Britain Strengthens Falklands Defense

Since this is supposed to be an expat forum, I hope we represent many diverse countries.

Here's the count for French victims of that "dictadura".

That's 18 victims (100% due to the "junta" -> 0% for the so-called "left wing terrorists".).
http://www.embafranc.../plaquette2.pdf

In each country, we have victims, would be nice to get a good overview with serious sources.

Alice Domont & Léonie Duquet (the two ederly nuns) of course are the most symbolical. They are no "collateral damage" and they are not isolated cases, they got killed being considered as "subversive" (thanks to Alfredo Astiz who surrendered not firing a single shot at the Brits... He was better at killing old nuns).
 
It could be this story about an audacious raid by the SAS in Rio Grande which is being discussed:
http://www.telegraph...ut-Exocets.html

and this:
http://metro.co.uk/2012/05/14/how-operation-plum-duff-remains-one-of-the-most-secretive-military-missions-434231/
 
Anyone know 21 Falklanders willing to vote against their interests?

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics-and-election/falklands-referendum/voters-against-british-sovereignty

We could clean up! :D
 
Hate to be dramatic, but expect a few surprises from CFK as the referendum nears.
That's all I'm saying.
 
This doesn't bode well for the ARA:
1653651w300.jpg
 
Well, leaving all the political considerations aside, Venezuela lacks a blue water navy. This means that the Venezuelan navy is unable operate far from its territorial waters. If you check on the map, you will see that the Venezuelan coast is thousands of miles away from the Falklands. Therefore, the type of military help Venezuela could give if a conflict with the UK over the Falklands were ever to arise would be very limited at best.

Still trying to catch up on this thread. Venezuelan Navy does have some useful small modern Italian frigates but this is irrelevant - what they do have is 24 of the very latest and best multipurpose jets around and which they plan to double I read. Sukhoi Su-30

RN / RAF would have a very hard time against them at least on a 1 v 1 basis I understand. One of the regular posters on here is ex military flier and has written about them and will be much more informed. Also the Venezuelan army has some of the latest army hardware which could be "lent out". Maybe these points have already been made so apologies if this has been said - ill read on :)
 
@ Frenchie. Soviets were fully involved. Where were you in the Cold War? It turned Hot War periodically by proxy - so giving the military-industrial complexes the opportunity to try out latest hardware and a first class marketing opportunity to rack up sales. The Falklands conflict was a great opportunity for all of the then world powers to both observe and to push own interests - for example there is little doubt that French interests were both complex and complicated in dealings with both the British and the Argentine Governments. The Soviets were supplying Argentina with limited hardware both directly and indirectly via Brazil.

See this which is interesting even if you dont swallow all of its hype - by a Russian journalist. But surely there can be little doubt about soviet engagement with Argentina. As for his idea that the Falklands conflict was the first outbreak of the War for the Antartic then we will have to wait and see. :huh:

http://en.mercopress...in-malvinas-war

Just because Galtieri was CIA trained (or possibly precisely because he was) didnt mean that he wouldnt pursue his interests where necessary by dealing with the Soviets :D

BTW UK payback for USA support (which was nuanced also) came soon after with HMS Conqueror and Operation Barmaid - http://www.telegraph...-on-Russia.html another example of USA using UK as a proxy

Here is the text from the Mercopress piece



Monday, May 31st 2010- 04:14 UTC
Russian book confirms Soviet intelligence support for Argentina in Malvinas war


Some interesting historical data about the Falkland Islands war and Soviet intelligence support to Argentina has emerged from a book by a Russian journalist and researcher, who as the son of a former URSS diplomat expert in trade affairs spent most of his youth in Latinamerica, Cuba, Ecuador and Uruguay.

Sergey Brilev, currently Deputy Director of Rossiya Television, RTR, begun by writing a book on his Latinamerican experience titled “Fidel, Football and the Malvinas”, where he unveils for his Russian readers a still much unknown and mysterious continent.
Although only ten when the 1982 conflict, and living in Uruguay, on writing the book he was much intrigued about how involved the Soviets were, naturally motivated on that old proverb, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” particularly since Argentina (and Uruguay) did not follow on the US grains sales embargo to the Soviet Union “punished” believe it or not for invading Afghanistan in 1979.
Brilev writes that in spite of the risks of a world conflict because of Soviet support in the war involving a NATO member, Moscow handed to the Argentines and their most ‘anti-communist’ leader General Leopolodo Galtieri crucial satellite information which helped with some of the greatest coups of the Argentine forces in sinking Royal navy vessels.
Apparently on May 15, 1982 the Soviets launched the Kosmos 1365 satellite which was positioned over the South Atlantic thus supplying strategic information about the British Task Force and its position to the Argentines. Brilev had first read the news in a Time magazine during the conflict and it was intriguing that the launch occurred at the height of the war and a month and a half following the Argentina landing in the Falklands.
Brilev tried access to Moscow archives but it was “classified information”. He therefore contacted top Soviet military officers from the eighties. Brilev mentions General Nikolai Leonov, who was then head of KGB analytical services and General Valentin Varennikov, first deputy chief of Soviet forces in Moscow. Both confirmed the provision of regular intelligence aid to the Argentines.
Brilev in the book argues that the Argentines were able to locate and sink HMS Sheffield with the Navy Mirages and Exocet missiles thanks to information from Soviet satellites already in orbit over the South Atlantic. The Argentine version of a Neptune aircraft detecting the Royal Navy frigate sounds “too patriotic”, says the Russian writer who adds that that model of naval search aircraft was too already old and had serious maintenance problems.
“I’m convinced the strategic information for the sinking of the Sheffield was supplied by the Soviets”, he insists.
Another Argentine coup, on May 25th, the sinking of HMS Coventry and the Atlantic Conveyor which went down with 15.000 tons of crucial equipment, Brilev also attributes to strategic info from the Kosmos-1365.
However Soviet support was not limited to satellite intelligence. Brilev states that the Soviets used TU-95 intelligence gathering aircrafts to follow the Task Force as it sailed south in an area from the Gulf of Biscay to the Equator. Sometimes the aircrafts would fly as low as 30/40 metres above the Royal Navy vessels. Soviet Colonel Georguiy Bulbenkov confirmed his participation as pilot in these low flight incursions.
But as a Russian who lived the collapse of the Soviet Union Brilev is also interested in trying to sort out how the former superpower under Communist rule until 1991 melted. Who decided in the Kremlin on such a delicate decision as spying on the British navy intent in recovering the Falklands and in support of a ferociously anti-communist regime?
His search for that answer took him all the way to Mikhail Gorbachov who in the eighties was a member of the Communist party Political Bureau which made all major strategic decisions. But Gorbachov was plain clear: “there was never a decision from the Central Committee to collaborate with the Argentine military Junta”.
Brilev concludes that in the early eighties the Soviet Union power structure was already under strain. The strategic aid was a decision of the Generals at military command level as a logical support for “the enemy of my enemy”. He then recalls that only two countries did not join the 1979 US sponsored international embargo on the Soviet Union, Argentina and Uruguay and “the military were very thankful for that”.

Finally Brilev says that as a school boy in South America he was always intrigued by the silver triangles at the bottom of the official Argentina and Chilean maps, which are marked as possessions of those countries. It’s hard to understand because after all “it was a Russian who in 1820 discovered Antarctica”.
Brilev finally states that in coming years the Falklands conflict will also be remembered as “the first armed incident of a major dispute in Antarctica”. The Russian researcher arrives at this conclusion following his visits to the Argentine, Chilean, British and Russian Antarctic institutes.
“In a couple of decades we’ll be facing a situation where the traditional sources of minerals and energy will be exhausted and the last great important reserves are in the Antarctic continent: that is why the Falklands, as I see it, will be considered a first major conflict over Antarctica”. The Falklands after all “are the natural and privileged gate to Antarctica”.
 
Still trying to catch up on this thread. Venezuelan Navy does have some useful small modern Italian frigates but this is irrelevant - what they do have is 24 of the very latest and best multipurpose jets around and which they plan to double I read. Sukhoi Su-30

The Su-30 is arguably the post powerful combat aircraft in operation in all of the Americas (North and South). However, the issue of these airplanes somehow taking part on a new conflict over the Falklands is very complex.

Let's set aside for the moment a few important factors, like the fact that all officers in the Venezuelan Air Force are political appointees and cronies of Chavez and that the FAV as an institution is NOT a meritocracy. Also, let's not take into account that during the International CRUZEX III exercise, held in Brazil on 2006, the FAV did not impress anyone. The FAV pilots, despite having the best planes on the event, performed rather poorly, displaying a complete lack of doctrine, imagination, flexibility and initiative and having lower scores and kill ratios than most of the other competitors. Maybe that had something to do with the "meritocracy" issue that plagues the FAV.

At any rate, let's leave all of that aside and let's focus on "simpler" problems:

1) The Su-30 has a Maximum range of 3,600 km. On a straight line, the distance between Caracas and Buenos Aires is of over 5,000 km.
2) On a case of a conflict for the Falklands, how many countries sitting in between Venezuela and Argentina would freely open their airspace for the Venezuelan air force to help on the conflict? Would te Venezuelan planes shoot their way to Argentina? Even if they did, how would the problem #1 be addressed?
3) Combat planes, specially something like the Su-30 are extremely complex machines, that require lots of very frequent maintenance and repair work to remain operation. A whole logistics infrastructure of tools, people and parts needs to exist around the planes for them to operate at any meaningful length of time. So, even if the FAV found a way to get the planes themselves to Argentina, the whole infrastructure that needs to exist for these planes to operate would also need to be moved. That on itself is a herculean task. We are talking about hundreds of people, tons of parts that would need to be moved from Venezuela to Argentina in order for those planes to be abe to actually "help" on any conflict.
 
For your "simple problems" then there are some simple solutions which do seem rather obvious

problem 1 solved by preplanning and provision of an advanced base or bases on Argentine soil. Su-30 range is well within distance Patagonia to the Falklands and in any case there is inflight refueling

problem 2 solved by solution 1 and preplanning such as either refuelling by landing en route organised between Mercosur "friends" and/or shipping the aircraft and or refuelling

"What is of the greatest importance in war is extraordinary speed: One cannot afford to neglect opportunity."

Clearly there are logistical problems but some more respect fo the Argentines (and Venezuelans) ability to sort these out if there is the political (and military) will is deserved IMHO

As for strategy - Lets consider that military planning has to deal with both possibilities and probabilities and the capacity to innovate.

"In conflict, straightforward actions generally lead to engagement, surprising actions generally lead to victory."

As for the fighting qualities of particular nations pilots then this is always going to be difficult to determine until the time comes and let's hope it doesn't. It is predictable that Russian involvement will follow from them wanting to sell more of their excellent aircraft as I said previously so they will be likely to be giving logistical and other practical support as well including training. In any case the Soviets didnt put up politically unreliable aircrew in their strike aircraft as far as I know and that make them any less effective. Try not to let idealogical hangups get in the way of rational military assessment :)

"To ... not prepare is the greatest of crimes; to be prepared beforehand for any contingency is the greatest of virtues."

I'm with the idea that the Argentine-Venezuelan pact and the reorientation of Mercosur from an economic to a political and possibly military entity and the inclusion of further south America like minded states has ramifications which the UK is unlikely to be dismissing in military terms as readily as you seem to be.

What the UK can and will do is another matter. Putting in more modern fighter aircraft plus ground etc support on the Falklands right now might be a good idea. :) Then wait and see if the order for more SU-30s for the Venezuelan air force goes ahead ;) That plus the equally or possibly even more important racked up diplomatic onslaught via the UN and regionally which is becoming well organised and directly against the UK which so far is laughably inept :p

"If an enemy has alliances, the problem is grave and the enemy's position strong; if he has no alliances, the problem is minor and the enemy's position weak."
 
Back
Top