Yet another Falklands Mk ii Thread - courtesy of the Daily Telegraph

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Jungelism, Mar 13, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Why can't Argentina be told publically to **** right off.
  2. Rather than having to dismantle Trident when we get a replacement we should fire a few off at Argentina. Nothing says **** off like a bucket of instant sunshine.
  3. Because it would get all the Latinos riled up and distracted from their vital work of trying to escape to the US, running their own countries into the ground, murdering each other in such numbers you'd think theres a war on, and producing all that high quality cocaine that keeps the city boys raging. The current White House tenants support seems to be limited to offering to have a nice chat with the Argies for us which isn't particularly encouraging. We've also no shortage of shitheads in this country who would be decry any such statement as warmongering Imperialism and would be more than happy to sell out 3,000 British citizens should the Argies really get pushy.
  4. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    hmm there is a set of plans somewhere for nuc mines or even better mothball all these ships down there along with a sub or two and a few hundred chally 2's we need to store for a bit
  5. "Vote for me because I think the Brit's are empire building pirates...yadda yadda." So what? Unless she comes out and says "actually we're not a bunch of over excitable skint mentalists and intend to build the required capability to force the issue" then there's nothing to see here.
  6. It just shows how much Kirchner is in trouble if she wants to make this a main plank of her election campaign. I thought last time she just brought her votes. She obviously wants to try and save a few quid this time.
  7. Because if we do it will carry no weight. There is a vested interest in this Falklands issue. If the Argies or the Brits get their way on the FI then what of Cuetes?, Gib, Cyprus and a number of other argued over areas.

    This whole mess, incidentally, is pretty much Spains doing due to their lack of diligence when completing Staff Work. To wit, a docket declaring the area of the Rio Plata independent of Spain and belong to the peoples of the Rio Plata. Note. Peoples of the River Plate, that's right. Argentina didn't even fcuking exist when this legal b0110cks was sh4t on a piece of Legal notepaper and thrown accross the Atlantic. What's more the Spanish didn't even have possession of the Falklands at that time... they'd quit them years previous, as had the Argies who only ever used them as prison colony and had that razed to the ground by USN warship, who delivered a slap in response tot he Argies getting uppity over sealling rights and had set upon a few US registered Sealers.

    1982 was just one more episode in a vexing saga by a bunch of nuttters who only beleive their own hype, their War Memorials to the 1982 war of freedom (or equally jingoistic name for Op Rosario) ALL declare that there will be another attempt. Not quite the stalwart, plain yet oddly triumphant British design.
  8. I could not believe they were daft enuff to do it the first time around, so equally they could be daft enuff to do it a second time, especially if they think we are on our chin straps with over commitment and defense cuts.

    Not likely but still possible...I think the odds are on that they will have another could be this year or in the next 100 years.
  9. [​IMG]
    the main memorial to the dead.

    As an aside, many Argies still have a downer on us for winning.

    Due to the juntas descision to use conscripts to hold the Islands, when they were soundly slapped, the Argies have a slight problem with the fact we used professional seasoned troops... Many 'Mums of the Malvinas' support groups say they blame the British Soldiers as much as the Argentine junta of the time... The British, as professional soldiers, should have taken great pains to ensure their boys went home (slight misunderstanding on what 'war' actually is methinks).

    Ironic then that Britian actually had the youngest soldiers in the war, conscription precluded any under 18s on the Argentine team. But the British had a number of 17 year olds, likewise a number of 18 year olds who would have been younger than the conscripts. Argentine conscription informed you of your military conscription at 18, then you turned up in January of that year. If the 'Class' was full then the younger lads were loaded on the next year.

    I am not crowing about this fact, just pointing out that age is immatierial. Training, equipment and leadership (from the Junta to the Conscripts own NCOs) was lacking on the Argentine side. And let's not forget the ridiculous charges of war crimes from the Latina side regarding the use of bayonets and the sinking of Belgrano (crewed by conscripts and essentially a Training Ship rather than the Hy Cruiser she once was).
  10. They view it as some sort of machismo pride thign AND the Falklands are prospering... they WILL have another crack in either military or diplomatic ways.

    If we aren't careful they'll infiltrate the Islands and vote us out (remembering our view of their status revolves around the 'wishes of the Islanders'.
  11. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    The Telegraph is wrong. CMD needs to get a grip on it. SDSR has said there is no threat to British interests and that nothing untoward, such as trouble in North Africa, can happen.

    There is absolutely no requirement for the UK to have something like an aircraft carrier.

    Sent from my iPhone using ARRSE so please excuse fat fingers and slips of the keyboard.
  12. Due to the juntas descision to use conscripts to hold the Islands, when they were soundly slapped, the Argies have a slight problem with the fact we used professional seasoned troops... Many 'Mums of the Malvinas' support groups say they blame the British Soldiers as much as the Argentine junta of the time...unquote

    Its not about the fact they were conscripts its about training, every conscript army I have dealt with blames conscription on poor quality when in fact they have more time to train their men than we do. Conscription does normally lead to poor moral but this was not the case with this lot as they were the duty heroes liberating the Malvinas.

    As for the mums their sons are now in their fifties or approaching it. They can whine as much as they want.

    You are right about the age of our troops in my section 2 were not 18 yet with no one except the IC and 2IC over 20.
  13. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    Wasn't it about timing also
    IIRC They had let the lads with three years under their belts go andf the guys who went to the Falklkands were the new intake with a couple of months in
  14. Exmarine, I take it you were there then.

    Re the duty hero, didn't some of the Argentines get confused because the Islanders basically shunned them? They were told that the Islanders were going to love them, they would have been far form the madding crowds of BA.