Off Topic
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
Wouldn't surprise me....
One of the main reasons we won was our nuclear attack subs, which kept the enemy navy in harbour.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 10:59, 1 reply, 12 years ago)
One of the main reasons we won was our nuclear attack subs, which kept the enemy navy in harbour.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 10:59, 1 reply, 12 years ago)
The subs in question weren't equipped with nuclear missiles though if my memory is correct
The 'nuclear' refers to nuclear-powered rather than nuclear weapons-carrying.
The Polaris boats would have been kept well away from the area, although they could have hit Argentina from pretty much anywhere on the planet.
I suspect the nuclear option was just a hypothetical exercise in case things went tits-up. I'd be amazed if the mad old bag would have seriously considered it.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:15, Reply)
The 'nuclear' refers to nuclear-powered rather than nuclear weapons-carrying.
The Polaris boats would have been kept well away from the area, although they could have hit Argentina from pretty much anywhere on the planet.
I suspect the nuclear option was just a hypothetical exercise in case things went tits-up. I'd be amazed if the mad old bag would have seriously considered it.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:15, Reply)
I didn't disagree with that, you ignorant tattie-muncher
Read the fucking post.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:21, Reply)
Read the fucking post.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:21, Reply)
Spaz, the presence of the Conqueror kept their navy in port
you used it as an exercise in showing off that you know the difference between the propulsion system of a submarine and what comes out the top.
Christ have you never read commando
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:25, Reply)
you used it as an exercise in showing off that you know the difference between the propulsion system of a submarine and what comes out the top.
Christ have you never read commando
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:25, Reply)
I wasn't arguing that, you boss-eyed ignoramus
Presumably English is your second language.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:31, Reply)
Presumably English is your second language.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:31, Reply)
You should revisit the post that I'm mocking, get someone to explain it to you and then go and kill yourself with the shame
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:33, Reply)
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:33, Reply)
I was clarifying a point made by localboy, which he then agreed with.
If you can't understand that then I recommend that you DYAAKY.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:35, Reply)
If you can't understand that then I recommend that you DYAAKY.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:35, Reply)
Don't get me started on your fat wife whose kept the house leaving you in a bedsit cooking tins of beans on an iron.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:38, Reply)
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:38, Reply)
I didn't. Clearly you have some kind of attention disorder.
Perhaps you were dropped on your head as a child.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:41, Reply)
Perhaps you were dropped on your head as a child.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:41, Reply)
you are correct....
the subs were nuclear powered but armed only with normal torpedoes.
Apparently the Argentines were more worried about a conventional bombing of their capital by Vulcans than any nuclear option.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:22, Reply)
the subs were nuclear powered but armed only with normal torpedoes.
Apparently the Argentines were more worried about a conventional bombing of their capital by Vulcans than any nuclear option.
( , Fri 15 Jun 2012, 11:22, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread