Falkland Islands Defence Review

Secretary of State for Defence, Michael Fallon, is to make a statement in the House of Commons on Tuesday 24 March 2015 on the Falkland Islands Defence Review.

The statement is expected to start at approximately 1.15pm,

UPDATE

102 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Deja Vu
Deja Vu
March 24, 2015 1:34 pm

I am watching it live, but how boring is Michael Fallon’s delivery.

Beno
Beno
March 24, 2015 1:51 pm

Meh,
Don’t get me wrong its all welcome. but most of that we knew already.

I have to conclude that “we are fed up of getting jip about this 2% thing, so I’m appearing to hand out some MORE money for defence, whilst simultaneously getting you worried that if Labour get in the Falklands could fall” is what he really meant to say.

180 Million increase over 10 years, what’s that % wise accounting for inflation anyone ?

Only good bit was he confirmed CAMM(L) will be there before 2017 (ish) when rapier shuts down.

Beno

Hohum
Hohum
March 24, 2015 2:04 pm

My dreams of Mach 5 nuclear warhead tipped AShMs just got dashed again.

The Other Chris
March 24, 2015 2:35 pm

“…how boring is Michael Fallon’s delivery.”

Touches upon something that irks me with modern politics: I want people running the country to be good at running the country, which doesn’t necessarily mean being photogenic.

This predilection with looking good on TV Debates for their share of 90 minutes, point scoring at PMQ’s or coming up with a soundbite pejorative for a proposed policy just to make the front page of the Sun does us all no good.

Wish they’d apply their energy elsewhere for our betterment.

Consequently I don’t mind a boring delivery, provided what’s being delivered has value.

Not sure plumbing is the most exciting topic, but when you need to repeatedly flush after the previous visitors efforts it can become very important!

The Other Chris
March 24, 2015 2:38 pm

@Hohum

Plumbing may be a cover:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon

The Other Chris
March 24, 2015 2:57 pm
WillS
WillS
March 24, 2015 3:40 pm

Cameron: “We’re getting criticised for not thinking enough about that defence thing. Quick, say something military-ish but utterly meaningless and predictable to excite the media buffoons.”

The Other Chris
March 24, 2015 3:49 pm

It would be easy to agree with such cynicism if the Falklands Defence Review hadn’t been on the cards for at least the last six months, if not earlier.

There’s also serious money being spent (LEAPP).

The Other Chris
March 24, 2015 4:13 pm

My point entirely.

monkey
monkey
March 24, 2015 4:18 pm

@ToC
Project Babylon hmmmm….. the oil industry building up down there would disguise the shipments….how far is Buenos Aires from the FI again?

mike
mike
March 24, 2015 4:30 pm

Interesting, two Chinook HC6’s will be sent south… regaining the capability that was cut years ago… ontop of the two S-61N’s (that will be upgraded for NVG/Night ops) and the new AW189’s (also fully adverse weather/night capable) the FI’ers will have a good amount of rotary assets available compared to recent years.

Mechanical Tom
March 24, 2015 4:30 pm

Interresting that they are sending two Wokkas down south. I wonder if this is being influenced by the shift to contracted SAR Helos with the Sea King withdrawal.

Challenger
Challenger
March 24, 2015 5:16 pm

Sending two Chinooks down there is good news (wonder if they will resurrect 78 squadron?). Although with a fleet of 60 to play with i’m sure JHC is eager to keep them busy, a case of use them or lose them.

Beyond that it’s pretty much as i expected, talk of upgrading supporting facilities and making a big deal about replacing Rapier with CAMM (albeit slightly earlier) that was going to happen anyway.

I knew hoping for a couple of extra Typhoon’s and a boost to the garrison forces was wishful thinking.

mickp
mickp
March 24, 2015 5:16 pm

Nothing special – pretty much a reconfirmation of continued support based on existing force levels and a few planned upgrades tagged on to make it look better.

I still think we should preposition kit there and use at as a training base to rotate units through

Not a Boffin
Not a Boffin
March 24, 2015 5:40 pm

What kit and what units?

It’s not like the islands are suitable for mounted manoeuvre warfare. Unless we’ve got an elite unit of Penguin-botherers, not sure what training value you’re going to get. Come to think of it, Penguin-bothering is likely to be a bone of contention with the enviro-mentalists. So there’ll be a Penguin-anguish risk index required before any activity……

mike
mike
March 24, 2015 5:44 pm

@ mickp

Kit (as in ammunition and soldierly equipment) is prepositioned… and for a while it was the whole shebang. Over the years its only the most critical of kit remains, as equipment expired, and even then its not exactly enough.

The RAF used to run regular exercises (mostly on paper and but some physical exercise) on rapid reinforcement of the islands (AAR, transports ect) but that too fell to the wayside a few years back.

Apart from the communications and infrastructure (and Rapier replacement), its pretty much back to what we had there a couple of decades ago.

Challenger
Challenger
March 24, 2015 5:56 pm

Do the given infantry company and support elements conduct any training whilst they are there? Yes the terrain isn’t suited to heavy equipment and maneuver warfare but surely it’s good for lighter cold weather, mountain stuff?

Chris
Chris
March 24, 2015 6:02 pm

NaB – ref what kit – I could see the remaining CVR(T) going on a long vacation south if they don’t fit well with the shiny new Scout/PMRS units. The terrain in the Falklands is pretty well impassible for any other armour (light or otherwise) so they’d have the upper hand even if hostiles landed their own light armour; BMP2 for example has 70% greater ground pressure.

Not a Boffin
Not a Boffin
March 24, 2015 6:50 pm

“but surely it’s good for lighter cold weather, mountain stuff?”

Err. Haven’t we got Wales for that? SENTA to be specific?

And lets face it, worrying animals is the national pastime there, there shouldn’t be any enviro restrictions.

macguba
macguba
March 24, 2015 7:04 pm

The most important thing is the signal of political will. Sending two Chinooks is the exact opposite of announcing the scrapping of HMS Endurance ….

as
as
March 24, 2015 7:07 pm

We will have to wait and see if the Russian pact comes to anything. That might change if they give them some equipment that could have an effect on the statuesque.

mickp
mickp
March 24, 2015 7:43 pm

@NAB – “not sure what training value you’re going to get. ”

Training in defending remote islands from a range of potential incursions from a nearby country?

‘Training’ would be a way of basing a slightly more credible force down there on a permanent basis without being overly provocative. It can factor in training for reinforcement flights etc

Units – RM or light infantry, making use of the Chinooks, HMS Clyde, RIBs and perhaps some CVRTs / Broncos

Richard
Richard
March 24, 2015 8:18 pm

Pathetic. Worse than no statement at all. Other than a couple of wokkas (replacing lost capability?), nothing of any substance.

Naive, I suppose, but I really thought that something a little more ‘joined-up’ was in the offing, with HMG about to receive a sound thrashing.

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
March 24, 2015 9:10 pm

@Thread – Great place to test cruise missiles, heavily armed Taranis (once available), cutting-edge mine warfare systems and the like from. Put the targets about 500 miles west, and run the whole thing from a tin shed in Milton Keynes… :-)

Great test bed to devise a UK Home Defence system that can be run from a bigger tin shed in Milton Keynes by (mostly) reservists from HM Regiment of Geeks using pre-positioned and remotely controlled high-tech kit. Allowing us to concentrate our more conventional forces on expeditionary warfare, forward deployed…except for the Skylon Strike Squadron, which could operate world-wide from the Sutherland Space-Port Military Zone…is there a five-star hotel in Sutherland anywhere? Or will the Dan Dare Squadron demand six-star? :-)

I’ll take more water with it…

GNB

Repulse
March 24, 2015 10:38 pm

If I was a “pint half full” guy I would be happy that the Government has committed to a long term OPV presence. However, given the size of the FI and broader UK South Atlantic EEZ which is in dispute (especially around the Oil Fields), I would have hoped for more; perhaps a proper replacement for HMS Endurance with hangars to accommodate these radical things call helicopters…

mickp
mickp
March 24, 2015 11:55 pm

Repulse – agree on Endurance replacement – a good strong long legged vessel with a double lynx hanger with a couple of OPVs in conjunction

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
March 25, 2015 5:50 am

We’ve missed a chance to kill 2 birds with one stone.

We could have sent the entire RAF Regiment down there. Permanently. After all, it is an airfield, it needs to be guarded. It would give them something useful to do.

Obsvr
Obsvr
March 25, 2015 7:44 am

Not sure that LEAPP is that big a deal and handful of Giraffes, other bits and pieces in a RA battery commanded by a sqn ldr is not exactly lashing out.

jedibeeftrix
jedibeeftrix
March 25, 2015 8:12 am

@ RT – “We could have sent the entire RAF Regiment down there. Permanently. After all, it is an airfield, it needs to be guarded. It would give them something useful to do.”

Agreed, never understood why FI wasn’t a RAF Reg duty.

Aubrey's Shadow
Aubrey's Shadow
March 25, 2015 8:35 am

@RT – spot on…..

I may have mentioned more Astutes before……. but a permanent S Atlantic SNN presence would prevent invasion. 12 or more TLAMs arriving at your MoD HQ, major airfields and naval base without notice. Keeps focus, even for S American politicians.

I feel though, that the air war is yet to come. Harassment flights with new Argentinian toys, and Chinese/Russian engineers keen to test their systems against Typhoons over disputed offshore platforms have the potential to turn nasty, and somebody eventually will end up taking a bath; I’ll give it 4 years. Then we’ll need a full squadron down there.

Not a Boffin
Not a Boffin
March 25, 2015 10:33 am

“‘Training’ would be a way of basing a slightly more credible force down there on a permanent basis without being overly provocative”

I don’t think we have to worry about being provocative, so you don’t need to worry about having an excuse to increase the size of the garrison. If you want a bigger land force, then increase from Coy size to Bn and deal with the rotation frequency – unless you think making it an accompanied tour would be a good idea!

mickp
mickp
March 25, 2015 10:43 am

I agree with the assessment that we have a few years grace before ‘nuisance stuff’ starts. It may go no further but it will be important that our eyes, ears and reactions are up to scratch and that we have ‘redundancy’ in capability

mickp
mickp
March 25, 2015 10:50 am

@NAB – Should be an army battalion on rotation, an appropriate sized RAF Regiment detachment to do what they should do, and RM company to work with HMS Clyde etc and appropriate support structure of cooks and plumbers etc. They can all train while they are down there

Not a Boffin
Not a Boffin
March 25, 2015 11:37 am

Last I looked the RIC works with the FIPV on a reasonably regular basis – can get quite exciting for our pongo pals. Very little point having an RM Coy group down there, not least cos you can only fit 20 or so of them on Clyde, so unless you give them a bunch of LC to play with (and there’s not much chance of that), rollmat fighting will break out fairly swiftly. The Rock Apes might jump at the idea though, as it gives them a role now Bastions gone.

Ultimately the defence of the islands comes down to retaining control and use of MPA and its associated fuel farm and ammo dump. Lose that (and the Wokkas) and it doesn’t matter whether its a Coy grp or a Bde, you’re going to lose. And that’s the point – not convinced that a permanent garrison 3 x the current one will make much of a difference in achieving that defence, except increased worry for the penguins, which is ecologically unsound. Same effect can be achieved in Wales at lower cost.

Clive F
Clive F
March 25, 2015 12:09 pm

Would there be any mileage in keeping spare Typhoons down there?
Crews could be sent down in times of high tension so cost would not be much once down there. We will soon have a surplus of airframes. There is now plenty of spare hangar room. They could be either rotated or kept in warm store or just there to “frighten the enemy”. Waiting for the idea to be “shot down”

Aubrey's Shadow
Aubrey's Shadow
March 25, 2015 12:34 pm

Whilst there is no serious risk of invasion any time soon, I do think the air war will pick up inevitably when eventually the FAA re-equips. As I said earlier, I think the threat of SSNs (if there, or believed to be) will keep anything ‘big’ at bay, as they can’t recklessly abandon ships and risk mainland airfield strikes in response to a full-blown military assault on the islands. But aircraft nuisance action I see as inevitable.

There has to be a balance of reaction between keeping international opinion and legitimacy onside on the one hand, and maintaining British military credibility on the other. I tend towards making a point as soon as they cross certain red lines – repeated incursions of airspace, shots fired, radar lock-ons etc. I think we would then have to take them down, as would many other countries; US, Russia, China, France etc. and we just have to bite the bullet on the reaction, for the longer-term value of credibility. Only then would we maintain the serious deterrent that we desire, and which would endure beyond the initial media kerfuffle. Then we’ll probably have to take a lot more down, if they responded. We have to be prepared to show that we mean what we say, as many others will be watching, Putin included.

Kent
Kent
March 25, 2015 3:47 pm

1. You could save a “cap-badge” outfit by sending it to the Falklands as a light combined arms battalion: 3 infantry companies, a reconnaissance squadron (It could be “1st Squadron, Blues and Royals” in honor of their service in the Falklands War.), and a field artillery battery.

2. You could put a squadron’s worth of Typhoons down there and let the flight that’s down there rotate through them to keep them all in flying shape. -Or- You could move all the remaining Tornado GR4’s down there and let the lads keep flying them until they run out. (This would be in addition to the Typhoons. The Tornados have the range to get to Punta Alta, Argieland, and back and Taranto the place. The Tiffies, don’t.)

3. Really need something bigger than HMS Clyde down there, something with room in a hangar for a couple of ASW helicopters and fitted “for” and “with” SAMs and a few guns (5 inch and CIWS minimum). Of course, Clyde or one of the new OPVs would need to stay as well.

And I didn’t even get into the realm of fantasy but once!

Kent
Kent
March 25, 2015 4:07 pm

Um, I was just looking at Punta Alta, Arg, on Google Maps satellite view, and it seems they have a problem with one of their ships. What’s up with that? The imagery is from this year.

The Other Chris
March 25, 2015 4:19 pm

@Kent

ARA Santísima Trinidad? A Type 42 Destroyer.

She’s decommissioned but sank in harbour. Likely due to lack of TLC but there are suggestions of sabotage.

Kent
Kent
March 25, 2015 4:20 pm

Okay, I just figured it out. That’s the ARA Santísima Trinidad, the only Type-42 destroyer build outside Britain, and it went down in January, 2013. Don’t know why I didn’t remember that.

Thanks, TOC. I’m surprised they didn’t blame the British.

The Other Chris
March 25, 2015 4:57 pm

@Kent

I’m sure they do, but we’ve gotten used to their government laying the blame for all of their own failures at our door.

mike
mike
March 25, 2015 8:58 pm

Nah… the old T-42 capsized due to shaking from fear of British submarines ;)

Observer
Observer
March 25, 2015 11:06 pm

You could increase the FI garrison presence. How does that affect the supply situation? Where do the units stationed there get their food, water and fuel from? Shipped from Europe? Supplied by the FI directly? Increasing army size is easy to say, but if you’re far, far away from your sources of support, it might be hard to sustain, and we are talking about going from company sized to regiment or battalion. That is a fairly large increase.

mickp
mickp
March 25, 2015 11:48 pm

@Kent re your points 1 to 3:

1 – yes
2 – yes
3 – but isn’t that really T26 (or at least ‘GP’ T26?) That said, I agree we should have a real HMS Endurance replacement with a twin Lynx hanger to work in conjunction with one or more OPVs, but wouldn’t be putting 5″ guns on – perhaps just CIWS / Sea Ram and some 30mm?

stewart hitchen
stewart hitchen
March 26, 2015 12:06 am

Keeping the batch one typhoons for Q.R.A. with 12 in the Falkland’s rest kept in storage in UK a stock of storm shadows for faith hope charity and desperation would say Keep of the Grass.

ChrisM
ChrisM
March 26, 2015 12:07 am

How difficult is it to stick a VLS in to the ground?
Sea Viper would give their Air Force something to think about, but even better would be to stick some Tomahawk in there. a permanent 24/7/365 ability to make them almost instantly pay for any aggressive moves (and once the anti-ship version is available…..)
And of course they beauty of VLS is that they wont know what is in the tubes, or even whether the covers actually have tubes under them…..

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 6:56 am

@ChrisM
I like the idea of VSL type silos buried about the Islands. When the T45 go in for a major refit perhaps the Sylvers , if replaced by Mk41 , could be relocated south. The 4.5″ mounts ( cut that entire ship section out) from the T23’s similarly relocated . Shame to waste all that 4.5″ ammo :-)

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 7:59 am

@Observer
Re- supply is a key issue for the existing Mount Pleasant Complex as well as for the Islanders themselves. All the fuel ( at present ) is imported as is much of the general foodstuffs so large stores have to be maintained and may need to be increased to cope. In an emergency though the Islands are self sufficient in food technically, there are 2/3rds of a million sheep on the island and the Falklands fisheries produce more protein than even the sheep produce.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:FalklandEconomicZone.png
You will never go hungry as long as you like lamb and fish! Sufficient vegetables could be grown too if required to the feed the present 1200 strong military and 3500 islanders.

Rocket Banana
March 26, 2015 8:44 am

Alternatively:

Remove 16 x Aster30 from four of the T45s now.
Buy a couple of SAMP/T launch vehicles now.
Put the Asters into the SAMP/T launch vehicles now.
Replace lost Aster30s in T45 with reboostered Aster15s later and install quad-packed CAMM later.

Hey presto, Falkland Island air defence… now.

The Other Chris
March 26, 2015 9:08 am

Or send HMS Dragon to the region with a fully fledged PAAMS system.

Oh wait… that’s what we’ve done!

;)

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 9:18 am

The problem with HMS Dragon and its kin are that they cost £1,000,000,000 each and require 150 personnel and about 10,000,000 litres of fuel a year along side that 98% of the time its will be in another part of the South Atlantic Ocean out of range where as a Sylver pod will sit inside its concrete shell available 247/365 days a year in range on minimal maintenance costs but otherwise not a lot in it.

Rocket Banana
March 26, 2015 9:58 am

TD,

That “Select Committee Report” is quite frankly concerning to the hilt.

Obviously I’m concerned about the possibility of scrapping PoW but more importantly it demonstrates an utter lack of understanding (or mitigation) of the possible changes that can occur very quickly.

I am still very much in favour of the original Army 2020’s five identical multi-role brigades. The current planned structure makes no sense.

Lastly, can we not ditch all our defence assets and do the same (politik) with Russia and ISIS too ;-)

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 10:21 am

@TD
I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment that a long term peaceful solution via cultural, economic and diplomatic means would be best but with their economic links getting stronger with the Chinese and their traditional partners like Spain being in place we have little room to manoeuvre. The obvious new route would be the sharing of the latest offshore hydrocarbon discoveries but will be a hard sell as they think its 100% theirs. Why share what’s yours already? Diplomatically will be a struggle with most Nations siding with the Argentinians, all of Central and South America , Russia and China and the US standing to one side ( lets not ignore Spain either who we have a separate but similar dispute with ). Culturally? At the last World cup they couldn’t resist demonstrating their views and how do you identify with a people who suffer the dirty war, 7,000 to 30,000 ‘disappeared’ and 10,000’s imprisoned in concentration camps too by the Military Junta and then demonstrate in its favour like this:-
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_xqwNsmzCbM
The only solution I can see is the Argentine drastically turns around its economy so the people have less reason to point at 5000 square miles of cold desolate islands as the source of all their ills compare to the 1,000,000 square miles they already occupy which host the Worlds second largest shale oil reserves and the worlds fourth largest shale gas reserved which are slightly easier to access than a platform in the South Atlantic Ocean. The Argentinians should be an extremely wealthy people based on their natural resources but they aren’t perhaps someone needs to tell the people why and its not the rocks 500 miles of their coastlines’ fault.

The Other Chris
March 26, 2015 10:36 am

@monkey

However an Aster 30 doesn’t just sit quietly in it’s (locatable and targetable) concrete bunker.

If you want a SAMP/T battery covering an island group rather than a fleet-mobile asset, then you’re looking at the likes of Mamba. One C&C vehicle, one or more radar vehicles (France use Arabel) and up to six transporter lorries on the Mamba implementation.

Or you develop your own SAMP/T implementation, at a cost.

Or you implement CAMM(M) for LEAPP.

Or you buy NASAMS.

I don’t think Patriot, Iron Dome or THAAD style implementations are necessary.

That’s the Air Defence options covered.

As TD points out, de-escalating is the right way to go if we can manage it.

The Other Chris
March 26, 2015 10:46 am

Apologies, meant CAMM(L) not (M).

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 12:37 pm

@ToC
Appreciate the feedback.
When the new systems already earmarked for the defence of East Falkland and the Mount Pleasant Complex are in place it will provide more than enough coverage to defend the fixed installation’s from air attack and the present ground troops to forestall any land assault.

mickp
mickp
March 26, 2015 12:40 pm

I am with the view that we should increase defensive capability but in a low key way – suggestions being any or all of:

– An appropriate RAF regiment force (company?) specifically to defend MPA
– Keep the roulement army company, but periodically rotate a 2nd / 3rd company through for ‘training’ and testing the reinforcement plan (ie to bring up to battalion strength)
– Preposition some CVR(T)s there / other appropriate vehicles that assist rapid movement over the terrain
– Update air defences as planned
– Maintain APT(S) as a mandated DD/FF standing task
– Let it be known that the South Atlantic is an SSN standard tasking
– Reinstate the pre 82 sized RM deployment, for use on HMS Clyde / HMS Protector
– Upgrade FIG patrol assets – sea and air
– Upgrade the Herc to US CG equivalent maritime patrol capability, sensors etc
– Longer term Protector replacement plan, dual Lynx capable
– Increase air component to 6 Typhoon, 2 Chinook and 2 or 3 army wildcat

Our largest vulnerability is the reliance on MPA. What contingency plans exist if MPA is out of action, what is Port Stanley still capable of operating? Of course and slightly tongue in cheek, when we get the F35, we don’t need runways anyway

Kent
Kent
March 26, 2015 12:53 pm

Stayed at work last night due to tornadoes, strong straight-line winds, and severe thunderstorms. Sirens started going off in the downtown area around 1715 hours local when a tornado was confirmed on the ground about 11 miles (18 km) to the west. I stopped people from leaving the building and sent them to the shelter while we monitored the weather. Lost power (in downtown Tulsa) until the generators kicked in. A building about two blocks away lost its roof. 80+ mph (130+ kmph) straight-line winds, hail, and, at one point, water in the street was running uphill. Once we got the all clear, we let people leave into a veritable monsoon. I got home to a house without power, an aggravated wife, worried grown daughter, and a dog that had just come out from under the bed. Luckily, I was able to get to an open restaurant and bring some dinner home, and power came on at the house quite quickly.

There is one confirmed death and a number of injuries in the metropolitan area, and there are still people without power (some projected until Saturday). Schools are closed. Still, it could have been much worse.

Back at work this morning less than 10 hours after I left, and I have a half-hour commute in from the country. People might wonder what happened to “Officer Friendly” this morning. “Officer Friendly” has left the building for today.

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 1:03 pm

@Kent
Sorry to hear of the death of one of your countrymen and that the city returns to normal as soon as possible.

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
March 26, 2015 1:24 pm

@Kent – hope all is swiftly set to rights; all good wishes to Tulsa from here at Gloomyville, and condolences on the death of your fellow Townsman…

GNB

Observer
Observer
March 26, 2015 1:44 pm

Kent, besides that, how was your day? :)

Stay cool man. Pun not intended. Things should be back to normal soon. They always do.

Kent
Kent
March 26, 2015 1:49 pm

Thank you, all. It just could have been so much worse. Apparently the tornado skipped about instead of running a solid ground track. It hit one mobile home park west of here (where the death and most injuries occurred) and missed most other very vulnerable areas. It, or straight-line winds, destroyed a gymnastics facility that was loaded with little girls and their moms. Fortunately, they had some warning, so everyone was in the concrete basement when the building blew away. Couldn’t tell how bad it was in the dark last night, but one of the marinas took a hit, too. The doughnut shop between here and the lake was leveled, leaving only the freezer standing on the slab. It was closed (open from 0400-1300 hours), and the baker/doughnut maker wasn’t due to come to work until 2200 hours. There is a one mile strip starting 5 miles east of downtown where the power poles along a major street were almost all taken down.

All in all, we were pretty fortunate. Any loss of life or injuries are tragic, but we’ll recover. Again, thank you for your condolences and concern.

Sorry, TD. I just realized this wasn’t on the Open Thread, but I’m too tired to worry about it.

Simon257
Simon257
March 26, 2015 2:34 pm

It’s all very well attempting to improve links with Argentina. But when they make kids cartoons on the subject, I don’t think well get very far!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VKkcTpCur7g

Tony Williams
Tony Williams
March 26, 2015 3:26 pm

I suspect that the Argentinian government is not seriously interested in taking over the FI; it’s too handy an issue for rallying popular support for them to distract attention from their many and various internal problems.

Just think about it for a moment: what would be the best way for them to gain control of the FI? It would be to launch a reassurance campaign to convince the FIs that there would be lots of benefits in going with Argentina; offer free higher education, boost trade and cultural links, maintain regular flights, announce that the FI would be able to keep their own little government, continue to drive on the left and so on. If they had done this before 1982 then the FIs would probably have become the Malvinas many years ago, since the UK would then have been happy to sign them over.

Instead they do the exact opposite, following policies which seem specifically designed to antagonise and worry the islanders and make any transfer from the UK politically impossible. They are either very, very stupid or they’re happy with the status quo.

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
March 26, 2015 3:34 pm

@ Tony Williams…or just Latins, for whom maintaining an appearance of machismo (however deluded) matters more than reality… :-)

GNB

IXION
March 26, 2015 4:35 pm

TW

Yes I argued long ago the ‘danger to the Falklands is a sane sensible govt in Argentina doing all those things, cooperate on trade, open up ports and airports, assist joint oil exploration, offer bribes/ enticements for the refineries to be on the mainland, push for ‘open borders’ so Argentinians can settle and work on the Falklands, etc 50 years from now they will all be voting ‘si’ to transfer of sovereignty.

Its a bit like World war 1. If the Germans could have kept it in their pants until 1930 by now we would eating a lot of sausage…..

monkey
monkey
March 26, 2015 5:07 pm


“If the Germans could have kept it in their pants until 1930 by now we would eating a lot of sausage….”
????? Sausage???

Kent
Kent
March 26, 2015 5:35 pm

@Observer – “Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?” So far, we’re 20°F cooler than yesterday. The high yesterday was in the high 70s; today it’s expected to be in the mid 50s. We get warm, moist air up from the Gulf of Mexico with daytime heating, then a cold from comes through, and BAM! thunderstorms that can bet severe almost without warning. Yesterday’s storms “popped” about a hundred miles away near Oklahoma City and started dropping tornadoes around 20 miles to our west. The storms were still tornadic* when they entered Arkansas 80 miles to our east.

*(That doesn’t mean there were tornadoes the whole way. It means that there were significant rotations in the storms that could drop tornadoes. Livin’ on the edge in Tornado Alley!)

as
as
March 26, 2015 5:46 pm

There is always the one option that so far we have not tried.
How much Argentinian money goes through banks in London?
How reliant is Argentina on trade with UK and Europe?
Could we push some buttons.
Ok America failed with Cuba so economic war do not necessary work but it could be worth a try.

Aubrey's Shadow
Aubrey's Shadow
March 26, 2015 6:44 pm

@as
You’re right on their vulnerability in this respect, but it’s the nuclear option, which we can’t strike with first. And once we have used it for what many will see as colonial pursuit, the credibility of London’s financial centre is damaged to a far greater extent that we want, or is justified over a relatively small spat in the South Atlantic. It’s as TD says, try to engage them, hope that better Governments follow, and in 10 years it could all be very different. But there still needs to be a big stick behind the back, like Uncle Sam carries.

as
as
March 26, 2015 7:02 pm

yes a big stick. There is the question of what type of big stick but you are right (carrier/bomber?) we need one.

I did find it odd that even as the war was going on in 82 they were still aloud to trade through London. In the current context you are absolutely right. It was just an idea.

Has anyone heard anything new about the proposed plan for the deep water port at Port William? It was going through planning but then everything went quite.

Aubrey's Shadow
Aubrey's Shadow
March 26, 2015 7:55 pm

I think an SSN Permanently Tasked Atlantic South-shaped big stick is the least escalatory, and the most credible deterrent.

Observer
Observer
March 27, 2015 1:17 pm

@Kent

That sounds like a lot of damage. I was thinking, would a steel reinforced brick or concrete house help in resisting tornados? They do a lot of prefab concrete these days, and it would be a one off cost instead of a recurring one. And might be safer? If so, maybe you can sell it as a regional resilience program for government subsidies, fix it once and for all rather than a continuous series of repairs and risk of lives?

Need to ask. Place where I stay (Singapore) has no natural disasters, so no idea what that would entitle.

Kent
Kent
March 27, 2015 3:09 pm

@Observer – The problem is evaluating the risk of a tornado strike. The man who died was in a mobile home which is basically a wooden framed box sheathed with aluminum or thin steel sheets. The last time a tornado hit that area was 1956. That said, the state offers grant money to help people install “safe rooms” or storm shelters on their property, but there is never enough money for all who want it. Most “brick” houses these days are just like any other stick-built building with a wooden frame except they are sheathed with a layer of bricks. In other words, they blow apart in tornadoes just like any other frame building. There are some options that are more “tornado safe” than others, though.

Insulated concrete form construction – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulating_concrete_form

Monolithic dome construction – http://www.monolithic.org/homes

Prefabricated dome construction – http://www.aidomes.com/

There are also steel frame houses, houses built into the sides of hills, etc. The problems are 1. cost, 2. zoning codes, 3. cost.

“Safe rooms” and storm shelters are probably the most cost effective way to deal with the danger, but, again, add the cost. Many mobile home parks are providing community shelters, and most churches, etc., offer shelter in emergencies.

The tornado that hit our area was a top end EF2 (enhanced Fujita scale) packing winds of 111-135 mph (178-217 kmph) that was on the ground for 9 miles. http://www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/ The storm that hit Moore, Oklahoma, on May 20, 2013, was an EF5 tornado. Where there had been 2 story brick homes in nice neighborhoods, there were empty concrete slabs with even the grass ripped out of the yards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Moore_tornado http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/EF5damageMoore2013.jpg

Observer
Observer
March 27, 2015 4:54 pm

So if there is such a large time gap, guess it’s not economical to tornado proof everything. Pity.

Kent
Kent
March 27, 2015 6:16 pm

@Observer – Unfortunately, some places seem to get hit over and over again. Moore, Oklahoma, for instance was hit with devastating tornados in 1999, 2003, and again in 2013. To top everything off, they were hit again at about the same time we were having our wind event! In all cases, the tornadoes tracked through almost the same areas. I have no explanation. The folks in Moore keep rebuilding and adding tornado shelters and safe rooms.

Mike Wheatley
Mike Wheatley
March 27, 2015 7:59 pm

Perhaps I should change my ID to “war mongering liberal”, but it seems to me to be a problem that Argentina has nothing to lose from making repeated attempts to invade & annex The Falklands, so their cost/benefits analysis will always include the threat of future invasion.

So we should find something of theirs to hold at risk, which they could lose in the event of another war.

E.g. a threat of us annexing Tierra del Fuego and handing it over to Chile. (Although, if it is “okay” for Argentina to annex the Falklands, and “okay” for Chile to annex Tierra del Fuego, then I don’t see why it would not be okay for us to annex T-de-F for ourselves…. yeah, sorry, I’m being a war-mongering liberal again.) (Not that I want T-de-F; but the Argies want it, and I think it would deter war if the Argies had something to lose.)

as
as
March 27, 2015 9:11 pm

@Mike Wheatley
Maybe we should sign a mutual defence pact with Chile?

Kent
Kent
March 27, 2015 9:39 pm

@Mike Wheatley – In November of this year, the 75th Anniversary of the Battle of Taranto should be a big deal and should be celebrated with a demonstration flight on November 11, 2015 off Base Naval Puerto Belgrano at Punta Alta with a number of Tornado GR.4s, perhaps escorted by Typhoons, just as a reminder that the ARA is still very vulnerable. How’s that?

Observer
Observer
March 28, 2015 11:37 am

lol Kent, that isn’t sabre rattling, that is rattling the whole armoury.

On a more practical note, my opinion is that once someone starts to try annexing parts of your country with force, turnabout is fair play.

as
as
March 29, 2015 3:19 pm
mickp
mickp
March 29, 2015 4:30 pm

@as, whilst I broadly share his conclusion at least for the time being it does look as though he’s swallowed a PR brochure, eg:
“Getting past the Royal Navy would be a challenge. In the South Atlantic, the Royal Navy deploys at least one of the new Daring Class Type 45 destroyers. Doesn’t sound much; but with each one capable of tracking up to 1,000 targets from 400Km simultaneously and engaging up to 300 targets in layers from 120 km to 30 km (provided the targets are larger than a tennis ball) simultaneously, it is the equivalent of 5 Type 42 destroyers of the type used in the Falklands War.”

That’s good, as with 6, we now have the equivalent of 30 T42s – happy days!

All Politicians are the Same
All Politicians are the Same
March 29, 2015 4:41 pm

@ MickP

The system may well be capable of that but once you have fired 48 missiles you will be throwing rocks.

mickp
mickp
March 29, 2015 5:48 pm

@APATs, agreed, the five for one argument has always been one of the worst

All Politicians are the Same
All Politicians are the Same
March 29, 2015 5:55 pm

@ Mick P

Precisely why the extra space could be utilised (apparently being held for possible strike length silos) and quad packed Ceptor should be looked at. 40 aster 30 and 32 Ceptor gives a very different outlook.

Mark
Mark
March 29, 2015 6:22 pm

We have the capability to attack buenos aires at will with ssns and TLAM that didn’t exist last time thats a calculation they didn’t have to factor in. Argentina is more a threat on the football field than on the military one, and if they played cricket well……

I can think of no reason why Quad packing ceptor should not be looked at.

mickp
mickp
March 29, 2015 6:55 pm

@APATS – that would be an entirely sensible midlife upgrade

Kent
Kent
March 30, 2015 12:38 pm

@Observer – What? You don’t think that would be effective? “¡Almirante! ¡Hay 24 aviones británicos fuera de costa Punta Alta!” They wouldn’t know if there was an Astute-class sub with TLAM off shore. They would certainly know if enough aircraft to sink their whole Armada showed up on radar.

Ant
Ant
March 30, 2015 4:03 pm

I still think you could, dimentially, get five CAMM into a Sylver/Mk 41 launcher.

Pent Packing?

TAS
TAS
April 1, 2015 7:50 am
monkey
monkey
April 1, 2015 3:47 pm

@TAS
I volunteer to stand by the UN anti- colonial committees decision and start ‘negotiations’ . I will be happily based either in New York or Geneva for the duration of the talks and will take me to retirment or when hell freeze’s over to be completed to a successful conclusion of the Falklands remaining British.

monkey
monkey
April 1, 2015 4:19 pm

Tomorrow El Presidente K is in Tierra del Fuego to oversee the 33 rd Anniversary of them starting the Falklands War which will see her preside over a ceremony installing a statute of the Virgin of the Malvinas. It has been on tour around the 23 states of Argentinia , their base in the Antarctic and to Rome to be blessed by Pope Francis who’s idea it was when he was Cardinal of Buenos Aeries. Perhaps through him , an Argentine by birth we could settle this once and for all or at least start the process of making them drop it as its getting boring now and is costing us money everytime the try to by new fighterbombers or warships or build SSN’s in partnership with Brazil or burn our flag or demonstrate at the World Cup or insist by law signs are put up in all public spaces that the Falklands are theirs or start building new nuclear reactors with their new best buds the Chinese or teaching in schools how the evil British colonialists stole the ( unoccupied) Islands whilst forgetting how much of their neighbours territory they have annexed or generally being a bunch of cry babies who can’t stand losing so cheat at football ( I am looking at you Diego ….) or … I am going for a lie down now

as
as
April 2, 2015 7:35 pm

Argentina accuses Britain of ‘war-mongering’ over Falkland Islands as veterans gather in Buenos Aires to pay tribute to dead soldiers 33 years on

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3022932/Argentina-accuses-Britain-war-mongering-Falkland-Islands-veterans-gather-Buenos-Aires-pay-tribute-dead-soldiers-33-years-on.html

You would think they had something more important to do today.

as
as
April 3, 2015 10:39 pm

Argentina threatens British firms ‘illegally’ drilling for oil off Falklands coast, as tensions rise on anniversary of conflict

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3024666/Argentina-threatens-British-firms-illegally-drilling-oil-Falklands-coast-tensions-rise-anniversary-conflict.html

as
as
April 6, 2015 3:11 am

EXCLUSIVE: Falklands at risk of new attack after MoD gaffe
BUNGLING civil servants were accused of handing Argentina an “invasion handbook” for the Falklands after forgetting to encrypt a secret document.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/568489/Argentina-Falklands-Invasion-Handbook-MoD-blunder

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
April 6, 2015 6:28 am

Virgin of Las Malvinas? I don’t think that any girl who has been on tour through 23 provinces, the Antarctic and Rome could be safely assumed to be a virgin. Particularly if rough soldiery are involved.

She seems like a challenge, anyway.

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
April 6, 2015 10:55 am

Have now googled her. She looks like a dumpy little chit, but the left footers seem to like that.

I think a massive improvement would be to paint a RAF roundel on her arse.

as
as
April 6, 2015 3:09 pm

Details about British base on the Falklands including co-ordinates of facilities and runway information are left open to the public on MoD website after security gaffe

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3027162/Details-British-base-Falklands-including-ordinates-facilities-runway-information-left-open-public-MoD-website-security-gaffe.html