Posted on 06/28/2005 10:52:40 AM PDT by RWR8189
Royal Navy ships sent to the Falklands in the 1982 war were carrying nuclear weapons, the official history of the conflict has revealed.
The book's author, Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman, said there was never any intention to use the nuclear depth charges against the Argentinian navy, but it proved impossible to remove the arms from the ships before the dispatch of the Task Force to retake the islands.
Prof Freedman's two-volume history is the result of eight years of research, including access to secret Whitehall files and military communications.
In it, he reveals the anger of then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher at the failure of her close ally, US President Ronald Reagan, to give her his full support against the military junta ruling Argentina.
He says that the British Government was taken almost completely by surprise by the Argentine invasion of the Falklands, which the South American nation has long claimed as its own.
And he rejects claims - publicised most prominently by former Labour MP Tam Dalyell - that the sinking of the Argentine warship the General Belgrano at the cost of hundreds of lives was a political move designed to scupper a possible peace deal.
Prof Freedman, the professor of war studies at King's College, London, said he was "rather surprised" to find proof in official papers that the British fleet included nuclear-armed ships.
"A number of ships had come from exercises off Gibraltar and had the normal complement of nuclear depth charges that British ships took with them at the time, and they didn't really have a good way of taking them off," he told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.
"The Government was desperate to get them away from the Task Force, but the delays that this would have caused at a time when they were trying to make the biggest diplomatic impact meant they decided they had better take them and get them off later.
"They put them in the safest places possible. There was no intention to use them, but they certainly went."
You go to war with the military you have available at the time.
I don't think depth charges, nuke or other, are going to do much good for you if you can't remove them from your own ship. :-)
Well, it did mark the end of the "Monroe Doctrine."
So what?
Once THE UK went to war with Argentina it set up an increased chancehaving to go to war with some one else that did have nukes..
Are they blaming Bush for this?
Sorry I was being sarcastic. Not sure whay anyone would be surprised that military ships have nuclear weapons on board.
BTW - the issue probably isn't whether they would use them (nuke deapth charges on ASROCs can take out surface vessels)
but if the British ship got hit it might break open the weapons container and cause leakage.
Bleh. Why is this even news? I've got nukes a quarter mile from me right now and you may too. Nukes travel up and down our major highways all the time. There are nukes on most aircraft carriers all the time. Nukes! Nukes! Everywhere you look there are NUKES! Cripes I'm surprised you can't buy the damned things on eBay!
Why would the Royal Navy want to remove those weapons when heading off to battle? It makes no sense at all.
The US went to Grenada and Panama with nukes too.
If the Brits used them, that would be a story.
So we're shocked to find that the Royal Navy is armed with nuclear weapons?
BTW, the Soviets had a lot nukes, just in case someone forgot.
What are we talking about here? ASROC?
I think this is running parallel to the DSM media campaign and the myth that W decided to go to war while Governor of Texas.
What the author is trying to project is that evil conservative Maggie Thatcher was hellbent on starting Nuclear War.
The truth is that Nukes are at sea 24/7.
Of course there was intent to use them. The Navy wouldn't burden itself with unneeded ballast. Perhaps they weren't intended for that particular action, but the plan is the first casualty of engagement, and, how could they know if another situation would not arise immediately before they could return to port for refitting.
Only a fool leaves his Sunday punch at home on his way to a brawl.
No it didnt. It wasnt a new colony and the US also didnt interfere in the war.
The US provided satellite intelligence to the British. It was discussed in the press at the time.
Of course, losing the war was probably one of the best things for Argentina in the long run.
No kidding...move along folks...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.