They can back what they like, the right of self determination trumps anything else, the Falkanders wish to remain conected to the UK, end of.Originally Posted by KennyKingoftheKop
|
|
They can back what they like, the right of self determination trumps anything else, the Falkanders wish to remain conected to the UK, end of.
Perfect that was pretty painless and here's me thinking they wanted the Falklands back
They'll have a hard job since they have taken Repsol's 59% stake in the oil fields of Argentina and has ********** the Spanish government off no end.
Indeed. But an Argentine attempt to retake the islands with the potential backing of the armed forces of other South American nations would make life a lot more difficult for us.
They won't get backing from the other countries military wise. Not a chance.
So Brazil and other SA contries who who take billions of our trade money will send their lads to fight and die against a nuclear power and trade partner all for Kirchners vanity and zero in return for their sacrifice? (a woman who will be out of power in a year or so anyway)...you really believe this?
Honestly, these are the warped fantasies of a country that has nothing to offer the world, their oil is drying up, their economy is collapsing, the IMF/UN etc won't even believe their governments financial figures anymore.
These actions are a failed government flailing around looking for something to deflect the attention of their impoverished population with...the average Argie is more concerned with rampant inflation leaving his life savings and pension wiped out and trying to put food on the table.
Didn't a top naval or military representative recently make plenty of noise about us being under powered should the proverbial hit the fan? Or was this just typical bluster, as the defence budgets are getting cut here, there & everywhere?Plenty down there already mate...the lone Type 45 destroyer is considered the most advanced anti air destroyer on the planet, it could swat the entire 70's vintage Argie airforce out of the sky before they knew what hit them, we also have several hundred military personel on the island and anti aircraft missiles...as for a sea invasion, forget it...we always have a nuclear powered sub lurking in the depths...watching...waiting.
This is why they were at the UN a few months ago crying about us "militerizing" our property, they know that any acts of aggression by their ancient, ill equiped, poorly trained,poorly motivated and downright inferior military would be stamped on hard by us.
You're spot on about the Nuclear Sub ... Will certainly make them think twice if they get the urge to try anything by sea.
For me the really disgusting bit about the advert was that the guy was training on a war memorial ... total lack of respect, class or sense.
Ens, just google the falklands and british military, the Falklands have never been so well protected in their entire history...we have everything we need down there, A Type 45 Destroyer, Eurofighter Typhoons, several hundred infantry, at least one sub, ground to air missiles etc.
The military always "needs more", but remember when they say that they probably could do with more to be at 100% ultimate readiness for any and all conflicts that they plan for.
A lot of folks seem worried by the lack of a carrier down there, but they don't realise that we have a proper military airfield there now...you need a carrier when you don't have military airfields or you don't have proper defences in place (of which we have both). We also have far better intel, they couldn't build up any military force or even plans without us noticing.
Also remember that the Argies attacked us with 60's/70's military technology the first time...they haven't renewed or replaced ANYTHING since the last conflict...it would be spears against machine guns.
Ultimately though, the fact that a silly advert with one bloke being cheeky is the most they can throw at us tells us all we need to know about their "capabilities" to pester the Falklands.
Honestly, there are plenty of things to worry about these days, but the falklands isn't one of them.
Last edited by FightCloob; 11-5-12 at 18:47.
Yes, our defence spending has gone down consistantly over the last 25 years & has just been massively hampered by 20 % cuts. But that being said our biggest problem & one that hasn`t been addressed & doesn`t look like it will be addressed is the lack of talent in the British Army from the rank of Lieutenant Colonel upwards. These are the ranks that draw up the strategic plans that have consistantly failed in Iraq & Afghanistan. There is nothing wrong with the ranks lower than these & it would be fair to say that these are world class but hampered by narrow minded thinking (or a complete lack of it) in the upper echelons, the ones who have to get the politicians onside have continually failed, who have to order the correct kit have consistantly failed, who have to give the correct orders, aims, targets & advice have failed.
Political bickering between the services has also affected equipement purchases, the RAF (because it flies things!)has the vast majority of the helicopter budget even though the Army is the battlefield end user & probably should have the helicopter fleet & budget split between itself & the Navy. Hence, lack of helicopters for troop & supply movements in Helmand province. This has ensured the army has to move troops & supplies into the patrol bases via the very few roads that lead to them, the Taliban then only have to attach a battery to any one of hundreds of IED`s they have buried to get a kill. The knock on effect of this is very slow movement by the infantry who have to try & find these bombs, or knowing that a Taliban ambush is liable to be in a place where our troops will have one piece of cover which the Taliban will have mined.
The same political bickering & underhand dealing has ended up with the navy getting carriers & aircraft of the type they don`t want because of the RAF wanting something else. The Navy has had to compromise on the JSF plane, they wanted the straight take off landing, more capable variant with carriers having steam powered catapults to launch the aircraft, the RAF wanted the less capable vertical take off & landing variant that needs ramps to be launched. The time delay for delivery because of bickering & penny pinching has helped to delay their entry into service if they ever do.
That being said in a war between nations they should do excellently, our Generals are very good at conventional warfare, but have appeared to have forgotten lateral thinking in unconventional warfare. Also Argentinas armed forces are shockingly poorly equipped, they have barely increased their capabilities since the last war.
That is just 1 island that the so-called "Brits" illegally occupy all over the world. Far play to the Argintines trying to take it back.
About time the Brits handed back the countries they've destroyed, raped, pillaged, murdered.
But as said.... Suppose wait til the likes of oil drys up.
C'mon Eire/Cuba/Argentina in Olympics!
Oh dear, you do realise that Argentina itself is a product of imperialism and genococide against the natives who lived there first don't you?
The right of self determination for the people who've lived on the islands for generations is sacrosanct in international and UN law. To remove them against their will would be ethnic cleansing.
Aah right. So because they occupied their country that way, it's makes what the Brits do, or have done ok? Balls.
Regardless of disecting how every country was formed, plundered or taken. Wt f, has that got to do with your "argument"
You say, "the people who live there, want to be British". Ok. It doesn't take away it was illegally taken from Argentina and what the people want has no relevance to the law. Funny these laws be changed and manipulated to suit the big-wigs and Americas/Brits of this world.
Last edited by BringRAFAback; 12-5-12 at 18:30.
Well, you shout at Britain for doing what every other powerfull country in the history of the world has done, yet seem to give Argentina a free pass..
But most importantly, you haven't addressed the true issue - SELF DETERMINATION.
The Falkland islanders have that right, so I will ask you again, do you believe they should be ethnically cleansed from the land they and their ancestors were born in or annexed by a foriegn power that has invaded them in the past?
Is that "right and just" in your opinion?
Ban the Arggy ***** from the Olympics
Read edited post, (as hit enter for space, but posted half-post)
Argentina didn't exist when the islands were discovered...there were no indigenous peoples there when we settled them (no natives ever actually), if anybody ever owned them, it was between Spain, the British, the French and the Dutch.
The fact is, you don't really care about the Falklands issue, you just have a dislike of "so called" Brits and are looking for an excuse to have a pop.
And the islanders wish to remain Falklanders with strong links to the UK, they call themselves Falkanders, they are born there, they die there, it is their home.
Perhaps Argentina would have a better chance negotiating something if the acknowledged that the Falklanders exist and didn't refuse to actually sit at a table with them and talk to them instead of refusing to acknowledge them as a people...
Aaaaaah right. Like here in Ireland? When they only acknowledged Irish in the north in 1998 because they blew the Shiiite out of them for 30years.
Your being hypocritical and wikipeadia copy & pasting isn't getting you anywhere.
Your justifying, your opinion, a bias yet logical argument. What I disagree with, is the fact you can say that about the people of the Falklands, but when a country use the same argument AGAINST the Brits in a country they illegally occupy, it's ignored by them.
Hypocrisy as ever.
The British had sovereingty over those Islands before Argentina was even country, just because the British military left the Islands for a dozen years a couple of hundred years ago doesn`t mean that Britain had given up that sovereingty. As for handing back countries I think that you may find that there are very few former colonies that remain under British rule & the ones that do remain under that rule are for the most part happy with it.
As for the oil, why do you think Argentina are kicking up such a fuss at the moment, oh & the Falklands were British long before oil was discovered in that region.
The difference in Ireland is that whether you like it or not there is a very large proportion of Northern Irelands population that are British Citizens & due to the amount of murders that have been perpetrated by the IRA, INLA ect the British may have an even bigger problem on their hands if they hand it back.
The Irish Government, Army & Garda couldn`t cope with an outbreak of sectarian or nationalist violence & Britain would be forced to act to protect its citizens. Ireland will be re-united one day but it`ll be dependent on how safe Britain feels it citizens will be. Whether you like it or not this will be one of the main worries for Britain, the main worry for the Republic is being able to afford re-unification & being able to control any violence that may break out, whether you like it or not roles will be reversed with the Republicans being seen as the oppressors whilst the Loyalists will feel like the oppressed.
Happy days for the Republic when it happens, not!
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
