The Student Room Group

Increasing Tension Between the UK and Argentina over the Falkland Islands

Scroll to see replies

Original post by bulgy
All those that are of the belief that the typhoon is such an invincible superweapon, think again.
The typhoon has a kill:death ratio of 9:1, and since the argentines have 34 of these badboys to our 4 typhoons, I make that quite a close fight. 102353_big.jpg


I don't think Argentina would send its entire air force in one go. And if they did, HMS Dauntless' PAAMS is so advanced it could probably take out most of them alone without the Typhoons anyway.
Reply 961
I think we have been over this several times before, in pure numbers yes Argentina could easily beat the Typhoons at RAF Mount Pleasant and HMS Dauntless, which is not at all the world’s best air defence vessel by any proximity, however the likelihood of them conducting such an audacious attack, or an attack all together, is next to none and thus Britain continues to trump them. Any attack would most likely involve their naval fighters (A-4s) which would be relatively easy bait for the Typhoons and if necessary the Dauntless or the two remaining Rapiers that defend Mount Pleasant.

In regards to the air defence comment Britain is vastly, vastly, under equipped in this area we have very few remaining Rapier guns and they are next to useless in the modern day with the likelihood that their FLAADS replacements will be even fewer in number. The Type 45 is not the world’s best air defence warship, at the moment, it could very well achieve that status for its size as there are very few comparable vessels although the fact that it is brand new means half of its toys do not work yet or have not even been equipped.
Reply 962
Original post by @Sam
I think we have been over this several times before, in pure numbers yes Argentina could easily beat the Typhoons at RAF Mount Pleasant and HMS Dauntless, which is not at all the world’s best air defence vessel by any proximity, however the likelihood of them conducting such an audacious attack, or an attack all together, is next to none and thus Britain continues to trump them. Any attack would most likely involve their naval fighters (A-4s) which would be relatively easy bait for the Typhoons and if necessary the Dauntless or the two remaining Rapiers that defend Mount Pleasant.

In regards to the air defence comment Britain is vastly, vastly, under equipped in this area we have very few remaining Rapier guns and they are next to useless in the modern day with the likelihood that their FLAADS replacements will be even fewer in number. The Type 45 is not the world’s best air defence warship, at the moment, it could very well achieve that status for its size as there are very few comparable vessels although the fact that it is brand new means half of its toys do not work yet or have not even been equipped.


I know you have said this a few times and I agree with you however if we are deploying this ship to the falklands for it to work as a viable deterrent I imagine its going to be very well equipped with weapons.
Reply 963
Original post by Aj12
I know you have said this a few times and I agree with you however if we are deploying this ship to the falklands for it to work as a viable deterrent I imagine its going to be very well equipped with weapons.


Its as well equipped as it can be at this stage of its development, ideally it would have the anti-ship missiles allowing the Lynx to be replaced with the much more capable Merlin (The Lynx has a limited anti-ship ability and is thus used as an alternative to the Harpoons that will be fitted at a later date), but obviously it is a new ship and its air defence technology is double crewed (additional technicians, software engineers etc) with the anticipation that something will probably break as it engages in exercises (and hopefully not combat) as is usual with any new piece of technology. The real issue that I find is that a lot of people look at this as a brand new ship assuming that it must be instantly ready for war when in reality it is probably a good year or two off that assuming that the Navy is given the funding to equip them to such a level (In reality this may never happen and if it does will be under the 2015 Defence Review). HMS Daring is probably in a slightly better situation with a more experienced crew now and the air defence systems are more tested, although it has still yet to receive all of its full load out it did get the CIWS assets for its recent deployment (The Dauntless still lacks these and would thus be exposed to the Argentine Navy) which is a plus and is probably why it was chosen for the more dangerous, or likely to be dangerous, mission within the Persian Gulf.

Obviously there has likely been some political decisions in regards to deploying these vessels in such a manner and I would reasonably assume that the Navy was, from a tactical perspective, more keen to deploy another Type 23 down south, although they probably supported the cabinet's suggestion when it came in for propaganda purposes. In my view the Dauntless would have been better going to sea a few months later with the Anglo-French battle group to gain experience in its primary role (Defending carriers) there they would also have the support of the French Navy who have the same basic air warfare system on their Horizon class destroyers, assuming that Argentina does not pull anything off it should be a good deployment for the ship though and will demonstrate its capacity to operate in the extremities of the globe.
There is one British settlement that the Argentines' haven't minded for ages, since 1865, to be precise.

I give to you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_Wladfa .

If the Argentines really wanted to say no to the British, then they'd have to do away with these remnants of Welsh culture too! :P
Not sure where to go with this, but feel free to discuss. :smile:
A Welsh Argie, now there's a good rugby team.
Not the same thing. All those Welsh-descended people consider themselves Argentinian... and colonised the area as Argentinians... not in the name of the UK.
The British are just as hypocritical, have you ever heard of the Chagos Islands? If not, John Pilger wrote an excellent essay on the topic. The British occuption of the Malvinas/ Falklands is only as legitimate as any similar Argentine claims.
Reply 968
...
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by GR3YFOXXX
The British are just as hypocritical, have you ever heard of the Chagos Islands? If not, John Pilger wrote an excellent essay on the topic. The British occuption of the Malvinas/ Falklands is only as legitimate as any similar Argentine claims.


I disagree with Britain's occupation of the Chagos Islands, but that doesn't make our occupation of the Falklands any less legitimate.
You clearly dont understand the point I'm making. The black British citizens of the Chagos Islands were forcibly deported by the British government. Only to provide the USA with a military base in the Indian ocean, whilst Thatcher was, and Cameron is, quick to publicly defend the rights of white British citizens in the Falklands/Malvinas.

The UK government continues to fight the against the Diego Garcians in the supreme court over their incontrovertible rights as British citizens. Whilst it simultaneously prepares to use its military to defend the Falklands/Malvinas.

The whole affair stinks of hypocrisy.
Reply 971
...
(edited 8 years ago)
Is it not time Britain took some form of retaliation against these war mongers? theyve tryed banning our shipping there, theyve banned all falkland flagged vessels from there, theyve banned cruise liners that have even take a peak at the islands and now theyre threatening to sue anyone who tryes to go after the islanders oil ... this below the belt action, in ones personal view, is a step to far and should be responded to in kind ... would some form of trade embargo on the state not make more sense than continuing to allow them to essentially lay siege to the people of Falklands?
what do you think sould be done about this and why?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17390911
What sort of "retaliation" do you have in mind?
Original post by Llamageddon
What sort of "retaliation" do you have in mind?


like for like, banning all Argentine flagged ships would be a appropriate start in my opinion ... not military action or the like heavens no.
Reply 975
I think Britain should start a rumor saying that they made a mistake and that there is no oil around the Falklands. Wait for Argentina to lose interest all of a sudden then hit them where it hurts and start drilling. :colone:
Reply 976
They give us Lionel Messi, and they can have the Falklands.
Reply 978
I don't get the fuss Argentina is making, its not as if the majority of Falkland islanders want to become Argentinian. The Argentinian government just seems to be using the excuse of wanting the islands back (which they never really owned) when in reality all they seem to want is the oil.
I wish the bint running that country would shut up and go be a porn star or something as she obviousley isn't mentally sane the cowardly Argentines have been using the Falklands to blind it's people from the real problems Argentina is facing.

We should tell them to GTF and don't negotiate with these ********s if they try anything, then we bomb the **** out of there entire navy and air force taking no prisoners.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/hillary-clinton-cristina-kirchner-stress
(edited 12 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest