Argentina Eyes the Falklands Again. This Time, the U.S. May Not Back Britain
Posted by kwentongskyblue@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 123 comments
2stepsfromglory@reddit
Tbh, is not as if the UK needed the US backing on this matter. The Falklands have never been part of Argentina; the inhabitants of the islands would prefer to throw themselves off a cliff than to be part of Argentina, and if Milei aka Netanyahu's personal buffon was dumb enough to try and invade them again, the only thing that would happen would be a repeat of what happened in 1982
SnarlingLittleSnail@reddit
As an American I would not mind supporting our South American friend. We can provide jets and limited airstrikes
Drded4@reddit
Nah, fuck that. I'm not down to burn what few bridges we have left with one of our best allies because the voices in Millei's head told him to invade the Falklands.
Snoo3763@reddit
You're pretty busy fucking up the middle east at the moment.
Southern-Ad4477@reddit
Nice payback for our support in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Bunch of teacherous pricks.
haberdasher42@reddit
On the UK? Interesting choice.
soulsteela@reddit
Standard U.S. treachery, only others are held by our agreements and treaties not us .
glarbung@reddit
Whelp, there goes the special relationship.
ELVEVERX@reddit
The UK has far less of a functional navy than it did in 1982
historicusXIII@reddit
But so does Argentina
PropJoesChair@reddit
This is true, but Argentina has an even further less of a functional military than it did in 1982. Also the Falklands are actively defended now after the argie bargie last time when there were none. It won't go well for the argies if they kick off again
Gisschace@reddit
Yeah this has been a bit of a none story in the UK, we’re more concerned with the King heading over for a state visit while someone is taking potshots at the government.
I don’t think we even care if the US backs us?? We sorted it ourselves last time
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
Umm no you didn’t “figure it out yourself”.
The US:
The CIA and NSA provided significant consequential intelligence to the UK.
The US allowed the UK to use Ascension Island airforce base - basically the kid point for UK.
Advanced missile as weaponry to the UK (better than what the UK had)
And the US (Reagan) ultimately and publicly came out for the Brits.
PropJoesChair@reddit
I agree that the US did help in 1982, indirectly, but we allow you to use ascension island and not the other way around buddy
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
That’s categorically false, you should look this up.
JAMisskeptical@reddit
r/confidentlyincorrect
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
The bases dummy
JAMisskeptical@reddit
Yeah because everyone thinks I’m the dummy here 🙄.
Wonder if there’s a ‘lacking in self awareness’ sub I can link to too?
PropJoesChair@reddit
ascension island, st helena and tristan de cunha are literally british overseas territories
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
the BASES
fletch44@reddit
The fact that this person is eligible to vote explains much about the current state of the USA.
PropJoesChair@reddit
Okay, I'll spell it out for your tiny mind
Ascension Island is a British sovereign territory. RAF Ascension Island is an air base on that island that is jointly operated by the US and UK, but owned by the UK. Jurisdiction lands solely within the UK South Atlantic forces commander.
Nothing happens there without the UK's permission, and only the UK's permission. WE allow YOU to use OUR base.
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
Look it up. It’s co operated and require co approval
sofixa11@reddit
The base is commanded by a British commodore.
Source that the UK requires American approval to use its own base that it owns and commands?
marshmallowrocks@reddit
You must be american with wild uneducated claims like that.
Do YoUr ReSeArCh
diego_simeone@reddit
The airforce base is named RAF Ascension Island, it’s jointly run by the US and UK. Ascension Island is a UK territory. I don’t think the US had much of a say in it.
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
You should confirm that - because what you are saying is 100% not true.
The_XMB@reddit
Americans using the American definition of true
techstyles@reddit
r/confidentlyincorrect
EnglishJesus@reddit
Google earth begs to differ…
diego_simeone@reddit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Ascension_Island?wprov=sfti1
Away_Investigator351@reddit
Besides the mistake you made on Ascension - none of this would be necessary now. The U.K can access that intel without the U.S, it can also access many capable missiles without going to the U.S for more, and public support by the U.S won't effect the result.
Argentina is further behind us now than before, we have a strong garrison on the Island now, which itself could wipe the Argentine air force.
We're fine, thanks.
Butane9000@reddit
How would you plan to do that with an understaffed and degraded Navy?
Gatrigonometri@reddit
The UK’s understaffed and degraded navy versus what, Argentina’s hopes and dreams?
PurpleMclaren@reddit
Lets not pretend that the UK armed forces arent a joke right now.
TheProfessional9@reddit
Worst case it's an article 5
PurpleMclaren@reddit
Germany showed up to a nato exercise with broomsticks as rifles in 2013. NATO is a joke as well.
koopcl@reddit
Germany and the rest of NATO has been rearming since 2022 and speeding it up since Trump came back to power. An example is that last year Rheinmetall surpassed the US as the largest munitions producer in NATO. 2013 was 13 years ago in a very different geopolitical context; 2012 had Germany investing 1% of GDP into defense while now Germany has the fourth highest funded military in the world. And sure, NATO is still much weaker than it should be, but Argentina isn't exactly Russia or China.
All of which is moot anyways since I don't think an attack on the Falklands would be enough to trigger article 5, I think it only covers continental Europe or something like that (I may be wrong but I remember talks about how NATO technically didn't cover Greenland last time Trump was messing around the topic).
PurpleMclaren@reddit
You can put as much money in the world into your military but if your doctirne is till stuck in the 90s/00s then its not gonna do much.
Russia found that out in Ukraine and adapted, US/NATO had 4 years of watching Russia and still havent figured out how to counter drones. NATO trainers try telling Ukrainian trainees to stop using drones since it isnt fair.. when NATO enters their next conflict they are going to be in for a very rude awakening.
alphaxion@reddit
Do you know why Ukraine was much harder to fight against in 2022 than when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014?
British armed forces went in and started training them, knowing that Crimea wasn't going to be the last move.
Ukraine has learned a lot more in actually fighting Russia that can be fed back to the UK. Wouldn't surprise me if they haven't been feeding that back and training UK forces already.
koopcl@reddit
Ok but unless you think "carry broomsticks into battle" was proper doctrine in the 90s then that's not what you were talking about nor what I was replying to.
But sure, you were talking about doctrine, not assets, why not. So bringing it back on topic, I agree NATO needs to modernize urgently and take the lessons from Ukraine much more seriously (I disagree on Russia properly adapting, considering they're on year 4 of "barely moving the line forward despite absurd numerical and strategical advantages") but unless you think Argentina deeply learned from the war in Ukraine and has secretly developed a massive drone force (instead of that they did in reality, buy a handful of decades old F-16s because they better adjust to their strategic needs considering their potential rivals are Chile and Brazil) with an accompanying doctrine for deep-sea operations (a country with no aircraft carriers or subs, by the way), then the point is moot. Because remember, the entire conversation is you saying NATO would be useless in a war against Argentina.
PurpleMclaren@reddit
I am talking about the current situation right now where Ukrianian trainees consistently outperform the guys who are supposed to be training them.
You can say I am moving goalposts since you dont have a rebuttal and it makes you uncomfortable to think about but that doesnt change the fact that NATO is not prepared for a modern conventional war.
Never said they would be useless, I said they are joke. Once FPV footage starts coming out of their men getting blown up the war is over, no leader will survive the political fallout.
Levitz@reddit
Damn you should tell all those countries who are terrified by it.
PurpleMclaren@reddit
Who is terrified of it exactly? What would a strongly worded letter do against an fpv drone?
Levitz@reddit
Sure, you are right, nobody cares about NATO, certainly not enough to try to prevent its growth. Totally.
It's just THAT good at writing "strongly worded letters".
Fantastic-Ad-2856@reddit
Same with America, got it's ass handed to it in Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran too.
PurpleMclaren@reddit
Dont forget Vietnam and korea as well.
Also were too scared to fight us on our land so they bombed us in the 90s.
JohnSenile54@reddit
As far as I know nato wouldn’t get involved as it’s not in the North Atlantic, the falklands don’t qualify apparently
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Compared to during the British empire, WW2 and modern USA, sure.
Compared to Argentina it’s not even close, the UK would walk over them without needing to deploy a significant portion of the Navy.
PurpleMclaren@reddit
...what navy?
Away_Investigator351@reddit
Compared to Argentina went over your head, did it?
We're not an Empire anymore, our Navy is fine enough to protect us and our assets. We're fine.
PurpleMclaren@reddit
Look up asymmetric warfare
Look up how many of your ships are in drydock
Away_Investigator351@reddit
Yes, can't wait to see how asymmetric warfare takes and occupies land 300 miles off their shore.
Yep, that's normal. You don't understand how a navy works if you think they're all ready and on the sea, look how fast HMS Dragon went from having work, to setting sail.
You're gullible, that's for sure. Naval command saying what they need to get more funding fools people like you into panic.
We're fine. Relax.
eelsandpeels@reddit
How do you use asymmetric warfare to capture and hold the Falklands.
politicsranting@reddit
By hiring a bunch of seals and penguins to start an insurgency in the waters around the island?
BeShaw91@reddit
Asymmetric warfare is a lot less effective when invading another nation that’s not politically aligned to you over a 300 km sea gap.
Like, that’s a dumb comment almost as suggesting the British F-35s could be defeated with enough land mines:
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Ok so you aren’t here in good faith, we all acknowledge the British military is not exactly up to scratch but acting like they have zero capability is just puerile.
Won’t bother acknowledging anything else you say, it won’t be worth the time taken to read it.
PropJoesChair@reddit
We have aircraft carriers and nuclear subs. the royal navy isn't what it was, but you're being facetious pretending we aren't still a leading naval power
sofixa11@reddit
The two aircraft carriers to start with.
alphaxion@reddit
The US didn't initially back the UK in 1982, either. They wanted the UK to just give up the islands because they didn't think they could project power that far any more.
It was only when the Vulcans were taking off from the UK and bombing the islands that they swapped and started supporting the UK.
The US is not and has never been a reliable ally.
Muted_Stranger_1@reddit
The royal navy is in no condition to replicate the the last Falkland war, but then again Argentine military aren’t doing all that great either, so who knows.
die_andere@reddit
The Argentine airforce had some good planes back during the falklands.
They currently have 6 f16s block 15a/b as their most modern planes. The last f16 block 15 rolled off the line in 1996.
Those things are old and tired (and few).
Jz1551@reddit
Traditional planes matter less today, it's all about drone warfare now and the advantage goes to Argentina due to proximity
sofixa11@reddit
Argentina doesn't have drones, drones haven't replaced aircraft, and Argentina really isn't that close to the Falklands. Last time around they couldn't operate their air force properly due to the distance.
ExArdEllyOh@reddit
300 miles over the South Atlantic isn't all that proximate. There's a lot of guff talked about them thanks to Ukraine but that is a conflict fought mainly over land, with a little bit over what is a millpond by South Atlantic standards. .
die_andere@reddit
No the advantage doenst go to argentina due to "proximity".
The kind of drones currently in massed use don't have the ranges required to get to the falklands and back from Argentina. Planes actually do have the range (or can refuel in the air).
Argentine is about 480KM away (at its closest) to the Falklands.
Argentine also doesn't have the money to get better equipment.
Faithful-Llama-2210@reddit
Nonsense
cambeiu@reddit
The only way Argentina has to deliver troops to the Falklands is for them to board a LATAM commercial flight in Chile to Port Stanley.
manhattanabe@reddit
Now Israel also responsible for the Falkland conflict. From the least antisemitic Reddit user /s.
2stepsfromglory@reddit
You should go back to elementary school because it seems you have the reading comprehension of an 8-year-old. I have called Milei Netanyahu's personal buffon because, indeed, he seems to enjoy being one.
manhattanabe@reddit
You wrote that Milei, controlled by that Jew Netanyahu, is trying to take the Falkland from Britain. This is a tactic used by antisemites for thousands of years. They blame the opposition side of being controlled by Jews in order to gain public opinion on their side. At least own in.
bxzidff@reddit
Are the Israeli prosecutors of Netanyahu antisemites as well in your book?
manhattanabe@reddit
What Netanyahu does is irrelevant. Tying to use his name to gain support for your side in the Falkland conflict is a clear attempt to recruit antisemites to your cause. Why else would his name even come up in this context?
bxzidff@reddit
Same reason his name comes up when discussing Orban or Trump. The global movement of a corrupt far-right who strongly support each other. Here is Netanyahu on Milei:
Both eager recipients of billions of American dollars in aid by the very same president who pretended he wanted to cut back on foreign aid. These three corrupt far-right leaders are linked.
2stepsfromglory@reddit
Dude you sure are paranoid, take a deep breath and go touch some grass. But anyway, I guess that for you it's completely normal to see the PM of a country acting as a clown like that /s.
manhattanabe@reddit
The fact that you even mention Netanyahu in the context of the Falkland conflict shows how much space Israel occupies in your mind, rent free. You need help.
JAMisskeptical@reddit
You ‘imagined’ the word Jew, it was never used.
Must be terrible feeling imaginary persecution all the time.
Corvid187@reddit
The UK doesn't need the US but also the US didn't support the UK last time in any meaningful way. Idk where Time has got this idea from.
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
What?
The US:
The CIA and NSA provided significant consequential intelligence to the UK.
The US allowed the UK to use Ascension Island airforce base - basically the kid point for UK.
Advanced missile as weaponry to the UK (better than what the UK had)
And the US (Reagan) ultimately and publicly came out for the Brits.
Corvid187@reddit
No they didn't.
It was widely reported at the time that the US was providing extensive satellite intelligence. We now know that the US didn't have a satellite over the South Atlantic at the start of the war, and The first usable imagery only came down on 28th May, over a week after the landing sit already taken place and the British had already conducted their own photo reconnaissance. Meanwhile because the US leaked the fact that they had broken Argentine military codes, US aid actively hindered British cryptographic efforts, forcing them to start from scratch.
The US didn't have a choice about the UK using ascension island. The place is UK sovereign territory, and the agreement struck with the US explicitly allowed for UK to use US facilities there.
Sidewinder lima ultimately proved completely redundant. In theory all aspect engagement capabilities should have been a significant advantage. However because none of the Harrier pilots had ever trained with such a system prior to the war, they ended up just using it like their existing weapons. Post-war analysis showed that literally 0 successful sidewinder shots were made from outside the engagement envelope of the legacy models.
ConcernHealthy876@reddit
This is all categorically false ai generated slop, where are you getting this?
zakary1291@reddit
Britain doesn't have the Navy to reproduce what happened in 1992. They would certainly need America's naval support to defend the islands.
bachh2@reddit
Even in 92 they needed the US to help them with the resupply did they not? Or am I mistaken it for something else?
Adventurous_Salt@reddit
Wasn't the war like a week long, how much resupplying was there?
Corvid187@reddit
Not for the Falklands, although that was in 1982.
surfsupdurban@reddit
Something else you're thinking of
Corvid187@reddit
This is not the case.
The Royal Navy in 1982 was going through the program of cuts implemented in the 1981 defence white paper, which had aimed to strip away almost all its global power projection capabilities to focus on European defence. Much of the task force that sailed to the South Atlantic was requisitioned from civilian shipping or pulled out of mothballs. They literally had work teams on board HMS Hermes as she sailed to Ascension bolting her back together.
Partially as a response to that unprecedented failure of conventional deterrence, that global projection mission has been built into future generations of British warships. As importantly, the conspicuous failure of the United States to meaningfully support the UK led Britain to reassess its dependence on the US, and since then the country has placed a unique emphasis on being logistically independent of them, precisely for another occasion like the Falklands.
The fleet has suffered another period of neglect and under capitalisation as a result of the 2010 conservative governments. However even in its dilapidated state, Britain's auxiliary fleet is still 8x larger than any of its peers, it has the worlds third largest register of militarily-useful commercial shipping, and it has twice the strategic airlift capacity for the size of its army of any of its peers. It would be an absolutely herculean task, but the fleet it could put to sea in extremis would be significantly more capable than that which sailed in 1982.
It would not need to do that however because since 1982 it is also disproportionately invested in the defences of the Falklands to make rapidly reinforcing and holding them against any attack at short notice significantly easier. The airbase at mount pleasant could handle literally thousands of additional troops arriving over just a couple of days.
By contrast the losses from the war, the subsequent British arms embargo, the fall of the military junta, and general economic crisis has left the argentine armed Forces as an absolute shell of their former self (a good thing since it was a massive drain on the Argentine people). The modern Argentine navy has literally no military amphibious capability, and it's questionable whether its sole aircraft carrier is even seaworthy anymore.
historicusXIII@reddit
But does Argentina?
One_Weird2371@reddit
If Argentina is dumb enough to invade again history will just repeat itself and the British will make short work of Argentina. They don't need the US backing.
historicusXIII@reddit
The Royal Navy is no longer able to set up a mission to defend the Falklands on their own. The question is, does Argentina have the means to take them though? One doesn't need to defend what doesn't get attacked.
diego_simeone@reddit
The UK Navy isn’t in a great shape but peoples perception of anything military is skewed by the ridiculous excess of the US. The UK has 2 aircraft carriers, only China with 3 and the US with 11 have more. I don’t know how reliable it is but a quick google has the UK 9th in naval power. Argentina are 33rd with half the units of the UK.
Jacinto2702@reddit
And Argentina has Messi.
That's something... I guess?
SEND_ME_REAL_PICS@reddit
Prime Messi could dribble past a few naval carriers, at least.
Significant-Ad-7182@reddit
I mean Argentina could try an invasion and the SAS could "Maduro" Milei from Argentina.
kolitics@reddit
100k standing army nearby can take an island with a population of 3000
historicusXIII@reddit
Are they going to swim?
-WhiteSkyline-@reddit
Nah, they’ll row over.
More efficient, and far stealthier.
Aggravating_Sound262@reddit
This is all just Milleí stirring up shit because his economic reforms aren’t working. The man is truly a mouthbreather, but zero chance he tests this whole thing.
It’s such a stupid sticking point for Argentine nationalists. When you drive to the airport in Bariloche, which is way up in the Andes on the Chilean border, there’s a sign that is like “7km to the airport XXXXkm to Las Malvinas”. Get over it bros. Your stupid former dictatorship wrote a check its ass couldn’t cash. You lost to a withering former empire led by the queen of austerity. You deserved to lose those islands.
moderngamer327@reddit
I mean they seem to have worked mostly well. Poverty is down and inflation is WAY down
surfsupdurban@reddit
I just don't understand it, the inhabitants of the island are almost entirely English speaking people of British descent, it's not like it's an island full of Argentinians under British rule.
HockeyHocki@reddit
The day Falkland Islanders actually want to be Argentinian is the day anyone needs take this nonsense seriously, is about as realistic as the US eying up Greenland
Faithful-Llama-2210@reddit
You should change your flair to the Butcher's Apron
NothingPersonalKid00@reddit
You think a larger country should overrule the wishes of a smaller one because of how close it is? A very interesting take given your flag.
Trollimperator@reddit
Hmm, the headline makes it sound, like the USA provided any support during the Falkland war. I wasnt aware of that being the case. Wasnt the USA just very confused at the time, that 2 allies are fighting a war against each other?
Corvid187@reddit
They provided some help but it was almost entirely redundant in practise. The regan administration was very divided on which side of the conflict to support. The state department favoured Argentina, the defence department favoured the UK, and the whitehouse didn't want to piss either off so resolved to do nothing and let each one back its respective horse surreptitiously.
CrookedFrank@reddit
What? The US gov literally CALLED the Argentinian gov the same night Argentina sent ships that way to say the US would side with Britain if they attacked.
SomeRudeTwat@reddit
Saying you are going to do something and actually properly committing to doing it are two extremely different things
Corvid187@reddit
...And they then proceeded not to side with Britain in a meaningful way.
The state department's explicit internal goal during its negotiations was to facilitate a 'managed transfer of sovereignty' to Argentina. Not exactly a ringing endorsement :)
Forged-Signatures@reddit
They did provide an 'advance' of missiles that Britain had ordered, from what I recall, that will still awaiting production and/or delivery - they permitted us to dip into their stockpiles of the same missiles in exchange for taking the newly produced missiles once they were ready.
Corvid187@reddit
The delivery of sidewinder Lima ultimately proved completely redundant. One in theory it's all aspect engagement capability was a significant advantage, in practise because none of the shar pilots had ever trained to use the system prior to the war, they ended up using it just like any other missile; post-war analysis showed that literally 0 successful sidewinder shots had been taken from outside the legacy missiles' engagement envelope.
Southern-Ad4477@reddit
No, they provided intelligence.
AMeasuredBerserker@reddit
They did provide sidewinders too.
Corvid187@reddit
The extent of US intelligence sharing was dramatically overestimated at the time of the conflict. We now know that they didn't have their first satellite in position until the 28th May, well after the landings and British photo reconnicence had already taken place. Meanwhile, their cryptographic 'help' actively hindered British operations after they leaked the fact they'd broken the Argentine military codes.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Argentina couldn’t take the Falklands, even the dogshit British military could quell any actual military action without much trouble.
There is a perfect case study for this and the gap between the 2 militaries has grown in the mean time.
Also, it is very unlikely Argentina has any genuine intent to do anything. Their leaders like to bring this topic up when they are trying to distract from other issues the country is facing, of which there is many and has been for a very long time.
Pklnt@reddit
When you compare the British military to the best militaries in the world, it might look underwhelming.
But when you compare the British military to the rest of the world, it still one of the best militaries in the world by far.
patoruzu3@reddit
Its very funny how you fall to sensationalist titles while trying to sound inteligent and wise about things you don’t know anything about
Yes, we believe the islands are ours.
Are we going to try to take them by force again? Not at all. Its madness and Milei is not that insane. Army was a abandoned throughout 20 years of left wing peronismo. We cant barely stop chinese fishing boats from invading our waters
SongFeisty8759@reddit
It was a close run thing back then.. the only thing I'm aware of America and a few other NATO powers doing was stopping argentina getting their hands on more exocete missile from 3rd parties the French had already sold them to. The British armed forces were in a poor state then and are in a poor state now, but are considerably more technically advanced than the Argentines , plus they have a lot of very experienced people still in their armed forces. The Argentines have gone from bad to worse with their armed forces and are now a rather wonky democracy , not a military Junta, meaning a war will be more difficult to start or maintain, no matter what the mood towards Los Malvines/The Falklands is.
Independent-South-58@reddit
People often forget that the UK in terms of Submarines and Airpower is actually in a much stronger position compared to 1982, the only major weakness for the UK currently is it's low numbers of escorts for it's carriers.
That weakness is however being fixed, type 26 and 31 frigates will slowly but surely ramp up in production, assuming the UK actually goes all in with those 2 designs is very feasible to see atleast a dozen of both in 10 years time
puzzledmidget@reddit
Wasn’t that Vulcan part being used as an ashtray in a Airforce officer’s club or something like that
Exostrike@reddit
My worry is Trump will back Milei and send a fleet to the Falklands to take over and let the Argentinaians take over.
I know it's ridiculous but this is Trump we're talking about. Anything is possible.
Michael_Gibb@reddit
That obviously rules out Milei.
The sovereignty of the Falkland Islands has already been determined both by a war that Britajn won, and by the overwhelming public opinion in the Falklands in favour of remaining a British Overseas Territory.
If sovereignty is non-negotiable, then with the people of the Falklands Islands favouring remaining with Britain, it means that Milei must respect the decision of the Falkland Islands people.
-WhiteSkyline-@reddit
Even without US intervention the outcome will be the same.
Still bloodshed, but the Falklands will remain British.
Having said that, I haven’t looked at the article, but presumably it’s your typical media piece stirring up the pot.
AutoModerator@reddit
The link you have provided contains keywords associated with the content restriction of Rule 2.3 of r/anime_titties. If you believe your submission does not exceed the content restriction threshold and should be permitted, please request a post review and approval via modmail.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.