Barrie Stevens Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Could there be a possibility that Argentina might invade the IOM like in a sort of territory exchange scheme Not really. The Island is more broke than Argentina ...save for what's left of the VAT deal.... Also, the Island politicians outdo even the Argies for incompetence and profligacy.... Seriously though.. (Really?...Yes!)...When you look at the defence position the Falklands now has a dedicated military port, an airport taking certainly Tri-Star size jets....missile defences and four Typhoon jets that can quickly be reinforced by air-bridge..... Also, the Royal Navy may be small but it has some fearsomely up-to date ships especially submarines now armed with Cruise Missiles as well as torpedoes and on the basis that if you attack or invade British territory then Britain can now legitimately hit back from afar from under the waves ....we can hit mainland Argentina.....It takes a nuclear sub to kill another nuclear sub... Argentina has not replaced its airforce losses from 1982 and the USA so far has refused to re-supply them...Argentina's only aircraft carrier is laid up for scrap and they and the rest of South America can scarcely match our navy for technology not even Brazil which is a big regional power...... There are many scare stories and sceanrios about another invasion but the missing factor in the equation is financial.... With the world's banks many of them broke, EU and the USA on the abyss and the markets fragile no one would thank Argentina and/or its pals for starting a war with a European country and causing the USA to agonise about taking sides... I was in Houston, Texas at the time of the first invasion and many people really identified with the Islanders and saw them as latterday versions of the American colonists who rebelled against the Crown in 1776...(Though they seldom mention that the French, Dutch and Spanish helped them nor that there were 14 British colonies. Thirteen rebelled but Florida (Then a British Colony capital Pensacola) fought to remain British but was overwhelmed after three attempted invasions)....Here endeth the first lesson! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kappa Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Maybe Alan could go to Argentina and show them how to organise land deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheels Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Strikes me that the economic situation in Argentinia at the moment has some similarities to that just prior to the Falklands war when Galtieri used it to divert attention from his countries internal problems. .... Wheels, what is your assessment of the Argentine economy? It is growing very strongly, based on abundant natural resources. According to the CIA, the main threat is inflation from excessive growth. It has a democratically elected government, and Cristina de Kirchner has re-iterated that they will pursue their claim to Las Malvinas by peaceful means. I believe that they are far more likely to pursue their economic interests than risk a military adventure, and with much greater growth potential than Europe and North America, they will probably be in very good shape for several generations. https://www.cia.gov/...ok/geos/ar.html I'm basing my comment on the large report in the Times either yesterday or the day before Can't remember which as they went in the bin However http://www.economist.com/node/21541850 says similar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrie Stevens Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Strikes me that the economic situation in Argentinia at the moment has some similarities to that just prior to the Falklands war when Galtieri used it to divert attention from his countries internal problems. .... Wheels, what is your assessment of the Argentine economy? It is growing very strongly, based on abundant natural resources. According to the CIA, the main threat is inflation from excessive growth. It has a democratically elected government, and Cristina de Kirchner has re-iterated that they will pursue their claim to Las Malvinas by peaceful means. I believe that they are far more likely to pursue their economic interests than risk a military adventure, and with much greater growth potential than Europe and North America, they will probably be in very good shape for several generations. https://www.cia.gov/...ok/geos/ar.html Argentina has always been a rich country but badly run and fraught with right wing politics and left wing reactions hence many military governments...Its prosperity both past and present has always been subjective and fragile..... Only a few years ago Argentina defaulted on its entire debts and the whole kit and caboodle had to be written off with many people left with what they stood up in. This will not change over night and despite the oil and gas wealth and massive grain and cattle wealth for most people it is a poor place to live...especially the Indians and mixed bloods... Argentina may look rich on paper and booming but it is all relative. Like Brazil. It is the country of the future and will always be the country of the future! Anyway, they are always on the edge of revolution and politcally unstable (Argentina) and their system does rely on a great deal of repression even now. The common people too are hysterical! I represented the French agri-business and ship owner Louis-Dreyfus in the London market/Baltic Exchange (under Buries Markes). I specialised in grain and other cereal exports from Argentina. ie the so called Plate Market...The country was rich then but they never quite got it together and I suggest they have not changed much. Also, they have no sense of reality witness their saying it was unfair for Britain to retake the Islands and their shock at how brutal the British reaction was in terms of killing. I was down there just before the invasion and saw their army on the streets. Being British I was simply waved on by the street patrols who barely looked at my passport but the locals really got it rough off their army! I thought then that they were not up to much. Their rifles and helmets were rusty. The soldiers scruffy. My experience was and remains that they are all show and hysteria and really it is part of the Latin machismo....Stand up to them and they go down! Also, the other Latins especially Chilenos have no time for them other than possibly Peru. Argies think themselves more European than American and Buenos Aires certainly resembles a cross between Paris/Madrid and Rome (Run down or was then). Argies think themselves better than others! I found their dealings chaotic save when the Army ran the ports but it was a long time ago now. Evita was a big hit in London for many years and I got a buzz out of visiting the places mentioned in the show even the cemeteries where General Peron and Evita are buried (Miles apart)... even then the poor were treating their mausoleums as shrines. Argentina is recovering but it is not that rich and stable and I do not think they will succeed with the Falklands unless they/we buy the Islanders off and now many "Kelpers" own their properties having been allowed to buy the farm like in the UK people bought council houses. Can you honestly see a South American democracy taking the property off an English speaking country with American approval? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guzzi Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Wheels, thanks for the link. My opinion is slightly more positive, and I'll bet there are quit a few national leaders that would like to be in her shoes, facing a slowdown in growth rather than zero or negative growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 This Link was from the Sun BRITISH oil explorer ROCKHOPPER yesterday scored a hat-trick of strikes off the Falkland Islands — leaving Argentina fuming. The firm said a new well proved its Sea Lion field 80 miles off the Falklands coast is BIGGER than expected and two further big oil hits were made on the way down — as well as a discovery of gas. The strikes will infuriate Argentina's Prime Minister Cristina Kirchner — who slammed Britain last year for trying to exhaust "Argentinian natural resources" Will this tip Argentina over the edge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagar the horrible Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 This Link was from the Sun BRITISH oil explorer ROCKHOPPER yesterday scored a hat-trick of strikes off the Falkland Islands — leaving Argentina fuming. The firm said a new well proved its Sea Lion field 80 miles off the Falklands coast is BIGGER than expected and two further big oil hits were made on the way down — as well as a discovery of gas. The strikes will infuriate Argentina's Prime Minister Cristina Kirchner — who slammed Britain last year for trying to exhaust "Argentinian natural resources" Will this tip Argentina over the edge? The bolas's could be flying tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigduke6 Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 Easy - send Tony Blair out there to modernise Argentina - or send the 3 trillion HR advisers and health & safety non-jobs - that will slow them down ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheels Posted December 26, 2011 Share Posted December 26, 2011 Or indeed the Manx government The masters of prevarication Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheels Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 This is it boys this is war 99 red balloons WAR plans to defend the Falklands have been dusted off as tensions with Argentina rise. http://www.thesun.co...-Falklands.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guzzi Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Very sensible. Thatcher did a lot to precipitate the invasion by reducing military presence on the islands, sending Argentina the message that Britain would not be all that interested in defending the islands. Argentina duly invaded, and Thatcher, in need of a political fillip, saw that her interests were served by re-taking them. By comparison, the islands are well garrisoned, and have fast jets permanently stationed there. It does no harm at all to remind all concerned that Britain has the will and the means to defend the islands. There won't be a war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Britain has the means? I don't think so, not at all. The Royal Navy can't provide much in the way of air support. It barely could in 1982. How do you think protecting the Falklands would be possible without carriers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guzzi Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Britain has the means? I don't think so, not at all. The Royal Navy can't provide much in the way of air support. It barely could in 1982. How do you think protecting the Falklands would be possible without carriers? Since the war, the RAF base has been greatly expanded, and crucially can now accept direct, transatlantic flights from large transport aircraft. There are four Typhoons based there to provide air defense, around 500 soldiers, and a naval presence well beyond the paltry presence that preceded the withdrawal of HMS Endurance in the 80s. That core garrison could rapidly be expand if the need arose. Carriers were relevant to the Falklands war as we had to support our amphibious assault - Argentina was the defender. In a future war, Argentina would have to conduct it's own amphibious assault against a well equipped and garrisoned defending force. I do not think that Cristina Kirchner has the intention or appetite for an action of that nature, with all the loss of life that it would entail. Indeed, I believe she has re-stated her intention to pursue Argentinas claim through peaceful means. I personally believe Britain would be well advised to talk, whilst maintaining military deterrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Britain has the means? I don't think so, not at all. The Royal Navy can't provide much in the way of air support. It barely could in 1982. How do you think protecting the Falklands would be possible without carriers? Easy. They could use an Astute Class submarine armed with cruise missiles with non nuclear warheads: http://www.royalnavy...Astute-Tomahawk Just one of these could easily deter an Argentine invasion force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Britain has the means? I don't think so, not at all. The Royal Navy can't provide much in the way of air support. It barely could in 1982. How do you think protecting the Falklands would be possible without carriers? Since the war, the RAF base has been greatly expanded, and crucially can now accept direct, transatlantic flights from large transport aircraft. There are four Typhoons based there to provide air defense, around 500 soldiers, and a naval presence well beyond the paltry presence that preceded the withdrawal of HMS Endurance in the 80s. That core garrison could rapidly be expand if the need arose. Carriers were relevant to the Falklands war as we had to support our amphibious assault - Argentina was the defender. In a future war, Argentina would have to conduct it's own amphibious assault against a well equipped and garrisoned defending force. I do not think that Cristina Kirchner has the intention or appetite for an action of that nature, with all the loss of life that it would entail. Indeed, I believe she has re-stated her intention to pursue Argentinas claim through peaceful means. I personally believe Britain would be well advised to talk, whilst maintaining military deterrence. I do agree. The Argentinians could certainly not present the fait accompli they did then and leave Britain completely on the back-foot. It would be very bloody were the Argentians to invade. But were to overcome any insular force, Britain couldn't do much about getting rid of them. Britain couldn't maintain air superiority in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.