Posted on 01/13/2013 10:02:53 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
Today the Telegraph is reporting that British Royal Navy strategists take seriously the nationalistic trash-talk emanating from leftist twit Cristina Kirchner: there's already planning for contingencies ranging from a simple show-of-force to another direct military challenge to British sovereignty in the Falklands (which Argentinians refer to as El Malvinas)....
In a situation that eerily echoes that of today -except replace 'left wing' with 'right wing'- in April 1982 the South American country had a failing right-wing junta in Buenos Aires -desperate for some populist appeal/diversion to quell domestic (economic) unrest- attempt to buoy public support through an ill-advised nationalistic military conquest.
And it worked, for a while: not only was the planned invasion and occupation of the Falklands launched prematurely (for political reasons) with lightly-trained troops, the military government
-under the command of General Leopoldo Galtieri- severely underestimated the steely resolve of PM Margret Thatcher in attacking what they refer to as the 'Malvinas', a small group of British-held islands 300 miles off the Argentine coast (then subsequently the inhospitable South Georgia Islands +840 miles further out to sea).
 |
| Argentine light-cruiser ARA General Belgrano on its way to the bottom |
 |
|
|
*** PING ***
FOR ANY wanting onto the RR ping list, FReepmail me @ ‘Reaganite Republican’
TIA!
I read a novel where Argentina actually beat back the British, took the Falklands, then went so far as to attack Britain.
Obviously, it was fiction, and if Zero wasn’t president, we’d back Britain 100%.
There’s not a Thatcher within 5000 miles of Britain. Argentina would win this time, because the British don’t have the will for the fight.
While I have no love for the current state of the UK or its corrupt government, the people of these islands have a right to determine their own future. Argentina’s historical claims are weak at best, and a war decided this conflict. I am sick to death of people going to the UN to try and change the results of a war. You lost. Get over it. Leave the islanders alone and solve your own widespread problems.
For the record, Kirchner is a corrupt, unstable authoritarian who has been involved in illegal corporate seizure, political assassination, and election fraud. One of the more quirky members of Chavez’ socialist puppet show.
No they wouldn't. The Argentine military is an embarassing, underfunded joke. They don't have any amphibious lift at all. Most of their aircraft are inoperable. For all the attention the downsizing of the British military since 1982 has gotten, the Argentine military has declined much more.
UK military is....probably 1/2 to 1/3 what is was back then, and the Args have noticed.
I think all of Britain has maybe 130 combat aircraft.
No carriers, and I think maybe 10 destroyers —shocking.
Exactly... The Royal Navy is half the size it was during the Falklands War. It isn’t capable of pulling off the same defense of the islands it demonstrated on the last go around.
5 destroyers, 13 frigates, a helicopter carrier, and two amphibious assault ships. 6 fleet subs and four nuclear missile boats that have no role here.
The Royal navy has no air protection anymore either. The Harriers are gone forever.
THAT is the entire Royal Navy. It has about 25% of the power of the Japanese Maritime self defense force.
And now the Argies have the German 209 sub. Much quieter than a nuclear fleet boat. Finding them at all is already tough. Finding them in the coastal waters of the Falklands archipeligo is even harder.
The RAF has no more bombers. They have nothing bigger than the Eurofighter. So there can be no strategic bombing of any kind. In the first war they flew several raid something like 7 or 8000km from Ascension Island. That capability is gone. Also out is any meaningful strikes against the mainland. The RAF with Eurofighters couldnt sustain a bombing effort against Libya, from NATO bases in the Med without us carrying the load.
The British soldiers are still ok, but are drasticically cut. The Army actually has more generals than it does tanks. But they could likely defend such a small place.
The Argies would have a difficult time landing forces on the islands again, so it would probably end a stalemate. But The forces of the UK are a faint shadow of the 1982 military they had. Even worse, they are lead by a wuss now, not Thatcher. And now their fighting spririt is all but gone.
Iranians in motorboats captured their boarding parties -within sight- of the mothership frigate. In the RN of 1982 that would have been unthinkable.
Also, the polictical reality on South America has changed, as has assymetric warfare. A socialist revolution has swept South America. So a war starting with Argentina, could see Brazil jump in against the “European aggressor”. And in 1982, it was rare as a warfighting policy, but if Argentina was attacked, assymetric would be things like IEDs going off in London, etc.
The Brits could hold the islands defensively, but cannot really project offensive power, and no amount of waving the union jack will change that. So the Argies and Brits each get in a few blows, sink a few ships, then the dirty stuff begins,, and it wnds up eaxctly where it was the day before the war. Senseless for the Argies to try it,,, Britains weakness has apparently been provocative though.
And God only knows what zippy in the White Hut would or wouldn’t do.
There is a tiny speck of an island in the middle of the Atlantic, far, far north of the Falklands —the British Ascenscion Island.
Long-range UK Vulcan bombers were intended to bomb the USSR, but they proved juuust able to make a round-trip strike on Argentine airfields on the Falklands. This scary fact meant the vast majority of Arg air-ops had to be flown from far-off Argentina, rather than from the islands themselves.
The Brits were able to scare Arg fighters from the Falklands by putting ONE bomb on one airstrip from ONE bomber (all the other escorting Vulcan bombers had to be used to air re-fuel just that ONE last bomber). Some of the parts used in that mission were literally being used as ASH TRAYS in the pilots’ lounge.
But what you must understand is the Brits were only juuuuust capable of pulling that off, and that was back then, when they were comparatively stronger.
Short of cruise-missile attacks from subs or ships, I don’t know how they would do this today.
Does anyone know...?
Dont know if Argentina has the ability to invade, but if they gain control of the island again, I don’t think Britain would take it back. I have been reading for years that British politicians want to negotiate with Argentina for a long term solution to the dispute.
Argentina is only doing what tyrants have done for century’s take on military adventures to distract the public when the economy and your currency are going in the toilet.
Something like Obomber is doing now.Getting us involved in conflicts where we should not be involved.Like Syria and Libya.
I neglected to make my point;
This time around, it’s likely the Args would SUCCEED in doing all their defensive air ops (i.e. launcing ASM’s at UK ships) from the Falklands itself, and not from far-off Argentina, as was the case in the 1980’s.
This would mean their strike range against any approaching British fleet would be MUCH, much greater;
There would be some time of air-sea battle before any type of landing could take place.
This is all assuming that the Brits do not now have a robust ability to launch conventional cruise-missiles from subs —I don’t know this, but suspect some of you do.
Sounds as though trouble is brewing in Argentina and they need another Falklands brouhaha to distract from what is happening at home.
I was in Argentina in the 80s when the battle over the Falklands began anew. At that time, Argentina had an extremely high rate of inflation and most Argentines had 2 or 3 “make-work” jobs to make ends meet.
El Presidente at the time, Gral. Galtieri, tried to pick a fight with neighboring Chile over a longstanding border dispute, but the Chileans wouldn’t play. Unfortunately, the hapless Brits would and got sucked into Galtieri’s distraction from the economic problems at home.
So, they are rewinding the tape from the 80s and starting the movie over.
‘Scuse me, this is where I came in.
Really? Not Las Malvinas?
“only doing what tyrants have done for century’s take on military adventures to distract the public when the economy and your currency are going in the toilet.”
Say,,, now that you mention that,,,it kinda sounds familiar!
You are correct that Britain would love to end this longstanding dispute with Argentina. There's just one tiny hitch in their gitalong that prevents them from ceding the Falklands back to Argentina - in the '82 war, PM Margret Thatcher posed the question to the Falkland Islanders themselves - did they want to be Argentine, or remain British?
The islanders overwhelmingly voted to remain British and, in subsequent votes on the same topic, the number has not changed. This is why Britain can't just sign the Falklands away and end this issue.
But, there is an additional problem. Ever since Britain took the Falkland Islands away from Argentina, the Argentines have refused to let go. There is a mindset in Argentina that every inch of land they once owned (or controlled) is still theirs, regardless who occupies it now.
Still, I am of the opinion that things are heating up for Kirchner and he needs a distraction. Making the Falkland Islands the focus of that distraction always works for corrupt Argentine leaders and, no doubt, it will succeed again.
Errr, Karchner is a she, not a he. Her former husband was president, but he did the nation a favor and died and the idiot peronista voters chose his wife to lead the republic. There has never been a peronista worth anything at all. Argentina would lose any attempt to invade Las Malvinas once more, but you can’t cure stupidity.
Doesn’t matter if Kirchener is a he or a she. It dosn’t change the fact that the Falklands are are a favorite distraction of corrupt Argentine leaders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.