Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)

    So basically we should sink to the levels of a barbaric military junta? Well, that's alright then.
    I am not sure that all of the members on the Belgrano were conscripts, I don't think that would even be the issue anyway.

    I think the issue remains whether it was really leaving the exclusion zone and not looking for fight or whether it was just moving around a bit.

    And for the record, I don't think anything the British forces did brought them anywhere near the barbaric military Junta you talk about.


    (Original post by Democracy)
    Except that it was outside our ZONE.
    True, however:

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

    The Belgrano was sunk outside the 200-nautical-mile (370 km) total exclusion zone around the Falklands. However, exclusion zones are historically declared for the benefit of neutral vessels; during war, under international law, the heading and location of a belligerent naval vessel has no bearing on its status. In addition, the captain of the Belgrano, Hector Bonzo, has testified that the attack was legitimate (as did the Argentine government in 1994).[11][12][13][14][15]
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)

    Not to mention most of the residents of the Falklands prefer to be living under British Control than Argie.

    Last time they were under Argie control the Argies took over their houses and lived in them. They made a mess, and literally **** everywhere.
    Yep. I meant that too under it being territory. Just like if spain decided to invade Gib
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The same reaction as last time. Although we should go further and invade Argentina. As we should have done last time, if Thatcher hadn't loved South American military dictators so much.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    The same reaction as last time. Although we should go further and invade Argentina. As we should have done last time, if Thatcher hadn't loved South American military dictators so much.
    Are you fighting then? :rolleyes:

    The MoD have nowhere near the resources to launch such a campaign and it would cost thousands of British lives.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    The same reaction as last time. Although we should go further and invade Argentina. As we should have done last time, if Thatcher hadn't loved South American military dictators so much.
    There was a mission to take out an airfield in mainland Argentina.
    It was an SAS operation. They stripped all the unnecessary parts from the helicopter and put in extra fuel (as it was so far it was a one way trip). Then they loaded the chopper with the SAS soldiers and whatever else they needed and headed off.

    The plan was to hit an airfield on mainland Argentina where there were a great amount of planes that were harassing British ships.

    Anyway they landed in Argentina and the SAS officer in charge got out but declared they were in the wrong position even though a few SAS NCO's and SNCO's disagree. So they got back on the chopper and flew somewhere else where the OC thought was right, but the others disagreed. So they hopped off and as planned the pilots went and ditched the helicopter. They planted explosives and headed for the border of the nearest neutral country which was Chile I think.

    The SAS soldiers had a think about where they were but couldn't deicde so they aborted the mission and headed for Chile.

    The SAS soldiers and pilots made it and were re-repatriated to the UK.

    Various members of the SAS were furious. They had a great chance for what was hailed as an amazing mission, a great chance and they threw it away. Other members of the SAS were speechless.

    I can only imagine what might have happend if they had taken out that airfield. Maybe one or two less ships would have been sunk.

    The Argies found the wreckage of the chopper but the Brits said it was merely on a patrol of the coast or something like that and it had a fault so they had to ditch.

    It wasn't very convincing and rumours started immediately of UK special forces missions in Argentina, which pissed of the Argies even more.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    There was a mission to take out an airfield in mainland Argentina.
    It was an SAS operation. They stripped all the unnecessary parts from the helicopter and put in extra fuel (as it was so far it was a one way trip). Then they loaded the chopper with the SAS soldiers and whatever else they needed and headed off.

    The plan was to hit an airfield on mainland Argentina where there were a great amount of planes that were harassing British ships.

    Anyway they landed in Argentina and the SAS officer in charge got out but declared they were in the wrong position even though a few SAS NCO's and SNCO's disagree. So they got back on the chopper and flew somewhere else where the OC thought was right, but the others disagreed. So they hopped off and as planned the pilots went and ditched the helicopter. They planted explosives and headed for the border of the nearest neutral country which was Chile I think.

    The SAS soldiers had a think about where they were but couldn't deicde so they aborted the mission and headed for Chile.

    The SAS soldiers and pilots made it and were re-repatriated to the UK.

    Various members of the SAS were furious. They had a great chance for what was hailed as an amazing mission, a great chance and they threw it away. Other members of the SAS were speechless.

    I can only imagine what might have happend if they had taken out that airfield. Maybe one or two less ships would have been sunk.

    The Argies found the wreckage of the chopper but the Brits said it was merely on a patrol of the coast or something like that and it had a fault so they had to ditch.

    It wasn't very convincing and rumours started immediately of UK special forces missions in Argentina, which pissed of the Argies even more.
    I heard of a mission very similar to this but I heard the SAS refused to do it as they saw it as a suicide run. The best SAS story I know is that 4-6 men held a 2 mile ridge for hours from a force of hundereds by positioning guns at intervals and running back and forth thus fooling the Argies into thinking they were up against a bigger force.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aramiss18)
    I heard of a mission very similar to this but I heard the SAS refused to do it as they saw it as a suicide run. The best SAS story I know is that 4-6 men held a 2 mile ridge for hours from a force of hundereds by positioning guns at intervals and running back and forth thus fooling the Argies into thinking they were up against a bigger force.
    Yes that story you heard of was B squadron SAS, as I stated in an early post the idea was that the Hercules would land but not stop, so that when the soldiers were off it would take off again straight away. Anyway it would still be moving and the soldiers would be running off in a concentrated area so they thought they would get gunned down easily. They thought it was suicide. They did train for it, but disagreed with it and voiced their concern.

    They had flown into the Ascension islands and were waiting to be deployed to the Falklands, when suddenly the mission was cancelled and some people blamed the soldiers of B squadron for negativity and practically accused them of refusing to do the mission.

    As a result the OC (Officer in Command, usually a Major) was sacked as were one or two of the Senior NCO's and B squadron was given a damning report and ********* by command.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    Yes that story you heard of was B squadron SAS, as I stated in an early post the idea was that the Hercules would land but not stop, so that when the soldiers were off it would take off again straight away. Anyway it would still be moving and the soldiers would be running off in a concentrated area so they thought they would get gunned down easily. They thought it was suicide. They did train for it, but disagreed with it and voiced their concern.

    They had flown into the Ascension islands and were waiting to be deployed to the Falklands, when suddenly the mission was cancelled and some people blamed the soldiers of B squadron for negativity and practically accused them of refusing to do the mission.

    As a result the OC (Officer in Command, usually a Major) was sacked as were one or two of the Senior NCO's and B squadron was given a damning report and ********* by command.
    To be honest I dont think any less of those soldiers, the OC or NCOs and cant understand anybody who would.The SAS are the very best soldiers around - no question - but theres only so much they can do although admittedly if the mission had been successful it could have saved the lives of Navy personnel.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aramiss18)
    To be honest I dont think any less of those soldiers, the OC or NCOs and cant understand anybody who would.The SAS are the very best soldiers around - no question - but theres only so much they can do although admittedly if the mission had been successful it could have saved the lives of Navy personnel.
    I don't think any less of them either. The SAS soldiers merely expressed their worries, but that wasn't the reason the mission was canceled. I think it was canceled for another reason, however because of the lack of motivation and enthusiasm the soldiers had some senior officers were pissed off so they took it out on them.

    It was a bum move but that's the army, **** happens.

    Also remember that in the SAS the decisions often rely on the man on the ground.

    During the first Gulf War the CO of 22nd SAS could have ordered Andy McNab to take vehicles and McNab turned him down (albeit politely.) It's an unwritten rule in the SAS that the last word is down to the men that are going out on ops.

    Therefore if soldiers in B Squadron SAS during the Falklands were openly worried about it, everyone from new troopers just off selection to expereinced Senior NCO's, the command should have taken the hint.


    But you know...that's life.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    Argentina is no longer run by a crazed junta..........
    But Britain is.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think we would have the capacity to retake the Falklands if it happenned today. The British forces are a shadow of what they were 30 years ago.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    This time maybe we could not sink a battleship filled with teenage recruits...
    You mean like all our warships? ARA General Belgrano was a threat to the British task force.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If the Argie-bargies DARED to set foot on there again, I would nuke Buenos Aries.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I don't think we would have the capacity to retake the Falklands if it happenned today. The British forces are a shadow of what they were 30 years ago.
    I think the capacity is the same, but perhaps the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken it's toll.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I don't think we would have the capacity to retake the Falklands if it happenned today. The British forces are a shadow of what they were 30 years ago.
    This is true, but the Argentines scarcely have the capacity to take it, either. Like ours, the Argentine military has suffered in the past 30 years. They've got a good few years while we're in the ******* before we launch CVF & and some more Type 45s. When the new carriers and all our new destroyers are up and running they don't really stand a chance.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I don't think we would have the capacity to retake the Falklands if it happenned today. The British forces are a shadow of what they were 30 years ago.
    Thats what the US generals said last time - except the Armed Forces did win.

    In what sense? The Army still has tens of thousands of professional infantry personnel trained to the best standards (not to mention RAF Reg and RM), the new Astute class submarine is second to none,the new destroyer is technologically superior to anything the argies would have, the Eurofighter is still very good plus theres always the Trident nuclear deterent.

    The only problem I see is that if they attacked soon so many of the MoDs resources are in Afghanistan and the Navy is deployed in Somali waters.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Defend them, same as if Spain tried to reclaim Gibraltar.
    Both are British, and mostly live British lives, ie education/language/law etc.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    This time maybe we could not sink a battleship filled with teenage recruits...
    Maybe next time they won't force teenagers into doing men's work. Perhaps they'll send little girls or women next time. Thats a problem for the Argentine conscience.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aramiss18)
    Are you fighting then? :rolleyes:

    The MoD have nowhere near the resources to launch such a campaign and it would cost thousands of British lives.
    I talk of Britain as a nation, naturally.

    "We" would have to devote alot of resources to it, but going in and bombing the Argentinian capital and military bases is achievable with aircraft carriers.

    It's unfortunate that the armed forces are undermanned and underfunded, but nonetheless with a more sensible government this would not be the case.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aramiss18)
    Thats what the US generals said last time - except the Armed Forces did win.

    In what sense? The Army still has tens of thousands of professional infantry personnel trained to the best standards (not to mention RAF Reg and RM), the new Astute class submarine is second to none,the new destroyer is technologically superior to anything the argies would have, the Eurofighter is still very good plus theres always the Trident nuclear deterent.

    The only problem of they attacked soon is that so many of the MoDs resources are in Afghanistan and the Navy is deployed in Somali waters.
    Because Sea Harrier FA.2 has been retired and Harriers Gr 7 and Gr 9 don't have scanning radars?

    Because many of our ships aren't properly equipped with the correct avionics?

    Because a large chunk of our marines are in Afghanistan?

    Because we can't use our deterrent on Argentina?

    Because our fleet is about 20% smaller than it was in 1982?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 15, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.