View Full Version : UK fears Falkland Island invasion by Russia-backed Argentina
mojaveman
03-25-2015, 21:02
All I can say is wow. Here we go again over 30 years later but with Vladimir Putin orchestrating the entire affair.
http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Falkland-Island-garrison-bolstered-combat-risk/story-26220747-detail/story.html
mojaveman
03-25-2015, 21:14
The issue is not getting the troops there. The real problem is the logistical support. They almost lost the war in 1983, it was a close call.
That and the fact that they undertook that operation with very little air cover for their ships.
That would be a smart Putin move....comes down to the will to fight/survive and proving the west is weak thru a client state is a good Commie move.
That's how you sway opinions in the Ukraine and Baltic states to accept Russian 'protection'......
Putin doesn't want a stand up fight...he thinks he can out bluff us, break our political will....with this admin he has had a look at the cards.
Team Sergeant
03-26-2015, 06:48
And Argentina's "president" could use a very serious "Wag the Dog" right about now.....
But they should also know that the USA will stand by the Brits, or will we?
And I agree an excellent move by Putin......
I seriously doubt the muslim in the White House would aid Britain in that fight.
....with this admin he has had a look at the cards
Yes indeed he did...
President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.
President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.
I'd say comrade Vladimir got one HELL of a good look at the cards.
mark46th
03-26-2015, 08:27
Yeah, Billy, I agree. Now is the best time for a move like this. Obama would leave the Brits hanging in the wind. Plus it would be a great distraction, allowing Putin to finish off the Ukraine or start something in the Baltic States....
Fundamentally transform...
The man is a genius. Look at what is going on in Europe, just moved troops into
Kaliningrad which just happens to be right next to Latvia, Estonia and Nato's back door.
Remington Raidr
03-28-2015, 23:21
Whole lotta flexibility going on.:rolleyes:
RomanCandle
03-30-2015, 11:07
How Did Putin get inserted into that story? Story sourced from the Sun of all places but still with no mention of Putin? :confused: Unless he was edited out before I read it.
Next he'll be on page 3 of the Sun and maybe under the bed or in the closet too. :rolleyes:
The Argies would be nuts to even consider it seriously. Putin would be even more stupid to back it. I would bet against it.
I found this regarding lease of SU 24 long range bombers to Argentina. That alone would hardly provide the capability to mount an invasion. They would be vulnerable to RAF Typhoons and Rapier Ground to Air systems. Even if Argentina were to acquire Gripen fighters the nearest airbase being Rio Grand is around 700km from the Falklands with the Gripen being a short range fighter +/- 800km CR. Not an ideal platform for flying top cover.
More like the Argentinians want to appear to strengthen to drive home a point of diplomacy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/11491467/Falklands-defence-Why-is-Argentina-considering-an-aircraft-deal-with-the-Russians.html
I would be thinking IF the Argentines retook the Falklands, the UK doesn't possess the force projection capability to retake the islands.
I think the key point is what the Falkland Islander's want....which is a strong association with the UK, and NOT Argentina.
With the current state of the Argentine military(far worse than it was in 1982), I reckon the only way they'd be able to project force onto the Falklands is by commercial airliner.
Russian SU24s and/or Venezuelan SU27s could be a problem.
ALL
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/11491467/Falklands-defence-Why-is-Argentina-considering-an-aircraft-deal-with-the-Russians.html
What would you consider the move then? Putin even mentioning a deal serves as a warning not only to the UK but the United States. He is expanding his military reach and flexing muscle. Do you think those 12 planes come by themselves? No, they come with advisors and support that will allow joint exchanges and development of the AO. Which happens to be very close to other South American countries who are pretty unstable. Nothing Russia does right now is done without thinking about how to benefit from the 2nd and 3rd order of effects. And if you don't think so, I would check under your bed.
What would you consider the move then? Putin even mentioning a deal serves as a warning not only to the UK but the United States. He is expanding his military reach and flexing muscle. Do you think those 12 planes come by themselves? No, they come with advisors and support that will allow joint exchanges and development of the AO. Which happens to be very close to other South American countries who are pretty unstable. Nothing Russia does right now is done without thinking about how to benefit from the 2nd and 3rd order of effects. And if you don't think so, I would check under your bed.
As I understand it, Putin has some very tight relationships with aligned oligarchs(whereas the unaligned ones flee to UK, get thrown in jail, or get a Polonium powered enema).
And it would appear there's quite close ties with aligned paramilitary outfits that are semi-independant(but reliant) or just pretend arms length "PMCs".
It leaves me wondering how Putin and the Russian state's relaitonship with russian organized crime is developing?
I've read about how ethnic Russian organized criminal organizations are amongst the most capable in the world stemming from post-Soviet collapse and high levels of education and military training of these groups conducting illicit activity.
I wonder if Putin's Russia will develop aggressive relationships with ethnic Russian organized criminals around the world, much as done by the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact by extention with the likes of Carlos the Jackel, Baader-Meinhoff, and RAF?
Iran > Qods Force > Hezbullah > Lebanese criminal gangs conducting illicit activity
China > MSS > water army > triads and expat networks
Russia > FSB/GRU > arms length paramilitary proxies > ethnic Russian gangs
???
What is the counter strategy? Los Pepes? Gladio? Counter-Guerilla?
RomanCandle
03-31-2015, 09:37
What would you consider the move then? Putin even mentioning a deal serves as a warning not only to the UK but the United States. He is expanding his military reach and flexing muscle. Do you think those 12 planes come by themselves? No, they come with advisors and support that will allow joint exchanges and development of the AO. Which happens to be very close to other South American countries who are pretty unstable. Nothing Russia does right now is done without thinking about how to benefit from the 2nd and 3rd order of effects. And if you don't think so, I would check under your bed.
Yes you are right. There is not a country in existence with any sort of capability that is not jostling for a position on the world stage. Clearly Russia wants to re-establish themselves as a world power and counter the influence and encroachment of NATO in their own back yard. They see a policy of Russian containment conducted by the US. Of course they will be establishing military and economic ties as much as they can, with whoever they can. Do they have a right to do so? I suppose as much as anyone else. They made a huge mistake by relying almost totally on oil and gas exports and realise that they need to diversify in an environment which they have found increasingly hostile.
A lot has unfolded on the world stage since the fall of the USSR to cause people not to think that domination by any one power is desirable. Neither a world controlled by an oligarchy of Russians nor Americans. I also wouldn't expect to see the rise of a new Soviet Empire. Sorry I just don't see that. There are others that are far more expansive and invasive than the Russians but then I guess their designs are purely altruistic. :rolleyes:
It simply appears that there are a lot of fights being picked but very little follow through and a lot of untidy loose ends. Over the last 15 years the world definitely hasn't become a better place because of it.
As an aside thought: We in the west consider ourselves the winners of the cold war. The Soviets would have been aware that economic political and social isolation was not sustainable. What happened in western universities during the cold war, what positions do those graduates hold today and how has society changed in the west as a result? How would that benefit a resurgent Russia wanting to re-establish itself on the world stage.
twistedsquid
03-31-2015, 15:55
Any move against The Falklands will be considered a move against the West, IMO. I doubt the Royals and American public will stand for that.
Hundred-Year Marathon: China's Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower (2013)
Any move against The Falklands will be considered a move against the West, IMO. I doubt the Royals and American public will stand for that.
After 15 years of war and the current situation in the Middle-East how much fight do you think the Royals and American public would muster?
A lot has unfolded on the world stage since the fall of the USSR to cause people not to think that domination by any one power is desirable. Neither a world controlled by an oligarchy of Russians nor Americans. I also wouldn't expect to see the rise of a new Soviet Empire. Sorry I just don't see that. There are others that are far more expansive and invasive than the Russians but then I guess their designs are purely altruistic.
It simply appears that there are a lot of fights being picked but very little follow through and a lot of untidy loose ends
Do they have to "Win" by just keeping us off balance they have the lead and control as long as we are reacting to their advances and trying to counter their moves. By increasing their influence especially in the western hemisphere and South America is a calculated plan. Cold war never ended.
twistedsquid
03-31-2015, 20:01
History's only combat use of a nuclear attack submarine was in The Falkands when the General Belgrano was sunk by a British sub. The Kingdom has a stiff upper lip. I was on the USS Guadalcanal when we crossed English warships returning. We dipped our colors. England will not let this happen.
I worry about the bluster and brinkmanship we had post Carter.
It seems to me that Carter II has doubled-down so often there will be nothing short of Apocalypse that would be proportional...
History's only combat use of a nuclear attack submarine was in The Falkands when the General Belgrano was sunk by a British sub. The Kingdom has a stiff upper lip. I was on the USS Guadalcanal when we crossed English warships returning. We dipped our colors. England will not let this happen.
While Britain may go to bat over the Falklands, I do not see much assistance coming from the United States. Any major operations by a Western Nation in South America will be used as a Rallying cry/propaganda of Western "Colonialism" for places like Venezuela, Bolivia and Argentina backed by Iran and Russia.
will be used as a Rallying cry/propaganda
It is not the critic who counts...
Why do we keep kowtowing to them!
UK was able to counter the last war in the Malvinas (Argentina's name for the Falklands) with our logistical and J2 support - I would be surprised if we merely sat by if such an event happened again.
The naval ops in the Falklands War (especially the anti-ship missiles) also had an impact on us, and led to a rethinking and reengineering of our naval vessel structural design.
I was TDY from the 7th SFG to CINCPAC J361 during that time and monitored the event from IPAC. Shortly after its conclusion, we worked with an SAS team who had been committed to the war. They were still recovering physically from the effects of the harshness of the environment found in those latitudes and had little good to say about the Argentine forces they encountered.
But so it goes...
Richard
twistedsquid
04-02-2015, 17:46
UK was able to counter the last war in the Malvinas (Argentina's name for the Falklands) with our logistical and J2 support - I would be surprised if we merely sat by if such an event happened again.
The naval ops in the Falklands War (especially the anti-ship missiles) also had an impact on us, and led to a rethinking and reengineering of our naval vessel structural design.
I was TDY from the 7th SFG to CINCPAC J361 during that time and monitored the event from IPAC. Shortly after its conclusion, we worked with an SAS team who had been committed to the war. They were still recovering physically from the effects of the harshness of the environment found in those latitudes and had little good to say about the Argentine forces they encountered.
But so it goes...
Richard
We studied the missile hit on HMS Sheffield and ineffectual low level bombing runs of the Argentinian Air Force against the British Amphibious group. The Exocet that hit Sheffield was sensor ID'ed by Sheffield (via NTDS) as "Friendly" (Nato missile) and overrides to bring CIWS online could not be implemented in time. The missile didn't detonate but the combination of residual missile fuel combined with the severing of critical equipment doomed the Sheffield. The air runs were at such low level that dumb bombs failed to arm via impellers and were nothing more than thrown stones.
I'm confident England has made note.
The Reaper
04-02-2015, 20:58
I would say that the British Navy no longer has the force structure to project the power they did before.
TR
Airbornelawyer
04-03-2015, 05:46
But Argentina is, in anything, in even worse shape, having undertaken little to no realistic military modernization since the Falklands War, and having virtually no recent experience in conducting even smaller-scale military operations.
And Argentina also has to keep an eye on a Chilean military which has significantly increased its combat power.
With the article about the possible sell most likely a gift from Russia of 12 A/C seems they are modernizing the force now. I see this slowly growing, Russia will station trainers and A/C there and add some other FID training to help modernize the forces of Argentina just slowly turning the heat up on the frog.
There is a article today
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/03/27/secret-submarine-base-norway-accidentally-handed-russians-314989.html
While the Soviet Union is no more, Russia today is just as dangerous if not more.
Golf1echo
04-03-2015, 13:44
One of the more poignant moments in my memory was coverage of the Gurkha Commander being denied the opportunity to take his men from the jagged rocks of the surrounding hills down into Port Stanley....
I don't recall seeing anyone more angry!
I have always respected the Chileans after that conflict :lifter
http://en.mercopress.com/2014/07/08/without-chile-s-help-we-would-have-lost-the-falklands-says-former-raf-intelligence
TiroFijo
04-14-2015, 14:36
Anybody with the slightest clue about Argentina's armed forces current strength would roll in the floor loughing hysterically about these invasion plans...
Team Sergeant
04-14-2015, 20:50
Anybody with the slightest clue about Argentina's armed forces current strength would roll in the floor loughing hysterically about these invasion plans...
I've not delved into any of the South American militaries so I'll take you at your word. The fight we saw in the 80's was completely one sided.
Airbornelawyer
04-15-2015, 00:34
That was my point.
Putin's Russia is sticking its nose in Latin America mainly to tweak the United States, though with a certain geopolitical objective. I doubt Putin really expects anything to come of Argentina's ambitions. But just as we have the Monroe Doctrine, Russia wants the rest of the world to treat Russia's so-called "near abroad" as Russia's turf. Not that the Monroe Doctrine really means much these days, and not that we are blessed with a president least likely to respect that doctrine, but it does allow Russia to accuse us of hypocrisy if we oppose Russian moves in Latin America while involving ourselves in affairs in Ukraine, Georgia and the like. And of all the countries in Latin America where Russia might meddle, Argentina is a "two-fer", since it also tweaks the UK over British support to Ukraine.
Realistically, though, Russia is suffering under the twin threats of the drop in oil prices and sanctions over Ukraine which have had some effect on the oligarchs who support Putin. Especially as a result of the drop in oil revenues, the Russian Armed Forces are having to re-evaluate their own ambitious modernization plans. Russia would be hard-pressed to modernize another country's armed forces unless that country had hard currency to pay, like Chavez's Venezuela at the height of the oil-price boom. Countries like Syria and Iran might also have hard-currency issues, but they also represent more serious geopolitical interests for Russia than Argentina does. India and China remain Russia's biggest customers, although India is also one of the US's biggest customers as well.
Argentina has done almost nothing to modernize its armed forces, especially its air force, since the 1980s, and in many areas is worse off. Manning levels, training and maintenance have all suffered as the military lost its privileged position since 1983. And, indeed, outside of its Exocet-carrying Super Étendard's and certain army, marine and police special operations forces, the Argentine military wasn't particularly potent by Western standards even in 1982. After the initial conquest of the Falklands, most of the SOF were withdrawn and replaced by conscript infantry, who proved rather unmotivated and ineffective against the British Army. Without conscription anymore to maintain even sufficient manning levels, and without the budgets to train and equip professional forces, the Argentine armed forces are far less of a threat now than they perhaps ever were.
TiroFijo
04-15-2015, 06:38
Exactly...
I just want to add that in 1982 Argentina had some of her best infantry forces in the border with Chile, since they almost went to war in 1978 over the Beagle cannel. Historically all the patagonic region had been disputed among both countries since their independence, and there is always a sour taste in Chile about the 1902 limits that almost led to a war.
Not surprisingly, the chileans helped the UK during the Falklands war, and Argentina was expecting action on its shouthern borders.
Argentina is currently led by a inept president with real mental issues, and does not have money to buy anything, much less build up their armed forces from the sorry state they are now. As much as Russia would like to poke the US/NATO in the eye doing whatever they can in the region, they have many other far more pressing issues at hand.
The real player in the region, in the long term, is China. They are buying whatever they can and extending economic influence.
logisticsclerk
05-05-2015, 17:14
If I may ask a polite question here: given the stationing of modern aircraft on the Falklands (I believe a number of Typhoons and helicopters are permanently stationed there) and the fact that the British Army and Royal Marines are infinitely more battle hardened than those of 1982, wouldn't an invasion be a much harder proposition than it was back then?
TiroFijo
05-06-2015, 05:49
I`m sure the UK MOD knows very well the current capabilities of Argentina's armed forces, it is very easy to see they are in a very sorry state today and not remotely capable of attempting an invasion.
This is all smoke... who knows why?
This is all smoke... who knows why?
Because de Kirchner is a piece of shit socialist who has wrecked her economy (and military) with her redistributionist policies. Saber rattling over the Falklands distracts the sheeple from their real problems (her).
Badger52
05-06-2015, 06:47
Because de Kirchner is a piece of shit socialist who has wrecked her economy (and military) with her redistributionist policies. Saber rattling over the Falklands distracts the sheeple from their real problems (her).That sounds unfortunately familiar.
TiroFijo
05-06-2015, 12:10
Because de Kirchner is a piece of shit socialist who has wrecked her economy (and military) with her redistributionist policies. Saber rattling over the Falklands distracts the sheeple from their real problems (her).
That is true,
But the smoke I was referring to are the claimed "worries" of UK over an "increased risk of invasion" to the islands, something that is really far fetched for anybody with a modicum of knowledge of the situation (that I'm sure the UK has) and a sane head.