Wi Brazil join the falklands war

The Brazilian economy collapses as the fragile foreign investment takes fright and flees. At the time, Brazil's debt as running at very unsustainable levels and had to be bailed out by the IMF who imposed very strict controls on the Brazilian economy.
 
That's a problem that has to be dealt with in pretty much any historical event, even in official documents.

However, this one seemed relatively genuine to me, and you have the opportunity to judge for yourself.
IIRC, it was in one of these that the comment was made, and apparently they're now available on YouTube
http://www.channel5.com/show/secrets-of-the-sas-in-their-own-words

Incidentally, it would be interesting to find out how you know such intimate details of classified operations
"for a certain fact".

Having been damn near killed by SAS incompetence on Mount Kent in 1982 (they reported it empty, so my troop and I were heli-borne in to grab it; it turns out that it wasn't quite empty, and the SAS patrol had missed a half battalion of Argentine infantry on the mountain), I'm a little less inclined to regard the SAS as the supermen their publicity machine makes them out to be.

Elsewhere, during South Georgia (and outside of my personal experience) the SAS ignored the direct advice of Marines trained in MAW, decided they knew better, and the consequence was three downed helicopters for no tactical benefit.

Less directly, I've had the misfortune to proof read several books published by supposed SAS types. Having been a Royal Marine Commando for a while (1969-1982), I know a bit about tactical operations. I've been less than convinced by a number of the tactical descriptions given in several of these. I can't say for sure whether the ex-SAS tag given to some of these authors is somewhat ambitious, whether the descriptions were deliberately made comical to anyone with the slightest knowledge of these things (for example, burned on my mind is a description of the SAS being surprised to discover that it gets cold at night in the desert), or whether the ex-SAS described really were incompetent.
 

Deleted member 94680

Doesn't seem much like something that would provoke a Brazilian DoW. I mean, it's just the RN sinking enemy ships.

(Unless you mean a Brazilian CV, not sure if they had one.)

Yeah, I meant a Brazilian CV. I assume they did as it was mentioned earlier in the thread. I meant to quote the post that suggested the Brazilians would attack the British Taskforce with their CV if they entered the War on the Argentine side.

Sadly, I don't know the size of the brazilian navy at the time, neither of the army and I cannot find this info online

At the best they could make a strike force led by the Carrier Minas Geraes and tried to break the british blockade of the falklands, but that's it


There's no way the British would expend the conflict unnecessarily, they were hanging out on the end of a ridiculously extended supply chain and they knew it.
 
Having been damn near killed by SAS incompetence on Mount Kent in 1982 (they reported it empty, so my troop and I were heli-borne in to grab it; it turns out that it wasn't quite empty, and the SAS patrol had missed a half battalion of Argentine infantry on the mountain), I'm a little less inclined to regard the SAS as the supermen their publicity machine makes them out to be.

Elsewhere, during South Georgia (and outside of my personal experience) the SAS ignored the direct advice of Marines trained in MAW, decided they knew better, and the consequence was three downed helicopters for no tactical benefit.

Less directly, I've had the misfortune to proof read several books published by supposed SAS types. Having been a Royal Marine Commando for a while (1969-1982), I know a bit about tactical operations. I've been less than convinced by a number of the tactical descriptions given in several of these. I can't say for sure whether the ex-SAS tag given to some of these authors is somewhat ambitious, whether the descriptions were deliberately made comical to anyone with the slightest knowledge of these things (for example, burned on my mind is a description of the SAS being surprised to discover that it gets cold at night in the desert), or whether the ex-SAS described really were incompetent.

Well answered. Thank you.
 
Regiao sol do Brazil
If Brazil moves sufficient numbers of troops to its Southern Provinces, they could help defend Rio de Janero against British Invasion.
With Uruguay turning a blind eye, the Brazilian Air Force and Navy could patrol the approaches to Northern Argentina, preventing British troops from landing.

If Uruguay helps patrol those waters, even better!

Even if Brazilian and Uruguayan troops never cross the Argentine border, they can still substantially reinforce Argentine defences.
 
This has serious butterflies in sports. What does FIFA do when Brazil, England and Argentina is at war and the world cup is to begin
 
Regiao sol do Brazil
If Brazil moves sufficient numbers of troops to its Southern Provinces, they could help defend Rio de Janero against British Invasion.
With Uruguay turning a blind eye, the Brazilian Air Force and Navy could patrol the approaches to Northern Argentina, preventing British troops from landing.

If Uruguay helps patrol those waters, even better!

Even if Brazilian and Uruguayan troops never cross the Argentine border, they can still substantially reinforce Argentine defences.

I know a bit about British military capabilities of the period. I think it is fair to say that a British invasion of mainland South America, be it Brazil or Argentina, is a little unlikely. It was as much as Britain could do to keep a fighting capability of around 6000 land troops with minimal heavy equipment active in the field, and come mid-June, that capability was, if not running on empty, at least looking with concern at the fuel gauge to see how much was left in the tank, and getting worried.

There was zero political imperative to invade the mainland (regardless of the military or diplomatic consequences, which would not be favourable to the British cause). The British stated war aims, and one which had a clear acceptance with everyone whose opinion mattered, of retaking the Islands. The Operation to retake the Islands clearly supported that war aim, and was thus accepted. Invading Argentina does not clearly further that war aim, so aside from the fact that it would have been a military fiasco of the first order, it would have pissed off the Americans no end.
 

Deleted member 94680

Regiao sol do Brazil
If Brazil moves sufficient numbers of troops to its Southern Provinces, they could help defend Rio de Janero against British Invasion.
With Uruguay turning a blind eye, the Brazilian Air Force and Navy could patrol the approaches to Northern Argentina, preventing British troops from landing.

If Uruguay helps patrol those waters, even better!

Even if Brazilian and Uruguayan troops never cross the Argentine border, they can still substantially reinforce Argentine defences.

How likely is a South American bloc developing against Britain though? Would Uruguay join in, or oppose the Brazilians and Argentinians in the expectation of British help? My understanding (possibly flawed and entirely false) is that Uruguay was pro-British? Would Chile get involved in this scenario, or wait to see how it develops?

I don't know enough about South American politics and foreign relations of the period to guess, so advice and opinions would be welcome.
 
Unlikely for Chile to interfere with British attempts to raid the Argentine mainland. Chile and Argentina squabbled over overlapping claims to Tierra del Fuego. The Argentine junta feared that Chilleans would exploit the Falklands distraction to re-occupy a few islands near Tierra del Fuego.
Rumour has it that Chile quietly repatriated British soldiers and airmen who "accidentally" landed in Chile.

In any case, the primary goal of British raids on the Argentine mainland was to warn the British Fleet when Exocet-laden airplanes took off. A longer-term goal was sabotaging those airplanes in the ground.
No Brit seriously expected to hold territory on the Argentine mainland.
 
[QUOTE="David Flin ....... I'm a little less inclined to regard the SAS as the supermen their publicity machine makes them out to be.
................
Elsewhere, during South Georgia (and outside of I can't say for sure whether the ex-SAS tag given to some of these authors is somewhat ambitious, whether the descriptions were deliberately made comical ...... [/QUOTE]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have long suspected that most of those books and films about (SEALS, SAS, SBS, SAS, Green Berets, Rangers, Fallschirmjagers, Delta Force, etc.) were part of a larger dis-information campaign.
First, tales of heroic deeds mean more medals awarded to soldiers in those units.
Secondly, tales of heroic deeds help with the next round of funding.
Thirdly, tales of heroic deeds help attract better quality recruits.
Fourth, tales of heroic deeds scare the enemy.
Fifth, inaccurate tales of heroic deeds spread confusion among the enemy.
 
If Brazil is on Argentina's side, you can expect Chile to join on Britain's, if only unofficially. Does Brazil back Honduras' invasion of Belize?

Reagan's going to have to pull a Suez here and force Britain and the Latins to stand down.
 
I have long suspected that most of those books and films about (SEALS, SAS, SBS, SAS, Green Berets, Rangers, Fallschirmjagers, Delta Force, etc.) were part of a larger dis-information campaign.
First, tales of heroic deeds mean more medals awarded to soldiers in those units.
Secondly, tales of heroic deeds help with the next round of funding.
Thirdly, tales of heroic deeds help attract better quality recruits.
Fourth, tales of heroic deeds scare the enemy.
Fifth, inaccurate tales of heroic deeds spread confusion among the enemy.

1. I can assure you that it is only a tiny percentage of soldiers who are interested in winning medals. You're just doing a job and working to look after your buddies. I wouldn't have wanted anyone looking for medals in my Troop. Medals are only of interest to people who aren't at the sharp end.

2. Yeah, right. That presumably explains why the Ghurkhas, the Royal Marines, the Paras, and the infantry units that have actually been doing the bulk of the work for the last 40 odd years have been cut to the bone and beyond, while the tankies and underwater boomer fish heads who do next to nothing have retained their capability.

3. Really? People join for many reasons. The quality of recruits (and I spent two years choosing the best infantry recruits the Army gets) does not depend on tales of heroic deeds. Besides, I made sure that people went in with their eyes open. Good and bad, they got told what it's like.

4. No they don't. You pay little attention to the guff your own side tells. You pay even less to what anyone else says about theirs.

5. Confusion is the default position. You don't need to spread it.

There is one reason, and one reason only, why such books are written. That is to extract money from a gullible and foolish public.
 
Top