WI: Chile Instead of Falklands

[Killer300]

Specifically, what if Argentina decided to invade Chile instead of the Falklands? From what I understand, the Junta at the time was choosing between them, so what if they chose Chile instead?

For one, Thatcher may suffer from this as she got a boost from the Falklands popularity wise. For another, and the bigger one, Argentina may win this one, because neither the US or the UK will have as much reason to intervene, which helps things, to say the least.

[The Kiat]

Why would they invade Chile? Would it be over the Land of Fire and control of the Magellean Strait?

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by The Kiat

Why would they invade Chile? Would it be over the Land of Fire and control of the Magellean Strait?

I don't know, I just know that they apparently were considering Chile instead of the Falklands.

[King Henry]

It was a conflict over the Beagle Islands that only the Junta actually cared about IIRC.

[hairysamarian]

Originally Posted by Killer300

I don't know, I just know that they apparently were considering Chile instead of the Falklands.

Chile was phase 2 of the plan, effectively. The Argentine government believed that they could roll over the Falklands quickly and that the British, under international pressure, would be forced to accept a fait accompli. Had that worked out (it didn't obviously) the Argentines planned to follow it up with a seizure of the Beagles. If you need a reference, I recommend "The Battle for the Falklands." (Max Hastings and Simon Jenkins)

[Killer300]

Hmm, is there a way to convince them that Phase 1 isn't going to work out?

[hairysamarian]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Hmm, is there a way to convince them that Phase 1 isn't going to work out?

Yeah, have them read a history book at some point. They seem to have been... challenged... in that regard, at least as far as understanding the British went.

[Xhavnak]

Originally Posted by hairysamarian

Yeah, have them read a history book at some point. They seem to have been... challenged... in that regard, at least as far as understanding the British went.

They never really understood the British attitude from the world wars that Britain would fight to defend nearly anything - particually British land.

In terms of an invasion of Chile the more limited it is the better, the Andes are not condusive to large scale modern warfare in the same way that Patagonia would be and the Chileans are likely to be victorious if inside Chile because of much easier resupply.

[jony663]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Hmm, is there a way to convince them that Phase 1 isn't going to work out?

No not really. They knew they were going to win.

[hairysamarian]

Originally Posted by Xhavnak

In terms of an invasion of Chile the more limited it is the better,

It was to have been quite limited indeed; just a couple of contested islands. The Junta was not looking for a long and costly war; they wanted something fast, something that would gain prestige in their people's eyes without making those people think about casualties.

[corditeman]

Operacion Soberiana :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Soberan%C3%ADa

Which - if executed - would have cut Chile (like Gaul) into Three Parts. I looked at it in British Tierra Del Fuego and posited the Bolivians in alliance with Argentina to recover their Atacama seacoast. Hand on heart, the Bolivians preserve naval units in case they get the Atacama back, the Chileans vehemently refusing any such idea.

My Argentino contacts indicate that although Chile was better in some aspects of their Navy, their Army and Air Force would have been effectively wiped out by Argentina. The one worry was that Brasil would intervene, hence a Cuerpo had to stay in the North East province of Argentina.

Although the excuse was the Beagle Channel dispute, I think that the ultimate objective was an Argentino control/puppet government of at least the northern half of Chile. Thank Heaven the Pope intervened!