The Falklands Conflict

[Banquet]

.

[ezzler]

I TOLD YOU , I AM YOUR FATHER !!!!!!

[a white rabbit]

ORIGINAL: ezz

The good all 'it was all Thatchers idea argument.'
Pathetic...

FDR knew about Pearl Harbour
JFK was klled by the mlitary for wanting to quit Vietnam
Churchill allowed Coventry to bombed to protect Enigma
G Bush personally planted explosives in the twin towers because he hates Saddam

Its all true man .. you gotta believe me ... I know ..
I know more than anyone .. its just obvious man ..
There never was a USSR , it was all a hoax to raise taxes .. that's why you couldn't go there man..
Roswell .. its all true .. Cheyney is an Alien man . just look at him..

Facts .. i dont facts .. I got insight and speculation and heresay .. they're more real than facts man .. you can prove Anything with facts.

Thatcher .. she paid the Junta wth poll tax money from her own people to kill her own soldiers ..All the time she was married to Regan..

The Nixon who went to China came back as a robot man .. just look at his arms .. they dont even bend..

Carter .. the CIA set him up .. He was a patsy for the tentacles of the secret empire.. * sniff *

Marilyn Munroe .. yeah the goverment killed her in that car crash with Jane Russell and Princess Di ..* uh oh getting confused again * sometimes my ears just like talk to me *

And right now Arsenal just beat lowly Fulham in the Last minute of play

Its all a conspiracy

You must believe me .. I am your father Luke I AM YOUR FATHER I am YOUR FATHER !!!!

..you on drugs or what ?

..this is a t3 board, we may do drugs but we're still coherent..

[Hartford688]

ORIGINAL: Banquet

Is that an SU-30 you keep posting pictures of Ike? Or is it another one of your brand new Argentinian designed aircraft that co-incidentally look remarkably similar to other designs?

I only ask because, if Argentina didn't design it, and if they don't have any in their airforce.. what is their relevance here? Maybe I should post up pictures of a British X-Wing?

They do have SU-29 aerobatic planes...pretty close...

SU-29

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: ezz

The good all 'it was all Thatchers idea argument.'
Pathetic...

FDR knew about Pearl Harbour
JFK was klled by the mlitary for wanting to quit Vietnam
Churchill allowed Coventry to bombed to protect Enigma
G Bush personally planted explosives in the twin towers because he hates Saddam

Its all true man .. you gotta believe me ... I know ..
I know more than anyone .. its just obvious man ..
There never was a USSR , it was all a hoax to raise taxes .. that's why you couldn't go there man..
Roswell .. its all true .. Cheyney is an Alien man . just look at him..

Facts .. i dont facts .. I got insight and speculation and heresay .. they're more real than facts man .. you can prove Anything with facts.

Thatcher .. she paid the Junta wth poll tax money from her own people to kill her own soldiers ..All the time she was married to Regan..

The Nixon who went to China came back as a robot man .. just look at his arms .. they dont even bend..

Carter .. the CIA set him up .. He was a patsy for the tentacles of the secret empire.. * sniff *

Marilyn Munroe .. yeah the goverment killed her in that car crash with Jane Russell and Princess Di ..* uh oh getting confused again * sometimes my ears just like talk to me *

And right now Arsenal just beat lowly Fulham in the Last minute of play

Its all a conspiracy

You must believe me .. I am your father Luke I AM YOUR FATHER I am YOUR FATHER !!!!

WOW! Take me to your leader! [&o]

[7th Somersets]

They do have SU-29 aerobatic planes...pretty close...

 

 
British Euro fighter. Euro Fighter. JaJaJa!!! What a joke!

[Cap Mandrake]

One clever thing I recall was TV coverage of a British unit boarding a cruiseliner in England at the start of the conflict. A military band was playing "Don't cry for me Argentina" as they boarded [:)]


That the plan was devised as a tail wagging the dog strategy to divert attention from domestic Argentinian issues there is no doubt, but the question I have is..who in the Argentine decision-making hierarchy could have possibly believed the Brits would let such a profound national insult stand? Did they really think they could win, eventually? Did they expect they could negotiate after taking the islands by force?


The other thing of interest was the US press coverage at the time. The Exocet was portrayed as being the death nell for all aircraft carriers. This was at a time of Reagan's big naval buildup
to a 600 ship Navy, including new carriers, of course. The success of the Exocet was seized upon by opponents of military spending as a sign that we should spend the money on God knows what..but not on carriers as they could all be sunk by any tinpot dictatorship with a couple of Cessnas and some Excocets.

The actual lesson should have been the opposite. Jump carriers with really cool, but short-legged Sea Harriers and the absence of long range airborne radar meant the Royal Navy could not protect the landing operations very well without putting the carriers in mortal peril. My guess is a USN operation to retake the Falklands would have involved 10 SSN's and 3 carrier battle groups. The mainland Argentine airfields would have been blitzed with about half the USN Tomahawk inventory some night and the carriers would have parked somewhere near the islands to cover the landing with F-14's pushed up to a couple of dozen miles off the Argie coast and Hawkeyes in the air 24 hrs a day. The New Jersey might even have showed up to keep everyone's head down.

BTW..those Argie A-4 pilots had brass ones.

BTW (again)..re Tomahawks. Didn't the RN have any at the time with conventiinal HE? Anyone know?

Just found out..first Tomahawks to the RN in 1995

[7th Somersets]

Cap Mandrake,

I agree the Argy pilots did have balls - being shot down over the South Atlantic was not a good fate - and many brave men simply disappeared.

Re Tomahawks - we did not have them (then!). Obviously we do now (having recently visited the 'bombshop' on a T Class sub I can vouch for that personally)

As has previously been pointed out - Britain's planned carrier fleet will involve bigger platforms for better power projection. No doubt with potential conflicts like the Falklands in mind.
I agree with your assessment of a US response to a similar incident. But then - they would have to be pretty daft to try.

Why would the Argentinians think that Britain would turn the other cheek? Well, perhaps they paid too much attention to some of the views that you have seen expressed in this Forum by some contributors. There is a vocal minority in the UK who would happily give up everything without so much as a boo! When I recently toured the Normandy battlefields with a group of vets - there were some tears for their friends left behind - but also anger that Chamberlain did not stop the German's and prevent the vast slaughter that followed.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
...
That the plan was devised as a tail wagging the dog strategy to divert attention from domestic Argentinian issues there is no doubt, but the question I have is..who in the Argentine decision-making hierarchy could have possibly believed the Brits would let such a profound national insult stand? Did they really think they could win, eventually? Did they expect they could negotiate after taking the islands by force?
...

As I mentioned earlier Cap Mandrake, Britain, financially, militarily and politically was in a bad way.

I reckon the Argentinian Junta of the time made a calculated guess that the British would not be able to launch a task force of any credible size, nevermind in the time scale required.

I reckon they thought it would take Britain quite some time to get a task force together and it wouldn't be enough anyway. Also, I think they were hoping that, in this time, the solution would be found politically in the UN.

Lets be brutally honest here...the Junta were in a state. They needed the Falklands back under the Argentinian flag. Now that we understand that was the case, it makes sense to assume that when they took them, they meant to keep them. Now that we understand that, we can see that by using their least capable units, recruits and conscripts, they clearly thought we wouldn't show up and, even if we did, it would be too late because the UN would've sorted it out and, should worst come to worst and they had to fight, the British forces would be too weak and too outnumbered to perform the task they had been assigned.

I truly believe they thought it would be sorted out at the political level within the UN and if not, Britain was too week to do anything about it. The fact that Britain had ammassed a major task force within a week, completely threw them and they were buggered from that point.

As for Maggie. I didn't like her much. She made some extremely poor desicions in her time as PM...but she had more balls than some of the arses who have succeeded her! I'll give her that. Her main failing was to not to listen....not to listen to the people, and not to listen to her advisors. There are times (The Falklands Conflict was one) where people need to stand up and hold strong and she did that...trouble was, she did it with avery decision she ever made!

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
...
That the plan was devised as a tail wagging the dog strategy to divert attention from domestic Argentinian issues there is no doubt, but the question I have is..who in the Argentine decision-making hierarchy could have possibly believed the Brits would let such a profound national insult stand? Did they really think they could win, eventually? Did they expect they could negotiate after taking the islands by force?
...

As I mentioned earlier Cap Mandrake, Britain, financially, militarily and politically was in a bad way.

I reckon the Argentinian Junta of the time made a calculated guess that the British would not be able to launch a task force of any credible size, nevermind in the time scale required.

I reckon they thought it would take Britain quite some time to get a task force together and it wouldn't be enough anyway. Also, I think they were hoping that, in this time, the solution would be found politically in the UN.

Lets be brutally honest here...the Junta were in a state. They needed the Falklands back under the Argentinian flag. Now that we understand that was the case, it makes sense to assume that when they took them, they meant to keep them. Now that we understand that, we can see that by using their least capable units, recruits and conscripts, they clearly thought we wouldn't show up and, even if we did, it would be too late because the UN would've sorted it out and, should worst come to worst and they had to fight, the British forces would be too weak and too outnumbered to perform the task they had been assigned.

I truly believe they thought it would be sorted out at the political level within the UN and if not, Britain was too week to do anything about it. The fact that Britain had ammassed a major task force within a week, completely threw them and they were buggered from that point.

As for Maggie. I didn't like her much. She made some extremely poor desicions in her time as PM...but she had more balls than some of the arses who have succeeded her! I'll give her that. Her main failing was to not to listen....not to listen to the people, and not to listen to her advisors. There are times (The Falklands Conflict was one) where people need to stand up and hold strong and she did that...trouble was, she did it with avery decision she ever made!

Yes, I suppose it is possible they underestimated British resolve and capabilities. There is a historical precedent for that kind of thing. Somebody thought it was a good idea to bomb Pearl Harbor.

I liked Thatcher [:)] One of my favorite Thatcherisms is when she reportedly told Reagan during some face off with the Soviets..."this is no time go wobbly" [:D]

[DuckofTindalos]

Funny how people always think Britain isn't going to do anything...[8|][:D]

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Funny how people always think Britain isn't going to do anything...[8|][:D]

We give that impression, but then fight like hell once things actually kick off [:D]*


* We have to wait until after afternoon tea, and anyone who interupts that is in for a kicking.....

[DuckofTindalos]

[:D][:D]

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Do they love her for defending Pinochet too? I mean he was only a Brutal dictator who killed 50,000 people who face war crime extradition charges in
several countries including 35 from Spain alone. Yes that`s Thatcher, always defending the people. [:D]

WHAT does that have to do with the Falkland Islands? [&:] I would love to know....

If we are going to bring up Britain's colonial past, and Chilean dictators which have nothing to do with the Falklands......Maybe the Argentine people loved their government for the alleaged harbouring of Nazi war criminals post war?

[Dixie]

Why would the RAF care that Argentina has 90's tech Soviet fighters, which are in turn based on a 70's design? The Typhoon was designed to take on Soviet stuff.

[DuckofTindalos]

[Ike99]

Is that an SU-30 you keep posting pictures of Ike? Or is it another one of your brand new Argentinian designed aircraft that co-incidentally look remarkably similar to other designs?

You know the proposed Argentine fighter does look very similiar to a Euro Fighter. [:D] Not suprising. I think it's a Argentine/German project. You ever seen it? Almost identical actually.

but short-legged Sea Harriers and the absence of long range airborne radar meant the Royal Navy could not protect the landing operations very well without putting the carriers in mortal peril. My guess is a USN operation to retake the Falklands would have involved 10 SSN's and 3 carrier battle groups.

Argentina wouldn´t last 3 seconds against the USA. No one would...yet. Maybe the Chinese eventually. The first time around we lost to the US Air missile. Not the British pilots. Yes, No Airborne radar hurt the Brits a lot.

I agree the Argy pilots did have balls - being shot down over the South Atlantic was not a good fate - and many brave men simply dissapeared.

55.

But maybe something good comes from this thread....
Would it sell?

[DuckofTindalos]

You know, no matter how much I search, I can find no evidence that the Argentinian air force operates Su-30's. The only operator in South America is "Loony" Chavez' air force up in Venezuela.

[Banquet]

This site details Argentine aircraft lost.

On a quick count about a dozen to sidewinders. The rest to ground fire, bombing, cannon and SAMs.

The AIM-9L helped us a lot but in my opinion there was still only going to be one result. We did manage to bring our own designed and built ships and aircraft. What did Argentina have that wasn't foreign made? Canberra, Mirage, Skyhawk, Exocet? The Navy?

ORIGINAL: Ike99

The first time around we lost to the US Air missile. Not the British pilots.

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Ike99


But maybe something good comes from this thread....
Would it sell?

Erm... "Fight for the Arctic"?!! Who was it that was supposed to be bad at reading maps? [:D] Or maybe Argentinian 'territorial waters' extend to the Greenland Sea these days? [;)]

There is a PC Falklands wargame, , The Falklands War . Similar gameplay to HttR/CotA only at a smaller scale. Just don't expect much in the way of graphics.