This is coolbert:
Here thanks to the Telegraph the observations of the man - - Rear-Admiral Sir John Forster Woodward - - in command of the English naval task force [he was the overall commander of the expeditionary force too?] during the Falklands Islands War. British able to repel after a three month war the Argentine military the disputed colonial possession, long-held English territory in the South Atlantic, one of those essential territories that Sir Jacky Fisher designated long ago as vital of British Imperial dominion over the oceans of the world.
"Falkland Islands: Britain 'would lose' if Argentina decides to invade now"
"Rear-Admiral Sir John Forster Woodward - who in 1982 gave the order to sink the General Belgrano - regrets not making more of how the Falklands war was won."
Admiral Sir John acerbic and forthright, almost a curmudgeon. Is alarmed by the "dire" state of the present British navy, not even now able to detail a single ship to protect home waters as they are designated!
The English currently unable to replicate that naval task force as was available thirty years ago! Specifically so of major concern to Admiral Sir John is that the Royal Navy [RN] NO LONGER AND UNTIL AT LEAST 2020 WILL NOT HAVE AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER IN THE INVENTORY!!
A naval task force dispatched with reinforcements to the Falklands is not an option in case of Argentinian attack? Aerial troop movement is possible, but ONLY if the single military airfield on the islands is in British hands, kept open and defensible!
“We could not retake the Falklands. We could not send a task force or even an aircraft carrier. If we had been in this state in 1982, the Falklands would be the Malvinas. We rely on sending reinforcements by air, but that would be impossible if we lost control of the airfield at Mount Pleasant.”
"The Argentines might hope to overcome the four Typhoon jets at Mount Pleasant with a dozen Mirages and then bomb the airfield out of action"
[it will be suggested by some that Admiral Sir John in pointing out such deficiencies is perhaps even inciting the Argentine and almost in a sense encouraging an attack!!]
Admiral Sir John also having some comments obviously directed at Prince William and his status - - the Prince currently performing his obligatory military duty in defense of the Falklands as part of the permanent British contingent. ROYALS ARE A HINDRANCE?
[obviously Admiral Sir John is retired for some time! His comments in the American military might be considered violations of UCMJ!]
"To put a royal in the front line is quite inconvenient. You have to take special measures to make sure he doesn’t lose his life. That means you service his aircraft three times as carefully as anyone else’s. If something goes badly wrong, you’ll be blamed. So you protect the Royal Family from their own wish to serve. They are a liability on the front line.”
The English ought to be glad that they have offspring of the royal family able and willing to serve and not just in a titular position either, but in a capacity that DOES place them in danger of some sort beyond the ordinary. Royals feel the position of aircraft pilot too is appropriate and in keeping with their status? William, his brother and father before him all were pilots!