However true that hypothetical situation is it would be an Argentine military which hasn't been upgraded (rather degraded) in 30 years, against a military that's been fighting the last 10 years with top kit....
Op Certain Death it is.
indeed - thats the point. my view is not that they have a chance of successfully overwhelming the defences (they obviously don't), but that they can attack the Islands, and probably cause losses in blood and treasure. moreover, there is a school of thought that says that CFK will get as much political kudos both domestically and in LatAm from an attack thats a complete military failure as she would from one that resulted in success - in that she would be able (to the feeble minded, but they make up a large part of the population of the world) to portray Argentina as the underdog, the victim of the vastly militarily superior nasty Brits.
the comment about CFK despising her military is correct - and while she certainly fears giving them any kind of political legitimacy by involving them in any 'great patriotic cause' over the FI, it also means that she's likely to be not overly concerned by the prospect of Argentine Super Etendard and Skyhawk pilots going for an enforced bath in the South Atlantic. thats a fairly widespread view in Argentina, she would not face massive demos from the Beunos Aires branch of Help for Heroes in the event of some needless waste of lives.
i would also take issue with the idea that we've learnt all the lessons of Falklands 1: what allowed Falklands 1 to happen was politicians and 'tunnel thinkers' within the MOD and FCO refusing to believe that the Argentines would be so beastly as to a) finally do what they had repeatedly threatened to do, and b) to do something which would make the same politicians and tunnel thinkers look frighteningly incompetent. theres also the 'C' word, which i won't utter here, but which we found to be rather neccesary when our brilliant Plan 'A' turned out to be utter shit.