An alternate Falklands war- what is the fallout?

Archon of Thessaly

At the news of of the Argentinian invasion of the Falklands, many senior Naval chiefs said that an armed response would be impossible. They said the distance was too large, the navy was too weak thanks to government cutbacks and that the Argentinian aircraft would take out the flotilla- which it nearly did.
Indeed, many US, Argentinian and UK officials, press and commanders were surprised that Thatcher was going to attempt it at all!
Of coarse, thanks the Army " Yompers", the special forces, the navy, air force and merchant navy the UK did the impossible and recaptured port Stanley- securing Thatchers next term.

But suppose the flottila was intercepted and destroyed, that invasion force was met by heavy resistance as it landed, that the weather deteriorated, that the unexploded bombs did explode and the Aircraft carriers were sunk, the attempt would fail. I doubt Maggie would survive such a disarster, the Argentinians would get there demands met, and Britain would be humiliated and isolated. But what would the long term consequences be if the the impossible was indeed impossible.....
 

Drunken_Soviet

The most probable long-term effects is that the British Army and Royal Navy suffer international humiliation, and people will lean towards a far-left party (As Miss Thatcher was a Conservative Party member which is a Right-Wing party), either that or there is a possibility of a Military Coup in London thus turning the UK into a Military Dictatorship.

Also Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina will become very hostile, also the Infamous "Hand of God" by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup match between england and Argentina will only sour the reations and may incite a riot between england and Argentina fans.

And finally sooner or later, war will erupt again between the UK and Argentina, with a potential invasion of Argentina itself.
 
Noravea

Noravea

Drunken_Soviet said:
The most probable long-term effects is that the British Army and Royal Navy suffer international humiliation, and people will lean towards a far-left party (As Miss Thatcher was a Conservative Party member which is a Right-Wing party), either that or there is a possibility of a Military Coup in London thus turning the UK into a Military Dictatorship.

Also Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina will become very hostile, also the Infamous "Hand of God" by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup match between england and Argentina will only sour the reations and may incite a riot between england and Argentina fans.

And finally sooner or later, war will erupt again between the UK and Argentina, with a potential invasion of Argentina itself.
Click to expand...

That part is largely impossible.
 

Astrodragon

Drunken_Soviet said:
The most probable long-term effects is that the British Army and Royal Navy suffer international humiliation, and people will lean towards a far-left party (As Miss Thatcher was a Conservative Party member which is a Right-Wing party), either that or there is a possibility of a Military Coup in London thus turning the UK into a Military Dictatorship.

Also Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina will become very hostile, also the Infamous "Hand of God" by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup match between england and Argentina will only sour the reations and may incite a riot between england and Argentina fans.

And finally sooner or later, war will erupt again between the UK and Argentina, with a potential invasion of Argentina itself.
Click to expand...


Can we have some of what you are smoking, please? All your suggestions are ASB.

Assuming a (highly unlikely) military defeat, Britain is hardly going to move to a left-wing government who are FAR more likley to reduce the armed forces?

A military coup because of a loss in battle? Please....

It would be very very difficult for Britain to lose the campaign (as opposed to it becoming a stalemate) as the Argentines have no way of countering the RN nuclear boats.
 

zoomar

Drunken_Soviet said:
The most probable long-term effects is that the British Army and Royal Navy suffer international humiliation, and people will lean towards a far-left party (As Miss Thatcher was a Conservative Party member which is a Right-Wing party), either that or there is a possibility of a Military Coup in London thus turning the UK into a Military Dictatorship.

Also Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina will become very hostile, also the Infamous "Hand of God" by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup match between england and Argentina will only sour the reations and may incite a riot between england and Argentina fans.

And finally sooner or later, war will erupt again between the UK and Argentina, with a potential invasion of Argentina itself.
Click to expand...

Wow! Everything from a military dictatorship in Britain, to soccer riots, and a British invasion of Argentina itself. Why not have aliens attack while you are at it.

Britain is humiliated and devolves even more quickly into a very junior partner in the atlantic alliance, Thatcher is ousted (legally, not in a coup), and people in the Falklands have to learn Spanish. That's probably it.
 

jamsodonnell

Assuming this scenario plays out then Thatcher's time as PM would be a lot shorter. Views on her time in Number 10 would would be less divided - most people would consider her premiership as a disaster.

William Whitlelaw would take over as interim PM. Not sure he would be elected leader of the Conservative Party though. come the next general election - in 1983 or 1984 - the Tories would be out. The disaster might give impetus to the Liberals and SDP but not enough to give them power. Labour would probably do better than they did in 1983 but I can't see them regaining enough ground to get back into power in their own right (The party really was a mess at the time). Possibly a Liberal/SDP/Labour coalition would take power. Not sure how long it would last though.

No idea jow long it would take for the Tories to recover but they certainly will in due course
 

jamsodonnell

Drunken_Soviet said:
The most probable long-term effects is that the British Army and Royal Navy suffer international humiliation, and people will lean towards a far-left party (As Miss Thatcher was a Conservative Party member which is a Right-Wing party), either that or there is a possibility of a Military Coup in London thus turning the UK into a Military Dictatorship.

Also Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina will become very hostile, also the Infamous "Hand of God" by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup match between england and Argentina will only sour the reations and may incite a riot between england and Argentina fans.

And finally sooner or later, war will erupt again between the UK and Argentina, with a potential invasion of Argentina itself.
Click to expand...

Absolutely no chance of a military coup.
 
Petike

Petike

Drunken_Soviet said:
The most probable long-term effects is that the British Army and Royal Navy suffer international humiliation, and people will lean towards a far-left party (As Miss Thatcher was a Conservative Party member which is a Right-Wing party), either that or there is a possibility of a Military Coup in London thus turning the UK into a Military Dictatorship.

Also Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina will become very hostile, also the Infamous "Hand of God" by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup match between england and Argentina will only sour the reations and may incite a riot between england and Argentina fans.

And finally sooner or later, war will erupt again between the UK and Argentina, with a potential invasion of Argentina itself.
Click to expand...

:D :D :D

N00b, n00b ! Get him a beer ! Get him a beer ! :D
 

Astrodragon

Archon of Thessaly said:
At the news of of the Argentinian invasion of the Falklands, many senior Naval chiefs said that an armed response would be impossible. They said the distance was too large, the navy was too weak thanks to government cutbacks and that the Argentinian aircraft would take out the flotilla- which it nearly did.
Indeed, many US, Argentinian and UK officials, press and commanders were surprised that Thatcher was going to attempt it at all!
Of coarse, thanks the Army " Yompers", the special forces, the navy, air force and merchant navy the UK did the impossible and recaptured port Stanley- securing Thatchers next term.

But suppose the flottila was intercepted and destroyed, that invasion force was met by heavy resistance as it landed, that the weather deteriorated, that the unexploded bombs did explode and the Aircraft carriers were sunk, the attempt would fail. I doubt Maggie would survive such a disarster, the Argentinians would get there demands met, and Britain would be humiliated and isolated. But what would the long term consequences be if the the impossible was indeed impossible.....
Click to expand...

First, the UK military never told the government action was impossible, just difficult.

Second, just how are the Argentines going to 'destroy' the RN task force? They arent. Assuming that somehoe they miraculously improve their attack to seriously damage it, it just pulls back (the TF was comitted well before the troops got close).

The weather (at least at sea) was pretty bad (normal for the area and season) anyway, I'm not sure how its supposed to get much worse? In any case, poor weather hits the only way the Argentines have of attacking, their air force. Again, I'm unclear as to what magical method is used to sink the carriers (Hermes in particular was a WW2 design, and TOUGH). In the longer term, the USA was (unofficially) looking at selling the UK at least one older carrier. With planes. Amazing what makes it onto the govenment-surplus market...

But lets assume that somehow the TF is forced to withdraw. It isnt that humiliating in international terms, no-one except the US was considered to be able to project power that far. The most likely outcome is strenthening of the fleet by Britain, the ruining of Argentine trade and economy, and a new TF next year.
You dont seem to understand the British thinking, Thatcher was FAR more likely to have been pushed out if she hadn't attempted the TF, than in sending it and having it fail. Britain is used to losing the first battles and winning the last ones.
 

MrwBrightside

Banned
What's the assumption that the Conservatives lose the election? They would most likely win a second term given how divided and unpopular Labour were at the time, under Michael Foot.
 
juanml82

juanml82

Astrodragon said:
Again, I'm unclear as to what magical method is used to sink the carriers (Hermes in particular was a WW2 design, and TOUGH).
Click to expand...
It's called 'bombs'. But, in any case, the UK still has other options. They can call the French and American for help (with their more powerful CVBGs), they can maintain a naval blockade of the islands with their subs. They can even ask the locals to leave their towns and retort to chemical weapons.
 
AlfieJ

AlfieJ

MrwBrightside said:
What's the assumption that the Conservatives lose the election? They would most likely win a second term given how divided and unpopular Labour were at the time, under Michael Foot.
Click to expand...

I would like to see what would happen to the alliance with both other parties in such a state...
 

LostCosmonaut

juanml82 said:
They can even ask the locals to leave their towns and retort to chemical weapons.
Click to expand...

While they could do this, I very much doubt that the British would be willing to break out the WMDs over the Falklands. That'd be a good way to get everyone (including possibly the Americans) pissed at them.
 

jamsodonnell

MrwBrightside said:
What's the assumption that the Conservatives lose the election? They would most likely win a second term given how divided and unpopular Labour were at the time, under Michael Foot.
Click to expand...

In 1981 and early 82 the Tories weren't doing well in the opinion polls either. Before the falklands they were in third place in opinion polls behind the Alliance and Labour. A defeat in the Falklands would hardly give them the boost that a victory did!

Labour were a shower at the time, that is true and while a large increase in Allince fortunes in the aftermath of defeat would give them an increased presence in parliament it would not be anywhere near enough to gain power.

A Lab Alliance coalition would be interesting as in "interesting times". It would not be an easy coalition but I cant see the Alliance entering into a coalition with a party that would be as disgraced as the tories would be post defeat.
 

MrwBrightside

Banned
Yes, but every governing parties struggles in the polls before a general election, especially with a troubled economy. Labour committed suicide in '83, I don't see how a failed Falklands War would affect this.
 

zoomar

Astrodragon said:
But lets assume that somehow the TF is forced to withdraw. It isnt that humiliating in international terms, no-one except the US was considered to be able to project power that far. The most likely outcome is strenthening of the fleet by Britain, the ruining of Argentine trade and economy, and a new TF next year.
You dont seem to understand the British thinking, Thatcher was FAR more likely to have been pushed out if she hadn't attempted the TF, than in sending it and having it fail. Britain is used to losing the first battles and winning the last ones.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree, but I think you underestimate what the world's perception would be. In 1980, it would have been almost unthinkable to people outside of Britain that the vaunted Royal Navy could not retake the Falklands with ease. I think many people were shocked that the Argentines had the success they did in sinking and damaging several warships. It was a close thing, and had even one of the full-deck carriers been damaged and put out of action, the TF would probably had to withdraw. If this happened, the US (which was placed in the somewhat awkward spot of diplomatically and logistically supporting Britain against another nominal ally in Argentina) would probably have pushed for a negotiated resolution and informed Thatcher than US support for another attempt would not be forthcoming.
 

The Red

Narrow Labour victory in 1984, probably with a low vote share. The Alliance will do considerably better than OTL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top