what is the world coming to ?

[montmorencyt2w]

Well fine, but it was also the days of Douglas Haigh so let's not wax too lyrical.

We could learn something from the good old days though... Remember what happened to that Admiral in Candide? I'm thinking that with political types.

Douglas Haig never became a politician, as far as I can see. Although he later got a reputation as a "butcher", at least according to Wikipedia, he was popular among his troops. He was certainly thought of as a hero in his lifetime (died 1928).

It was the generation of people who served in WWI, who later became politicians, that I was partly thinking of. This would include people like Clement Attlee & Anthony Eden. Churchill was a bit of a special case, as he was initially a politician in WW1, but later resigned and went into the army, seeing active service. (He had served as an active soldier in his early career as well).


A later generation would serve in WWII and later become politicians, such as Ted Heath, James Callaghan or Denis Healey.


Nevertheless, I suppose we still should not wax too lyrical. Some people called Churchill a warmonger, and Margaret Thatcher was almost of the same generation as Ted Heath, and she took us into the Falklands war readily enough.

 

[William Waller]

Margaret Thatcher was almost of the same generation as Ted Heath, and she took us into the Falklands war readily enough.

Not wishing to quibble over details MM, but Lady Thatcher did not take us to war. British territory was invaded without provocation by a corrupt and brutal South American military dictatorship hoping to distract its mutinous population from the economic collapse and extensive human rights abuses that the regime was causing.

She met her obligation to defend British territory and British subjects.

She also received a thoroughly unmerited boost to her reputation as a result, but that's another story.

Sir William

 

[montmorencyt2w]

Not wishing to quibble over details MM, but Lady Thatcher did not take us to war. British territory was invaded without provocation by a corrupt and brutal South American military dictatorship hoping to distract its mutinous population from the economic collapse and extensive human rights abuses that the regime was causing.

She met her obligation to defend British territory and British subjects.

She also received a thoroughly unmerited boost to her reputation as a result, but that's another story.

Sir William

I'll grant you that it was slightly more justified than the Iraq invasion (where British territory was never under threat ... what was under threat was American interests, and therefore British interests as a client state).

And yes, the then Argentinian government was a dictatorship. But the UK has done business with plenty of dictatorships. We've helped to install a few. That in itself was not grounds for the re-taking of the Falklands by force.


British territory? Legally, possibly, but only as a relic of a now mostly disbanded empire. WTF are we doing with overseas territories nowadays? Pretending to be a world power?

If the Spanish were to invade Gibraltar, should we retake it by force? Highly questionable.

Well, we probably won't agree on that, but we can agree that the "Falklands Factor" probably helped to win the 1983 election.

 

[William Waller]

I'll grant you that it was slightly more justified than the Iraq invasion (where British territory was never under threat ... what was under threat was American interests, and therefore British interests as a client state).

Absolutely, I like the way you put that.

And yes, the then Argentinian government was a dictatorship. But the UK has done business with plenty of dictatorships. We've helped to install a few. That in itself was not grounds for the re-taking of the Falklands by force.

Indeed we do conduct business with unsavoury regimes, picking at choosing at random (morally speaking) which ones we favour and which ones we condemn. Look at the WWII myth of a war against evil, where we allied ourselves to one of the worst regimes of the 20th century. In what way was Nazi Germany worse than Soviet Russia? The Russians even had their own 6 million person genocide, although for some reason people have chosen to forget it.

I can't agree that the grounds were not there for military action in the Falklands however. It was countering pure, unprovoked aggression.

British territory? Legally, possibly, but only as a relic of a now mostly disbanded empire. WTF are we doing with overseas territories nowadays? Pretending to be a world power?

The "relic" argument could apply to almost any territory if carried to its logical conclusion. The British are supported by the principal of self-determination in the Falklands, and the Argentinian claim is beyond absurd.

If the Spanish were to invade Gibraltar, should we retake it by force? Highly questionable.

Well, we probably won't agree on that, but we can agree that the "Falklands Factor" probably helped to win the 1983 election.

Sure it did. What I mean when I say "unmerited" is that Lady Thatcher used the Armed Forces but did not provide them with the proper resources. She reduced our Navy still further, and I have a vague memory that shortly before the war she had been negotiating to sell some of our ships (that were used during the conflict) to, amongst others, the Argentinians. Does this ring a bell? I'll see if I can dig out a reference if not.

In my opinion a leader who attempts to gain advantage through using the Forces whilst simultaneously running down their capabilities is acting in a contemptible manner. Not as bad as The Odious Blair Cretin, but bad nonetheless.

Sir William

 

[Bobby Rodgers]

I'm sorry for the families of the casualties

 

[sighthound]

Sure it did. What I mean when I say "unmerited" is that Lady Thatcher used the Armed Forces but did not provide them with the proper resources. She reduced our Navy still further, and I have a vague memory that shortly before the war she had been negotiating to sell some of our ships (that were used during the conflict) to, amongst others, the Argentinians. Does this ring a bell? I'll see if I can dig out a reference if not.

In my opinion a leader who attempts to gain advantage through using the Forces whilst simultaneously running down their capabilities is acting in a contemptible manner. Not as bad as The Odious Blair Cretin, but bad nonetheless.

Sir William

I was in the merchant navy then and one of our companys oil tankers was requisitioned to go to the Falklands as were many other types of ships,even ferries to take the soldiers.This was due to alot of the Royal Fleet Auxilary being sold off.Our ship was used as a floating garage for the Royal Navy,even had aviation fuel (avcat) to supply the planes on the aircraft carriers.Now I belive most of our merchant fleet has gone under foreign flag.

 

[William Waller]

I was in the merchant navy then and one of our companys oil tankers was requisitioned to go to the Falklands as were many other types of ships,even ferries to take the soldiers.This was due to alot of the Royal Fleet Auxilary being sold off.Our ship was used as a floating garage for the Royal Navy,even had aviation fuel (avcat) to supply the planes on the aircraft carriers.Now I belive most of our merchant fleet has gone under foreign flag.

Very interesting, thanks SH.

William