It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Margareth Thatcher want to nuke Argentina?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   
There's a new book that mentions that during the Falkland wars in the early 80's, British prime minister Thatcher was threatening to nuke Buenos Aires. According to this book, written by Ali Magoudi (close associate of then president Mitterand) there would've been a nuclear war had she followed through with her threats.

Here's the article.

www.guardian.co.uk...




posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Sounds like nothing more than a political tactic to scare the French into surrender (something usually not hard to do
) and give them the disarming codes for the enemy missiles (all potential buyers of French military hardware should take note of this BTW).

But even if she was serious, wouldn't it be warrented since they did attack sovereign British territory?



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Im sure i read somewhere that Thatcher instructed British forces to go 'Tactical Nuclear' during the Gulf war, but only if Saddam used chemical weapons on our troops.

So maybe she did toy with the idea of nukes during the Falklands???


And as was said before, Argentina illegally invaded a British colony...so why shouldnt she have used them??
It is obviously a good thing that she didnt, but i believe she was well within her rights to consider it!


Mic



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 06:10 PM
link   
To answer the title of the thread: No, I do not believe that Thatcher "wanted" to nuke Argentina. Any good leader will keep all their cards on the table, especially in times of conflict. It was smart of her to use the threat of nuclear attack on Argentina when dealing with the French President. Why? Because it worked! For all we know, and as far as I believe, it was a bluff. Unless the war drastically escalated and casualties really began to mount, I don't think Thatcher would have really considered using nuclear weapons. Any western democracy knows that the use of nuclear weapons is always a last resort.




Im sure i read somewhere that Thatcher instructed British forces to go 'Tactical Nuclear' during the Gulf war, but only if Saddam used chemical weapons on our troops.


Thats not surprising, especially considering the United States made the same threat. Without using the word "nuclear," the US basically made it clear to Saddam that if WMD were used against the coalition that we would respond with everything at our disposal. We know that Saddam definitely had WMD during the first Gulf War. So in my book this is yet another example of the threat of using nuclear weapons acting as a deterrant.

What I don't understand is that Thatcher allegedly received the missile codes from the French sometime in early May of that year. Yet, according to the timeline of the Fauklands war it appears that British ships continued to be hit and sunk by Exocet missiles. These codes were supposed to render the missiles "blind and dumb." Is it possible that the French tipped off Argentina that Britain was in posession of the codes, and Argentina made the appropriate changes? Did the French give Britain some bad codes? Or did Argentina see their missiles drastically decrease in their effectiveness and realise that something was up? I'm hoping that someone on here may know the story behind this whole Exocet missile code story. Thanks in advance!



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Let me get this straight...
The Iron Lady was going to use nukes against Argentina over the Falklands, which was "inhabited by three sheep," or was she actually talking about using nukes on France if Mitterand did not handover the "deactivate" codes to those Exocet missiles used by Argentina? I doubt there were actual "deactivation codes" for those early type Exocets. The UK would have had such information [ie: for frequency jamming, etc] anyhow, being they used the Exocet missiles, as well.

At any rate, I am not seeing the Iron Lady threatening the use of nukes on Argentina over their Exocet missiles. Why? Cause Argentina only had 5 Exocets. On second thought though, I have no doubt she would have used them if such was true. She had gonads, and E=MC2 is always one way of never having to say "surrender," in relation to the Falklands.

I do find it highly, highly dubious that the Iron Lady would threaten to use nukes on Argentina, but only letting Mitterand know of those intentions? As such, she would have made such a threat to the leader of Argentina, President Galtieri. Did she? Not that I can find.

Furthermore, why are they even mentioning Mitterand as a sane and credible source for such claims and assertions as this? Was not Mitterand seeing a psychoanalyst while in office? Furthermore, how credible is Magoudi's account on this? I have some reservations.

What is even more humorous, if not unethical, is that now his psychoanalyst is revealing those private, personal, state confidential conversations that he had with his patient, Mittereand. Speaks volumes on a number of fronts. Hell, then we are not even delving into the issue of Mitterand revealing state secrets to a civilain, his psychoanalyst. :shk:







seekerof

[edit on 22-11-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Sounds like nothing more than a political tactic to scare the French into surrender (something usually not hard to do
) and give them the disarming codes for the enemy missiles (all potential buyers of French military hardware should take note of this BTW).


Can't we have just one discussion without resorting to French bashing?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Minor point here, but wasnt Major in charge during GW1? not Thatcher?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   
yep i thought the same thing as well thatcher left in 1990 i think gulf war 1991?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 07:24 PM
link   


Furthermore, why are they even mentioning Mitterand as a sane and credible source for such claims and assertions as this? Was not Mitterand seeing a psychoanalyst while in office? Furthermore, how credible is Magoudi's account on this? I have some reservations.


Mitterand is supposed to have told Magoudi to write a book about it, knowing he was going to die before it was published. Even Magoudi says he has no idea if its true he's just writing about what he was told by Mitterand.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   


The Argentinians had no previous experience with antiship missiles, and the Exocet was a complicated and cranky weapon. The Argentinians experienced a lot of trouble fitting the Exocet launch system and rails to the Super Etendards. In November 1981, Dassault Aviation, owned by the French government and builder of the Super Etendard, sent a team of nine of its own technicians (and some additional French Aerospatiale specialists) to work with the Argentine navy to supervise the introduction of the Etendards and Exocets. Although France complied with the NATO/ Common Market weapons embargo, the French technical team remained in Argentina and apparently continued to work on the aircraft and Exocets, successfully repairing the malfunctioning launch systems. Without the technical help and collusion from the government of France—Britain’s NATO “ally”—it is improbable that Argentina would have been able to employ its most devastating weapon.


This paragragh is taken from Seekerof's Exocet missile link in his post above. The last thing I want to do is turn this thread into another French-bashing party, but I think the actions by the French in the Fauklands war are despicable. While they may not have violated any NATO sanctions, they violated the principles of being a close ally. For me, this is just the icing on the cake as far as my perceptions of France go. When I learned that France is the biggest and most blatant user of espionage among allied nations against the United States, I nearly became sick. It will always be my opinion that France cannot be trusted and cannot be counted on. They would love nothing more than to see the collapse of the US and Britain, and given the opportunity they would (and probably have) work(ed) toward that goal.

Moving on... I think Seekerof brought up an excellent point that we're overlooking.



At any rate, I am not seeing the Iron Lady threatening the use of nukes on Argentina over their Exocet missiles. Why? Cause Argentina only had 5 Exocets. On second thought though, I have no doubt she would have used them if such was true. She had gonads, and E=MC2 is always one way of never having to say "surrender," in relation to the Falklands.


Bingo. To me, this alone totally discredits the whole "Thatcher/Exocet codes" story. Surely the British would have known that Argentina was in posession of only 5 Exocet missiles, and by the time Thatcher had met with Mitterand on May 7th, Argentina was down to 4. While I could see Thatcher using the "nuclear card" as a bargaining chip, I just can't believe that she would use her biggest bluff (and I will always believe it was just a bluff) just for the alleged codes to 4 missiles.

Until I see something in the way of real proof, it will remain my conclusion that this author is fabricating a story to make a few bucks, knowing that Mitterand is not around to confirm or deny it, and a denial coming from an extremely elderly Thatcher, who's in poor shape, would not be worth much. It'd be expected that if Thatcher really did use the threat of nuclear attack on Argentina that she would continue to deny it until the end.

If there is any truth anywhere in this story, then I believe Thatcher may have used the threat knowing that France had sent a support crew to work on the jets and Exocet missiles, and thus demanded their return to France.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   
First of all... My english is not very good...


I am from Argentina and, during the Malvinas/Falklands War I heard about Thatcher wanted to nuke Argentina... But not Buenos Aires... The rumour here was she wanted to nuke Cordoba, because in that city is the "Fábrica Militar de Aviones" (Military Aircraft Factory) and is the site of a major airbase in Argentina...



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Theres a difference between a threat, a bluff and actual intent. Maggy would have been lynched at home if she nuked an Argentine City, killing tens, if not hundreds of thousands of innocents.

We may have all been on the patriotic bandwagon for the war, but the British people would balk at the idea of nuking a country over such a relatively trivial matter.

At least this isn't in the same league as the famous "Argentina sunk the Invinceable" thread that caused us so much grief a few months back. I think it's been trashed now due to the way it went....



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I seem to remember reading about a supposed shipment of improved Exocets that France was going to sell to a third party. The idea being that the third party was then going to ship them to Argentina. The UK and the US applied political pressure to France and the shipment was cancelled. It was also my understanding that some in the French aerospace industry were in favor of Argentina getting the Exocets so that France could obtain information on the missile's performance under wartime conditions to use as a selling point.



posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I remember this issue quite well at the time....

The nuclear threat was to attack mainland Argentina, I remember the BBC news
article showing the blackout practice in the city they were thinking of back then
whose name I cant remember right now. The images are clear in my mind, if
someone mentions some city names, i'll remember then...could have been Santa
Cruz, but i'm not 100% convinced it was that....

There was an early agreement that the conflict was to be non-nuclear a day or so
later so there must have been some quick discussions once the Iron Lady spoke..

I have no recollection of any discussion re: France & Nukes, all I remember there
was the argument regards technical support and mainternance codes or similar
for the exocet missiles, which the UK pressured France to cease.

As regards the GulfWar question, she was Prime Mininster at the outset, but was
ousted before the military campaign started. John Major took the reins just at
the end of November 1990



posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I think that Thatcher may have used the nuclear threat simply to get Argentina to backdown before the British task force got there so there would be no conflict. If I remember correctly it took several weeks for the British forces to get there, and it would make sence to threaten (bluff) to nuke Argentina just to see if they would back down. But it was just a bluff, unless things got more serious.
I also think that the problem with France was not for codes or anything like that, but because they had sold some Exocets to Argentina and the British didn't what the French to deliver them because of the blindspot that they found that their ship's radar had.
BTW, why do people seem to hate the French? They don't deserve the abuse that they are getting. They really went up in my opinion when they threatened to deport the rioters last summer, then the riots stopped -- harsh but fair.



posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Did Margareth Thatcher want to nuke Argentina?..

...that sounds exactly like Maggie Thatcher, but there is no evidence to back up this claim.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 11:08 AM
link   
It was probably a bluff, but you never know with that lunatic. One thing we can be sure of however--she managed to channel some tasty arms contracts to her imbecile son. Batting for Britain!



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
wouldn't it be warrented since they did attack sovereign British territory?

But, then again, that territory is the falkland islands. Global Thermonuclear War over a prinicple of pre-eminence of the UK in South America? Doesn't seem worth it. They could get the territory back in any number of ways, or do any number of things to maintain their preemminence before destroying themselves ala MAD.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Thatcher was a real leader and a real conservative. This sounds like more socialist backbitting in their bid to take over the world.

If she threatened to use nukes it would only be in the realization that her opponents were able and probably willing to do what it took to win.



posted on Dec, 18 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


"British people would balk at the idea of nuking a country over such a relatively trivial matter."

No they wouldn`t!

It`s cowardly talk like that, which has turned this country into the snivveling politically correct mess that it is today!

Let those nukes loose!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join