The Falklands thread

daver said:
Actually a lot of them believe they sank HMS Invincible, we changed HMS Ilustrious into Invincible, Ark Royal into Illustrious then we built a clone carrier in a foreign shipyard (in c 6 months) to hide it as it would have been embarrassing for us. Also all the crew have been kept silent about it for 30 years and all the foreign shipyard workers as well.

Some others think they didn't sink her, but did damaged her, but we magically repaired her at sea so that you couldn't tell she was damaged, naturally also keeping everyone silent etc etc.
Click to expand...

I've heard that many times, it just reflects the desperate need that argentina has to think they did better in the war than they did (and ignoring the fact that Ark Royal was years away from being ready).
 
Strife212 said:
It's different though, it's not possible to retake the Falklands without carriers.
Click to expand...

Strife212 said:
It's true but if they took the Islands we have no power projection now, we can't retake them.
Click to expand...

A single type 45 destroyer can take down anything the Argies put in the air, and they don't have anything capable of dealing with our subs, so a single destoryer and a single sub could maintain complete air and sea superiority.

All we need then is some amphibious landing craft and/or HMS Ocean.

We can easily take back the islands. More importantly, due to the technology imbalance I've highlighted, the Argie could never take them off us in the first place, even in face of only a minimal defence force.

They just don't have anything which can kill our air-defence destroyers or subs.
 
IMG_0542.jpg


IMG_0543.jpg


IMG_0544.jpg
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
The US Navy said as much, but considering what we found when we arrived in Afghanistan in 2001 I can honestly say that they were/are not really qualified to make that judgement. :)
Click to expand...

"All the gear, no idea" a mate in Afghan once said :D
 
Castiel said:
You don't realise how close you are...:D
Click to expand...

Exactly. Met a few people who "knew about mountains" when I was attached to McChrystal's lot. I tried to explain to them the difference between where they were going and Montana but bless 'em they knew best. I had little doubt they would imminently require my services for a second time.
 
Xordium said:
Exactly. Met a few people who "knew about mountains" when I was attached to McChrystal's lot. I tried to explain to them the difference between where they were going and Montana but bless 'em they knew best. I had little doubt they would imminently require my services for a second time.
Click to expand...

Inbetween trying to discourage the NA from trying to kill us and trying to explain to the yanks that just because 10,000ft above sea level seems like its closer to the Sun doesn't mean you can wear shorts, and no, of course your desert gear won't stand out in the snow.... it was no surprise that Mr Laden buggered off......;)
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
Inbetween trying to discourage the NA from trying to kill us and trying to explain to the yanks that just because 10,000ft above sea level seems like its closer to the Sun doesn't mean you can wear shorts, and no, of course your desert gear won't stand out in the snow.... it was no surprise that Mr Laden buggered off......;)
Click to expand...

Ar, but no yanks would mean no easy pickings at poker and free commemorative zippo lighters!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom