Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (16406)	4/3/2007 3:02:32 PM
From: 8bits	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 220305

Yeah the Falklands was pretty silly 1845 wounded and 907 killed. More than the population of the island. I actually heard the Argentine version from a friend who emigrated to the US in 1984 and the British side who had a schoolmate who was badly wounded. The Argentine military government fell after the Falklands. The Argentine economy was in bad shape and the war was used to whip the populace into a nationalistic fervor. Pre-internet Argentina was fed daily doses of the many loses of the British and how the Argentinians were winning every battle.. until the announcement that they lost the war. Huge street protests convinced the ruling junta that they couldn't hold the country. The Argentine military which was adept at killing more than 30,000 civilians could not hold an island against a former colonial power ruled by a woman. One of the previous acts of a "brave" Argentine colonel who opted not fight the British but surrendered over 400 of his men was to shot a 16 Swedish girl and throw her in the trunk of his car. Apparently after adding up the expenditures by the British it was calibrated that expenses for the war would have covered every British subject of the Falklands such that they could have received an estate in the Midlands and a pension for life. War in costly in more ways than one.