Iranian Forces Go On War Alert!

[Admiral Yi]

The problem with Squeeze's "practically invite" formulation is that it suggests a linkage between physical deterrence and the moral or legal claim.

[CountDeMoney]

I know you don't like Thatcher, but I don't see how she could be culpable in causing the Argentines to invade.  It's not like Argentina was some hostile communist state.  They were suppose to be on our side.

They were on our side; up to the moment of the imperialist aggression by the UK, Argentina was our #1 sponsor of military training and support for the Contras.  In fact, Ambassador Kirkpatrick was having dinner at the Argentinian Embassy the night the Argies took their legal and rightful action.

Thanks for fucking up our Latin American strategery for the sake of nostaglia, Brits.

[Razgovory]

I know you don't like Thatcher, but I don't see how she could be culpable in causing the Argentines to invade.  It's not like Argentina was some hostile communist state.  They were suppose to be on our side.

I am reminded of some claims that the US encouraged Iraq to conquer to Kuwait, which is nonsense.  Iraq was making some noises about settling the border dispute militarily (and if they just siezed some oil wells nobody would have cared that much.  Except Kuwait), but nobody expected Saddam to take the whole country.

Communism or not's got nothing to do with it though and 'our' side was different when it comes to Argentina.

Your comparison doesn't work though.  Everyone knew Argentina wanted the Falklands.  They were sabre rattling and had been for fifty years or so.  Also it's not the equivalent of whatever the US did in Kuwait because the US is a third party.

In this case you've got a piece of land which two countries claim.  One is thousands of miles away and has mostly forgotten about it but keeps a vessel just pootering around.  The other's far closer and has used jingoism attached to reclaiming the islands as a propaganda boost.  When the ship gets pulled out I think it's almost inevitable that the other country's going to take that as an invitation, it's a sign that there's no commitment to the islands.

As Tyr says this all came up under Callaghan.  I think the Treasury or MoD suggested cutting that South Atlantic commitment because it was quite expensive and Callaghan vetoed because he thought the Argies would take advantage.  So Thatcher's decision and the Argie response didn't come entirely out of the blue.

Yeah, yeah.  Argentina is hardly the only country that had claims on British territory during the Cold War.  Spain didn't invade Gibraltar.  Simply because you don't cover it in mine fields and razor wire doesn't mean you should expect a military invasion.  There were people living there, that's enough of a commitment.

[Sheilbh]

Any other examples? We always have a fleet in Gibraltar. Not to deter the Spaniards under Franco (though that's a bonus) but to generally project power.  It would be like if the US maybe stepped back from South Korea or Taiwan.

[Valmy]

They were on our side; up to the moment of the imperialist aggression by the UK, Argentina was our #1 sponsor of military training and support for the Contras.  In fact, Ambassador Kirkpatrick was having dinner at the Argentinian Embassy the night the Argies took their legal and rightful action.

Thanks for fucking up our Latin American strategery for the sake of nostaglia, Brits.

Imperialist aggression?  It was the Argies who were trying to conquer UK territory not the other way around.  And if the Falklanders wanted to be Argentine they could at any time they wanted.  But why would they?  The Argentine government and its mangement of Argentina hardly inspire much confidence.

[Razgovory]

Any other examples? We always have a fleet in Gibraltar. Not to deter the Spaniards under Franco (though that's a bonus) but to generally project power.  It would be like if the US maybe stepped back from South Korea or Taiwan.

South Korea and Taiwan are independent countries.  It would be like the US invading the Bahamas because you guys cut your budget.  Or China invading Guam because we cut our budget.  Also, don't you guys have some bases on Cyprus?  Nobody invaded there. 

I'm sorry, I simply don't buy that a cut military budget is invitation of invasion.  The Argentine government made an irrational act.  You can not predict someone making an irrational act.

[dps]

In this case you've got a piece of land which two countries claim.  One is thousands of miles away and has mostly forgotten about it but keeps a vessel just pootering around.  The other's far closer and has used jingoism attached to reclaiming the islands as a propaganda boost.  When the ship gets pulled out I think it's almost inevitable that the other country's going to take that as an invitation, it's a sign that there's no commitment to the islands.

As Tyr says this all came up under Callaghan.  I think the Treasury or MoD suggested cutting that South Atlantic commitment because it was quite expensive and Callaghan vetoed because he thought the Argies would take advantage.  So Thatcher's decision and the Argie response didn't come entirely out of the blue.

My memory (which may be off on this, and the books I could look it up in to make sure are at my mom's) is that the "commitment" was 1 ship, not 2-3 as you mentioned earlier, and that ship was more along the lines of a coast guard ship than an actual warship--in fact I believe that it was classified as a "fisheries protection ship" or something like that--it was there to deter poaching, not armed invasion.  And I don't think that it was being withdrawn from service, just pulled out for a refit (though I'm even less sure on that point).

[Josquius]

Yeah, IIRC there was just the HMS Endurance which indeed was not a full war ship and probally wouldn't have been much use had the Argentinians invaded (indeed I do believe it had not yet returned to Britain when they did move in), nonetheless the planned withdrawal of this at least nominal naval prescence from the area sent out a clear signal to the Argentinians that Britain didn't really care and, since it couldn't even afford to keep that one little ship in the area, was unable to defend the Falklands.

Yeah, yeah.  Argentina is hardly the only country that had claims on British territory during the Cold War.  Spain didn't invade Gibraltar.  Simply because you don't cover it in mine fields and razor wire doesn't mean you should expect a military invasion.  There were people living there, that's enough of a commitment.

Gibralter was covered by NATO.
And Spain, even under Franco, was a lot 'tamer' than Argentina. Far more of a known quantity with whom there was a bit of an agreement that things are the way they are even if they don't like it. I may be wrong here but though Spain claims Gibralter I don't believe they mark it as a regular part of Spanish territory on maps.

[Admiral Yi]

Did the British government intend it as a clear signal they didn't mind if Argentina invaded?  Did the British population interpret it as a clear signal at the time the decision was made?

[crazy canuck]

Maggie 

[Neil]

They were on our side; up to the moment of the imperialist aggression by the UK, Argentina was our #1 sponsor of military training and support for the Contras.  In fact, Ambassador Kirkpatrick was having dinner at the Argentinian Embassy the night the Argies took their legal and rightful action.

Thanks for fucking up our Latin American strategery for the sake of nostaglia, Brits.

Imperialist aggression?  It was the Argies who were trying to conquer UK territory not the other way around.  And if the Falklanders wanted to be Argentine they could at any time they wanted.  But why would they?  The Argentine government and its mangement of Argentina hardly inspire much confidence.

CdM went to a few to many LaRouche rallies.

[Sheilbh]

South Korea and Taiwan are independent countries.  It would be like the US invading the Bahamas because you guys cut your budget.  Or China invading Guam because we cut our budget.  Also, don't you guys have some bases on Cyprus?  Nobody invaded there. 

That they're independent countries only enhances my argument though.  But if you removed your forces from South Korea, or in the Cold War, Germany I think it would be interpreted as a sign that Korea or Germany is no longer a major interest to you and that you wouldn't fight for it.  Doubly so when it's your own territory, it's an absolute withdrawal.

If you've got a bit of territory that someone else claims - and it's likely that they'll try and take it - and you remove the only force defending it then it seems likely that that'll be interpreted as a sign that you're not willing to fight.

I'm sorry, I simply don't buy that a cut military budget is invitation of invasion.  The Argentine government made an irrational act.  You can not predict someone making an irrational act.

I think the Argentine invasion was pretty rational.

Did the British government intend it as a clear signal they didn't mind if Argentina invaded?

No.  But, as I say, that was how Jim Callaghan just a few years earlier thought it would be interpreted.  He cut other bits of the defence budget to preserve the South Atlantic for that very reason.

Did the British population interpret it as a clear signal at the time the decision was made?

We had no idea that the Falklands existed or were British until the Argies invaded.  It came as a surprise.

[grumbler]

Thanks for fucking up our Latin American strategery for the sake of nostaglia, Brits.

Indeed.  The Brits have my thanks, as well, no matter what their motives.

[Ideologue]

I know you don't like Thatcher, but I don't see how she could be culpable in causing the Argentines to invade.  It's not like Argentina was some hostile communist state.  They were suppose to be on our side.

They were on our side; up to the moment of the imperialist aggression by the UK, Argentina was our #1 sponsor of military training and support for the Contras.  In fact, Ambassador Kirkpatrick was having dinner at the Argentinian Embassy the night the Argies took their legal and rightful action.

Thanks for fucking up our Latin American strategery for the sake of nostaglia, Brits.

How can you be so right about China, yet so wrong about this?  The mind boggles.

[jimmy olsen]

I know you don't like Thatcher, but I don't see how she could be culpable in causing the Argentines to invade.  It's not like Argentina was some hostile communist state.  They were suppose to be on our side.

They were on our side; up to the moment of the imperialist aggression by the UK, Argentina was our #1 sponsor of military training and support for the Contras.  In fact, Ambassador Kirkpatrick was having dinner at the Argentinian Embassy the night the Argies took their legal and rightful action.

Thanks for fucking up our Latin American strategery for the sake of nostaglia, Brits.

How can you be so right about China, yet so wrong about this?  The mind boggles.

He's an IRA sympathizer.