I assume he's only dreaming, and got nothing else to say on the matter

They had ceremony here. I only think it right they remember the poor sods who fell in battle. However it ended up all rather 'tacky'.

It seems impossible that the war was 40 years ago. I’m sure the photographic exhibit will be sensitively done.

40 years on from the Falklands: ‘The deadliest day could have been avoided – it still haunts me now’

Two veterans reveal how the nightmares of the Sir Galahad and Sir Tristram bombings have left unanswered questions

ByJoe Shute,  SENIOR FEATURE WRITER2 April 2022 • 5:00am

It has been 40 years, but Michael ‘Iddy’ Iddon can still taste the smoke pouring from Sir Galahad. Almost every night, as he lies in bed, the burning carcass of the Royal Navy ship looms into view, and the nightmares of the events of June 8, 1982, return to haunt him.

During these flashbacks, he is trapped once more in the smoke-filled corridors of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) ship, wires sparking and lights hanging off the wall, giving urgent medical care to the dead and dying around him.

Sometimes, he pictures the hold and exploding ammunition stores ignited by one of three 500lb bombs dropped from an Argentine Skyhawk jet. Or he feels the freezing waters of the South Atlantic, where he nearly drowned trying to escape, closing in around him.

“I see it all,” the now 59-year-old says quietly of the day that changed his life, sitting in the living room of his Burnley home. “Looking back at the pictures, it is all grainy – but in my head it is crystal clear.”

This weekend, marks the 40-year anniversary of the beginning of the Falklands War. But amid the commemorations, there are, Iddon says, just two dates that remain seared in his mind: June 8, when the bombing of the Sir Galahad and fellow RFA ship Sir Tristram, as they moored in Fitzroy Sound, led to the worst British loss of life throughout the Falklands campaign; and June 14, when victory was ultimately declared.

Whole article:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/falklan…paign=DM1555702

This issue is very sensitive to me, as an argentinean. THe first question that I can see is that half of the library says Falklands are fro UK and the other half says that are from Argentina. I an not an expert, therefore I cannot decide, altough there is a question which I demand is why we never accepted to put the issue in the International Court of Justice? Why we, after April 2nd 1982, we do not accepted the Haig proposal with the three flags inside? Why we did not undestand that going to fight with a great power, winner of the last two World Wars, we engaged in misfortune?

I remember that in those days many countries of Europe were concerned about the presence of Nuclear weapons, meanwhile Mrs Thatcher was the only one which said that nuclear weapons must stay in the UK. With those antecedents, why our "clever" diplomacy assumed that UK will not react to a military move?

Well, the plain fact is that we lost the war, and the last day homages to the fallen and stories about the Islands have me fed up.

I will quote an example: Denmark, which is now considered one of the most advanced countries of the world, had swallowed defeat since many centuries.

Let's go back to History: In the X Century they had to withdraw from England (remember The Danelaw?): then in the XVI century they lost Sweden and then Norway. and the last setback was losing the Schleswig Holstein province, occupied by Germany under Bismarck. Therefore they are accustomed to lose. They have accepted to be losers.

This speaks about a people which has reached good sense and maturity, a thing that I see it lacks in my own country.

Be aware that if I say this among my countrymen I will be considered an obnoxious person, traitor, coward or whatsoever they want. But this insistence in the Malvinas Falklands issue only produces resentment, sadness and desire of vengeance, that of course cannot be performed.

I see that we need good sense, and get an agreement with the islanders and keep together the surveillance of the South Atlantic, now invaded by chinese fishing fleets.

This statement in any way is an insult to those who died or were injured in the 1982 war. (Both sides).

Mere good sense, that's all.

Quote from Carlos

This speaks about a people which has reached good sense and maturity, a thing that I see it lacks in my own country.

Great post Carlos.

If the politicians had the maturity that you show then Argentina would be ranked in the first world. Sadly I see very little changing for the good in the foreseeable future.

Carlos, I don’t believe I’ve ever read such a matter-of-fact summation of the Falklands/Malvinas situation, then and now.

Thank you also for the historical perspective vis-a-vis Denmark.

This ridiculous Forergn Minister is the worst that we ever had in all Argentine History. I recall that in 1938 we had as a Foreign Minister Dr Carlos Saavedra Lamas, who won the Nobel Prize for his intervention in the Bolivian-Paraguay war of 1936. Mr Cordell Hull, Secretary of State of the US, remained resented beause he also wished to have the Nobel Prize,

Cafiero is the opposite of a cultured diplomat. Unable to speak any other language than Spanish (and I suspect with many mistakes as well).Also looking how he uses the fork and knife in a dinner, you can have a significant opinion about his manners.

With this kind of people we shall have a minimal approach with the islanders? I am not that naive.

Cafiero has learned at least one thing: he has someone else translate his thoughts to English.

But his thoughts are still nonsensical:

”We believe that no outcome of any war can resolve a dispute recognised by the international community.” Whaaaaat? Then why did Argentina start a war in the first place?

The current politicians will say that the war was provoked by a non democratic government, and this is true. Nobody suspected that this move were in the plans of the government, at least before February 1982.

Honestly, I agree with you, Splinter . It has always seemed strange for one country to own and control islands so close to another country.

Threatening, even.

The Brits should have gone further and claimed the mainland as well. The Brits gave them many things which helped make Argentins one of the top five countries in the world. Then the Spanish came along to fuck it up.

Wanting the Falklands to be Argentine is nothing but a joke to be honest.

Quote from Rice

Honestly, I agree with you, Splinter . It has always seemed strange for one country to own and control islands so close to another country.

Threatening, even.

I don't think Splinter was saying what you think he was.

The French island of Corsica is significantly closer to Italy than it is France. It used to be Italian, historically Italians sought to have it back. France still owns it, but I don't think France's ownership is threatening.

Quote from Rice

Honestly, I agree with you, Splinter . It has always seemed strange for one country to own and control islands so close to another country.

Threatening, even.

More offensive historically is when the indigenous people of a country are used and abused by incomers from other countries. At least the Falklands weren't inhabitted when the Brits came along.