Las Malvinas AKA The Falkland Islands - why the argy-bargy?

by cedars 319 Replies latest members politics

• 

  james_woods

  The only major loss I recall reading about from back then was a destroyer taken out by an Exocet missile. But the British armed forces of 2012 aren't the armed forces of 1982. The fight would be far more even if Argentina attacked this time around. I suspect they'd be begging for help from the U.S.

  If you are talking about the General Belgrave, that was an Argentinian cruiser - it was torpedoed by a British nuclear submarine. This is the only ship ever sunk by a nuclear submarine in world history. Well, I mean by torpedo - the U.S. sank a hawaiian fishing boat by violently surfacing right under it.

  The ship badly damaged (and IIRC later scuttled) by the Exocet was a British transport & supply vessel.

  An Argentinian submarine was bombed into oblivion when it was discovered docked at one of the Falkland Islands - on the surface in plain sight!!!

  Another little bit of military trivia is that this was the only wartime use of the big delta-winged British Vulcan bombers before they were retired.

  I read an account of that war by an Argentinian air force officer who said that their air force generally considered the Argentinian foot soldiers to be cowards and generally worthless in every way.
• 

  cofty

  Another little bit of military trivia is that this was the only wartime use of the big delta-winged British Vulcan bombers before they were retired.

  It was a thing of beauty. A friend of mine's dad was a Vulcan pilot, he reckons the cockpit was tiny and uncomfortable.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dLE_aNQUnM
• 

  james_woods

  Yes, the Vulcan will long be remembered for the fantastic aerobatic displays they used to do at airshows. And, I guess, for the James Bond movie Thunderball...

  There is one at the U.S. Strategic Air Force museum in Omaha, Nebraska.

  BTW - sorry; the name of the Argentine cruiser was General Belgrano, I believe...
• 

  botchtowersociety

  If you are talking about the General Belgrave, that was an Argentinian cruiser - it was torpedoed by a British nuclear submarine.

  No. There was a British destroyer hit by an Exocet.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War#Sinking_of_HMS_Sheffield
• 

  slimboyfat

  Well supposedly oil has been discovered in the region which might explain the renewed interest. Plus simply the fact that Britain is in decline and South American countries are on the rise and they would like to underline the fact by removing the last remnants of European empires from the region.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Tory PM Margaret Thatcher having saved the Falklands for Britain, there would be a pleasingly ironic symmetry if it was another Tory PM David Cameron who lost them to Argentina.

  The Falklands won Thatcher the 1983 election - maybe it will lose Cameron the 2015 election.

  I was born in the middle of the Falklands war by the way.
• 

  cofty

  I was born in the middle of the Falklands war by the way - slimboyfat

  Young un!

  I was an apprentice working at the telephone exchange at Shettleston in Glasgow. I remember somebody reading the newspaper and shouting out that Argetina had invaded the Falklands and I was thinking where are the Falklands?
• 

  Sic Semper Tyrannis

  The Spanish had an embryonic colony there in the first decade of the 19th century. This was based on the Treaty of Tordesillas where the Pope effectively gave one half of the uncolonized world to Spain and the other half to Portugal. The Spanish left, but the Argentinians replanted the settlement as part of their desire to assert their newfound authority. After the Argentine governor confiscated the cargo from American whalers, the US Navy retaliated by sacking the settlement. There was such a power vacuum that the British, who never recognized Spanish or Argentine control, evicted the remnaining settlers and planted one of their own on the same plot.

  Argentina claims that this is occupied Argentinian territory. The UK maintains that the Falklands were disputed territory at the time, and by right of continuous settlement for 180 years, the territory is theirs. They also claim that the islanders have a right under the UN Charter which deals with issues of self-determination. Argentina disputes this and claims that the occupants of the Falkands are settlers planted by the British.

  You will find very few Argentinians who are willing to move to the 'Malvinas'. The issue is fundamentally a silly one, based on whose flag gets to fly. But on final analysis, I'd say whatever government the islanders desire should be first and foremost.
• 

  cuckoo in the nest

  A large container transport ship, the Atlantic Conveyor was hit by an Exocet too, when it was mistaken for one of the Royal Navy aircraft carriers. At the time it was carrying many of the Task Force's helicopters, including the heavy lift Chinooks. I'm not certain now, but there may have been extra Harrier aircraft aboad also.
• 

  hotspur

  SBF - the total irony of the 1982 debacle was that, through Tory political and diplomatic blundering, the Argentinians thought the UK was not interested in any soverignty of The Falklands which give them the impetus to invade. Also, as has been stated already, the Argentinian Junta needed something to distract from the mess that was theirs!

  It really bugs me that Thatcher managed to become the hero(ine) when, in fact, the whole mess would not have happened at all without her and the UK had to watch as the Tories raped the economy! I remember some pundits saying it would take around 30-40 years for the damage she did to become apparent.