Great discussion and well balanced too. Points to agree upon are that war should not be treated with cartoonish gung ho depictions (as I’ve seen in a number of museums). Behind those who lost their lives, mobility or sanity in this conflict, there were also families and former lives that were changed forever. This aspect of war must also be included. It was great to see all 3 services represented and their full and vital contributions to the successful outcome of the conflict fully acknowledged, well done. Finally, the one sided nature of the conflict reporting and historiography does everyone a disservice. I’ve had to translate a number of Spanish accounts of the war to allow my own historical research a sense of balance and perspective. Great presentation
@Phil if you go to the Imperial War Museum and go look at Lord Ashrofts collection of Victoria Crosses, there are accounts of soldiers actions that won the awards that are told as animated cartoons. As an ex serviceman who saw active service, I thought this type of depiction trivialised what my fellow servicemen twenty through.
@Phil My friend, if you would be willing to reread the thread, my point is relating to a true and honest depiction of armed conflict. Yes I agree with you nations needs mythology of a sort to inspire bravery and heroism, but my gripe is the depiction of current and former service personnels deeds is throwaway in nature. Please be aware that not at anytime did I insult you. In response to your post I pointed you to evidence that is available for all to see, to back up my points. And, I have made no aspersions on your life (as I don’t know you). And, no although cooks do a vital job, I was an infantryman who saw active service during the First Gulf War of 1990-1991. The whole point of debate is not to shut discussion down, but to sift through the various points and provide evidence to support one’s position, which hopefully will enlighten and educate people. There are a great many documentaries available that talk about experience of war, and very few veterans glorify or trivialise their war experience. I wish you a pleasant day 🤙
Another so called "expert panel" with a sub-par presentation A couple of "know it all"blokes who weren't even around at the time There are several of these 40th anniversary forums who have miserably failed .. I want to hear from veterans and i want to hear a discussion strictly about the Falklands Not about current world affairs or tut tutting about "colonialism" with 21st century mores I switched off too at 7 minutes FAIL
Yes, this is almost an obligatory effort to mark the occasion by the service museums. There are plenty of videos on YT with good interviews with Falklands veterans, e.g. Rifleman Moore. What I'm also missing here is the Argentinian perspective.
Bloody hell. You took the words right out of my keyboard. I have studied this war for 40 years and just hate hearing from these snobs (who probably weren't even born at the time) waffling and spouting a load of meaningless drivel about stuff they read about in a book. There were so many lessons that the 3 services learned from the conflict, and these idiots hardly mentioned any of them. Lack of Early Warning Aircraft/radar, Aluminum ships, Rapier sensitivity, crappy boots, Air mobility and troop transport, Misused combat air patrols Barrage balloons etc. etc. etc. Waste of time
If the Warsaw Pact had decided to attack during the Falklands conflict, would the NATO forces in Europe have been seriously compromised due to the withdrawal of UK troops and equipment to the South Atlantic?
The army units that went down were chosen due to having non nato commitments. However the navy was committed to nato but I believe that other commonwealth navies took on some of their patrolling. 3 Commando brigade were committed to defending NATO northern flank in Norway. So yes they did compromise NATO but tried to keep it to a minimum.
Typical so called intellectuals who think that because they look after some artifacts in a museum they are therefore qualified to grant us their wise opinion. Wrong.
So there's nothing more to hear about, no more insight to be gained other than that offered by direct actors? You clearly believe that a bizarre anti-intellectual take is valid though. What are your credentials, seeing as you are an authority?
@@GeordieExpat13 I was born in 1983. I now have a PhD in modern history. We agree that it was a significant historical event; we also agree, I suspect, that representation of the past is crucial to our sense of identity and morality. Therefore, that representation has many more moving parts and aspects than are determined by "on-the-scene" actors. Whether you like it or not, the conflict has a resonance - an abstract, intellectual one - far beyond those who participated.
@@GeordieExpat13 Were you this much of a s**t house down there? Being a veteran doesn't make you better than anyone else mate. Go Stateside if you want that adulation
@49:00 we do fail to understand aspects the Falklands "Conflict" : the Argentine is ethnic Italian : the tug-of-war Pope John-Paul endured and his eventual historical "Pastoral" visit to the UK whilst Port Stanley was being bombed and YET negotiations to effect an Argentine blockade in Europe was blocked by Italy and Common Agricultural Policy was forced through DESPITE a UK veto : the Pope also visited Argentina in the following weeks : President Reagan spoke to both houses in the Palace of Westminster about trade and Berlin and fighting for freedom whilst Israeli forces attacked Arafat's PLO in Lebanon risking war with Syria : President Reagan also visited the Pope
As a vertebrate, I agree with this show. its shameful the British won. I for one hope the UK is invaded soon, because being proud of your own country is appalling. Unless you are not the UK in which case its admirable.
Great discussion and well balanced too.
Points to agree upon are that war should not be treated with cartoonish gung ho depictions (as I’ve seen in a number of museums). Behind those who lost their lives, mobility or sanity in this conflict, there were also families and former lives that were changed forever. This aspect of war must also be included.
It was great to see all 3 services represented and their full and vital contributions to the successful outcome of the conflict fully acknowledged, well done.
Finally, the one sided nature of the conflict reporting and historiography does everyone a disservice. I’ve had to translate a number of Spanish accounts of the war to allow my own historical research a sense of balance and perspective.
Great presentation
@Phil if you go to the Imperial War Museum and go look at Lord Ashrofts collection of Victoria Crosses, there are accounts of soldiers actions that won the awards that are told as animated cartoons. As an ex serviceman who saw active service, I thought this type of depiction trivialised what my fellow servicemen twenty through.
@Phil 🤣, have you ever served?
@Phil My friend, if you would be willing to reread the thread, my point is relating to a true and honest depiction of armed conflict. Yes I agree with you nations needs mythology of a sort to inspire bravery and heroism, but my gripe is the depiction of current and former service personnels deeds is throwaway in nature.
Please be aware that not at anytime did I insult you.
In response to your post I pointed you to evidence that is available for all to see, to back up my points.
And, I have made no aspersions on your life (as I don’t know you). And, no although cooks do a vital job, I was an infantryman who saw active service during the First Gulf War of 1990-1991.
The whole point of debate is not to shut discussion down, but to sift through the various points and provide evidence to support one’s position, which hopefully will enlighten and educate people.
There are a great many documentaries available that talk about experience of war, and very few veterans glorify or trivialise their war experience.
I wish you a pleasant day 🤙
Another so called "expert panel" with a sub-par presentation A couple of "know it all"blokes who weren't even around at the time There are several of these 40th anniversary forums who have miserably failed .. I want to hear from veterans and i want to hear a discussion strictly about the Falklands Not about current world affairs or tut tutting about "colonialism" with 21st century mores I switched off too at 7 minutes FAIL
Yes, this is almost an obligatory effort to mark the occasion by the service museums. There are plenty of videos on YT with good interviews with Falklands veterans, e.g. Rifleman Moore. What I'm also missing here is the Argentinian perspective.
Bloody hell. You took the words right out of my keyboard. I have studied this war for 40 years and just hate hearing from these snobs (who probably weren't even born at the time) waffling and spouting a load of meaningless drivel about stuff they read about in a book. There were so many lessons that the 3 services learned from the conflict, and these idiots hardly mentioned any of them. Lack of Early Warning Aircraft/radar, Aluminum ships, Rapier sensitivity, crappy boots, Air mobility and troop transport, Misused combat air patrols Barrage balloons etc. etc. etc. Waste of time
timestamp 25:04 it took weeks for news to be released. The BBC reported on Goose Green before the lads went in
If the Warsaw Pact had decided to attack during the Falklands conflict, would the NATO forces in Europe have been seriously compromised due to the withdrawal of UK troops and equipment to the South Atlantic?
The army units that went down were chosen due to having non nato commitments. However the navy was committed to nato but I believe that other commonwealth navies took on some of their patrolling. 3 Commando brigade were committed to defending NATO northern flank in Norway. So yes they did compromise NATO but tried to keep it to a minimum.
Extremly dissapointing, turned it off after 7 minutes
Typical so called intellectuals who think that because they look after some artifacts in a museum they are therefore qualified to grant us their wise opinion. Wrong.
So there's nothing more to hear about, no more insight to be gained other than that offered by direct actors? You clearly believe that a bizarre anti-intellectual take is valid though. What are your credentials, seeing as you are an authority?
@@granitesevan6243 I was there, how about you?
@@GeordieExpat13 I was born in 1983. I now have a PhD in modern history. We agree that it was a significant historical event; we also agree, I suspect, that representation of the past is crucial to our sense of identity and morality. Therefore, that representation has many more moving parts and aspects than are determined by "on-the-scene" actors. Whether you like it or not, the conflict has a resonance - an abstract, intellectual one - far beyond those who participated.
@@granitesevan6243 Thought so.
@@GeordieExpat13 Were you this much of a s**t house down there? Being a veteran doesn't make you better than anyone else mate. Go Stateside if you want that adulation
@49:00 we do fail to understand aspects the Falklands "Conflict" : the Argentine is ethnic Italian : the tug-of-war Pope John-Paul endured and his eventual historical "Pastoral" visit to the UK whilst Port Stanley was being bombed and YET negotiations to effect an Argentine blockade in Europe was blocked by Italy and Common Agricultural Policy was forced through DESPITE a UK veto : the Pope also visited Argentina in the following weeks : President Reagan spoke to both houses in the Palace of Westminster about trade and Berlin and fighting for freedom whilst Israeli forces attacked Arafat's PLO in Lebanon risking war with Syria : President Reagan also visited the Pope
As a vertebrate, I agree with this show. its shameful the British won. I for one hope the UK is invaded soon, because being proud of your own country is appalling. Unless you are not the UK in which case its admirable.
Tossers.