Don’t they know its bloody Christmas and people have others things to do?
It is with a rather inconvenient sense of timing that Argentina continues to rattle their dull sabre at the Falkland Islands. The latest diplomatic effort which is part of an escalating campaign to ratchet up the tension is the orchestration of an agreement between Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay (the Mercosur countries including Paraguay) to block entry to their ports of any ships flying the Falkland Islands flag.
The register of shipping (click here) lists 25 vessels under the Falkland Islands registration, which is internationally registered and a member of the Red Ensign Group Register.
From that list it is clear that the vast majority are fishing vessels, although there are a couple of research vessels, and thus the blockade is about impacting the economy of the Falkland Islands.
The Lisbon Treaty makes it clear that the Falkland Islands are recognised as being a British Overseas Territory by all signatories and the World Trade Organisation should have something to say on this illegal restriction of economic activity.
There are obvious political and economic factors here.
Cristina Kirchner, swept into power on the strength of increasing public spending and has been maxing out the national credit card ever since. As we know only too well the bill has to be paid and with increasing allegations of personal aggrandisement what better way of both providing a useful scapegoat and highlight a potential goldmine that could be used to solve all the nations financial problems.
So when Desire Petroleum started exploratory drilling the scene was set for a ratcheting strategy of harassment and pressure.
No doubt 2012 will see more of the same; it is the 30th anniversary of the conflict next year.
Brazil and Argentina have in recent times had a number of disagreements over trade issues and the defence cooperation treaty between Brazil and the UK, which we covered here, no doubt rubbed them up the wrong way but despite this Brazil has agreed to participate in this ban on FI flagged vessels.
The UK also has a series of trade agreements with Brazil and these must also be taken into consideration, Brazil has a growing economy, developing offshore industry and will be hosting the next major global sporting event after the 2012 Olympics, the 2014 World Cup, all opportunities for UK defence and security businesses. If they do end up buying the ex Trinidad and Tobago offshore patrol vessels and even participating in the Type 26 programme things will become even more interesting. The backbone of the Brazilian Navy is British built after all.
The Uruguayan President, Jose Mujica, summed it up;
We hold nothing against the U.K. but we have a lot in favor of Argentina
With the airport at St Helena soon to start construction there is a move to open up an alternative route for the exploitation of natural resources via Africa that would see an alternative to South American ports, blackmailing the Falkland Islands might not be so effective in the future.
Of course, the irony of the Spanish descended ruling class in Argentina waxing on about the rights and wrongs of empires is obviously lost on them but make no mistake, they have been playing a good game, the UK has had to resort to the old ‘summoning of ambassadors’ response, usually reserved when one nation wants to have a little cry in the corner about the other.
Whatever the strength of the UK’s case and our intention to address things calmly it is obvious that even sane and rational people in Argentina do not see it like that and the issue remains one that any politician in trouble can use to divert attention from their own failings.
Until the Argentine people realise that the sensible thing to do is negotiate, open up and seek some long term agreement with the people of the Falkland Islands there is nothing that can be done in that regard.
One would hope that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is doing the rounds, reminding our allies of their obligations, especially nations of the EU, we should remind them who the second largest contributor to EU’s budget is.
It could be that the others have agreed as a show of solidarity but won’t actually do anything in practice and the whole thing will blow over.
How does Argentina expect us to react, I guess it would be an open display of military power so they can continue to play the victim card and normally I would say the best thing to do would be to wave off their latest pathetic attempt with a haughty disdain and dismissive wave of the hand but this is a gnawing away at our position so maybe we need to be a little more forceful.
Enter stage left the former First Sea Lord, Lord West, who suggested sending a nuclear submarine to the Falkland Islands in a show of strength.
Far from trying to settle in a grown-up way and having better and better relationships with the Falkland islanders, they are upping the ante and becoming very confrontational
Interestingly, he didn’t specify which type of nuclear submarine should be sent!
So do we hold our nerve, realise that this is a bit of harmless political shenanigans or do we do a bit of ante upping ourselves?
That is a difficult question to answer.
Perceptions count and quiet diplomacy is not always the best way to deal with a problem, despite diplomats always saying it is, perhaps Lord West is right and we need a show of force to demonstrate to those seeking to raise the profile of the issue that we can also do a spot of profile raising.
Argentina needs to be reminded they are playing a grown up game with harsh offside rules and whilst they might be good at cheating at football they are less successful in the military arena, unless that means throwing political prisoners off the back of aircraft.
Whilst Argentina currently poses little or no military threat to the Falkland Islands with encouraging signs of exploitable hydrocarbon resources and the simple issue of protecting islanders I am beginning to think it is time for playground rules.
Maybe Kenny Rogers has the answer?
The Government needs to find a set of balls and remind those down South who the big dog is.
What form this would take and the exact timing is open for debate, something proportionate and not over the top but definately ‘something’
This should absolutely take place in parallel with an abundance of behind the scenes diplomacy but there is nothing like hinting that whilst one might walk quitely, there is a stick and the occasional glance of it would not go amiss.
Edited to add
No, its not April Fools Day but have a look at this utter tripe from the Daily Mail
Ho Ho Ho
The Brazilians won’t buy T26. Buying weapons isn’t always political fidelity. In Africa the Soviets sold weapons and lent advisors to both sides in more than one dispute.
My big fear isn’t war but some engineered situation that ends up in the UN.
told ya so! and to think some had the nerve to call me a drama queen…now we have TD actually endorsing a show of force!
its so sweet to be right!
The Argentines are idiots. The easiest way to get the Falklands back is to not mention them for a few more decades. We’d then get complacent and they’d be able to walk back in. Every time they gob off they just put the Garisson higher on the list of priorities. And they’ve gobbed off this time and achieved some bizarre pyrrhic victory which is more about the other countries patting Argentinian on the head and throwing them a bone so they shut the fuck up for five minutes. When you analyse the decision it has no real depth to it and only makes us less likely to get bored of our Garisson.
Well Frankie Goes to Hollywood is on the radio now with “Two Tribes.”
The Daily Mail is scaremongering with this sh*te,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077813/The-day-Argies-retook-Falklands-Prince-Harry-captured-600-soldiers-killed-One-writers-terrifyingly-plausible-account.html
I think I am relieving the 80s.
That is the funniest thing I have read all year, has Sharkey, Save the Royal Navy and the PTT joined forces?
Just to be clear, I maintain that there exists no realistic threat beyond what we are scaled for but a modest but visible reminder would not go amiss
wow.
a bunch of wishful thinking. talking about reminding EU partners of there responsibilities? they’ll throw the fact that Cameron ignored his responsibility.
defense cuts hurting much? a sub is useful but it can’t stop an air assault. oh and i notice that no one…including the RAF is talking about sending additional fighters to the islands.
and many are under estimating S. American pride and Argentinian revenge factors. this isn’t just about getting the islands, its about humiliating the British.
within 6 months, shots will be fired…i would bet money that it will involve the OPV being sunk by aircraft but we will see.
That Daily Mail article, just… words can’t describe that tripe. What a pile of pathetic bullshit.
Solomon, the argentines would have to be insane to fire shots in the next six months. Their military capabilities right now are beyond pathetic.
The Argentine Navy and Airforce have barely changed since the 1980′s. Unless they suddenly start renewing their Airforce and submarines, all they can do is sabre rattle and harass.
In the circumstances a bit of pre-emption would be in order. An appropriate UK response could be to double the number of Typhoons on the islands (4 to 8 I believe).
This souldn’t strain the RAF. I note that initial deliveries of Typhoons to Saudi Arabia has recently been completed, so presumably deliveries to the RAF are steping up again.
Please don’t quote the Daily Mail as a source of any useful information whatsoever.
Perhaps I should have put it in the comedy section!
Ah yes, Solomon was proven absolutely right and isn’t really a drama queen at all. I mean, these rumblings from down south have never happened before have they and Argentina have apparently built a navy in the last 2 weeks and are prepping for invasion…
I expect the British governments position will remain exactly the same. They tend not to comment on every whine eminating from Buenos Aires beyond the ‘F.I will remain British until Falklanders say otherwise’.
I would expect the most ‘action’ will be between British diplomats and the W.T.O.
really Andy? on what grounds does the UK have to go to the WTO when the rest of the world is almost about to go into a trade war over carbon tax being placed on international air travel?
the Falklands are facing economic isolation…yes trade with the UK and EU will be maintained but for an island protectorate, its essential to be able to trade locally.
oh and no one is saying that it would be an easy undertaking, all i’m saying is that while many like to look at Argentina and state that their military capability hasn’t improved, i would also state that British military capability has declined.
oh and i find it rather distasteful how some refer to a war hero on these pages.
no its not distasteful, its disgraceful.
‘i would also state that British military capability has declined.’
In terms of numbers, yes without doubt. The UK however had no stand off weaponry in 1982, few ships with adequate air defence and a virtual undefended Island whilst having little intelligence agents active in S.A.
It is pure fantasy to see an attack by Argentina with their current military inventory. They would be pounded. And then pounded some more, just for fun.
And unlike 1982 when attacks on the mainland were sensitive due to the cold war they would know that they would be launching this suicide mission in full knowledge that anything military related in Argentina would be about to get hit by cruise missiles.
are you sure that the UK could hit the Argentinian mainland with impunity? how would the world look upon that development?
if anything actions of that type would rally the S. American countries into a more active role. you can bet money that Venezula would lend a squadron of SU-30′s to the fight as well as anti-ship missiles via the Russians.
sorry but i don’t think you’re fully appreciating the situation here. the Libyan campaign did not impress…6 total TLAM shots? a destroyer sent to a region at war with known anti-ship missiles yet only having 2 anti-air missiles aboard?
i don’t think many appreciate how much the Royal Navy is being starved to pay for the Army and Air Force. additionally i don’t think many appreciate the capability gap that is being experienced by your force until its re-equipped later on this decade. their is a window of opportunity here.
Given the woeful state of Argentina’s military there is zero chance of any armed insurrection on their part. What they are doing is trying to get us to up the anti so there president can play the hero at home and the victim to the UN.
The best thing to do is to look to sue all countries involved in the embargo, also we give all these countries Brazil and Argentina included foreign development aid. That should stop for the time being.
Interestingly I don’t see Chile mentioned in the countries blockading us. It may also allow us to inflict extra leverage on the Argentines by opening a dialogue with Chile about building oil terminals etc. at Punta Arenas. Possibly even offer them a cut of the revenue. Make it clear to Argentina that we will develop that oil with or without their help and they will come back to the table.
I don’t think it would hurt to send a few more Eurofighters down there and possibly a friendly visit from HMS Astute on a world tour. However if we ratchet up things too much all we are doing is playing into Argentina’s hands.
We may also simply consider allowing Falkland vessels to fly the red ensign to side step the entire issue. It’s one thing to block 25 Falklands ships its quite another to block all UK vessels.
@ Also we should not look to make any sanction against Brazil. First of all we don’t want to piss them off and secondly it would help to break up any show of solidarity if Brazil does not get punished by Uraguay and Paraguay do.
Another step might be for us to make it clear that due to Argentina’s poor economic situation and its very badly equiped military we do not feel that Argentina could pose any threat to us and we are very concerned about there economic position and as such we will increase foreign aid to Argentina. This aid will go to homless street children and poor rural families. This would put Cristina Kirchner in a very bad position. We highlight the poor economy that she is trying to hide. If she refuses the aid she looses her support amongst the poor and if she accepts she looks weak. Either way she come soff bad and we come out smelling like roses.
there we go!
Theres a reason i suggested such a hard line, beyond war porn, remember the last war, when de-escalation was mistaken for weakness, and they invaded?
I strongly believe any show of force needs to include a submarine, because its an area we really are a world leader in, and south america has no capability in countering
Interesting, I still think (buying and) sending another OPV(H) down there would be a good start. This couple with additional low scale military exercises and perhaps some Reapers…
@ Dominic J – I accept there has to be a response. However I doubt it’s likely that they have forgotten we have this capability. Not to mention how will anyone know it’s there. Unlike last time the Argentines have almost no force to speak of while I defences are as strong as ever. Rattling the sabres with a show of military force plays straight into Christina’s hands. We come of not looking like the people on the correct side but instead as some colonial power holding a group of islands thousands of miles from our home. I believe she is trying to use the Falkland’s to divert attention away from the fact her country is still bankrupt and cut off from international lending and their inflation is amongst the highest in the world 25%. If we respond with a show of military force we play into her hands. I truly believe she is trying to get us to some sort of UN settlement. If we highlight the laughable capabilities of her armed forces and the poor state of her economy it should be enough to weaken her position and get her to turn elsewhere.
I truly believe that the problem here is not Argentina (let’s face it they are always going to be belligerent) but Uruguay. They are the ones getting involved in other countries issues. We have to make them understand that there are consequences to their actions. As a small country with a population of just 3.2 million is allot easier to bully than say Brazil. Let’s see what aid Argentina can send to help them after we pull ours. Uruguay has a disputed sea boarder with Brazil. Let’s bring that one up at the UN and recognise Brazils claim. Let’s see how long South American solidarity lasts then.
We should look to do this on a phased basis gradually increasing the pressure on them until they crack.
send a reaper and another OPV? funny!
an A-4 can vector onto one, slide up behind it and launch an air to air missile and the only thought will be that it malfunctioned. a reaper has no air to air radar so its highly likely that this act of war will go unnoticed.
UAV’s as a weapon of war in anything but a counter insurgency is one of the biggest lies told to the general public.
i wouldn’t be surprised if many of the lost UAVs over Afghanistan weren’t shot down.
the idea of an additional OPV is silly too. laugh all you want at the MEKO 360 that the Argentinians have but they’d make short work of those ships…very short work of them. the idea of deploying ships that have large machine guns as their primary arm in a potential war zone is telling.
what more do people need to see before its understood that the Royal Navy is being underfunded? a Russian armada sailed around Scotland and was escorted by one frigate. the expeditionary capability of the Navy (its LHA’s) are being retired before there time and its force projection (Harriers) were retired and sold off because of political pressure applied by the RAF.
the Royal Navy is stretched and this Falklands issue is the latest example….oh and do you want to know what the RAF is proposing? joining operations in Somalia while remaining quiet about the issues in the Falklands.
martin
i like the way you think
soloman
no one is suggesting uavs would win a war.
But they could follow the argentine fleet whenever it leaves port, throw in the ever present submarine threat, and its an annoyance.
Could they be shot down?
Of course, but if the ssn is watching the uav, we have proof of an unprovoked attack, bye bye meko.
@ Solomon – No doubt the royal navy is stretched but really if we have to rely on it in the Falkalnds we have not done the job right. These OPV’s are armed with cannons only because they are not warship’s. They are not unlike your US Coast Guard cutters. They are not deisgned to stop an Aregntine invasion. That’s the job of the Typhoons and the Frigate on station as well as the nearly 1,000 very well trained soldiers. Argentina simply cannot hope to mount any kind of invasion of the Falkalnds. It’s as likley as Mexico invading Texas. Our forces may be stretched fighting US lead wars and our government may have cut things to the bone. Admitadley our army as with yours can be a little short sighted but we ain’t stupid and we would have to be really stupid to loose the Falklands under these circumstances.
@ soloman yeah that’s right no one in the RAF is looking at the FI at all…
@ Dominic J – Argentina has a fleet?
I do like the idea of following them with Reaper though. Whne ever they go into international waters if they ever do. This would really piss them off. Pitty we did not have MPA- We could follow the Reaper to see if they did shoot it down.
I like Martin’s idea – that or get the EU to ban Argentine Beef, etc. As the pressure is diplomatic at the moment the response should be to.
As someone mentioned above the government appears to be focused on Somalia:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/raf-could-give-support-in-somalia-intervention-6280778.html
It appears the Cameron doctrine is air power doctrine…
not gonna work Gareth. with the carbon tax imposed by the EU on international air travel, the world is one small step away from a global trade war. the EU will NOT back the UK in this step over the Falklands.
I serioulsy doubt we can look for EU support on this matter. Nor do i feel we need it.
If the Islands were under direct threat then maybe. But no one wants to get involved in other peoples squabbles.
In terms of RAF involvement in Somalia that seems to be the most sensible thing to come out of the MOD in a long time. No boots on the ground, taraining local forces and providing C4ISTAR for African Union Forces alomg with a few special forces. Maybe we are finally learning our lesson.
Solomon said “a bunch of wishful thinking. talking about reminding EU partners of there responsibilities? they’ll throw the fact that Cameron ignored his responsibility.”
Cameron first responsibility is to the British people not the EU. What the members of the Eurozone do or don’t to protect their currency is their responsibility. The reason why the Eurozone is upset is that the UK as the second biggest economy in the EU is refusing to throw money at their problem and that the world’s financial agencies seem to like HMG’s fiscal plan. The UK is isolated. The Federal Reserve does expect the UK to look over its fiscal plans does it? No.
i agree with Cameron’s decision. just illustrating how the greater EU will react to the UK coming for help on the Falkland island issue.
Every single Lisbon Treaty signatory has an obligation to the UK and by definition the FI.
If something were to happen, however unlikely that actually is, they would be faced with a big decision. Chip in and help or sit on their hands.
Both would have implications
The problem with Cameron’s decision is that he used the veto when he did not have to. He thought he was in a strong position and he wasn’t. He tried to use the financial woes of the Eurozone crisis to get concession on the Financial Transaction Tax. All he had to do was negotiate an opt out for the UK on these new rules. Instead he over played his hand in an attempt to pander to his Euro skeptic back bench and left us looking like the bad guys when in reality its Germany causing all the problems. It beggar’s belief and shows the real caliber of the current government front bench.
“Unless they suddenly start renewing their Airforce and submarines, all they can do is sabre rattle and harass.”
They are doing both. They are investing to increase the submarine force and have a nuclear propelled one by 2015. They have just announced the re-engining of 30 Pucara and launched an order for 40 more Pampa Light Attack / Trainer aircrafts from next year. They are building new ships and acquiring new helos and France almost sell them the Foudre LPD.
France will sell the second LPD in a few years time when the 4th Mistral arrives, and you can bet that Argentina is putting pennies to the side to buy that one. They also have their eyes on the Super Etendard that FRance will soon retire.
They have a decade of time to play their cards. They might not look too much of a realistic threat yet, but there’s far too much complacency on here and elsewhere.
I would seriously doubt any direct help from EU allies even with the Lisbon Treaty. Even if they were willing other than the French sending the CDG (no chance) and maybe some Ducth Marines 9very little chance) I fail to see what help they could provide.
“As someone mentioned above the government appears to be focused on Somalia:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/raf-could-give-support-in-somalia-intervention-6280778.html”
Oh, yes, i remember that Nimrod MRA4 had to have its first deployment in the Somali area. That will be a great help to…
Oh, wait.
Forget about it.
@ Gabriele – Argentina with an SSN?
If they take a decade to do this which they would need then we should have a very nice 65,000 tonne aircraft carrier armed with a load of 5th generation fighters. More than enough to deal with some 30 year old French plains.
I can’t see many EU members not backing us, at least diplomatically. France might be p***ed off right now and would like to keep friendly relations with S.America (so do we!) but having a major European power humiliated would reflect badly on all of Europe and they wouldn’t want to set a precedent concerning Colonial possessions.
To my mind, the only question marks would be over Spain and Portugal, due to historic ties and Spain might want to link FI with Gibraltar.
i’m sure they’ve made lots of statements . But how realistic is it all that’s the question. With regards to the nuclear sub that in particular seems to be in la la land.
TD
I’m sure overseas territories are excluded from the EU defence pact.
But its extremely unlikely the EU would be that stupid.
If they came to our support guns blazing, it would end right wing euro realism for a generation.
If they sat out, which they have every right to do, it would not play well on the door steps. Lib/Lab drinking halls might be replete with tossers patting each other the back saying “told you we should have joined fully” but it wouldnt play well in The Sun.
Martin
There was no VETO
There was no treaty to veto.
There was an attempt to get an agreement that no nation would have a national debt greater than 60% of GDP and a deficit greater than 3% of GDP.
For Cameron to sign it, he would then have to come home and cut £120bn of spending (the “cuts” so far, have been an increase of £20bn instead of increase of £40bn).
It was always fantasy
Martin
“When ever they go into international waters if they ever do.”
Or just sit 11 miles off the coast…
My original suggestion was to use the cheaper Warrior / Grey Eagle, or a UK derivative. I’d build a network of statuions over all the overseas territories, if ever we want to annoy someone, we can start tailing their warships (and its much cheaper than using a surface ship of our own)
@ Dom – No one is Europe is signing up for penalties to be applied this year on the 3% and 60%. Even Germany would be getting fined then. Again we could have opted out but still allowed the other countries to use the EU institutions. But instead Cameron essentially vetoed it. Now they are going to do it anyway buy round about routes what does htta say for us.
“Enter stage left the former First Sea Lord, Lord West, who suggested sending a nuclear submarine to the Falkland Islands in a show of strength.”
Quite entertaining addition to the quiet diplomacy of HMG that says publicly:
“How many more Belgrano’s have you got to lose?”
Everyone knows the answer to that, even if no-one actually says it.
Just read about Argentina’s plans for an SSN. Honestly I think the UK would have of building the Death Star than Argentina has of completing this project.
Oh well, just as the original 1982 invasion was played out with domestic problems to hide, so it appears that this situation is developing similarly. 2012 will be an interesting year, expect more sabre rattling from Argentina (if nothing else, because the 30th anniversary is a good time to remind Argentinians that the Islands are “theirs”), and the hope that the UK media will be so focussed on the Olympics and Euro 2012 that they don’t notice and further aggressive moves.
In my view, its pointless trying to influence the crazy bint, but the armed forces, they’re easy.
I’m just tracking down the footage now, but there was a show on channel 5 about a submarine, probably Turbulant.
It was practicing ASW with the Royal Navy in the Indian Ocean. It started off surfaced, submerged, and then the helicopter tried to keep track of it
http://www.channel5.com/shows/royal-navy-submarine-mission/episodes/episode-3-341
29 minutes in.
The Helicopter lost it in about 30 seconds, and Turbulant just followed it around, recording it.
So do the same to Argentina, follow a warship, record it, and “leak” it on Warships1 (thats the navy equivilant to ARRSE right?). It’ll take what, 5 minutes until every blog in the world has repeated it, Cameron can go on Telly to “reprimand” the subs Captain, and by morning, the argentine navy has had every sailor madly trying to figure out when and where this occured.
3 months on, Mad Bint orders an invasion, and the Navy tells her to jog on.
Not quite as spectacular as blowing a ship up, but perhaps my plan can be passed on through unofficial channels, just as a “see, we could have been really mean”.
Or maybe thats just not how things are done in the real world….
“and “leak” it on Warships1 (thats the navy equivilant to ARRSE right?)”
That would be rum-ration (http://www.navy-net.co.uk/)
warships1 is more like here.
Firstly, we shouldn’t confuse support for Argentina’s territorial claim with support for Argentine military action against the islands.
Whether Argentina could theoretically take and hold the Falklands is not the main issue; we have to consider risk and reward. In ’82 the Argentine risk was considered negligable and the reward was an overwhelming wave of popular support for a regime reaching the point of collapse.
In ’82, the Junta believed that they could carry out a practically bloodless, unopposed invasion; today, the Argentine government must consider the likelihood of a C130 full of paratroops getting shot down over the Atlantic by a Typhoon, or the likelihood of a troop transport getting torpedoed on route. All for a fleeting sense of self pride and some fishing licenses, it’s a whole different kettle of fish.
Not even worth considering, unless a few billion barrels of oil are found on the shelf.
@ Brian black,
I agree with your outline thoughts, but to make the full calculus is a bit of a multi-dimensional, and moving calculation.
Plotting politics over time: as others observe, there’s an EU and UK politics dimension to any response. I can hardly imagine Ed Miliband should he ever become PM doing a Maggie. Plotting Argentine politics against increasing economic threats. Plotting economic value of the FI, pre and post any resources find of significance. etc
Plotting relative military capabilities over time, and in some detail (e.g. logistics / amphib capabilities / FJ capabilities / number of subs online etc). The Argentines could work up an assault formation of a couple of light brigades and subs and SF in what – 4 months? Could we work up an amphibious capability in the same time frame, even starting from a higher base? Not easy to judge.
I also thought we’d all accepted that the most likely Argentine invasion route was sea / sub, in order to negate the Typhoon threat. Once they are on land in adequate (i.e. Battalion) strength to not be pinned down by our land forces, there is nothing the Typhoons can do apart from either make a dash to Chile or Uruguay and plead asylum, or be captured on the runway at some later point. No ground attack capability on those there expensive Typhoons. Or any anti-shipping capability.
So perhaps the key point is to get a sub down there as fast as we can, to get the Typhoons upgraded to FGR status (with current pilots), or to cross our fingers.
@ James – I can’t believe you have such disregard for the British Army as to think a battalion of Argentines could single handedly over whelm the Garrison. And here was me thinking that you were in the pro Army camp.
‘The Argentines could work up an assault formation of a couple of light brigades and subs and SF in what – 4 months?’
Not really my area, but on another blog, there was an ex army SO who thought it took 12-18 months last time. With no large scale deployment little experience of it, less money etc you would be looking at years to get it right.
‘No ground attack capability on those there expensive Typhoons.’
They can do ‘dumb bombs’ IIRC there is a basic computer linked into the PHUD similar to Tornado and it’s got the cannon. Far from ideal but it is something.