Was the sinking of the General Belgrano legal?
The sinking of the General Belgrano remains controversial, mostly in Argentina and on the British left. The Argentine Navy and the captain of the Belgrano, however, have maintained that the sinking was legal.
Was the sinking of the ARA General Belgrano an unethical surprise attack?
Although the sinking of the ARA General Belgrano seems to share many similarities to an unethical surprise attack, it is important to note the important circumstances surrounding the situation. Shortly after the sinking of the ARA General Belgrano, controversy arose around whether or not the sinking of the vessel was legal.
Who was the British submarine that attacked the Belgrano?
Lewin told the Cabinet that Commander Chris Wreford-Brown, the captain of British nuclear submarine Conqueror, had the Belgrano in his sights and was seeking permission to attack. The ship was part of a small battle group, flanked by two Argentinian destroyers.
Was the Belgrano really heading for the British ships?
( The Capt of the Belgrano, around 2017, admitted that he WAS heading for the british ships, he was not steaming away from the Islands but towards, and had every intention of attack. He also said that if he had been the captain of the submarine, he would have done exactly the same thing). Lord Parkinson denied this.
Did General Belgrano’s initial probe in the direction of the British?
However, while General Belgrano ’s initial probe was in the direction of the British task force, it is extremely unlikely that any British surface ship would have wandered into her patrol area. Having virtually no anti-air or anti-submarine capability, her ability to decisively affect the battle was extremely low.
What kind of missiles does General Belgrano use?
In 1968, General Belgrano was partially modernized, and equipped with two British Sea Cat missile launchers. The Sea Cat, an early anti-aircraft weapon, fired a missile capable of mach .8—slower than most jet fighters and surface-to-surface missiles at the time.