A name of argentine witness wich I remember is name Jose Carrizo he was shot in the head twice and lost some grey matter and a eye but manage to survive. I think there are others.
You have not portrayed us as Monster but others do that.
Foolish ? Hiperbole ? dont think so, more foolish is to said that a point blank shot in the head is an “accident”.
Most of this histories are in spanish so I need to translate before posting here.
In the meanwhile I let you a image of the “ears collector” Stewart McLaughlin, who according to ltn Mark Cox cut 24 argentine ears.
McLaughlin was killed in action by a mortar shell.
http://www.clarin.com/diario/96/05/26/infrec4.html
A rough translation of above link with babelfish :
Scouse" McLaughlin was one of the most seasoned parachutists, was a “corporal one”, maximum rank of the sergeant majors, and fought wounded in its back, but it died in the battle practically beheaded by a mortar. When lieutenant Mark Cox found her body, he recognized it by his equipment, and he tried to rescue some food that was in its knapsack. The surprise was that one of its ammunition pockets was full of human ears. The second that found them was John Week, ordered to make the documentation of the battle.
In different interviews it was said that there were twelve pairs of ears collected by McLaughlin, a quite high amount if one remembers that 29 Argentineans in the battle died. But nobody really counted them.
Vincent Bramley saw an alive prisoner, with its hurt leg, to that it needed the two ears. DES Fuller, another parachutist, was witness of another similar episode.
The fact was enough so that McLaughlin was not decorated postmortem. But their companions justify their action saying that the Argentineans “no longer needed” their ears.
“What another class of atrocities you describe in your book?”
Atrocities are a word very hard to use. The corporal McLauglin mutilated bodies of died soldiers, and probably one or two that they were alive but who they were going to die. That I know, were no other atrocities committed by the British forces. There were violations of the Convention of Geneva by the Argentine forces, but these things always happen in the war.
"The Argentine committed them? "
I do not believe that the Argentineans have committed atrocities in Longdon. We must recognize that the Argentine troops were surpassed by the amount of British forces, that always were more successful and professional than the Argentine military. The system of defense and communications of the Argentineans very was fractured by the ferocidad of the British attack in Goose Green and Longdon, and they could not organize a resistance. It had not welded British captured. Therefore, there were no atrocities. But what happened it is that the day of the invasion, a British helicopter was demolished in waters of San Carlos and the Argentine forces shot with machine guns on waters, I believe that was Regiment 12. In the battle of Goose Green, two British officials were died by machine-gun fire when they took a white flag, and that is a treason act.
"But the British wanted to execute an official of their own army that hid during the battle by fear. "
He could be executed. One hid between rocks during the battle. He never exposed himself to no horror. But he could not clearly support the tension of the beginning of the battle and genuinely it was a psychiatric loss.
"It can execute it in a martial judgment? "
Not in the British Armed Forces of these days. This was cancelled in World War I and nothing is punished with death.
I really dont need to add nothing, I just will try to find time to translate the Bramley narration.
Chevan one of you message has been moved to Off Topic militaria, please leave this exclusively to the Malvinas theater of operation.
