Oil and gas found in Falkland waters

[DoleScum]

well, they're not really big players on the scene now... they tend to be more reactive to outside pressure than applying any pressure of their own. They'd probably be very happy to have the US out of their affairs, although they'd still be pissy about US support of Israel

I don't know about that. Do you think that the US, EU or anyone else would give a flying ---- about Iran, Iraq or any other arab nation if it wasn't for their ability to hike up oil prices.

I can definately see arab nations becoming more confrontational once they lost the leverage of control over global oil supplies. Without oil to make the west sit up and pay attension ME countries may resort to more extreme measures.

Doubtful... Britain is one of our closest allies, and Argentina has always been problematic at best. With Britain in charge of the oilfields, we get to deal with a similar culture and language. WIth Argentina, we'd have to deal with a nation who would have a lot to say about the problems in S./C. America, and a lot of people who aren't really all that fond of us. If Britain suddenly came into possession of vast oil reserves, the US would be delighted...

Up to a point I agree with you. However historically Britain and the US have only gotton on well once the power balance between them increased massively in favour of the US. During the C19th and early C20th when Britain was the dominant power, or the relationship was more equal, relations were often fairly strained.
I agree that the US would not want to see control of huge amounts of oil pass from friendly, stable Britain, to unfriendly, unstable Argentina. However, I can see the US supporting Argentinian claims for freer access to the islands - and particularly rights of settlement for Argentinan families as a means of fostering an independence movement in the Falkland isles.
An independent Falklands would be totally reliant on the US as a customer and defender.
So who knows....

It'd certainly be interesting to see the consequences of the US having to suck up to the British... and I suppose if huge oil reserves were found off the Falklands then the islands would essentially consititute a third British Empire all by themselves.

 

[mishery]

I don't know about that. Do you think that the US, EU or anyone else would give a flying ---- about Iran, Iraq or any other arab nation if it wasn't for their ability to hike up oil prices.

I think the US and EU would be as interested in the middle east as they are in Africa. How much did the US and EU do when the genocide was going on in Rwanda?

It'd certainly be interesting to see the consequences of the US having to suck up to the British...

I think a wise UK government would realise that p***ing off your main customer is not a good idea. I wonder about the UK relationship Europe. I suspect that "we don't need Europe" brigade would get louder.

NAFTA becomes NAAFTA, the second A being "(and) Atlantic"?

 

[Anaxagoras]

Britain would likely pull out of the EU. The economic rationale for remaining would have been removed, and the Eurosceptic element in British politics would be vastly increased ("The Frenchies are trying to take our oil money!")

 

[Alratan]

Britain would likely pull out of the EU. The economic rationale for remaining would have been removed, and the Eurosceptic element in British politics would be vastly increased ("The Frenchies are trying to take our oil money!")

I disagree, we would stay in, and use our oil money to buy off the new members so the votes went our way. We would still want to be in the EU to influence Europe, and such things, and we would want to retain the greatest to the European financial markets.

 

[NapoleonXIV]

I think a wise UK government would realise that p***ing off your main customer is not a good idea. I wonder about the UK relationship Europe. I suspect that "we don't need Europe" brigade would get louder.

NAFTA becomes NAAFTA, the second A being "(and) Atlantic"?

Someone should tell the Arabs that. The thing is they could easily cut off America completely and sell every drop to the rest of the world, probably for more.

However, I have few worries here. Even the Thief Executive couldn't turn the Brits against us. We're your children, you know, the recalcitrant, bitchy one who left after the big fight, but said hi in the supermarket a month later, then called at Thanksgiving and finally came to the Christmas party (but still didn't bring any good liquor). And like them or not you always stand behind family

 

[Straha]

Second Falklands war anyone?

 

[Alratan]

Not a chance.

The UK would now about it well in advance, and the US would have absolutely no hesitation in giving full support. Which ever mad Argentine president tried it would be given a very severe warning, and when the news leaked would probably be impeaced or otherwise overthrown.

 

[TheMann]

My guesses here.

If the reserves are that massive Argentina and Britain will fight over it again, or a better scenario being Britain and Argentina allow somebody else (an impartial nation) to sanction the land in order to avoid fights (I would say South Africa or Brazil would be likely candidates) and then split the money. 40% Britain, 40% Argentina, 20% South Africa or Brazil.

The US would see the opportunity to get the heck out of the middle East and buy all the oil they could from the three nations, and all three strike it rich big time. The Falklands' population skyrockets, as Brits, Argentines and South Africans move to the islands to run the industries. Argentina and South Africa would roar to prominence on the world stage d*mn quick, especially since both are resourceful and intelligent nations to begin with. Britain would accelerate back to world energy superpower, the money fueling a powerful revival of Britain's public and private infrastructure.

The USA would play things well. The US would offer every nation in South American NAFTA membership and Argentina and South Africa would becoem the US' most favoured nations in trade. The US would forget about the Middle east aside form Israel, Qatar, Bahrain, the Emirates, Kuwait. The Americans and Europe would buy up most of the Falklands reserves, leaving the Middle East to China, India and others. Saudi Arabia would be in the middle of civil war in weeks. The price of oil would fall substantially, but not to making places broke levels. The smaller Middle East nations would do just fine, but the big giants like Saudi Arabia and Iran would be a mess.

All in all, there wouldn't be many downsides, I think.

 

[Umbral]

Britain would likely pull out of the EU. The economic rationale for remaining would have been removed, and the Eurosceptic element in British politics would be vastly increased ("The Frenchies are trying to take our oil money!")

Once again, the example of Norway is relevant.

 

[Sargon]

I could not see Britain giving up the Falklands at all, remember that a war was fought there since the islanders wanted to stay British. And if there are valuable deposits of natural resources there, would YOU give them up?? No way. It remains a Crown Colony, and maybe at most, some financial deal is done with Argentina to buy them off with a regular part of the profits. I don't think the British would be unwise enough to allow Argentinians to move there in any numbers since they would not want to risk a future referendum going their way.

You can bet that a fair chunk of that money will be spent on increasing the size of the garrison there, and with some form of naval expansion. Perhaps 3 CVF instead of 2 (when 1 is in refit, the 2 others being available in service is better) with enough attendant escorts for each.

As for the US and UK, the special realtionshop just got better, and more even Both sides would do very well indeed out of it. Third British Empire? Not quite, but expect Britain to have more clout than before, politically, economically and militarily.

Sargon

 

[Fellatio Nelson]

Second Falklands war anyone?

Don't think so.

You seen the state of the Argentinian navy and air force nowadays?

They have fallen way behind the British armed forces in terms of advanced technology and firepower; and the Falklands garrison now musters about a battalion with air and naval support, whereas in '82 it was about a platoon of marines and a company of badly equipped local reservists.

 

[Alratan]

There would definetly be no move to import Argentine or South African labour.

Britain has a very mature and sophisticated oil extraction industry. Shell and BP would have a bonanza, and Exxon-Mobile would mutter about fair trade on the side-lines. The oil majors would recruit lots and lots more Europeans to go and be not-quite-expatriates in the Falklands, who would be rather annoyed to discover that they were taxed as if they were on the British mainland.

There would probably be a lead time of about 10-15 years on full development, but an income of $450 billion is nothing sniff at. We could say that about gross tax of 10% is historically likely, plus corporation tax of about half that, amount, so about $75 billion direct government income. The UK government currently spends about $500 billion. This means an increase in spending of about 15%, which, particualrly if its in infrastructure, should be sustainable.

One of the big advantages would be that Britain would also gain from the British companies making profits, and the large number of extra people potentially employed.

 

[Dave Howery]

You can bet that a fair chunk of that money will be spent on increasing the size of the garrison there, and with some form of naval expansion. Perhaps 3 CVF instead of 2 (when 1 is in refit, the 2 others being available in service is better) with enough attendant escorts for each.

maybe the Brits would build themselves a Nimitz-type real fleet carrier (or buy one from us), or more likely two, so that one could be on station all the time in the area....

The US would be in petroleum heaven... a huge source of it right in our own hemisphere... added to that of Venezuala, we'd have more than enough for years to come... which would have the double edged affect of easing the pressure to drill in AK and discouraging efforts to develop alternate fuels...
The developing world would benefit also, as the price of oil in general would drop, and they could get in on the Middle Eastern oil, with the US out of the market... but then they would have to deal with all the strife there....

 

[Sargon]

maybe the Brits would build themselves a Nimitz-type real fleet carrier (or buy one from us), or more likely two, so that one could be on station all the time in the area....

The US would be in petroleum heaven... a huge source of it right in our own hemisphere... added to that of Venezuala, we'd have more than enough for years to come... which would have the double edged affect of easing the pressure to drill in AK and discouraging efforts to develop alternate fuels...
The developing world would benefit also, as the price of oil in general would drop, and they could get in on the Middle Eastern oil, with the US out of the market... but then they would have to deal with all the strife there....

Hmm, perhaps, but not sure where we'd be able to dock a thing that huge. Still the cash can pay for new docks though

CVF is not too bad, it will still be the largest warship the RN has ever built, will carry around 45-50 aircraft, is upgradeable to different aircraft since it incorporates CTOL, STOVL, CATOBAR and VTOL options in it. With 3 of them, then that gives greater flexibility of deployment instead of 2.

It looks pretty cool too!

Sargon

 

[birdy]

those future carriers are so cool....... Betchya Tony cant wait to cancel it!

 

[Sargon]

those future carriers are so cool....... Betchya Tony cant wait to cancel it!

If he does, me and the gang from warships1 accompanied by a very angry Landshark will be going round to Number 10 to knock his block off

Sargon

 

[tinfoil]

I think you might have some interesting scenerios if the oil fields extend far enough from the Malvinas (Falklands) to blur the UK's sole claim to sovereignty. Imagine part of the oil field clearly lying in Argentine home waters, and part of it in between the two lands.

Now Argentina has some new oil wealth to afford a better military, and a desire for more wealth combined with an axe to grind from the First Falklands War (FW1). They may even find international allies!

There might be enough tension to create FW2.

 

[Tyr]

I don't see security being a problem or anything.
America has what they would like in a ideal world with the falklands- a peaceful, democratic ally in charge leaving things open for companies Americans have a steak in. Argentinas current government won't invade and even if they did get another military take over we'd crush them- probally with US help this time.
Its the way capitalism works. 'America' doesn't have to actually control the Falklands.

 

[PMN1]

those future carriers are so cool....... Betchya Tony cant wait to cancel it!

Well given the financial 'help' Labour gave to Swan Hunter for the Bay class landing ships just before the last election, given how important these two ships are for labour constituencies, it would be a brave labour PM who would cancel them, even gordon brown would hesitate.

 

[PMN1]

maybe the Brits would build themselves a Nimitz-type real fleet carrier (or buy one from us), or more likely two, so that one could be on station all the time in the area....

They are already real fleet carrier and there are strong rumours that they are now coming in at 75,000 tons which is about the same the Forrestal's less the weight of catapults etc and those weren't that much smaller than the Nimitz's