Refused to sell more during the conflict
There were a small number of Exocets still available on the open market and were activley being sought by various countries. UK undercover agents disguised as Arabs bought them if I remember rightly but they very nearly went to a third party acting on behalf of the Argies. Proper cloak and dagger stuff!
Is it just me or is TJ cranking up his hatred lately? All that Thatcher tension is about to explode!
My comment on weaponary was [i]mainly[/i] tongue in cheek, as you say capitalism at work. I did like the white flags comment though 🙂
BB That presumes you know where the carrier is... As already pointed out, the effect of the Belgrano incident was that the Veinticinco de Mayo was immediately recalled to port, the lack of a sea borne platform reduced the Argentine air forces effective loiter time over San Carlos and could well have saved hundreds of British lives...
Big Grey thing, with planes on can't miss it! If not try Google maps, or alternatively use the same technology that you ued to spot the Belgrano...(American if my recollections serves me right)
Weak point if you don't mind me saying so Zu old boy.
didn't the french sell the argies the exocets then supply us with some important tech info on eliminating them?
iirc wasn't a lot of the Argentinean army conscripts from the villages?
Deigo Garcia a blokes son just gone their for a 12 month tour lucky git.
Big Grey thing, with planes on can't miss it! If not try Google maps, or alternatively use the same technology that you ued to spot the Belgrano...(American if my recollections serves me right)
Sorry mate - you're smoking crack there... theres rumours that the Russians picked up the Belgrano, and the Norwegians managed to eavesdrop on that information, but that was after the Conqueror was already trailing.
I think you seriously overestimate the technology of the day, and underestimate the difficulty of finding a ship at sea.
You do recall what computers were like in those days? and that we were still using propeller planes for much of our maritime surveillance...
In the words of the Belgrano's Captain:
“I think we posed a real threat… we never had any intention of going back to shore; we were only waiting for the right moment to act”
I was at the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry on Tuesday and saw an AEW Shackleton they have on display. I was suprised to see how long it remained in service for!
Couldn't the yanks lend us one of their battle groups?
[img]
El-bent, if it wasn't so obvious you know bugger all about the RAF and airpower in general, I'd object to you calling me a dick.But it is and I don't. Go do your homework.
Go on then, Enlighten me. 🙄
wowzers its like a game of military top trumps on here
even amongst a bunch of grown men who ride bicycles there are some proper nerds on here!
What I like most about the picture above is the guy water skiing behind the submarine!
I joined up just as the Falklands finished in 1982, do I get the chance to have a go at them again if I re-join up as I missed all the action last time around?!
LOL yea does look like someone water skiing 😀
I was at the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry on Tuesday and saw an AEW Shackleton they have on display. I was suprised to see how long it remained in service for!
Sounds like a comfy OAP armchair to me 😀
an excellent book by Max Hastings
oxymoron
You know. If it wasnt for the Argentinian air force you wouldn't go far wrong for thinking the Argies are a little bit shit at fighting.
From reading, they struck me (as a whole) as being abit Dads Army meets Malaga barman.
The Airmen are the ones who covered themselves in (rightful) glory. Imagine flying a sh1te Pucara and having to hug the contours of the land then drop into a hailstorm of lead from the ground along with missiles and of course the Harriers.
You would feel like a Pigeon with a handgun strapped to you. **** that.
Not a professional army (conscripts).
Not a professional army (conscripts).
Part of them yes.
Couldn't the yanks lend us one of their battle groups?
Ughhh - the Yanks f'cked us over with the Falklands, and it's a bit of a habit. If you're familiar with your history you'll realise that the UK / US alliance and "special relationship" are a load of bollocks - since, oh about a little tea party in Boston....
US conduct (esp foreign poilcy, bt also military) in WW2 could arguably be regarded as anti-UK (and other European "imperialist" natons like France and the Netherlands) as it was anti German, anti Japanese.
Umm, it's either a conscript army or not hora.
The NCOs and ruperts may be enlisted but it's still not a professional army.
the Yanks f'cked us over with the Falklands
American mercenaries lay buried in lime pits in many parts of the Falklands. With their service dogtags.
Make of that what you will.
Ughhh - the Yanks f'cked us over with the Falklands
By supplying us with the very latest Sidewinder AA missile technology?
In WW2 US policy was admittedly self-serving and cynical
To argue that it was:
as anti-UK (and other European "imperialist" natons like France and the Netherlands) as it was anti German, anti Japanese.
is just daft
They didn't carpet bomb us like they did the Germans, and they didn't nuke us like they did the Japanese. And they only bombed the French and the Dutch out of tactical necessity
Ughhh - the Yanks f'cked us over with the Falklands,
Please explain that statement.
(It was the French that provided technical assistance to the enemy for their Exocets.)
What do you mean by that CFH?
CaptainFlashheart - Memberthe Yanks f'cked us over with the Falklands
American mercenaries lay buried in lime pits in many parts of the Falklands. With their service dogtags.
Make of that what you will.
Que? - never heard that one.
Well, there you go. Every day's a school day. As I said, [i]Make of that what you will[/i]
I don't understand it, I don't know why and I won't pretend that I do, but there are Americans in lime in the Falklands.
Nor I.
No mention in any of the accounts I've read from that period or written subsequently.
More info please. Links? Source material?
Source material?
Falklanders.
American bodies from when? What period?
CFH - all bollocks, based on the fact that a number of the Argentinian POW's had perfect English with American accents.
Given the fact that a number of them were from Argentine/American families and had been to high school and university in the States, but as argentinian residents got called up for their national service, it wasn't really surprising that they were mistaken for Spams - a fair number probably qualified for dual citizenship.
a google "falklands war american mercenaries" throws up unsubstatiated allegations. Waht looks likely is that this is an urban myth
It looks like there were american educated argentine citizens captured and shot as well as some british argentines - all conscripts
Well, this is from people who live there. It's their story, not mine. Make of it what you will.
Since the Argentinian military Officer Corps was professional, many officers having been to Sandhurst and no doubt West Point and such like, I can't for one minute think why they'd want to employ non-Argentinian mercenaries to take with them.
I have friends of friends out there on a civi contract so I'll ask.
Re. American mercenaries the link below is interesting as it is from a respectable journalist.
INDEPENDENT.CO.UK El-Bent
start by working out how you do BVR combat with the GR9.
Then work out air combat without a main runway. Then crack on with getting troops out of the 'stan (they will stop elsewhere before coming home) then come back to me
I'm serving RAF with sufficient experience to know you're talking bollocks. When you've read your shit clearly you'll see different.
Go back to school.
Cletus - the journalist clearly states he is just repeating what is in a book. One uncorroborated source. It only claims they spoke english with an american accent. As do many argentines
More tory lies eh TJ ?
😉
Umm, it's either a conscript army or not hora.
The NCOs and ruperts may be enlisted but it's still not a professional army.
It was mixed. For instance on the Belgrano there were 'old hands' who had been with the Belgrano for years in the regular Navy serving alonsgside conscripts. I take from this that its a sort of national service alongside professionals.
The Argentinian special forces (one of the books mentioned that I read) were professional soldiers not conscripts.
While we're back at school-reading about the Falklands war of 1833 and the claims to ownership in the 50 years before this could clear a few things up....
Thanks for the entertaining thread folks
Yes, maybe we should go back to pre-1824 and Spains ownership of Argentina?
...or possibly the ongoing border/islands dispute with Chile?
Just been talking to the mrs and her mum and they said there weren't any Americans there. Apparently some Argies had an americanised english if that makes any difference.
Captain Flasheart - they're asking if you're from there or if not who do you know?
hora - a conscripted military is nowhere near as effective as a professional volunteer military. Regardless of the number of 'regulars', the far lower levels of ability/motivation etc of conscripts coupled with the higher levels of supervision/effort to employ them drags the overall capability down. Those 'professionals' are often those who came to the end of conscription and decided to sign on as they liked it/didn't know any different/couldn't do anything else.
TooTall- its all semantics. Neither of them had been tested in battle. A kid joining up to escape the dole in Merthyr Tydfil is going to have the same experience and fears.
Dont forget one of the regiments that fought had just come over from walking around the Palace/trooping the colours as their main role in the Army.
😯
hora - it isn't all semantics. Nothing of the sort. I take it from your dismissal of my point that you share my experiences of working with both conscripted and volunteer military forces? I would love to hear more of your thoughts on this subject.
think you seriously overestimate the technology of the day, and underestimate the difficulty of finding a ship at sea.You do recall what computers were like in those days? and that we were still using propeller planes for much of our maritime surveillance...
How much technology does it take to lay up offshore, and to receive comms from portside observations?? You seem to be overlooking the fact that we did have people on the mainland, etc etc etc. Similar to the SAS unit dropped onto Stanley airfield by Vulcan bomber, which then carried out obos and ultimately directed Naval fire onto Stanley with virtually no civilian casualites in the final battle. Allied to that the Nuclear sub didn't just chance on the Belgrano it had done as above, and was tracking the bugger for considerable time before it nailed the poor sod, pretty much as described above.
Regarding the technology of the day, not sure how well you remember the 70's/80's but it was that time when the cold war was still on and Nato had been carrying out surveillance on the planets surface to a very intense degree for decades. It was also the era, when we designed and utilised amongst other things, Concorde, The Harrier, The Sinclair C5 and so on...so whats your point?