Tough Dog Says "Donate"
Click the Pic
Posted on 04/20/2011 8:08:52 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
'A deep-rooted hatred of the British': How Israelis 'armed junta' in Falklands conflict
Israel secretly provided arms and supplies to Argentina during the Falklands conflict, according to revelations in a new book.
Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin had such a deep-rooted hatred of the British that the Jewish state covertly became the biggest supplier of military equipment to the Argentine military junta.
Gas masks, radar alert systems, air-to-air missiles and fuel tanks for fighter bombers were sent from Tel Aviv to arm General Galtieri’s forces. The most audacious deal involved supplying 23 French-built fighter aircraft – Mirage IIICs – which were camouflaged with the insignia of Peru. But they arrived after the war was over.
Britain, under Margaret Thatcher, retook the Falkland Islands in June 1982, two and a half months after Argentina invaded. Some 255 British servicemen, more than 650 Argentines and three islanders were killed.
Although it was well known at the time that France was supplying missiles to Argentina – most infamously the Exocet missiles used to sink HMS Sheffield with the loss of 20 crew – Israel’s involvement went unnoticed.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
All the British ever did was keep Jewish refugees from escaping to Israel during WW II, hire the Grand Mufti to incite Jew-hatred and pogroms prior to WW II, and lead the Arabs in massacring the Jews of Gush Etzion and bombard the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem after WW II. Why, for all that triviality, would Israel (gasp!) sell arms to the Argentine Junta?
“Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin had such a deep-rooted hatred of the British that the Jewish state covertly became the biggest supplier of military equipment to the Argentine military junta. “
Well, that does it. relations between the UK and Israel will not be the same again until Menachem Begin is out of office.
Begin was head of the Irgun, one of the two Zionist/Jewish terrorist groups active in Palestine between 1944 and 1947, both groups bombed and murdered and tortured British soldiers and civilians, as well as native Arabs and even Jews. The bombing of the King David hotel in 1946 was just one of many acts by both groups.
The other group, the Stern Gang, were so extreme that Abraham Stern actually met Nazi agents in 1941 to agree a plan where the Stern would sabotage the British in Palestine in return for all Jews in Europe being allowed a move to a Jewish state in German occupied Middle East (the Jews would get their homeland and the Germans would get ‘rid’ of European Jewry....)
20/20. The purpose of the article is to put Israel in the crosshairs.
Let's talk about something else, about British war crime of sinking Argentinian Belgrano cruiser.
Or about France providing Exocet antiship missile codes sold to Argentina to the British prior to operation. It practically made Excocet inoperable against two British aircraft carriers.
That's what we get when the tradision of "rum, sodomy and the lash" code of honor is combined with French military victories
Scum are riding together in their aggresion on Libya.
The French did NOT supply weapons to the Argentine. They HAD supplied weapons prior to the conflict, but on its outbreak they suspended further deliveries of exocet missiles. The Argentines cleverly managed to get the five they had working well enough to score three very impressive hits.
Finally, even IF Israel supplied weapons to Argentina, it would certainly been a pragmatic economic decision, not a political one. But they wouldn't have done it. Its too risky a move. They would certainly have been caught before now.
Not according to the lawyers.
Or about France providing Exocet antiship missile codes sold to Argentina to the British prior to operation. It practically made Excocet inoperable against two British aircraft carriers.
How do you reckon that? The Argentines only had five exocet missiles and three of them scored hits, sinking two ships. That's not a bad success rate! The Brits were lucky (and skilfull) in keeping the Carriers out of harm's way.
That's what we get when the tradision of "rum, sodomy and the lash" code of honor is combined with French military victories
What are you trying to say? (PS Tradition is spelt with a "t").
Scum are riding together in their aggresion on Libya.
Who are you referring to? (PS aggression is spelt with two "s"'s)
There’s no deep rooted hatred anywhere here (except by the author of the book that contains this slur). It’s plain simple economics and realpolitik. The Brits sold arms to both Israel and certain Arab nations (I think you mean Jordan, not exactly the most virulent of Israel’s enemies. As I recall Egypt and Syria were in the Soviet’s pockets at this time and got all their weapons from them).
It was a war, Argentina started it, ships get sunk in war....it was no war crime.
Belgrano was outside of 200 miles exclusivity zone established by the British government and was sailing away from the Falklands.
Ms Thatchhore knew it very well but denied it publicly
The sinking of Belgrano was deliberete act, to stoke the fires of the war and prevent diplomatic settlement.
Any act against peace is penultimate crime.
Take it up with Galtieri.
That it is dihonest to accuse Israel of something Israel did not do, while at the same time both Britain and France acted dishonestly in the Falklands war.
When the British and the French work together, like premeditated attack on Libya no wonder the act of thuggery is it is touted as an honest act with honorable motives.
The article here is true enough, in that it is describing a book that claims that Israel supplied weapons to Argentina, but the claims this book makes are obviously false. As has been stated very eloquently on this thread, everyone sells arms to everyone else all the time. Israel did sell arms to Argentina (pre-war), but so what? The US, Britain and France all sold weapons to Argentina pre-war. And this is not wrong because those weapons were not sold to the Argentine government that started the Falklands war, and in any case, none of the selling nations purposed their use.
You are so off-beam with this accusation of "thuggery" and "touting as honest acts and honor". In the first place, all the nations of the world are primarily concerned with their own interests, and honor and nobility are usually excuses they use to cover their actions. I'm not as cynical about this as many people - I happen to think that honor and an altruistic desire to improve the lot of others really does have some weight in the councils of the mighty, but at the same time I'm not so naive as to believe such things cannot be shelved if they become "inconvenient".
In the second place, it is an astounding event when Britain and France work together on anything, and it rarely works very well. I would be very, very surprised if the attack on Libya is premeditated. I know that both have got it in for Gaddaffi, and lets face it - the world would be an immensely better place if he wasn't in the picture anymore. But removing him by force is just too darn risky in this day and age. And in any case, what has either nation to gain from such an act? Seizing oil? The stuff is largely extracted from Libyan soil by western techies anyway. Besides, very little of the product reaches either country (<1% for Britain).
And look at what both countries stand to lose! Oil prices have shot up since this all kicked off, because the markets hate instability. They are both heavily involved in other conflicts, especially the British (Afghanistan), and neither has the money or manpower to become entangled in another. If there is a major civil war in Libya there will be a huge refugee problem, and a lot of it is going to rebound on southern Europe. The French have closed their border with Italy already to keep fleeing libyans out. There is no guarantee that any new Libyan government is going to be any more friendly than the last one, and what happens if Gaddaffi wins anyway? He's not going to be well pleased with the people who attacked him, and he is the type to hold grudges.
No, I'm sorry. This neo-colonial libyan aggression conspiracy theory just doesn't float.
Any act against peace is penultimate crime.
And Kumbya to you too.
The order and sinking of the Belgrano occurred on the afternoon and evening of 2 May
On the Morning of 2 May the Argentinians ordered an Alpha Strike from the carrier Veinticinco de Mayo against the British Fleet. Due to unseasonable calm weather, they couldn't get enough Wind Over Deck to launch a fully loaded A-4 Skyhawk so the strike was postponed.
If it has been launched and succeeded, you don't think that would have stoked the fires of the war and prevented a diplomatic settlement?
It was war. Potential enemy threats get taken out when the opportunity presents.
If the Belgrano had been able to lose contact with Conqueror by heading north over the Burwood bank, and getting within range of the British carriers, well questions would have been asked in the House
Commander Wreford-Brown, "The Royal Navy spent thirteen years preparing me for such an occasion. It would have been regarded as extremely dreary if I had fouled it up".
Well, Kumbaya and imagine whirled peas to you too ---
The Brits should have sent their subs into Argentinian harbors and sank everything afloat with an Argentine flag, especially that carrier that they were hiding.
Firstly, the Belgrano was not sailing back to Argentina as modern myth has it, it was sailing to link up with other ships and launch a pincer attack on the Royal Navy.
Secondly, like many, you seem to misunderstand what the exclusion zone actually was. All it was was a publicly declared zone in which the British stated any non-British ship could be sunk. There is a misunderstanding then and now that it was a legal zone under international law under which no ship could be sunk outside it.
The Argentines under international law were entitled to sail to Portsmouth or Faslane or Belfast and sink every RN ship, as we would have been legally allowed to sail into Argentine ports and sink the enemy.
Israel abided by pre-war arms deals with Argentina. Israel had a horrible experience of being betrayed by the perfidious creator of Eurabia Charles De Gaulle, when France refused to honor arms deal with Israel starting in 1966. And the British were no better. Israel helped the British design the Chieftain tank. In 1969, the British stopped sale of this tank to Israel even as they were sold to Iran, Kuwait, Oman, and Jordan. th elast three of which were still in a state of war with Israel. Perhaps Begin would have betrayed Argentina if Thatcher declared that Perfidious Arabist Albion would stop screwing Israel, but Israel needed to sell weapons to keep its domestic arms industry alive and security assured.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.