DBWI: Would the United States have intervened in a war for the Falklands?

Enigmajones

Little known historical fact, in April of 1982, Argentina attacked the British arctic island of South Georgia. The Argentines apparently planned to take the island, but were defeated by the dispatched British ship from the Falklands. Apparently, the Argentines were edging to go war over the Falklands, but after South Georgia failed, the Junta government scrapped the whole invasion plan.

So here's my question, if Argentina invaded the Falklands in 1982, would the United States have intervened? And if so, on which side? Feel free to speculate on how the war would have worked out as well. Im not familiar with them, but they kind of look like the Faroes with British people.
 
Last edited:

MSZ

Banned
Well, it seems obvious to me that if they would intervene, it would be on the British side, with the 'special relationship' still going on, even if article 5 of NATO treaty technically didn't cover the Falklands. But I doubt their aid would even be necessary, the Royal Navy and RAF was a force much more capable than anything the Argentinians had - they would be able to deal with the junta by themselves.
 
Cymraeg

Cymraeg

Enigmajones said:
Little known historical fact, in April of 1982, Argentina attacked the British arctic island of South Georgia. The Argentines apparently planned to take the island, but were defeated by the dispatched British ship from the Falklands. Apparently, the Argentines were edging to go war over the Falklands, but after South Georgia failed, the Junta government scrapped the whole invasion plan.

So here's my question, if Argentina invaded the Falklands in 1982, would the United States have intervened? And if so, on which side? Feel free to speculate on how the war would have worked out as well. Im not familiar with them, but they kind of look like the Faroes with British people.
Click to expand...


Depends. Kirkpatrick was dementedly in favour of appeasing that group of blood-stained fascists. Weinberger on the other hand was very pro-British. I guess it all depends on how awake Ronnie was. US would be neutral if Kirkpatrick had anything to do with it, but neutral in an "oh-my-gosh-whatever-happened-to-those-containerships-full-of-Sparrow-missiles?" kind of way if Weinberger had anything to do with it.
 

Enigmajones

Im not very familiar with the Argentinian military of the period. Only thing I can think of was when they went to war with Chile in 87. But I don't know much about that conflict, I really need to buff up on my South American history.
 

d32123

Banned
I don't think we'd intervene simply because we wouldn't even have to. The British would completely and utterly curbstomp the Argies if they actually seriously attempted to invade the Falklands and they knew as much. There's a reason why they didn't actually attempt to pull it off.
 

Kooluk Swordsman

Has anyone noticed that Britain is 6000 miles away from the Falklands and was in a recession?

I don't see the Brits winning this one. They're not the British Empire anymore. Maybe they could have funded Chile more against the Argentine but that's about it.
 

Enigmajones

Kooluk Swordsman said:
Has anyone noticed that Britain is 6000 miles away from the Falklands and was in a recession?

I don't see the Brits winning this one. They're not the British Empire anymore. Maybe they could have funded Chile more against the Argentine but that's about it.
Click to expand...

Well if Argentina has the Falklands, I think the junta just bought its power for the next 20 years. I think Argentina would probably avoid going to war over Picton, Lennox and Nueva. Even if the initial raids on the islands did work, the border war was exhausting.
 
Plumber

Plumber

Yes, for Argentina. Reagan was a strong supporter of the Monroe Doctrine. He invaded Grenada, a Commonwealth country, because it was in the Western Hemisphere instead of running to Maggie.
d32123 said:
I don't think we'd intervene simply because we wouldn't even have to. The British would completely and utterly curbstomp the Argies if they actually seriously attempted to invade the Falklands and they knew as much. There's a reason why they didn't actually attempt to pull it off.
Click to expand...
Please. Since Suez, Britain has been a joke.
 

Gunnarnz

Plumber said:
Yes, for Argentina. Reagan was a strong supporter of the Monroe Doctrine. He invaded Grenada, a Commonwealth country, because it was in the Western Hemisphere instead of running to Maggie.
Click to expand...

Yes, this. Doesn't the Monroe doctrine effectively prevent any non-American power from conducting military operations in the Americas? If the British did fight for the Falklands, the Americans would have to oppose them if they wanted to retain any credibility at all.
 

corditeman

Don't under-rate either Maggie or Ronnie...

...Giving the Argies a bloody nose would avoid the Soviets thinking that they could invade Western Europe successfully. It took a near-war with Sweden in the Baltic to end Soviet adventurism. Britain would only need the tools to finish the job and incidentally keep Argentina and Chile from war. Brazil and Argentina nearly detonated experimental nukes - wasting resources fighting Britain would have done Ronnie's job for him by destabilising the Junta.
 

RandomChance

Argentinians invade, yanks don't intervene (or Britain fails), Michael Foot wins the following election and kicks the UK out of NATO and the Yanks out of the airbases In the UK, leaving the UK along side France, Switzerland and Finland as non-aligned.
 

Enigmajones

corditeman said:
...Giving the Argies a bloody nose would avoid the Soviets thinking that they could invade Western Europe successfully. It took a near-war with Sweden in the Baltic to end Soviet adventurism. Britain would only need the tools to finish the job and incidentally keep Argentina and Chile from war. Brazil and Argentina nearly detonated experimental nukes - wasting resources fighting Britain would have done Ronnie's job for him by destabilising the Junta.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you can really call the Karlskrona Incident as nearing war, but it certainly heightened tensions between NATO and WarPac. And I don't know what your talking about in regards to Reagan, its well known the only reason Argentina lasted so long was because of America's support after the South Georgia incident. Of course Ronnie left them high and dry after the Chileans pulled off that victory at Mendoza, but you could hardly say that Reagan wanted the Argentinians to fall.
 
Georgepatton

Georgepatton

Gunnarnz said:
Yes, this. Doesn't the Monroe doctrine effectively prevent any non-American power from conducting military operations in the Americas? If the British did fight for the Falklands, the Americans would have to oppose them if they wanted to retain any credibility at all.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's ever been used to let South American countries invade and seize territory occupied solely by Europeans, so no, I'm not buying that. We're better friends with the UK than Argentina, and one is certainly more important than the other in terms of the Soviet Union. We're going to throw away the anchor of the G-I-UK line to let a dumbass junta beat up British civilians because of the Monroe Doctrine? Not buying it. The extension of the junta's tender mercies to the British civilians in the Falklands is just the icing on the cake in this regard.
 

Devolved

Based on historical experience the US would stay neutral until the last few days of the war. Then they would show up with their fleet and accept the Argentine surrender and tell the world they won the war.

Then they would make a movie about US Marines landing on the Falklands and fighting heroically. It would go without saying that there wouldn't be a British Serviceman in sight.

I would guess Clint Eastwood would play the grizzled old US admiral who is haunted by the ghosts of his dead comrades in Vietnam. Before landing troops he thumps his desk and says "Goddam it Chuck can I really send good men to die so far away from Idaho?"

"Sure you can Jake" answers Chuck.

"I don't know if I can do it Chuck. I still see the faces of those boys we left behind in Nam. Kowalski, Ramirez, Hogan, Eriksson and Goldstein. I don't think I can go through that again."

"Yes you can Jake. I've known you since the Academy when you were a punk kid from the wrong side of town. I saw that punk kid grow into a fine officer and the finest goddmam Admiral in the US Navy. You know what you've gotta do"

"Damn it Chuck you're right. Send the boys in and let's give those Argie bastards hell"

Cue the 'Halls of Montezuma' sound track as the landing craft hit the beaches and the marines storm ashore.

As the battle ends Eastwood looks up at the sky and sees the faces of his dead comrades in Vietnam looking down. They are smiling and nodding their heads. Eastwood salutes them and the faces fade away.

Of course it's all speculation as the Falklands invasion was avoided .
 

Devolved

Georgepatton said:
Troll much, Devolved?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Ha ha. I'm just answering the OP. He did ask people to speculate.

OTL the Americans did make a Clint Eastwood film about a tiny little operation in Grenada so it's not a stretch to say they would do one about the Falklands too. I am also sure it would be laden with similar sentiments about burying the ghosts of Vietnam.

That would be one effect of a successful US intervention in a war in 1982. Not trolling:).
 

Enigmajones

Devolved said:
Ha ha. I'm just answering the OP. He did ask people to speculate.

OTL the Americans did make a Clint Eastwood film about a tiny little operation in Grenada so it's not a stretch to say they would do one about the Falklands too. I am also sure it would be laden with similar sentiments about burying the ghosts of Vietnam.

That would be one effect of a successful US intervention in a war in 1982. Not trolling:).
Click to expand...

Yes because the scenario you posited was similar to the last war that the US and the UK fought together right?:rolleyes:

Also Heartbreak Ridge was pretty good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top