Originally Posted by Rayc

Saturday 11 February 2012


Argentina accuses Britain of sending nuclear missiles to Falklands

Argentina has stepped up its sabre-rattling rhetoric over the Falkland Islands by accusing Britain of sending nuclear missiles to the South Atlantic.

Argentina accuses Britain of sending nuclear missiles to Falklands - Telegraph

Indeed, the Agentinian claptrap is unbelievable! I happened to see a brief snatch of the Argies foreign minister talking to the UN on either CNN or Al Jazeera last night where the moron was accusing Britain of Militarising the S Atlantic! He used a large map to point out those incredibly heavily armed fortresses we have on St Helena & Tristan Da Cunha amongst Ascension Island & obviously the Falklands themselves as examples!
Idiotic to say the least, I dont think Tristan has ever had a garrison of any sort, the last garrison St Helena had was probably the few sent to guard Napoleon, before Argentina even existed as such!
Ascension is, I believe primarily a US base with a few Brits to cope with stopovers! The Falklands themselves have at best a scant handfull of troops, hardly a threat to Argentinas security!
Why on earth the useless talking shop that is the UN, doesn't tell the Argies to go & f..k themselves, it isn't theirs, never has been theirs and never will be unles some political idiot gives the Islands to them!!

South American politicians prefer it when they can throw their oppositon out of aircraft over the Atlantic (for example), rather than actually debate matters.

Originally Posted by ex_colonial

Ascension is, I believe primarily a US base with a few Brits to cope with stopovers! The Falklands themselves have at best a scant handfull of troops, hardly a threat to Argentinas security!

I don't even think there is many military down there now
A lot of it did go to civvie contractors mostly ex RAF
IIRC the aircraft bring their own people - A Cpl and a couple of techies to turn it around but the refuel and everything was contracted.

Off Course the plus points are unlike 82 we've got kit sitting there to handle planes arriving at short notice.

What about NATO involvement? An attack on one is an attack on all and all that.

I'd just like to take this opportunity to assure Mr Timerman that this is NOT a British nuclear-tipped missile in its camouflaged silo on St Helena.



It's merely another SAR asset...

Originally Posted by FNUSNU

What about NATO involvement? An attack on one is an attack on all and all that.

Nope - outside the North Atlantic area so Article 5 doesn't apply. I've always assumed it was crafted precisely to avoid NATO getting drawn into post-colonial disputes. Oh, and Art 5 doesn't guarantee military support. Good, eh?

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Originally Posted by Rayc

Saturday 11 February 2012


Argentina accuses Britain of sending nuclear missiles to Falklands

Argentina has stepped up its sabre-rattling rhetoric over the Falkland Islands by accusing Britain of sending nuclear missiles to the South Atlantic.

Argentina accuses Britain of sending nuclear missiles to Falklands - Telegraph

Absolute gold-dust. They are either so desperate that they are reduced to making up utter shite, or they are so stupid they can't tell the difference between a boomer and a hunter-killer. Personally I'd go with the former, but you never know.

Either way, they haven't exactly covered themselves in glory with this bollocks.

Spicky twats

You should read the dribble on this..... Makes me hate the Diegos even more!!

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Las-M...=wall&filter=1

Originally Posted by wm1965

How would the British public react if we sent 5 ships and Ocean to help the French out after an Indonesian invasion of New Caledonia? Let alone if any of our guys died.

Why not? We've lost people in Afghanistan after the US was attacked.
We lost millions after Poland was invaded...

I suspect that if we had a defence treaty with France to help protect each other's overseas assets that people wouldn't be too upset. However, I'd wager that France is unlikely to agree to any such deal, seeing as the chances are (even if they're small) that any such war will be for British territory, so the Frogs don't gain much from it.

"It's all about the oil!" is a tedious cry from Guardian readers and conspiracy theorists. We lost a few hundred people over the Falklands before there was a sniff of oil. Was it all about the mutton?

It may just be that it's UK territory inhabited by British people.

Interestingly a few European powers still have overseas territories, including Spain (those rocks off North Africa that the locals want). France, Holland etc wouldn't like a precedent set. Whilst they wouldn't give us direct military support (not that we'd need it) they wouldn't make a fuss.

And the US? None too keen on flaky South American shit holes.

And let's face it: most of the world can see exactly what Argentina is up to. They're not fooling anyone bar perhaps Chavez. And Chavez has accused America of giving South American leaders cancer, so is a known mentalist.