Reply With QuoteFrom recollection, prior to the Falklands the US had been on a diplomatic push in South America. Kirkpatrick(?) was very keen on not throwing that away.
Reagan tried to halt Falklands response
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/...lands-response
Interesting stance from Reagan.The papers detail how Thatcher urgently sought US President Ronald Reagan's support when Argentina's intentions became clear, and reveal Thatcher's exasperation with Reagan when he suggested that Britain negotiate rather than demand total Argentinian withdrawal.
The documents describe an unusual late night phone call from Reagan to Thatcher on May 31, 1982 - while British forces were beginning the battle for control of the Falklands capital - in which the president pressed the prime minister to consider putting the islands in the hands of international peacekeepers rather than press for a total Argentinian surrender.
Reagan's considerable personal charm failed on this occasion.
Thatcher, in full "Iron Lady" mode, told the president she was sure he would take the same dim view of international mediation if Alaska had been taken by a foe.
"The Prime Minister stressed that Britain had not lost precious lives in battle and sent an enormous Task Force to hand over the Queen's Islands (the Falklands) immediately to a contact group," says the memo produced the next morning by Thatcher's private secretary. She told the president there was "no alternative" to surrender and re-establishment of full British control.
From recollection, prior to the Falklands the US had been on a diplomatic push in South America. Kirkpatrick(?) was very keen on not throwing that away.
He was probably keen to prop up the right wing Junta in Argentina. It was still the Cold War and while despicable regimes the Juntas across South America kept the Communists out. Reagan would have rightly seen the humiliation of total defeat in the Falklands as being the end of the Argentine Junta which could possibly be replaced by a Soviet Union friendly government.
Ronnie was never at his best when "awoken." If he was sleeping, I'm not surprised he was less then diplomatic.
I thought this was kinda suspected for a while now? I recall mentioning during talks of the great alliance that this was a thorny spot
Likewise, the Brits weren't happy with the whole Grenada situation
A fight between close and important allies. Not an easy pick. Especially with the case of Argentina that could have gone bad damaging huge US interests in South America. I'm sure the junta got a few very hot phone calls from the White House.
Mrs. Thatcher was one hell of a woman. The US could use a leader like her.
No, Mrs. Clinton doesn't come close.
her biggest mistake was allowing the poll tax be first endured here in Scotland .. which brought much resentment .. as well a few others ..Originally Posted by seraosha
Don't get me started on the Hillerybeast.
Good thing Reagan gave them those AIM-9L's, Satelitte Imagery and refueling facilities, training up SAS on their US provided Stingers and getting the LPH USS Iwo Jima ready for RN use if they lost a carrier
http://news.usni.org/news-analysis/n...alklands-war-0
Frankly doesnt surprise me that the Administration would look to peaceful ends first, but I suppose since most think Reagan was a Bloodthirsty cowboy it's a shock to hear he was willing to help explore peaceful reconciliation. and add to that Kilpatrick was pro Argentina versus most of the other cabinet members.
Economically?
Caspar Weinberger, unlike Reagan, was from day 1 in favor of helping the British Forces.
That's some wonderful writing.The newly public documents also reveal an extraordinary draft telegram written several days later by Thatcher to Argentinian leader Gen. Leopoldo Galtieri in which she describes in very personal terms the death and destruction both leaders would grapple with in the coming days unless Argentina backed down.
She tells her counterpart that the decisive battle is about to begin, imploring him to begin a full withdrawal to avoid more bloodshed.
"With your military experience you must be in no doubt as to the outcome. In a few days the British flag will once again be flying over Port Stanley. In a few days also your eyes and mine will be reading the casualty lists. On my side, grief will be tempered by the knowledge that these men died for freedom, justice, and the rule of law. And on your side? Only you can answer the question."
The telegram was never sent, and Galtieri resigned in disgrace several days after Britain reclaimed the islands.
LD, from what I understand, the training Delta provided the SAS, on Stingers, wasn't officially sanctioned by DoD. It was more along the lines of Delta knowing they're buddies were headed into a combat situation, and wanting to make sure the SAS knew how to use all the gear they had in their armory.
She was a one trick pony and did more harm to the UK than the Luftwaffe. A leader like Thatcher would be the coupe de grace for the US economy.
Posting Permissions
