Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Falklands Oil Tensions Stirring...


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

er...yes...otherwise it would be no detterant at all. :P

Not too sure about that. Argentinian 'planes (Super Etendard, A4 Skyhawk) are relatively archaic but more numerous than four eurofighters and a VC10 tanker. An enemy with superior numerical forces can defeat an opponent which has better equipped weapon systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. However, does technological superiority make up for our armed forces being smaller now than they were in 1982? To put it another way, would a salvo of tomahawks and four eurofighters be enough to thwart an invasion this time around? Perhaps, but surely a larger deterrent force (say a full squadron of eurofighters, permanent patrol of Tomahawk armed SSBNs with an Invicible class carrier) would be better. Is "just enough" deterrence sufficient?

it wouldn't be the same sort of war. In 82 we had maybe 40 men and an icebreaker in the islands. We weren't signalling the right sort of intent. Now we are. There are other things as well. For example in 82 we didn't have in flight fighter refuelling. Some bombers could be refuelled in flight, but not the fighter jets. Now we do. This has two effects, firstly the aircraft down there are more efficient and secondly we can get more fighters down there much more quickly.

If we had to fight a campaign based on ther 80's strategy (they invade, hold the land and then we retake) it would be a lot more difficult, but I'm sure our other commitments would be put on hold for a while.

Two more points is what else is down there that we don't know about. Maybe an astute class nuclear sub ? These are truly awesome weapons systems.

The Argentinians would be truly nuts to try anything. It's all posturing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it wouldn't be the same sort of war. In 82 we had maybe 40 men and an icebreaker in the islands. We weren't signalling the right sort of intent. Now we are. There are other things as well. For example in 82 we didn't have in flight fighter refuelling. Some bombers could be refuelled in flight, but not the fighter jets. Now we do. This has two effects, firstly the aircraft down there are more efficient and secondly we can get more fighters down there much more quickly.

If we had to fight a campaign based on ther 80's strategy (they invade, hold the land and then we retake) it would be a lot more difficult, but I'm sure our other commitments would be put on hold for a while.

Two more points is what else is down there that we don't know about. Maybe an astute class nuclear sub ? These are truly awesome weapons systems.

The Argentinians would be truly nuts to try anything. It's all posturing.

Agreed on both counts. But given the likely extraction of (albeit unproven) oil reserves, the geopolitics of the region is going to prove interesting. I was surprised to learn that the Argentinians have been co-operating with the Brazilians e.g. in terms of flying Argentine naval aircraft from Brazil's Sao Paulo aircraft carrier. The Argies and Brazilians have been traditional rivals, but the lure of South Atlantic oil might make them convenient allies in any future crisis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too sure about that. Argentinian 'planes (Super Etendard, A4 Skyhawk) are relatively archaic but more numerous than four eurofighters and a VC10 tanker. An enemy with superior numerical forces can defeat an opponent which has better equipped weapon systems.

Then why haven't they?

A. because the current detterent is 'just enough'.

If they do attack then clearly the detterant was not enough. You understand what I am saying? Just enough, is still enough until it is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why haven't they?

A. because the current detterent is 'just enough'.

If they do attack then clearly the detterant was not enough. You understand what I am saying? Just enough, is still enough until it is not.

yeah, we should take the frogs while they aren't expecting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why haven't they?

A. because the current detterent is 'just enough'.

If they do attack then clearly the detterant was not enough. You understand what I am saying? Just enough, is still enough until it is not.

Exactly.

Four eurofighters and a tanker are IMHO, not enough of a deterrent. I am not saying that the Argies will do anything now, tomorrow, next week or a year from now. What I am saying is that the stakes are changing; the lure of oil wealth means that what might have deterred them until now, might not deter them in future. That's all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too sure about that. Argentinian 'planes (Super Etendard, A4 Skyhawk) are relatively archaic but more numerous than four eurofighters and a VC10 tanker. An enemy with superior numerical forces can defeat an opponent which has better equipped weapon systems.

Didn't four hundred british troops march to Goose Green and defeat 1200 dug in Argentinians?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Four eurofighters and a tanker are IMHO, not enough of a deterrent. I am not saying that the Argies will do anything now, tomorrow, next week or a year from now. What I am saying is that the stakes are changing; the lure of oil wealth means that what might have deterred them until now, might not deter them in future. That's all.

Send Wing Commander Bigglesworth....that'll sort them out. what what.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't four hundred british troops march to Goose Green and defeat 1200 dug in Argentinians?

1200 ill-trained, poorly led and ill-equipped kids against 500 of our hardest b*stards, better-armed, better-equipped and better trained?

Wouldn't have made any difference if it was 12000.

Have you ever spent time with any serving paras?

They're really not very nice, in general.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Four eurofighters and a tanker are IMHO, not enough of a deterrent. I am not saying that the Argies will do anything now, tomorrow, next week or a year from now. What I am saying is that the stakes are changing; the lure of oil wealth means that what might have deterred them until now, might not deter them in future. That's all.

They don't sound like much of a deterrent, unless you know something about their capabilities and the capabilities of the enemy air force.

You have to remember that these are amongst the most modern and potent fighter aircraft in the world, against a third rate air force. In 82 the airforces were much more

closely matched in terms of capability.

It's also not just about winning an air war over the Falklands. Even if the Argentinians managed to defeat them, the cost to them would be so great that their air power would be severely weakened. Maybe then some of their neighbours would start to have a go. I don't think they have great relations with Chile.

IIn order to win a conventional war you have to go in with significant superiority. Anything else is suicide.

As for carriers, they are sitting ducks to decent subs and reconnissance satellites. I doubt that now we would send any carriers down there if it came to fighting. If the Argentinians starting launching air missions off a Brazillian carrier it could be sunk by a sub within days. I don't see that the Brazillians have enough to gain to risk that.

If I were the Argentinians I would negotiate an economic settlement. But they probably can't because they use this crisis to bolster political support, a bit like China does over Taiwan. Stoking nationalist fervour is a dangerous game when you have to play the bluff cards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As bad as the situation is in the UK, there are a lot of big problems brewing at the moment in Argentina. It is very weak. The politics are as fractious as ever, there is vicious food price inflation (a life or death issue in this country, with its veneration for eating large amounts of beef) and shenanigans over the resignation of the head of the central bank and the appropriation of the bank's dollar reserves by the government. Plus fears of yet another devaluation (denied, of course).

"Las Malvinas" is as sure a way now as it was 30 years ago to unify the political class and distract the less well educated (stereotypically, the hard core football hooligans).

But it's very unlikely to come to war. They treated the veterans of the last conflict (mostly conscripts) like sh!t and the average person here isnt going to want to sign up to fight for a piece of rock in the south atlantic.

They still class the islands as Las Malvinas and owned by Arg. Bus ticket I got when I was there had a map and I was rather intrigued !!

As for the second bit. It doesn't quite work that way. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hdiJk0I3PvmHUj3BTCewpI_bplPg

Given the state of the UK's finances and weakened defences, would the Argies dare to reprise some unfinished business?

in a word,yes.

it's not just the deliberate debasement of hardware.

this goes into the political sphere too,such as changes to admiralty law or rules of engagement.

take the somali pirate incident as an example.

a royal navy frigate called to the area should not spend hours trying to sweet talk and reason with them.

it should be extremely simple.

1)establish contact.

2)fire a warning shot across bows

3)resume contact and issue ultimatum with a set time span to comply

4)once designated time has elapsed,blow the crap out of them.

no nonsense.....and if the reputation is established for doing what it says on the tin and no comprimise,then the fear and respect for that law are formented.

same applies in families with disobedient kids.

....here's what I want you to do,you are out of order.

......ok,no comprendé.....loss of pocket money for a week or two(or grounding if they are sociable and missing their friends will hurt a bit)

...ok still no comprendé,time for a smacked botty.

Edited by oracle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you bored to insanity ?

plenty to do..fishing was some of the best in the world...had a trials bike...took squash lessons and became quite good at it...my m8 was a shanook pilot so plenty of jollies and 12hr working days..had a local girlfreind,,,,life was good.. B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those islands are indefensible and not worth the bother. The best solution is to negotiate some kind of special status with the Argies so the Islanders get to retain autonomy and continue with their British culture. Its not as if they have much contact with the mainland anyhow so should be no problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1200 ill-trained, poorly led and ill-equipped kids against 500 of our hardest b*stards, better-armed, better-equipped and better trained?

Wouldn't have made any difference if it was 12000.

Have you ever spent time with any serving paras?

They're really not very nice, in general.

Would be the same with the Eurofighters. Complete duck shoot.

The targets would not know they were under attack until they were neutralised.

This assumes the Eurofighters can operate from a secure base obviously.

Would be interesting to see a handful of high tech birds erasing an entire air force.

Not much fun for the opposition's pilots & families though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 434 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.