Iraq also used there Mirage F1 to mount poison gas attacks. From what I've read Iraq's AF liked their Mirage F1's, they had good up times.

I don't know a lot about the Super Etendard I know that it serve a good many years. Not even sure Argentina has any left flying it's a pretty old platform.

I don't know the state of Argentina's Nesher's or the three Mirage III Peru sent them. I can only assume since the A-4 were upgraded that they may be retired and in storage.

After the first RN ships were sunk I was surprise England didn't start hitting mainland targets (using subs) that would have bought the fighting to the Argentinean public's attention fast.

The Nesher was a fntastic little plane by the way.

Know any good Nesher stories?

Originally Posted by mmarsh

The Mirage F1 can, USS Stark was hit by a Exocet fired by a Iraqi Mirage F1.
In the Falklands However, Exocets were fired from Super Etendard bombers.

I'd forgotten that the Super Etendard was used, but I was sure that the Mirages had tried to use them on the piquest ships, as the Etendards weren't up to the close air combat of the Falklands Sound.

with the way the argentines used their airfoce, neither were the Nesehrs and Miarges. Had the Brits been fighting an airforce of higher grade they would have been hard pressed. Both the Mirage III and the Nesher are IMHO, far better at air to air than the Harrier...

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

with the way the argentines used their airfoce, neither were the Nesehrs and Miarges. Had the Brits been fighting an airforce of higher grade they would have been hard pressed. Both the Mirage III and the Nesher are IMHO, far better at air to air than the Harrier...

True, but you don't bring a knife to a gunfight. GB was well aware of the Argentinian Air Force and its capabilities (more or less). So it was a gamble, that's why the AA was one of the main priorities to be established on landing.

Also as a soldier, sailor or airman you have to make do with what you've got. Soemthing I think that the British Amred Forces are very good at! It also revealed to the powers that be, in order to truly project British power we need sonething meatier than the Harrier. But in our innimitable fashion we moved as rapidly as politics would dictate and will not see a true aircraft carrier until the Queen Elizabeth is commissioned in 2016 (later I'm thinking).

Coming back to the original point of the thread - YES, the sinking of the Belgrano was necessary, due the strengths & weaknesses of British Armed Forces at the time, as well as strategic necessity.

Well, I dont feel confortable talking on this topic, as I dont have much military knowledge.
But I think that it's a legitimate target. It's not a nanny ship or something of this kind... If I know that there is a ship full or people and weapons trying to find a way to get me. I would jump on the first solution to destroy them safely.

Of course, if they "promised" to not attack anyone outside their killzone of 60miles. THey didnt respect their own plan.

But I dont think that they give such "promise". It's just that they had a key area to defend at all cost. Some sort of "green zone" to operate. It doesnt mean that they will ignore a military target outside this zone.

Of course, they dont have to shovel feed us stories... They sunk an enemy ship. Who cares?

But we have to admit that it was a potential threat. I dont know if an Iraqui peasant with an RPG can be a major threat to a column of armed armored humvees... But he might get lucky and do some major damage.

I think that my real problem is political. The brits had nothing to do in the Falklands. Do you need a map to see how far is the UK from the area? What a joke. The colonial Era is finished, get back to your island.

And let the Argentinians take care of the Island right next to them.

But it's my opinion. I would let Saddam take Kuweit too. For me, it's an Iraqui province. It's so small and so rich in oil that it shouldnt be a country...

Originally Posted by LeMask

I think that my real problem is political. The brits had nothing to do in the Falklands. Do you need a map to see how far is the UK from the area? What a joke. The colonial Era is finished, get back to your island.

And let the Argentinians take care of the Island right next to them.

Despite the fact that the Falkland Islanders dont want to be part of Argentina?

By aiding British forces against the Argentine invaders, the Falklanders actions alone said they want to stay part of Britain.

lols there arnt any argentinians on the islands, only brits...why should argentine have them?

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

lols there arnt any argentinians on the islands, only brits...why should argentine have them?

You know the Falklands is abit like the Northern Ireland situation. The Crown really has no real interest in the Falklands except for a very few and very loud percentage of the population that live there. If it werent for this they would probably let the Argentinians have the Islands.