistake, made by a politicians trying to get themselves out of a hole.
And we don't have politicians here doing the same?
Come on, I lost mates and wear the badge with pride, and never would I detract from the professional guys we have, sent to do a job, and do it, without question.”
“Oliver”
Who are you trying to kid??
You jumbled sentence structure and hackneyed phrases scream “faker!”
“Our professional GUYS” - oh please, I cannot think of any Brit Serviceman who would say that. You are using “American English” and poorly at that.
@122
Oct 04th, 2013 - 07:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you know not one person has actually answered the question. ” WHY DOES ARGENTINA WANT THE FALKLAND ISLANDS?
I have to say they ( ARGIES TROLLS ) have yet to answer. I have actually been in the UK military and do know what it is like to face an enemy, and yes it is a matter of principle. I say this much at least the Argies wore uniform not like in Afganistan or Iraq where the cowards do not wear uniform. I confronted the Radfan Wolves in the early 60's and they did not wear uniform.
Oh my goodness.....everyones a bloody soldier, I might have known
Oct 04th, 2013 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0.....I had an Action Man and a Johnny Seven.....does that count?
@124
Oct 04th, 2013 - 07:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No not really
You obviously have not served in the armed forces. While you are here WHY DO YOU WANT THE FALKLANDS?
125
Oct 04th, 2013 - 08:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Obvious....how so?. Yes it is misleading the way I write.....nothing like a bit of inferring.....don't you just love the English language.
Me want the Falklands?.....a desolate group of islands in a desolate location...full of inbreds and pretend British.....do me a favour!
If I want a red post box....I'll buy one off the newly privatised not so Royal mail!
@126
Oct 04th, 2013 - 08:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Pray tell us dear fellow, just exactly is your gripe, you seem to have a down on the world, or is it you just need attention?
So now we have another RG troll. This oliver person.
Oct 04th, 2013 - 08:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Or if hes not a troll, then hes an appeaser.
The RGs love appeasers.....give them an inch & they'll take a mile.
But l think the lads have unmasked him.
What are you oliver?
An RG or an appeaser?
Or perhaps a traitor.
127
Oct 04th, 2013 - 08:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who doesn't need attention....its part of being a human being...
What gripe I just exist to give you and other posters meaning....
....imagine if everyone agreed
.....how could you exist without the likes of me...
128
It's a bit Twisted to say Oliver must be an appeaser, a traitor or a Fagan, sorry Faker or a troll because he doesn't agree with your views......who said your views are correct...just because a handful of posters support them.
124 think
Oct 04th, 2013 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“.....I had an Action Man and a Johnny Seven.....does that count?”
No.
Fuck off.
130
Oct 04th, 2013 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Awww what's wrong....didn't you have those as a kid....
......bless you... nose stuck up against the toy shop window
.....I'm sorry....
heh heh.....did you have to google it..did you Troy ....did you....you know what I'm talking about...;-))))
131thinksvoiceover
Oct 04th, 2013 - 10:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you trivialise the sacrifices real men made to thwart the selfish actions of your people, and you continue to do so.
“.....how could you exist without the likes of me... ”
no, don't flatter yourself. You are a miserable annoyance, and Peronist pawn. You live for the attention you get from us.
A prominent American, part of Haig's team, relayed this quote,
“”You know the definition of an Argentine, Prime Minister? – it's an Italian speaking Spanish who likes to pretend he's English”),”
You'll be chuffed to know that I thought of you when I heard it.
132
Oct 04th, 2013 - 11:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes ....but what about my bad points?
*128 for a minute there I thought you were going to ask oliver what the summer winds in Australia are called??
Oct 05th, 2013 - 01:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Funny how quickly you lot rattle the cage when somebody with sense goes against your pathetic way of thinking. losers!!
This thread has degenerated into a Trollfest now.
Oct 05th, 2013 - 02:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0signing off.
WHY DOES ARGENTINA WANT THE FALKLANDS> Any answers?????
Oct 05th, 2013 - 07:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0@129 A_Voice,
Oct 05th, 2013 - 09:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0Lets analyse your post & respond,
I DO say that oliver is an appeaser at best.
What would you call a person who wanted to give someone else's home & country away to a noisy obnoxious power who was “demanding” it?
And who has NO right to it.
To avoid further conflict, hey?
“He who surrenders freedom for security, deserves neither”- Winston Churchill, l believe.
He wants to just give away OUR lslands(the capitals are for your benefit, sr A_Voice!).
What about HIS house & country?
lts all very fine for him to be safely ensconced in the UK.
He doesn't have to put up with Argentine insults & lies.
Would he give his house & country away if a foreign, belligerent, untrustworthy power “demanded” that he do so.
lf he is British & has those views, then he is a traitor.
For my situation, which is NOT your situation,my views ARE correct & yours & oliver's are NOT. Much, more than a “handful” of posters agree with me.
Do some more research mate, or as sr Think likes to say, “lnform yourself”
@134 A(something, but NOT Aussie)Sunshine,
l asked you those questions because l believe that you are definitely NOT an Aussie. You didn't understand the slang & you couldn't correctly answer ANY of my questions.
You couldn't even name the Govenor-General!
You are trying to give the impression that average Australians support Argentina's ridiculous “claims” to British territory in the South Atlantic.
Having lived in Australia & having many Australian relatives & friends, l know that this is wishful thinking on your(& Argentina's)part.
l stand by my statements,
You are NOT an Aussie.
@136 golfcronie,
Because they're Latins & their pride is dented.
Also, they hate to lose--look at their football antics.
@129 A_Voice,
Lets analyse your post & respond,
I DO say that oliver is an appeaser at best.
What would you call a person who wanted to give someone else's home & country away to a noisy obnoxious power who was “demanding” it?
And who has NO right to it.
To avoid further conflic
@122 Troy
Oct 05th, 2013 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0You are quite right. This 'oliver' doesn't construct his sentences like a native speaker, and he does use Americanisms.
As a ex-soldier myself, I can tell you that he doesn't come across as ex-service at all - certainly not British ex-service.
He also shows an amazing lack of understanding behind what caused the Falklands War. Many trolls on here don't understand that in order to serve in Her Majesty's Armed Forces you have to understand the Laws of Armed Conflict BECAUSE using the excuse 'I was only following orders' is not a defence, indeed it is illegal to follow an illegal order - such as torturing people, or killing unarmed civilians. They also don't understand that members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces have to have an understanding of international law, UK law, and an understanding of relevant bodies and their role within those bodies; such as the UK Parliament, the EU, NATO and the UN.
This is why I don't believe that oliver is who he claims to be. He doesn't understand international law, he doesn't understand the UK armed forces, or how the UK government comes to decisions ESPECIALLY when armed conflict is being considered.
Oliver. If you are still around I suggest you look up the UN Charter. Also look up UN Security Council resolution 502 - which was a legally binding resolution demanding that Argentina remove ALL of it's military assets from the Falklands. A resolution that they ignored BREACHING international law.
The UK on the other hand tried the diplomatic route, but Argentina wouldn't even listen. So the UK invoked Article 51 of the UN charter, which is the right to self-defence.
So, in 1982, the UK acted within the constraints of international law, Argentina broke international law.
Argentina has no rights to the Falklands. The UK has no rights to the Falklands. Only the Falkland Islanders have rights to the Falklands, and they certainly aren't willing to give away their homes and freedoms to a bunch of fascists.
137
Oct 05th, 2013 - 10:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Haha Isolde....missing all the obvious “For British only” bits of my post @129....
not a response not a murmur straight over the top of you non British head...
Consider yourself....not one of the family!
.....any real Brits see them?
BTW a paraphrase of Ben Franklin not Churchill...
@139 A_Voice,
Oct 05th, 2013 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0l don't have to prove my nationality to you or anyone else, so you can surmise what you like.
l couldn't give a rat's arse.
Your puns were terrible, thats why l never commented.
Yes, l think you are right as regards who made the quotation although it sounds like the sort of thing that Winston would say.
And l must thank you for showing me how to post without losing the text, which has sometimes happened.
Although it added to the end what l cancelled or thought that l cancelled.
140...Isolde
Oct 05th, 2013 - 01:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My puns.....yes they were terrible, but would only be recognised by a Brit....including the deliberate mis-spellimg of Fagan...Fagin...just so it couldn't be googled...:-))))
My posts are littered with such trivialities...to see who responds and who doesn't...
....as I always say...the wheat from the chaff.....I like to know!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HazQlWgdzg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HazQlWgdzg
.....I wondered what was going on with the repeat post....and guessed...
“Bessie, my dear, you are ugly, and what's more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow
I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.”......is more Winston Churchill....
Hows the braddock fishing in Chubut? Do you catch them on the fly?
Oct 05th, 2013 - 03:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@140 Isolde
Oct 05th, 2013 - 04:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well said.
Did you notice @141,
”My puns.....yes they were terrible, but would only be recognised by a Brit....including the deliberate mis-spellimg of Fagan...Fagin...just so it couldn't be googled...:-))))
My posts are littered with such trivialities...to see who responds and who doesn't...
....as I always say...the wheat from the chaff.....I like to know!“
This is really all about ”ThinkVoice” telling us how clever he is and moreover, wanting our approval and recognition for it.
The Brits, etc. on MP are concerned with the issues and the arguments, whereas Snr. ThinkVoice is primarily motivated by a pathetic game of one-upmanship. That's what appeals to him most about his Troll job.
:-D
#141
Oct 05th, 2013 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is this another of your “try ons”?
I always believed that the quotation replying to Bessie Braddock was.....
“And you, Madam, are ugly. but I shall be sober in the morning”.
Am I correct ? If not can you direct me to your source...I don't use Google or Wiki.
I am still puzzled as to how we left the subject of Mirage F.I.'s.
143
Oct 05th, 2013 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0....She's not interested in you Troy.....give it up...;-))))
....I'm still waiting for my bad points...
....you are still top of the list of Brit Wannabes.....Canadian!
141
.....No
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support/the-churchill-centre/publications/chartwell-bulletin/2011/31-jan/1052-drunk-and-ugly-the-rumor-mill
.....what the hell more is left to be said about Mirages?
@144 Clyde
Oct 05th, 2013 - 06:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I am still puzzled as to how we left the subject of Mirage F.I.'s.”
yep, they're just “trolling” now.
@146
Oct 05th, 2013 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Back to the Mirage F1s.
These aircraft are more likely to replace the Mirage 3s et al that are falling apart than to present any threat to the Falkland Islands -in fact I nearly fell off my seat laughing that only 8 have refuelling capacity.
I genuinely thought Argentina was a cert to by the Pakistan/Chinese Thunderjet which has the advantage of being a new aircraft. To put things into perspective, and I realise the F1s were modernised in the 90s, Spain was recieving it's F1s in the late 70s-before the Falklands War!
I bet Argentina has no idea that Chile has F16s, the aircraft that generally was adopted in NATO as opposed to the Mirage F1.
146
Oct 05th, 2013 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ha ha let's look at the thread....I came in @28 commenting on the article on why they would need Mirages.....
You came in @36....commenting on me......Who's the Troll?
You need to look at your posts on this thread and see how many of them were just attacking other people.....yep....all but one!
Oh my goodness.....You are the Troll..;-))))
Yawn
Oct 05th, 2013 - 07:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina buys clapped out old junk to replace it's even older clapped out junk.
Oct 05th, 2013 - 08:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A_Voice of Think is so embarrassed that he desperately tries to divert the thread.
*137 you are sillier than a wet hen!! who cares what the govenor´s name is,never have been interested and never will!! Actually, if you did a study on the streets of Melbourne and asked people for the name of his lordship, I bet 99.9 percent would not know!! or care a s.......t.
Oct 06th, 2013 - 12:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0@151 fake aussie
Oct 06th, 2013 - 10:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'd bet you'd be wrong there.
You know nothing about how Australian politics and governance works, that is obvious from everything you post, and you've already been outed as a fake by real Australians on here.
One wonders why you continue to come back and humiliate yourself like this.
@143 Troy Tempest,
Oct 06th, 2013 - 10:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks Troy.
lf A_Voice is really the dreaded Think, then his English has suddenly improved.
Think talks & spells like a Scandinavian speaking & spelling English.
While A_Voice is much more fluent in English.
Are we to believe that:-
1) Think was actually pretending to be a Scandinavian.
2) Think has had a crash course in modern English.
3) They are 2 different people, or
4) Think's handlers at the Argentine Secret Service are writing his script a lot better than they used to! lol.
@151 Argentine Sunshine,
Not you again? when you're in a hole, stop digging.
l didn't ask you the Govenor's name.
You're fooling no-one.
What was the name of that wind again?
You know, the one that ALL Melbournites know.
Would you like me to tell you?
This charade has gone on long enough, don't you agree?
It may be NOW time to multiply by two (or three) the number of Typhoons in the Falklands!
Oct 06th, 2013 - 10:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Philippe
*152 once a fool always a fool.
Oct 06th, 2013 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0*153 No I don´t want to know about hot winds!! Maybe you should go on master mind or who wants to be a millionaire. You could make a fortune....
Sigh...I miss Chicureo.
Oct 06th, 2013 - 11:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0Haha Troy......
Oct 06th, 2013 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Trust a woman's intuition
Ever tried to lie to one....you realise half way through you've been rumbled....
.....and why...because they don't listen to what you say, but how you are saying it.....
Just like they are not reading what you write, but how you are writing it......
......Donner sa langue au chat
@7 Troneas - “you don't know what you are talking about. its a bit more complicated than that. and you are mixing up concepts, times, situations, etc. that have no parallel to the malvinas case. i would expand on this but i have explained it in depth before on these forums and i have a feeling this wouldn't be the last time, either.
Oct 06th, 2013 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and you are right, there weren't indigenous people in the malvinas - there was, however, a legitimate argentine garrison there.”
So it is Ok for Argentina to remove a people then inform the world it is different to the Falkland case. What a load of rubbish. In 1982 your miserable dictators had considered removing the entire population from the Falkland Islands. Then you have the nerve to suggest Britain removed a Legitimate garrison from the Islands. Well then tell me why was there a need for a garrison to be implanted by Argentina on the Islands in the first place. If you felt they belonged to Argentina. I will tell you why Troneas it is because your Country tried to establish a settlement on the islands even though you knew they were actually British and your then dictators believed Britain would not come so far and mount a recovery. You even thought the exact same thing in 1982 and again you got it totally wrong.
You are wasting your time commenting because it will not change who we are and what we have desired.
And still the FALKLANDERS are laughing up their sleeves, Mirage isn't that a trick of the light, as in the desert they thought they saw an oasis but could never reach it. Aptly named these Mirages, because they will never reach the FALKLANDS, at least in one piece.
Oct 06th, 2013 - 07:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@159 Hopefully not, because if so we will be in serious problems you and we.
Oct 07th, 2013 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@160
Oct 09th, 2013 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse +1If any of your Mirages reach the Falklands and fire one shot, they will have to take the chance that, if they are lucky enough to escape, there might not be a runway for them to return to. The refuelling aircraft would almost certainly be taken out too.
This will not happen however, as the Mirages will be required to defend BA to replace your museum pieces.
I suggest that Argentina will have the deepest problems if your Mirage pilots are stupid enough to run the gauntlet of British defences.
Not the UK.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!