Falkland Islands

[Legbreaker]

I think it'd be rather amusing if the Americans sent a Carrier Battle Group along with a Marine Expeditionary Unit down to the Falklands to "settle" the dispute, and all Chavez and Castro could do was whine.

Not that the US could get away with even thinking about doing that given it's a dispute strictly between the UK and Argentina. I can't imagine the Queen and HM Government looking very fondly over the US throwing their weight about where it's definately not wanted.

The UK, despite the last few decades of cutbacks, still has the strength to deter the Argentine military, otherwise the Argentinians would have already acted.

[Legbreaker]

Westland Lynx, UK; South Georgia Islands, 2000.
This Lynx is one of three assigned to the British Army garrison of the South Georgia Islands and is used both for patrols and liaison purposes. Ordinarily the maritime version would have been used, but shortages forced the British to make use of standard Lynxes in some less important spots. These aircraft have been equipped with internal flexible fuel bladders for extended range operations.
The aircraft has not been stationed to the islands long, as it still sports the olive/tan dry summer camouflage pattern instead of a more suitable colour scheme. The only other markings are the ID numbers in black and the subdued British national roundel.

I've spent a little time looking at the South Georgia Islands and I can't for the life of me work out what even one, let alone three perfectly good helicopters are doing there!
There's no permanent residents on the islands, and it's not exactly a high priority military target, so what the hell is going on Industry is virtually non-existent (fishing is about it) so they can't be there to protect them.
Argentina did have a small hidden base on the southernmost island (well away from the semi-permanent settlement), but the UK kicked them out in 1982 after the Falklands War.

My best guess is the writers weren't aware of just how desolate and remote the islands are.

[RN7]

As far as Kirchner is concerned, there is a few things worth noting. Kirchner is a member of a political group along with her husband that is pointedly dedicated to the reclamation of the "Malvinas" (Unfortunately, the name of said group eludes me at this point though I read about them recently, I'll try to find it again). Another, Argentina is feeling the effects of the economic downturn and is being forced to trim the budget and social programs, along with the usual political problems that continue to plague the country. The "crisis" that Kirchner is pushing is giving her a serious bump in the polls when beforehand her polls were looking pretty abysmal (long story, but again, lots of problems involving political and budget issues in the country and Kirchner made some bad calls as it appears). And finally....rich fisheries, oil and natural gas treasure troves around the Falklands The Argentines aren't stupid, they want those islands and the potential resources they could gain from them. Just how well the Argentines would effectively administer the islands, and efficiently harvest said resources were they in control of the islands might be another matter.

The Argentinians figure if they can play the "poor exploited country versus the colonialist power" card against the U.K. at the United Nations, they might be able to garner enough sympathy along with an economic blockade courtesy of Mercosur that'll lead to a successful handover of the Falklands to the Argentinians. However, IMHO, this is more a "Holy Grail" fantasy (with respect to the actual Holy Grail myth, of course). The Argentinians claim on the Falklands is flimsy at best from a pure legal sense, there is no original ethnic group that is claiming ownership of the Falklands, and the 3,000 current Falkland Islanders, who sadly appear to have been largely overlooked by most worldwide media have vocally stated their desire to remain an independent territory of the United Kingdom. Suffice to say, the Falklanders have had some colorful words to describe Christina De Kirchner, Hugo Chavez (who's been offering military support to Kirchner) and Sean Penn (who's been vocally supporting Kirchner's position) as of late, to put it mildly.

I totally agree and Kirchner's rhetoric is very transparent. The sad part of it all is that Argentina might once have been a very wealthy country. At the turn of the 20th century it was one of the richest countries in the world and was a major player in the world economy, and was a real alternative to North America and Australia for European immigrants. Despite being Spanish speaking there are more people of Italian origin in Argentina than Spanish, and a lot of peope of German, French and even British descent. At one time Britain was even a major investor in the Argentine economy and there were very friendly links despite some irrelevant issues over the Falklands.

However then came Peron who led Argentina down the path of populist socialism like most of the rest of South America, with its own band of nationalism/fascism and Argentina has been an economic basketcase and political backwater ever since.

Kirchner's recruitment of Castro and Chavez has to be one of the greatest public relations disasters in Argentine history. I mean does Kirchner really think America or even Europe is going to take Argentinas side with these two scumbags supporting Argentina As for Sean Penn, well he's of Irish decent so he's trying to be cool, but he's also a Hollywood actor which says it all as they are notable in the most parts for their high intelligence, NOT!

[RN7]

And that Sean Penn has taken up Argentina's cause in this issue It strikes me as really odd. I'm not a big fan of Penn's work in film (some of his roles have been ok) but I have always had the impression that he's a fairly intelligent, well informed kind of guy. Why the hell has he taken this stance over the Falklands issue Of course he's entirely entitled to have his own opinion on the matter, but why is he going out of his way to back Argentina in this in the media It confuses me.

Hey he married Madonna and is a Hollywood actor and has been in fist fights all over the world, so I think he a bit confused too!

[RN7]

Not that the US could get away with even thinking about doing that given it's a dispute strictly between the UK and Argentina. I can't imagine the Queen and HM Government looking very fondly over the US throwing their weight about where it's definately not wanted.

The UK, despite the last few decades of cutbacks, still has the strength to deter the Argentine military, otherwise the Argentinians would have already acted.

I don't think Argentina's military has progressed in any significant way since the Falklands War. Unfortunately for Argentina the British military has despite defence cutbacks, and certainly its air force and navy is two generations ahead of Argentina's. Despite being without a real carrier for the next five years the RAF and RN would absolutely slaughter them to put it midly, and would do the same to anything Cuba or Venezuela trew at them.

[Rainbow Six]

Not that the US could get away with even thinking about doing that given it's a dispute strictly between the UK and Argentina. I can't imagine the Queen and HM Government looking very fondly over the US throwing their weight about where it's definately not wanted.

The UK, despite the last few decades of cutbacks, still has the strength to deter the Argentine military, otherwise the Argentinians would have already acted.

Agreed. I understand the US did provide the UK with some low key support during the 1982 War - access to US satellite imagery springs to mind as one example - but I don't think UK defence cuts have reached the stage where we would need to go cap in hand to the Americans and ask them to "settle" things for us.

I've spent a little time looking at the South Georgia Islands and I can't for the life of me work out what even one, let alone three perfectly good helicopters are doing there!
There's no permanent residents on the islands, and it's not exactly a high priority military target, so what the hell is going on Industry is virtually non-existent (fishing is about it) so they can't be there to protect them.
Argentina did have a small hidden base on the southernmost island (well away from the semi-permanent settlement), but the UK kicked them out in 1982 after the Falklands War.

My best guess is the writers weren't aware of just how desolate and remote the islands are.

Totally agree...there's no logic in basing helicopters on South Georgia. I'd question why there would be a permanent British garrison of any sort.

[Rainbow Six]

Hey guys,

just read an article today in Daily Mail about Fauklands mission and Royal family, specifically prince William being a pilot there. Basically, it suggested that the army in Fauklands is not very pleased about having any members of Royal family there, since the safety requirements has to be 3x as strict as they would be otherwise.
What do u think about it Do u agree that members of Royal family shouldnt serve in the war in Faukland Islands

I didn't read that article but I do recall similar concerns being raised when it was first mentioned that the Household Cavalry Regiment (which Prince Harry served in at the time) was to be deployed to Afghanistan. It was feared that his presence in theatre would attract insurgents, thus increasing the risk to other soldiers. You may recall that when he did finally deploy there was a complete news blackout (which was finally broken by a blogger iirc, at which point he was quite quickly pulled back to the UK). I believe part of the reason he retrained as an Apache pilot was so he could avoid the same sort of issues in any future deployment as a helicopter pilot is more "anonymous" than a bloke on the ground (that same logic may have applied when Prince Andrew went to the South Atlantic in 1982).

However that was Afghanistan - as RN7 points out, Argentine sabre rattling / UN protests notwithstanding, I'd be surprised if the risks are judged to be particularly high in the Falklands.

[headquarters]

Falklands

Well - there is oil.Or great prospects of it anyhow.

Of course there will be an argument. Kirchner - btw - has said that military options are of the table as fars as the islands go.

There is of course a solution that is blatantly obvious - cut the Argentines in on the oil like they want and live happily ever after. Just a thought.

[Targan]

Totally agree...there's no logic in basing helicopters on South Georgia. I'd question why there would be a permanent British garrison of any sort.

Unless that was where the British hid some helos and Harriers and associated personnel, supplies, equipment and POL during the Argentinians' attempted occupation of the Falklands. They may have mothballed some of those assets there after the Argentinians left because it became impractical to bring them back to the main islands, at least for a time.

[Rainbow Six]

Unless that was where the British hid some helos and Harriers and associated personnel, supplies, equipment and POL during the Argentinians' attempted occupation of the Falklands. They may have mothballed some of those assets there after the Argentinians left because it became impractical to bring them back to the main islands, at least for a time.

That's certainly possible but the notes on the plate state that the Lynx is fully operational and actively carrying out patrols, which doesn't suggest it's mothballed

[Targan]

That's certainly possible but the notes on the plate state that the Lynx is fully operational and actively carrying out patrols, which doesn't suggest it's mothballed

The photo was taken to celebrate the aviation assets on South Georgia being returned to operational status Maybe they finally had the fuel and spares to start 'em up and fly 'em back to Stanley.

[Legbreaker]

Fatal flaw to that theory.
The notes specifically state the aircraft hasn't been there long.

[Targan]

Tricky. Trying to match up available canon data when it doesn't really make any sense. I'm just throwing ideas out there, is all. Maybe it'll make more sense to me after another Blanton's on the rocks. Well, that's my excuse anyway

[Rainbow Six]

Here's a theory...

Two Lynxes are mothballed on South Georgia. They're mostly operational, but are missing vital parts (or pilots).

A third Lynx (the one in the plate), fitted with long range fuel bladders, is despatched from the Falklands with the neccessary parts (or crew) to restore the two mothballed helos to a fully operational state. This ties in with the line about it having recently arrived in the islands. The photo was taken during this period

Perhaps when all three are operational they all move to the Falklands

Like Targan says it's tricky though...there's a few "what if's" in there.

Personally, I'm inclined to think it makes more sense if we accept it as a typo of sorts and change all reference to the South Georgia islands to the South Atlantic Islands, leaving it to one's own choice whether the helos are on the Falklands or South Georgia. (As far as I know technically there's no such place as the South Georgia Islands anyway - it's either the Island (singular) of South Georgia or the South Sandwich Islands...)

[Fusilier]

Personally, I'm inclined to think it makes more sense if we accept it as a typo of sorts and change all reference to the South Georgia islands to the South Atlantic Islands, leaving it to one's own choice whether the helos are on the Falklands or South Georgia. (As far as I know technically there's no such place as the South Georgia Islands anyway - it's either the Island (singular) of South Georgia or the South Sandwich Islands...)

You aren't alone on that. There are several geographical errors in the different books so I'm assuming that this was just another one.