Falklands war your views

[Kapitan]

whats your views or thoughts on the falkands war ?


il post mine later when i wake up a bit :D

[Abraham]

I have to sleep and see if I can dream a view up...

[TLAM Strike]

It was a fairly pointless war that taught military strategists a few things.

I mean, come on invading a territory of a nation that possesses Nuclear Weapons! :roll: I'm just glad more people didn't die on both sides. :down:

[jumpy]

Kindof pointless spitt of rock in the middle of ******* nowhere!
Still, I guess there was a principal at stake... damn argies. Last time the iron lady got to stomp her jackbooted feet on somebody elses neck, other than the polltax rioters or the micks :lol:
Oh yer, and there were a few people who lived there who wanted to remain british subjects.
More of a demonstration of intent and resolve than a propper shootin' war... despite appearances to the contrary. Just as well it didn't last very long... good show by the harrier pilots, bad planning by the argentine airforce- if they had concentrated on shooting down the harriers instead of attacking the shipping, they might have had free reign in the sky to do as they pleased once the harriers were out of the way.
What do you remember most clearly from the falklands war? - that bloke with truely awful burns :down:

[Kaleun]

Hi,

It was not a pointless war - we the UK needed to defend the falkland islands from invasion, we require the falkland islands to be under the Union jack for 2 reasons:

1) It F*cks off the Argentineans

and more importantly

2) Strategic Sheep farming purposes!!!!
:rotfl:
Kaleun

[Captain Nemo]

I remember at the time, being a mere 20 years old, I was against the war. It seemed to be a complete waste of time to fight for some islands in the South Atlantic that most average Britons hadn’t even heard of (when the news first broke I thought they were some islands off the coast of Scotland!). However, as time has passed I think the UK definitely made the right decision to fight to liberate the islands from the Argentineans.

From a political viewpoint the Falklands war couldn't have happened at a better time for the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, who was not doing that well in the opinion polls, and if they were to be believed was heading for a defeat at the next General Election. The war boosted the UK population's opinion of the Conservative Government and Margaret Thatcher went on to win the election in the summer of 1983 with a thumping majority. In the same way General Galtieri was also fighting for his political life. He thought that invading the Falklands would bolster his standing and redirect people's attention away from issues such as the Argentinean economy that was in deep trouble (inflation at 600%) and the mass disappearance of people at the hands of the junta that was causing major unrest. In the end the UK was victorious and it was Galtieri’s head that rolled.

Nemo

[StdDev]

Breshnev took Afghanistan,
Begin took Beirut,
Galtieri took the Union Jack;
and Maggie, over lunch one day,
took a cruiser with all hands,
apparently to make him give it back.

[Abraham]

Breshnev took Afghanistan,
Begin took Beirut,
Galtieri took the Union Jack;
and Maggie, over lunch one day,
took a cruiser with all hands,
apparently to make him give it back.

I remember that song, who made it?
:D

[Damo1977]

whats 'SoCal' mean sat over southern 'c'alifornia, and decide to stomp over it mexican s6tyle


B4 u fuk over facklands war u locked away turd, reserach it

Maybe what we remember in Iraq with AMerican troops in 20 yrs time

[StdDev]

Breshnev took Afghanistan,
Begin took Beirut,
Galtieri took the Union Jack;
and Maggie, over lunch one day,
took a cruiser with all hands,
apparently to make him give it back.

I remember that song, who made it?
:D

Roger Waters (as in Pink Floyd)

[jumpy]

wtf Damo... lol you been boozing again m8?
Don't see any connection with Falklands and Iraq myself. I recon if Maggie had been in charge of invading Iraq, I'm fairly sure she'd have removed the velvet glove and dished out a dose of iron fist(ing) treatment to saddam the first time round :rotfl:

[Marcantilan]

Well, a lot of UK friends in this forum topic.

For the UK, was a limited war, one of many post WWII conflicts (Korea, Suez, Burma...)

For us Argentinians was a total war. One still fresh in individuals and colective memory.

About my point of view, the recuperation (not invasion) of the Malvinas, by force, was a huge mistake.

Note that I only regret the use of force (and sure, the death of people from both sides).

But the goal of the war was (and still is) just. Malvinas Islands are a part of the argentinian territory, mutilated by a british expedition, back in 1883.

Controversial, isn´t???

An Argie point of view.

[Torpedo Fodder]

But the goal of the war was (and still is) just. Malvinas Islands are a part of the argentinian territory, mutilated by a british expedition, back in 1883.

Which unfortunately is not relavant anymore, as anyone alive when Argentina owned the islands is now dead and gone, and most of the Falkland's (or Malvinas, whatever) population in 1982 (many of whom were born and raised there) wanted to remain under British rule and still do. Why should Argentina own the islands if the local population doesn't want that?

[August]

What the CIA says about the Falklands:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fk.html

[jumpy]

An Argie point of view.

Bearing this in mind, I want to make clear that no slur was intended in my first post - 'damn argies' being a tounge in cheek statement, not some deep seated hatred or whatever.
Remembering way back then, I would have been at primary school or something, so any direct influence to me was minimal to say the least. In my view this was a fight over a principal more than anything else; if no-one had been looking, or if international appearances were not important to world leaders/countries, then I doubt that a great deal of fuss would have been made over such a windswept and (by all accounts) inhospitable bit of rock in the middle of nowhere. Still, I suppose there are countries who have gone to war for less...
Having said that, the choice of who the islands belong to is really a question for the folk who have their homes there imo. So if the 'currrent majority' want/wanted to be british, so be it... I'd probably feel the same way if they wanted to be argentinian.
All too often (and I do not exclude the UK from this) countries dwell needlessly on the past and of history long gone- pretty much every border dispute since the year dot is based upon this simple, if irrational precept. 'Great Brittain' owned half of the world at one point and they didn't get it by playing fair, it's true, but what have we now? where is the 'empire' today? dead and consigned to the history books where it belongs. The days of empire building are over... for us brits anyway :88) :doh:

[Oberon]

The Falklands...I just missed that one but yes...Maggie.
A bit of a show for the Iron Lady who was getting worried about losing her grip...kinda like Clinton's trip into Kosovo. The tabloids loved it, particularly the Sun :oops:

[lesrae]

Well, a lot of UK friends in this forum topic.

For the UK, was a limited war, one of many post WWII conflicts (Korea, Suez, Burma...)

For us Argentinians was a total war. One still fresh in individuals and colective memory.

About my point of view, the recuperation (not invasion) of the Malvinas, by force, was a huge mistake.

Note that I only regret the use of force (and sure, the death of people from both sides).

But the goal of the war was (and still is) just. Malvinas Islands are a part of the argentinian territory, mutilated by a british expedition, back in 1883.

Controversial, isn´t???

An Argie point of view.

Very interesting to read an Argentinian's point of view, thanks.

I've always had a problem with 'posession' of territory, does the present day Australian own Australia or does it belong to the Aborigine who was quite happy living there before they arived? The same could be asked about the USA and Nativa American Indians or the current South Americans and native Incas or Mayans. Not great examples as in all cases the original inhabitants are now co-existing, to a greater or lesser extent, with the settlers. At the end of the day, it seems to me to be the old 'posession is 9/10ths of the law' rule :o

In the case of the Falklands, as with all wars, it was a waste of life. What sticks in my mind was the lack of information we were getting about what was happening, it was taking several days for news to get back to the UK as all information channels were controlled by the military, compare that with recent 'realtime' news of the gulf conflicts!

I've known Royal Marines and Submariners who served in the conflict, the common thread they have is an extreme reluctance to discuss it - war is not glamorous.

The most interesting technical point (in my opinion) of the conflict was Chris Wreford Brown's decision to use WWII vintage Mk8 torpedoes rather than the new Tigerfish torpedoes when he attacked the ARA General Belgrano (another terrible loss of life). This must have been quite a slap in the face for BaE systems who made the new torpedo!

[StdDev]

I've always had a problem with 'posession' of territory, does the present day Australian own Australia or does it belong to the Aborigine who was quite happy living there before they arived? The same could be asked about the USA and Nativa American Indians or the current South Americans and native Incas or Mayans.

Obviously the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines had way too lax immigration policies! :roll:

[lesrae]

I've always had a problem with 'posession' of territory, does the present day Australian own Australia or does it belong to the Aborigine who was quite happy living there before they arived? The same could be asked about the USA and Nativa American Indians or the current South Americans and native Incas or Mayans.

Obviously the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines had way too lax immigration policies! :roll:

:D

[Marcantilan]

Sorry, I introduced a mistake im my post: HMS Clio kicked Malvinas Governor´s J. Vernet in 1833 not 1883!

My fault.

Since then, and until today, the Argentine Goverment, every year, submited a protest note, to the UK and, from 1945, to the UN.

So, from an argentinian aspect of the problem, it´s about an illegitime attack and seizure of territory, by a foreing power.
(Similar problemas around the globe: Think about the Kurile Islands, Japan and Russia. Japan still claims the islands were it´s territory, and the usurpation was 60 years ago.)

And about the war, I know some veterans (a couple of Infantry army officers and navy personnel). Yes, as lesrae said, they are reluctant to talk about the war. But If I could extract some from the books, I think the most important lessons from the war were:

1) Technology means a lot in modern warfare (SHAR´s with winders won the aerial war, and SUE´s with Exocets ruled the sea)
2) Good training and motivation is the other half of the equation (I could think in Royal Marines, Paras, Royal Artillery, Argentine Air Force)
3) Back in the 80´s, UK girls were ugly (al least those filmed in the piers when HMS Invincible sailed to the south)

[lesrae]

3) Back in the 80´s, UK girls were ugly (al least those filmed in the piers when HMS Invincible sailed to the south)

:rotfl:

I think you're confusing ugliness with terrible 80s fashion sense ;)

[TLAM Strike]

3) Back in the 80´s, UK girls were ugly (al least those filmed in the piers when HMS Invincible sailed to the south) You can trust the ugly ones. The pretty ones, all they care about is themselves. :lol:

[snowsub]

I've always had a problem with 'posession' of territory, does the present day Australian own Australia or does it belong to the Aborigine who was quite happy living there before they arived? The same could be asked about the USA and Nativa American Indians or the current South Americans and native Incas or Mayans.

Obviously the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines had way too lax immigration policies! :roll:

lol they should have sent Cook out to baxter.

Maybe that's what the Falklands are, a Detention centre for British migrants coming into Argentina :P

[Ghost Dog]

although I was a wee lad back in day, I do remember how most of the US and Canadian news anchors pronounced the word Falklands to sound very much like "Fawkan".

so being a wee tot of about 7 yrs, I heard it more like *******ing islands. at school I was say things like "theres a war going on in those fu**ing islands!"

I didnt learn the truth till I was about 11 or 12.

[Kapitan]

We still won we still own the islands they are still british.

[Godalmighty83]

3) Back in the 80´s, UK girls were ugly (al least those filmed in the piers when HMS Invincible sailed to the south)

if the wives were hot babes the sailors would refuse to spend months at a time at sea.

neither side deserves halos over there heads.


as a side note if the navy at the time hadnt had that stupid 'attack-confirm' system which meant sub commanders had to get permission from the mainland to fire torpedoes the war would have been a good deal bloodier and over a good deal sooner.

[XabbaRus]

I was only 6 but still remember seeing it on the news and wondering what it was all about. It seemed very ethereal adn detached.

However in some ways thinking about it the way that it took days to get information and that the forces could control the information was a better way tha todays video game live action street fighting in Bagdad news.

The one memory I do have is our neighbour who was a para in the war who was disgusted at the footwear our boys had and the shame he felt of his boys taking the boots of dead argentinian soldiers as it was a lot better.

[Falcon666]

Well, apart what has been stated before, the Falklands war taught something that every South American nation should have taken note of (I know Brazil didn't). A conscript military force (Argentine Army and Navy) is poorly organized, poorly motivated, poorly trained, and stands little chance against a professional military force (Royal Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force).

In fact, the only area in which the Argentines had some success was with Air Forces. Since Navy and Air Force pilots are all Officers that volunteered, and therefore they have higher morale, therefore they train harder and are truly dedicated to their jobs, unlike enlisted 18 and 19 year olds, who regard their time in the Navy or Army as a waste of time.

Other than that it's just a series of misconceptions by the Argentines that lead to poor decisions. First of all they believed that the UK wouldn't counter-attack, then they believed that the US would be on their side (or at least not helping the Brits with intel and logistics). And his final mistake was to believe that even if the Brits did bring a fight, that the Argentine military was capable of defeating the Royal Navy - which had been preparing for over 30 years for war against the Soviets - simply because the Royal Navy would be far, far away from Britain, therefore short on supplies, and with a long-ass supply line.


Finally, its just another example of the problems that any totalitarian country engaged in military operations faces. Even if someone disagreed with Gen. Galtieri and the Argentine Leadership and realized the flawed facts and logic guiding their decisions, that individual failed to express his thoughts, simply because doing so would have meant at best losing their job, and at worst death.

[U-533]

Conventional type weapons need to be tested some how for real.:sunny:


The VSTOL planes and their carrier worked better than expected....


:yep:

[Fish]

Sorry, I introduced a mistake im my post: HMS Clio kicked Malvinas Governor´s J. Vernet in 1833 not 1883!

My fault.

Since then, and until today, the Argentine Goverment, every year, submited a protest note, to the UK and, from 1945, to the UN.

So, from an argentinian aspect of the problem, it´s about an illegitime attack and seizure of territory, by a foreing power.
(Similar problemas around the globe: Think about the Kurile Islands, Japan and Russia. Japan still claims the islands were it´s territory, and the usurpation was 60 years ago.)

And about the war, I know some veterans (a couple of Infantry army officers and navy personnel). Yes, as lesrae said, they are reluctant to talk about the war. But If I could extract some from the books, I think the most important lessons from the war were:

1) Technology means a lot in modern warfare (SHAR´s with winders won the aerial war, and SUE´s with Exocets ruled the sea)
2) Good training and motivation is the other half of the equation (I could think in Royal Marines, Paras, Royal Artillery, Argentine Air Force)
3) Back in the 80´s, UK girls were ugly (al least those filmed in the piers when HMS Invincible sailed to the south)

Forgive my ignorance but are most Argentins not from Spain? :hmm:

[STEED]

Pointless just an exercise in stupidity, holding on too the last bits of a former empire. There's more sheep there than humans!!!

PS: Are we still defending those sheep at the cost of the British tax payer?

[August]

Pointless just an exercise in stupidity, holding on too the last bits of a former empire. There's more sheep there than humans!!!

PS: Are we still defending those sheep at the cost of the British tax payer?

I would have thought you'd have more sympathy for your own fellow citizens. The inhabitants are British subjects no?

[STEED]

I would have thought you'd have more sympathy for your own fellow citizens. The inhabitants are British subjects no?

I do they were in the middle of what?

Both sides never declared war!!

[August]

I would have thought you'd have more sympathy for your own fellow citizens. The inhabitants are British subjects no?
I do they were in the middle of what?

Both sides never declared war!!

So you're saying that if a foreign nation were to occupy British territory you wouldn't feel it necessary to do anything about it?

[ABBAFAN]

3) Back in the 80´s, UK girls were ugly (al least those filmed in the piers when HMS Invincible sailed to the south)


Not maggie though!:arrgh!:

[Linton]

Conqueror was sunk with MK8 as the tigerfish at that time was an asw weapon not asuw.The TI also remarked he had never had a successful bang with the tigerfish.

[ABBAFAN]

I believe that the whole point of a nations armed forces is just that.to defend its subjects.it is a much more reasonable use of force than dodgy oil wars in far flung places.I would not regard the Falklands as a pointless war or war mongering on Margaret Thatchers part.Thatcher tried to avoid war as far as was possible but there was no other option.Unfortunate.I wonder if it will ever happen over Gibraltar.

[STEED]

So you're saying that if a foreign nation were to occupy British territory you wouldn't feel it necessary to do anything about it?

We should have declared war it's strikes me as some what odd with no declaration of war, an interesting thing here Margret Thatcher was becoming unpopular here and it looked like she was going to loose the general election but after the war there was a massive u-turn and she was re-elected.

Was there a political agenda here? I don't know is my answer.

[DanCanovas]

you ever feel that you have so much to say on a subject and yet you just can;t be arsed to say it :rotfl:

[STEED]

There's a lot of political wrangling over the Falkland's, as I remember the folks there were offed to be rehoused to one of the Scottish isle's with a nice some of cash.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty_of_the_Falkland_Islands

[kurtz]

When the Falklands conflict first kicked off I thought it was in the scottish Isles:oops:

A few things;

The Falklands are important they are the gateway to Antartica with its putative oil reserves and important scientific bases, Britain guarantees it's neutrality, I don't think Argentina with it's then terrible financial state could have kept it's hands off it.

I kinda suspect that both sides fancied a bit of a war and the Argentinians got suckered into it by Maggie (who I kinda miss these days).

And does anyone remember that greta song by the Macc Lads?

You can keep that puff Ardiles
Cos we're going to have your Malvinas!

(Buenos Airies I think)

Apparantly the Sun were going to hand it out as a patriotic song but thought better of it after a second listening.

[ABBAFAN]

Has anyone seen any of these falklands films?

An ungentlemanly act;about the initial Argentine landings starring Ian Richardson
Illuminados por el fuego;is an interesting Argentine film about one ex conscripts memories.
Tumbledown;starring colin firth about the battle.

[TteFAboB]

:o
The flag of the Falklands has a sheep in it?!
:rotfl:
Kiwis must be so jealous!

[ABBAFAN]

Ive been to the Falklands.Its very nice there.The duke box in one of the pubs(the globe and laurel I think)has all the videos for the tracks on it.A video juke box if you like.:|\\

[Tchocky]

We should have declared war it's strikes me as some what odd with no declaration of war, an interesting thing here Margret Thatcher was becoming unpopular here and it looked like she was going to loose the general election but after the war there was a massive u-turn and she was re-elected.

Why should ther have been a declaration of war? Such a declaration is total, whereas this conflict was one of reclamation.

And I'm sure Maggie was aware of the political brownie points in getting "our lads" off to fight Johnny Foreigner....

[kurtz]

Pointless just an exercise in stupidity, holding on too the last bits of a former empire. There's more sheep there than humans!!!

PS: Are we still defending those sheep at the cost of the British tax payer?

Yes there is still a base there, guarding the British people who live there (so sheep may safely graze:D ) and also as I said earlier guarding Antartica from exploitation.

EDIT: can't spell Guard properly without 2 goes!

[August]

So you're saying that if a foreign nation were to occupy British territory you wouldn't feel it necessary to do anything about it?
We should have declared war it's strikes me as some what odd with no declaration of war, an interesting thing here Margret Thatcher was becoming unpopular here and it looked like she was going to loose the general election but after the war there was a massive u-turn and she was re-elected.

Was there a political agenda here? I don't know is my answer.

Well I don't have much an opinion of Thatcher one way or the other, but I thought her handling of the Falklands situation was excellent. The RNs slow deployment down to the Falklands gave time for world opinion to turn against Argentina, which your government was very convincingly able to cast as being in the wrong.

It reminded me of your countries efforts to turn US opinion against Germany and in favor of the Allies in WW1. It was very well played by Britian, especially for a country that, back then, was still thought of more as a former enemy than as a friend.

[bookworm_020]

Weren't the Falklands first settled by British on one Island and the Spanish on the other main Island?? The British took it all over after a long period of time when the Islands were abandond. The Spainish at one point controled both (the Command of the Spanish Island had some grand idea's of expansion), but gave the British back the Island with an apology!

The American then weighed into the debate after the Islands were abaonded by both british and spanish settlers, declaring that the Islands were under no claim and were free.

The British had by this point had enough, and went down and occuiped the the Islands, which have stayed in there hands except form the time in 1982.

The Argentine claim on the Islands is based on the spanish holding. I have dates at home for all of the events that I've listed (they maybe a little out of order, but they're pretty much on the money). I don't know of the legal staus of the Argentine claim, but it looks a little weak to me.

[baggygreen]

possession is 9/10s of the law, as they say..

I dont think it was a matter of taking the time to turn world opinion against argentina, i think its a matter of it taking such a long time for the forces to get from britain where they had to be assembled, to the falklands! Think about it, how long does it take us in a type IX boat?? its a bloody long way.

As for the reasons behind the initial invasion, I suggest we look at the state of argentinian politics at the time. the govt was shaky, and in IR there is an idea which states that the best way to unite your people and take their mind off internal problems is to create an external threat, the 'us against them' idea.

[robbo180265]

So you're saying that if a foreign nation were to occupy British territory you wouldn't feel it necessary to do anything about it?

We should have declared war it's strikes me as some what odd with no declaration of war, an interesting thing here Margret Thatcher was becoming unpopular here and it looked like she was going to loose the general election but after the war there was a massive u-turn and she was re-elected.

Was there a political agenda here? I don't know is my answer.

My two pennies worth....

As I understand it Thatcher was warned that Argentinia was about to invade the Falklands some 8 months before it happened by the Americans. Instead of putting more troops in and around the Falklands, she actually did nothing(inviting the invasion)

When the "war" got under way, again the Americans had got Argentinia agree to talks with our government, and at almost the same time a nuclear submarime sunk the Belgrano(apologies if I misspelt its name)not in and also heading away from the exclusion zone. No-one to this day knows for sure who gave the order as the subs log books went missing on the way back here.

We know what happened next. An awful lot of lives were lost and Thatcher was re-elected on the back of the war.

I for one can't wait to dance on that womans grave! (it wasn't just the Falklands - that witch ruined our country, and we're still reeling from her control now)

[kurtz]

So you're saying that if a foreign nation were to occupy British territory you wouldn't feel it necessary to do anything about it?

We should have declared war it's strikes me as some what odd with no declaration of war, an interesting thing here Margret Thatcher was becoming unpopular here and it looked like she was going to loose the general election but after the war there was a massive u-turn and she was re-elected.

Was there a political agenda here? I don't know is my answer.

My two pennies worth....

As I understand it Thatcher was warned that Argentinia was about to invade the Falklands some 8 months before it happened by the Americans. Instead of putting more troops in and around the Falklands, she actually did nothing(inviting the invasion)

When the "war" got under way, again the Americans had got Argentinia agree to talks with our government, and at almost the same time a nuclear submarime sunk the Belgrano(apologies if I misspelt its name)not in and also heading away from the exclusion zone. No-one to this day knows for sure who gave the order as the subs log books went missing on the way back here.

We know what happened next. An awful lot of lives were lost and Thatcher was re-elected on the back of the war.

I for one can't wait to dance on that womans grave! (it wasn't just the Falklands - that witch ruined our country, and we're still reeling from her control now)

Bit of trivia, to the extent of my knowledge it was the second time the Belgrano had sunk, the first time was as USS Phoenix (appropriately enough) at Pearl Harbour. As I say IIRC according to Wikipedia it survived the attack, I also thought it was the Carolina...

[Bort]

As many have mentioned here already, the central interesting thing about the Falklands war was that it tested many Cold War technologies that although long in service, but had not really been used in conflict before. Some cold truths regarding cruise missiles, nuclear submarines and VTOL aircraft were made painfully obvious to the two combatants, as well as the rest of the world. I suppose it remains to be seen, in the next real sea battle whether or not these lessons have been taken to heart.:hmm:

[Takeda Shingen]

Ive been to the Falklands.Its very nice there.The duke box in one of the pubs(the globe and laurel I think)has all the videos for the tracks on it.A video juke box if you like.:|\\

OKAY

[The Avon Lady]

Ive been to the Falklands.Its very nice there.The duke box in one of the pubs(the globe and laurel I think)has all the videos for the tracks on it.A video juke box if you like.:|\\
OKAY
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/2749/loudxz5.jpg

[Marcantilan]

Illuminados por el fuego;is an interesting Argentine film about one ex conscripts memories.

Iluminados por el fuego is a bad film from a bad book.

[Boris]

My dad's theory is that the Falklands War was probably based on false intelligence on the part of the Argentinians, deliberately fed to them by the CIA.
Thinking they could easily win the confilct, they went ahead and did it. The CIA of course, did this to topple the dictatorship in Argentina, which was taking all the CIA (under the table) funding for the war against communism in south america, without doing enough to stop it.
In fact, the Tupamaros had been infiltrated by Argentinian agents for some time, and were perpetuating a long dead socialist movement, just to keep getting the CIA's aid money.
So the Falklands War may well have been the CIA's revenge on a regime they no longer had any use for.

[ASWnut101]

As many have mentioned here already, the central interesting thing about the Falklands war was that it tested many Cold War technologies that although long in service, but had not really been used in conflict before. Some cold truths regarding cruise missiles, nuclear submarines and VTOL aircraft were made painfully obvious to the two combatants, as well as the rest of the world. I suppose it remains to be seen, in the next real sea battle whether or not these lessons have been taken to heart.:hmm:

Nuclear Submarines? I know the Belgrano was sunk by a vintage, non-nuclear sub with ancient WWII torpedoes.:yep:

[bookworm_020]

Nuclear Submarines? I know the Belgrano was sunk by a vintage, non-nuclear sub with ancient WWII torpedoes.:yep:

The sub was a reasonly modern nuclear sub. Yes it did use Mk 8 Torpedoes instead of the Mk 24 Tigerfish, but there were two reasons for this.

1 The Tigerfish was unreliable and didn't have a good history of reliablity

2 The Mk8 had a bigger warhead, wich they believed (correctly) that would do more damage to armored WW2 vintage vessal.

Of the three mk 8's fired two hit and exploded, sinking the Belgrano, one missed the cruiser and hit a destroyer, but failed to exploed! ( The argintinians heard it hit their ship, later examination found the dent and marks from impact.)

[irish1958]

If you steal something, how many years of decades must go by before it is yours?

[RedMenace]

Breshnev took Afghanistan,
Begin took Beirut,
Galtieri took the Union Jack;
and Maggie, over lunch one day,
took a cruiser with all hands,
apparently to make him give it back.

We showed Argentina
Now let's go and show these.
Make us feel tough
And wouldn't Maggie be pleased?

:smug:

[NefariousKoel]

I'd prefer to put things in my own perspective.

I didn't care much at the time since I was all of approximately 6 or 7. Also, I'm an American.

That being said, first of all, I don't and wouldn't have cared since it's one of our closest allies. Sorry, my Argentinian brothers, but a country that's stuck with mine for a long while... you're on your own.

But most notably: The Falklands were a UK protectorate. Not forced to be one, but voluntarily part of that country by repeated popular vote. I would relate the situation (currently) as Puerto Rico (a US protectorate) being invaded by Haiti.

The people there were part of that nation and still wanted to be. The Brits were fully justified in their response.

From what I've gathered, the Falklands still wants to be part of the UK since last reading the complaints they had about their banks being outsourced to African customer service a few years ago. There was a lotta bitchin' that's for sure. :lol:

[BladeHeart]

[quote=ASWnut101] .........
Of the three mk 8's fired two hit and exploded, sinking the Belgrano, one missed the cruiser and hit a destroyer, but failed to exploed! ( The argintinians heard it hit their ship, later examination found the dent and marks from impact.)

...and I thought it was just those G7s on my boat!

On a more serious note. Regardless of what may or may not have been the political motivation of and manipulation of Maggie Thatcher, as far as the British people were concerned at the time the Falklands were an obscure part of the UK populated by "Brits" who wanted to be "Brits". Then someone tried to take it away by force rather then "ask for it" ( I know I was around at the time).

UK public psyche 101
1. UK society sets its moral standards on the utopian equalitarian principle; fair play and being reasonable.
2. The UK thinks that it should be a morally correct society; often confused with polically correct.
3. Ask and we try to oblige, push and we push back; we don't like bullies.
4. There is a difference between gentleness and weakness.

Even the likes of Blair could not give the Falklands away for at least a generation or so.

[kurtz]

[quote=ASWnut101] .........
Of the three mk 8's fired two hit and exploded, sinking the Belgrano, one missed the cruiser and hit a destroyer, but failed to exploed! ( The argintinians heard it hit their ship, later examination found the dent and marks from impact.)

...and I thought it was just those G7s on my boat!

On a more serious note. Regardless of what may or may not have been the political motivation of and manipulation of Maggie Thatcher, as far as the British people were concerned at the time the Falklands were an obscure part of the UK populated by "Brits" who wanted to be "Brits". Then someone tried to take it away by force rather then "ask for it" ( I know I was around at the time).

UK public psyche 101
1. UK society sets its moral standards on the utopian equalitarian principle; fair play and being reasonable.
2. The UK thinks that it should be a morally correct society; often confused with polically correct.
3. Ask and we try to oblige, push and we push back; we don't like bullies.
4. There is a difference between gentleness and weakness.

Even the likes of Blair could not give the Falklands away for at least a generation or so.

:up: Beautifully put!

[TarJak]

Well I don't have much an opinion of Thatcher one way or the other, but I thought her handling of the Falklands situation was excellent. The RNs slow deployment down to the Falklands gave time for world opinion to turn against Argentina, which your government was very convincingly able to cast as being in the wrong.

It reminded me of your countries efforts to turn US opinion against Germany and in favor of the Allies in WW1. It was very well played by Britian, especially for a country that, back then, was still thought of more as a former enemy than as a friend.

You have to hand it to a country that spent hundreds of years developing a systematic way of handling political spin and pumping up a patriotic media machine when it wants to. Without making it look like the government an civil service are actually doing it.:yep:

[Kapitan]

If your trying to say the UK is in the wrong your far mistaken, the argentines invaded british terratory to which resulted in a retaliation strike by the british.

The sinking of the belgrano was one of a tactical nature she posed thee most threat to the british fleet than any other vessel around at that time, hence she was sunk.

[Marcantilan]

Well, one could argue about the british invaded first, back in 1833, so the argentinians were retaking own land. But´s not the point: my truth, your truth. The sad thing is the loss of life and the incompetence of the governments to avoid it.

And about the ARA General Belgrano thing, I don´t think the sinking was a "war crime" (as lot of people say here and abroad). She was a legitime target, a big cruiser in a "hot" zone.

But (always a but) the tempo of Mrs. Thatcher decision (sink the cruiser) was wrong, specially with a peace proposal over the table (offered by the peruvian government).

[Kapitan]

Peru couldnt have done squat if it tried the only diplomatic cure is to see the war out and win that way they would over through the argentine leader which they done thats why the british carried on i believe.

[kurtz]

Well, one could argue about the british invaded first, back in 1833, so the argentinians were retaking own land. But´s not the point: my truth, your truth. The sad thing is the loss of life and the incompetence of the governments to avoid it.


I don't think you could argue that we settled the islands. We never attacked anyone to get them. There is no justification for the Argentine agression there, they were just trying to be macho and when they didn't have the balls to pull it off started bleating to the 'international community' about being hurt.

[Marcantilan]

Well, HMS Clio kicked argentinian governor Vernet and all of the habitants of the islands January 3, 1833.

And they don´t asked politely...

Anyway no offenses here, just point of views.

[ASWnut101]

[quote=ASWnut101] .........
Of the three mk 8's fired two hit and exploded, sinking the Belgrano, one missed the cruiser and hit a destroyer, but failed to exploed! ( The argintinians heard it hit their ship, later examination found the dent and marks from impact.)

...and I thought it was just those G7s on my boat!

On a more serious note. Regardless of what may or may not have been the political motivation of and manipulation of Maggie Thatcher, as far as the British people were concerned at the time the Falklands were an obscure part of the UK populated by "Brits" who wanted to be "Brits". Then someone tried to take it away by force rather then "ask for it" ( I know I was around at the time).

UK public psyche 101
1. UK society sets its moral standards on the utopian equalitarian principle; fair play and being reasonable.
2. The UK thinks that it should be a morally correct society; often confused with polically correct.
3. Ask and we try to oblige, push and we push back; we don't like bullies.
4. There is a difference between gentleness and weakness.

Even the likes of Blair could not give the Falklands away for at least a generation or so.

Umm, I didn't write that... (check your quote name:know:)

[bookworm_020]

I wrote the thing about the Mk 8 Torpedos, ASWnut101 did the thing about the UK psyche. Just want to make sure credit goes where credit is due.

[ASWnut101]

I'm sooo confused. I can't remember writing any of that.:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: