Argentina getting very cross

Discussion in 'The Clubhouse Bar' started by gingergenius, Feb 26, 2010.

  1. gingergenius

    gingergenius Guest

    source

    What does everyone make of this? I'm especially interested in our Argentine members' opinions.

    On the surface, from the (British) news stories I've read, it seems like we're doing nothing wrong - drilling for oil in territory that is ours.

    The Argentines seem to be making a fuss, 1) because they want the Falkland Islands, and 2) because they'll miss out massively if oil is discovered.

    Personally, I couldn't give a **** whether Britain owns places like the Falklands or Northern Ireland. It's really up to the people who live there. But in this case, it seems like Falkland Islanders are very keen on being British.

    Why then do the Argentine Govt. feel so strongly as to consider bypassing the UN (something which should they should be heavily punished for imo) and go to the US over this?
     
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    The government of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (owner of quite possibly the most hideous official portrait in the universe) is deeply unpopular in Argentina.

    Currently you have farmers strikes over attempts to force food prices down, a central bank up in arms because the Kirchner wants to raid the reserves to pay off outstanding debt, a standoff against a conservative free press and a population in discontent over corruption and an economy that isn't doing too well to put it mildly.

    So with legislative elections up next year, Kirchner is doing this now for three reasons:

    1) to direct attention away from her own government's popular failings by acting tough on the Falklands.
    2) to renew Argentina's claim on the islands (there is always talk that Argentina might one day renounce its claim in exchange for a cut of mineral wealth or a big payoff).
    3) to try and get their foot back in the door after they walked out of a lucrative mineral sharing deal in 2007.

    In reality though as it stands now Argentina won't make much headway. Determination lies with the people of the Falklands and the British Government's position has been the same throughout: they will act on the results of any referendum held in the Falklands.

    The Argentines can't invade because of their dire financial situation and the fact that the British enjoy military superiority in all areas in the islands and are far more switched on for an attack than they were in 1982. They can't force a change by diplomatic means because that would mean that the United States and the European Union would have to take sides and like with the issue of Gibraltar neither are willing to do that.

    So, the best they can hope for is for Britain to let them resume the 2007 deal to share the wealth.
     
  4. gingergenius

    gingergenius Guest

    So Kirchner's taken a leaf straight out of the Margaret Thatcher 1983 book of how to get reelected when you're insanely unpopular.
     
  5. Bullitt

    Bullitt Guest

    Depends if she's only unpopular in the North.
     
  6. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    Also to be fair, she didn't exactly phone up General Galtieri and said "here, gizza war my love.."
     
  7. shtove

    shtove Guest

    Oil.

    Note that the US is taking pretty much the same line it did last time. Don't know much about this, but I think it's along the lines of the Monroe doctrine. And seems the rest of Sarf Merica is lining up behind the crazies who run government in Argentina, including the joke dictator Chavez.

    Argentina recently sacked its central bank governor, freeing up the government to print its own currency and pretend that all their debts aren't so bad after all. The promise of oil revenue would be a boost to the kleptocrats. Gordon Brown looks on with interest as he Saves The World.

    I read that the Falklands are well garrisoned, with serious RAF kit, so no chance of immediate conflict.
     
  8. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    There are currently several Eurofighter Typhoons and a refueling craft based on the islands as well as a Type 42 Destroyer (this time fitted with stuff that can fend off Exocet missiles made and supplied by our dear and peace loving friends and allies in France) and a company of regular army along with engineers, signals and so forth.

    Also two RN submarines are on standby in the area usually which is probably a bigger deterrent than all of the above put together.

    On top of that you have the FIDF who are better equipped than they were in 1982.

    In other words, much more formidable than before!
     
  9. MunsterMan

    MunsterMan Guest

    I have no real views on this, bit I have to say "It depends on what the locals want" line annoys the f*** out of me. In principal it is right, but I don't recall Great Britian giving a f*** about what any of the locals though when they took their land in the first place.
     
  10. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    Its a pretty tall order to "ask" the "locals" when there aren't any actual locals there.

    If you look at the history of the islands, the Americans removed the Argentines from the islands and they were left empty until Britain returned to re-establish its claim.

    The people the yanks did remove were actually convicts and exiles. The Falklands was being used as a penal colony by the Argentines at the time.
     
  11. gingergenius

    gingergenius Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MunsterMan @ Feb 26 2010, 10:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Yes, we we committed some heinous acts in the past.

    But the Falklands were uninhabited before we settled them. And nowadys, it should be 100% up to the locals which country they live in.
     
  12. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    We've all committed some pretty bad things in the period of empire and some pretty cool things. No part of the UK & Ireland is exempt from this.
     
  13. shtove

    shtove Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Feb 27 2010, 10:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    No Brit inconsistency there, at all at all at all! ;)
     
  14. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    Really? So we've supplied and supported a 3rd party fighting against France when in the last 30 years exactly? :lol:

    And lets get the facts out in the open here, France withdrew from the Eurofighter consortium because they disagreed with the design and aims of the project. Nobody kicked them out and it had nothing to do with us. During 1982 the French supported their Argentine "customers" by shipping exocet missiles.

    So France get to act very badly and yet somehow we're the inconsistent ones? :p

    Sit down.
     
  15. feicarsinn

    feicarsinn Guest

    The French do what they want. It's what makes them great. They're the only western European nation that doesn't seem to givea flip what the U.S. thinks of them. Very admirable.
     
  16. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    I remember going through my new starter induction at QinetiQ a few years ago and in between the boring "be very careful, Al Qaeda and the Real IRA could be watching even now!" they mentioned corporate espionage and what foreign visitors to watch out for:

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
    When it comes to "am I bovvered"-ness, Israel is France on steroids.
     
  17. shtove

    shtove Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Feb 27 2010, 12:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    When it comes to "am I bovvered"-ness, Israel is France on steroids.
    [/b][/quote]
    And no mention of China. Elephant? What elephant?
     
  18. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    Kind of hard when the elephant rarely gets invited. Seriously, the top threats (i.e. those visitors who are most likely to try it on and get a peek at classified stuff) listed to me by several guys I worked with at QinetiQ were France & Israel followed by Eastern Europeans and America.

    To be honest the Chinese rarely colaborate on defense research with the likes of the UK and so rarely get invited on visits. The Americans, French and Israelis however do cooperate on a regular basis with the UK and thus get invited round for tea alot hence why they're paranoid about them seeing stuff.

    Part of the drill was basically "if you see the suits, turn your monitors off and put your work in the nearest draw." This got tricky if you have four Cisco routers and switches and two laptops and you saw a bunch of guys in suits being led along by a tour guide heading your way...

    EDIT: the reason why I single out the French and Israelis is because they were an absolute pain in the arse to escort around a large site as they'd be forever trying to discreetly hang back, wander off into cubicles or excuse themselves to go to the toilet and go without someone to help them and then vanish in the building.

    The whole thing was a game as they were trying to get as much information as possible not looking for blueprints saying "TOP SECRETZ LOL" but trying to find out what projects we were working on.
     
  19. Charles

    Charles Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Feb 27 2010, 07:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Like you guys would never do the same in France or Israel... :rolleyes:
     
  20. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    Surprisingly no, at least not our staff when we go abroad as usually we just treat it as a jolly (i.e. get through the tour and business ASAP and then hit the pub) and in any case we leave that kind of thing to the security services. French & Isreali visitors who (as far as we know) were genuine and really did try it on at every level.

    Let me give you two examples. One an American delegation from a major US defence contractor and another from a French contractor.

    The former quite happily went where they were told, were more than happy to go through the basic tour, were happy to stand at the door and wait for everyone to switch their screens off, put work away, etc and were more interested in the nice buffet lunch. By the way we were working on a major project with them at the time.

    The latter were basically some of the sneakiest I've seen and they spent most of their time trying to wander off, tail back so they could go peek at stuff, try and talk to staff, walk quickly into rooms without waiting for us so they could get a look at what we were doing, tried to insist that we'd show them round other areas, ask a bazillion questions which they knew we weren't going to answer but wanted to ask anyway in case one of us would slip up. This list went on. It was exhausting just trying to keep up with them. It was hilarious when we suggested we go to the pub for lunch (like we usually do, y'know, being normal people and not trying to rape and pillage other nations for their state secrets 24/7) and this would get a reaction approaching angry bemusement because they were there simply to snoop and sneak about like secret squirrel.

    And the thing was, we'd get people like these from French and Israeli companies most of the time.
     
  21. Charles

    Charles Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Feb 27 2010, 08:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Well what can I say, you're soft, they're not. It's their job to be sneaky ********, not to be nice and mellow.

    Oh and I don't think you can really take the moral high ground either...
     
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page