[Newsbot]

Title: Argentina developing nuclear-powered submarine
Category: Military
Posted By: Scape
Date: 2011-08-03 08:40:41

[GreenTiger]

If GB wants the Falkland Islands to remain the Falkland Islands then they had better get some military assets down there fairly soon especially seeing that Obama (unlike Reagan) would be inclined to side with Argentina and screw our ally GB.

[bootlegga]

I'm sure the RN isn't the least bit worried about a submarine made by Argentina. What's more worrying is that first Brazil and now Argentina are building nuke subs - it sounds like an arms race is brewing down there.

[GreenTiger]

I'm not sure of the political situation down there, but there is probably less than complete agreement.

[bootlegga]

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

If GB wants the Falkland Islands to remain the Falkland Islands then they had better get some military assets down there fairly soon especially seeing that Obama (unlike Reagan) would be inclined to side with Argentina and screw our ally GB.

Sounds they have a fairly respectable force in place;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_o ... nd_Islands

[BartSimpson]

A little bird once told me that when the Argies saber rattled last year over the Falklands that someone informed them via unofficial channels of UK plans for dealing with the next Argie attack on the Falklands. In short, the UK has altered its policies since 1982 and the next war won't have a cute little 'hostility zone' where British civilians can be killed but Argie civilians are off the table. Next time around will be a real war with Argentine cities and infrastructure targeted for reduction.

[uwish]

bootlegga bootlegga:

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

If GB wants the Falkland Islands to remain the Falkland Islands then they had better get some military assets down there fairly soon especially seeing that Obama (unlike Reagan) would be inclined to side with Argentina and screw our ally GB.

Sounds they have a fairly respectable force in place;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_o ... nd_Islands

Not sure is 500 army personel and 4 fighters with 1 destroyer constitutes a respectable force or not.

Definately not enough to fend off the Argentinians if they decided to do a quick strike

That being said, the UK military is being cut by 25% and likley could not defend the falklands while being deployed in Iraq and Af. Their own military leaders had publicly stated they would have a very hard time doing anything in the Falklands if something were to happen.

[BartSimpson]

uwish uwish:

Not sure is 500 army personel and 4 fighters with 1 destroyer constitutes a respectable force or not.

Definately not enough to fend off the Argentinians if they decided to do a quick strike

That being said, the UK military is being cut by 25% and likley could not defend the falklands while being deployed in Iraq and Af. Their own military leaders had publicly stated they would have a very hard time doing anything in the Falklands if something were to happen.

That's probably part of why targeting Argentine cities is on the table. The RAF will just need to stop at Ascension to pick up some toys and then drop them on Buenos Aires to properly express Her Majesty's displeasure.

Were I the Brits I'd also put nukes on the table. Who knows? Maybe they have. Thinking about that, the Argies are pretty damned stupid messing with people who've got things that go...

[martin14]

Nukes may all the Brits have left, after the next round of cuts.


Wonder where the Argentinians are getting the technology from.... ?

[dino_bobba_renno]

bootlegga bootlegga:

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

If GB wants the Falkland Islands to remain the Falkland Islands then they had better get some military assets down there fairly soon especially seeing that Obama (unlike Reagan) would be inclined to side with Argentina and screw our ally GB.

Sounds they have a fairly respectable force in place;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_o ... nd_Islands

500 men and 4 Eurofighters? Doesn't sound like much to me. They do have the rapid responce team but the actual current deployment isn't overly large. Mind you it may be big enough to discourage Argentina from trying anything.

[Canadian_Mind]

Half a battalion worth of troops (more likely a company sized element with support troops), and 1/6th of a full squadron of jets. That's quite the punitive force.

[bootlegga]

uwish uwish:

Not sure is 500 army personel and 4 fighters with 1 destroyer constitutes a respectable force or not.

Definately not enough to fend off the Argentinians if they decided to do a quick strike

That being said, the UK military is being cut by 25% and likley could not defend the falklands while being deployed in Iraq and Af. Their own military leaders had publicly stated they would have a very hard time doing anything in the Falklands if something were to happen.

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

500 men and 4 Eurofighters? Doesn't sound like much to me. They do have the rapid responce team but the actual current deployment isn't overly large. Mind you it may be big enough to discourage Argentina from trying anything.

Well, I'll admit I'm not up-to-date on the military capabilities of Argentina, but if Wikipedia is accurate, those 4 Typhoons are more than a match for the entire Argentinian air force (which only has two dozen fighters - all decades old and close to obsolete). The Argentinian Navy is a bit better off, but against Astute class SSNs, most of it wouldn't last long. Likewise, the Army is using equipment from the 80s (or older), like M113s (which Canada retired years ago) and tanks from the mid-1980s.

While I'm sure that Argentina could take the islands back, but with the force that the UK has stationed there, it would cost them dearly, probably a couple of ships, a dozen or more planes and a couple hundred troops.

I don't see Argentina willing to go toe-to-toe with the Brits state-of-the-art equipment when most of their equipment is obsolete and out of date.

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

I don't see Argentina willing to go toe-to-toe with the Brits state-of-the-art equipment when most of their equipment is obsolete and out of date.

If they're going to do anything they'll have to do it while Obama is still in office. If Palin gets in then the Argies can count on the Brits having the US along to help do a full court press to evict the Argies again.

[dino_bobba_renno]

bootlegga bootlegga:

uwish uwish:

Not sure is 500 army personel and 4 fighters with 1 destroyer constitutes a respectable force or not.

Definately not enough to fend off the Argentinians if they decided to do a quick strike

That being said, the UK military is being cut by 25% and likley could not defend the falklands while being deployed in Iraq and Af. Their own military leaders had publicly stated they would have a very hard time doing anything in the Falklands if something were to happen.

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

500 men and 4 Eurofighters? Doesn't sound like much to me. They do have the rapid responce team but the actual current deployment isn't overly large. Mind you it may be big enough to discourage Argentina from trying anything.

Well, I'll admit I'm not up-to-date on the military capabilities of Argentina, but if Wikipedia is accurate, those 4 Typhoons are more than a match for the entire Argentinian air force (which only has two dozen fighters - all decades old and close to obsolete). The Argentinian Navy is a bit better off, but against Astute class SSNs, most of it wouldn't last long. Likewise, the Army is using equipment from the 80s (or older), like M113s (which Canada retired years ago) and tanks from the mid-1980s.

While I'm sure that Argentina could take the islands back, but with the force that the UK has stationed there, it would cost them dearly, probably a couple of ships, a dozen or more planes and a couple hundred troops.

I don't see Argentina willing to go toe-to-toe with the Brits state-of-the-art equipment when most of their equipment is obsolete and out of date.

I'm in the same boat as you, I really don't much about this stuff either but what your saying makes sense. It may not be much of a force but enough to effectively defend the island until help arrives.

I think at the end of the day though it doesn't matter how large of a force the Brits have there so long as they have something there to defend it. I think the last invasion was due to a kind of "perfect storm" of events. The political situation in Argentina and the rumours about the Brits were downsizing their force there culminated into what may have seemed like an opportunity to the Argentineans at the time. I can't see the Argentineans going back for seconds after having their asses handed to them the last time.

Besides, I’m sure the UN would step in and put a stop to any type of aggression on the part of Argentina *chuckles*

[bootlegga]

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

bootlegga bootlegga:

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

500 men and 4 Eurofighters? Doesn't sound like much to me. They do have the rapid responce team but the actual current deployment isn't overly large. Mind you it may be big enough to discourage Argentina from trying anything.

Well, I'll admit I'm not up-to-date on the military capabilities of Argentina, but if Wikipedia is accurate, those 4 Typhoons are more than a match for the entire Argentinian air force (which only has two dozen fighters - all decades old and close to obsolete). The Argentinian Navy is a bit better off, but against Astute class SSNs, most of it wouldn't last long. Likewise, the Army is using equipment from the 80s (or older), like M113s (which Canada retired years ago) and tanks from the mid-1980s.

While I'm sure that Argentina could take the islands back, but with the force that the UK has stationed there, it would cost them dearly, probably a couple of ships, a dozen or more planes and a couple hundred troops.

I don't see Argentina willing to go toe-to-toe with the Brits state-of-the-art equipment when most of their equipment is obsolete and out of date.

I'm in the same boat as you, I really don't much about this stuff either but what your saying makes sense. It may not be much of a force but enough to effectively defend the island until help arrives.

I think at the end of the day though it doesn't matter how large of a force the Brits have there so long as they have something there to defend it. I think the last invasion was due to a kind of "perfect storm" of events. The political situation in Argentina and the rumours about the Brits were downsizing their force there culminated into what may have seemed like an opportunity to the Argentineans at the time. I can't see the Argentineans going back for seconds after having their asses handed to them the last time.

Besides, I’m sure the UN would step in and put a stop to any type of aggression on the part of Argentina *chuckles*

I think you're correct on the perfect storm scenario. IIRC, back in 1982 the Brits only had a platoon (or maybe even a squad) of troops in Port Stanley, with little or no air support (a helo maybe) and had announced plans to withdraw the HMS Endurance the next year, so the force currently there is far more capable than the Brits had in place in 1982.

Still, it might not be enough to stop the Argentinians from getting a foothold on the islands (or maybe even capturing Port Stanley), it would cost them far more this time around AND then they would have to face the inevitable British counterattack. This time around, the battle would be far more one-sided. British forces have lots of combat experience, even better equipment now and unlike the first Falklands War, understand modern naval combat far better. If the Argies tried using Exocets (or some other cruise missile) to hit RN ships around the Falklands, they'd have to penetrate a much more capable and robust SAM screen on RN ships than was present on RN ships in 1982.

Finally, due to the US using NATO Article 5 to get assistance in Afghanistan, the Brits could also conceivably request help from NATO to recapture them - if they felt they didn't have the force structure to do so by themselves. I don't doubt some would balk at helping the Brits, but I could see a few other NATO nations either providing support or material/manpower for such a conflict.