MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Thousands turn out to pay their last respects to Baroness Thatcher in London
Queen Elizabeth led mourners on Wednesday in St Paul's Cathedral at the funeral of Baroness Thatcher Britain's longest serving prime minister of modern times. More than 2,000 guests from around the world paid their last respects at the biggest such occasion since the Queen Mother's funeral in 2002. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesARA GENERAL BELGRANO
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0you will never rest in Peace Tatcher...
Interesting not to see a single government official from US, however two of the twentieth century's worst war criminals, Kissinger and Dick Cheney were there.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0The “family” getting together
@1 hypocrit
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0You cheesy little worm.
The mighty Argentina sneaked 2,000 troops up at dawn to attack an unarmed civilian population and take away their homes and their freedom.
Not even a Declaration of War.
Then, after Britain and the UN asked Argentina to leave - they didn't.
Your WARship, the Belgrano, had Exocet missiles and other weapons and was clearly a threat to the British fleet. Your own Captain agreed.
We sank her.
The ARA destroyers escorting her could have rescued the crew, but THEY RAN AWAY - to your everlasting shame!
And now you say “it's not fair, what a bad lady”
In short, you're a great example of the morons that believe and spread the lies of cowardly Argentina and the amoral CFK.
Liars, thieves, cowards, the lot of you.
There are many who do not like Maggie Thatcher, but they all agree that she did the RIGHT and MORAL act when she gave the order to sink the Belgrano.
Argentina should never have invaded and never put the ship and crew in harm's way.
Margaret Thatcher owned by a housewife.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O184yGKknSQ
Marcos Alejandro owned by Margret Thatcher !!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Margaret UVic boy Margaret, stop drinking.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Marcos
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0I suspect that you are 'projecting'.
What time is it where you are??
What's with all the friendly chatter, Marcos!
Do you not have a life? I'm certainly not missing your chummy banter.
I mean that in the friendliest way, of course.
Same time as it is where I am 06:30 UK time. Hypocrite!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 05:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0A very dignified funeral for a great British lady
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0@9 Britworker
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0That's right. She did the right thing with total resolve. She deserved a respectful funeral.
@1 hipolyte
The Belgrano was sunk, a casualty of war. The threat of being killed on a warship goes with the territory. It was on patrol, it was a threat. The sinking caused the argentine naval to remain in dock. Britain would, if it needed to, sink all your ships in dock. War is a war and threats are threats and you guys brought the pain and anguish down upon yourselves.
Kissinger in the guest list, how appropriate.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Must be a terrible honour. Literally.
Then again, having the dead one in mind, it's a ll a big happy family.
And us on the other side, well, we are happy too...
Disgusting comments Stevie, you should be ashamed.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0As for the Belgrano that was a warship at war in a conflict you started and as such it was a legitimate target as the Belgrano captain has said several times.
Rest in peace Maggie you were a great leader and someone who changed the world for the better in the time you were here and the funeral was very dignified and beautiful.
Not my fault Xect, his name IS Kissinger. What was I supposed to call him?
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0There didn't need to be any US government officials, it wasn't a state funeral but a private one. The guest list was created by the Thatcher family so anyone's absence was down to them.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 08:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Belgrano was sunk as a legitimate act of war, confirmed by all relevant authorities. The only people who continue to comment on it negatively or scream “war crime” are those who either ignore the facts or don't know them, I reccimend a little research before brain engages mouth.
I was at the funeral and, whether you were a supporter of her legacy or not, it would have been hard for anyone to deny it was a really great event. Very well organised, very appropriate behaviour by all (apart from a few protestors who were drowned out by the applause of the crowds).
There was one protestor who was interviewed complaining about Thatcher's legacy, he was 22 so wasn't alive when she was in power. He was an anthropology student which smacks of a priveleged background and he seems to have been unaware of the fact that it was Labour that introduced increased student loans, decimation of the student grant system, and handed over the country's money to banks without setting any major deadlines on when they should return it.
@ Stevie
Apr 18th, 2013 - 08:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0you being on the other side of what?
Belgranos escorts ran failing to pick up survivors. War crime!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 08:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0@17
Apr 18th, 2013 - 08:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0They didn't just cowardly run and leave their sailors drowning, when the cowards realised they were beat, they left their teenage 'soldiers' to freeze and starve on the Falklands for weeks afterwards the end if the war. If it wasn't for the kindness of the Falklands people and British soldiers there, the Argentine death toll would have been much higher.
They actually owe Mrs Thatcher a debt of gratitude.
@1, The greatest moment in her legacy for me will be the sinking of the Belgrano which Argentina sent on a seek and destroy mission against our great courageous UK forces!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0Its a pity the rest of the great argentine navy turn tail and fled leaving their fellow oppressors burning and drowning in the freezing cold water theres brotherly love for you, argentina style, you want guilt? how must those sailors leaving the dying to drown must feel? probably relief knowing argentina,
or all those people in B.A celebrating the invasion of The Falklands? sorry but any guilt lies slap bang on argentinas doorstep, That is Argentinas LEGACY, deal with it...... :)
SELF-DETERMINATION........sinks oppressors, now reap it!
18
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Brit self-determination doesn't apply to the South Atlantic.
Regardless of what they determine.
same old whiners complaining that the UK fought back against the expansion of the Argentine First Reich eh?
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ooohh! Its a war crime! You arent supposed to shoot back at us! Its not allowed!”
And now they are trying via indoctrination and re-writing history to steal, by colonisation, what they failed to capture by force of arms.
Thank God for Maggie!
Down with the Argentine Reich!
Marcos - I suspect the US president had more pressing events in Boston to consider,all know his views which he made very public last week, I imagine his ambassador was there though.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0You and Hipolyte are such poor little demented children.
@ Marcos Alejandro Only a idiot like you SQUATTING in another country because Argentina is not a fit place for you to live and cry because your ship was sunk after you instigated a war but that's Argentina in every walk of life even the rest of South America are being vocal about it now.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:16 am - Link - Report abuse 01...didnt the Captain of the Belgrano admit he was a threat to the task force and a ligitamate target.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0RGs tried to play with the big boys the got hurt. Dont get uptight I understand you are humiliated by defeat but you sank a few of our ships as well dont forget so dont be down small victories and all that, try better next time.
ps
The Gurka in the funeral procession is still miffed he didnt get to attack the RGs before they ran :)
#1
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Good decision Maggie. I was never a supporter of her or her policies EXCEPT in the case of the Falklands.
It is probably non pc to say it but the Belgrano got what it deserved. If you go to war, there are consequencies.
Did the UK bleat about unfairness when our ships were sunk?
Sorrow for the crews,, but they kept on fighting and taking casualties in the best traditions of the service.
Contrast Argentina, UNFAIR, we are not going to play with you as it is too dangerous. You are supposed to let us sink your ships and not retaliate.
Kissinger is not universally disliked in Argentina. I recall seeing pictures of an Argentine family at an event with Kissinger proudly displayed in their Argentine home.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0If Japanese carriers launched some planes over the central Pacific but they had not dropped any bombs or declared war, would an interdiction be in order or would this be a war-crime?
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0At least the Japanese had sufficient bushido to declare war with the bang.
I know that the Belgrano came from a nation that had not declared war, but taking over a country like the Falklands might be considered a bit bad, especially as it was done with the Argentinian army, airforce and navy. This strikes me as a bit warlike - especially as people were being killed and frightened.
I think that Pearl Harbour could have been a little less difficult had the response been more like the Belgrano incident.
Btw, did the Argentinians ever get around to declaring war?
Can you have a 'war crime' without a war?
I always say it
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0ARGENTINA ALWAYS THE VICTIM
Being Irish I first started reading these threads a couple of months ago in an attempt to understand the Falklands issue.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0I have learned a hell of a lot but mostly what I have learned is that wherever you go on the internet you find Argentines whingeing about this...whingeing about that...even whingeing that the football match in the 1966 World Cup against England was rigged ????????
Never in the field of human history was so much whinged about by so few!
(sorry Mr Churchill)
The captain of the vessel, Capt. Bonzo, on various occasions insisted that the sinking of of the General Belgrano was, in his words, “a licit act of war”. He acknowledged that he was, under orders, effecting manoeuvres in order to better attack the ships of the British Task Force. His account of the event was supported by Admiral Enrique Molina Pico, Head of the General Staff of the Argentine Navy.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0Whilst, of course, an unfortunate event it would never have occurred had not Argentina illegally invaded the Falkland Islands in the previous April thus provoking the British armed response to regain the archipelago.
Any other interpretation of the event is just plain stupidity and wishful thinking on the part of Argentina and its pursuit, by way way of myths and fairy tales, for sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.
@1,4,6 Unlike “people” such as yourselves, I rarely find it appropriate to repeat myself. So go and read my responses to your drivel http://en.mercopress.com/2013/04/18/falkland-islands-in-moving-tribute-to-baroness-thatcher-a-great-friend-of-the-islands
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0@11,19 Your day will come. It WON'T be a happy one. Self-determination. You want to put money on it? What have YOU been drinking? Meths?
@19 Stevie “Brit self-determination doesn't apply to the South Atlantic.”
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Other than fools like you, la Kretina and slimy Timerman, who has determined this?
@4/5. Marcus owned by a woman who was owned by a housewife... Pathetic. Weak. No wonder your country hates her.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lets not forget my friends Marcos Alejandro is an Argentine squatter living in the UK because Argentina is un stable and not a good place to live -His own words by the way to a British news paper
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0These pathetic insults from the RG trolls will not change the fact that Maggie will go down in history as one of the greatest British prime ministers of modern times ..... the funeral did justice to her legacy!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It´s not use trying to reason with Markus Dickus, Esteban & the others since their childish minds have been indoctrinated from an early age by governments who lie , cheat & steal from their own people ......this in an area full of tin-pot dictators
Let´s compare the legacy of CFK at her funeral (which could be soon due to her constant ill health) & apart from the usual Mercosur/Unasur cronies, the only other invitees will be Iran, Angola & N.Korea...... all bastions of democracy
And when all the insults start pouring in from the anti-K´s, these same RG trolls will be the first to start crying about lack of respect etc., etc.,
3 Troy Tempest I see you are another brain washed...
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As all almost of the hipocrites brits, you have a huge lack of knowledge on what you are writing. you should study more before writing, I presume you do it just because it is for free...
Tatcher, now you answser to their souls FACE TO FACE, why did you kill them ?? T o evade the peace proposal of Belaunde Terry and cover your problems, therefore, winning the elections ? YOU WILL NOT REST IN PEACE. Say hello to Mahatma Ghandy ( however I don't think you will be in the same place ever)
@hipolyte, Believe me you piece of shit Thatcher will be going to a far better place than bog eyed Nazi Nestor the thieving rat and is chemically enhanced wife the Botox Queen Crissy Kirchner
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 035 hipolyte
Apr 18th, 2013 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If Argentina had followed the demands of resolution 502 and withdrawn its army there would have been no lives lost!
Hipo 35 - READ what is said at 37 - it happens to be the truth - that concept and belief that the Kirschener Govt and Peron before work hard to eliminate and eradicate from Argentina and Argentines.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 01:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you actually know WHICH Govt and PrimeMininister approved the form and plans of Mrs Thatcher,s Funeral?
It was a LABOUR Govt lead by Gordon Brown as PrimeMinister.
Of course the storming of Moody Brook Barracks on the morning of 2 April 1982 using heavy machine guns and white phosphorus was just for a laugh. Pretty sure the Argentineans didn't really mean it.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 01:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina Always The Victim
Apr 18th, 2013 - 01:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0WHINGE WHINGE WHINGE WHINGE WHINGE
Ding dong, the witch is dead!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 026 GeoffWard2
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just a small correction about the Japanese declaring war before the event: they did no such thing.
Due to the need to decode and then translate everything the Japanese Ambassador arrived to issue the Declaration of War AFTER Pearl Harbour had been attacked.
And does it really matter whether Argentina declared war or not: they have proven time and time again they will deny anything that they later think will harm their current political purpose. They are in fact NEVER to be trusted on anything as a government.
@35 Hippolyte are you perhaps Sussies left flip flop?
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@41 Two Witches, first is sussie, she'll be dead soon through drug abuse and verbal Diarrhoea.
The second is TMBOA and she'll be dead soon through Botox abuse and verbal Diarrhoea.
@ Brazilian, That is no way to talk about Kirchner's evil sister Alicia Castro
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 041 Brazilian
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I didn't know TMBOA had died.
Whe did this joyful event happen?
@1 hippo do any of your ships pay thier respect to the dead crew members of Belgrano when they are in the vicinity of the wreck? Because ours do!!!!! I expect that the answer is no, not least because no Rg ships are seaworthy but more likely you have NO respect for anyone or anything alive or dead now trot on lowlife.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@35 Why did she kill them? Because they were cowardly, invading, argie shit, of course. Why else?
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@41 It's good old shit for brains again!
@35hipocrit
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As I said,
“The mighty Argentina sneaked 2,000 troops up at dawn to attack an unarmed civilian population and take away their homes and their freedom.
Not even a Declaration of War.
Then, after Britain and the UN asked Argentina to leave - they didn't.
Your WARship, the Belgrano, had Exocet missiles and other weapons and was clearly a threat to the British fleet. Your own Captain agreed.
We sank her.
The ARA destroyers escorting her could have rescued the crew, but THEY RAN AWAY - to your everlasting shame!
And now you say “it's not fair, what a bad lady””
Tell us, what is your version of events??
Did Argentina declare war?
Did Argentina invade an island of unarmed civilians?
Did Argentina send out its Carrier and its Battledhip with Escorts around the Falklands??
WHEREEVER SHE IS.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 03:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I just hope that whereever thatcher is, she can rest in peace, which will be very difficult for her.
Such a despisable human being like thatcher used to be, can be forgiven by god only, due to in my opinion i don't think that most people who live in earth have enough goodness and wisdom in order to forgive somebody so controversial and hateful like her.
Margaret thatcher wasn't just a human being who committed mistakes like any other person, she was a criminal too, she was somebody who everything she did was on behalf of the richest sectors of the british society, and in detriment of the workers.
Beside, her order in relation to the sinking of the belgrano during the malvinas-falklands war in 1982 showed the kind of human being she used to be.
I don't use to talk about god in any of my comments, because i have never had a good relation with the church, due to i'm gay, and as everybody know, that institution has never accepted to give gay people the same rights than everybody else, anyway despite it, i have always believed in god, and this time it was necesary to make reference to him.
On the other hand, all those people who were celebrating thatcher's death in the streets from london a few days ago, aren't less misserable than what thatcher used to be when she was alived, due to beyond ideological differences, respect and humanitarian reasons should always prevaill.
If they are so detractors of thatcher's policies, they don't need to celebrate her death, because of a matter of respect, what they have to do, is to continue fighting for their rights.
I respect all those people who admire thatcher, in fact, if she was re elected twice in the u. k., is because this is evident that many people agreeded on her policies. However i have a different point of view about thatcher, but the difference among all those people who celebrated her death, or hugo chavez's one moth ago and i, is that i express my differences of opinion respectfuly.
@49
Apr 18th, 2013 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just to correct you, she was democratically elected to Prime Minister on three successive occasions, not two.
It isn't expected that an Argentine would like, admire or understand her, so you could have saved your breath. She did after all humiliate you.
48 Troy Tempest the more you write, the better I understand how poor educated you are...
Apr 18th, 2013 - 04:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0just one little example for you.
Did England declare war to Argentina in 1833?
Did England invade an island of unarmed civilians ?
Did Engand send out its CLio to the Malvinas ??
hasta la vista misseducated.
#49
Apr 18th, 2013 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Beside, her order in relation to the sinking of the belgrano during the malvinas-falklands war in 1982 showed the kind of human being she used to be.”
Yes, resolute in the face of adversity, caring about the safety of the British forces and taking the advice of her naval commanders. !!!!!
Belgrano, Belgrano, Belgrano “ad nauseum” Don't you EVER read what your own naval personnel have said about this !!
Obviously not. You just keep whingeing on about an innocent cruise liner that was sunk by the dastardly Brits.
You are obviously a naval historian of great standing !!
@51 hipo
Apr 18th, 2013 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This article is dealing with what happened when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister, not what Argentina thinks happened in 1833.
did Argentina invade the Falklands 1in 1982 ?
did Argentina ignore UN resolution 502 and not withdraw its army?
#51
Apr 18th, 2013 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No. ENGLAND could not declare war, it was not a sovereign state then. It would have had to be Britain, in which England was the largest country..
Did England declare war to Argentina in 1833? No !
Did England invade an island of unarmed civilians ? No
Did Engand send out its CLio to the Malvinas ?? No but it did go to the Falklands.
Just correcting your gross ignorance of the facts and your palpable misseducation.
#53
did Argentina invade the Falklands in 1982 --YES
did Argentina ignore UN resolution 502 and not withdraw its army? -- again YES
YOU SEEM A RATHER WELL - EDUCATED CHAP !
49... What all 200 that celebrated her death with pre printed socialist worker posters in traf square, hardly a mass protest, more people at my train station in the morning.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But everyone has the right to post views , and living in a democracy the UK even let protestors line the route, I think it all went off really well a great send off for the Iron Lady who stood up to Argentine Colonial ambitions.
HMS Elizabeth,
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Video ready to see, finished this year
Queen will launch it in 2014.
http://www.bfbs.com/news/
or this one
http://www.bfbs.com/news/
the Royal Navy,
your navy ==their nightmare .?/
.
@ axel arg (# Your sexuality as nothing to do with your thoughts or opinions but what you should do is question why Argentine officers sexually abused young Argentine conscripts when your country illegally invaded The Falkland Islands,these conscripts openly admit they were treated better by the British than there own officers which says a lot of the kind of people you are also perhaps being gay you look on your leader SS Hitler Kirchner as some kind of gay icon with those baboon lips and dirty dyed hair she is a disgrace to all Argentine and to Argentina she as ripped you all of financially and maybe you will be a better people when she goes and joins her one eyed lover which for the world can not be quick enough.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@56 Briton
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0One hell of a threat when she is planed and armed!
Fantastic size to the thing, can't wait for it to come near the Falklands.
Argies will run away and hide bigtime.
Mind you, they might have the icebreaker ALMOST ready to come out and challenge the QE, but probably Putridjelly will have pocketed the money again!
LOLs
Did England declare war to Argentina in 1833? Argenwho?
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Did England invade an island of unarmed civilians ? No, why would you invade your own territory. Unarmed my arse by the way.
Did Engand send out its CLio to the Malvinas ?? No, the Malvinas are only a figment of your imagination.
@49
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Belgrano could have been sunk as soon as it left port or even attacked as it was in berth. The exclusion zone was set up to warn all shipping, military and especially merchant, that the area inside was a potential area of conflict.
After Argentina had illegally invaded British sovereign territory, an act of war had occurred hence all Argentine military assets were potential targets.
Get over it.
BRITWORKER. CLYDE15. ANDY65.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ANDY: I have always known about the serious abuses that some of our officers commited in the islands, and i have always criticised them in many of usuall comments in mercopress. Beside, those cases are being investigated by justice.
I'm not sorprised for the misserable comparison that you do in relation to hitler and c. f. k., in fact, there are many other ignorant people like you who often express that mediocre comparison, it just showes your low level of debate.
On the other hand, when i made reference to my sexual condition, is because i wanted to express that i have never refered to god before in any of my comments in this forum, and i explained why i did it this time.
BRITWORKER: If you want to refer to humiliation, you should take into account also the hard repressions against the workers who protested because of thatcher's policies, anyway, as it usually happens, many of you tell just what is convenient for you.
CLYDE15: I respect your opinion but i don't agree on it. Before sinking the belgrano there were conversations, beside, the ship was sealing away from the islands, and out of the exclution zone. I have always thought that it was a war crime, because it was sunk outside the exclution zone, however i could know last year that in the end of april of 1982, thatcher's govt. had decided to change the rules, and notified the authorities about it, since that moment i have started to have serious doubts about wether it can be considered like a war crime. Anyway, beyond this controversy, if there were conversations to solve the conflict, the order to sink the ship was unnecesary, in fact, it was asked to her a reconfirmation for that decision.
Actually what she wanted to show is that she wasn't interested in a negotiated solution like resolution 502 asked both nations, because just a militar victory would save her misserabe and pathetic government.
Sorry if you and all the other thatcherists can't see it.
Comment removed by the editor.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0CONQUEROR.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I shouldn't answer your comment, because it is as reactionary and decadent as most your comments.
However i decided to give you an answer because i think it's important to signalize that beyond your reactionary and mediocre thought, you don't represent in absolut what a great country like the u. k. thinks about giving gay people the same rights than everybody else, due to the british congress approved gay marriage one month ago, like in france and new zealand, in argentina it was approved in july 2010.
@ axel arg So what you fail to understand is this
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina invaded a peaceful small community in English terms we call such people COWARDS you then cry like a girl when a government takes action to remove your forces and complain when that old rust bucket Belgrano was sunk,why do you think that you can send a heavily armed battle cruiser out to a war zone then cry when it is destroyed??? only Argentines would make themselves look and sound so stupid even Argentine military have accepted that The Belgrano was a rightful target to be sunk.
If you look at your country and it's history you seem to constantly be living in a state of crying that for some reason you are badly done by the problem lies with YOU my friend and all Argentines who over the last 31 years have elected one corrupt administration after the other, finally my comparison with Hitler and your beloved botox queen is quite just,you are a nation of European immigrants which for some reason you are ashamed to admit and that you occupy a land that was colonised by Spanish pirates and yes you are in deed the sons and daughter of Spanish pirates just like you accuse The Falkland Islanders of being in planted at least they are comfortable with there heritage and history which is more than can be said for Argentines.
58 ChrisR ==agreed..
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 063 axel arg ==due to the british congress
we have no congress..
@ hypocryte
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So Maggie is the personification of evil ehh???
Did she kill 30,000 of her own citizens?
Did she torture & imprison thousands of protestors?
Did she throw thousands of people out of planes into the Rio de la Plata?
Did she steal the babies of murdered victims & give them to her military cronies?
No .... I don't think so! But you don't seem to understand the definition of evil since you go out every April 2 & celebrate the actions of the Military Junta!!!
@ axel arg When you talk about gay marriage in your country may I also point out the new ITALIAN POPE recently squatting in Argentina and now in planted into The Vatican is anti gay marriage but we all notice how your dear leader the botox queen rushed to Italy to kiss the popes ass I guess as the saying goes SHE WOULD SELL HER SOUL TO THE DEVIL just to get liked.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0SHE WOULD SELL HER SOUL TO THE DEVIL
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0or
her body to the highest bidder..
@35hipocrit
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0hipocrit
You have avoided answering my question:
What is your version of events leading to the sinking of the Belgrano?
Didn't you militarily invade an Island of 3,000 unarmed civilians and 65 Royal Marines??
Didn't you attempt to massacre the Marines in their sleep by spraying their barracks with machine gun fire and white-phosphor bombs?
Did you declare War?
Who would you say the 'war criminals' are???
Are you unable to answer ?
@Troy Tempest, there brainwashed mate how can they answer you think its bad in North Korea these poor bastard Argentines are close on there heels
Apr 18th, 2013 - 11:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 070andy
Apr 19th, 2013 - 12:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's ok, Andy. There is hope for this one.
Hipohop is actually avoiding answering because he knows his statement is pure rot.
He knows that what he wants to believe has no basis in fact, but to believe the truth is unbearable.
He spews his wrath in frustration - drowning out his own doubts.
Axel - please tell me - just how much do you know about teh social-economic conditions in the UK of the 1960s and 1970s?
Apr 19th, 2013 - 12:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0I want to hear from you BOTH sides of the argument over why Mrs T tackled the 3 bug unions - which they openly admit - the previous Conservative and Labour Govts had failed to do so in the previous 20 years.
Do please compare UK,s economic standing in the world in 1959 and 1979 - tell me what you find?
Did you know that as a result of her policies millions of working class folks in UK were able to buy their own houses - even own a car which many did not before.
How does a Country pour endless sums of money it has not got- for ever and ever and ever - into over staffed outdated industries that produce a product that is unsaleable due to its price and quality?
I am not saying that folks did not suffer as a result of what she did - some did - some then went a different direction and have advanced themselves and their families - others stayed in the rut and largely live of welfare instead.
If it was all so wrong and terrible then please answer me:
1 Why did the subsequent Labourt Govt do NOTHING to reverse her policies in the 13 years they has in power?
2 Why have so many countries all around the world followed similar policies
3 Why is it that those European countries that stuck to the old “nationalised” system - are the ones who are now having to seek financial bailouts?
As for the Belfgrano- get a life - she was steaming a triangular waiting holding pattern- her bows changed direction very few minutes- her Captain and your senior Navy Admirals at the time have made all that abundantly clear - get a life and get over it - would she or a Super Entendard NOT have fired on a British carrier 250 miles North or east of the Islands if its bows were facing S.Africa or the North Pole?
There was NOTHING new in the “Belunde Plan”
#61
Apr 19th, 2013 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Don't you realise that your carrier was about to launch an attack on the British task force BEFORE the Belgrano was sunk. Thatcher made the decision on the advice of her military advisors.
All this while“talks were going on ”!! So, it's OK for your people to attack us but not for us to attack you - while talks are going on ?
Resolution 502, was that the one that required Argentina to remove her armed forces from the Falklands ? Did Argentina comply ? NO !
Argentina's idea of talks are the same now as then. We want sovereignty over the islands, give them to us.
In 1982 it would have been,we have an armed force in the Falklands and will stay there until you acknowledge this and remove ALL British presence from the area.
The Belgrano has been a myth in Argentinian society for years and is used as a “cause celebre”and rallying cry to demonise a military action which was necessary from the UK''s point of view. Mrs. Thatcher's number one priority was to ensure the safety of her armed forces. She made the decision, on advice, to
protect the British fleet. Your naval personnel agreed on the action and have said they would have done the same thing.
However, we still here incessant calls of war crime, etc.
Your country's mind set is that they prefer to continue with the myth rather than the facts. It is easier to put all the blame on an external force rather than see where the blame really lies.
#66, etc. Re Thatcher
Apr 19th, 2013 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0'Did she kill 30,000 of her own citizens?
Did she torture & imprison thousands of protestors?
Did she throw thousands of people out of planes into the Rio de la Plata?
Did she steal the babies of murdered victims & give them to her military cronies?'
Let's have a bit of perspective.
Argentina was a military dictatorship; the UK was a democracy.
And all this was in the last century, when Germany and Russia murdered over 10 million non-combatants, EACH!
OK, it's obvious that the Argentinan dictatorship followed the example of Germany and Russia; but it is equally true that the Germans and Russians followed the example of the Spanish in Central and South America.
Argentina, post-Galtieri, has decimated the armed forces and much more than that with their military leaderships.
Argentina is NOT, today, murdering thousands of its 'enemies' or the millions of its available citizens.
It is struggling massively because of its inadequate leadership and its political establishment.
Its people DO need help, but it looks like there have to be changes at the top before we can all help them.
@74 GeoffWard2
Apr 19th, 2013 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Excellent post.
ANDY65. ISLANDER1. GEOFFWARD2.
Apr 20th, 2013 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have always thought that the sinking of the belgrano was a war crime, because it was sunk outside the e. z.
However i could know last year that in the end of april of 1982 her govt. had decided to change the roles, and notified the pertinent authorities about that new decision. Since that moment i have started to have doubts about wether it can be considered like a war crime.
Anyway, beyond this controversy, if thatcher was so interested in defending the islands, she could have sent a huge militar mission to the archipelago in order to protect the islanders from the terrible abuses that the junta commited in the continent against our people, however that decision didn't implicate a war.
Resolution 502 asked the retire of our soldiers, and asked also both nations to solve their differences by mean negotiations.
In the case of the junta, despite their imbecility, they were disposed to negotiate with the u. k. However, like it or not, it was thatcher the one who didn't want to negotiate about the sovereignty, that's why she ordered to sink the belgrano, because she wanted to show that none negotiated solution was posible, due to it wasn't going to help her to save her pathetic govt.
If thatcher really cared about the wishes of the islanders, she would never send nicolas readley to the islands and to buenos aires in 1980, beside, she would have never ignored the warns in relation to the cuts off that her administration had determined for the defense in the south atlantic.
In reference to her ideas, i respect if you admire her policies. Actually she did what all neoliberal leaders do, she diminished inflation level, but increased the number of unemployed people, those were the same policies that we had during the decade of the 90's. Anyway, it is understandable that many people in this forum cotinue making the tipicall ignorant comparisons that they often do, in reference to arg's situation.
#76
Apr 21st, 2013 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0However, like it or not, it was thatcher the one who didn't want to negotiate about the sovereignty, that's why she ordered to sink the belgrano, because she wanted to show that none negotiated solution was posible, due to it wasn't going to help her to save her pathetic govt.
The Belgrano was sunk because it was a threat to British lives.
Even YOUR naval chiefs agree on this. But, of course, this does not fit in with your conspiracy theory so we keep hearing the same old lies time after time after time.
Of course the British public rallied behind her actions because they were our men going into danger against an unprovoked invasion of a peaceful island community for which we were responsible.
Unless you were in Britain at that time, you cannot believe the fury against Argentina that was felt by the general public.
A good percentage of the population would have been quite happy to see B.A. go up in a nuclear pyre !
Happily, the public are not in charge of strategic or battlefield planning.
Electorates are fickle. After the crushing defeat of Argentina
Thatcher reaped the benefit of a feeling of relief and goodwill resulting in her return to power.
I was not a supporter of her government or policies BUT I do not believe for a minute that she used the Belgrano as a tool to bolster her election chances. Certain situations transcend politics and this was one.
CLYDE15.
Apr 21st, 2013 - 07:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For being honest, i'm not sorprised for your reactionary comment, in fact, in this website there are some reactionary people like you who often make misserable comments, like what you express about argentina's future, if i were as mediocre and misserable as you are, i would predict or wish for the u. k. the same than what you expressed for argentina, however i'm absolutly sure that in britain not all people are reactionary like you, and they deserve a better country.
In relation to the sinking of the belgrano, i respect your opinion, but i wasn't born yesterday.
Beyond i have always thought that invasion of 1982 not only was an act of desperation by the junta, with the purpose of saving the criminal process which had started in 1976, it was also absolutly repudiable, however if both nations were called to find a negotiated solution for the conflict, by resolution 502, it should have been respected by both countries.
Before the sinking of the belgrano there were conversations between both parts, beside, the junta was disposed to negotiate about the sovereignty, so, if both were having conversations in order to find a solution, you don't have to be so smart to realize that the sinking of the belgrano was absoluty unnecesary, especially if we take into account that it was sealing away from the archipelago.
I understand that for the u. k. the ship was a threat, and i accept also that maybe the sinking of the belgrano wasn't a war crime, anyway there was a never any investigaton by justice in order to determine wether it was a war crime.
However, i'm not so inocent in order to ignore that when thatcher ordered to sink the ship, what she wanted to show, was that she wasn't interested in any negotiated solution, and i already explained why i think it.
If she really cared about the wishes of the islanders, she would never send the readley's mission to the islands and to buenos aires in 1980.
@axle aargh
Apr 21st, 2013 - 10:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“she wasn't interested in any negotiated solution, and i already explained why i think it.”
Invading and occupying our islands then demanding they be sureendered, is not “negotiation”, it's extortion.
And it was not necessary.
#78
Apr 22nd, 2013 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Reactionary comments ? That's good coming from you !!!!!!
You come up with the same post time and time again.
Explain to me how it can be a war crime to sink an enemy combatant ship whose purpose in being at sea was to attack the British fleet ? There was no exclusion zone for this vessel and its escorts. We have quoted ad nauseum what your navy has said about this affair. She was a legitimate target but YOU seem to know better.
Sailing away and going back to Argentina - you seem to know the facts better than your own Navy.
As to denigrating Argentina, well, when I first came on to this site all I wanted was information about the situation with Falklands. I was rather appalled at the language being used by both sides and have sometimes, in exasperation gone over the top myself. I have read statements from your leaders made on the international stage, that are quite frankly damned lies.
As to Argentina's future, I have NO interest in your country apart from what I consider to be their illegal prosecution of the Falklands. Whether you sink or swim as a country is entirely up to you.
As to negotiations ? Your country invaded and held the population as hostages as a bargaining tool. Leave Thatcher out of the equation for now. Unlike you, I was 40 years old when the invasion took place. After initial disbelief, I realised the seriousness of the situation and that your “junta” had made a “BIG” mistake. The pictures we received of mass jubilation in BA and the pictures of our marines being humiliated for propaganda purposes did not go down well. The general groundswell in the UK was “these cocky Argentinian bastards need a kicking and will get one soon ”
All the proposed negotiations were slanted in favour of Argentina so the die was cast. Get out of the Falklands or we will throw you out - and we did.
You have a fixed belief in your views on Thatcher's decision, I have a totally different one. Neither of us can convince the other, so let it lie.
CLYDE15. TROY TOMPEST.
Apr 22nd, 2013 - 03:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have never been interested in persuading absolutly anybody in this forum, what i have always wanted to do, is to give an opinion, but wether you or anybody else take what i say, is irrelevant for me.
Like it or not, the exclution zone existed, and beyond wether the sinking of the belgrano was a war crime, the most important is to take into account that both nations were called to find a solution peacefuly by mean resolution 502. I respect your opinions but i don't agree on what you think about this issue. In my opinion none of the two countries respected resolution 502.
Firstly arg. should have never invaded the archipelago.
On the other hand, despite the repudiable invasion, if both nations were called to find a negotiated solution, it shold have been respected the two nations.
Although i was a baby in 1982, i wasn't born yesterday in order to ignore that when thatcher ordered to sink the belgrano, what she wanted to show was that none negotiated solution was posible.
In relation to what leaders of both countries express before international scenario, if you think that only our govt. tells what is convenient for it, respecting the historic and the legal aspects of this conflict, sorry, but this is evident that you have been perfectly indoctrinated by your own propaganda. Like it or not, both parts tell just what is convenient for them.
Regarding the people who were celebrating in plaza de mayo, the day of the invasion, which is something that many of you love emphasizing about it, however you all ignore that during the dictatorship there was not any freedom of press, in fact, all the chanels and radios were under the control of the junta, and all the information that came from the islands was distorted on behalf of the interests of the junta, thats' why, it was said all the time that we were wining.
Beside, the 2nd of april, galtieri said that arg. had recovered the sovereignty without any rancour, which was false.
#81
Apr 22nd, 2013 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have pasted this from another forum as a reply to your thoughts above.
Try reading “the Official History of the Falklands Campaign, Volume 11, War and Diplomacy by Sir Laurence Freedman.
I recommend that you read this book for an account of the campaign from British records made at the time.
The Belgrano incident is covered in full including a political enquiry in the UK Parliament. Many of her political opponents tried to implicate political motives to the Belgrano sinking but she was exonerated in this respect.
On 1 May 1982, Admiral Juan Lombardo ordered all Argentine naval units to seek out the British task force around the Falklands and launch a “massive attack” the following day.
The Belgrano, which was outside the exclusion zone to the north, was ordered south.
Lombardo’s signal was intercepted by British Intelligence.
You may also be interested to know - I did not know this fact until I read this report - that on 1 May an Argentine sub. fired a torpedo at a British ship and missed and an abortive air attack with an Exocet missile was made and also failed.
Could this have been regarded as a”war crime“ if it had succeeded ?
In consultation with her war cabinet, Mrs Thatcher ordered the sinking of the Belgrano and it was sunk on the 2 May ”as a danger to the British fleet ” on the recommendations of Admiral Sir Terence Lewin.
So it would appear that by attacking first, the Argentines were not really interested in a negotiated solution as they fired on the British fleet first.
There is nothing else to add to this - you either accept it or reject it as your conscience dictates.
It appears to me that the Belgrano affair is so deep in Argentine folk legend that it would be too painful to admit that maybe you have the wrong version of events and that it would be like questioning Holy Writ. The Argentine version is more palatable to your population than the facts.
CLYDE15.
Apr 24th, 2013 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I would like to buy tha book, but i don't know wether it is on sail in argentina.
I already said that i accept that perhaps the sinking of the belgrano wasn't a war crime. The point is that there was never any investigation by justice, in order to determine wether the sinking of the ship was a war crime.
I really didn't know that an argentne submarine fired a torpedo against a british ship on 1 may.
Anyway, there are other important issues to discuss about this question.
I have never believed in thatcher's concerning in relation to the wishes of the islanders, if she really cared about them, she wouln't send the readley's mission to the islands and to bs as in 1980, in order to find a solution for this conflict of sovereignty, beside, she wouldn't have ignored the warns in reference to the cuts that she had determined for the defence in the south atlantic. These two objetive facts show that the wishes of the islanders weren't a priority for her.
As a democrat, she could have avoided the war, if she was so interested in defending the islanders, she could have sent a huge militar misssion to the achipelago in order to protect the islanders of any of the terrible violations that the junta commited in the mainland against our people, and at the same time start the negotiations with the junta, as it was asked by resolution 502.
However, thatcher wasn't disposed to discuss about the sovereignty, i read once that she said this in her nemories. Actually what she wanted to do, was to evacuate the islands, an return to the previous status quo to the 2nd of april.
In the case of the junta, they were disposed to negotiate about the sovereignty, in fact, they were disposed to discuss about the three flags proposal, or a shared sovereignty.
However, thatcher wasn't an idiot, and she knew that only a militar victory would save her misserable and pathetic govt., that's why she never wanted to discuss about the sovereignty, and recover the islands with a war.
Private or state funeral there should have been some Obama´s reps from his government at the funeral..something is not right with this USA government and the British government..its a chilly relationship...
Apr 24th, 2013 - 03:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#83
Apr 24th, 2013 - 04:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The book is available from Amazon but rather expensively priced.
This review is from: The Official History of the Falklands
Campaign, Volume 2: War and Diplomacy: v. 2 (Whitehall Histories) (Hardcover)
At nearly 800 pages you would expect this volume to be an entirely comprehensive history of the Falklands War. In fact Volume 2 of the excellent Official History leaves out far more of the war than you might expect. Sir Lawrence Freedman is extremely thorough on the London end of the conflict as is to be expected (we find references to Mrs Thatcher correcting grammar on memos sent to her!) from unfettered access to the government archives. The coverage of the negotiation process and the workings of Whitehall is fascinating to the uninitiated. It is highly recommended to those seeking to understand just how government and foreign negotiations work.
CLYDE15.
Apr 25th, 2013 - 11:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you clyde, i'll try to get it. It's a very complicated question, which must be analysed deeply.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!