If Thatcher wasn't the pm of the UK at the time, would any

>>914053
yes... the only reason the people in britain wanted to destroy argentina over the falklands, is that the argentinian national television broadcasted captured british troops lying handcuffed on the side of the road being humiliated... The biggest shame for any brit possible

Yes, short of an absolute useless weakling. No government is going to let it's territory be annexed or its citizens subjugated without a fight. It sends a message to every other country around you.

>>914053
What's the point having a military if you don't use it lol. I think a more beta PM would have spent an extended amount of time in diplomacy and would eventually be forced to use military means to take back the islands.

>>914111
>>914126
Reminder that Thatcher herself abandoned Hong Kong to the Chinese (inb4 the lease had ended, there was no lease for the actualy city and island, just for the outskirts). Britain also gave away the Suez Canal to Egypt.

Argentina just assumed that Britain was just a completely spineless pushover now, which it pretty much was, but they didn't count on Thatcher flipping the fuck out in an attempt to distract from the humiliating surrender to China that was going on at the same time.

File: 1458847379465.jpg (39KB, 464x346px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 464x346px

>>914053
>Useless

>>914162

>Thatcher
>in 1997

>>914053
If you give dictators an inch they will take a mile, you can't appease them by letting them take territory and evict or permit them to murder civilians who have lived there for generations.

Neil Kinnock was part of a new generation of liberal cuckolds and would have tried to use appeasement, however Michael Foot was the leader of the labour party at the time and was strongly opposed to that policy in ww2 and likely onwards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilty_Men

First, you have to understand why Thatcher did it. She was deeply unpopular, in the middle of a recession caused by the economic shock of her neo liberal economic program, trailing in the polls, and her own party was considering ousting her.

And then suddenly, like a gift from god, the Argentinians gave her way to reverse all of that. A short, winnable war of defence. Patriotism and nationalism are an intoxicating drug. Enough to reverse the unpopularity of her domestic policies. So she drove up the nationalism dial to 10, and riding the popularity wave of being in charge of a successful short war (how few of those were there in the 20th century?) she called an election soon after, that would cement her power and government and let her truly transform the country for better or worse with her neoliberal project.

>>914162

Hong Kong wasn't being invaded and taken by force.

File: Acquisition_of_Hong_Kong.svg (1).png (124KB, 1264x922px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1264x922px

>>914162
>gave away Suez
They went to war and lost. Completely different. Also pic related, the only territory the British were allowed to keep was Hong Kong island, Stonecutters island and south Kowloon. The New Territories are vast, not "outskirts"


>>914171
It was the Thatcher administration that answered the "Hong Kong question" meaning they decided instead of enter a prolonged diplomatic struggle with China over Hong Kong island and southern Kowloon they ceded the whole lot.

>>914181
It would've been. The Chinese weren't going to just back off.

>>914176
She's a fucking snake. Destroyed any semblance of economic equality that the post war welfare state had set up and created the cancer that is the London finance sector. And no, I'm not a northerner, not even British.

>>914171
Negotiations happened in the 80s.

>>914181
No, that's because the British surrendered long before it came to that.

>>914193
>They went to war and lost.
No, they launched an expedition that they were dragged into by France, and then as soon as the Americans told them to cut it out they surrendered.

>Hong Kong island, Stonecutters island and south Kowloon
Literally the only relevant parts of Hong Kong.

>>914193
The French and British took Suez easily. Then the British suddenly left without even telling the French. The French could have held it alone, but no longer had any legal justification to do so after the British had retreated.

>>914212
>>914223
I'm talking about lost in the Vietnam sense. Not tactical defeat but strategic loss at the end of the day.

>>914170
I don't know, what are they used for?

>>914235
It was only a loss because the Brits decided to pull out. And not for any of the reasons the Americans pulled out of Vietnam, like loss of life, economic drain, political impact of an increasingly unpopular war dragging on for a decade... but just because the US and Soviets disapproved.

>>914276
Supporting the apartheid 'regime' is not a bad thing though, South Africa is a disaster now

>>914276
Margaret Thatcher did nothing wrong, proof.
>>908177
>>908186
>>908187
>>911420
>>912397

>>914276
>image macros

>>914193
Galtieri convinced his diplomatic staff mentioning the Suez crisis many times. He tought the USA would behave in a similar way.

>>914339
Sovereign territory of Britain occupied 100% by white Britons is different from a colony. Galtieri was an overly confident buffoon. Funny how his invasion was to get the approval ratings up and it resulted in his deposition while Thatcher's administration was saved by the invasion.

>>914300
Surely over-centralising Britain's economy in finance, and relaxing laws that led invariably to our banks being vulnerable to the great recession in 08-09 was a short sighted mistake?

File: Thatcher Revolt.jpg (115KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 312x445px

>tfw you'll never take part in the Poll Tax riots

>>914053
Why wouldn't they protect white British against an invasion by Argentina supported by the most tenuous of Spanish claims to the islands?

Its hard to imagine a British PM NOT sending a task force but a more "progressive" government might have accepted the Peruvian president's proposal.

>>914200
>a fucking snake

Are you sure you aren't northern? Are you sure?

British unions were a cancer eating itself at the time. Blame the unions, not the bitter pill that had to be swallowed

>>914276
Many of the "bad" things thatcher did weren't even bad
Fuck Nelson Mandela, fuck post-apartheid South Africa, and fuck anyone who didn't get the helicopter ride they deserved

>>914276
>Abolished free milk for primary school children

National fucking tragedy

>>914162
>Britain also gave away the Suez Canal to Egypt.

Not without a fight though
Bongs and frogs absolutly blown the shit outta Egypt until backstabbing America told them to fuck off and let Egypt take their canal

>>916032
It was the best possible outcome for them, trying to support a puppet regime in Egypt could have turned into vietnam

File: british_feel.jpg (191KB, 563x721px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 563x721px

>>914053
>you can't just put churchill's brain in a robot and make it Dictator every time Britain gets into a conflict

>>914253
They are used for making Argentinians eternally butthutt.