[News] Margaret Thatcher Statue

[clapham_gull]

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/112603

 

[beorhthelm]

The US Naval Institute, link put on this thread earlier. What's your source for saying the negotiations over sovereignty never took place. I think this is the third or fourth time I've asked you now

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

i agreed there were negotiations, during the 1970's. i'm asking you for evidence there were ongoing negotiations in 1982. your source makes no such claim, and supports the argument the Argentine's were the instigators of the conflict.

 

[clapham_gull]

i agreed there were negotiations, during the 1970's. i'm asking you for evidence there were ongoing negotiations in 1982. your source makes no such claim, and supports the argument the Argentine's were the instigators of the conflict.

I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing, but Nicolas Ridley flew to Argentina in 1982 to discuss sovereignty and then flew onto the Falklands to discuss it with the islanders.

The Margaret Thatcher foundation (above) are happy to include a Times story on it's website as an historical document.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing, but Nicolas Ridley flew to Argentina in 1982 to discuss sovereignty and then flew onto the Falklands to discuss it with the islanders.

The Margaret Thatcher foundation (above) are happy to include a Times story on it's website as an historical document.

fair play to bring actual detail, though wasnt that in 1980, and he was sent back to London with a resounding no thankyou. as the article highlights, no agreement could be had without islanders agreement.

 

[clapham_gull]

fair play to bring actual detail, though wasnt that in 1980, and he was sent back to London with a resounding no thankyou. as the article highlights, no agreement could be had without islanders agreement.

I've read a lot around the issue (although forgotten most of it) because it's the thing that never really gets talked about.

The government at the time (and in private governments after) really wanted shot of the Falklands because of the expense. This was clearly picked up by the Argentinian Government (who played it wrong) and never in a million years did they suspect the UK would send a task force.

The government had already chipped a way at the Falklanders right to a UK passport.

I'm clearly of the belief that if such a **** up happened today, it would probably see the PM resign. The 80s were a different time.

I'm also of the belief that the government were as responsible for the invasion as the Argentinians.

 

[London Irish]

i agreed there were negotiations, during the 1970's. i'm asking you for evidence there were ongoing negotiations in 1982. your source makes no such claim, and supports the argument the Argentine's were the instigators of the conflict.

My original post said there had been negotiations over sovereignty between the UK and Argentina, to which you replied bollocks. Now you want to shift the goal posts to say there had to be negotiations right up to the invasion itself for my point to be true. You could just try and be a bit classier and withdraw the bollocks, you know?

 

[Comrade Sam]

I still occasionally remember she's no longer PM and smile. Then remember Boris is and return to despair.
No statue please.

 

[beorhthelm]

My original post said there had been negotiations over sovereignty between the UK and Argentina, to which you replied bollocks. Now you want to shift the goal posts to say there had to be negotiations right up to the invasion itself for my point to be true. You could just try and be a bit classier and withdraw the bollocks, you know?

i cant as you're confusing me for other poster. my whole point was objecting to you using some negotiations in years previous to justify the actions of Argentina to invade, and subjugate the people there.

 

[clapham_gull]

fair play to bring actual detail, though wasnt that in 1980, and he was sent back to London with a resounding no thankyou. as the article highlights, no agreement could be had without islanders agreement.

I typed the wrong year, yes it was 1980 however.....

That year leaseback and handover discussions took place in New York and Switzerland with the Argentinian Government. The agreed plan was to hand the Islands over to Argentina but for the UK to lease it back for 99 years and keep the British administration, albeit with both British AND Argentinian Flags being flown over public buildings.

The whole ruse was blown open by his visit to the Falklands....

The facts are simple and pretty undisputed. In the 80s leading up the invasion the UK was negotiating with Argentina to get rid of the Falklands.

The UK had opened the door and the Argentinians walked in.

Thatchers government won the war, but if it wasn't for them it wouldn't have started in the first place.

On the subject of the Falklands, personally I can only agree with "self determination" argument. The Falklands is not some colonial artifact, it's an oddity of history. Argentina has as much right to it as New Zealand.

I'd prefer that we didn't have to fork out millions in taxes to look after it but at the same time if your family has lived there for generations so be it.

I respect that, but Thatcher clearly didn't and tried to sell them the river. After realising her mistake she saw the opportunity to re-brand her self as a victorious general.

It's probably the single thing I dislike her most for.

 

[beorhthelm]

The facts are simple and pretty undisputed. In the 80s leading up the invasion the UK was negotiating with Argentina to get rid of the Falklands.

The UK had opened the door and the Argentinians walked in.

Thatchers government won the war, but if it wasn't for them it wouldn't have started in the first place.

the detail of how long they negotiated does seem to be in dispute. accept the government may rather not continued with the territory, but the Falkanders were adamant on remaining British, so there was stalemate. in the end it was the Argentines that started the conflict, open doors, signals or whatever.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I've read a lot around the issue (although forgotten most of it) because it's the thing that never really gets talked about.

The government at the time (and in private governments after) really wanted shot of the Falklands because of the expense. This was clearly picked up by the Argentinian Government (who played it wrong) and never in a million years did they suspect the UK would send a task force.

The government had already chipped a way at the Falklanders right to a UK passport.

I'm clearly of the belief that if such a **** up happened today, it would probably see the PM resign. The 80s were a different time.

I'm also of the belief that the government were as responsible for the invasion as the Argentinians.

What, Boris?

No chance.

 

[Bodian]

Indeed. It was worse than that, actually.

The Argies had been mobilising their fleet on a regular basis. It was a way for the generals (the dictatorship) to keep the people onside - 'we shall retake the Malvinas, don't worry about the oppression'.

When Callaghan was PM, he was regularly briefed about Argie boat movements. We had a ship on standby that would easily reach the Falklands before the Argies. It was used several times, and the Argies just slunk back home. Didn't even make the news (it was kept quite for obvious reasons).

When Thatcher got in she regarded the Argie dictators as a bulwark against communism. She was briefed several weeks before the invasion but refused to do anything against her 'allies', refusing to believe it was a real invasion.

Was it our own (Shoreham's anyway) Richard Luce who withdrew the HMS Endurance, which basically led to the invasion?

 

[clapham_gull]

the detail of how long they negotiated does seem to be in dispute. accept the government may rather not continued with the territory, but the Falkanders were adamant on remaining British, so there was stalemate. in the end it was the Argentines that started the conflict, open doors, signals or whatever.

That's a very generous to the Government at the time.

Extensive negotiations had taken place (both in Europe and Argentina) with the Falklanders being left in the dark.

"Stalemate",er ok.... They weren't involved.

It's like placing all your prized possessions in the road outside your house, setting up floodlights to advertise the fact and going to bed. You can exclusively blame those who took them for your loss but history will judge you the same.

Equally at fault, just like Thatcher.





Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

[The Clamp]

To use the famous qute from Göring, who was by no means a good person but knew a thing or two about persuading people into war:

“Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

Saying that war is about "defending beliefs and values" is laughable. Its the argument leaders use, but nearly all of the time - throughout history - these argument just turn out to be excuses, with the real goal being to expand the borders or grab natural resources.

But hey, who can blame them. The mainstream never learn to question authority despite endless proof that it should be quite wise to do so. The most important lesson learnt from history is that people doesnt learn from history.

History - The same shit happening to different people.

 

[GT49er]

My original post said there had been negotiations over sovereignty between the UK and Argentina, to which you replied bollocks.

No he didn't.

PS. I note you are now correctly stating there 'had been' some discussions, but not ongoing negotiations, and certainly not in 1982. No agreement had been reached (in fact any such idea had been democratically rejected by the Falkland islanders, and discussions were ended), the British making it clear that they honoured their commitment to the islanders.
The Argies then thought for some very mistaken reason that they might get away with a bit of naked aggressive military imperialism. Big mistake - cost a lot of lives.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Was it our own (Shoreham's anyway) Richard Luce who withdrew the HMS Endurance, which basically led to the invasion?

Could be. Dunno. It was on Thatcher's watch, though. Commander in a chieftan, in white fatigues. There was a picture.

 

[Bodian]

Could be. Dunno. It was on Thatcher's watch, though. Commander in a chieftan, in white fatigues. There was a picture.

Indeed - on Thatcher's watch. I seem to to also remember 'Richard Luce - blood of Lebanon on your hands' painted on the fence at Hove Park just up from the Goldstone for many years. They were an odious bunch of sh1ts at that time weren't they.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Indeed - on Thatcher's watch. I seem to to also remember 'Richard Luce - blood of Lebanon on your hands' painted on the fence at Hove Park just up from the Goldstone for many years. They were an odious bunch of sh1ts at that time weren't they.

To be fair to the Thatcher gang they were all high as kites on the fresh blood of newly savaged organised labour.

Like council estate kids on a binge of Jessup Jessup and Clarkey Cat, it was never going to end well.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Ifs, buts and maybes. She wouldn’t have been elected if......so many ons and offs....but the fact is she was elected to be your, our, PM on three occasions.

On the unions, quite a few industries did the same. Newspapers. Whatever, I have extensive knowledge of unions. I am not surprised at all that she had to go down the route she did.

I’m well aware she was elected three times. It doesn’t mean she was universally popular!!

Extensive knowledge of unions from what point of view. As a lifelong and (I like to think, reasonable) trade union member, I would agree that the Trade Unions were too strong in the 1970s. IN MY VIEW, she took it too far the other way, in a nasty vindictive way. Anyone with any sense, though, could see that the Government and the Trade Unions at that point were never going to be able to sit down and talk about it. I did an MBA many years ago where in one of the modules a short case study was about the miners strike and comparing Arthur Scargill and the then chair of the Coal Board, Ian MacGregor, the point being they were never going to agree given their backgrounds.

 

[Chicken Run]

I typed the wrong year, yes it was 1980 however.....

That year leaseback and handover discussions took place in New York and Switzerland with the Argentinian Government. The agreed plan was to hand the Islands over to Argentina but for the UK to lease it back for 99 years and keep the British administration, albeit with both British AND Argentinian Flags being flown over public buildings.

The whole ruse was blown open by his visit to the Falklands....

The facts are simple and pretty undisputed. In the 80s leading up the invasion the UK was negotiating with Argentina to get rid of the Falklands.

The UK had opened the door and the Argentinians walked in.

Thatchers government won the war, but if it wasn't for them it wouldn't have started in the first place.

On the subject of the Falklands, personally I can only agree with "self determination" argument. The Falklands is not some colonial artifact, it's an oddity of history. Argentina has as much right to it as New Zealand.

I'd prefer that we didn't have to fork out millions in taxes to look after it but at the same time if your family has lived there for generations so be it.

I respect that, but Thatcher clearly didn't and tried to sell them the river. After realising her mistake she saw the opportunity to re-brand her self as a victorious general.

It's probably the single thing I dislike her most for.

These talks you describe were enforced by the UN in 1965, see below

In 1965, the United Nations passed a resolution calling on the UK and Argentina to proceed with negotiations on finding a peaceful solution to the sovereignty question which would be "bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations and of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)."

A series of talks between the two nations took place over the next 17 years until 1981, but failed to reach a conclusion on sovereignty