The Falklands War

[natas777]

I would rather that the UK had lost the war so we wouldn't have had Thatcher and Major for the next 15 years.

[beemerider500]

I worked with a fella that immigrated to the US from Argentina. I asked him if he was there during the Falklands war and he said "yes, he was". So, I asked him "what was it all about?" and he replied "there is a form of shellfish indigenous to the locale that is used in the manufacture of blue paint... and all paint makers use this as the source for blue pigment".
I don't know if there is any truth to it or not, but if it is... it would (just) be another dispute over the control and revenues created by a natural resource.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by Ennath

...(I remember in the 1980's hearing the remark that the BAOR was the best trained...army in Europe.)

Great propaganda trick. All armies use it. Tell them they're "better trained" and they all believe it, because they want to. Give them badges and funny-color hats to make them feel even more "better trained"

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by windymiller

Contrast this with the modern Labour party who will happily send British soldiers to fight and die in pointless wars just so their leaders can massage their own egos and pretend to be major world players.

Agreed. There's a difference between war as an act of national self-defence when attacked, and war as "diplomacy by other means" (Prince Metternich). At present we simultaneously scale back our military and wildly over-deploy it in highly dangerous active service situation, imposing stress and wearing out men and material we should be conserving against vital need. I detest the thought that thousands of men coming home from Afghanistan may be welcomed with a P45 and a pre-booked appointment at Jobcentre Plus; it seems as if our army will soon be three men and a dog. But its good that they're coming home, because only the Afghans can run Afghanistan, and if they can't, we can't run it for them.

However, in 1982, the position could not have been much clearer. Argentina had interpreted very weak and confusing signals, including a clear willingness of the British Foreign Office to ignore the "paramount" wishes of the 1,700 Falklanders, as an intention to hand the islands over (I think it probably was) and decided to fast-forward the priocess and take them by force. Thatcher, Lord Carrington and Defence Secretary John Nott were totally asleep at the switch; but the domestic politics of Argentina were little understood in Britain until the invasion forced us to get ourselves up to speed on them fast. General Galtieri, the current leader of the fascist junta, was presiding over an economy in collapse, and hoped to shore up his government's status and prestige by seizing the Malvinas in this melodramatic fashion. A peaceful negotiated handover six months or a year later would not have suited him so well, and even waiting until Britain had sold HMS Invincible and HMS Illustrious to India or whoever (which would have been sound military strategy) was too late for his political window. He acted to make himself look good and cement the military's grip on political power.

Thatcher, Carrington and Nott should not have been so unaware of the likelihood of such a move. In 1978, the Callaghan Labour government deployed warships in the South Atlantic when there was tension with Argentina, specifically to signal that Britain intended to resist any attack on her dependencies in the region. It would have been common sense to do the same in early 1982, when similar tensions were known to be running; but all the talk from dickhead Nott was about the need to axe HMS Endurance and save a few pennies.

We talk about the victory in the Falklands; and it was an event which profoundly influenced British politics. But a really smart and diligent British government might have deterred Argentinian aggression before it happened, which would have been a much better thing to do. In all things, peace is better than war, but the price of peace must not be appeasement, because history shows that appeasement leads to worse and bloodier war later on. However, I would like to see lots and lots of inexpensive peace and quiet for our armed forces into the future; they've been grossly over-deployed for years.

[rupertramjet]

Wow just day one and already three pages! I am delighted, thanks to all that have contributed so far, long may it continue!

Couple of little ones though, We the British Army are known in all theatres, by other Nations as 'The Borrowers' because we habitually borrow kit from our coalition partners. Now many would be deeply ashamed of this, we are not. Because in the true spirit of comradeship, we are quite happy to lend our kit back. Now is it really our problem if they think our stuff is crap and dont want it?

Best trained in the World, perhaps, but definately the most professional, in a lot of Countries the Military is a short stop gap or a last resort. We are luckier, it is seen as a career, which will open doors and leave you with a pension.

We take eighteen year olds, who have been told from day one they are a waste of space, a few months later they march of the square at Passing out Parades, to many the first thing they ever acheive, you can smell the pride in the Partents and the Recruits, I have even seen a few RSMs smile.

[2cheap]

Originally Posted by natas777

I would rather that the UK had lost the war so we wouldn't have had Thatcher and Major for the next 15 years.

Wow!
That is so sad.
But we have people in the US that think that way too.

They would prefer Obamanomics over Reaganomics.

I blame the schools.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by natas777

I would rather that the UK had lost the war so we wouldn't have had Thatcher and Major for the next 15 years.

If Labour had recognised that it had a duty to uphold Britain's right to defend herself against foreign aggression, that might not have happened. A political party which will not support its country's right to defend itself when it is attacked is not fit to govern, and in 1982, Labour was that party. And much as I detested Thatcher and still do, I am glad that Argentina lost. I would not trade an Argentinian victory in exchange for being spared 15 years of Tory misrule, but, rather, I am glad that we did not sell our souls.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by 2cheap

Wow!
That is so sad.
But we have people in the US that think that way too.

They would prefer Obamanomics over Reaganomics.

I blame the schools.

I blame the AM radio stations. You have people who say "I hope Obama fails", when to say this of a serving president is tantamount to wishing failure on the American economy and the American nation collectively. It is all about lack of rational perspective. And it is universal to human nature and crosses the political divide.

[knobby109]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

If Labour had recognised that it had a duty to uphold Britain's right to defend herself against foreign aggression, that might not have happened. A political party which will not support its country's right to defend itself when it is attacked is not fit to govern, and in 1982, Labour was that party. And much as I detested Thatcher and still do, I am glad that Argentina lost. I would not trade an Argentinian victory in exchange for being spared 15 years of Tory misrule, but, rather, I am glad that we did not sell our souls.

Thatcher was what we needed at the time. Apart from the war, the nation was drifting into genteel poverty (overseas observers thought we were heading for a banana republic) and it required some really tough decisions to pull things round.In the sense that she inherited about the weakest economy in Europe and John Major handed over just about the strongest;she was the surgeon the country needed but of course surgery is painful and cannot avoid collateral damage.
John Major's resignation speech;
"The economy is booming, interest rates are low and inflation is low and unemployment is falling.

The growth pattern is well set, the health service is expanding, the education service is improving and the crime statistics are falling.

All of those I think are benevolent improvements in the interests of all of the people of this country. I believe the incoming government ... to whom I repeat my warm congratulations upon their success ... the incoming government will inherit the most benevolent set of economic statistics of any incoming govern ment since before the First World War.

I hope very much in the interests of the whole British nation that they are successful in retaining this economy in the future. "

[rupertramjet]

Funny how few people remember that. Nobby, I also remember the incoming New Labour Government, saying that they would retain the exisiting fiscal policies for at least the next four years, because, they are working. Most people forget that.

Margaret Thatcher was much loved by the Armed and Civil Forces, the reason was simple, she immediately increased pay across the board, under the previous labour regime, armed forces pay had fallen so far behind that a London bus driver earned more than a fighter pilot, the road sweeper that cleaned up the blood in Northern Ireland, earned a lot more than I, as a Lt in the Army did.