Dutch spies helped GCHQ break Argentine crypto during Falklands War

Glue_Sniffer

Old-Salt
War time propaganda has long been effective in "dehumanizing" the other group of people.

Political leaders often start wars to distract from domestic problems.
Although in the case of the Falklands, I believe the British government was more motivated by Antarctic region oil and gas deposits.
 
War time propaganda has long been effective in "dehumanizing" the other group of people.

Political leaders often start wars to distract from domestic problems.
Although in the case of the Falklands, I believe the British government was more motivated by Antarctic region oil and gas deposits.
I think they were more motivated by the need to liberate 2000 British subjects who had been illegally invaded by a Facist Military dictatorship who had tortured and murdered thousands of their own citizens since 1976. A bit of an old fashioned concept I know. Especially for a Marxist.
 

Glue_Sniffer

Old-Salt
I think they were more motivated by the need to liberate 2000 British subjects who had been illegally invaded by a Facist Military dictatorship who had tortured and murdered thousands of their own citizens since 1976. A bit of an old fashioned concept I know. Especially for a Marxist.
Well maybe the oil was just an additional bonus. Either way, allowing the Argentinean invasion was a massive failure of deterrence. The British were also lucky to win that conflict. It was a massive gamble by both sides.
I've explained my understanding of Marxism, but I haven't said I agree with the ideology.
 
Well maybe the oil was just an additional bonus. Either way, allowing the Argentinean invasion was a massive failure of deterrence. The British were also lucky to win that conflict. It was a massive gamble by both sides.
I've explained my understanding of Marxism, but I haven't said I agree with the ideology.
The Argie invasion was indeed a failure of deterrence, but to let it go unchecked would've been a greater failure of upholding international law and an encouragement to other belligerents.
 

Glue_Sniffer

Old-Salt
What were the alternatives to the Falklands War?

Possibly a negotiated evacuation of the island's population and helping them to resettle in the UK, or NZ etc. Wouldn't cost much for only 2000 people.
This could have avoided much bloodshed. But possibly looked like a defeat for the British government. Would it have lost them the election? Maybe.

I think the truth is that a lot of the British population are more than happy to sit at home cheering on a war on the TV, safe in the knowledge that they will not be harmed by it.
 
What were the alternatives to the Falklands War?

Possibly a negotiated evacuation of the island's population and helping them to resettle in the UK, or NZ etc. Wouldn't cost much for only 2000 people.
This could have avoided much bloodshed. But possibly looked like a defeat for the British government. Would it have lost them the election? Maybe.

I think the truth is that a lot of the British population are more than happy to sit at home cheering on a war on the TV, safe in the knowledge that they will not be harmed by it.
I think a lot of British people make the assumption that if a Fascist army annexes their home town at gun point, their Government will send in the armed forces pronto to teach the cheeky ******* a lesson in basic principles of decent behaviour.


Just 'cos it's 9000 miles away, Port Stanley is no less British than, say, Dover.


Arguably more so.
 
Well maybe the oil was just an additional bonus. Either way, allowing the Argentinean invasion was a massive failure of deterrence. The British were also lucky to win that conflict. It was a massive gamble by both sides.
I've explained my understanding of Marxism, but I haven't said I agree with the ideology.
Despite the Jingoism of Spring 1982, the Government was, until then, quite calmly contemplating scenarios in which the non democratic, semi Fascist Argentine Government would take over the FI, and screw the islanders.


That's governments for you.
 

Glue_Sniffer

Old-Salt
I think a lot of British people make the assumption that if a Fascist army annexes their home town at gun point, their Government will send in the armed forces pronto to teach the cheeky ******* a lesson in basic principles of decent behaviour.


Just 'cos it's 9000 miles away, Port Stanley is no less British than, say, Dover.


Arguably more so.
I'd rather they peacefully negotiated my freedom.
The Falklands War was unusual in the lack of civilian casualties.
Statistically, there was a high chance those civilians could have been killed.
 
Despite the Jingoism of Spring 1982, the Government was, until then, quite calmly contemplating scenarios in which the non democratic, semi Fascist Argentine Government would take over the FI, and screw the islanders.


That's governments for you.
There's a distinct difference between seduction and rape in politics as everywhere else.

If you've finished your refreshment and thinking of departing the establishment and someone is eyeing your table, you may feel inclined to make haste and offer it up, but if they stomp over and tell you your time's up now fcuk off, you may feel differently.
 
I'd rather they peacefully negotiated my freedom.
The Falklands War was unusual in the lack of civilian casualties.
Statistically, there was a high chance those civilians could have been killed.
Statistically, there was a high chance that any opponents of a repressive government would learn they couldn't fly when they fell out of helicopters.
 

yank_eyetie

Old-Salt
Common knowledge, Thatcher and Pinochet were always allies.
From wiki
Relationship with the United Kingdom
Chile was officially neutral during the Falklands War, but Chile's Westinghouse long-range radar that was deployed in the south of the country gave the British task force early warning of Argentinian air attacks. This allowed British ships and troops in the war zone to take defensive action.[100] Margaret Thatcher, the British prime minister at the time of the war, said that the day the radar was taken out of service for overdue maintenance was the day Argentinian fighter-bombers bombed the troopships Sir Galahad and Sir Tristram, leaving 53 dead and many injured. According to Chilean Junta member and former Air Force commander, General Fernando Matthei, Chilean support included military intelligence gathering, radar surveillance, allowing British aircraft to operate with Chilean colours, and facilitating the safe return of British special forces, among other forms of assistance.[101]

In April and May 1982, a squadron of mothballed British Hawker Hunter fighter-bombers departed for Chile, arriving on 22 May and allowing the Chilean Air Force to reform the No. 9 "Las Panteras Negras" Squadron. A further consignment of three frontier surveillance and shipping reconnaissance Canberras left for Chile in October. Some authors have speculated that Argentina might have won the war had the military felt able to employ the elite VIth and VIIIth Mountain Brigades, which remained sitting in the Andes guarding against possible Chilean incursions.[102] Pinochet subsequently visited the UK on more than one occasion.[103] Pinochet's controversial relationship with Thatcher led Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair to mock Thatcher's Conservatives as "the party of Pinochet" in 1999.
I knew a builder who was originally from Chile. He was livid when Pinochet was arrested because, in 1982, he was a conscript in the Chilean Army stationed in the Southern part of the country. He told me that they were mobilized and ready to attack Argentina to help the UK.
 
Statistically, there was a high chance that any opponents of a repressive government would learn they couldn't fly when they fell out of helicopters.
Especially when they were all chained together. It made swimming very difficult even if they had been able to fly.
 
I'd rather they peacefully negotiated my freedom.
The Falklands War was unusual in the lack of civilian casualties.
Statistically, there was a high chance those civilians could have been killed.
Statistically? Enlighten us please.
 
War time propaganda has long been effective in "dehumanizing" the other group of people.

Political leaders often start wars to distract from domestic problems.
Although in the case of the Falklands, I believe the British government was more motivated by Antarctic region oil and gas deposits.
Firstly Britain didn't start anything.
Secondly Argentina invaded because they wanted to distract from the problems at home
Thirdly, although seismic data goes back to the 50's , the first exploratory wells weren't dug until 1998!
Lastly the Falklands are a crown dependency, with a Govenor who is the Queen's representative, who was at the time protected by a small detachment of Royal Marines. All of these came under an unprovoked attack on April 2nd 1982, by a country run by a military Junta.
What do you think the British government should have done?
 

Latest Threads

Top