steven ! Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 From recently released National Archives Guardian Britain's ability to defend itself against an attack from the Soviet Union was so diminished in the late 1970s that the prime minister exclaimed: "Heaven help us if there is a war!" Now, if Margaret Thatcher had not won the 1979 General Election I wonder how the Falklands War would have panned out? I am sure that Argentina must have thought UK would be an easier touch with a woman in charge. Certainly their chances would have been better had James Callaghan been wishy-washying about, I would have thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 From recently released National Archives Guardian Britain's ability to defend itself against an attack from the Soviet Union was so diminished in the late 1970s that the prime minister exclaimed: "Heaven help us if there is a war!" Now, if Margaret Thatcher had not won the 1979 General Election I wonder how the Falklands War would have panned out? I am sure that Argentina must have thought UK would be an easier touch with a woman in charge. Certainly their chances would have been better had James Callaghan been wishy-washying about, I would have thought. Callaghan might not have had the resolve, but it is a bit hard to know. But the strength of the Royal Navy may have a better or worse if a Labour government was in power. I doubt it would have made a big difference in terms of capability. It still would have very close run thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 Callaghan might not have had the resolve, but it is a bit hard to know. But the strength of the Royal Navy may have a better or worse if a Labour government was in power. I doubt it would have made a big difference in terms of capability. It still would have very close run thing. Close thing my arse we kicked the Argentinians out of the islands with no help from the good old US of A who caused the whole thing in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Ayres Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 Callaghan might not have had the resolve, but it is a bit hard to know. But the strength of the Royal Navy may have a better or worse if a Labour government was in power. I doubt it would have made a big difference in terms of capability. It still would have very close run thing. Close thing my arse we kicked the Argentinians out of the islands with no help from the good old US of A who caused the whole thing in the first place. Jim Callaghan did not "Exclaim" anything, he wrote a short note on a document. And although I prefer to treat the USA like they are Cuba, without their communincations and 'intelligence' capability we would have had great trouble doing anything about the Malvinas. Also, I don't think the depletion of forces and equipment happened overnight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 Callaghan might not have had the resolve, but it is a bit hard to know. But the strength of the Royal Navy may have a better or worse if a Labour government was in power. I doubt it would have made a big difference in terms of capability. It still would have very close run thing. Close thing my arse we kicked the Argentinians out of the islands with no help from the good old US of A who caused the whole thing in the first place. Jim Callaghan did not "Exclaim" anything, he wrote a short note on a document. And although I prefer to treat the USA like they are Cuba, without their communincations and 'intelligence' capability we would have had great trouble doing anything about the Malvinas. Also, I don't think the depletion of forces and equipment happened overnight. I am afraid you are a little wrong there, the Falklands conflict first started when a team from the Exxon oil company found oil off the coast of South Georgia, over the next 2 weeks an increased communication was seen between Exxon, Argentinia and the US govt, then the Exxon team was shipped to Durban by the US govt and placed under guard, shortly after this the Argentinians invaded the Falklands. During the following weeks secure traffic increased between USA and Argentina, at this time with repeated requests from GCHQ for US sattellite images of the area and for intelligence updates the USA insisted their systems had a software fault and they had no real assets in Argentina, in fact all requests for help got nowhere until the point the British troops landed when a sudden fix of software occured and information started arriving from "newly sourced assets". So as you see the USA was fuck all help and as usual only decided to join in when they knew which side was about to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 Callaghan might not have had the resolve, but it is a bit hard to know. But the strength of the Royal Navy may have a better or worse if a Labour government was in power. I doubt it would have made a big difference in terms of capability. It still would have very close run thing. Close thing my arse we kicked the Argentinians out of the islands with no help from the good old US of A who caused the whole thing in the first place. I think it was close run, if it would have taken any longer to get the Argentinians out the British would have had to pull out. And if the exocets were any more accurate it would have spelled disaster. Also, it was a very well run job considering the strength of the Royal Navy at that time which wasn't set-up for expeditionary operations such as this. Ever since the late 1960s Britain had been winding down its ability to conduct long distance operations that require putting troops around the littorals of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 Now, if Margaret Thatcher had not won the 1979 General Election I wonder how the Falklands War would have panned out? I am sure that Argentina must have thought UK would be an easier touch with a woman in charge. Certainly their chances would have been better had James Callaghan been wishy-washying about, I would have thought. It was Thatchers lot who announced they were withdrawing HMS Endurance. They also announced that they were changing the status of those in Crown Dependencies. This was a deliberate move to prevent Hong Kong Chinese from exercising their right to move to Britain prior to the colony being handed back to China. Unfortunately this also changed the status of the Falkland Islanders. Both of these extremely stupid moves sent a clear signal to the Argentines that the UK was abandoning the Falklands so they went for it. I would like to think that ANYONE other than Thatcher would not have sunk the Belgrano thus allowing Haig to bring about a peaceful settlement. But as she would cling to power at any cost, including the lives of the military on both sides, the conflict was going to take place regardless. And what a stupid waste of money "Fortress Falklands" has been ever since. To put it in perspective had Port Stanley been a mining community in Wales then the appalling Thatcher would have destroyed it's soul without a second thought. Bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 It was Thatchers lot who announced they were withdrawing HMS Endurance. It was a stupid decision given the messages from Argentina but I can understand the need to reduce spending on military and it was the Navy that had to take the hit. Both of these extremely stupid moves sent a clear signal to the Argentines that the UK was abandoning the Falklands so they went for it. Though I think the assumptions on Britain's military capability carried more weight in making the decision whether to attack. The withdrawal of Endurance did sent a strong signal. And what a stupid waste of money "Fortress Falklands" has been ever since. To put it in perspective had Port Stanley been a mining community in Wales then the appalling Thatcher would have destroyed it's soul without a second thought. Bitch. But P.K., these are BRITISH citizens that have to protected! It is a waste of money. I doubt there would be much to worry about if the military presence was reduced or removed entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 But P.K., these are BRITISH citizens that have to protected! By the same token so were the Hong Kong Chinese! But Thatcher deliberately cut them off from Britain. Nice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 But P.K., these are BRITISH citizens that have to protected! By the same token so were the Hong Kong Chinese! But Thatcher deliberately cut them off from Britain. Nice... Oh yes, but a different sort of British citizen, a bit foreign looking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 But P.K., these are BRITISH citizens that have to protected! By the same token so were the Hong Kong Chinese! But Thatcher deliberately cut them off from Britain. Nice... Oh yes, but a different sort of British citizen, a bit foreign looking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 But P.K., these are BRITISH citizens that have to protected! By the same token so were the Hong Kong Chinese! But Thatcher deliberately cut them off from Britain. Nice... Oh yes, but a different sort of British citizen, a bit foreign looking! And oil wasn't involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 And oil wasn't involved Are you being sarcastic? I thought you said it was. It's news to me all this Exxon stuff but will definitely try and read up about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 And oil wasn't involved Are you being sarcastic? I thought you said it was. It's news to me all this Exxon stuff but will definitely try and read up about it. Please read more carefully, it was Hong Kong you made your last statement about. As for reading up I doubt you will see much on it as at the time a D notice was slapped on it rather fast, in fact it was the fastest I have ever seen one done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 It was awfully nice of the US Delta Force to lend us some Stinger Missile systems to cover the gaping holes in the Rapier air defence net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.