31 Years Ago Today The Sheffield Was Destroyed

[PaulBee]

I understand why some are concerned about this topic being raised. My personal view is that the Malvinas are constantly mentioned anyway, so I´ll look at the pics with interest.
If I may go on a tangent: 31 years after the war over these little islands, Argentina is constantly mentioning and wanting to negotiate ownership. In contrast, within
a couple of years of WW2, nobody that I´ve heard of was debating over which lands should be Axis and which should be Allied.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

I have to agree that it was a bless that the AR navy (Massera) was defeated during the war of the south atlantic. Some of the comments are accurate, it was improvised by a bunch of idiots who thought they were more powerful than god.
The military lost the prestige that they used to have and it allow democracy to arise.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Maybe, but then the stakes would have been much higher. Before the Falklands conflict, Brazil and Argentina were in a state of "cold war", if you will. One of the imagined scenarios in which this could war would have turned 'hot" would have been an Argentinian "land grab" move towards Chile. Maybe the Argentinian military would have felt emboldened had they beaten the British, but they would still be contemplating a two front war against Chile, Brazil and Brazil's puppet state at the time, Paraguay.

There's lots of speculation when we're working with counterfactual history, but the Argentine military's perspective was about as myopic as possible - they probably wouldn't have thought far enough ahead to consider Brazil (which then had pretty good relations with Pinocho's Chile).

 

[ghost]

Argentina could never have "won" this "war"! Are we forgetting that Mrs Thatcher had allies. ???????

 

[Matiasba]

Actually most of South America should be grateful. It was very much a domino effect after the fall of Galtieri, with Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay and Chile following right after. Had the junta prevailed during the war, the fall of the dictatorships would have taken much longer, with the process probably beginning with the end of the cold war, instead of almost a decade sooner.

The military governments in South America finished when almost the URSS was finished. That was their purpose. Bolivia 1982, Uruguay and Brazil 1985, Paraguay and Chile 1989.

 

[Matiasba]

Argentina could never have "won" this "war"! Are we forgetting that Mrs Thatcher had allies. ???????

There were no chances at all.

 

[cbonanni]

I have heard from several Brasilians that they were very nervous regarding Argentina and a possible invasion. They also said much of that worry came from the fact that Brasil barley had enough ammunition to last a week. Regarding Chile , the Andes have worked as a barrier for peace very well.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

During the 70's the strategy of the extreme left and right was ti kill prominent leaders. When they were dead, they continue with inteligent people. That s how this bunch of idiots become the leaders of the 3 forces.

 

[camberiu]

The military governments in South America finished when almost the URSS was finished. That was their purpose. Bolivia 1982, Uruguay and Brazil 1985, Paraguay and Chile 1989.

I was living in Brazil at the time. It was the fall of the junta in Argentina that triggered the the fall of the military dictatorship in Brazil in 1984, which called for elections in 1985. That triggered also the changes in Uruguay. With the fall of the military dictatorship in Brazil, Strossner of Paraguay had no political leg to stand on and eventually felt too. This emboldened the democratic movement in Chile.

 

[camberiu]

Argentina could never have "won" this "war"! Are we forgetting that Mrs Thatcher had allies. ???????

it is not that simple. There were many more variables than you are considering.
The UK was not fighting Argentina from a position of strength, and their military situation was very precarious. The British supply lines and navy were stretched to the breaking point. had the Argentians used their submarine torpedoes correctly or had more Exocet missiles, the British would have lost lots of ships really fast and the position of the fleet would have been unsustainable. Their only option then would be to try for a direct attack on continental Argentina. However, at that time, Brazil's military ruler, General Joao Figueiredo, had already called Ronald Reagan and warned that although the Brits were free to slaughter the Argentinians in the Islands and the ocean, any direct British attack on continental Argentina would have been considered an attack on Brazil itself, and Brazil would enter the conflict on the side of Argentina.
The US would then be facing a bleak prospect of having both Brazil and Argentina confront its greatest ally and very potentially fall into the Soviet sphere of influence.

This was a very complex game of geo-political power and not nearly as simple as many people think.