Posted on 04/02/2016 5:22:59 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
THE Falklands Islands have been left without the protection of a British warship for the first time since the conflict 34 years ago.
The Royal Navy has provided a "permanent presence" in the South Atlantic since British troops invaded the islands in 1982.
But a manpower crisis, a need to deploy ships closer to home and a series of engine problems with the Navy's Type 45 destroyers has led to the islands being left unguarded.
No warship has been dispatched since a frigate returned from the region in November, last year.
Shadow defence secretary Emily Thornberry branded the situation as "unacceptable" and demanded the Ministry of Defence act immediately.
She told the Independent: "In one area after another we have seen the impact of the savage cuts made to our armed forces since David Cameron came to office, but even by those low standards, it is unacceptable that the government is failing to provide the protection for the Falkland Islands that has been promised, and that that Islands have a right to expect as British citizens.
"The Ministry of Defence must rectify the situation immediately.”
The row comes days after David Cameron defended the islander's rights following a United Nations commission recommended that Argentina's territory should be expanded by to surround the islands
The Navy's fleet six Type 45 destoryers, which includes HMS Dauntless, has been plagued by reliability issues over the past few years.
Argentina lost a brief, bloody war in 1982 with Britain after its troops invaded the islands.
British armed forces lost 255 troops in the conflict.
With the hordes of Muslims stinking up their once Faire Isle, it appears they have about given that project up too.
Hey Emily ... here is a little advice for you and the occupants of the Falklands ...
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
War for oil. It happens to the best of nations.
Not to mention that just last week the UN gave the waters surrounding the Falklands to Argentina as an exclusion zone.
Not mentioned is that, although there’s a naval gap, there’s now a permanent garrison of 1200 Royal Marines and other troops, a squadron of Typhoons, a modern airbase, plenty of gound-to-air missiles etc....none of which were there in 1982.
Somehow, I cannot see Obozo giving Dave the kind of support that Ronnie gave Maggie.
4% of the UK is Muslim. Problematic, but not the swamping horde Americans think. After 70 years of non-white immigration, the UK is still 92-93% white.
The people there will be armed, but as farmer/rural types, with some rifles and shotguns.
Yeah, Thornberry’s rubbish, innit.
And there’s also no Pinochet this time to give crucial intelligence to the Brits.
Other than defending territorial claims, what is the reason to want the Falklands, is it a prize, natural resources?
I trust your opinion, my point was simply the Argentine navy has a precedent, as opposed to an extensive history, of success against unarmed opponents.
I know it is against the English grain, but they need heavy shoulder fired weapons, 50BMGs, locally based aircraft to defend the island. Probably some anti-ship weapons. That would make it unlikely they would be attacked.
It has to be a credible force.
So a permanent garrison of 1200, a squadron of Typhoons on a new airbase and a battery of defensive missiles isn’t a credible force? The Falklands had nothing like that in 1982 - only a platoon of Royal Marines.
Yes, I read that post after I made my statement. I’d say that was a credible force.
And anti-ship weapons are very small today and with ranges as close as between the Falklands and the main land react time would be very very short.
Why does Emily Thorneberry care? Her party would just hand it over to the Argued without a fight if Comrade Corbyn became leader.
So not only are the warships lacking anti-ship missiles and anti-sub torpedoes, but they are dead in the water.
Sic Gloria... The British Empire is dead
You would think they would spring a few quid to arm the other two type 45's with Harpoon as well. Off the shelf quad Harpoon launchers must be chicken feed compared to the total cost of these ships.
You forget that you’re conversing with American conservatives.
We think nothing of buying an AR15 or three, and ammunition by the thousand rounds, and shooting thousands of rounds per year just because we like the practice. And because it gives the liberals a conniption fit.
Royal Marines or no, your Falklanders would be better off armed like American conservatives than like “farmer/rural types”.
But it’s your country ... screw it up any way you like.
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.