Round 2 ?

[tombogan03884]

I'm surprised "Lewrockwell" or one of the other tin foil sites hasn't picked up on this and tried to blame it on the US or the "World Zionist conspiracy". It is so obviously a ploy by "NeoCon Trotskyite" reactionaries.
Then again, maybe the Argies just need their arses kicked again.

UK to "robustly" defend Falklands, Argentina seeks U.N. aid

http://news.yahoo.com/uk-robustly-defend-falklands-argentina-seeks-u-n-234654815.html

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - London's U.N. ambassador warned Argentina on Friday that Britain would "robustly" defend the Falkland Islands if necessary, but added that his country remained open to bilateral talks with Buenos Aires on any issue except the islands' sovereignty.

British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant was speaking to reporters after Argentine Foreign Minister Hector Timerman met with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the president of the U.N. Security Council to ask for help in stopping what he said was Britain's "militarization of the South Atlantic."

"We are not looking to increase the war of words, but clearly if there is an attempt to take advantage of the 30th anniversary of the Falklands war by Argentina, then we will obviously defend our position and defend it robustly," Lyall Grant said.

The British envoy's comments came a day after British Prime Minister David Cameron vowed to defend the islands "properly.

Britain and Argentina fought a 10-week war over the Falkland Islands in 1982 after Argentina invaded the South Atlantic islands, which the Argentines call Las Malvinas. London has refused to start talks on sovereignty with Buenos Aires unless the 3,000 islanders want them.

Tensions have risen before the 30th anniversary of the Falklands conflict this year. Oil exploration by British companies off the islands has raised the stakes.

Timerman repeated accusations that surfaced in the British press about a nuclear submarine being sent to the South Atlantic. He said that bringing atomic weapons into the region violated Latin America's treaty banning the presence, pursuit or use of nuclear weapons.

Britain has signed two protocols to the 1967 treaty, according to which it vowed to support the maintenance of a nuclear-weapons-free zone across Latin America.

BRITAIN OPEN TO BILATERAL TALKS

Lyall Grant denied militarizing the region and said Britain had a "purely defensive military posture" for the islands. He neither confirmed nor denied reports a nuclear-armed British submarine is lurking around the Falklands.

"We do not comment on the disposition of nuclear weapons, submarines, et cetera," he said.

"But it is well known that ... as part of our overall defensive posture, there are submarines on patrol all around the world at any time. So it's not a question of anything new in what he (Timerman) is suggesting," Lyall Grant added.

Timerman said he welcomed Ban's offer to mediate in the dispute.

"Argentina agrees that the secretary-general should begin conversations with both countries so that we can sit down at a table ... to resolve this conflict in a peaceful way," he said.

Security Council action on Argentina's complaint is very unlikely given Britain's veto on the 15-nation panel.

Lyall Grant said Britain was open to bilateral talks with Argentina and there was no need for "third-party mediation." He said it was Buenos Aires, not London, that was preventing talks aimed at defusing the tensions between the two nations.

"We have always been open to dialogue with Argentina. ... We had a dialogue with Argentina and they broke it off," he said, adding that "we are not going to discuss sovereignty."

Lyall Grant said one of the problems in restarting talks with Buenos Aires was a 1994 amendment to Argentina's constitution requiring that the government seek sovereignty over the islands.

"We have made clear that we are not prepared to go into talks with the precondition that has been set in the Argentine constitution and discuss sovereignty over the heads of the people of the Falkland Islands," he said.

Argentina has also condemned British plans to deploy one of its most advanced destroyers, HMS Dauntless, to the area. It has also criticized the posting of Prince William, second in line to the British throne, to the islands as a military search-and-rescue pilot.

[santahog]

The Britts own it. The Britts proved it. The Britts need oil too.. Good ting for the Britts, (and BP) that the Conservatives got to pick the PM tis time..
Lift a pint to the Britts!..

Bet they stay off the phone this time...

Wasn't the last time the first time a nuke sub sunk a ship in combat?

[alfsauve]

"We are not looking to increase the war of words, but clearly if there is an attempt to take advantage of the 30th anniversary of the Falklands war by Argentina, then we will obviously defend our position and defend it robustly," Lyall Grant said.

Actually this would be the third battle of the Falklands.   The first "Battle of the Falklands" wasn't so much a battle to defend the territory as it was a WWI  Naval battle.


When the 82 action took place I happened to be flying into Dallas' Love Field.   In the atrium was (and may still be) a very large world map done done in colored terrazzo with brass inlay for country outlines and legends.  One of the few islands that was labeled, oddly enough  was the Falklands.    I stood there, trying to point out to those walking by the significance.  Sadly few were aware of the ongoing fight at the time.

[twyacht]

If I am remembering accurately, the Arg's had FNFAL's, as did the Brits, and a French Exocet missle hit a British cruiser? But in the end, the Brits prevailed.

Brits holding on to it's remaining "Empire".....

Quiet desperation is the English way,....
Pink Floyd

[tombogan03884]

Both sides used FN FAL's.
French made Excocet missiles and Argentine bombs hit several British ships, causing the loss of 5.

http://www.naval-history.net/F62brshipslost.htm

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

The ARA General Belgrano was an Argentine Navy light cruiser in service from 1951 until 1982. Formerly the USS Phoenix (CL-46), she saw action in the Pacific theater of World War II before being sold to Argentina. After almost 31 years of service, she was sunk during the Falklands War (Spanish: Guerra de las Malvinas) by the Royal Navy submarine HMS Conqueror with the loss of 323 lives. Losses from the Belgrano totalled just over half of Argentine deaths in the Falklands War.

She is the only ship ever to have been sunk in anger by a nuclear-powered submarine[1] and the second sunk in action by any type of submarine since World War II, the first being the Indian frigate INS Khukri by the Pakistani Hangor during the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War.

[Sponsor]

[Ping]

Quiet desperation is the English way,....
Pink Floyd

Too funny twyacht.


I think Argentina will get slaughtered if they try something this time. Big difference wth both using FN FAL's in the 80's to what is in Britain's Arsenal today.

[tombogan03884]

Quiet desperation is the English way,....
Pink Floyd

Too funny twyacht.


I think Argentina will get slaughtered if they try something this time. Big difference wth both using FN FAL's in the 80's to what is in Britain's Arsenal today.

Britian no longer has half the ability to project power they had in 82.
And what they had then was just barely enough, it was damned close.

[sledgemeister]

Britian no longer has half the ability to project power they had in 82.
And what they had then was just barely enough, it was damned close.

Spot on, they also had Thatcher, and she was no ones biatch, unlike the poor excuse for left over sperm they have now.

[Pathfinder]

Britian no longer has half the ability to project power they had in 82.
And what they had then was just barely enough, it was damned close.

Spot on, they also had Thatcher, and she was no ones biatch, unlike the poor excuse for left over sperm they have now.

All very true, and probably major factors in a shooting war. However, Argentina didn't get enough of being totally effed up under the generals, and they are back there, as well as cozying up to Chavez these days.

Also, at least the Brits have some real world combat experience these days from Iraq. The Argentinians? Not so much. That will make a difference.

[tombogan03884]

All very true, and probably major factors in a shooting war. However, Argentina didn't get enough of being totally effed up under the generals, and they are back there, as well as cozying up to Chavez these days.

Also, at least the Brits have some real world combat experience these days from Iraq. The Argentinians? Not so much. That will make a difference.

Only if they can get there.