What do Argentinians call the Falkland Islands? - crossword puzzle clues & answers - Dan Word «Let me solve it for you» What do Argentinians call the Falkland Islands? Today's crossword puzzle clue is a cryptic one: What do Argentinians call the Falkland Islands?. We will try to find the right answer to this particular crossword clue. Here are the possible solutions for "What do Argentinians call the Falkland Islands?" clue. It was last seen in British cryptic crossword. We have 1 possible answer in our database. Possible answer: Cameron rejects call to return Falkland Islands to Argentina | UK news | The Guardian Cameron rejects call to return Falkland Islands to Argentina Prime minister says he will 'do everything to protect interests of islanders' following demand by Argentina's president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner: critics suggest Argentina's president is seeking to deflect attention from social disharmony at home.

Photograph: Juan Mabromata/AFP/Getty Images Thursday 3 January 2013 11.16 EST First published on Thursday 3 January 2013 11.16 EST Close This article is 4 years old The renewed demand by President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner for the Falklands to be handed back to Argentina elicited a defiant response from the UK and Falkland governments , with David Cameron vowing to do everything he could to protect the islanders' desire to remain British. The prime minister rejected Fernández's call to restore the Falklands's "territorial integrity" by returning them to Argentina . The islanders are due to vote in a referendum in March that is expected to give overwhelming backing for the territory to remain British. "The future of the Falkland Islands should be determined by the Falkland islanders themselves, the people who live there," said Cameron. "Whenever they have been asked their opinion they have said they want to retain their current status with the UK.

They are holding a referendum this year and I hope the president of Argentina will listen to that referendum and recognise it is for the Falkland islanders to choose their future, and for as long as they choose to stay with the UK they have my 100% backing." The Argentinian president made her latest intervention over the Falklands 180 years to the day after the islands were "forcibly stripped" from her country. In a caustic letter to Cameron , which was also published as an advert in the Guardian and the Independent on Thursday, she accused the British government of "colonialism". The Foreign Office criticised the Argentinian government for ignoring the wishes of the islanders and rejecting any prospect of imminent negotiations, as demanded by Fernández. In a series of tweets , it said: "The people of the Falklands are British and have chosen to be so. They remain free to choose their own futures and have a right to self-determination as enshrined in the UN charter. There are three parties to this debate, not just two, as Argentina likes to pretend.

There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish." The Foreign Office disputes Fernández's claim in the letter that "Argentines on the islands were expelled by the Royal Navy and the United Kingdom subsequently began a population implantation process similar to that applied to other territories under colonial rule". It says there was no civilian population on the island in 1833, with the Royal Navy expelling an Argentine military garrison that had arrived three months earlier. There was an angry response from the Falklands, with many people taking to Twitter to hail the islands' relationship with Britain. The @falklands_utd account , which supports the right to self-determination, tweeted: "Through our right to self-determination we choose to maintain our relationship with Great Britain … Kirchner can write as many letters as she wishes. They carry less weight than the paper they were written on." There was also some criticism of UK papers for running the advert by the Argentinian government. Barry Elsby, a member of the islands' legislative assembly, dismissed Fernández's claim that the Falklands was a UK colony.

"We understand that the Argentine government has put out a letter that both calls our home a colony and claims that the United Kingdom is ignoring United Nations general assembly resolutions," he said. "We are not a colony. Our relationship with the United Kingdom is by choice. Unlike the government of Argentina, the United Kingdom respects the right of our people to determine our own affairs, a right that is enshrined in the UN charter and which is ignored by Argentina." Thirty years after Britain and Argentina fought a 10-week battle over the Falklands, Fernández has embarked on a sustained diplomatic campaign to attempt to assert Argentina's sovereignty claim, which has seen her clash with Cameron over recent months. With her approval rating flagging ahead of mid-term legislative elections in October, the renewal of hostilities is likely to strengthen the perception of some critics that she is trying to draw attention away from domestic problems by attempting to unite Argentinians behind the "Malvinas" cause. In the letter, Fernández notes that the islands are 8,700 miles away from London and says that not only Latin America but the "vast majority of peoples and governments around the world" embrace Argentina's claim and "reject colonialism".

In an indication of the passions the issue still arouses, #Malvinas was one of the top 10 worldwide trending topics on Twitter at one point on Thursday, although there was also a surge of support for British sovereignty under the Falklands hashtag. Prime minister emphasises government's strong resolve after Argentinian president ramped up claims on sovereignty Published: 6 Jan 2013 Editorial: The governments of the UK and Argentina would do well to look to the island of Tromelin for a model for their negotiations Published: 3 Jan 2013 The Falkland Islands are in the news again - but what do we really know about the territory the Argentinians call the Islas Malvinas?

This is the key data Published: 3 Jan 2013 President Fernández uses letter to David Cameron in British press to say Britain should open sovereignty talks over islands Published: 3 Jan 2013 Barack Obama makes Falklands gaffe by calling Malvinas the Maldives - Telegraph Falkland Islands Barack Obama makes Falklands gaffe by calling Malvinas the Maldives Barack Obama made an uncharacteristic error, more akin to those of his predecessor George W Bush, by referring to the Falkland Islands as the Maldives. Barack Obama made a gaffe more associated with predecessor George W Bush Photo: Getty Images Las Malvinas compared with the Maldives Photo: ALAMY By Jonathan Gilbert in Buenos Aires 3:50PM BST 16 Apr 2012 Comments President Obama erred during a speech at the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, when attempting to call the disputed archipelago by its Spanish name. Instead of saying Malvinas, however, Mr Obama referred to the islands as the Maldives, a group of 26 atolls off that lie off the South coast of India.

The Maldives were a British protectorate from 1887 to 1965 and the site of a UK airbase for nearly 20 years. Cristina Kirchner, the Argentine president, has renewed her country's sovereignty claim to the Falklands in the build-up to the 30th anniversary of the Argentine invasion of the islands, which triggered the Falklands War, on April 2. She has accused David Cameron of maintaining a "colonial enclave" in the South Atlantic and taken Argentina's claim to the UN. Related Articles HMS Dauntless sets sail for the Falklands 04 Apr 2012 But Mrs Kirchner left the summit – attended by North, South and Central American nations – earlier than expected last night as Colombian press reported she was unhappy that a declaration of support for the Argentine claim to the British-controlled territory was not included in the summit's final document, which went unsigned after the USA and Canada used their vetoes. Mrs Kirchner, to whom the Mercosur trade-bloc and the Union of South American Nations had previously confirmed their support in the diplomatic dispute over the islands, was seeking further backing from the Americas.

During the summit, she said Cartagena was an ideal place to talk about the Falklands since the wall that surrounds the city's historic centre was built by the Spanish crown to protect it from "English pirates". Mrs Kirchner also reprimanded Juan Manuel Santos, the Colombian president, for failing to mention the islands in his speech. In his address, Mr Obama maintained the USA's stance of neutrality over the Falklands, saying he wanted to ensure good relations with both Argentina and Britain. "This is something in which we would not typically intervene," he said, adding that there should be dialogue between the UK and Argentina even though the Coalition refuses to negotiate sovereignty of the Falklands with Mrs Kirchner's government. Argentina, The UK and The Falkland Islands (Your Call) - YouTube Argentina, The UK and The Falkland Islands (Your Call) Want to watch this again later? Sign in to add this video to a playlist. Need to report the video? Sign in to report inappropriate content. The interactive transcript could not be loaded. Loading... Rating is available when the video has been rented. This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.

Published on Apr 3, 2012 30 years after the war, do the Argentinians have a point about the Falklands? Events marking the anniversary are taking place in Britain and Argentina. But three decades later - the row over sovereignty goes on. David Cameron says Britain is committed to upholding the rights of the islanders - who want to remain British. Argentina says the islands were taken by colonialist force over 150 years ago and want them back. Who has the moral high ground? Britain? The Islanders? Or does Argentina have a point. This phone-in was on the back of recent comments supporting Argentinean colonialism from Sean Penn, George Galloway, and Morrissey among others. Category What do the Argentinians think about the UK & Falkland islands? - Quora Quora About the islands: May be my own answers on the topic can tell you something. My personal feelings are mixed: I was taught since early childhood those islands are part of our country. I was a fresh recruit at Argentinean Army in April 1982. I was far away from the fight.

But people belonging to my generation died, were wounded physically or mentally (Today's aftermath has more suicides among veterans along the years, than KIA armed forces members.) In those days I saw amazing things: Continued solidarity of the people with their sons in the combat area. Folks volunteering to fight. Extremely stupid "we'll-win-this-soccer-game" attitude among many (too many) others. I still think that should be part of Argentina. Not at any price. Not without a common agreement. Current population wishes and modern decolonization policies make that close to impossible. About the UK: More than two centuries of mixed relationship, with mixed effects for different population groups, plus how this relationship has been taught at school have left an important brand-mark in Argentinean citizens. 20th century was filled by a love-hate view. Love on pop culture and history, hate on certain political topics. Love: Music. Specially pop and rock. Beloved touristic destination. Hate: Malvinas / Falkland war. Missunderstandings: Argentina: Why are Argentines so miffed at the musical "Evita"? My personal feelings: I have no bad feelings against British people.

They, like Argentinean people, were mixed in a purely political (and egoist) action, where two governments close to a crisis tried to profit of a given episode. In the meantime, I live abroad, in Germany. I have the opportunity to work daily with British colleagues. I have to them the highest respect and I really appreciate them a lot, in a friendly way. I hope this helps you to have a look to the Argentinean side. Written Sep 11 Argentina has always been a very Anglophile country, from the very beginning. Were can the Rolling Stones fill 4 stadiums in a row? Music, art, culture, everything British has always had a huge impact and influence here. The Malvinas/Falklands issue is an unfortunate dent in our countries' relationship. To say the truth, it's always been used to brainwash us with a pretty skewed version of its history, and we've always been taught at school that they were stolen from us. It's not exactly like that. The real history is ridiculous, absurd and quite convoluted from all points of view. I don't mean that we didn't have rights over the islands. But might makes rights, and the UK finally settled there.

Not with soldiers or with military bases but with actual settlers with their families. Time to accept it and move on. However, I believe we should negotiate the exploitation of economic resources. Written May 5, 2016 (I'm British, by the way). I don't know what the general population thinks, but it seems that a few politicians - Christina de Kirchner, for example - like to use the Falklands as a political tool, in effect saying "vote for me and I'll get them back". Of course, she achieved no such thing, but she did get voted for, and was (is? Not sure) the Argentinian PM. That suggests that a fair few Argentinians at least have an opinion. What i think of UK?. I like their love for beer, for music (we love rock take a look at AC/DC in River or Iron Maiden). I am a fan of Doctor Who, what can i say. I admire their industry, specially between 1850 and 1950. I’ve seeing videos of locomotive factories in the 20, it is incredible. I like english as usefull language, but i don’t like the british accent. I like more US english.

Still i consider english a primitive and rudimentary language. Literal translations to spanish sound like an indian talking. Good soldiers. If we let aside the Malvinas issue, there is no real problem with them. Except antarctica. I don’t hate people, people is all the same in every place, with virtues and flaws. The ugly part: I despise their government I find disgusting their crown and I think the world would have been a better place if you followed France and used the guillotine in your nobility. I find odd how the british are proud of being second class citizens, called the “commons”, and they dumb devotion for “high” born good for nothing nobility. I can’t comprehend their proud for their former empire and how they reconciliate it with civilization and democracy. The british empire was one of the bloodies empires in history having invading around 90% of today countries territory, slaved millions for centuries, legalized piracy, organized massacres of aboriginals in America and Australia, took people around the world to show them off in zoos in their metropoli, starved to dead millions and severely destroyed any uprising in their empire with barbaric acts of massacres around the world.

With their bloody history its pisses me a lot when they go around internet talking about other countries wrongs with such pompous arrogance completely ignoring and hiding their own mess. The british arrogance, oh boy it has no end. They are so sure they are the best guys ever, they do all good, they never lie, they literally can’t imagine they are wrong. Only the rest of world lies and do propaganda, they don’t, as their view. It just takes a look to the BBC or The Sun, The Telegraph to see level of manipulation and blatant bias and lies. But no, to the anglo world they are always right and they have the moral high to dictate and criticize from their fictional high horse. I see them secretively believing they are the superior race. I don’t like your design in machines (from esthetic viewpoint). I always joke about ugly things as british design. There is a lot of tanks, airplanes, cars that are plain ugly. UK is not a land of good design, let that to France and Italy. I see UK as the lapdog of the United States of America. They are good obedient servants. Their military is just an auxiliary force for the US Armed Forces.

They were the trojan horse of the European Union to hold it down in favor of the US interest. Now they leave, haha, the US is pissed with it, no more UK putting obstacles to the Franco-German hegemony in Europe. As global power, they are each day more irrelevant, and they now it but won’t accept it. I fear that when the antarctic treaty ends, they will come guns blazing as they are issued to do to expel us out of the Antarctic sector we claim and their overlaps. The UK always resorted to the reason of brute force to impose their interest and will. Malvinas is the base they will use. And I even afraid of them invading Patagonia. They have a “mapuche” NGO with the central in England whose directors are english (imagine MI6) and that organization is linked to terrorist attacks in Chile and the beating almost to dead of several policemen and citizens in Argentina. They seek to claim for an independent “mapuche” state in patagonia.

Mapuche International Link The Falkland Islands: everything you ever wanted to know in data and charts | News | The Guardian Datablog The Falkland Islands: everything you ever wanted to know in data and charts The Falkland Islands are in the news again - but what do we really know about the territory the Argentinians call the Islas Malvinas? This is the key data Thursday 3 January 2013 12.10 EST First published on Thursday 3 January 2013 12.10 EST Close 2,932 people live there The Falkland Islands has just completed its census for 2012 and reported back already. The islands' population is down 4% since 2006, although the government puts this entirely down to a fall in 477 contractors who were employed at the Mount Pleasant Airport which serves as the Islands' military base. The vast majority of the Islands' population live in Port Stanley, the capital - with a falling number in the surrounding 'Camp' wilderness. • TOP 1,300 UK military personnel Falkland Islands. Royal Artillery army soldiers training at Mount Pleasant Base, East Falklands.

Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian The UK still has a major military presence on the island. At last count it was: • 1,300 Service personnel plus around 50 MOD civil servants. • Four Typhoon fast-jet aircraft • Frigate or Destroyer (currently Type 23 frigate HMS Montrose to be replaced by Type 45 destroyer HMS Dauntless) • Royal Fleet Auxiliary Gold Rover • HMS Clyde permanently stationed in the region as Falklands Patrol • Infantry company currently from 2 Scots The cost has been rising, although the figures below do not reflect coming cuts in the MoD's spending. 59% say they are Falkland Islanders Pro-British car in Port Stanley Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian The majority of the population self-identify as either 'Falkland Islanders' or 'British', with a smaller number coming from either Chile or tiny St Helena. 2.17. There has been a decline in the proportion of the population from St.

Helena (now 10.4% compared to 13.1% in 2006) and an increase in the Chilean population (now 6.4% compared to 5.4% in 2006). Half a million sheep Sheep on the Falkland islands. Graphic by Paul Scruton The agriculture of the island is still a major part of the economy and is dominated by sheep farming - surveyed every year by the government . • TOP £46m a year The Falklands is largely self-financing, apart from the costs of the military base, which are paid by the UK taxpayer. The Island spends around £46m a year, mostly on public works and infrastructure. 28% work for the government Falklands Island currency. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images The largest employment sector on the Islands is the Falkland Islands Government – accounting for 28% of all employment. Other significant employers in the Islands are agriculture (11%), hospitality and tourism (11%) and transport and communications (12%).

Employment in the agricultural industry has continued to decline since 2006 with 189 employees in 2012 (down from 205 in 2006). Pay is low by UK standards - the average income is £20,100, compared to £26,500 for UK full-time workers. It also varies, depending on where people live. The census points out wide inequality of earnings too: almost half of all residents (49.2%) report an annual income of less than £15,000 (with almost 12% reporting income of less than £5000). Most retirees report incomes of less than £15,000 per annum, however fully two thirds of all persons reporting incomes of less than £15,000 per annum also report that they are employed Smokers and drinkers Disco night in Deanos Bar on the Falkland Islands. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian Just over a quarter - 27.7% of the population (aged 15 and over) are smokers - compared to 20% in the UK.

And it's much more prevalent among young people – almost half (46%) of people aged 15-25 are smokers; as are 31% of people aged 25-40. Three quarters of the population drink alcohol too - with 12.8% of men and 8% of women drinking over the recommended daily limits of 21 and 14 units respectively. Almost half of the over-drinkers were men aged between 40 and 55. • TOP 14% increase in the elderly population Youths during Sports Week [a week in the 'Camp' ie:countryside at end of shearing] Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian Children aged 0-15 numbered 465 or 16.5% of the overall population of the Islands – a similar number to that reported in the 2006 Census. Elderly people (defined to be those aged 65 and over) numbered 301 or 10.7% of the population. 46% of the population are married Wedding rings.

Photograph: Alamy Those never married total 30% of the population (compared to 33% in 2006). Divorced people declined from 193 to 151 (6% of the population), while the married remained roughly the same at around 46%. The most noticeable change since 2006 is the increase in the number of people cohabiting – doubling since 2006 (2006 = 124; 2012 = 254). Cohabitation was much more prevalent amongst younger people, with almost twice as many people aged 16-30 cohabiting than were married. Oil exploration could be worth £1.5bn Falkland oil exploration.

Photograph: GRAPHIC NEWS How to call Falkland Islands: country code, area codes, phone books The time in Falkland Islands is now 09:33:08am Calling Falkland Islands from the United States explained: 011 - US exit code; dial first for international calls made from the USA or Canada 500 - Country Code for Falkland Islands Phone Number - 5 digits US to Falkland Islands international dialing format: 011 500 ?? ??? What a Falklander thinks about the Falkland Islands dispute February 16, 2012 | 4:45 am It's the conflict that seems to never end: Argentina and Britain have disagreed over who owns the Falkland Islands since the 19th century. Thirty years ago, hundreds of people died in a bloody war over the British territory after Argentina sent in troops and the British ejected them. They can’t even agree on the name: Argentinians call the islands the Malvinas. Tensions have grown after the British announced that Prince William would take part in military exercises nearby, which Argentina saw as a threatening sign of militarization.

Argentina, in turn, has put new economic pressure on the islands, shutting Falkland-flagged vessels out of regional ports. Plans for oil and gas exploration off the Falklands only raise the stakes of the perennial conflict. Argentinian officials want the United Nations to mediate negotiations and put the islands under its control. The British have refused, saying the islanders want to stay under British sovereignty. But what do the Falklanders think about it? The Times talked to Mike Summers, a member of the Falkland Islands Assembly, about the sparring over the South Atlantic islands. How does the recent escalation in rhetoric between Argentina and Britain affect people living on the islands? It doesn’t really. We’ve been so used to this for so many years. It just goes on. For people in government, it’s slightly different. We have to keep reacting to things. But for most of the citizens, it’s just part of the background noise. I’ve heard that the vast majority of Falklanders want to stay under British sovereignty. Has the issue of British vs. Argentinian sovereignty ever been put to a vote? We’ve never had a referendum on the subject because it is just so self-evident to everybody that it’s the way people feel.

In every election, everybody who stands for election says we’re opposed to the Argentine claim to our country. Nobody has ever got anywhere in an election that didn’t make that perfectly clear. Public sentiment is not at all difficult to judge on this issue. I’m not aware of a single person on these islands who thinks we should be talking about transfer of sovereignty. It’s hard to imagine what a change in sovereignty would mean. Why does it matter to Falklanders? The Falkland Islands are largely self-governing. We have our own government, we make our own laws. The British sovereignty contributes a defense deterrent and assistance in foreign affairs matters and that’s it. If Argentina became sovereign, that sort of arrangement is unlikely to exist. They would likely be trying to recolonize the Falklands. It would be an enormously retrograde thing. We’d be governed by a foreign country with no knowledge or understanding of the people here, no knowledge or understanding of how this community works and how the people in it think. It would be a foreign country taking over our country. You have to add to that the fact that Argentina is historically and culturally completely different than the Falklands. Their legal system is different from ours. Their cultural mores are different than ours.

And frankly, it’s a country that’s not very well governed. Corruption is rife. Press freedom is restricted. It's not a country you’d want to be associated with. Is there any anxiety about the idea of the U.N. talking about its sovereignty? People in the Falklands are not concerned about that because the U.N. is the guardian of the principle of self-determination. As far as people in the Falklands are concerned, this shouldn’t be judged as a dispute between England and Argentina, it should be judged as what the people of the Falklands want to do. What do you make of what Sean Penn said ? [The actor has taken Argentina’s side in the dispute, saying “the world today is not going to tolerate any ludicrous and archaic commitment to colonialist ideology,” the Associated Press reported Monday.] Good luck to Sean Penn. I don’t think many people [care] what Sean Penn thinks. I hope he’s a better actor than he is a politician. Why do you think tensions have grown so much recently? The main factor is really Mrs.

[President Cristina Fernandez de] Kirchner racking up more and more harassment and attempts to intimidate the people of the Falklands by trying to cut trade between us and mainland Latin America. The British government, to their credit, has responded to it. Effectively, Argentina is trying to blockade the Falklands and force us to go and discuss sovereignty. It’s like a schoolyard bully trying to beat someone up to give them their sweets. It’s intolerable that a country of that size should be trying to bully a country of 3,000 people into submission. The upcoming anniversary of the invasion of the Falklands will also cause some focus in the next few weeks. [April 2 is the 30th anniversary of Argentina sending troops to the islands; June 14 is the 30th anniversary of end of the war.] I hope very much once we get past June that Argentina will relax and take a more mature attitude toward its neighbors. How does oil exploration play into this conflict? I think it does, in modern times.

But of course the Argentines started on this track in the 1950s when [former President Juan] Peron decided claiming the Falklands would be a good way of distracting the public from problems he was having in Argentina at the time. Whilst Argentina may shout and scream that they’re pinching our oil, that’s not how it started. It was an attempt to divert attention of the common man in Argentina from problems there and find a common rallying point. RELATED: Falkland Islands: Britain 'would lose' if Argentina decides to invade now - Telegraph Falkland Islands Falkland Islands: Britain 'would lose' if Argentina decides to invade now Admiral Sir John Forster Woodward - who in 1982 gave the order to sink the General Belgrano - regrets not making more of how the Falklands war was won. Sandy Woodward Photo: GEOFF PUGH By Cole Moreton Comments "That was stupid,” says Sandy Woodward, a plain-speaking man of the sea. “It was a mistake. I regret that when the war was over we agreed to play it low key,” he adds.

“We should have made more noise, to make sure people realised it was the Navy that had done the job, not the bloody Air Force or the Army. The Air Force dropped one bomb on target. There were more Commandos, who are naval soldiers, than there were Army.” Admiral Sir John Forster Woodward, known to all as Sandy, firmly believes that if he and other senior figures had made more of what they had achieved in the South Atlantic, the Navy would not now be in its present state – which he describes as “fairly dire. The Navy took itself for granted, and the country took the Navy for granted. Then we allowed it all to disappear after the Falklands. “If we’d been louder, then investment in the services would have been more naval than it has been. We wouldn’t have ditched the aircraft carriers Invincible and Ark Royal. We wouldn’t have got rid of the Sea Harriers – an appalling decision.” Woodward lives in a cottage overlooking water on the south coast, where he races yachts. The sandy hair has turned white and the admiral is about to turn 80, but this tall, flinty man is in command of his brief and expects to be taken seriously.

“It’s not the Navy that I joined at the age of 13, or that I served in during the Falklands. "I accept change, but not serious change for the worse. If you are a naval professional, then a Navy without an aircraft carrier and the right aircraft on board is comparable to the Swiss navy.” Related Articles Falkland Islands 'was nearly shared by Britain and Argentina' 13 Mar 2012 That’s damning. Switzerland, of course, doesn’t have a navy. Britain will not have a working aircraft carrier until the new HMS Queen Elizabeth comes into service in 2020, and even then it may not have any jets to carry. The new Joint Strike Fighter, which was due to replace the scrapped Sea Harriers, has been delayed by a design flaw which makes it unable to land on deck. Without an aircraft carrier, Woodward believes the current Navy is also fundamentally flawed. “What’s a navy for? Expeditionary force, which means going a long way from home. If you can’t rely on neighbouring countries to make a base on land sufficiently close to where you want to be, then you have to go by sea and take your air power with you. We simply can’t do that now.

The best we can do for an expeditionary force is a day trip to France.” If the Falklands are ever captured by Argentina it will be impossible to win them back, says Woodward. “We could not retake the Falklands. We could not send a task force or even an aircraft carrier. If we had been in this state in 1982, the Falklands would be the Malvinas. We rely on sending reinforcements by air, but that would be impossible if we lost control of the airfield at Mount Pleasant.” He is not, however, as despairing as that sounds. “The problem doesn’t arise, because they won’t be taking it,” he says, rapping his knuckles on the kitchen table for luck. “I hope I’m right.” His hope is based on the recent arrival of the destroyer HMS Dauntless. “We need her surface-to-air missiles. The Argentines might hope to overcome the four Typhoon jets at Mount Pleasant with a dozen Mirages and then bomb the airfield out of action, but while she’s there with her missiles they won’t try that.

I’m not sure the Government understands how important she is.” Argentina believes Britain has also sent a nuclear-powered attack submarine, or SSN, which the MoD neither confirms nor denies. As an expert submariner, Woodward sees the use. “If they want to invade, it will have to be by sea and an SSN will chop them up. They know that.” He is less impressed by the decision to send Prince William to the Falklands as a search and rescue helicopter pilot. “What on earth are they intending to achieve?” asks Woodward, who had Prince Andrew as a Sea King pilot in his own fleet. “To put a royal in the front line is quite inconvenient. You have to take special measures to make sure he doesn’t lose his life. That means you service his aircraft three times as carefully as anyone else’s. If something goes badly wrong, you’ll be blamed. So you protect the Royal Family from their own wish to serve. They are a liability on the front line.” The admiral lives in a cottage called Before Anchor, but that’s nothing to do with his past.

It’s a reference to the village pub, where we go for fish and chips without salad – “sod the greens” – and a pint of beer, which is called, also by coincidence, Invincible. That was the name of one of the two aircraft carriers in the Falklands fleet, the other being Hermes, upon which he sailed. Woodward joined the Navy in 1946 as a schoolboy. Most of his career had been as a submarine commander, which he once said did things to a man’s character: “Submarines are always in enemy-controlled waters, therefore you should treat anything you see, hear or smell as an enemy. There are no friends.” When Argentina invaded in April 1982, he was a newly appointed Rear-Admiral on an exercise in the Mediterranean. “The Falklands were as strange to me as to anyone else. I’d never been near them.” As task force commander, he was required to tour the ships telling the crews why they were doing this. Woodward was unusually lost for words, and fell back on the blunt truth. “I said, 'Look, whether you realise it or not, you’ve taken the Queen’s Shilling.

You’re now going to be invited to front up for it. Whatever you think of the problem, our job is to stop it. People will die, ships will be lost, that’s the deal. Go to it.” Woodward says he never wasted his time trying to get his men to like him. “My ethos of command was to get respect and trust. I wasn’t going to make any effort to be liked. Some people are naturals at it. I’m not.” He upset some fellow officers with his best-selling account of the conflict, One Hundred Days, and is about to do it again with a new edition containing his uncensored diary from the war, describing one colleague in particular in the strongest terms possible. “I was taking out my frustration in the diary, not on them. For Christ’s sake, it’s 30 years later; if they’re still upset about it, they ought to be taken out and shot anyway.” The sinking of the General Belgrano on May 2 was hugely controversial, as the cruiser was outside the exclusion zone set up by the British and sailing away. As you would expect, Woodward is unapologetic. “It’s very simple.

There was the Belgrano and two destroyers armed with Exocet missiles milling around in the southern ocean. I know from experience that while they were within 200 miles of our ships, they could have us overnight. So I wanted them removed, didn’t I?” The rules of engagement set in Whitehall forbade an attack. Woodward knew that by the time he got those rules changed, the Belgrano would be gone. “On occasions, you have to disobey your specific instructions from home, which are already out of date because the situation has changed since they were put in place.” So he ordered the submarine HMS Conqueror to attack. The order was intercepted and diverted to Whitehall, where his superiors understood the urgency of the situation and short-circuited the process of consultation. The Prime Minister gave permission. The torpedoes were fired. The cruiser was sunk and 323 people died. “The fact is that because we had broken their codes, although we were not prepared to say so at the time, we knew she was going to the waiting position [with a view to attacking later].

The Argentine commander has also said that while it was deeply undesirable, it was also eminently reasonable and he would have done the same. Nobody at home ever gave me a hard time over it.” What people fail to realise, he says, is how close Britain came to losing the war. “If the Argentines had held out for another week on land then we would probably have lost it. Our people were in the open. It was snowing. The sheer wear and tear of two months at sea in vile conditions meant our ships were wearing out. The offshore group was on its last gasp. It was as close as that.” Three islanders, 255 British servicemen and 649 Argentines died, but when Woodward eventually got his feet on Falklands soil for the first time he was less than impressed, writing of the landscape in his diary: “Bloody awful… definitely not a jewel in the Queen’s crown.” Was it worth it then? “Yes. I don’t think I need to say any more than that.” Britain did not seem particularly grateful when he got home. “I wasn’t even properly debriefed. Nobody seemed to want to know.” The civil service had its own welcome.

“Usually if you have been the victor in a major military event, there is some acclaim. Mine was 'a claim’ from the people who do the accounts, saying, 'We have been looking at your entertainment expenditure as admiral and observe that you haven’t spent anything over the last three months. "So we have revised your allowance downwards and backdated it. You now owe us £600.’ That was my reward. I didn’t bother to say I had been entertaining the Argentinians.” Sandy Woodward was, however, knighted later that year. He retired seven years after that. “Life after was a bit of an anti-climax. When you’ve done that, nothing else is going to seem quite as important.” Two decades ago, he parted from his wife and moved to the West Sussex coast. “I love the smell of the sea, even when the tide is low.” His son lives in California and his daughter in Surrey. On his kitchen table there is a scale model of a 19th-century fighting ship, which Woodward is rigging by hand. His real vessel is being refurbished. “She is a Devon Yawl, a racing boat for geriatrics. I’ve been racing since I was 14.

I’m obsessive about it. If I see another boat I’ve got to overtake it if I can.” Idyllic though his retirement seems, Woodward insists his views are relevant. “I have stayed very much in touch with what’s going on. I don’t hesitate to tell the First Sea Lord if I think he’s getting it wrong, and he, bless him, actually does take some notice. I am, after all, the only senior naval officer still alive who has taken the Navy to war. That doesn’t mean to say I’m right, but I’m probably worth listening to. Albeit with a pained expression.” 'One Hundred Days’ by Admiral Sandy Woodward (HarperPress) is available from Telegraph Books for £8.99 plus £1.25 p&p. Call 0844 871 1516 or go to books.telegraph.co.uk

Question: What do the Argentinians call what we call the Falkland Islands?
Answer: Las MALVINAS