[Aj12]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17932669

Ok so I take a lot of issue with this.

First is with Argentina wanting the Falklands in the first place. I don't see how they can keep trying when they get the same response, we won't discuss it till the Islanders want to. You can't come back to that. They live there and they want to be part of Britain. Case closed.

Secondly is the actual BBC article:
However, the warship was outside the 200-mile maritime exclusion zone Britain had declared around the Falklands and was said to be sailing away from the islands when she was hit. Critics said the action was excessive and scuppered any chance of a diplomatic solution to the conflict.

Anyone who spends more than 10 minutes on Wikipedia will find out that whilst it was outside the exclusion zone it was going to be part of a pincer attack. Everyone from British veterans to Argentine Veterans have admitted it was right to sink it. Including the captain of the ship and the Argentine government in 94. Next is the crap about the exclusion zone. Yes we declared it but the actual text of the deceleration says we maintain the right to take action outside of it.

I'm all for impartiality at the BBC but not when it flies in the face of actual established facts.

And yes I know this is the zillonth thread on the Falklands but this article and Argentinian's actions really piss me off.

[Snagprophet]

But how can they be left wing if they supported the UK's actions in anything?

[Craig_D]

I agree. The concept of not attacking outside the exclusion zone is ridiculous anyway. When you've been dragged into a conflict as the UK had in '82, I fail to see how the UK didn't have a right to destroy Argentine military equipment wherever they found it. It wasn't a fishing ship, it was a warship; a resource for attacking the UK, that makes it a threat wherever it is. I'm fairly certain that Argentina - if they could - would have sunk HMS Invincible wherever they happened to find it, whether that was moored of Argentina, off Portsmouth or sailing down the Thames.

[Darth Stewie]

Just ignore them, the only reason they are doing this is to get a rise out of us.

Argentina is fast becoming a global pariah especially with their recent YPF seizure and they really need a wake up call if they think they can continue to behave however they want without ramifications.

[Studentus-anonymous]

Sinking an enemy warship operating in a theatre of war in a time of war which was not of the defending power's choosing. Not debatable to be fair.

Britain would have been well within her rights to not only sink the Belgrano, but attack every last military asset that posed even the slightest threat to the Falklands, the Argentinians should be thankful that a stereotypical British sense of restraint stopped the UK from doing anything else but recapturing the islands, all the while being attacked by fast jets from Argentina.

Between British subs and that new type 45 destroyer, the Argentinians have little hope of approaching the islands in the near future. Meanwhile the world is getting to see a government increasingly delusional and self destructive.

The Argentinians will have to choose what they want more, some imperialistic grab for some islands, or solid economic and diplomatic ties with other countries and a government which realistically deals with domestic issues.

[internet tough guy]

(Original post by Aj12)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17932669

Ok so I take a lot of issue with this.

First is with Argentina wanting the Falklands in the first place. I don't see how they can keep trying when they get the same response, we won't discuss it till the Islanders want to. You can't come back to that. They live there and they want to be part of Britain. Case closed.

Secondly is the actual BBC article:
However, the warship was outside the 200-mile maritime exclusion zone Britain had declared around the Falklands and was said to be sailing away from the islands when she was hit. Critics said the action was excessive and scuppered any chance of a diplomatic solution to the conflict.

Anyone who spends more than 10 minutes on Wikipedia will find out that whilst it was outside the exclusion zone it was going to be part of a pincer attack. Everyone from British veterans to Argentine Veterans have admitted it was right to sink it. Including the captain of the ship and the Argentine government in 94. Next is the crap about the exclusion zone. Yes we declared it but the actual text of the deceleration says we maintain the right to take action outside of it.

I'm all for impartiality at the BBC but not when it flies in the face of actual established facts.

And yes I know this is the zillonth thread on the Falklands but this article and Argentinian's actions really piss me off.

never thought I'd see the day when wikipedia contents are held in such high regards

[Snagprophet]

(Original post by Studentus-anonymous)
Britain would have been well within her rights to not only sink the Belgrano, but attack every last military asset that posed even the slightest threat to the Falklands, the Argentinians should be thankful that a stereotypical British sense of restraint stopped the UK from doing anything else but recapturing the islands, all the while being attacked by fast jets from Argentina.

.

I say the next time they try anything we bomb all their air fields after sinking their out of date navy.

[Dr Bungle]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...t-Stanley.html

The provocative 90 second commercial, screened on the 30th anniversary of the sinking of the General Belgrano, features Olympic hopeful Fernando Zylberberg and is filmed in Port Stanley.

Pathetic

[jimbo139]

I do love the way in which Argentina refers to our support for the Islanders as 'colonialism'. The essence of colonialism is to unilaterally occupy another territory, against the wishes of the inhabitants to continue determining their own future. The Falkland Islanders have lived on the islands for over 150 years, and overwhelmingly wish to remain separate from Argentina. Argentina denies that the Islanders have a right to determine their own future, and having failed in their attempt to subdue them by armed invasion 30 years ago is currently trying to blackmail them through economic sanctions. The colonialist power here is obviously Argentina, not the UK. But hey, if it takes their mind off the total mess their leaders have made of the Argentine economy it must be worth a try.

[Aj12]

(Original post by internet tough guy)
never thought I'd see the day when wikipedia contents are held in such high regards

There's nothing wrong with wikipedia provided the article's are well referenced

[navarre]

I'm not sure what kind of loony toon world the Argentine government lives in. To claim that the Falklands have always been and always will be Argentine is a fantastic indication of mental illness, but the reality is very different.

If I, as a politician, laid stake to Normandy and claimed it had always been British, no doubt the men in white coats would whisk me off promptly. But at least the British claim to Normandy has some slight historical precedent, even if it is absurd. The Argentine claim to the Falklands has no justification whatsoever.

[pol pot noodles]

(Original post by jimbo139)
I do love the way in which Argentina refers to our support for the Islanders as 'colonialism'. The essence of colonialism is to unilaterally occupy another territory, against the wishes of the inhabitants to continue determining their own future. The Falkland Islanders have lived on the islands for over 150 years, and overwhelmingly wish to remain separate from Argentina. Argentina denies that the Islanders have a right to determine their own future, and having failed in their attempt to subdue them by armed invasion 30 years ago is currently trying to blackmail them through economic sanctions. The colonialist power here is obviously Argentina, not the UK. But hey, if it takes their mind off the total mess their leaders have made of the Argentine economy it must be worth a try.

What really proves that Argentina is the only nation interested in colonialism is the fact that they also claim South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands despite having never owned them, ever, bar a brief illegal occupation during the Falklands War . I'm suprised people don't bring this up more often.

[Brandmon]

(Original post by Aj12)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17932669

Ok so I take a lot of issue with this.

First is with Argentina wanting the Falklands in the first place. I don't see how they can keep trying when they get the same response, we won't discuss it till the Islanders want to. You can't come back to that. They live there and they want to be part of Britain. Case closed.

Secondly is the actual BBC article:
However, the warship was outside the 200-mile maritime exclusion zone Britain had declared around the Falklands and was said to be sailing away from the islands when she was hit. Critics said the action was excessive and scuppered any chance of a diplomatic solution to the conflict.

Anyone who spends more than 10 minutes on Wikipedia will find out that whilst it was outside the exclusion zone it was going to be part of a pincer attack. Everyone from British veterans to Argentine Veterans have admitted it was right to sink it. Including the captain of the ship and the Argentine government in 94. Next is the crap about the exclusion zone. Yes we declared it but the actual text of the deceleration says we maintain the right to take action outside of it.

I'm all for impartiality at the BBC but not when it flies in the face of actual established facts.

And yes I know this is the zillonth thread on the Falklands but this article and Argentinian's actions really piss me off.

I wouldn't say that there was anything wrong with the BBC article. The best means by which to judge warfare events objectively is to take intentions out of the equations - considering they could go either way (or worse, abused for either side's claims - such means can even be used to justify German agression during WW2)

Either way, the Argentinians had it coming - Rule Britannia.