[Marxism] First things first [Re: British Government Refuses To Discuss Sovereignty of Malvinas]
nmgoro at gmail.com
Mon Mar 30 17:32:34 MDT 2009
> S. Art.:
> "One can only imagine what Mr. Cloke would do if, say the BJP regained
> control of the Indian government and decided for its own perfectly
> jingoistic reasons to invade Diego Garcia."
> Yeah, especially as Mauritius claims it and it's part of their archipelago!
And Mauritius is right of course. Then, please substitute Mauritius and
its jingoistic imperialism for India. Thank you.
Now, over to the core of this mail:
> "But in fact the officer-to-soldiers ratio of dead and wounded in the Arg
> Armed Forces during the Malvinas part of the South Atlantic Islands
> Battle was one of the highest in military history everywhere."
> Yes, but this is typical for not just Argentina, but many of the
> Southern Cone nations: a ridiculously high proportion of officers (and
> not just the non-commissioned types like sergeants). So it makes sense
> they had a higher proportion of deaths.
What matters here is that it is simply FALSE that the military sent the
"children" to die. The higher officer-to-soldier rate belies anything
said on the matter. As to connected issues, to begin with, the soldiers
were not CHILDREN but citizens fighting for their own land, against
foreign occupation. This is not a minor issue, since the
De-Malvinization campaign which -alas- has had plenty of "Leftist"
support, out of stupid and abstract anti-militarism, has been one of the
mainstays of the imperialist onslaught on Argentina AFTER the war.
As to the officer-soldier ratio, it was not certainly the way our friend
depicts it in Argentina, 1982. Our Armed Forces, in this sense, were by
those times quite "normal". The image of Latin American armies as gangs
of fat, large moustache, cruel bullies that Hollywood and other sources
have been selling to the world has little to do with actual realities,
save for those armies that were tailored as "National Guards" by the
USofAm and its imperialist military.
It was certainly NOT this way in Argentina, 1982.
Of course, nothing of this says a word on the political leanings, etc.,
of those armed forces. But truth is truth, and the Arg Armed Forces in
1982 did NOT have a heavier load of officers than any "average normal
Army", if such a thing has ever existed, the world over.
> The key number, actually, to find is the proportion of generals to
> overall troop strength. I think Bolivia had the highest for a number of
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/nmgoro%40gmail.com
More information about the Marxism