Argentine Invasion Of Islands? Britain Increases Force.

[Pensador]

Stupidity is obviously contagious. I guess Britain is expecting the Argentine army to take buses to Santiago and from there fly via LAN to Port Stanley. Because today, that is the only way they can get there.

LOL

 

[Pensador]

Stupidity is obviously contagious. I guess Britain is expecting the Argentine army to take buses to Santiago and from there fly via LAN to Port Stanley. Because today, that is the only way they can get there.

A MadMax Argentinian invasion team came to my mind when reading this. Remember the scene with all the pieced together cars, trucks and buses racing across the terrain to fight. Maybe they could strap some rafts to the side of this...

And paddle it all they way there.

 

[Matt84]

Do not underestimate the United and Organized Argentine Navy, here pictured launching attack on the Seabourn Quest.

Notice this time around the vessels are Industria Argentina

Yey! One finally made it to the water, but he's going West to the sewer, not East to the South Atlantic, even though his vessel is perfectly seaworthy.

 

[Pensador]

I think they forgot their winter apparel again too.

 

[camberiu]

These jokes are funny, but people sometimes forget that back in 1982, Argentina had the most powerful and capable navy of the southern hemisphere.

 

[Pensador]

These jokes are funny, but people sometimes forget that back in 1982, Argentina had the most powerful and capable navy of the southern hemisphere.

My how things have changed. Makes one wonder.

 

[Matt84]

These jokes are funny, but people sometimes forget that back in 1982, Argentina had the most powerful and capable navy of the southern hemisphere.

But that war proved that indeed no, considering the fluidity and liquidity of the ocean, Argentina never had the most powerful navy of the hemisphere, Britain did (and the United States, and one could assume The Soviet Union too), it just takes a few weeks to get there.

 

[camberiu]

But that war proved that indeed no, considering the fluidity and liquidity of the ocean, Argentina never had the most powerful navy of the hemisphere, Britain did (and the United States, and one could assume The Soviet Union too), it just takes a few weeks to get there.

The Royal Navy could come, but could not stay. They had an incredibly short window to conquer the Falklands. Their supply lines were stretched to the breaking point. It was either land on the Falklands or go home. The ships could not stay there for long. They were running out of fuel, ordnance, spare parts and food. We are not talking about nuclear aircraft carriers with almost unlimited endurance here. During the cold war era, the Royal Navy was structured to operate in the North Atlantic, specifically at the GIUK gap (Greenland, Iceland and United Kingdom) to bottle up the Soviet Fleet. It was meant to always have land based air cover and be near the harbor for frequent re-supplies. To send it all the way to the South Atlantic was one hell of a gamble, specially considering that it was to operate without proper air cover (the Harrier was viewed more like a contraption or a weird science project) against a very well equipped Argentine Navy. The thing is that the bulk of the Argentine navy stayed in their harbors. We are talking about a conventional aircraft carrier (which the UK did not have), Type 42 destroyers (the same as best ships that the RN had), and modern French A69 frigates. Let's not discount the Type 209 submarine, that excluding speed and endurance, outclassed the British nuclear subs on everything else. But it all stayed docked, with the exception of the WWII light cruiser, General Belgrano. The Type 209 performed brilliantly and it alone could have sunk half of the RN task force, but they armed the torpedoes wrong.
Had the Argentines handled things differently, it could have turned really ugly really fast for the RN.

 

[Matt84]

Then it's a good thing they had Chile to land and get supplies.
So why did the fleet stay docked? lack of fuel?
I genuinely don't know or can imagine a reason beyond the chance that the whole war was really meant as a distraction from the get go.

 

[camberiu]

Then it's a good thing they had Chile to land and get supplies.
So why did the fleet stay docked? lack of fuel?
I genuinely don't know or can imagine a reason beyond the chance that the whole war was really meant as a distraction from the get go.

There is no way Chile in 1982 had the infrastructure to service and re-supply the bulk of the British fleet. Also, officially, Chile was neutral in the conflict.
No one knows for sure why the Argentine fleet stayed docked. I think the main reason was that Argentina simply did not expect the British to respond the way they did. Also, I think in line with the traditional Argentine patrimonialistic view of things, the Argentine navy ships were above all monuments, status symbols of Argentine "superiority" and "supremacy" in the region. So when the RN came, they Argentine leaders were just too scared to put their ships out to sea and face the possibility of being destroyed.