D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Do we really base 800 troops on the Falklands?
Possibly a bit more at times
Surely even you can't find anything wrong with that
Do we really base 800 troops on the Falklands?
Do we really base 800 troops on the Falklands?
I think it's closer to 1200 troops
Population of the Falklands is less than 3,000, they seem to be very well defended.
How about the Falklands?
On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.
The reality is that the Argentine economy is always on the edge. Any chance to pop over to The Falklands would give the President a huge boost with the population plus bring extra money into their coffers from the oil revenue. If we reduced the numbers on The Falklands it would practically be an invitation to invade and we are in no position any more to regain it.
Whether we should be in The Falklands at all is another matter but if we are going to be there it is simpler to man it than try to regain it.
On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.
The reality is that the Argentine economy is always on the edge. Any chance to pop over to The Falklands would give the President a huge boost with the population plus bring extra money into their coffers from the oil revenue. If we reduced the numbers on The Falklands it would practically be an invitation to invade and we are in no position any more to regain it.
Whether we should be in The Falklands at all is another matter but if we are going to be there it is simpler to man it than try to regain it.
On a Trident theme, it didn't persuade the Argentines not to invade last time. Sorry, a big waste of money that we don't have for me.
We didn't have it in 1982 however, one submarine patrolling the area was all that was needed to keep the Argentine Navy tied up in port.
What oil is that then?
The Falklands have voted to be part of the U.K. so that's the best reason for us to be their
Trident isn't a deterrent to stop people invading the Falklands
Self determination is the key which is why I support the current position. However, a map of the world explains why our right to the Falklands is tenuous. Really it should be independent but then it is likely that the Argentines would invade so we are pretty much stuck with the status quo.
Can we specify who we are deterring Trident with? Does it work that way? Do we have a list of which countries we are deterring?
(sorry, I will try to learn the multi quote thingy)
Few quid a day and pirate rig. So i'm informed.
I was being somewhat tongue in cheek but I guess that is the crux of the matter. Does it deter? I am not convinced.
That is the same argument used by sellers of anti tiger spray in the UK.
There are potentially huge reserves in the waters around there.