One for Des

Well you or I will never know the exact orders. They could have been to sink
them all, or just prevent them from coming any closer etc etc. My point is,
with the exception of missile strike targets, it is extremely rare for a sub
commander to be given specific orders such as "sink *that* ship". Far more
likely is the scenario where the commander is told "prevent troop
reinforcements from approaching the islands by any mean possible", then left
to work out his own plan.

Put yourself in the position of a sub commander. Would you bet your life/120
crew members lives/your sub on the fact that they weren't? Far more likely
that you would assume that they were equipped for sub-hunting and act
accordingly.

 

Moutocoprophilia?

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19

 

Classic stuff. The video on the big screen behind them at the Earls
Court gig had some very meaningful images.

 

True, but I just had the urge to put in my 2 pence, 'cause I know about
things like that.

 

They do it with *very* long antenna.
Think in terms of kilometre measurement.

 

Which Australian Pink Floyd brought up to date for their recent
concerts, including pictures of Comical Ali.

 

I thought it was hundreds of metres rather than km but as Champ's shown
in another thread my memory isn't what it was.

 

Well, no, not really. As I've said elsewhere, I'm prepared to differ on
matters of opinion, because so much of this argument involves that.
Which was why I snipped the rest, and merely made it plain I was taking
a persona stance. No offence.

On matters of fact I take a different attitude.

 

That's an old, old story. Heard that years ago.

 

Good though innit?

I think the documentary itself was called "Exocet". Will have a trawl for it
later.

 

One of the frequencies uses 1.5 klick antenna. It's been on this NG or
it may have been IXION. A very naughty person gave an accurate range of
measurements.

 

(The Older Gentleman) spouted the
following in :

None taken.

Facts is all they need MacAwber.

I've always found facts to be much easier to argue about than ethics.

The problem with facts is that, especially when they come from high
sources, you often wonder whether they are facts or propaganda.

Saddam Hussein had WOMD ready to be deployed at 45 minutes notice:
Fact or Fiction?

Japan tried to surrender to the septics two days before little boy was
dropped on Hiroshima.
Fact or fiction?

 

spouted the following in

I'm trying to illustrate why, in the context of the present debate, I'm
not going to be drawn into expressions of outrage at the actions of the
french.

Assuming you meant Iran seemed more despicable than Iraq then just
consider the relativity of your statement 'at the time'.

You won't find many articles about the British oppression^w defence
industry's relationship with this particularly despicable military
dictatorship in the Times on Sunday. Still, as long as enough money
keeps rolling in to keep Henry at OxBridge eh? All's fair in love, war
and other peoples detention centres as long as we don't have to look at
the photos. As long as no one has knowledge of it, we wont have to
comment.

**** off. There's your response. Go back and read what I said about the
loss of life on the Sheffield. It's the bastards who cause people to die
horrendous deaths for the sake of a few votes that you should be
directing your questions to.

Your perceptor needs oiling. I've got plenty of issues with the
government of the day, but in the context of the current debate, I know
what I'm saying, why I'm saying it and what the major issue is as far as
I am concerned.

If I feel the need for some ameteur psychoanalysis, you can be shit-sure
I won't be coming to you for it TVM.

I didn't condemn anyone. I described my reaction to the sinking of the
Belgrano and the reaction of their group to the same event
behaviour.

Thats the coconut.

 

spouted the following in

Yes, you probably would be.

 

Well apart from the fact that the task force was still a long way away and
the Belgrano wasn't carrying exocet missiles, I'm devastated by your
argument.

 

Bet the whales love that.
tinnitus on a grand scale.

 

Brace yourself UKRM:

IMHO using nuclear weapons against those (mainly) civilian targets was the
greatest sin *ever* perpetrated by Homo Sapiens, bar none. It defines evil
and wanton.
No, my account hasn't been hijacked.

I was once quite well read on the physiological effects of medium to large
radiation doses (went with the job) much of which was based on study of the
Japanese trauma victims. I read some 1st hand survivor accounts t'other day
in a book I was given. It's chilling stuff.

I know there was a fairly large military presence in Hiroshima but it was
still a civilian centre.
There had been a spiral of attacks against civilians by both sides in Europe
which was pretty unforgivable which no doubt influenced the decision, but
it's no excuse.
I know the Allies had been sorely tested and were worried about mainland
resistance, but it's no excuse.

The Jap war/political machine deserved to be nuked, no mistake, but there
*must* have been large viable military targets. I'll never understand the
thought processes that resulted in what was actually chosen and as for doing
it twice...

 

Does it _really_ matter.

I see it as a deterrent. I'm sure someone else said the same, a sort of
'don't **** with us' thing.

Seemed to have the desired effect - the Argies were, from that moment
on, shit scared of bringing out any of their serious hardware (OK, a 50
year old carrier and assortment of other old ships) - something which
probably changed the outcome.

If they'd brought out their carrier, there was a very real risk we could
have lost both Illustrius _and_ Hermes - which would have been an
absolute disaster.

 

(SteveH) spouted the following in

Yeah, sure. Two days later Sheffield was hit with an exocet missile.
Much loss of life and people burned real bad.

Pretty serious hardware.

Deterrent, sheesh, not that old chestnut please.

 

And how much worse could it have been if they'd have had a carrier in
the area? - their planes were having to chop back speeds due to fuel
capacity. If they'd been able to launch them from closer, our Harriers
would have been completely outflown in the skys. If we'd lost our air
superiority, then we'd have lost a hell of a lot more ships than we did.