Posted on 09/02/2013 8:08:18 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
The warning came from a top Tory after MPs backed down over joining a missile strike at Syria.
Former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind said the South Americans could stage a second invasion because the UK showed it was unwilling to go to war.
Mr Rifkind blamed the Labour leader for failing to back David Cameron’s missile offensive against Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad. Sir Malcolm, 67, said: “This will not affect our determination to defend the Falklands.
“But that had better be made clear to the Argentin-ian government, especially by Mr Miliband.”
Prime Minister David Cameron, 46, was defeated after Mr Miliband, 43, withdrew his support for intervention last week.
Tory MP Andrew Rosindell, 47, added: “It is clear that Labour played politics with Syria, using it as a tool to wound Cameron.
“But if it has undermined the executive’s right to take military action in the national interest without the need to consult Parliament, it could have a serious impact on the Falklands.”
Assad is accused of launching chemical weapons in Syria, killing 1,400 people.
Meanwhile US Secretary of State John Kerry, 69, said they now had evidence sarin gas was used.
Oh, no one cares about the Maldives! [/s]
If he loses Britain, where would it be?
His brother David is a far more impressive figure...but I guess he wasn't acceptable to the Maoists who run the party.
 |
 |
 America demands Justice for the Fallen of Benghazi! |
 |
 |
Only after massive increases in defense expenditures. The Argies are still equipped mainly with Skyhawks. The odd thing is that Britain would probably be better off positioning most of its military there (including some of its nukes), since that is the only place in the world where British territorial integrity is seriously threatened. That would certainly deter the Argies. It would also lay the basis for a large scale settlement of the Falklands. An island with 3m people on it (vs the 3K currently there) would provide large numbers of conscripts to repel any Argie attack.
Britain has an interest in defending the Falklands. But there is no reason for England—or the U.S.—to get involved with helping the terrorists in Syria.
The idea that anyone thinks Britain won’t defend itself because it won’t get involved in somebody else’s problems is so idiotic that perhaps only Rifkind could have thought it up. That’s like suggesting the Golan Heights will be invaded by Assad because the Israelis have destroyed their own credibility by not punishing the man for killing Sunni Arabs.
Actually, given how Britain might not have been able to retake the islands without considerable US assistance, this time around obama will be looking for payback.
Uhm - don’t you mean the Malvinas? The Maldives are in the Indian Ocean I believe.
Britain has a little running problem with Gibraltar, too
Tell it to Obama
the UK ha no interests in Syria
Spain can overrun Gibraltar any time it wants to. The reason it refrains from doing so is expulsion from NATO and the EU. Not to mention the fact that Britain is very close by and can take it back at will, mainly on the basis of military expenditures that are 5x Spain's. Falklands is expensive to retake if overrun because it is so far away, but Britain should have no problem doing it (Britain's mil expenditures are 20x Argentina's). The problem is politics. The 3K or so islanders don't exert a lot of political pull, and sure as heck don't have any economic weight.
It's a lot simpler to hand it back to the Argies, which is what Thatcher's administration was trying to do when the Argies attacked. If Britain found it palatable to hand Hong Kong, a bustling and prosperous metropolis of 6m people, back to the Chinese, it should come as no surprise that they've been trying to do something similar with respect to the Falklands and Gibraltar for decades. The difference is that while Hong Kong can probably not be recovered from a Chinese attack without the loss of hundreds of thousands of British lives, Gibraltar and the Falklands probably can.
Argentina’s military is decrepit and falling apart with no money. They couldn’t face off against even 1 Brit ship today
From Wikipedia more or less accurate I think
In total there are 78 commissioned ships in the Royal navy. 18 of the commissioned vessels are major surface combatants (5 guided missile destroyers and 13 frigates) and 11 are nuclear-powered submarines (4 ballistic missile submarines and 7 fleet submarines). In addition the Navy possesses an aircraft carrier (though without fixed-wing aircraft), an amphibious assault ship, two amphibious transport docks, 15 mine countermeasures vessels, 24 patrol vessels, 4 survey vessels and two historic warships (Victory and Bristol). The total displacement of the Royal Navy is approximately 340,000 tonnes (or 775,000 tonnes including the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and Royal Marines).
____________________________________________________________________________
Most European Militaries are seen as a job creation mechanism not as a tool of the government to kill people and destroy things.
The Brits won’t nuke the Falklands. There are not a lot of other realistic options. They don’t have a fully armed aircraft carrier group. They can’t do much of anything without the help of the US Navy.
Sorry, but that’s crap. Whilst we have certainly reduced the RN far too much, the idea we’d have to rely on your navy is nonsense.
America gave the UK help in 1982, and we thank you for it, but frankly it has been exaggerated. Certainly the myth that we couldn’t have won the war without it is nonsense.
Also, There really wasn’t a British military presence
before the first Falkland war- they now have:
1200 army personnel
2 war ships- (destroyer and a cutter)
an expanded airfield with a detachment of RAF Tornado
fighter bombers-(4)
a reinforced company of Royal Marines
a couple of Sea-king helicopters
Air defense weapons
And last- a rapid response force is in place if they get
a warning of a large buildup of Argentine forces
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.