Argentinian blockade of the falklands

Hambo

New Member
....hence my comment that sending an increased ASW capability to the area is highly appropriate. One wonders, had the MR2s not been in their twilight weeks, whether the MoD might have sent one or two down to bolster asw surveillance, and maritime surveillance in general. The T42s are no longer as crucial as they once were, with the Typhoons (which arrived at roughly the same time as HMS York) easily outclassing anything in the entire southern hemisphere, let alone a few airframes which should by rights be sat in a museum by now. Short of a major escalation in the volume of units deployed, the Type 23 really completes the picture in terms of a rounded defence of the islands.[/QUOTE]

The idea that Argentine Special Forces could get ashore would make an interesting scenario. Could a few special Forces teams close down the airfield? A team armed with a few .50cal sniper rifles, MANPADS and light anti armour weapons might make it impossible to operate aircraft until the defending force has neutralised them,but in the time takes to organise the defending infantry, if no Typhoons could get airborne, would that allow a window for the Argentine airforce to mount a raid aimed at damaging the runways?

Here goes. An hour before dawn, three SF teams infiltrate close to the airfield. A Tristar arrives on a supply flight and is hit with an anti tank round as it taxis in, the ensuing blaze and confusion blocks one of the runways. A typhoon is scrambled, but its hit by accurate sniper and light mortar fire as it taxis to the second runway.

Defending forces mobilise and a sustained firefight erupts across the expanse of MPA, the location of the SF forces are soon noted but prove tough to dislodge.

RAF radars on west Falklands detect an incoming raid but with no prospect of getting the three remaining Typhoons airborne until order has been restored, 12 Skyhawks and Mirages streak across MPA, a couple of aircraft fall victim to Rapier but several bombs hit the airport buildings and some cluster weapons are sewn across the hardstandings,a couple of shallow craters are made on the runways. A second raid follows a few hours later.

Two argentine hercules drop a company of Infantry in the Fitzroy area, setting up a loose perimeter before moving to support the attack on the airfield. Argentine "fishing" boats and associated merchant vessels make at speed to the islands to drop off troops in the window when the airfield is out of action. Argentine aircraft return to attack UK ground forces and continue the attack on MPA.

UK forces overwhelm the SF forces attacking MPA, but the runways are too badly damaged to allow take offs and landings, further raids arrive through the day harrassing damage repair teams. The Argentine Navy arrives on scene trying to support landings and provide gunfire support.

With MPA out of action and no prospect of reinforcement the UK forces take up defensive action. The Argentine forces are not strong enough to dislodge them so a stalemate occurs. Both sides have suffered heavy casualties and the Argentine air attacks continue on MPA and defending forces.

The Argentine Govt tries
to whip up Poitical support knowing full well that in 2 weeks its Navy will be forced out of the area by the RN SSN's, two weeks later the RN Task Force will arrive and the UK military will prevail...but they almost managed it, and there are plenty of British casualties.

Is that too far fetched? Im sure the SAS/SBS could tie down 4 fighters long enough for a an strike, could the Argentine SF do the same? Could they infiltrate by submarine as citizen suggests? Or have I had too many lagers?
 

riksavage

Banned Member
The Falklands defence force practice just about every possible scenario going - seaborne, airborne, SF attack. The RAF Regiments role for one is to defend the air base, their tactics do not restrict them to the inner- perimeter, their remit reaches further out covering areas likely to be occupied by SF operators trying to prevent aircraft landing or taking off through the use of .50's, MapPads etc. They do the same in Iraq and A-Stan and push out to patrol areas ideal for siting stand-off weapons. The mortar teams will already have all possible DF locations marked ready for counter-fire. Any suspicious activity in or around urban areas will immediately draw the attention of the locals, meaning any infiltrating personnel will have to confine themselves to hides built in open ground - cold, wet, eating uncooked rations, crapping in plastic backs - not nice in a mild climate, never mind the wind swept Falklands.

The only way the Argies can realistically infiltrate SF units unseen is via submarine, and lets be honest we are talking about a section at most deploying by rib, which will probably mean the sub has to surface to disembark the team with enough heavy kit to sustain operations and present a realistic threat. These troops will have a finite life-span based on the fact there are ZERO friendly forces or sympathetic locals on the Island - they will have to self-sustain unseen until reinforcements arrive.

The only way reinforcements can arrive in a timely fashion without incurring unacceptable losses is if the UK's entire garrison is neutralised preventing a contested landing - 30 RM's (armed with SLR's, GPMG's Charlie-G's) made life very uncomfortable for the Argie SF and their APC's in 82, just imagine what a composite battalion (RAF reg, resident regular infantry fighting company, odds & sods and local defence force) armed with 81mm, Javelin, Starstreak, Rapier, 105mm, GPMG's LMG's, grenade launches, day-night fighting capabilities, sophisticated command and control backed by a fully on-side population are going to represent, couple that with the fact the UK garrison will be drawn from man-power with combat experience who will up against a military in steep decline with no element of surprise thanks to their ongoing blustering and sabre rattling. I know which side I will be placing my bets on! Even if the Typhoons are incapacitated, Rapier's are destroyed you still have ManPad Starstreak, impervious to jamming and with a 10 second activation time from a cold start - so bring on the Argie C130's stuffed to the brim with conventional infantry? Assuming the Argie somehow evade radar and try an amphibious attack - Javelin, 81mm and 105mm, .50's and GPMG's in the SF role will reap carnage, the Islands post-82 road network means there's no way a beachhead will be secured before the QRF arrives (Javelin alone could sink / disable the first wave).

The Argies aren't stupid, their military have already conducted the necessary risk assessments and they know full well the chance of an invasion succeeding is absolute zip.
 

John Sansom

New Member
John, I think the mistake would be to consider this in terms of a litteral, classic blockade. Nobody can realistically consider this an option for Argentina. They are politically and militarily incapable of creating one, let alone sustaining it in the face of a British response (as it would be a blatant act of war).

What I meant in referrence to Argentine submarine activity is this:
Argentina has been waging a low-level covert operation against the islands for years. This is well known among the small number of people with an ongoing interest in the SW Atlantic, and not a passing one based on hysterical headlines. Over recent years, we've had an Argentine submarine caught red-handed in South Georgia's terittorial waters (by a T23, no less), have had numerous incidents involving Argentine aircraft 'probing' the fringes of Falklands airspace, have had Argentine warships harrassing merchant and fishing fleets within te Falklands EEZ under the guise of innocent-passage. Most concerningly, in 2006 (iirc) a local spotted suspicious men in Fox Bay, called MPA who deployed the QRF, and an Argentine inflatable of the type used by the Buzo Tactico was discovered having apparently been abandoned in rather a hurry.

The only way Argentina can actually get boots on the ground in the Falklands is by using submarines. I believe they only have two sea-worthy subs at the moment, but it's more than enough to repeat such a 'raid', or something more developed. Of course, the big question is how many of these incursions have gone unnoticed.
This has recently been acknoledged, or rather let-slip, by Roulement Infantry Company soldiers being iterviewed by the BBC
BBC News - Yorkshire soldiers train in Falklands for Afghanistan


....hence my comment that sending an increased ASW capability to the area is highly appropriate. One wonders, had the MR2s not been in their twilight weeks, whether the MoD might have sent one or two down to bolster asw surveillance, and maritime surveillance in general. The T42s are no longer as crucial as they once were, with the Typhoons (which arrived at roughly the same time as HMS York) easily outclassing anything in the entire southern hemisphere, let alone a few airframes which should by rights be sat in a museum by now. Short of a major escalation in the volume of units deployed, the Type 23 really completes the picture in terms of a rounded defence of the islands.
Thanks, Citizen578. I get the messsage....but even pin-prick tactics would put small Argentinian units at serious risk, and, of course, could result in all-out hostilities.

It's a wee bit hard to believe that the Argentinian government would not appreciate this. Then again there's the matter of Argentinian public opinion. Their troops and airmen, although struggling bravely, took a helluva beating last time around. Does the Argentine public have the appetite for another go-round? Surely, even the most vainglorious of politicians would have to take this question into account.

Right now, I'd say my bet's on energetic verbal sabre rattling combined with persistent lobbying within the UN precincts.

None of this, however, really answers my question of how Argentina might mount an even moderately annoyning "blockade". I guess this is known as talking oneself into a corner.

Again...thanks for your in-put.:confused::confused:
 

citizen578

New Member
Hambo,
Rik already beat me to it. A year or two ago, we had a thread on here about a 'Second Falklands War', that was eventually locked becuase of an idiot who seemed to think the Klingons would ally with Argentina to defeat the British garrison. But anyway, yours is a similar scenario to one discussed (repeatedly) in that thread. I suspect Tom Clancy would have a field-day coming up with various ideas for how it might be achieved, but the reality is that it would be a failure.
Argentina only operates some rather aged SSKs, which are only capable of carrying a few additional personnel; not enough to mount an effective strike on MPA, I suspect. As Rik said, the resident garrison, which numbers over 1000 British personnel, train day-in-day-out for the likely scenarios, and no doubt have it pretty well sussed in terms of likely entry-points/number/weapons/fire locations/etc..
Even if Argentine troops were to enter hidden on merchant/fishing vessels dockig in Stanley, it still begs the question of ''what next''? Argentina has no real way of reinforcing any small units which might land, unlike the RAF which has an impressive air refuelling fleet, long range fighter-bombers, and weapons which could even be launched from aircraft operating from Ascension.
I've posted this before, and it's now a couple of years old, but it gives an insight into just how desperate things are for the Arg forces:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...SY-P0r&usg=AFQjCNFwh1xei_H9HXEVFOHLa-i7JVM8BQ
I believe Argenina's air and naval forces still operate at roughly 30% air/sea-worthiness, and last I heard they have only 8 A4-AR as 'genuine' offensive aircraft.

It's important never to be complacent, obviously, and I think the recent events will have sharpened the politicians' minds to give BFSAI the equipment and support they need to provide an effective defence. However, there simply isn't the will in Argentina for any real military action, only for the low level pettiness we've seen since Nestor Kirchner's regime, continued by Madame Botox.
 

avargas2001

Banned Member
How to deal with pyrats

According to international laws we have the rights to sink a pyrat boat if it endangers the Argentine national security, the same way drugs dealers are shoot at by the army, we can shoot ships who are ilegally moving in our waters meaning people who travel with out proper documentation, People in Malvinas have the right to go back to their motherland or apply for Argentine citizenship wich is a lot easyer then what south Americans have to do to get to Canada or USA, why do english people act like white supremasist ?? :p: :lol2 :sniper
 

avargas2001

Banned Member
Thanks, Citizen578. I get the messsage....but even pin-prick tactics would put small Argentinian units at serious risk, and, of course, could result in all-out hostilities.

It's a wee bit hard to believe that the Argentinian government would not appreciate this. Then again there's the matter of Argentinian public opinion. Their troops and airmen, although struggling bravely, took a helluva beating last time around. Does the Argentine public have the appetite for another go-round? Surely, even the most vainglorious of politicians would have to take this question into account.

Right now, I'd say my bet's on energetic verbal sabre rattling combined with persistent lobbying within the UN precincts.

None of this, however, really answers my question of how Argentina might mount an even moderately annoyning "blockade". I guess this is known as talking oneself into a corner.

Again...thanks for your in-put.:confused::confused:
o yes we would love a re-match at war, but I belive that Argentina has better ways to deal with britain for example we have lots of land in Argentine with british land owners and also busynesses wich can be expropiated as Fidel Castro did to the enemy of his nation during the revolution, I believe Chavez expropiated the land of wealthy land owners who didn't work the land and kept the nationals uneployed, I think we can gain a lot more land from the pyrats inland then the land they want to steal in Malvinas, Malvinas is the reson we need to get political capital as bush said it.
 

avargas2001

Banned Member
Are all british people ignorant or just the ones here ??

As your stay here will be short, I might suggest you reinvest the time in some English lessons.
:lol2 LOL This is america no white supremasist is going to have a say in my stay in Canada if they do then they better get out of my land because when I get back I will clence the land of all english speaking pest, by the way I speak better english then the spanish your little brain will ever grasp, entendiste maricon ??
 

avargas2001

Banned Member
Nothing the Argentinians can do about it though, unless they can convince Venezuala or Brazil to back them, and even then their window only extends up until 2018 or so when the F-35B becomes available to the RN in large numbers. Assuming their preparations arent detected and MPA isnt reinforced with more Typhoons and Tornado GR.4's that is.
LOL What do you mean there is nothing we can do about it ?? about expropiating or sincking all pyrat and illegal ships in the area as we did in the past, about expropiating land in Argentina that belongs to british civilians in exchange for Malvinas we can even get some of those british yatch that are always pesting arounbd the area, I think if we sink a few of them with all and turists in them the turism industry will be as dead as your illution of a british fackland whatever that means, maybe in 1982 we should of rid Malvinas of all the British Kelpers and let real Argentine move in the land the way british did in the past with the pyrats.
:sniper:p:
 

Thiel

Member
The stupidity, it burns.
Doesn't this guy have any idea of what international oppinion means?
Start sinking civilians, no matter what nationaity, and you'll find yourself on the receiving end of economy crushing sanctions.
 

Grim901

New Member
The stupidity, it burns.
Doesn't this guy have any idea of what international oppinion means?
Start sinking civilians, no matter what nationaity, and you'll find yourself on the receiving end of economy crushing sanctions.
Or a few TLAMs on nice juicy Argentine mainland targets. If it really came down to it and we were likely to lose the conflict to retake the islands, i'd seriously consider showing them that they can't confine their antics to some small islands. They did plan to go after Gibraltar last time after all.
 

John Sansom

New Member
:lol2 LOL This is america no white supremasist is going to have a say in my stay in Canada if they do then they better get out of my land because when I get back I will clence the land of all english speaking pest, by the way I speak better english then the spanish your little brain will ever grasp, entendiste maricon ??

While I do have a wee bit of difficulty in understanding the detail of this note from avargas2001, there can be no questioning the vehemence with which it has been delivered. Still, if I had used the English equivalent of "maricon" to describe a fellow poster on this site, I would probably be bounced right out of town. Aplogies to the moderators for this little slide down the OT slope.:rolleyes:
 

Sea Toby

New Member
I don't understand why the Argentine cannot accept self determination by the kelpers. Any likely compromise and settlement by the UN there would be a vote by the islanders. Its obvious the kelpers wish to remain British....

The Argentine during the last crisis showed their affection of the kelpers by positioning artillery between homes and on school grounds. The Argentine painted red crosses on munitions facilities. The Agentine didn't even bother to mark mine fields. How can the Argentine boast international law when they massively flaunted it?

The French islands of Saint Pierre and Miquelon are a few miles off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada. One does not see the Canadians threatening these islands whatsoever. The Baltic Sea island of Bornholm is a few miles off the Swedish coast, but Sweden does not threaten the Danish on Bornholm. Only the Argentine wish to invade...

Simply put, the Falkland Islands aren't worth the trouble, nothing much more than some sheep farms. The kelpers wish to live in peace with their neighbors, unfortunately the same cannot be said of Argentina....
 

Alonso Quijano

New Member
is a troll.
I think there's a bit of psychosis with that of the Falklands, I do not think the argentina government has no intention to invade or attack Falklands.
 

BRM

New Member
As has been stated in numerous other posts Argentina does not have the capability to reinvade the Falklands and the British forces on the islands plus the FIDF are much more capable than they were in 1982.
How does Argentina blockade the Falklands and with what?
Hopefully British oil companies will find lots of oil in the area of the Falklands because with north sea oil not going to last forever we need it and so i would imagine does Argentina maybe a real deal that can be of benefit to both our countries and lower tensions over the Falkland Islands.
Who in their right minds wants to see more of our respective armed forces fight and die there.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
...
Simply put, the Falkland Islands aren't worth the trouble, nothing much more than some sheep farms. The kelpers wish to live in peace with their neighbors, unfortunately the same cannot be said of Argentina....
Agreed about everything else you've posted, but -
1) The islands themselves aren't worth much, but the sea around them is valuable, & perhaps very valuable. Big fishing industry these days, & the possibility of oil. Remember, there's a worthwhile amount of oil on the mainland, enough for Argentina to have been pretty well insulated from world oil crises, though not enough to produce an exportable surplus.

2) "Argentina" is not warlike, in my experience, & I've been there, & travelled through much of the country, staying with locals. I met a lot of people who thought the Falklands should be Argentinean, but nobody who approved of the war. It was mostly seen for what it was, an attempt by a hated dictatorship to prop itself up by giving the people something they wanted, i.e. the Falklands, with a quick & almost bloodless coup de main. They were then, & I believe are now, deeply cynical about the motives of their rulers. I didn't then, & I do not now, see any enthusiasm among Argentineans for fighting anyone. I have no doubt the vast majority see through the posturing of the Kirchners, & recognise the parallels with behaviour of Galtieri & his cronies.
 

Warwiz

New Member
A lot has been mentioned about possible oil of the Falklands, now here in the States, there is now occurring, a huge oil spill of the Gulf of Mexico, which threatens to destroy the wild life around the coast. Now let’s say that there is oil around the Falkland’s, and while the drilling begins there is a huge oil spill that reaches the shore of Argentina………….Could Argentina sue England?:confused:
 
Top