Nobody besides you suggested that one would keep a standing navy at the same levels as during a world war. In comparison to the third world, however, the UK indeed had a GIGANTIC navy and Argentina could provide no defense. Don’t mistake it: this was the first world bullying the third, and the global north not GAF about the wellbeing of the global south.
while you are correct. 1st vs 3rd world is an old cold war term that reeks of racism. 1st world were the allies to the US. 2nd world was Russian allies. 3rd world was all the nation to poor to be considered worth caring about. Who happened to be mainly in the global south.
So while I totally agree Falklands was not a racist act. 1st and 3rd world really is a term we need to expunge as our history is full of plenty of others acts that were.
Geopolitical terms are not by default racism. Likewise 3rd world was nations not aligned with the US or USSR, not nations too poor to be worth caring about.
Also fuck ‘global south’, most idiotic term I’ve ever heard. Imagine pretending that Russia is in the same sphere as other Western countries and that China is a struggling economy compared to Russia? Fuck off with that nonsense, meanwhile one of the worlds most southern countries is considered northern.
Yes but the fact is the actions of Europe in the 1700 has left nations we think of as southern poorer then northern nations. And most of those nations were not allies to a cold war side. Because both sides did not consider then stratigically important.
Given the European (my ancestors of course) actions of treating the area as resources to remove. And the clear fact that the wealth of the north has been built upon those resources.
Ignoring them during the cold war may not have intentionally been due to povertly. But the fact they were behind other nations and unable to catchup was. Meaning there was a def link between poverty and them being named 3rd world. Caused by previous european actions.
As for the global south. I dont understand the term myself. But as it is a term certain nations have chosen themselves to represent the issue. I am not arrogant enough to tell them they cannot use the name for themselves. Or that I will call them something else.
In 1982 the UK navy was not in the top 10. Our military as a whole was likely in the top 5 but we had been reducing our navy to the point we needed to convert civilian ship as mine sweepers.
“When Argentina launched the attack on British citizens Living on land Argentina had absolutely no claim to” The simple fact is if any nation ignored a hostile power trying to forcibly take over the homes of their citizens. Especially when that hostile power had recently lost an election among those citizens to give the nation to them and become Argentine citizens. No one would consider the leader of that nation to be doing their job.
Thatcher was a removed and most Brits agree with you their. But her actions in the Falklands were forced by the Argentine government nothing more.
The fact that the Argentine navy is tiny. Just goes to proves how fucking stupid it was to try and take land by force. When you punch big guy in the nose. No one feels sorry that he breaks your arm. Only that your mouth is to big to back up your threat.
Argentina failed to convince the people of the Falklands that they wanted to join Argentina. So started a war as a way of distracting their own population from their government corruption. And have been using the same trick every few years for the last 5 decades.
Nobody besides you suggested that one would keep a standing navy at the same levels as during a world war. In comparison to the third world, however, the UK indeed had a GIGANTIC navy and Argentina could provide no defense. Don’t mistake it: this was the first world bullying the third, and the global north not GAF about the wellbeing of the global south.
This wasn’t the first world bully the third.
This was a fascist government invading an neighbouring country and getting its arse kicked.
while you are correct. 1st vs 3rd world is an old cold war term that reeks of racism. 1st world were the allies to the US. 2nd world was Russian allies. 3rd world was all the nation to poor to be considered worth caring about. Who happened to be mainly in the global south.
So while I totally agree Falklands was not a racist act. 1st and 3rd world really is a term we need to expunge as our history is full of plenty of others acts that were.
Geopolitical terms are not by default racism. Likewise 3rd world was nations not aligned with the US or USSR, not nations too poor to be worth caring about.
Also fuck ‘global south’, most idiotic term I’ve ever heard. Imagine pretending that Russia is in the same sphere as other Western countries and that China is a struggling economy compared to Russia? Fuck off with that nonsense, meanwhile one of the worlds most southern countries is considered northern.
Yes but the fact is the actions of Europe in the 1700 has left nations we think of as southern poorer then northern nations. And most of those nations were not allies to a cold war side. Because both sides did not consider then stratigically important.
Given the European (my ancestors of course) actions of treating the area as resources to remove. And the clear fact that the wealth of the north has been built upon those resources.
Ignoring them during the cold war may not have intentionally been due to povertly. But the fact they were behind other nations and unable to catchup was. Meaning there was a def link between poverty and them being named 3rd world. Caused by previous european actions.
As for the global south. I dont understand the term myself. But as it is a term certain nations have chosen themselves to represent the issue. I am not arrogant enough to tell them they cannot use the name for themselves. Or that I will call them something else.
In 1982 the UK navy was not in the top 10. Our military as a whole was likely in the top 5 but we had been reducing our navy to the point we needed to convert civilian ship as mine sweepers.
“When Argentina launched the attack on British citizens Living on land Argentina had absolutely no claim to” The simple fact is if any nation ignored a hostile power trying to forcibly take over the homes of their citizens. Especially when that hostile power had recently lost an election among those citizens to give the nation to them and become Argentine citizens. No one would consider the leader of that nation to be doing their job.
Thatcher was a removed and most Brits agree with you their. But her actions in the Falklands were forced by the Argentine government nothing more.
The fact that the Argentine navy is tiny. Just goes to proves how fucking stupid it was to try and take land by force. When you punch big guy in the nose. No one feels sorry that he breaks your arm. Only that your mouth is to big to back up your threat.
Argentina failed to convince the people of the Falklands that they wanted to join Argentina. So started a war as a way of distracting their own population from their government corruption. And have been using the same trick every few years for the last 5 decades.