b787
Captain
if i read something it will be in Spanish, i know the story embellished, British good guys, Argies bad guys, so no for me is not a good read, good read for me always in Spanish
Falklands War, 1982, Thread
- Thread starter PanAsian
- Start date
- Status
That book does a very credible job of objectively presenting both sides.
By saying what you did, simply because it is in English, and without ever having read it..you are simply showing your own bias.
Anyhow...it is a good book and does a very good job of presenting the history without slanting it way off to either side.
b787
Captain
First Jeff, let me apologize if i gave you the wrong impression, i am sure is a good read, but i meant is not that good for some one who reads Spanish, in History, the British tent to embellish their victories, (the Spanish world does up to some degree the same), The Falkland war, despite is viewed as an isolated event, it is not, it is only the continuation of the many wars Spain and England fought from the XV to the XVIII century.
In fact the war has its origin is in that period, the war was a victory for England, however if you read the history of the many wars Spain and England fought, (you must know since some were fought in what today is the US soil) That Spain defeated many times the British, the Battle of Cartagena de Indias (1741) in modern-day Colombia, was one of the battles in which the British were defeated.
The Falklands/Malvinas war is just an extension of the many wars Spain and England fought, however in the case of Argentina, the Spanish former empire remained weak, fragmented and without a sense of cultural unity.
The conflict is not yet solved, the view from the Spanish speaking world, is not the view Presented in the English speaking world.
While some one reading the book might think is fair, reading Spanish sources that view might change, why?
For example the battle of San Juan de Ulúa (1568) the British usually tend to enbellish their History, they avoid to highlight battles like this one where their fleet was destroyed and will give the idea of heroic and great success in battles where they won.
The Falklands/Malvinas war, was a war where they almost lost, they got lucky Spain did not help Argentina and Italy the same, and the USA was not neutral, but as a military value, they embellish their victory and hide the fact would Argentina had gotten more weapons they would never had won.
antiterror13
Brigadier
b787
Captain
sometimes but no always the Spanish world has its own record of victories over the British
Obviously nah
but recently after death of Fidel Castro a rumor or it was based ? say Cuba could possibly have send submarines they had now retired 6 Foxtrots for attack British Armada en route for Falklands in fact around central Atlantic close Ascencion Island but can be one idea for a what if i am wargamer hehe 
Equation
Lieutenant General
Obviously nah
Those Foxtrots submarines would have to travel long distances therefore needs constant refueling and resupply of air in order to make it down to the Falklands islands. Yes they can make a stop to friendly Latin American neighbors for replenishments but they would probably be caught by British intelligent and spies. I don't know how much they would be of use.
antiterror13
Brigadier
deleted
antiterror13
Brigadier
b787
Captain
England would had never nuked Argentina, they sent the nukes as a threat, but an empty one, why? well Brazil demanded that England would not attack continental Argentina, England never did it, in fact if they never did attack the air bases was because that was part of the deal
Why simple South America could had become a nuclear power complicating things for the USA
- Status