Quote
Argentinian President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has announced plans for what local media are calling a major announcement Tuesday amid escalating tensions between Argentina and Great Britain over the Falkland Islands.
Kirchner is gathering ruling and opposition party politicians, diplomats and veterans from the 1982 war between Britain and Argentina over the South Atlantic islands, which Argentina calls Las Malvinas, the English-language Buenos Aires Herald reported. Her announcement is scheduled for 7 p.m. local time (5 p.m. ET).
Speculation in recent days has been that Kirchner will cut the Falklands air link to the South American mainland by banning the airline LAN Chile from using Argentinian airspace to fly to the islands from Chile. The Saturday flights are the only scheduled air service to the Falklands and carry fresh food as well as passengers, Britain's Sky News reports.
Argentina already bans Falklands ships from its ports, an action joined by other South American and Caribbean nations.
"If the LAN Chile flight is cancelled, it would be pretty difficult to resist the already credible thesis that there is an economic blockade of the civilian population of the Falklands," a senior British diplomat in the region was quoted as saying by the UK's Guardian newspaper last week.
Though Britain won the 1982 war, expelling an Argentinian military force, Argentina still claims the territory, which has been under British rule since 1833, as its own. Britain maintains that the 2,500 residents of the Falklands have the right to determine their allegiance, and so far that has been staunchly British.
"We support the Falklands' right to self-determination, and what the Argentinians have been saying recently I would argue is actually far more like colonialism, because these people want to remain British, and the Argentinians want them to do something else," British Prime Minister David Cameron told UK lawmakers last month.
Tensions between London and Buenos Aires were raised even higher this month when Britain sent the heir to the throne, Prince William, to the Falklands as a military helicopter pilot.
"Prince William is coming ... as a member of the armed forces of his country," Argentina's Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "The Argentinian people regret that the royal heir is coming to the soil of the homeland with the uniform of the conqueror and not with the wisdom of a statesman who works in the service of peace and dialogue between nations."
The prince's deployment comes as Britain is making other moves to support its 1,700 personnel at the Mount Pleasant military complex in the Falklands.
The Royal Navy is sending its top-of-the-line warship, the destroyer HMS Dauntless, to the South Atlantic in the spring on what the British Defense Ministry calls a routine deployment, according to British media reports, including the BBC. Additionally, a British nuclear submarine is also headed to the Falklands, according to a report in the UK's Daily Mail.
So why, besides supporting the Falklands' inhabitants, does Britain want to hang on to the islands? There are lucrative fishing grounds around the islands as well as a growing oil drilling industry.
Argentina, of course, has economic interests, but analysts say the current standoff has much to do with internal politics.
"The government is being squeezed from lots of different areas, so one way to distract from the economic problems facing the country is to raise the Malvinas issue," Mark Jones, an expert in Latin American politics at Rice University in Texas, told CNN. "It's one of the few issues outside football that you can get universal consensus on."
And in Argentina, football, or soccer, is helping fuel the tensions.
When the season kicks off Friday in the top flight of Argentinian soccer, the league will be named Crucero General Belgrano (the cruiser General Belgrano) after the Argentinian warship sunk by a British submarine during the conflict 30 years ago. Argentina lost 323 sailors in the sinking, almost half of its total casualties during the war. Britain puts its casualties in the 74-day 1982 war at 255 troops and civilians.
In a report Tuesday on MercoPress.com, the South Atlantic News Agency said that Argentina's top soccer league is run by the government, which also owns its TV rights. All games are broadcast free, and advertising is often used to promote government programs, according to the report.
If the Argentinian government is pushing its Falklands claims on domestic TV, it's using a different media to put out a message in the Falklands themselves, according to Time.com. Islanders report receiving harassing phone calls, e-mails and even tweets, Time reports.
"It's intimidating to be woken in the night to someone shouting at you in Spanish," Lisa Watson, editor of the islands' newspaper The Penguin News, told Time.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/07/argentinian-leader-plans-big-announcement-amid-falklands-tensions/
Hmmm.
I suppose the lessons of a third rate military trying to take on a first rate one have been lost on them?
Or was Meryl Streep's performance in Iron Lady so poor that Fernandez de Kirchner thinks there's room to improve on their previous performance?
Seems like its an almost exact repeat of the circumstances that let to the conflict in '82. A lagging economy on the mainland causing the Argentinian government to waive the "Las Malvinas" flag in order to bolster support and distract away from the poor economic situation.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 07, 2012, 05:37:41 PM
Seems like its an almost exact repeat of the circumstances that let to the conflict in '82. A lagging economy on the mainland causing the Argentinian government to waive the "Las Malvinas" flag in order to bolster support and distract away from the poor economic situation.
I suppose now is when the adage "Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them" will come into play. Will the Argentine public remember the lesson?
For some reason I thought Argentina was in decent shape politically if not economically. Too bad. Some brave men on both sides may die because of this stupidity. More Argentine than British and for no good reason.
Funny thing is, I recently pulled out my copy of Shrapnel's Falklands War and have been thinking about installing it. I guess now might be as good a time as any.
Trouble is we haven't got the Harriers or Carriers to repeat 1982! Defence cuts, and relying too much on land based air support. We can't roll out our ineffective Vulcan bombers now.
It does seem to be an exact copy of what happened almost 30 years ago, with the political situations and economies in synch with that time period.
I guess the move to put Prince William on the islands, was one of a warning. So if it all kicks off again, we'll go in as hard as we can, with whatever we can scrape up, and Cameron will heralded a hero if we manage to pull it off again.
It may result in nothing, but we have a number of vets who still remember the last time vividly. I can't see us backing down no matter what.
Good job I spent the better part of last year reading into the conflict.
Quote from: spelk on February 07, 2012, 06:09:42 PM
Trouble is we haven't got the Harriers or Carriers to repeat 1982! Defence cuts, and relying too much on land based air support. We can't roll out our ineffective Vulcan bombers now.
It does seem to be an exact copy of what happened almost 30 years ago, with the political situations and economies in synch with that time period.
I guess the move to put Prince William on the islands, was one of a warning. So if it all kicks off again, we'll go in as hard as we can, with whatever we can scrape up, and Cameron will heralded a hero if we manage to pull it off again.
It may result in nothing, but we have a number of vets who still remember the last time vividly. I can't see us backing down no matter what.
Good job I spent the better part of last year reading into the conflict.
I guess we'll be looking to you for some context if this thing gets any worse.
Quote from: spelk on February 07, 2012, 06:09:42 PM
Trouble is we haven't got the Harriers or Carriers to repeat 1982!
They don't even have any Vulcans left to fly Blackbuck missions ;) I suspect the lack of airpower may be offset by cruise missiles
and the EF 2000's they have stationed there. The Argies are still flying upgraded A-4's and Mirages. They wouldn't stand a chance against the HMS Dauntless and it's AEGIS like systems. Make for some great CNN clips though - if only lives weren't at risk.
Interesting to see this pop up in a time when one would think this sort of thing dead letter. JH has a pretty astute analysis here. I wondered if Argentina is both playing smoke and mirrors or hoping, in some strange misinformed universe, that the British would just roll over because it is too much trouble? I see that the Falklands now have oil in the equation - was that part of the 1982 issue?
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 07, 2012, 10:28:29 PM
Interesting to see this pop up in a time when one would think this sort of thing dead letter. JH has a pretty astute analysis here. I wondered if Argentina is both playing smoke and mirrors or hoping, in some strange misinformed universe, that the British would just roll over because it is too much trouble? I see that the Falklands now have oil in the equation - was that part of the 1982 issue?
I don't remember oil being an issue. It was considered a windblown, sheep infested land in the middle of nowhere. But Margaret Thatcher wasn't about to let the UK get run over just because it was on the other side of the world.
At least that's how I remember it. Oil may play a factor now.
Quote from: LongBlade on February 07, 2012, 10:45:27 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 07, 2012, 10:28:29 PM
Interesting to see this pop up in a time when one would think this sort of thing dead letter. JH has a pretty astute analysis here. I wondered if Argentina is both playing smoke and mirrors or hoping, in some strange misinformed universe, that the British would just roll over because it is too much trouble? I see that the Falklands now have oil in the equation - was that part of the 1982 issue?
I don't remember oil being an issue. It was considered a windblown, sheep infested land in the middle of nowhere. But Margaret Thatcher wasn't about to let the UK get run over just because it was on the other side of the world.
At least that's how I remember it. Oil may play a factor now.
I remember the same - that there was little economic or tactical importance. Now they talk of lucrative fishing and oil. This seems to be a paradigm shift.
Quote from: spelk on February 07, 2012, 06:09:42 PMwith whatever we can scrape up
I'm sure there's a cruise liner somewhere (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QE2#Falklands_War) you can commandeer.
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 08, 2012, 06:50:45 AM
Quote from: spelk on February 07, 2012, 06:09:42 PMwith whatever we can scrape up
I'm sure there's a cruise liner somewhere (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QE2#Falklands_War) you can commandeer.
Hell, there is one docked off the coast of Italy that the Brits can probably get for half-price. She needs a little work though.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 08, 2012, 07:00:40 AMHell, there is one docked off the coast of Italy that the Brits can probably get for half-price. She needs a little work though.
I'm not sure "docked" is the verb you're looking for ;)
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 08, 2012, 07:38:42 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 08, 2012, 07:00:40 AMHell, there is one docked off the coast of Italy that the Brits can probably get for half-price. She needs a little work though.
I'm not sure "docked" is the verb you're looking for ;)
Yeah, it looks like the kick-stand failed.
From my perspective, this sums it up nicely:
Quote"The people of the Falkland Islands are British out of choice," the British Foreign Office said in a statement. "They are free to determine their own future, and there will be no negotiations with Argentina on sovereignty unless the Islanders wish it."
I really don't think that we're in for a repeat of 1982. Argentina is not a military dictatorship today.
My God I feel old. I graduated high school (I was 18) in 1982 when these photos were taken:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.turner.com%2Fcnn%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F120201125029-uk-falkands-conflict-horizontal-gallery.jpg&hash=88d65b12ce769b76ed57d4e946df90a31fed4a68)
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.turner.com%2Fcnn%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F120201125744-uk-falklands-conflict-2-horizontal-gallery.jpg&hash=67332e42f2f695e30a98ec5bcce1c11cc75dc4d1)
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.turner.com%2Fcnn%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F120201125617-uk-falklands-thatcher-2-horizontal-gallery.jpg&hash=68ce9384376ea8520ba8e45c003cd1bfb9948e35)
It's like looking at photos from WWII when I was a kid!!!
Quote from: Centurion40 on February 08, 2012, 10:35:02 AM
My God I feel old. I graduated high school (I was 18) in 1982 when these photos were taken
Dogpile on 40Cent!
I was 9 (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fi%2Fmesg%2Femoticons7%2F25.gif&hash=fcdc014c2debeaa327ee61f19f2e858cad4ed724)
Heh...I have you beat 40Cent. I was in graduate school at the time and can still remember news clips of Argentinian jets making bombing runs on RN destroyers and amphibious ships at San Carlos.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fth554.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj417%2FShar_dreamer%2Fth_Grandpa_Angry.gif&hash=41b8f3976a34d22931d74043e053e848951dfe1b)
I joined the West Nova Scotia Regiment (army reserves) at 16 (in Grade 10), in January 1980 and was humping in the muck with my FN, similar to the Brits pictured. I got out in October 1981, shortly after beginning Grade 12 to concentrate on my studies, as the life of a grunt did not appeal to me. The whole Falklands War freaked me out, as I identified with the possibility of being in the trenches.
It got surreal as a squadron of Vulcans was spotted flying high over my town on their way south.
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 08, 2012, 11:01:57 AM
Quote from: Centurion40 on February 08, 2012, 10:35:02 AM
My God I feel old. I graduated high school (I was 18) in 1982 when these photos were taken
Dogpile on 40Cent!
I was 9 (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fi%2Fmesg%2Femoticons7%2F25.gif&hash=fcdc014c2debeaa327ee61f19f2e858cad4ed724)
LOL! I'm "Man of the Hour"!!! :-\
You're a year older than me, Cent.
Quote from: Centurion40 on February 08, 2012, 11:22:42 AM
I joined the West Nova Scotia Regiment (army reserves) at 16 (in Grade 10), in January 1980 and was humping in the muck with my FN, similar to the Brits pictured. I got out in October 1981, shortly after beginning Grade 12 to concentrate on my studies, as the life of a grunt did not appeal to me. The whole Falklands War freaked me out, as I identified with the possibility of being in the trenches.
It got surreal as a squadron of Vulcans was spotted flying high over my town on their way south.
You can legally serve in the army at the age of 16 in Canada?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 08, 2012, 12:46:34 PM
Quote from: Centurion40 on February 08, 2012, 11:22:42 AM
I joined the West Nova Scotia Regiment (army reserves) at 16 (in Grade 10), in January 1980 and was humping in the muck with my FN, similar to the Brits pictured. I got out in October 1981, shortly after beginning Grade 12 to concentrate on my studies, as the life of a grunt did not appeal to me. The whole Falklands War freaked me out, as I identified with the possibility of being in the trenches.
It got surreal as a squadron of Vulcans was spotted flying high over my town on their way south.
You can legally serve in the army at the age of 16 in Canada?
Yes, if your parents sign-off and if you begin service in your 17th year of life. I turned 16 in November 1979; I was sworn-into the CF reserve January 1980. I was 16 and 2 months old. Far too young, in hindsight. I was the 2nd youngest guy in my Basic course. The youngest, a friend of mine, was born in December.
I also joined the CF Reserves (Militia) at the tender age of 16. As I recall, it was not unusual for recruits who were too young to lie about their age in order to join up.
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 08, 2012, 11:01:57 AM
Quote from: Centurion40 on February 08, 2012, 10:35:02 AM
My God I feel old. I graduated high school (I was 18) in 1982 when these photos were taken
Dogpile on 40Cent!
I was 9 (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fi%2Fmesg%2Femoticons7%2F25.gif&hash=fcdc014c2debeaa327ee61f19f2e858cad4ed724)
Pile on Brant!
I was 3!
Interesting about starting the military when you are 16 in Canada. A lot of US kids wanted to (and did, during war time), but AFAIK it is has been 18 since the modern age.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 07, 2012, 05:37:41 PM
Seems like its an almost exact repeat of the circumstances that let to the conflict in '82. A lagging economy on the mainland causing the Argentinian government to waive the "Las Malvinas" flag in order to bolster support and distract away from the poor economic situation.
That would be a bullseye.
Quote from: Centurion40 on February 08, 2012, 10:30:42 AM
From my perspective, this sums it up nicely:
Quote"The people of the Falkland Islands are British out of choice," the British Foreign Office said in a statement. "They are free to determine their own future, and there will be no negotiations with Argentina on sovereignty unless the Islanders wish it."
I really don't think that we're in for a repeat of 1982. Argentina is not a military dictatorship today.
The area is now seen as a way to prosperity through natural resources. Even if there isn't oil, the easy win, extending sovereignty over a massive continental shelf when food prices are rising is a very big deal. People will fight over securing food for future populations.
Look at it on google earth. If they can extend exclusive fishing rights out around the sandwiches (lol) as well they can sell surpluses of food for cash.
UK should be developing the fishery for sale of food to the EU.
I don't know about the Falklands, but I want to say that GIF would be a great teaching tool for how the longbow was the medieval equivalent of the machine gun.
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 09, 2012, 11:24:42 AM
I don't know about the Falklands, but I want to say that GIF would be a great teaching tool for how the longbow was the medieval equivalent of the machine gun.
Good point. That momma don't play.
@SoM Bitch.
that ain't no medeval style military longbow.....
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 09, 2012, 11:24:42 AM
I don't know about the Falklands, but I want to say that GIF would be a great teaching tool for how the longbow was the medieval equivalent of the machine gun.
She can also teach how to impressively drape melons.
Quote from: Windigo on February 09, 2012, 12:44:33 PM
@SoM Bitch.
that ain't no medeval style military longbow.....
Looks like it to me... but this is getting way OT...
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.english-longbow.co.uk%2Ftudor-richard-2.jpg&hash=695cea259a94ee2af2617d32f08619556cf04317)
True, it uses plastic and isn't as curved, but she is shooting at very close range, compared to what they could fire. And it isn't so much the bow, but the firing technique. Although the longbow required a lot more pull to fire, they say they could shoot something like 20 arrows a minute or more.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbayonetgames.com%2Fblogart%2FThreadDirection.jpg&hash=94afbc0caae3c72eb88186e461c381af9945b20c)
though if the English deploy longbows to defend the Falklands, we're back on track!
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 09, 2012, 01:57:08 PM
though if the English deploy longbows to defend the Falklands, we're back on track!
See, England + Longbow is still within the scope of a Falklands discussion. You just have to think outside the original box and on multiple levels of meaning.
English longbow, 2012-style
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F--wHuNL_UJwc%2FTs0e8iCyWsI%2FAAAAAAAABoM%2FSIlbXbTAc0Q%2Fs1600%2F45153287.jpg&hash=a5df0fdf0e45507bc58f790f506649af140936b2)
ROFL
("Ruh-roh..")
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 09, 2012, 01:58:11 PM
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 09, 2012, 01:57:08 PM
though if the English deploy longbows to defend the Falklands, we're back on track!
See, England + Longbow is still within the scope of a Falklands discussion. You just have to think outside the original box and on multiple levels of meaning.
I would actually like Welsh longbowman.... much better tactics
Its a recurve bow in the animated GIF. Smaller and easier to pull than a traditional Longbow.
"A recurve bow has tips that curve away from the archer when the bow is strung. By definition, the difference between recurve and other bows is that the string touches a section of the limb when the bow is strung. A recurve bow stores more energy and delivers energy more efficiently than an equivalent straight-limbed bow, giving a greater amount of energy and hence speed, to the arrow. A recurve will permit a shorter bow than the simple straight limb bow for a given arrow energy and this form was often preferred by archers in environments where long weapons could be cumbersome, such as in brush and forest terrain, or while on horseback."
Dunno how well attack helicopters would do in the Falklands weather neither. :)
Quote from: spelk on February 09, 2012, 02:41:07 PM
Its a recurve bow in the animated GIF. Smaller and easier to pull than a traditional Longbow.
"A recurve bow has tips that curve away from the archer when the bow is strung. By definition, the difference between recurve and other bows is that the string touches a section of the limb when the bow is strung. A recurve bow stores more energy and delivers energy more efficiently than an equivalent straight-limbed bow, giving a greater amount of energy and hence speed, to the arrow. A recurve will permit a shorter bow than the simple straight limb bow for a given arrow energy and this form was often preferred by archers in environments where long weapons could be cumbersome, such as in brush and forest terrain, or while on horseback."
Dunno how well attack helicopters would do in the Falklands weather neither. :)
Ok Ok... geez...
But if you want to see the whole video (well worth doing it is awesome), go here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI
I used to know the difference in bows like you... but then I took an arrow to the knee.
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 09, 2012, 03:28:19 PM
Quote from: spelk on February 09, 2012, 02:41:07 PM
Its a recurve bow in the animated GIF. Smaller and easier to pull than a traditional Longbow.
"A recurve bow has tips that curve away from the archer when the bow is strung. By definition, the difference between recurve and other bows is that the string touches a section of the limb when the bow is strung. A recurve bow stores more energy and delivers energy more efficiently than an equivalent straight-limbed bow, giving a greater amount of energy and hence speed, to the arrow. A recurve will permit a shorter bow than the simple straight limb bow for a given arrow energy and this form was often preferred by archers in environments where long weapons could be cumbersome, such as in brush and forest terrain, or while on horseback."
Dunno how well attack helicopters would do in the Falklands weather neither. :)
Ok Ok... geez...
But if you want to see the whole video (well worth doing it is awesome), go here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI
I used to know the difference in bows like you... but then I took an arrow to the knee.
and you took it like a BOSS!
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 09, 2012, 03:28:19 PM
Ok Ok... geez...
Not trying to rag on you SOM!, just saw an opportunity to thrust forth some knowledge. I used to do some archery a year or two back, and I was shooting with a composite recurve - how I longed to be able to afford and use a proper longbow. It still remains a goal of mine, to do some clout archery with a longbow. One day.
Quote from: Staggerwing on February 09, 2012, 02:13:55 PM
ROFL
("Ruh-roh..")
Rmmmm... I rike my roffles wif maple syrup rand brueberries! Reheheheheheee.
Quote from: spelk on February 10, 2012, 03:14:20 AM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on February 09, 2012, 03:28:19 PM
Ok Ok... geez...
Not trying to rag on you SOM!, just saw an opportunity to thrust forth some knowledge. I used to do some archery a year or two back, and I was shooting with a composite recurve - how I longed to be able to afford and use a proper longbow. It still remains a goal of mine, to do some clout archery with a longbow. One day.
Start doing arm exercises! Be a real medieval man and make one yourself with a yew branch! ;D
Unless they deploy you to the Falklands, for this looming war that will end all.... tiny islands?