Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Falklands Conflict at Sea | How the British took the South Atlantic" video.

The loathsome 'Sir' John Nott has always avoided most of the criticism he deserved for his half baked defence review.
7
Good idea. You stick to ball games, and leave adult issues to others.
2
Still waiting, are they?
1
True enough. The idea of turning a carrier into the wind to launch aircraft is rather out of date.
1
Why was it illegal? Perhaps you haven't actually read the terms of the Exclusion Zone, which were delivered to the Argentinian government well in advance of the sinking. Perhaps you don't believe in the right of self determination? Oh well, many more civilised people do.
1
@nomorewar4189 Which natives?
1
I'm sorry, but I was distracted by the postman. Could you repeat it please?
1
@brakenoodle105 Unfortunately, he was the very model od a self-interested fly by night politician.
1
And if my ancestors had been born elsewhere, I might have been Holy Roman Emperor.
1
@ROTHSTEIN01 It was only introduced in 2005.
1
How do submarines annihilate aircraft? Please explain, Herr von Clausewitz.
1
@guacho30 Indeed. You should stick to kicking an inflated pig's bladder up and down a field, and leave politics to the Grown Ups.
1
@OleLeik The fact is that, in the inter-service infighting which habitually goes on in Britain, the RAF had generally come out ahead of the RN. Now, when there was an actual military situation, the RAF was revealed to be a paper tiger. This was a cause of considerable alarm for the chaps in light blue uniforms, and the complex and largely pointless Vulcan raid was created to paper over the actual powerlessness of the RAF. Of course, the RAF propaganda machine has since been hard at work, and reliably informed us that the Vulcan raid made all the difference. The RAF have been doing this consistently since the mid 1920s, the days of Trenchard, so we should not really be surprised.
1