Michele Hanson asks 'What was the Falklands war all about?' She just can't think of anything weighty that it could have been about. This is the level of it:
[T]he Falkland Islands are 8,000 miles away, right round the other side of the globe and hardly any of us knew where they were until the war started.No other consideration worth taking seriously? As a teacher, I would tell my students that in engaging with a viewpoint you should try to meet its strongest arguments, not just those that are obviously weak. But the Falklands war is just a mystery to Hanson. She can't think of a thing that might have been urged seriously in its favour. Those who say that blogs and bloggers are subject to no editorial scrutiny or control might like to ponder why there are opinion journalists writing for actual newspapers who can't meet the standards some of us try to instil in undergraduates. Finally Hanson lets it put in an appearance, the consideration that matters, but only in a belittled form: the war, she says, 'kept Thatcher going for another term and 1,800 Falkland islanders British' - as if keeping them British was the key aspect of the question, rather than the wishes of the Falkland Islanders as a community.
I never could quite work out why Argentina shouldn't have the Falklands/Malvinas. They're practically on its doorstep.