Britain Strengthens Falklands Defense

[JamJam]

@Frenchie,

All true, but it does leave out the fact that the Brits did a hell of a good job sailing to the other side of the world to kick an invading army only a few hundred miles from their own coast. Not many other armed forces could have done that at the time.

In all wars there are lots of 'what ifs' but at the end of the day the side who makes the least mistakes wins.

 

[French jurist]

@Frenchie,

All true, but it does leave out the fact that the Brits did a hell of a good job sailing to the other side of the world to kick an invading army only a few hundred miles from their own coast. Not many other armed forces could have done that at the time.

In all wars there are lots of 'what ifs' but at the end of the day the side who makes the least mistakes wins.

Indeed, the refueling process of the planes was indeed very impressive as it's been mentioned in the other thread.

My one & only critic against the British was their weakness to Exocets (most, if not all, of the AM39 hitted a target. The MM38 did not for compatibility reasons).

It was a big mistake to try to take the islands by force for anyone who knows a bit the British mentality.

Now, if there's a solid union among the Mercosur, that Brazil & Argentina gain in power, then the Falklands could be a determining factor to give huge contracts (whether weapon related or others) to a specific country. Pragmatism is the key...

 

[camberiu]

Indeed, the Argentinean strategy had many defects, and they face a British fleet which was also not prepared to deal with Exocets.

No one was prepared to deal with Exorcets at the time. It was the first time such type of weapon had ever been used in combat, and Argentina had acquired it right before the war broke out. The destructive power and effectiveness of airplane launched sea skimming anti-ship missiles stunned the whole world (even the French). Doctrines to deal with this new threat had to be developed on the fly. It was much more the effect of fundamental change in a way to conduct naval warfare than real incompetence from the decision makers.
The Argentinians, on the other hand, committed basic errors of execution and planning. Had they waited more for the exorcets, had they sent experienced troops instead of fresh conscripts, had they based fighters on the islands themselves, had they not messed up with the torpedos, had the airforce trained dropping bombs at low altitude, etc.....
The reality is that the odds were stacked against the British. They were operating far from home, with stretched supply lines, limited air cover, with no land base nearby, with a small amount of untested low performance fighters, and outnumbered. But they were methodical, disciplined, organized and decisive. With all honesty, can you ever apply those same words to Argentinians, under any circumstance?

 

[JamJam]

Indeed, the refueling process of the planes was indeed very impressive as it's been mentioned in the other thread.

My one & only critic against the British was their weakness to Exocets (most, if not all, of the AM39 hitted a target. The MM38 did not for compatibility reasons).

It was a big mistake to try to take the islands by force for anyone who knows a bit the British mentality.

Now, if there's a solid union among the Mercosur, that Brazil & Argentina gain in power, then the Falklands could be a determining factor to give huge contracts (whether weapon related or others) to a specific country. Pragmatism is the key...

That would be dangerous but I don't see Brazil wanting to get involved in anything more that verbal backing, especially after the UK gets its new aircraft carries.

Would be interesting to see if the French would want to get involved as the UK and France seem to working together more in military conflicts. Probably not.

 

[camberiu]

That would be dangerous but I don't see Brazil wanting to get involved in anything more that verbal backing, especially after the UK gets its new aircraft carries.

With this current administration, I doubt it. Also, not many Brazilians (or most South Americans) are willing to shed blood for Argentinians. It would be a hell of a political gamble to send young Brazilians to die for Argentinians.

 

[French jurist]

Would be interesting to see if the French would want to get involved as the UK and France seem to working together more in military conflicts. Probably not.

Tricky question (reflected nowadays by the Indian Rafale deal... another reason for the Brits to hate us, lol... not signed yet though).

It's the same as asking what the British would do if France was entering into a conflict against Pakistan (pure example) and UK was the main weapons provider of Pakistan. Would UK give codes to save French lives?

British/French relations are complex (love/hate to some point). France remembers Mers-El-Kebir but also remembers WW1+2 (not even mentioning the fact that British bombers during WW2 were the ones flying the lowest, taking big risks, to save as many French civilian lives as possible).

Ironically, I consider that France & UK definitely lost the status of an Empire together, in 1956 (Suez).

Now, there's another big similarity between both countries: the remains of our respective empires throughout the world (all those small islands everywhere). With the 200 miles legal change (maritime law), France has strictly no interest that UK loses les Malouines by force.

Right now, the US + UK are backing France in Mali btw.

Those small/medium sized conflicts are interesting (except for the widows & the mothers losing their son) for all their implications.

 

[camberiu]

Tricky question (reflected nowadays by the Indian Rafale deal... another reason for the Brits to hate us, lol... not signed yet though).

Yes, specially considering the current Scorpene submarine deal with Brazil, plus the pending Rafale and FREMM frigate deals also with Brazil. I'd like to see how much loyalty is really there once money begins to talk.

 

[French jurist]

Yes, specially considering the current Scorpene submarine deal with Brazil, plus the pending Rafale and FREMM frigate deals also with Brazil. I'd like to see how much loyalty is really there once money begins to talk.

The Rafale deal doesn't smell too good with Brazil (didn't check lately though).
As usual, France spends a lot of money to do things its own way & to produce a plane nobody will buy, lol. Typically French.

 

[camberiu]

The Rafale deal doesn't smell too good with Brazil (didn't check lately though).
As usual, France spends a lot of money to do things its own way & to produce a plane nobody will buy, lol. Typically French.

Now once again we will disagree about France. Your country has a very long success record in terms of military aircraft, including the Mirage (III, 50, F1 and 2000). The Atlantic, the super eterdard, the Aplha Jet and much more.
The Rafale is a fine plane. it is not selling simply because it is so freaking expense to operate.

 

[French jurist]

Now once again we will disagree about France. Your country has a very long success record in terms of military aircraft, including the Mirage (III, 50, F1 and 2000). The Atlantic, the super eterdard, the Aplha Jet and much more.
The Rafale is a fine plane. it is not selling simply because it is so freaking expense to operate.

We don't disagree, the Rafale is a good plane.

The Mirage F1 also to make haircuts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaXTKQcAwJM