reply

Hello Tango, Here is my reply to you.

A lot of luck was involved as is in any war, the most dangerous weapon the Argentineans had was the French made exocet, which caused a lot of British casualties. That is why I believe the General Belgrano was sunk, it was a message of If you sail you will be attacked, as the Argentineans had more ship launched than air launched. This in itself was one turning point of the conflict because had their navy had free reign they would certainly had sunk more British ships.

The Argentinean army wasn’t well prepared but then that is down to the officers and regulars of the Argentinean army.

You say that most of them deserted when the Ghurkhas were coming yes they did from the areas where the Ghurkhas were but not from other areas, however, yes the Ghurkhas are in effect mercenaries but the do join the British army (as well as the Indian and Nepalese). Yes there are other issues with them which I don’t wish to talk about here. The Ghurkhas are a fearsome and formidable force, but then the British get only the best Ghurkhas.

The several friendly fire incidents did occur (but that is the case with any war) however, the big difference between these and the american blue on blue is that these were in the night and snowstorms. The american blue on blue with the Fusiliers was during the day with good visibility. Also the piss off factor is that the americans will not own up to being at fault. As for Col Jones, that I cannot say but there is at least one officer who was killed by his own for being a wanker but I will not give his family the embarrassment of naming him. So yes it does happen but that is direct and aimed shooting not a mistake. Maybe the Anzac’s in WW1 should have had the Officer who claimed to have seen markers in the enemy trenches should have been shot by his own. Please don’t tar all officers with the same brush as I have met and served under many good ones. If you want some good reading the look at Genghis Khan, he chose his officers/leaders by merit, and although he built a very strong empire on this ethos it too fell. So who’s system is better? Rhetorical question. I don’t believe it is a common attribute of senior British officers but yes some are like it. In war time they will if it is needed be punished by their men.

You have stated ‘The Falklands war was won by 2 para and the 7th Gurkhas (from Nepal)and the assistance of the island farmers that towed artilary and mortars etc to positions the Brittish could not get to by military vehicle and farmers tractors did the job instead. ‘ so in your own words it was won by the British army as both 2 Para and 7th Ghurkhas are in the British army. However, I believe there was more than just that, the SAS knocked out aircraft and airfields on west Falkland ( (7) Just a week before the landings, a raid is mounted by D Sqdn SAS on the airstrip and facilities at Pebble Island,especially to destroy the ground attack Pucaras based there. First of all men of the Squadron's Boat Troop are put ashore over Tuesday night to reconnoitre the area and three days later on Friday 14th, "Hermes" and escort "Broadsword" together with "Glamorgan" in the fire support role leave the CVBG, and passing to the north, approach Pebble Island by night. As "Glamorgan" closes in to gunfire range, "Hermes" flies off the 48 SAS attackers and NGFO team in her No.846 Sea Kings to be guided in at midnight by the awaiting patrol. (8) After a forced march to the airstrip, the attack goes in led by Captain Hamilton, and all the aircraft there put out of action or destroyed by prepared charges. A fuel depot, ammo dump and radar installation is also destroyed. All this time "Glamorgan" provides gunfire support, and as the raiders withdraw, a brief Argentine counter-attack is halted when the officer in charge is shot. With two men slightly wounded the SAS are safely picked up again by the helicopters. Please see http://www.naval-history.net/F38opsweek7.htm ). So the forces may have contained personnel from Australia and NZ, it is not unusual for Aussies or Kiwi’s to have exchange tours and also partake in conflicts of one type or another. Personally I have served with 3 Skippies all Australian one was a wanker and 2 were good blokes (does that mean one third of Aussies are wankers? Not my view but just another rhetorical question. You seem to think to know the British officers of today, but personally I would disagree with your thoughts.

Maybe next time you would be brave enough to put your name to your post or even an alias email address so you can read answers to your thoughts.

Cheers Giles