Another Falklands conflict?

It looks like tensions between Britain and Argentina are on the rise:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=296232006

Is there any chance Argentina might try taking the Falklands again?

Would they have a good chance of success if they tried?

We can tell who came off worst in this Falklands conflict
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4756514.stm

"Jim Watt" wrote in message
...
On 28 Feb 2006 16:05:30 -0800, wrote:

It looks like tensions between Britain and Argentina are on the rise:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=296232006

Is there any chance Argentina might try taking the Falklands again?

Would they have a good chance of success if they tried?

The British learnt a lot from the Falklands conflict, if they invaded
again it suggests Argentina did not.

Argentina has since rearmed, Britain no longer has a third of the capability
to wage war compared to the last time.
And they're already engaged in Iraq, an operation taking up most of their
strategic transport capability.

I'm of the opinion that the Argentinians could very well succeed in taking
the islands and keeping them.

Failure to react before and after such an event would be an
ignominious end of Mr Blair's career, he probably knows that.

His career is already over...

Subsequently, Britain bought a spy satellite, and it would only take
one well placed SSN to sink an invasion. Wonder where HMS
Tireless is at present ... As HMG has made no attempt to sell out
the islanders politically, anyone planning on gloriously renaming
Stanley is likely to join the crew of the Belgrano.
--

He's more likely to become the next gobernator of the Malvinas.
Argentina has spaceflight capacity (albeit small scale), they could possibly
launch an ASAT with a few months leadtime.

On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 20:31:30 +0100, "Jeroen Wenting" jwenting at
hornet dot demon dot nl wrote:

Argentina has since rearmed, Britain no longer has a third of the capability
to wage war compared to the last time.
And they're already engaged in Iraq, an operation taking up most of their
strategic transport capability.

I'm of the opinion that the Argentinians could very well succeed in taking
the islands and keeping them.

The RN capability is adequate to prevent that, and it would be
suicidal to try. Politically it would be a disaster for Blair either
way, so he will take steps to prevent anything ever happening.


--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jeroen Wenting wrote:
"Jim Watt" wrote in message
...
On 28 Feb 2006 16:05:30 -0800, wrote:

It looks like tensions between Britain and Argentina are on the rise:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=296232006

Is there any chance Argentina might try taking the Falklands again?

Would they have a good chance of success if they tried?
The British learnt a lot from the Falklands conflict, if they invaded
again it suggests Argentina did not.

Argentina has since rearmed, Britain no longer has a third of the capability
to wage war compared to the last time.
And they're already engaged in Iraq, an operation taking up most of their
strategic transport capability.

I'm of the opinion that the Argentinians could very well succeed in taking
the islands and keeping them.


We have Tornado's at Port Stanley. An invasion would be vigorously and
effectively opposed. Last time, there was only a small force of
Marines, too small to turn back a full-scale invasion.

George W.Bush has already had his hands full of trouble, I dont think
he want to see two US allies fighting each other while Iraq is still
burning. He will do whatever he can to stop the two sides sliding into
open military conflict if there were really signs indicating war was
likely to happen. And I think he want, he can and he will stop the
invasion in the first place, thus nullifying the need for Britain to
react militarilly.

Alan Dicey wrote:
Jeroen Wenting wrote:
"Jim Watt" wrote in message
...
On 28 Feb 2006 16:05:30 -0800, wrote:

It looks like tensions between Britain and Argentina are on the rise:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=296232006

Is there any chance Argentina might try taking the Falklands again?

Would they have a good chance of success if they tried?
The British learnt a lot from the Falklands conflict, if they invaded
again it suggests Argentina did not.

Argentina has since rearmed, Britain no longer has a third of the capability
to wage war compared to the last time.
And they're already engaged in Iraq, an operation taking up most of their
strategic transport capability.

I'm of the opinion that the Argentinians could very well succeed in taking
the islands and keeping them.


We have Tornado's at Port Stanley. An invasion would be vigorously and
effectively opposed. Last time, there was only a small force of
Marines, too small to turn back a full-scale invasion.

No F.3s at Port Stanley. These are based at Mount Pleasant.

TJ

Alan Dicey wrote:
Jeroen Wenting wrote:

"Jim Watt" wrote in message
...

On 28 Feb 2006 16:05:30 -0800, wrote:

It looks like tensions between Britain and Argentina are on the rise:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=296232006

Is there any chance Argentina might try taking the Falklands again?

Would they have a good chance of success if they tried?

The British learnt a lot from the Falklands conflict, if they invaded
again it suggests Argentina did not.

Argentina has since rearmed, Britain no longer has a third of the
capability to wage war compared to the last time.
And they're already engaged in Iraq, an operation taking up most of
their strategic transport capability.

I'm of the opinion that the Argentinians could very well succeed in
taking the islands and keeping them.


We have Tornado's at Port Stanley.

We have a small flight of tornadoes at Mount Pleasant (4 I think, the
RAF website is down at the moment) I doubt they could do much more than
local area defense of the airfield.

Assuming we had tankers at Ascention can anyone guess how long it would
take to fly down additional F3s?

In sci.military.naval Iain Rae twisted the electrons to say:
Assuming we had tankers at Ascention can anyone guess how long it would
take to fly down additional F3s?

Actually, assuming there's a big enough fuel store present at Wideawake,
the presence of pre-positioned tankers there probably isn't too much of a
problem (strictly IMHO). Send some tankers down there first, "strictly a
routine training deployment, no it's not provocative, next question" and
then launch some F3s afterwards.

The problem is crew rest, I'd say. The tankers should be able to take
both spare crews (for the Wideawake-Falklands leg) for themselves and
the F3s, however once your extra F3s get to Mount Pleasant there's going
to be a delay before they can start operating. Unless there are more
than 4 Tornado crews down there already or you're going to send the
tankers all the way to Falklands as well ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

"Iain Rae" wrote in message
k...
Alan Dicey wrote:
Jeroen Wenting wrote:

"Jim Watt" wrote in message
...

On 28 Feb 2006 16:05:30 -0800, wrote:

It looks like tensions between Britain and Argentina are on the rise:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=296232006

Is there any chance Argentina might try taking the Falklands again?

Would they have a good chance of success if they tried?

The British learnt a lot from the Falklands conflict, if they invaded
again it suggests Argentina did not.

Argentina has since rearmed, Britain no longer has a third of the
capability to wage war compared to the last time.
And they're already engaged in Iraq, an operation taking up most of
their strategic transport capability.

I'm of the opinion that the Argentinians could very well succeed in
taking the islands and keeping them.


We have Tornado's at Port Stanley.

We have a small flight of tornadoes at Mount Pleasant (4 I think, the
RAF website is down at the moment) I doubt they could do much more than
local area defense of the airfield.

FYI; the Tornado aircraft comes in many guises (Modifications) ...
The F3 variant is an _interceptor_ . 'Local area defense(sic)' would occur
hundreds of miles from the airfield.


Assuming we had tankers at Ascention can anyone guess how long it would
take to fly down additional F3s?

Why restrict a reinforcement to (Tornado)F3's?

--

Brian