Sunday, February 21, 2010

Malvinas War redux?

Don Williams said...

1) Off topic, Ferfal, but the British newspapers report that your "Botox Evita" (heh heh) is about to start another Falklands War as a way of handling her domestic problems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7280424/The-Botox-Evita-seeks-a-new-lift.html

2) Unless you guys have a couple of nukes I don't know about, I think its a bad idea to fight the Brits on the high seas. They've been playing that game for 400 years or so and are still pretty good at it.

Strategypage.com rates Argentina's naval power at a 2, Great Britain's at 46.

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/navy/navalforcesoftheworld.asp

February 21, 2010 6:39 AM

You know, its the second time in less than two days that someone mentions this and yet there's not a single line of it on the local Argentine news.
They mentioned making a claim of some sort but nothing like going to war against UK which would of course be suicide in our current state.
My mother told me the same thing, that in Spain the news is that Cristina is about to declare war as a way out... ???

I'd be a bit more worried if the Kirchners hadn't systematically destroyed our armed forces during all these years.
We have nothing to fight with! Even our stock of small arms is shameful. Mostly old FALs and a handful of ARs. We sure were in much better shape when we fought the first time.

The Kirchners have blamed all the troubles of man kind on the Argentine armed forces, cutting their budget to nothing, destroying their structure and public image, we really have no armed forces left, only a shadow of it.

I think that if the declares war to UK, after insulting and destroying them like no other president ever did, people would simply march over there, pull here out of the presidential house and beat the crap out of her. Let the mothers of Plaza de Mayo and their communist buddies fight the war now.

FerFAL

17 comments:

Joseph said...

FerFAL, at best any fighting would be nothing but a short term distraction and very expensive. And chances are the British are already working to enforce the military presence on the islands.

That, and the military at some point may say "enough". They may not want to squander what resources they still have on a pointless war.

FerFAL said...

Even the dumb mass knows that it would be a distraction.
War? We can't survive RAIN in Buenos Aires, most people cant afford FOOD.
Her even hinting a war would cause a revolt and she'd have to resign.
Even trying the waters to see if she would get the people on her side would be a fatal political mystake. We're already used to er cheap tricks. I can't remember the last time I came across a Kirchner supporter.
People hate her botox infested face and putrid guts.
And when she talks, oh, it just makes you sick. I kid you not and I'm not alone here either, I've talked to others that change the channel as well as soon as they hear her speak.

FerFAL

Don Williams said...

1) I'm sure that Argentina could protect herself against an invasion of Argentina proper. Iraq showed the problems an expeditionary army has with invading and occupying a foreign country.

2) But trying to fight in the Falklands islands would require a major navy.

3) And like most countries, Argentina would have a hard time projecting much power outside of her borders -- supply lines are very vulnerable and most countries can't afford a navy sized to do more than defend their coastline.

Anonymous said...

The Kirchners are scumbags but really smart scumbags.

By neutering your military, they avoid coup risk

Anonymous said...

It's almost certain that nothing will come of this. I agree with Joseph that the Brits wouldn't want to squander their resources on a pointless war. The Royal Navy is a shell of what it was last time it visited Argentina. Their reign over the high seas is long over.

Check out this article by Captain Michael Clapp at the Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1252149/Its-bitter-truth-We-send-task-force-Falklandstoday.html

Shows what happens when a once great power walks too far down the road of liberalism and a nanny welfare state. You can't rule the oceans if all your GDP is going to fund cradle to grave welfare benefits for all your citizens.

Patrick

Anonymous said...

... but if you turn your head just right and don't look right at her,... and you squint, and maybe turn the lights down,... after a few beers she looks like she might be pretty? HAHA. I often think that's the reason she was elected.

... but if the UK over-ran Argentina they would have a new colony to tax, this is just the ticket empires everywhere need, simple resistance-free colony-reclamation and other expansion. I've read articles discussing this, such a war might look good from the UK balance-sheet perspective. Would a UK occupation be viewed favorably if the current leadership in Argentina has such weak support? What if the UK promised a chicken in every pot?

~TimeX

Anonymous said...

"And when she talks, oh, it just makes you sick. I kid you not and I'm not alone here either, I've talked to others that change the channel as well as soon as they hear her speak."

That's how I feel about Obama.

irishdutchuncle said...

she should be blaming all of your problems on britain. i blame britain for all of the problems in the modern world. (or on their double nought spies that control america... otherwise we would have invoked the monroe doctrine and taken your side in the last malvinas war)

Bones said...

A British oil company is set to begin drilling for oil in the Falklands basin. So not only is it convenient political cover for the Kirchners but greed is involved, too.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/02/22/falklands.oil.rig/index.html

gaga said...

Britain don't have to send a task force, a couple of squadrons of fighters, a couple of nuclear subs and some ground reinforcements.

The captain is sad about the demise of the Navy, well the limitations of surface ships pitched against aircraft is well known and the Falklands conflict is probably a good example of this.

As for the Spanish/Argentina claiming the Falklands, the British decided hundreds of years ago that the Pope cannot declare ownership of the Americas - possession counts. The Spanish haven't owned the Falklands since before Argentina declared independence and its rather rich an colony complaining about British Colonialism.

FerFAL said...

Britain has much right over Malvinas as they do over the city of Buenos Aires.
Anyone believes Buenos Aires belongs to Britain?
Well, they DID invade Buenos Aires once (got kicked out) That's a good example of how the British emprie handles things.
Our petty dictators are laughable, but it doesn't make Britain colonial policy right.

FerFAL

gaga said...

"Our petty dictators are laughable, but it doesn't make Britain colonial policy right."

Was Spanish colonial policy different? - after all It was a Spanish colony when they invaded it.

You are right in a way, what right did Spain have to own BA, they stole the land it from the indigenous population.

Jamie said...

Like Ferfal said and it wasn't the Army of Argentina that kicked the brits butt. It was the ordinary citizens of BA that crushed them. I think from start to finish the battle lasted about 13 hours.
Those folks can fight.

Don Williams said...

Evidently, Argentina is getting a lot of diplomatic support from South American countries -- Brazil and Chile, not just Venezuela.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7036764.ece

From that same article:

"The British Geological Survey estimates that up to 60 billion barrels of oil could be beneath Falklands waters, although Desire Petroleum, the company carrying out the drilling, says that the commericially viable reserves are much smaller ....
...Tensions between the former adversaries rose last week to their highest level since the war, as Argentina attempted to block ships supplying what it says are “illegal” British activities and Britain hit back with a warning that the islands were much better defended than on the eve of the Argentine invasion in 1982. "

Don Williams said...

On the other hand, Argentina's Deputy Foreign Minister Victorio Taccetti is evidently intoxicated by powerful drugs.

From http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world/view/1039136/1/.html

BUENOS AIRES: Argentina voiced confidence on Monday Britain would negotiate on the disputed Falkland Islands when its oil exploration operations run into trouble.

But Deputy Foreign Minister Victorio Taccetti ruled out the use of force to settle the long-running dispute with Britain.

"The situation is not going to take a turn for the worse," he told Argentine media from Mexico.

"The day the United Kingdom has a tough time operating (on oil prospecting), they will negotiate with us," Taccetti said. ...

..."We (the Argentine government) continue to advance our strategy, which excludes the use of force," he stressed.
-------------
I think it was the Brits who once defined "diplomacy" as saying "Nice Doggie" (to sooth an aggressive dog) while looking around for a big rock (to throw at the dog).

Loquisimo said...

Britain may be a has-been military power, but Argentina has no military to speak of, it having been dismantled. A war between Argentina and Britain would be a joke from beginning to end. Britain would use Cristina's "war" as an excuse to do what Clinton did to Belgrade in 1999 and bomb Buenos Aires to smithereens. After that, there wouldn't BE an Argentina, at least not in any recognizable sense.

But it wouldn't go that far. Cristina would declare war, and what's left of the army would drag her and her worthless hubby out of the Casa Rosada by their hair, stand them against a wall, and fill them full of lead. After that, any of their cronies who weren't in Uruguay by then would suffer the same fate.

And then, who knows? I'm not sure Argentina has the capability to govern itself in any meaningful manner anymore. There's no military to speak of, and what is there would shatter after the Ks got their just desserts. Then you have the narcos who would want to grow pot and coca on Argentine farmland. It's likely that SOME sort of govt would eventually emerge, probably based on the Mafia. Or it could become Somalia, but before that happens somebody would claim all that farmland.

At least the USA still would have the capability to govern itself if the Obama regime was overthrown. OK, maybe the Mexican narcos would bite off a chunk of desert, but they'd quickly find that it's worthless without the complicated water piping systems. But for the most part we could still govern ourselves. Argentina likely couldn't hold together without the Ks, despicable as they are. Argentine society is gutted.

Don Williams said...

Re Loquisimo's comment "Argentine society is gutted."
----------
I disagree -- there are several billionaires still living in Argentina --although they have taken measures to protect their wealth from confiscation.

One of the billionaires owns a significant part of Argentina's News Media.

I note available facts. Since I haven't lived there, I am not qualified to judge the cohesion of the society.

But Argentina's high Gini index (indicates a high concentration of wealth) suggests that while the Argentina military may not be geared up for a major war with the UK, it has more than enough power to keep control of Argentina's population and protect the wealthy.

In that regard, Argentina is no different from most countries throughout human history. She is likely to be more stable, in fact, because her geographical location isolates her from external forces. External countries, for example, are unlikely to sponsor and support an insurgency in Argentina. She is not really threatened with invasion from without, which shakes an elite's hold on power.

I would ask Ferfal to comment but I'm not sure if that would be wise of him.