TV/Movies Megathread

[viper37]

Who's left to be taken? The family pet?

I think it's the wife.

[Admiral Yi]

Not really. There's a strong argument that if the RN hadn't been removed from the area there wouldn't have been a war.

Of course that's not sufficient - the Argentines invaded and her response during the war was very good.

Yes really.  Removing the icebreaker from the Falklands station didn't make war inevitable.  It didn't force the Argentinians to invade. 

The Argentinian junta caused the war, not Thatcher.

[Josquius]

Not really. There's a strong argument that if the RN hadn't been removed from the area there wouldn't have been a war.

Of course that's not sufficient - the Argentines invaded and her response during the war was very good.

Yes really.  Removing the icebreaker from the Falklands station didn't make war inevitable.  It didn't force the Argentinians to invade. 

The Argentinian junta caused the war, not Thatcher.

Holy captain literal.

[Admiral Yi]

Holy captain literal.

Were you using "caused" in the figurative sense?

[Neil]

Holy captain literal.

Were you using "caused" in the figurative sense?

I think he was using it in the 'I hate Thatcher and will use any ammunition against her I can get my hands on, no matter how nonsensical' sense.

[Neil]

Which is a looooong way away from "the Falklands war was her fault."

Not really. There's a strong argument that if the RN hadn't been removed from the area there wouldn't have been a war.

Of course that's not sufficient - the Argentines invaded and her response during the war was very good.

The problem with that is that's the argument that was used by the RN to try to hold onto every base, every coaling stations and absolutely everything they could get their hands on:  That if the RN isn't around, someone might get uppity and destabilize the region.

[Razgovory]

I suppose we are lucky that Argentina hasn't invaded the UK, with it's reduction in naval capabilities in recent years.

[CountDeMoney]

Stop shitting this thread up with Falklands bullshit.  Take it elsewhere.  This thread is for Ideologue's obtuse movie reviews.

[Sheilbh]

Yes really.  Removing the icebreaker from the Falklands station didn't make war inevitable.  It didn't force the Argentinians to invade. 

The Argentinian junta caused the war, not Thatcher.

That's a very narrow and frankly useless way of looking at something though.

There's a difference between starting and causing, for example. If you create the circumstances that allow the Argentines to invade then you get some of the blame. It's like saying appeasement didn't make war inevitable - so Baldwin and Chamberlain are fine - because Hitler caused the war. Literally true, honestly bollocks.

The problem with that is that's the argument that was used by the RN to try to hold onto every base, every coaling stations and absolutely everything they could get their hands on:  That if the RN isn't around, someone might get uppity and destabilize the region.

The RN did make that argument to the MoD. As I say the comparison with Callaghan's instructive. He looked at a map of British commitments and forces and said you couldn't cut that because there'd be nothing else in the South Atlantic. Given that Argentina's a loud military dictatorship they may interpret that as Britain stepping back from the region.

[garbon]

That's a very narrow and frankly useless way of looking at something though.

Wouldn't that be akin to telling someone that they caused a robbery because they didn't have an alarm system (with the prominent alarm system sign on their lawn) equipped at their home?

[Sheilbh]

Wouldn't that be akin to telling someone that they caused a robbery because they didn't have an alarm system (with the prominent alarm system sign on their lawn) equipped at their home?

More like there's a shifty guy in the who's been around your house and you leave the front door open.

[Admiral Yi]

That's a very narrow and frankly useless way of looking at something though.

There's a difference between starting and causing, for example. If you create the circumstances that allow the Argentines to invade then you get some of the blame. It's like saying appeasement didn't make war inevitable - so Baldwin and Chamberlain are fine - because Hitler caused the war. Literally true, honestly bollocks.

Do you honestly think that removing an icebreaker created the circumstances that allowed Argentina to invade??  Was that icebreaker going to repel the Argentine fleet with its massive firepower?

The Chamberlain example perfectly reinforces my argument.  Chamberlain's sacrifice of Czechoslovakia convinced Hitler that the UK would do virtually anything to avoid war.

You yourself said the Argentines *misinterpreted* the icebreaker as a change in commitment.  You can't be held accountable for someone else's misinterpretation of your words or deeds.  No reasonable person would look at the decision to retire the icebreaker and conclude "I guess the UK won't object too much if we occupy and annex las Malvinas now."

[Sheilbh]

Do you honestly think that removing an icebreaker created the circumstances that allowed Argentina to invade??  Was that icebreaker going to repel the Argentine fleet with its massive firepower?

No. But that's not what I'm arguing. It created the circumstances for Argentina to invade. They interpreted the withdrawal of the last British forces from the area, not unreasonably, as a weakening of Britain's commitment to the region. Therefore they thought there would be unlikely to be a military response if they invaded - at worst there'd be some negotiations.

You yourself said the Argentines *misinterpreted* the icebreaker as a change in commitment.  You can't be held accountable for someone else's misinterpretation of your words or deeds.  No reasonable person would look at the decision to retire the icebreaker and conclude "I guess the UK won't object too much if we occupy and annex las Malvinas now."

You're leaping here. They did misinterpret it, because the UK did fight back (not least because of Thatcher). But I think you can be held accountable for someone else's misinterpretation if it is reasonable to believe that that misinterpretation would be made - Callaghan, the RN and others believed that's how it would be interpreted by Argentina.

It wasn't about withdrawal of an icebreaker, but the symbolic effect of decommissioning the last British force in that area of the world. The assumption the Argentines made wasn't that Britain wouldn't object but that they wouldn't go to war. After 30 years of decolonisation and seeing a local colonial power withdraw from the neighbourhood, I don't think that was an unreasonable view by the Argentines. For a start I'm not sure that many other PMs would have gone to war over it.

Edit: The Argentines didn't predict a war. They expected the US to not support the UK - as in Suez - and for a colonial power to back down when presented with a fait accompli - as in Rhodesia, Goa and many other places. The Falklands was the exception.

[viper37]

So, NCIS was back yesterday with a killer episode.  I like that show.  Much more dramatic than usual though, after a soft start.

[Neil]

The RN did make that argument to the MoD. As I say the comparison with Callaghan's instructive. He looked at a map of British commitments and forces and said you couldn't cut that because there'd be nothing else in the South Atlantic. Given that Argentina's a loud military dictatorship they may interpret that as Britain stepping back from the region.

That said, the war was much more useful than just keeping the icebreaker there.