Falkland Islands part deux

Discussion in 'Americas' started by trackwhack, Dec 24, 2011.

  1. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,582
    I matched your sarcasm with sarcasm. You added no content and only trolled another member. I pointed it out. You're still sulking.
     
  2. Verdane

    Verdane Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    UK
    I'm seriously not... i'm laughing. Chill out. And I didn't troll anyone - I corrected what appeared to be an error or incorrect assertion.

    And in fact it was an error - the referendum process was well under way in Scotland when that post was made. It was just details like the wording that were being thrashed out.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2014
  3. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,582

    Of course the referendum process was well underway ... And Cameron had a problem with it. Hence the comment. Stop trolling ... again. And go read the papers on the day before the comment was made. And figure out what Cameron said, before you post more shite.
     
  4. Verdane

    Verdane Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    UK
    You have twice accused me of being a troll as a form of personal attack, which by definition is troll like behaviour. But please continue, I find your efforts to try and goad me into an argument, whilst simultaneously accusing me of trollish behaviour, rather entertaining.

    taranraju was accusing Cameron (a man I am loath to find myself defending) as being against self determination - ie having a choice. The fact the referendum process was under way with Cameron's agreement counters this statement. Perhaps if i'd checked the posting date I wouldn't have bothered responding... however I didn't. But that doesn't invalidate what I wrote or make me a troll.

    On October 15, 2012, the Edinburgh Agreement was signed by First Minister Alex Salmond and Prime Minister David Cameron. The Agreement ensures that the Scottish Parliament at Holyrood will be able to deliver a referendum that meets the highest standards of fairness, transparency and propriety.

    That was a long time before "postgate" & whilst obviously Cameron is opposed to Scottish independence ( as UK prime minister it's his job to oppose the break up of the UK), that's not the same as opposing self determination. In terms of the referendum the only bit I recall him actively opposing was the devo max option that Salmond initially wanted on the voting paper - and that had implications for the whole of the UK which didn't get a vote. Cameron wanted and in out referendum plain and simple.

    Now, i understand you are working yourself into a bit of a hissy fit over a perceived slight to your boyfriend/girlfriend/whatever... and I appreciate it's important to you to feel you are winning an argument (probably any argument) but perhaps you would find a nice warm bath more productive.
     
  5. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,582
    @Verdane

    Your argument is flawed because Cameron made his thoughts on the referendum quite clear whether he agreed in his official capacity or not. hich is what tarun raju pointed out. When you made the comment, I pointed out in the exact tone that you used that the post was relevant. you went on to argue about some other irrelevant topic like me following this thread vehemently and thats when I called you a troll because you displayed classic troll behaviour.

    you agreed yourself that you had not noticed the date and you should have just said as much when it was pointed out to you. good day.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  6. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,141
    Likes Received:
    8,562
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    I think the major revelation in this thread is that Argentina rattles the saber over Falklands only when it's need to distract from Argies' domestic economic problems.
     
  7. Verdane

    Verdane Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    UK

    I agree,it is a standard Argentine tactic during periods of internal financial difficulties to distract the populace by ramping up nationalism over the Falklands.

    Most of the Argentine government pronouncements related to the Falklands are filled with hyperbole or lack validity; but I can understand why most of the nonsense spouted by the Kirschner government resonates with many Argentines.

    Ironically they chose to rip up agreements for the joint exploration and development of the islands resource, an agreement which would have benefited the Argentine economy; since which oil exploration has proceeded without them.
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  8. HMS Astute

    HMS Astute Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2014
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    230
    Location:
    Italy

    even the chinese people in hong kong prefer stay part of the british oversea territory than being controlled by the chinese communist government lool. let alone the british people live in falklands.





    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2014
  9. HMS Astute

    HMS Astute Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2014
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    230
    Location:
    Italy
    there are enough surface to air defence systems stations on several corners of the island. in addition to that, 4x typhoon jets and 1x refuelling aircraft are always patrolling the area. furthermore, at least a trafalgar class nuclear submarine and a type 23 frigate are deployed there. argentina has no chance to make their wet dream becomes reality by using military power. 1x type 45 destroyer alone is capable of destroying the entire argentine air force, and we can also send in our stealth subs to sink their entire navy fleet and also destroy their airports from 2500km range.


    Typhoons flying past Mt Alice Radar site in West Falkland Islands

    [​IMG]




    Type 45 Air Defence Destroyer patrolling the Falkland Islands

    [​IMG]
     
  10. HMS Astute

    HMS Astute Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2014
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    230
    Location:
    Italy
    how funny you're so determined to talk about our contribution in libya when you only spent 1/3 of the amount uk contributed during this war, and your super reliable mighty carrier had to withdraw from the service even in a very limited and short term war like this. why don't you talk about how you always have to beg the uk to borrow the bigass C17 plane whenever you have to deliver your fighting kits to africa? it's funny you like to criticise other people, but can't see yourself.

    French Carrier Out of Action

    French Carrier Out of Action - WSJ



    do you even know the current state of the argentine navy and air force? their ships are frequently sinking in their dock due to inadequate maintenance.



    pathetic opinion. no further comment.



    as already mentioned several times in this thread that typhoon jets always patrol the area and there are at least 1x or 2x type 23 frigates on deployment. you're not only wrong about the amphibious capability, but utterly clueless about what you're saying. royal navy has more assault ships, landing ships, transport docks, helicopter carriers, sea lifts, supply and support ships than your french navy. let alone the comparison of total tonnages lol. rfa fleet alone has many more ships which are significantly bigger than what french navy got.

    Royal Fleet Auxiliary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    we just bought additional 65x of them a few weeks ago (18th, July 2014) and we can easily get more if necessary and in emergency situation. doubt it would be required against argentine anyway.
     

Share This Page