Falkland War 1982 ( Argentine side ) [Archive]

Stormy

11-06-2005, 07:08 PM

These seem to be someone's personal pics, enjoy. More to come.

Gada 601
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M005.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M006.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M009.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M035.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M036.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M039.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M041.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M045.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M046.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M049.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M091.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M097.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M105.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M108.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M109.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M113.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M114.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M122.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M120.jpg

MARINO

11-06-2005, 07:22 PM

It's an Argentinian AA Regiment,isn't it?

Stormy

11-06-2005, 07:23 PM

http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M001.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M002.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M013.jpghttp://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M012.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M014.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M016.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M011.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M008.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M017.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M019.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M020.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M024.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M031.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M037.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M038.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M040.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M042.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M050.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M053.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M054.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M057.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M100.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M104.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M116.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M118.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M133.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M134.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M135.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M136.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M137.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M139.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M141.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M142.jpg

http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Fotos%20Malvinas.htm

MARINO

11-06-2005, 07:29 PM

nice find stormy, we can see some Pucaras. woot

Eldar

11-06-2005, 07:33 PM

what a strange pics, they seem to be so relaxed despite they were at war...

anyway, thanks for sharing1

Hydro

11-06-2005, 07:35 PM

I think these pics were taken quite early in the war, note the pictures on the troop transport plane, possibly when this quys unit was shipped in after the invasion. There is one picture of what appears to be the aftermath of a bombing raid, Harrier or "Black Buck" Vulcan. A good find, you don't often find pictures from the Argentine side.

tenda

11-06-2005, 07:36 PM

never seen and really interestings pic's tnx....woot

Stormy

11-06-2005, 07:37 PM

I'll see if I could find some more. :)

ronin2172

11-06-2005, 07:39 PM

what a strange pics, they seem to be so relaxed despite they were at war...

anyway, thanks for sharing1
interesting observation....

I read that the Argentines did not believe the british were willing or even capable of retaking the islands...perhaps that is why they look so relaxed...

Eldar

11-06-2005, 07:39 PM

is the City with the harbour Port Arthur??

shadower

11-06-2005, 07:40 PM

Thanx for the great pics!

LordHalbert

11-06-2005, 07:40 PM

Is that a lamb or sheep they're cooking up in one of the pics?

BTW, I love lamb - sooo tasty !!

Stormy

11-06-2005, 07:43 PM

is the City with the harbour Port Arthur??

I think that's Port Stanley/Puerto Argentino, not sure.

MARINO

11-06-2005, 07:46 PM

Think is Port Stanley, or Puerto Argentino

Stormy

11-06-2005, 07:46 PM

Downed Sea Harrier.

http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M069.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M070.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M073.jpg

larryzou

11-06-2005, 07:47 PM

its Argentinian military man???I never seen the pic.thinks man.

Eldar

11-06-2005, 07:51 PM

interesting observation....

I read that the Argentines did not believe the british were willing or even capable of retaking the islands...perhaps that is why they look so relaxed...

Wow...HMS Hermes and HMS Invincible with their Sea Harriers were some kind of unexpected visitors, I read that the conquest of the Falkland Islands for the Brits without the harriers would turned more difficult (sorry for my english :P)

Eldar

11-06-2005, 07:55 PM

is the City with the harbour Port Arthur??

OMG, I'm sleeping, I mean Port Stanley
:(

TacoDelRio

11-06-2005, 08:01 PM

Cool pictures! I'm very interested in the history of this war, thanks for the pictures!

Is all that "Skyguard" 35mm AAA?

I also like the camo Volkswagen Microbus.... wonder what use it is, unless they supercharged it somehow or did some redneck modification.

Looks like a beautiful, if somehwat environmentally hostile, place to live. Tundra, just real nice and peaceful. Badass looking shore batteries too!

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:02 PM

http://www.educar.org/2000/fotos/1980s/Malvinas-01.jpg
http://www.educar.org/2000/fotos/1980s/Malvinas-02.jpg
http://www.educar.org/2000/fotos/1980s/Malvinas-03.jpg
http://www.educar.org/2000/fotos/1980s/Malvinas-04.jpg

Eldar

11-06-2005, 08:04 PM

British POW's been watched?

MARINO

11-06-2005, 08:16 PM

There's an excellent pic of a line of AAV, in Port Stanley.

Fee Fi Fo Fum

11-06-2005, 08:19 PM

The British coming to get there Island back.

http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/9122/falklands0084gv.jpg
http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/7611/falklands0099dn.jpg
http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/285/falklands0121vs.jpg
http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/7262/falklands0135go.jpg
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/8736/falklands0142dq.jpg
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/3324/falklands0156sa.jpg

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/9639/falklands0177ou.jpg
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/1729/falklands0162no.jpg
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6798/falklands0181qw.jpg
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/728/falklands0195yx.jpg
http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/7898/falklands0208ds.jpghttp://img374.imageshack.us/img374/1737/falklands0213kx.jpg

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:22 PM

Excellent pics Fee.

MARINO

11-06-2005, 08:22 PM

Yep but this thread is about Argentinian side, you are off topic ;)

Fee Fi Fo Fum

11-06-2005, 08:27 PM

Yep but this thread is about Argentinian side, you are off topic ;)

True, But no harm in some quality pictures ah? As longs as we keep it at that.

*Grabs flame jacket*

MARINO

11-06-2005, 08:29 PM

No problem i admire british armed forces, it's the best army.Like the one with a British soldier with an Union Jack,i've but in grey, i wan't it in colour.

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:30 PM

http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/1.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/2.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/3.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/4.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/5.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/8.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/9.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/10.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/11.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/12.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/16.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/18.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/24.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/6.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/13.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/15.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/17.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosIanHowat/23.jpg

More to come.

MARINO

11-06-2005, 08:32 PM

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5439/cas0340rh.jpg
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3/falklands20argentine20prisoner.jpg
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/4325/malgrn28ak.jpg
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3439/cov28wu.jpg

bluffcove

11-06-2005, 08:40 PM

Awesome photographs by both of you,

(if Schatzer turns up then MP.net is screwed!)

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:43 PM

A-4B/C Skyhawk

http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A42.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/A-4BAmarelo.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/tn_A-4B%20MALVINAS%20(2).jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/tn_A-4B%20C-212%20REFUEL.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/tn_KM%20A-4B.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/A-4B%20C-214%20MALVINAS.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/tn_A-4PFAA.jpg

http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/A-4CMalvinas_2.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosMarioSerelle/tn_a4c_02.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4B%203.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/DSCN3167.JPG
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/cov2.jpg

A-4Q Skyhawk
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/A-4QARAMalvinas.jpg

Mirage IIIEA - Dagger
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/MirageIIIE-FAA.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/tn_008.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/mirage3_11_2.jpg

http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/Dagger.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/tn_1%B0%20mayo%20%2782_%201%BATen%20Posadas_2-Marcada.jpg

Super Etendard
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/Etendard%20ARA.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/tn_img0008.jpg
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/A-4JoseMiguel/tn_DSCN0174.JPG

Pucará - Canberra
http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/Marcadas/Pucara.jpg

http://www.mach2.hpg.ig.com.br/Imagens/AvioesMalvinas/FotosMarioSerelle/tn_canberra.jpg

MARINO

11-06-2005, 08:44 PM

http://www.ara.mil.ar/La_Armada/MediosyCapacidades/infanteria/imagenes/bim5/BIM5_17.jpg
http://www.ara.mil.ar/La_Armada/MediosyCapacidades/infanteria/imagenes/bim5/BIM5_02.jpg
http://www.ara.mil.ar/La_Armada/MediosyCapacidades/infanteria/imagenes/bim5/BIM5_02.jpg

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:46 PM

Thanks Marino.

Hydro

11-06-2005, 08:46 PM

Some excellent photos, but I can't help but think some of those Gurkha ones may be post war ;)

Schatzer? HAHAHAHA. I'm sure he was sick in the head.

Eldar

11-06-2005, 08:46 PM

poor Pucaras :(

good pics from both buddies, different armies, different points of view, a common war.

keep'em coming

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:47 PM

Who is this Schatzer character ?

MARINO

11-06-2005, 08:51 PM

poor Pucaras :(

good pics from both buddies, different armies, different points of view, a common war.

keep'em coming
Most of those Pucaras were destroyed by Argentinians. Only 3 Puzaras were downed by Britons, the rest in accidents or after the war, destroyed by argentinias.
I recommed you a book wrote by a Ex-Spanish Air Force officer, called Malvinas Testigo de Batallas.

Edit (By Mod) - Factualy incorrect - most Pucaras destroyed on the ground by SAS and Naval Gunfire support - most of these pictures were in fact taken on Pebble Island after the SAS raid of 14-15 May '82 which destroyed a total of eleven aircraft.

British forces actually destroyed a total of 13 Pucara aircraft out of a total of 100 Argentine aircraft destroyed during the conflict.

Hydro

11-06-2005, 08:52 PM

He was a certain Argentinian individual who frequented another forum (did he come here at one point...? Can't remember). He had some seriously twisted views on the Falklands (Like the Argentines sunk HMS Invincible, and Britain rebuilt a copy in a secret shipyard on the Falklands and covered the sinking up. There was one big flaw in this plan, Invincible didn't go to the Falklands, Ark Royal and Hermes did. Invincible was launched in 1985 I think.) He was invited over to a forum where a lot of serving and ex serving Brit forces reside, and was absolutely, positively run ragged to the point where he had to apologise in very large letters.

Marino: I believe the Hereford Sports And Social club had a pop at a few Pucaras on the ground as well.

Stormy

11-06-2005, 08:54 PM

http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/camillero2.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/Malv%20casas.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/malv24.jpghttp://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/malv25.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/malv26.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/hm%20Malv.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/Malv%20Reg%20Nec.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/heli%20malv.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/enfermero3.jpg
http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/dirsan/Malvinas/malv%20avion.jpg

Eldar

11-06-2005, 09:05 PM

Type 42 Air Defence Destroyer HMS Sheffield burned to the waterline after being hit by a single Aerospatiale AM39 Exocet ASCM launched by an Argentinian Super Etendard strike fighter. Twenty sailors were killed in this attack. The warhead failed to explode but residual propellant ignited an uncontrollable fire. Another Falklands Exocet casualty was the County Class Destroyer HMS Glamorgan, severely damaged with thirteen dead (UK MoD image).

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ulthwe/HMS-Sheffield-MoD-S.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ulthwe/HMS-Sheffield-MoD-2-S.jpg

Type 42 Air Defence Destroyer HMS Coventry, sister ship to the Sheffield, capsized and sank after being hit by two 1,000 lb aerial bombs, with nineteen dead (UK MoD images).

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ulthwe/HMS-Coventry-Unk-2-S.jpg

Type 21 Frigate HMS Ardent burning after being hit by 1,000 lb aerial bombs, delivered by low flying Argentinian A-4 fighters. The Ardent sank. Twenty two sailors died in this attack (unknown source, UK MoD images).
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ulthwe/HMS-Ardent-MoD-S.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ulthwe/HMS-Ardent-Unk-1-S.jpg

RFA Sir Galahad burns after being hit by three 1,000 lb bombs, delivered by Argentinian A-4 Skyhawks in dive attacks. This attack killed 48 personnel (UK MoD image).

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/ulthwe/Sir-Galahad-MoD-S.jpg

RIP

Stormy

11-06-2005, 09:19 PM

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Stormy

11-06-2005, 09:22 PM

XXXXXXX Sorry, these pics don't work.

Oddbod

11-06-2005, 10:14 PM

Awesome photographs by both of you,

(if Schatzer turns up then MP.net is screwed!)

If Erwin's around, then I hope he appreciates these unique photo's:-)

LordHalbert

11-06-2005, 10:22 PM

I guess these ships are still at the bottom of the ocean rusting away. I guess many years from now they'll be explored like the Titanic - might even find skeletons :(

Noob Brit

11-06-2005, 10:39 PM

They'd be classed as war graves. If anyone wanted to get near them they'd need a license and it would be look - don't touch I believe. I don't think they'd be allowed to place camera inside.

Noob Brit

11-06-2005, 10:41 PM

Patrick videos has an interesting Argentine perspective on the war here

Argentine Air Force in the Malvinas War (http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos.php?action=view&id=341&go=download)

The quality isn't too good but there's some footage I've never seen before.

snniper77

11-06-2005, 11:59 PM

wow.... really great pics.... i m argentinian and i ve never seen the AA company pics before...

best pic: 2 A4 skyhawk atacking a british ship (the camera man was a really crazy person)

Stormy

11-07-2005, 12:09 AM

Thank you all for viewing. More to come.

Stormy

11-07-2005, 12:36 AM

http://www.aeroclubdesevilla.com/Actividades/duxford2005/plat11.JPG

CBFASI

11-07-2005, 01:33 AM

Your finds on those pictures of the AA unit are rather good Stormy, nice to see that the British weren't the only guys taking pictures.

Them coastal guns I beleive are from HMS Canopus placed I think between WW1 and WW2, all long de-activated by 82.

Catch22

11-07-2005, 01:52 AM

Be praised for the good job on the thread Brother Space Marine Stormy!

Hereford Sports And Social club - gotta remember this one ;-)

ronin2172

11-07-2005, 02:03 AM

Wow...HMS Hermes and HMS Invincible with their Sea Harriers were some kind of unexpected visitors, I read that the conquest of the Falkland Islands for the Brits without the harriers would turned more difficult (sorry for my english :P)
You need to be aware of the situation at the time.....

The british military was oriented towards defending Europe, The Royal Navy was in the process of selling one of her carriers to Australia.

So it was said in the book I read that it was possible the Argentines assumed that the british lacked the means to retake the Islands as there was no logical staging point for the british to launch an operation. No one had ever conducted an amphibious operation over that great of a distance before...
Mind you they did not take into consideration that the british have one of the best equipped and trained sub fleets in the world, and how that could affect them resupplying the units there.

The Argentines might have also assumed that the british did not have the political will to retake the islands...afterall there was only a small detachment of Royal Marines defending the Falklands in the first place. They thought who in their right mind would risk their sons and hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment to retake a isolated island populated by sheep farmers?

Also remember the Junta at the time invaded the falklands to deflect attention from problems at home (nothing like national pride to make one forget they live under a repressive dictator), You dont go into something like that without reasonably thinking you can win. Also the Argentines assumed the US would step in and mediate as both countries were allied to the US (I guess they were not big on history) in fact i think they counted on that to happen.

One would wonder what could have happened if the Argentines had managed to get a sizeable force of A4's and mirages to operate off of the Falklands and not from bases in Argentina. The harriers as well as they performed could not be everywhere at one time...and the brits had a distinct lack of AEW assets to help the cap they were able to maintain

op centre

11-07-2005, 04:02 AM

These were clearly taken before the first harriers carried out their airstrikes and the britishs army starting yomping becouse they still has something to smile about in these photo's.

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 04:03 AM

An interesting find. I have to agree with a previous posted that most of these must have been taken very early on. The Argies lok far too cheerful to have been later on, once they had to start earning their pay instead of bullying the locals.

Never mind, they didn't stay long!

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 04:11 AM

I think that's Port Stanley/Puerto Argentino, not sure.

It is Port Stanley, full-stop. It has never been Puerto Argentino, that name is just wishful thinking.

MARINO

11-07-2005, 05:21 AM

.
Marino: I believe the Hereford Sports And Social club had a pop at a few Pucaras on the ground as well.

Yep capturedalso in Yeotviltown , and also some Pumas , Tamizes, etc...And Brithis choppers wich did a good job.

thenight

11-07-2005, 06:26 AM

Very interestings pic welldone

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 06:41 AM

Yep but this thread is about Argentinian side, you are off topic ;)

Not quite. The Argentineans invaded, We only took back what was ours - On Topic!
:bash:

MARINO

11-07-2005, 06:50 AM

Yep, but we have tons of pics from UK view, and it clearly saysFrom Argentinian side ;)

MARINO

11-07-2005, 07:20 AM

nice video.

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 07:38 AM

Yep, but we have tons of pics from UK view, and it clearly saysFrom Argentinian side ;)

Yes, fine - but to add the UK point of view does not make it off topic - Argenina invaded British Sovreign territory, therefore it is all on topic surely. Let's not split hairs on this or we'll have another thread turn into a flame war - OK?

intrinsic

11-07-2005, 07:45 AM

The skyguard and associated AA system was bought back to the UK and was employed by a Royal Auxillary Air Force Regiment Squadron 2629 until such time they ran out of funding and ammo

torN

11-07-2005, 07:49 AM

My cousand was on HMS Conqueror at the time it sank the General Belgrano. He was a diver in the RN and did some amazing things. But its very intresting to see pictures from the otherside, i still dont understand the reason why the Argintines invaded the Falklands, i should realy read into it!

Great pics, thanks!

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 07:50 AM

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b212/HighlandSniper58/DSCN0174.jpg

I am always intrigued when I see this photograph - I'm not sure when this one was taken, but for years post-1982 the Argentine Navy were still claiming to have sunk HMS Invincible even though it was known world-wide that they had in fact sunk the Atlantic Conveyor. I have also seen photos of HMS Hermes as a "kill" marking on a Super Etendard - does anyone know if they are still claiming Invincible & Hermes?

I think it is an interesting fact that Argentina chose to invade when she did - a very bad move. Clearly they had waited until Britain had de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force, however had they waited until 1983 when the planned and subsequent sale of HMS Hermes to the Indian Navy, and HMS Invincible to Australia had taken place, then we would have been all but incapable of mounting a task force to re-take the Falklands - seriously bad planning by the Argies, but we all know it was a politico-economic smokescreen to take the heat off of the Junta more than anything else - Sabre rattling gone to far without proper planning.

Oddbod

11-07-2005, 08:08 AM

Please note that Ark Royal IV(R09) was scrapped in 1980 & Ark Royal V(R07) wasn't commissioned until 1985.
The two carriers involved were Hermes & Invincible.

kayaker

11-07-2005, 08:20 AM

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/728/falklands0195yx.jpg

Whats on the in the end of the rifle barrel of the guy on the left?

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 08:45 AM

Please note that Ark Royal IV(R09) was scrapped in 1980 & Ark Royal V(R07) wasn't commissioned until 1985.
The two carriers involved were Hermes & Invincible.

Read my post again...........

Clearly they had waited until Britain had de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force, however had they waited until 1983 when the planned and subsequent sale of HMS Hermes to the Indian Navy, and HMS Invincible to Australia had taken place

:cantbeli:

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 08:47 AM

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/728/falklands0195yx.jpg

Whats on the in the end of the rifle barrel of the guy on the left?

As Britain didn't use rifle grenades on the SLR at that time, I'm guessing a muzzle cover made from canvass.

kayaker

11-07-2005, 08:49 AM

Cheers,
Ryan

Eldar

11-07-2005, 09:00 AM

Interesting info about the ''de-comissioned'' Carriers!

Fee Fi Fo Fum

11-07-2005, 09:09 AM

What is Argentina's current political stance regarding the Falkland Islands?

Stormy

11-07-2005, 09:31 AM

Horrible servers, some photos aren't showing up. Also, I just found new pics and the server hosting the pics died on me! You believe that! Right in the middle when I was posting them up! oh well.

Sorry, this site is temporarily unavailable!
Acces to this site will be restored within an hour. Please try again later

That's what I get. I post them later then when I get back, if the site is up and running.

Wow That truly looks like one scorched piece of sh*t of an island

Not that bad, hills here and there, tundra landscape with shrubs, few trees here and there, lots of rocks.

Here are some off-topic extras.

---------------->

http://www.kpadgett.org.uk/falklands/images1/0194-7%20Long%20Island%20landscape.jpg
http://www.kpadgett.org.uk/falklands/images1/0200-3%20Long%20Island%20Mountain.jpg
http://www.kpadgett.org.uk/falklands/images2/0131Port%20San%20Carlos%20Panorama%20from%20Settlement%20Rocks1.jpg
http://www.kpadgett.org.uk/falklands/images2/0132Port%20San%20Carlos%20Panorama%20from%20Settlement%20Rocks2.jpg
http://www.kpadgett.org.uk/falklands/images2/0133Port%20San%20Carlos%20View%20from%20Smylies.jpg

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 09:46 AM

Mmmm...........very like the Scottish west coast, or some of our islands.

EsoognomEhT

11-07-2005, 10:41 AM

Many argie loons still claim the invincible was sunk...fools!

And yah some of the Ghurka ones are bit post war, the A1 BFA is a bit of a give away ;)

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 11:30 AM

EsoognomEhT

11-07-2005, 12:01 PM

gm79

11-07-2005, 12:45 PM

I´ve found Argentine President Nestor Kirchner!

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8682/kis7vp.th.jpg (http://img194.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kis7vp.jpg)
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8682/kis7vp.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img194.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kis7vp.jpg

Hellfish

11-07-2005, 02:06 PM

That does look a lot like him...

Svätopluk

11-07-2005, 02:23 PM

I've even seen it suggested by the Argies that we secretly built a fourth carrier of the Invincible class and called it Invincible to cover up the real loss of its namesake - have you ever heard such rubbish? That was on this board earlier this year. Others may remember the same idiot who made all sorts of mad claims about the Falklands campaign, how British losses were really >10,000 etc., etc.

rofl rofl rofl
Ive heard that the HMS Invincible was hit by a 500kg bomb, and had some light damage, and that the Navy secretly repaired the ship. There were rummors going around in those days, that the ship didnt returned to Britain with the rest of the fleet and it spend some time in dock and was fresh repainted... but as I sad, im not british or Argentinian and Im not extremely interested in the topic, so I could be wrong.....

EsoognomEhT

11-07-2005, 02:47 PM

Stormy

11-07-2005, 03:44 PM

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/argentine-tanks.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/pucara.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/pucara-1.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/argentine-artillery-1.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/argentine-prisoners.jpg

DeltaWhisky58

11-07-2005, 03:49 PM

Stormy

11-07-2005, 04:00 PM

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/falklands-stanley.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/buzo-tactico.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/british-prisoners.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/british-prisoners-1.jpg

Buzo Tactico:
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/argentina_tactico_buzo_excel.gif

http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/buzo_malv3.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/buzo_malv2.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/buzo_foto21.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/buzo_foto11.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/buzofoto28.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/BUZO_foto27.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/buzo_rend_ingl3.jpg
http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/argentinabuzo_tatico_445436_photo.jpg

Noob Brit

11-07-2005, 05:26 PM

The skyguard and associated AA system was bought back to the UK and was employed by a Royal Auxillary Air Force Regiment Squadron 2629 until such time they ran out of funding and ammo

I believe the Skyguard radar is still used to this day to catch speeding pilots!

It's sent into low flying areas to check the height and speed of aircraft to make sure no-one is breaking the minimum height (100ft in designated areas) or speed (varies depending on aircraft - Harrier is restricted to a lower speed for example because it's louder)

And just the like the police, the pilots aren't told where the speed traps are going to be :)

king_nothing100

11-07-2005, 05:39 PM

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/6563/falklands9rz.jpg
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/3989/falklands20ql.jpg
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/679/falklands31uq.jpg

yanito

11-07-2005, 08:59 PM

I am always intrigued when I see this photograph - I'm not sure when this one was taken, but for years post-1982 the Argentine Navy were still claiming to have sunk HMS Invincible even though it was known world-wide that they had in fact sunk the Atlantic Conveyor. I have also seen photos of HMS Hermes as a "kill" marking on a Super Etendard - does anyone know if they are still claiming Invincible & Hermes?

I think it is an interesting fact that Argentina chose to invade when she did - a very bad move. Clearly they had waited until Britain had de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force, however had they waited until 1983 when the planned and subsequent sale of HMS Hermes to the Indian Navy, and HMS Invincible to Australia had taken place, then we would have been all but incapable of mounting a task force to re-take the Falklands - seriously bad planning by the Argies, but we all know it was a politico-economic smokescreen to take the heat off of the Junta more than anything else - Sabre rattling gone to far without proper planning.

http://primahost3.prima.com.ar/faa/conflicto/objetivos_navales.html

Stormy

11-07-2005, 09:12 PM

Thank you all for viewing and posting. Yanito, if you find any photos of this conflict representing the Argentine side please post them, thank you, kind sir.

DeltaWhisky58

11-08-2005, 03:25 AM

http://primahost3.prima.com.ar/faa/conflicto/objetivos_navales.html

Didn't realise the Argie propaganda had continued to the preset day - they seem to think they hit Invincible, I'd like to see their evidence.

kayaker

11-08-2005, 03:25 AM

Can't have been a good day out for the Marines.

DeltaWhisky58

11-08-2005, 03:56 AM

http://primahost3.prima.com.ar/faa/conflicto/objetivos_navales.html

I've been doing some further reading/translation of the FAA site - for an official website this is nothing but propaganda, the aircraft loss figures are vastly understated, their claims to British ships destroyed/damaged are inflated, and the section on British casualties although relatively accurate is just plain ridiculous.

THese web pages are dated 2005 - I am disappointed that nearly 25 years on, that the FAA should publish material which is so easily contracdicted.

snniper77

11-08-2005, 08:49 AM

I've been doing some further reading/translation of the FAA site - for an official website this is nothing but propaganda, the aircraft loss figures are vastly understated, their claims to British ships destroyed/damaged are inflated, and the section on British casualties although relatively accurate is just plain ridiculous.

THese web pages are dated 2005 - I am disappointed that nearly 25 years on, that the FAA should publish material which is so easily contracdicted.

about the HMS Invincible story....well.... some believe it s true and some others dont... there re 2 pilots (one from SUE and the other from A4Q) that say they attacked the carrier with the remaining exocet (out of 5 AM39 received... 2 used against HMS Sheffield, 2 more used against Atlantic Conveyor... and the one left supposedly used against HMS Invincible) so it s hard to tell them liers after all they did for Argentina.

Besides... there s a lot of ppl that analise the "attack".... one of the most famous questions about the Invincible is the coming back.... HMS Hermes came back looking really bad (which is kinda obvious if u think it spent more than 3 months in the sea and fighting a war) and HMS Invincible came back to england looking brand new (so most ppl say the ship spent quite a lot of time in Ascencion island repairing the damage and being repainted). Another thing they say is that HMS Inv. sailed away form the island after the attacks. There re tons of things that can be analised... however.... the strongest rumor is that HMS Invincible was damaged... that s what the FAA says and that s why the SUE nose has only one red mark and not the "X"

ps: i m looking for the "proofs" of the attacks.... there re plenty of topics opened in spanish forums with lots of pics...

DeltaWhisky58

11-08-2005, 09:43 AM

about the HMS Invincible story....well.... some believe it s true and some others dont... there re 2 pilots (one from SUE and the other from A4Q) that say they attacked the carrier with the remaining exocet (out of 5 AM39 received... 2 used against HMS Sheffield, 2 more used against Atlantic Conveyor... and the one left supposedly used against HMS Invincible) so it s hard to tell them liers after all they did for Argentina.

Besides... there s a lot of ppl that analise the "attack".... one of the most famous questions about the Invincible is the coming back.... HMS Hermes came back looking really bad (which is kinda obvious if u think it spent more than 3 months in the sea and fighting a war) and HMS Invincible came back to england looking brand new (so most ppl say the ship spent quite a lot of time in Ascension island repairing the damage and being repainted). Another thing they say is that HMS Inv. sailed away form the island after the attacks. There re tons of things that can be analised... however.... the strongest rumor is that HMS Invincible was damaged... that s what the FAA says and that s why the SUE nose has only one red mark and not the "X"

ps: i m looking for the "proofs" of the attacks.... there re plenty of topics opened in spanish forums with lots of pics...

Come on, get a life. You are obviously going to believe what you want to believe, but the Argentine public was fed such a load of tripe by its government for such a long time its hardly surprising.

To see on an official Argentine Air Force website that they claim to have hit the Invincible, 23+ years after the end of the conflict is just a total joke. I have no doubt that at the time the Argie aircrew may have thought that they hit Invincible, the fact was they launched at what they thought was Invincible when in fact it was Atlantic conveyor.

If Invincible had been hit by an AM39, the damage would have been such that it was impossible to repair anywhere but in a full blown dockyard - to suggest that she was repaired at Ascension Island is complete and utter rubbish. Take a look at the vessels which were hit by AM39s and look at the level of damage - Atlantic Conveyor was a vessel of similar size - think about what you claim...............

Whilst no-one has ever doubted the bravery and tenacity of the Argentine Airforce/Navy pilots, their intelligence and other back-up was poor and it is hardly surprising that they made the errors in ship identification because they did not have adequate surveillance assets.

I'm sorry, but I do not believe your stories, even if you clearly do. I have friends who served on Invincible during the Falklands conflict, I am more than satisfied with their accounts, especially as these back up the official accounts of the conflict. remember this - even the aircraft losses on the FAA site are understated by around 50% on proven fact - do you still believe them?

As a point of interest Mr. snniper77, I have also just spoken with a close friend who was - and still is - Nimrod Aircrew and flew on surveillance missions from Ascension throughout the Falklands campaign - when I put your assertions to him, he had a really good laugh - who do you think was flying top cover for the fleet? After all, the facts are out - we had nothing to hide, and Invincible remained fully servicible - like or not.

afrographX

11-08-2005, 09:50 AM

Is the Brit on this pic SAS or SBS? Because as far as I know only those units got M16s during the Falkland War. Or not?

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/6563/falklands9rz.jpg

DeltaWhisky58

11-08-2005, 10:03 AM

AFAIK the M-16 (and XM177E1) were certainly used by SAS/SBS, RM M&AWC and RA forward observation units units (e.g. 148 Battery) during the Falklands conflict and possibly others.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b212/HighlandSniper58/falklands9rz.jpg

I've cleaned up the image you posted, and I'm not 100% convinced that this is actually a guy with an M16, but that is neither here nor there

Saturn5

11-09-2005, 10:35 AM

DW58: I think the gun in that picture is a M-16 or its derivate. Look at the butt of the rifle. The upper side is strait.

Hydro

11-09-2005, 10:55 AM

A few Royal Marine Officers got their hands on AR-15's, I've seen a couple of pictures of them using early AR-15's in the Falklands, no bolt assist etc.

DeltaWhisky58

11-09-2005, 11:12 AM

DW58: I think the gun in that picture is a M-16 or its derivate. Look at the butt of the rifle. The upper side is strait.

It probably is, it's just not very clear on the that picture even after Photoshopping it.

A few Royal Marine Officers got their hands on AR-15's, I've seen a couple of pictures of them using early AR-15's in the Falklands, no bolt assist etc.

I'd be interested to see those - I've seen confirmed SAS/SBS, M&AWC and 148 Battery, but have seen no photographic or written evidence of other RM use.

Hydro

11-09-2005, 11:17 AM

It probably is, it's just not very clear on the that picture even after Photoshopping it.

I'd be interested to see those - I've seen confirmed SAS/SBS, M&AWC and 148 Battery, but have seen no photographic or written evidence of other RM use.

I'll see what I can do, I haven't got a scanner at the moment. I've one pic from one book (Guns of the Elite 2nd edition, George Markham), and the other books in Scotland unfortunately!

Saturn5

11-09-2005, 11:30 AM

I am not a gun-nerd so if it is not a Ar-15/M-16 what else could it be?

Svätopluk

11-09-2005, 11:56 AM

There is no truth whatsoever in that story - where did you get it, and Argentinean newspaper?
British Newspapers, i dont speek spanish.

DeltaWhisky58

11-09-2005, 12:56 PM

There is no truth whatsoever in that story - where did you get it, and Argentinean newspaper?

British Newspapers, i dont speek spanish.

I suggest you start reading a better newspaper then - no point in believing what you see in the leftist gutter-press! The evidence against this ridiculous idea is overwhelming.

Svätopluk

11-09-2005, 01:17 PM

I suggest you start reading a better newspaper then - no point in believing what you see in the leftist gutter-press! The evidence against this ridiculous idea is overwhelming.I already said in my first post, that I could be wrong. It was only somethiong I remember to heard and read some time ago. These rummors were heard wery often during the late 80is.

DeltaWhisky58

11-09-2005, 01:44 PM

Ive heard that the HMS Invincible was hit by a 500kg bomb, and had some light damage, and that the Navy secretly repaired the ship. There were rummors going around in those days, that the ship didnt returned to Britain with the rest of the fleet and it spend some time in dock and was fresh repainted... but as I sad, im not british or Argentinian and Im not extremely interested in the topic, so I could be wrong.....

To go back to your original post..............So why post when you are so unsure and disinterested? Why post at all, there are plenty topics which I'm sure will interest you more.

One of the things you have to appreciate about living in a free country such as The United Kingdom, is that the press have a great deal of freedom in what they print unlike so many other states. Much of what is printed - especially after a conflict such as that between Britain and Argentina in 1982 - was speculative, inaccurate and just plain untrue. There was a great deal of effort by the left wing press to discredit the Conservative Government then still in power.

In your post about a subject in which you clearly state you're not interested, you have done little or no research. Unlike yourself, I have researched the subject of The Falklands Conflict of March-June 1982 in very great detail and can assure you again that your claims have no factual basis whatsoever - I've already quoted a lot of evidence and first hand witnesses.

Please don't bother to answer unless you have something positive or factual to say. :cantbeli:

rocket13

11-09-2005, 02:16 PM

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/pucara.jpg
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/falklands/pucara-1.jpg

If i remember correctly. Wasn't that Argentina's only home made plane?

EsoognomEhT

11-11-2005, 01:02 PM

No better way to remember those that fell in the Falklands than by stuffing the Argies tomorrow!

pegasus

11-11-2005, 01:27 PM

yep & it wont be a freindly!!

Svätopluk

11-11-2005, 04:18 PM

To go back to your original post..............So why post when you are so unsure and disinterested? Why post at all, there are plenty topics which I'm sure will interest you more.

One of the things you have to appreciate about living in a free country such as The United Kingdom, is that the press have a great deal of freedom in what they print unlike so many other states. Much of what is printed - especially after a conflict such as that between Britain and Argentina in 1982 - was speculative, inaccurate and just plain untrue. There was a great deal of effort by the left wing press to discredit the Conservative Government then still in power.

In your post about a subject in which you clearly state you're not interested, you have done little or no research. Unlike yourself, I have researched the subject of The Falklands Conflict of March-June 1982 in very great detail and can assure you again that your claims have no factual basis whatsoever - I've already quoted a lot of evidence and first hand witnesses.

Please don't bother to answer unless you have something positive or factual to say. :cantbeli:...........OK

Stormy

11-11-2005, 05:42 PM

http://www.machtres.com/Lamina.jpg

http://www.deyseg.com.ar/fotos/fotos/malvinas3(1).jpg
------------------------------------------------

http://www.tierradelfuego.org.ar/webcam/ima/20040518-12.jpg
http://www.submarinopirata.com/submundo/argentina/fotos/arasantafes11-3.jpg
http://www.btinternet.com/~sa_sa/south_georgia/images/sanatfesunk.jpg

----------------------------------------------------------------

BELGRANO
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/BELGRANO/blelgrano.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/BELGRANO/blegrano1.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/BELGRANO/belgrano2.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/BELGRANO/hund1.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/BELGRANO/hund2.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/BELGRANO/hund3.jpg

ALACRITY
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/alacrity.jpg

ARDENT
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/50198ardent_crimbo_card-med.jpg

GLAMORGAM
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/19468glam3-med.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/arrow_30mm.jpghttp://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/arrowboat.jpghttp://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/ara-202/arrowhole.jpg

------------------------------------------------------------

http://ar.geocities.com/xliiivirtual/pict16.jpg

http://www.student.euv-frankfurt-o.de/~euv-6662/Alfredo_Astiz_signing_the_surrender_document_on_board_the_British_HMS_Plymouth.gif

-------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.fuerzasnavales.com/imagenes_magazine/magazine_19/mag19_3/El%20ARA%20Isla%20de%20los%20Estados%20saliendo%20de%20Usuhaia%20rumbo%20a%20las%20Malvinas.jpg

-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1905000/images/_1906008_antelope_pa_300.jpg
http://www.skyhawk.org/2c/ar_antlp.jpg

--------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk/coventry/features/stories/2002/04/images/hms-270.jpg
http://www.btinternet.com/~broadsword82/ourstory/cov15.jpg

-------------------------------------------------------------

Stormy

11-11-2005, 05:47 PM

Link = More pics.

http://ar.geocities.com/laperlaaustralfotos/fotos04.htm

http://www.neuquen.gov.ar/org/mpicun/g1.jpg

DeltaWhisky58

11-11-2005, 05:56 PM

Stormy: Whilst I - and no doubt our other readers - appreciate the time and effort you have gone to with these continued posts, the most recent one is a touch odd. The translations of the Argentine captions from Spanish to English leaves a lot to be desired (Babelfish or something similar?) and a fair bit of the text makes little or no sense owing to the poor translation of both words and syntax.

[Edit] Stormy has now removed these captions.

Stormy

11-11-2005, 06:08 PM

Yes, Babelfish. Sorry.

woofer

11-11-2005, 06:09 PM

south georgia in the early 90's theres still a bit of wreckage but the flags still flying
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/1WFR-NORTHERN-IRELAND/aan.sized.jpg

Stolly

11-11-2005, 07:06 PM

pegasus

11-11-2005, 07:49 PM

what troops are stationed there at the mo, anyone know?

Miami Vice

11-11-2005, 08:43 PM

Thanks for posting all the photos guys. Its not often you see pics of the argentines (not in Britain anyhow). I certainly hadn't seen many before looking at this

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 04:32 AM

Thing i find strange about all this "Invincible hit by SSM / bomb" stuff is how none of the press on board noticed ?

And how nobody was hurt ?

Seems a tough one for the people who believe that story to answer.....

It didn't happen - full stop. A figment of the imagination of the Argentine propaganda machine because they were well and truly thrashed. They sunk a goodly number of our ships, and unlike their army and navy the Argentine air force and naval air arm performed bravely despite massive losses. Why they have to continue to lie about their results after nearly 24 years is beyond me - do they still believe the propaganda of a now defunct fascist regime?

what troops are stationed there at the mo, anyone know?

We have a re-inforced infantry company with artillery support; AA missile unit; Tornado air defence aircraft with tanker support; C-130 cargo a/c; Sea King, Chinook and army helos; long range air defense radar; at least one RN warship on station at any time plus what "might" be below the water; and regular visits by units on deployments including Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft etc., a little more than in April 1982!

The Falklands can be re-inforced by air at fairly short notice - we don't intend to let 2nd April 1982 happen again.

N.B. Britain's amphibious warfare capabilities are way, way better than they were in April-June 1982.

As for the Argies...........well they got a few new skyhawks from Uncle Sam, but didn't replace the rest of what they lost.......100 aircraft, AFVs, equipment for >10 Regiments, ships etc.

I think it safe to say we are not leaving The Falkland Islands any time soon, Argentine sabre rattling or not - they don't frighten us.

Stormy

11-12-2005, 05:48 AM

Hey Delta, kind sir. I wonder how I got a red block after having a nice respected green one, hmmm ?

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 06:59 AM

Stormy - it takes quite a few negative feedbacks to get a red block - one member can only hit you once - think about it.

Maskirovka

11-12-2005, 07:33 AM

I was to young when the Falklands War took place to remember much of it. But I have a couple of questions:

Was the attack a complete surprise for everyone? And if not, why didn´t UK station a fighterdivision and some troops there just in case.

I think a read somewhere that a brittish soldier actually hit a argentinian submarine with his Carl Gustaf, is that true?

http://world.guns.ru/grenade/cg_m3-1.jpg

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 08:09 AM

Britain was in fact fairly well aware of the possibility of Argentine operations against the Falkland Islands, and had been warned about the possibility for several years, however government complacency (largely in the foreign Office) prevented any action being taken until it was too late. So basically we were aware of the impending invasion plans and should have been able to prevent it...........the rest is history............

The runway at Port Stanley airport was not suitable for taking any of our long-range transport aircraft, and certainly not for operating jet combat aircraft assuming that we had been able to get them down there in time.

Yes, the 84mm Carl Gustave gun was used against a naval vessel, but not a submarine. It was used by Royal Marines on South Georgia where an Argentine Navy French-built type A69 frigate called Guerrico was holed on the water line.

Marine David Combes, who was normally the ships steward on Endurance now placed his name in naval history books by firing his Carl Gustav 84 mm anti tank weapon at the Guerrico. The Royal Marines watched as the 10lb projectile staggered across the waves and then, on it's last legs, smashed into Guerrico's hull just above the waterline, sending up a column of white water. They then heard a loud rumble come from inside the ship. Below decks Argentine damage control parties struggled to stop the flow of water that was now coming though the hole.

Britain's Small Wars (Falklands) (http://britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/index.html)

Miami Vice

11-12-2005, 08:12 AM

Have a look at this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_invasion_of_the_Falkland_Islands

On there it says that the British on the islands were informed of the possible invasion on march 31, the argentinians invaded on April 2. They had enough time to muster a small force of marines and the Falklands islands defence force but there wouldn't have been time for significant reinforcements from Britain.

edit:just noticed that fella above posted before me and did a much better post than me so er..just ignore this or sommat

Maskirovka

11-12-2005, 08:40 AM

Britain was in fact fairly well aware of the possibility of Argentine operations against the Falkland Islands, and had been warned about the possibility for several years, however government complacency (largely in the foreign Office) prevented any action being taken until it was too late. So basically we were aware of the impending invasion plans and should have been able to prevent it...........the rest is history............

The runway at Port Stanley airport was not suitable for taking any of our long-range transport aircraft, and certainly not for operating jet combat aircraft assuming that we had been able to get them down there in time.

Yes, the 84mm Carl Gustave gun was used against a naval vessel, but not a submarine. It was used by Royal Marines on South Georgia where an Argentine Navy French-built type A69 frigate called Guerrico was holed on the water line.

Britain's Small Wars (Falklands) (http://britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/index.html)

Thanx a lot for that info. Carl Gustaf vs frigate :) lol, wish I would have witnessed that weird battle

Maskirovka

11-12-2005, 08:50 AM

Marine David Combes, who was normally the ships steward on Endurance now placed his name in naval history books by firing his Carl Gustav 84 mm anti tank weapon at the Guerrico. The Royal Marines watched as the 10lb projectile staggered across the waves and then, on it's last legs, smashed into Guerrico's hull just above the waterline, sending up a column of white water. They then heard a loud rumble come from inside the ship. Below decks Argentine damage control parties struggled to stop the flow of water that was now coming though the hole.

Do you know what happened with Guerrico? She couldn´t have sink from old "Kalle" could she?

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 08:59 AM

Do you know what happened with Guerrico? She couldn´t have sink from old "Kalle" could she?

I think she was put out of action for some considerable time, but didn't sink.

BTW The submarine Santa Fe (formerly USS Catfish) was taken out during the re-taking of South Georgia by a combination of AS12 missiles, machine gun fire and depth charges - she sank in Grytviken harbour.

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 03:34 PM

OK guys - Argentina just got her own back...............Rugby Union match..........

Beat Scotland 23 pts. to 19 in Edinburgh................we was robbed, NZ ref. needs new glasses or a white stick!!! :-(

pegasus

11-12-2005, 03:53 PM

at least we won the footy !!!

Fenna

11-12-2005, 03:58 PM

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 04:58 PM

Wouldn't quite say the Argies got their own back :D

No, maybe not..............but I'm damned annoyed all the same - two tries disallowed! :-(

woofer

11-12-2005, 05:01 PM

I think she was put out of action for some considerable time, but didn't sink.

BTW The submarine Santa Fe (formerly USS Catfish) was taken out during the re-taking of South Georgia by a combination of AS12 missiles, machine gun fire and depth charges - she sank in Grytviken harbour.

I think it is still there its an official war grave. When I was posted there I remember someone saying there was an argentinian ship in the bay. Theres also a helicopter on the mountain side.

DeltaWhisky58

11-12-2005, 05:23 PM

I think it is still there its an official war grave. When I was posted there I remember someone saying there was an argentinian ship in the bay. Theres also a helicopter on the mountain side.

That'll be the Argie Puma shot down by Lieut Mills and the boys ......

At the same time Mills reached his trench, 1st Lieutenant Alejandro Villagra piloting a Puma Helicopter lifted off from the Bahia Paraiso carrying another 15 argentine Marines to reinforce the seven already ashore. Villagra brought the Puma too close to Mount Hodges, and Mills gave his men the order to open fire. A hail of fire hit the Puma. Two Argentinean Marines were instantly killed and several wounded, but Villagra and his co-pilot were amazingly unhurt and managed to stop the helicopter from dropping out of the sky.
Both pilots managed to coax the smoking aircraft across the bay to the Hummocks were it crashed and rolled over on its side, injuring more Marines. The seven Marines already ashore started to advance on Shackleton House. Lance Corporal Thomsen waited until they were within 100 yards of his position, then told Marine Holding manning a GPMG to let them have it, which he did. The Argentine Marines dived for cover in the near by buildings. The Battle of Grytiken had now started.

DeltaWhisky58

11-13-2005, 08:35 AM

The current Falkland Islands garrison:
http://news.mod.uk/img/pressdatabase/images/supportingImages/large/AD05Falklands_tn.jpg
11.11.05 - Personnel from 1 Kings Own Scottish Borderers, currently serving in the Falkland Islands as the Roulement Infantry Company based at Mount Pleasant, bow their heads in Remembrance

Stormy

11-13-2005, 04:57 PM

Unfortunately the first set of photos aren't working anymore.

IMARA

12-03-2005, 07:23 PM

IMARA

12-03-2005, 07:24 PM

I answer to this because is one of the few comments I´ve read.

JoaMei

12-03-2005, 07:57 PM

"I think it is an interesting fact that Argentina chose to invade when she did - a very bad move. Clearly they had waited until Britain had de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force, however had they waited until 1983 when the planned and subsequent sale of HMS Hermes to the Indian Navy, and HMS Invincible to Australia had taken place, then we would have been all but incapable of mounting a task force to re-take the Falklands - seriously bad planning by the Argies, but we all know it was a politico-economic smokescreen to take the heat off of the Junta more than anything else - Sabre rattling gone to far without proper planning."

Delta whisky, argentine government was not interested in wining the war, but in driving people´s atention out from social, economical and political problems. For that, they didn´t need to wait for britain to "de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force". It was all politics, nothing more.

Your soldiers were better trained, you had better weapons, you had better equipment, you had "better" help. You win the war. Gongratulations

Afaik it was about the giant oilfields under the Islands and the surrounding ocean and not politically motivated.

http://www.falklands-oil.com/

Petroleum summary:

this is a petroleum province in its infancy;
there are several under-explored and undrilled basins;
we have a world-class source rock;
several working petroleum systems have been proven;
only 6 wells – all in very small area – all tested same play;
live oil has been recovered to surface;
there are numerous undrilled targets > 200 MM bbls;
we have top quartile fiscal terms;
new licences and farm-ins are available;
we promote easy data access;
there are benign drilling conditions.

DeltaWhisky58

12-04-2005, 05:11 AM

I think it is an interesting fact that Argentina chose to invade when she did - a very bad move. Clearly they had waited until Britain had de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force, however had they waited until 1983 when the planned and subsequent sale of HMS Hermes to the Indian Navy, and HMS Invincible to Australia had taken place, then we would have been all but incapable of mounting a task force to re-take the Falklands - seriously bad planning by the Argies, but we all know it was a politico-economic smokescreen to take the heat off of the Junta more than anything else - Sabre rattling gone to far without proper planning.

Delta whisky, argentine government was not interested in wining the war, but in driving people´s atention out from social, economical and political problems. For that, they didn´t need to wait for britain to "de-commissioned their true aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her Phantom/Buccaneer force". It was all politics, nothing more.

Your soldiers were better trained, you had better weapons, you had better equipment, you had "better" help. You win the war. Gongratulations

Imara - what you have stated is exactly the reason I gave in the post which you have quoted - totally confused! Also to suggest that the Argentine Junta (note I don't use the term Government) was not interested in winning the was is complete balderdash as we all know - Argentina had been after The Falklands Islands since 1833 - would any regime deliberately provoke a war that it didn't intend to win, especially as failure was almost guaranteed to bring about the regime's downfall as we saw. Come on, you'll have to try better than that - history has shown that your assertions are nonsense.

When are you Argies going to accept the fact the fact that the Falkland Islands ARE British as accepted by international law and treaty.

DeltaWhisky58

12-04-2005, 05:14 AM

Afaik it was about the giant oilfields under the Islands and the surrounding ocean and not politically motivated.

http://www.falklands-oil.com/

Come on, pull the other one. Yes, the oil and fishing rights are perhaps why Argentina is still keen to get the Falkland Islands under her control, but that was in no way the major consideration in 1982 - then it was a combination of territorial power and as I have previously stated political posturing etc.

IMARA

12-04-2005, 11:04 PM

"Also to suggest that the Argentine Junta (note I don't use the term Government) was not interested in winning the was is complete balderdash as we all know - Argentina had been after The Falklands Islands since 1833 - would any regime deliberately provoke a war that it didn't intend to win, especially as failure was almost guaranteed to bring about the regime's downfall as we saw. Come on, you'll have to try better than that - history has shown that your assertions are nonsense."

Come on, try to understand the message, try to be smart instead of being quick to deliver an agression or an answer that does not have anything to do with the posts you read. What I was trying to say is that the main objective was to drive people´s atention towards the war. No balderdash, fact.
And what assertions are you talking about? I know more than you about the guys who governed my country, and more about the island´s history. Accept it or not, they used to belong to us many years ago. Then, you took them. Now please, think a little bit, just a little bit. Am I discussing who the islands belong to? Am I arguing who won the war, or who was superior?
You talk about planing? planing? A politician has 36 million people who want to kill him for the mess he did, is he going to wait, or to make any plans? Now, he starts a war to make people pay attetion as sooner as posible.
So difficult?

"Afaik it was about the giant oilfields under the Islands and the surrounding ocean and not politically motivated."
Politically motivated, at all. We are one of the richest countrys in the world from the point of view of natural resources. Those oilfields would have been a good help, but they were not essencial for our economy, and they are not esential today.
The government was very corrupt, so they decided to start a war. It´s not so difficult to understand and to see, as it is not the first case. Mussolinni did the same, invading Abyssinia. And he ended practically as we did. Just history.

G-Capo

12-04-2005, 11:09 PM

Las Islas Malvinas son Argentinas!

IMARA

12-04-2005, 11:21 PM

G-capo saludos desde capital

Catch22

12-05-2005, 06:47 AM

Las Islas Malvinas son Argentinas!

Sure, now go there and tell that to the Royal Marines.

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 08:13 AM

Las Islas Malvinas son Argentinas!

rofl Not for long - they couldn't hold on to them!

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 08:20 AM

Also to suggest that the Argentine Junta (note I don't use the term Government) was not interested in winning the was is complete balderdash as we all know - Argentina had been after The Falklands Islands since 1833 - would any regime deliberately provoke a war that it didn't intend to win, especially as failure was almost guaranteed to bring about the regime's downfall as we saw. Come on, you'll have to try better than that - history has shown that your assertions are nonsense.

Come on, try to understand the message, try to be smart instead of being quick to deliver an agression or an answer that does not have anything to do with the posts you read. What I was trying to say is that the main objective was to drive people´s atention towards the war. No balderdash, fact.
And what assertions are you talking about? I know more than you about the guys who governed my country, and more about the island´s history. Accept it or not, they used to belong to us many years ago. Then, you took them. Now please, think a little bit, just a little bit. Am I discussing who the islands belong to? Am I arguing who won the war, or who was superior?
You talk about planing? planing? A politician has 36 million people who want to kill him for the mess he did, is he going to wait, or to make any plans? Now, he starts a war to make people pay attetion as sooner as posible.
So difficult?

Now who'se missing the point - I had already clearly ctated that the main reason for the invasion was as a diversion from the politico-econimic state the country was in, so why did you have to repeat the point?

OK, so you are an Argie, but who in the hell are you to tell me how much I do and don't know about the reasons for this conflict. I lost friends because of the naked agression of the megalomaniacal idiots who mis-governed your country!

Accept the fact is was a seriously bad move on the part of the Junta, The UK and Argentina are supposedly friends again, so why can't you just accept the fact that you lost a war you should never have started in the first place. Oh, BTW Argentina never "owned" The Falklands, they just think they did.

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 08:22 AM

Las Islas Malvinas son Argentinas!

G-capo saludos desde capital

1. The language of this forum is ENGLISH

2. The Falkland Islands are British, have been since 1833 and will remain so.

Adam Wilhelm

12-05-2005, 08:56 AM

Your soldiers were better trained, you had better weapons, you had better equipment, you had "better" help. You win the war. Gongratulations

IMO both Britain and Argentine had similar weapons (FN FAL, FN MAG etc.) and i think what made the difference was the training and the motivation by the British.
About "better" help i cannot speak but i was under the assumption that the British didn´t get any help?

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 09:04 AM

Britain did receive certain "aid" from other countries, e.g.:

1. AIM9L sidewinders were released from NATO war stocks for use on our Sea Harrier FRS.1 aircraft, although there is no certaintly that these were directly responsible for our high air-air kill rate, I think that was down to the Harrier and RAF/RN pilot's skills.

2. Intel supplied by the US/Chile

3. Other "aid" was offered by the US but turned down.

All in all I think Britain managed fairly well on her own.

What about the aid that Argentina received - I think most of us know where that came from and in what shape! The source may have locked the armoury door after the first batch had gone, but they didn't recall the technical teams who set the kit up for them after the conflict was well and truly in progress.

Adam Wilhelm

12-05-2005, 09:19 AM

IMARA

12-05-2005, 02:50 PM

"OK, so you are an Argie, but who in the hell are you to tell me how much I do and don't know about the reasons for this conflict. I lost friends because of the naked agression of the megalomaniacal idiots who mis-governed your country!"

I lose an uncle. My father, 3 friends. So I hate the Junta so much as you, maybe more than you.

"Accept the fact is was a seriously bad move on the part of the Junta, The UK and Argentina are supposedly friends again, so why can't you just accept the fact that you lost a war you should never have started in the first place."

Read my posts again, and again, and again until you realise I AM ADMITTING the Junta´s mistakes. It´s all reading comprehension, didn´t you pass that subject at school?

"1. The language of this forum is ENGLISH"

Come one, I´ve wasted a lot of time trying to make understand my points and in reading your posts, ALL in english. Just a message in spanish, won´t do you any harm

"1. AIM9L sidewinders were released from NATO war stocks for use on our Sea Harrier FRS.1 aircraft, although there is no certaintly that these were directly responsible for our high air-air kill rate, I think that was down to the Harrier and RAF/RN pilot's skills.

2. Intel supplied by the US/Chile

3. Other "aid" was offered by the US but turned down."

You forgot the gas and petrol from Chile!
But well... "little" aid

"What about the aid that Argentina received - I think most of us know where that came from and in what shape!"

10 old planes from Peru, and... nothing more. And from the black market, weapons and ammo. But we were practically alone in the war and we didn´t have AIM-9´s nor sattelites. I think the "little" aid was something more that little.

" I think that was down to the Harrier and RAF/RN pilot's skills."
It´s easy to destroy with a modern Harrier an old Mirage, design to be an interceptor and not a fighter. Much more easier when the second one has very low autonomy because of it´s little fuel capacity. Don´t talk about pilots, ´cause everybody in the hole world knows the quality of our men. So much like this, that your own pilots talked about them. And well, you returned home with some ships less. Have you piloted a plane at meters from the sea, delta whisky? I haven´t seen nor read of any RAF pilot doing that.

Anyway I think Britain did a good job, you recaptured the island´s. You won the war. You fought well (read this carefully delta whisky)

ariel1981

12-05-2005, 03:20 PM

sorry,bombs and spares from israel

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 04:23 PM

10 old planes from Peru, and... nothing more. And from the black market, weapons and ammo. But we were practically alone in the war and we didn´t have AIM-9´s nor sattelites. I think the "little" aid was something more that little.

And what about the French terchnical team who continued to work on the Super Etendard/AM39 and set them up for their missions- if that wasn't aid what was?

Whatever, the facts are quite clear for all to see, Argentina just choses to interpret things a little differently from the way they actually happened, e.g. The Argentine AF website.

This thread has rumbled on for ages - we've had quite a few interesting posts, some of them really quite creative, but you can't re-write history. The facts of the matter are in the public domain for all to see, British official accounts are almost all now in the public domain, and easily verifiable.

JoaMei

12-05-2005, 04:42 PM

And what about the French terchnical team who continued to work on the Super Etendard/AM39 and set them up for their missions- if that wasn't aid what was?

Whatever, the facts are quite clear for all to see, Argentina just choses to interpret things a little differently from the way they actually happened, e.g. The Argentine AF website.

This thread has rumbled on for ages - we've had quite a few interesting posts, some of them really quite creative, but you can't re-write history. The facts of the matter are in the public domain for all to see, British official accounts are almost all now in the public domain, and easily verifiable.

The french team left after the beginning of the war.

pelao

12-05-2005, 05:31 PM

It is Port Stanley, full-stop. It has never been Puerto Argentino, that name is just wishful thinking.

You´re flaming brother...

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 05:44 PM

The french team left after the beginning of the war.

Not according to Aerospatiale who employed them - they forgot to recall them.

You´re flaming brother...

I'm not your brother, and no I'm not - I am purely standing up for what I believe. The Falkland Islands are British, The United Nations and International law says they are British, end of story.

IMARA

12-05-2005, 06:21 PM

"And what about the French terchnical team who continued to work on the Super Etendard/AM39 and set them up for their missions- if that wasn't aid what was?"

Ohh... come on, I can´t believe it. No french team worked for us during the war. All they did was to give us the missiles (and not every single missile we had paid for). Please...

"Whatever, the facts are quite clear for all to see, Argentina just choses to interpret things a little differently from the way they actually happened, e.g. The Argentine AF website."
What other example do you have? All what I post in this forum are things which I read and heard from recognized documents, books and people, many of whom fought in the war (British and Argentines). But... maybe you know more than them.

"This thread has rumbled on for ages - we've had quite a few interesting posts, some of them really quite creative, but you can't re-write history. The facts of the matter are in the public domain for all to see, British official accounts are almost all now in the public domain, and easily verifiable."
Argentines official acounts are too in public domain. It´s not surprinsingly that they are the same, as always happens. But I didn´t try to re-write history, by contrast, I assumed things many argentines do not assume. Some of your answers to this? "history has shown that your assertions are nonsense."
"It is Port Stanley, full-stop. It has never been Puerto Argentino, that name is just wishful thinking". More agressions than facts...

And you continue saying "Falklands belong to Britain, the United Nations says it...", thing that in any moment I discussed. Falklads are british and will be yours for ever. Read again the last sentence of my last post (yes, the one that ends saying "read this carefully delta whisky") But please do it. And stop repeting things everybody everybody knows and nobody discussed.
End of the story

pelao

12-05-2005, 06:32 PM

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 06:50 PM

Imara - firstly, please make an effort to use the "quote" function - it makes reading quoted threads much easier.

The French technical team from Aerospatiale were in Argentina well after the beginning of the conflict - this is well documented in the public domain, please don't make assertions like this which are clearly wrong. Whether you believe it or not - it is fact.

Read my posts! When I stated in my last post about The Falklands being British, I was in fact pointing this out for the benefit of pelao who didn't seem to understand why I was posting.

I would point out that whilst I think Argentina was wrong - in my view - for invading the Falkland Islands, I know and appreciate that the territorial claim maintained by Argentina is something which has been around for generations, and no doubt some people in Argentina thought they were doing the right thing, it's just a great shame that it resulted in over one thousand un-necessary deaths on both sides, countless injuries and what is probably worst of all psychological scarring which will stay with many of the soldiers for the rest of their lives. Yes, I am well aware that the suicides etc. are not just confined to British Falklands veterans - the victims of the Islas Malvinas conflict continue to suffer just as much in Argentina.

The whole conflict was the result of political posturing by an unpopular government - something we actually seem to agree upon. The fact that many confirmed details of the conflict are still suppressed/mis-informed by the Argentine media and government sources is neither here nor there, but I can not sit back and see factually incorrect information being passed off on this subject. I have researched the subject of the Falklands conflict very thoroughly over the past 23 years using both official and private sources and it still amazes me after all these years that we continue to get spurious claims such as those made by some people on this thread about such matters as supposed British ship losses, aircraft kill rates etc., subjects which are so well documented as to be beyond dispute, yet there are claims on official Argentine government/military sites which are totally without foundation.

I think we have to agree to disagree on this topic because I refuse to accept claims which I know not to be true, and I can not help the fact that some members of this forum still choose to believe what can only be described as propaganda.

I respect your views are clearly biased in favour of your own country, please accept what I have written and my reasoning. I had just left military service on the outbreak of the conflict, many of my friends served, some didn't come back. I don't know your connections or your age, but having been of an age to serve I take this subject very seriously and believe me I have not and would not make any assertions other than those based on hard, verifiable fact.

DeltaWhisky58

12-05-2005, 06:54 PM

Everybody in chile knows that what you said in point 2. is the truth. My thaugt is that brits doesn´t need aid to get victory. It was like David against Golliat.

Ironically, this is not quite right - the final result in many ways was a very close run thing - it was not until well after the end of the conflict that it was revealed just how close we were to running out of ammunition etc., especially for naval guns and artillery.

Whilst not doubting the effectiveness of both the Argentine Air Force and Naval Air Arm, had their tactics and weaponry been just a fraction better, the result could have been tragically different.
Whilst the reasons for Argentina's defeat are complex, two of the major factors were poor leadership/planning and a badly trained conscript element to her armed forces. The professional soldiers/sailors and airmen did their jobs well.

stonecutter

12-05-2005, 07:07 PM

Not according to Aerospatiale who employed them - they forgot to recall them.

Interesting. If that's true, then you must also remember that France gave Britain highly classified information on the Exocets and Super Etendards, and how to protect against them. Read this article:

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2002%2F03%2F13%2Fnot13.xml

*edit* -- perhaps Aerospatiale wanted to be able to market "combat-tested" Exocets, so they made sure that at least a couple of them got fired in anger....not very nice I know. But that's just pure speculation -- maybe someone here knows better.

Hydro

12-05-2005, 07:11 PM

Didn't the SBS land on and sink an Argentine cargo ship that was carrying Exocets from France to Argentina? Possibly through intelligence supplied by the French?

StormShadow

12-05-2005, 07:12 PM

splendid! the photos are back!

Gentlemen, behave yourselves. I don't want my thread closed.

Edit..
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M143.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M131.jpg
http://www.malvinasmdp.org.ar/Images/Fotos/M120.jpg

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
http://www.comcen.com.au/~raiment/Malvinas-Falklands10.JPG
http://www.comcen.com.au/~raiment/Malvinas-Falklands1.JPG
http://www.comcen.com.au/~raiment/Malvinas-Falklands2.JPG
http://www.comcen.com.au/~raiment/Malvinas-Falklands4.JPG
http://www.comcen.com.au/~raiment/Malvinas-Falklands9.JPG

*
*
*
*
*

http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/673/rumbo_malvinas.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/673/Dagger1.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/674/fotoproa.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/674/Conqueror.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/675/Neptune.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/675/Sue203.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/675/Suelanzando.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/675/Sheff01.jpg
http://www.dintel-gid.com.ar/images/675/Sheff02.jpg

speckfire

12-05-2005, 07:42 PM

Very nice pics. I know one thing for sure is that if every Argentinian air force/navy bomb expolded, the British would have been in serious trouble. The Argentinians airforce/navy were dropping mk82 bombs much lower than supposed to inorder to avoid AA fire thus not having time to arm properly. They did hit lots of targets but lucky for the British the bombs never went off. The west did not want to sell Argentina any snakeyes ;)

pelao

12-05-2005, 07:43 PM

I'm not your brother, and no I'm not - I am purely standing up for what I believe. The Falkland Islands are British, The United Nations and International law says they are British, end of story.[/quote]

Delta Whisky: be sure I have enough brothers. I just tried to be friendly.

MARINO

12-05-2005, 08:15 PM

1. The language of this forum is ENGLISH

2. The Falkland Islands are British, have been since 1833 and will remain so.
WTF those evil Britons P-), they were Spanish before, and before being spanish they belonged to no one, you tried to take us, twice, but you took them when we left it.:D

I'm kidding :lol:

pegasus

12-05-2005, 09:25 PM

they are british & will stay that way forever. do you really think we would have let people die for nothing! its over you lost. thats it!! if they tried again it would be the same result.

StormShadow

12-05-2005, 10:04 PM

http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/2456/105mmaa4xy.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1664/ameatiaerea9oq.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/3990/arges6yb.png
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/5010/camionbombarde0gz.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/4861/canon155ysoldad6yr.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6956/colinaradioa2gc.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6499/desembarco8im.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/7426/endescanso1kb.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/8997/foto24hb.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6139/foto73kf.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6854/foto90bx.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1797/foto104sj.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6146/foto130qr.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/5139/foto145ig.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1208/foto1619jl.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1893/fumandoespero2ok.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/9261/kk2mz.png
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/7981/ll4zq.png
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/7225/pucara222in.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1234/puma330aa5bx.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6250/rendicion1a8cc.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/5664/rendicion3a8xo.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/8279/rendicion5a4ae.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6686/scorpion20ki.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/4397/sealynxskua5ht.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/4180/solbritrend19dc.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/7804/transporteca4xi.jpg
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/213/tropasenmalvinas7yk.jpg

IMARA

12-05-2005, 10:08 PM

"Imara - firstly, please make an effort to use the "quote" function - it makes reading quoted threads much easier."
Excuse me but I don´t know how, I used to know before, but the page has changed.

"I respect your views are clearly biased in favour of your own country, please accept what I have written and my reasoning. I had just left military service on the outbreak of the conflict, many of my friends served, some didn't come back. I don't know your connections or your age, but having been of an age to serve I take this subject very seriously and believe me I have not and would not make any assertions other than those based on hard, verifiable fact."
I´m sorry for all the looses, don´t think they do not mean anything to me. It´s just that we will never agree in some aspects. You have read information I have not read, and I´ve read info. that you have not read. We heard different things, we read different things. So talking about the assertios, I (as I´m sure you too) would not be capable of making any assertions other than those based on hard, verifiable facts (which I know or course)

But my views are not in favour of my country. I post and say what I have read, heard and seen, always trying to be objective. I totally agree with everyone who says that Argentina made an important mistake in invading the islands. And I have recognized many times, not only in this forum, that Falklands belong to Britain.
But note something. Above all, I respect people, whether they agree with me or they don´t. So as you ask me to accept what you have written and your reasoning, I ask you to accept what I have written and my reasonings.

DeltaWhisky58

12-06-2005, 03:19 AM

Didn't the SBS land on and sink an Argentine cargo ship that was carrying Exocets from France to Argentina? Possibly through intelligence supplied by the French?

News to me - never heard of anything like that happening, although it very nearly happened in a European port but the mission was called off AFAIK.

G-Capo

12-06-2005, 08:30 PM

Excellent pics storm shadow!

StormShadow

12-06-2005, 08:31 PM

Thanks for viewing.

Bryson C

12-06-2005, 08:50 PM

Very interesting pics. Thx for posting them.

Canadian Sig

12-06-2005, 08:56 PM

Love the pics.......could live without the arguments.

cut

12-09-2005, 08:42 AM

A little interesting anecdote in the who was there first argument...
the name Malvinas comes from the French name Isles Malouines, because the it was named by sailors from St-Malo.

Panzerknacker

02-10-2007, 08:39 PM

A little messed-up topic with politics and everything, but nice nice pics after all, I had never seen that old costal batteries in the first page.

Panzerknacker

02-10-2007, 08:46 PM

And my first pic in here. This are the 2 pilots who survived the attack against the HMS Invincible, Ernesto Rubén Ureta (Left) and Ensign Gerardo Guillermo Isaac (Right). They are posing with WWII French Ace Pierre Clostermann (Centre) when he visited Argentina in 1986.

http://i5.tinypic.com/2h4xidi.jpg

kayaker

02-11-2007, 04:16 AM

untouchable facial expressions. The photo really grabs your attention.

Good picture, thank you for posting.

SamHamam

02-11-2007, 12:33 PM

Some great photos on this thread, but it doesn't half make me feel:

a) Old

b) Nostalgic for a time when things seemed so much simpler - even when fighting small wars.

Panzerknacker

02-11-2007, 05:49 PM

Good picture, thank you for posting

You re welcome.

b) Nostalgic for a time when things seemed so much simpler - even when fighting small wars.

Yea, the combattants and non-combattants were clearly delimited...even more the people in there cares about some rare and obscure laws called "The Geneva convention"...amazing. :|

601 batallion army soldiers, note the M-16 at the back.

http://i10.tinypic.com/2lwp3t1.jpg

Oerlikon 35mm in action against air and ground targets.

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/6610/gada601145ew.jpg

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5034/gada601153bg.jpg

halcon_cruz

12-09-2007, 12:17 AM

Didn't realise the Argie propaganda had continued to the preset day - they seem to think they hit Invincible, I'd like to see their evidence.

The evidence that we have is the word of two of FAA pilots. and that my friend is more valious than any other evidence against you could have

halcon_cruz

12-09-2007, 12:31 AM

Now who'se missing the point - I had already clearly ctated that the main reason for the invasion was as a diversion from the politico-econimic state the country was in, so why did you have to repeat the point?

OK, so you are an Argie, but who in the hell are you to tell me how much I do and don't know about the reasons for this conflict. I lost friends because of the naked agression of the megalomaniacal idiots who mis-governed your country!

Accept the fact is was a seriously bad move on the part of the Junta, The UK and Argentina are supposedly friends again, so why can't you just accept the fact that you lost a war you should never have started in the first place. Oh, BTW Argentina never "owned" The Falklands, they just think they did.

it was not a war - war was never declared)