The Falklands

[CharlesBronson]

CB
The reason for blindfolds and handcuffs is twofold.
1st to stop captured personnel from seeing what is around them and then giving this information back to their own side if released. The Argentinion service personnel were returned to the main land after a period and as the British were staying they didn't want any information going back. The initial failure of the Argentine Forces allowed the British captives to give information when they were returned.
2nd It also prevents captives from knowing what is going on around them or where they are, so they are less likley to make a successful escape.
Once interned in a POW camp then all these restrictions would be removed and POW's would be free to move around and it would then be up to the captors to prevent anything of interest being seen by the POW's.

On a personal note I admire a lot of the Argentine airmen for their courage in pressing their attacks and for doing their jobs on the Islands under fire.
The conscripts were badly led, clothed and supported but it didn't stop the majority of them fighting battles that resulted in large numbers of casulties om both sides.
Tactically the British were superior to the Argentines in all areas of the conflict, and that with the equipment leads in some but not all areas resulted in the events being finished the way they were.

Thanks for your information but...I dont meant to be rude but you arent saying anything new/ or something that wasnt not already mentioned here...are you ?

Is funny how the word "conscript" quickly replaced the word "soldier" in every british book/magazine/website, and fill a gap in this war, it seems that until 1982 every war in the entire world was fought with enlisted/volunteer personnel.

Also seems like the britons have a mini-orgasm with that word.

 

[trap one]

CB
Not trying to repost just summarize what everyone else had said. I do apologize if it sounded any other way.
The "conscript" is a word that describes the way a soldier is recruited into the forces. Actually I certainly acknowledge that all wars are fought with the majority of combatants being "conscripted" into the forces.
There is never a chance of always winning because one side is "conscripted" and one side is "volunteer". I have been to the Islands more than once, it takes a special leadership to be able to motivate and command in such hostile conditions. I believe that the Argentine army didn't have that Leadership/command skills and so the Lads on the front line (conscripts for the most part) were let down. If they had then I suspect that casualties would have been higher on both sides and the end of the conflict would have been further towards the end of the year. You only have to look at the Vietnam wars, with all sides involved having conscripted forces and volunteers. But the side most willing to take casualties and continue to fight, when the other sides became disenchanted with the war as they lost the propaganda war, were the eventual winners.
The Falklands/Malvinas conflict can be reviewed by us as it happened so long ago and hopefully it would not erupt again.
I build a lot of "what if models " and as arm chair generals we can say what we would have done. But none of us would have politicians telling us we can't have the money or do this or that because they say so.

As for the Orgasm no not for me, either way people who go to war be they volunteers or conscripts are going to die.

 

[The Basket]

Ethnic cleansing is in general use now CB not just for the former Yugoslav wars.

If Argentina ever rules The Falklands then you are going to have to deal with a British population who doesn't support Argentine rule. People who don't like their leaders usually do something about it.

The prisoner thing is another issue. Sure the Brits may have done some bad things but did the Argentines do anything bad either? Maybe only a few soldiers guarding a large number of prisoners so maybe some of restraint has to be used.

The conscript thing is absolutely true. I ex military and there is a world of difference between conscripts and pros. I don't know how long conscripts served in Argentinas army but it maybe 2 years? Against long serving guys with plenty of training and experience.
My uncle served in Korea as a conscript as a signaller and he hardly thought it good. He never went to the Army careers office to be a soldier...the Army came to him. Not Motivated...not what he wanted. Serve his time and go.
In life...the guy with the most training, the most experience and the most motivation will win almost every time.

 

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

What were you guys using a Quad Radar for Par's with terminal from an air defence radar slaved to ATC.

No, we had nothing to do with the Scopies (FIADGE - Falkland Islands Air Defence Ground Environment) – quite right too, you never know what you might catch! They had their (captured) TPS-43 and other stuff up on Mt Longdon (or was it Kent?) - which was the best place for them (in more senses than one!) - and we had an air-mobile Plessey AR-1 ATC Surveillance Radar that fed into a Cossor SLA-3B PAR that was long past its sell-by date. We also had a mobile TRN-26 TACAN and a DF kit so that we could 'go passive' if we needed to.

The AR-1 cabin was on the North side of the airfield and fitted beautifully between 2 rock outcrops that formed a wonderful natural blast wall for protection; it couldn't have been better if it had been built by the Royal Engineers! And of course it camouflaged magnificently.

The AR-1 actually supplemented the TPS-43 rather nicely as most AD Radars have a large 'overhead' due to their PRF. I was being checked out on radar on my day 2 by an RN type who, fortunately, was cross-trained as a Fighter Controller when the line from Ops rang;

Me: "Approach – what is it Ops?"

Ops: (about 9 octaves above middle C) "AIR RED, AIR RED, AIR RED!"

Me: (superciliously) "Don't you mean EXERCISE air red, air red, air red?"

Ops: "NO I F****** DON'T!"

The Targets suddenly appeared on the edge of our cover (and inside FIADGE's), 2 pair of Harriers were scrambled, Rapiers went weapons free, GPMGs were manned and my RN colleague conducted a 180 x 5 converting to a Fox 2 shot about 15 miles out with Harrier Lead 2. Fortunately, Harrier Lead got a visident on Target 1 just as he was about to pickle a 9L. And identified a Sea Harrier! All a bit too close for comfort. In sum, all a bit of a comms screw-up that would take faaaaar to long to detail here.

Still, good lessons learned all round.

 

[trackend]

Also seems like the britons have a mini-orgasm with that word.

I'm British and I don't have a mini orgasm with that word. If a squaddie is not a regular and not a conscript pray tell what are they? The only other type I can think of, off hand is a mercenary.

 

[CharlesBronson]

The "conscript" is a word that describes the way a soldier is recruited into the forces. Actually I certainly acknowledge that all wars are fought with the majority of combatants being "conscripted" into the forces.
There is never a chance of always winning because one side is "conscripted" and one side is "volunteer". I have been to the Islands more than once, it takes a special leadership to be able to motivate and command in such hostile conditions.

I'm British and I don't have a mini orgasm with that word. If a squaddie is not a regular and not a conscript pray tell what are they? The only other type I can think of, off hand is a mercenary

Volunteer or not both are soldiers, but I guess this word might be a very radical one for some british sources/members.

Ethnic cleansing is in general use now CB not just for the former Yugoslav wars.
If Argentina ever rules The Falklands then you are going to have to deal with a British population who doesn't support Argentine rule. People who don't like their leaders usually do something about it.

Sorry basket but you are becaming definately silly, if you have an seriuos idea spit it out, but this....


Recreation of the attack against Pebble island airfield, 14-15th may 1982

 

[CharlesBronson]

The ears collector.

A macabre hobby of the Malvinas war.

Source : Daily Telegraph

 

[trackend]

Volunteer or not both are soldiers, but I guess this word might be a very radical one for some British sources/members.

I agree CB they are both soldiers but if one soldier is a Professional and has seen action and the other one is told to don a uniform and has not there is a world of difference.
Quite a few of the British forces had been involved in conflicts before the Falklands (Northern Ireland for example)
Thats not to decry conscripts WW2 was mostly fought by conscripts.

 

[The Basket]

OK CB...do you want silly...personal abuse...ah well.

The point you are ignoring is that the local British population don't want to be Argentines. So therefore in any referendum...they will vote UK.

Therefore how can the Falklands ever be Argentine?

 

[mkloby]

OK CB...do you want silly...personal abuse...ah well.

The point you are ignoring is that the local British population don't want to be Argentines. So therefore in any referendum...they will vote UK.

Therefore how can the Falklands ever be Argentine?

That's a point - but here's something else to consider. English actions and policy over hundreds of years directly caused the demographics of Ireland to change drastically, particularly in the north. Does that make it legitimate British soil now? There obviously isn't a clear cut answer. However, us Catholics are breeding you out of the north because for some reason protestants don't like to have children. (major problem throughout much of europe).

 

[Hop]

That's a point - but here's something else to consider. English actions and policy over hundreds of years directly caused the demographics of Ireland to change drastically, particularly in the north. Does that make it legitimate British soil now?

There are very few countries in the world that weren't taken at gun/sword point some time in recorded history. Is Texas legitimate American soil? California? All the west was taken by the US more recently than Northern Ireland.

However, us Catholics are breeding you out of the north because for some reason protestants don't like to have children. (major problem throughout much of europe).

That's a general western problem, not limited to Protestants. Spain and Italy have the lowest birth rates in western Europe, last I saw, and I don't think many Protestants remain there. (It also affects affluent countries like Japan and South Korea, so it's not really a Christian thing at all).

BTW, the same is true in the US. How long until the Mexicans take back Texas, California and the rest? I believe California already has as many Hispanics as whites.

 

[CharlesBronson]

OK CB...do you want silly...personal abuse...ah well.

The point you are ignoring is that the local British population don't want to be Argentines. So therefore in any referendum...they will vote UK.

Personal abuse ?, moi ?

Is not that I am ignoring the "british" population,I am simply talking about the 1982 war in disregard of other political considerations.

Therefore how can the Falklands ever be Argentine?

I dont know, but in any case I wont get bother about the racial and religion issues of the islanders, the people here dont much pay attention to that aniway. Argentine always embraced all colors and religions without making any difference, my grandfathers can tell you that. Not many countries in the world could do so.

But as I say before, my participation in this topic is to talk about the 1982 war, not much else.

 

[mkloby]

There are very few countries in the world that weren't taken at gun/sword point some time in recorded history. Is Texas legitimate American soil? California? All the west was taken by the US more recently than Northern Ireland.



That's a general western problem, not limited to Protestants. Spain and Italy have the lowest birth rates in western Europe, last I saw, and I don't think many Protestants remain there. (It also affects affluent countries like Japan and South Korea, so it's not really a Christian thing at all).

BTW, the same is true in the US. How long until the Mexicans take back Texas, California and the rest? I believe California already has as many Hispanics as whites.

Why are you making an issue of nothing Hop? You didn't hear me say whether one line of reasoning was right or wrong, did you? I brought up situation to illustrate it's not cut and dry and who is presently inhabiting an area that is in contention.

Good points on birth rates. I was only referring to the traditional large Catholic family (which obviously doesn't hold true anymore if you look up national birth and fertility rates!) With respect to births per female, Europe as a whole is at about 1.4 I believe. The estimate is that to maintain population you need about 2.1 births per female (not considering immigration). This will have obvious implications for Europe, and much of the west, over time when you do consider immigration and shifting demographics. More likely rooted in socio-economic factors.

Back to the thread topic...

 

[trackend]

That's a point - but here's something else to consider. English actions and policy over hundreds of years directly caused the demographics of Ireland to change drastically, particularly in the north. Does that make it legitimate British soil now? There obviously isn't a clear cut answer. .

I think this could better be carried on in another thread however I agree with your comments MK as you rightly point out much of the same argument same could apply to countless other nations eg North America. Canada, Australia, even Argentina.
A historic line as to sovereignty has to be drawn somewhere.

Sorry for going off thread guys.

 

[rogthedodge]

On the ears thing, it's been reported many times before. It's a wierd, sadistic (even from dead bodies) and disgraceful thing to do. It was tolerated in some US units in 'Nam but it's, rightly, an offence in our Army


One small solace in the story is that it shows such things are not tolerated in the British Army. There's no debate, why McGlaughlin Jnr should even think there's a case for an award is beyond me. Sure he was brave but a brave wierdo

BTW I think the 'war crimes' comment refers to the mercenary / execution rumour I posted earlier in this thread. Doesn't make it true but confirms it was a strong rumour there was some investigation (?)

Poor taste comment - couldn't help noticing 'Scouse', if it's not hubcaps radios ............ Only joshing Scallies!

 

[Graeme]

But as I say before, my participation in this topic is to talk about the 1982 war, not much else.

What information do you have on Operation Corporate? Was the 707 fitted out for reconnaissance/surveillance or simply long range 'eyes in the sky'? The magazine only mentions it once, in this caption.



Would the Skyhawk have 'won the war'?

 

[CharlesBronson]

What information do you have on Operation Corporate? Was the 707 fitted out for reconnaissance/surveillance or simply long range 'eyes in the sky'? The magazine only mentions it once, in this caption.

Page 14 of this topic.

This serie of photo belongs to the recce mission of an argentine Boeing 707 (TC-91) from the First Air Brigade. The day was the 21th april 1982 and the Boeing was watching the progress of the Royal Navy in route to the islands. The argentine aircraft was detected ( obviusly) and a Sea harrie climbed to his side. One of the 707 crew take the pictures.

the Boeing itself.

The eye and the radar was used, but mostly the eye.

According to crew a seadart was fired but missed.

Would the Skyhawk have 'won the war'?

Dont think so, probably would made it longer.

On the ears thing, it's been reported many times before. It's a wierd, sadistic (even from dead bodies) and disgraceful thing to do. It was tolerated in some US units in 'Nam but it's, rightly, an offence in our Army
BTW I think the 'war crimes' comment refers to the mercenary / execution rumour I posted earlier in this thread. Doesn't make it true but confirms it was a strong rumour there was some investigation (?)

I only hope that this kind of "tribal" practice wasnt the rule in the British soldiers.
The war crimes histories are mostly based in two books. "To hell and back" and "Green eyed boys", both described several cases of prisoners execution by british paratroopers.

 

[Graeme]

Thanks Charles.

 

[mkloby]

On the ears thing, it's been reported many times before. It's a wierd, sadistic (even from dead bodies) and disgraceful thing to do. It was tolerated in some US units in 'Nam but it's, rightly, an offence in our Army


One small solace in the story is that it shows such things are not tolerated in the British Army. There's no debate, why McGlaughlin Jnr should even think there's a case for an award is beyond me. Sure he was brave but a brave wierdo

BTW I think the 'war crimes' comment refers to the mercenary / execution rumour I posted earlier in this thread. Doesn't make it true but confirms it was a strong rumour there was some investigation (?)

Poor taste comment - couldn't help noticing 'Scouse', if it's not hubcaps radios ............ Only joshing Scallies!

Rog - individuals may have condoned it, but never the US military. Please don't attempt to make it appear as if such atrocities are acceptable in the US military, but not condoned in the Brit military.


CB - do you know what year Argentina took possession of their King Air 200s? I remember you posting some pics of them in this or another thread.

 

[rogthedodge]

Never said it was acceptable or condoned by US military authorities. Key words being 'tolerated' and 'some'.