Documental: Falklands' Most Daring Raid

Registrador

Madmaxista
Desde
10 May 2010
Mensajes
17.700
Reputación
32.645
Lugar
en la bodeguita de moncloa
De como un solo bombardero Vulcan destruyo el aerodromo de Port Stanley en una mision de 16.000 km.

[youtube]PBJ99bIhAVk[/youtube]

Especialmente interesantes las imagenes reales de los entramientos para el bombardeo en el minuto 12:20 (dos semanas antes de la mision).

El bombardero Vulcan de los britanicos estaba totalmente obsoleto y de hecho fue retirado 6 meses despues de la mision. Fue disenado en los anos 40 para bombardeo nuclear y nunca habia entrado en accion. La mision fue especialmente complicada porque tuvieron que repostar en vuelo 4 veces, sin escolta de cazas y tras 16.000 millas de vuelo.

En resumen, los britanicos como siempre con los huevones cuadrados armados de cemento. :Aplauso:
 
Última edición:
Muy bueno, lo vi hace tiempo. Muy británico cuando encuentran una pieza del sistema de repostaje en vuelo usándose como cenicero.
 
Lo vi hace tiempo y pensé exactamente lo mismo.
Los tienen bien puesto, no como los pardillos de los argentinos (o españoles o lo que toque).
 
La misión Black Buck requirió un enorme trabajo de planificación para que el Vulcan llegara al objetivo, aviones cisterna Victor tuvieron que repostar a otros cisterna para que acompañaran al bombardero:

refueeling-plan19.png


La distancia no fue tanta como pones, desde Isla Ascensión a Port Stanley marcan 7.500 kilómetros (que ya esta bien):

BlackBuckVisulization565.png


Para eso quieren los british las colonias, para tener bases de apoyo y suministro colocadas estratégicamente en todo el mundo :p

Los daños materiales al objetivo no fueron graves y el aeropuerto pudo volver a usarse enseguida. Pero el ataque acojonó a los argentinos, pues demostró que los británicos podían atacar territorio continental argentino si querían.
 
Autobombo británico, los pilotos argentinos demostraron muchos mas bemoles cuarenta veces.
 
Autobombo británico, los pilotos argentinos demostraron muchos mas bemoles cuarenta veces.

Los Chilenos fueron quienes decidieron la guerra traicionando como ratas a los Argentinos:

Tener a los traidores colaborando con los argentinos supuso:

1.- Que las tropas de elite argentinas NO estaban en las islas, sino que estaban desplegadas esperando un hipotetico ataque chileno en el continente.

2.- Que los ingleses conocian las tras*misiones y los despegues de los aviones hacia las islas, por lo que podían avisar a los barcos cada vez que despegaban los cazas argentinos.

Los ingleses son la mayor sarama que ha conocido este planeta y desde luego han sido, son y serán nuestros mayores enemigos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NflCCtfGD8A

Tienen la maquina de propaganda que es hollywood, de ahi que la gente jamas sabra de los campos de concentracion de soldados prisioneros alemanes despues de la SGM, y que por ejemplo en Holanda se emplearon para desminar las playas muriendo como conejos.

Eso son genocidios buenos, y la historia la escriben los vencedores.


Western Europe[edit]

German soldier clearing a mine near Stavanger, Norway, August 1945.
Background[edit]
At the Yalta conference in January 1945 the Allies agreed upon the use of German forced labor. The U.S. used over 500,000 German POWs in Germany in Military Labor Service Units.[20] Great Britain used 225,000 Germans as "reparations labor". In addition to the 200,000 Germans held by French forces (and 70,000 held by France in Algeria), France demanded 1,700,000 POWs for use as "enforced labor".[21] In July 1945 they were promised 1,300,000 POWs by the SHAEF. The number of actually delivered prisoners is debated, as is the number of surviving POWs eventually released by the French.[22]

Contrary to Section IV of the Hague Convention of 1907, "The Laws and Customs of War on Land", the SHAEF "counter insurgency manual" included provisions for forced labor and hostage taking.[23]

France[edit]
General George S. Patton commented in his diary "I'm also opposed to sending POW's to work as slaves in foreign lands (in particular, to France) where many will be starved to death." He also noted "It is amusing to recall that we fought the revolution in defense of the rights of man and the civil war to abolish slavery and have now gone back on both principles".[22] On 12 October 1945 The New York Herald Tribune reported that the French were starving their POWs, and compared their emaciation to that of those liberated from the Dachau concentration camp.[24] A firsthand account of these conditions was given by Herbert Werner, a German Naval officer who was sent from Norway to Germany to France, in the epilogue of his memoir, Iron Coffins.

German prisoners were for example forced to clear minefields in France and the Low Countries.

According to Simon MacKenzie, "callous self-interest and a desire for retribution played a role in the fate" of German prisoners, and he exemplifies by pointing out that sick or otherwise unfit prisoners were forcibly used for labour, and in France and the Low countries this also included work such as highly dangerous mine-clearing; "by September 1945 it was estimated by the French authorities that two thousand prisoners were being maimed and killed each month in accidents"[25][26]

Some of the 740,000 German prisoners tras*ferred in 1945 by the U.S. for forced labour in France came from the Rheinwiesenlager camps, these forced labourers were already very weak, many weighing barely 50 kilos.[27]

On 13 March 1947 the U.S. made an agreement with the French to the effect that roughly 450,000 German prisoners would be released, at a rate of 20,000 a month. This number included in addition to the prisoners handed over to them by the U.S. also the roughly 200,000 prisoners the French had themselves captured.[28]

In retaliation for acts of resistance French occupation forces expelled more than 25,000 civilians from their homes. Some of these civilians were subsequently forced to clear minefields in Alsace.[29]

United Kingdom[edit]
In 1946, the UK had more than 400,000 prisoners, many had been tras*ferred from POW camps in the U.S. and Canada. Many of these were used as forced labour, as a form of "reparations".[30][31]

The two main reasons for their internment were political re-education (Wilton Park), and for non-officers employment as agricultural and other labour.[32][33] In 1946 a fifth of all agricultural work in the UK was performed by German prisoners.[33] An emotional and public debate ensued in the UK, where words such as "slaves", "slave labour" and "forced labour" were increasingly used in the media and in the House of Commons of the United Kingdom.[34] In 1947 the Ministry of Agriculture argued against rapid repatriation of working German prisoners, since by then they made up 25 percent of the land workforce, and they wanted to use them also in 1948.[34] Faced with political difficulties in using volunteer foreign labour a compromise solution was suggested by the ministry of agriculture, German prisoners were to be allowed to remain in Britain as free men.[34] ***owing disputes about how many former prisoners of war would be permitted to remain voluntarily in Britain and whether they would first have to return briefly to Germany before being allowed to officially migrate to Britain,[34] by the end of 1947 about 250,000 of the prisoners of war were repatriated, and the last repatriations took place in November 1948.[33] About 24,000 chose to remain voluntarily in Britain.[33]

Norway[edit]
In Norway the last available casualty record, from August 29, 1945, shows that by that time a total of 275 German soldiers had been killed while clearing mines, while an additional 392 had been maimed. German protests that forcing POWs to clear mines was against international law, article 32 of the Geneva conventions, were rejected with the assertion that the Germans were not POW's; they were disarmed forces who had surrendered unconditionally ("avvæpnede styrker som hadde overgitt seg betingelsesløst"). Mine clearance reports received by the Allied Forces Headquarters state: June 21, 1945; 199 dead and 163 wounded Germans; 3 Norwegians and 4 British wounded. The last registration, from August 29, 1945 lists 392 wounded and 275 dead Germans. Mine clearance was then for unknown reasons halted for close to a year before recommencing under better conditions during June–September 1946. This time many volunteered thanks to good pay, and death rates were much lower, possibly thanks in part to a deal permitting them medical treatment at Norwegian hospitals.[35]

United States[edit]
The United States tras*ferred prisoners for forced labor to both the UK and France (which received 740,000 from the US). For prisoners in the U.S. repatriation was also delayed for harvest reasons.[36]

Civilians aged 14 – 65 in the U.S. occupation zone of Germany were also registered for compulsory labor, under threat of prison and withdrawal of ration cards.[37]

Conclusion[edit]
Most captives of the Americans and the British were released by the end of 1948, and most of those in French captivity were released by the end of 1949.

According to the Office of Public Administration (part of Federal Ministry of the Interior), compensation for Germans used as forced labor after the war cannot be claimed in Germany since September 29, 1978, due to the statute of limitations.[38]
 
Última edición:
Los ingleses son eficientes cual maquinaria de precision y valerosos como leones.
Basta ver la gesta de Singapur, 1941. O Dunkerque
 
Los ingleses son eficientes cual maquinaria de precision y valerosos como leones.
Basta ver la gesta de Singapur, 1941. O Dunkerque

Los ingleses sin los americanos estarían todos ahora mismo hablando aleman, pero no desde 1945, desde 1917.

Que las elites financieras norteamericanas hayan empleado a su gente como carne de cañon para salvarles el ojo ciego, empleando atentados de bandera falsa en ambas ocasiones, describe bastante bien lo que da de si esta gente.

Acojonante la maquinaria de precision, en Dunquerke corriendo como conejos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWXDRFjZ_Eg
 
Última edición:
Alguien me puede explicar como es que los argentinos no tenian cazas patrullando alrededor de las Falklands?

---------- Post added 18-sep-2014 at 14:31 ----------

La distancia no fue tanta como pones, desde Isla Ascensión a Port Stanley marcan 7.500 kilómetros (que ya esta bien):

La mision fue ir Port Stanley y volver! :p 7.500 + 7.500 = 15.000 km
 
Última edición:
Alguien me puede explicar como es que los argentinos no tenian cazas patrullando alrededor de las Falklands?

---------- Post added 18-sep-2014 at 14:31 ----------



La mision fue ir Port Stanley y volver! :p 7.500 + 7.500 = 15.000 km

Adivine usted el principal defecto de los Argentinos.

Como no iba a pasar nada pues los ingleses no tenían (ponga la palabra que desee) no ampliaron la pista.

En consecuencia las CAP (de cazas a reacción) había que montarlas desde el continente y el tiempo de vuelo sobre las islas limitadisimo. Era imposible por tanto mantener suficientes cazas el suficiente tiempo.
 
Los Chilenos fueron quienes decidieron la guerra traicionando como ratas a los Argentinos:

Justo tras la conquista argentina de las Malvinas, el presidente argentino Galtieri declaro en plena exaltacion patriotica-alcoholica (era un beodo que estaba mas tiempo ebrio que sobrio), que las siguientes en caer serian las islas del canal.

Conflicto del Beagle - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre

Asi que los chilenos se limitaron a defenderse de quien les amenazaba.
 
Volver