OTL Falklands War as a TL

James G

Gone Fishin'
If an author was to write a Falklands War TL as it went in OTL, but naturally the whole conflict hadn't happened, what do you think would be called out as implausible and ASB?

So, if a TL was written with a POD as happened, the scrap metal merchants and a subsequent cunning plan by the junta, that surely would be called out as weak, yes?
The invasion costing no British lives among the defenders but the attackers taking losses?
What else?
 
The unexploded bombs; despite WW2 UXBs showing up even now people are amazed that bombs didn't explode in the Falklands.

The 6 exocets getting 2 kills; surely guided missiles are like magic and get the kill every time.
 
Argentinian deciding it was a good idea to attack, I mean we are only talking about a nuclear armed P5 member, who has clearly never really been any good at any sea going warfare...... I mean why would a dictatorship that only wanted a war for internal propaganda reasons pick Great Britain rather than Chile to fight?
 
If an author was to write a Falklands War TL as it went in OTL, but naturally the whole conflict hadn't happened, what do you think would be called out as implausible and ASB?
The late Alison Brooks of SHWI fame wrote a short piece on this idea in the form of a review of an alternate history novel about an imaginary 'Falklands Conflict', you can find it mirrored here. In answer to your question, all of it. :)
 
The late Alison Brooks of SHWI fame wrote a short piece on this idea in the form of a review of an alternate history novel about an imaginary 'Falklands Conflict', you can find it mirrored here. In answer to your question, all of it. :)

Thanks for that.

Among the many things she pointed out: the fact that the sinking of an enemy ship in wartime (after said enemy had already sank a British warship) was somehow controversial in Britain. If the the Falklands War was a TL, readers would laugh that off as a conservative author using a strawman to attack antiwar liberals.
 
Last edited:
I would be amazed that some nation is so stupid that would go war against country which is great power and possess nuclear weapons. It could had easily pick Chile instead UK.
 
I would be amazed that some nation is so stupid that would go war against country which is great power and possess nuclear weapons. It could had easily pick Chile instead UK.

Well, the Argentine junta were hoping the remoteness and insignificance of the islands would not provoke a military reaction. Too bad they were dealing with Maggie.
 
To be fair if Michael Foot had been PM they'd have gotten away with it.

Not necessarily. Foot fully backed Thatcher's response, as can be seen in Hansard during the emergency debate. He quibbled over the fact that the situation had arisen, pointing out that action before the event (such as that which Callaghan took in 1977) could have prevented the situation. However, given the situation at that point, he backed the Government response, and there's little doubt that had he and Thatcher been switched on that day, he would have taken pretty much the same steps she did from that point.
 
I think the "Falklands War" is from the same crappy British writer who wrote "The Suez Crisis 1956" timeline, but simply decided to write Brit-Wank instead of a Brit-Screw.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
The late Alison Brooks of SHWI fame wrote a short piece on this idea in the form of a review of an alternate history novel about an imaginary 'Falklands Conflict', you can find it mirrored here. In answer to your question, all of it. :)

And that was brilliant! Basically what this threat is all about but extremely well-written.
 
Top