Originally posted by Aidan
Speaking as a British geography graduate …

The British Isles has been the geographical description of the entire group of islands, of which Great Britain is the largest, for centuries

I rest my case.

And just in case, I’d hesitate to describe myself as an Irish nationalist, by most definitions I’m probably not.

But describing the collection of Islands as being ‘British’ is offensive, outdated, and just plain obsolete. The fact that some people cling on to it does not make any more correct. Calling it a ‘geographical’ description is akin to a German including Austria in the term ‘Germany’; they’re close, they were once joined, they speak very similar languages. But they’re different countries.

Decry it as political correctness all you want, but official language has moved on. For example, one would hesitate now to describe the UK as a Roman Kingdom; does that mean that using any other term of description is mere political correctness in the face of non latin propaganda?

Hold up mate, swings and roundabouts n stuff. It might not be offensive if you are British. I’d expect the British to respect Irish feelings on the subject but if you are British (and some people in Ireland (including the Republic) do feel British) it is not offensive. Its just a matter of perspective.

Originally posted by BuffPuff
Well, on paper the Argentine AF should have made mincemeat out of the RN (Royal Navy) Harrier fleet. However, in reality, thins are not always so simple.

Firstly, although the Argentine AF had the Mirage a fine fighter, which was combat proven by the Isreali’s, and was twice as fast as the Harrier, it was also a poorer dogfighter. This would be less of a problem if the Argentines had F-4’s, which would have had some chace at killing Harriers with Sparrows (had the US sold the missiles too, big if…!!??). As such the Mirage and the Harrier, being equipped with short range IR AAM’s and guns had to get in close. The Harrier had the advantages in a tight fight.

Secondly, the Sea Harriers were equpped with AIM-9L sidewinders. The L version of the Sidewinder was an “all aspect” weapon. Thi means the Harrier did not have to stay on the hot tail of a Mirage, but could take side on and even head on shots
with reasonable success.

Thirdly, the Argentine AF Mirage had a thirsty turbojet engine. Once it approached the British Task Force over the Falklands, the fuel situation became critical, so much so that the Mirage could barley survive five minutes worth of combat with the Harrier without running out of juice. Made the Mirage less effective as a fighter. This gave the Harrier a massive advantage. Their mobile bases, the carriers, were always closer to the Harriers, than Argentina was to the Mirage Fighters. Remember, the Falklands (Malvinas) are around 400 miles (650km) from Argentina.

There are cother issues of course such as training, threat of Vulcan bombing raids on Argentine airfields etc.

Points one and 3 are good ones and cannot be argued with but the all aspect capability of the L type ‘winder is a little over touted. True it did have this capability I’m not arguing that but not a single Sidewinder kill was acheived in head-on or side-on aspect. They were always and I mean without fail, launched from as directly behind the target aircraft as they could get because it still had a higher kill probability than in either of the other two aspects. Its not the only urban myth about the South Atlantic war either.

It is said in the popular press (and the less well thought out aviation press as well) that VIFFing was a war winning tactic used to great effect in 1982. Quite frankly this is BS, all of the dogfights, bounces, ambushes, shots, launches, kills (call them what you want) were all carried out at the highest speed attainable by the SHAR1s except when Nigel Ward shot down a C130 with his guns. He pulled along side the aircraft so the crew knew what he was about to do. He was hoping they would bail out. They didn’t. They stuck with it to the bitter end. Good bunch of pilots the Argentines by all accounts, real pros.

Originally posted by Hyperwarp
Funny isn’t it! When western European nations (old and new) go around invading, occupying countries looting their wealth, killing, raping their people etc….. they are called great or noble etc. But, if anyone else in the world does it, they are evil, barbarians, animals! What is wrong IS wrong!

No no no. You still do not get it. It is not called Great Britain because it did anything great. Well actually ‘some’ of things it did were great but thats still not the reason. For instance. The surrounding environs of London are known collectively as ‘Greater London’ or “London plus if you like…….”, same with all the big cities, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff etc. The United Kingdom (and I know this has been explained; you are just not taking any notice because you are too tied up with your rhetoric and your hang ups and you’re ‘living in the past by the way.) is made up of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland etc. People from the United Arab Emirates might recognise the setup.

Alone these countries are simply Wales or Scotland or England etc, but when you put them all together, as in the Greater London analogy, they become ‘Great’ or if you prefer, ‘Greater’ Britain. It is not political, it is not meant to tout superiority (at least not anymore that is) it is simply a matter of geography. Great Britain is bigger than its constituent parts.

Well who cares anyway? I suppose it gives those with a chip on their shoulders something to whinge about. Wake up you patsy pansy fart arses. Get a feckin life!

Originally posted by GoldenDragon
He was better known to his comtemporaries as William the B@st@rd – before conquering the Bigger Bretagne.

No. He was known as William the ******* because he was illigitimate.

you haven’t the privilege of the appellations

No. Sorry. You are going to have to explain in words that an idiot can understand.

Adonis you don’t make racist remarks and then accuse others of the same, that only gets you noticed for all the wrong reasons. What part of this do you not understand? YOU keep bringing up the “Empire Syndrome” because it exists in your tiny brain along with all your other hatreds and hang ups and your inferiority complex. Who gave you the right to decide what my country should be called? If you want that right you will have to come and become a citizen here and then cast your vote. You will be welcome so long as you keep your opinions to yourself. If I start verbally insulting your country I fully expect you to retaliate, please do me the courtesy of allowing me to do the same.

We’ve had this argument before and it gets us nowhere.

Wait until he is convicted and then hand him over to the family of the dead kid.

Britain these days should seriously think about dropping the Great from its name because with Wales & Scotland going through devolution they’ll just end up with England & N.ireland……O’h i forgot a few sheep on a rock somewhere near Argentina & a couple of Monkeys on a rock somewhere near Spain

Getting dangerously close to another racist outburst there ‘ADONIS’. Oh sorry, racism is only bad when the British do it. All you fvcking foreigners out there find something sh1t to say about your own fvcking countries. You know nothing about mine so you are not qualified to comment. NOW FVCK OFF!