>You are not suppossed to answer publicly. Let the others take a stab at it.

>1) correct. Austral = Southern
>2) correct. The Spanish were looking for the famed silver mines (mostly in Peru not Argentina anyway but they didn't know)
>3) Wrong. Many years before. Name the year and city. Hint: It was commanded by an ineffective General named WhiteLocke who was sacked by London right after his failed invation. Another hint: There was a second invasion the following year commanded by a more capable General by the name of Beresford. This one was better planned and conducted and more successful at the beginning but ultimately failed bevcause London did not provide sufficient military support for the adventure. Beresford had to capitulate and went home to have a distiguished career in Wellington's Army against Napoleon.
>
>(Here's the History buff in me talking). Again, I did not have to look this up as history is one of my hobbies.
>
>The Brits should know this one if they know their country's history well enough.

Yes, we're not all that hot on world history - most our history lessons were taken up with Europe - Alsace & Lorraine, the French Revolution and the N. Wars, repeal of the Corn Laws, and crap like that. To my shame I've never heard of the above generals.

The only British possession I know of in S. America was British Honduras (Now Belize). Hilmar may have been on to something in that the British DID take THE FALKLANDS off the Argentinians originally. But I doubt if a city existed then.

Incidentally, trivia, no looking up, how did the hispanic-named "Malvinas" get that name?