Wars and Conflicts permalink
Falklands War
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by spacecadet2509 (U10237957) on Friday, 2nd November 2007
Can anyone tell me why Argentina chose to invade the Falklands in April 1982? If the Falklands have been British since the 1830s and the dispite over the islands has been goig on since then who didn't Argentina invade during the First of Second World Wars? Or during the Suez crisis in the late 50's? Surely it would have been impossable to send a task force to retake the Falklands during the world wars or suez with the armed forces occupied elswhere? In the days bofore international phone calls Argentina could have invaded the Falklands and it could have been weeks of months before anyone would know. Also during WW2 there were German U boats in the Atlantic which even it enough ships could be found would make sending a take force to retake the islands difficult? Were there any enough British forces on the Falklands during these times to stop an Argintinian invasion?
-
Message 2
Posted by MB (U177470) on Friday, 2nd November 2007
The invaded in 1982 for their own domestic reasons.
If they had invaded during WWII then I presume that it would have been considered an act of war against the Allies. The reaction might have been delayed because everyone was busy elsewhere but they could have been treated as assisting the Germans so attacked by quite a large force.
MB -
Message 3
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Friday, 2nd November 2007
A very good and interesting question spacecadet2509.
It must be appreciated, however, that the notion of the whole Argentine nation being united and brought up on the ‘desire’ for the return of Las Malvinas is in fact a relatively modern invention and ironically (or understandably) has actually been a notion which has been promoted by the UK establishment.
From the 1830s through to 1916 Argentina was a developing and sparsely populated country which was 100% engaged in South American continental affairs including border disputes with Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay and Brazil. During those years the concept of Argentina challenging the British Empire in any way would have been an absurdity – even to the most nationalist Argentine. Not only was Britain the chief creditor, investor and trading partner of Argentina but the British navy in the 19th century was a force to match that of any of the world’s major powers – let alone a developing country in South America.
This situation was still pretty much the same in 1914 although it is conceivable that an Argentine invasion of the Falklands would have been possible in the immediate aftermath of the German victory at Coronel. The fragile Argentine government of the time, however, was in no position to act in such a swift and decisive way. Neither was it inclined to. The then president Victoriano de la Plaza of the National Party was from the pro-British establishment.
When de la Plaza was replaced in 1916 by the Hipolito Yrigoyen of the Radical Party it could have been probable for an Argentine invasion – but again there was no tradition of this kind of thinking in Argentine politics. At the time Argentina was enjoying a period of a long economic boom and the populist Yrigoyen was not going to jeopardise this with a dangerous and irresponsible foreign policy which risked an expensive war against Argentina’s chief trading partner. He, therefore, followed the policy of neutrality which had been established by de la Plaza.
Besides by now the British naval humiliation at Coronel had been reversed at the Battle of the Falklands and the islands were now a significant naval base in the global armoury of an empire at war. Not exactly a promising target for the tiny and antiquated Argentine navy. Basically there was inclination or incentive for Argentina to invade and, furthermore, there was everything to lose.
By the time of the Second World War the Argentinean economy was no longer in boom while Argentine politics was still very much inward-looking. The then president Roberto Ortiz, for example, was an ill man and (as with the Battle of the Falklands early in the First World War) the Battle of the River Plate early in the Second World War demonstrated that the British navy was in the area and more than capable of defending British interests. The proposal of Argentina fighting against Britain at that time would have still been received as a preposterous idea by most Argentineans.
By the time that a more outward-looking politician emerged onto the political scene in Argentina (Juan Peron in 1946) then the Second World War was already over. So any concept of ‘Britain’s difficulty being Argentina’s opportunity’ was gone. If anything Peron was an admirer of the Labour government of Clement Attlee in Britain as were many of the leaders of the Argentine trade unions who formed a major part of Peron’s powerbase. Germany, Italy and Japan had just been defeated in a major war for embarking on aggressive foreign policies and so aggressing against Britain was just not an option for Peron at the time. Moreover this was particularly so as he sought international respectability as evidenced, for example, by the diplomatic tour of Europe by his wife Eva. An invasion of the Falklands at this time would have been catastrophic not only for Peron but also for Argentina.
By the time of the Suez Crisis in 1956 Peron was out of office and a fragile military dictatorship of Pedro Aramburu held sway. The military was again inward-looking and in no mind for a war with a still impressive British military machine.
It was only the desperation of the regime of Leopoldo Galtieri in 1982, combined with the understandable belief that the British empire was over and so the will and the ability of the UK to protect a far-flung outpost was in question, which prompted the invasion that year. As history has shown – Galtieri’s gamble was a bad miscalculation. -
Message 4
Posted by George1507 (U2607963) on Friday, 2nd November 2007
No mention of the British stalling in talks over the sovereignty of the islands?
Successive governments had ignored the issue for years, and it's not surprising (although not excusable) that the Argentines got fed up.
We are almost back to square one now, the UN is insisting on talks about the sovereignty of the islands. -
Message 5
Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Friday, 2nd November 2007
ironically - if they had waited 1yr we COULDNT have taken them back as the carriers would have been gone
-
Message 6
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Monday, 5th November 2007
Good point stalteriisok.
It must also be appreciated, from a strategic point of view, that Simonstown in South Africa was a major and sovereign British naval base until 1955 and also continued to be used by the Royal Navy until 1975. Simonstown is in the South Atlantic and so would have featured prominently in the thinking of both the British and the Argentine naval commands.
The departure of the Royal Navy from Simonstown in 1975 would fit in to the timeframe of the beginings of Argentinean muscle-flexing after that date. The Argentinean navy threatened the Falklands in 1977 and, of course, invaded in 1982. -
Message 7
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Monday, 5th November 2007
It wasn't just the carriers, either. The Assault ships were due to go to - Intrepid was actually being decommissioned for sale, Fearless was also up for sale, there was even talk of disbanding the Royal Marines. The final "we don't care about the South Atlantic" message, in the view of the Argentine Junta, was claimed to have been the decision to withdraw the Ice Patrol Vessel Endurance, plus the fact that the Argentines had occupied Southern Thule without provoking any noticeable British reaction.
-
Message 8
Posted by englishvote (U5473482) on Monday, 5th November 2007
Urnungasl
Exactly, why did the Argentines not wait? Once Britain had sold HMS Invincible and scraped HMS Hermes, HMS Fearless, HMS Intrepid and the ice patrol ship Endurance, surly the British government would have been eager to have dispensed with the Falklands problem.
Just how many people in Britain could have found the Falklands on a map prior to 1981, even if they knew that the Falklands were British territory?
Would there have been protests in the street if the Falklands had been handed over to Argentina in 1980?
Now of course there is no chance of any British government tacking the risk of alienating the British people by abandoning the Falkland islanders.
Any chance that Argentina had of obtaining the Falklands disappeared the day they invaded. -
Message 9
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Monday, 5th November 2007
EV - I concur.
-
Message 10
Posted by ungodfather (U2173708) on Monday, 5th November 2007
The Argentines didn't wait because Galtieri and his Junta didn't give a fig for some little rocks in the S Atlantic. They just needed a quick victory to deflect attention from their failures at home.
Sadly for them they proved as inept at their alleged profession of warmongering as they were at their hobby of governing. -
Message 11
Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Tuesday, 6th November 2007
if the argies had played it soft - how many of us would have cared - they should have said - we now are your "owners" carry on as you have done for the last 150 years - no problem - nothing changes except the flag over government house
we can supply your needs easier from 800 miles than 3000 miles - get on with it
st
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.