Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UK REJECTS ARGENTINA'S FALKLANDS CLAIM
chronicle.gi ^ | January 19 2010 | chronicle.gi

Posted on 01/19/2010 1:21:35 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: the scotsman
Knowing what you're talking about is not a prerequisite for most Freepers on these military threads.
41 posted on 01/19/2010 6:20:38 AM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

Are you disputing the theory of continental drift?

This is pretty much settled science.


42 posted on 01/19/2010 6:30:23 AM PST by rahbert (Bop Bop, dibidip dibidip....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

Heh. They can’t even tell us why there are 15th century maps of the Antarctica land mass which we didn’t know until satellite mapping in the 60s. Many of these theories are out on a limb out on another limb.


43 posted on 01/19/2010 6:31:37 AM PST by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: rahbert

(a) that’s not what I said,

(b) see my post after yours,

(c) nothing’s settled unless it’s empirical. Show me any scientific, empirical results and I will believe them. Show me theories on top of hypotheses on top of speculation & I will laugh at it.


44 posted on 01/19/2010 6:34:34 AM PST by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

“Knowing what you’re talking about is not a prerequisite for most Freepers on these military threads.”

Maybe not, but a good enough proportion DO know what they’re talking about that the facts come thick & fast. I like it.


45 posted on 01/19/2010 6:36:07 AM PST by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Looks like the Argentine leaders need another war to distract the citizens from the coming economic distress.


46 posted on 01/19/2010 6:42:08 AM PST by Rockitz (This isn't rocket science- follow the money and you'll find truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9
So what are they supposed to blockade us with?

Argentine Air Force (Fuerza Aérea Argentina or FAA)

47 posted on 01/19/2010 6:52:41 AM PST by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dixie Yooper
......taking over Chili ..... navel skills

¡Ay Chihuahua! Señor, I advise you to never get the Chili in your navel again.

48 posted on 01/19/2010 6:54:04 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (Go-Go Donofrio.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Britain to the Argies, “Don’t make us kick your ass again.”


49 posted on 01/19/2010 6:56:34 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weslo
The Argies were dropping bombs from cargo planes.They were lucky that the duds actually hit the ships. The A-4 fighter-bombers they scrambled were more effective but had very limited time over the targets. The few Harriers available to the Brits slaughtered them, too.

The Brits have more than enough naval assets to isolate any Argentine expedition. The Argentine Air Force simply cannot operate effectively that far from the mainland, it's a 1,000 mile round trip.

On the ground, the Argentine Army was somewhat effective in static defensive positions, but was unable to act offensively or even maneuver, and had absolutely no logistics capability. They were handily outmaneuvered and essentially ran out of supplies.

Now, with a beefed up garrison and helicopter gun ships facing them, they wouldn't stand a chance. It wouldn't be a surprise attack this time, either.

50 posted on 01/19/2010 7:08:57 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (Go-Go Donofrio.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out
"Maybe not, but a good enough proportion DO know what they’re talking about that the facts come thick & fast. I like it."

Ha. Don't count on it. Most of the posts on this thread are uninformed speculation at best.

51 posted on 01/19/2010 8:13:25 AM PST by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Oh I’m sure Obama will help them hug it out.


52 posted on 01/19/2010 9:25:38 AM PST by gura (R-MO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

4 Eurofighters!?!?! Wow, I’m trembling.


53 posted on 01/19/2010 9:44:19 AM PST by gura (R-MO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: gura

It wouldn’t take long to ferry flight a squadron of fighters to reinforce the RAF base.


54 posted on 01/19/2010 9:50:04 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

4 Eurofighters couldn’t knock down 30+ upgraded A-4’s, and afterwards might not find anywhere to land. Same for the successive ferry flights.

The UK’s posture looks pretty precarious IMHO.


55 posted on 01/19/2010 9:57:23 AM PST by gura (R-MO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: gura

The Argies can go ahead and try it again if they think they can take and hold the islands. IMO, they won’t do a dang thing.


56 posted on 01/19/2010 10:06:45 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Agreed. No round 2.


57 posted on 01/19/2010 10:08:56 AM PST by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Weslo

1—The British land commanders (Major Jeremy Moore and Brigadier Julian Thompson)had already agreed that even if all British supply ships had been sunk, the forces already disembarked would ‘yomp’ to Port Stanley and fight.

Remember, by the time of the heaviest (and desperate) Argentine attacks, almost all the British troops and supplies were already ashore. In fact, the later raids were a desperate Argentine attack because the British had landed unopposed at San Carlos and could and were unloading quickly.

2—America have us 12.5m gallons of fuel at Ascension Island. And also the well known intelligence info from US satellites.

BUT the American contribution has frankly been exaggerated from some help to such help that would have lost Britain the war if not given.

12.5m gallons was helpful but merely a fraction of the overall amount used. Ascension Island may have been and be a US base, but its British and leased to you. Some of the satellites used were US-UK and therefore partly ours.

And whilst America helped, so did Chile, South Africa and France.

We thank America for its help in 1982, but American aid didnt win us the war.


58 posted on 01/19/2010 11:25:01 AM PST by the scotsman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra
The Falkland defenses are 50 times stronger than they were. Moreover: we now have ultra-quiets (the Astute class) to nullify their surface navy. No-one in Argentina is going to want another ‘Belgrano’. Plus everyone on the island is British - there’s zero demographic pressure. The Argies will never get it back.

Thank you for that positive assessment. I hope you are right. You sound like you live there or have inside information. Do you think the Argies will try to take it back?

59 posted on 01/19/2010 4:17:06 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

How are they going to do that? How are they going to find British supply ships? They have no air borne LRMP’s. Without them, how do they know when to call up the strike planes and then direct them successfully? The only alternative is to maintain a constant air patrol over the islands and all of the surrounding area (many hundreds of square miles) with only 100 or so jets? Its a thirty minute+ flight time. Half the Argentine airforce can only just make the Falkland Islands and back as it is.


60 posted on 01/20/2010 12:53:32 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson