Then you need to go and find the myriad of British pubs around the world that seve British pub grub including Fish and chips.

There was a popular British Fish n' Chip restaurant in Moscow before the Mafia shut it down.

All talking about the Navy and the Air force are Ok.

But it is Boots on the ground that would be needed to win any war. All that matters how you get them boots there (Navy) and how you defend them (RAF).

Also what boots would be able to sent there.?
The army is already very stretched due to it deployments to Afganhistian and Iraq.

As August posted on the the first page of this thread i hope also that the USA would help out with more than Sat Imagery should any war come about.
the buddy buddy system and all.;)

Thats the point with the Navy and Armies current commitments in Afghanistan and Iraq I don't think we have the resources avaliable to tackle and invasion of the Falkland Islands/Malvinas. Really the Argentinian junta has never had such an opportunity before, the Royal Navy is weeker than it was in 1982 and the armed forces are streched to their absolute limit. Senior chiefs said themselves that there were no reserves for any sudden crisis, at home in the UK or abroad. All units that are in the UK are resting, everything else is deployed or in the process of being deployed to over sea operations!

Well the is only one choice then.
Spend more on Forces and spend more on recruiting people.
We need to building up are armed forces NOT reducing funding and cutting numbers.

I think maybe we should go down there and finnish this argument off once and for all, one single all out ballte no help argentina v britain one on one and lets see the out come.

Im placing my bets on the UK.

Are you thinking in a Rocky Balboa vs. Ivan Drago scenario?

There is no junta in Argentina anymore, its a democracy.
The majority of Navy and RAF are free for debloyment. Your Army of 100.000 has some 15.000 troops overseas, im sure there are no troops on rest if someone attacks your territory. This scenario is unlikely but if it would come true the British would dominate Sea-Air-Land, period.
The Argentians had a better chance in -82, with little better planning, preparation and leadership they would have won.

Actually the regaining of the Malvinas was well planned but started early. Argentina originally wanted to start the operation in September '82 or something because the current conscripts would be more experienced by then and the weather would be more favourable. Furthermore the troops that would have been most suitable to fight in the Malvinas/Falklands terrain were left at the continent to defend against Chile in the southern Andes. I believe Argentina would have had a better chance in the Falklands (ground) war if these mountain troops could or would have been deployed to the islands.

I stand corrected on the government then. Nothing is ever certain in war, period. You can never be sure that you will win, by doing so you underestimate your foe. That leads to carelessness and unecessary losses, or worse!

Yep lets get nuking. :D :up: :rock:

Trust you :lol:


http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/604...o07qhy9zv2.gif http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/873...smilie2fw8.gif http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/1...egunsdutv0.gif


http://imgcash1.imageshack.us/img231...opcorn3dv3.gif


http://imgcash6.imageshack.us/img517...georgeevz7.gif http://imgcash6.imageshack.us/img91/...britaincj6.gif

who is going to be nuked??

don´t kill me just because I hate fish & chips...

I know I'm being sarcastic.

Lighten up people it's not all doom and gloom.

I don't think STEED would advocate something as serious as a nuclear strike just because you didn't like fish & chips :nope:

He's not that bad you know.....I reckon he'd advocate something much less destructive or severe....simple castration perhaps :hmm:

:lol:

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Next on the list, France, for "dissing" the English fry up!