Telegraph: "Britain Can Do 'Nothing' To Prevent Argentina Retaking Falkland Islands"

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by soleil, Jun 12, 2011.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    Conveniently ignoring that the Argentines do not have anywhere near the ability to invade the islands, let alone sustain them, nor do so in the face of the very considerable defences already in place. More to the point, by the time they did have such a capability, CVF will be in service and all the carrier fanatics can surely rest easy knowing that a fixed wing CV would have prevented the Falklands back in 82?

    It may come as a shock to some armchair admirals, but the point of British Defence policy is not to maintain the assets needed to recapture the Falklands. It is to prevent us from getting tothe situation where we lose them again in the first place!
     

  2. So what is there to stop Argentina gaining resources from the US to aid their acclaimed rights? After all, they (US) offered us resources back in 82...
    All governments swing from one to the other including the Elmers.

    Yet another example of this Gov burying their heads in sand, prefering to react rather prevent.
     
  3. Its all a touch moot anywho. I predict the "Malvinas" being handed back to the sweaties without public opinion being taken into account nor comment from the sovereignty.

    At which point I will hang up my flag, pick the crown out of my epaulettes, and move to Oz to drive trucks with my uncle.
     
  4. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    Why would we hand the Falklands over to Scotland?
     
  5. sorry should have specified, Sweaty daigo [email protected]$
     
  6. A couple of D class would provide enough security for some troop ships in the nonexistent event that Diego does fancy a scrummage against a strengthening island with a weakened force of its own.

    We could probably look to the Dutch and French for more support than the Americans.
     

  7. Your point is noted, PT, and his RN career probably didn't overlap yours, but Sandy Woodward is hardly 'some armchair admiral' and IMHO should not be dismissed as such.



    Bob
     
  8. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    Sorry BOTWU, not dismissing Woodward as an armchair admiral - that point was aimed at the very large number of Telegraph readers whose nautical exposure ends at salted brine in their tinned foods, yet who see fit to judge UK defence policy based on this letter.
    As for Admiral Woodward - I have incredible respect for what he did - however, I should note that his experience is now 20 years out of date since he retired, and also he has an agenda to promote his own stake in the Phoenix Thinktank - he is by no means an objective observer...
     
  9. So, old age and belonging to a think tank has diminished Sandy Woodward's critical faculties and independence of thought? Please explain.
    While you're at it please also explain what, "...and also he has an agenda to promote his own stake in the Phoenix Thinktank - he is by no means an objective observer.", actually means. Does "stake" mean membership and if so why would he need to promote it? Does his "stake" (and/or membership), lack credibility? How would that work?
    On the other hand, does Phoenix lack credibilty? Does it collectively lack objectivity or does Sandy Woodward personally lack objectivity? If your answer to any of these last questions is yes, please justify your answer. Please explain how membership of a think tank automatically impairs a person's objectivity and disqualifies them from taking part in a debate on defence policy and finance.
     
  10. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    "So, old age and belonging to a think tank has diminished Sandy Woodward's critical faculties and independence of thought? Please explain."

    I mean that he has been retired for over 20 years, and as such has not had full exposure to our current plans, actual capabilities, readiness states, plans, munitions levels and capabilities and so on. He has almost certainly not been briefed in depth on these issues as he no longer has a need to know the specifics. As such, his awareness and knowledge on the detailed issue is at least 20 years out of date.

    "and also he has an agenda to promote his own stake in the Phoenix Thinktank - he is by no means an objective observer.", "
    Exactly what I said on the tin - Adm Woodward is a key member of a high profile thinktank which is obscenely biased towards the pro Navy, Anti-RAF stance typified by Sharkey Ward, a man who may be good at flying planes and spinning dits, but who can't write objective work (or even basic research work) for toffee. As such, you have to remember that the Admiral has an agenda in play (namely to support the RN, potentially to the detriment of the other services) as part of his own think tanks agenda. Its like looking at something Bill Gates writes on IT and discounting that he has a rather significant interest in Microsoft.

    "On the other hand, does Phoenix lack credibilty? Does it collectively lack objectivity or does Sandy Woodward personally lack objectivity"
    Absolutely yes - if you go and search on the SDSR forum of ARRSE, you'll see some in depth analysis of the bollocks being touted by the PTT and their supporters. That movement is doing more harm to the RN than good right now due to the rubbish that is included in its articles, and the utter lack of basic research and understanding of what is going on in defence.

    PTT typifies my major concern with retired officers - well meaning, good people who served their country well. They should stop commenting on technical matters in a public arena once they retire as times change, capabilities change and they don't know the most up to date situation.
     
  11. I have to agree with PT here, despite the respect and reverance in which Snady Woodward is held, his comments aren't up to date at all. I recall Captain Clapp writing a woefully innacurate article riddled with holes a while ago along a similar vein:

    It's the bitter truth: We couldn't send a task force to the Falklands today | Mail Online

    No matter who you are, unless your firmly in the loop, or at the least current, your "professional" opinion is rather relegated to the same level as that of the bloke in the pub.
     
  12. Good points made by MLP and PT.

    Indeed I think I may actually be that bloke in the pub - virtually on a daily basis I find myself woefully out of my depth on a rapidly widening range of topics that only a few years ago I would have felt very comfortable discussing - that's what currency is all about
     
  13. PT,
    Good points, indeed. A reasonable exposition of one opinion, at least. Has anyone a counter argument/opinion?
    I'm not so certain that people like SW who deeply involve themselves in the advocacy of a service they have been a major part of are ever so far out of the loop that they are significantly wide of the mark. I would expect that contacts would be maintained, perhaps they shouldn't but I would still expect it to happen.
    You have given me a clearer idea of the nature of Phoenix, I thank you for that and I have to admit that extreme bias towards the RN is bound to exist in such an organisation.
    Your responses have given me food for thought and I shall endeavour to find out more before coming to an opinion of my own. Thanks.
     
  14. Why is it heads of the services only say these things publicly after getting their golden handshake?
     
  15. While I don't necessarily include PT in this category, many of a light blue hue label any supporter of carrier-borne air as stupid, senile or a relic of the Cold War era. Irrespective of their seniority, experience, combat record or intellectual argument, they are made the target of any amount of ad hominem attacks and anything they say is described as "drivel".

    Judging by the quantity of vitriol directed at him, Sharkey Ward DSC AFC of the Phoenix Think Tank really gets up his detractors' noses, bless him. =-)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. He is a turbo penis though.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

Share This Page