Falklands Conflict

Admin's and Mod's Admins and Mod's - Archive Room
#21

I think the same as you :slight_smile: ,but about talking of this,Im not the best,because I dont know a lot about falklads/malvinas war,there is people who know more here about that war,for example= war veterans.
and I don`t speak enough english to explain things we think of that war in my country.

Soviet side was in argentinian side,because in that year,the cold war was (usa was at england side),but soviet don`t fight because of pope Juan Pablo II talked in russia.
he went to argentina too,but we fight in the war.
if soviet union entered in the falklands war,a world war will happened.

but im happy because the war was smaller than I thinked.

lots of thanks Preatorian! :smiley: .

greetings

#22

yes,im not against of where is anybody from,I had lots of english friend,south africans and australians too!,but I fought with most of them,because they`re always in the british side.

greetings again!

#23

There is absolutely nothing wrong with different cultural backgrounds fighting in the same army.

i couldn’t agree more.

#24

Except when one of the army parts fight with savagism and brute attacks with knives and another things,and the other side of the same army,are waiting when the brutes finish the work!.

what`s the diference between fight obligated and for your country,and fight only as a job,for money and pleasure???

#25

[quote=“Erwin Schätzer(argentina)”]

Except when one of the army parts fight with savagism and brute attacks with knives and another things,and the other side of the same army,are waiting when the brutes finish the work!.

what`s the diference between fight obligated and for your country,and fight only as a job,for money and pleasure???[/quote]

Ya, I cant say much about the Gurkas, and I dont think you know much about how they operate during battle, so maybe we should leave that part alone…

#26

well,our argentinian friend might have a point.brits have this bad(clever?) habit of letting someone else handle their problems.and there is something about gurkas i don’t get.why would they attack before regular troops?why not send the cannon fodder first,elites later?to save an anglo-saxons life?

#27

that`s what I want to say,thanks texwiller :smiley:

I don`t know if you know something about gurkas,but I talk about them with veterans of malvinas,I think they know more about gurkas than you and me.

sorry if I get angry,we think that war was very injust,thats why Im checking this topic.

#28

I foun this post in a malvinas british side forum(use a translator,i can`t translate):

La derrota fue inglesa, no Argentina.

Argentina perdió 649, Gran Bretaña mas de 1.000

Argentina perdió un Crucero de la 2 guerra, y un par de barcos pesqueros y un guardacostas.

Gran Betaña perdió 9 buques de gran porte, y 23 averiados.

Ni hablar de $$$$$$, Gran Bretaña perdió miles de millones…

derrota militar argentina??? jaja ni en sueños.

Podran arrebatar algo durante un tiempo, pero nunca podrán arrebatarlo todo el tiempo.

aun quieren demostrar que ellos son nuestros amigos
y estan relojeando el nido que nos quieren arrebatar
finjen de colaborar y darnos total apoyo
y estan preparando el hoyo donde nos piensan enterrar
y con lo nuestro quedar: la Patria de los criollos

read this(translator use):
http://libreopinion.com/members/elmalvinense/Autor.htm

#29

Interesting theory, but in practice, it can be difficult. Witness the
difficulties of command and control suffered by the Austro-Hungarian
armies in WWI. 17 different languages, 7 different religions.

#30

If malvinas are in argentinian submarine platform,why the brits live in it?

#31

Come on Erwin!!
If Kurile Islands belongs to Japan Archipelago, why Russians lives in it?
If Pakistanis and Indians lives in Kashmir, who belongs this region?
If Gibraltar belongs geographically to Spain, why Brits lives there?
Who belongs Jerusalem if lives there Christians, Jewish and Muslims?
And so on…
Please don’t think with your heart!!

#32

Letting someone else handle their problems!? As I know it, the Gurkas are in the British Army, and if they are so good as everyone says they are, then it would be tactics. BTW, the British military is one of the best and most well trained militaries in the world, no guy on that army is going to crouch in a small little ball, and let the others do the work.

#33

[quote=“HEINRICI”]

Interesting theory, but in practice, it can be difficult. Witness the
difficulties of command and control suffered by the Austro-Hungarian
armies in WWI. 17 different languages, 7 different religions.[/quote]

Yes, i suppose that would be difficult, however Im talking mainly about people who are from the same country and have different cultural backgrounds and maybe different religion.

#34

For examle, Red Army in WW2 included more 50 nations and about 70 national languages… That was very hard to control that type of army, but HQ made it…

#35

British point of view:
http://www.falklands.info/history/history1.html
What about Argentinians point of view?
Edited: Historical point of view, of course. :smiley:

#36

For examle, Red Army in WW2 included more 50 nations and about 70 national languages… That was very hard to control that type of army, but HQ made it…

excellent example!another good example would be ottoman empire(which used converted troops -janissaries- as elite strike force and Turkish troops from middle anatolia as cannon fodder :slight_smile: )

Letting someone else handle their problems!? As I know it, the Gurkas are in the British Army, and if they are so good as everyone says they are, then it would be tactics. BTW, the British military is one of the best and most well trained militaries in the world, no guy on that army is going to crouch in a small little ball, and let the others do the work.

ask any ANZAC about that :slight_smile:

#37

I know the british point of view,i talk here whit my britishs friends and with msn with them in england,I read the point: http://www.falklands.info/history/history1.html
,that islands where first sighted by the spanish,but,when the country was liberated,the spanish properties in the spanish colony,was heredated by argentina.

I can`t explain very well,in english the: argentinians historic point of view,so look it translating this web: http://libreopinion.com/members/elmalvinense/Autor.htm and see the true.

#38

because there are lots of thieves in this world,that`s why i think the world is a big mass of $·@/*!.

(edited because I forgot the quote)

#39

I`m not against the british people,the problem was between:


MARGARET TATCHER (UK side)

and argentinian military president :


LEOPOLDO GALTIERI (AR side)

I dont have problems with englishs,I want peace between our countries. because here,people dont like britishs,and I think british don`t like argentinians too.

but the people must be concient about some problems,because of their importance!.

greetings to all :slight_smile:

#40

I don’t have a problem with the Argentinian people but when the war was fought The British army,Navy and RAF were trained to go against the Soviets so the Argentinians were not really in with a chance although some of their troops were good there were a lot of conscripts.

I don’t think you have much idea about equipment or maybe it’s just the translation but you will struggle to stop an exocet with a harrier.I believe the Exocets came from France so is that fair?

The British standard rifle of the time was the SLR basically the same as the Argentinian rifle but without the automatic facility.And there is abslutely no chance of the British army acting like you seem to imply and I have met veterans of that war.