The Falklands War Alternate History

[CountDeMoney]

Argentina's big error was sending their own conscripts instead of cutting a deal to hire some Revolutionary Guards from the Islamic Republic.   They should have known that the Royal Marine SOP is to slaughter Argentines at a drop of a hat but to surrender to the first guy that asks nicely in Farsi.

[grumbler]

If someone in 2000 had told you that a buch of Arabs armed with boxcutters would hijack four large US commercial planes in America and, their sole flight training consisting of flight sims, accurately ram two of them in the World Trade Center at low altitude and getting another plane to hit the Pentagon at an even lower altitude, and that a few minutes later both Towers would nicely fold unto themselves and totally disappear... what would have been your reaction?

Invade Iraq!

[Alatriste]

What was the Argentine justification for war anyway?  The Falklanders are all of British (IIRC mostly Scottish) descent, right?  The Falklands never actually belonged to Argentina/New Spain, right?  So was it just a claim based on geographic proximity?

AMERICA:  OMG CAN I HAS BAHAMAS!  U ARE: NEARBY.

It's... complex. Take this example from 1764-1774

- French traders establish a little base (1764)
- Spain protests. Traders are compensated and evacuate (1766)
- British Navy comes and builds an small fort (1766)
- Spanish Navy comes and forces them to surrender (1770)
- International mini-crisis. British return (1771)
- British bore to death, evacuate the damned islands (1774)
- Spanish navy returns and shortly afterwards leaves too.

Rinse and repeat.

The powers that be, at Madrid, Paris and London looked at the map and wanted the islands, but men sent there found them once and again to be barren, unbearably cold, and unprofitable. Only  steam made the islands useful enough to deserve more or less permanent occupation, first by whalers, then by the Royal Navy, that needed a coaling station in the South Atlantic.

[Fireblade]

Ok, so it sounds like the AH here is: the British beat the living shit out of the Argentines.... which is different from reality how?

I think we need to bring Turtledove ( ) in for a rewrite.  In his version, the British will be advancing on Port Stanley and suddenly Roberto Eduarto Lee from the XXV century will show up with laser machineguns and wipe out the British army, Royal Navy, and then conquer London for El Confederacio. 

I bet Timmy is making a map right now!

[Martinus]

What was the Argentine justification for war anyway?  The Falklanders are all of British (IIRC mostly Scottish) descent, right?  The Falklands never actually belonged to Argentina/New Spain, right?  So was it just a claim based on geographic proximity?

AMERICA:  OMG CAN I HAS BAHAMAS!  U ARE: NEARBY.

LOL seeing how pretty much all conquests ever made by your own country were based on that justification, you shouldn't roll your eyes at it. 

[Caliga]

 

Americans don't conquer, we liberate. 

[Viking]

Americans don't conquer, we liberate. 

You move in your people, then you liberate the immigrants from their aboriginal oppressors (Texas, California, Hawaii etc.)

[Grey Fox]

This thread is gold.

It's too bad we don't seem to have any one ready to defend the argentinian side of the dispute.

[Caliga]

It's too bad we don't seem to have any one ready to defend the argentinian side of the dispute.

Well, that's likely because we don't have any Argentine posters.  We need spiess to get one of his cousins in law on here or something. 

[Josquius]

What was the Argentine justification for war anyway?  The Falklanders are all of British (IIRC mostly Scottish) descent, right?  The Falklands never actually belonged to Argentina/New Spain, right?  So was it just a claim based on geographic proximity?

AMERICA:  OMG CAN I HAS BAHAMAS!  U ARE: NEARBY.

It's... complex. Take this example from 1764-1774

- French traders establish a little base (1764)
- Spain protests. Traders are compensated and evacuate (1766)
- British Navy comes and builds an small fort (1766)
- Spanish Navy comes and forces them to surrender (1770)
- International mini-crisis. British return (1771)
- British bore to death, evacuate the damned islands (1774)
- Spanish navy returns and shortly afterwards leaves too.

Rinse and repeat.

The powers that be, at Madrid, Paris and London looked at the map and wanted the islands, but men sent there found them once and again to be barren, unbearably cold, and unprofitable. Only  steam made the islands useful enough to deserve more or less permanent occupation, first by whalers, then by the Royal Navy, that needed a coaling station in the South Atlantic.

Goes back further than that even with various folk discovering them and claiming them but never doing anything about it or even not even knowing exactly where they are. Checking wiki it says Britain has claimed them since before there was a Britain in 1690.

This thread is gold.

It's too bad we don't seem to have any one ready to defend the argentinian side of the dispute.

OMFG ITS JUST GEOGRAPHY! ITS ON THE ARGENTINIAN SHELF! ITS JUST ARGENTINA! HOW'D YOU LIKE IT IF THE SHETLANDS WERE ARGENTINIAN!! MALVINAS ARGENTINOS FOREVER...OS!

[Grey Fox]

OMFG ITS JUST GEOGRAPHY! ITS ON THE ARGENTINIAN SHELF! ITS JUST ARGENTINA! HOW'D YOU LIKE IT IF THE SHETLANDS WERE ARGENTINIAN!! MALVINAS ARGENTINOS FOREVER...OS!

While funny, I'm more wondering how it would look written in none-japanese fashion.

[derspiess]

This thread is gold.

It's too bad we don't seem to have any one ready to defend the argentinian side of the dispute.

Seedy is on record as having taken the Argie side, but I'm not sure if that was trolling or not.

[Ed Anger]

This thread is gold.

It's too bad we don't seem to have any one ready to defend the argentinian side of the dispute.

Seedy is on record as having taken the Argie side, but I'm not sure if that was trolling or not.

I will say one thing, watching the Brits take exocets in the ass back in '82 was comedy gold on the nightly news.

[CountDeMoney]

This thread is gold.

It's too bad we don't seem to have any one ready to defend the argentinian side of the dispute.

Seedy is on record as having taken the Argie side, but I'm not sure if that was trolling or not.

Violation of the Rio Treaty as well as numerous albeit liberal interpretations of the Monroe Doctrine?  You betcha! *wink*