Could I take the south bit of Argentina?

I am going to get the Falklands Independence, then build up it's military, population and economy over 8 years.

Then trick Argentina into starting a war they couldn't win. By making the Falklands look much weaker than it really would be. By that point the Argentina economy would be world about 800 billion and spend 8 billion a year on the military, but they spend 60%-70 of their money on the army, which is a huge mistake. As the Falklands are going to take the southern bit of Argentina, or the Tierra del Fuego region.

With a navy of 50 ships.
1 destroyer, 4 frigates, 2 submarines, 2 light stealth frigates, 6 stealth corvettes, 3 fast stealth boats, 4 large patrol boats, 10 small patrol boat and 4 supply ships and 14 land craft. Total first year cost 4.3 billion pounds.

With a air force of 59 aircraft.
24 Eurofighters, 16 Tornado's, 6 Apaches, 3 herucles, 10 chinooks and 10 puma's. Total cost, 4.3 billion.

With a army of 30,000 troops. 20 tanks, 40 105 mm guns, 100 motars, 300 army land rovers, 60 other armoured veichles. Total cost 6.5 billion.

Total military cost over 8 years, 15.1 billion.

Using the much better navy and airforce I would cut Argentina in two, then after destroying their navy and airforce, I would land 30,000 troops on the southern bit of Argentina, taking it. As it is the least defended part of Argentina, the 2nd richest and the lowest population.

So do you think the Falklands could defeat Argentina in a war in 8 year? And what sort of a military would be needed to do the job?

 

No way, the UN would never allow you to gain territory with military force, international law is quite explicit on that, you'd never get away with it without being Jewish.

 

But what if Argentina attack the Falklands first, and the Falklands needed to do it to end the war?

 

You'd have to give it back to them when the war ended, Article 2 is quite explicit.

4. All Members (except Israel) shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

 

Funny how you forget that Israel was created by the UN in the first place. Kinda sinks the legitimacy of the UN, doesn't it?

 

Oh my god, this is so funny!

Please please tell me this is entirely a joke, right? Just more idiotic mindless rambling, with no basis in reality?

I mean, you are aware that the entire population of the Falkland's is just over 3,000, are you not? So where are they going to get the people for this "300,000 man military"?

Where are they going to get the income to build this?

Where are they going to house them, and how are they going to feed them?

And you had better expand your budget many times. You see, the most expensive thing about a military is not the equipment, it is the military itself. Training, pay, housing, maintenance facilities, medical costs, dependent costs, and the like. So your $6.5 billion will quickly become $65 billion, then more and more.

And your 300,000 is going to take on a force of over 550,000, and win?

And now kindly tell us again how you are not wanting a new Colonialist British Empire, and are not wanting to achieve world dominance through military means?

 

No it wasn't.

 

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, passed as UN Resolution 181 on 29 November, 1947.

You might wanna look it up sometime.

UN Resolution 181, Part II, Section B:

B. THE JEWISH STATE
The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Trans-jordan. It includes the whole of the Huleh Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan Sub-District, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State. The Jewish section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat El-Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza Sub-District and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba Sub-District, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza Sub-District, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron Sub-District boundary line to 'Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/res181.htm

 

lol! lefty hater gets pwnd!

 

you're gonna need nukes. i hear Iran is going to have a sale on them early next decade.

as long as you use them defensively, only the wack-job left will hold it against you...but then they'd hate you having them unless you threaten to wipe someone they don't like off the map.

 

I've got relatives in Chubut; they'd have your guts for garters, Auntie.

 

Yes, that's a partition plan, not a conferring of statehood and any Jewish state was dependent on an Arab state. See all the references to the Arab state in your text, if the resolution created the state of Israel then it also created the state of Palestine.

 

Yes this idea isn't really that serious, but that not a joke. With economic growth through private sector investment and oil and gas money will come the population growth needed, around 350,000 population could support a military of 35,000?

I would pay the troops a average wage of 40,000 a year including all ranks, so lower ranks would get less them 40,000, high ranks get more, so that cost would be around 1.5 billion a year, times by 8, so £12 billion roughly.

I was thinking about 45,000-55,000 each to train the 35,000 troops, sailor's and airmen. I know pilots cost more. So that would be another 16-20 billion. Nodoubt my numbers are way off.

Their is already an air base at mount pleasent, but the hanger would need to be made bigger and so to the housing, all of which would cost 500 million plus. Then their would be 2 army bases and a naval base, these would proberly cost 5 billion, and grow as the navy and army grows.

Plus all the other cost you said, it would be 40 billion over 8 years.

No my better navy and airforce is going to defeat their's, and then cut the Tierra del Fuego region off from the rest of the Argentine army. Cutting Argentina in two, so instead of taking on 200,000 troops and a population of 45 million, I would be taking in a military of 5,000 troops and a population of 150,000.

I don't want to rebuild the British empire through this, why would I give the Falklands independence?

I look forward to you and other poking many holes in my plan, as each time you do I learn more.

The main reason for taking this part of Argentina would be controlling the Drake Passage, and the shipping that goes through it. Plus it would mean a close alliance with Chile and more the double the territory I would have, the main problem I see is, hiding the military from Argentina.

 

I would have 2 Trafalger class nuclear powered attack submarines, but no nuclear weapons, as if I had them Argentina would never attack, I would get them once this war is over. though.

 

It makes about as much sense as declaring that you will defeat the UK with your independent Isle of Man.

I know you enjoy building your fantasy army, navy, etc but you always completely ignore the realities.

The realities is that the Falklands are a small island group that probably couldn't feed much more than the population that is there. That every number you have created is pulled straight out of your head.

But the easiest answer is no.

 

The creation of the Arab State is something else once again, and has no bearing on the thread at hand. Although I know you love to hijack them since you do it constantly.

If you want to know what happened to the Arab State, talk to the other Arab nations, most specifically Jordan.

BTW, interestingly enough, both Argentina and the UK voted Abstention in this resolution.

 

You see, this is where you totally fail.

Because this would not have the effect you think it will at all. In fact, it would accomplish what almost happened in 1982, the unification of Central and South America against the UK.

And because this would be a naked agression against an American Nation, the US will be pulled in also. But not on the side of the UK, but they will hae to back Argentina in this aspect.

You see, the Alliance between the US and UK is only binding if attacked, not if they themselves attack. And in this instance, the US would be forced to follow the Monroe Doctrine, and support Argentina.

And as for Chile, there is no question who they will support. Or Brazil. Or almost any other nation.

You obviously know and understand nothing of South American politics and alliances, do you?

And I am not even going to start in on the military aspect, that has complete failure written all over it. Obviously you have no understanding of anything military. But that has already been established.

 

I would imagine that all the other nations of South America would not take too kindly to Argentina being invaded, you appear to be in a fantasy world, perhaps you should sign up to the royal navy or the army to get a good understanding of the real world of military operations

 

Big whoop-de-do. You got 2 submarines.

And how much good are these going to do in a land war in Argentina? These are submarines after all, not subterranian. Their use against Argentina would be less then nothing.

And do not forget the navies of all the other nations. They are not gonna just sit back and let Argentina be cut up, they will gorm a Latin American Alliance that will hurt the UK badly.

And Brazil does not have a really shabby Navy either. 5 submarines, with 4 more soon to be delivered (modern French built subs, Scorpene class). They also have a decent close support Aircraft Carrier, which has 22 A-4 Skyhawks, as well as 6 Skyhawk helicopters, in ASW configuration. Plus their 2 newly refurbished S-2 Trackers, configured for AEW configuration.

I think the biggest question would be how much of this striking force would be left after taking on Argentina and it's allies.

 

He does live in a fantasy world. He is a rabid Colonizationist, and can't understand why the former British Colonies don't willingly apply to have themselves brought back into the Empire.

And he already stated that all the former colonies would be better off begging to be allowed back into the Empire.

If that is not a fantasy, I do not know what is.

 

Yeah that's an 'unusual' outlook. I can only ask you don't take his views as representative of the whole UK

 

Hahaha, not at all. Trust me there, I find it very unusual. Much as those of the US that have similar opinions of certain areas of the world would be better off under US control.

All are nutcases in my book.

 

No, the creation of an Arab state is not something else, I see nothing said about Israel in that resolution that wasn't equally said about Palestine. If the resolution created the state of Israel then it also created the state of Palestine.

 

Certain areas would be better under the control of the U.S.

 

First off, in 1982 most south American nations hated Argentina, however the UK support the military government, even selling them type 42 destroyers. Every time I look into Thatcher in foreign policy terms she gets worse and worse. What does central America matter, it's the main south American powers that matter Chile, Brazil, Uragury and Argentina, other nations don't matter, over the Falklands issue. And the very best out come I could see, is the Falklands did force Argentina to peace and to give up any claim to the Falklands, would be the Falklands giving up the region of Argentina, they Falkland would have taken, so like Israeli-Egypt war and the Sinai, which Israel took and were force to give back, for peace. That's what I would take and what I want Argentina to see the right of self-determination of the Falklanders.

You make the mistake of thinking this would be a UK matter, it would be the Falklands vs Argentina, no UK, and even then and now, the Falklands no longer care about US backing, they care about the EU's backing which they have, apart from Spain.

I understand, they want to stand on their own feet, and not have foreign powers tell them what to do, I understand that. However the Falklands are not a foreign power, they are in south America, and if the Falklands people wanted to be part of Argentina, which they don't, they would support that, and so would the EU, but that isn't the case, they want to be British, and not part of Argentina.

And just how far out where my numbers for training and bases? I am thinking 10-20 billion, hahaha. And no doubt I missed out about 50 different things.