It could be argued whether they have a right to be there in the first place, never mind who they wish to belong to. Just sayin'.
Since when has an invading country ever cared what the locals think. Im pretty sure that all the civilizations that got shoved off their land in the past, would have voted against being invaded.
A few mentions of us reasserting our sovereignty in 1833 but little mention of this - "The American sloop USS Lexington destroyed the Argentine settlement at Port Louis on 28 December 1831, and the United Kingdom returned to the islands in 1833." This was following the Argentinean seizing of US fishing vessels in an attempt to control fishing around the islands. Those who do not learn from history's mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
According to my Friend who lives in the Falklands we already have a small Naval task force down there, i'm not certain Argentina are stupid enough at this time to barge in and attack the islands. I've only read one report on the matter, and from what i understood, they are attempting to go through official channels, including i think the UN. Sam
One of my family members is part of the 1000 strong garrison. There is also a flight of Typhoons, and hunter killer sub and a small task force
Something else occured to me last night. Lets say that Argentina did claim through the UN and won and wanted to extract some oil. Guess where the knowledge and expertise lies in extracting oil from those kind of conditions? Thats right, in the north sea sector and mainly in the UK. We are heavier hitters that argentina, militarily, financially and politically so they can crawl to the UN all they want but i doubt they will get anywhere. Besides it would set a dangerous precedent if the UN backed Argentina as it would be no different to Chinas claim to Taiwan for example. Plus we keep forgetting we had a deal with Argentina to share the oil reserves that they pulled out of in 2007.
That knowledge exists all over the world. The North Sea fields are small fry compared to just about everywhere else. Argentina would have no problems extracting the oil. Bad example. The Republic of China (Taiwan) currently lay claim to Taiwan AND to mainland China. The Peoples Republic of China (China) currently lay claim to mainland China and also to Taiwan. The PRC is recognised by all international bodies, though most remain ambiguous in terms of support for their claim to Taiwan, whereas few bodies *officially* recognise RoC, though most do unofficially. It's one of the most complicated an disputed sovereignty arguments we've seem and doesn't really fit the Falklands model - where control has not been disputed for over 100 years and where the UN rules of self-determination are being observed (i.e. the islanders want to remain British).
Perhaps so, but how much of an off-shore oil industry does Argentina actually have? I understand they have a reasonably sized oil industry on the southern tip of the country, but I believe that's land-based. A partnership between the UK and Argentina on oil exploration would be a very good idea for both parties. We do have many world experts on oil-extraction, we have loads of companies who've been doing it for a long time, and there are around another 9-10 rigs right now sitting in the same place that the one which has just moved down to the Falklands came from. But realistically, the Argentinians have screwed themselves on that front, they tore up the agreement to share in the work, so now we can use our own oil industry, our own people, our own transport links, and do this all in our own waters. We even have a large merchant navy which goes where the rigs are - although obviously the distances involved would change things in a big way, if the oil is worth enough - we can do the whole lot.
Yes it is, it is carrying members of the Navy and the Marines making it a task force. Plus it is joing the patrol of a hunter killer. That is a task force
It's not really a naval task force though. One ship with a sub possibly maybe in the area at some indeterminate point in the possible future doesn't make a naval task force. Just because it has some royals aboard doesn't make it more of a task force in the naval sense of the word either. OTOH, I believe there is a River class patrol vessel based permanently at the Falklands along with the type 42. But it doesn't really constitute something many people would name a task force other than in an optimistic sense. /military rant
If there are 60bn barrels to be had, the Argentinians will secure whatever help they need from any other of the dozen nations with sufficient expertise. Sure, it would have been much better had they maintained the agreement with us, because we would have provided said expertise and given them a healthy slice of the pie, but should they gain control of the islands/oilfields, they would have no problems getting the oil out, transported, refined and on the market. Breaking the agreement obviously complicates things for them.. a lot, but it's all rather academic. The islands are ours and the oilfields are within our territorial waters, and that won't be changing for quite some time. You are wrong on so many levels... Firstly, any subs in the region will be doing their own thing - if you only have two offensive ships in the region, they won't be spending all their time following each other. Secondly, having Marines on board (as all similar craft do at all times) does not make a single ship on patrol a 'task force' - marines are in the Navy, not the Army. Thirdly, a Task Force is a recognised term (in NATO countries at least) and when Task Forces are formed they are given names, such as 'Force Z' - there is no such Task Force currently in the South Atlantic. Pedantics and semantics aside, the key point is that the language you used was designed to convey the idea that there were sufficient units in place to repel another invasion. There isn't, at least there might not be. Along with HMS York, there is HMS Clyde (a fisheries vessel), RFA Goldrover (a small tanker) and recently there was also HMS Scott which is a survey vessel. HMS York couldn't repel an invasion, even from the ageing Argentinian fleet. I suspect that the Air-to-Surface capability of 4 Typhoons is the bigger threat.
Marines are part of the Navy, however they operate as a distinct entity with there own rank structure and training centers. Fair enough it is not a NATO task force, I was using the word in a more civvy setting. But I love your suggestion that any subs in the area will do there own thing. Sure if there is a Trident carrying sub out there it will mind its own busness, but it well known that there is a hunter killer out there and it would certainly get involved in anything that may or may not happen. Also, starstreak will be avalible for anti air missions (much more effective than Blowpipe). Overall I feel nothing will happen, and in addition to that if it did we would comperhensivly defeat any form of invasion. This is just the Argentinean Government trying to distact its people
to be frank an honest if the oil does lie with in the waters of the falkland island then Argentina do not have much to stand on it is not in there waters therefore it is not their oil, it would be a different story if in-fact it lay within their waters which i do not think it will. but it just purely rests on which side of the border it lays. the difference this time around is the fact that the other south american nations are backing argentina this time around, but then again only time will tell what will happen. i am sure they will know that if they force Britain to act with force then it will at almost end badly for them once again.
you know theres more energy is the water around the falklands than there is in the oil sitting nearby....but you know oil is the cheap quick fix. Im fairly certain someone is going to become jealous of someone elses oil and start a war over it but that someone else will have a nuke AND WE WILL ALL BE F...........
That is not correct. If you want expertise in extracting oil from the sea bed in deep and difficult conditions than the North Sea sector leads the world.
You're all missing the real potential catastrophe in all this.... What will happen to future runs of Total Wipeout???
