Re: Falkland islands
 

And the 1982 conflict was basically a happy slapping because Galtieri needed to look hard in front of his mates.

Re: Falkland islands
 

Back in the 90's oil was only about $10 a barrel, so with the difficulty in extraction it wasn't worth it. But with the sky rocketing prices now and more modern techniques in extraction its more financially viable. The original surveys where done by Shell, and I imagine they are not interest now as Argentina have said anyone drilling in that area will loose any rights to drill in Argentinian areas, hence the little British company drilling.

I don't think it was about oil back then as it was worth naff all.

Re: Falkland islands
 

It would have been so much easier if they had just had Galtieri & Thatcher slap each other.

I would say less so his mates and more so the US......they had been asking for US backing of the junta for a long time pre the war.

Re: Falkland islands
 

And waiving the 1823 Monroe Doctrine which states that any efforts by countries to colonize land or interfere with states in the scope of the Americas would be viewed by the United States of America as acts of aggression requiring US intervention. Basically, they agreed not to come and kick us out when we got shot of the Argies. Quite a ballsy move, actually. This was, I believe, the first time it had been waived and gave Britain the unspoken authorisation to commit her forces.

I served there in 1991 and, like FG1, found the Bennies to be extremely proud to be British and fiercely loyal to the Crown - unlike some people in THIS country.

Just as an aside, around 60% of the Islanders are of Australian or New Zealand extraction due to the relatively high numbers of sheep shearers from those countries going there to help out with the shearing.

Re: Falkland islands
 

You could argue that the Monroe doctrine would only be applicable if we had invaded Argentina, which other than being pointless would be totally impractical.

AFAIK they did embargo arms to Argentina but they did that long before anyway in protest of the junta. They also provided Ascension Island with huge quantities of fuel for us to run the V bombers on.

Re: Falkland islands
 

The other point here is that the United Kingdom and Argentina had a treaty by which any oil revenues would be shared - I D/K in what proportions - Argentina unilaterally renounced it in 2007.

So this is not a dispute about oil.

Re: Falkland islands
 

The US supplied us with fuel and an airbase on Ascension Island to work from. Without either of these, the conflict would have been long over before we could get there.

Good book for those interested - Vulcan 607
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vulcan-607-R.../dp/0593053915

Re: Falkland islands
 

Absolutely cracking read, otherwise termed "operation; skin o tha teeth"

Re: Falkland islands
 

This was actually a really tricky one for the Americans at the time.Besides the Munroe issue,Argentina was a USA client state and had been supported extensively by them for many years.I was in Argentina before the war and there were plenty of American military there training and equiping the junta's forces.This during their "dirty war"when the junta murdered thousands of the opposition.You still see groups of elderly women standing outside government buildings in Buenos Aires asking what happened to their "disappeared ones".The Americans tried to mediate to prevent the war,but eventually gave Britain their tacit support to retake the islands.They even offered military support to us,allegedly on the understanding it would be declined to save their embarrassment.The rest is history and the Argentines have no real claim to the islands other than that they are the nearest country.By the same token France should have Jersey and Spain Gibralter.Best to ask the inhabitants,especially if there is no dispute amongst them.

Re: Falkland islands
 

Yup. Cracking read. Real "flying by the seat of your pants" stuff. (no pun intended!!) The airbase on Ascension, as with Diego Garcia, is owned by Britain. It is, however, manned and administered by the USAF. I belive it was used as an alternative landing site for the space shuttle before it was found that most of Florida was a more cost effective option.

As for YC's point about the Monroe Doctrine - yeah, you could argue that but the point I was making was that they waived it.