We are talking about HMS Invincible so shhh, or go away.[/quote]
Yes, and we’ve shown you photos of HMS Invincible arriving home to Portsmouth after the war. I’ve posted proof of Invincible’s aircraft flying the day after she supposedly sank. We’ve posted all the proof that anyone sane could ever need. Why are we still discussing it?
We are still with this, because you couldn´t answer this…
Anybody can aswer this???
The attack and the impact existed
England never recognized it.
There isn´t any registry of aerial activity from that aircraft carrier, from that date (may 30)…
Nobody knows where it was the Invincible from the 30 of May to July ends, which enter the disguised Illustrious like Invincible in Port Stanley.
Nobody can explain why the aircraft carrier do not touch land on June 14 (when the others ships, all the others including Hermes touched port Stanley or returned to England.
It is virtually impossible and irrational that the repairs have become to opened sea, with temperatures below cero and a few hours of light.
Nobody can´t explain why the second aircraft carrier entered disarmed, if it was the Illustrious it was operative from half-full of June (so may be the Ark Royal was there too)
Nobody can´t explain why HMS Illustrious (or Ark Royal??) returned immediately to UK (obviously to be finished and to be armed).
-Why the HMS Invincible that left to the Falklands had the black tower, and when it arrived in September it had it of gray color? repainted?? in the middle of the ocean, it was so cold there…
See…
may 1982…
30 may 1982
was extracted of the tv that´s why you think it´s a fake, but i´ve the photo in my hands.
This before the attacked of the aircraft of the AAF. You can se the Exocet, the people and the circules, indicating the Chinook to stay there.
after the war…
17 september portsmouth
it is not the same ship…
The Irony:
How Argentines helped British win war
by Martha Buckley
BBC News
Think of relations between Britain and Argentina and images of the Falklands conflict, jingoistic tabloid headlines and Diego Maradona’s “hand of God” goal at the 1986 World Cup, might come to mind.
But the British and the Argentines have not always been enemies.
During World War II, Argentina’s ambassador, Miguel Angel Carcano, refused to leave London during the blitz, saying: “As long as the King and Queen stay in London, I will too.”
Hundreds of his countrymen volunteered to travel thousands of miles to Britain to join the fight against Hitler.
Their contribution is recalled in a book, Wings of Thunder (Alas de Trueno in Spanish), launched this week with a special remembrance service for ex-servicemen at the RAF church of St Clement Danes in London.
Though Argentina was officially neutral, nearly 4,000 of her young men left the safety of South America to fight - many never to return.
Among them was Jack Miles, an Argentine of British descent, who contacted the British consulate in 1940 to join up.
So many joined the RAF that a special Argentine squadron was set up.
Though Argentina was a very neutral country and very far away, we knew if Britain caved in then we would be next, or we would be on the list
Jack Miles
He told the BBC News Website: "We were very much aware of the strength and power of Germany and we had to stop this huge war machine.
"I didn’t care what I did, I wanted to contribute to the war effort.
“Though Argentina was a very neutral country and very far away, we knew if Britain caved in then we would be next, or we would be on the list.”
Jack, now 87, sailed for Britain the following year, aged 22, arriving in London in October 1941.
He said: "I arrived at Euston station at about 10pm. There was an air raid going on, it was completely black and there was a tremendous racket.
“I was all alone, I had never been out of Argentina before and it made me wonder if I was doing the right thing.”
Jack Miles left Argentina to help Britain fight Hitler
Jack soon found his bearings and met up with younger brother, Eric, then 19, who had arrived a week earlier.
Eventually Jack joined the RAF and became a pilot and Eric joined the army, becoming a tank commander in the 25th Dragoons, fighting in the jungles of Burma.
Jack was sent to Canada where he spent 18 months as a flying instructor before he too was sent to Burma in 1944.
As the war with Japan was ending, his main task was evacuating prisoners of war from Saigon, in modern-day Vietnam, and Thailand.
Many of the freed Japanese POWs were also in a terrible state.
He said: “They were in an awful state, poor chaps. They were thin, they had jungle sores, they had been through hell.”
One trip, transporting a group of 31 POWs, almost ended in disaster.
Belly landing
He said: "It was awful weather, raining with the windscreen wipers going like mad and I lost both engines.
"We made a belly landing in a rice field about three or four miles from the runway in Rangoon.
"So we had to walk, crawling waist or shoulder deep in a river. We were all just covered in leeches.
“What affected me very much was all the POWs came and thanked me for them not having been hurt.”
Anybody who invades another country is wrong, I think
Jack Miles
Jack’s brother Eric also survived the war, despite being “pretty badly shot up”, as did another brother.
But two of his Argentine cousins died in action, one brother killed the day after the other in 1941.
Several of his school friends were also killed.
Football
After the war Jack continued his flying career in Argentina.
But he disagreed with the regime of dictator Juan Peron and emigrated to Canada in the 1950s. Jack later became vice-president of one of the country’s biggest airlines.
Jack stresses the links between Argentina and Britain rather than the divisions which existed after the Falklands conflict.
DANI I´M WAITING FOR YO ANSWER
I am waiting IrishDuck, for the consuqences
Here is the capbadge of the ultra secret commando unit that stopped the Nuclear weapon reaching BA.
tHIS PERSON CONTINUE INSULT.
wHAT HAPPEN dANI?
I have answered it all:
These are his questions. I’ve answered the ones I can in bold.[/quote]
That picture of the Invincible ‘burning’ is fucking awful, I’d be embarassed to admit that I’d made it, never mind putting it in a national newspaper.
What happened with you Dani???
Why you are mute?
Also, you posted this link: http://www.naval-history.net/F61home.htm
Where it quite clearly states
Ships and Aircraft
Some ships will sadly not be returning - destroyers “Coventry” and “Sheffield”, frigates “Antelope” and “Ardent”, LSL “Sir Galahad” and the “Atlantic Conveyor” - but by the end of August, most of the others have left the Falklands area (some later make a second trip) to be replaced by a smaller number of destroyers and frigates and other vessels mostly on their first journey south. Amongst these are the four merchantmen, two minesweepers and their support ship “St Helena” all of which which sailed from the UK before the surrender. MCMS “Brecon” and “Ledbury” arrive in early July to relieve the five minesweeping trawlers, and spend the next five weeks hunting for any ground mines laid by the Argentines, none of which are found.
Of the major warships, assault ships “Fearless” and “Intrepid” set sail a week and a half after the surrender, and arrive at Portsmouth on the 14th July after first unloading marines and Sea Kings of No.846 NAS at Devonport. As for the carriers, until the arrival of the RAF Phantoms at Stanley, only their Harriers can provide much of the air defence still needed by the Falklands. Following the surrender, “Invincible’s” first priority is to sail well clear to the north, escorted by frigate “Andromeda” in order to change a main engine. “Hermes” remains behind until “Invincible” is back, and on the 4th July sails with escort “Broadsword” for Portsmouth, arriving on the 21st to another great welcome. Well before then, on the 2nd July, Admiral Woodward is relieved as Task Group commander by Rear Admiral Reffell flying his flag on destroyer “Bristol”.
But there is no relief for “Invincible” which has to await the arrival of newly-commissioned sister ship “Illustrious” carrying a reformed No.809 Sea Harrier squadron and the first early airborne warning Sea Kings. Reaching the Falklands on the 27th August, and after a day’s vertrep, “Invincible” is at last able to head north on the 28th accompanied by “Bristol” and later RFA “Olna”, arriving at Portsmouth on the 17th September to be met by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. After 166 days at sea, “Invincible” claims the record for the longest continuous carrier operations ever.
The Sea Harriers and most of the Navy, Marine and Army helicopters go back to the UK with the returning ships. As for the RAF, mainly based at or flying to Ascension, the few Vulcan bombers fly home by the time of the surrender, and the last Nimrod MR.2’s continue operating from Ascension until August, but even then, there is little let-up for the other aircraft. VC.10’s maintain the air-link between the UK and Ascension, returning with many of the troops from there. Hercules transports fly south regularly, and from late June are landing at Stanley. (By then, two members of 47 Sqdn have earned gallantry awards for their air-drop missions.) And for many more months, Victor tankers and later Hercules conversions refuel the extended range Nimrods and Hercules deep into the South Atlantic and on to the Falklands. On the island itself, a number of Harrier GR.3’s of 1(F) Sqdn once again fitted with Sidewinder for air defence, are based at Stanley, but in October, 29(F) Sqdn Phantoms fly down from Ascension to the newly opened RAF Stanley to start taking over from them.
Finally there is the question of the last resting place for those British dead not buried or lost at sea. The policy has long been for those killed on active service to remain in the country where they fall, but many families choose to bring their men home. In October, LSL “Sir Bedivere” leaves the Falklands carrying over sixty back to the UK. Another sixteen however, including Lt Col Jones VC, stay in the Falklands.
You can’t just lie about links to make you look right, even if it is what you;re used to your government doing[/quote]
yes but only the part about Illustrious the rest is all shit.
yes but only the part about Illustrious the rest is all shit.[/quote]
Oh right, so all of it is shite apart from the bit that you agree with? You are a fool, a troll and quite possibly mad.
OFF TOPIC
And Dani???
How much?
Wich is the true history England?
Why do you teach at your students lies?
Please participant of this forums read this¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
Argentine Claim and Possession - Following independence from Spain in 1816, the future state of Argentina lays claim to the previous colonial territories, and in 1820 sends a frigate to take possession of the Falklands. In 1826, Louis Vernet of French origin establishes himself and a number of colonists at Puerto Soledad to develop fishing, farming and trade, and as governor from 1828 attempts to control the widespread sealing. Waking up to developments, Britain’s consul general in Buenos Aires protests in 1829 against the appointment of a governor and re-asserts old claims to sovereignty.
United States and British Involvement - In 1831, after arresting American sealers accused of poaching, Louis Vernet sails in one of them for Buenos Aires where the captain is to stand trial. In reprisal, the US warship “Lexington” arrives off Puerto Soledad, destroys the fortifications, arrests some of the people and declares the islands free of government before sailing away.
Argentina and the United States argue furiously over each other’s high-handed behaviour, and next year a new governor is appointed but then murdered by rebellious colonists. As Argentine forces attempt to restore order, Royal Navy warships “Clio” and “Tyne” under the command of Captain Onslow arrive in early 1833, force them to leave and claim the Falklands for Britain. Argentina protests strongly, but the British Government maintains that all rights to sovereignty were retained during the 1770 negotiations with Spain.
British Colonisation - Britain later starts to settle the islands and formally declares a colonial administration in 1842, although Argentina continues to press her claim and from the 1960’s on, with increasing vigour. Stanley is established in 1845. By this time, Britain’s right to ownership rests mainly on her peaceful and continuous possession over a long period of time, and when serious negotiations begin, they become dominated by the islander’s desire to remain British.
Argentine Claims - After a period of Argentine lobbying, the United Nations passes Resolution 2065 in 1965 specifying the Falklands/Malvinas as a colonial problem, and calling on Britain and Argentina to find a peaceful solution. Talks continue on and off for the next seventeen years under both British Labour and Conservative Governments. Britain initially appears flexible over the question of sovereignty, and by 1971 the Argentines are agreeing to concentrate on economic development and support, but thereafter, both side’s position hardens. The Argentines will accept nothing less than full sovereignty and in late 1980 the islanders reject the one remaining solution of lease-back for a fixed period.
On the road to war, Argentina sets up a scientific base on Southern Thule in the South Sandwich Islands in 1976 and stays put, and in 1982 her forces find themselves about to land on South Georgia and to invade and hold the Falklands themselves.
Arkantos, no one cares. The islands are British, the islanders are British and want to stay British. Your army tried to take the Falklands and failed miserably. Live with it.
And I think we’ve all seen who deals with false propaganda on the last few Falklands threads.
DID YOU READ ALSO MY QUESTION???
DID YOU READ ALSO MY QUESTION???[/quote]
you have to put a warning to 1000ydstare or sent off of this forum, he has insulted veterans and insult the tripulation of the Belgrano Cruiser.
DID YOU READ ALSO MY QUESTION???[/quote]
Go on Dani, get him 
:lol:
DID YOU READ ALSO MY QUESTION???[/quote]
you have to put a warning to 1000ydstare or sent off of this forum, he has insulted veterans and insult the tripulation of the Belgrano Cruiser.[/quote]
But you posting pictures of a veteran who happens to have had a sex change wince the war as ‘typical of British soldiers’ isn’t an insult?
and ??? have you seen my last post??? nothing to say?
I think you are gay, it´s confirm my theory of the british soldiers.[/quote]
First and last warning to TheIrishDuck.
TheIrishDuck and Arkantos please stop insulting.
1000ydstare please cool down as well.
Flame war again? Be my quest.