JFKvsNixon Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 But Germany was not; and the only reason for the arms race was to stay ahead of Germany. Hmmm, we're talking about buts and maybes but at the time Germany was actively clambering for an over seas empire and also were in a Naval arms race with the British Empire. It's hard to see how this could be perceived not to be a threat to the British Empire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 As for naval forces the carrier, destroyer and submarine will continue in being with submarines becoming ever more sophisticated and deadly. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-11605365 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-11605365 Maybe the rum ration issue was just a bit too generous on that particular day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcspb1 Posted November 10, 2010 Author Share Posted November 10, 2010 Update: Admirals urge rethink on Harrier and Ark Royal cuts "In respect of the newly valuable Falklands and their oilfields, because of these and other cuts, for the next 10 years at least, Argentina is practically invited to attempt to inflict on us a national humiliation on the scale of the loss of Singapore. "One from which British prestige, let alone the administration in power at the time, might never recover." The admirals concluded: "We believe that these decisions should be rescinded in the over-riding national interest, before it is too late." Source My previous hypothetical posts seem to be almost correct... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 The chances of Argentina threatening the Falklands are as close to zero as make no odds. This is to be expected from the heads of the various services as they see their power slip away. After all, what's the point in being an Admiral if you have nothing to lord over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 More Admirals than ships I understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 The chances of Argentina threatening the Falklands are as close to zero as make no odds. This is to be expected from the heads of the various services as they see their power slip away. After all, what's the point in being an Admiral if you have nothing to lord over? They just need a new hobby: http://www.rcnavalcombat.com/OurShips/WarshipPhotoGallery/tabid/64/AlbumID/657-1/Page/0/Default.aspx -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 We've got a lot to thank Blair and Brown for ... and the people who kept re-electing them . You got that right. That grabbing sod Blair took the UK into an illegal war based totally on lies and was well paid for his trouble and spilt blood by Bush's pals. He's getting paid millions while everyone else suffers. Vote labour then book yourself into a mental health institution - you need your daft head looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 The chances of Argentina threatening the Falklands are as close to zero as make no odds. That's true, they're now using Facebook instead! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1327997/The-Queens-Facebook-page-gets-150-000-visits-day.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.