'UK can do 'precisely nothing' to prevent Argentina retaking the Falklands'

Source: Asian News International

'UK can do 'precisely nothing' to prevent Argentina retaking the Falklands'

London, June 13 : Admiral Sir John "Sandy" Woodward, who commanded the British Naval Force in the South Atlantic during the Falklands War, has warned that the defence cuts will allow his country to do "precisely nothing" to prevent Argentina from retaking the islands.

Woodward also stressed that America has little interest in supporting Britain in any conflict because a stable Argentina is now more important to the State Department, The Telegraph reports.

He said that the US is pushing for negotiations over their sovereignty and that as "significantly the islands were already being called the Malvinas by the US, tells us all too clearly which way the wind is blowing."

With the Armed Forces already "over-committed" in Afghanistan and Libya, and the Navy drastically weakened following last year''s defence review, "the answer appears to be that we can do precisely nothing other than accede to US pressure," the 79-year-old insisted.

Read more: http://www.newkerala.com/news/2011/worldnews-6044.html

They were able to contest Argentinian air supremacy only by a daring SAS/SBS sabotage operation on the airfield on West Falkland, and with twenty-or-so Harrier jump-jets deployed on two small aircraft carriers, one of which (HMS Invincible) was already sold to the Australians.

Most of the anti-air radar and missile systems deployed on frigates and destroyers did not work against low-level supersonic attacks, and the British would have suffered catastrophic losses just from the bomb hits they sustained were it not for the fact that the United States neglected to send over an owner's manual along with the bombs the Argentinians were using, so that many of them had their fuses set incorrectly and did not actually explode after a hit.

When one considers how thin that margin of victory was, Admiral Woodward certainly appears to know what he's talking about now.

The Brits can do the Navy thing pretty well. Also, the technology is a lot better today. As long as they want to remain British citizens I think Argentina will play hell getting those islands back. He's posturing for more funding.

Just a sad old man reliving his glory days by bringing up a complete non-issue to try to be relevant again.

The technology is better, but that works against the Brits because the technology has proliferated among the formerly less capable nations. When the Sheffield was sunk by an anti-ship missile in the Falklands War, many thought that was the end of the British counter-invasion right there, but fortunately for them they had it on the best authority (ours) that the Argentinians only had a few more of them. They are much less expensive today, and the Chinese will sell them to anyone.

In the meantime, the Royal Navy is a fraction of the size it was in the 1980s. Even though the critical importance of the aircraft carrier was underscored in that war, the Brits sold them off anyway, and now they have only one left, plus three smaller helicopter landing ships. They have no battleships, no cruisers, six destroyers, and thirteen frigates (not including one destroyer and two frigates being decommissioned this month), giving them a total of twenty-two seagoing combat surface ships. That's not enough to protect an invasion fleet.

In fact, at this point it could be argued that Lord Nelson's flagship from 1805, HMS Victory, which is still in commission just like the USS Constitution is here, once again has the most firepower of any ship in the Royal Navy. It probably fields more naval guns than the rest of the fleet combined (not all guns are created equal, obviously).

Certainly part of what Adm. Woodward is trying to do is secure completion funds for a new aircraft carrier, because the Illustrious is old and was hastily completed so that it could relieve the Invincible for guard duty off the Falklands in 1983. With no aircraft carrier, the British cannot project military power unaided, which means that all of their remaining territorial possessions and associated states are vulnerable.

But the Brits have an unusual tradition of learning these lessons over and over, the hard way, and somehow they always seem to pull it off. So we shall see.

Should the Argies attempt another invasion of the Falklands, the British will seek to expel them again. The Admiral is very probably correct when he says that a repeat of the last wars tactics will not work.

The UK still has other options, particularly sub-surface.

Her Majesty's forces may choose not to exempt Buenos Aires and the mainland from "strategic" attack in that event.

It's up to the citizens of the Falkland Islands to decide, and the majority of Falklanders don't want to be part of Argentina. Since the conflict/war is still fresh in a lot of peoples' memory, and this position has been made known to London, the UK is not going to entertain any requests by Argentina for sovereignty. Later on, the idea may be entertained but there is a great deal of hostility towards Argentina in the Falklands with respect to territorial claims.

Al Queda of the Falklands are coming.

Terrorist penguins! Run for your lives! Unleash the walruses!

It'll be anarchy! Dogs and cats living together!

Blah, blah, kill me...

What right does a country have to occupy and claim territory thousands of miles away, obtained by brute force or trickery?

If the Falklanders want to remain British subjects, they can take a flight to Heathrow and be done with it.

Malvinas belong to Argentina. Period.

by your logic all Argentinians should go back to Spain.

After all, a far higher proportion of the Kashmiri population want to be part of Pakistan than of Falklanders wanting to be Argentinian. And Srinagar is far closer to the Pakistani capital than the Indian one.

it is a state carved out by the same brits out of spite. That land belongs to India.

Or is your view that you personally are always in the right, and everyone else's views are irrelevant?

Good for the goose, good for the gander.

And close most of our bases around the world.

If so, get the fuck back to Mongolia where you belong, you bloody imperialist.

jus sayin

You have NO idea about the situation in the Falklands so stick
your unwanted ignorant opinion where the sun doesn't shine.

The irony is far too thick when an American lectures others on imperial take overs.

Their ancestors came to the continent from somewhere else as well. I think if we follow this logic, we should sort out the exact location where "Mitochondrial Eve" lived, and have everyone live there in one giant building that reaches to the moon.

If you aren't a Native American you need to book a flight as well amigo...

What gives Argentinian colonizers of Spanish/Portuguese/Italian descent any more claim to the island than Falklander colonizers of British descent? Especially as there is NO evidence that the island was ever populated by humans before the first settlers arrived?

The only opinion that matters is that of the residents, whos families have lived there for over 150 years. THEY have made it clear that they don't want to join Argentina.

the native language of South America. . .

The Falklands have been continuously British since 1833, though the initial British settlement happened in 1765 on West Falkland, one year after the French built a colony on East Falkland. The Spanish bought the French colony and tried to expel the English in 1770. A treaty was made establishing British rights to the islands.

The English withdrew in 1776 but maintained a claim on the islands according to treaty. Spain maintained a colony until 1809, with the remaining colonialists leaving in 1811.

The United Provinces of the River Plate (later Argentina) laid claim in 1820, with an 1828 colony authorized by both Argentina and Great Britain.

For most of the history of human habitation of the Falklands, it has been an English colony. This was confirmed by treaty long before the Argentinean claim. There was no "brute force or trickery". The residents, most of which were born and raised there, have made it clear their desires to remain British.

The Falklands are English. Period.

unemployment number.

Under the Bush Plan, the UK will retain the Falklands, while the Malvinas will go to Argentina. :dunce:

The situation of the Falklands is not what it was in 1982; there's a detachment of Royal Marines and an RAF squadron with Typhoons based there now, which there wasn't then; the Argentinians don't have anything in their air force comparable to the Typhoons, their military, to be quite honest, isn't up to the standard of training of the Royal Marines, and were they foolish enough to attempt to retake the Falklands by force they'd find themselves with quite a bit more of a fight on their hands than they had last time. And while the UK is at present without an active aircraft carrier while the Queen Elizabeth class are under construction, UK military cooperation with France would probably see the French lending one of their carriers to British operations.

And self-determination is recognised in international law; the Falklands are British because the inhabitants wish to be, and the islands have never been occupied by Argentina. So they're welcome to demand their return all they like, they won't be getting it.

The Brits have as their biggest concern the Falklands.

Really?


What a wonderful trouble-free world they live in..........

Seriously - this is one of those issues where clear thinking and a rational approach by both parties could solve any 'problem' with the islands

For either side, going to war with each other would be suicide

the islands have British sovereignty and the inhabitants have no wish to either be relocated or live under Argentine government. The Argentine claim to the Falklands has as much merit as a Canadian claim to Alaska would; Alaska has never been Canadian, but it's closer to Canada than to the US-48, so obviously it SHOULD be Canadian, right?

...or does America plan on giving back Manhattan Island?

It's about whether the UK Navy has the will or means to repel an invasion from Argentina or not

Argentina could "re-take" the Falklands quicker than the UK could scramble jets to the location

There's an RAF base in the islands, any Argentinian assault would have to be extremely sneaky to go unnoticed to the point where the planes stationed on the islands couldn't have an effect. That's not to say that a massive assault couldn't succeed, but any force attempting to invade would take such massive losses that no sane country would ever consider it.

It also completely ignores the fact that the current Argentine navy consists of a few destroyers, all of which are at least nearly 30 years old (their flagship is a 41 year old British-built type 42 destroyer), and a couple of submarines.

Argentina simply does not have the military capability to launch a successful invasion of the islands.

Not saying it would be pretty, but it's that old line "they got the guns but we got the numbers"

Would cost the lives of thousands. There are over 1000 British military personnel on the islands, how many troops would Argentina need to shift a well-trained, and better equipped opponent? How ever many troops they'd need to seize the islands they'd have to get them there first, by sea they'd be hugely vulnerable to air attack. By air? They'd need an enormous number of planes to carry enough troops to do the job, all of which would be vulnerable to air and ground attack from the islands.

The Argentine invasion worked in 1982 because there really wasn't anyone on the islands available to prevent an attack, the small force that's there now is a sufficient deterrent to attack except by an insane leader willing to throw away thousands of lives for a farce. Don't forget that the 1982 invasion was committed by a military junta desperate to shore up their government through a bit of misplaced nationalism.

Lots of inhumane things were done by Argentina during that period

The British know the military geography of the seas better than anyone, which is why even today they hold some of the most important naval real-estate in the world: Gibraltar, Ascencion, Bermuda, Diego Garcia, Akrotiri, and the Falklands. As long as they stick to the policy of freedom of the seas, the rest of the world more or less welcomes it, because a less-stable nation in control of such areas would almost certainly use that geography (or be unable to prevent someone else from using it) to prey upon international shipping--as virtually every one of those places was used before the Brits came along and took it away from whomever else had it.

The Falklands (and to a lesser extent, New Georgia, which the Argentinians also covet) in particular controls the only open-ocean route between the Pacific and the Atlantic, until the north polar cap melts, so next to Gibraltar, it may be the most important naval base on earth.

When Argentine pirates cut loose, you know what they do? They invade California.

:)

- K&R

No oppression, no hunger, not much except evidence of erosion and of plant life.

In 1982 I was Chief of Operations for resettlement of refugees out of Cambodian, Laos, Vietnam and other countries out of SE Asia for the IOM. Based in Bangkok we had established an Orderly Departure Program where migrants agreed to by both sides could be moved legally out of the Vietnam eliminating the need for 'boat people' to leave in the middle of the night bribing the new regime and suffering hardships on the sea and then waiting years in refugee camps.

The key to the programme was 'family reunification'. If we could find some family member that would serve as a sponsor anywhere then thats where the family moved to.

In early 1982 a very large Chinese family with no other relatives anywhere in the world was stalled until we found that they had one cousin in a distant Atlantic group of islands.

It took several months to arrange because we had to get special transit visas for Japan, the US, Mexico and Argentina.

It took a week for the 19 family members to travel and they arrived on April 1st, 1982.

As I opened the newspaper on April 2nd I wondered about the capriciousness of history and war and the perception of good fortune in the Chinese diaspora.

I knew that in all liklihood this family was aware that Vietnam was coming up to almost 1500 years of war and occupation. Except for 500 years of the Dai Viet period there had been constant civil war and war with China since the time of Christ.

Geography constrained most of China's southern border and like a spout on a tea pot Vietnam served as a passable route for centuries of Chinese adventurism and colonialism.

After the Chinese the French came in, and then the Americans. Most people don't realize it but after the Americans left the Chinese invaded Vietnam one more time, kind of a nostalgic war for both sides and in 6 months the Chinese lost almost half as many as the Americans had lost in 12 years.

I was pondering this family and all of the years of war they had witnessed as I was reading the astonishing news that on the 2nd of April, exactly one day after the 19 members of the Chin family had finally managed to flee 1500 years of conflict in Indochina, that Argentina had announced war on the same obscure islands that we had worked so feverishly to send them to.

Knowing how the Chinese diaspora is so consumed with omen and luck and thinking that the Falklands didn't really sound like much of a place to land on, but at least the refugees would think to themselves that they could live in peace with no prospect of war, I wondered what the family would ponder as being the trigger for the incalculable bad luck to land in Stanley just 12 hours before the Argentinian war ship ARA Santisima Trinidad disembarked special forces to take the town.

When war seemed to go completely out of fashion we managed to send them to the only place where it had any real enthusiasm.

Whenever I hear anything about the Falklands I always wonder whatever happened to the Chins. Did they just move out of the way and let the war pass them by, did they work extra hours and help their cousin make more money by selling noodles to the Argentinian soldiers, did they spend hours in recrimination blaming each other trying to figure out which among the family had insulted the gods to bring this onto them.

I wonder whatever happened to the Chins.

Is he taking the wife this time??

I took a ferry across the Strait of Magellan from Punta Arenas, Chile to Porvenir, Chile in Tierra Del Fuego - the western half of Tierra Del Fuego is Chilean. When I drove across the arid windswept 100 mile nearly uninhabited dirt road to the Argentinian side:



...I crossed the border and almost immediately met pavement and:



Then...made it down to here:



and took a few pictures from the top of the mountains there:




...with Ushuaia in the background.

Especially since they are not being ruled by a right wing dictator. He's currently on trial for human rights abuses.