Falkland Islands 2.0

[MymanObama 0]

Anybody paying attention to this developing situation?

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,415]

What''s happening?

Is there any news from the guy accused of collusion in importing batteries for export for Hawk Missiles in Iran.

(Or FBI sting as it''s known).

[BW 0]

Yes i have been Kirchy just angry because of Rockhoppers findings but shes cutting off her nose to spite her face. Argentina needs the UK more then we need them.

[Joanna Grey 0]

The sequels are never as good as the original.

[Herman 9,765]

The Empire Strikes Back was a good sequel.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,558]

[quote user="BW"]Yes i have been Kirchy just angry because of Rockhoppers findings but shes cutting off her nose to spite her face. Argentina needs the UK more then we need them.[/quote]

Yeah, but we need Brazil more than they need us - and making Argentina angry doesn''t help keep Brazil sweet.

 

It''s mainly big talk though - I think the Argentina President is in need of some popularity, and nothing gains popularity in Argentina like annoying the Brits.

[Miss Jane Marple 0]

Well, dear, I remember the last time we fought over this group of islands. It wasn''t very pleasant. Too much wickedness in the world.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

[quote user="Miss Jane Marple"]Well, dear, I remember the last time we fought over this group of islands. It wasn''t very pleasant. Too much wickedness in the world.[/quote]Absolutyely agree, so it is, utter wickedness. Argentina''s economy has recovered much better than ours is and once they have bought their first submarine ready to visit a newly Independent Scotland, who are already discussing whether to take their fair share of oversees territories with them, we will see more Argentinians up here in the northern hemisphere and maybe get used to them, there''s more to Argentina than great footballers.Argentina young population does not care much about this storm in a tea cup and Sean Penns position on the Malvinas is just another starwmen argument used to wind up and frustrate a fairly successfull UN diplomatic process.But, most important, why has this strange subject been allowwed to exist here on the fashion, bubble gum and dental floss forum.Is some politics allowed if it suits the general propaganda drive?Moreover will we be allowed to post about ''nasty Iranian dictators and their evilness, whilst Bahrains mistreatment of the majority of the population is banned? What about the Saudi spring and those foreign mercenaries shooting at civilians in Syria? would that be OK as well?make your mind up Pete, why is a debate about the Falklands/Malvinas not a political thread/issue. Before somebody points fingers, look at what nevermind done now, I ''m not reporting the thread, nor have I done so. I''m merely pointing out the pointlessness of the wickedness that is censorship.

[BW 0]

Pete only deletes threads when certain members complain about them.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

[quote user="BW"]Pete only deletes threads when certain members complain about them.[/quote]Ahh, a man in the know. To have a stance on not allowing political comments, when both of Norfolks largest papers do nopt do national politics unless it is forced upon them from their favopurite party, is ludecrous. It does not give anybody any real news, just tittle tattle, a warmish re-hash of what has been covered elsehwere.Thats what I''m doing as well, except I choose to be critical of our actions at times. I acknowledge that the Falklands/Malvinas have been uninhabited for 140 years and that their proximity to Argentina makes them geographically not ours. Its a bit like claiming Ruegen for the sake of having won ww2.Now that we helped the rebells win their war against Ghaddaffi''s ''horrible excesses'' and have taken control over Brega with a few thousand US soldiers ensuring that the oil flows, do we have any responsibilities for human rights violations that are carried out by our new allies?Should this kind of nutritous sustenance, supported by UN resolutions and all that dances to the same tune, be made mandatory requirement for feeding those who we accuse of not dancing to our tune?http://rt.com/news/libya-rebels-torture-africans-679/

[Herman 9,765]

Wow,that was some revolution.Libya has not only changed politically,it''s changed geograhically.

[BW 0]

Don''t see any torture in that video if i am honest they just shouting at them locked in a cage. This is normal when you are a criminal.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

[quote user="BW"]Don''t see any torture in that video if i am honest they just shouting at them locked in a cage. This is normal when you are a criminal.[/quote]Those green piece of material in their mouth, with tied hands behind their backs, are not hankershiefs BW, they are flags cut up and stuffed into their mouth, I suppose some on here would call it sustenance of sorts.There are currently some 200 different militias operating in Misrata alone, liberated by the arms they have kept, they are now on the rampage and the scurge of the installed instabile rebell regime. Maybe the defyling of second world war graves of British soldiers enables people to see what we have produced. Should we ask for our widely underestimated costs of that war, some paultry 200 million, back?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17244211

.

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="Joanna Grey"]The sequels are never as good as the original.[/quote]

True, because this sequel would be much shorter than 82''s version of events with an invasion lasting as long as it takes for the sub in the area to target some military targets in Buenos Aires with Tomahawks and press ''fire''.We''ll have to do it the above way for lack of aircraft carriers, hence lack of aircraft.Still, it''ll be swift and save money with fewer lives lost [img]http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/emoticons/emotion-21.gif[/img]

[pete_norw 0]

   Well we always seem to have a return match with every arm''s conflict, Think I''m a little to old for Yomping across Goose Green now though,

 

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Joanna Grey"]The sequels are never as good as the original.[/quote]

True, because this sequel would be much shorter than 82''s version of events with an invasion lasting as long as it takes for the sub in the area to target some military targets in Buenos Aires with Tomahawks and press ''fire''.We''ll have to do it the above way for lack of aircraft carriers, hence lack of aircraft.Still, it''ll be swift and save money with fewer lives lost [img]http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/emoticons/emotion-21.gif[/img][/quote]This should have been on this thread yesterday, its the darn OS on here.Whilst the sequel is never as good as the original,  Joanna does not really care. His words not mine.

Britain will lose Las Malvinas’

Mon Mar 5, 2012 2:4PM GMT

.

“You have got to take your own air support with you and you can’t

without a carrier. End of story.” Former commander of the Royal Marines

Major General Julian Thompson

.

One of Britain’s most senior military chiefs has warned that Britain

would have to surrender the sovereignty of Las Malvinas to Argentina in

case a military confrontation over the islands takes place.

.

Former commander of the Royal Marines Major General Julian Thompson said

it would be the “end of story” if Argentina decides to engage in a

military confrontation as tensions between London and Buenos Aires grow

stronger.

,

Britain has categorically ruled out the possibility of negotiations over

the sovereignty of the archipelago while its military might has been

questioned from within the British army.

,

“The Argentines have a marine brigade. They’ve got a parachute brigade

and some good special forces. All they’ve got to do is get those guys on

to the islands for long enough to destroy the (RAF) Typhoon jets and

that’s the end of it,” said Thompson in an interview with the Times.

.

You have got to take your own air support with you and you can’t without

a carrier. End of story,” said Thompson, who was the commander of land

forces in the 74-day war between Britain and Argentina in 1982.

.

Britain’s Royal Navy will be without an aircraft carrier until HMS Queen

Elizabeth, which is supposed to be operative by 2016, enters service.

.

Britain’s Royal Navy will be without an aircraft carrier equipped with

fighter jets for 10 years because of the rising costs of the Ministry of

Defense’s (MoD) projects, reported the Telegraph on 2 March.

.

Furthermore, former head of the British army General Sir Michael Jackson

said earlier in January that it would be “impossible” for Britain to

re-colonize the islands in a worst-case scenario.

[walkern canary 0]

[quote user="nevermind"][quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Joanna Grey"]The sequels are never as good as the original.[/quote]

True, because this sequel would be much shorter than 82''s version of events with an invasion lasting as long as it takes for the sub in the area to target some military targets in Buenos Aires with Tomahawks and press ''fire''.We''ll have to do it the above way for lack of aircraft carriers, hence lack of aircraft.Still, it''ll be swift and save money with fewer lives lost [img]http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/emoticons/emotion-21.gif[/img][/quote]This should have been on this thread yesterday, its the darn OS on here.Whilst the sequel is never as good as the original,  Joanna does not really care. His words not mine.

Britain will lose Las Malvinas’

Mon Mar 5, 2012 2:4PM GMT

.

“You have got to take your own air support with you and you can’t

without a carrier. End of story.” Former commander of the Royal Marines

Major General Julian Thompson

.

One of Britain’s most senior military chiefs has warned that Britain

would have to surrender the sovereignty of Las Malvinas to Argentina in

case a military confrontation over the islands takes place.

.

Former commander of the Royal Marines Major General Julian Thompson said

it would be the “end of story” if Argentina decides to engage in a

military confrontation as tensions between London and Buenos Aires grow

stronger.

,

Britain has categorically ruled out the possibility of negotiations over

the sovereignty of the archipelago while its military might has been

questioned from within the British army.

,

“The Argentines have a marine brigade. They’ve got a parachute brigade

and some good special forces. All they’ve got to do is get those guys on

to the islands for long enough to destroy the (RAF) Typhoon jets and

that’s the end of it,” said Thompson in an interview with the Times.

.

You have got to take your own air support with you and you can’t without

a carrier. End of story,” said Thompson, who was the commander of land

forces in the 74-day war between Britain and Argentina in 1982.

.

Britain’s Royal Navy will be without an aircraft carrier until HMS Queen

Elizabeth, which is supposed to be operative by 2016, enters service.

.

Britain’s Royal Navy will be without an aircraft carrier equipped with

fighter jets for 10 years because of the rising costs of the Ministry of

Defense’s (MoD) projects, reported the Telegraph on 2 March.

.

Furthermore, former head of the British army General Sir Michael Jackson

said earlier in January that it would be “impossible” for Britain to

re-colonize the islands in a worst-case scenario.[/quote]

I have read that piece too ,but the situation is a lot different to than it was in 1982 ,the garrison at Mount pleasant is a lot bigger than the handful of Royal Marines we had down there last time ,yes without an aicraft carrier or two it will be difficult ,and don''t forget ,when was the last time Argentina was involved in a conflict ?? whilst we have an army of battle hardened veterans the Argentines are almost amateurs compaired to our armed forces ,they would be comitting sucide ,for starters they would have to get to RAF Mount Pleasant ,which is several miles in land and well guarded ,plus they would have to get through several minefields which their predecessors laid there back in 1982 Lets hope the Argentine public are not easily fooled by princess botox ,both the UK and Argentina could both do well out of cooperating

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

This article above comes from Press TV.I agree, we do have an army of battle hardened soldiers, but they should be coming home, not still be dying in Afghanistan. You say that ''it will be difficult without an aircraft carrier or two'', yes it will and because we haven''t got any, the defense of Mount Pleasant would costs more lives. Don''t forget it was Argentinian special forces who laid these mines, they have plans and know where they are if they have not succumbed to the harsh ravages of the South Atlantic weathers.I have no crux with the Argentinians or any other South Americans and you suggestion that ''both the UK and Argentina could both do well out of cooperating '' is more to my liking.Listening to young Hague, Cameron and Clegg talking tough over Iran and Syria could soon mean that the next tranche of recruits will be endangering their lives for Israels foreing policy goals, despite its population being opposed to war. Since last year draft-dodging has become a way to protest about Bibi''s plans.This sort of made up story below, not unlike the 45 minute lies of Bliar taking us into Iraq and causing hundreds of thousands of civilan casualties, are not necessarry unless he''s been told to nudge up the status, whichever way possible. Tonights the beginning of Purim, the Jewish month of cleansing, until 8th. March and US troops are in place. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111307/Iran-trying-build-nuclear-missiles-capable-hitting-London-Cameron-warns-MPs.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

[quote user="nevermind"][quote user="BW"]Pete only deletes threads when certain members complain about them.[/quote]Ahh, a man in the know. To have a stance on not allowing political comments, when both of Norfolks largest papers do nopt do national politics unless it is forced upon them from their favopurite party, is ludecrous. It does not give anybody any real news, just tittle tattle, a warmish re-hash of what has been covered elsehwere.Thats what I''m doing as well, except I choose to be critical of our actions at times. I acknowledge that the Falklands/Malvinas have been uninhabited for 140 years and that their proximity to Argentina makes them geographically not ours. Its a bit like claiming Ruegen for the sake of having won ww2.Now that we helped the rebells win their war against Ghaddaffi''s ''horrible excesses'' and have taken control over Brega with a few thousand US soldiers ensuring that the oil flows, do we have any responsibilities for human rights violations that are carried out by our new allies?Should this kind of nutritous sustenance, supported by UN resolutions and all that dances to the same tune, be made mandatory requirement for feeding those who we accuse of not dancing to our tune?http://rt.com/news/libya-rebels-torture-africans-679/[/quote]rather than starting up a new thread I add this blog post from Libya to the previous one. It looks like King Idris has helped to ferment the european resolve to turn Libya into a chaotic militia controlled mess, now he would like to come back, if the people want him to serve them, what an honorous notion after one helped to kill thousands of one''s own countrymen women and children, still going on, from the seurity of one''s five star hotel.http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2012/03/exiled-libyan-monarchy-shamelessly.html

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="nevermind"]This article above comes from Press TV.
I agree, we do have an army of battle hardened soldiers, but they should be coming home, not still be dying in Afghanistan. You say that ''it will be difficult without an aircraft carrier or two'', yes it will and because we haven''t got any, the defense of Mount Pleasant would costs more lives. Don''t forget it was Argentinian special forces who laid these mines, they have plans and know where they are if they have not succumbed to the harsh ravages of the South Atlantic weathers.

I have no crux with the Argentinians or any other South Americans and you suggestion that ''both the UK and Argentina could both do well out of cooperating '' is more to my liking.
Listening to young Hague, Cameron and Clegg talking tough over Iran and Syria could soon mean that the next tranche of recruits will be endangering their lives for Israels foreing policy goals, despite its population being opposed to war. Since last year draft-dodging has become a way to protest about Bibi''s plans.
This sort of made up story below, not unlike the 45 minute lies of Bliar taking us into Iraq and causing hundreds of thousands of civilan casualties, are not necessarry unless he''s been told to nudge up the status, whichever way possible.
Tonights the beginning of Purim, the Jewish month of cleansing, until 8th. March and US troops are in place.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111307/Iran-trying-build-nuclear-missiles-capable-hitting-London-Cameron-warns-MPs.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
[/quote]

Join the dots, nevermind hates Israel.

[walkern canary 0]

[quote user="nevermind"]This article above comes from Press TV.I agree, we do have an army of battle hardened soldiers, but they should be coming home, not still be dying in Afghanistan. You say that ''it will be difficult without an aircraft carrier or two'', yes it will and because we haven''t got any, the defense of Mount Pleasant would costs more lives. Don''t forget it was Argentinian special forces who laid these mines, they have plans and know where they are if they have not succumbed to the harsh ravages of the South Atlantic weathers.I have no crux with the Argentinians or any other South Americans and you suggestion that ''both the UK and Argentina could both do well out of cooperating '' is more to my liking.Listening to young Hague, Cameron and Clegg talking tough over Iran and Syria could soon mean that the next tranche of recruits will be endangering their lives for Israels foreing policy goals, despite its population being opposed to war. Since last year draft-dodging has become a way to protest about Bibi''s plans.This sort of made up story below, not unlike the 45 minute lies of Bliar taking us into Iraq and causing hundreds of thousands of civilan casualties, are not necessarry unless he''s been told to nudge up the status, whichever way possible. Tonights the beginning of Purim, the Jewish month of cleansing, until 8th. March and US troops are in place. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111307/Iran-trying-build-nuclear-missiles-capable-hitting-London-Cameron-warns-MPs.html?ito=feeds-newsxml[/quote]

The mine fields we have both mentioned were not marked by anyone ,especailly the Argentine engineers who laid them ,it took the Royal Engineers (and some unfortunate sheep) to locate the mine fields ,which are still there ,some marked ,but there are probably a few others unmarked ,anti personel mines are nasty things ,they can lay there for years and will still function as perfectly as the day they were laid ,there are dozens of people killed and maimed in the balkens and Angola who are unfortunate witnesses to this I see what you mean about camoron ,clegg , and vague going on about Iran ,I am surprised no one has mentioned 45 minutes yet ,talk about Deja vu

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Thanks for the info regards haphazard mine laying, you might have put your finger on a very important point. If for example the laying of mines, all sorts, have to be marked on a OS map of the relevant area, then these could be recovered much easier, a point I discussed with a human mine sweeper who done two years in Afghnanistan, he thinks its criminal to not mark them.I heard stories of exploding sheep and the odd fat penguin trying to fly, poor sods don''t deserve it.Looks like Saudi is having a problem with some students revolting, next thing, they want to drive cars....;)http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/03/2012391628527147.html