Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Standing Tall... 70s Style

Articles in the various British papers today detail a heretofore "secret" deployment of a British combined submarine/surface task force to the Falklands in 1977. This was during a confrontation five years before the Falklands War in which 50 Argentine scientists had landed on one of the British-held islands in the area, which the Callaghan government thought might be a prelude to an invasion. Check out these "rules of engagement" issued to the task force commanders:

"Commanding officers and aircraft captains are to respond to any aggression with tactful firmness and are to exhibit a determination to meet any escalation, though not to exceed that already carried out by the enemy.
"All use of force must be governed by the principle of using only the minimum force necessary to achieve the aim." Such force must be used only until it was evident "that the immediate aim is being achieved, and must in no way be retaliatory".


The CO of HMS Dreadnought, the submarine in the task force, received the following additional guidance:

"If you are attacked with [anti-submarine] weapons by [Argentine] forces, you are to surface or withdraw at high speed submerged, whichever will be of least risk to life." [Emphasis mine.]

My first thoughts on reading this were, "Whiskey Tango...?" Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was always taught that a nuclear submarine surfacing in the face of fire was the equivalent of a tank approaching a hostile force with her turret reversed; that is, an internationally-recognized sign of surrender or desire to withdraw (the act of surfacing essentially renders a nuclear sub hors de combat).

The thing that's funniest to me about these articles is that they seem to be trying to spin it as "the brave Labour government standing up to foreign aggression, which Lady Thatcher didn't have the foresight to do". As I remember, there was no Argentine plan to invade in 1977 (the military junta that ordered the invasion didn't take over until later) and the Argentines in 1982 didn't tip their hand very far in advance of the actual invasion. In any event, it's clear to me from the ROE under which the Brits were operating in 1977 was so restrictive that it was essentially a giant bluff; one that worked out, but a bluff nonetheless. No wonder our adversaries during that time thought the West was nothing but a paper tiger...

5 Comments:

Blogger ninme said...

Have you ever been to the Falklands?

6/01/2005 12:25 PM

 
Blogger Bubblehead said...

Nope, but I've heard it's just about the most unpleasant place in the world... windy and cold. I've been down to 44' 30 min South, but that was south of Australia in January, so it wasn't that bad...

6/01/2005 12:36 PM

 
Blogger ninme said...

Huh. I was going to ask you about the sheep.

I'd like to go. With a windbreaker, natch. But it's a bit out of the way, which makes it the sort of place you'd only ever go if you happened to be inside a submarine that happened to be going. For whatever reason.

6/01/2005 4:06 PM

 
Anonymous RM1(SS) (ret) said...

I don't know about the sheep in the Falklands, but I do know that the guy who was caught in the act with a sheep while I was in Scotland was a skimmer, not a submariner.

6/02/2005 4:21 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

when were you in scotland?

6/05/2005 1:07 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home