[Kenny Bunk]

Aye, the Brits did OK. But in many ways, the Argies made it a lot easier. They over-rode their local commanders with some really stupid orders that weakened their defense AND GAVE AWAY THEIR ADVANTAGE ON THE GROUND.

Without command and control SNAFUS on the Argie part, the Brits would have been much more roughly handled. Perhaps they still would have won. But without heavy (make that MASSIVE) US help and Argentine General Staff incompetence, it would have been a good deal uglier than the mess it truly was.

LESSON HERE: You cannot win a war with Lyndon B. Johnson/McNamara-style command and control

[spitz]

Aye, the Brits did OK

You know something? I’ve heard all this before, all the reasons why the British didn’t actually ‘win’ the Falklands war.

Argentine incompetence, conscripts (who hadn’t eaten, slept or were cold), the Argie Navy withdrew to port, bombs didn’t go off, the airforce was at its operational limit, MASSIVE US help, the AIM9 . . . the list goes on no doubt.

Maybe the thread should be about how the US saved the Brits - Again. Or how the Argentines lost the war. I mean it couldn’t actually be that the British were better trained, motivated and competent enough to overcome the enemy and their own challenges.

Credit where credit is due, to those who were there.