The Next War

[TrevorOfCrete 0]

2nd Falklands War:

British Military facing ever increasing cutbacks, whilst it's stretched to the limit in Afganistan and Iraq.

Argentina still making noises about the Falklands islands. If they're going to do anything, now would be the time to strike....

they should move that money from Tridents to conventional, much more needed. Actually the Falklands war was misleading, it was mostly the Navy and Royal Marines (+ Para's), so Britian would be able to deal with a Falklands situation again. (+ most of the argentinian Navy is ex-british vessels stripped out and sold to them)

[Pathy 0]

There's a huge difference between a military dicatorship and a western "democracy". Argentina today is not what it was yesterday. Too bad that Britain still shines US-boots.

Quote[/b] ]Please NO rebutle comments this is not a "political" discussion, just an exercise in examining the global climate.

[Spokesperson 0]

There's a huge difference between a military dicatorship and a western "democracy". Argentina today is not what it was yesterday. Too bad that Britain still shines US-boots.

Quote[/b] ]Please NO rebutle comments this is not a "political" discussion, just an exercise in examining the global climate.

Can't help it due to your flag.

[ran 0]

I'd rather leave that kind of conjectures to the country fair gypsy's crystal ball.

One should not just sit down and think about the things that could come but should stand up and act in such a way that only the best or at least better of these things happen.

I do not wish for a military conflict to happen anywhere. The most sensible course of action is just to stay ready if it happens, to try to defuse crises or assist within you own possibilities in defusing them. (don't you people think that I suddenly became a pot smoking peacenik though)

Quite a few people in this thread sound more like gypsy readers than sensible beings with an interest in geopolitics. I don't want to offend the original poster, but this kind of approach is somewhat naive (that's the opinion I have when I read the title and some comments posted by a few other members here) and makes some of you people sound like teenagers who are bent on seeing some war porn on 24/7 news channels or eager to accomplish their wet dream of wearing a uniform and to be aired on the aforementionned news broadcasts.

History is only written once the party has ended.

The only thing that can seriously be done is to list and assess potential areas of conflict without placing any "bets" on where it's going to explode first because we simply don't know and we're bound by the uncertainity of our future, of the events that are to come.

Mankind in one place of another has been at a constant state of conflict for roughly the last three decades. The question is not really to know where and when the next real time war movie will start but how to prevent actual and potential crises from escalating and pushing us a little bit farther into global mess.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

Great post ran.  I must confess I merely threw this topic out there to read the thoughts of others.  I hoped it would aid in assessing the possibilities.

I had to accept the eventuality that it would degenerate to the silly, but I thank you for taking a moment to think.

Your comment:

"One should not just sit down and think about the things that could come but should stand up and act in such a way that only the best or at least better of these things happen."

Well said.  I guess this is not really the place for such an intense and serious discussion, but maybe more people like you will suprise me.

If you would like to direct the discussion from pure conjecture and on to something along the lines of your statement, by all means.

[kavoven 4]

2nd Falklands War:

British Military facing ever increasing cutbacks, whilst it's stretched to the limit in Afganistan and Iraq.

Argentina still making noises about the Falklands islands. If they're going to do anything, now would be the time to strike....

You've got this from Patrick Robinson, haven't you?

[ran 0]

Your comment:

"One should not just sit down and think about the things that could come but should stand up and act in such a way that only the best or at least better of these things happen."

Well said. I guess this is not really the place for such an intense and serious discussion, but maybe more people like you will suprise me.

If you would like to direct the discussion from pure conjecture and on to something along the lines of your statement, by all means.

You might already know about this website but it's a good start:

http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=1200&l=1

There are several lists of ongoing armed conflicts on various defence websites and even wikipedia, they're worth what they're worth though and sometimes don't cover all the conflicts and crises either due to lact of updates, selection criterias or even sometimes political agendas.

There's a lot of openly accessible ressources out there.

[Baff1 0]

Quote[/b] ]There's a huge difference between a military dicatorship and a western democracy. Argentina today is not what it was yesterday. Too bad that Britain still shines US-boots.

Their political system may have changed since the first Falklands conflict but that doesn't mean they still don't have 'grievances' over the Falklands. They still feel the same way about it.

From Wikipedia on Falklands Military;

Quote[/b] ]The MoD has announced that No. 1435 is converting to the Eurofighter Typhoon by the end of 2007 instead of 2009. This is in response to recent reassertions of claims of the islands by the Argentines.

I notice that while we are busy decommisioning our navy, that so are the French.

Guess who they just sold all their marine landing ships to?

[deanosbeano 0]

maybe in the next war we will be fighting these little blighters

the things not the people who made em.

todays waiters = tomorrows logistic crew ?

[ran 0]

France did something similar when jets from the Ivory Coast attacked their soldiers, they simply blew up the entire Ivory Coast air force and said, "If you can't play nice we'll take away your toys".

The main difference is that they attacked our soldiers. The governmental forces attacked guys who were originally there on the express demand of the Ivorian head of state who is normally the head of the local armed forces. A plauseable ongoing theory in some circles is that certain people of Gbagbo's close military staff wanted to strike with a strong blow the french comittment to Ivory Coast which at the time kept the Ivorian governmental forces on the backburner against the rebels due to the buffer zone installed between the two opposing parties. To say wether this is true or not is impossible for me.

The whole deal about the bombing and the represails is shady though. While if you dig up old forum archives I was totally supportive of the said represails against the Ivorian AF I would now relativise this support. There's still an ongoing enquiry to know the what/who/why of several elements of the affair.

I wouldn't say that it was a simple "stick nose in own poo" punitive action but something much more intricate. The pilots are still in the nature while they could have been caught on that fateful day, the Ivorian responsabilities are yet to be known etc...

[kerosene 0]

ANyones whos really instrested in this should read "resource wars" by MIcheal Klare, its a really good book.

http://www.amazon.com/Resourc....&sr=8-1

I'm not plugging it, I just really liked it.

[USMC NEEDER 0]

I say Iran and Britain because Iran captured some sailors and US and China because China blew up one of our satellite's a few months ago.

[karantan 0]

... and US and China because China blew up one of our satellite's a few months ago.

Really? I didn't knew that. One of your satelites in the orbit?

[USMC NEEDER 0]

Yup, it was a weather satellite in Space.

[USMC NEEDER 0]

here you go read this - http://www.cnn.com/2007....stories

Its kinda yellow-journalism and they blame bush because its cnn but oh well...

[karantan 0]

Thanks for the link mate, but it says it was an old Chinese weather satellite, not an American one. If they would knock down an American satelite that would clearly been an act of an aggresion, and we would had some major conflict at our hands by now, or at least a serious worldwide crisis.

And US are worried and they're complaining about something what according to this article themselves are capable to do since 80's, a bit of a two faced policy, dont' you think?

[USMC NEEDER 0]

I didn't read it myself so... lol... but just look up China blows up US Satellite on Google.

[karantan 0]

Well, in one thing you might be right; one day US and China might became an enemies. Just one word; Taiwan ...

[Dark_vityaz 0]

Don't know why in that american black list by Gates China and Russia have appeared.They don't know the Russian history.Russia has never attacked anyone.Just defence their boards. China is developin seriously but hasn't any blitzkrieg plans.