Half a world, and half a lifetime away.
Discussion
[quote=Gerber1]Some really interesting responses, thanks.
I have some other questions though if anyone cares to speculate.
How close did we come to losing a carrier?
Quite close. Invincible fired a Sea Dart missile at one point.
Then there is the Invincible Torpedo conspiracy. Tin foil hatters in Argentina insist invincible was sunk. That's clearly b
ks. However there are unconfirmed reports that she came close to being torpedoed. I recall her captain Jeremy Black alluded to something once. Something about a scary moment.
Was destroying Argentine air bases with intercontinental ballistic missile fired from the UK not an option?
It was considered. A non-nuclear Polaris as a demonstration. It was unworkable for many reasons not least an attack on the South American mainland would potentially trigger treaties.
Also a Polaris would not really have done that much damage. It wasn't a precision weapon.
The logistically complicated Black Buck Vulcan missions did demonstrate the UK's ability to strike Argentina. The then new Tornado couldn't do the job. It could be refueled from a tanker but it didn't carry enough lubrication oil to make the trip there and back.
Yet another legacy of 1966 where the RAF persuaded the government they could perform the strike role of the RN carrier force. The UK military was very Europe and NATO focussed. A Tornado would be ideal for a hop across the North Sea to bomb a target in East Germany WW2-style. It was never designed to do a Black Buck. Though Black Buck was an amazing military feat, it's impact was more psychological than physical. I met an islander who was there when the Vulcan dropped it's bombs. He told me it was both terrifying to be on the receiving end of a V-bomber's wrath, but also reassuring that it was on his side.
SF raids were also considered. One involved a C130 landing at a base and loads of SAS blokes spilling out to do harm. Again, this wasn't considered for long.
An attempt was made to land SF by helicopter. There's a good book about this.
After the Belgrano sank all Argentine vessels returned to port, had they not do you think the outcome would have been different?
Who knows. Their carrier would have potentially been a problem. If it came to a one on one between Belgrano and a RN frigate, i could see it ending badly for the frigate.
The presence of ARG warships would have been just one more thing to contend with though a lot of RN ships carried Exocet but then again so did a few Argentine ships.
It would take a brave navy to put to sea when modern nuclear powered hunter killer subs were on the prowl. This was perhaps one aspect of the conflict where the UK had the upper hand from day one. Our SSNs were built to fight in a deep ocean. It was basically their job description.
I have some other questions though if anyone cares to speculate.
How close did we come to losing a carrier?
Quite close. Invincible fired a Sea Dart missile at one point.
Then there is the Invincible Torpedo conspiracy. Tin foil hatters in Argentina insist invincible was sunk. That's clearly b
ks. However there are unconfirmed reports that she came close to being torpedoed. I recall her captain Jeremy Black alluded to something once. Something about a scary moment.Was destroying Argentine air bases with intercontinental ballistic missile fired from the UK not an option?
It was considered. A non-nuclear Polaris as a demonstration. It was unworkable for many reasons not least an attack on the South American mainland would potentially trigger treaties.
Also a Polaris would not really have done that much damage. It wasn't a precision weapon.
The logistically complicated Black Buck Vulcan missions did demonstrate the UK's ability to strike Argentina. The then new Tornado couldn't do the job. It could be refueled from a tanker but it didn't carry enough lubrication oil to make the trip there and back.
Yet another legacy of 1966 where the RAF persuaded the government they could perform the strike role of the RN carrier force. The UK military was very Europe and NATO focussed. A Tornado would be ideal for a hop across the North Sea to bomb a target in East Germany WW2-style. It was never designed to do a Black Buck. Though Black Buck was an amazing military feat, it's impact was more psychological than physical. I met an islander who was there when the Vulcan dropped it's bombs. He told me it was both terrifying to be on the receiving end of a V-bomber's wrath, but also reassuring that it was on his side.
SF raids were also considered. One involved a C130 landing at a base and loads of SAS blokes spilling out to do harm. Again, this wasn't considered for long.
An attempt was made to land SF by helicopter. There's a good book about this.
After the Belgrano sank all Argentine vessels returned to port, had they not do you think the outcome would have been different?
Who knows. Their carrier would have potentially been a problem. If it came to a one on one between Belgrano and a RN frigate, i could see it ending badly for the frigate.
The presence of ARG warships would have been just one more thing to contend with though a lot of RN ships carried Exocet but then again so did a few Argentine ships.
It would take a brave navy to put to sea when modern nuclear powered hunter killer subs were on the prowl. This was perhaps one aspect of the conflict where the UK had the upper hand from day one. Our SSNs were built to fight in a deep ocean. It was basically their job description.
Edited by wildcat45 on Sunday 16th April 10:43
Edited by wildcat45 on Sunday 16th April 10:56
Edited by wildcat45 on Sunday 16th April 10:59
16th April
HMS Hermes arrives at Ascension.
Main Task Force departs Ascension.
Admiral Woodward flew north to HMS Fearless for talks with Commodore Clapp and Brigadier Thompson and returned to HMS Hermes the same day.
HMS Invincible arrives at Ascension.
Wideawake airfield on Ascension busiest in world that day.
Stenna Seaspread departs from Portsmouth after being refitted to act as a repair ship.
Fitting out of the Cunard container ship Atlantic Conveyor begins at Devonport.
RFA Tidepool on passage for delivery to Chilean navy summoned back.
Haig arrives in Buenos Aries again. Even before he arrived, Galtieri had figured out that the Americans meant business, and he called Reagan to assure him that he desired a peaceful solution, and hoped that America would not desert its new ally.
Costa Mendes really began to get the American's goat. He was a lawyer. Questions like 'how high should the flagpole be', 'what should the observers be called', and so on were posed by him, some might argue that they really were just a waste of time. Just to help out, the three armed services each sent a representative to the talks as well, but unlike Mendes, they didn't speak English, requiring everything to be interpreted and slowing everything down. They had no more authority than Mendes did though: Without Admiral Anaya's say-so, nothing was a given, regardless of what the negotiators promised, and Anaya was convinced he was on the brink of a victory.
HMS Spartan spots a landing ship, Cabo San Antonio, laying mines off Port Stanley harbour, and wants to know if she should sink it. The War Cabinet concluded that, really, the landing ship wasn't a warship, and it wasn't trying to breach the exclusion zone as it was already in it. Oh, and they weren't sure about revealing the presence of the submarine yet, and they really weren't sure if they wanted to escalate by sinking an Argentine ship this early in the war.
Cabo San Antonio would survive, for now.
SD.
HMS Hermes arrives at Ascension.
Main Task Force departs Ascension.
Admiral Woodward flew north to HMS Fearless for talks with Commodore Clapp and Brigadier Thompson and returned to HMS Hermes the same day.
HMS Invincible arrives at Ascension.
Wideawake airfield on Ascension busiest in world that day.
Stenna Seaspread departs from Portsmouth after being refitted to act as a repair ship.
Fitting out of the Cunard container ship Atlantic Conveyor begins at Devonport.
RFA Tidepool on passage for delivery to Chilean navy summoned back.
Haig arrives in Buenos Aries again. Even before he arrived, Galtieri had figured out that the Americans meant business, and he called Reagan to assure him that he desired a peaceful solution, and hoped that America would not desert its new ally.
Costa Mendes really began to get the American's goat. He was a lawyer. Questions like 'how high should the flagpole be', 'what should the observers be called', and so on were posed by him, some might argue that they really were just a waste of time. Just to help out, the three armed services each sent a representative to the talks as well, but unlike Mendes, they didn't speak English, requiring everything to be interpreted and slowing everything down. They had no more authority than Mendes did though: Without Admiral Anaya's say-so, nothing was a given, regardless of what the negotiators promised, and Anaya was convinced he was on the brink of a victory.
HMS Spartan spots a landing ship, Cabo San Antonio, laying mines off Port Stanley harbour, and wants to know if she should sink it. The War Cabinet concluded that, really, the landing ship wasn't a warship, and it wasn't trying to breach the exclusion zone as it was already in it. Oh, and they weren't sure about revealing the presence of the submarine yet, and they really weren't sure if they wanted to escalate by sinking an Argentine ship this early in the war.
Cabo San Antonio would survive, for now.
SD.
wildcat45 said:
Who knows. Their carrier would have potentially been a problem. If it came to a one on one between Belgrano and a RN frigate, i could see it ending badly for the frigate.
This was a major reason for sinking her; on paper Belgrano, fifteen 6" guns in 5 turrets and a further eight 5" guns, had the ability to knock st out of the battle group and potentially shrug off exocet hits through subdivision, armour and sheer size, or at least shrug them off long enough to sink or admin kill enough of our ships to wreck any prospect of completing the landing. The reality of her being a training ship, barely operational and filled with sailors who had seen little or no training meant that was unlikely but the risk she represented was real.Edited by hidetheelephants on Sunday 16th April 11:39
ChocolateFrog said:
Great thread, I was -3 months at the time so don't obviously remember it first hand.
I do remember my dad telling me that he was going through his final year of medical school with an Argentinian colleague who copped more than his fair share of abuse (banter).
He wasn't the only one. Tottenham footballer Ossie Ardiles faced a huge amount of criticism and fury from fans when he played.I do remember my dad telling me that he was going through his final year of medical school with an Argentinian colleague who copped more than his fair share of abuse (banter).
SD.
Really good info all, thanks for sharing.
Just before the task force arrived, what was the consensus of the imminent war from both at home or around the world?
E.g. did people at home want to teach the Argies a lesson, and did other countries (Europe, US etc.) think we were mad daring to attempt it?
Just before the task force arrived, what was the consensus of the imminent war from both at home or around the world?
E.g. did people at home want to teach the Argies a lesson, and did other countries (Europe, US etc.) think we were mad daring to attempt it?
Gerber1 said:
Really good info all, thanks for sharing.
Just before the task force arrived, what was the consensus of the imminent war from both at home or around the world?
E.g. did people at home want to teach the Argies a lesson, and did other countries (Europe, US etc.) think we were mad daring to attempt it?
From my recollections as a child at the time, I think the answer to that is 'yes'.Just before the task force arrived, what was the consensus of the imminent war from both at home or around the world?
E.g. did people at home want to teach the Argies a lesson, and did other countries (Europe, US etc.) think we were mad daring to attempt it?
At least it seemed that way to me, anyway.
Gerber1 said:
Just before the task force arrived, what was the consensus of the imminent war from both at home or around the world?
This is my recollection...I was aged 19 years so old enough to have been directly affected if I had taken a different career path. During the task force build up there was so much diplomacy and it seemed to take an age for the task force to arrive and maybe it all seemed a procession played out on TV like the phony war in WW2. Surely the Argentines were just a nuisance that would be easily swatted aside by our forces. South Georgia was liberated and there was "Rejoice at that news" and that seemed so easy and the Argentines were just a pushover, there were some small skirmishes with stirring reporting like "I counted them all out..." on the TV and then it was "Gotcha" and we took out the General Belgrano with obvious significant loss of life and it was now more serious then was expected but it still seemed that we were largely OK and how could the Argentines now continue against a secret British submarine force that must have been there all the time and surely now the Argentines would now give up. Then a couple of days later and HMS Sheffield was hit and it was just completely unthinkable how the Argentines could actually have the capability to actually strike at us and take out our ships. How could that have happened?. Ian McDonald on the TV and the way he read out the briefings was like the aftermath of a nuclear war. Now we had actually lost a ship ourselves and now the whole taskforce and all those men were in the now directly in the firing line and it was really serious.
Apologies if any of the above is factually wrong or trivialises any part of the conflict as it is just my best recollection of the time.
Starfighter said:
The effect of those raids could have been achieved by the Sea Harriers and using much less by way of resources. A debate of later on in this thread.
Without a specialist runway denial munition such as JP233, MW-1, or Durandal, taking a runway out is really rather difficult.The only way to do it with dumb 1000lb bombs is to drop them from height such that they acheive a lot of vertical velocity and bury themselves into the runway. Of course dropping from height gives you a hugely increased CEP (Circular Error Probability) so you have to drop a lot of bombs (21 x 1000lbs from a Vulcan). It also makes you rather vulnerable to ground fire.
The Sea Harriers would have had to do it in dive attacks which would have made them extremely vulnerable to the Argentine AA defences. Something that could not have been afforded given:
a. The limited number of a/c.
b. The limited payload of the a/c.
c. The limited ground attack capability of the a/c.
The attacks the Harriers did make were low level 'lay-down' 'first run attacks' which, while they may take out infrastructure and parked a/c were/are about the square root of damn all use against a runway (the bomb grazes the runway and bounces off).
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
The attacks the Harriers did make were low level 'lay-down' 'first run attacks' which, while they may take out infrastructure and parked a/c were/are about the square root of damn all use against a runway (the bomb grazes the runway and bounces off).
There's also the hazard for those following Biggles(or anyone dumb enough to take a 2nd bite) that the johnnies on the AAA are now awake and trying to turn you and your aircraft into swiss cheese; at least one Harrier got bagged because an inexperienced pilot did a second pass.wildcat45 said:
Much of the performance of the RN down there was hampered by the legacy of the 1966 defence review.
Had that not have happened, it is likely there would have been no war, but if there had been i believe it would have been much shorter and less bloody.
The Sea Harrier did a magnificent job. However the two new carriers that were cancelled in 1966 would have been able to introduce Phantom jets into the air defence round the Falklands. Fast interceptors which could have taken out ARG jets long before they got anywhere near the islands and the fleet.
Airborne Early Warning in the shape of the stubby old Gannet would. Have given commanders and fighter controllers a better set of eyes.
The Buccaneer would also have been there as a superb means of taking out ground targets. It's an unlikely scenario, but it would have given the UK the option of attacking bases on the mainland.
Hermes most probably would have been there but as a Commando Carrier - an LPH capable of delivering troops by air - so no Yomping across the islands.
That said, the escort ships would likely have been the same or similar types.
Sea Dart would have been at sea on big Type 82 vessels. Operating in open water with plenty of sky for the sensors to see, not as happened operating in the littorals where headlands, hills and general geography got in the way.
Similarly Sea Wolf. The ships in and and around San Carlos would have needed basic point air defence butt with air superiority only a few 'leakers' would have made it through. (It could still have failed though.)
We'd probably not lost air defence ships like Sheffield and Coventry. Antelope and Ardent - or whatever ships would have been in their place - would still have been destroyed. As i said, the odd ARG jet would have been bound to get through and those two ships, especially Ardent were doing exactly what they were supposed to do by getting in harm's way.
It is worth noting that both Sea Dart and Sea Wolf went on to be refined and became very good weapons. Sea Dart especially evolved into a pretty decent bit of kit backed but by improved ship sensors like the 1022 and 996 radars which moved the RN away from essentially 1950s technology.
Sea Wolf had a pretty bad bug in its system which meant that it could fail at the crucial moment. This was addressed and the vertical launch GWS26 version of the missile is now 35 years on, begining to leave service.
As stated above, the RN of 1982 wasn't built for brutal one-to-one fighting in the equivalent of a Scottish sea loch. It was very broadly speaking, an integrated sub hunting specialist part of NATO designed to last a few weeks/months against Russian subs and long range bombers in the Greenland/UK/Iceland gap.
That said, the RN did a largely magnificent job in 1982. As did all the services. BZ
Buccaneers could have attacked the Argentine forces on the Falklands from all points of the compassHad that not have happened, it is likely there would have been no war, but if there had been i believe it would have been much shorter and less bloody.
The Sea Harrier did a magnificent job. However the two new carriers that were cancelled in 1966 would have been able to introduce Phantom jets into the air defence round the Falklands. Fast interceptors which could have taken out ARG jets long before they got anywhere near the islands and the fleet.
Airborne Early Warning in the shape of the stubby old Gannet would. Have given commanders and fighter controllers a better set of eyes.
The Buccaneer would also have been there as a superb means of taking out ground targets. It's an unlikely scenario, but it would have given the UK the option of attacking bases on the mainland.
Hermes most probably would have been there but as a Commando Carrier - an LPH capable of delivering troops by air - so no Yomping across the islands.
That said, the escort ships would likely have been the same or similar types.
Sea Dart would have been at sea on big Type 82 vessels. Operating in open water with plenty of sky for the sensors to see, not as happened operating in the littorals where headlands, hills and general geography got in the way.
Similarly Sea Wolf. The ships in and and around San Carlos would have needed basic point air defence butt with air superiority only a few 'leakers' would have made it through. (It could still have failed though.)
We'd probably not lost air defence ships like Sheffield and Coventry. Antelope and Ardent - or whatever ships would have been in their place - would still have been destroyed. As i said, the odd ARG jet would have been bound to get through and those two ships, especially Ardent were doing exactly what they were supposed to do by getting in harm's way.
It is worth noting that both Sea Dart and Sea Wolf went on to be refined and became very good weapons. Sea Dart especially evolved into a pretty decent bit of kit backed but by improved ship sensors like the 1022 and 996 radars which moved the RN away from essentially 1950s technology.
Sea Wolf had a pretty bad bug in its system which meant that it could fail at the crucial moment. This was addressed and the vertical launch GWS26 version of the missile is now 35 years on, begining to leave service.
As stated above, the RN of 1982 wasn't built for brutal one-to-one fighting in the equivalent of a Scottish sea loch. It was very broadly speaking, an integrated sub hunting specialist part of NATO designed to last a few weeks/months against Russian subs and long range bombers in the Greenland/UK/Iceland gap.
That said, the RN did a largely magnificent job in 1982. As did all the services. BZ
Edited by wildcat45 on Saturday 15th April 07:50
April 17th
The main task force sails south from Ascension Island.
Haig presents Argentine junta with 5-point plan. Withdrawal by both sides, three-flag-administration until December, restored communication with the mainland, talks in the new year on a long-term settlement, and consultation to ascertain the islanders' views.
The Argentine military's working groups studied this long into the night. Only the Air Force seemed willing at all to compromise.
Admiral Sir John Fieldhouse chairs conference at Ascension Island with Admiral Sandy Woodward and 3 Commando Brigade which sets out detailed plans for the retaking of the Islands by force.
They are informed that the government is utterly committed to the recapture of the Falklands by whatever means necessary, "without limitation." If diplomacy failed, the Task Force could count on absolute political support for its operations.
The basics of the timeline are hammered out at this meeting:
The earliest a landing could possibly take place was May 16th. With only one assault ship, Fearless, the Task Force had no backup capability, and possibly insufficient assault lift. The Navy's other assault ship, HMS Intrepid, had already been put into mothballs as an early part of Nott's downsizing plan, and it would take at least until then to reverse the process and get the ship South. The latest was May 25th, otherwise the troops may not have sufficient time to complete operations before the onset of Winter, which would also seriously bash the warships about and make cover difficult.
Argentine service councils debate Haig's proposals.
The main task force sails south from Ascension Island.
Haig presents Argentine junta with 5-point plan. Withdrawal by both sides, three-flag-administration until December, restored communication with the mainland, talks in the new year on a long-term settlement, and consultation to ascertain the islanders' views.
The Argentine military's working groups studied this long into the night. Only the Air Force seemed willing at all to compromise.
Admiral Sir John Fieldhouse chairs conference at Ascension Island with Admiral Sandy Woodward and 3 Commando Brigade which sets out detailed plans for the retaking of the Islands by force.
They are informed that the government is utterly committed to the recapture of the Falklands by whatever means necessary, "without limitation." If diplomacy failed, the Task Force could count on absolute political support for its operations.
The basics of the timeline are hammered out at this meeting:
The earliest a landing could possibly take place was May 16th. With only one assault ship, Fearless, the Task Force had no backup capability, and possibly insufficient assault lift. The Navy's other assault ship, HMS Intrepid, had already been put into mothballs as an early part of Nott's downsizing plan, and it would take at least until then to reverse the process and get the ship South. The latest was May 25th, otherwise the troops may not have sufficient time to complete operations before the onset of Winter, which would also seriously bash the warships about and make cover difficult.
Argentine service councils debate Haig's proposals.
18th April
Leaving the troops and troopships behind at Ascension to continue their training and rehearsals, the third battlegroup now moves South.
HMS Antrim has shot off ahead, the Type 42s are the middle group, this is the third). This group consists of the two carriers, destroyer Glamorgan, and frigates Yarmouth (Type 12), Alacrity (Type 21), and Broadsword, (Type 22), and the replenishment ships Resource and Olmeda.
They got off to a rather hasty start, Olmeda reported seeing a periscope feather, so the ships hauled away a couple of hours earlier than expected. Given that the sonar operators tracked the target evading rapidly, it was either a Soviet nuclear boat taking a gander, or a whale.
Turned out it was a whale.
|https://thumbsnap.com/IIWlHIWx[/url]
Argentine aircraft carrier Veinticinco de Mayo returns to port with engine trouble.
Meantime, in Buenos Aries, Haig gets fed up, and tells the Junta outright that Britain was not bluffing, and America could not see two friends at war. Also, Washington would not tolerate the fall of the Thatcher government. As a result, either Argentina entered into realistic negotiations on the basis of Resolution 502, or America would side with Britain.
This didn't have much effect, especially on Admiral Anaya. He expressed the view that the British had no stomach for a fight, that democracies could not sustain casualties, and that the Task Force would simply break down in the South Atlantic Winter. He was also aware of the divisions within the American administration, and didn't believe that Haig could deliver a 'tilt' towards Britain. So he simply told Haig point blank that he was lying.
Alexander Haig sends telegram to William Clark (National Security Advisor) explaining the state of negotiations to date.
That said, they didn't reject the Haig plan outright. (As one American observed, that would have required of them a decision). They were discussed amongst the Army Council, a 54-man body probably equivalent to an extended cabinet or small parliament. No commander doubted their ability to inflict unacceptable losses on the British, well, at least, not in the company of his peers. They had air superiority, submarines, anti-ship missiles, and 8,000 men dug in around Stanley alone. Why negotiate?
SD.
Leaving the troops and troopships behind at Ascension to continue their training and rehearsals, the third battlegroup now moves South.
HMS Antrim has shot off ahead, the Type 42s are the middle group, this is the third). This group consists of the two carriers, destroyer Glamorgan, and frigates Yarmouth (Type 12), Alacrity (Type 21), and Broadsword, (Type 22), and the replenishment ships Resource and Olmeda.
They got off to a rather hasty start, Olmeda reported seeing a periscope feather, so the ships hauled away a couple of hours earlier than expected. Given that the sonar operators tracked the target evading rapidly, it was either a Soviet nuclear boat taking a gander, or a whale.
Turned out it was a whale.
|https://thumbsnap.com/IIWlHIWx[/url]Argentine aircraft carrier Veinticinco de Mayo returns to port with engine trouble.
Meantime, in Buenos Aries, Haig gets fed up, and tells the Junta outright that Britain was not bluffing, and America could not see two friends at war. Also, Washington would not tolerate the fall of the Thatcher government. As a result, either Argentina entered into realistic negotiations on the basis of Resolution 502, or America would side with Britain.
This didn't have much effect, especially on Admiral Anaya. He expressed the view that the British had no stomach for a fight, that democracies could not sustain casualties, and that the Task Force would simply break down in the South Atlantic Winter. He was also aware of the divisions within the American administration, and didn't believe that Haig could deliver a 'tilt' towards Britain. So he simply told Haig point blank that he was lying.
Alexander Haig sends telegram to William Clark (National Security Advisor) explaining the state of negotiations to date.
That said, they didn't reject the Haig plan outright. (As one American observed, that would have required of them a decision). They were discussed amongst the Army Council, a 54-man body probably equivalent to an extended cabinet or small parliament. No commander doubted their ability to inflict unacceptable losses on the British, well, at least, not in the company of his peers. They had air superiority, submarines, anti-ship missiles, and 8,000 men dug in around Stanley alone. Why negotiate?
SD.
hidetheelephants said:
wildcat45 said:
Who knows. Their carrier would have potentially been a problem. If it came to a one on one between Belgrano and a RN frigate, i could see it ending badly for the frigate.
This was a major reason for sinking her; on paper Belgrano, fifteen 6" guns in 5 turrets and a further eight 5" guns, had the ability to knock st out of the battle group and potentially shrug off exocet hits through subdivision, armour and sheer size, or at least shrug them off long enough to sink or admin kill enough of our ships to wreck any prospect of completing the landing. The reality of her being a training ship, barely operational and filled with sailors who had seen little or no training meant that was unlikely but the risk she represented was real.Edited by hidetheelephants on Sunday 16th April 11:39
On the Type 42's, Exeter was a late arrival to the task force and carried the latest version of Sea Dart. She had much more luck shooting things down than her sisters. I forget which book but there is a grim account of Exeter downing a Lear Jet, the crew of which could be heard all the way down over radio. There where no survivors.
With Sharky Ward, he clearly has had a lot to say over the years. Which has alienated him from both the Navy and RAF. Some of his criticisms are well founded, such as following up Blackbuck 1 with a "suprise" dawn raid was indeed silly, and wasted aircraft.; some as Ginetta Girl points above where not.
Edited by DMN on Tuesday 18th April 16:26
Thank you very much for this and all other contributors
Here is a short piece of music that happens to be a favourite of mine and is in-keeping with this topic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhKSYAH-2qw
Here is a short piece of music that happens to be a favourite of mine and is in-keeping with this topic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhKSYAH-2qw
19th April
Argentina rejects Haig's plan unless Britain agrees to transfer sovereignty by 31 December 1982 and allow Argentine nationals to settle in the Islands.
EEC foreign ministers declare support for Britain.
Alexander Haig sends a telegram to Francis Pym outlining the Argentinean demands.
Read also Haig's annotations to the text.
This is the end of the Shuttle Diplomacy - Alexander Haig has flown a total of 32,965 miles. (Does he get points for this? And not once was he manhandled off a United plane!)
SD.
Argentina rejects Haig's plan unless Britain agrees to transfer sovereignty by 31 December 1982 and allow Argentine nationals to settle in the Islands.
EEC foreign ministers declare support for Britain.
Alexander Haig sends a telegram to Francis Pym outlining the Argentinean demands.
Read also Haig's annotations to the text.
This is the end of the Shuttle Diplomacy - Alexander Haig has flown a total of 32,965 miles. (Does he get points for this? And not once was he manhandled off a United plane!)
SD.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff