Falkland Islands: Tensions Rising

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by DocDutch

all countries that have nukes have tested their weapons

They haven't launched them with warheads. They have launched the missiles, and they have detonated the warheads. But not at the same time, and not in an attack on another country.

Originally Posted by danielf

Indeed. So much so, that they've renamed the Football Competition in her memory.

There's a very interesting double game going on here. While the FCO keeps repeating the lines about routine deployment and not commenting on submarine movements, senior officers in the RAF and RN have obviously been given a nod and a wink from someone at the MOD to make deployments, and comments upon them.

The British government is presenting a diplomatic and principled face to the world at large whilst allowing the military to dance a Hakka off the coast of Argentina.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Chris

You're right, we will not be sending our nuclear deterrent to the South Atlantic. The Trident system is a strategic weapon designed to prevent a nuclear assault on the UK's home territory, not sabre-rattling by second division south American republics.

When you hear talk of 'nuclear submarines' heading for the Falklands, 'nuclear' refers to the sub's power plant and is an indication of its ability to remain on station, submerged and undetected, for a very long time.

In 1982, one torpedo from one British submarine was enough to force the entire Argentine navy back into port for the duration of the war. Memories of the General Belgrano will still be sharp within the Argentine military and this weekend's very rare leak about British submarine movements will have been calculated to poke that old wound and give any hawks in their defence ministry pause for thought.

Does anyone know if the Royal Navy is sending nuclear submarines to the Falklands!

Yes, they are. That fact was leaked to the Press at the weekend. Cameron and Hague have both since refused to confirm or deny it because it is Government policy not to discuss submarine deployments, however you can be sure the reason we're all talking about it is that they (the military, at least) wants us to.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Chris

Yes, they are. That fact was leaked to the Press at the weekend. Cameron and Hague have both since refused to confirm or deny it because it is Government policy not to discuss submarine deployments, however you can be sure the reason we're all talking about it is that they (the military, at least) wants us to.

But not to fire nukes at Argentina as Alan thinks we should threaten them with.

No, that is not going to happen under any circumstances. To think otherwise is to inhabit a very strange fantasy universe.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

But not to fire nukes at Argentina as Alan thinks we should threaten them with.

I have not suggested nuking Argentina, just placing Submarines with Nuclear Weapons at the Falklands!

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

I have not suggested nuking Argentina, just placing Submarines with Nuclear Weapons at the Falklands!

And what would that achieve, when Argentina know full well that we would NEVER use them against them???

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

And what would that achieve, when Argentina know ful well that we would NEVER use them against them???

I meant, very, very unlikely to use them!

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

I have not suggested nuking Argentina, just placing Submarines with Nuclear Weapons at the Falklands!

and just why would you do that ?.As i explained to you earlier doing that is not a deterant because Argentina know that we would not use them for what is in the big picture a trivial matter .If we did that we would risk escalating the whole afair into a mutli national incident of the type faced by America in the Cuban crisis .

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

and just why would you do that ?.As i explained to you earlier doing that is not a deterant because Argentina know that we would not use them for what is in the big picture a trivial matter .If we did that we would risk escalating the whole afair into a mutli national incident of the type faced by America in the Cuban crisis .

We would only use them if Argentina invaded the Falklands!

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

We would only use them if Argentina invaded the Falklands!

NO WE WOULD NOT .It is the most ridiculous suggestion you have made to date

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

I meant, very, very unlikely to use them!

Not "very, very, unlikely". We would NEVER use them against them, and they know that, so they wouldn't be a deterrent to an invasion of the Falklands.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

NO WE WOULD NOT .It is the most ridiculous suggestion you have made to date

Fine then!

[danielf]

No we wouldn't. Nukes are meant for mass scale destruction and are sure to result in massive civilian casualties. If Argentina tried to invade the Falklands, we'd target their military, not their civilians.