Falkland Islanders to hold referendum over sovereignty

[N35t0r]

It worked in 1982... from only 18 miles distance.

The Brits have to know the location of every single vehicle of appropriate size.

If we tried now, we wouldn't even get to the islands. And if we did, we'd probably stumble upon one of the minefields we so graciously left behind.

[Hauldren Collider]

They'd invade us if they were nice guys

I don't think Chile or Brazil would ever invade. First, it's a logistical nightmare, and second, we're still Brazil's third largest trade partner, even after the heavy restrictions set by our government for the past couple of years.

I don't think it is likely, I just think that when it comes to defense and foreign policy, you can't make any assumptions about the future.

[Sava]

Also, you can't hit subs with exocets.

You also can't land amphibious IFV's from a submarine. Some LCS is going to have to get close to the shore to support any serious landing. Small teams are perfectly capable of neutralizing static launch sites and intercepting larger mobile platforms. But at 400 lbs, you could launch an ASM from small truck or SUV.

British subs have tomahawks, right? You could blow up their airbases and their joke of a fleet with cruise missiles from that single sub before they knew what hit them.

How about every single technical?

Hell, you could rig a Russian Sunburn in a structure the size of a McDonald's.

Good luck shooting down that at Mach 3.

[Sava]

If we tried now, we wouldn't even get to the islands. And if we did, we'd probably stumble upon one of the minefields we so graciously left behind.

You don't need to hold the islands. You just need to make it cost the Brits a few billion pounds.

[kentonio]

Sava, there is basically no way they could even get to the islands. Our air superiority would be absolute, and I'm not saying that because of nationalistic bias. Anything they put in the air would be burning on the ground before it got anywhere near our shipping, and no landing craft would get anywhere near the islands. If they did manage to sneak a commando squad to the islands there's a large garrison of marines who would stop that invasion dead in the water. It's just not a plausible scenario any more.

[Hauldren Collider]

You also can't land amphibious IFV's from a submarine. Some LCS is going to have to get close to the shore to support any serious landing. Small teams are perfectly capable of neutralizing static launch sites and intercepting larger mobile platforms. But at 400 lbs, you could launch an ASM from small truck or SUV.

How about every single technical?

Hell, you could rig a Russian Sunburn in a structure the size of a McDonald's.

Good luck shooting down that at Mach 3.

I think you are missing my point. Any hypothetical Argentinian invasion force could be crippled by British forces already deployed.

[kentonio]

Also Argentina doesn't have Sunburns.

Current Operators

People's Republic of China
Russia
Vietnam
India
Iran

[snoopy369]

I think Sava is suggesting guerilla tactics rather than an invasion. I don't know that Argentina has the desire, not to mention capability, to do something like that; but his point is valid, that if they really wanted to, they probably could do some serious damage to the Falklands and/or British shipping interests. Of course, then Britain could just invade Buenos Aires...

[kentonio]

His guerilla tactics all seem to stem from the idea of Argentinians making it to the islands in the first place.

[snoopy369]

Kon-Tiki anyone?

[Jon Miller]

They'd invade us if they were nice guys

I don't think Chile or Brazil would ever invade. First, it's a logistical nightmare, and second, we're still Brazil's third largest trade partner, even after the heavy restrictions set by our government for the past couple of years.

My impression from Chile is that they are more concerned about you invading them.

JM

[MRT144]

You know, if the Argentinians do attack the Falklands again, you could always invoke article 5 of NATO...If I were Argentina, that would make me very leery of saber rattling.

Get your war boner on.

[PLATO]

I think Sava is suggesting guerilla tactics rather than an invasion. I don't know that Argentina has the desire, not to mention capability, to do something like that; but his point is valid, that if they really wanted to, they probably could do some serious damage to the Falklands and/or British shipping interests. Of course, then Britain could just invade Buenos Aires...

I guess it depends on what you mean by "serious". In the greater scheme of things Argentina is a flea bite of a challenge for the Brits. As usual, the logistics could be a strain for any type of lengthy operations, but the U.S. would make sure they had what they need.

[N35t0r]

Anything they put in the air would be burning on the ground before it got anywhere near our shipping,

Anything we put in the air will probably be in the air because it was burning in the ground a moment before. (This probably also applies, partly at least, to our civil airliners)

Jon: 20 years ago, probably. We even were this close to going to war with them (there's mined passes over the andes, on both sides, even today) over some glorified rocks around cape horn. I don't think even Uruguay is worried about us invading them. At least, I think they're more worried about all the argentine tourists, and these past couple of years haven't been good...

[Hauldren Collider]

Get your war boner on.

Really, it's the opposite, by threatening stuff like that, there would never be a war.