491 replies to this topic

[Vanishing Point]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 14:59, said:

Not a snowballs chance in Hell that that is true...... We have never left a country we have invaded, same as the Brits. The essence of an empire; divide and conquer, then keep conquering.

Like we 'conquered' Germany you mean.

[Woody3says]

It hasnt worked since the beginning of the last century, doesnt mean they wont continue to do it.

This is supposed to be a complete withdraw right? No bases and no troops? So there would be no need for parts then.....

[Woody3says]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 19 2011, 11:17, said:

Like we 'conquered' Germany you mean.

Still have bases there. NASA and Plum Island are transplants of Nazi technology. We came, we took, we remained....same as the Persians and Romans. We will fall just the same too.

You know as well as I do that perception and reality are two different things.

[Vanishing Point]

24gerrard, on Dec 19 2011, 15:51, said:

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

It doesnt work anymore Woody.
Costs to much and everyone knows whats going on strait away now.

Interesting that the F117 first strikes on Iraqi Freedom all missed the target.
So even flying a cross between the batmobile and a frizby doesnt guarantee hits.

The same applies as in the discussion concerning precision strikes using mosquitos v bomb the place back to the stone age using Lancasters.In this case,like Hanoi,they should have used B52's until there's nothing left but marshland full of craters in the case of Hanoi and sand full of craters in the case of Iraq,carefully avoiding the oil fields.

Instead of which we've now just left the place wide open for Iran to start up again what Iraq couldn't finish.

[Woody3says]

24gerrard, on Dec 19 2011, 09:51, said:

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all
Interesting that the F117 first strikes on Iraqi Freedom all missed the target.
So even flying a cross between the batmobile and a frizby doesnt guarantee hits.

Ahh, but the planes did their job. the point was that the "smart bombs" are not so smart as advertised.

[Vanishing Point]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 17:22, said:

Still have bases there. NASA and Plum Island are transplants of Nazi technology. We came, we took, we remained....same as the Persians and Romans. We will fall just the same too.

You know as well as I do that perception and reality are two different things.

It's fact not perception that the Germans were (a lot) better off after and since they'd been 'conquered' by America than they were under Hitler. and we'd have probably been better off if we'd have been on the German side and then surrendered with them too in which case we'd have got as much out of the Marshall aid plan as Germany did.

Edited by Vanishing Point, 19 December 2011 - 17:30.

[Woody3says]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 19 2011, 11:26, said:

It's fact not perception that the Germans were (a lot) better off after and since they'd been 'conquered' by America than they were under Hitler.

If thats what you meant the first time then yes, undoubtedly. I was just stating OUR MO has been the same the whole time.

[Vanishing Point]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 17:29, said:

If thats what you meant the first time then yes, undoubtedly. I was just stating OUR MO has been the same the whole time.

The problem with the states (and Britain) is that they're too soft and an easy touch for anyone who wants to try their luck at attacking them.If a place is a threat then the idea should be to wipe it off the map not make them better off than they were before if they lose.

[Vanishing Point]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 17:24, said:

Ahh, but the planes did their job. the point was that the "smart bombs" are not so smart as advertised.

They didn't do their job as well as just carpet bombing them with B52's on a rotating continuous basis until there's nothing left to bomb would have done.

[Woody3says]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 19 2011, 11:33, said:

The problem with the states (and Britain) is that they're too soft and an easy touch for anyone who wants to try their luck at attacking them.If a place is a threat then the idea should be to wipe it off the map not make them better off than they were before if they lose.

What "wonderful" things political correctness has done for society and sovereignty. Soon the two Oprah-societies of the Atlantic will have to deal with the dragon of the orient. Well at least I might get to see cheapracers car that way!

[saudoso]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 15:24, said:

Ahh, but the planes did their job. the point was that the "smart bombs" are not so smart as advertised.

And they can be just as smart as the people denominating targes...

[Vanishing Point]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 17:50, said:

What "wonderful" things political correctness has done for society and sovereignty. Soon the two Oprah-societies of the Atlantic will have to deal with the dragon of the orient. Well at least I might get to see cheapracers car that way!

Probably while we're all in chains working there as slave labour all because we forgot the Yangtse incident and the US forgot about Vietnam and used the hearts and minds approach before,at the time,and ever since,instead of just looking after our own interests and not those of our enemies.

[24gerrard]

At the end of the day it all depends on which currencies the Rothschilds decide to print, so I wouldnt lose any sleep over it.
It all goes round in cycles and has done since the fall of the Roman Empire.
Its just to difficult to justify a world war this time and con the public into having one.
It must have been so much easier when we just had the French to batter and the Bank of England to bow down to.
I feel sorry for VP who still lives in those times it seems. (if only)

It will be interesting to see if the Americans do manage to invade Iran though.
The present world economic situation and the huge cost of the over kill 'Cold War' arms systems is going to make it almost impossible even for the ultra right wing war mongers in America I feel.

Pulling out of Iraq is a complete failure of the past few decades IMO.
The only American industry worth being in will be illegal drugs soon.
China has the edge now.

[Vanishing Point]

24gerrard, on Dec 19 2011, 20:44, said:

At the end of the day it all depends on which currencies the Rothschilds decide to print, so I wouldnt lose any sleep over it.
It all goes round in cycles and has done since the fall of the Roman Empire.
Its just to difficult to justify a world war this time and con the public into having one.
It must have been so much easier when we just had the French to batter and the Bank of England to bow down to.
I feel sorry for VP who still lives in those times it seems. (if only)

It will be interesting to see if the Americans do manage to invade Iran though.
The present world economic situation and the huge cost of the over kill 'Cold War' arms systems is going to make it almost impossible even for the ultra right wing war mongers in America I feel.

Pulling out of Iraq is a complete failure of the past few decades IMO.
The only American industry worth being in will be illegal drugs soon.
China has the edge now.

China only has 'the edge' up until such time as one of those right wingers in the states decides that their best form of defence at the moment is to get back to the idea of mutually assured destruction in the case of China or Russia and close the US borders to further import of Chinese products.

Iran and North Korea can be dealt with easily enough by way of Cruise missiles but this time with 'proper' war heads on them and changing the object from winning hearts and minds and re building the country to just one of total removal of the problem.

Edited by Vanishing Point, 19 December 2011 - 23:50.

[24gerrard]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 17:24, said:

Ahh, but the planes did their job. the point was that the "smart bombs" are not so smart as advertised.

Could have done the same with a Mosquito probably with the lack of opposition.
Same result no doubt.

[24gerrard]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 19 2011, 17:26, said:

It's fact not perception that the Germans were (a lot) better off after and since they'd been 'conquered' by America than they were under Hitler. and we'd have probably been better off if we'd have been on the German side and then surrendered with them too in which case we'd have got as much out of the Marshall aid plan as Germany did.

Dunno about that. America had a plan to attack Britain in the mid 30s.

[24gerrard]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 17:50, said:

What "wonderful" things political correctness has done for society and sovereignty. Soon the two Oprah-societies of the Atlantic will have to deal with the dragon of the orient. Well at least I might get to see cheapracers car that way!

I think America will finish its campaign in the middle east first Woody.
Iran is next on the list.
I just hope diplomacy with North Korea can hold the line there during the coming crisis.
China is not the military problem.

[ozdude]

Hopefully at some stage, VP and others, you will realise that those who get bombed and blown to bits are people like you and I. Mothers, fathers, children, friends and neighbours; human flesh and blood.

Gerrard is correct. The only people who profit from war are banksters and their ilk who convince us to kill one another for some cleverly packaged myth.

Back to the Fairey - was wondering how a small version would work in the ozzie outback. Sounds like the design might be a lot safer than the various small, light, and ultra-light fixed wings; or the various helicopters that fly under the 'experimental' category.

[bigleagueslider]

Woody3says, on Dec 19 2011, 06:59, said:

Not a snowballs chance in Hell that that is true...... We have never left a country we have invaded, same as the Brits. The essence of an empire; divide and conquer, then keep conquering.

Indeed, all US troops have departed Iraq.

As for the US never leaving "a country we have invaded", a quick check of history will show that to be false. The US invaded and liberated several western European countries in WWII, such as France, Belgium, Netherlands, and kept no military presence there. There have been several invasions of Central American/Caribbean countries over the years, such as Panama, Nicaragua, Honduras, Grenada, Haiti, where the US has no military presence.

Wherever the US has a military base on foreign soil, it is through a treaty. When these treaties end and are not re-negotiated, US troops leave. The two most recent examples being US troops leaving Iraq and Pakistan.

slider

[cheapracer]

ozdude, on Dec 20 2011, 13:57, said:

Gerrard is correct. The only people who profit from war are banksters and their ilk who convince us to kill one another for some cleverly packaged myth.

In modern times 24 is correct, the amounts of money that pass hands is staggering.

As Axle Rose says .... (Civil War)

"What we've got here is failure to communicate
Some men you just can't reach...
So, you get what we had here last week
Which is the way he wants it!
Well, he gets it!
N' I don't like it any more than you men" *
(whistle)

Look at your young men fighting
Look at your women crying
Look at your young men dying
The way they've always done before

Look at the hate we're breeding
Look at the fear we're feeding
Look at the lives we're leading
The way we've always done before

My hands are tied
The billions shift from side to side
And the wars go on with brainwashed pride
For the love of god and our human rights
And all these things are swept aside
By bloody hands time can't deny
And are washed away by your genocide
And history hides the lies of our civil wars

D'you wear a black armband
When they shot the man
Who said "peace could last forever"
And in my first memories
They shot Kennedy
I went numb when I learned to see
So I never fell for Vietnam
We got the wall of D.C. to remind us all
That you can't trust freedom
When it's not in your hands
When everybody's fightin'
For their promised land
And

I don't need your civil war
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor
Your power hungry sellin' soldiers
In a human grocery store
Ain't that fresh
I don't need your civil war
Ow, oh no, no, no, no, no

Look at the shoes you're filling
Look at the blood we're spilling
Look at the world we're killing
The way we've always done before
Look in the doubt we've wallowed
Look at the leaders we've followed
Look at the lies we've swallowed
And I don't want to hear no more

My hands are tied
For all I've seen has changed my mind
But still the wars go on as the years go by
With no love of god or human rights
'Cause all these dreams are swept aside
By bloody hands of the hypnotized
Who carry the cross of homicide
And history bears the scars of our civil wars

"We practice selective annihilation of mayors and
Government officials for example to create a vacuum
Then we fill that vacuum as popular war advantage
Peace is closer" **

I don't need your civil war
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor
Your power hungry sellin' soldiers
In a human grocery store
Ain't that fresh
And I don't need your civil war
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no
I don't need your civil war
I don't need your civil war
Your power hungry sellin' soldiers
In a human grocery store
Ain't that fresh
I don't need your civil war
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no uh-oh-uh, no uh-oh, uh no
I don't need one more war

I don't need one more war
No, no, no, no uh-oh-uh, no uh-oh, uh no
Whaz so civil 'bout war anyway?
(whistle)

[Tony Matthews]

Country Joe and the Fish

Well, come on all of you, big strong men,
Uncle Sam needs your help again.
He's got himself in a terrible jam
Way down yonder in Vietnam
So put down your books and pick up a gun,
We're gonna have a whole lotta fun.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Come on Wall Street, don't be slow,
Why man, this is war au-go-go
There's plenty good money to be made
By supplying the Army with the tools of its trade,
But just hope and pray that if they drop the bomb,
They drop it on the Viet Cong.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam.
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Well, come on generals, let's move fast;
Your big chance has come at last.
Now you can go out and get those reds
'Cause the only good commie is the one that's dead
And you know that peace can only be won
When we've blown 'em all to kingdom come.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Come on mothers throughout the land,
Pack your boys off to Vietnam.
Come on fathers, and don't hesitate
To send your sons off before it's too late.
And you can be the first ones in your block
To have your boy come home in a box.

And it's one, two, three
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam.
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

[24gerrard]

ozdude, on Dec 20 2011, 05:57, said:

Hopefully at some stage, VP and others, you will realise that those who get bombed and blown to bits are people like you and I. Mothers, fathers, children, friends and neighbours; human flesh and blood.

Gerrard is correct. The only people who profit from war are banksters and their ilk who convince us to kill one another for some cleverly packaged myth.

Back to the Fairey - was wondering how a small version would work in the ozzie outback. Sounds like the design might be a lot safer than the various small, light, and ultra-light fixed wings; or the various helicopters that fly under the 'experimental' category.

The small W116 autogyro is ideal for use in the outback.
Light autogyros have been used for the purpose for many years.
Livestock control of course and they were to be used in Africa against poachers.
I wonder how many elephants and other endangered species have died since the 1980's when we suggested that idea?
The Wallis has a superior performance to all other autogyros.
Yes, light helicopters are far more dangerous for the purpose, engine failure is usualy fatal.

The Rotodyne would revolutionise Australia's transport and economic structure.
It is the one concept that could rapidly open up the outback.
A huge change for the country.

Edited by 24gerrard, 20 December 2011 - 10:41.

[24gerrard]

bigleagueslider, on Dec 20 2011, 06:02, said:

Indeed, all US troops have departed Iraq.

As for the US never leaving "a country we have invaded", a quick check of history will show that to be false. The US invaded and liberated several western European countries in WWII, such as France, Belgium, Netherlands, and kept no military presence there. There have been several invasions of Central American/Caribbean countries over the years, such as Panama, Nicaragua, Honduras, Grenada, Haiti, where the US has no military presence.

Wherever the US has a military base on foreign soil, it is through a treaty. When these treaties end and are not re-negotiated, US troops leave. The two most recent examples being US troops leaving Iraq and Pakistan.

slider

They just leave American companies in control of the countries and American Maf-- sorry CIA to defend them
Any objections and small attacks are mounted from carriers.
Treaties are pretty secure and in Americas economic interests, often at the expense of the local populations.
You wonder why many do not like America.

Edited by 24gerrard, 20 December 2011 - 10:32.

[24gerrard]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 19 2011, 23:35, said:

China only has 'the edge' up until such time as one of those right wingers in the states decides that their best form of defence at the moment is to get back to the idea of mutually assured destruction in the case of China or Russia and close the US borders to further import of Chinese products.

Iran and North Korea can be dealt with easily enough by way of Cruise missiles but this time with 'proper' war heads on them and changing the object from winning hearts and minds and re building the country to just one of total removal of the problem.

Nope.
It depends solely on what the bankers interests are in China.
Looks pretty secure at present even with the latest internal crisis.

[Wuzak]

24gerrard, on Dec 20 2011, 21:27, said:

The Rotodyne would revolutionise Australia's transport and economic structure.

How?

The major city to city routes are Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane.

Build a high speed electric rail system and we can move more people more efficiently than the Rotodyne ever could and, more importantly, more efficiently than the current airliners, slow (relatively) diesel trains and cars.

Then we have freight - which is handled by train, truck and ships. I suppose that the Rotodyne could replace trucks.

Most of the other transport is commuter traffic - cars, buses, trains, trams, etc.

24gerrard, on Dec 20 2011, 21:27, said:

It is the one concept that could rapidly open up the outback.
A huge change for the country.

Open up for what?

[24gerrard]

Wuzak, on Dec 20 2011, 12:02, said:

How?

The major city to city routes are Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane.

Build a high speed electric rail system and we can move more people more efficiently than the Rotodyne ever could and, more importantly, more efficiently than the current airliners, slow (relatively) diesel trains and cars.

Then we have freight - which is handled by train, truck and ships. I suppose that the Rotodyne could replace trucks.

Most of the other transport is commuter traffic - cars, buses, trains, trams, etc.




Open up for what?

Selling tucker by the bilabongs?

[Vanishing Point]

Tony Matthews, on Dec 20 2011, 08:57, said:

Country Joe and the Fish

Well, come on all of you, big strong men,
Uncle Sam needs your help again.
He's got himself in a terrible jam
Way down yonder in Vietnam
So put down your books and pick up a gun,
We're gonna have a whole lotta fun.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Come on Wall Street, don't be slow,
Why man, this is war au-go-go
There's plenty good money to be made
By supplying the Army with the tools of its trade,
But just hope and pray that if they drop the bomb,
They drop it on the Viet Cong.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam.
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Well, come on generals, let's move fast;
Your big chance has come at last.
Now you can go out and get those reds
'Cause the only good commie is the one that's dead
And you know that peace can only be won
When we've blown 'em all to kingdom come.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Come on mothers throughout the land,
Pack your boys off to Vietnam.
Come on fathers, and don't hesitate
To send your sons off before it's too late.
And you can be the first ones in your block
To have your boy come home in a box.

And it's one, two, three
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam.
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

Remember that one at the time and this one.

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

But it all might have been a lot different if the US had forgotten about trying to fight the Vietcong on their own terms on the ground,therefore no draft needed, and just made it an air war.

[Vanishing Point]

ozdude, on Dec 20 2011, 05:57, said:

Hopefully at some stage, VP and others, you will realise that those who get bombed and blown to bits are people like you and I. Mothers, fathers, children, friends and neighbours; human flesh and blood.

Gerrard is correct. The only people who profit from war are banksters and their ilk who convince us to kill one another for some cleverly packaged myth.

I don't think that the majority of the general Japanese,German,or Chinese/North Korean/North Vietnamese public took that view about their government's aggressive attacks on and invasion of other countries.

I've been there as that idealised socialist and it took a long time for me to start to understand what my dad was telling me about war being hell but sometimes there's no alternative.

[cheapracer]

24gerrard, on Dec 20 2011, 18:27, said:

It is the one concept that could rapidly open up the outback.
A huge change for the country.

Yeah 'cause everybody is rushing to live there....

[Woody3says]

bigleagueslider, on Dec 20 2011, 00:02, said:

Indeed, all US troops have departed Iraq.

As for the US never leaving "a country we have invaded", a quick check of history will show that to be false. The US invaded and liberated several western European countries in WWII, such as France, Belgium, Netherlands, and kept no military presence there. There have been several invasions of Central American/Caribbean countries over the years, such as Panama, Nicaragua, Honduras, Grenada, Haiti, where the US has no military presence.

Wherever the US has a military base on foreign soil, it is through a treaty. When these treaties end and are not re-negotiated, US troops leave. The two most recent examples being US troops leaving Iraq and Pakistan.

slider

The express purpose of troops on the ground in WWII was to repell the Germans, not the French, Belgians, or Dutch. Our soldiers remain on German soil. I'd hardly quantify the Cent/South American firefights as an "invasion" of any kind.

As for Iraq, you believe CNN, Ill believe the PO's and shipping receipts with Al Asad stamped all over them. You know an election for POTUS is coming soon? He would NEVER use the military for a domestic boost in appeal now would he......

[Woody3says]

cheapracer, on Dec 20 2011, 08:31, said:

Yeah 'cause everybody is rushing to live there....

Well, your countrymen are rushing to mop up all the precious metal mines they can find there.

[24gerrard]

Woody3says, on Dec 20 2011, 15:11, said:

Well, your countrymen are rushing to mop up all the precious metal mines they can find there.

Thats only because Europe wont buy their sheep.

Just think, Australia could grow all the worlds eco friendly fuel and generate enough electricity from solar power to drive world industry.

Sorry, I forgot, easier to dig for diamonds so long as De Beers lets them.

[ozdude]

Wuzak, and others

Whilst the major Australian cities are coastal, there are a lot of people who reside and work in rural and inland areas. There are also vast areas that are not well serviced by road, rail or air transport.

Aviation is more than commuting between capital cities. Rural aviation includes flying doctor services, livestock mustering, fire fighting, aerial spraying and much more. Some quick and interesting statistics on rural aviation in Australia @ www.raaa.com.au/issues/the-industry.html

A brother in the Western Australia rural aviation industry complains that bureaucracy, huge distances, significant costs for aircraft purchase and maintenance, natural hazards, and the high cost of pilot training make for a declining commercial sector.

Roto dyne craft mightn’t solve these issues, but could provide a much needed stimulus.

Cheers, ozdude

[24gerrard]

I see South American countries have banned ships with the Falklands flag using their ports.
Britain is starting up oil and gas exploration into the Antarctic.

A modern Rotodyne would be ideal for that environment.

[carlt]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 19 2011, 23:35, said:

the idea of mutually assured destruction

We would not be having this conversation - the world is barren of life -

A Knob Head like you would have pressed the wrong f@cking button in the White House

[bigleagueslider]

The best use of a commercial aircraft like the Rotodyne would not be Australia. Australia has lots of open space, and population centers widely separated. So conventional fixed-wing jets with higher speeds operating from runways would be best. The Rotodyne would be better suited for someplace like India. Where space is less available, and the population centers are much closer together. Besides, Australia's relatively small population of 23 million could not justify the costs associated with deploying a new type of commercial aircraft like the Rotodyne. However, India's population of 1.2 billion easily could.

A good analogy for adopting a VTOL commercial aircraft like the Rotodyne in India is provided by the cell phone. India never had the widespread use of telephones that western countries saw. Instead, by the time most Indians could afford their own phone, cell phone technology existed. So Indians now use cellphones, and India avoided much of the massive infrastructure costs associated with building out telephone systems. They leapfrogged the technology.

[Vanishing Point]

carlt, on Dec 21 2011, 10:58, said:

We would not be having this conversation - the world is barren of life -

A Knob Head like you would have pressed the wrong f@cking button in the White House

Obviously not because if that was the case your first sentence would have applied by now.

[Vanishing Point]

24gerrard, on Dec 21 2011, 10:42, said:

I see South American countries have banned ships with the Falklands flag using their ports.
Britain is starting up oil and gas exploration into the Antarctic.

A modern Rotodyne would be ideal for that environment.

I think the reason why Argentina started the Falklands war was because we'd recently got rid of our aircraft carrier fighter aircraft capabilities and they thought (correctly) that any task force sent to defend the Falkalnds wouldn't have adequate air cover using the reduced compromised air defence capability that we had at the time.

Notice a there's a pattern taking place here.

Although I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that the government has taken up your idea for all of the country's air defences going by it's past cost cutting record.

Edited by Vanishing Point, 23 December 2011 - 12:47.

[24gerrard]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 23 2011, 12:42, said:

I think the reason why Argentina started the Falklands war was because we'd recently got rid of our aircraft carrier fighter aircraft capabilities and they thought (correctly) that any task force sent to defend the Falkalnds wouldn't have adequate air cover using the reduced compromised air defence capability that we had at the time.

Notice a there's a pattern taking place here.

Although I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that the government has taken up your idea for all of the country's air defences going by it's past cost cutting record.

I saw a much bigger pattern.
I saw Maggy Thatcher gaining huge numbers of votes from our wardrums while her son was involved with uprisings in Africa.
I saw Argentine subjects selling polo ponies to British stables at the height of the war.

You are correct, cuts in our armed forces did have a direct bearing on Argentina invading the Falklands.
Question is, do you seriously believe this possibility was not known and allowed for.
We now have a well defended base there which has been justified to the world and it is very convenient to protect
our exploitation of the oil and gas reserves in Antarctica.
Luvly jubbly.

[Vanishing Point]

24gerrard, on Dec 23 2011, 13:33, said:

I saw a much bigger pattern.
I saw Maggy Thatcher gaining huge numbers of votes

You are correct, cuts in our armed forces did have a direct bearing on Argentina invading the Falklands.
Question is, do you seriously believe this possibility was not known and allowed for.
We now have a well defended base there which has been justified to the world and it is very convenient to protect
our exploitation of the oil and gas reserves in Antarctica.
Luvly jubbly.

Suggest you check just how many votes that she actually got as a proportion of the elctorate bearing in mind the ones like me who stayed at home because the Labour party had by then abandoned it's core voters.She didn't get in by those who voted for her rather it was a case of those who didn't vote for Labour.

The 'possibilities',relating to defence cut backs,are never taken into account when the choice is save money or just throw more lives away than needed to get the job done on the cheap.

The fact is all Argentina needs to do now is set up an exclusion zone and sea blockade of the Falklands using land based air power v shipping.No contest as shown last time but this time they've got the benefit of learning where they went wrong last time.Unless that is the offer of help from the US is accepted by us this time.

[saudoso]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 23 2011, 10:42, said:

I think the reason why Argentina started the Falklands war was because we'd recently got rid of our aircraft carrier fighter aircraft capabilities and they thought (correctly) that any task force sent to defend the Falkalnds wouldn't have adequate air cover using the reduced compromised air defence capability that we had at the time.

Notice a there's a pattern taking place here.

Although I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that the government has taken up your idea for all of the country's air defences going by it's past cost cutting record.

Argentina started the affair because the generals where in mud to the tip of their noses and they needed a distraction for the masses.

[Vanishing Point]

saudoso, on Dec 23 2011, 14:33, said:

Argentina started the affair because the generals where in mud to the tip of their noses and they needed a distraction for the masses.

But those generals also had some bright military advisors too in making sure that,at that point,we still weren't armed with two aircraft carriers full of Phantoms to face their air force with.If we had they wouldn't have been stupid enough to committ their forces in trying to get the Falklands back because together with having a submarine in the area to get their surface ships with we also could have neutralised the land based air threat facing our ships which is what nearly caused the loss of the whole task force.

[saudoso]

Vanishing Point, on Dec 23 2011, 13:13, said:

But those generals also had some bright military advisors too in making sure that,at that point,we still weren't armed with two aircraft carriers full of Phantoms to face their air force with.If we had they wouldn't have been stupid enough to committ their forces in trying to get the Falklands back because together with having a submarine in the area to get their surface ships with we also could have neutralised the land based air threat facing our ships which is what nearly caused the loss of the whole task force.

Never understimate the blindness of dictators. Or lack of principles. They would risk taking a beating in the atlantic to keep things under control at home. And they where pretty sure UK wouldn't attack on the mainland.

Edited by saudoso, 23 December 2011 - 17:51.

[24gerrard]

saudoso, on Dec 23 2011, 17:49, said:

Never understimate the blindness of dictators. Or lack of principles. They would risk taking a beating in the atlantic to keep things under control at home. And they where pretty sure UK wouldn't attack on the mainland.

It might have damaged the polo pony breeding studs from which the Argies were supplying ponies to the British aristo's in the UK.

[Bloggsworth]

I used to frequent an Agentinian restaurant in Long Acre in central London, during the war it was still doing good business - One of the waiters said to me "I don't understand why you English still eat here", I told him that though our governments were at war ordinary English people didn't hold him personally responsible.

The war was a cock-up by the Foreign Office who let the Argentinians believe that we would offer no resistance if they walked in. Anyone who believes that MT engineered it in order to call a General Election with the certainty of winning it is, quite frankly, deluded - She would have learned the lesson of the 1945 General Election.

[24gerrard]

Bloggsworth, on Dec 23 2011, 21:53, said:

I used to frequent an Agentinian restaurant in Long Acre in central London, during the war it was still doing good business - One of the waiters said to me "I don't understand why you English still eat here", I told him that though our governments were at war ordinary English people didn't hold him personally responsible.

The war was a cock-up by the Foreign Office who let the Argentinians believe that we would offer no resistance if they walked in. Anyone who believes that MT engineered it in order to call a General Election with the certainty of winning it is, quite frankly, deluded - She would have learned the lesson of the 1945 General Election.

It was not 1945 and the motivation was not to win an election.
The war did justify the later build up of military force on the islands in support of oil and gas exploitation.
Next time I am sure the Americans will assist, it will be easier than Iran and this time a shorter time span to being able to capitalise on the wealth created.
Depends on the bankers of course.

[Vanishing Point]

Bloggsworth, on Dec 23 2011, 21:53, said:

The war was a cock-up by the Foreign Office who let the Argentinians believe that we would offer no resistance if they walked in.

There is no way that Britain can guarantee the defence of the Falklands without the ability of being able to provide naval air superiority.We haven't had that capability since the 1970's and the Argies therefore 'walked in' because they knew it.We've now got even less capability than the compromised naval air power that we had during the time of the Falklands War and the Argies know it so no surprise that they are thinking about having another try.

Edited by Vanishing Point, 23 December 2011 - 22:54.

[24gerrard]

Didnt you know, Cameron has got two state of the art aircraft carriers being built in Scotland to take the wonderful new American bat man and robin frisby plane.
All they have got to do is stop it burning huge holes in the flight deck when it takes off and hope the Argies dont move first.
We just gave the last Harriers to America.



What a brain dead government we have, so sad to see such a once great nation brought so low by such morons.

[Vanishing Point]

24gerrard, on Dec 23 2011, 23:32, said:

Didnt you know, Cameron has got two state of the art aircraft carriers being built in Scotland to take the wonderful new American bat man and robin frisby plane.
All they have got to do is stop it burning huge holes in the flight deck when it takes off and hope the Argies dont move first.
We just gave the last Harriers to America.



What a brain dead government we have, so sad to see such a once great nation brought so low by such morons.

Spending a pound,by going for the idea of ineffective VTOL aircraft carriers again,to save a penny in building 'proper' ones.It would be interesting to find out how much was saved by scrapping the Ark Royal and Eagle and their Phantom force v the costs of lost ships during the Falklands War.

But I think the Argies don't have too much to worry about even if they wait until we've built our new frisby carriers and we probably won't be able to rely on Chile's help this time either.Although having said that the new carriers seem to have catapult and arrester capability designed into them which then just leaves the question of what type of 'proper' aircraft would they be supplied with assuming that the government will be clever enough to just use that capability instead and forget about using the F 35.

But the Harrier is no loss considering it's non existent air superiority capabilities.

http://en.wikipedia....ntine_Air_Force

Edited by Vanishing Point, 24 December 2011 - 01:19.

[24gerrard]

So the Argies have got 8 SU29s.