The Falklands thread
- Thread starter LabR@t
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
So effectively your position is we are all wrong, you are right, but you won't tell us why.
Excellent. Thats a sterling debate, that is.
Well please enlighten us, were you there fighting on the front line?
Dude so did the argies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Navy#Present_day
But we would still sink the lot
christ if thats them moving on what were we up against in 82? row boats with sling shots attached?
4 third rate destroyers from the early 80s and some rattly subs.
looking at that list do they have anything in their navy dating after 1983? its as if they've gave up as a naval force 30 years ago
oh and regarding the quality of their navy
Guys, play fair. It's very difficult to to have an objective opinion about something personal - it may be personal to the guy above. Reads that way, but of course I could be wrong.
My brother was in the Falklands war, and to this day it's something I wouldn't raise with him as I know he finds it difficult to deal with - he was quite young to be fair and now has quite a long military career behind him.
Attacking someone for responding emotionally to a subject is an unhelpful and dangerous game really. You wouldn't do such a thing to somebody's face, why is it OK to do it online?
My brother was in the Falklands war, and to this day it's something I wouldn't raise with him as I know he finds it difficult to deal with - he was quite young to be fair and now has quite a long military career behind him.
Attacking someone for responding emotionally to a subject is an unhelpful and dangerous game really. You wouldn't do such a thing to somebody's face, why is it OK to do it online?
There is no way they could deploy aircraft with that Type 45 there, it's currently one if not the most advanced air defense destroyer in the world. Any plane taking off from an Argentine airbase could be shot down before it clears the runway.
Sorry mate, at the time of the FW1, we had a much larger Navy (Aircraft carriers even, with aircraft)
I believe the Sheffield was state of the art and had the then new Sea Wolf defense system, which didn't work very well did it?
Old post, but I missed it first time around.
Point the first: Sheffield did not have Sea Wolf Missiles, it had Sea Darts which were anti-aircraft but not anti-missile.
Point the second: we still have one carrier: the Illustrious. And in a few year's time, we'll have a couple more.
He hasn't responded emotionally to a subject and it's a thread about the Falklands. If he has difficulty discusisng it then absolutely fair play but.. why come into a thread specifically about it which is only going to be full of people discussing it, and then disagree with them, if thats the situation?
We are all in this thread to discuss the topic at hand. Thats why it exists?
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 4,255
- Location
- North Sea
What, so it's down to me to prove why your ridiculous assertions are only in your head, as opposed to you proving that they aren't? Is there a Zionist Pro-Israeli lobby? Sure. Do they run the world as some sort of shadow government as you seem to suggest? Hell no.
Oh, and I'll craft your reply for you if you like. "Yes I am a braindead drone of the MSM, sleepwalking us all into a Zionist superstate." I 'eagerly' await your torrent of tedious CT circle jerk sites featuring a smorgasbord of misquoted (at best) and just plain made up sources.
Last edited:
Apparently according to wiki they can track and destroy multiple targets as small as a cricket ball, travelling at three times the speed of sound, which seems pretty awesome.
I hope we don't get into a war, the last falklands war was bad enough, and once again we have the strength, just like last time, and we nearly came a cropper then. War never goes the way you expect, regardless of the tech you may have, it all comes down to whos commanding it in my book, (of course if they are struggling I reckon there's a few people on here that could sort it
).The only time Argentina is likely to attack is if the US is too busy attacking Iran to get involved for a cut in the oil there. 
Frankly, if Argentina are prepared to go to war with us over the Falklands it will be a well planned out surprise attack, I don't see how we can defend the islands for any prolonged length of time because it would be a logistical nightmare for us.
Frankly, if Argentina are prepared to go to war with us over the Falklands it will be a well planned out surprise attack, I don't see how we can defend the islands for any prolonged length of time because it would be a logistical nightmare for us.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,247
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
The only time Argentina is likely to attack is if the US is too busy attacking Iran to get involved for a cut in the oil there.
Frankly, if Argentina are prepared to go to war with us over the Falklands it will be a well planned out surprise attack, I don't see how we can defend the islands for any prolonged length of time because it would be a logistical nightmare for us.
Well unless they plan on walking on the sea floor using straws to breath i fail to see how they can approach the island without us knowing about it.
That we do. Pity there are no planes to go on it
Works well for attack choppers though
Which you could argue is PERFECT in this situation.
[TW]Fox;21217286 said:
Come on Fox, you'd argue a blue cat was a yellow octopus if you felt like it
He's obviously responding emotionally to this discussion - I'd be astonished if you really couldn't see that for whatever reason he's treating it quite personally.
Personally things that are 'close' to me I'd avoid on a discussion forum simply because I'd know I couldn't have a discussion about it in a way that more objective people or separated people could. Doesn't make them right and me wrong though.
Subjective/Objective is critical to understanding an arguer's position in any conversation or discussion. Literal example - I'm totally against capital punishment right? But then I'd quite happily pull the lungs out of somebody's ears if they hurt my daughter.
Extreme example of Objective/Subjective - unless the people discussing are the same side of the / it's an utterly goalless discussion, unless the discussion/argument itself is the whole point.
I'm being ridiculously sensible tonight? Must be because I've run out of vodka.
UK?
Well if that's how you feel, please remove yourself from the thread.