|
|
Post by Kubo Caskett on Feb 4, 2016 1:03:55 GMT
The prospect of a major war in late 20th century Latin America fascinates me given the circumstances involved. So much so that I've covered this in Project Lizard, a TL that is top secret for now.
But anyway, to recap, Argentina under a junta wanted to settle the whole dispute about a few islands in the Beagle Channel with Chile with force by invading Chile which was under the rule of Augusto Pinochet. However, the would-be conflict is aborted due to the junta allowing the pope to mediate the dispute. Not that the junta gave up on attacking Chile, they kept this idea in mind (even during the Falklands War) until the fall of the junta in 1983.
Now what if the junta decided to just go ahead with the invasion and just screw the pope because their "national dignity"? What would the consequences be for both Latin America and the world? |
|
|
|
Post by abdulhadipasha on Feb 5, 2016 1:57:41 GMT
I suspect they would lose, with perhaps a similar effect to the Falklands War. The Argentines didn't have much enthusiasm for invading a relic of imperialism, so it's hard to imagine the population getting too worked up about a pointless struggle over a few frozen rocks.
I'd have to give some thought to what the consequences would be - it would be a huge boost for Pinochet if Chile wins, and instant overthrow for him if the war goes poorly. I still say Chile wins, and is likely to be given aid if the victim of aggression - I'm not sure that would make much geopolitical difference as the region (Beagle Channel) is largely strategically irrelevant after the opening of the Panama Canal. Maybe there would be a few territorial changes as a result?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kubo Caskett on Feb 5, 2016 22:13:57 GMT
I suspect they would lose, with perhaps a similar effect to the Falklands War. The Argentines didn't have much enthusiasm for invading a relic of imperialism, so it's hard to imagine the population getting too worked up about a pointless struggle over a few frozen rocks. I'd have to give some thought to what the consequences would be - it would be a huge boost for Pinochet if Chile wins, and instant overthrow for him if the war goes poorly. I still say Chile wins, and is likely to be given aid if the victim of aggression - I'm not sure that would make much geopolitical difference as the region (Beagle Channel) is largely strategically irrelevant after the opening of the Panama Canal. Maybe there would be a few territorial changes as a result? I have the same thoughts about Argentina given that they committed aggression in the Americas, though I believe that either Argentina reverts to a Peronist regime (with a more leftwing bent) or a socialistic/communistic regime ala Cuba. That and Pinochet's regime would last long after 1990, given that he would have basically full power over the region and he would have a lot of foreign fans in places like Brazil, the Philipines, and maybe North America (similar to how Stalin has fans...for shame). |
|
|
|
Post by Kubo Caskett on Feb 13, 2016 19:57:54 GMT
Come to think of it, how likely is it for Argentina to be taken over by a communist organization by the time the war ends in defeat for Argentina? The war would have likely drained resources and efforts to wage the infamous Dirty War against anyone who's to the left of the political spectrum and the communist insurgents would be breathing abit more air in that case.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kubo Caskett on Mar 24, 2016 0:33:55 GMT
This is might be over a month old but I like to see discussion on this continue (and if the mods want me to not refresh the thread, I'll be happy to stop).
bump.
|
|
