Skip to comments.The UK Is Sending Its Most Advanced Warship To The Falklands
Posted on 01/31/2012 7:01:42 AM PST by blam
The UK Is Sending Its Most Advanced Warship To The Falklands
January 31, 2012
The UK announced today that they would be sending their most advanced warship to the South Pacific, near the Falklands Islands.
The announcement seems likely to inflame tensions with Argentina over the disputed Falklands, and may worsen the increasingly aggressive rhetoric from both sides, who went to war over the islands almost 30 years ago.
The Telegraph reports that the HMS Dauntless is a Type 45 destroyer, worth over £1 billion ($1.57 billion), and is "the most advanced anti-aircraft and anti-ballistic ship in the world".
"It can shoot down Argentine fighters as soon as they take off from their bases," a Navy source told the Telegraph. "This will give Buenos Aires serious pause for thought."
The Navy has denied that the deployment was due to the tension in the region, and told the BBC that the ship would replace another already stationed there.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
” the disputed Falklands”?
Where’s the dispute?
Argentina wants the islands as they have oil reserves.
Folks there want to remain Brittish.
Nice ship, but I keep hearing that odd saying from those who had dealings with the titanic, though nothing is perfect, nothing is unsinkable.
As if Argentina hasn’t been “inflaming tensions” lately?
Ded reckoning’s a lost art (at TBI apparently).
“It can shoot down Argentine fighters as soon as they take off from their bases,” a Navy source told the Telegraph.
Lets hope their intel is as good as their bravado.
Gotta steer clear of them thar exocets.
I seem to recall Hussein recently saying some anti-Brit rot regarding the islands recently.
Been a few weeks since he last caused an insurrection against US allies.
Great catch. Hilarious.
Our neighbors just left Argentina...said the security situation there was deteriorating daily under the lefty leadership. We get a serious lack of info from what is going on the South America in the media here.
> The UK announced today that they would be sending their most advanced warship to the South Pacific, near the Falklands Islands.
Why the South Pacific?
The Falklands is in the South Atlantic.
The Argies did this last time.
Their country was in a mess, the economy crap and so they used the islands to bring their people together and ignore the economy.
Now they are again blowing hot hair and harping on about the islands which they know they will never get.
All the Royal Navy will do is put another exclusion zone around the islands with a couple of nuclear subs and I guarantee the nuclear subs are there right now off the coast of Argentina and sink any Argue ship which tries to break that zone just like the Belgrano did
Kirchner has returned to her duties after successful cancer (thyroid) surgery three weeks ago. She responded to Cameron’s claim that Argentina was engaging in “Falklands Colonialism.” So the war of words continues. Brits have 1K troops on the Falklands, home to three thousand residents.
funny me. i always thought the faulklands were inthe atlantic. silly me!
Yes. We can’t have American voters learn that a kleptocrat government and money-printing central bank leads to bad outcomes.
“Lets hope their intel is as good as their bravado.”
I think a brand new Type-45 against the Argentinian air force of a few 1950’s Skyhawks and 1960’s Mirages should cope OK. The pilots would need a fair bit of their own bravado to want to mix it with the Typhoons stationed on the islands.
If Kirchner is smart, and she is, it is best to keep the Argentine Navy safe in port. No sane person has any desire to once again see young Naval conscripts struggling for their lives in the storm tossed sea.
My chief concern for the Falklands is the last time we helped out the Brits with some intel. Can you imagine His Excellency, with his overt hatred of the Brits, doing the same? I can see him helping out the lefties in Argentina because social justice demands it.
"The UK announced today that they would be sending their most advanced warship to the South Pacific"
That's already been done.
The Argentine s lost the war, they lost the Belgrano and then they lied about it.
I’ve talked to many who was in that war in the British army and they all said that after the battles they saw the young poor conscripts, freezing, left by their Govt.
The Argentine s still try to claim it’s theirs every time the leader see the poll numbers going down.
No question in my mind that Soetero would love for the corrupt socialist Argies to stick it to his dad’s oppressors, the evil British Empire. I hope the back channels between our two militaries can cooperate in the absence of direct orders not to do so from Pennsylvania Avenue.
I think the Argies are barking from under the porch on this one.
Besides The Business Insider is based in New York, not the most internationally aware city.
Yes, my first thought as well. There was a time when the UK could do much more, but they are on their way to becoming a 3rd rate military power.
They better have a lot of reloads, too.
If the Argies forward deploy their aircraft, they would be vulnerable to forces stationed in the Falklands; if they stage them away from the Atlantic coast, they would provide target practice for a ship in the Pacific.
Weren't there stories the last time Britain kicked Argentina's ass that British commandos crossed Chile to destroy Argentine aircraft of the ground?
“The UK Is Sending Its Only Warship To The Falklands”
Meh, it’s not quite that bad yet:
Both countries military are in abysmal condition. If it wasn’t for US support during Falklands 1, the outcome would have been totally different. Don’t worry about Argentine pilots, they have plenty of bravado... just lousy equipment.
“Yes, my first thought as well. There was a time when the UK could do much more, but they are on their way to becoming a 3rd rate military power.”
Of course we are. We’ve barely got a canoe and shotgun between us, that’s why we’re the fifth most powerful armed forces in the world despite being a small wet island off the French coast. . . . . . ;)
“Both countries military are in abysmal condition. If it wasnt for US support during Falklands 1, the outcome would have been totally different. Dont worry about Argentine pilots, they have plenty of bravado... just lousy equipment.”
The fifth most powerful military in the world ‘abysmal’. If you say so. I do wish some of our American friends would stop thinking a few Sidewinders wins a war. Bravado or not, the Argentinian pilots had a 100% air to air loss rate against Harriers. They’re still in the same planes and we’re in Typhoons. Good luck to them if they think they are hard enough.
If you'll click to the original article, you'll find that I DID correct this mistake,
"It can shoot down Argentine fighters as soon as they take off from they bases,"
I suspect AA.
Why did you say Burma?
“Bravado or not, the Argentinian pilots had a 100% air to air loss rate against Harriers.”
The Argentine airforce was not there to dogfight Harriers but to sink British ships... which they did.
I think that this time its a diversion, the Argies would more likely try to invade “disputed” Chilean islands in the Beagle channel.
I love that expression.
Why does this title always make me think of HMS Hood?
I’m sure they do not want to face HM Marines or Gurkali- speaking knife-wielding infantry again either.
Not asking for a research project but do you know off hand how many (if any) Gurkha Battalions the Brits have?
nail on head pal
for the size of the country and the lack of money getting put in the UK has a great military
Reminds me of the cartoon I saw during the Falklands War of the early '80's. You saw a few Brit soldiers with full camo, guns, etc., and one on the radio saying, "Roger, Invincible, we have captured South Georgia. Natives seem bewildered, over." The natives in question were a bunch of hillbillies and an old hound dog in front of Floyd's General Store. I still have the cartoon somewhere in a box with a bunch of others from that era - it was a real hoot.
I question the idea that we are in front of France. They still actually have an aircraft carrier capable of deploying fixed wing aircraft, and we don’t (we may or may not get this capability back in 2020)...
The French Navy has always had a front of a few very impressive ships.
But they have always been very weak in AAW.
Back in the 80s the intention was 6 C70 AA Frigates to back the 2 Suffern destroyers - they got 2
In 2000, the Suffrerns were to be replaced by 4 Horizons, while the 2 smaller C70s would get a mid-life refit with Aster30 missiles.
- Horizons cut to 2, no midlife refit for the C70s, whose End of Life has been extended 7 years.
So nominally there are 4 French AAW ships, but until at least 2020 two are small, aging, and armed with the obsolescent Standard SM-1, which they fire from the oldest Mk-13 launchers in the world, built 50 years ago.
6 Attack submarines and 11 destroyers does not amount to much. Your aircraft carrier probably would be at great risk if it approached those islands during wartime.
Well, aside from the United States, what nations have blue water formidable navies? There doesn’t seem to be much else...and to think at one time Canada had the 3d largest navy in the world.
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.