MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands/Malvinas: Argentina has “no conflict hypothesis” says Defense head
Minister of Defense Agustín Rossi said Argentina has no “conflict hypothesis” regarding the Falklands/Malvinas Islands, strongly denying statements from a British newspaper which argued the UK was closely monitoring Argentina's investment in military procurement. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThat was a decision taken by the military dictatorship”. and you all backed it until you lost!
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse +1Anybody who has at least a clue on defence knows that the 33% increase in spending in defence of what nothing is speant is in no way near of what the hardware and capabilities that are need to overcome the forces in those islands, it doesnt even contemplate defensive system that can counter storm shadow missiles and tomahawks showering in from the South Atlantic and destroying the Argentine infrastructure that is the back bone of the economy in hours.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse -1The people that wrote this article haven’t got a clue of what they are talking about.
Ohh and Rossi must resign if he says and I quote “Argentina is a country which does not work with a conflict hypothesis. We are not thinking in that when we are developing the capabilities of our armed forces”
“considering the event of “a military raid” by Argentina in Port Stanley.”
Feb 27th, 2014 - 02:01 am - Link - Report abuse +1This paper is as ignorant as Castro, they have no idea after nearly 30 years that MPA exists.
“ giving Argentina the ability to attack Stanley airfield with laser guided bombs.”
If they can get there, with refuelling.
“while criticizing the UK government for its insistence in ignoring United Nations resolutions imposed over the issue of the Falklands/Malvinas Islands.”
Says Castro who has never read what is in the resolutions.
“ solely as an excuse to continue maintaining a gigantic base in”
With 4 fighter aircraft-wow.
,“ to keep buying weapons and ”
Considering the size of the forces has greatly reduced over the years-the weapons are not being bought for MPA.
Oh dear, who in earth believes anything written in the Daily Mail?
Feb 27th, 2014 - 07:39 am - Link - Report abuse +1Bomb Port Stanley airport? They could go right ahead as this is a civil airport so is of no military value. The jets would have to fly past MPA to get to Port Stanley though, and probably wouldn't get past West Falkland before they were converted into high velocity scrap metal.
@2
Feb 27th, 2014 - 07:47 am - Link - Report abuse +1Dead right, CD.
What kind of Defence Minister implements a 33% budget increase without a conflict hypothesis? Peronist financial management, as any fule kno, is a joke, but this would truly be the height of irresponsibility.
And why does Argentina need naval assault craft?
It all sounds terribly like militarization of the South Atlantic. Why, somebody should complain to the UN.
Argentinian military personnel in the South Atlantic Theatre 77,000
Feb 27th, 2014 - 07:56 am - Link - Report abuse +1British military personnel in the South Atlantic Theatre 3,000
Yes it is Britain militarising the region.
The Falkland Islands main defence is fear. The Chileans rightly identified that one of the main reasons Argentina lost the war is they are cowards. I am not sure about the other reason, they can't surely all be gay and I tend to believe the other reason is God is on the side of the British. Surely there must be some punishment for being corrupt liars and I believe that is why God does not like them.
Tbf those odds are a major problem I mean where would we put all the POWS?
Feb 27th, 2014 - 08:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0High time the descendants of the Spanish gave Argentina back to the original inhabitants, clearly the conquistadors that run the place at the moment like repatriating original territories...let's see them make a start.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:01 am - Link - Report abuse +1They will try again, l feel it in my bones.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0We must not get too cocky or complacent.
We must be always vigilant.
Cristina is on her way out and she knows it. Her only ace left to get the national acclaim that she so desires is to get the islands. It's the last card that every Argentine leader has. British cost-cutting policies leading to reduced military capabilities is only likely to spur her on.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0If Britain gets caught with its military pants down, it's the islanders which will suffer again with little chance of rescue this time. Shore up defences until la loca goes just in case she tries a Galtieri beforehand.
“The United Kingdom remains isolated from the opinion of the international community, breaking United Nations resolutions through a refusal to reopen talks,”
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse +1Still repeating that lie, the old dog won't let some bones go will she.
@6
“British military personnel in the South Atlantic Theatre 3,000”
Less than half that number actually, the rest are ancillary staff and civillain workers.
““Here in Great Britain a routine renovation of Argentine defense is presented as a threat to the Malvinas Islands, solely as an excuse to continue maintaining a gigantic base in the South Atlantic, to keep buying weapons and justifying the lack of dialogue,””
Anyone remember when the Argentine minister of defense stated that the Falklands would taken if it wasn't for MPA. As for dialogue, the UK has stated again and again that it is happy to have talks as long as there is a representative of the Falklands present.
33.4% increase in the defence budget. Remind me again what the unofficial rate of inflation is in Argentina. Also if Argentinian currency reserves are so low what are they going to use to buy all the shiny new military equipment. Maybe they'll try bartering. How many tins of corned beef does a Mirage jet cost nowadays :-). Argentina is joke.They constantly embaress themselves with their crazed ramblings. Please, please somebody take them away so we can have a proper enemy to test our wits against. This lot are just not up to the job.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's interesting what you hear. According to a drunken Argentine officer / diplomat, this is how they plan to get the islands:
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Implement a no-fly / total exclusion zone, disable the runway and sit it out without attacking whilst waiting for aggression from the island forces, which will give the excuse to retaliate. Do it on the onset of winter and they know a taskforce won't arrive, giving them time to get a foothold on the islands and pressurising the islanders to surrender. USA and Chile won't give the same support as in 1982 so negotiation will be enforced whilst the Argies build up their numbers on the islands.
Plausible idea or BS from a drunk nationalist?
@ 13 La Patria
Feb 27th, 2014 - 10:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0More like poorly thought out “thinking ahead” which from personal experience here is not a strong point exhibited by LatAms.
How will they disable the aircraft landing ability for more than a few hours? Argies have no or very few bombs that might work it seems. And do you think that the Falklands defence forces are going to sit it out without repairing the runways?
No need for a defence force to be sent: we have one on station within striking range at all time, it’s called a nuclear submarine.
THAT is what TMBOA is shitting herself about and quite rightly too if the UK had a PM with balls, so she might be right after all.
As regards to getting a foothold on the islands I am pretty sure the existing garrison would manage to cut it off at the groin. Of course, once the argies take losses themselves they will do what all LatAms do, including the Tupamaros of Uruguay AND RUN AWAY!
5
Feb 27th, 2014 - 10:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0“And why does Argentina need naval assault craft”…. WHAT?? Which ones?? When are they buying them? To whom it’s going to buy them. Argentina spends currently over 80% of its defense budget on salaries alone
There is drug cartels are walking in through the north of the country. We don’t even have helicopters and our border patrol gendarmerie is being more and more deployed in the interior of the country covering up for lack of effective policing and spiraling insecurity. There are hundreds of illegal planes crossing in from Bolivia and Paraguay full of dope to clandestine airfields all over the north per month and there are neither radars nor fighters to stop them, and above this a “Defense Minister” that says Argentina doesn’t have nor work with hypothesis of conflicts.
Argentina is not a regional power as it may have being 30 to 20 years ago. Argentina is effectively a vassal state or protectorate of Chile and Brazil nowadays.
For Argentina to start even considering taking those islands it needs at least a capable naval battle group with a division of 4th generation fighters in its carrier to block any traffic and aid flying in from the Ascension islands to RAF MT Pleasant while giving time enough for an invasion force of + 3000 men but that can actually get them to land as phase 1 and then face off Challenger tanks and seasoned troops who know the terrain and have being waiting for them for 30 years…Its incredible why this article in the Sunday mail talks of the lack of a carrier as a main threat. Why would the UK need carriers if Argentina doesn’t have them and needs them more?? The UK can man the garrison in the islands with men and aircraft in less than a week with the Atlantic air corridor
It is funny....
Feb 27th, 2014 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0UK sends its new Navy ship to the Falklands for routine patrol and by coincidence a royal works in the Falklands as a Search and Rescue pilot at the same time and Argentina goes nuts. They scream militarisation, provocation, aggression, possible invasion, nuclear weapons and threat to peace in South America! Both the Navy ship and royal leave, and Argentina still screams the same bland and untrue statements.
But then Argentina spends $4.5billion in military hardware and they don't understand the British fuss about it?
You have to love Argentine hypocrisy! A nation that thrives off irrationality.
This from Argentines who have publicly stated that it is there given right and intentions to lie to manipulate international opinion.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 11:43 am - Link - Report abuse +1Having any Argentine's state that diplomacy is their option is like Hitler telling all those poor souls that they were of to a Butlins style holiday camp.
The Argentine Government are proven liars (continuously) to both the international community and their domestic population.
The Argentine Government are proven crooks (continuously) to both the international community (theft of loaned money, theft of hard assets) and their domestic population (pensions, dollar savings, gold reserves etc).
They will attempt to steal the Falklands as they stole the land from the native Souh American peoples.
I for one wish to live in a world where self determination is enshrined as a human right. The UK will defend this right. I for one will happily accept additional taxes to ensure the Falklands Islanders continue to thrive in their nation.
Argentina is such irrational and unpredictable country that any threat has to be taken seriously, the British believed the then Argentine government assured the UK they would not attack in 82.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”The United Kingdom remains isolated from the opinion of the international community, breaking United Nations resolutions through a refusal to reopen talks,” the diplomat said on Wednesday.
the Argentine ambassador fails to understand Argentina did not just ignore the UN resolution they totally violated and invalidated it with their act of aggression in a far more serious manner than refusal of talks, what Argentina means is to hand over of sovereignty which Argentina has yet to prove is legitimate, they assume that such evidence is not required, as further evidence of her inability to understand she assumes that she can return to the previous status quo after the criminal actions of the pervious Argentine government which they absolve themselves of all responsibility, the Argentine government of today is not responsible for its actions in 1982 but the British government are for events 1833. No wonder Argentina will not attend the court and resolve the issue once and for all , but unbelievably think the British will now hand the islands to on their say so..... some foreign policy!..... they are fantasists not living in the real world.
“Argentina has 'no conflict hypothesis' says Defense head”.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...at this moment in time, he forget to add.
The suggestions being made by the “British newspaper” are being reported in “other sources”. There is a not unreasonable assumption amongst the British military that any increase in argie military capability is of concern. Under NO circumstances could argieland be permitted to land a military force on the Falkland Islands. There must be increased readiness and the capability to sink or shoot down anything approaching the Falklands. The essence is military capability. If the British military wish overestimate argie capability, so be it. If a certain newspaper wishes to alert the people of Britain, good on it. The important thing is that nothing unauthorised from latam gets within a hundred miles. So it's time to beef up the defences. A good start would be an additional squadron of Typhoons. Plenty of munitions. Required level of capability? Enough to sink the entire US Navy. The ability to make an argie ship “fly”. In pieces. Enough aircraft to deliver 20 missiles per vessel every 30 minutes. And then on to expend remaining munitions on BA and any vessels nearby. No more of that “only around the Falklands” rubbish. Meanwhile, 16 Air Assault Brigade has boarded and taken off. Accompanied by transports with Scimitars, WMIK Land Rovers, Supacats, towed L118 105 mm light guns, Javelin anti-tank and lightweight Starstreak air-defence missile launchers. And WAH-64 Apache and Lynx helicopters from the Army Air Corps, and Chinook, Merlin and Puma support helicopters from the RAF. Rules of engagement. Destroy and kill! NO mercy, NO prisoners. Perhaps there could even be a “public” contingent. Members of the British public who hate cowardly argies for attacking a peaceful community. Hey, WE have a conflict hypothesis. WE reckon argieland will be crying for a lot more than 649! Oh look, there's an argie in the water desperately trying to swim. Bang! Not trying to swim anymore, is he? Am I warlike? Not really. Not until some filthy, genocidal, colonialist scum try to expand!
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@18 - good points the head if the UN has already clearly and unequivocally stated that the UK is not in breach of any UN mandates.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina perpetuate lies as they have openly stated they will. Thankfully the world has access to factual history which clearly reveals the utter total crap that originates from Buenos Aires.
The world has changed, Britain is not a colonial power, Britain believes in the rule of law and not the jungle. Britain is outward looking and engages with the world. Most importantly Britain will do what it takes to ensure the world is protected from dangerous ideologies. Our allies take on this burden a also.
Argentina is failing as a nation (it is sad for the normal Argentines) and Cristina and her cronies will end up in prison (rightly so).
If Argentina attack the Falklands (I really hope they do not, as it would be a terrible heinous crime) the UKs armed forces (with many international personnel within it) will defend the Falklanders.
The more equipment Argyland buys the more target practice we get.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 12:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Argentina does not represent a hostile threat to the United Kingdom or the Malvinas,
Feb 27th, 2014 - 01:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +1In other words, we withdraw our forces, all in the name of peace and dialog, and you gangsters invade the islands again,
Yeah right..
,,,,,,,,,,,,
The ambassador looked back to the invasion led by General Leopoldo Galtieri in 1982 to emphasize that such an event could not happen again
Yeah right,
That’s what they said of Germany,
You gangsters are just waiting for that elusive victory,
You can never ever be trusted.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Argentina will never return to war over the Malvinas. That was a decision taken by the military dictatorship”.
Was a dictatorship, and still is a dictatorship,
You invaded them; you still want to invade them,
And you WILL invade them the first chance you get,
You are greedy corrupt untrustworthy and devious,
You can never ever be trusted.
prove us wrong,
we dare you...
@20 - Conqueror you really take no prisoners lol.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 01:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I understand the sentiment though in that it really gripes many Brits that a small peaceful community is threatened by Argentina's empire building dreams.
A couple of apaches would be a sensible option, and maybe a converted Sampson Radar and mobile launch silos similar to a land based type 45.
In all fairness though Argentina must and should stop this crap and let peace have a chance in the Falkland Islands. You Falklanders deserve a future free from Argentine oppression and colonialism.
You guys are insane and inane... You don’t even know what you are talking about.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 02:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina is scrapping the barrel to find dollars to pay for liquid gas for winter and you guys believe Argentina is planning for an invasion.
Islamification of your own country is a far more serious and menacing threat for your country that Argentina can possibly be in at least a century
@25 The threat isn't that there will be a complete redux of 1982. There is little doubt that your military can't compete against the deterrent force in the Falklands now which is what keeps them free and happy. Rather, given your military capacity which as you say isn't up to UK's strength and the economy isn't going to support it and that small amount of cash and what it can buy that the Brits are going on about, it is more likely that the “conflict hypothesis” would be an escalating passive aggressive stunt and you don't exactly need an aircraft carrier or even a destroyer for that. Scenario in point: the 8-year-old [alas, your government] pushing the 5-year-old [the Faklanders] on the playground [e.g., the Falklanders EEZ and the Falklander's rightful assets therein] in hopes that her 10-year old other bother [the UK] will stand between the two as he has been since 1982 at which point the 8-year-old will scream BULLY and this time show the sleepy playground monitor a well-earned bruise and get the “validation” he needs. That's how they've been playing it in the diplomatic circles/bubbles, it follows that it could escalate to a direct but still passive aggressive confrontation. As those oil assets begin to pay off and your neighbors take notice and begin quiet diplomacy unless your government grows up with respect to the Falklands, potential for a “more-than-diplomatic tantrum” becomes “more-than-not-unlikely”...
Feb 27th, 2014 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 026
Feb 27th, 2014 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I was actually talking about the users here that still fantasize of Argentina trying it out. They obsess in overanalyzing words coming from Castro, Timerman, Rossi or whomever. It’s just words of spokesman a failed gov’t desperate for attention. I dont think the UK MoD which has first class intelligence sources and info arriving is very concerned. One just doesn't arm yourself overnight nowdays like in the 1930s. There is sattelites that can see all the ships in port and all the hangars and planes in the air bases of x country in hours.
At most Argentina can have a coast guard vessel capture an oil worker crew in the border waters and force a international incident and have them for a couple of days like Iran did with the British Marines in the Iran-Iraq border in 2004 and 2007.
Im pretty sure that anybody who is going to invest a substantial amount of money in developing a off shore well in the South Atlantic has being reassured by the UK gov’t that the armed forces will fire first and ask questions later if Argentina threatens their assets. And Argentina knows this
Having re thought the matter, the military spending is probably not for use against the Falkland Islands. They will probably do what most Argentine governments end up doing and either cream massive amounts of the spending into their own pockets so that what is left doesn't work. Or if the country is in dire straights then the assets will mainly be used against its own civilian population.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 02:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@25 CabezaDura2
Feb 27th, 2014 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We know that. Indeed the majority of Argentines think any military endeavour would be utterly crazy and stupid.
However, if such an event were to occur in the future AND BE successfully, the same naysayers would be out in the square thumping their chests, exclaiming “Viva la Patria!” and wanting to 'die for the Fatherland' etc; just like you people did when your Italian, Spanish speaking Generalissimo, Glitterati tried it on before; 30, 000 'disappeared? fcuk it, let’s have a party. That's your culture.
Obviously, the Islamification of the UK (with the migrating Birds theorem of territorial integrity), is the best hope you have of getting your grubbing, greedy hands on these remote rocks 500 kilometres off your coast. Good luck with that.
Allahu Akbar to you sir!
28
Feb 27th, 2014 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What Argentina currently spends a lot of money in - a men lots of- is on espionage and that is internal against argentines themselves.
The only hardware project that I heard about is a drone that was apparently made to spy on the Malvinas/Falklands can only fly 40 km, so it’s not destined to go very far unless its really supposed to spy locally
.......and the range of uk cruise missiles?? in the event of any argentine aggression on The falklands, im guessing could make things pretty toasty at B.A. whilst sitting back with a cup of earl gray and cucumber sandwiches enjoying the fireworks.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0my question is.... how can a supposed “developing country” claiming global aid to fight poverty be allowed to receive financial aid while it develops its armed forces when their is no threat to itself (unless they provoke one), call me old fashioned but isn't development aid meant to fight poverty and not another nation??
also isn't this further destabilizing the area with further argentine militarization??
29
Feb 27th, 2014 - 03:30 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Not at all, I wouldn’t fancy at all Argentina (one of the last catholic countries in the world by then) being ill prepared when the Great Sultan of the Islamic Caliphate of Britanistan calls upon a jihad on its Christian neighbor
@32
Feb 27th, 2014 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I sense you are an adherent and blasphemous watcher of The YouTube and all its EDL teachings
Come now, you visit my tent and take pray with me the next time you visit my country (if you have ever been that is) and see for yourself this bountiful land – praise be to Mohammed. May be we find another wife for you yes? All now come in black: absolutely no Pesos though - Dollars or AMEX only.
Peace be upon you you.
@27 That's precisely my Tom Clancyism, though. The goal of the action isn't to succeed in even putting a dent into an oil platform or “detaining” “illegal” workers in the Falklands EEZ, but rather to “count coup” against a stronger overall adversary and to precipitate what is now called a “disproportionate response” and proudly wave the red feather in the face of the big bad Norte for both prestige with their neighbors and also to simultaneously cry victim to the world community.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@28 But such drones to monitor their “allies” next door and arguably can be justified for shore patrols though it was stupid for them to even mention that it could be used against the Falklands.. Likewise also recall that you don't have to launch drones from land; you can do it from civilian ships which once again, can be seen as a provocative action for which a “disproportionate response” can be launched and giddily received and paraded about.
32
Feb 27th, 2014 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +1France has nearly twice as many Muslims as the UK so maybe you should be more worried about the spread of the Caliphate from French Guyana but then even Argentina has about 1,000,000 muslims (although the Argentine Gov says it's only 440,000)
The Iberian Peninsula was Muslim for hundreds of years and probably reached it's cultural peak during that time so maybe Islam isn't so bad when you compare it to the Inquisition!
Mind you 'nobody expected the Spanish Inquisition' - bring on the comfy armchair!
Well we've all heard of the 6 day war. Wonder if the UK could reduce a war with RG Land to 6 minutes?
Feb 27th, 2014 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(Admittedly I am looking at this from the outside rather like CD but most people regrettably get their views in the “Islamification on the UK” from Melody Phillips or the BBC always putting Andy rage-boy Chowdery on as the “authentic voice” of Muslims who would all rather wish he'd just get laid. IIRC, a goodly amount of pushback against the separate but equal trial balloon that were banded about british universities was not through humanists or EDL but from female muslim students themselves who were getting p*ssed at being told where they should sit let alone think.)
Feb 27th, 2014 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 034 The drones will be destroyed as soon as they go to far into FI airspace even if they are successful in spying oil facilities....what are they going to do about it?? Gen Milani has gained more power in recent years that any military chieftain has had since the 1980s and he is a spy master and intelligence gatherer for CFK, vast amounts of reserved funds are controlled by him to spy on the journalist, judge, opposition politicians, governors, her own troops, businessmen, farm unions, labor unions, pickets, and the list goes on forever. Milani will succeed CFK and outlive she is going in 2015, he will still have his power
Feb 27th, 2014 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 033
Wow….So first you claim I’m a malvinista and the next thing you accuse me of being an “adherent and blasphemous watcher of The YouTube and all its EDL teachings”…
I think you are a bit -a lot- confused… (!!)
I can talk about facts, numbers common sense about this topic and and it will be impossible to get it through a PC libtard… So I will actually limit myself to saying that I trust and value more a opinion youtuber or disenchanted youngsters that walk the streets of Europe than somebody living in a bubble at over 8000 km away.
I don’t like at all EDL Golden Dawn and others but I recognize that they do exist for a reason.
36 The Cestrian
Feb 27th, 2014 - 04:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0With modern fire and forget weapons it would be six seconds: the time it takes to push the buttons.
35
Feb 27th, 2014 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And they had Paris burned for it in 2005...in the larger scale of things Islam hasn’t got a reason to go on a vendetta against Protestantism, the northern European countries like Scandinavian countries, Britain, Belgium, France the Netherlands and Germany are giving themselves away without a fight. It has against Catholicism the Muslims should hold vengeance. It has always being Catholic armies that stopped them. Poitiers, Lepanto, Great siege of Malta and the great siege of Vienna ALL CATHOLIC.
@38
Feb 27th, 2014 - 05:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Apologies, but I'm not a frequent enough contributor to this message board(s) to know what your view (or agenda) is regarding the 'Malvinas Question' or anything else for that matter.
I do find it amusing though, as it stands out; the view (certainly on many Argentine message boards) that the UK/Europe is doomed to become some sort of Islamic Caliphate in the future. This of course presents a fear amongst many of your compatriots but also a hope to those of the Malvinistic persuasion.
Personally I am a Hard-line Fundamentalist Liberal: party politics and religion aside, that pretty much sums up most of the folks here in Ukistan.
41
Feb 27th, 2014 - 06:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Ehh??
And what “agenda” do you reckon I have?? I am a regular contributor but I don’t post in Malvinas/Falkland articles hardly ever, I’m sure you do so more than I do.
So far what I have actually said in broader perspective??
1) The article of the Sunday mail is rubbish because Argentina’s current situation in defence and economic matters
2) You guys are completely wrong and out of touch from reality thinking Argentina is planning an invasion due to reason 1)
3) You run a far more concerning reality in your backdoor.
What has this really got to do with a Malvinista agenda, please explain… ??
If you have to know 95% of Argentines don’t care nor wake up thinking in Malvinas every day. The vast majority of people is apathic about politics. I can assure you are not the center of the world for everyday argentines.
But you actually find people do have a view and a opinion about things.
BTW it is easy to be a “Hard-line Fundamentalist Liberal” living 8000 miles away from the poorest streets of Britain.
@42
Feb 27th, 2014 - 06:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well I actually live in the UK most of the time, (FI are initials). Have been to Argentina on a several occasions though. BTW, 95%+ of Brits have little interest in what happens in the Argentina or the Falklands for that matter. The whole Falklands thing is done; blood and treasure, self determination and all that.
Your right, this article is likely BS. Its just a different sort of sort of smoke - site costs don't pay themselves you know. But it is an issue non less that effects things and the friction will for a long time; folks do so like to natter on these forums ;)
@42... In truth I believe you when you say most Argentines on a day-to-day basis are “meh” on the Falklands. But as soon as the Falklands does something “self-determiney” all hell breaks out in BA and the government has a fit and they get a bump in validation from a fascist core who can't cope with the FI being in the hands of the Islanders with British protection and support. And nobody comes up and calls BS on it.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 07:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This “people don't really care about the Malvinas” reminds me a lot about shrugging off the “under god” in the US Pledge of Allegiance as “ceremonial deism so it's not really important” -- UNTIL the same people are confronted by those who don't say it when they do the pledge, then all hell breaks out. If the Malvinas issue isn't the same kind of “ceremonial patriotism,” if you will, then why is the “leave them alone lobby” well... nearly nonexistent. Likewise, what WOULD happen to an administration that came out, in a Nixon goes to China moment, and said, “this is the 21st century, the Islanders have spoken and as good its going to get is for us to be neighbors so let's make the most of it and thaw this childish stance we've had for decades. The Malvinas are NOT Argentine, they are the Falklanders'”? How long would they last? Would this “meh” majority say, “Great! Let's trade with them, the sooner we thaw the better” and likewise push back had against the “Malvanazis” and “Malvanistas” and reward the forward-thinking politicians? I'd really like to see that. It would mean a lot for geopolitics in the region, remove a bogus tool of distraction for dishonest hacks, promote civilized trade and honestly stop making your country look bad, REALLY bad outside the regional bubble. But I am more hopeful than optimistic. The Malvinas is a bell that your governments know they can ring to rally what probably IS a vocal minority to drool on command BUT I'd argue too that its ringing subliminally defangs the “meh” majority.
What if ?????????
Feb 27th, 2014 - 07:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina ,
Could she , would she , can she, Will she,
Remember CFK will go to any lengths , sacrifices all, just to achieve this very elusive VICTORY,
It only takes one,
Just one attempt,
Just one little tiny capture,
And it could well achieve what her predecessors have failed to do,
Victory, no matter how small or insignificant it may well be.
Special Operations Forces Group:
• 601 Commando Company (Spanish: Compañía de Comandos 601) is a special operations unit of the Argentine Army, created the January 5 of 1982.
• 602 Commando Company (Spanish: Compañía de Comandos 602) is a special operations unit of the Argentine Army, created May 21st, 1982. They fought in the Falklands War.
• 601 Air Assault Regiment (Spanish: Regimiento de Asalto Aéreo 601) is a special operations unit of the Argentine Army, created in January of 2003. The regiment is divided in three assault companies: A, B and C. Its motto is “Sapientia et Labore”.
One of the objectives of the modernization process for the Argentine Army was to manage an enabled force that could move quickly to any crisis
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The Special Operations Group (Spanish: Grupo de Operaciones Especiales, GOE) is a special operations force of the Argentine Air Force. This strategic division, headquartered at Morón Air Base in the Buenos Aires province, is mainly responsible for resolving aircraft hijacking issues
Just a thought,
Nah it would never happen ??????????
.
Yes but they actually have to get to the islands undetected which is a tad difficult what with radar bases on the islands able too see everything that takes off on the mainland.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The intelligence brief I had was this is all very well but honestly, next day some argie col could wake up and decide its a good day for a coup or something stupid.
44
Feb 27th, 2014 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It would really depend on the popularity and charisma of any the Argentine politician.
President Carlos Menem laid wreath in St Pauls cathedral in London in 1998 for the British fallen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orH6LIkEYXg
That should have being a “Nixon in China moment”
Argentina and the UK have ties that exceed by far the islands question, Menem understood this but also he knew that nationalist and the war memories were too short ago so he re-launched the relations with the UK on a whole range of other issues and left the islands sovereignty in the shade.
Menem IMO he was very naive in a way and quite corrupt, but he wasn’t an evil meaning person like the Kirchners were.
Anyway massive sectors of the Argentine population follow daily the performance Argentine football players in England. It’s a different world.
The funny I see here is people from abroad commenting on the electoral and distraction that is achieved in Argentina with these issue, and I tell you I don’t think that saber rattling by itself gains any votes at all for the K gov’t. I ever heard of a Kirchnerist voter say he would vote for the Kirchners out of the policy towards the islands
The Germans and French killed each other like flies in the Prussian-French wars, WWI to settle their nationalist feelings over Alsace-Lorraine. When the population understands the true cost and meaning of war things change.
46
Feb 27th, 2014 - 08:27 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Not difficult on a cruise ship...a few thousand troops or mercenaries masquerading as passengers....
@48 A_Voice
Feb 27th, 2014 - 08:38 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Yes but they have to be able to get off the ship onto shore. Heavily armed soldiers might be noticed trying to walk down the gangplank at a normal port, and then the RAF would just bomb the crap out of the ship.
Also they would only have small arms, just rifles and machine guns. So again, the Typhoons would easily take them out.
If they tried to land elsewhere, they'd need landing craft, which the Argentine's haven't got.
Either way, getting enough troops ashore takes time, and they would be vulnerable to air attack, followed by attack by ground troops, who would have light armour and artillery.
49
Feb 27th, 2014 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse -1I thought the objective was to destroy the runway.....
No troops just passengers with suitcases carrying explosive and arms..
Impossible...?
I'll tell you something impossible,,,,
Bunch of terrorists take control of four US Airlines and fly them into strategic targets on American soil....
Now that's what I would call flights of fantasy..
48. Oh for gosh sakes you watch too many movies. Rgs aren't that smart nor organized to pull off something like that.
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse +151
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Watching twin Towers was like watching a movie...if it had been a movie first or novel people would have claimed it was beyond belief and pure fantasy.....
..yet......
@45 (her definition of VICTORY! is “getting away with it” domestically ;-/ )
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Would she want to count coup? I bet she would like to try if that meant she'd go out with a bang AND ensure that no one after her could top her many “diplomatic victories” over the Falklands by ending it all with one helluva preemptive bridge burning. But the UK would indeed inflict a serious response and give her military a bloody nose that she and her successors AND their chiefs of staff would never forget since it WOULD be an act of war and prove that their “no conflict hypothesis” is a lie for all the world to see. But for some people in BA, I suspect that would be a feature not a bug Also, that presumes that they would be able to make it to the Falklands or their EEZ, let alone try anything against their assets. And they just can't project “discretely” or otherwise. I'd be a suicide run to pump up a failed president and I doubt even a hobbled post-Junta military that couldn't respond with a coup or putsch would take kindly to it or forgive her. I'd see her pulling something with the “civilian” sector “activists” first but once again, specifically so she could play “victim” of the big bad Norte.
48
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What had being suggested as one of the cheapest alternatives for Argentina some years ago by some British strategist is that Argentine special forces were landed on the islands in the cover of night by a submarine advanced at least 14 km to RAF Mt Pleasant sabotaged the Rapiers, the air strip and if possible the hangars and Typhoons. And then have at the same time the C-130 fly in paras from the mainland as reinforcements. You would also need 4 or 5 diesel subs to play cat and mouse with the British sub that is vox populi wondering around. The problem is that the will be facing a garrison that is well prepared, and even if Argentina manages to get a foothold it would be quickly overrun if it the islands are aided by the Ascension islands air bridge… That’s why it’s very high risk and low chances of success if you don’t have at least one battle group and 4th generation aircraft on it on the high seas blocking the traffic
@20 Conqueror,
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You have a lot of valid points.
l don't often agree with you, but this time l have to.
Apart from the last bit though.
@CabezaDura2,
Thats complacency, assuming that “they can't get here”.
Reminds me of what they taught our troops about the Japanese in Malaya in 1941.
1) they are short-sighted
2) they can't shoot straight
3) no-one can penetrate the jungle(what about the railway we built from Singapore to Bangkok?)
4) their equipment is rubbish
5) their aircraft are cheap inferior copies of western aircraft & are made of bamboo & ricepaper! yeah right. they decimated our Airforce
And look how that turned out.
Don't underestimate the Argentines or their hatred.
We do so at our peril.
@50 A voice
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:47 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“No troops just passengers with suitcases carrying explosive and arms..”
So Lan Chile allow people to carry explosives and weapons through customs onto aircraft? Do you not have X-ray machines in South America to check luggage contents?
You may have noticed that MPA is not Chicago-so every aircraft landing is watched- i.e. there are not 10 aircraft landing each minute at MPA.
The passengers are handled by the military so any passenger jaunting off to the runway rather than the air terminal will get a live guided missile headed towards them at 40-50 mph.
And it helps to blow a runway up if the explosive is dropped into the runway with a bomb-how is a suitcase going to penetrate a runway?
And if any morons come out shooting, do you think the garrison at MPA is going to ignore this rather than shooting lumps out of anyone so much as brandishing a weapon?
55
Feb 27th, 2014 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For starters I don’t even believe such an action will be received by the public the same way it did with Galtieri in 1982.
In regards to security and defense alone Argentina has far more pressing, dangerous and important matters to attend to.
Any hard wing argentine leader can win his reputation as a tough guy fighting the drug cartels in Santa Fe and the North of the country….
What if Paraguay becomes a rich Bahrain in the center of South America in the next years??
How would Argentina’s relations with growing and recourse hungry Brazil and Chile play out in the future??
August 13th 2012. Argentina’s minister of Defence, Arturo Puricelli, called on the UK “to sit and dialogue” over the Falklands/Malvinas sovereignty and warned that the British military presence in the South Atlantic “is the only element that upholds the usurpation of that part of our national territory”.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 12:45 am - Link - Report abuse +1A threat if there ever was one. If the British military leaves, Argentina will attack. Signed: Argentina’s minister of Defence, Arturo Puricelli.
http://en.mercopress.com/2012/08/13/argentina-shows-off-jet-model-and-calls-on-uk-to-dialogue-on-falklands-sovereignty
“That was a decision taken by the military dictatorship”
Feb 28th, 2014 - 02:06 am - Link - Report abuse +1The usual 'somebody else did it' - although more than 90 percent of all Argentines - even the guerillas in jail in 1982 - supported the war instigated by the Argentine government led by the president, general Galtieri.
As established by the first few comments and then by the furious, foaming at the mouth circle jerk that followed ...no Argentina cant militarily take the falklands/malvinas.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 02:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0This was a routine upgrade, like in every country they're regularly necessary, regardless of the isles situation, they're just par for the course, and many more standard run of the mil upgrades will follow in time as Argentina grows by its millions with a proportionate defense budget. As with any country.
Any equipment bought that could conceivably be used to attack the isles as a secondary option is no doubt planned and destined for a different priority, for primary use within Argentina for natural everyday national security needs.
Not that the isles shouldn't keep pace, keep spending on maintaining that defense gap...til one day the cold isolated fort falklands requires 5 pricey military to 1 civilian. And twice the annual GDP on defense...just to be certain. The money for those missiles could have been spent on widescreen plasma tv's but must pay the invasion insurance premium.
London wont mind continually sending and spending for the great reward of needlessly antagonizing a country/market of 50 million.
And the people in sunny BA definitely wont.
Ah the idyllic life on a tropical paradise, pfff who needs Europe when ya got this.
Maybe Argentina will try it as plan b during the world cup if they get knocked out early on. Anything to keep the crowds cheering and flags waving. Messi could spearhead the attack
Feb 28th, 2014 - 04:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Messi dribbling over one of the unrecorded/mapped Argentine mine fields from their last attempt at colonialism would make pretty bad TV and even worse military tactics. That means it is probably being seriously considered by the Argentine gestapo.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 06:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0@50 A_Voice
Feb 28th, 2014 - 07:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0It still wouldn't work. Firstly they would still have to get to the airport. It isn't right next to the dock, you know.
I also believe that a large number of male only 'tourists' carrying large suitcases heading towards a military base would ring a few alarms, especially as very few tourists would get off the cruise ship to actually stay for any length of time in the Falklands.
All British military runways are defended by the RAF Regiment. The Regiment would have plenty of time to get into position, bring up light armour and artillery support, PLUS the support of the other combat troops based on the Falklands.
So when your 'disguised' troops finally arrived, they would have a well armed reception committee waiting for them. Then there is only 2 scenarios left. They surrender en mass, and are paraded before the world to show how the Argentine government are a bunch of liars. Or they bravely make a stand and go out in a blaze of glory, with pretty much the same results.
But at the end of it you have Argentina once more being the aggressor and it would then give the UK a very good reason to send more troops to the Falklands, and who in the world could blame them in the face of Argentine aggression and the fact that the Argentine government tells bare faced lies to the world when it talks about peace.
However, it is all a mute point, and just a interesting discussion topic.
As for Argentina spending $3 billion or so US dollars on the military, well good luck to them. Their military is woefully underfunded and desperately needs the cash. However $3 billion is just a drop in the ocean, when you consider that the UK spends approx £47 billion (nearly $78 billion dollars) per year on defence, which doesn't actually include the price of operations such as Afghanistan, which is an additional extra.
@60
Feb 28th, 2014 - 09:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0One of the more entertaining aspects of the Malvinista delusion is the belief that some Fairy Godmother is about to come to the rescue, and then all will be well. And variously cast in the role of Fairy Godmother we've seen the Chinese, the Russians, the International Community, any number of Latam organisations featuring the same members wearing different hats, etc, etc, etc.
Most recently, it's been the British taxpayer cast in the role, a fairly consistent theme across the Malvinaverse, as if somebody is pulling strings behind the scenes.
This represents a failure to understand Brit psychology as profound as the comic attempt to coax Plaid Cymru into the Malvinaverse, or the belief that the Scottish referendum somehow represents the last death throes of the British Empire. In this respect, there is no better guarantor of the Falklands future freedom than Peronist Argentina's inability to assess its own case, combined with clueless posturing that passes for foreign policy, and which has made Argentina the nutter on the bus of the world community.
As for your contention that 33% is just a normal increase, maybe it is in the word of Peronomics, but in the real world it quite obviously isn't.
But of course you must surely be right that any purchase which “could conceivably be used to attack the isles as a secondary option is no doubt planned and destined for a different priority, for primary use within Argentina for natural everyday national security needs”. No staggering naivety there. Naval assault craft, for example, have a myriad of innocent civilian uses and should in no way be construed as implying any desire for a capability to actually assault anybody from the sea. Heaven forfend.
Not that I believe myself that any of this heralds a new Argentine military adventure, I believe it's more of an attempt to placate the Electrode Party as the economy goes down the pan.
@64, “... Electrode Party...”
Feb 28th, 2014 - 01:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If that was a typo, it was an awesome one.
55
Feb 28th, 2014 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And who is going to be the Argentine version of King Pyrrhus of Epirus ?? Even if Argentina succedes in taking the islands on a very high risk and low chance sneak attack, an Astute class sub can fire tomahawks per rates of 10 or 6 minutes?? and take down key Energy assets of the Argentine economy.
It can destroy El Chocon, the Atuchas and other key generators and lights will go off for 15 MM people within hours. Ports and key bridges can be taken down and the economy will enter recession immediately. Argentina won't be able to sell out its harvest without ports wich is vital. The little refineries that are still around taken down. The suburbs of BsAs will become hell on earth if there is no lights. To paraphrase an Argentine hit “Magical nights of the City of Buenos Aires”, criminal gangs will take over the city in the night and it will be a mess. Mass unrest will emerge if the country is broken overnight. It doesnt even make sence politically if you wont have a functioning country after taking the islands.
@66. Forget a straw man for the E.D.L., CD, you're starting to sound like Conqueror :-P There might be a targeted strike at a political/military soft spot to punish any fool who'd dry anything frisky (or more than frisky) that will make them regret any stunt, but such a national-level decapitation move? Not so sure.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 02:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 067
Feb 28th, 2014 - 02:57 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Many things can be said of Conqueror however he is NOT a fool
Its more or less the same thing that happened in Iraq and Libia when they turned off the lights of Baghdad or Tripoli by a shower of missiles. I wouldent count ever on what the enemy might “never go so far of doing”. Real strategy considers all posibilities. I dont know how the UK will react but the capabilities to do so are certainly there. If Britain actually looses those islands AGAIN in 30- 40 years then the public in the UK will be calling for blood and the destruction of the Argentine economy to make a point upon the politicians of Argentina unlike in 1982.
64 - I dont see it as a fairy godmother or strings being pulled. If I was to use an analogy it would be something like this;
Feb 28th, 2014 - 03:13 pm - Link - Report abuse -1A young growing Argentina going out for a pleasant jog and walk just to shape up, then chilling out and merrily watching the falklands in the boxing gym sweating its ass off without paying for the trainer or facilities.
The 33% chunk was badly needed , 33% is unlikely to re-occur regularly although gross spend will of course grow along with the country.
Its the falklands job to keep up with that pace, defense budget after defense budget. Decade after decade, spend after spend.
One more plane, one less doctor.
Thats the price of jingoistic tabloid mentality close mindedness for 2500 people living on land half the size of Wales.
(Oh and naval assault craft are generally worth having when you've got a gigantic coastline)
69
Feb 28th, 2014 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse -1I agree but its not that the 33% even exists...It translates that Rossy laughed and said “hopefully” but most likely he said “Ojala” in spanish slang it really means “if only it were true”. What really has Argentina agreed on so far ?? The havent even purchased the Kfirs nor the Mirages.
So far its some purchased 34 USED Humvees to fight the cartels up north...What a joke
I agree with CD....it's no more than a much needed upgrade....
Feb 28th, 2014 - 03:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lessons have been learned in modern warfare as seen in Libya....
Infrastructure, Airports, Communication, Energy and any means an enemy has to propagate war are immediately attacked and isolated...
Argentina may be able to pull off a sneak attack, but their military and economic capabilities to sustain it would probably be gone within the day....
The object of modern warfare is no longer to gain territory..as according to UN law it has to be returned.....
I don't know what the true capabilities of the assets on the Falklands are, but I would imagine they are sufficient to take out Argentine capabilities and are not wholly for the defence of the islands.....
I would imagine the base is the equivalent of an aircraft carrier sitting permanently off the coast of Argentina.....
@69. “Thats the price of jingoistic tabloid mentality close mindedness for 2500 people living on land half the size of Wales. ”
Feb 28th, 2014 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +1PRO-JEC-TION.
Remind me again, who invaded who in 1982 in violation of UN GA and SC resolutions, ramming their Dirty War down the Falklander's Throat in a desperate attempt to keep it going in the mainland since Junta saw the writing on the wall that the gig was about to be up? Hint, it wasn't 2500 people living on land half the size if Wales. They were the ones that WERE invaded and had guns put in their faces, their land mined indiscriminately and used as hostages held danger-close to argentine positions in Stanley and Goose Green.
Who celebrated that invasion by cheering in the street? Hint, it wasn't 2500 people living on land half the size if Wales They were facing down gun barrels while fascist secret police like Patricio Dowling from their Dirty War were reviewing files on them. It was the people in the streets of Buenos Aires who thought all of the above was great! Until of course the Junta and all their trimmings let them down.
Who decades later still celebrates the Junta's failed Hail Mary invasion and all the above with coin? Hint, it STILL isn't 2500 people living on land half the size if Wales. It's the unrepentant government that sits currently in, once again, Buenos Aires.
Jingoism indeed.
@69
Feb 28th, 2014 - 04:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry, but your analogy escapes me. A more appropriate version might be the Argentinian demanding the keys to the gym, on the grounds that his great great great grandfather once attempted to burgle the place two centuries ago, and anyway it's nearer his house.
You'd think at some point Argentina and their few cheerleaders would at some point actually manage to learn something, but this emphasis on the cost of defending the Falklands is exactly the same mistake as the junta made in 1982.
1982 has ensured that the Falklands isn't any more a cost issue. Not that the cost is large anyway. It's 4 planes and a thousand blokes, who would just be somewhere else anyway. Conceivably in the future the islands could become a cost issue, but only if there was a sane, friendly, cooperative government in place in a stable, democratic Argentina. None of these adjectives currently apply, and it looks as if it will be a long time before any of them ever do. In the meantime, Peronist cluelessness remains the best guarantor of the Falklands current status there is.
A further example of Peronist cluelessness, if any were necessary, would be to get into an economic pissing contest when you've already pissed all over your own economy. Or to expect people to believe that neurotic territorial disputes have got nothing to do with it, you need naval assault craft in case you might have to assault your own coastline.
72 - “Jingoism indeed”
Feb 28th, 2014 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0'Gotcha' ..... ring a bell ??
Open an online uk newspaper story about .... oh say Argentina buying some mirages and what do you get, sun readers in their hundreds spouting about ow they'll av them Argies. (Jingoism lives on)
Why ? .... half of them dont even know themselves, other than theres a potential fight and they're the bigger side....thus opportunity to silverback it up a bit.
Thats the reason why the falklands exist, from the days of sailboats to today, morons who know nothing more than to toe the line.
Especially, although certainly more reasonably, on the islands themselves.
There is no higher mindedness or justice when it comes to the falklands beyond who has the bigger gun. Never has been, and from what I see on forums looking like there never will be. Thats no great risk to Argentina in the future, life goes on in sunny BA.
So they better keep spending their hard earned money on defense instead of luxuries.
And moreso if one day Argentina gets richer/stronger.
But thats surely not possible though right ?
Neither were Vegas or Qatar, ridiculous economic concepts. Cuba ... a commie colony founded right on the worlds superpowers coast...lol ridiculous political concept.
Whats this ... second largest shale gas deposits in the world. Ya never know.
You refer to people cheering in the streets during the invasion as though it was a bad thing, why wouldn't they, who was cheering in the streets 12,000 km away when it failed.
Were they wrong to cheer ? The empire itself was one gigantic invasion, ramming itself down throats*, including long ago on the Malvinas, how does the celebratory song of old go again? Britannia rules the waves. Celebrating the empires invasions in the street.
So kind of hypocritical.
*no conq please dont.
@74
Feb 28th, 2014 - 05:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You can always tell a Malvinista has lost the argument, when they resort to the British Empire, cf the Reductio ad Hitlerum or Godwin's Law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
74. You write/argue remarkably similar to Think and Voice.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You didn't all go to the same high school did you?
Well we got it up to 76,
Feb 28th, 2014 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We need it higher,
Some time ago a specialist stated that it would not be the east island, but the west island,
Fox bay or hill island regions,
Or even,
Port Howard or Darwin of the Falkland sound,
He stated that their aim was not to invade as such, but a publicity stunt,
With the end result being a small group taking over a precise place with enough equipment, arms, food and water for say two weeks,
To give the government time to demand the UN stop any deaths or capture until negotiations could take place,
But this came with great risks,
So as a topic of conversation,
Could it be done, or was the expert merely feeling the water..
Just a topic boys, just a topic..
71
Feb 28th, 2014 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Fourtunatly Argentina counts with strategic depth from any attack from aircraft from the islands. The problem would be two subs in the River Plate or at 150 nautic miles of shore of Bahia Blanca can destroy any asset with metric accuracy in any point of the country.
There gov’t did have a point about plucking its fethers over the submarine, that everybody knows is there and the UK didn’t even bother to deny its there. It simply says what any Submarine power would say, they dont disclose the location of the subs. The Ks havent actually bothered in doing anything about it.
There is only three P-3 Orions operational in Trelew, Chubut as far as I know. 9 are needed to patrol the entire sea platform.... And that is considering how very limited they would be by themselves in tackling a Astute class XXI century nuclear sub
1. Who'll supply Argentina without cash up front? Has Argentina got any cash? If deals are actually made, what percentage will be siphoned off by corruption?
Feb 28th, 2014 - 07:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 02. Argentina's procurement plan sounds more dangerous to its next-door neighbours than to the Falklands.
3. Argentine leaders don't think like normal people. Anything can happen, at any time. Uruguayans have been keeping a careful watch on Argentina for over 150 years. The Falklanders will have to do likewise. Just one of those unlucky geographical facts, like having an active volcano nearby.
4. It is most unlikely that Argentina will attack a vigilant prey. Not their style.
@74 Claiming hypocrisy for the british empire while carrying water for spanish-decended fascists who dance on a mass grave made by the Spanish Empire who still peak spanish and are not very...uh... First Nationy looking... while denying the same privilege to the descendants of other europeans settlers who didn't commit genocide on the land on which they sit who have been there as long as their spanish counterparts (or even longer) and who just want to be left alone in peace.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Of course, Vesty. Whatever you say.
75 - ah ok, so now mentioning the British empire = Godwin fail. Thats a new one. Anything else on the list... ??
Feb 28th, 2014 - 07:50 pm - Link - Report abuse -1But fair enough, feel free to disregard the empire bit.
You can replace it with forces returning from Iraq in there if necessary.
Unless thats a Neo-Godwin too.
@81
Feb 28th, 2014 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Everything depends on context. The British Empire is most often a new-Godwin, in that it's typically part of a trajectory that goes Malvinas-Belgrano-Invasion of Buenos Aires-Chagos-British Empire-Anglophobia-Gringophobia.
Iraq can be a neo-Godwin, in that it's typically dragged out when it's utterly irrelevant to the matter at hand, as in your example above.
But my favourite is Chagos. Only a Malvinista can simultaneously believe that Chagos was a foul crime, and it's grossly unfair the UK wouldn't perpetrate it on the falklanders to please Argentina.
@82 and shucks, Hans. What DO you call someone who demands incessantly that they get back their “rightful” version of Poland, Denmark, and Czechoslovakia? Goodwin says calling a spade a shovel in this case is a no-no. But he never had to deal with a Malvnaz... uh... Malvanista.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps we could call the Empire exit from the debate Niesund's Law in future...although it would hardly be fair ...seeing as the occupation of the Falklands was part of the British Empires' colonialism....
Feb 28th, 2014 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 078
I did of course forget to factor into scenarios... Ceteris paribus.....
The volatile situation in Ukraine could draw UK's attention as NATO support if Russia decided to invade Ukraine...they technically have already in Crimea...
NATO signed a declaration to protect Ukraine's territorial integrity...
US, UK would need everything they have against Russia.....
Great opportunity for a sneak attack......
76
I have noticed that, I hate arguing with him, as he usually illustrates salient points I hoped he may have missed.....it's like arguing with myself...
84
Feb 28th, 2014 - 08:44 pm - Link - Report abuse -1And how do you tell when the subs are in the Argentine Sea platform instead of the Black Sea or not??
@84
Feb 28th, 2014 - 08:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Aw shucks, thanks for simultaneously naming the law, and then invoking it.
85
Feb 28th, 2014 - 09:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well, you don't...
..but........Audaces fortuna iuvat ..
The Brits are complete diplomatic and political amateurs. They are loosers by definition, Germany dominates economically the whole of Europe, but it hasn't got the guns. France and the UK have them. Robert Kaplan predicts that Germany sooner or later it will have to militarize itself and become a assertive military power in Europe leaving behind its traditional peace oriented past, the same as Japan is doing. France is grabbed by the balls by Germany but at least it gets the agricultural subsidy and a vital sector of the French economy is protected... and Britain is willing to be doing the job the Germans should be doing in Eastern Europe for free and aiding billions Ukraine's new govt. And yet Cameron is licking Merkels ar*e for some little guarantees she wont give him within the EU. The british leaders are loosers and weaklings who dont understand politics and know how to exercise power. ...... but there military top brass and the intelligence community is not.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse -1@88- poor attempt at deflection.
Feb 28th, 2014 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I think you will find a European armed forces is already being prepared. Germany, the UK and France have very close ties.
Now back to topic. Do you support Argentina's colonial ambitions throughout the region?
Do you support Argentina's militarisation of declared region of peace?
Do you support Argentina's blockade of a peaceful, determined nation (the Falklands)?
Do you support Argentina's intimidation of its neighbours?
Do you support the genocidal history of Argentina?
Do you support the theft and corruption of the Argentine government?
Do you support the Argentine government's support of the killings of innocent civilians in Venezuela?
Argentina - the failed state, unpredictable, openly misleading and full of lies.
God help the normal Argentines (they really are a dying breed)
“Do you support Argentina's militarisation of declared region of peace?”
Feb 28th, 2014 - 11:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0what? lol
”Do you support Argentina's blockade of a peaceful, determined nation (the Falklands)?“
nation? colony, ruled by a remote government
”Do you support the genocidal history of Argentina?”
genocidal? says a british wannabe? read the hostory of your own country, you dumbass
89
Feb 28th, 2014 - 11:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -1tPoor attempt on deflection ??? You are an idiot. This is a open board, I was answering no 87 and yes I will stand by my post and it actually has to do with the islands in a way but you are too stupid to understand. And yes your diplomacy and politicians are made up by loosers and weaklings. Touched a nerve?? Go ahead and try to rebuff it ...You are not obliged to comment nor correspond to it.
So who the hell are you to come around demanding answers from me about stuff that I've explained over and over many times already.
You are an idiot that reads the Sunday Mail. Go away
@90 and 91 - oh dear, reverting to the most basic of name calling. Keep leading the rebellion, it's all going in Argentina's favour ;)
Feb 28th, 2014 - 11:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Chuckle, chuckle
92
Feb 28th, 2014 - 11:57 pm - Link - Report abuse -1oh dear reverting to the most basic victimization as an excuse to run away...
Ok.....“Mr” idiot
@93 - nice attempt at distraction again.
Mar 01st, 2014 - 12:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0How much is the Argentine government paying you?
So seriously, what do you think about the corruption in Argentina, and the support of the murder of those innocent Venezuelans?
Do you support the militarisation of the South Americas by Argentina?
Chuckle, chuckle
LOL
Mar 01st, 2014 - 03:37 am - Link - Report abuse -1Actually it is you the one that is trying to deflect and disregard my opinion.
Its not that you can actually play the card of “Ooh never seen you before” because I have being outspoken of my gov’t even in this thread. There is no point in linking hundreds of links and my comments and interventions against the gov't of Argentina and Venezuela. Im not going to go and prove you anything nor give you excuses, because its most likely that you know by now Im profoundly anti K.
So I will have no respect for you.
Or you are a slimy devious coward (but a basic and banal one) or a blatant retard if you really claim im paid by the Argentine gov't. Take your pick.
@95 - at least you've made a fair an honest statement regarding not supporting CFK.
Mar 01st, 2014 - 05:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0I had not read many of your posts on other threads so apologies if I have misrepresented your genuine thoughts towards Queen Cristina.
So what are your thoughts on why Argentina needs to improves/expand their armed forces.
What do you see the ultimate goal is?
“while criticizing the UK government for its insistence in ignoring United Nations resolutions imposed over the issue of the Falklands/Malvinas Islands.”
Mar 01st, 2014 - 06:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Like the members of the current Argentine government, Ambassador Castro is misrepresenting the UN position on the Falkland Islands.
The UN General Assembly resolutions on the Falklands apply to Argentina as well as Britain and they are not binding. Therefore they can be ignored if either party wishes.
Argentina continuously misrepresents the UN resolutions by implying that Britain is acting in contravention of these resolutions.
In any case, on at least one occasion, it is Argentina not Britain who has backed away from complying with the GA resolutions, and of course in 1982, following their illegal invasion, Argentina refused to comply with the UN Security Council resolution to withdraw its troops from the Falkland Islands. This was a binding resolution and Argentina was in contravention of the UN.
Being loose with the truth while ignoring past noncompliance is not going to help Argentina in its efforts to turn world public opinion against Britain, MOST people are not stupid.
82 - Only a Malvinista can simultaneously believe...Yeah a malvinista like Hitler !!
Mar 01st, 2014 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0D'oh Godwin fail.
Or is it ?? Who decides .... I say Hans.
Argentina's policy regarding the South Atlantic is very clear and it is based on international support: we are asking for dialogue”.
Mar 01st, 2014 - 09:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +1HA!!! That should read:-
Argentina's policy regarding the South Atlantic IS VERY clear...... They are trying to steal British sovereign territory... They are trying to steal British land and enslave British citizens.
They were caught last time, red handed and got their fingers burned and for the past 30 years, they have been sulking about it.
@99 too/oldie,
Mar 02nd, 2014 - 05:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Love it!
Perfectly sums it up, the sulky sues.
more like a to do item at the very bottom of the long list
Mar 02nd, 2014 - 03:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't know how many of you have been to the Mt. Pleasant airport but I would suggest that .... For the cost of the aircraft they would need to get there and be effective .. the Argentines won't have many... Mix that with the British infrastructure in place and oh well ... Chau Rio Gallegos, Comodoro Rivadavia then Buenos Aires... Ala miércoles
Mar 02nd, 2014 - 05:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@101
Mar 02nd, 2014 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That's a very perceptive view, for once, of just where Argentina's neurotic obsession sits among UK priorities, and indeed everybody else's, including their nominal supporters.
It is a big lie to claim that Argentina has “no conflict hypothesis”
Mar 04th, 2014 - 03:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0for the simple reason that,
Argentina's desire to swallow up the FREE Falkland Islands is
STRONGER THAN EVER.
Philippe
@99
Mar 06th, 2014 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“Argentina's policy regarding the South Atlantic IS VERY clear...... They are trying to steal British sovereign territory... They are trying to steal British land and enslave British citizens.”
They would at least gain some credit for honesty rather than pretending they are not Imperialists.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!