Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    sing
    Posts
    3,353

    Default Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Protests in Argentina as Prince William begins Falklands deployment - Telegraph

    Too bad Argentina lost.

    • ARG did not apply Sun Tze's art of war.
    • ARG did not know how to fight an asymmetrical war.
    • ARG failed to portray on the internet+news media and to the UN that it was a war to liberate Falklands (islands just off ARG but 8,000 miles away from the UK) from a colonising power.
    • A TV documentary showed that UK pleaded with the French to reveal the electronic secrets of the Exocet missile after one UK ship was sunk. After the French told the UK, the Exocet missiles used by ARG were ineffective due to Electronic Counter Measures. ARG should have bought Russian made anti-ship missiles.
    • ARG failed to drag out the war over many years. They should. UK public opinion will turn against the UK PM if it cannot get a quick victory.
    • In 1982, it cost the UK 1.2 Billion to deploy such a naval flotilla to Falklands. After the UK naval force have left, ARG can attack Falklands again and repeat this cycle many times until UK goes bankrupt trying to fight an endless war.
    • ARG can learn from the tenacity of the Vietnamese in defense of their homeland.
    Last edited by ricohflex; 4th February 2012 at 10:20 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Ah shame on me, upon reading the thread title, indignantly I had thought 'But Italy beat West Germany 3-1 what'
    -------------------------------
    Endure. In enduring grow strong.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    ARG army all show but no go. The war was just to deflect internal criticism towards an external enemy.
    Many were conscripts dragged to fight for an unpopular military regime; certainly no match for the professional British Army and its SAS.

    ARG can learn from the tenacity of the Vietnamese in defense of their homeland.
    The Falklands has always chosen to be British, despite being 8000 miles away from UK. The Argies were viewed as invaders, not liberators.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Big Kahuna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    On soccer field, Diego Simone 1, David Beckham 0......on Battle field....its the other way round

  5. #5

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    simple. petty pride without any thoughts about others. that's what lead argentina down this path and they're still holding on to the mistake of their forebears

  6. #6
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    TS... you do know at that time... Argentina was led by military dictators, the country is in the midst of a devastating economic crisis and there was alot of human rights violations. While Argentina has long claimed that the Falklands, aka Islas Malvinas (in Spanish), belongs to them... the invasion has more to do with diverting public attention away from Argentina problems at home then anything else.

    Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    sing
    Posts
    3,353

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Yes. The dictatorship of Leopoldo Galtieri was faltering. Argentina was weakened because the dictatorship turned against its own people for years. He hoped to bolster the dictatorship's prestige by attacking Falklands. Due to this, the dictatorship was not able to galvanise the whole Argentinian people against the UK in the Falklands war. A country that only knows how to bully its own people, is a weak country.

    But the dictatorship is not the point. The dictators are gone now.

    It does not change the fact that Falklands is just off the Argentinian coast but occupied by UK which is 8,000 miles away - and that Argentina has never given up its claim of sovereignty over the island even up till today.

    The UK was lucky they were not fighting a people like the Russians or the Japanese or the Vietnamese. Or else the outcome would be very different. Imagine if the UK had to fight Falklands against an enemy like how the Japanese defended Iwo Jima. If so, every inch of ground the UK soldiers gain has to be paid in blood. What if Argentina has attacked the UK ships with a swarm of kamikaze planes like the Japanese in WW2?

    The Russians died literally by the millions, fighting the Germans. Russians were prepared to pay this price and for as long as necessary, defending their homeland. In contrast, Argentina surrendered after only a few hundred casualties and 74 days in the Falklands war. Pathetic.

    The UK must have done their calculations about PRC's determination and military ability to take back Hong Kong by force if necessary and UK did not want to try to test PRC's resolve. By 1967 PRC had hydrogen bomb and PRC made it clear that NO options are off the table when it comes to national sovereignty. So UK handed over Hong Kong in 1997 at the end of the 100 years treaty. UK realised in 1997, that it could not bully PRC anymore like how it did in 1900 ( 八國聯軍 ).

    Likewise UK did their calculations about the Argentinian people's weak will to take back Falklands and realised it could continue to hold on to Falklands.
    Last edited by ricohflex; 5th February 2012 at 11:10 PM.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    how come nobody seems to care what the falklands people want???? Arg or UK, what gives them the right to own some piece of land???? frankly speaking i find all these fight over places and land like Taiwan. Tibet, Hong Kong or whatever places bewildering.... in history i think it is always the govts or armies that take over the land by force and claim ownership.. then the indigenous people who should rightfully own the land(??) suffers... i really find the whole issue of ownership of land confusing.....

  9. #9
    Member 9V-Orion Images's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Autenticate ALGRN @ 7987.8270
    Posts
    1,760

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by cws77 View Post
    how come nobody seems to care what the falklands people want???? Arg or UK, what gives them the right to own some piece of land???? frankly speaking i find all these fight over places and land like Taiwan. Tibet, Hong Kong or whatever places bewildering.... in history i think it is always the govts or armies that take over the land by force and claim ownership.. then the indigenous people who should rightfully own the land(??) suffers... i really find the whole issue of ownership of land confusing.....
    Hello, the people of Falkland identified themselves as British subjects and can be rather "hostile" to the Argentines at times so as to speak.

    There are numerous inaccuracies as stated by some poster(s) here, shouldn't be bothered to point them out.
    CS Aviation / Flickr
    Per aspera ad astra

  10. #10

  11. #11
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    There is a small... but important fact, the TS didn't said... that is the Fact of Falklands Islands being under British Rule since 1833.. almost 150 years before the 1982 Falklands War. The current islanders have British blood lines... and have voted times and times again, to remain as British Subjects. Therefore when Argentina moves its marines onto the Falklands... its not liberation... but an invasion. The Rocks on the island don't care one way or the other who's in charge... but the islanders who had great grandfather or great grandmother from 1833 would think difference.

    Russians, Japanese, Vietnamese was fighting bravely for their motherlands... protecting lands that they hold, and which their families still live in. But what are the Argentines fighting for ?? Rocks that have not seen the Argentina flags for 150 years ?? Against islanders that consider themselves British ??


    Re-establishment of British rule on the Falkland Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,323

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    The British may have sailed 8000km to the Falklands but the islands are not exactly 'just off ARG'. There is like 500km of rough sea between the islands and the mainland. Considering that ARG did not have substantial miliary infrastructure or assets on the islands nor air projection capability due to the early retirement of their sole carrier and the bombing of the only runway on the island, it would have been hard for the ARG to maintain its grip on the island.

    That is not to say that ARG was outgunned, although their fighters were flying at maximum range from the mainland, they were able to inflict crippling damage to the British ships. However, the vast experience of the British forces in expeditionary warfare is a huge advantage over the ARG forces. Other reasons that I can think of why the ARG lost are:

    - Professional soldiers (SAS) vs conscripts (ARG)
    - British submarine threat to ARG ships
    - Superiority of Harrier fighters ( though with a grain of salt)

    It may have cost the British 1.2B (pounds) to send their ships to the Falkland, but could ARG afford to throw 200 or even another 100 million into the conflict, given the dire state of their economy? The commitment of ARG to the conflict is dubious from the start.

    Quote Originally Posted by ricohflex View Post
    Protests in Argentina as Prince William begins Falklands deployment - Telegraph

    Too bad Argentina lost.

    • ARG did not apply Sun Tze's art of war.
    • ARG did not know how to fight an asymmetrical war.
    • ARG failed to portray on the internet+news media and to the UN that it was a war to liberate Falklands (islands just off ARG but 8,000 miles away from the UK) from a colonising power.
    • A TV documentary showed that UK pleaded with the French to reveal the electronic secrets of the Exocet missile after one UK ship was sunk. After the French told the UK, the Exocet missiles used by ARG were ineffective due to Electronic Counter Measures. ARG should have bought Russian made anti-ship missiles.
    • ARG failed to drag out the war over many years. They should. UK public opinion will turn against the UK PM if it cannot get a quick victory.
    • In 1982, it cost the UK 1.2 Billion to deploy such a naval flotilla to Falklands. After the UK naval force have left, ARG can attack Falklands again and repeat this cycle many times until UK goes bankrupt trying to fight an endless war.
    • ARG can learn from the tenacity of the Vietnamese in defense of their homeland.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    I watched a documentary about the weaponry used, and IIRC

    Argies:
    1. Mirage supersonic, air-superiority fighter
    2. Exocet missiles
    3. Infantry armed with (ironically) British-made SLR (self-loading rifle aka machine gun)

    Brits:
    1. Non-supersonic Harrier jumpjet
    2. Most infantry units did not even have the SLR and were still armed with WW2 era bolt-action rifles

    Most analysts thought the Mirage would totally own the Harrier, but in the end Harriers shot down 20 Argie fighters with none lost in air-to-air combat.
    Superior training >>>> expensive toys.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zichar View Post
    Ah shame on me, upon reading the thread title, indignantly I had thought 'But Italy beat West Germany 3-1 what'
    I thought it was because Maradona kelong.

  15. #15
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by cks2k2 View Post
    I watched a documentary about the weaponry used, and IIRC

    Argies:
    1. Mirage supersonic, air-superiority fighter
    2. Exocet missiles
    3. Infantry armed with (ironically) British-made SLR (self-loading rifle aka machine gun)

    Brits:
    1. Non-supersonic Harrier jumpjet
    2. Most infantry units did not even have the SLR and were still armed with WW2 era bolt-action rifles

    Most analysts thought the Mirage would totally own the Harrier, but in the end Harriers shot down 20 Argie fighters with none lost in air-to-air combat.
    Superior training >>>> expensive toys.

    Not really correct...

    The main infantry weapon use by both side is the Belgium made FN FAL ... The difference is that the Brits uses the Semi Automatic version... while the Argies uses the Fully Automatic ones. It was recorded that many Brits replace their Semi Auto rifles for the fully Auto version which they pick up from the fields... The Lee-Enfield might be a WWII rifle... but its use mainly by Snipers.

    About the Mirage... the Argies were using the French MirageIIIEA... these fighters are considered as multirole/strike aircraft. Fearing an attack by Brits bomber like the Vulcan... most of the Mirage were kept closer to mainland Argentina. They also have a smaller fuel tank and couldn't fully take up the role as fighter/bomber escort. And when the Mirage was used... its has more of an anti-ship role using the French made Exocet missile as its main weapon. The Sea Harrier only took down 1x Mirage III... the rest were, 9x IAI Dagger A, 3x A-4B Skyhawk, 3x A-4Q Skyhawk and 2x A-4C Skyhawk... and some other transport planes...


    Weapons of the Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Argentine air forces in the Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  16. #16

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by diver-hloc View Post
    There is a small... but important fact, the TS didn't said... that is the Fact of Falklands Islands being under British Rule since 1833.. almost 150 years before the 1982 Falklands War. The current islanders have British blood lines... and have voted times and times again, to remain as British Subjects. Therefore when Argentina moves its marines onto the Falklands... its not liberation... but an invasion. The Rocks on the island don't care one way or the other who's in charge... but the islanders who had great grandfather or great grandmother from 1833 would think difference.

    Russians, Japanese, Vietnamese was fighting bravely for their motherlands... protecting lands that they hold, and which their families still live in. But what are the Argentines fighting for ?? Rocks that have not seen the Argentina flags for 150 years ?? Against islanders that consider themselves British ??


    Re-establishment of British rule on the Falkland Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    No wonder China wanted to "liberate" Tibet... few generations down Tibet would rightfully belong to China

  17. #17

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    Hello, the people of Falkland identified themselves as British subjects and can be rather "hostile" to the Argentines at times so as to speak.

    There are numerous inaccuracies as stated by some poster(s) here, shouldn't be bothered to point them out.
    My bad... earlier posts have already pointed that out..

    hmm but Argentina did not really lose...from Wiki " In Argentina, the Falklands War meant that a possible war with Chile was avoided. More importantly, Argentina returned to a democratic government in the 1983 general election, the first free general election since 1973. It also had a major social impact, destroying the military's image as the moral reserve of the nation that they had maintained through most of the 20th century." loss to Argentina dictatorship perhaps , but beneficail to Argentina as a country?????

    and I read somewhere that more british soldiers die from committing suicide than in the actual war itself..... i think in a war everybody loses out in the end... except for some rich and powerful ...

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    2,522

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    The Mirage IIIE variant is actually an older airplane introduced in 1964 versus the Harrier FRS Mk1, which entered service in 1978. At that time, the Mirage III was considered the best European fighter due to the success of the IAF where it was pitted against MiG-21s during the War of Attrition. It was also the first production fighter to exceed mach 2.0 in speed, but this was at the cost of turning rate/radius. The Mirage III was heavily marketed as a performance fighter at an affordable price. The birth of the Sea Harrier is an interesting read, short version is that the UK could not afford to build full-sized aircraft carriers like USA. Hence they turned to building smaller ski-jump carriers which would be perfect for the Harrier line.

    Armaments-wise, as far as I can google, both airplanes were armed with IR heat seeker missiles. The Mirage IIIE was armed with R.550 Magic I air-to-air missiles, these were rear-aspect IR missiles, meaning they can only lock-on a target from behind (rear). The Sea Harriers on the other hand where armed with the latest AIM-9L all aspect IR missiles, which allowed for tracking and lock-on from all sides including head-on. Both missiles are short ranged. This missile reportedly achieved 80% kill-rate in Falklands and due to its new technology, enemy pilots had not been able to develop effective evasion tactics. The Sea Harrier also possessed a superior radar tracking system, I could not find information regarding the Mirage IIIE for comparison though.

    Performance-wise, the Mirage IIIE and Sea Harrier are vastly different machines and in the hands of a skilled pilot can used to great effect. The Mirage IIIE has high speed but low manoeuvrability and the Sea Harrier was sub-sonic but had high manoeuvrability. I haven't been able to find any descriptive air-to-air battles to make opinions with certainty but one thing for sure the Argentine Air Command did realise the Mirage IIIE would be out-matched in a short-ranged dogfight thus regulating them to be used as decoy lures instead of as air superiority fighters.

    IMO if the Mirage IIIEs had all-aspect missiles too it may have been more of a level fight with proper tactics (Boom & Zoom). The IAF used Mirages III against MiG-21s successfully but its air combat tactics is proving a little hard to find.

    Training-wise, the Argentinian Air Force had never trained for such long range engagements and the inability for air-to-air refuelling capabilities doomed their combat effectiveness & loitering time. The British had superior pilot training as well as the advantage of being steered to their targets by their warships, information is lacking but I presume the Argentinian pilots had to look for their own targets or where guided by ground based radars. Both forces lacked beyond the horizon Airborne Early Warning support.

    Threat from the Exocet missiles meant the HMS Invincible & HMS Hermes stayed a considerable distance from the islands and the short legs of Sea Harriers meant the British were never able to gain air superiority despite the overwhelming kill ratio. Argentinian aircraft were still able to get airborne, presumably in defence of ground forces and anti-landing operations.

    The conclusion is that the British had the upper hand most of the time, superior weaponry as well as training.

    References:
    Dassault Mirage III Strike Fighter - History, Specs and Pictures - Military Aircraft
    BAe Sea Harrier Carrierborne V/STOL Strike Fighter - History, Specs and Pictures - Military Aircraft
    Global Aircraft -- Dassault Mirage III
    R.550 Magic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    British Aerospace Sea Harrier | Military-Today.com
    Argentine air forces in the Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Aftermath of the Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    1 more link for the Mirage III with specs including radar but no description on performance.
    http://www.flightlevel350.com/Mirage...aft_facts.html
    Last edited by foxtwo; 7th February 2012 at 12:00 AM.

  19. #19
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by cws77 View Post
    No wonder China wanted to "liberate" Tibet... few generations down Tibet would rightfully belong to China

    If we follow what TS had written regarding closeness as a reason for Falklands to be returned.... then I fear the Sultan of Johor could also 'reclaim' S'pore as we onces belong to them before 1812... and much closer to Johor than Falklands is to Argentina.

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  20. #20

    Default Re: Why did Argentina lose in 1982?

    Quote Originally Posted by diver-hloc View Post
    If we follow what TS had written regarding closeness as a reason for Falklands to be returned.... then I fear the Sultan of Johor could also 'reclaim' S'pore as we onces belong to them before 1812... and much closer to Johor than Falklands is to Argentina.
    That's why i think the "ownership" of land is a very grey issue(at least to me it is haha). what can be "right" or "wrong" will change over time... frankly speaking I dun agree or disagree with either side...thats why i stated i was confused in an earlier post... i am still ... in a way ....its like... so Tibet will belong to China after a few generations... i cannot really accept that as right... but yet i cannot say they revert back if the people there are unhappy about it ....

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •