So, when do we invade?

This is not a repeat from 1982.

Slaxl: Teknowaffle: I don't get why the Argentinians think that they have a claim to the Islands just because they are relatively close to them. (about 300 miles at the closest point) despite the islands having a mostly British history and pretty much entirely British culture/language.

I mean, Sweden could make an actual claim to the Åland islands 25 miles off the coast. The islands were under Swedish control through most of the history of the Swedish empire, Swedish is the dominant language and culture, but the Islands belong to Finland. But no one complains.

You're right, they have no legitimate claim to the islands, so I suspect it's just a nice place to direct internal anger outwards whenever there's an issue the government can't deal with quickly enough. Also there'll be a legitimate desire to possess the islands because of natural resources. I just hope there are enough natural resources to make Britain want to fight for them, and stop cutting back on the military.

Gotta think of those strategic sheep.

It's not just the sheep.

The Falklands are near a strategic naval choke-point.

If the HMS Astute can get there without constantly bumping into the sea floor, the Argies won't like it up them!

Is the F-35 JSF ready to go yet? Cause the UK needs to go kick some uppity third world shiat holes ass, just like the last time they tried this shiat.

If not maybe the US could loan them an aircraft carrier and some F-22's

sillydragon: So, when do we invade?

When we discover oil there. Granted it's not covered in sand so I don't know if we have a viable attack plan.

dittybopper: Slaxl: Teknowaffle: I don't get why the Argentinians think that they have a claim to the Islands just because they are relatively close to them. (about 300 miles at the closest point) despite the islands having a mostly British history and pretty much entirely British culture/language.

I mean, Sweden could make an actual claim to the Åland islands 25 miles off the coast. The islands were under Swedish control through most of the history of the Swedish empire, Swedish is the dominant language and culture, but the Islands belong to Finland. But no one complains.

You're right, they have no legitimate claim to the islands, so I suspect it's just a nice place to direct internal anger outwards whenever there's an issue the government can't deal with quickly enough. Also there'll be a legitimate desire to possess the islands because of natural resources. I just hope there are enough natural resources to make Britain want to fight for them, and stop cutting back on the military.

Gotta think of those strategic sheep.

It's not just the sheep.

The Falklands are near a strategic naval choke-point.

And oil has been discovered in the region.

I think the UK should not shirk from sending the Prince to do a tour there. It would certainly give Argentina pause. If they managed to kill him in some kind of military action, the subjects of the UK would be significantly motivated to support a war against Argentina. He is the heir to the throne and quite popular with the people.

President Cristina Kirchner has adopted a steadily more beligerent stance towards Britain's South Atlantic possessions.


That's so weird... Because I've been told so many times by women's studies majors that if women were in charge of things there would be no war and lots of cooperation! It's almost as if women are imperfect human beings just like men, and not some fantasy creature with superior genetically coded morality. Weird, right?!?!

"Glow-in-the-Dark Buenos Aires"

- - Four Stars the Geiger Counter Review



The Faulklands Wars -- a live miniseries coming in February or It may be winter where you are, but it's summer here and the posturing is easy. Brought to you by HBO in conjunction with TVE, CanalPlus,Haliburton, various arms dealers, Hughes Aerospace and various cartels.

dittybopper: Slaxl: Teknowaffle: I don't get why the Argentinians think that they have a claim to the Islands just because they are relatively close to them. (about 300 miles at the closest point) despite the islands having a mostly British history and pretty much entirely British culture/language.

I mean, Sweden could make an actual claim to the Åland islands 25 miles off the coast. The islands were under Swedish control through most of the history of the Swedish empire, Swedish is the dominant language and culture, but the Islands belong to Finland. But no one complains.

You're right, they have no legitimate claim to the islands, so I suspect it's just a nice place to direct internal anger outwards whenever there's an issue the government can't deal with quickly enough. Also there'll be a legitimate desire to possess the islands because of natural resources. I just hope there are enough natural resources to make Britain want to fight for them, and stop cutting back on the military.

Gotta think of those strategic sheep.

It's not just the sheep.

The Falklands are near a strategic naval choke-point.

Oil. They have discovered oil around the Falklands. The Argies want them for the oil and the national pride. Britain will fight for them, but tensions will have to ramp considerably I think before this happens.

It's pretty bad when you get pushed around by Argentina.

Maybe hire a few 'privateers'? There's a lot of out of work pirates in Somalia.

Any reaction from the British left?

I remember the "Falkland war" back in the 80's. Most tense 2 months of me not giving a crap I can remember.

I suspect this is a politician trying to gain support from the populace via nationalism and patriotism to further her career, to the detriment of her nation.

Argentina will be feeling the hand of God across their face if the UK decides they have had enough shenanigans.

cgraves67: dittybopper: Slaxl: Teknowaffle: I don't get why the Argentinians think that they have a claim to the Islands just because they are relatively close to them. (about 300 miles at the closest point) despite the islands having a mostly British history and pretty much entirely British culture/language.

I mean, Sweden could make an actual claim to the Åland islands 25 miles off the coast. The islands were under Swedish control through most of the history of the Swedish empire, Swedish is the dominant language and culture, but the Islands belong to Finland. But no one complains.

You're right, they have no legitimate claim to the islands, so I suspect it's just a nice place to direct internal anger outwards whenever there's an issue the government can't deal with quickly enough. Also there'll be a legitimate desire to possess the islands because of natural resources. I just hope there are enough natural resources to make Britain want to fight for them, and stop cutting back on the military.

Gotta think of those strategic sheep.

It's not just the sheep.

The Falklands are near a strategic naval choke-point.

And oil has been discovered in the region.

I think the UK should not shirk from sending the Prince to do a tour there. It would certainly give Argentina pause. If they managed to kill him in some kind of military action, the subjects of the UK would be significantly motivated to support a war against Argentina. He is the heir to the throne and quite popular with the people.

Good plan?

Is Kerchner up for re-election soon?

Slaves2Darkness: Is the F-35 JSF ready to go yet? Cause the UK needs to go kick some uppity third world shiat holes ass, just like the last time they tried this shiat.

If not maybe the US could loan them an aircraft carrier and some F-22's

Loan them some F-22's what?

Those Argentine vessels will "intercept" a sub-launched Harpoon missile if they're not careful. Even with cutbacks the Royal Navy is still one of the more serious navies around.

mongbiohazard: President Cristina Kirchner has adopted a steadily more beligerent stance towards Britain's South Atlantic possessions.


That's so weird... Because I've been told so many times by women's studies majors that if women were in charge of things there would be no war and lots of cooperation! It's almost as if women are imperfect human beings just like men, and not some fantasy creature with superior genetically coded morality. Weird, right?!?!

plus Thatcher...

Last time I checked a blockade was an act of war. Seems like Britain can do what it likes to lift the blockade. General Belgrano, anyone?

Argentina does realize there is thing called NATO right? And that trumps the various agreements we have not to fark with the 3rd world part of this hemisphere. Even if they defeat the Royal Navy (unlikely), it just means they won a free ass kicking from an American carrier task force.

/we should send a DDG down for a port visit in the Falklands and see if they talk shiat about the "Permit"

mongbiohazard: President Cristina Kirchner has adopted a steadily more beligerent stance towards Britain's South Atlantic possessions.


That's so weird... Because I've been told so many times by women's studies majors that if women were in charge of things there would be no war and lots of cooperation! It's almost as if women are imperfect human beings just like men, and not some fantasy creature with superior genetically coded morality. Weird, right?!?!

Brilliant! And so true! Thank you for posting.
Also the British just need to send one of the Invincible Class Aircraft Carriers and some Royal Marines and straighten this out once and for all.

apeiron242: Is Kerchner up for re-election soon?

Slaves2Darkness: Is the F-35 JSF ready to go yet? Cause the UK needs to go kick some uppity third world shiat holes ass, just like the last time they tried this shiat.

If not maybe the US could loan them an aircraft carrier and some F-22's

Loan them some F-22's what?

What you can't launch that money sucking flying monstrosity from an aircraft carrier? What is it good for then?

These guys do realize that the UK has the best submarine training course on the planet, no? Send one hunter killer down there and it'll be an end to it.

Is it 1982 again? (Yawn, stretch)

AirForceVet: Sent a couple of nuclear attack submarines to the Falklands. That'll remind Argentina to quit acting like a imprealist.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 550x360]

Doesn't even have to be a nuclear submarine, although they have the speed to get there quicker. Don't forget that the Belgrano was sunk using WWII technology: The torpedoes themselves were a pre-WWII design. Of course, it didn't help that the ARA General Belgrano was commanded by a washed-up chimp actor.

Slaves2Darkness: Is the F-35 JSF ready to go yet? Cause the UK needs to go kick some uppity third world shiat holes ass, just like the last time they tried this shiat.

If not maybe the US could loan them an aircraft carrier and some F-22's

Well the F-22 does not fly off carriers so that would be a bad mix.

I don't think the marine version of the F-35 (the 'B' version) is ready to go ... which is what the UK was looking to replace their Harriers with.

But, on the bright side, the UK put an airbase on the Faukland Islands (commissioned in 1985) and apparently it has 4 Typhoons (Eurofighters) based there permanently. I'm pretty sure that the Argentinians don't have anything that can match them even if there are only 4.

They also have a navel base and ~500 army troops (which they can reinforce through the airbase).

Overall this seems like a bad move by Argentina ... if the shooting starts I think it will go worse than the last time they tried it.

J.Garcia'sRightMiddleFinger: I suspect this is a politician trying to gain support from the populace via nationalism and patriotism to further her career, to the detriment of her nation.

Argentina will be feeling the hand of God across their face if the UK decides they have had enough shenanigans.

This is exactly what enabled the 1982 war, nationalism to cover for a deplorable economic condition. The Argies have been pushing for assumption of control over the Falklands for decades; legally they have lost several times. The Spanish took the islands, then abandoned them to British occupation in the late 18th century. The Argies have tried to claim that the Spanish claim never waned and they have inherited it.

They lost that argument. If they keep this up they may just lose this argument as well.

TFA
Mrs Kirchner used the last UN General Assembly meeting to put Argentina's claims of sovereignty over the Falklands on a par with Palestinian claims to statehood.

You've got to be farking kidding me.

Why the fark do they want those rocks?

trotsky
Oil.

Oh.

Slaves2Darkness: apeiron242: Is Kerchner up for re-election soon?

Slaves2Darkness: Is the F-35 JSF ready to go yet? Cause the UK needs to go kick some uppity third world shiat holes ass, just like the last time they tried this shiat.

If not maybe the US could loan them an aircraft carrier and some F-22's

Loan them some F-22's what?

What you can't launch that money sucking flying monstrosity from an aircraft carrier? What is it good for then?

When has the US Air Force's "Air Superiority Fighter" ever been designed for carrier use??

: Don't fly me for Argentina

The Brits don't have any long range bomber capability anymore, do they? In 1982 they had to refuel the Vulcans Mk 2 (courtesy USA) when the made their strikes on the island. In addition, didn't they just scrap their last carrier (Royal Oak?)?

And, didn't Argentina did hurt the Royal Navy something fierce!

Brits lost: HMS Ardent, HMS Sheffield, HMS Antelope and MV Atlantic Conveyor, HMS Coventry,

The HMS Argonaut, HMS Brilliant were badly damaged.

/That Vulcan is a bad-assed looking aircraft, though!

Phil Moskowitz: These guys do realize that the UK has the best submarine training course on the planet, no? Send one hunter killer down there and it'll be an end to it.



Our perisher courses! Where are they? Answer that one, Herr Goering! The British have plenty of them! Talking big is all he's good for, that fat slob.

Slaves2Darkness: apeiron242: Is Kerchner up for re-election soon?

Slaves2Darkness: Is the F-35 JSF ready to go yet? Cause the UK needs to go kick some uppity third world shiat holes ass, just like the last time they tried this shiat.

If not maybe the US could loan them an aircraft carrier and some F-22's

Loan them some F-22's what?

What you can't launch that money sucking flying monstrosity from an aircraft carrier? What is it good for then?

Air superiority. Except not air over the water.

BTW, some one asked in a thread yesterday whether navies are obsolete. This is why they are not.

Teknowaffle: I don't get why the Argentinians think that they have a claim to the Islands just because they are relatively close to them. (about 300 miles at the closest point) despite the islands having a mostly British history and pretty much entirely British culture/language.

I mean, Sweden could make an actual claim to the Åland islands 25 miles off the coast. The islands were under Swedish control through most of the history of the Swedish empire, Swedish is the dominant language and culture, but the Islands belong to Finland. But no one complains.

Pretty much this.

I'm no fan of Argentina (although I'm south american), but the question that always pops into my head is. How can some country who is not even remotely close to this islands own them? And not the country that's next to it?

Border disputes with say Uruguay or Brazil, that I can fathom, but the UK? who is thousands of miles away?

And yea, now the islands are pretty much british with all the brits living there for decades, but before that there was still an Argentine demand, before the islands where "britished' up.

Its like the US or Russia or whatever having demands of land in Antartica for example. WTF PEOPLE ITS REALLY FAR AWAY. Argentina, Chile, Australia, NZ should be the ones claiming something in Antartica... jeez.

Maybe its time for someone to hold them accountable for giving hideouts to nazis

Wow. The amount of scare quotes in TFA is ridiculous.