20th Century Battlefields: Falklands Part 4/6

[MustNotRead]

w3ow, poor British tactics. like, yeah, lets just line up out fleet for the Argies to shoot like fish in a barrel. i mean, what were they thinking??!

[Noodles37UK]

Jones was either gung ho or damned brave. I'd go for the latter.

[182deuce]

The whole operation seems to be nothing more than one leadership blunder after another. I think the only reason the brits weren't defeated was only through the capability of the soldiers on the ground doing the actual fighting. If some colonel told me to assault an occupied hill, with no cover, no air or artillery support, outnumbered and outgunned, I'd suggest he have his head examined after he go fuck himself. Just saying...

[Arminevh]

@182deuce Only that the British had naval, artillery and air support and where certainly neither outnumbered nor outgunned. The British fought with undeniable courage and determination but it is a fact that Argentina used a very small proportion of their forces in this conflict.

This documentary contains too many mistakes

[omegavalerius]

@Arminevh

Why so? Makes no sense to not use all your long reaching air power. Remember, the Argentinians couldn't risk sending more ships because they knew that the submarines, surface ships and harriers would take them out.

[ftge87]

Does Anyone have the documentry with dan snow narrating aboubt joseph whitworth ?

[jazzfusionsoul]

alanheath3,You might be right,sadly... that was the one place they were badly needed but then again where they could've been? 

[malouin82]

it the super etendard who launch exocet missile, not skyhawk

[pasak2054]

You left out the battle for South Georgia. A tremendous battle

[Georgebushbent]

its ironic that the catholic argentinians made there stand at darwin hill

[toemas8]

@Georgebushbent I'm sorry but that's not ironic.

[Georgebushbent]

@toemas8 it is if you understand the definition of irony

[toemas8]

@Georgebushbent keep trying... Alanis.

[urbanwamp]

@Georgebushbent Evolution FTW!!!

[VegardMinde]

The English can prize themselves lucky for the incompetent Argentines with their bullshit weaponary.

[alanheath3]

@VegardMinde Their weaponry was very similar to ours!

[Grimrippa1]

0.52 - what a joke lol ----- our hearts are with them brave British sailors and army men (and their families) who lost their lives to defend the right of the Falkland BRITISH people and Britain's pride. Heroes.

[LoveYoutubAlways]

lol nice gamble

[L999WAG]

@chevyalltheway06 Perhaps because NATO means North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the Falklands are South Atlantic? Just an excuse for France to sell more Excocet Missiles I think.

[Nylander88]

@chevyalltheway06 Britain never called for article 5 in the council and NATO would only intervene in Europe or North America

[ttproleague]

you've got to be kidding me......thats how this war ended ???....i'm sure when the 2nd in command was in school, his teacher told him his big mouth would get him nowhere. Seems like it did :P

[bluesabar]

not all the helicopters was destroyed 1 survived BRAVO NOVEMBER

[MilitantOldLady]

@bluesabar

you watched the new Mike Brewer series about war machines didnt you? ;)

[bluesabar]

@MilitantOldLady ARR you caught me...You watched that too ha someone else with brain watch that show to get all the facts

[MilitantOldLady]

@bluesabar

busted :D

[martynrobin121]

The Falklands was a British Victory, America didnt play apart of it, Yes America and Chille might have helped the British in some way however small. But Britain was still going to win the war. Just alot of Americans seem to think they "always save the british" when its a lie and made them look stupid.

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 We did send a Air Craft carrier group in case mate under President Reagan's Orders. Thatcher never used it.

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 So what are you trying to say?? Britain only won the Falklands war because of America?? How much do you think America and Chille helped Britain?

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 I'm not saying anything. But knowing the war start to end Britain wouldn't have been able to hold out much longer if Argentina kept up fight and not surrendering. The UK was over polled by 8,000 miles. It was taking it's toll.

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 How couldnt Britain fight on?? We have 1 of the best navy in the world, We have the best trained forces in the world and 1 of the best Air-Forces. We went to the Falklands with the odds against us and we still came out on top with small loses. Yes Britain was over 8,000s miles away, but we still could defeat the Argis everytime! We would never give up on our over seas territories unless they wanted independence. How could Argentina of kept hold og Falklands??

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 Man you really need to read about how Britain's cut backs almost coast you the war. I mean jesus are you 15 or something if i may ask?

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 You will find ever since the great war, Britain has cuts in defence etc etc, The Argies took the Falklands and we took them back, How could they have stopped us?? We have better navy and air-force and land forces. How did Britain nearly lose the war? We had everything we needed!

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 Your supply lines were way over stretched by June. If Argentina would have kept fighting Britain have lost the war.

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 May have*

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 Britain would have never lost the Falklands, They have the best technology in the world, They have 2nd best navy in the world and the best trained forces. And 1 of the best Air-Forces in the world. The Argis could have never won, They didnt have what it takes! Aslong as the Falklands wanted to stay a British territory the British would have fought for them and would have won whitch ever way you look at it.

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 Wel not true the cuts almost cost the UK the Won Argentina had a bigger force if they kept on fighting Britain would have lost.

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 You forget the British had the best technology in the world, Second best to the U.S.A. they had 1 of the best navy in the world and 1 of the best Air-force. They took the Falklands back and if the Argis wanted to even try to take them back, They would need to match the Royal Navy at Sea whitch they couldnt! How could Argis have took the Islands back? British Forces are the best in the world, Numbers arnt everything.

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 Just look at the Argis they have a good Air-Force, But there Land Forces were weak they had more numbers than the British but that means nothing just more people to kill. The Navy was good but the British had the 2nd best navy in the world, British had the best technology and modern missiles. The Argis couldnt have took the Islands back without defeating British navy!

[TheIceman567]

@martynrobin121 Just let me ask how old are you? Really.

[martynrobin121]

@TheIceman567 I am 20, And you dont seem to know what your talking about do you? British took back the Falklands and how could the Argis have took them back? The British have abetter navy so how could the Argis have invaded? The British also had better technology and best weapons and most modern missiles in the world. Yes the Argies had a good Air-Force but they couldnt take the Islands back. They would need to defeated the Royal Navy and gain Air-control for an invasion.

[TheIceman567]

@TheIceman567 Man you are dumb here even watch "Malvinas /Falklands war: How Close To Defeat ( 1 ) " On youtube back my point stupid. God you are a retard.

[TheIceman567]

@TheIceman567 Btw it's even a British show.

[L999WAG]

@TheIceman567 Hang on, the British only sent the Parachute Regiment, the Royal Marines, The Ghurkas and the Blues and Royals and we won. If the Argies had defeated these four regiments then the British would send in the other 19 infantry regiments in their arsenal. I don't think thousands of conscripts are any match for the best trained army in the world.

[TheIceman567]

@L999WAG well you're right to a point. By June the British navy was feeling the pain of being 8,000 miles in the south Atlantic. If the Argies had gone on a fought for places like Port Stanley god knows that would have hurt more since the Royal navy and British troops were exhausted by Mid-June.

[cwood4ever]

Is it true that the Americans gave the British some refueling ships to use?

[wtong89]

@cwood4ever

Technically but it was liek this. America took over British NATO Duties in Europe while teh British uses their military assets in Falkalnds.

[HerculesRockefellerr]

@cwood4ever...the biggest contribution US made was giving the Brits the sidewinder missile right before the war which was brand new at the time. The sidewinder took down many Argie planes and without it the the exocet anti-ship weapon would have killed many more brits then it did already.

[alcapone796]

start at 02:22 when hae says that the helicopters were destroyed he is right but the surviving helo was bravo november and its flying in afganistan

[sertox12345]

where is the air power?????????????

if they used that it would be over fast

[sertox12345]

where is the air power?????????????

[Hinato29]

Royal and State Marines are the best in my opinion. Though while I'm in I'd like to work or at least meet someone from the British SAS. Soldiers are soldiers no matter what.

[BertrumPantyshield]

@chevyalltheway06 Don't worry, the Lisbon Treaty also obliges the European Union to defend any member state invaded. So there you are. A new set of much more reliable allies.

The US helped a lot, indeed, offered an aircraft carrier (to be manned by the RN) for use. Use of Ascension Island (British owned, but leased to the US for use as an airbase), satellite imaging, SIGINT, and masses of supplies and fuel "left" on Ascension. The French stopped selling exocets, which was nice of them.

[funkeystyley]

@BertrumPantyshield The European Union could not defend Britain. With the exception of Russia Britain has the most powerful military, France might be able to help but relatively there is nothing that could happen if a real power invaded.

[BertrumPantyshield]

@funkeystyley Don't worry I was being sarcastic. The EU couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, never mind state on state war. The enemy will never get to invade anyway thanks to the might of the Royal Navy! 1/2 an Aircraft Carrier, 7 SSNs, and 19 escorts. Look at them quake in their boots!

Also, it has to be a dire situation when you're relying on the French to help.

[jazzfusionsoul]

Where were the Harriers during the Argentinian Air raids? Why there were no Air Dog fight?

[f14fan1243]

@jazzfusionsoul Bad weather out at sea prevented the Harriers from taking off.

[Patasup]

@jazzfusionsoul bad weather

[cheesepwnage]

@jazzfusionsoul because where the aircraft carriers where the weather was to bad to be able to get air support to the land units.

[jazzfusionsoul]

@cheesepwnage, Thank you :)

[dudzdude]

@jazzfusionsoul cos they were too heavily outnumbered to counter the arges

[PorkIsHalal]

@jazzfusionsoul

The British Harriers has no guns, only 2 sidewinders. (Only US Marines installed them)

After they fired both, they have to scoot.

[stormwell]

@PorkIsHalal Dude I think you'll find the British Harriers DID have guns in the form of 30mm ADEN cannons. The Vietnam conflict had brutally shown that fighters still needed guns.

[djcrazythomashulks]

@stormwell indeed becouse the jets had good weapon systems but crap missiles the wouldnt lock on

[shaider1982]

@stormwell Harriers had gun pods, not built in ones.

[djcrazythomashulks]

@PorkIsHalal plus the british had good missiles

[alanheath3]

@jazzfusionsoul They could not be everywhere I suppose.

[maxibus141]

@jazzfusionsoul the hills meant that the radar didn't work so they didn't know they were coming

[Amar7605]

@jazzfusionsoul Probably because the Harriers were tasked to protect the aircraft carriers and if they did engage the Argentenian Air Force then they would get caught in the AA fire.

It's not like Ace Combat, brother.

[MarkramUK]

@jazzfusionsoul The aircraft carriers were the top priority. If the Harriers left to defend the invasion force then A) The carriers would have no protection and B) If any Harriers were lost then that's one less for the rest of the war.

[Muralidharan001]

@jazzfusionsoul Its briefed in previous part. Its due to bad weather. There was a high mist at sea if aircraft takes off it can't land on carrier without visibility, already landing on a carrier is a difficult job. Argentine forces launched from their mainland and they can land in any clear weather airfield in their country.

[jazzfusionsoul]

@Muralidharan001 OK, That may be the case.

[animegamer77]

God, I would love to have a suitcase like that~!

[IowaEngineering]

british r fucking fascists coloniasts

[Drummerkins]

@IowaEngineering And you're a colonial.. welldone.. you hate yourself.

[IowaEngineering]

@Drummerkins wat does tat mean..i am an optimist!

[blackdragon9876]

@IowaEngineering the fuck are you saying YOU DONT MAKE SENSE, ENGLISH DO YOU SPEAK IT!!!

[IowaEngineering]

@blackdragon9876 yea i am frm d fucking united states..i dont simply speak it i eat it

[Patrick5009]

900 troops surrendering. Just goes to show the difference between British and Argentinians. With 50 men the Brits would never give up. let alone 900. Its not in out nature to surrender.

[fj311]

@Patrick5009 I'd wager it has more to do with the nature of the troops involved, rather than their nationality. The Argentines were conscripts, having their boyhood ideals of war and glory being torn apart by what was happening around them, while the Paras were professionals, both volunteers and elites. Don't forget, 69 Royal Marines surrendered at the beginning of the conflict(and this show!). Of course, the RMs acquitted themselves with the actions of the 22 on the South Sandwich Islands...

[ToonFanatic1234]

@ kamekazeboy123

Tanks would be no use in this, too rugged and mountainous. Also, they'd have to get them off the transport ships and they'd probably have been destroyed on the ships

[kamikazeboy123]

arent there any tanks on the brits side??Btw those toy soldiers looks really cute=)

[GGSDavejones]

@kamikazeboy123 Tanks would either sick in the bogs or get stuck in the rocky hills

[MaoSuratt911]

The psychological warfare worked..

[themangix357]

Whoa! Didn't know that pranks in warfare was so effective. XD

[TheRalf1968]

the british troop have done their job very well

[Bander1]

Argentine troops are maricones, the real army of South America are the Brazilians. They fought very well in ww2 in Italy and battle tested vs. the German army. I don't know of any 20th century and beyond South American army which fought successfullly vs. a non South American power.

[Bander1]

As for the Argentines being bravy, there are accounts of them running away when they heard they were facing Gurkha troops. hahahaha.

[Bander1]

Menendez is an idiot. He was not the correct commander for the Falklands. He gave up too easilly.

[scoutcube1]

argentinians are very brave.

the falklands were orginally theirs, not the british

[neverfearchrisishere]

@scoutcube1 .....It was the British and French that first formed colonies on the islands so the Brits had a solid claim.

The Argentinian colony when it was conquered consisted of the remnants of an abandoned prison colony and a Whaling/fishing colony which had been recently devestated by the USA - who had attacked the colony for carrying out acts of Piracy.

.

Before the British retook the islands the largest settlement had consisted of a dozen old shacks... hard to even call that a colony.

[Limskjordan]

Its the SAS, not the Royal Marines.

[Calzo777]

@Limskjordan royal marines sounds more cool

[Limskjordan]

@Calzo777 Naw... If you know what the SAS can do, you will know the SAS is way more cool. But its just a personal opinion :)

[Calzo777]

@Limskjordan i'm aware of what they can do and have done but their names been tainted by those stupid call of duty games. i can't talk about them without someone mentioning that game

[Limskjordan]

@Calzo777 That is so true. The COD portrayal of them is very inaccurate.

[RetroGangstarr]

@Limskjordan SAS ELITE!!!

[Brera011]

So, because the British frigattes had well working defencive systems, the Exocets were misleaded and searched another target, the Atlantic Conveyor. Why weren't the British ships equiped with anti rocket systems like Goalkeeper or Phalanx?

[Fricasso79]

@Brera011

Because it was 1982.  Hardly any ships had anti-missile systems back then.

[TowerHamletsNeil]

@Brera011 It was the falklands war which ushered in the era of all warships operating heavy anti missile defence weaponry..

[greenarcangel]

lol