Yup, the war was as absurd as it could possibly be. The Operacion Rosario, the invasion of the Islands, was planned to end by April 4/5 1982 and in fact the special operation units that first landed on the Islands and took part on the skirmish with the 68 or so Royal Marines returned to the continent by that date and never returned. The 3 objective were fulfilled neutralize the garrison, raise the flag, call the UK to sit down for real negotiations. There were only 3 people who really knew why the Junta decided to stay and send more forces there and all of'em are dead by now. Crazy.
The short story: Argentine believes the UK is a threat to its interests in the South Atlantic and that's why there's a conflict.
The little longer story:
It is true the current Argentine government, in its vulgar display of incompetence, barks and employs a harsh rhetoric, but it's just that, noise, BS, just like the mercopress stuff. Fact is, the Islands are supplied and connected to the continent with Argentine authorization. You can go to Rio Gallegos and take a LAN flight to Mt Pleasant. However, during the last 3 decades there were a number of real situations with the UK military. This sole example serves to illustrate the point: On July 25, 1988 an Argentine navy L 188 Electra, identified as 6-P-102 ( Transport aircraft used for maritime patrol/fishing control ) took off from Rio Grande runway with then vice governor of Chubut , Juan Carlos Altuna on board. Its final destination was the city of Trelew. At 53[sup]0[/sup]12" S, 65[sup]0[/sup]50" it was intercepted by two RAF Phantoms ( XV240B & XV 495C) that escorted the flight for about 12 minutes before returning to Mt Pleasant. Situations like this one repeated later on, until relatively recently. Feel free to verify if every bit of this is true.
Going back to the cause of the conflict, let's agree on this: you have a conflict as the result of a choice you've made. Countries, just like people, can choose to dispute something or not, usually when there's a perception that an interest is at stake. There are a number of documents about that help understand what is the Argentine view, some are still classified but this is a good one that makes the point.
II Parte - Antecedentes del conflicto
Capítulo I - Situación general
Ámbito geoestratégico
9. La importancia del Atlántico Sur desde el punto de vista estratégico no se deriva de los recursos renovables o no renovables, reales o potenciales que pudiere ofrecer, sino que ella proviene de su tráfico marítimo, ya que más de 200.000 barcos surcan sus aguas por año, enarbolando banderas de numerosos países, pero particularmente de Europa Occidental.
10. Dentro de este tráfico marítimo, hay uno de especial relevancia estratégica: el transporte de crudo. Aproximadamente el 80% del petróleo que abastece a Europa occidental desde el Golfo Pérsico y el 40% de las importaciones de los EE.UU. recorren las aguas del Atlántico Sur por la vía de la Ciudad del Cabo, en búsqueda de los puertos del Hemisferio Norte.
11. De este tráfico mencionado, sólo una pequeña parte lo hace por la ruta del Pasaje Drake y la región del conflicto austral. Pero, teniendo en cuenta que la totalidad del tráfico marítimo de nuestro país debe necesariamente cruzar las aguas del Atlántico Sur, en su ruta a puertos de ultramar, donde se colocan nuestras exportaciones y se obtienen los insumos básicos para la industria nacional, puede afirmarse que el control de esas vías de comunicación asume un rol vital para la Nación.
12. Al respecto, el control de los pasos interoceánicos del Cono Sur puede llegar a asumir una importancia significativa en caso de un conflicto regional o mundial que pudiese afectar al Canal de Panamá, vía de comunicación marítima vital entre el Pacífico y el Atlántico, cuyo tráfico se vería así derivado al Estrecho de Magallanes, el Canal de Beagle y, particularmente, el Pasaje Drake.
13. La presencia de una potencia ajena a la región, ocupando política y militarmente los archipiélagos australes motivo del conflicto del Atlántico Sur, junto a su actitud agresiva que lesiona las aspiraciones de la República Argentina sobre esos territorios, adquiere, de esta forma, una proyección de enorme trascendencia sobre objetivos permanentes de la Nación, cercena su integridad territorial, condiciona sus vías esenciales de comunicación y estratégicamente el equilibrio de poder en el Cono Sur del Continente.
Sources: http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/component/content/article/108-gobierno-informa/25773-informe-rattenbach
http://www.cescem.org.ar/informe_rattenbach/parte2_capitulo01_02.html
Whether you like it or not, accept it or not, this is why there's a conflict between the UK and Argentina over the Islands and it won't be solved until these concerns are properly addressed.
Yall have a nice one.
