South American Alliance invades Falklands.

[Garrison]

So, what would Brazil, Venezuela, Peru, or anyone else gain from teaming with Argentina for the Falkland Malvinas?

That's the key question. Yes maybe Hugo Chavez would do it in the name of fighting western imperialism but Venezuala's involvement is going to rile up the USA.

As for Brazil; it's got far too much trade with the EU to go around backing such a plan, not to mention the not so small matters of a World Cup in 2014 and an Olympics in 2016. They are not going to risk their international standing to help a dubious Argentinian regime that is only sabre rattling over the Falklands to distract from their economic woes.

 

[AndyC]

It boils down to that ancient military maxim: do not enter an arse-kicking contest with a porcupine.

 

[larpsidekick]

The entire Argentinian submarine flotilla spent 19 hours of last year submerged. There is enough funding to put each ship at sea for all of four days. The entire Argentinian fleet spends less time at sea than one Royal Navy ship. There are reports they have no 'in date' ordinance for their destroyers. (source via Thin Pinstriped Line, here

Any POD will have to get over the lack of funding for the Argentinian armed forces, cos they're certainly going to have to bear the main effort for 'their war' - even with allies.

 

[AdA]

If you're baffled why someone should think "This guy thinks an SU30 is an M2000" when the picture of the SU30 is next to a short text that only mentions the M2000 and shows the writer doesn't know terribly much modern air warfare"... then I really can't help you.

Because sentences that begin with "and" and end in too usually introduce a new topic?
Because when someone knows that Brasil operates Mirage 2000s and Chile operates F16 is bound to know what Venezuela operates?
Because this is AH.com and not your high school jet fighters fans club?
Because assuming that everyone who doesn't agree wholeheartedly with you doesn't know what he's talking about is childish?

 

[AdA]

Tankers

Wiki credits FAB with four KC137 and 2 KC130.
Chile with 3 KC135.
Wiki doesnt list them but Jane's credited Venezuela with KC137. Even if it doesn't have tankers noe the Su30MK2 are long range aircraft and if deployed to Argentina would be doing exactly what they were designed to do, being close to the PLAAF version, wich was, after all, bought mostly to overrun an island.

So the whole "there are no tankers in south america" line was a bit of a stretch.

The UK deployment is perfectly adequated to fac the Argentinian Forces, severely weakned by the country's economical crises.
But the other three countries are spending big on defence now.
The problem with this thread is the Why? From a military POV, any of this three countries would force Britain to up their game considerably.

 

[Alexpira]

Forget about Brazil joining this war in 1982 or today....even if the Brazilian Government stands by the Argentinian "rights" to the Falklands, this is done more as a "neighbor favor" and "south american solidarity" than a real thinking that Argentina has rights over those islands.

The opinion of many people in Brazil and the majority of the Brazilian political spectrum is that the Falklands are used by Argentina as a scapegoat from its internal problems when socio-economic crisis arises in that country and that any kind of solution should be negotiated by both parties. Also, there is the understanding that British people are in the Falklands since the 19th. Century and, if this permanent occupation is not considered in any kind of solution to the conflict, some actual Brazilian areas that were occupied and annexed by Lusophone peoples during the 17th. and 19th. Century like parts of Mato Grosso and Acre could be claimed by its former owners (Paraguay and Bolivia) using the same kind of argument that Argentina uses with the Falklands.

So, no chance of a suicidal Brazilian intervention in this conflict....

 

[amphibulous]

Because sentences that begin with "and" and end in too usually introduce a new topic?

I'd say they are usually just badly written.

Because when someone knows that Brasil operates Mirage 2000s and Chile operates F16 is bound to know what Venezuela operates?

Hardly.

Because this is AH.com and not your high school jet fighters fans club?

The poster (you?) didn't even know enough to consider that none of the airforces involved have tankers and that without them these "fighters" wouldn't actually be able to ***fight*** over the Falkands - they'd just turn up and get shot. So I'd say that "high school" is being generous to whoever it it. He might want to read John Boyd's EM study (I think some sort of condensed notes Boyd did are available online) or read Shaw's book if he's going to play Air Marshall online.

Because assuming that everyone who doesn't agree wholeheartedly with you doesn't know what he's talking about is childish?

Sigh: anyone who rants about M2000s and Su30s attacking the Falklands who doesn't talk range is being - well, not childish, but incorrect to the point where, yes, you can say he doesn't know what he is talking about. Not remotely. And anybody who throws a tantrum over this rather than saying "Oops! I hadn't realized how important 'fuel state' is - can you give me some links?'" is, indeed, being childish.

 

[amphibulous]

Forget about Brazil joining this war in 1982 or today....even if the Brazilian Government stands by the Argentinian "rights" to the Falklands, this is done more as a "neighbor favor" and "south american solidarity" than a real thinking that Argentina has rights over those islands.

The opinion of many people in Brazil and the majority of the Brazilian political spectrum is that the Falklands are used by Argentina as a scapegoat from its internal problems when socio-economic crisis arises in that country and that any kind of solution should be negotiated by both parties. Also, there is the understanding that British people are in the Falklands since the 19th. Century and, if this permanent occupation is not considered in any kind of solution to the conflict, some actual Brazilian areas that were occupied and annexed by Lusophone peoples during the 17th. and 19th. Century like parts of Mato Grosso and Acre could be claimed by its former owners (Paraguay and Bolivia) using the same kind of argument that Argentina uses with the Falklands.

So, no chance of a suicidal Brazilian intervention in this conflict....

To be fair to the OP, this was a what-if -I don't think there was a claim of plausability!

 

[corditeman]

A few thoughts...

...Back when I was with Pete123123 discussing the Argentine situation with adjacent countries (I was writing British Tierra del Fuego at the time) it was pointed out to me that Chile, Bolivia and Argentina, have been at odds many times in the past. If you look at Argentina's plan to mount an invasion of Chile (Operation Soberiana) during the Beagle Channel dispute, a sizeable portion of the Argentine army had to remain in the northeast to stop possible Brazilian intervention. And who stopped the war from breaking out? Why, the emissary of His Holiness the Pope, Cardinal Antonio Samore.

The implication is that MERCOSUR partnerships have their limits and that the South Cone is very unstable. The OP is thus untenable and I suggest that neither Cristina Kirchner nor Hugo Chavez are so daft as to carry out such an attack. Brasil would probably stop such an attack out of self-interest, for Chile and Uruguay would fear that they would be next on the list.

 

[Alexpira]

...Back when I was with Pete123123 discussing the Argentine situation with adjacent countries (I was writing British Tierra del Fuego at the time) it was pointed out to me that Chile, Bolivia and Argentina, have been at odds many times in the past. If you look at Argentina's plan to mount an invasion of Chile (Operation Soberiana) during the Beagle Channel dispute, a sizeable portion of the Argentine army had to remain in the northeast to stop possible Brazilian intervention. And who stopped the war from breaking out? Why, the emissary of His Holiness the Pope, Cardinal Antonio Samore.

The implication is that MERCOSUR partnerships have their limits and that the South Cone is very unstable. The OP is thus untenable and I suggest that neither Cristina Kirchner nor Hugo Chavez are so daft as to carry out such an attack. Brasil would probably stop such an attack out of self-interest, for Chile and Uruguay would fear that they would be next on the list.

To be fair, MERCOSUR is an almost failed project nowadays....Brazil and Argentina are always in odds given commercial disputes, Paraguay was wrongfully suspended from the free trade area after the impeachment of President Lugo and Uruguay is too small to make a real difference in the bloc.
Former big plans of monetary union or unification of armed forces were scrapped and forgotten since the beggining of the 2000s.
We could say that today Argentina is much more alligned with Venezuela than Brazil....