The Sun Will Never Set On The British Empire.

[JohnLeech]

(edited)

. As the aircraft used by the Argentinians was all French sourced, .......

The UK operation also served as a sobering education for the ministry of defense. ........ Although UK service personnel were lost, their sacrifice meant that equipment was re-examined....... When RN personnel suffered horrific burns because of the fabric type used in their uniforms, the situation was analyzed. (The polyester melted to the skin when there was intense heat as was evidenced by the Excocet missile devastation.)

And most importantly of all, the brave Falkland Islanders stood firm against the invading Argentinians.They resisted and there were no collaborators. As soon as the Argies arrived, they changed the official language to Spanish and attempted to force the inhabitants to change the side of the road they were driving on. There was also intimidation and brutality........

Thank God you were never in military intelligence!

Far from being "all French sourced", no more than 10% of the Argentinian aircraft used in the Falklands conflict were French.

Their Pucaras were made by FMA, Argentina's own aircraft company; their Daggers were made by IAI in Israel (and serviced by IAI in Argentina during the conflict), and their F-86 Sabres, A-4 Skyhawks (allegedly re-furbished by Israel) and KC-130 tankers were American.

While the Sun may have the reported about the brave Falkland Islanders, the driving on the right side of the road, the intimidation and brutality, etc, it was "economical with the truth". There was only one road in the Falklands, in Stanley, and only one car (the Governor's London Taxi) so changes to driving regulations had little effect on the locals' tractors. The only "intimidation and brutality" by the Argentinians was by some of their officers to their own troops. Resistance and collaboration? There was none of the former (it would have been pointless) and a questionable amount of the latter. A handful of islanders helped the British troops with local information and directions but most of the Bennies wanted as little to do with the British as they did the Argentinians. They had been ignored by Britain for over a century, with Britain leaving the running of the islands up to the Falkland Islands Company - islanders did not even hold full British Citizenship until 1983, after the war. As for equipment deficiencies and transparency by the UK, dream on. It had been well known for over 20 years that battledress (DPM) uniforms melted, as that lesson had been learnt painfully a number of times in Northern Ireland, but nothing had been done about it. The Sir Galahad changed that, but only because the MoD was shamed into doing what it should have done years before.

No, the sun didn't set on the empire for the simple reason that for the majority of its population the sun seldom shone.

Or maybe you mean The Sun ....?

[MAJIC]

The liberation of the Falklands is a sterling example. Against terrible odds, and in difficult conditions the courage and bravery of HM defense forces liberated an island invaded by faciast thugs. The UK didn't just liberate the Falklands, they also enabled the return of elections in Argentina.

Hardly, and any idea that Britain still stands for "justice and freedom" disappeared when the UK took part in the unjustified invasion of Iraq.

Prior to the Argentian invasion negotiations were already well under way between Britain and Argentina to hand over sovereignty of the Falklands to Argentina (without consulting the islanders). Galtieri, however saw the invasion as the only way he could remain in power and either avoid elections entirely or avoid losing at the elections, and was never prepared for a military conflct.

The campaign could possibly have been avoided and a negotiated settlement reached, brokered by the US, had the political decision not been taken to sink the Belgrano, which was outside the exclusion zone and heading away from the Falklands.

Without belittling the courage, bravery or ability of the British troops, the odds were hardly "terrible". With the exception of the limited Argentine Air Force and their Exocet missiles, which inflicted the bulk of British casualties, and a very few Argentinian special forces and marines, the Argentine forces were poorly trained and equipped and primarily conscripts who put up little resistance to the far better trained, equipped and supported British ground troops.

John Leech.

You have stated the facts very well,as the Historians,more or less agree on.

However it should be remembered that PM Thatcher was also in the same position as Galtiera,her popularity had wained,drastically,and she, according to the Political Commentaters had little chance of winning the next Election,so it worked both ways. Whoever lost the Falklands War,would also lose power,as proved to be the case for Galtiera.

Or as some wise man once said: Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoudrel!

In spite of the opinions of some,that Thatchers financial cutbacks, was partly responsible for the war: by lowering the Union Jack,and closing the Weather station,and also calling back the Survey Vessel,on the Falklands at the time.

And thereby signalling to the Argentinians,that Britain was no longer interested in the Falklands.

Even so,The British people were glad to see the Falklands retrieved, for the sake of the Falklanders,myself included.

[leininger]

I think it is too late to worry too much about things such as if Thais should have sided with Japanese. I do believe it would have been suicidal for them to do otherwise. The Chinese, who have a much larger and stronger army than Thailand, have never defeated the Japs. The US even had a rough time with them. So I do not think Thailand had much chance in fight with Japan.

As far as the end of British Empire, it seems it was not just British but all empires are a thing of the past. For many many reasons, it is just not feasible anymore for one nation to be able to control many others. This is just my opinion.

Britain did good things and bad things. As did US and most other nations, except Burma which seems to do only bad. But I digress. My point is perhaps it is worthwhile to study and appreciate history, if for no other reason than to not repeat it. But it is waste of time to feel guilty or to lament the mistakes of your country.

[geriatrickid]

Thank God you were never in military intelligence!

Far from being "all French sourced", no more than 10% of the Argentinian aircraft used in the Falklands conflict were French.

Their Pucaras were made by FMA, Argentina's own aircraft company; their Daggers were made by IAI in Israel (and serviced by IAI in Argentina during the conflict), and their F-86 Sabres, A-4 Skyhawks (allegedly re-furbished by Israel) and KC-130 tankers were American.

While the Sun may have the reported about the brave Falkland Islanders, the driving on the right side of the road, the intimidation and brutality, etc, it was "economical with the truth". There was only one road in the Falklands, in Stanley, and only one car (the Governor's London Taxi) so changes to driving regulations had little effect on the locals' tractors. The only "intimidation and brutality" by the Argentinians was by some of their officers to their own troops. Resistance and collaboration? There was none of the former (it would have been pointless) and a questionable amount of the latter. A handful of islanders helped the British troops with local information and directions but most of the Bennies wanted as little to do with the British as they did the Argentinians. They had been ignored by Britain for over a century, with Britain leaving the running of the islands up to the Falkland Islands Company - islanders did not even hold full British Citizenship until 1983, after the war. As for equipment deficiencies and transparency by the UK, dream on. It had been well known for over 20 years that battledress (DPM) uniforms melted, as that lesson had been learnt painfully a number of times in Northern Ireland, but nothing had been done about it. The Sir Galahad changed that, but only because the MoD was shamed into doing what it should have done years before.

No, the sun didn't set on the empire for the simple reason that for the majority of its population the sun seldom shone.

Or maybe you mean The Sun ....?

I was willing to read and consider your point of view until you misrepresented the historical record.

I believe that your intent is to mislead the reader by playing with numbers. It looks like you have lifted your information from the Socialist Worker, which has used the Falklands War as a means to attack former PM Thatcher and her legacy. Socialist Worker has used similar arguments.

I shall now respond to your statements

Misrepresentation 1

"Far from being "all French sourced", no more than 10% of the Argentinian aircraft used in the Falklands conflict were French."

The statement above is misleading because what was germane was the available fighter aircraft. I hardly consider a Fokker passenger plane a lethal weapon. Nor does an airtanker qualify as a fighter aircraft. The combat able aircraft in the Argentine airforce that were available were as follows;

i) Approx. 25 Pucará

ii) 40 McDonnell Douglas A-4s of various configurations

iii) 30 IAI Daggers

iv) 17 Mirage IIIEA

The Pucaras were turbo props and were not going to be used against the British naval vessels especially if the navy had its air cover sent up. Instead the Pucaras were used to drop napalm on the British soldiers. One was shot down doing just that. Another was shot down by a British helicopter as the Pucara attacked a medevac flight. Yes, those Argentinians were tough fighters, attacking the wounded and dropping napalm. The Pucaras were not suited for the Falklands campaign. That is why over ½ them were quickly lost. the 40 A-4 Skyhalks were only as good if their fuel tankers were in close proximity.

That then brings us to the 30 IAIs. As you well know, the Daggers were French mirage fighters built under license by the Israelis.

This then means means that of the approximately 87 air force combat aircraft available for direct air engagements 47 were of French design. and of those 87 aircraft, most of the attacks on the Royal Navy came from mirage jets. These were the jets carrying the French supplied exocet missiles. You also fail to mention that the French had a training program for the Argentinian air force. At the end of the war 10 more Mirage jets arrived that had been sent by Peru.

Misrepresentation 2

The Argentinians were benevolent occupiers and any claims to the contrary is because of the Sun Newspaper.

Fact: When the Argentine military police took control, they set up an interrogation center where multiple islanders were taken. The Argentinians had brought with them detailed files on these people, right down to who their family members were and evidence showing negative statements allegedly made about Argentina. David Colville, and William Luxton along with his family were arrested and deported.

Fact: Major Patricio Dowling was in charge of pacifying the civilian populace. He is alleged to have beaten civilians and to have threatened women with acts of rape and abuse. The Argentinian government when faced with the evidence of such acts relieved him of his command. It is argued, that the Argentinians acted once the UK warned of serious retribution should anything happen to the civilian population. Others credit the Argentininian government appointee for intervening and stopping the campaign of terror, where military thugs were kicking in doors at all hours and terrorizing the civilian populace with rough searches.

Fact: 128 Falkland Islanders were interred at Fox Bay contrary to the Geneva Convention on the detention of civilian non combatants. The detention center was surrounded by a minefield laid down by the Argentinians.

Fact: The Argentinians confiscated civilian property.

Former PM Thatcher sums the situation up best with the following statement in her memoirs;

We were defending our honour as a nation, and principles of fundamental importance to the whole world - above all, that aggressors should never succeed and that international law should prevail over the use of force. The war was very sudden. No one predicted the Argentine invasion more than a few hours in advance, though many predicted it in retrospect. When I became Prime Minister I never thought that I would have to order British troops into combat and I do not think I have ever lived so tensely or intensely as during the whole of that time.

The significance of the Falklands War was enormous, both for Britain's self-confidence and for our standing in the world. Since the Suez fiasco in 1956, British foreign policy had been one long retreat. The tacit assumption made by British and foreign governments alike was that our world role was doomed steadily to diminish. We had come to be seen by both friends and enemies as a nation which lacked the will and the capability to defend its interests in peace, let alone in war. Victory in the Falklands changed that. Everywhere I went after the war, Britain's name meant something more than it had. The war also had real importance in relations between East and West: years later I was told by a Russian general that the Soviets had been firmly convinced that we would not fight for the Falklands, and that if we did fight we would lose. We proved them wrong on both counts, and they did not forget the fact.

Edited October 15, 2010 by geriatrickid

[JohnLeech]

No, I wasn't playing with numbers or reading from the Socialist Worker; I was there.

Misrepresentation1

Fact: Look at the numbers, which are readily available. Yours are incorrect as you have omitted all the aircraft flown by the Argentinian Navy and the Canberras used as bombers; the Mirages were never used as anything more than decoys (they had insufficient range).

Fact: The Exocets were carried exclusively on the Super Etendards belonging to the Argentinian Navy, not the Mirages as you say

Fact: Dropping napalm was no less acceptable at the time and had a similar effect to white phosphorus, which we used extensively ("fruit and nuts" was the term). The Argentinians actually only used napalm on only one occasion.

Fact: The Scout helicopter shot down at Goose Green was flying in support of the Royal Marines; it was a legitimate target at the time it was engaged.

Misrepresentation2

I never said or implied that the Argentinians were "benevolent" - that's an outright lie.

Fact 1: Any occupier would have done the same - except that many would have arrested and incarcerated potential trouble-makers, not deported them and allowed them to leave.

Fact 2: What is alleged and argued is immaterial and unsupported. The Argentinian Chief of the new Secretariat, Commodore Carlos Bloomer-Reeve who had lived on the island before and was well known to and popular with the islanders, had him removed. There simply was no widspread abuse of the islanders as you allege.

Fact 3: Detention of civilian non-combatants is not contrary to the Geneva Convention. It is routine in military operations anywhere, including by the British. Your claim that "128 Falkland Islanders were interred at Fox Bay ... The detention center was surrounded by a minefield laid down by the Argentinians" is simply untrue. 14 islanders from Stanley were moved to Fox Bay for 3 days (27 April- 1May) then returned to Stanley where they were kept under house arrest - there was no Fox Bay detention centre and no minefield; 114 islanders from Goose Green were imprisoned in the Goose Green Recreation Club for 4 weeks (1 - 29 May).

Fact 4: The Argentinians paid for all civilian property they confiscated.

I am not knocking the legitimacy of the war - just your interpretation of what happened.

[geriatrickid]

Mr. Leech you are presenting your interpretation of events and we can go back and forth on this with nothing gained. You are entitled to your defeatist revisionism, however, I am entitled to cite from the reports and documents.

Your initial claim was that only 10% of the aircraft was of French specs or origin. I provided information that demonstrated why I believed you had misrepresented facts. What matters most was attack capable aircraft. It is inappropriate to include unarmed non combat use military transport aircraft such as a Fokker in the the count.

Yes there were Super Etenards used by the Argentine Navy. They were French. All that it does is increase the number of French aircraft. Ok, so add 4 more. Do you want to add the dozen or so Aerospatielle French made helicopters? I left them out because they were withdrawn from combat roles for fear of losses. I left out the aerospatiale Pumas used by the army and coastguard too. If anything the numbers I used were kinder to you than they should have been. Yes there were 8 Canberras available for combat, however they were restricted to night flying since they were inappropriate for the theatre. The Canberras were used by the Argentinians at the end of the war to bomb British positions, but this was seen as an act of desperation. In any case, fine, I'll include the Canberras, but they are offset by the additional French sourced aircraft. Remember your original statement was that the number of French related equipment amounted to only 10%.

How can you compare a white phosphorous grenade to napalm? The genade is intended used to provide cover because of the thick cloud it produces. Napalm is intended to burn property and personnel. A white phosphorous grenade is deployed for shielding purposes. Are you telling me that you threw them at combatants?

In respect to the Scout helicopter you reference there is a misunderstanding. I was refering to the medivac helicopter that had been attacked. it shot down the Argentinian plane. It's a notable event because it was a helicopter taking out a a hostile airplane.

When you dismissed the treatment of the civilians as being the result of the Sun's reporting it was the equivalent of taking the view that the civilians were well treated. Compared to other conflicts, the civilians did ok, but when one looks at some of the Argentinians that were in the Falklands, it was only a matter of time before the killings would have started.

Remember this guy? Lt. Alfredo Astiz.. , He was in charge of an anti subversive unit in Argentina. His known list of victims does not include a single proven terrorist. Instead, he can claim the deaths of a 17-year-old Swedish girl [Dagmar Hagelin], whom he shot in the head from behind, two French nuns, aged 40 and 63, four Mothers of Plaza de Mayo in their 50s and three women in their twenties, none of them linked by any court to any terrorist activity. On April 26, 1982, unable to withstand a British attack for more than 24 hours, Astiz the brave, surrendered on the South Georgia island to British commandos. "He was very brave when he had to murder unarmed women, but he surrendered immediately when he had to fight real soldiers," said Nora Cortiñas, another mother who remembers Astiz from when he infiltrated the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo group.

Do I need to go through the list of Argentinian commanders to impress upon you that thugs and killers had landed on the Falklands?

As I stated, the Commodore did remove the psycho police chief before he killed someone. I even gave him credit for it. However, civilians were indeed detained. The number I cited in respect to detainees was taken from the list compiled by the Argentinians themselves. Have you listemed or read any of the eye witness reports of the non combatants? No they were not tortured as was the case of Argentinian civilians and no one had started pushing them out of helicopters over the sea yet as had been done to thousands of Argentineans over the years, but it was inevitable.

How about you take the time to read and listen to the civilians or will you claim they are influenced by the Sun as well?

http://www.falklands...82memories.html

http://db.bbc.co.uk/...rogramme6.shtml

OK, so I misread the number imprisoned at Fox Bay, it was 14 with the other 114 held at Goose Green. The fact still remains the civilians were held as prisoners.

There was indeed a minefield laid at Fox Green. It's in the <deleted> inventory. Fox Bay would have been mined because it was the largest settlement on West Falkland. It had previously housed the RAF base didn't it? There are still 100 minefield locations cordoned off in the Falklands because the demining is too difficult. Those mines were not laid by the British. They were laid by the peace loving Argentinians.