Thatcher-war Criminal

[P.K.]

Any peace plan Haig could have brokered went down with the Belgrano and Thatcher et al all knew it. For god's sake the Belgrano was at Pearl Harbour when the Japs bombed it! It was ancient and basically clapped out. In any event an ancient battle-cruiser is no match for at least two nuclear submarines and a carrier-led battlegroup.

 

As a cost-cutting measure HMS Endurance was being withdrawn and all the signs were there that it was politically expedient for the UK to hand the islands over to the Argies. Unfortunately for the Argies it was politically expedient that they act sooner rather than later so with all the signs from the UK that they were getting them back anyway they went early.

 

What followed was the appalling spectacle of Julian Thompson, who was in charge of the troops on the ground, being ordered into attacks on stupid targets like Goose Green. In his own words it could have been left "to wither on the vine" as it had no strategic or tactical value. But the politicians wanted a battle with a victory and never mind the human cost as Thatcher needs to stay in power.

 

Men died taking a worthless (to Julian Thompson) objective. A Colonel was awarded the VC for what looks like completely losing it and putting all his men at risk. A very, very strange commendation. He should have been running the battle, not getting himself shot in the back. Oh and by the way "Fortress Falklands" has cost millions ever since.

 

All in all an excellent demonstration of what was important to the politicians during the "Thatcher" years.

[Dave the Cardboard Box]

Good reply PK. I remember Michael Foot in the Commons questioning Thatcher on why the Endurance was being removed, and the signals that would give the Argentinians and the Falkland Islanders, and predicting it could be a disaster.

 

She had just wreaked enormous damage through 1981 on the working class, with unemployment nearly 4 million, and she had little likelihood of being re-elected. The war was her salvation.

 

Even after the war started Haig and co had just about got a peace deal sorted - when she made the decision to attack Belgrano, when it was clearly sailing AWAY from the area of conflict and outside the exclusion zone.

 

You can apply the argument in nearly every scenario that all deaths in wars and conflicts are the direct result of individuals wanting to hold on to their PERSONAL power and the wealth and influence that comes with it.

 

And the more wealth and power you have, the better quality of sex you get, which is what it all comes down to in the end.

 

That self propelling DNA has a lot to answer for.

[Rog]

If anyone thinks that what happened with the Thatcher government was bad then just wait and see what measures will have to be taken once this lousy shower eventually get slung out and the incoming Conservative government set about putting things right and as usual get the blame just as Margaret Thatcher did.

 

She wasn’t the problem, she was the part of the cure but unfortunately a cure that simply had to involve major surgery

[Lonan3]

If anyone thinks that what happened with the Thatcher government was bad then just wait and see what measures will have to be taken once this lousy shower eventually get slung out and the incoming Conservative government set about putting things right and as usual get the blame just as Margaret Thatcher did.

 

She wasn’t the problem, she was the part of the cure but unfortunately a cure that simply had to involve major surgery

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thatcher's surgery was like applying a frontal lobotomy to a headache.

Somehow, they managed to mistranslate the Russian description of her into 'Iron Lady' when they had actually called her a 'frigid bitch.' And people are still being deceived by the spin that was put on her years in power and ignoring the fact that she and her cohorts damned near destroyed the country. Eventually, her actions were too much even for the Conservative Party to cope with and, thank God, they got rid of her.

[R_ReaVeR]

If anyone thinks that what happened with the Thatcher government was bad then just wait and see what measures will have to be taken once this lousy shower eventually get slung out and the incoming Conservative government set about putting things right and as usual get the blame just as Margaret Thatcher did.

 

She wasn’t the problem, she was the part of the cure but unfortunately a cure that simply had to involve major surgery

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well said.

[ButterflyMaiden]

If anyone thinks that what happened with the Thatcher government was bad then just wait and see what measures will have to be taken once this lousy shower eventually get slung out and the incoming Conservative government set about putting things right and as usual get the blame just as Margaret Thatcher did.

 

She wasn’t the problem, she was the part of the cure but unfortunately a cure that simply had to involve major surgery

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

 

It might be helpful to examine the facts relating to Margaret Thatcher and her Government.

 

First we should note she was democratically elected and that lends some legitimacy to her actions.

 

However, she set about destroying the political settlement that had existed in the UK since the end of WW2.

 

Her macro economic policies ..which favoured financial capital over industrial capital resulted in mass unemployment and devastated the industrial cities of the Midlands and the North.

Her micro economic policies were driven by an extremist free market ideology.This ideology was pursued with the zeal of a fanatic and resulted, amongst other things,in irrepairable damage to the UK's infrastructure and

public services.

 

Her social policies favoured the individual over the collective and resulted in a deeply divided society in which the needs of the poor, the elderly, the unemployed and the ill were granted little or no acknowledgement.

 

Her cultural policies were unashamedly xenophobic and resulted in rioting and looting in the UK's cities.

 

She has left an appalling legacy which will take many years to purge.

 

None of that makes her a war criminal. Furthermore, the determination of criminality is entirely subjective and, as such, is set against discourse.This is why the ranks of war criminals are never populated by the victors .. always the defeated.

In the case of the Falklands, the prevailing discourse posited Argentina as the wrong doers, the aggressors.

It follows that any miltary action by the UK, including the sinking of the General Belgrano, would, according to the prevaling discourse, be defensive. .. (See Foucauld for fascinating insights to the power of discourse)

 

On a personal level, of course, we are all free to approve or disapprove of her actions in the Falklands War.

My father, for example, served in the Royal Navy during the Falklands campaign.His ship was damaged by aircraft attacks thankfully without anyone losing their life.

I have no doubt at all he had a professional pride in the way the task force

executed its instructions. However, he thoroughly disapproved of the conflict, especially the sinking of the General Belgrano.This was a view shared by many of his friends in the service at the time.

It is a view I also share ... but as stated above ..this doesnt make Thatcher a war criminal.

[P.K.]

the ranks of war criminals are never populated by the victors .. always the defeated.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a line I have heard before but it's out of date. We now have the Hague Tribunal so simply being the victor is no longer a defence as Slobodan Milosovic will testify.

 

Of course, what usually happens is that the aggressor attacks and kills some of your soldiers specifically there for the purpose. You can then counter attack with a clear mandate. In the case of the Falklands there had been no UK fatalities so a peace plan had a real chance of success. However a peaceful settlement would have been the last nail in Thatcher's coffin. Bye bye Belgrano....

[Addie]

Sunday Express = troll newspaper. Stories which are designed to wind you up. At least as bad as the Daily Mail. Judge them by their classified adverts for rubbish. Adverts which are aimed at the sort of people who read that kind of rubbish. And they know their readership.

 

The Falklands War was a total waste of life. If Argentina hadn't invaded they'd have got them back years ago. That was the Foreign Office policy which Mrs Thatcher supported as PM. She wasn't in the least bit interested in the islands until the Argentinians invaded. Then she sacked a very good Foreign Secretary who had been following her policies.

 

Mrs Thatcher had a good war after the invasion. So did HM Navy. Despite the fact the the war exposed the idiocy of building warships out of (was it) aluminium. She did very well out of her ability to send people to their deaths. People saw her as a strong leader.

 

Thatcher ordered the Conqueror to sink the Belgrano despite knowing that it was outside of the 'exclusion zone'. But the notion of an 'exclusion zone' was idiotic. Either we were at war or we weren't.

 

As a war leader she was probably right to sink the ship. But Britain shouldn't have been at war over a group of islands in the South Atlantic. A group of islands which nobody, including Mrs Thatcher, cared about before the invasion.

 

It was a stupid war more than 20 years ago. I'd have respected her more if she would have said honestly that she didn't care about the Falklands until the invasion. She never said that.

 

I remember very well the morning after the Belgrano was sunk. Lots of Brits were excited and jubilant. There was no sense of the horror. The Sun said 'Gotcha'. A day or two days later they sank one of our ships. HMS Sheffield IIRC. And Britain blamed the French for selling missiles - rather than blaming the arms trade and deciding to campaign against it. At a time when Britain and the US was arming Saddam's Iraq against Iran, the Kurds and other anti Saddam groups.

 

War is stupid. *snip*  The Falkands was a deeply nasty and silly little war. More than 20 years ago. It was a failure of the Thatcher government and their mixed signals which resulted in the war.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wish I'd written that.

 

Lonan3 Posted Yesterday, 11:35 AM

Thatcher's surgery was like applying a frontal lobotomy to a headache.

Somehow, they managed to mistranslate the Russian description of her into 'Iron Lady' when they had actually called her a 'frigid bitch.' And people are still being deceived by the spin that was put on her years in power and ignoring the fact that she and her cohorts damned near destroyed the country. Eventually, her actions were too much even for the Conservative Party to cope with and, thank God, they got rid of her.

 

And that ...

[ButterflyMaiden]

the ranks of war criminals are never populated by the victors .. always the defeated.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a line I have heard before but it's out of date. We now have the Hague Tribunal so simply being the victor is no longer a defence as Slobodan Milosovic will testify.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not really the point I was making. I was referring to the power of discourse and on that basis it is extremely unlikely that any court or tribunal would consider Thatcher to be a war criminal.

[Lonan3]

Not really the point I was making. I was referring to the power of discourse and on that basis it is extremely unlikely that any court or tribunal would consider Thatcher to be a war criminal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's probably true. History, however, may not be so reticent.

[P.K.]

the ranks of war criminals are never populated by the victors .. always the defeated.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a line I have heard before but it's out of date. We now have the Hague Tribunal so simply being the victor is no longer a defence as Slobodan Milosovic will testify.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not really the point I was making. I was referring to the power of discourse and on that basis it is extremely unlikely that any court or tribunal would consider Thatcher to be a war criminal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know. A shame.

 

Still, Tam Dyall must be smiling.