• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Argentina Reasserts Claims To Falklands (again)

Respectfully,
1982 was a different time and a different regime in Argentina. I defer to this...

There are a few easy-to-see factors that differentiate the current military status today from that of '82:

Argentina is a democracy now, vice a military dictatorship as in '82 (this is actually a rather significant point -- and unlike what someone earlier said, Argentina is a democracy in every sense of the word, not a "democracy, sorta")
Argentina has an entirely, 100% volunteer military force now -- so conscripts wouldn't be sent to the Falklands to make cannon fodder for the Brits
Argentine military capability is completely different than in '82 -- in recent years Argentina has completely overhauled her armed services and they now present a rather impressive capability

So, should a new conflict arise in the Falklands, given the UK's current commitments elsewhere, a British victory is not automatic.

That being said, I am of the opinion that Argentina will settle for diplomatic (including economic) efforts to achieve her aims.  An armed conflict is certainly not desirable.

Logistically the UK would be hard pressed to just pluck a BN, even a TA one a plop them down there, with not much more than a light Infantry capabilty
As the great Dylan (Bob) once said..."The times. they are a changin"
 
...so now that Argentine is a legitimate democracy, they're trying to renew something that resulted in hundreds of deaths is somehow different this time?  Perhaps might not the UK play differently this time as well?

One could argue that Argentina is just having a 25th Anniverary of Los dias del Malvinas...in reality, it's a chunk of land that the Islanders have inhabited as, at their request, a UK Outer Colony constantly since 1833.

The Argentinians should have a look at:  MoveOn.org

G2G
 
Jammer I disagree with your assement of the Brit abilites to get a signaficant force to that region, I believe whole heartedly that the UK could and would win an egament to retake te Islands by force. THere still have a large Navy and the merchant transports to do it, they might not be able to moblize as quick but they could/would still win.
 
+1

The Port Stanley airfield was upgraded in the mid-80s to take Lockheed Tri-Star transports, plus anything else in that class that can haul troops. Even though there's only 1 rifle company in situ, the rest of the battalion is on short notice to move to reinforce (was based in Gibraltar, not sure where they are now). Airborne/ airmobile and Commando Brigades regularly practise 'out of area operations' to respond to threats from countries like Argentina and can be wheels up in a short period of time and headed south. Having gotten a good kicking first time around, the Royal Navy is now smarter and better equipped to deal with leading a deterrence/re-invasion. The RAF is there in small number right now but can reinforce quickly.

And just because Argentina is now a democracy doesn't mean that they won't abandon diplomacy and resort to violence to get their way. There are alot of democracies at war right now doing just that.
 
The Port Stanley runway can also handle the C-17s.  The RAF found it was cheaper to take the wings off their Tornados and fly them to the Falklands inside the C17s than arrange air-to-air refuelling.

A Battalion may not be enough to win militarily - but it would probably be sufficient to win politically - with suitable fire support.
 
HitorMiss said:
Jammer I disagree with your assement of the Brit abilites to get a signaficant force to that region, I believe whole heartedly that the UK could and would win an egament to retake te Islands by force. THere still have a large Navy and the merchant transports to do it, they might not be able to moblize as quick but they could/would still win.
I think your right. It may take a while but Brittian would inevitably come out on top
 
warspite said:
I think your right. It may take a while but Brittian would inevitably come out on top

Ahoy HMS Warspite,

While I fully respect the British military's capabilities, I do not think one must lured into a sense of complacency, just as the Czarist Russians were lured into a fatal complancecy during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 simply because they assumed that since they were a Western nation, their victory was inevitable; they paid for that dearly with the loss of much of their fleet during the Battle of Tsushima and other subsequent land battles and naval battles in the Yellow Sea, the Korean Peninsula and in Manchuria. The Argentinians probably thought about a parallel to that past war in the first Falklands conflict, since Argentina, like Japan, was closer to the Area of Operation/Objectives to be taken, while Britain, like Russia, had to send their reinforcements over a great distance to the AO; unfortunately for the Argys, this parallel didn't apply the first time.

The British were shocked out of their own complacency towards the Japanese during World War II, when HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse were sunk by Japanese land-based torpedo bombers just a couple of days after the Pearl Harbor attack; the fact that the two capital ships were destroyed AT SEA unlike the Pearl Harbor attack was an even greater shock.

I am NOT saying that the Argentinians could take on England/the West now with the same kind of versatility that Japan did in the past, but it would be wrong to assume that British victory is ASSURED, unless London uses their Tridents on Argentina, which I highly doubt. 

Even Jammer said:
Argentine military capability is completely different than in '82 -- in recent years Argentina has completely overhauled her armed services and they now present a rather impressive capability

I wish Jammer would elaborate on this more.  Still, just because the Argentinian carrier Veinticinco De Mayo is out of commission (though she didn't count much in the first Falklands conflict) and just because Argentina had an economic crisis earlier this decade doesn't mean her armed forces will be more of a pushover than in 1982.

Just a little observation.  :salute:



 
I'd be happy to elaborate.
The Argentine Air Force would potentially casue the most grief to any UK invasion force. They still would have to issue of in-flight refuelling to get to their targets, however they do still have Mirage III, IAI Dagger, and Mirage V. A small force of Mirage 2000s would round out AIr defence and long range strike capabililties.
A4M Skyhawks would take care of dedicated CAS and precision strike. One would surmize that Argentine pilots would show the same tenacity and determination they showed in 1982. If only thier armourers had their act together there would have been a lot more tragedies on the UK side.
Pucaras would not have a large role to play unless they had a foothold on the ground.

Argentine Army:

200 x TAM medium tanks
102 x SK-105 Kurassier light tanks
50 x AMX-13/105 light tanks being replace by the indigenous Patagon
40 x Panhard AML-90 reconnaissance vehicles
34 x Mowag Piranha reconnaissance vehicles
105 x VCTP infantry fighting vehicles plus variants
317 x M113 armored personnel carriers plus variants (M577,M106,M548,...)
20 x AMX Mk F3 self-propelled 155 mm artillery
15 x VCA self-propelled 155 mm artillery
100 x CITEFA Model 77 155 mm artillery
100 x 105 mm artillery
360 x 120 mm mortars
1000? x 81 & 60 mm mortars
76 x 40 mm anti aircraft cannon
150 x 30 mm anti aircraft cannon
3.1 Second Army Corps
3.1.1 2nd Armored Brigade
3.1.2 12th Jungle Brigade
3.2 Third Army Corps
3.2.1 4th Paratroopers Brigade **
3.2.2 5th Mechanized Infantry Brigade
3.2.3 8th Mountain Brigade
3.3 Fifth Army Corps
3.3.1 1st Armored Brigade
3.3.2 6th Mountain Brigade
3.3.3 9th Mechanized Infantry Brigade
3.3.4 10th Mechanized Infantry Brigade
3.3.5 11th Mechanized Infantry Brigade
3.3.6 601st Anti-Aircraft Artillery Force **

The Argentine Navy also has a dedicated Marine Corps that has been revitalized and re-equipped by the US no less!!! they Have what amounts to a Brigade+ with landing capabilties.
Current Surface fleet holdings are:

Destroyers (DDG)

Almirante Brown-class (MEKO 360)

ARA Almirante Brown (D-10)
ARA La Argentina (D-11)
ARA Heroína (D-12)
ARA Sarandí (D-13)
Hércules-class (Type 42 destroyers)

ARA Santísima Trinidad (D-2) - in reserve
Frigates (FFG) (classified by the Argentine Navy as "corvettes")

Espora-class (MEKO 140)

ARA Espora (P-41)
ARA Rosales (P-42)
ARA Spiro (P-43)
ARA Parker (P-44)
ARA Robinson (P-45)
ARA Gómez Roca (P-46)
Drummond-class (D'Estienne d'Orves class)

ARA Drummond (P-31)
ARA Guerrico (P-32)
ARA Granville (P-33)
Large Patrol Vessels

Murature-class

ARA Murature (P-20)
ARA King (P-21)
Missile Boats

ARA Intrépida (P-85)
ARA Indómita (P-85)
Patrol Boats

ARA Baradero (P-61)
ARA Barranqueras (P-62)
ARA Clorinda (P-63)
ARA Concepción del Uruguay (P-64)
Supply ship (AOR)

ARA Patagonia (B-1)
Amphibious Command Ship (LCC)

ARA Hércules (B-52) - formerly a Type 42 destroyer, reconverted to fast Marine transport and command vessel.
Amphibious Assault Vessel (LKA)

ARA Bahía San Blas (B-4)
Icebreaker (AGOS)

ARA Almirante Irizar (Q-5)

Sub-Surface holdings are:

Santa Cruz-class (TR-1700)

ARA Santa Cruz (S-41)
ARA San Juan (S-42)
Salta-class (Type 209)

ARA Salta (S-31)
1 Tactical Divers Group (Buzos Tacticos)


Given the capabilties shown here coupled with the fact that the current UK gov't cannot even secure the release of 12 RN pers held by Iran, it would seen unlikely that UK would raise no more than a diplomatic fuss if the Argentines made sabre rattling noises over the Falklands

 
I'm curious which source you used to get that current Order of Battle?
www.globalsecurity.org? www.fas.org? Those sites usually have those modern US and foreign military Orbats to a point.

Or from various reference books such as "Janes' All the World Navies, 2006-2007"? Just curious- people use cite the source for the information you just provided.
 
CougarShark said:
I'm curious which source you used to get that current Order of Battle?
www.globalsecurity.org? www.fas.org? Those sites usually have those modern US and foreign military Orbats to a point.

Or from various reference books such as "Janes' All the World Navies, 2006-2007"? Just curious- people usually cite the source for the information you just provided.

This question was directed at Jammer; sorry for the typos above (I can't edit it to due my verbal warning status).
 
These three sources will only give you a general idea of what they have, and often they will provide you conflicting info.  There are also other sources that you will have to use to verify numbers.  Sites that list Aircraft that have crashed, Insurance companies that will list naval disasters, other sites that will list wpns sales, etc.  Then you have to do all the detective work to figure out what bits of the puzzle fit where; so Janes, FAS, and/or Global Security can only give you a general idea.  Fun, Fun, Fun!
 
Jammer - that lot would never fit onto the Islands!  ;)

also don't forget that the average Argie has not got the combat experience that the Brits have gained over the last few decades (Falklands, N Ireland, Gulf 1, Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Gulf 2 and Afghanistan). Also, the competence of Argentinian troops is questionable, as the Canadian army can verify from UNPROFOR in Croatia. I would say that the British TA would be better trained and motivated.
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/30/wmalvinas30.xml

An interesting story

Alan Craig vividly remembers the morning of April 2, 1982.

 
Alan Craig had just started at university and was drinking a coffee in a café when there was a newsflash: Argentina had invaded the Falklands. "Straight away, I knew I'd be called up," he recalled.

A few days later the order came. But the café where Mr Craig was sitting was in Buenos Aires and the barracks to which he reported belonged to the Argentine military.

The Falklands veteran has strong memories of his call-up to fight against a military force from "home".

"I didn't want to go," he said. "But my father told me to do my duty. He said: 'We've never had a deserter in this family, and it's not going to happen now'.

"My mother felt rather differently, she felt as any mother must feel when her son goes to war. They fought like hell. I found out later it almost destroyed their marriage."

Mr Craig, 44, is one of an estimated 100,000 Argentines of British origin still living in Argentina. Apart from his Scottish name, he speaks word-perfect English, as well as Spanish, he loves "rugger" and shepherd's pie and his father and grandfather won decorations for service with the British armed forces in both world wars.

A coffee table in his flat in the Argentine capital is fashioned from an old drumskin from the Grenadier Guards, the regiment Mr Craig's grandfather served with during the First World War.

Perhaps most significant is his liberal use of Argentina's forbidden F-word: Falklands. In Argentina it is not used. They are instead nuestras Malvinas - our Malvinas.

Argentines regard it almost as a badge of honour to disagree on most things, but one thing is sure to unite them: a belief in their rightful claim to the Malvinas, seized by British pirates in 1833.

But Mr Craig, who lives with his wife Veronica, son Brian, 18, and daughter Samantha, 16, in a flat on the south side of Buenos Aires, was always going to be a bit different.

His grandparents emigrated from Arbroath, Scotland, in 1923. A decorated veteran of the First World War, his grandfather David wanted to leave post-war Europe.

After finishing school in 1980, Alan went on a rugby tour of Britain.

On his return in 1981 he was called up for military service. It was here that Mr Craig met Adrian Gomez-Csher, the man who would become his best friend.

"We remained firm friends throughout military service. We helped each other through it."

Little did they know that one month after their military service ended, they would be conscripted to fight in the Malvinas, where, sharing the same foxhole, they would help each other through the most terrifying experience of their lives.

As the south Atlantic winter approached along with the task force, Mr Craig was to discover how his grandfather must have felt in his First World War trench.

"We were cold, wet and hungry. Our clothes were completely inadequate for the conditions, we didn't even have an anorak at first. I had three pairs of socks which I wore all at once. Cold and miserable, and waiting: waiting for the British to come. In the first few days, I used to get into terrible fights because I said the British would come. I was sure of it.

"I knew the British, and they wouldn't let this happen without a fight." He was right. The British came nine weeks later.

Mr Craig's 7th Infantry Regiment, dug in on Mount Longdon, suffered more casualties than any other in the Argentine Army: 36 men were killed, most in a vain defence of Longdon and then Wireless Ridge against crack troops of the Parachute Regiment. Mr Craig doesn't talk of bravery, or glory: just confusion and fear.

"The British started shelling at night. You could see the tracers lighting up the sky. The Argentine artillery were bombing the British but they were falling short and hitting us. We fought overnight and then at daylight there was a pause in the fighting. We looked around us, and most of the officers had gone.

"Then the fighting began again. It was fight or run, sometimes we couldn't run so the only option was to fight. We would fight, then retreat. Fight again, retreat, working our back to Stanley, until we ran out of ammo."

A few hours later, before the British troops arrived at Stanley, the Argentine commander-in-chief, Brig Mario Menendez, agreed to surrender, ignoring Gen Galtieri's orders to fight to the death.

For many Argentine soldiers, their return to civilian society was more traumatic than the war. More Malvinas veterans, some 370, have committed suicide since June 1982 than died in the whole of the land campaign.

Mr Craig had always considered himself one of the lucky ones. "I went back to my family and thank God my father helped a hell of a lot.

"He knew what I'd been through. He went to war when he was 18 or 19 like me, but he was at war for years: how could I complain about a few weeks in the islands? I thought I could cope with everything and then last year a bomb went off in my life."

Like many war veterans, for Mr Craig, the impact of the experience was just lying dormant. Early last year he found himself jobless, and increasingly depressed. Then he had a breakdown. He spent six months talking to a psychiatrist about the war, telling her things he'd never even shared with his wife.

"I realised I had just been keeping it all bottled up. I thought I was being strong, not needing to talk about it, but I was fooling myself."

With that in mind, Mr Craig is returning to the Falklands for the first time in June.

"I remember my Dad took me back to the UK in 1977 or '78. We went to every aerodrome where he flew from: you could see he was closing a story many years after.

"In 1982 I went against my history, it was very hard. When I go back I finish closing up my story."

 
The Rifleman said:
Also, the competence of Argentinian troops is questionable, as the Canadian army can verify from UNPROFOR in Croatia.

I'm interested to hear further elaboration on this.
 
Information regarding ORBAT of the Argentine Military were gleaned from several current sources., some of which cannot be divulged on this medium.
Janes provided the lions share of open source information available.
Just as Argentina would likely not attempt another adventure to the Falklands, the UK in kind would likely not commit forces to repel an invasion.
I stand by my assessment that the UK is far to thin on the ground to undertake another operation with an incredibly long logistical tail.
"Amateurs discuss tactics, professionals plan logistics".
 
Jammer,

You are suggesting that the UK would back down and hand over the Falklands without a fight should the Argies drum up enough military-backed bluster. What leads you to believe that the UK would let the Islands be annexed by Argentina without a fight this time around, especially since they've plowed alot of money and effort into reinforcing Island defences since 1982? Unless I'm mistaken, history is pretty short of examples where the British have allowed other countries to walk away with chunks of their sovereign territory and citizenry without a fight.
 
Jammer said:
Information regarding ORBAT of the Argentine Military were gleaned from several current sources., some of which cannot be divulged on this medium.

But it's ok to post said ORBAT ::)
 
Only posted after careful vetting and consultation with others. Thanks for your concern.
 
Jammer said:
Only posted after careful vetting and consultation with others. Thanks for your concern.

Oh I ain’t too concerned me son, as my profile shows I’m so far retired that the Taliban and or the Buzo Tacticos would have to be overrunning the Eaton Centre before they considered putting me back in uniform. ;D

Point though Daft and Barmy is shy hence the stuff missing in his profile. However trust me I know who he is and would consider him a local SME here with regards to what the Brits could and would do or not do. I wrote my Thesis on the Falkland’s and would still defer to his expertise. 8)
 
Back
Top