Quote:
|
Anyway, i'm suprised you posted that, as I thought you was in the Falklands-war-was-just-to-boost-Thather's-re-election-chances camp.
|
You thought wrong, didn't you, and not for the first time - don't put me into 'camps'*, it's rather insulting. I sometimes wonder quite what an erroneous impression you have of me, and whether it's my fault or yours, then I think 'why worry?'.
My usual point is that if you give Thatcher credit for winning the war, you have to give Callaghan more credit for staving off the invasion in the first place in 1977. Being an ex-navy man, he understood that the Argentines couldn't deal with nuclear attack subs, and the mere whisper of one being in the area would give the anti-invasion voices in Buenos Aires ammunition to fight the hawks. So he sent one. Forward 5 years, and the message being sent was British withdrawal and unwillingness to fight, which tipped the balance in favour of the hawks. By then, Thatcher *had* to fight, she had no choice politically (the point here is that the Argentine right wingers were just as ignorant of affairs in London as we were of affairs in BA, despite copious intelligence warnings).
My other point is that the Falklands is a triumph for the UN doctrine of self-determination, rather than 'spheres of influence' and other imperialist claptrap. If the people want to be British, they've got just as much right in Port Stanley as in Port Sunlight. Remember that next time you slag off the UN.
* Or 'brigades', for that matter.