What lessons were learned from the Falklands War?

Bluster and more bluster from you. You waste your time, my link completely dealt with the nonsense of your opinion re. the support for Thatcher's achievements. Deny the facts of that if you can. You can read English and calculate percentages I assume.



BritinAfrica said:
.

I never said John Smith was the greatest orator, but simply a very good, excellent (cross out which doesn't apply) orator. .
Click to expand...

"An even better PM could have been the Labour leader John Smith, who during his maiden speech as leader tore into John Major like nothing I have ever seen before or since, an amazing orator. ...."




BritinAfrica said:
Oh I don't think there are 55 million Thatcher haters........
Click to expand...

"I suppose two opinions out of 55 million British people is a clear indication of what the British think of Thatcher. lol. "

" As for the site regarding Thatcher......."


***
Exactly - my link, the site which reveals the nonsense of your take on the attitudes of the British electorate, and which establishes the fact that have very little grasp on the truth of the matter. Anyone can scout for scraps on the net and call it research, but you still need to have an inkling of the subject. Insults do not make your argument stronger. The site demonstrates that the British public still consider Thatcher well, and would vote for her today. They never rejected her at the ballot box.



BritinAfrica said:
I await your responses, (even though they are biased in the extreme) with baited breath lol
Click to expand...


Oh yes - ignoring the link are you, cocking a blind eye to the truth are you. Face the link, you only have to be able to read.

You can now read it on the political threads, as you suggested. Go and see why my facts and figures add up and yours are not even in the running.
 
Last edited:
Del Boy said:
Bluster and more bluster from you. You waste your time, my link completely dealt with the nonsense of your opinion re. the support for Thatcher's achievements. Deny the facts of that if you can. You can read English and calculate percentages I assume..
Click to expand...
Insults are unbecoming Del. Your link certainly did not deal with what you call the nonsense of my opinion, far from it in fact.

Del Boy said:
"An even better PM could have been the Labour leader John Smith, who during his maiden speech as leader tore into John Major like nothing I have ever seen before or since, an amazing orator. ....".. .
Click to expand...

And I still stand by that, anyone would have been better then Thatcher.


Del Boy said:
"Exactly - the site which reveals the nonsense of your take on the attitudes of the British electorate, and which establishes the fact that have very little grasp on the truth of the matter. Anyone can scout for scraps on the net and call it research, but you still need to have an inkling of the subject. Insults do not make your argument stronger. .
Click to expand...

I do not insult, I dont lower myself to such tactics. The thing is Del, I have a full grasp on the subject, your insults and arguments clearly show without doubt that you do not. Yes anyone can scout for scraps on the net, you proved that yourself.


Del Boy said:
"Oh yes - ignoring the link are you, cocking a blind eye to the truth are you. Face the link, you only have to be able to read. .
Click to expand...
Quite frankly using those insults illustrates that you have lost any credibility you had. Yes I did read the link, I even commented on it.

Del Boy said:
"You can now read it on the political threads, as you suggested. Go and see why my facts and figures add up and yours are not even in the running.
Click to expand...
My facts and figures not only add up, but have left yours at the starting post.

Your post on the political forum didnt achieve the support that you hoped. You may be blind or at the very least blinkered, but thankfully the majoirty of people arent.
 
Last edited:
BritinAfrica said:
Insults are unbecoming Del. Your link certainly did not deal with what you call the nonsense of my opinion, far from it in fact.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. The link established the fact of Thatcher's popularity with the electorate, and why. Anyone who denies that is obviously a fool; it is there to be referred to by anyone.

BritinAfrica said:
And I still stand by that, anyone would have been better then Thatcher.
Click to expand...

Really? But you clearly denied having said it!


BritinAfrica said:
I do not insult, I dont lower myself to such tactics. The thing is Del, I have a full grasp on the subject, your insults and arguments clearly show without doubt that you do not. Yes anyone can scout for scraps on the net, you proved that yourself.
Click to expand...

Utter Rubbish - as my link proves. The link is there to be referred by anyone. The link establishes the popularity of Thatcher in the psyche of the British electorate, and your denial in the face of this reveals your claims of knowledge of the subject to be fraudulent.







BritinAfrica said:
Yes I did read the link, I even commented on it.


My facts and figures not only add up, but have left yours at the starting post.

Your post on the political forum didnt achieve the support that you hoped. You may be blind or at the very least blinkered, but thankfully the majoirty of people arent.
Click to expand...


You may have read it but you certainly have not grasped it; it clearly establishes the high esteem in which in which Thatcher is held in the psyche of the Britsh electorate, and can be referred to by anyone.

Your facts and figure amount to the posted opinions of a few tens of people, my link speaks for milllions.

My post on the political thread was not for popularity or support, it was for you, and especially at your request. Remember?

My posts on it 1 and 9, stand ready to be denied by anyone. you have absolutely failed to do so.
 
Last edited:
Delboy, its clear to me (and anothers) that you are unable to take part in sensible adult debate, your childish tantrums are becoming tiresome. I will therefore, call a halt to this silliness. Nothing I say or what anone else says, or what evidence is produced will result in any sort of common sense from you. I have since been warned by a member that this is one of your tactics.

You do not have the support that you claim to have, even your attempt to get support on the politicial forum fell on deaf ears, people have seen you for what you are.

Orignally I thought you were an intelligent sensible person, now I have reviewed that thought somewhat.
 
Last edited:
Take a lookee at my post on the Political thread, where you asked me to take it!

This last post of yours demonstrates ignominious defeat, it seems to me, based upon the reliance upon personal insult, and dismissal of the link which clearly establishes the point I was seeking to make regarding Margaret Thatcher's standing with the British electorate. Your secret machinations with the disgruntled who have failed from time to time to shout me down, as you have, are of no concern of mine, as I look for support only from myself, and have claimed no other support such as you mention. You are confusing me with some other guy who gives a **** regarding that.

It is impossible to deny the legitimacy of the youGov poll on my link, post 35, and so your frustration is understandable. I refer you again to this.

I refer you again to the political thread 'Britain's greatest PM', raised especially for you at your request - Posts 1 and 9 represent an undecorated factual resume of Thatcher's qualifications, and you can't beat that, even with your wild mud-slinging, because it is the truth. The truth is my only tactic.

Perhaps we shall meet again on the political thread. Adios amigo.
 
Last edited:
Adios amigo?

LMAO

Whatever you claim,, Thatcher:-
Was hated by many because of her policies
Not as popular as you assume

Britain is still paying for her legacy
 
Last edited:
Ah - now that's more like it. All accepted. Nothing there that conflicts with my link, which in fact makes that point.

I am arguing for the facts of the electorate's high opinion of Maggie, and why they would still elect her above others, even today.

But if want to dismiss the link, post 35, then explain why so. No personal stuff, no bluster, without calling up the cavalry to recue you.
 
Cavalry to rescue me?

LOL I dont need anyone to rescue me. You were the one who made the appeal not I. An appeal that failed dismally I might add.
 
Hey - you still are unable to counter the link on post 35. The fact then stands that the British electorate value Thatcher highly and respectfully, and would vote for her today.

I have to assume that you accept that fact, therefore.

You are still relying on the personal stuff. Well let me answer your accusation of my 'appeal', as you seek to brand it.

My thread was 'Britain's greatest PM?' A few guys put forward posts, and amongst these guys were some I have respect for. Frankly, I thought that the posts were somewhat weak, in that some were facetious, and others chose candidates, which was good, or posted negatives of Maggie, but these posts were weak in that they did not present enough detail, in most instances ,to support their candidate and counter my candidate. I did not experience failure in the response, in that there was very little opposition to my proposition. I make that a positive. I expected to be under severe fire, but no such luck.

So I asked them please to read the opening post; I didn't think they had done so sufficiently, and politely said so. Hardly pandering to their egos. My opening post was establishing the views of the British public, and that was the candidate I was putting forward ; it was full and deserved to be opposed seriously. At no time did I expect support, just some strong opponents to my candidate, with reasons.

Your choice was hopeless, I have to say; nobody did as badly as that. Edward Heath!??
 
Last edited:
Del Boy said:
Hey - you still are unable to counter the link on post 35. The fact then stands that the British electorate value Thatcher highly and respectfully, and would vote for her today.

I have to assume that you accept that fact, therefore.

You are still relying on the personal stuff. Well let me answer your accusation of my 'appeal', as you seek to brand it.

My thread was 'Britain's greatest PM?' A few guys put forward posts, and amongst these guys were some I have respect for. Frankly, I thought that the posts were somewhat weak, in that some were facetious, and others chose candidates, which was good, or posted negatives of Maggie, but these posts were weak in that they did not present enough detail, in most instances ,to support their candidate and counter my candidate. I did not experience failure in the response, in that there was very little opposition to my proposition. I make that a positive. I expected to be under severe fire, but no such luck.

So I asked them please to read the opening post; I didn't think they had done so sufficiently, and politely said so. Hardly pandering to their egos. My opening post was establishing the views of the British public, and that was the candidate I was putting forward ; it was full and deserved to be opposed seriously. At no time did I expect support, just some strong opponents to my candidate, with reasons.

Your choice was hopeless, I have to say; nobody did as badly as that. Edward Heath!??
Click to expand...

DelBoy, I believe Margaret Thatcher was good for Britain when she came aboard as prime-minister. She tried, (unsuccessfully) to pull Britain out of a Socialist morass and she certainly brought back to Britain a sense of leadership and pride many of it's citizens hadn't experienced for some time. I don't know if anything can be learned from the Falkland's War? Maybe if you are Argetinian, you may want to run like hell if you see Ghurkas. Man those little men can fight.
 
Some of the lessons of the Falklands War has got to be the vital importance of seaborne air power, mobility, good equipment, intel and communications.
 
I'm not sure what still survived of Socialism after her departure. Even the Labour party ditched it, however we are now seeing the results of her laissez faire policies in the financial sector which she instigated. Many disasters are not traced to the true perpetrators.

Regarding the Falklands, the main military lesson for the British was the need for a long range airborne warning system or one that could be launched from carriers. The main political lesson was always send out the right signals, better to bark than bite, but then perhaps Thatcher needed a fight to retain power.
 
Sorry Perseus, but you have to recognise that Labour, with its morass of ex communists and Trots in pole positions of power (incl. our current Chancellor, Darling, of whom Socialist leader Kinnock once complained, 'who the hell allowed that trot into the party'?) has been in complete financial control since 1997, so the buck has to stop there, at the Iron Chancellor, current PM Brown.
 
You can rest in your bed 'Del Boy' that the right wing has triumphed and the 'Trots and changed their spots' (like that one Eh!:mrgreen:). For example, who is currently opposing the 48 hr. week against the Socialist Europeans?
 
Civilian assistance

One very valuable lesson from the Falklands that was missed by everyone including myself, was the assistance given to British forces by the civil population.

Because the vast majority of British helicopters were lost in air attacks, there was a serious problem of re-supply and getting the wounded back for medical treatment. The civil population stepped in with their Land Rovers providing vital transport, at times under fire. Their intimate knowledge of the area was an enormous help, while transporting supplies across country at night.

Then there was the stubbornness of the civilians. The Argentines insisted that everyone drove on the right side of the road, many Falkland Islanders refused. One such Islander was driving his Land Rover on the left, came face to face with an Argentine APC and refused to move over. In the end, the APC moved over to the left side of the road. This may not seem to be much of an incident in the scheme of things, but it showed that the Falkland Islanders were not going to submit to Argentine rule without protest.

Without the assistance given by the civilian population, the task of British forces taking back the Falklands would have been much more difficult.
 
Great point by BritinAfrica, for me there are 2 lessons from the Falklands War.

1. Don't get too wrapped up in equipment - they are just tools, it is the people and their morale that use them, make them work and achieve objectives.
2. Never underestimate the impact of national pride. I was 16 yrs old during the Falklands, living in Portsmouth, mixed with many of the returning vets (&yes drank beer with them), they were part of my inspiration to join the British Army later in life.
 
One thing many people over look is the Harrier pilot's training. After the Argentines invaded the Falkland / Malvinas Islands shortly before the RN's fleet sailed south, the RN and RAF Harrier pilots went through a "Red Flag" type course. They flew against French Mirages, they developed and refined tactics they would need to be successful in their air defense role. After two and a half weeks of their training, the pilots were flown south to the Accension Islands, where the RN was passing by. The pilots were then picked up by helicopters and ferried to the carriers.
The Sidewinder-9L was new and was a help but, it was the pilot experience and tactics, the knowledge of how to best take advantage of the Mirages that were the biggest factor. The Harriers only had to defend against the low level attackers because the "fleet SAMs" could deal with the medium and high level attackers. The Argentine pilots had no such training in how best to deal with the Harrier. They only had the early IR version of the Matra 530 Missile a IR variant, a 1960s vintage missile. The Mirages came out initially shadow boxed with the Harriers but, never had any tactics to force the Harriers to come up to their altitudes. Never a co-ordinated effort with (say) A-4s at wave top level to force the Harriers to dive on the A-4s and the Mirages could then pounce the Harriers.
Another very important lesson was the Argentine Air Force (FAA) never located the exact location of the RN carriers. They found the carriers once but, that was a chance meeting. Previously, FAA Super Etendards thought they had located the carriers but, in reality they had only found one of the elements of the destroyer screen. The FAA maritime reconnaisance squadrons were not able to maintain contact even though their patrol aircraft had sufficient range to do so.
This conflict happened as a whim by the military leaders, who expected not to fight but, to negotiate a new agreement with the UK over the possession of the islands. Otherwise, many steps that needed to be taken would have been... serious infantry training, bombs with fuses that were effective against ships, obtain more Exocet Missiles, forces that could turn the airport on Port Stanley into a functioning military airbase upon which they could repel the UK forces.
 
The most important lesson? Perhaps the most obvious, that ships were very vulnerable to missiles. The war propelled the development CIWS'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top