MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, November 27th 2021 - 07:41 UTC

 

 

Malvinas next of kin ceremony to remember the sinking of 'General Belgrano'

Wednesday, April 30th 2014 - 09:03 UTC
Full article 48 comments

The Malvinas and South Atlantic Islands next of kin commission and the Cruiser “General Belgrano-last crew” association will be honoring next Friday 2 May the 323 crew members of the Argentine man-of-war sunk during the Falklands/Malvinas conflict in 1982. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Clyde15

    Yes, they should be remembered and mourned by their families as families on both sides remember the loss of their loved ones.

    I just hope that this will not start another round of postings about how it was a “War Crime” and so on. They were casualties of a war started by Argentina which led to many unnecessary deaths and a lot of bereaved families.

    If anyone thinks about posting about “war crimes”.....read the last paragraph about the ship's intentions. It was on a war time mission and suffered the consequences.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Andy65

    Even though Argentina was the aggressor it will always see itself as THE VICTIM-ARGENTINA ALWAYS THE VICTIM.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Britworker

    The proud Argentine fleet fled the scene and returned to their base and never came out again. That just about sums them up, they thought that attacking peaceful defenceless islanders was easy until they realised that they had a bloody big guard dog. Despite their rhetoric, I doubt they will ever make that mistake again.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    The reason the loss of life was so high was due to the cowardice of the Belgrano's escort vessels. They left those men to die in the freezing waters of the South Atlantic in contravention of every naval rule and tradition. They ran even when the British guaranteed that they wouldn't be fired upon.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • zathras

    A well balanced article I thought but I suspect certain people will THINK otherwise.

    There were two exclusion zones. The outer one which USS Phoenix was well within was still a combat zone.

    And over the previous few hours she had been at various times facing in all directions.

    The problem was we had the Argie communication codes cracked so knew her precise orders. And it was known that that along with the Aircraft carrier HMS Venerable the Argies were planning a pincer movement on the British Task Force.

    However when the government was asked why we did what we did the information about the cracked codes (which Argentina was still using) could not be made public.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Room101

    Loss of life and injuries on both sides.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    Much emphasis should be put on the last paragraph of this piece, viz:

    “However Argentine navy officers with time admitted that their instructions were precisely to sound out British forces defense and plans and thus the in and out sailing tactic. Following the sinking of the “General Belgrano”, the Argentine fleet including aircraft carrier “25 de Mayo” returned to their base in Bahía Blanca and never came out again.”

    It should be reiterated that the Captain of the “General Belgrano”, Captain Bonzo, stated on more than one occasion that the sinking of his vessel by the Royal Navy submarine was a “legal act of war” and that he felt no bitterness towards his opponents over the incident. Argentine Rear Admiral Allara, the Argentine staff officer at the Navy department in Buenos Aires stated, “The entire South Atlantic was an operational theatre for both sides. We, as professionals, said it was just too bad that we lost the Belgrano”.

    So any posting here from trolls stating otherwise should be ignored for what it is - rubbish/basura. Unfortunate incident, nevertheless!

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 12:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @zathras. Oops. Britain had already informed argieland, via the Swiss Embassy in Buenos Aires, that anything threatening British forces would be considered a legitimate target. No “zones”. Unless, for a naval vessel, you want to consider the oceans and seas of the world a “zone”. Argie warship - kill it. And that's what we'll probably do in the future. Tired of all these nit-picking “rules”. Should have gone on and wiped out the naval base and Buenos Aires.
    @6 But not enough on the argie side. Maybe, if there's a next time, we could wipe out a thousand argies for every Brit. Argieland needs to be taught that attacking Britain, its people and its territories is horrendously expensive and painful. Wonder how argies would feel now if they'd lost 255,000 in 1982? In fact, that might be a good idea. Tell argieland that every British death will mean a thousand argie deaths. That every British wounding will result in 500 argie wounding. That PoWs will NOT be repatriated. That they will be transported to somewhere inhospitable for 20 years of imprisonment. Why didn't HMS Conqueror surface and machine gun the life boats? Nazis used to do that. And the difference between argies and nazis is what?

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 01:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @7
    As far as they are concerned that is a made up lie. Propaganda, Fantasy. Nothing will change that view in Argentina.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 01:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Spanish Mole

    @8 Conqueror
    My dear oligophrenic Daily Mail Reader :

    1-Britain do not rule the waves
    2-ding dong the witch is dead
    3-dont forget to take your tablets

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 01:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    9Mendocino- sorry to destroy your mind but your Argentine Admiral in charge of the southern South Atlantic Command in the conflict on more that one occasion in public stated:
    “We were at war - and in war it is the duty of a Captain to sink the enemy ship - before it sinks you”.
    I watched him say that on TV in 1983

    As far as the ARA senior command was concerned - it was war - and in war ships get sunk.

    get over it.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 02:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @11
    No need to say sorry. you have far from destroyed my mind.

    what you say is correct.

    get over what?

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 02:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Evil Colonialist Pirate

    @12
    As far as the ARA senior command was concerned that's probably so. But unfortunately it's too good an opportunity for the Argies and their president to play the victim card and start crying foul.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 02:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    I think Mendocinovino was actually agreeing with the article statement but explaining that Malvinistas are too brainwashed to believe the truth.

    JMO

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Cognitio

    10. If it was worth the effort the Royal Navy could certainly rule the waves down Buenos Aries way. Mind you that's not much of a boast. The captain of the isle of white ferry probably could do the same if all he had to face was the Argentinians. The Argentinian would launch they're entire fleet with great pomp and fanfare. But one ship would capsize whilst moored to the dock, one would breakdown whilst leaving the harbour and the third would probably get seized by the baliffs. ;-)

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 02:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    #10 I 'Think' we know who you are ' My dear fellow'

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    There have been threats from time to time from Argentina that legal action was being planned against Britain for the “General Belgrano” incident. However, these have always come to nothing because of the overwhelming evidence from the Argentine Navy authorities that the sinking was an accepted, acceptable and legitimate “act of war.
    Nevertheless, the unfortunate incident remains part of the ”folkloric“ Malvinaista claims against Britain - it is just another ”legend” to add to all the other fairy tales, lies and false historical claims used to make the risible claims for sovereignty.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 05:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Room101

    I remember only too well what it is like to slide down the deck of a capsizing warship, to have a near-drowning experience.
    I'm not alone in that; it does feel like it at the time, though.
    So, Argentinians or not, those sailors that literally go down to the sea in ships, in warfare or in other circumstances, have my sympathy. The terror in the dark underwater, the thud of approaching propellers that threaten an approaching chopping death. And there are those to remember that were trapped in compartments and descending helplessly to the depths.
    Warfare isn't the Holy Grail- it's just a job.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Brit Bob

    Didn't it hit an iceberg?

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 06:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Room101

    No.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 07:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Cognitio

    16. Actually you probably don't. Cognitio doesn't mean to “Think” it actually means Knowledge. As used in the expression “Manui dat cognitio vires”. I'm not flying false colours I actually do genuinely believe the Argentinians are a bunch of irredeemable crooks.
    :-)

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 09:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • José Malvinero

    Vengeance, May 4.
    MALVINAS ARGENTINAS FOREVER.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFG8CtXpTKk

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    @22

    José, its a school night. Bed now.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 09:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    22 José Malcontent

    “Vengeance, May 4. ”

    Reminds of the nut jobs walking around for a week with a sandwich board that reads, “ End of the World, Tomorrow!!”

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • screenname

    Wonder if they will spare a thought for the merchant navy seamen murdered on the Atlantic Conveyor by the Heroic Argentinean air aces?

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    “At 15:00 relatives of crew members will board a vessel at the Buenos Aires naval stockade and drop wreaths in the River Plate.”

    I bet it's a new Buquebus ferry owned by one Juan Carlos López Mena, recently photographed with TMBOA and “No Mony Pepe”. It'll be the only one to make it out and back.

    An awful thought has just crossed my mind! you don't think TMBOA is trying to get rid of the embarring families now, do you?

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    @22

    Argie war porn made up of stock footage. Quite a cottage industry for that they seem to have.

    Of course, we're also supposed to accept they only believe in dialogue and peaceful settlement, but maybe Jose's rabies is a rare and isolated case.

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 10:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @14
    at last someone with a brain on here that chooses to use it....:)

    Apr 30th, 2014 - 11:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • José Malvinero

    25
    Could you tell us what was the “innocent” merchant ship Atlantic Conveyor in the Argentine Sea? With this sinking, of the invading forces lost a squadron of “small” Chinook helicopters, an airstrip, among other things. Sadly (very sadly) a squadron of Harrier saved for one hair that very little time before the attack, had abandoned the innocent ship. what a shame. One of the many luck with counted the invaders.

    May 01st, 2014 - 12:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • screenname

    @29 José Malvinero: “Could you tell us what was the “innocent” merchant ship Atlantic Conveyor in the Argentine Sea?”

    It was a ship.

    Fool

    May 01st, 2014 - 02:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Don Alberto

    @ 29 José Malvinero writes: “One of the many luck with counted the invaders.”

    Precisely José. Haven't you realized that all those many lucky events show that the almighty G*d was siding with the British and against the Argentines?

    May 01st, 2014 - 02:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    José Malvinero - just to remind you that Argentina illegally invaded the Falkland Islands! And when ordered to leave the archipelago by the United Nations Argentina completely ignored the order thus leading to much more loss of life.
    Guilty party? ARGENTINA!

    May 01st, 2014 - 07:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    #22
    You seem to revel in the deaths of the combatants. Remember that there are bereaved families and troops on both sides still suffering the affects of this war although it was over 30 years ago. Compassion seems to be absent from your psychological make up.
    You keep on ranting in your ineffectual, childish manner as you are devoid of anything sensible or apposite to say.
    It is people like you that ensure there will never be ANY reconciliation between the Falklanders and Argentina.
    You are a poor excuse for a human being.

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • AzaUK

    Blood has been split over the Falkland Island and that's something that UK wont forget.

    The only ways Argentina will get their hands on the Falkland islands is more blood and in the present climate that is not going to happen

    May 01st, 2014 - 09:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    Argentines also forget that in 2007 the British Govt proposed as a peace and reconciliation move - a joint service and wreath laying over the area where she went down with an ARA and RN ship - guess who refused it?

    May 01st, 2014 - 10:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 28 Mendocinovino

    Your post @ 9 is to say the least ambiguous, but that is also true for many of your posts particularly the ones about out Blessed Queen and the Royal Family. You were cautioned by a number of Brits to tone it down but you still persisted. You reap what you sow.

    ElaineB is widely travelled in Argentina and is used to the curious Espanol that is common there, not so with many of us and I for one always “listen” to what she says.

    May 01st, 2014 - 12:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    ChrisR

    There is a Mendocino in Mendoza. I think it is no coincidence that our wine-swilling friend “Nostrils/ Toby” is proud to call that his home too.

    May 01st, 2014 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @36
    you again silly old fool?

    So according to your logic and wisdom having an opinion is being ambiguous is it? No. You and others had already formed your opinion on me and so you were already writing to rebuttal before I'd even finished my post.

    Cautioned? really? is that your take on it? Looks to me like they saw that you'd been bitch slapped and came to your aid.

    You have tried your bullying tactics again and again to try and silence me but you will find it will not work. Perhaps you had success in your past with this. Sticks and stones....Shame we will never meet in person instead of hiding behind your keyboard pretending to have a life . I'd like to see you try it on me!

    What curious Espanol are you referring to?

    @37
    What are you talking about????

    May 01st, 2014 - 02:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    9 Mendocinovino

    The following can be defined as the best qualified Argentine view

    “Mr Director:
    Mrs. Pierini framed the sinking of the cruiser General Belgrano as a war crime unpunished and unclaimed by our country.
    I have an obligation to make public my total disagreement. Was not a war crime, but a combat action, the 323 crew members who gave their lives were not murdered: died fighting for our country, which is the maximum that can make delivery military.
    The integrated naval force was deployed for an attack on the British fleet forming a coordinated operation with other naval groups, the course that had momentarily away from the enemy fleet, as commander Admiral should wait a moment considered most suitable. The Belgrano and the other ships were a threat and a danger to the British.
    Its location outside the exclusion zone meant not withdraw from the war. All commanders at sea had been the British media establishment that area. The message stated in its final part: The government of His Majesty reserves the right to attack any ship or aircraft, within or outside the exclusion zone, which it considers a threat to its forces. Leave the exclusion zone was not to leave the combat zone to enter a protected area.
    There was a violation of international law was an act of war and that was the position as head of the Navy in 1995 with presentations held in various courts.
    The internal political problems did not govern the conduct of those who fought. The Belgrano was sunk endowment aware of its risks.
    To think that were poorly killed and not killed in combat is to offend the memory they deserve who fought for us.

    Enrique Molina Pico
    Admiral, former Chief of
    General Staff of the Navy
    CI 4293994”

    http://www.lanacion.com.ar/700676-cartas-de-lectores

    May 03rd, 2014 - 10:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    #39
    They will still not believe it because they don't want to. Simple as that !!

    May 03rd, 2014 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @39
    Almost the same as Clyde15.
    These kind of things get buried. people do not speak of them. If they were to speak of them they are lies obviously by the British. The average Argentine wants to know when he can have his wages so he can buy food. Few have any reason to go and research and find out for themselves. Fewer have the resources.

    May 03rd, 2014 - 12:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • axel arg

    SIX WORDS.
    ¨A fair cause, on bastard hands¨, this is how a great man and writter like gabriel garcia marquez described the malvinas cause, after the decision taken by the junta.
    I refered to the sinking of the belgrano in planty of opportunities, in fact, i said that i used to think that it was a war crime, because it had been sunk out of the exclution zone, however, since two years ago, i started to have doubts about whether it can be considered or not like a war crime, due to since 2012, i have known that in the end of april,thatcher's government decided to change the rules, and notified the pertinent authorities about that decision. In fact, bautista jofre dates in his book:1982, page 354 and 355, the words of admiral enrique molina pico,who said that it can't be considered that the sinking of the belgrano was a war crime, he described it as a war action. He said that all those who were on the sea, had an envelope, where it was stablished that the government of her majesty could attack any ship, which it considered like a threat.
    Perhaps, it wasn't really a war crime, but it was a clear sign to show the junta that none negotiated solution was posible, because only a militar victory was the solution for thatcher. She wasn't an idiot, and she knew that only a victory like that one would save her misserable government, in a context of very hight unemployment.
    We don't have to forget that in 1980, her government sent nicholas readley to the islands and to buenos aires, with the purpose of finding a negotiated solution for the conflict, beside, she was warned about how dangerous was to cut the defence for the south atlantic in 1981. As you can see, the islands weren't a priority for her government, however the criminal and idiot junta gave her a great hand, with the invasion of 1982.
    The war of 1982, was the result of two cretin and mediocre leaders, who were able to do anything to save their misserable goverments.

    May 03rd, 2014 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    AXLE

    You “changed the rules” by surprise attacking somebody else 's unarmed civilian community of 2,500 farmers, fishermen, their wives, children, and elderly parents, with no Declaration of War.

    You took their homes and freedom and threatened their lives.

    The UN ordered your forces to leave.
    The US asked that you leave.
    The UK warned you to leave.

    You thumbed your noses at them.

    ANY Argentine military assets could be deemed as potentially hostile or aiding Argentina in some capacity.

    The British were therefore free to do WHATEVER was required to regain freedom for the Islanders and their home.

    And now you winge and complain - “ it wasn't fair!!”

    You are saying exactly the same thing you were saying in 2012.

    May 04th, 2014 - 02:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    Axle
    You just sound like a broken record.....let it go. It's ancient history.

    It was a military decision to protect British lives. You have no idea WHAT the junta were up to. You seem to think that we should have taken a risk for “peace”. If you send out your navy to threaten, then there are consequences. The Belgrano was the consequence.

    May 04th, 2014 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    @ 40 axel arg
    You are the archetypical “Malvinaista” troll! You cannot see beyond the end of your nose! Argentina illegally invaded the Falklands/Malvinas archipelago on 2 April 1982 WITHOUT provocation and with no warning!
    Please explain that logically!

    May 04th, 2014 - 06:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    40 Axle Aarghhh

    Sorry Malvinista,
    Britain was only REACTING to an unprovoked military invasion of their sovereign territory.
    They struck back militarily and swiftly, as the only option they had left, after UK diplomacy, attempted US arbitration, and UN Resolution 502 had failed.

    Argentina's motives are their own, internal, and justified only to themselves.

    May 04th, 2014 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @42
    “it was a clear sign to show the junta that none negotiated solution was possible,”

    Negotiations about the future status of the Falkland Islands including shared sovereignty still continued up to June 1982 regardless of the Belgrano sinking.

    The Belgrano was not sunk to scupper peace, it was sunk because it was a threat to British lives.

    R.A. Sandy Woodward was instrumental in getting it sunk, not Mrs Thatcher.

    It must be pointed out that earlier in April, a British submarine had contact with the 25 de Mayo-permission to sink it was refused by MT.

    Permission was asked earlier on to shoot down Argentina's Boeing 707 reconnaissance aircraft that was shadowing the British task force. That permission was refused by MT.

    I am glad you have rejected the nonsense that sinking the Belgrano was no more a war crime than Argentina's sinking of HMS Sheffield, Coventry, Antelope etc etc.

    However no one has proved to us yet on these posts that Argentina ever had definitive sovereignty over the Islands pre-1833. Britain may well have offered shared sovereignty to avoid conflict, but Argentina refused to withdraw its troops. In all of the negotiations the sticking point preventing any shared sovereignty was the right of the Islanders to self determination, which Argentina ignored.

    ”she (Margaret Thatcher) knew that only a victory like that one would save her misserable government, in a context of very hight unemployment.“

    A valid point Axel, yes Ridley did try to sell lease-back, and the Conservative government did not protect the Islanders properly. Indeed if MT had lost the war-she would have been kicked out of office.

    ” As you can see, the islands weren't a priority for her government,”

    Yes, but they were a priority for the people who were BORN on them.

    Indeed the problems with the Falklands have been caused by both the Argentine's and previously, the UK's disregard for the Islanders right to self determination.

    Both countries were wrong.

    May 05th, 2014 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mendocinovino

    @47
    nicely put...

    May 06th, 2014 - 01:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!