PDA

View Full Version : Falklands/Malvinas slagging match



Pages : 1 [2]

Panzerknacker
02-03-2009, 06:16 AM
I am very calm, my post ( 225) was very calm and kind of "closing speech".

Actually as more old I get calmer is my character.:rolleyes:


Fecking hell, this bloke doesn't give up does he, an unusual trait for an Argie!!


Thank you, is nice that you noted this.

Rising Sun*
02-03-2009, 06:57 AM
I am very calm, my post ( 225) was very calm and kind of "closing speech".

Actually as more old I get calmer is my character.:rolleyes:

Yes, well, don't age too quickly or you'll be asleep. :D




Fecking hell, this bloke doesn't give up does he, an unusual trait for an Argie!!

Thank you, is nice that you noted this.

Zulu's comment could be funny in other circumstances, but in this sensitive thread such comments should not be made as they denigrate the service and sacrifices of the Argentinian forces who fought well and were injured and killed in that enterprise.

Such comments might provoke understandably and justifiably hostile comments from the Argentinian side, so they will not be tolerated.

As stated previously: Behave.

The future of this thread is in the hands of the people who have the greatest interest in discussing it. If you ignore the moderators' numerous warnings to conduct yourselves properly, this thread will be closed permanently.

Now, try to disappoint me by showing me that I won't have to close the thread because these warnings have been ignored.

32Bravo
02-03-2009, 09:49 AM
Such comments might provoke understandably and justifiably hostile comments from the Argentinian side, so they will not be tolerated.

I find this thread highly provocative. It is a thinnly, veiled and hostile attempt, by its author, to denigrate the British troops involved in that unfortunate war.

Instead, what he ought to be considering is the good that came from the actions of the Britsh Forces in forcing the demise of the facist regime which was torturing and murdering his own people.

I have no dislike of Argentinian people: I'm even a fan of the authors other thread 'Argentine Models' (which is yet another, but clearly identified as, a fantasy topic) but this is blatant provocation and no amount of window dressing by him or the MODS, whom I know are trying to remain impartial.

If anyone wishes to discuss the war, then by all means discuss it, but let's please stop the conjecture. If the author has any evidence of war crimes then let said author take said evidence to a lawyer and begin legal proceedings. Instead of insulting the sacrifice of my countrymen and, by association, myself and the other British contributors to this site.



The future of this thread is in the hands of the people who have the greatest interest in discussing it. If you ignore the moderators' numerous warnings to conduct yourselves properly, this thread will be closed permanently.


Furthermore, the Britsh members of the site, many of whom are former military personnel, were never trained to turn the other cheek to a hostile foe.

Scupper it!

32Bravo
02-03-2009, 11:02 AM
This regime committed abhorent crimes against the people of Argentina. The same regime that invaded the Flakland/Malvinas Islands. This same regime that the British were supposed to roll over and accept as the true govrnment of the Falklands. If one wishes to investigate crimes and and administer jsutice, what better place to start:



Argentina is to convert the former junta's biggest torture centre into a museum of its crimes, officially confronting the horrors of the military dictatorship that ruled the country for seven years.
With relatives of the dead and surviving victims looking on, President Nestor Kirchner announced the move at the colonnaded, whitewashed Navy Mechanical School (Esma) in Buenos Aires.


"I come as president to beg forgiveness on behalf of the state for remaining silent during 20 years of democracy," he said. "There is only one name for those who run concentration camps such as the Esma and that is murderers."

Human rights groups estimate that up to 30,000 people disappeared as the 1976-1983 dictatorship sought to eliminate Left-wing radicals.

About 5,000 people were tortured at Esma, one of 300 secret detention centres, and many of them were then drugged and thrown from aircraft into the Atlantic to die.

Some pregnant detainees were kept blindfolded after giving birth so they could never see their children, according to government and rights reports. The babies were then handed over to military families for adoption.

Juan Cabandie, now in his twenties, told the crowd: "I was one of 10 babies born here and taken from my mother's arms by doctors of torture.

"Two months ago, I finally found out who my parents were. Now I know that I am the son of 'disappeared' people, I want to look their murderers in the eye. I ask for justice for them and that this never happens again."

A woman whose son died in Esma said: "What has happened here today will bring me some peace, but it cannot bring my child back. I know the names of his murderers and I want them to pay by spending the rest of their lives in prison."

The museum is the latest element in a campaign by Mr Kirchner, who was arrested by the junta as a student, to cleanse Argentina of the legacy of its brutal past.

He began his term in office by sacking the heads of all the armed forces and ordering a purging of the federal police. He went on to annul amnesty legislation, paving the way for junta members to go on trial.

and more:



US Declassified Documents: Argentine Junta Security Forces Killed, Disappeared Activists, Mothers and Nuns

US officials were split in blaming the Generals, made considerable efforts to find and save victims, but then dropped demands to find those responsible

On the 25th anniversary of the disappearance of leaders of the internationally renowned civil disobedience group the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, recently declassified US documents show that the Embassy in Buenos Aires had evidence of the Argentine Military Junta's responsibility in the crime. The US dedicated substantial resources to establish the whereabouts of the victims and protect their lives, but once it learned they had been killed, it dropped the demand to the Junta to find and punish the perpetrators and discipline officers condoning it.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB77/

Nickdfresh
02-03-2009, 03:32 PM
I find this thread highly provocative...

With all due respect, where do we draw the line at closing threads we find highly provocative?

I agree the thread premise seems nihilist in light of certain actions by certain armed services in their own countries against their own people, which certain thread starters seem to sort of condone with their signatures and postings...

But I don't believe good message boards close threads because they piss people off. IMO

Panzerknacker
02-03-2009, 03:40 PM
find this thread highly provocative. It is a thinnly, veiled and hostile attempt, by its author, to denigrate the British troops involved in that unfortunate war.

Instead, what he ought to be considering is the good that came from the actions of the Britsh Forces in forcing the demise of the facist regime which was torturing and murdering his own people.

I have no dislike of Argentinian people: I'm even a fan of the authors other thread 'Argentine Models' (which is yet another, but clearly identified as, a fantasy topic) but this is blatant provocation and no amount of window dressing by him or the MODS, whom I know are trying to remain impartial.

If anyone wishes to discuss the war, then by all means discuss it, but let's please stop the conjecture. If the author has any evidence of war crimes then let said author take said evidence to a lawyer and begin legal proceedings. Instead of insulting the sacrifice of my countrymen and, by association, myself and the other British contributors to this site.


Well definately you mask had fell Bravo, a pity really, you always try to give an image of funny, intelligent and joyful character, but with this same post you had show that you are just another "fanatic" like me.

Let me add if you think that I made this topic because a supposed "disliking" or attemped "denigration" against british people or soldiers you are extremely, extremely wrong.

Nickdfresh
02-03-2009, 03:42 PM
Well definately you mask had fell Bravo, a pity really, you always try to give an image of funny, intelligent and joyful character, but with this same post you had show that you are just another "fanatic" like me.

Let me add if you think that I made this topic because a supposed "disliking" or attemped "denigration" against british people or soldiers you are extremely, extremely wrong.

Okay, so why did you make it?

32Bravo
02-03-2009, 03:44 PM
But I don't believe good message boards close threads because they piss people off. IMO

Well, okay, Nick, but then one can hardly complain if people react to said provocation in, say, the manner of Zulu Zulu.

Personally, I thought his comments quite restrained, given the circumstances. I have tried to ignore much of what has been posted to this thread up until now, but there is a limit.

I am not asking for the thread to be closed, but I wouldn't loose any sleep if it was. My saying 'Scupper it' was merely a polite comment.

32Bravo
02-03-2009, 03:54 PM
Well definately you mask had fell Bravo, a pity really, you always try to give an image of funny, intelligent and joyful character, but with this same post you had show that you are just another "fanatic" like me.

Let me add if you think that I made this topic because a supposed "disliking" or attemped "denigration" against british people or soldiers you are extremely, extremely wrong.

No, on both accounts.

First of all I was demonstrating how easy it is to dig up dirt.

Secondly, your motives are obvious.

I'm nothing like you. I haven't even referred to you by name, even your site name, and I certainly haven't accused you of being a fanatic - as it happens, I don't think you are a fanatic (after all, you think shooting rabbits is the macho thing) - just an ingrate. We British get rid of the evil Junta for you, and there you go having a pop at us for it.

32Bravo
02-03-2009, 03:58 PM
Let me add if you think that I made this topic because a supposed "disliking" or attemped "denigration" against british people or soldiers you are extremely, extremely wrong.

If you want to investigate crimes, why don't you investigate those that have been committed by your own people against your own people. I'm sure that their are many perpetrators of those crimes roaming about Buenos Aires.

I'm sure if that happened in my country and I was so concerned about bringing people to justice as you appear to be, I wouldn't be wasting my time with some flimsy story about some supposed war crime in some obscure place. I'd be too busy chasing after the bad guys. Or is it that you, as with the Junta, are attempting to distract attention away from that?

Panzerknacker
02-03-2009, 04:12 PM
I'm nothing like you. I haven't even referred to you by name, even your site name, and I certainly haven't accused you of being a fanatic - as it happens, I don't think you are a fanatic (after all, you think shooting rabbits is the macho thing) - just an ingrate. We British get rid of the evil Junta for you, and there you go having a pop at us for it.

:shock::shock:




If you want to investigate crimes, why don't you investigate those that have been committed by your own people against your own people. I'm sure that their are many perpetrators of those crimes roaming about Buenos Aires.

I'm sure if that happened in my country and I was so concerned about bringing people to justice as you appear to be, I wouldn't be wasting my time with some flimsy story about some supposed war crime in some obscure place. I'd be too busy chasing after the bad guys. Or is it that you, as with the Junta, are attempting to distract attention away from that?


:shock::shock::shock::shock:

Obviously Bravo you are now in such state of anger and hate that is impossible to make a proper discussion with some sence right now.

Better we let this thing for other day.

32Bravo
02-03-2009, 04:19 PM
:shock::shock:




:shock::shock::shock::shock:

Obviously Bravo you are now in such state of anger and hate that is impossible to make a proper discussion with some sence right now.

Better we let this thing for other day.

There you go, again, playing with your little moticon toys, as well as making making assumptions about my state of mind.

I guess my question regarding investigating the crimes perpertrated by the Junta against the Argentine people is a little sensitive to you, or is it just not open to sensible discussion.

Panzerknacker
02-03-2009, 04:27 PM
as well as making making assumptions about my state of mind.


You made the assumption that I dont want to talk about it, wich is completely false ( shame on you :mrgreen:)
I had expressed my views about the internal conflict of Argentina in here, but of course this topic has been largely ignored by several british members, mostly because is outside the Malvinas subforum.

http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4831


I must say I put this link without any faith, I know very well that nobody going to continue the discussion there, they like to talk about the desaparecidos in this section. Seems that is quite orgasmic exercise between some ( and note I say some not your nick) british members.:rolleyes:

pdf27
02-03-2009, 04:51 PM
Ladies (?) and Gentlemen.
This thread is clearly never going to return to the original topic. In the circumstances it seems best to allow it to remain open to allow the air to clear, so I'm stickfying this topic as the "Falklands/Malvinas slagging match".

Serious discussion on the Falklands/Malvinas conflict should be restricted to all other threads in this forum. These will continue to be moderated very tightly.

This thread will be lightly moderated (as per the rest of the forum) as there seems to be demand for such a thread. Swearing, etc. will not be tolerated, nor will failure to produce evidence to support any claims made.

Nickdfresh
02-03-2009, 04:55 PM
Well, okay, Nick, but then one can hardly complain if people react to said provocation in, say, the manner of Zulu Zulu.

Personally, I thought his comments quite restrained, given the circumstances. I have tried to ignore much of what has been posted to this thread up until now, but there is a limit.

I am not asking for the thread to be closed, but I wouldn't loose any sleep if it was. My saying 'Scupper it' was merely a polite comment.


I didn't comment on Zulu Zulu's post, but it did seem a bit "nah nah nah nah, nah! We won!" in its tone.

But yes, certain comments in this thread seem a bit slanted towards the 'garrison-as-martyrs' myth and a simplification of things. That is not to say that there aren't relevant questions being raised, including those of the Argentine excesses towards the occupied populace....

Nickdfresh
02-03-2009, 05:03 PM
You made the assumption that I dont want to talk about it, wich is completely false ( shame on you :mrgreen:)
I had expressed my views about the internal conflict of Argentina in here...
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4831
...

Actually, I don't recall actually you expressing any views there beyond a supercilious abstract of the conflict.

Panzerknacker
02-03-2009, 05:19 PM
Actually, I don't recall actually you expressing any views there beyond a supercilious abstract of the conflict.

Well I think your opinion about my views is also a supercilious abstract.;) You always seems always particulary touched or anger with that issue, always in the edge of the insult, I remember Pdf had to erase one of your post in my "Panzerknackers gallery".

Sorry but if you or any other think that could can make me repeat myself over and over again about that issue is plain wrong, I said all I had to say there and also I said all I had to say here.

This late post of mine other is just try to make up some mugging against my intentions ( and that intentions are incidentally linked with my person)as Bravo did.

I dont know what is slagging but if this going to degenerate in an "banter" ( funny word that I learned from Bravo ) toward argentines with the vane hope that I going to respond to that It better closed down for good.

Firefly
02-03-2009, 05:53 PM
With all due respect, where do we draw the line at closing threads we find highly provocative?

I agree the thread premise seems nihilist in light of certain actions by certain armed services in their own countries against their own people, which certain thread starters seem to sort of condone with their signatures and postings...

But I don't believe good message boards close threads because they piss people off. IMO

Totally agree with this.

Stick to topic though, plenty of room elsewhere on this forum for cricket (if you can understand it) and other stuff.

Nickdfresh
02-03-2009, 06:05 PM
Well I think your opinion about my views is also a supercilious abstract.;) You always seems always particulary touched or anger with that issue, always in the edge of the insult, I remember Pdf had to erase one of your post in my "Panzerknackers gallery".
....

Which "issue?" Was it war crimes in general? Or was it of authoritarian, borderline fascist regimes based on lawlessness? I'm not a big fan of either actually...

Alas, that's why I hate deletions, because I have no idea what you are talking about, nor the context of which you are talking about which you are talking about....

Cuts
02-03-2009, 08:45 PM
Ladies (?) and Gentlemen.
This thread is clearly never going to return to the original topic. In the circumstances it seems best to allow it to remain open to allow the air to clear, so I'm stickfying this topic as the "Falklands/Malvinas slagging match".

Serious discussion on the Falklands/Malvinas conflict should be restricted to all other threads in this forum. These will continue to be moderated very tightly.

This thread will be lightly moderated (as per the rest of the forum) as there seems to be demand for such a thread. Swearing, etc. will not be tolerated, nor will failure to produce evidence to support any claims made.

Should that be the case I can foresee a sudden fall in the number of posts from certain members on this thread.

That said, this (http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?p=149454#post149454) might yet prove me wrong.
I truly hope so.

Cuts
02-03-2009, 09:12 PM
as well as making making assumptions about my state of mind.

You made the assumption that I dont want to talk about it, wich is completely false ( shame on you :mrgreen:)
I had expressed my views about the internal conflict of Argentina in here, but of course this topic has been largely ignored by several british members, mostly because is outside the Malvinas subforum.

Reference the bold, those civilians that found their homes invaded were of the opposite opinion.
Given that you were a babe in arms at the time and therefore unaware of the situation, do you really believe your singular opinion carries more weight than all of theirs ?


http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4831


I must say I put this link without any faith, I know very well that nobody going to continue the discussion there, they like to talk about the desaparecidos in this section. Seems that is quite orgasmic exercise between some ( and note I say some not your nick) british members.:rolleyes:

My missus looks into the site from time to time and has often made some pertinent comments hereto.
Those she made this evening reference that particular post were most enlightening as she coupled them to others from the same source.
You have, (understandably by location,) a certain 'machismo' image you wish to demonstrate to yourself, but your hardly oblique reference to sex in conjunction with this post seen alongside your odd idea that popping rabbits is 'manly' was noted.
She did mention some of your other posts - and photographs - and has applied her professional eye to things.
Straight question, do you have a compensation fixation ?

32Bravo
02-04-2009, 05:14 AM
A much more sensible thread title - well done!

Panzerknacker
02-04-2009, 08:41 AM
Reference the bold, those civilians that found their homes invaded were of the opposite opinion.
Given that you were a babe in arms at the time and therefore unaware of the situation, do you really believe your singular opinion carries more weight than all of theirs ?



My opinion is mine, if carry more weight or no honestly I dont care. From my point of view always my opinion about anything carries more weight than the others.



My missus looks into the site from time to time and has often made some pertinent comments hereto


With you long, gayful and boring stile of writing I have several troubles findind out when is you and when is you "missus" speaking :lol:


You have, (understandably by location,) a certain 'machismo' image you wish to demonstrate to yourself, but your hardly oblique reference to sex in conjunction with this post seen alongside your odd idea that popping rabbits is 'manly' was noted.

Dont be confused by location, Argentina is one of the most gay friendly countries in the southern hemisphere, you and your couple can visit us anytime. Bring your missus too, I am sure we can find a place for her. :mrgreen:

Man of Stoat
02-04-2009, 08:53 AM
From my point of view always my opinion about anything carries more weight than the others.


THERE's your problem!


Dont be confused by location, Argentina is one of the most gay friendly countries in the southern hemisphere....

... cos it's only gay if you receive, no?

Isn't the maxim: a woman for babies, a boy for fun, and a llama for ecstasy?

Panzerknacker
02-04-2009, 05:06 PM
THERE's your problem!



Problem why ? since when you care about others point of view ? I dont saw you interested in other members point of view specially in the small arms topic.



... cos it's only gay if you receive, no?

Isn't the maxim: a woman for babies, a boy for fun, and a llama for ecstasy?


As I am not I cant say for sure, but you got at list 2 members here with such inclinations, better ask them :rolleyes:

Nickdfresh
02-04-2009, 07:14 PM
Problem why ? since when you care about others point of view ? I dont saw you interested in other members point of view specially in the small arms topic.



He's far more objective on that topic than you are on this one...


As I am not I cant say for sure, but you got at list 2 members here with such inclinations, better ask them :rolleyes:


Well, I do find Llamas very sexy!

Cuts
02-04-2009, 08:26 PM
Reference the bold, those civilians that found their homes invaded were of the opposite opinion.
Given that you were a babe in arms at the time and therefore unaware of the situation, do you really believe your singular opinion carries more weight than all of theirs ?
My opinion is mine, if carry more weight or no honestly I dont care. From my point of view always my opinion about anything carries more weight than the others.
Therein lies your problem.
If you tell yourself that your opinion is always more authoritative than that of others you will never learn.

This accounts for much.




My missus looks into the site from time to time and has often made some pertinent comments hereto
With you long, gayful and boring stile of writing I have several troubles findind out when is you and when is you "missus" speaking :lol:
Are we are to assume that your word, 'gayful' means homosexual ?
Your attempts to elicit anger by your use of the term 'gay' as an insult have no effect on those of us confident of our heterosexuality, but it is interesting. The professionally qualified have suggested your constant derogatory use is an obvious exhibition of projection.

For your future guidance my missus does not post on these fora although she sometimes looks through. Should there be a posting style of particular interest to her she often gives me a run down of symptoms shown.
So far she's been unerringly accurate.




You have, (understandably by location,) a certain 'machismo' image you wish to demonstrate to yourself, but your hardly oblique reference to sex in conjunction with this post seen alongside your odd idea that popping rabbits is 'manly' was noted.
Dont be confused by location,
Nav is a skill one learns in a real army young man, you'd know that had you the opportunity to join one.


Argentina is one of the most gay friendly countries in the southern hemisphere,
That must suit you well.
It has always been such a paragon of tolerance.


you and your couple can visit us anytime.
Polygamy's not legal at home so I have only the one bint, and anyway I've already visited your country, at a time when you were unlikely to be aware that any others existed.


Bring your missus too, I am sure we can find a place for her. :mrgreen:
She says she's not interested in children, besides, she only goes for winners.


Your lack of response to the question of compensation speaks volumes.
My apologies if you found it too close to the mark.

Zulu_Zulu
02-05-2009, 04:26 PM
For my part let me make my position clear.

I have respect for Argentina as a country.
I have respect for Argentine veterans of an extremely traumatic war.
I have respect for Argentine pilots (mad bastards)
I have respect for the Argentine people I met in Argentina.

I have no respect for anyone trying to re-live the war from the comfort of an computer chair and offering words of wisdom when they haven't the first clue how chaotic and truly horrible armed conflict really is. Especially armchair generals who make decisions in the calm surroundings rather than the split second life or death decisions whilst listening to the golden insects.

If you're a veteran of either flag then I listen to what you have to say because you were there in the mud. If you weren't then your opinion does not hold the same weight.

reydelcastillo
02-05-2009, 07:56 PM
Mr Zulu Zulu

Could not agree more

There is still a lot to learn about that Conflict , each side has its story , if you could bring both sides of the story together you would be able to find the truth

If you can remain on Military Actions only , there would be a lot to learn -

I was able to see how well this has work in other British Forums , I was able to bring together British and Argies looking forward on certain military actions and it is amazing how they exchange info and are able to bring to us their conclusions -

Just go to PPRUNE , go to Military Crew on Falklands Crash Sites , see how British Pilots exchange accounts with Argies Vets -

Go to Key Publishing Aviation Forums , see on Falklands What if ,,

Go to Military Photos , see Falklands what if -

All of them are teaching us a lesson , I think It's time for this to happen in this Forum

With all My Respects - Enrique Rey

pdf27
02-06-2009, 01:48 AM
All of them are teaching us a lesson , I think It's time for this to happen in this Forum
That was the original intention of this forum. However, there are a small number of people determined to engage in nationalistic willy-waving who have turned the whole forum into a screaming nightmare to keep moderated.
This thread is a last-ditch attempt to get all the children in one play-pen, leaving the rest of the sub-forum for mature discussion. If it doesn't work then this forum will almost certainly be locked for good as more trouble than it's worth.

Rising Sun*
02-06-2009, 02:49 AM
If it doesn't work then this forum will almost certainly be locked for good as more trouble than it's worth.

And, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, given the great latitude that has been allowed so far, don't be surprised if this thread is closed permanently without further warning if there is just one more offensive post.

32Bravo
02-06-2009, 03:01 AM
And, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, given the great latitude that has been allowed so far, don't be surprised if this thread is closed permanently without further warning if there is just one more offensive post.

What is to be considered offensive: strong language; denigrating comments; terms of affection or even compliments?

Are we speaking of being offensive to the majority, or the minority?

Ife we are speaking of the majority, then who protects the minority from the majority?

Hey!...it's Friday!!!...I guess PK would say that I'm in a jolly mood...but, if it snows this afternoon, I'll be jolly pissed off!

Rising Sun*
02-06-2009, 03:59 AM
What is to be considered offensive: strong language; denigrating comments; terms of affection or even compliments?

Offensive in the strict sense of aggressive or attacking language, as well as the more common usage of language which offends someone.

My memory may be failing me (and according to my wife it, like other parts of me, is), but I don't recall mod intervention being necessary in any thread, and least of all this one, for offensive terms of affection or even compliments. ;) :D


Are we speaking of being offensive to the majority, or the minority?

Offensive as judged objectively by the mods, which certainly will not be on the basis of a given thin-skinned poster being upset by another poster's comment.


If we are speaking of the majority, then who protects the minority from the majority?

We are speaking of the mods, who are an oppressed and unappreciated minority, but who need no protection for we are the power and the glory, Amen!. :D

32Bravo
02-06-2009, 04:15 AM
We are speaking of the mods, who are an oppressed and unappreciated minority, but who need no protection for we are the power and the glory, Amen!. :D

Perhaps from each other... I hope there is no bickering going on there..."I want to ban him!"..."NO! you can't, I do!"...Well, okay, then, as long as you allow me to lock the thread, this time!"...

Rising Sun*
02-06-2009, 04:27 AM
Perhaps from each other... I hope there is no bickering going on there..."I want to ban him!"..."NO! you can't, I do!"...Well, okay, then, as long as you allow me to lock the thread, this time!"...

Not a chance.

All is sweetness and light in the mod room, where harmony and consensus reign. Especially in relation to this thread.

32Bravo
02-06-2009, 04:51 AM
All is sweetness and light in the mod room, where harmony and consensus reign. Especially in relation to this thread.

Aaah, how sweet! You’ve brought a nice, warm, reassuring glow to my tummy, not unlike hot soup on a very cold day!

pdf27
02-06-2009, 05:36 AM
Aaah, how sweet! You’ve brought a nice, warm, reassuring glow to my tummy, not unlike hot soup on a very cold day!
He never said what the harmony and consensus actually were. For all you know we might unanimously hate you all!

32Bravo
02-06-2009, 06:24 AM
He never said what the harmony and consensus actually were. For all you know we might unanimously hate you all!

Yes, I have heard that the unifying effect of a shared hate figure sometimes results in queer bed-fellows...I guess you chaps are the proof! ;)

Zulu_Zulu
02-06-2009, 02:22 PM
Of the few forums I am a member of its fairly clear to me that once the abuse has died down a little reasonable debate follows. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Mr Knacker may well be misinformed, may well be wrong on certain things but he ain't wrong on everything. Give the bloke some respect, he does after all give a shit about the 1000 Argentine body bags (combat and suicide) resulting from this conflict.

This fact alone puts him above most.

Firefly
02-06-2009, 03:50 PM
Perhaps from each other... I hope there is no bickering going on there..."I want to ban him!"..."NO! you can't, I do!"...Well, okay, then, as long as you allow me to lock the thread, this time!"...

As the ultimate arbiter of all things Mod, I can honestly say that this thread or section has not been discussed in the Mod room recently, although it has, in the past, been the subject of much debate.

I have an interest in the Falklands room as Ive been there, and due to visit them again later this year.

Lets keep a level head here guys.

32Bravo
02-07-2009, 03:19 AM
As the ultimate arbiter of all things Mod, I can honestly say that this thread or section has not been discussed in the Mod room recently, although it has, in the past, been the subject of much debate.

I have an interest in the Falklands room as Ive been there, and due to visit them again later this year.

Lets keep a level head here guys.


Those comments of mine were not intended to be taken seriously, and if I have in anyway upset any of thems whose task is thankless, then I apologise unreservedly.

Rising Sun*
02-07-2009, 04:20 AM
Those comments of mine were not intended to be taken seriously, and if I have in anyway upset any of thems whose task is thankless, then I apologise unreservedly.

Me old marra, I don't take any of your comments seriously, nor probably do the rest of the mods, or other members. ;) :D

Except your serious comments, which are seen to be serious by their nature and context, and which contribute usefully to the knowledge on this forum.

There is no need for an apology, unreserved or slighty reserved or even marginally qualified, for you have not upset those of us who endure our thankless task as the path of martyrdom to eternal salvation. We must endure other and far greater trials than you can impose to purify ourselves for heaven. ;) :D

32Bravo
02-07-2009, 05:21 AM
Me old marra, I don't take any of your comments seriously, nor probably do the rest of the mods, or other members. ;) :D

Except your serious comments, which are seen to be serious by their nature and context, and which contribute usefully to the knowledge on this forum.

There is no need for an apology, unreserved or slighty reserved or even marginally qualified, for you have not upset those of us who endure our thankless task as the path of martyrdom to eternal salvation. We must endure other and far greater trials than you can impose to purify ourselves for heaven. ;) :D

Well, as we are all kissing and making up, you may kiss me on both cheeks, providing you restrict them to the face in the French fashion - non of your MOD style of cheek-kissing, please.

Rising Sun*
02-07-2009, 05:31 AM
Well, as we are all kissing and making up, you may kiss me on both cheeks, providing you restrict them to the face in the French fashion - non of your MOD style of cheek-kissing, please.

At the risk of sending this suddenly harmonious forum off on a tangent, I don't do French.

Kissing, cutlets, windows, widows, knickers, maids, and so on.


Alright, maybe I'll do the odd French maid and maybe a young French widow, but they have to beg for it. :D

32Bravo
02-07-2009, 06:55 AM
At the risk of...

Admire a chap who takes the odd risk.




Alright, maybe I'll do the odd French maid and maybe a young French widow, but they have to beg for it. :D


They'd have to be! :lol:

Panzerknacker
02-07-2009, 06:06 PM
French women are overrated.

I can kiss all your...wifes/girlfriends, in every places and locations, no problem with that.

32Bravo
02-08-2009, 04:26 AM
Speaking of kissing wives and girlfriends, is this PTSD?

I've been training my missus to direct me about the fridge. This morning she put said training into practise to direct me to the bacon.:

She "Open fridge door!...down, six o'clock bottom chiller-shelf!...left, 9o'clock, Pastrami..."

Me, rudely interrupting "Pastrami?...what the **** is ****ing Pastrami?...Again!"

She "Open fridge door...down, 6o'clock...bottom shelf, food-chiller...open chiller...left, 9o'clock...packet of smoked, diced bacon...beneath packet, bacon.. in Weightwatchers packet!"

Me "****ing Weightwatchers?...Do you think I'm quear or something?...I want man's bacon!...I need to keep up my energy levels!...how else am I to keep you pleased?"


Then I woke to my missus placing gentle kisses on my brow.

As I focussed on her beautiful, smiling face she said

"Good morning, darling!...did you sleep well?"

Me "Yes, thank you, darling!...would you like me to prepare breakfast?"

She " Oh, yes please, darling!"

Me "Bacon in the bottom of the fridge, in the Weightwatchers packet, is it?"

"Yes, darling"

"Wont be long!...just take quick shower first!"

"Lovely!"

Rising Sun*
02-08-2009, 06:49 AM
Speaking of kissing wives and girlfriends, is this PTSD?

I've been training my missus to direct me about the fridge. This morning she put said training into practise to direct me to the bacon.:

She "Open fridge door!...down, six o'clock bottom chiller-shelf!...left, 9o'clock, Pastrami..."

Me, rudely interrupting "Pastrami?...what the **** is ****ing Pastrami?...Again!"

She "Open fridge door...down, 6o'clock...bottom shelf, food-chiller...open chiller...left, 9o'clock...packet of smoked, diced bacon...beneath packet, bacon.. in Weightwatchers packet!"

Me "****ing Weightwatchers?...Do you think I'm quear or something?...I want man's bacon!...I need to keep up my energy levels!...how else am I to keep you pleased?"


Then I woke to my missus placing gentle kisses on my brow.

As I focussed on her beautiful, smiling face she said

"Good morning, darling!...did you sleep well?"

Me "Yes, thank you, darling!...would you like me to prepare breakfast?"

She " Oh, yes please, darling!"

Me "Bacon in the bottom of the fridge, in the Weightwatchers packet, is it?"

"Yes, darling"

"Wont be long!...just take quick shower first!"

"Lovely!"


So, which one was the dream? :D

Rising Sun*
02-08-2009, 06:55 AM
I can kiss all your...wifes/girlfriends, in every places and locations, no problem with that.


This just goes to show that we can all be kissy huggy happy in this thread, so how about the regular posters keep that up?

Or I'll post a picture of the location PK can kiss my wife, and I guarantee that everyone will have a problem with that. :D

navyson
02-08-2009, 06:55 AM
So, which one was the dream? :D

Sounds like the latter part of 32bravos story... it's too surreal!:D

Rising Sun*
02-08-2009, 07:09 AM
Sounds like the latter part of 32bravos story... it's too surreal!:D

It is clear that you are married. :D

navyson
02-08-2009, 07:11 AM
It is clear that you are married. :D

Yes, but that didn't get in the way of me and the wifes love!:mrgreen:

Zulu_Zulu
02-08-2009, 07:55 AM
All this man love is a touch disconcerting.................. are we all going to bum each other to death?

navyson
02-08-2009, 08:01 AM
All this man love is a touch disconcerting.................. are we all going to bum each other to death?
I'm just waiting for the thread to pick back up again. I was in my early teen years when this happened and our news in the US didn't cover it much. So, I knew very little of this until reading on the threads here in this forum. No harm in a little fun in the meantime though!:)

32Bravo
02-09-2009, 02:56 AM
.......... are we all going to bum each other to death?


Always thought that was the teritory of you seafaring types - perhaps no coincidence that Navyson responded? :lol: - but, take your point regarding the topic. :army:

32Bravo
02-09-2009, 06:46 AM
Captain Freer - 2 Para

On Longdon, while we were fighting, no quarter was given. Once the fighting was over, we felt no more aggression against the Argentines. There were a lot of enemy wounded, which we looked after as well as we looked after our own. The Argentines that stayed and fought were extremely brave and one cannot help but admire them. They inflicted twenty killed and forty-plus wounded on us, putting the better part of a rifle company out of action that night, which was very much a testimony to their courage. The only thing they didn't do was counter-attacking us. You are always at your weakest when you've taken an objective, but by that time they'd all disappeared toward Stanley.

Magnanimous comments by Captain Freer.

Staff Sergeant Elliot - 3 Commando Brigade Air Squadron


We'd moved our helicopters from Port San Carlos to the base of Mount Kent.

The Argentine prisoners didn't look too bad really - nothing like as dishevelled as we'd imagined they would be. They had lots of kit, and were wandering around with dry feet wearing wellington boots. Quite a few big ones didn't look defeated at all - marines or special forces, probably.

I watched 2 Para walking past us on their march to Mount Kent before their attack on Wireless Ridge. They looked in a much worse state than the Argentines. But it was their spirit that counted, rather than what they looked like, or the kit they had!

32Bravo
02-09-2009, 01:00 PM
Captain Freer - 2 Para


Magnanimous comments by Captain Freer.

Cont'd.

The reason I say this, is that the rule of thumb for the attacking force is that they should have a numerical superiority of at least 3:1 over those of the enemy.


The defending force will have sited its positions making full use of man-made (e.g. minefields), and natural, obstacles to funnel or channel the attacking force into its killing areas, which are normally covered by as much firepower as can be mustered. It is the expectation of the attacking force to take casualties and, usually, the best way of reducing them is by the element of surprise.

IIRC 3 Para had nothing like a 3:1 advantage and was attacking a battalion size formation, thus making the numbers about 1:1.

Taking this into consideration and, as I understand it, the majority of 3 Para's casualties were inflicted by Artillery fire, then Freer was, indeed, being magnanimous. Probably because he was impressed by the courage of those Argentines who did stand their ground and fight, and also to assist in repairing the damage in relations between our two nations which came about on account of this futile war.

IMHO there was a professional element among the defenders of Mount Longdon. The siting of the defenders' positions are indicative of that.

Zulu_Zulu
02-09-2009, 06:20 PM
Notwithstanding the fact that 3 Para took a well fortified position with huge tenacity and bravery, I think the tactics of a silent approach was wholly wrong. The approach was known to be heavily mined, the Argies were known to be using radar and there was a reasonable chance of being discovered. Because of this tactic B company were shot to f*** starting when Brian Milne trod on the mine.

All in 20/20 hindsight mind you.

32Bravo
02-10-2009, 03:00 AM
All in 20/20 hindsight mind you.

I enjoyed your input.

Most students of military history use 20/20 hindsite, particularly those at Staff College. How else do we learn before making our own mistakes, if not from those of others? Training, theory and practise, and execution.

Zulu_Zulu
02-10-2009, 03:16 PM
I was pinned down by a .50 cal browning and I clearly remember looking to my left at Longdon. It was just a mass of fire and bouncing tracer. It was the kind of sight that made you glad you weren't there.

That said I was kind of wishing I wasn't where I was too.

32Bravo
02-10-2009, 03:17 PM
I was pinned down by a .50 cal browning and I clearly remember looking to my left at Longdon. It was just a mass of fire and bouncing tracer. It was the kind of sight that made you glad you weren't there.

That said I was kind of wishing I wasn't where I was too.

One can relate to that emotion. :)

32Bravo
02-11-2009, 06:46 AM
Captain Freer, 3 Para, Mount London.


Longdon is about one kilometer long, a rocky outcrop like a spine, which falls steeply away to the northern side, in Argentines had used wire, angle irons and rocks to build sangars (bunkers) that would keep out small arms fire. They were very well positioned and took some getting out. The engagements took place at about fifty meters' range, then closed to the use of grenades and bayonets.

I was commanding a company fire support team, six of us with two machine guns. To operate a machine gun properly, using link ammunition, you need somebody to feed in the ammuntion plus a third person as gun controller to direct fire. The actual firer gets tunnel vision at night, and can't see anything apart from what he's shooting at. We were firing initially at about twenty-five to thirty meters, at positons as the platoons went in to attack them. After a while, the ranges became a little more, but not much. The rifle platoons were in close-quarter battle - gutter fighting. I was directing fire at muzzle flashes in the darkness, with the occassional stab of light from exploding artillery, which revealed the people we were firing at.

32Bravo
02-11-2009, 06:54 AM
Sergeant Ian McKay VC 3 Para. Mount Longodn



Citation
During the night of 11th/12th June 1982, 3rd Battalion The Parachute Regiment mounted a silent night attack on an enemy battalion position on Mount Longdon, an important objective in the battle for Port Stanley in the Falkland Islands. Sergeant McKay was platoon sergeant of 4 Platoon, B Company, which, after the initial objective had been secured, was ordered to clear the Northern side of the long East/West ridge feature, held by the enemy in depth, with strong, mutually-supporting positions. By now the enemy were fully alert, and resisting fiercely. As 4 Platoon's advance continued it came under increasingly heavy fire from a number of well-sited enemy machine gun positions on the ridge, and received casualties. Realising that no further advance was possible the Platoon Commander ordered the Platoon to move from its exposed position to seek shelter among the rocks of the ridge itself. Here it met up with part of 5 Platoon.

The enemy fire was still both heavy and accurate, and the position of the platoons was becoming increasingly hazardous. Taking Sergeant McKay, a Corporal and a few others, and covered by supporting machine gun fire, the Platoon Commander moved forward to reconnoitre the enemy positions but was hit by a bullet in the leg, and command devolved upon Sergeant McKay.

It was clear that instant action was needed if the advance was not to falter and increasing casualties to ensue. Sergeant McKay decided to convert this reconnaissance into an attack in order to eliminate the enemy positions. He was in no doubt of the strength and deployment of the enemy as he undertook this attack. He issued orders, and taking three men with him, broke cover and charged the enemy position.

The assault was met by a hail of fire. The Corporal was seriously wounded, a Private killed and another wounded. Despite these losses Sergeant McKay, with complete disregard for his own safety, continued to charge the enemy position alone. On reaching it he despatched the enemy with grenades, thereby relieving the position of beleagured 4 and 5 Platoons, who were now able to redeploy with relative safety. Sergeant McKay, however, was killed at the moment of victory, his body falling on the bunker.

Without doubt Sergeant McKay's action retrieved a most dangerous situation and was instrumental in ensuring the success of the attack. His was a coolly calculated act, the dangers of which must have been too apparent to him beforehand. Undeterred he performed with outstanding selflessness, perseverance and courage. With a complete disregard for his own safety, he displayed courage and leadership of the highest order, and was an inspiration to all those around him.






The Battle :

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/mt-longdon.htm

32Bravo
02-11-2009, 07:33 AM
Major Philip Neame, D Company, 2 Para



We bypassed 3 Para on Longdon, and exploited beyond them on to Wireless Ridge - with a very sparse set of orders telling us to get cracking. Fortunately, it was delayed 24 hours; the Guards weren't ready in the South, and as the Tumbledown and Wireless Ridge features dominated each other, the two attacks had to go in together.

Major John Crossland, B Company 2 Para


The delay allowed us to look over the ground, iron out a more definitive plan of attack and change the orders. We had terrific fire support, plus two troops of light armoured vehicles. Goose Green had been a 'come-as-you-are' party, whereas this was a much more deliberate attack.

32Bravo
02-11-2009, 07:40 AM
Drop Zone flashes worn on the upper arm :

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/Paras_DZ_Flash_updated.GIF

32Bravo
02-13-2009, 06:47 AM
I've met Julian Thompson on several occassions, a very nice chap, and this statement is rather typical of his good nature.


Brigadier Julian Howard Thompson, Commander 3 Commando Brigade:

I remember standing on the Wireless Ridge skyline with one of my staff officers, looking down towards Stanley with my binoculars, When a 2 Para sergeant major bellowed: "GET DOWN OFF MY SKYLINE YOU IDLE PEOPLE!" I thought how unhelpful and unpopular it was to be standing around on somebody else's skyline and flung myself down behind cover, feeling very chastened.

I'd take odds of a penny to a pound that said sergeant major was more than aware of whom it was he was 'bracing-up'. :)

This 'bracing-up' probably had a lasting effect after the battle:


Lt. Col. David Robert Chaundler, Commaniding Officer, 2 Para.

I got B Company moving forward on to the final ridgeline of Wireless Ridge and I was about to order them down into the valley when Julian Thompson arrived by helicopter. I was standing out on the forward slope wearing my red beret, feeling pretty pleased with life. He wouldn't have been fully aware of the tactical situation, so he crawled up the ridge behind a rock. Seeing me standing out there in the open and thinking he was about to loose another commanding officer of 2 Para, he rushed out and rugger tackled me! I said: "It's all right brigadier, it's all over. We've got to get into Port Stanley."
he said: "Yup, you're right."

pulqui
03-24-2010, 03:49 PM
Panzerknacker, thank you for making the effort to post a reply.

That your post addresses none of the questions or comments anyone has posed comes as a not unexpected, though nonetheless saddening, confirmation of your avoidance of fact.


'Messier than usual' meaning you are now confronted by facts you cannot defend.



I am quite willing to discuss the Argentine 'Dirty War' outside of this forum and that we shall, but the reason for the original thread entitled 'Los Desaparecidos' was to discuss the effect it had on those civilians whose home was invaded, further illumnated to me by the gentleman I mentioned in #164 of this thread.

I all honesty I cannot think of a reason why you whinged at the moderation staff to get it moved, other than in an attempt to avoid some very pertinent questions.

You say your guess is that I wished to annoy you, that neither was nor is the case.
There are many intelligent posters here that can debate a wide range of subjects and oddly enough none of them feel the urge to resort to fits of hysteria when presented with an opposing view.
Your guesses need some serious accurising work.



The phrase used in English about burying one's head in the sand, ie. to emulate an ostrich means to avoid the point, not to hide oneself away.

However the fact you feel the need to advertise yourself posing with a couple of rather inadequate weapons is your own business, whatever conclusions others may draw should be immaterial to you.

That I choose not to place myself in the public eye is mainly due to PERSEC.
(It's a soldier thing, therefore outside of your scope of understanding.)

That you imagine yourself 'brave' to post such pictures is amusing in itself, is that really your definition of brave ? :D
To those that matter my record speaks for itself and needs no amplification on a virtual plane.


Nor indeed am I.
Otherwise I wouldn't be able to count a couple of ex-members of Ejército Argentino amongst my friends.



Now I knew you had a sense of humour !
That has actually made three of us laugh out loud. Thanks.



I understand you have a slow leak.
Still with that much through traffic one would expect any balloon knot to lose some integrity.


Oh those irritating provocations !
Provocations such as 'please answer this question' !
It's outrageous that people ask you to prove your point !
I mean, why can't they take everything you say as gospel ?
I think anyone who questions your edicts should be banned !

Or not...





Your alter ego is now Swiss ?
Pretty amazing stuff, particularly as most Swiss are far more confident in themselves than you have ever indicated yourself to be.
Once again your guesswork is severely damaged by your insecure need to show a macho image.



Ag, shame !
If you really feel the need to use profanity try nipping outside and swearing at the moon.
Perhaps then you won't appear as stupid as you do when you react childishly here.
If you really consider the islands to be so base why do you want them so badly ?
A lack of toys as an even younger child maybe ?


Well in the absence of any argument you certainly demonstrate an advanced fantasy.
As far as I'm aware, (I cannot speak for everyone,) no-one has ever expressed that desire, anyone that imagines that is the case proves they have either a very loose grasp of the facts or an even looser grasp of reality.
Most people are fully aware that however else the Argentine invasion force transgressed the Geneva or Hague Conventions, they did not murder any civilians.
This was due mainly to the actions of Comodoro Carlos Felipe Bloomer-Reeve and Captain Barry Melbourne Hussey, plus of course the normal human desire of the Argentine soldier not to harm innocents.

Besides, the occurrence this forum is concerned with happened nearly twenty-seven years ago when you were how old ?
Two years ?
Barely weaned from the breast.
That you hold such vehemence and bile indicates only that indoctrination has had a profound effect on you.


Nothing of your last post takes issue with the feelings of the Falkland Islanders' toward the violently authoritarian regard that the government of the time held for civilians.
That begs the question of why your silence on this subject ?

With the advantage of seeing the outcome of events 28 years ago, argentinians were too naive: we should put the islanders on a ship with their cattle (so not to mess with their sexual life) and send them to Madagascar.

Would the brits come anyways? For sure. The Iron bi-tch was looking at the polls, so she had to go on.

leccy
03-24-2010, 05:45 PM
With the advantage of seeing the outcome of events 28 years ago, argentinians were too naive: we should put the islanders on a ship with their CATTLE (so not to mess with their sexual life) and send them to Madagascar.

er SHEEP on the Islands


Would the brits come anyways? For sure. The Iron bi-tch was looking at the polls, so she had to go on.

The Junta were not looking to divert attention away from troubles at home either then?

Rising Sun*
03-24-2010, 06:28 PM
er SHEEP on the Islands


Maybe the Argentinians fancied the sheep for themselves. ;) :D

royal744
01-01-2011, 12:11 PM
Speaking as an American bystander who was riveted by the cheek of the Argentine invasion of the Falklands at the time, am I permitted the simple and irrefutable observation that no violence of any kind would be discussed in this thread if the Argentines had not invaded in the first place? It was unlikely that the Falkland Islanders were preparing to invade or otherwise threaten Argentina by off-loading thousands of sheep and stampeding them through the capitol. Frankly, I believe that the Argentine leadership made the same mistake that Hitler made when he prepared to invade Poland - that the English and French would never go to war. And none of this would have occurred if "General" Galtieri hadn't seen his position at home as weak and getting weaker. Nothing like an "easy" little war to get the juices flowing. Galtieri showed about as much common sense as President Bush when he lied us into a war with Iraq in the belief that it would be a simple, cheap victory against an enemy who had not attacked us. But that's another topic. Or is it?

pulqui
01-01-2011, 04:21 PM
Why are you americans so eager to mess in this matter where you are completely out of place.

Anyways you did the same during the war: you provided the Brits with brand new Sidewinders, and Stingers, because british missiles were not suited for the task. I mean you, or your Government. It has been even said that in case our AIr Force had sank a british carrier, the US Navy would provide a Tarawa class minicarrier to the RN.
You yankees and brits are brothers in screwing the world ! !

tankgeezer
01-01-2011, 05:00 PM
Why are you americans so eager to mess in this matter where you are completely out of place.

Anyways you did the same during the war: you provided the Brits with brand new Sidewinders, and Stingers, because british missiles were not suited for the task. I mean you, or your Government. It has been even said that in case our AIr Force had sank a british carrier, the US Navy would provide a Tarawa class minicarrier to the RN.
You yankees and brits are brothers in screwing the world ! !

Member Pulqui: This is an official notice from a moderator. This type of posting contributes nothing to any discussion, especially when it involves such an old thread. You have been warned in the past about this type of behavior, so do not let it happen again lest you be given very long penance. Juvenile behavior is never welcome anywhere, and certainly not here. Get a clue, grow up, or move on.

pdf27
01-01-2011, 06:42 PM
Why are you americans so eager to mess in this matter where you are completely out of place.

Anyways you did the same during the war: you provided the Brits with brand new Sidewinders, and Stingers, because british missiles were not suited for the task. I mean you, or your Government. It has been even said that in case our AIr Force had sank a british carrier, the US Navy would provide a Tarawa class minicarrier to the RN.
You yankees and brits are brothers in screwing the world ! !
Quite apart from the mod warning, your post is factually incorrect. The Sidewinders used in the Falklands were a model already in service with the UK - what the US did was to provide additional stocks of the missile to the UK, allowing them to use the missiles without drawing on warstocks dedicated to NATO. This was clearly self-interest on the part of the US, because if they hadn't there is a strong chance the UK would have decided "screw NATO" and used the missiles anyway. Stinger was only used by some special forces units, and accounted for one or two aircraft at most - hardly a war-winning weapon.
Finally, the Tarawa class of warships are LPHs, not carriers - externally similar, but very poorly suited to the type of carrier operations being carried out in the Falklands. The "offer" was very tentative - essentially made at the level of various admirals musing that they had spare warships of this class that they weren't doing very much with and their friends in the RN could probably borrow one if needed. In reality, crewing issues (finding several thousand RN sailors to man a ship they'd never seen before and take it into a war zone) would have been insurmountable. If they had ever been that desperate, the RN would probably have reactivated HMS Bulwark (scrapped at about the time of the Falklands war) as well as the various sailors who had served on her since the end of WW2. Desperate measures, but better than nothing...

Rising Sun*
01-02-2011, 07:25 AM
You yankees and brits are brothers in screwing the world ! !

Rather less than, say, Germany and Japan in the past century, but, so far as defeating Argentina goes during the Falklands War the Americans were nowhere near as helpful to Britain as was France. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1387576/How-France-helped-us-win-Falklands-war-by-John-Nott.html

royal744
01-02-2011, 10:35 AM
Why are you americans so eager to mess in this matter where you are completely out of place.

Anyways you did the same during the war: you provided the Brits with brand new Sidewinders, and Stingers, because british missiles were not suited for the task. I mean you, or your Government. It has been even said that in case our AIr Force had sank a british carrier, the US Navy would provide a Tarawa class minicarrier to the RN.
You yankees and brits are brothers in screwing the world ! !

LOL. Well, it seems to me that the Americans had been lending to the Argentinians the use of an American aircraft carrier parked offshore so that its naval air force could practice take-offs and landings for at least a decade prior to the Falklands War. I guess aid to one does not equal aid to the other.

Nickdfresh
01-02-2011, 03:38 PM
Rather less than, say, Germany and Japan in the past century, but, so far as defeating Argentina goes during the Falklands War the Americans were nowhere near as helpful to Britain as was France. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1387576/How-France-helped-us-win-Falklands-war-by-John-Nott.html

Argentina's South American neighbor, Chili, was also quite hospitable to her British adversary I understand. I do recall--although I was rather young at the time but the Falklands War was CNN's first televised, round-the-clock war on TV--hearing that the Argentine military junta gov't erroneously, if not absurdly, expected the U.S. gov't under the Reagan Administration to side with it. Or to at least to remain neutral on the basis that the U.S. and Argentina were continental, nominally anti-communist allies. This wishful thinking belied the fact that the U.S. and U.K. shared NATO membership and a cultural heritage buoyed by the shared historical alliances in WWI and WWII. Also not too mention the fact that the Argentine dictatorship was trying to conquer and subsume residents who enjoyed a vastly different cultural, and political, tradition and force them into either an alien citizenship or expulsion based on a questionable, lawless territorial claim and a need to distract the Argentine populations' attention from the inherent political failures and resulting economic malaise of their own shitty, tin-pot bastards...

reydelcastillo
01-06-2011, 08:22 PM
New book came out " Tras los Submarinos Ingleses " After the British Subs -
Written by Mariano Sciaroni tells the story behind aircraft carrier 25 de Mayo and it's defence against British Subs HMS Splendid and HMS Spartan -

http://www.elsnorkel.com/historia/malvinas-1982/1628-malvinastras-los-submarinos-ingleses-extracto.html

Rising Sun*
01-07-2011, 08:35 AM
New book came out " Tras los Submarinos Ingleses " After the British Subs -
Written by Mariano Sciaroni tells the story behind aircraft carrier 25 de Mayo and it's defence against British Subs HMS Splendid and HMS Spartan -

http://www.elsnorkel.com/historia/malvinas-1982/1628-malvinastras-los-submarinos-ingleses-extracto.html

Looks interesting.

The only description I could find in English was http://bookstove.com/book-talk/malvinas-looking-for-english-subs/

Do you know if there is anything more detailed in English?

pdf27
01-07-2011, 11:32 AM
We Come Unseen by Jim Ring has quite a good section from the UK side, although you get the feeling there are substantial chunks that those he's talking to are leaving out for whatever reason,

reydelcastillo
01-08-2011, 09:39 AM
There is no english version yet for this book , the author is looking forward to have it translate .- We can get the author's e mail and get in touch with him for details on his book .-
Regards Enrique

TexWiller
03-10-2013, 08:01 AM
Oh my god, this discussion went on for years? I joined this site around 2005 and left a couple of years later. I'm sure people would still be arguing about this if the forums weren't half dead :D Anyway, this was/is a good community and it's nice to see it's still going on. Forgive me if this is a bit off-topic =)

navyson
03-10-2013, 12:58 PM
Oh my god, this discussion went on for years? I joined this site around 2005 and left a couple of years later. I'm sure people would still be arguing about this if the forums weren't half dead :D Anyway, this was/is a good community and it's nice to see it's still going on. Forgive me if this is a bit off-topic =)
Good to see you back Tex. The Falklands/Malvinas is still going on in reality too. Just read an article on Yahoo about Argentina banging their drums again, and the island inhabitants voting on referendum to remain allied to the UK. If I can find it, I'll post the link.

Cuts
03-13-2013, 05:26 AM
To avoid any possible claims of bias, here's a link from the Guardian, a paper that seems to think it was a pity Argentina didn't win in '82.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/mar/12/falkland-islands-diplomatic-offensive-argentina

A more than 90% voter turnout decided by a majority of 99.8% to remain British, however the Argentine Ambassador to the UK, Alicia Castro, says the vote is "totally irrelevant, and the Argentinie Foreign Minister, Héctor Timerman claims it is "illegal."
Presumably then all other democratic polls are similarly totally irrelevant and illegal.
I wonder how they will break it to President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner that the national poll that voted her in is irrelevant and illegal ?

:-)

Churchill
03-13-2013, 05:54 PM
I wish they would logic, but unfortunately people don't seem to be able to do that any more...

Cuts
03-14-2013, 03:22 AM
http://oi46.tinypic.com/6695xw.jpg

JR*
03-14-2013, 07:34 AM
I suppose that the Argentinians are concerned that the sheep (who vastly outnumber the people on the Falklands) were not given a vote. Seriously, one presumes that (apart from a certain issue of national pride), the real point here (though Argentina seldom mentions it) is that taking over the Falklands would give them a "front" onto the Antarctic, something that could yield immense economic benefit in the long term. One can, perhaps, have some understanding of the argument that the current human population of the Islands was "transported there by a colonial power". However, one could equally say that much of the current population of South America got there as a result of their ancestors having been transported there by colonial powers (the Spanish and Portuguese Empires), and I assume that the majority of, for example, Argentinians of non-indigenous descent have no immediate plans to return to the Iberian Peninsula or, indeed, West Africa. And, of course, the Irish Nationalist community should be considering expelling the Unionists from Ulster; after all, they were "transported there by a colonial power" in the 17th century. One could go on ... This post-colonial argument has little running these days. One can speak of exceptions (Hong Kong and Macau, for example) but, generally, the only approach to such situations (unless one wants perpetual international conflict based on "historic claims") is to let the counters lie where they are.

One possible solution just occurs to me - annex the Malvinas to the Papal States ... Best regards, JR.

Cuts
03-14-2013, 09:00 AM
I suppose that the Argentinians are concerned that the sheep (who vastly outnumber the people on the Falklands) were not given a vote. Seriously, one presumes that (apart from a certain issue of national pride), the real point here (though Argentina seldom mentions it) is that taking over the Falklands would give them a "front" onto the Antarctic, something that could yield immense economic benefit in the long term. One can, perhaps, have some understanding of the argument that the current human population of the Islands was "transported there by a colonial power". However, one could equally say that much of the current population of South America got there as a result of their ancestors having been transported there by colonial powers (the Spanish and Portuguese Empires), and I assume that the majority of, for example, Argentinians of non-indigenous descent have no immediate plans to return to the Iberian Peninsula or, indeed, West Africa. And, of course, the Irish Nationalist community should be considering expelling the Unionists from Ulster; after all, they were "transported there by a colonial power" in the 17th century. One could go on ... This post-colonial argument has little running these days. One can speak of exceptions (Hong Kong and Macau, for example) but, generally, the only approach to such situations (unless one wants perpetual international conflict based on "historic claims") is to let the counters lie where they are.

One possible solution just occurs to me - annex the Malvinas to the Papal States ... Best regards, JR.

Yep, let the Islanders vote on that.

Oh...

TexWiller
03-16-2013, 07:18 PM
Good to see you back Tex. The Falklands/Malvinas is still going on in reality too. Just read an article on Yahoo about Argentina banging their drums again, and the island inhabitants voting on referendum to remain allied to the UK. If I can find it, I'll post the link.

Thanks. I'm aware of the current developments concerning the islands. Yes, it's still a relevant issue. But I don't think the war itself is important subject in the fields of history and military science. Most of the discussion surrounding the subject is just nationalistic babble.

Cuts
03-19-2013, 04:39 PM
It was bound to happen though I didn't think it'd occur so rapidly.
Someone's got a sad on and run to daddy (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/9937147/Cristina-Kirchner-asks-Pope-Francis-to-intervene-in-Falklands-row.html).

jimmyoc
06-30-2013, 08:48 AM
Hi, I just thought I would let you know, that I have now finished my account of the 3rd Battalion The Parachute Regiment during the Falklands war,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_vwXyOsiM8
It specifically concentrates on the last three days of the war, i.e. the battle for Longdon, the occupation and finally the move into Port Stanley. It is written with an accurate time and understandable sequence of events throughout the battle and the following days. Over 50 veterans of the battle were interviewed for the book, the majority were British, but we had a number of Argentine veterans whose help was invaluable in pointing out various machine gun positions and letting me know who was where and which men were manning the various Heavy Machine Guns.
It is now available on Amazon Kindle, However you do not need a Kindle or Ipad, it can be read on your home computer or Laptop by using firstly this link http://www.amazon.com/kindleforpc

Then using this link, http://www.amazon.co.uk/Three-days-in-June-ebook/dp/B00DMFMZWQ/ref=zg_bs_362344031_18 this will take you to the Amazon book page.
I am at the moment making enquiries about a hard backed version, which I am certain will be out shortly.
All the very best,
Bye for now Jimmy O’Connell

royal744
08-26-2013, 11:38 PM
Again as a bit of a bystander, I'm fascinated and repelled by the topic of the Falkland Islands simultaneously. Fascinated because the Brits showed their mettle and traveled thousands of miles to defend a small, isolated colony of theirs that was the subject of some pretty naked aggression. And they did defeat the erstwhile "conquerors" with spirit, elan and pretty efficiently, suffering the casualties of war along the way. I am repelled by the blinkered obtuseness of the Argentinians in not being aware of the fact that it is very bad manners to steal someone else's property at gunpoint, much less another country's colony. At the time it was happening, I followed the fairly meager daily reports on CNN and watched as the British task force left England, approached,landed and commenced the arduous task of separating the robbers from their ill-gotten gains. I watched as the Argentine Air Force resolutely pressed home their somewhat effective attacks on British shipping until sufficient British air assets were in the neigborhood to shush them away. I understand that various and separate armed actions took place that resulted in an Argentine defeat, pure and simple. We call a country that steals things without so much as a "how do you do", a Kleptocracy. I have asked before in this or a similar thread, How many native Argentinians greeted the Argentinians with cheering crowds welcoming their "saviors' and waving little Argentinian flags standing before buildings and houses gaily festooned with Bunting in bright Argentinian colors? After all, they were liberators no? No parades, music, bands playing, making nice with the locals, etc,? Were there in fact, any "oppressed" Falkland citizens of Argentinian extraction who lived there at all?

Even though soundly defeated with an English population in 100% possession of the Falklands, it appears that home-grown propaganda in Argentina continues to distort and lie about the so-called Argentinian "claim" to the Falklands. Thus the issue will not go away as long as the Argentines need a hot button issue to distract them from their own rather hazily questionable internal affairs. Word has it that Argentina has asked the new Pope to intervene. As Stalin once observed at Yalta, "How many divisions does the Pope have? None, so good luck with that.

How many permanent Argentines were living on the islands before the British arrived? French? Italians? Lower Slobovians? If I were the British, the only things I would discuss are fishing limits, economic trade between the two countries and perhaps some cultural exchanges to foster mutual understanding. I would not mention any Argentinian "mineral rights" under the seabed either. And if there's to be a non-aggression treaty, well, I wouldn't take their word for it: trust, maybe, but verify always.

pdf27
08-28-2013, 12:17 PM
How many permanent Argentines were living on the islands before the British arrived? French? Italians? Lower Slobovians?
The only real answer to that is "some" - it's a very murky story, with various countries kicking the citizens of others off the rocks, until the British got serious about keeping it (and in the process kicked out half a dozen Argentines and let a rather larger number stay). IMO the French actually have the best claim, but they're totally not interested. Incidentally, the US Navy were arguably the ones most responsible for kicking Argentina off the islands...

DavidW
08-29-2013, 03:36 AM
Amidst all this discussion, it may be worth mentioning (and I haven't scoured the previous 23 pages, so it may have been already) that the Falkland Islands were British before Argentina even existed.

Rising Sun*
08-29-2013, 05:18 AM
Word has it that Argentina has asked the new Pope to intervene. As Stalin once observed at Yalta, "How many divisions does the Pope have? None, so good luck with that."

There is a precedent for papal intervention in the distribution of South American real estate, and in particular for a Spanish pope favouring Spain's claims. http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Treaty_of_Tordesillas.html

On that basis, it's not unreasonable for Argentinians to expect that the current Argentinian pope would be sympathetic to Argentina's claims, although I think he's a better man than that.

royal744
08-29-2013, 11:47 AM
Amidst all this discussion, it may be worth mentioning (and I haven't scoured the previous 23 pages, so it may have been already) that the Falkland Islands were British before Argentina even existed.

Yes, David, it's been brought up several times in this thread. It doesn't impress the Argies much who seem to believe that they have some mythical claim on the islands "from on high" based solely on the relative proximity of the Falklands to Argentina. With that kind of logic, Canada should belong to the US or vice versa and every country in Europe should belong to every other country. Oops, that's called the European Union, LOL. As I have mentioned once before in this or another similar thread, there are two islands in the St. Lawrence Seaway called St Pierre and Miquelon. The islands belong to France. They have belonged to France since well before the British defeated the French on the Plains of Abraham at Quebec. Neither the US nor Canada will be invading them anytime soon, nor obnoxiously beating the drums of war just because they are "close".

DavidW
09-02-2013, 01:38 PM
Well put!

jimmyoc
12-04-2013, 04:38 PM
Paperback now available...

https://vimeo.com/80883659
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Three-Days-in-June/515197075193204?id=515197075193204&sk=photos_stream

Nickdfresh
10-03-2014, 05:32 PM
Well. On we go... :)


3 October 2014 at 1:58pm

Top Gear Falklands row: Cast and crew forced to leave Argentina after angry protests
http://news.images.itv.com/image/file/487287/stream_img.jpg
Top Gear has been involved in a number of controversies. Credit: Stefan Rousseau/PA Wire

The team used a Porsche with registration H982 FLK - suggested by politicians and army veterans in the country to be a veiled reference to the 1982 conflict.

A group of war veterans protested outside their hotel, while a local politician said the team had been escorted to the airport.

Local media showed pictures appearing to show the car, which no longer bore the license plate, abandoned and with smashed windows.

The BBC confirmed they were leaving the country, although show bosses have said the number plate was merely a coincidence and was not chosen deliberately.

LINK (http://www.itv.com/news/2014-10-03/top-gear-falklands-row-cast-and-crew-forced-to-leave-argentina-after-angry-protests/)

tankgeezer
10-04-2014, 12:45 AM
It would not surprise me to find that they did know about the license plate, the production staff has been known to exercise very poor judgement, in particular the episode in which they drove from Florida to Louisiana. Production thought it would be funny to paint the cars with slogans inflammatory to Southerners. They had no idea of the danger they were put in,and were lucky to escape in one piece. http://youtu.be/pKcJ-0bAHB4

pdf27
10-04-2014, 07:41 AM
It's almost certainly a fake plate, and hence deliberate - https://www.vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/ lets you check details about a car if you have the make and registration number. That number and Porsche doesn't return any hits...

tankgeezer
10-04-2014, 08:51 AM
Did the car have a U.K. plate, or Argentine? I looked for images of Argentine plates, and found many different types. I also found an image of Clarkson,(who does not look too much like a license plate) which was part of an article in
Car, and Driver Magazine:
"Jeremy Clarkson and Top Gear Crew Flee Argentina Over Number-Plate Fracas
October 3, 2014 at 3:21 pm by Andrew Wendler about the incident .
For what it’s worth, we looked up the plate number in question on a U.K. registry decoder, and it indicates that the registration originated in Maidstone, England, between August 1990 and July 1991, so the plate very well could be original to that Porsche. "
I don't care for Mob scenes, and certainly not over something like this. Had their cars been painted with snubs about the Falklands war, that would be different, but with the plate, they have plausible denyability. Even so, the production people at T.G. need to change their way of doing things a bit. (Unless the B.B.C. has an award category for most stonings in a season. )

Rising Sun*
10-04-2014, 08:59 AM
Clarkson & Co, who got stoned (as in the target of stones being thrown) and run out of town in the South of the US for their car emblazoned with "MAN BOY LOVE RULES" or similar plus going to German event in Spitfires with commentary gloating over defeating Germany, are being accused of provocative behaviour in Argentina?

Hard to believe. ;) :lol:

Problem with Americans, Germans and Argentinians is that they lack Top Gear's sense of humour. ;)

tankgeezer
10-04-2014, 09:42 AM
I agree, as when the guys from Top Gear Australia came for a visit, and were brought to the location in a prisoner transport Van. (Series 16, episode 4 @3:00 min. mark.) Being left handed, I have a different sense of humor from many people,(I found a picture of a whoopie cushion on an electric chair to be hysterically funny) and I generally enjoy the humor on Top Gear. However, sometimes I just shake my head at what they come up with. For the deep South show, and now it seems for the Argentine show, I have to wonder what were they thinking/smoking when they did their planning. Rating will climb, so all will be well.

Rising Sun*
10-04-2014, 10:35 AM
I agree, as when the guys from Top Gear Australia came for a visit, and were brought to the location in a prisoner transport Van. (Series 16, episode 4 @3:00 min. mark.) Being left handed, I have a different sense of humor from many people,(I found a picture of a whoopie cushion on an electric chair to be hysterically funny) and I generally enjoy the humor on Top Gear. However, sometimes I just shake my head at what they come up with. For the deep South show, and now it seems for the Argentine show, I have to wonder what were they thinking/smoking when they did their planning. Rating will climb, so all will be well.

Top Gear Australia was a crap show, which deservedly didn't last long.

As for the convict aspect, when I was a kid people here were ashamed of any convict taint in their family's past. Now they glory in it, and invent it in most cases. (My 'convict' ancestor was an Irishman who served in the British army in the Tasmanian convict colony, which was something my half Irish grandmother was strangely proud of but which nowadays is something of an embarrassment. This is compensated for by my grandmother's mother being the widow - before marrying my grandmother's father - of a policeman shot dead by our most famous outlaw, also of Irish descent. I researched this some years ago and found it, like most family folklore, to be rubbish. )

tankgeezer
10-04-2014, 11:13 PM
I never saw much of TG AU, just on the odd occasion when it was run on BBC TG. At one time or other, they had all the different franchise hosts over to England to cross advertise the show. I remember the AU crew and the Police Van, Clarkson said they would arrive in much the same manner as their ancestors departed 100 yrs ago. I can, but never do watch the U.S. version, its seems less clever in the native culture. The Top Gear franchise has been around a long time, and it may in a couple more years, find its just end.

JR*
10-06-2014, 04:34 AM
An uncharitable thought crossed my mind - what a pity that the veteran Argies let Clarkson and his fellow superannuated adolescents get away ...

Seriously, as somebody who regards his car as a metal box with four wheels that gets him around, rather than some sort of statement of personal status and work, I find "Top Gear" in any manifestation almost unwatchable, not least because of the juvenile, boy-racer attitudes projected by Clarkson and his lieutenants. I cannot make up my mind on the number plate issue - it was probably an unfortunate coincidence but, then again, the "Top Gear" crew have proved themselves quite stupid and infantile enough to engineer such a stunt (btw - as far as I understand it, the British motor vehicle licensing system has the flexibility required to grant a customized registration; it could not happen, for example, in Ireland where a completely inflexible system based on the year and order of registration applies). In the end, more likely an unfortunate coincidence but, if it was a "jolly jape", it would not be out of character for "Top Gear" ... Yours from the Sheepcotes, Port Stanley, JR.

7200

"Hold fire, amigos ! Wait until you see the whites of Clarkson's backside - any minute now ..."

JR*
10-06-2014, 05:09 AM
7199

Idiot Jeremy Clarkson and his Merry Men have a long history of attention-seeking, offensive statements and behavior. Above is a still from the "Top Gear" Christmas Special of 2011, during which Clarkson and his juvenile colleagues behaved and spoke offensively of various aspects of the culture of the country in which the programme was filmed - India. One jolly jape - supposed to be a humorous comment on Indian sanitation - involved driving a Jaguar car fitted with a toilet ("ideal for India") around a slum in which the residents could not boast even running water ... Words fail me. JR:roll:

tankgeezer
10-06-2014, 09:52 AM
At least they think they are funny...Though if they continue as they have in causing gross aggravations to foreign Nation's Peoples, the show may end due to lack of extant presenters.

JR*
10-07-2014, 08:16 AM
As for the convict aspect, when I was a kid people here were ashamed of any convict taint in their family's past. Now they glory in it, and invent it in most cases. (My 'convict' ancestor was an Irishman who served in the British army in the Tasmanian convict colony, which was something my half Irish grandmother was strangely proud of but which nowadays is something of an embarrassment. This is compensated for by my grandmother's mother being the widow - before marrying my grandmother's father - of a policeman shot dead by our most famous outlaw, also of Irish descent. I researched this some years ago and found it, like most family folklore, to be rubbish. )
..
From Rising Sun*

Interesting, Rising Sun. Transportation to Australia has long had a different image in Ireland, at least. This is based on the idea that many of our heroic rebels were transported, mainly from the 1798 rebellion but also (and most prominently) after the "Young Ireland" group's farcical rebellion of 1848, towards the end of the period of transportation. What is forgotten, of course, is the fact that most Irish transportees (like all British ones) were not heroic patriots, but the usual cast of burglars, sheep-stealers, habitual petty criminals etc. This, of course, opens a wider question - to what extent was crime in the late Georgian and early Victorian period fuelled by necessity ? Two of the major sources of transportees - London and its environs and Ireland - were very hard places to make a decent living for the vast majority of the population in the Georgian period.

Of course, in a curious way, the introduction of transportation was actually a relief to those transported, at least by comparison with what might have befallen them before. For most of the history of Georgian Britain, being caught out in any significant act of larceny, burglary, sheep-stealing etc. could occasion a visit to the Old Bailey (or the Sessions in Ireland) with rapid transition through Newgate to an execution site. Yes, it was very tough for the early transportees to Australia and Van Diemen's Land - but at least they were alive. Over time, things became easier. Liberated convicts - "ticket of leave men" - were able to set up businesses or obtain grants of land; something that would have been impossible at "home". This became known back "home" - though not, apparently, to the authorities. There was an occasion on which a body of female criminals imprisoned on a "hulk" (decommissioned Naval ship, used as an offshore prison) were given the good news that their sentence of transportation had been commuted to imprisonment in one of the new penitentiaries. Said authorities were astonished to be confronted with a huge riot on the part of the convicts - they were incensed at being deprived of the opportunity for a new life in Australia.

Have you read "The Fatal Shore" by Robert Hughes ? Excellent and accessible work of history dealing with the transportation period ? Or "The Secret River", a novel by Kate Grenville, dealing with the experiences of a family transported to Australia, and their experience of life before and after ? Both strongly recommended. Best regards, JR.

Rising Sun*
10-09-2014, 08:04 AM
From Rising Sun*

Interesting, Rising Sun. Transportation to Australia has long had a different image in Ireland, at least. This is based on the idea that many of our heroic rebels were transported, mainly from the 1798 rebellion but also (and most prominently) after the "Young Ireland" group's farcical rebellion of 1848, towards the end of the period of transportation. What is forgotten, of course, is the fact that most Irish transportees (like all British ones) were not heroic patriots, but the usual cast of burglars, sheep-stealers, habitual petty criminals etc. This, of course, opens a wider question - to what extent was crime in the late Georgian and early Victorian period fuelled by necessity ? Two of the major sources of transportees - London and its environs and Ireland - were very hard places to make a decent living for the vast majority of the population in the Georgian period.

Of course, in a curious way, the introduction of transportation was actually a relief to those transported, at least by comparison with what might have befallen them before. For most of the history of Georgian Britain, being caught out in any significant act of larceny, burglary, sheep-stealing etc. could occasion a visit to the Old Bailey (or the Sessions in Ireland) with rapid transition through Newgate to an execution site. Yes, it was very tough for the early transportees to Australia and Van Diemen's Land - but at least they were alive. Over time, things became easier. Liberated convicts - "ticket of leave men" - were able to set up businesses or obtain grants of land; something that would have been impossible at "home". This became known back "home" - though not, apparently, to the authorities. There was an occasion on which a body of female criminals imprisoned on a "hulk" (decommissioned Naval ship, used as an offshore prison) were given the good news that their sentence of transportation had been commuted to imprisonment in one of the new penitentiaries. Said authorities were astonished to be confronted with a huge riot on the part of the convicts - they were incensed at being deprived of the opportunity for a new life in Australia.

Have you read "The Fatal Shore" by Robert Hughes ? Excellent and accessible work of history dealing with the transportation period ? Or "The Secret River", a novel by Kate Grenville, dealing with the experiences of a family transported to Australia, and their experience of life before and after ? Both strongly recommended. Best regards, JR.


Jasus, Mary and Joseph!

Where to start?

I’ll focus very briefly on the Irish experience here, in a colony then dominion and now possibly a sort of nation (under the British Crown thanks to our dominant political suckholes to the monarchy) which until a few decades ago was dominated by the British Protestant majority with a large underclass of Irish Catholics.

Here is a useful, if somewhat academic, paper on the early period: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/conferences/hcpp/braithwaite.pdf

However, your reference to ‘home’ has caught my interest as it may explain something from my youth, which still perplexes me as my clear recollection conflicts with confident assurances that my recollection is wrong.

After a long period of fear about and opposition to and discrimination towards the Irish / Fenians / Catholics and their hostility to the Crown, notably during WWI, and their blood sacrifices of infants on the altars of Catholic churches in the dead of night aided by secret tunnels between convents and presbyteries, which is roughly similar to current idiotic opinions about Muslims here, by the 1970s I was assured by my aunt that I was lucky to get a place in the national Department of Navy ‘because it was a Catholic department’. Along with Taxation and various others. (Which was true, as the others didn’t hire Catholics.)That’s all gone now, apart from Indians taking over various departments.

I’m very interested in what you said about ‘home’. When I was in primary school in the 1950s it wasn’t unusual for teachers and other to refer to, at least what I thought they meant as, Britain as ‘home’, a period when the weakening British pink still coloured much of the global map.

I always assumed that ‘home’ referred to Britain / England in all contexts, as it had done for many decades in general usage here among the general (probably non-Irish) populace although few if any of them had been, or were ever likely to go, there. Given that I was then in the care of Christian Brothers of Irish descent, your comment now suggests another possibility which is consistent with my aunt’s denial that her mother, my grandmother, would ever have referred to England / Britain as ‘home’. Yet I have clear recollections of my grandmother referring to ‘home’.

My aunt, the daughter of my half Irish paternal grandmother (there was half-Irish on my paternal grandfather’s side, too) assured me that I was sorely mistaken in my recollection of her mother / my grandmother referring to England / Britain as ‘home’. My aunt said that there was no way my grandmother would have referred to England / Britain as ‘home’ because she was not sympathetic to English rule.

Your post suggests that my aunt and I might have been at cross purposes, on the basis that my clear recollection of my grandmother referring fondly to ‘home’ meant Ireland while my indoctrination in the secular (i.e. British focused) schooling syllabus followed even by the Christian Brothers who taught me meant that ‘home’ referred to Britain. And, despite being educated at that time by Christian Brothers of Irish descent or linked to it (St Kevin’s, Glendalough), I still have a clear recollection of at least one lay teacher who definitely meant ‘Britain’ when he referred to ‘home’.

Haven’t read Grenville. Read Hughes in the ?1980s? when it was first published. I think I gave it up about half way through as, at least to the slight extent that I recall, it would have been a lot more readable about half its size, and it wasn’t full of revelations for me anyway.

The Americans honour their somewhat mythical Puritan founding fathers, while conveniently forgetting that convicts were transported to the American colonies until the War of Independence deprived them of this source of cheap labour. Australia was founded purely as a penal colony, to the extent that it was staffed by convicts, but America had a long history of convict transportation which never figures in its popular history in its conception of itself.

Here is an oddity. When I was admitted to practise in the late 1970s, I hoped to exercise an obscure law I had discovered as a law student, being a law received through our inheritance of British law, which allowed a person convicted of (as I recall) a felony to request the Court to be “transported beyond the seas”. This related to staffing the American colonies with convicts to meet labour shortages in those colonies. Alas, I never had a client facing a charge serious enough to advise him or her to exercise that right so I could witness the interesting events which would follow. An omnibus repeal of outdated laws got rid of it a few years later, much to my disappointment. We also got rid of felonies about the same time, or maybe a bit later.

JR*
10-29-2014, 09:04 AM
Very interesting, RS*. As regards "cross purposes", I can only say that as far as Irish "migrants" and their immediate descendants are concerned, it is likely that their "Heart was in Ireland" - to them, as to many recent migrants, that was "home". That the official line taken by the Australian education system was that "home" was Great Britain, is hardly surprising and, to be fair, it is worth recalling that up to the early 1920s, Ireland was part of that British "home".

Regarding transportation to the Americas - yes, this was a common phenomenon in the 17th and 18th centuries. Large numbers of British and Irish convicts of all classes were transported to the West Indies and to the North American colonies as "indentured labourers" - "temporary" slaves to all intents and purposes. It was a useful way of getting rid of such convicts until Australia became available, contributing at the same time to the colonial/mercantilist economic system prevalent at the time. Of course, the real solution to these labour supply problems was the Atlantic slave trade, which supplied more numerous labourers who turned out in general to be better suited to the conditions in which they were required to work in the West Indies and in the American colonies. Best regards, JR.

32Bravo
09-10-2016, 03:30 AM
Very interesting thoughts and facts. In his book The Slave Trade, the historian Huhg Thomas suggests that a contributing factor to the better survivability of coerced African labour in the British West Indies to that of white European indentured labour, was that the indentured labourers held no residual value for the planters. The Africans, on the other hand, required a financial investment and could be sold on if necessary. Therefore, the treatment of many of the Europeans was worse than that of the Africans.

Furthermore, after emancipation in 1834, indentured labour was reintroduced in the British West Indies, particularly in British Guiana and Trinidad, in the form of East Indian labourers. However, a better deal was negotiated by the Indian government and after several years of indenture the labourers completed their contract and were allotted several acres of land on which to settle. Which was what had attracted them to indenture in the first instance. This indenture of Indians was curtailed circa 1920.