Falklands attack surprised Thatcher

[Jimbuna]

I'm not sure I believe this....she may have been a lot of things but 'stupid' wasn't one of them :hmmm:


The 1982 invasion of the Falkland Islands by Argentina took Margaret Thatcher by surprise, newly released government papers have shown.
The then-prime minister only saw it was likely after getting "raw intelligence" two days before the Argentines landed.
Papers released under the 30-year rule show Mrs Thatcher was acutely worried about retaking the islands.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20800447

[STEED]

Secret deal to get re-elected. :shifty:

We will never know...

[Jimbuna]

Probably never will but her popularity was at an all time low...until she sent the task force south.

[eddie]

I think that would have been a worrying situation for any Brit PM, to have sent the troops so far away. If things would have turned out badly, how long would it have taken to get them extra help? I wouldn't be able to get an sleep after giving the task force that order.

[Herr-Berbunch]

I wouldn't be able to get an sleep after giving the task force that order.

She wasn't one for much sleep anyway, although she really did get more than was made out. I believe that this did cause less sleep than normal though, and rightly so as disaster was only a stroke of luck (or not) away on several occasions.

She held firm, and won the game. Failed for Bliar though. :D

As for her not being aware really until two days before - the Falklands was a negligible asset to the former Empire, Argentina's postulating their sovereign rights didn't figure greatly in the grand scheme of the world prior to that. After '98 (that I know of), bin Laden used to appear on regular Int Reps. Deployments overseas received an Int brief prior, and he was always mentioned for embassy bombings and later USS Cole but never figured to us a greater threat than European terrorists, mainly the IRA, Red Army Faction, ETA, et al. In 2001 I was in Oman, we watched the news and the first thing one guy said was, 'it's that guy from the Int Brief, Oss-wotsisname'. Two days before - he didn't figure, and nor had Argentina.

[eddie]

I was wondering something, with Britains involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and trouble broke out in the Falklands again, how would the general population feel about sending troops there again if they had to?

[BossMark]

Secret deal to get re-elected. :shifty:

We will never know...
Well unfortunately it won the evil bitch the 1983 general election :wah:

[Cybermat47]

I remember last year that it was starting to look like there was going to be another Falklands war. Thank God it didn't happen.

[Herr-Berbunch]

I was wondering something, with Britains involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and trouble broke out in the Falklands again, how would the general population feel about sending troops there again if they had to?

If we were in Iraq and Afghanistan we wouldn't have many left to 'go South', but I think the people would rather our forces fight for British Territory over some hot, unfriendly, hole any day.

[Tribesman]

I am surprised that the Falkland papers are getting so much coverage when the released papers also includes Thatchers governments plans to abolish the health service and sell all the schools.

[Jimbuna]

I was wondering something, with Britains involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and trouble broke out in the Falklands again, how would the general population feel about sending troops there again if they had to?

If we were in Iraq and Afghanistan we wouldn't have many left to 'go South', but I think the people would rather our forces fight for British Territory over some hot, unfriendly, hole any day.

Thankfully the Argentine military has been weakened by a greater margin than ours over the past decade and we now have more than a platoon of Commandos on the island unlike the last time.

There are approximately 1200 personnel on station whom are front line infantry, engineer and signals and they are augmented with the citing of Rapier missile systems, four Typhoon fighters for air defence as well as a tanker and Sea King helicopters.

The RN always maintains at least one AA destroyer there and the real power punch (if needed) a classified number of SSN's in the area equipped with Tomahawk etc. etc.

IMHO any sabre rattling or sudden attack even, would mean the garrison holding on long enough for a few more SSN assets to motor on down and take out whatever was threatening the sovereignty of the islands....who knows, perhaps even launching strikes on Argentine bases themselves?

Given a week or so I should imagine an air bridge would be developed bringing fresh troops and air assets.

STUFT (ships taken up from trade) would take longer but I doubt the RN could provide sufficient escorts and in that sense we sorely need at least two carriers and that is where 21st century lend lease from our US cousins would play a part (LOL just wishful thinking on my part) :)

In conclusion....I'm confident neither side would wish for such an eventuality and I certainly feel that way myself but make no mistake, the present government is determined to protect the people of those islands who have repeatedly voiced their preferences to the whole world and with the added bonus of potential oil and mineral wealth in the area that resolve has only heightened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Falkland_Islands