UK warns Argentina regarding the Falklands
BartSimpson @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:07 pm
Things are most definitely heating up. I hope I am wrong, but it looks like the Argies are ramping up for a repeat of the 1982 Falklands Invitational Pissing Match. And I'd say it's either on for March or April - just before the onset of winter.
UK warns Argentina regarding the Falklands
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162- ... falklands/
$1:
LONDON — In their latest spat over the disputed Falkland Islands, the British government summoned Argentina's top diplomat to the Foreign Office on Wednesday to explain his country's decision to ask 20 leading companies to stop importing British products and supplies.
Argentina's Industry Minister Debora Giorgi told the companies on Tuesday they should replace British imports with products from other nations, in Argentina's latest attempt to pressure London to negotiate about the sovereignty of the islands.
Tensions are rising ahead of the anniversary of the brief war between Argentina and Britain over the Falklands, which began on April 2, 1982, and saw more than 900 people die.
Britain's Foreign Office said raised its concerns about the imports to Argentine charge d'affaires Osvaldo Marsico, who is expected to "report back to Buenos Aires for urgent clarification." Marsico is Argentina's chief diplomat in Britain, as the country has not had a full ambassador since 2008.
"We made clear that such actions against legitimate commercial activity were a matter of concern not just for the UK, but for the EU as a whole, and that we expect the EU to lodge similar concerns with Argentine authorities," Britain's Foreign Office said in a statement Wednesday.
A Foreign Office spokesman, speaking on customary condition of anonymity in line with policy, said that Argentina would not benefit from the move.
"The U.K. is the sixth largest investor in Argentina, and we import from Argentina significantly more than we export to them," the spokesman said. "So it is firmly not in Argentina's economic interest to put up these barriers to trade."
Officials also planned to discuss Argentina's decision on Monday to turn away two Carnival Corp. cruise ships from its southernmost city of Ushuaia, invoking a new law that bars vessels linked to Britain.
Prime Minister David Cameron's spokesman Steve Field said it was "very sad that Argentina continues with their approach of confrontation, not cooperation."
Argentina has become increasingly assertive over its claims to the islands that it calls the Malvinas, as well as the British-held South Georgia and South Sandwich islands. At stake are not only the islands, but also rich fishing grounds and potential undersea gas and oil reserves in the surrounding seas.
Cameron insists London will not enter negotiations on the sovereignty of the islands. He has said the people of the Falklands must decide their own future and claims Argentina has taken a colonialist approach to the islands' residents.
Argentina's Industry Minister Debora Giorgi told the companies on Tuesday they should replace British imports with products from other nations, in Argentina's latest attempt to pressure London to negotiate about the sovereignty of the islands.
Tensions are rising ahead of the anniversary of the brief war between Argentina and Britain over the Falklands, which began on April 2, 1982, and saw more than 900 people die.
Britain's Foreign Office said raised its concerns about the imports to Argentine charge d'affaires Osvaldo Marsico, who is expected to "report back to Buenos Aires for urgent clarification." Marsico is Argentina's chief diplomat in Britain, as the country has not had a full ambassador since 2008.
"We made clear that such actions against legitimate commercial activity were a matter of concern not just for the UK, but for the EU as a whole, and that we expect the EU to lodge similar concerns with Argentine authorities," Britain's Foreign Office said in a statement Wednesday.
A Foreign Office spokesman, speaking on customary condition of anonymity in line with policy, said that Argentina would not benefit from the move.
"The U.K. is the sixth largest investor in Argentina, and we import from Argentina significantly more than we export to them," the spokesman said. "So it is firmly not in Argentina's economic interest to put up these barriers to trade."
Officials also planned to discuss Argentina's decision on Monday to turn away two Carnival Corp. cruise ships from its southernmost city of Ushuaia, invoking a new law that bars vessels linked to Britain.
Prime Minister David Cameron's spokesman Steve Field said it was "very sad that Argentina continues with their approach of confrontation, not cooperation."
Argentina has become increasingly assertive over its claims to the islands that it calls the Malvinas, as well as the British-held South Georgia and South Sandwich islands. At stake are not only the islands, but also rich fishing grounds and potential undersea gas and oil reserves in the surrounding seas.
Cameron insists London will not enter negotiations on the sovereignty of the islands. He has said the people of the Falklands must decide their own future and claims Argentina has taken a colonialist approach to the islands' residents.
Gunnair @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:10 pm
Alarmist posts don't become you. Oh...wait.
BartSimpson @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:11 pm
I'm saying what I'm saying because having Argentine businesses switch from UK suppliers to other suppliers is what you'd want to do to prevent economic upsets when you're expecting a disruption in trade with the UK...like you would during a war.
Gunnair @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:18 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
I'm saying what I'm saying because having Argentine businesses switch from UK suppliers to other suppliers is what you'd want to do to prevent economic upsets when you're expecting a disruption in trade with the UK...like you would during a war.
It can also be the application of economic pressure to overcome a political issue. Like us courting China a lot more after Keystone. It certainly got some US attention.
Then again , maybe we're prepping for wa... Oops, I've said too much already.
EyeBrock @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:33 pm
Well, Argentina's economy is in the toilet and the UK 'aint far behind. A war will be good for one of them, just like it was in 1982. I predict a similar outcome.
Gunnair @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:39 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Well, Argentina's economy is in the toilet and the UK 'aint far behind. A war will be good for one of them, just like it was in 1982. I predict a similar outcome.
A shooting war may have a similar outcome militarily, but not economically. The UK is in the shitter along most of Europe. The kind of coin needed for a shooting war is hard to come by and the more ethnically diverse UK of today is less likely to line up singing Rule Britania as the Home Fleet sails for glory.
BartSimpson @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:20 pm
The matter of the Falklands is not a political issue. The politics were settled in 1771 in the Masserano Declaration which the Spanish in 1982 recognized as having the force of a Treaty that ceded the islands to the UK.
The Argentines are then no more than armed criminals trying to steal that which is not theirs.
Canada would be the same were it to try to steal St. Pierre & Miquelon from France and under the exact same premise as the Argies are claiming the Falklands, to wit; proximity.
And your appreciation of the economic straits of the UK explains perfectly why the Argentines have picked this time to press their claims. They'd not attack or threaten the UK were the UK stronger.
GreenTiger @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:34 pm
What won't help the UK is that unlike Ronald Reagan Barak Obama has a real personal axe to grind with Great Britain and as Barry likes to be more PC than to stand by our allies I would not expect much help from Washington for the UK.
I agree the economic situation in both countries is not good and a costly war would be one hell of a drain on both their economies.
Hopefully as suggested this is a lot grand standing but at some point I think the Argies will do something unpleasant.
A question for the more military folks here: How is the military situation line up between these two?
EyeBrock @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:34 pm
Gunnair Gunnair:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Well, Argentina's economy is in the toilet and the UK 'aint far behind. A war will be good for one of them, just like it was in 1982. I predict a similar outcome.
A shooting war may have a similar outcome militarily, but not economically. The UK is in the shitter along most of Europe. The kind of coin needed for a shooting war is hard to come by and the more ethnically diverse UK of today is less likely to line up singing Rule Britania as the Home Fleet sails for glory.
Mmm, I don't think things are hugely different in the UK now compared to 1982. In the early 1980's the UK was still deep in recession and Maggie looked like a one-term wonder. The RAF and RN didn't have enough money to buy fuel and most large deployments , OPs and Ex's were cancelled or not even put to paper.
On the ethnic front, aside from the Pakistanis and Brit-born Pakistanis, the UK public are still pretty much for engaging the Argies in whatever is required to fuck them off again.
Remember, the UK has been at war or on active service ops nearly every year since 1945. War isn't exactly a stranger to them and what would be deemed unlikely in Canada will get the UK's great unwashed mobilised pretty quickly as a mob baying for war.
Fickle bunch those Limeys.
GreenTiger @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:43 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Gunnair Gunnair:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Well, Argentina's economy is in the toilet and the UK 'aint far behind. A war will be good for one of them, just like it was in 1982. I predict a similar outcome.
A shooting war may have a similar outcome militarily, but not economically. The UK is in the shitter along most of Europe. The kind of coin needed for a shooting war is hard to come by and the more ethnically diverse UK of today is less likely to line up singing Rule Britania as the Home Fleet sails for glory.
Mmm, I don't think things are hugely different in the UK now compared to 1982. In the early 1980's the UK was still deep in recession and Maggie looked like a one-term wonder. The RAF and RN didn't have enough money to buy fuel and most large deployments , OPs and Ex's were cancelled or not even put to paper.
On the ethnic front, aside from the Pakistanis and Brit-born Pakistanis, the UK public are still pretty much for engaging the Argies in whatever is required to fuck them off again.
Remember, the UK has been at war or on active service ops nearly every year since 1945. War isn't exactly a stranger to them and what would be deemed unlikely in Canada will get the UK's great unwashed mobilised pretty quickly as a mob baying for war.
Fickle bunch those Limeys.
Glad to hear it.
![[BB]](./images/smilies/beers.gif "Beers")
BartSimpson @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:49 pm
GreenTiger GreenTiger:
How is the military situation line up between these two?
Geography favors the Argies because their logistics chain is drastically shorter than Britian's. The downside of the geography is that any war will be fought in Argentina's neighborhood and that's going to hurt trade for them. Meanwhile the economy of the UK will go relatively unaffected.
The Argie Navy only has a couple of hulls that are less than 10 years old and they are way behind on their refit and replenishment contracts (mostly being done locally by German firms). That puts most of their navy a generation behind whatever the Brits send after them.
The Argie air assets are also behind the curve because they'd be up against the upgraded Tornados and the Typhoon - which is on par with the F-22.
Troops? The Argies are like most Latin American countries, long on bluster and criminally short on training. Most of their troops are marginally literate mestizos from the back country who are subject to frequent abuse from their superiors. In the first Falklands war the Argie troops on the islands reportedly got their best meals and medical care of the occupation after they surrendered.
Things generally favor the Brits.
But one has to wonder if Obama will try to stymie the Brits because no one expects he'll covertly help them like Reagan did the first time out.
Lemmy @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:08 pm
Canada should support the wishes of the Falkland Islanders and they want to remain under Britain. That is the only point that matters.
GreenTiger @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:14 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
Canada should support the wishes of the Falkland Islanders and they want to remain under Britain. That is the only point that matters.
This is exactly what the American position should be as well.
Gunnair @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:30 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Gunnair Gunnair:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Well, Argentina's economy is in the toilet and the UK 'aint far behind. A war will be good for one of them, just like it was in 1982. I predict a similar outcome.
A shooting war may have a similar outcome militarily, but not economically. The UK is in the shitter along most of Europe. The kind of coin needed for a shooting war is hard to come by and the more ethnically diverse UK of today is less likely to line up singing Rule Britania as the Home Fleet sails for glory.
Mmm, I don't think things are hugely different in the UK now compared to 1982. In the early 1980's the UK was still deep in recession and Maggie looked like a one-term wonder. The RAF and RN didn't have enough money to buy fuel and most large deployments , OPs and Ex's were cancelled or not even put to paper.
On the ethnic front, aside from the Pakistanis and Brit-born Pakistanis, the UK public are still pretty much for engaging the Argies in whatever is required to fuck them off again.
Remember, the UK has been at war or on active service ops nearly every year since 1945. War isn't exactly a stranger to them and what would be deemed unlikely in Canada will get the UK's great unwashed mobilised pretty quickly as a mob baying for war.
Fickle bunch those Limeys.
Well, we'll wait and see then.
GreenTiger @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:12 pm
I wonder what the Argies would have in store for the kelpers if they were to win?