Gibraltar

[John52]

The Tory Right (Michael Howard) beligerence over Gibraltar, with its references to the Falklands tragedy, got me thinking. Over a million Brits chose to live under the Spanish Government (so they can't be that bad).

Should we abandon a million Brits living in Spain, and go to war with our Spanish friends to defend 30,000 wealthy tax exiles in Gibraltar who ban our motorhomes and pay nothing for their defence?

(you might have guessed what my answer would be ;-) )

[Violet1956]

John52 - 2017-05-03 1:44 PM

 

The Tory Right (Michael Howard) beligerence over Gibraltar, with its references to the Falklands tragedy, got me thinking. Over a million Brits chose to live under the Spanish Government (so they can't be that bad).

Should we abandon a million Brits living in Spain, and go to war with our Spanish friends to defend 30,000 wealthy tax exiles in Gibraltar who ban our motorhomes and pay nothing for their defence?

(you might have guessed what my answer would be ;-) )

 

Must admit to be rather ignorant about the Gibraltar issue do you have a link John to anything that Michael Howard has said?

 

Cheers

 

Veronica

[Bulletguy]

Violet1956 - 2017-05-03 3:08 PM

 

John52 - 2017-05-03 1:44 PM

 

The Tory Right (Michael Howard) beligerence over Gibraltar, with its references to the Falklands tragedy, got me thinking. Over a million Brits chose to live under the Spanish Government (so they can't be that bad).

Should we abandon a million Brits living in Spain, and go to war with our Spanish friends to defend 30,000 wealthy tax exiles in Gibraltar who ban our motorhomes and pay nothing for their defence?

(you might have guessed what my answer would be ;-) )

 

Must admit to be rather ignorant about the Gibraltar issue do you have a link John to anything that Michael Howard has said?

 

Cheers

 

Veronica

This Veronica >> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/gibraltar-michael-howard-got-to-war-with-spain-falklands-brexit-hilarious-never-going-to-happen-a7664536.html

[John52]

Its been in a few papers. I'll post theGuardian link so the Mad Hatter can say its the loony lefties again ;-) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/britain-and-eu-worse-off-without-brexit-deal-says-michael-fallon

I've been in a few times because I don't have a motorhome. Its a van loaded with furniture ;-)

Gib looks very prosperous because they are only British when it suits them - not British when it comes to paying tax etc *-)

You can see why it winds the Spanish up because much of their tax revenue is lost through people nipping over the border to buy cheaper fuel, fags etc. So they slow the border crossing down to make it less profitable for the smugglers :-S

[Guest pelmetman]

John52 - 2017-05-03 3:28 PM

 

You can see why it winds the Spanish up because much of their tax revenue is lost through people nipping over the border to buy cheaper fuel, fags etc. So they slow the border crossing down to make it less profitable for the smugglers :-S

 

Smugglers? :-S ........Oh you mean the Spanish :D .......

 

Funny how the Spanish make such a big deal about Gib whilst ignoring their own little Gib's such as Ceuta or Melilla.........

 

So what are your views about them then John?......Or is it only British enclaves that tickle your moral compass? >:-) ........

 

 

[John52]

pelmetman - 2017-05-03 3:43 PM

 

Funny how the Spanish make such a big deal about Gib whilst ignoring their own little Gib's such as Ceuta or Melilla.........

 

So what are your views about them then John?......Or is it only British enclaves that tickle your moral compass? >:-) ........

 

 

Fair point I don't know much about Ceuta or Melilla.........

It isn't only British enclaves that tickle my moral compass, just happen to know more about them, and have a vote to influence them :-S

[Bulletguy]

John52 - 2017-05-03 3:28 PM

 

Its been in a few papers. I'll post theGuardian link so the Mad Hatter can say its the loony lefties again ;-) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/britain-and-eu-worse-off-without-brexit-deal-says-michael-fallon

I've been in a few times because I don't have a motorhome. Its a van loaded with furniture ;-)

Gib looks very prosperous because they are only British when it suits them - not British when it comes to paying tax etc *-)

You can see why it winds the Spanish up because much of their tax revenue is lost through people nipping over the border to buy cheaper fuel, fags etc. So they slow the border crossing down to make it less profitable for the smugglers :-S

Howards comments leave me to believe he's possibly suffering with delusional psychosis. Both UK and Spain are NATO countries so an attack on Spain would not only be ridiculous and we would be answerable to all other NATO countries. The man is quite frankly, bonkers mad.

 

Though Spain would still like Gibraltar back, Gibraltar needs Spain for it's workforce and freedom of movement is an absolute essential with approx 12,000 a day crossing it's border. Some Gibraltarians of course live in Spain as housing is cheaper. It's major industry is gambling which could easily relocate.

 

However it's population voted overwhelmingly to Remain (96%) and May should keep that in mind. Is Brexit bonkers UK prepared to put thousands of Gibraltarians out of work and on the social? Exiting the EU is already going to cost billions and taxation, something no politician wants to talk about right now, is bound to increase.

 

More here on Gib.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/gibraltar-brexit-how-affect-uk-spain-what-connection-leave-eu-europe-headland-rock-a7663981.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/03/spain-plans-end-gibraltars-privileged-existence-tax-haven-brexit/

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170430/spain-says-no-gibraltar-red-lines-in-brexit

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170503/spain-demands-brexit-brings-end-to-gibraltars-unfair-competition

 

 

[Violet1956]

Bulletguy - 2017-05-03 4:39 PM

 

John52 - 2017-05-03 3:28 PM

 

Its been in a few papers. I'll post theGuardian link so the Mad Hatter can say its the loony lefties again ;-) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/britain-and-eu-worse-off-without-brexit-deal-says-michael-fallon

I've been in a few times because I don't have a motorhome. Its a van loaded with furniture ;-)

Gib looks very prosperous because they are only British when it suits them - not British when it comes to paying tax etc *-)

You can see why it winds the Spanish up because much of their tax revenue is lost through people nipping over the border to buy cheaper fuel, fags etc. So they slow the border crossing down to make it less profitable for the smugglers :-S

Howards comments leave me to believe he's possibly suffering with delusional psychosis. Both UK and Spain are NATO countries so an attack on Spain would not only be ridiculous and we would be answerable to all other NATO countries. The man is quite frankly, bonkers mad.

 

Though Spain would still like Gibraltar back, Gibraltar needs Spain for it's workforce and freedom of movement is an absolute essential with approx 12,000 a day crossing it's border. Some Gibraltarians of course live in Spain as housing is cheaper. It's major industry is gambling which could easily relocate.

 

However it's population voted overwhelmingly to Remain (96%) and May should keep that in mind. Is Brexit bonkers UK prepared to put thousands of Gibraltarians out of work and on the social? Exiting the EU is already going to cost billions and taxation, something no politician wants to talk about right now, is bound to increase.

 

More here on Gib.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/gibraltar-brexit-how-affect-uk-spain-what-connection-leave-eu-europe-headland-rock-a7663981.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/03/spain-plans-end-gibraltars-privileged-existence-tax-haven-brexit/

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170430/spain-says-no-gibraltar-red-lines-in-brexit

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170503/spain-demands-brexit-brings-end-to-gibraltars-unfair-competition

 

Thanks BG for these links. I feel a little more informed but I still don't get what the Spanish want to happen about Gibraltar post Brexit. Someone with a better knowledge, perhaps you, will have to explain that to me. The people of Gibraltar seem to want to remain part of UK sovereign territory but it doesn't seem to suit them to be out of the EU. I ask myself whether I should care about their dilemma? Do you know why I should?

Veronica

 

 

[John52]

Violet1956 - 2017-05-03 5:00 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2017-05-03 4:39 PM

 

John52 - 2017-05-03 3:28 PM

 

Its been in a few papers. I'll post theGuardian link so the Mad Hatter can say its the loony lefties again ;-) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/britain-and-eu-worse-off-without-brexit-deal-says-michael-fallon

I've been in a few times because I don't have a motorhome. Its a van loaded with furniture ;-)

Gib looks very prosperous because they are only British when it suits them - not British when it comes to paying tax etc *-)

You can see why it winds the Spanish up because much of their tax revenue is lost through people nipping over the border to buy cheaper fuel, fags etc. So they slow the border crossing down to make it less profitable for the smugglers :-S

Howards comments leave me to believe he's possibly suffering with delusional psychosis. Both UK and Spain are NATO countries so an attack on Spain would not only be ridiculous and we would be answerable to all other NATO countries. The man is quite frankly, bonkers mad.

 

Though Spain would still like Gibraltar back, Gibraltar needs Spain for it's workforce and freedom of movement is an absolute essential with approx 12,000 a day crossing it's border. Some Gibraltarians of course live in Spain as housing is cheaper. It's major industry is gambling which could easily relocate.

 

However it's population voted overwhelmingly to Remain (96%) and May should keep that in mind. Is Brexit bonkers UK prepared to put thousands of Gibraltarians out of work and on the social? Exiting the EU is already going to cost billions and taxation, something no politician wants to talk about right now, is bound to increase.

 

More here on Gib.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/gibraltar-brexit-how-affect-uk-spain-what-connection-leave-eu-europe-headland-rock-a7663981.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/03/spain-plans-end-gibraltars-privileged-existence-tax-haven-brexit/

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170430/spain-says-no-gibraltar-red-lines-in-brexit

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170503/spain-demands-brexit-brings-end-to-gibraltars-unfair-competition

 

Thanks BG for these links. I feel a little more informed but I still don't get what the Spanish want to happen about Gibraltar post Brexit. Someone with a better knowledge, perhaps you, will have to explain that to me. The people of Gibraltar seem to want to remain part of UK sovereign territory but it doesn't seem to suit them to be out of the EU. I ask myself whether I should care about their dilemma? Do you know why I should?

Veronica

 

 

The Gibraltarians want to remain a tax haven sucking revenue out of the EU (for which it needs free movement), subsidised by the British taxpayer paying for its defence etc.

I couldn't care less about their dilemma, but do care how much more they are going to cost Britain (and the Brits living in Spain) in the negotiations, especially with the Tory right treating it like another Falkland Islands. :-( Makes me wonder how much money they have got stashed away in these tax havens they are so keen for us to protect.

[Bulletguy]

Violet1956 - 2017-05-03 5:00 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2017-05-03 4:39 PM

 

John52 - 2017-05-03 3:28 PM

 

Its been in a few papers. I'll post theGuardian link so the Mad Hatter can say its the loony lefties again ;-) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/britain-and-eu-worse-off-without-brexit-deal-says-michael-fallon

I've been in a few times because I don't have a motorhome. Its a van loaded with furniture ;-)

Gib looks very prosperous because they are only British when it suits them - not British when it comes to paying tax etc *-)

You can see why it winds the Spanish up because much of their tax revenue is lost through people nipping over the border to buy cheaper fuel, fags etc. So they slow the border crossing down to make it less profitable for the smugglers :-S

Howards comments leave me to believe he's possibly suffering with delusional psychosis. Both UK and Spain are NATO countries so an attack on Spain would not only be ridiculous and we would be answerable to all other NATO countries. The man is quite frankly, bonkers mad.

 

Though Spain would still like Gibraltar back, Gibraltar needs Spain for it's workforce and freedom of movement is an absolute essential with approx 12,000 a day crossing it's border. Some Gibraltarians of course live in Spain as housing is cheaper. It's major industry is gambling which could easily relocate.

 

However it's population voted overwhelmingly to Remain (96%) and May should keep that in mind. Is Brexit bonkers UK prepared to put thousands of Gibraltarians out of work and on the social? Exiting the EU is already going to cost billions and taxation, something no politician wants to talk about right now, is bound to increase.

 

More here on Gib.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/gibraltar-brexit-how-affect-uk-spain-what-connection-leave-eu-europe-headland-rock-a7663981.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/03/spain-plans-end-gibraltars-privileged-existence-tax-haven-brexit/

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170430/spain-says-no-gibraltar-red-lines-in-brexit

 

https://www.thelocal.es/20170503/spain-demands-brexit-brings-end-to-gibraltars-unfair-competition

 

Thanks BG for these links. I feel a little more informed but I still don't get what the Spanish want to happen about Gibraltar post Brexit. Someone with a better knowledge, perhaps you, will have to explain that to me. The people of Gibraltar seem to want to remain part of UK sovereign territory but it doesn't seem to suit them to be out of the EU. I ask myself whether I should care about their dilemma? Do you know why I should?

Veronica

I think it's more a matter of what UK's intention is. As a British Overseas Territory (BOT), same as Falklands who didn't get a vote as they aren't an EU country but more of them later, UK has continued to hold on to these territories which many UK mainland people would question the reasoning and logic of. However these territories have been assisted by UK Gov in keeping the population onside by remaining part of the UK.

 

But now with Brexit they obviously feel they are being completely ignored and their lives impacted for the worse makes me wonder just how much longer they will consider remaining part of the UK is in their best interests. Does their patriotism extend to wanting a blue passport which UK apparently intends to resurrect circa 1960's style with "British" stamped in as their nationality? Of course there are also many thousands more expat Brits living permanently in Spain (and other EU countries) who are seriously concerned about their future, particularly as many are elderly and retired there. Whilst some are undoubtedly wealthy and financially comfortable, many are not and could not afford to relocate back to the UK.

 

A bit of an aside but still relevant, after the war the Falkland islanders were given a referendum on whether to remain as a BOT territory and all except three voted to remain with UK. Like Gibraltar they must now be wondering if they did the right thing. Prior to the war breaking out, Thatchers government was in secret talks with Argentina over handing sovereignty of the Falkland islands behind the backs of the islanders at a clandestine meeting with a senior Argentinian official less than two years before the invasion of the British territory. This never came out into public domain until some time later but islanders are fully aware of the duplicity UK government was prepared to go to and Gibraltarians should bear their experience in mind.

 

75% of the Falklands exports go to the EU market so they will now be facing even more serious issues than Gibraltar. Not only will the Falklands’ export market be in danger, so would the guaranteed solidarity of all 28 EU member states in recognising British sovereignty over the islands. Whenever an Argentine president decides to launch a diplomatic drive against the self-determination of the islanders, as the last one did, they receive no hearing at all in European capitals. Remove the obligations to Britain in the European treaties, and a future president will sense the chance to be bolder.

 

Gibraltar is just 1500 miles away from London but on the front doorstep of Spain. The Falklands is 8000 miles away...but less than a 1000 from Argentina.

 

[Guest pelmetman]

John52 - 2017-05-03 5:56 PM

 

The Gibraltarians want to remain a tax haven sucking revenue out of the EU (for which it needs free movement), subsidised by the British taxpayer paying for its defence etc.

.

 

When I revisited Gib in 2011 I was shocked to note just how reduced our military presence on the Rock was, compared to when I was stationed there in the late 70's.......

 

So I doubt our bill for its defence amounts to much :D ........

 

Cant say I'm fussed either way, but I guess its up to the Gibbo's to decide ;-) .......

 

 

[Violet1956]

pelmetman - 2017-05-03 6:19 PM

 

John52 - 2017-05-03 5:56 PM

 

The Gibraltarians want to remain a tax haven sucking revenue out of the EU (for which it needs free movement), subsidised by the British taxpayer paying for its defence etc.

.

 

When I revisited Gib in 2011 I was shocked to note just how reduced our military presence on the Rock was, compared to when I was stationed there in the late 70's.......

 

So I doubt our bill for its defence amounts to much :D ........

 

Cant say I'm fussed either way, but I guess its up to the Gibbo's to decide ;-) .......

 

I'm with you Dave on this. It's up to them to decide what they must do. I won't be surprised if their financial interests dictate their decision. It's what most of us do after all.

 

Veronica

[John52]

Violet1956 - 2017-05-03 6:27 PM

It's up to them to decide what they must do.

Veronica

 

Like asking the Jewish settlers in Palestine whether they want to remain part of Israel *-)

What of the British taxpayers subsidising Gibraltar's defence etc - should we be told the truth about what Gibraltar costs us and given a vote on whether we want to continue paying it?

[John52]

pelmetman - 2017-05-03 6:19 PM

 

John52 - 2017-05-03 5:56 PM

 

The Gibraltarians want to remain a tax haven sucking revenue out of the EU (for which it needs free movement), subsidised by the British taxpayer paying for its defence etc.

.

 

When I revisited Gib in 2011 I was shocked to note just how reduced our military presence on the Rock was, compared to when I was stationed there in the late 70's.......

 

So I doubt our bill for its defence amounts to much :D ........

 

Cant say I'm fussed either way, but I guess its up to the Gibbo's to decide ;-) .......

 

 

I last walked around all the public areas about a couple of years ago and there still seemed to be a large proportion occupied by the British military. But the real cost is not whats stationed there or in use, but the highest military spending in Europe to maintain forces in case they are required :-S

[John52]

Bulletguy - 2017-05-03 6:12 PM

 

Prior to the war breaking out, Thatchers government was in secret talks with Argentina over handing sovereignty of the Falkland islands behind the backs of the islanders at a clandestine meeting with a senior Argentinian official less than two years before the invasion of the British territory.

 

 

.. and selling off the Aircraft Carriers so the Argentines were led to believe Britain wouldn't go to war over a useless lump of rock 8000 miles away TheFalkland Islanders didn't even have British passports so would have been treated like illegal immigrants if they had come to Britain.. The Argentine Foreign minister likened it to 2 bald men fighting over a comb. :-(

Another factor was the Americans gave us use of their satellites so we could see what the Argies were doing when they couldn't see what we were doing. Not belittling our forces but the odds were against them so I doubt if they could have won without that huge advantage.. But it suited both sides to keep it quiet. The Americans wanted to rebuild relations with Argentina. And the Murdoch press wanted to pretend Thatcher had beaten the Argies single handed - Murdoch needed Thatcher in power to help him defeat the trade unions at his Wapping printworks :-S

[RogerC]

Some really ignorant comments going on about the Falklands and Gib at the moment.....

Falklands:  Yes there were back door conversations going on as there almost always are in political circles.  That much should be clear to a blind man so I don't see what is news with that comment.  It is not duplicity it is politics straight and simple....back door diplomacy.

Argentina had massive internal problems (the 'dissappeared', financial ruin around the corner and civil unrest to name the three most significant factors).  The Junta needed something to try and bring the country under control therefore an invasion was judged to be the most effective way of achieving a political aim because at that point the 'talks' were stalled. 

These days I consider it to be an extremely unlikely scenario whereby Argentina would consider similar actions.

Gibraltar/Falklands.......BG said "UK has continued to hold on to these territories which many UK mainland people would question the reasoning and logic of."

 

 

I would suggest anyone with an iota of military interest would be well aware of the importance of holding onto Gibraltar, and to a lesser extent the Falklands.....as we do with Ascension, Diego Garcia, Cyprus Sovereign base areas.  They are strategic assets.....plain and simple.....militarily and politically they are of great importance.  Maybe someone should have a chat with their son before passing comment on BoT and back room deals. 

 

 

John blindly comments, as he always does given any opportunity to 'knock' the UK:

"What of the British taxpayers subsidising Gibraltar's defence etc"

Whilst we are clearly no longer guardians or masters of the oceans Gib retains it's greatest importance as the gateway to the Med/Atlantic.  It is an important military and political asset that serves more than just Gibraltarians.

Another sickening comment from the resident UK establishment hater:

"Another factor was the Americans gave us use of their satellites so we could see what the Argies were doing when they couldn't see what we were doing. Not belittling our forces but the odds were against them so I doubt if they could have won without that huge advantage."

So you know the US provided satellite information that provided such a huge advantage John?  Please provide your source for that piece of nonsense.  

The weather in the South Atlantic during that period was horrendous as far as cloud cover and visibility is concerned.  Once the US had repositioned it's satellites over the region the imagery was all but useless and we were already 7 days into the land phase.  According to CIA released documents the satellites were not in orbit until 28 may.....7 days after the land phase had commenced.

It's a good job the likes of John and BG are not at the 'controls' as both seem to be completely incapable of seeing the 'bigger picture' through those incredibly biased glasses.....and John just appears to hate/despise anything or anyone who has contributed to the world in which we live other than his martyrs/suffragettes etc etc.............sad really.

 

 

BG ....seeing as your son rose rapidly through the ranks of SF maybe he could enlighten you on the merits of holding onto Gib....and correct our misguided contributor regarding his 'doubts' of the abilities of our armed forces considering the SAS and SBS played such a major part in the Falklands conflict??

[pepe63xnotuse]

Hi Roger..

 

You almost make it sound as if we can, if we so wished, act as gatekeepers to the Med'?...

What military capabilities have "we" actually got on Gibraltar?...

..and wouldn't any major military power, soon deal with what ever we could manage to moor up or float down there...?

(I say "float down" and "moor up" because I haven't heard of us having some sort of "Guns of Navarone" arrangement on Gib? .)

 

Of cause it's at a strategic point but isn't it severely compromised because it's stuck to another country?

(supply lines, infrastructure etc) , especially as that country isn't always one that sees eye to eye with the UK, over Gib'..?

 

:-S

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-05-04 2:29 PMSome really ignorant comments going on about the Falklands and Gib at the moment.....

Falklands:  Yes there were back door conversations going on as there almost always are in political circles.  That much should be clear to a blind man so I don't see what is news with that comment.  It is not duplicity it is politics straight and simple....back door diplomacy.

Argentina had massive internal problems (the 'dissappeared', financial ruin around the corner and civil unrest to name the three most significant factors).  The Junta needed something to try and bring the country under control therefore an invasion was judged to be the most effective way of achieving a political aim because at that point the 'talks' were stalled. 

These days I consider it to be an extremely unlikely scenario whereby Argentina would consider similar actions.

Gibraltar/Falklands.......BG said "UK has continued to hold on to these territories which many UK mainland people would question the reasoning and logic of."

 

 

I would suggest anyone with an iota of military interest would be well aware of the importance of holding onto Gibraltar, and to a lesser extent the Falklands.....as we do with Ascension, Diego Garcia, Cyprus Sovereign base areas.  They are strategic assets.....plain and simple.....militarily and politically they are of great importance.  Maybe someone should have a chat with their son before passing comment on BoT and back room deals. 

 

 

John blindly comments, as he always does given any opportunity to 'knock' the UK:

"What of the British taxpayers subsidising Gibraltar's defence etc"

Whilst we are clearly no longer guardians or masters of the oceans Gib retains it's greatest importance as the gateway to the Med/Atlantic.  It is an important military and political asset that serves more than just Gibraltarians.

Another sickening comment from the resident UK establishment hater:

"Another factor was the Americans gave us use of their satellites so we could see what the Argies were doing when they couldn't see what we were doing. Not belittling our forces but the odds were against them so I doubt if they could have won without that huge advantage."

So you know the US provided satellite information that provided such a huge advantage John?  Please provide your source for that piece of nonsense.  

The weather in the South Atlantic during that period was horrendous as far as cloud cover and visibility is concerned.  Once the US had repositioned it's satellites over the region the imagery was all but useless and we were already 7 days into the land phase.  According to CIA released documents the satellites were not in orbit until 28 may.....7 days after the land phase had commenced.

It's a good job the likes of John and BG are not at the 'controls' as both seem to be completely incapable of seeing the 'bigger picture' through those incredibly biased glasses.....and John just appears to hate/despise anything or anyone who has contributed to the world in which we live other than his martyrs/suffragettes etc etc.............sad really.

 

 

BG ....seeing as your son rose rapidly through the ranks of SF maybe he could enlighten you on the merits of holding onto Gib....and correct our misguided contributor regarding his 'doubts' of the abilities of our armed forces considering the SAS and SBS played such a major part in the Falklands conflict??

As I said, it suits both America and Britain to play down the value of satellites *-) When Britain had colonies all over the world, and could train its guns on what was then the only entrance/exit to the Med from Gib that was of obvious benefit. But you fail to explain what benefit it is now. (except of course to tax avoiders, and politicians going there on all expense paid junkets)But, Above All, can you please get away from this nonsense that those of us who don't want to send our lads to fight are disrespecting or not supporting them.

[Bulletguy]

RogerC - 2017-05-04 2:29 PM

 

Falklands: Yes there were back door conversations going on as there almost always are in political circles. That much should be clear to a blind man so I don't see what is news with that comment. It is not duplicity it is politics straight and simple....back door diplomacy.

Back door 'diplomacy' is perhaps a nicer more pleasant description. It cannot be ignored that it was deceitful and underhanded in that at the time, none of the residents were aware which in one word is duplicity. But this is just playing with mere semantics. There was no reason for Thatchers Government to withhold information from Falkland residents over their future unless they feared a backlash or uprising.

 

Gibraltar/Falklands.......BG said "UK has continued to hold on to these territories which many UK mainland people would question the reasoning and logic of."

 

I would suggest anyone with an iota of military interest would be well aware of the importance of holding onto Gibraltar, and to a lesser extent the Falklands.....militarily and politically they are of great importance.

And i also followed that sentence with, "these territories have been assisted by UK Gov in keeping the population onside by remaining part of the UK. And that sentence which you cut out is actually more important to where we are at today.

 

Yes many people on mainland UK certainly did question the logic and reasoning of a chunk of rock 8000 miles away sitting off the coast of Argentina. Many more had never even heard of the place. It was alien to most people.

 

Reference the above quote, all BOT island territories receive funding from UK Gov and for years that has been by keeping the population onside (the word i used, but you can substitute it with content or secure if you wish) by remaining part of UK. Brexit has now changed all that so BOT residents such as Gib must be questioning where their years of allegiance has now placed them. Falklanders are financially reliant on the EU for export trading but they may now see that disappearing.

 

We have these 'dots' of rock all over the place and Pitcairn is another (who didn't get a vote of course), but many mainland UK people had never even heard of that place until it got splashed all over the media in 2004.

 

Militarily UK maintains a substantial presence in the Falklands, more than Gib, with a permanent garrison of over 350 troops and facility to take up to 1200, a brand new RAF airbase with Typhoons, and the RN maintains a presence with a number of vessels. Not bad going for a tiny little remote (to UK) island which previously only had a small volunteer force.

 

My son was only eight years old at the time of the Falklands war so among the many who had never even heard of it at that time in his life.

 

 

 

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-05-04 4:51 PM  

 But, Above All, can you please get away from this nonsense that those of us who don't want to send our lads to fight are disrespecting or not supporting them.

You said nothing about not wanting to send 'our lads' anywhere.....you said you 'doubted they could win without satellite information'!! I have already replied and told you it was not available until (at the earliest) 7 days 'after' the beach head had been secured and troops were advancing, already in contact and defeating the enemy .  By that time we already had SAS and SBS troops carrying out raids and operating covert observation posts,  2&3 Para and 3 Cdo RM were ashore and well on their way towards retaking the islands!!!!

So yes I will 'get away' as you put it when you stop the constant running down our Armed Forces....(all of them) at every pathetically tenuous opportunity .  They are respected by a great many countries around the world and considered by many to be the best.  Foreign nations seem to be more respectful and grateful towards our troops than you. You appear to feel it OK to comment (taking the most recent rubbish you posted as an example) that without satellite information 'you doubt' we would have succeeded..........you know 'nothing'....absolutely nothing.... and that is why your armchair criticisms make me sick!!!! 

As I asked for proof of your accusations I would be pleased to admit I am wrong should you find anything of value or substance to confirm that without US satellite information it was doubtful we would win???

Interestingly the CIA were of the mindset that whilst it was clear that it would be an extremely difficult task, and considering other possible scenarios the 'likely' outcome would be a UK success.

As for Gibraltar being of benefit?  Naval facilities (resupply, repairs and training).  Airfield and support services.  Army training facilities etc all accessible without the need for diplomatic approvals from any other nation.  Without Gib we would have had a much more difficult task in regaining the Falklands so might I suggest that instead of ranting on in your usual critical manner you might like to look a little deeper into issues before making such unfounded statements.

[RogerC]

Bulletguy - 2017-05-04 5:30 PM   Militarily UK maintains a substantial presence in the Falklands, more than Gib, with a permanent garrison of over 350 troops and facility to take up to 1200, a brand new RAF airbase with Typhoons, and the RN maintains a presence with a number of vessels. Not bad going for a tiny little remote (to UK) island which previously only had a small volunteer force.My son was only eight years old at the time of the Falklands war so among the many who had never even heard of it at that time in his life.

Actually the RAF base (Mount Pleasant) is not new....it was built in 1985 to provide for a greater military support package than Stanley and it's airfield/naval facilities could cope with.  The main building is in the Guinness book of records as being the longest corridor in the world at 0.5 miles long..............having spent more nights, days, weeks and months in, and above the South Atlantic from 1982 through to 1996....from Port Stanley through an awfully bad 'coastel' accommodation ship to eventually something like decent single accommodation at MPA I am well aware of the military presence there.

Regarding withholding information.....surely during diplomatic activity one does not go broadcasting information to all and sundry?  I suspect feelings would have been sought prior to any 'real' activity to concede the islands to Argentina and considerations made accordingly.

As for your son only being 8 at the time......as you say he is ex SF I would be immensely surprised if he wasn't knowledgeable with regard to his forebears actions, the heroism and sadly relatively large losses during that conflict which is why I suggested his appreciation of the importance of the FI might help clarify some of the misgivings posted on the forum.

[Bulletguy]

RogerC - 2017-05-04 9:02 PM

 

Actually the RAF base (Mount Pleasant) is not new....it was built in 1985......

I know that. I did mean in relation to post war and assumed you would realise that's what i was talking about and not just opened up last week. Prior to the war they had none of what i mentioned apart from the small volunteer force. After the war, UK Gov threw millions at the islanders on infrastructure and services, the permanent military garrison is said to cost around £70 million a year, whereas before they'd been pretty much left to their own devices.

[nowtelse2do]

The Falklander's should be ok work wise when the oil starts to flow.

 

Dave

[RogerC]

Bulletguy - 2017-05-05 12:17 AM

RogerC - 2017-05-04 9:02 PMActually the RAF base (Mount Pleasant) is not new....it was built in 1985......

I know that. I did mean in relation to post war and assumed you would realise that's what i was talking about and not just opened up last week. Prior to the war they had none of what i mentioned apart from the small volunteer force. After the war, UK Gov threw millions at the islanders on infrastructure and services, the permanent military garrison is said to cost around £70 million a year, whereas before they'd been pretty much left to their own devices.

So a belligerent nation invades another country which is then liberated and a military presence is then maintained to deter the same aggressor from trying it on again........what's the problem?

Would you rather we said oh well never mind the lives lost retaking the islands?  Now we have ejected the aggressor we won't bother to defend it and leave it open to another invasion from a nation that still harbours intentions of claiming the land?

The cost in £'s is irrelevant......the islands are British and thank goodness the short-sightedness of years past didn't pervade thinking regarding post conflict actions. 

So if you want to moan/complain or whatever about the cost of maintaining a presence in specifically the Falkland Islands you really should be aiming it at Argentina.

[Bulletguy]

RogerC - 2017-05-05 12:27 PM

 

So a belligerent nation invades another country which is then liberated and a military presence is then maintained to deter the same aggressor from trying it on again........what's the problem?

 

Would you rather we said oh well never mind the lives lost retaking the islands? Now we have ejected the aggressor we won't bother to defend it and leave it open to another invasion from a nation that still harbours intentions of claiming the land?

 

The cost in £'s is irrelevant......the islands are British and thank goodness the short-sightedness of years past didn't pervade thinking regarding post conflict actions.

Given how much UK supposedly valued the Falklands we should have maintained a strong military presence before as a deterrent rather than after an invasion. After all, there had been more than enough warning shots. Perhaps we didn't really value it that much otherwise UK Gov wouldn't have been considering handing over sovereignty. It will prove interesting to watch how UK Gov reacts to protecting and supporting the rights of it's citizens on Gibraltar, 96% of whom had no desire to exit the EU.

 

So if you want to moan/complain or whatever about the cost of maintaining a presence in specifically the Falkland Islands you really should be aiming it at Argentina.

And i imagine any UK PM naive enough to expect that would get the same short shrift response as Trump received from the President of Mexico over his silly wall which i note he's since begged Congress for funding, who have turned him down.