Falklands War The Second?

Ping Chow Chi · 12-03-2012 4:17pm

thecommietommy wrote: »

I know, it's not like the Brits would ever occupy any country against the wishes of it's inhabitants !!!!

It is strange that you seem to championing Argentina to do just that.

tac foley · 12-03-2012 5:10pm

Dear Mr commietommy - the Falkland Islands are Crown Dependencies, and are not being occupied against the wishes of their inhabitants.

BTW, something I've meant to ask for ages - with a 'name' like yours, are you a former British soldier?

tac

getz · 13-03-2012 2:34pm

Ping Chow Chi wrote: »

It is strange that you seem to championing Argentina to do just that.

he likes argentina,he likes the way it treats its people,if you speak out of turn you could well go missing like 30,000 others did,now what was that about the falkland islanders being part of their neighbour ,

Maoltuile · 14-03-2012 1:44am

getz wrote: »

he likes argentina,he likes the way it treats its people,if you speak out of turn you could well go missing like 30,000 others did,now what was that about the falkland islanders being part of their neighbour ,

You'd be referring to the former Argentinian junta, then, the one that (just like their neighbouring generals in Chile, under Tory friend Mr. Pinochet) 'disappeared' several thousand people?

'Cos yeah, the juntas and the democratic civilian governments that replaced them are one and the same *eyeroll*.

getz · 14-03-2012 8:06am

Maoltuile wrote: »

You'd be referring to the former Argentinian junta, then, the one that (just like their neighbouring generals in Chile, under Tory friend Mr. Pinochet) 'disappeared' several thousand people?

'Cos yeah, the juntas and the democratic civilian governments that replaced them are one and the same *eyeroll*.

its obvious that you dont know anything about the :democratic goverment of argentina,the president herself has been charged with corruption,and as it takes an average of 17 years to go through the courts and only one in 24 ever get convicted,also the human right group CONADEP has also been accused of corruption, as millions of their funding has been spent on villas ,posh cars and put into overseas bank accounts,your idea of a democratic civilian goverment .

Maoltuile · 14-03-2012 8:53pm

getz wrote: »

its obvious that you dont know anything about the :democratic goverment of argentina,the president herself has been charged with corruption,and as it takes an average of 17 years to go through the courts and only one in 24 ever get convicted,also the human right group CONADEP has also been accused of corruption, as millions of their funding has been spent on villas ,posh cars and put into overseas bank accounts,your idea of a democratic civilian goverment .

Riiiiight. Well, sunshine, you can go right on believing that to your heart's content, I'm done with this.

goldie fish · 14-03-2012 9:12pm

getz wrote: »

its obvious that you dont know anything about the :democratic goverment of argentina,the president herself has been charged with corruption,and as it takes an average of 17 years to go through the courts and only one in 24 ever get convicted,also the human right group CONADEP has also been accused of corruption, as millions of their funding has been spent on villas ,posh cars and put into overseas bank accounts,your idea of a democratic civilian goverment .

Sounds just like the last FF Government.

getz · 15-03-2012 10:37am

Maoltuile wrote: »

Riiiiight. Well, sunshine, you can go right on believing that to your heart's content, I'm done with this.

dont let the truth get in the way of your belief,check it out

thecommietommy · 15-03-2012 12:15pm

gatecrash wrote: »

Hong Kong was leased. The lease was up, and not extended.

As for the quoted bit, you got a source to back up that assertion?

Oh yes, of course it had nothing to do with the fact that China is a superpower and Thatcher didn't send something similiar to the Falklands fleet to hold Hong Kong as the Chinese would wipe your ass's !!!!!

tac foley wrote: »

Dear Mr commietommy - the Falkland Islands are Crown Dependencies, and are not being occupied against the wishes of their inhabitants.

BTW, something I've meant to ask for ages - with a 'name' like yours, are you a former British soldier?

tac

Nope, and the commie bit is poking a bit of fun at my own left politics.

cyrusdvirus · 15-03-2012 12:26pm

thecommietommy wrote: »

Oh yes, of course it had nothing to do with the fact that China is a superpower and Thatcher didn't send something similiar to the Falklands fleet to hold Hong Kong as the Chinese would wipe your ass's !!!!!

Nope, and the commie bit is poking a bit of fun at my own left politics.

hmmm.....
I'm Irish. Just so's you know.

And maybe this bit might be difficult for you to understand, but when the lease was up, the lease was up.

As for Margaret Thatcher sending a fleet..... well, it was Tony Blair who was residing in Downing Street at that time.

seriously, the thing you are using to post on boards can also be used to look up information. You won't look like such an idiot. Even a casual look at the Wiki entry for Hong Kong shows it was handed over in 1997.

johngalway · 15-03-2012 12:32pm

gatecrash wrote: »

hmmm.....
I'm Irish. Just so's you know.

And maybe this bit might be difficult for you to understand, but when the lease was up, the lease was up.

As for Margaret Thatcher sending a fleet..... well, it was Tony Blair who was residing in Downing Street at that time.

seriously, the thing you are using to post on boards can also be used to look up information. You won't look like such an idiot. Even a casual look at the Wiki entry for Hong Kong shows it was handed over in 1997.

Some posters may not have been born in 1997

I remember the green trucks going across the border into Hong Kong with what looked similar to the Terracotta army in them, very strange.

cyrusdvirus · 15-03-2012 12:33pm

johngalway wrote: »

Some posters may not have been born in 1997

I remember the green trucks going across the border into Hong Kong with what looked similar to the Terracotta army in them, very strange.

Aww thanks John... now you're making me feel old!!

:)

15-03-2012 12:46pm

The one thing that strikes me about all this is that Argentina started to bring their position public again soon after the British Navy had publicly disbanded a load of carriers and other warships. Britain would not be in the same position at all to fight such a war if it came to it but I don't think it will happen as the people living on the islands have stated that they are happy with their current status haven't they?

thecommietommy · 15-03-2012 12:47pm

gatecrash wrote: »

hmmm.....
I'm Irish. Just so's you know.

And maybe this bit might be difficult for you to understand, but when the lease was up, the lease was up.

As for Margaret Thatcher sending a fleet..... well, it was Tony Blair who was residing in Downing Street at that time.

seriously, the thing you are using to post on boards can also be used to look up information. You won't look like such an idiot. Even a casual look at the Wiki entry for Hong Kong shows it was handed over in 1997.

The lease..the lease...the lease. Yeah sure, no gun boat diplomacy like the good old days. It must have brought a tear to your eye all the same

cyrusdvirus · 15-03-2012 1:01pm

thecommietommy wrote: »

The lease..the lease...the lease. Yeah sure, no gun boat diplomacy like the good old days. It must have brought a tear to your eye all the same

No, not really.

I didn't visit until October 1997, so I didn't ever see it under British rule.

Fratton Fred · 15-03-2012 7:17pm

gatecrash wrote: »

No, not really.

I didn't visit until October 1997, so I didn't ever see it under British rule.

Apparently the only change was that all the Ozzie bar staff were replaced by Chinese ones.

cyrusdvirus · 15-03-2012 11:21pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Apparently the only change was that all the Ozzie bar staff were replaced by Chinese ones.

What i found weird was that any and all references to British rule were gone. The british issued H.K. dollar my brother told me that they had a week to hand therm over for the new chinese issued H.K. Dollar. The stamps, everything, absolutely everything was changed. I found that really weird... But then i saw HMS Tamar, and the Prince Of Wales building, still called the POW building..

I found it really incongrous that they chinese had changed everything from the money to the stamps and left this massive 6 foot high lettering on the old British HQ, proclaiming it to be the P.O.W building!:D

getz · 16-03-2012 9:33am

gatecrash wrote: »

What i found weird was that any and all references to British rule were gone. The british issued H.K. dollar my brother told me that they had a week to hand therm over for the new chinese issued H.K. Dollar. The stamps, everything, absolutely everything was changed. I found that really weird... But then i saw HMS Tamar, and the Prince Of Wales building, still called the POW building..

I found it really incongrous that they chinese had changed everything from the money to the stamps and left this massive 6 foot high lettering on the old British HQ, proclaiming it to be the P.O.W building!:D

china one country two systems, the british/chinese culture is still going strong in hong kong after one hundred years,a capitalist system with horse racing football ect, the citizens still take a christian first name alongside their chinese name,it works well for china and its economy,so why change it,there was never a hate relationship against the british rule,if fact the british got a lot of respect from china by honouring the agreement.

thecommietommy · 16-03-2012 5:43pm

8.00pm Sunday 18 March, Channel 4, FALKLANDS' MOST DARING RAID - The humorous, heroic story of how a Cold War-era Vulcan flew the then longest range bombing mission in history with a Second World War bomb that changed the outcome of the Falklands War.

http://www.channel4.com/tv-listings/daily/2012/03/18

Maoltuile · 16-03-2012 7:52pm

getz wrote: »

there was never a hate relationship against the british rule,if fact the british got a lot of respect from china by honouring the agreement.

OK, this needs a reality check:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

Dogwatch · 16-03-2012 8:47pm

Maoltuile wrote: »

OK, this needs a reality check:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

Old news, they finished that war 140 years ago!!!!!!!!!

Buffman · 17-03-2012 1:11am

The real reason for this latest spat has reared its head again. Argentina is now threatening legal action against the oil companies operating in the Falklands.

I am pie · 20-03-2012 1:07pm

thecommietommy wrote: »

8.00pm Sunday 18 March, Channel 4, FALKLANDS' MOST DARING RAID - The humorous, heroic story of how a Cold War-era Vulcan flew the then longest range bombing mission in history with a Second World War bomb that changed the outcome of the Falklands War.

http://www.channel4.com/tv-listings/daily/2012/03/18

Regardless of your political views, this was a great show and an incredible display of courage for those in the Vulcan and fuel supply planes. You could argue that one bomb (the one which hit the runway) changed the shape of the whole conflict.

On a different note I see the Peruvians have changed their minds and rescinded approval for the british warship to dock. Regional solidarity is more important than British influence in South America today. The US will more or less sit on the fence as they need a stable continent.

Can't see this going anywhere beyond a noisy diplomatic spat whilst the region sits squarely behind Argentina and the US sits on the fence.

There is more chance of that Vulcan bomber making it across the Atlantic again than Argentina launching an attack. They will agitate with agressive diplomatic measures, their plan is to make the Falklands / Malvinas the regional equivalent of a turd in the punchbowl.

Argentina attempted to restore Aerolineas Argentinas flights to the islands. The local govt refused. I think they'll have difficulty getting LAN Chile back in to service the islands as the Chileans have annouced their intention to maintain solidarity with the Argentines.

BostonB · 20-03-2012 1:22pm

I am pie wrote: »

...You could argue that one bomb (the one which hit the runway) changed the shape of the whole conflict....

I think that's a very weak argument.

A great story nonetheless.

I am pie · 20-03-2012 2:05pm

BostonB wrote: »

I think that's a very weak argument.

A great story nonetheless.

Well, the program makers seemed to be insinuating that the plan was for Argies to use that runway to launch planes which would attack the british fleet.

I'm not really familiar with the details, just paraphrasing the program makers insinuation.

getz · 20-03-2012 2:15pm

I am pie wrote: »

Regardless of your political views, this was a great show and an incredible display of courage for those in the Vulcan and fuel supply planes. You could argue that one bomb (the one which hit the runway) changed the shape of the whole conflict.

On a different note I see the Peruvians have changed their minds and rescinded approval for the british warship to dock. Regional solidarity is more important than British influence in South America today. The US will more or less sit on the fence as they need a stable continent.

Can't see this going anywhere beyond a noisy diplomatic spat whilst the region sits squarely behind Argentina and the US sits on the fence.

There is more chance of that Vulcan bomber making it across the Atlantic again than Argentina launching an attack. They will agitate with agressive diplomatic measures, their plan is to make the Falklands / Malvinas the regional equivalent of a turd in the punchbowl.

Argentina attempted to restore Aerolineas Argentinas flights to the islands. The local govt refused. I think they'll have difficulty getting LAN Chile back in to service the islands as the Chileans have annouced their intention to maintain solidarity with the Argentines.

solidary with the argentines,dident last long,uruguays vice president blasted argentinas protectionist and foreign exchange policies because they damage mercosur,which is currently living its worst possible moment,he says argentina permanently opt for instruments that make access to markets most difficult, [mercosur has been in talks EU which has now been put back until brazil takes the presidency] paraguay calls on argentina for :reflection and dialogue: when it hits you in the pocket you soon lose your friends

BostonB · 20-03-2012 2:24pm

I am pie wrote: »

Well, the program makers seemed to be insinuating that the plan was for Argies to use that runway to launch planes which would attack the british fleet.

I'm not really familiar with the details, just paraphrasing the program makers insinuation.

Its a good feat of aviation and a good story.

You could argue all day of its military value.

cyrusdvirus · 20-03-2012 2:27pm

BostonB wrote: »

I think that's a very weak argument.

A great story nonetheless.

How?

it denied the use of the only runway on the islands to the argentine fast jets, thus meaning they had to fly from the mainland to engage their targets, reducing search and loiter time. It also meant that the planes were flying with reduced weapons loads to allow for increased fuel capacity..

It WAS a crucial attack and to deny that it altered the shape of the conflict it just plain ol' silly.

I am pie · 20-03-2012 2:35pm

getz wrote: »

solidary with the argentines,dident last long,uruguays vice president blasted argentinas protectionist and foreign exchange policies because they damage mercosur,which is currently living its worst possible moment,he says argentina permanently opt for instruments that make access to markets most difficult, [mercosur has been in talks EU which has now been put back until brazil takes the presidency] paraguay calls on argentina for :reflection and dialogue: when it hits you in the pocket you soon lose your friends

Complaining about protectionist trade policies and allowing British vessels to doc are worlds apart. All of those countries are economically dependent on Brazil and Argentina. Uruguay in particular in extremely close to Argentina diplomatically, as are Chile (Kirchner visited last week to discuss enhanced co-operation). Every country in the region is pro regional solidarity, don't let a trade spat confuse you.

Uruguay and Paraguay are economically dependent on Argentina. Falling out with them would destroy their economies. Those particular turkey's won't be voting for Christmas any time soon.

For example, the French and the British are no strangers to diplomatic spats, disagreements on economic policies etc...but when push comes to shove they are firm allies militarily. The same applies to Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil,Venezuela and others in the south american region.

You're clutching at straws.

cyrusdvirus · 20-03-2012 2:46pm

I am pie wrote: »

Complaining about protectionist trade policies and allowing British vessels to doc are worlds apart. All of those countries are economically dependent on Brazil and Argentina. Uruguay in particular in extremely close to Argentina diplomatically, as are Chile (Kirchner visited last week to discuss enhanced co-operation). Every country in the region is pro regional solidarity, don't let a trade spat confuse you.

Uruguay and Paraguay are economically dependent on Argentina. Falling out with them would destroy their economies. Those particular turkey's won't be voting for Christmas any time soon.

For example, the French and the British are no strangers to diplomatic spats, disagreements on economic policies etc...but when push comes to shove they are firm allies militarily. The same applies to Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil,Venezuela and others in the south american region.

You're clutching at straws.

Do you HONESTLY think that if the Argentinians invaded the Falklands, that the US, would not bring it's diplomatic weight firmly down on the side of the UK? Militarily, not so sure, but you can be certain that the US will stand beside the UK if this were to come to pass.

Falklands War The Second?

Comments