Argentina had two boats that could be a problem.
Belgrano put it self in a place that made it the easiest target and the rest of the fleet ran away and hid.
The carrier already aborted the pincer maneuver because it couldn't get it's planes off the deck because they needed cooperating weather to even take off so the Belgrano and the carrier had already aborted the mission when it got sunk.
I'd love to see your moronic ass in Ukraine delicately avoiding shooting at outdated stuff because "hurrdurr very outdated weapons are no longer a threat"
British submarines do not fly the naval ensign, they have always flown the Jolly Roger because during ww1 they were advocating for submarines to not be labeled as "naval vessels" because they wanted an excuse to blow up U-boats without observing normal naval ROE
even gun cruisers are a strategic asset that can perform shore bombardments and carry anti-air and anti-ship missiles, they're old but they're still a threat
Because the British were shockingly bad at actually responding to direct threats to their ships once they actually got into range during that war, and also shore bombardment is scary.
Why are guns a threat in the hands of a Black?
fpbp. Always remember: Around Argie, No Lethargy.
Because it had Exocet missiles strapped to it and and large calibre guns that could threaten troops on shore. A thread died for this.
>why was an enemy combatant sunk during war
Dunno, moron, guess it'll be a mystery forever.
Herb this slide thread.
I just don't get why it was hyped up as a dangerous threat when it was clearly very outdated.
Because otherwise people would have complained when we blew it up.
Also it was their flagship so an excellent morale booster for the boys and morale shitter for the spics.
It also caused Argentina to send its carrier back to port, and *that* was a serious threat to the fleet.
Argentina had two boats that could be a problem.
Belgrano put it self in a place that made it the easiest target and the rest of the fleet ran away and hid.
The carrier already aborted the pincer maneuver because it couldn't get it's planes off the deck because they needed cooperating weather to even take off so the Belgrano and the carrier had already aborted the mission when it got sunk.
I'd love to see your moronic ass in Ukraine delicately avoiding shooting at outdated stuff because "hurrdurr very outdated weapons are no longer a threat"
Chat shit, get hit. Anyhow this is a slide thread, what has just happened to Russians?
Lovely boat and what not but why is the navy pretending to be pirates?
Afaik standard procedure after a sub kill, UK and USA
British submarines do not fly the naval ensign, they have always flown the Jolly Roger because during ww1 they were advocating for submarines to not be labeled as "naval vessels" because they wanted an excuse to blow up U-boats without observing normal naval ROE
even gun cruisers are a strategic asset that can perform shore bombardments and carry anti-air and anti-ship missiles, they're old but they're still a threat
>nooooo why did you sink my heckin warshipino, it wasn't dangerous at all, it just wanted to play, you clearly wanted it to happen
It's just like listening to a niggbull owner when his beast gets shot during the failed attack.
HOW ABOUT YOU JUST READ A FRICKING BOOK Black person
Because the British were shockingly bad at actually responding to direct threats to their ships once they actually got into range during that war, and also shore bombardment is scary.