Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: ScottieMV6 on 23 February 2010, 10:17:51
-
Over the Falklands?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm
If we get into any more wars they will have to bring conscription back :o :o
-
A war over oil? surely not ;)
-
I doubt we will go to war again, he big worry will be the pressure put on us by the rest of the americas....including the northern states ::)
-
Over the Falklands?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm
If we get into any more wars they will have to bring conscription back :o :o
Watch the forigners leave the country in their droves, seems like a good idea to me ;D
-
Over the Falklands?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8529605.stm
If we get into any more wars they will have to bring conscription back :o :o
Watch the forigners leave the country in their droves, seems like a good idea to me ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
My days of lying in the cold & wet have been over for a long time & i'll never go back >:(
I don't mind staying out for a few hours with Mutley, but i like my creature comforts too much now :D
-
I would be looking towards the Middle East rather than the south Atlantic Scottie. :( :(
-
can't see it happening at the moment.
i think its typical south american sabre rattleing.
the argies forces are in a worse state then ours at the moment.
more of a chance of a bit of argie bargie like we had in the 70's with iceland over the cod.
could do with a few old icelandic gun boats down there :y
alot cheaper if they get rammed then a type 45 frigate :y
-
as for the middle east
i'll give it 5 years and it will get VERY nastie out there :(
i just hope israel can calm down but to be honest, i don't think they will this time :(
how many years before iran gets nukes ??
-
We are already at war.
It is a very British thing to be at war with someone. We have a good track record for what a 1000 years.
It showcases our weapons which do make the country a LOT of money (it isn't advertised widely as no one likes to brag that our landmines will still be killing innocent people in far off lands in fifty years tiem)
lastly it is a vote winner. Might not seem so in Afghanistan at the moment but as I said a few days ago, it didn't do maggie any harm to pop down to teh Falklands.
-
bring it on, give them a damn good spanking like last time. Actually good news for the Vulcan's, get them back in service again :D
-
bring it on, give them a damn good spanking like last time. Actually good news for the Vulcan's, get them back in service again :D
Buy shares in BAe and tuck them away in your personal pension portfolio.
We got very lucky the last time in the Falklands. Without the use of the Ascension Islands, etc etc
-
Where would we find a Naval task force ? :-/ ::) ;)
-
bring it on, give them a damn good spanking like last time. Actually good news for the Vulcan's, get them back in service again :D
Buy shares in BAe and tuck them away in your personal pension portfolio.
We got very lucky the last time in the Falklands. Without the use of the Ascension Islands, etc etc
Hopefully our American buddies will let us use it again, no doubt they will if we offer them some of the oil ::)
Really must read Vulcan 607 again, i liked the discussions on the huge fuel RAF would need, US: how does a tanker with 7 million litres of fuel sound? UK: Brilliant, we will have 1 of those per week :D
-
I would be looking towards the Middle East rather than the south Atlantic Scottie. :( :(
agreed..
-
as for the middle east
i'll give it 5 years and it will get VERY nastie out there :(
i just hope israel can calm down but to be honest, i don't think they will this time :(
how many years before iran gets nukes ??
yep.. middle east is a pandora box.. and never goes better..
and I also dont think israel will stay and watch.. :(
-
the only reason they never kicked off in 91 was because of my old mates on 2 sqn and the sas proved that they could find the scuds :y
israel couldn't give a f*ck what the rest of the world thinks nowdays >:(
the latest stunt with the pasports is another example of that >:(
if iran gets nukes, israel will hit them hard
if iran uses nukes in retaliation then israel will turn iran into dust
then god knows where it will stop :-/ :(
-
bring it on, give them a damn good spanking like last time. Actually good news for the Vulcan's, get them back in service again :D
Buy shares in BAe and tuck them away in your personal pension portfolio.
We got very lucky the last time in the Falklands. Without the use of the Ascension Islands, etc etc
Hopefully our American buddies will let us use it again, no doubt they will if we offer them some of the oil ::)
Really must read Vulcan 607 again, i liked the discussions on the huge fuel RAF would need, US: how does a tanker with 7 million litres of fuel sound? UK: Brilliant, we will have 1 of those per week :D
Ha ha, my petrol tanker only carries 42800. My boss would love me to carry that much!! ;D ;D
-
bring it on, give them a damn good spanking like last time. Actually good news for the Vulcan's, get them back in service again :D
Buy shares in BAe and tuck them away in your personal pension portfolio.
We got very lucky the last time in the Falklands. Without the use of the Ascension Islands, etc etc
Hopefully our American buddies will let us use it again, no doubt they will if we offer them some of the oil ::)
Really must read Vulcan 607 again, i liked the discussions on the huge fuel RAF would need, US: how does a tanker with 7 million litres of fuel sound? UK: Brilliant, we will have 1 of those per week :D
Ha ha, my petrol tanker only carries 42800. My boss would love me to carry that much!! ;D ;D
I think they would have to have a new ADR category for that size of tanker !
-
the only reason they never kicked off in 91 was because of my old mates on 2 sqn and the sas proved that they could find the scuds :y
israel couldn't give a f*ck what the rest of the world thinks nowdays >:(
the latest stunt with the pasports is another example of that >:(
if iran gets nukes, israel will hit them hard
if iran uses nukes in retaliation then israel will turn iran into dust
then god knows where it will stop :-/ :(
hope that will never happen.. and actually I dont think iran will use nukes.. (I hate those mullahs by the way)
but to use nuke they must eat their brains in the breakfast..
however, its a big country and not similiar to iraq as so many political pieces.. and also will be hard to gulp for israel imho.. my estimation is; if it happens it will be limited to air force operation .. and also if it grows bigger, because of oil, some unexpected countries will involve.. :-/
-
the only reason they never kicked off in 91 was because of my old mates on 2 sqn and the sas proved that they could find the scuds :y
israel couldn't give a f*ck what the rest of the world thinks nowdays >:(
the latest stunt with the pasports is another example of that >:(
if iran gets nukes, israel will hit them hard
if iran uses nukes in retaliation then israel will turn iran into dust
then god knows where it will stop :-/ :(
hope that will never happen.. and actually I dont think iran will use nukes.. (I hate those mullahs by the way)
but to use nuke they must eat their brains in the breakfast..
however, its a big country and not similiar to iraq as so many political pieces.. and also will be hard to gulp for israel imho.. my estimation is; if it happens it will be limited to air force operation .. and also if it grows bigger, because of oil, some unexpected countries will involve.. :-/
iran has one of the best ground based air defences networks on the planet so that will be very tough :(
by the time russia has finished building it for them, even the so called stealth aircraft will struggle :(
thats the wonderful thing about religon, it only takes one fanatic and the right ingreadients and ..................... boom :(
-
the only reason they never kicked off in 91 was because of my old mates on 2 sqn and the sas proved that they could find the scuds :y
israel couldn't give a f*ck what the rest of the world thinks nowdays >:(
the latest stunt with the pasports is another example of that >:(
if iran gets nukes, israel will hit them hard
if iran uses nukes in retaliation then israel will turn iran into dust
then god knows where it will stop :-/ :(
hope that will never happen.. and actually I dont think iran will use nukes.. (I hate those mullahs by the way)
but to use nuke they must eat their brains in the breakfast..
however, its a big country and not similiar to iraq as so many political pieces.. and also will be hard to gulp for israel imho.. my estimation is; if it happens it will be limited to air force operation .. and also if it grows bigger, because of oil, some unexpected countries will involve.. :-/
iran has one of the best ground based air defences networks on the planet so that will be very tough :(
by the time russia has finished building it for them, even the so called stealth aircraft will struggle :(
thats the wonderful thing about religon, it only takes one fanatic and the right ingreadients and ..................... boom :(
I also must note that we are buying gas from Iran also..and we wont be happy if somebody bombs those gas lines in the middle of winter >:(
-
I don't think we will go to war over the Falklands again - they will use diplomatic legal means through world pressure and claim a share of the oil profits.
As for Taliban - they could lose a lot of support in Afghanistan as many of their "troops" integrate, but the hard core will move to other areas possibly in Africa and the battles will continue for many years yet. :(
.
-
I don't think we will go to war over the Falklands again - they will use diplomatic legal means through world pressure and claim a share of the oil profits.
As for Taliban - they could lose a lot of support in Afghanistan as many of their "troops" integrate, but the hard core will move to other areas possibly in Africa and the battles will continue for many years yet. :(
.
best bet is gas them >:(
-
I don't think we will go to war over the Falklands again - they will use diplomatic legal means through world pressure and claim a share of the oil profits.
As for Taliban - they could lose a lot of support in Afghanistan as many of their "troops" integrate, but the hard core will move to other areas possibly in Africa and the battles will continue for many years yet. :(
.
yeman here we come >:(
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
The special relationship goes from strength to strength!
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
Obama's no friend of ours
I'm certainly not buying anything this man is selling.
(http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv345/Catdracula/r808097666.jpg)
-
Go to war over the Falklands, that's a laugh. Knowing how this government work, they'll give them away. They've given away everything else ;D
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
You're quite correct Nick.
This relationship has always been a one way street - ask almost anyone connected with the Foreign Office or those who tried to have convicted terrorists - after their escape - returned here to lawful custody from their safe havens in the United States.
As I have said on many occasions we always were, and will remain, the streetwalkers of the US.
The following proposal holds a much more sinister intent than the so-called 'close relationship' being given for its creation.
Revealed: The new $1billion high-security U.S. London embassy... complete with moat
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253378/Revealed-The-new-650m-high-security-US-London-embassy--complete-moat.html#ixzz0gY5Dzg7m
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
You're quite correct Nick.
This relationship has always been a one way street - ask almost anyone connected with the Foreign Office or those who tried to have convicted terrorists - after their escape - returned here to lawful custody from their safe havens in the United States.
As I have said on many occasions we always were, and will remain, the streetwalkers of the US.
The following proposal holds a much more sinister intent than the so-called 'close relationship' being given for its creation.
Revealed: The new $1billion high-security U.S. London embassy... complete with moat
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253378/Revealed-The-new-650m-high-security-US-London-embassy--complete-moat.html#ixzz0gY5Dzg7m
Interesting reading the comments on that artical, quite interesting point raised that the US are neither backing nor condeming what we are doing.
Think if another country was doing what we were doing, might be more of an out-cry from the US.
Without any long-range bombers, and if they don't let us use Ascension Island, we are stuffed :(
-
also looking at our rather pathetic fleet level now, with just 7 destroyers, don't think we could last long :(
Only thing we have is the subs, which proved cruical last time
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/803897/Misc/royalnavyfleet.jpg)
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
You're quite correct Nick.
This relationship has always been a one way street - ask almost anyone connected with the Foreign Office or those who tried to have convicted terrorists - after their escape - returned here to lawful custody from their safe havens in the United States.
As I have said on many occasions we always were, and will remain, the streetwalkers of the US.
The following proposal holds a much more sinister intent than the so-called 'close relationship' being given for its creation.
Revealed: The new $1billion high-security U.S. London embassy... complete with moat
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253378/Revealed-The-new-650m-high-security-US-London-embassy--complete-moat.html#ixzz0gY5Dzg7m
Interesting reading the comments on that artical, quite interesting point raised that the US are neither backing nor condeming what we are doing.
Think if another country was doing what we were doing, might be more of an out-cry from the US.
Without any long-range bombers, and if they don't let us use Ascension Island, we are stuffed :(
As far as I can see T this is a development the US doesn't really need at the moment - hence the apparent ambivalence.
The entire sub-Continent holds a degree of interest for the US in one way or another, however there are difficulties emerging that will demand closer attention by virtue of their being in the backyard of the US, so to speak - difficulties that will oblige the US to seek closer ties with the few remaining friendly nations there.
You are correct when you point out in a subsequent post that our capital holdings (military) had deminished by a substantial amount - for whatever reason. This fact alone, aside from the considerable draw on resources from operations in the Middle East, makes a repeat campaign in the South Atlantic very doubtful indeed.
The infrastructure, hardware - but more importantly the human resources - doesn’t appear to be available in the density necessary to afford a realistic chance of success.
-
the upside is, the financial benifits from drilling the oil. Depends, if there is none to be found, this issue will be gone. But if its found to swimming in oil, could be worth investment. But as you say, hardware is an issue, and so is time to build more :-/
-
Demothball Invincible and get some of the Shars back in the air 8-)
-
US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7040245.ece
Obama's no friend of ours. >:(
That is well known by now :( :(
-
The Argies should have raised this when B.liar was PM. He would have given it to them as long as he had a cut off the profits from the oil and had a guarenteed consultancy role in introducing new business partners to the islands. He could then have hired a company of PR experts to convince all concerned that it was a great historic day for British democracy and anyone who said different was a Daily Mail reading right wing little Englander mentalist who should be totally ignored. ;)