 | | |
| paulzolo wrote: Oh, look the Tories are in power and we're upping tensions in the Falkland Islands. | |
| | |
To be fair, we're doing an awful lot less of upping tensions than they are.
Jon
| x404.co.uk http://www.x404.co.uk/forum/ |
|
| UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina http://www.x404.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=15831 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | pcernie [ Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16993391 'Rubbish. According to my antique map, we're...' |
|
| Author: | l3v1ck [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
Nuclear armed my arse. Nuclear powered, quite possibly. But there's a massive difference between the two. |
|
| Author: | paulzolo [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
Oh, look the Tories are in power and we're upping tensions in the Falkland Islands. |
|
| Author: | Spreadie [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
With things heating up, I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest at a sub being dispatched to the area. Most definitely nuclear powered, but so what if it's a missile sub? They are still sent out on active duty for intelligence gathering and the like. The open seas are free passage to all and, if it is heading for the Falklands, it'll be patrolling our coastal waters. The Argies are being overly sensitive. Given their feelings about their erstwhile flagship's encounter with Conqueror, I can understand that; but this is a non-story. |
|
| Author: | jonbwfc [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:50 am ] | |||||||||
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina | |||||||||
To be fair, we're doing an awful lot less of upping tensions than they are. Jon |
||||||||||
| Author: | Linux_User [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:48 pm ] | ||||||||||||||||||
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina | ||||||||||||||||||
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16993391 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Author: | Spreadie [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:02 pm ] | ||||||||||||||||||
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina | ||||||||||||||||||
I did read the article. Define the Caribbean and Latin American region for me. Does it include a group of British owned islands over three hundred miles off the south coast of the mainland? |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Author: | MrStevenRogers [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 2:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
stuff the argies. technically we are still at war ... |
|
| Author: | jonbwfc [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 2:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
Haven't the Russians had a nuclear powered icebreaker operating in and around the antarctic circle for years? I can actually see some justification for people worrying about nuclear powered craft in and around Antarctica tbf. However I doubt UKGov will either confirm or deny whether they've got a nuclear powered sub in the area or not (for all sorts of reasons) so it's pretty much conjecture at this moment. Either way, sending a sub to international waters is a heck of a lot less belligerent than some of the things the Argentine government are doing. They're obviously pushing nationalist issues for domestic political gain. That seems a much more irresponsible act than anything UKGov is up to. Cameron may be (no.. is) a buffoon but he's playing this in a much more reserved way than Cristina Kirchner seems to be doing. However, personally, I think this will all come to nothing. I'm sure Mrs Kirchner is aware that while Argentina probably could take and retain the Falkland islands if they want to, the cost in terms of Argentine dead - and therefore domestic political cost - and equally international political cost - whatever their claims, the fact is under international law they would be invading another nations state and would therefore automatically become subject to some severe international political and trade sanctions - would be great. You'd have to hope if she's been watching the international real politik at all recently, she'll have figured out that starting a fight over an oilfield or two rarely turns out to be worth the trouble. EDit : I've just been looking at the current Argentine armed forces, or at least what's publicly known about them. if they try to take on the UK in a fight even given the state of the UK armed forces, they'll get slaughtered. The Air Force is almost antiquated - their newest jets are based around the Mirage 5, which is a 1960's aircraft. The Typhoons stationed on the Falklands will eat them for breakfast, even if they get past the anti-air kit on HMS Dauntless. They have some C-130's to transport troops but they're all knackered, two of them have fallen out of the sky recently. Their navy is even smaller than ours - the biggest ship they have left is a destroyer and they've got next to no real anti-sub capability. Admittedly they have plenty of infantry but I can't see a way they're going to get them to the Falklands without a large chunk on them ending up dead somewhere in the ocean and the rest being utterly isolated and thus being in the same no-win situation they were the last time. Furthermore, the leg from the Ascension islands (the nearest other RAF airfield capable of taking fast jets) and the Falklands is just within the Tornado and Typhoon's flight range (hmm.. there's a coincidence) so they could probably reinforce the air cover in less than 24 hours if they have to. And if they can keep the air base open, they can ship troops and equipment in, also at relatively short notice. The garrison can get a lot bigger and get nastier teeth quite quickly. Given the Falklands are 250nm from the Argentine mainland and transport ships are not in the main fast, It's very likely that if the Argentines did decide to invade, by the time their forces arrived they'd be facing much stiffer opposition than had been there when they left. If the Argentines actually do invade The Falkland Islands it will be an act of utter insanity. It will get tens of thousands of their young men killed and they will probably end up having to hand the islands back. Again. Jon |
|
| Author: | paulzolo [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
 A useful, and possible Quite Interesting spot of information about the ARA General Belgrano. It was originally the USS Pheonix, and survived Pearl Harbour. It was the first sip to be sunk by a nuclear power submarine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_General_Belgrano A even less useful bit of information is the ZX81 game that a friend and I were writing for the ZX81. It involved shooting torpedoes from your submarine at ships on a horizon. We named it Argy Bargy. I spent ages designing little battleships using ZX81 graphics. Hours of fun. I suppose Argy Bargy 2: The Prince’s Revenge will have to use cutting edge 3D graphics. 
|
|
| Author: | dogbert10 [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
I don't thing Argentina has any intention of invading the Falklands. Kirchner is doing this purely to enhance her own popularity at home. |
|
| Author: | l3v1ck [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
Given the state dauntless is in at the moment (insider knowledge), that's not something the argies need to worry about. |
|
| Author: | l3v1ck [ Mon Feb 13, 2012 10:39 pm ] | |||||||||
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina | |||||||||
If they are, then how's the time. We don't have any carrier based fighters at the moment, and won't for at least five years. Once we have f-35c's, they'd be toast. |
||||||||||
| Author: | jonbwfc [ Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:03 am ] | ||||||||||||||||||
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina | ||||||||||||||||||
As long as we can hold the airfield, the Falklands is a carrier. And one not vulnerable to being sunk. With about 1200 marines sat on it. The fact Dauntless doesn't have it's full arsenal isn't exactly insider knowledge (if it was likely to be fighting anything like an equipped Navy, it'd be buggered) but I don't think any sane commander would risk taking it on at it's own game on the hearsay that it's major systems aren't ready yet. That would be... well you'd be the guy running the weather station down at the tip of South America before your feet hit the ground if you got it wrong. |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Author: | l3v1ck [ Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: UK sent nuclear sub near Falklands, says Argentina |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|