Milo
No, can't see it from here.
I like this
"among them Major-General Julian Thompson, reveal how appalling weather, overstretched British air defences, poor communications and even incompetence sometimes stacked the odds heavily against the British. Veterans of some of the bloodiest battles talk us through the fighting. Their personal accounts reveal how professionalism and sheer courage overcame these problems."
Another eample of the British overcoming against the odds.
"500N
In a nutshell - from the programme's point of view
Unequipped, untrained for the conditions, and unfit.
No supply chain, no engineers, no artillery and no knowledge of what they were expected to do.
In fact no plan from on high of what to do with them when they arrived."
Funny how I was just watching a video on youtube of the events leading up to the Falklands surrender and a fair bit of footage of British artillery being fired.'
"no plan from on high of what to do with them when they arrived"
Are we talking Gov't / HQ back in the UK or the Commander of the taskforce ? Seems strange that they say this considering they landed at San Carlos and walked all the way to Stanley.
"Unequipped" - well doesn't every war start with the troops being Unequipped ?
We all know that a fair bit of equipment was lost when the Atlantic conveyor was sunk. Here is a couple of questions for all.
Q1. If the Atlantic Conveyor was NOT sunk, how much of an effect would the extra helicopters and stores have made to the British campaign and
Q2. How much shorter do you think the war would have been IF the ability to lift troops forward by helo had been available ?
Q3. The extra Harriers would have enabled far more sorties to be flown and more CAP. Would this have possibly stopped some of the ships from being sunk ?