The Falkland Islands

Is this true?

It's a bit misleading, there are more fighters on the continent than the ship has missiles but it could certainly cope with what the continents combined forces would actually be able to deploy over the islands. Argentina itself would struggle to mount a 4 plane strike.
 
There is not enough room on the ship to store all the missiles.

Edit you beat me too it
 
I made a quick trip to wiki and made an estimation that there are about 310 fighter aircrafts in South America. Can that thing hold 310 missiles?
 
I made a quick trip to wiki and made an estimation that there are about 310 fighter aircrafts in South America. Can that thing hold 310 missiles?

Currently only 48 missiles (soon to be at least 70). Though, that is far more than enough to deal with what South America can actually deploy over the islands.
 
Here are the specs for the ship if anyone's interested.

HMS DAUNTLESS

Background

The Daring class are the largest escorts ever built for the Royal Navy in terms of displacement. After HMS Daring's launch on 1 February 2006 former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West stated that it would be the Royal Navy's most capable destroyer ever, as well as the world's best air-defence ship.

Basics

Type: Guided missile destroyer
Displacement: 8,000 tonnes standard
Length: 152.4 m (500 ft 0 in)
Beam: 21.2 m (69 ft 7 in)
Draught: 7.4 m (24 ft 3 in)
Propulsion: 2 shafts Integrated electric propulsion(IEP);
2× Rolls-Royce WR-21 gas turbines, 21.5 MW (28,800 shp) each
2× Wärtsilä 12V200 diesel generators, 2 MW (2,700 shp) each
2× Converteam electric motors, 20 MW (27,000 shp) each
Speed: In excess of 29 kn (54 km/h; 33 mph)
Range: 7,000 nautical miles (13,000 km) at 18 kn (33 km/h)
Complement: 190 (accommodation for up to 235)

Sensors and processing systems

SAMPSON multi-function air tracking radar (Type 1045)
S1850M 3-D air surveillance radar (Type 1046)
2× Raytheon I-band Radar (Type 1047)
1× Raytheon E/F-band Radar (Type 1048)
Ultra Electronics Series 2500 Electro-Optical Gun Control System (EOGCS)
Ultra Electronics SML Technologies radar tracking system
Ultra Electronics/EDO MFS-7000 sonar

Electronic warfare and decoys

UAT16
Surface ship torpedo defence (SSTD)

Armament

Anti-air missiles;
Sea Viper air defence system.
48 cell SYLVER A50 VLS, for a combination of 48;
Aster 15 missiles (range 2-30 km)
Aster 30 missiles (range 3-120 km)

Guns;
1× BAE 4.5 inch Mk8 Mod. 1 gun
2× 30 mm guns
2× Phalanx CIWS
2× Miniguns
6× General-purpose machine guns

Provision for;
2× Quad Boeing AGM-84 Harpoon launchers (8 anti-ship missiles)
BGM-109 Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles

Aircraft carried

1-2×Lynx HMA8, armed with;
4× Sea Skua anti ship missiles, or
2× anti submarine torpedoes
or
1×Westland Merlin HM1, armed with;
4× anti submarine torpedoes

Aviation facilities

Large flight deck
Enclosed hangar
 
I guess Argentina squawks about this every few decades hoping that the UK has gotten too tired to care? Seems to me though that Argentina doesnt realize they are an easy victory for the UK to use to improve morale at home if they cause trouble.
 
I guess Argentina squawks about this every few decades hoping that the UK has gotten too tired to care? Seems to me though that Argentina doesnt realize they are an easy victory for the UK to use to improve morale at home if they cause trouble.

No, they do it for political points at home.
 
The Devil's Advocate is back!


Since Argentina is hell-bent on diplomacy, sending warships and a royal heir will only incense them and their allies.

Many people in the UK have been swept up by post-1982 propaganda and have somehow forgotten that the UK wanted to lease the Islands back to Argentina prior to giving them back for good without ever consulting the inhabitants, now it appears they've always been part of the British Archipelago since before William the Conqueror. Crazy, eh? Now people on both sides are over-hyped over a piece of rock stuffed with penguins and landmines and sheep.

People also forget that, after the Islands were definitively in Spanish possession from 1774 onwards, in the first half of the 19th century the UK attacked the Argentine mainland four times (the 1806 and 1807 occupations of Buenos Aires; the 1838 Anglo-French blockade of Buenos Aires and the 1845 Anglo-French blockade of Buenos Aires and invasion up the Paraná river, this latter attack intended to turn Uruguay and a few Argentine provinces into a separate weak entity to be dominated by both invading countries) and eventually settled for merely the Falklands, as well as intervening in the war between Brazil and the United Provinces to force Uruguay into becoming an independent country, to weaken the defenses of the Buenos Aires harbour.
But no, the colonialists are the Argentines indeed. If, as Mr. Cameron says, the archipelago is not a colony, then why does it have a separate pound? Make some sense Cameron! :crazyeye:
No, they do it for political points at home.
And the difference between this and Cameron calling Argentina 'colonialists' instead of doing anything about the issue is…?
I wonder what stance the US and EU would take this time.
Now not even the U.S. will recognise the 'legality' of British control, they've been calling it 'de facto control' for some time now.
U.S. Position on the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands

Taken Question
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC

Question Taken at the January 19, 2012 Daily Press Briefing
January 20, 2012

QUESTION: Does the U.S. take a position on the recent posturing between the United Kingdom and Argentina over the Falklands?

ANSWER: This is a bilateral issue that needs to be worked out directly between the governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom. We encourage both parties to resolve their differences through dialogue in normal diplomatic channels.

We recognize de facto United Kingdom administration of the islands but take no position regarding sovereignty.​
Unless you meant the war which is *not* going to happen?
The EU' ambassador inArgentina, Alfonos Díez Torres:
¿Qué papel jugará Europa en la resolución del conflicto entre Londres y Buenos Aires por las Malvinas?

-El tema de Malvinas no entra en el ámbito de la política exterior de la Unión Europea. Tenemos una política exterior que no lo abarca todo.
*translation*
[newspaper]-What part will Europe play in the resolution of the conflict between London and Buenos Aires over the Falklands?
[A.D.T]-The Falklands issue isn't within the scope of the EU foreign policy. We have a foreign policy that doesn't encompass everything.​
Basically he shrugged it off.

Now, as for this being based solely on the self-determination of the kelpers.
I watched an interesting (read: opposition) political show that dismissed most of the political duckspeak and started tackling some geopolitical facts.
Fisheries: Argentina earns hundreds of millions from fisheries every year. But a lot of ships sneak in through Falklands waters into Argentine territorial waters and fish there.
Oil: some companies have been saying there's oil down there. Completely unimportant of course.
Antarctica: the UK has a claim on Antarctic territory. Several countries are dividing up the Arctic Ocean for themselves, looking for oil, gas, etc. etc. The show posited that the UK might be wanting to exloit natural resources down South and keeps the islands in case it becomes viable.
Not just about the kelpers I think.
 
I wonder what stance the US and EU would take this time.

Washington D.C.

"Mr. President, Argentina has invaded the Falkland Islands!"
"Oh Christ, this again..."
*yawn* "Issue a statement: 'The US condemns actions which threaten world peace, blah blah blah, strongly urges both sides to return to the negotiating table, blah blah blah, will call for an emergency UN Security Council meeting, blah blah blah. You know the drill.'"
"Yes, Mr. President. Do you want to add some personal appeal or opinion?"
"Yes - 'screw you whoever and wherever you are, I have elections to worry about...' actually, forget it, leave it as it was."
"Yes, sir."



Brussels

*beep* "You have reached the office of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. We apologize, but Ms. Ashton is currently unavailable. Please call again when you ratify the treaty on budgetary responsibility. You can leave a message if you deliver it barefooted dressed only in the EU flag while singing the 'Ode to Joy'." *beep, laughter in the background*
 
The american position is disgusting...
Hopefully a different President will change that.
 
But if we are nice to the World, the World will be nice to us....


right....?
 
Since Argentina is hell-bent on diplomacy
If they were hell-bent on diplomacy, they wouldn't be trying to usurp the rightful sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands. Being hell-bent on diplomacy would be something like a statement/resolution/whatever forever swearing off any claim on the Falklands and acknowledging the rightful sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the islands.
 
Idd, it's the Obama/left-wing policy. Be nice to your enemies and they'll be kind to you, piss all over your allies. Remember all that fawning and back scratching and bowing Obama did in that 2009 Cairo speech? Disgusting.
 
If they were hell-bent on diplomacy, they wouldn't be trying to usurp the rightful sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands. Being hell-bent on diplomacy would be something like a statement/resolution/whatever forever swearing off any claim on the Falklands and acknowledging the rightful sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the islands.

What? :confused: I didn't know that in American English "diplomacy" was a synonym for "surrender" :crazyeye:

Diplomacy is a way of achieving a goal. Argentina's stated goal (who knows how seriously they take it) is to gain the Malvinas. It has tried the military way of achieving this goal, but it failed. Now it seems to by trying diplomacy instead, or at least something close to it.
 
But if we are nice to the World, the World will be nice to us....


right....?

Eh, the fact is that there is a lot of hate in the world towards the U.S. because of American foreign policy.

What you said is a quite simplistic and inaccurate version of reality.
 
What? :confused: I didn't know that in American English "diplomacy" was a synonym for "surrender" :crazyeye:

Diplomacy is a way of achieving a goal. Argentina's stated goal (who knows how seriously they take it) is to gain the Malvinas. It has tried the military way of achieving this goal, but it failed. Now it seems to by trying diplomacy instead, or at least something close to it.

I don't know if anybody else saw it, but a few days ago a British mp proposed a bill to parliament to "remind the Argentines that they lost the Falkland's war." On one hand I found this incredibly funny and one of the best political trolls of the year so far. But on the other hand the Argentines do need to remember that this debate has been answered and not in their favour. The Argentine government uses the islands as a Mcguffin that they bring up when ever their country has economic or political problems. The U.S. need to stop this "staying neutral on the subject" nonsense. We need to support our British allies and not an Argentina that tries to marginalize our economic standing in South America at everyone turn.
 
If they were hell-bent on diplomacy, they wouldn't be trying to usurp the rightful sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands. Being hell-bent on diplomacy would be something like a statement/resolution/whatever forever swearing off any claim on the Falklands and acknowledging the rightful sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the islands.

Man, no wonder we're in so many damn wars, if this is what Americans think "diplomacy" is.
 
So let's say a guy is standing in front of my house screaming that it's really his house and property and he wants me to sign it over to him. As far as I am concerned, that's an aggressive act, not a diplomatic one.
 
Does Argentina ever try to talk to the Government of the Falklands about this? While Britain maintains a large military edge over Argentina it seems the most prudent course of action for them to take.
 
Top Bottom