Not really. Even back when the Falklands war occurred, the U.K. was a much more powerful military force than Argentina.Dilbert_X wrote:
If the Argentinians had put up a real fight they would have won it easily.
Now I doubt there are enough ships.
I doubt it, da Silva isn't the type to start a war over something like this.Ticia wrote:
I've just heard even Brazil is with them. UK should be worried.
No but he will support Argentina and that itself is scary. Brazilians hate Argentinians with more passion than tango.ghettoperson wrote:
I doubt it, da Silva isn't the type to start a war over something like this.Ticia wrote:
I've just heard even Brazil is with them. UK should be worried.
Socialists believe more that the classes are linked rather than populations defined by borders... They'll stick together and bring in Chavez too.Ticia wrote:
No but he will support Argentina and that itself is scary. Brazilians hate Argentinians with more passion than tango.ghettoperson wrote:
I doubt it, da Silva isn't the type to start a war over something like this.Ticia wrote:
I've just heard even Brazil is with them. UK should be worried.
I don't think so. I read somewhere they've ruled out military action from the start. You do know all they mean by support is that ships going from Argentina to the Falklands need a permit.Ticia wrote:
I've just heard even Brazil is with them. UK should be worried.
Dilbert_X wrote:
If the Argentinians had put up a real fight they would have won it easily.
Now I doubt there are enough ships.
They're not really relics of past glories, they're still inhabited by people who want to remain part of the UK. If it wasn't the case I'd agree with you but it aintruisleipa wrote:
tbh screw the falkland islands and the islanders..it's like gibraltar...a relic of past glories. If Argentina want them back they can have 'em as far as I'm concerned.
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2010-02-24 14:04:15)
Maybe Hugo can ask the US if he can use our earthquake machine.M.O.A.B wrote:
We claimed it already, they invaded, we whupped their asses and took it back. They're just pissy over the fact the oil that might exist there will go to us instead of them.
lol at Chavez though, still popping the paranoid pills.
I agree, the islanders want to remain part of the UK. Its just going against their will doing otherwise.Mekstizzle wrote:
They're not really relics of past glories, they're still inhabited by people who want to remain part of the UK. If it wasn't the case I'd agree with you but it aintruisleipa wrote:
tbh screw the falkland islands and the islanders..it's like gibraltar...a relic of past glories. If Argentina want them back they can have 'em as far as I'm concerned.
Their aircraft could still fly.Bertster7 wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
If the Argentinians had put up a real fight they would have won it easily.
Now I doubt there are enough ships.
Yeah - of course they could. The fact that their navy couldn't leave port after we sent nuclear subs down there didn't impede them at all.
I think you should learn yer history better yeah? No-one knows for sure who discovered them first. before the UK returned there in 1833 the yanks, Spanish and French all laid claim to them. The first settlement was established by a Frenchamn. So the claim that the islands have always been British is bollocks. I just hate remnants of British imperialism like this, and Gibraltar. For all I care they can go to Argentina, and the Rock to Spain. The idea of these littel islands in the south pacific being British is daft to me, and the fact we went to war for them and nearly a thousand died for them is just bonkers. But it's just my opinion.Pubic wrote:
The UK was there first.
yah true. to me that just shows the yanks, spanish and french have been relatively sensible nations in abandoning a claim to a pile of rocks populated by sheep and their lovers. Not sure what your third point has to do with it tho'.Mekstizzle wrote:
Well firstly the yanks, spanish and french all gave up their claim ages ago. Secondly Argentina didn't even exist when the falklands started to be settled. Thirdly Argentina itself is the product of Spanish colonialism
sheep fuckers? dont they live in finland?ruisleipa wrote:
yah true. to me that just shows the yanks, spanish and french have been relatively sensible nations in abandoning a claim to a pile of rocks populated by sheep and their lovers. Not sure what your third point has to do with it tho'.Mekstizzle wrote:
Well firstly the yanks, spanish and french all gave up their claim ages ago. Secondly Argentina didn't even exist when the falklands started to be settled. Thirdly Argentina itself is the product of Spanish colonialism
ever heard of the "san luis incident"?Dilbert_X wrote:
Their aircraft could still fly.Bertster7 wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
If the Argentinians had put up a real fight they would have won it easily.
Now I doubt there are enough ships.
Yeah - of course they could. The fact that their navy couldn't leave port after we sent nuclear subs down there didn't impede them at all.
If one exocet had hit the carrier it would have been game over, the Atlantic Conveyor was bad enough.
Fighting a war on the other side of the worl without air cover, or US support, was bad enough.
