• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Once again: Argentina reaffirms Falklands sovereignty

#1
http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,20281,18692110-5001028,00.html

Argentina reaffirms Falklands sovereignty

From correspondents in Buenos Aires

April 03, 2006

ARGENTINIAN President Nestor Kirchner reaffirmed his country's sovereignty over the Falklands today as he spoke to military veterans on the anniversary of the 1982 war with Britain over the islands.

Argentine forces invaded the Falklands, which Buenos Aires calls the Malvinas, on April 2, 1982 asserting their claim that the islands are Argentine territory.

The British retook the islands following a short war, which killed more than 600 Argentine troops and 200 British.

"Argentina reaffirms its legitimate sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and the islands of the South Atlantic," Mr Kirchner told hundreds of veterans during a commemoration event at El Palomar military base west of Buenos Aires.

"The claim on the islands is a permanent objective and undeniable right of the Argentine people," Mr Kirchner said.

However, he stressed that his government's strategy toward regaining sovereignty over the islands would be conducted through a "dialogue, diplomatically and in peace".

The islands' sovereignty has between disputed by Argentine and Britain since 1833, long before 1982, when Argentina's military regime sent troops to occupy the islands, which lay off Argentina's east coast.

The two governments re-established diplomatic relations in 1990.

Done and done in the past, but it's the 24th today. Would we possibly have to take the Falklands back before the 25th?
 
#3
This has already been done a couple of months ago. Can't find the link cos I'm a wee bit busy. Think the concensus was that they couldn't take the islands back easily now as there is a far more potent force there than previously. We also still have our submarine threat. Perhaps the US would help out as well as we've helped them so much recently (just off to open my back door to let the flying pig out, brb)
 
#4
crabby said:
This has already been done a couple of months ago. Can't find the link cos I'm a wee bit busy. Think the concensus was that they couldn't take the islands back easily now as there is a far more potent force there than previously. We also still have our submarine threat. Perhaps the US would help out as well as we've helped them so much recently (just off to open my back door to let the flying pig out, brb)
What potent force? Slack handful of fast air, 1500 REMFs and a Coy+ of Inf with the rest of the mil unavailable 'cause we are commited elsewhere? Wish I could be so confident.....
 
#5
The fast air is quite a potent force even if it is a bit too windy/cloudy/late/early for them to fly. The state of the argentine airforce and army is worse than 24 years ago. Also any threat of escalation and we'll post a sub, possibly two down there, enough to frighten off what's left of their navy hopefully. Basically I reckon there's "enough" of a deterrent, or one that could be quickly flown/shipped in that the argies would think twice.
 
#7
Perhaps the Argie president is considering a sizeable 'loan' to the Labour Party coffers in the hope that he can exchange the resultant offered Peerage for the Falklands Islands. And you know what? I wouldn't put it past Tone to accept.

I have NO doubt that our Armed Forces would be perfectly able to repel any invaders to the Islands, the difficulty would lie in getting the offical go-ahead surely?

(Edited an hour after original posting to correct MAJOR window-licking typing error: intended word added in bold :oops: )
 
#8
.Dolly said:
Perhaps the Argie president is considering a sizeable 'loan' to the Labour Party coffers in the hope that he can exchange the resultant offered Peerage for the Falklands Islands. And you know what? I wouldn't put it past Tone to accept.

I have doubt that our Armed Forces would be perfectly able to repel any invaders to the Islands, the difficulty would lie in getting the offical go-ahead surely?
If any a time for a royal proclamation..
 
#11
crabby said:
Perhaps the US would help out as well as we've helped them so much recently (just off to open my back door to let the flying pig out, brb)
Well its not as if Uncle Sam gae us the latest AIM missiles, or intelligence, or offered the loan of an aircraft carrier or anything during the war, is it?...
 
#13
Bravo_Bravo said:
crabby said:
Perhaps the US would help out as well as we've helped them so much recently (just off to open my back door to let the flying pig out, brb)
Well its not as if Uncle Sam gae us the latest AIM missiles, or intelligence, or offered the loan of an aircraft carrier or anything during the war, is it?...
don't forget the AWACS ;)
 
#16
I read a Hansard a while back which suggested that we were negotiating an amicable settlement that would guarantee stability for those living in the Falklands. This appeared to be saying that we would eventually give the Malvinas back. Can't remember the date but recall that it was picked up by Mail and a couple of the (then) broadsheets.

One of the reasons cited for negotiation was that it cost so much to keep presence there (they didn't mention the fact that there's not enough oil to warrant staying).

255 British forces lost their lives for this territory (Argentine losses around 400 higher) - felt then, and still do, that whilst political soultions better than conflict that (think it was 2003) to just hand the islands over, especially for money motive, would be a national disgrace and would turn their victory into a defeat.

Sorry if sounding jingositic,

P
 

Nehustan

On ROPS
On ROPs
#17
58_Pattern said:
Don't worry we have the mighty Sea Harrier don't we ?
Well...you never know what lurks over the horizon (or under it I suppose). Now if it was down to me I'd be looking into Submarine Aircraft Carriers...whats that motto 'Not by strength but by guile'

[align=center] :twisted:[/align]
 
#18
Padre said:
I read a Hansard a while back which suggested that we were negotiating an amicable settlement that would guarantee stability for those living in the Falklands. This appeared to be saying that we would eventually give the Malvinas back. Can't remember the date but recall that it was picked up by Mail and a couple of the (then) broadsheets.

One of the reasons cited for negotiation was that it cost so much to keep presence there (they didn't mention the fact that there's not enough oil to warrant staying).

P
Padre, This was the position of HMG from 1965 onward when discussions started with the Argies. HMG at that time ignored the wishes of the Isalnders who were not very happy with this. HMGs attitude attitude changed of course but only after the devious gits got bored and invaded.
 
W

Wolf_Nipplechips

Guest
#19
(they didn't mention the fact that there's not enough oil to warrant staying).
Er, yes there is. Desire - (I've got shares). It's just that there isn't the infrastructure for development (Stanley isn't Aberdeen), nor the need to extract, just yet.

Of course, if Benny swapped his bobble-hat for a shemagh, the Steyr for an AK74, started calls to prayer from the spire of Stanley Cathedral, and the UN declared sheep-produced methane to be a WMD, we could see some justification for a 'Halliburton's Expeditionary War' type thingy.
 
#20
Realised that the opinion was held during the late seventies but was not aware went that far back.

Having scanned various sources quickly can't find anything to say that greater potential for 'handing back' (how can you give back something that wasn't theirs?) exists today. Seems though that we might have almost the same conditions as early 80's where they acted against us as result of stalled negotiations.

Know there is oil, but didn't think there was enough to attract certain attitudes from the powers that be.

Thanks for the info, often forget that Falklands still on burner.

P
 

Latest Threads